The first sentence seems factually incorrect or at least appears to be a bare assertion without basis. "SAT ... does not measure ... native intelligence indepen

The first sentence seems factually incorrect or at least appears to be a bare assertion without basis. "SAT ... does not measure ... native intelligence independent of social or educational background." Studies have found an extremely high correlation between SAT and g-factor. Is this correlation completely due to social and educational factors? That's quite a strong claim and I would need to see some compelling evidence for it. The correlation between SAT and wealth is not surprising. Wealth and g-factor are also correlated. In addition, g-factor of parents is extremely highly correlated to that of their kids through both genetics and upbringing. That there exists a transitive correlation between all of parental wealth, child-g, parental-g, and child-SAT is totally expected from our understanding of intelligence in the literature. Wealth as a driver independent of g needs to be explicitly tested for in a multivariable model (has this been done?).