So why did the black firefighters perform poorly?

[William Joyce]

What do you attribute to differences in IQ scores between European people and oriental people? Are European people genetically intellectually inferior to people of the orient - or is the difference due to upbringing?

I'm persuaded by J. Philippe Rushton's

J. Philippe Rushton, Ph.D. - Bio Sketch

and others' theories related to evolution on this topic. In a nutshell, different populations adapted to different environments over the course of many thousands of years, resulting in higher levels of intelligence for colder climates (roughly).

Historically, Asian populations may have had even colder climates to deal with than whites... though I don't know for sure. It's interesting to speculate on, but I accept that Asians generally have higher mathematical IQ's than whites. It doesn't bother me, if that's what you're wondering. In fact, it's a comfortable fact for me because by acknowledging all aspects of racial difference, even when it cuts against whites, nobody can accuse me of reckless ethnocentrism! (Though it doesn't often work... breathe sideways about inherent racial differences, and you're just a "racist".)

Also, as the Bell Curve notes, environment does count... exposure to a strict upbringing can make a person a little smarter than they would be otherwise. But it's genetics that make the template... and you can only do so much with that. That was the notion that got Arthur Jensen into so much trouble. This California hippie professor said we're wasting money by spending too much to raise black test scores because they're only going to go up so much. Of course, decades later, he's been proven right... we've spent billions on public education and "desegregation" in an effort to get black scores up, and the result has been a big fat zero.

Personally, I don't think that's because, as conservatives claim, blacks lack moral fiber. I think that's just the way they are. Why cause them -- and us -- so much freakin' pain, frustration and waste by pretending otherwise?

 

[manifold]

Matt refuses to consider the possibility of a thing until someone can prove it's a certainty.

And he says he doesn't have a closed mind.

 

[Againsheila]

It would take a totally controlled study – an experiment in which from birth to death large populations from each race had their experiences identical and totally controlled – every minute of every day. Then we would know for certain to what degree, if any, IQ differences between races are due to genetics or experience.

By this standard, no science could ever occur because no study can be controlled to this extent.

Well, I know some really smart blacks and some really dumb whites so I don't think it's fair to claim that it's hereditary. I believe it's environmental and the more than 68% illegitimacy rate among blacks is the cause. I also think that as the illegitimacy rate for whites climbs, our intelligence will decline as well.

 

[mattskramer]

Matt refuses to consider the possibility of a thing until someone can prove it's a certainty.

And he says he doesn't have a closed mind.

Okay. I guess that I did use absolutist rhetoric. I’ll retract such language and say that I doubt that genetics is the cause for the difference and I would like to see absolute scientific proof that it is.

 

[William Joyce]

Well, I know some really smart blacks and some really dumb whites so I don't think it's fair to claim that it's hereditary.

I also know smart blacks and dumb whites, but exceptions don't prove the rule. Some women are taller than some men, but it doesn't follow that women are generally taller than men. And that is, campers, hereditary.

 

[Shogun]

Your “The Bell Curve” book has been largely debunked.

No, it hasn't. The core idea that intelligence is more influenced by INHERITANCE than ENVIRONMENT is rock-solid. The "debunking" of the Bell Curve is hysterical politics, not sound science.

Stalking the Wild Taboo - WSJ Statement on The Bell Curve

no, it's really not. I'd love to see a source that is a lot less laughable than what you just posted. If you know of someone who solved the nature vs nurture debate i'd love to know his name.

 

[manifold]

If you know of someone who solved the nature vs nurture debate i'd love to know his name.

Good point. There is no reason to expect that it will ever be solved.

But I still maintain the the influence of nature is and always will be greater than zero. To suggest that it is zero seems monumentally laughable to me. Yet that is precisely what many try to peddle as truth... in this so called debate.

 

[Shogun]

I don't discount the influence of nature. I like to think that we all fall, individually, on a NvN x,y axis similar to that political spectrum that pops up around here from time to time. And, I'm willing to accept the concept of a finite statistical truths. But, it may very well be that racial differences do not vary enough to matter anyway.

 

[manifold]

But, it may very well be that racial differences do not vary enough to matter anyway.

What would it take to matter?

