/sci/ - Science & Math

Race realism thread. In this thread you only post scientific fact

>>12082076
You're not they've been conditioned to get angry whenever they're views are challenged. And people tend to think less critically whenever they're angry.

The facts are africans have a lower IQ than other races. This is true when you're comparing them in a diverse society and internationally.
This is why they're are very few developed countires that are primarily african.
And why africans have higher crime rates than other races even when all other factors are equal.

What % of the Black-White IQ gap is due to genetic differences?
Please source your response.

>>11520777
Because the oligarchs care more about 'diversity' of appearance than diversity of thought.

>>10873821
It's not about what I believe, it's about the facts.
Thankfully, /sci/ and /pol/ have made it abundantly clear what they are.

This board has left-leaning jannies and mods that suppress any discussion of race-based differences in intelligence. Even by people wanting honest discussion. It is harmful to science and society not to discuss this issue.

See: How Stifling Debate Around Race, Genes and IQ Can Do Harm

So I have been told that people on /sci/ deny that different races have different average IQ i.e. evolution stops at the neck. I thought this could not possibly be true. Is it?

Is difference in IQ between races connected to amount of scientific discoveries made by them?

>>9906886
>>9906887
This.

>>9906900
>LALALALALALA
>GENETICS DON'T INFLUENCE THE BRAIN
>I CAN'T HEAR YOU
Imagine being this guy...

Why is it forbidden in science to openly acknowledge the fact that some races and groups are smarter than others, as measured by IQ or/and cultural achievement (the latter being a bit more subjective), due to differing evolutionary conditions and long term geographical separation?

In other areas, it's perfectly acceptable. For example, to acknowledge that blacks are superior in certain athletic endeavours due to their evolutionary heritage.

How much does race influence intelligence?

Is IQ an accurate measure of intelligence?

How much does childhood development and social norms effect IQ?

Is popular society in denial?

Is equal treatment of the races justification for hiding the truth?

Discuss

>inb4 go back to /Pol

>>9096146
It's ok, go on over to /pol/, the alt-right is the drug you need to reclaim your illusory superiority and get back to normal.

>>9063464
>Please explain how the average African IQ is actually +1SD higher than what Lynn measured.
Please realize that nobody is debating that sub-saharan IQ test performance is lower than british IQ test performance. That's objectively true. The debate is over the question: is the different due to environment, or innate population differences (genetics)?

Remember "The Bell Curve?" Perhaps you've seen or even shitposted pic related? The widely-cited 85 IQ figure is derived from the 70 IQ figure developed by Lynn's team. The extra 15 points comes from asking, "If Africa was a developed continent similar to Europe, what would the IQ average be?" So they (as stated previously, and even quoted by you) corrected for various environmental issues, psychometric uncertainty, and the Flynn effect in Europe to arrive at 85, still safely below 100, and then pushed the "genetic" narrative.

But suppose they had started from the more accurate 80 IQ? Then the same 15 points puts black IQ at 95, an insignificant difference.

>Rindermann's 2007 study corroborated Lynn's study.
No, it didn't. It alluded to the significant IQ difference between regions. It doesn't corroborate Lynn's data or the 70 IQ figure, nor does it corroborate Lynn's overall claim that the difference is mostly genetic in nature.

>lol it's called rhetoric
Well, it's a type of rhetoric called rhetorical fallacy, and I will continue to call it out when I see it. Your /pol/tier tactics will not work here.

>Fair enough. I disagree but that's not an unreasonable position.
I would say your position is quite unreasonable. You claim Lynn's study is valid purely because you want to believe in its conclusions, even when you agree that his data is invalid because his methodologies were unsound.

.

>>8377072
Not collectively, if you look at averages. But individually, you will find highly intelligent people from all races.

>>8207903
>even if
you mean "even when", and that's the only relevant part of your post:

>Even when the average difference of intelligence is over 10 IQ points, there is still a very wide overlap, which means the only rational policy is to evaluate every person independently.

Do you accept the theories that different races have different average IQs? Why? Why not?