/sci/ - Science & Math

His research was very important and when it comes to country by country data it's well accepted. People only debate the race conclusion for obvious reasons. If I'm not mistaken there is one country in Africa(the one with smaller IQ) that sparked some controvercy because of sampling problems.

The data also pretty much agrees withother tests like Pisa.

what does IQ gauge, exactly? Is it a scientifically rigorous method of measuring something?

>>9177866
Well it also agrees with our standard perception of the world. Whites, euros, and asians are top dog. South Americans and caribbeans are the first tier of sub human. Then comes Africa

>>9177850
The way the data is presented may lead to biased people to prove their bias. This is omitting something: the history of Africa.

Turns out, Africa was a very colonized place from Europeans, and they couldn't manage to develop a powerful civilization, except for Egypt which was absorbed by muslim countries. And, africans were treated as slaves in the past. Not to mention they were isolated from the european-asian world.

This has very little to do with their actual capability or potential and more to do with how their history progressed.

>>9177870
>The way the data is presented may lead to biased people to prove their bias.

In other words, the data may give credibility to a certain theory

>>9177867

There were a bunch of intelligence tests in the past, verbal, mathematical, visual, etc... Some scientists noticed that there was a great correlation between test scores, so people who do well in one tend to do well in the others. So, it was pretty clear that humans in general don't have each one a particular intelligence(as multiple intelligence supporters claim to this day) but rather a general intelligence that influence all those areas: verbal, visual, spatial,... Then scientists found a way of isolating this general factor g, this g is what is now known as IQ.

>>9177870

The data is there, you can try to explain however you want. His work was to measure the IQs not to explain the differences.

>>9177877
>the data may give credibility to a certain theory
No? I'm talking about confirmation bias. Nonbiased people will be able to look past from that with this same data.

>>9177883
>you can try to explain however you want
Oh I can, I'm just saying this may be food for biased people.

Were the tests administered in the same conditions? In the same building? Was everyone given the same time? Was everyone exposed to the same upbringing and education? Were the tests that were administered explained clearly and were they administered and communicated in the same way to each of the populations? Over what range of time was this study conducted?

>>9177884

It's food for actual researchers too, who want to understand the nature of IQ and wich factor influence it.

>This has very little to do with their actual capability or potential and more to do with how their history progressed.

We can test your theory, but I think it is weak. For example, if historical suffering can decrease IQ so drastically, how do you explain the IQ from the jews from Europe? They're actually higher than the average european IQ. If historical suffering decreases IQ so much how did the centuries of jewish oppression not decrease their IQs?

>>9177868
If by "our" you mean /pol/ retards then yes, still, top countries are only asian, how come that doesn't makes white people the first of the "subhumans"? and the top european country is Italy, where everybody always shits with the whole "Italians are not white" thing.

This is the reason everyone thinks /pol/ is a joke, it's not interpreting data to arrive to a logical conclusion, it's about using it to enforce the opinion you already have.

>>9177891
>It's food for actual researchers too, who want to understand the nature of IQ and wich factor influence it.
I agree! This information may be useful. I'm not talking about the data itself, but how it is presented, which may lead to a common person to jump to conclusions.

>We can test your theory, but I think it is weak
Hypothesis, my good man.

>For example, if historical suffering can decrease IQ so drastically, how do you explain the IQ from the jews from Europe?
Not historical suffering, but lack of contact with other civilizations. That way the development of jews can be explained: they had constant contact with europeans.

>>9177889

>Over what range of time was this study conducted?

You can look it yourself you retard, we're not Google. But it obviously took a lot of time since it needed people from a ton of different countries.

>Were the tests that were administered explained clearly and were they administered and communicated in the same way to each of the populations?

They used what is called matrix test, wich is a culture fair test. But what do you think? That a bunch of white racist europeans went to the middle of the jungle and gave a test about greek philosophy to savage niggers and then when they failed the test they classified the entire country as retarded? That's what you really think?

>Was everyone exposed to the same upbringing and education?

Yes, Richard Lynn alone adopted 5.000 niggers from Gambia and educated them only so they could take the 30 min IQ test.

>Were the tests administered in the same conditions?

No, Richard Lynn was pointing an AK-47 to the niggers while they were taking the test while blasting Moonman at maximum volume.

Was everyone given the same time?

Niggers had 10 seconds to do the test, whites had 2 hours.

>>9177909
>without sparking a /pol/ megathread
>10 posts later he's yelling NIGGER RACIST NIGGER NIGGER SAVAGES WHITE CULTURE

IQ is pseudoscience.

>>9177909
his results can't be replicated. See here:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S104160801000035X

flynn cherry picked his data.

>>9177914

No, it's scientific consensus. It's a well accepted concept in psychology.(You would know that if you went to Wikipedia).

>>9177900
The Chinese cheat, also how come most inventions are made by whites.
The Italians are not whites thing are said by retarded Nordcentrists anyway

>>9177879
It's still fairly important to categorize intellectual capability by semi-specific area of interest. A math whiz could be comparatively worse with language processing yet still higher in working memory and spatial.

>>9177850
well maybe because education is shit in africa

>>9178527
Is education shit in America?

