4 ms·

knowledge of this is scientifically sound, it is the consensus of everyone who studies it seriously. This is so untrue, I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic

knowledge of this is scientifically sound, it is the consensus of everyone who studies it seriously. This is so untrue, I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic or not. The overwhelming consensus by scientists at reputable top universities don't allege this at all. But I'm sure you can find it at fringe or less reputable state universities.

cb18 11y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainstream_Science_on_Intelligence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainstream_Science_on_Intellig... This is a false statement: The overwhelming consensus by scientists at reputable top universities don't allege this at all.
- kenjackson 11y ago
  I figured that this is where it came from. These are generally fringe researchers, led by the author herself, Gottfredson. As was commonly noted at the time... few who signed it were measurement experts. Note the lack of prestigious programs of the signatories. This is the Wall Street Journal fringe. Certainly not the mainstream of top researchers in the field.
  - cb18 11y ago
    Your trying hard, but you seem to have no idea what you are talking about. "This is the Wall Street Journal fringe." It ran in the journal Intelligence signed by their editorial board. Who are these "non-fringe" you speak of? People who tell you what you want to believe? HuffPo bloggers? Or are you just blowing hot air, totally ignorant of this field in general, and decided to call some people you've never heard of "fringe"...
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
wrong_internet 11y ago
No, the consensus of scientists who actually study this is pretty strong, and supports the parent's post. Jayman has collected a nice sequence of citations on the matter, most of which are peer-reviewed: https://jaymans.wordpress.com/hbd-fundamentals/#Race-IQ https://jaymans.wordpress.com/hbd-fundamentals/#Race-IQ Much effort has been made to minimize the effect of poverty, stereotyping, and other non-hereditary factors in much of the literature. Most people downvoting the parent are likely doing so because this research is uncomfortable, not because it is wrong.
- kenjackson 11y ago
  That's a horrible list of mostly the race baiting circle jerk (for lack of a better term). Even a cursory glance shows that it lacks several authors who have written papers that dispute this. Coincidence? Probably not.
  - cb18 11y ago
    lacks several authors Like who? Stephen Jay Gould? a cursory glance Maybe you should give it a closer look so you're not resting your worldview on confirmation bias.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
- fsloth 11y ago
  "No, the consensus of scientists who actually study this is pretty strong," Lots of groups develop their own consensus. That still does not mean it's correct. The main problem is that they want to find an arbitrary metric and then prove that there is a racial variance to it. I would claim that this is a variant of P-mining[0]. They take the concept of "IQ" within the context of the tests to be a scientifically concrete measure like height or weight (which it isn't) than then search for datasets which supports their racial superiority hypothesis. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_dredging https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_dredging Also, Any list that contains the name "Tatu Vanhanen" should be immediately suspect. He's one of the known "racial IQ" crackpots.

cb18 11y ago

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainstream_Science_on_Intelligence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainstream_Science_on_Intellig... This is a false statement: The overwhelming consensus by scientists at reputable top universities don't allege this at all.

kenjackson 11y ago
I figured that this is where it came from. These are generally fringe researchers, led by the author herself, Gottfredson. As was commonly noted at the time... few who signed it were measurement experts. Note the lack of prestigious programs of the signatories. This is the Wall Street Journal fringe. Certainly not the mainstream of top researchers in the field.
- cb18 11y ago
  Your trying hard, but you seem to have no idea what you are talking about. "This is the Wall Street Journal fringe." It ran in the journal Intelligence signed by their editorial board. Who are these "non-fringe" you speak of? People who tell you what you want to believe? HuffPo bloggers? Or are you just blowing hot air, totally ignorant of this field in general, and decided to call some people you've never heard of "fringe"...
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]

wrong_internet 11y ago

No, the consensus of scientists who actually study this is pretty strong, and supports the parent's post. Jayman has collected a nice sequence of citations on the matter, most of which are peer-reviewed: https://jaymans.wordpress.com/hbd-fundamentals/#Race-IQ https://jaymans.wordpress.com/hbd-fundamentals/#Race-IQ Much effort has been made to minimize the effect of poverty, stereotyping, and other non-hereditary factors in much of the literature. Most people downvoting the parent are likely doing so because this research is uncomfortable, not because it is wrong.

kenjackson 11y ago
That's a horrible list of mostly the race baiting circle jerk (for lack of a better term). Even a cursory glance shows that it lacks several authors who have written papers that dispute this. Coincidence? Probably not.
- cb18 11y ago
  lacks several authors Like who? Stephen Jay Gould? a cursory glance Maybe you should give it a closer look so you're not resting your worldview on confirmation bias.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
fsloth 11y ago
"No, the consensus of scientists who actually study this is pretty strong," Lots of groups develop their own consensus. That still does not mean it's correct. The main problem is that they want to find an arbitrary metric and then prove that there is a racial variance to it. I would claim that this is a variant of P-mining[0]. They take the concept of "IQ" within the context of the tests to be a scientifically concrete measure like height or weight (which it isn't) than then search for datasets which supports their racial superiority hypothesis. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_dredging https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_dredging Also, Any list that contains the name "Tatu Vanhanen" should be immediately suspect. He's one of the known "racial IQ" crackpots.