/sci/ - Science & Math

If right wingers are high IQ why are racist people mostly dumb?
Why are trump supporters dumb?

>>11197039
>I'm the mean dumb racist of your dreams
you're just a dumb racist
don't be science denier, now

>>11084017
>accurate thinking is mental gymnastics
0.6% is not a high percentage, it's a very simple concept

>>11067026
>Why do people accept Richard Lynn's fake IQ study without looking much into it?
Two reasons.
First, because it suits them. They're willing to ignore the significant methodological issues since they see the results they were "expecting."
Second, because they themselves have low IQ. Racism and prejudice are correlated with decreased cognitive ability.

>>10941807
>LOL U MAD
Bow down.

>>10931148
>the average racist is literally retarded

>>10885764
>therefore relevant scientific literature doesn't exist
That's not what I said, though.

>>10770044
>IQ isn't a me--

>>10733225
>>10733214
>>10731793
they're SCIENTIFIC journa--

>>10714652
>Incidentally equating being white to being racist in your strawman clickbait subtitle
Can racist brainlets stop blowing themselves out for even one moment?

>>10581105
>high IQ racists (Here is evidence of undesirable traits being higher among black people, therefore I dislike blacks)
That's sensible, as long as you are able to properly evaluate that evidence. The undesirable trait must be causally linked to the property by which you discriminate.
So it's valid to say "I don't like dark skin, so I don't like blacks" or "I don't like wide noses and big butts, so I don't like blacks"
If you were to say "I don't like violent criminals, so I don't like blacks" you would be ignoring the vast majority of statistics that show that being black is not predictive of criminality, and thus you would fall into the umbrella of overly reductionist low IQ racists.

>>10575348
It's not a surprise

>>10566796
>Your assertion is not.
nope
i got a whole rack of them if you really want

>>10553887
First, we should establish the nature of intelligence itself. Otherwise, we cannot meaningfully analyze the gap.

>>10543155
low iqs cant separate individuals from the scary guys daddy warned them about

>>10534852
>There's some research showing conservative beliefs correlate to a lower IQ
naturally. and there's actually a fair bit.
a willingness to collect and accept facts, consistently apply logic, and exercise abstract thought will all turn you into a liberal; that's why academia and the sciences are so full of them.

>>10518270
>It wasn't just Lynn and co that did racial IQ tests
Actually Lynn didn't run any of those studies. Lynn aggregated the data of IQ tests from other scientists. It is clear you haven't even skimmed a single paper, not even the seminal paper which the famous 70 IQ figure is derived.
The linked article presents a mountain of evidence showing that he cherry-picked the studies that would produce the result he wanted. They analyze his data, and they examine his stated reasons for the inclusion or exclusion of each and every study he used.
You faggots always want citations, but when you get one, you won't even glance at it.
Eventually, people stop answering your shitposts, then you claim you're being ignored or filtered.

>If you deny the black white IQ gap, you're literally denying science.
The text you quoted actually refers to the black white IQ gap. What they disagree on is the size of the gap. Did you even read the post you responded to?

>>10518265
This is /sci/. Don't ignore the link to the paper, open it and at least glance at the abstract. It's from the same journal Lynn himself published in.
Here it is again for you: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2009.11.003

It's not a "massive conspiracy", it's a small group of white supremacist academics, mostly American, furiously publishing in the twilight of Jim Crow laws, trying to prove the negro subhuman.

>>10517994
>It does imply that races vary in intelligence
And yet the number of traits that are the same between races dwarfs than the number of traits that are different. Thus, variance in one respect does not necessarily imply variance in another.
>>10518007
>he's a narcissistic black dumbass
Also, please refrain from using logical fallacies to bolster your argument. Thank you.

>>10493037
>IQ is associated with success in academia
>academia is primarily liberal
What did he mean by that?

>>10101567
here's a hypothetical situation.
imagine you have 5 positions to fill with 10 candidates, each of which has perfect scores and are all equally excellent candidates based on the numbers.
5 asians, 2 whites, 2 blacks, and 1 hispanic make up the 10 candidates.
which 5 do you take and why?

>>10101565
involvement in the sciences is correlated with intelligence.
liberalism is also correlated with intelligence.

>>10066383
>>10066409
It's only the natural extension of the shit-mess of unreproducible studies called "psychology."
It's no crappier than anything published by Freud, Jung, etc.
It gets so much hate because psychologists and """social scientists""" don't want people to see that their entire field is just bullshit

>>9822850
>Because scientists have to go to university and universities have required electives which are the breeding grounds for leftist rhetoric therefore most scientists these days were exposed to leftist propaganda for years.
You have it backwards. Unis are breeding grounds for leftist rhetoric because higher IQ people collect there.
If anyone is being "programmed" it's almost certainly the right wing, particularly the religious right. Suggestibility is associated with lower IQ, so their leaders have little problem inculcating them with contradictory belief systems.

>>9789033

>>9738912
>The logic part is 100% true since it's been proven people who identify as liberal tend to have a higher IQ than people who identify as conservative.
I think a lot of this is due to a subtle form of confirmation bias unwittingly endorsed by the right itself. A lot of beliefs that only an extreme brainlet could internalize fall just happen to fall under the umbrella of conservative thought.

For example, the concept that you can tell a given individual's intelligence purely by his ethnicity. Or the concept of murdering your own daughter for class-mixing. Both are hard right-wing positions that any reasonable person will reject after a few simple thought experiments.

>>9698107
>when /pol/tards get btfo in their genetics threads