14 ms·

That you didn't even know that Lynn and Vanhanen's research have been debunked means it is useless wasting time on you. Because if you were really interested in

That you didn't even know that Lynn and Vanhanen's research have been debunked means it is useless wasting time on you. Because if you were really interested in the topic of IQ and genetics you would have known that already! That kind of selective understanding is the hallmark of alt-righters everywhere. The book The Bell Curve that you references doesn't make any definite inferences regarding IQ and race. It does not claim that IQ differences between races do exist. I know your defense is that you are not "actually" claiming that blacks are inferior intellectually to whites, you are "merely" asking the questions. Which is a bullshit defense since your questions are based upon faulty research that you have accepted without even doing the most basic research. > What? That's not what I was saying at all. We are talking about the inequality between races. There is an overrepresentation of black people in the most popular professional sports in the US There is an over representation of tall people too. There is an over representation of men... If you think I'm being hostile, it is because your arguments are so incredibly lame. I'm not a geneticist, but even I can refute them without much effort just by reading a few Wikipedia articles. Like why even reference The Bell Curve when that book was written a quarter of a century ago? It tells us nothing about modern genetic research. Edit: You can have the last word if you want -- I'm not going to reply. I'm not interested in debating IQ and race. My reason for replying in the first place was to show that it is not true that people with your opinions are being downvoted/ignored/silenced/censured/disrespected/shunned by the media or whatever. There is no global SJW conspiracy. It's just that this "blacks have low IQ" trope have been pushed a whole lot. Try googling for "hacker news iq race" to see for yourself. It gets boring beating a dead horse.

supreme_sublime 9y ago
> The book The Bell Curve that you references doesn't make any definite inferences regarding IQ and race. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve > Herrnstein and Murray report that Asian Americans have a higher mean IQ than white Americans, who in turn outscore black Americans. The book argues that the black-white gap is not due to test bias, noting that IQ tests do not tend to underpredict the school or job performance of black individuals and that the gap is larger on apparently culturally neutral test items than on more culturally loaded items. The authors also note that adjusting for socioeconomic status does not eliminate the black-white IQ gap. However, they argue that the gap is narrowing. >I know your defense is that you are not "actually" claiming that blacks are inferior intellectually to whites, you are "merely" asking the questions. I'm not "merely asking questions" I have a thesis. That is, races (defined as geographically based populations) are different from one another in more ways than just their skin color. Of course, there is lots of overlap because we are all human. >If you think I'm being hostile, it is because your arguments are so incredibly lame. I'm not a geneticist, but even I can refute them You honestly aren't doing a very good job.
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  > The authors also note that adjusting for socioeconomic status does not eliminate the black-white IQ gap. However, they argue that the gap is narrowing. There are known environmental factors in IQ (most notably, early childhood environment factors), and because of de jure and de facto segregation (including redlining), which was quite active until fairly recently historically and continues to have substantial lingering effects on people's environment (even if all such active practices were ended, and some of the de facto practices have not been, that would still be true for a long time unless you randomly relocated the whole population to erase the impacts), so adjusting for socio-economic status other than race does not actually control for the environmental factors that contribute to IQ. As such, the effect identified could plausibly be environmental, which would also explain why it is weakening over time with the elimination of some and erosion of other segregationist practices.
  - supreme_sublime 9y ago
    > There are known environmental factors in IQ (most notably, early childhood environment factors), and because of de jure and de facto segregation (including redlining) Redlining doesn't really have much to do with early childhood malnutrition[0], which is the majority of "early childhood environment factors". Though pollution[1] seems to cause problems as well, which would have more to do with the neighborhood someone lives in. > so adjusting for socio-economic status other than race does not actually control for the environmental factors that contribute to IQ. I'm not sure this follows. Why wouldn't controlling for socioeconomic factors (such as parental income) be able to control for an environmental factor that has been shown to lower IQ (such as malnutrition)? Some of the lines of logic that this would result in are kind of disturbing. It almost seems like you are suggesting that black people being segregated (via redlining) to be around other black people will make them have a lower IQ, even if they are just as wealthy as the white people across the railroad tracks. Perhaps they are on a more polluted side of the tracks? Though it doesn't seem that pollution would account for the standard deviation difference. Perhaps I'm just misunderstanding what you are saying. [0]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2628311 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2628311 [1]https://www.cbsnews.com/news/air-pollution-in-womb-linked-to-low-iq/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/air-pollution-in-womb-linked-to...

supreme_sublime 9y ago

> The book The Bell Curve that you references doesn't make any definite inferences regarding IQ and race. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve > Herrnstein and Murray report that Asian Americans have a higher mean IQ than white Americans, who in turn outscore black Americans. The book argues that the black-white gap is not due to test bias, noting that IQ tests do not tend to underpredict the school or job performance of black individuals and that the gap is larger on apparently culturally neutral test items than on more culturally loaded items. The authors also note that adjusting for socioeconomic status does not eliminate the black-white IQ gap. However, they argue that the gap is narrowing. >I know your defense is that you are not "actually" claiming that blacks are inferior intellectually to whites, you are "merely" asking the questions. I'm not "merely asking questions" I have a thesis. That is, races (defined as geographically based populations) are different from one another in more ways than just their skin color. Of course, there is lots of overlap because we are all human. >If you think I'm being hostile, it is because your arguments are so incredibly lame. I'm not a geneticist, but even I can refute them You honestly aren't doing a very good job.

dragonwriter 9y ago
> The authors also note that adjusting for socioeconomic status does not eliminate the black-white IQ gap. However, they argue that the gap is narrowing. There are known environmental factors in IQ (most notably, early childhood environment factors), and because of de jure and de facto segregation (including redlining), which was quite active until fairly recently historically and continues to have substantial lingering effects on people's environment (even if all such active practices were ended, and some of the de facto practices have not been, that would still be true for a long time unless you randomly relocated the whole population to erase the impacts), so adjusting for socio-economic status other than race does not actually control for the environmental factors that contribute to IQ. As such, the effect identified could plausibly be environmental, which would also explain why it is weakening over time with the elimination of some and erosion of other segregationist practices.
- supreme_sublime 9y ago
  > There are known environmental factors in IQ (most notably, early childhood environment factors), and because of de jure and de facto segregation (including redlining) Redlining doesn't really have much to do with early childhood malnutrition[0], which is the majority of "early childhood environment factors". Though pollution[1] seems to cause problems as well, which would have more to do with the neighborhood someone lives in. > so adjusting for socio-economic status other than race does not actually control for the environmental factors that contribute to IQ. I'm not sure this follows. Why wouldn't controlling for socioeconomic factors (such as parental income) be able to control for an environmental factor that has been shown to lower IQ (such as malnutrition)? Some of the lines of logic that this would result in are kind of disturbing. It almost seems like you are suggesting that black people being segregated (via redlining) to be around other black people will make them have a lower IQ, even if they are just as wealthy as the white people across the railroad tracks. Perhaps they are on a more polluted side of the tracks? Though it doesn't seem that pollution would account for the standard deviation difference. Perhaps I'm just misunderstanding what you are saying. [0]https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2628311 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2628311 [1]https://www.cbsnews.com/news/air-pollution-in-womb-linked-to-low-iq/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/air-pollution-in-womb-linked-to...