"Race, Evolution, and Behavior," by Professor J. Philippe Rushton

[JoeB131]

Says you.

Charles Murray proves his assertions with fact after brutal, punishing fact.

No, he just misreprestned and fabricated data, but I'm not wasting my time reposting how thoroughly he's been debunked.

Refuting Charles Murray – Learn Speak Act

sites.lsa.umich.edu

Examinations of his data find them wrong and lacking in scholarly integrity (Fischer et al. 1996, Wilson 1987). As Murray arrives on our campus to share his ideas, we as scholars find it important to offer this context for his claims and to stand against them.

First, soon after the publication of Murray’s The Bell Curve, journalist Charles Lane tracked down the “scientific” sources that Murray relies on to build his argument that those at the bottom of American society are there fairly because they are by nature less intelligent, and (as he continues to argue in current work) there is nothing social policy can or should do about it. Lane found that Murray relies on articles published in Mankind Quarterly, a journal whose history and reputation were grounded in racism and anti-Semitism. Many of the authors cited in The Bell Curve had funding from the Pioneer Fund, which has pushed white supremacist positions.

Second, the social science does not support Murray’s claims. Inequality by Design: Cracking the Bell Curve Myth, by Claude Fischer and five other sociologists at the UC Berkeley, concluded that Murray’s work “is wrong statistically, that it is even more profoundly wrong logically and historically, and that its implications are destructive.” (Fischer et al. 1996, p.13-14). Murray claims that lower income people, especially African Americans, are at the bottom rungs of American society because they belong there. He claims they are less intelligent, less hard working, less moral than those at the top. He individualizes and naturalizes success in the American system. However, Fischer and colleagues reanalyze the very same data Murray relies on to make such claims and by disaggregating his social class variable and adding four more social-environmental variables to the analyses (community environment, educational history, etc.) they demonstrate that social environment, not intelligence, explains poverty in these data. Fischer and colleagues conclude that, “Inequality is not fated by nature, nor even by the ‘invisible hand’ of the market; it is a social construction, a result of our historical acts. Americans have created the extent and type of inequality we have, and Americans maintain it” (Fischer et al., 1996, p.7 italics in original).

 

[Hector12]

No, he just misreprestned and fabricated data, but I'm not wasting my time reposting how thoroughly he's been debunked.

Refuting Charles Murray – Learn Speak Act

sites.lsa.umich.edu

Examinations of his data find them wrong and lacking in scholarly integrity (Fischer et al. 1996, Wilson 1987). As Murray arrives on our campus to share his ideas, we as scholars find it important to offer this context for his claims and to stand against them.

First, soon after the publication of Murray’s The Bell Curve, journalist Charles Lane tracked down the “scientific” sources that Murray relies on to build his argument that those at the bottom of American society are there fairly because they are by nature less intelligent, and (as he continues to argue in current work) there is nothing social policy can or should do about it. Lane found that Murray relies on articles published in Mankind Quarterly, a journal whose history and reputation were grounded in racism and anti-Semitism. Many of the authors cited in The Bell Curve had funding from the Pioneer Fund, which has pushed white supremacist positions.

Second, the social science does not support Murray’s claims. Inequality by Design: Cracking the Bell Curve Myth, by Claude Fischer and five other sociologists at the UC Berkeley, concluded that Murray’s work “is wrong statistically, that it is even more profoundly wrong logically and historically, and that its implications are destructive.” (Fischer et al. 1996, p.13-14). Murray claims that lower income people, especially African Americans, are at the bottom rungs of American society because they belong there. He claims they are less intelligent, less hard working, less moral than those at the top. He individualizes and naturalizes success in the American system. However, Fischer and colleagues reanalyze the very same data Murray relies on to make such claims and by disaggregating his social class variable and adding four more social-environmental variables to the analyses (community environment, educational history, etc.) they demonstrate that social environment, not intelligence, explains poverty in these data. Fischer and colleagues conclude that, “Inequality is not fated by nature, nor even by the ‘invisible hand’ of the market; it is a social construction, a result of our historical acts. Americans have created the extent and type of inequality we have, and Americans maintain it” (Fischer et al., 1996, p.7 italics in original).

Charles Murray will be disproved when someone develops a method of substantially and permanently improving the IQ score and academic performance of a child who scores poorly on an IQ test at the age of seven. No one ever has. No one ever will.

In the foreseeable future DNA tests will be developed that are even better predictors of lifetime potential than IQ tests.

 

[Hector12]

Okay, you can keep ranting your slogans, but here's the reality.

Environment plays a far greater role than genetics.

Take China. In 1949, when the Commies took over, 80% of the Chinese population was illiterate.

Amazingly, those dirty, stinking commies invested in literacy. They also simplified the Hanzi alphabet from 50,000 characters to a mere 8,000, which really helped.

Today, the literacy rate in China is 99.83%

The Communist Chinese had good genetic material to work with.

The Chinese are like Jews. They perform well everywhere in the world that they move to. Unfortunately, this arouses the resentment of people who cannot compete with them.

 

[JoeB131]

Charles Murray will be disproved

Except he's been disproven many times.

The Communist Chinese had good genetic material to work with.

No, they didn't. Again, China was 80% illiterate in 1949.

 

[Hector12]

Except he's been disproven many times.



No, they didn't. Again, China was 80% illiterate in 1949.