 

[Shogun]

But, it may very well be that racial differences do not vary enough to matter anyway.

What would it take to matter?

a significant variation, or standard deviation, from an average. Joyce's numbers of 15 points lower on an IQ test would be quite significant but I don't put much weight on his sources. However, a difference of 5 points probably won't be all that significant. If some sort of theoretical finite statistic showed that whites are 3% better at cognitive skill than blacks is that REALLY a significant amount worthy to use as valid evidence for what have you? I don't think so.

 

[manifold]

But, it may very well be that racial differences do not vary enough to matter anyway.

What would it take to matter?

a significant variation, or standard deviation, from an average. Joyce's numbers of 15 points lower on an IQ test would be quite significant but I don't put much weight on his sources. However, a difference of 5 points probably won't be all that significant. If some sort of theoretical finite statistic showed that whites are 3% better at cognitive skill than blacks is that REALLY a significant amount worthy to use as valid evidence for what have you? I don't think so.

For the sake of argument, let's assume Joyce's IQ figures are accurate and blacks are on average 1 standard deviation (15 points) below whites. How would this matter?

 

[Shogun]

it wouldn't, individually, because every race has variation higher or lower. However, broadly applied, finite evidence of superiority over inferiority could be used to facilitate a great many valid and ignorant arguments. Women are statistically weaker than men. Which sex dominates most physical employment?

 

[manifold]

it wouldn't, individually, because every race has variation higher or lower. However, broadly applied, finite evidence of superiority over inferiority could be used to facilitate a great many valid and ignorant arguments.

What would be a valid argument?

 

[Shogun]

it wouldn't, individually, because every race has variation higher or lower. However, broadly applied, finite evidence of superiority over inferiority could be used to facilitate a great many valid and ignorant arguments.

What would be a valid argument?

that patterns of racial dominance in sports are not just a coincidence. That Africa remains a tribal wasteland strait out of the bronze age except for the one state created by whites in South Africa. That Asians really are better at mathematical calculations. so forth.


Why do you think construction is saturated with dudes instead of women?

 

[manifold]

it wouldn't, individually, because every race has variation higher or lower. However, broadly applied, finite evidence of superiority over inferiority could be used to facilitate a great many valid and ignorant arguments.

What would be a valid argument?

that patterns of racial dominance in sports are not just a coincidence. That Africa remains a tribal wasteland strait out of the bronze age except for the one state created by whites in South Africa. That Asians really are better at mathematical calculations. so forth.


Why do you think construction is saturated with dudes instead of women?

But how would any of these observations/conclusions matter from a policy or practical application perspective? So what if Africa remains a tribal wasteland straight out of the bronze age? What would that change?

 

[Shogun]

What would be a valid argument?

that patterns of racial dominance in sports are not just a coincidence. That Africa remains a tribal wasteland strait out of the bronze age except for the one state created by whites in South Africa. That Asians really are better at mathematical calculations. so forth.


Why do you think construction is saturated with dudes instead of women?

But how would any of these observations/conclusions matter from a policy or practical application perspective? So what if Africa remains a tribal wasteland straight out of the bronze age? What would that change?

it legitimizes racial variation and is exactly why pc people fight so hard to disregard the concept of a finite statistical truth for the sake of preserving individual equality. But, again, i'll make a correlation between physical reality between the sexes: Why do you think the US has yet to greenlight women in active infantry combat roles?

 

[manifold]

it legitimizes racial variation and is exactly why pc people fight so hard to disregard the concept of a finite statistical truth for the sake of preserving individual equality. But, again, i'll make a correlation between physical reality between the sexes: Why do you think the US has yet to greenlight women in active infantry combat roles?

What do you mean by "it legitimizes racial variation?" Can you give me some examples?

I understand your point about physical gender differences. But gender is an entirely different segmentation variable and I'm not convinced that it proves anything about racial variation.

 

[Shogun]

it's an example based on correlation is all. It's easier to prove the difference of the physical body than it is to compare intelligence. Sure, it's entirely different in application of segmentation but it's still an example of rationalized segregation based on inherent nature differences. If standard deviations regarding intelligence were as easy to identify as deviations in strength between genders, and they were as significantly different as such, we'd see a lot more rationalized racial segregation like we have gender segregation in combat line infantry. rightly or wrongly despite the individual. After all, I know there are women that could whip both of our asses but they are still not allowed in combat infantry positions.

