Given that IQ exams rely heavily on how well you assimilate general knowledge, it’s more indicative of the quality of education rather than actual intelligence.
It's worse than that, the two authors of the so called completely discredited study are Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen (both also discredited and disgraced by the scientific community). They utilized the argument that intelligence can be meaningfully ranked on a single linear scale of intrinsic worth, an approach completely debunked by Stephen Jay Gould and many other real scientists. Psychologist Jelte Wicherts at the University of Amsterdam and colleagues scoured the study and discovered much of the data was "averaged" from neighboring countries and most of the very limited test subjects particularly from 3rd world countries were uneducated children who couldn't even read the test.
Lynn and Vanhanen claimed that some studies included dated as far back as 1948 and involved as few as 17 people and that IQ was correlated with incomes as far back as 1820, a neat trick given that the IQ test wasn’t invented until a century later.
Stephen Jay Gould?
Explain how he's somehow more honest?
Gould actually been criticized for his critique on Morton's samples.
Gould was the first to theorize that Neoteny was involved in Human evolution, admitted that Asian Mongoloid's had more Neoteny than any other race, but then floundered on this mattering, talk about a dishonest approach, eh?
P.S
The Flynn Effect was first found by Lynn in Japanese samples.
Why is that left out, however?
