/sci/ - Science & Math

etc etc
Good night

>>9023680
But you did dismiss the correlation being causation argument when the burden of proof is always on the claimant, which you are. If I were to say something else that involved one data point and one variable, say, a gender wage gap coming from this surface-level monetary amount and a supposed pay discrepancy between men and women, you'd have to go into sociological phenomena to disprove it. The same goes for the racial IQ gap. You take one surface-level data point belonging to each group and draw your conclusions based only on that.

You can make whatever claims you want, but it's intellectually dishonest to say that this one thing must absolutely be the scientific cause and that I'm ignorant for suggesting that there might be other causes. That's the logic of an ideologue, and the real world is not ideal.

>>8879546

There's more than a 100 SNP's identified.
The only reason only those 9 were picked in YOUR picture is precisely because these 9 SNP's "fit" your little racial theory. There's plenty

>http://www.ensembl.org/Homo_sapiens/Phenotype/Locations?db=core;name=Educational%20attainment;ph=26069;r=6:98136357-98137357;v=rs9320913;vdb=variation;vf=5140739

>http://www.ensembl.org/Homo_sapiens/Phenotype/Locations?db=core;name=Cognitive%20function;ph=5713;r=12:56086299-56087299;v=rs877636;vdb=variation;vf=624831

Open up the links. See that there's plenty of genes where africans "win".

Here's an example

Effect of SNP (T) is 0.03 unit decrease
http://www.ensembl.org/Homo_sapiens/Variation/Phenotype?oa=EFO:0004784;ph=26069;r=1:8365340-8366340;v=rs3753275;vdb=variation;vf=2442131

Frequencies for races:
http://www.ensembl.org/Homo_sapiens/Variation/Population?db=core;ph=26069;r=1:8365340-8366340;v=rs3753275;vdb=variation;vf=2442131

You can see frequency of T in africans is 0.59 for Euros it's 0.80.
From the first link we can see that the T decreases intelligence by 0.03 units.
This allele IS NOT present in your picture. WHY? Because it doesn't fit the racial agenda. And there's many such examples.

pic semi related

>>8849211
The first two parts of your post is valid. The third part is just jumping to conclusions that science has never actually come to.

>Black Africans are dumb as rocks, on average
Which you extrapolate from limited data. Somehow, current nigerians (in nigeria) have the same IQ as blacks in america (in spite of 24% white ancestry). Also, pic related. There's a mine of citations here:
>>/sci/thread/S8833056#p8834089

>they don't love
>they lack empathy, courage and the ability for abstract thought
Unscientific and agenda-driven.

>>8834030
Source in pic related

>>8393723
Here's the case of Bermuda, although it's not an African country. I don't believe there's any study on the topic. I would assume white Namibians and South Africans do score higher, due to the fact they historically belong to the "dominant caste", pretty much like in the US.

>>8321882
>the gap doesn't
See pic.

>>8292044
Hope you're talking about the Transracial Adoption Study.

>>8253775
>>8253823
Here's another picture showing black people in Bermuda are slightly smarter than white people. The intelligence gap is mostly an issue in the US, where racism is institutionalized.

>>8252136
>according to a genome-wide study by Bryc et al. (2009), the overall ancestry of African Americans was formed through historic admixture between West/Central Africans (more frequently females) and Europeans (more frequently males). Consequently, the 365 African Americans in their sample have a genome-wide average of 78.1% West African ancestry and 18.5% European ancestry
Stop acting like a retard.
Also, even assuming they're more mixed than they are in the US, one still would expect them to score lower than non-mixed people because of their higher prevalence of "black specific" alleles. Pic related shows they don't.