And, to answer your question, I'd bet CEO positions full of whites would be less of a disputed issue if cognitive abilities were as comparably obvious as physical strength between men and women. Likewise, we would stop pretending that the progeny of former slaves just happen to be better at sports than white progeny of slave owners.

 

[Justin Case]

The blacks are probably not as smart, based on blacks having an average 15 point deficit in I.Q. compared with whites. Also, they probably didn't prepare for the exam. What was the incentive? Take time away from malt liquor, purple drank, fried chicken, watermelon, jenkem, and avoiding child support just to study for some test? AA would surely guarantee that they got the promotions, as undeserved as they were, just like in the past, right? Wrong.

 

[William Joyce]

Your “The Bell Curve” book has been largely debunked.

No, it hasn't. The core idea that intelligence is more influenced by INHERITANCE than ENVIRONMENT is rock-solid. The "debunking" of the Bell Curve is hysterical politics, not sound science.

Stalking the Wild Taboo - WSJ Statement on The Bell Curve

no, it's really not. I'd love to see a source that is a lot less laughable than what you just posted. If you know of someone who solved the nature vs nurture debate i'd love to know his name.

This list of academics is laughable?

The following professors -- all experts in intelligence and allied fields -- have signed this statement:

Richard D. Arvey, University of Minnesota
Thomas J. Bouchard, Jr., University of Minnesota
John B. Carroll, Un. of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
Raymond B. Cattell, University of Hawaii
David B. Cohen, University of Texas at Austin
Rene V. Dawis, University of Minnesota
Douglas K. Detterman, Case Western Reserve Un.
Marvin Dunnette, University of Minnesota
Hans Eysenck, University of London
Jack Feldman, Georgia Institute of Technology
Edwin A. Fleishman, George Mason University
Grover C. Gilmore, Case Western Reserve University
Robert A. Gordon, Johns Hopkins University
Linda S. Gottfredson, University of Delaware
Robert L. Greene, Case Western Reserve University
Richard J.Haier, University of Callifornia at Irvine
Garrett Hardin, University of California at Berkeley
Robert Hogan, University of Tulsa
Joseph M. Horn, University of Texas at Austin
Lloyd G. Humphreys, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
John E. Hunter, Michigan State University
Seymour W. Itzkoff, Smith College
Douglas N. Jackson, Un. of Western Ontario
James J. Jenkins, University of South Florida
Arthur R. Jensen, University of California at Berkeley
Alan S. Kaufman, University of Alabama
Nadeen L. Kaufman, California School of Professional Psychology at San Diego
Timothy Z. Keith, Alfred University
Nadine Lambert, University of California at Berkeley
John C. Loehlin, University of Texas at Austin
David Lubinski, Iowa State University
David T. Lykken, University of Minnesota
Richard Lynn, University of Ulster at Coleraine
Paul E. Meehl, University of Minnesota
R. Travis Osborne, University of Georgia
Robert Perloff, University of Pittsburgh
Robert Plomin, Institute of Psychiatry, London
Cecil R. Reynolds, Texas A & M University
David C. Rowe, University of Arizona
J. Philippe Rushton, Un. of Western Ontario
Vincent Sarich, University of California at Berkeley
Sandra Scarr, University of Virginia
Frank L. Schmidt, University of Iowa
Lyle F. Schoenfeldt, Texas A & M University
James C. Sharf, George Washington University
Herman Spitz, former director E.R. Johnstone Training and Research Center, Bordentown, N.J.
Julian C. Stanley, Johns Hopkins University
Del Thiessen, University of Texas at Austin
Lee A. Thompson, Case Western Reserve University
Robert M. Thorndike, Western Washington Un.
Philip Anthony Vernon, Un. of Western Ontario
Lee Willerman, University of Texas at Austin

We might add James Watson to the list, but of course, once the heat was turned up, he got out of the race-reality kitchen.

Are you sure you're not just ICKED OUT by the idea of inherited differences in intelligence? If so, I get it. But it's still reality.