The OP ridiculed the idea that there IS a difference in intelligence. [...] Now, you have moved the debate to whether the cause of that difference is environmental or genetic. ...
I haven't "moved the debate" anywhere. I simply pointed out that the Wikipedia entry linked to by Godboy actually supported what he intended to refute, namely that environmental factors matter in IQ testing.
correll said:
...That all the environmental factors always seem to be effecting blacks to lower their score more than whites, raises the possibility that researchers are looking to explain away a politically incorrect fact. [...]Here's a question. How much work has been put into finding environmental factors that could hurt White scores?
A lot of the work that's been done in the field in recent years has considered socio-economic factors regardless of race. This research has shown a clear correlation between affluence and higher IQ scores...
almost all the way across the racial spectrum.
For instance, as noted by
Ron Unz:
In “
Race, IQ, and Wealth,” I examined the pattern of IQ scores for various European peoples as presented by Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen in
IQ and the Wealth of Nations and noted the considerable evidence for a large socio-economic influence. In nearly all cases, impoverished, rural populations seemed to exhibit far lower IQ scores than affluent, urban ones,
even when the populations compared are genetically indistinguishable. Furthermore, these lower IQs often rise rapidly once conditions improve, in what might be called a “Super-Flynn Effect.” ...
He goes on to document the singular exception to the rule - East Asians. The entire article is well worth the read.
The point is this: as far as blacks and whites are concerned, at least one major environmental factor reigns supreme in IQ test scores - the
socio-economic factor.