The average IQ for Chinese is 105. The average for Negroes in sub Saharan Africa is 70.

 

[JoeB131]

The average IQ for Chinese is 105. The average for Negroes in sub Saharan Africa is 70.

I'm sure that's what they tell you on AmRen.

So what was the average IQ for Chinese in 1949?

I'm guessing, not very high.

The only difference is China wasn't as badly effected by European colonialism as Africa was. It wasn't partitioned like Africa was.

 

[Hector12]

I'm sure that's what they tell you on AmRen.

So what was the average IQ for Chinese in 1949?

I'm guessing, not very high.

The only difference is China wasn't as badly effected by European colonialism as Africa was. It wasn't partitioned like Africa was.

There are IQ tests now that require no knowledge of reading, mathematics, and English. A space alien could take one of those tests. I am confident the space alien could get a perfect score in record time.

You always blame whites for the sorry shape Negroes are in. Name one single black majority, black run country with a high standard of living, a low crime rate, and a well functioning government.

 

[JoeB131]

There are IQ tests now that require no knowledge of reading, mathematics, and English.

Oh, I'm sure those are even less credible than the ones your favorite quacks have been using.

You always blame whites for the sorry shape Negroes are in. Name one single black majority, black run country with a high standard of living, a low crime rate, and a well functioning government.

Name one that white people haven't ratfucked.

You can't.

 

[Hector12]

Oh, I'm sure those are even less credible than the ones your favorite quacks have been using.



Name one that white people haven't ratfucked.

You can't.

European colonialists brought schools, hospitals, and electricity to sub Saharan Africa. Since independence these are decaying. American Negroes enjoy more affluence and better health than Negroes in any black majority, black run country. Negroes benefit from white tutelage. We have not benefited from their presence.

 

[Picaro]

The Chinese are like Jews. They perform well everywhere in the world that they move to. Unfortunately, this arouses the resentment of people who cannot compete with them.

Myth. 'Jews' look 'brilliant' simply because the poor and scholars with no rich sugar daddies to fund them while they study the Torah simply lost most of the poor and illiterate to assimilation over the centuries. Sephardics test pretty normal. At one time Jews were around 10% of the Roman Empire's population and a huge percentage of the ME population. As Ezra's 'reforms' gradually eliminated the poor and middling from any influence and instituted a 'master race' mentality, the number shrunk considerably over the centuries. Large numbers converted to Christianity and Islam.

Also education and literacy aren't the same as 'intelligence'; lots of over-educated morons running around who would probably score high on IQ tests..

Anybody who has been to Asia just laugh at the myth they're 'more intelligent', for the same reasons. The majority have never taken any IQ tests; they aren't usually given to farmers and rural types in any community. The test results are heavily skewed to the wealthier and better educated demographics.

Ashton's data only applies to a limited cultural demographic.

It is all about culture, not race.

 

[Hector12]

It is all about culture, not race.

Culture is shaped by ability, which is shaped by genes. People spend time doing what they are good at. At the bi racial city where I live the basketball courts are always full of Negroes, weather permitting. One rarely finds a Negro in one of the public libraries. They are full of whites.

 

[MarathonMike]

Except he's been disproven many times.



No, they didn't. Again, China was 80% illiterate in 1949.

If you are trying to equate literacy with innate intelligence, you have no clue about this subject.

 

[Hector12]

I voted against trump in 2016 and 2020. I intend to do so again, if he runs.

By most definitions of "racism" a white racist believes that white Gentiles are the most superior race. I am a white Gentile. On the basis of average IQ scores and success in intellectual endeavors I consider Ashkenzi Jews to be the most superior race.

The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution, by Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending

Chapter 7, "Medieval Evolution: How the Ashkenazi Jews Got Their Smarts'

The Ashkenazi Jews—the Jews of Europe—began as a distinct community about 1,200 years ago along the Rhine. The word “Ashkenaz” was the Hebrew name for Germany, so the Ashkenazim are literally “German Jews,” although they later came to inhabit other areas, particularly Poland. Today the Ashkenazi Jews, some 11 million strong, live throughout the world, with the largest concentrations in Israel and the United States. There are many other Jewish communities— such as the Sephardic Jews who once lived in Spain, the Mizrahi Jews of the Middle East and North Africa, and the Bene Israel of India—but the vast majority of the world’s Jews are Ashkenazi.

They have had a surprisingly large influence on the world over the past couple of centuries, and they have played an outsized role in science, literature, and entertainment. Might they be smarter than other groups of people? Apparently so. Ashkenazi Jews have the highest IQ of any ethnic group known. They average around 112–115, well above the European norm of 100. This fact has social significance, because IQ (as measured by IQ tests and their equivalents, like the Graduate Record Exam [GRE] or the Scholastic Aptitude Test [SAT]) is the best available predictor of success in academic subjects and many jobs.1 Jews are just as successful in such jobs as their tested IQ would predict, and they are hugely overrepresented in those jobs and accomplishments with the highest cognitive demands. We’re not the first to notice this. Popular opinion has held that European Jews are smart for a long time. At the turn of the century in London, for example, Jews took a disproportionate share of prizes and awards in the school system.2

The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution [1 ed.] 9780465002214, 2008036672, 9780465020423 - DOKUMEN.PUB

I am not Jewish. Because this is the first day of Hanukah, I decided to express my admiration for those who are Jewish.