>>9178537
KeK

>>9177850
>Without sparking a pol-tier IQ megathread
I absolutely guarantee it will

Like all social sciences there are way too many conflicting factors and it can be extremely difficult to rid them of any bias, so you can't definitely say that IQ and race has much to do with each other and anyone saying this is being a shitty scientist and probably doesn't normally browse /sci/.

>>9177850
The map shows sierra leone as red yet its next to lithuania.

>>9178623
You've made me notice a shitload of the African ones are coloured wrong

Unsurprising considering the braindead "personal comment" at the bottom

>>9177900
By "our" I'd mean any reasonable and intelligent person who isn't a massive pussy and denies inconvenient truths. Stereotypes are incredibly accurate and everyone already thoughts asians were smarter whites next latinos next and obviously blacks last. If you ever thoughts otherwise you are like the ones who pretend they never noticed any sex differences.
It's always the wannabe intellectuals of /sci/ and /lit/ that have to dispute well established science because their /pol/ paranoia. Pseud

>>9178537
And just for reference, these results are from the 50th percentile +-1SD of blacks with typically 15-35% European admixture.

>>9178738
>>9178623

Not sure what either of you are referencing. Are you talking about the color column? It's referring to skin collr

>>9177850
Arabs and northern Africans have proven not to be brainlets throughout history and yet according to this map their average IQ is one of the lowest across the world. It's pretty obvious that socio-economic factors have a significant influence on IQ.

>>9177850
>correlation = causation
From that map we can imply that the skin is the primary organ for cognitive ability and the brain is useless.

>>9179086
>Europeans have proven to be murderous psychopaths throughout history and yet according to every possible metric of success their societies are some of the most prosperous and sought after across the world. It's pretty obvious that psychopathy has a significant influence on societal well being and advancement.

This is the argument you just made. You equated isolated achievements of certain groups to the whole of the major group they belong to and came to an illogical conclusion.

>>9179152
No that's not equivalent to his argument. This is what his argument is:

>OP's map asserts Arabs have low IQ now
>Historically Arabs have had high IQ
>Therefore there must be some factor besides Arabness/race that influences IQ (namely socioeconomic status)

Your example is:

>Europeans are psychopaths
>Europeans are successful
>Psychopathy and success are correlated

Your strawman is not parallel to his argument

>>9179152
>It's pretty obvious that psychopathy has a significant influence on societal well being and advancement.
That's true though. Although I would call it aggression, not psychopathy.

Aggression + intelligence = success

>>9179163
>Historically Arabs have had high IQ
We're going to need some strong evidence that goes beyond the cultural changes from the Golden Age that led to an extreme European self-preservation uprising which successfully beat back the malicious hordes after decades of persecution.
Which itself strongly argues against whatever anon means by "socio-economic factors"

Can't bring an example using history without understanding the history itself.

>>9179168
>Aggression + intelligence = success
Absolutely. Tuned aggression, focused and morally conscious, societally tweaked behavior which limits simply hurting another (or others) ((or the group in total)) for the quick gain of oneself.

"Psychopathy" on the other hand, breaking down all others for the sake of only oneself...

>>9177912
The second someone mentions something along the lines of "not to make this a /pol/ thread" it's the same as someone saying "I don't hate x but [shit only people who hate x would say]"

>>9179207
How about ignoring the bullshit that doesn't matter such as a halfwit devolving down to base insults? How about just focusing on the facts or lack thereof?
In any case the arguments of IQ, the relevance of IQ, and the cultural ties with societal progress INVARIABLY result in a conversation about history and culture. It's part and parcel for the course.

For example:
It could be logically concluded that the decades of giving charity and aid to African countries has harmed the intellectual growth of their people, has Taken Away their necessity to innovate and advance, and thus within them created (or spurred) the creation of a culture which does not need to work so hard mentally. This argument then can hinge on a conversation about Welfare States, and the morality of (or lack of) letting "Darwinian selection" take its course, or the morality of (or lack of) using as much resources as necessary to give every living person in need as many footholds to success as feasible.

It sure as hell ain't possible to discuss these topics with any focused effort on /pol/, and it sure as hell is relevant to the topic of IQ, IQ discussions are fundamentally about discovering the external relationships that effect our concept of intelligence, and social, socio-economic, and historical evidences are generally agreed as being very relevant to figuring it out.

>>9178777
Man you got me, I thought you were serious at first and that got me to reply, but no one can be this retarded, should have known it was a troll.

>>9179215
There is no "ignoring" when trying to have a civilized discussion and halfway into the discourse the person you're talking to chimps out and start shouting nothing but racial drivel. It induces a sense of biased arguments and obviously details threads. If this happens every fucking time this type of thread pops up it's a waste of time to engage in the first place and it's a damn shame because the subject is interesting regardless of the implications of the data.

>>9179304
Derails*

>>9179304
>>9179305
>Wahh I can't ignore the bullshit emotional manipulations of someone's argument and simply look at the facts they are saying
>t. brainlet

>>9179215
>It could be logically concluded that the decades of giving charity and aid to African countries has harmed the intellectual growth of their people, has Taken Away their necessity to innovate and advance, and thus within them created (or spurred) the creation of a culture which does not need to work so hard mentally.

yes cause all those uncontacted tribes were just so advanced, they werent going anywhere anyways, giving them money was obviously a huge mistake though

>>9179331
Do you even history of Ethiopia?

No, no, for you sir
For you, start at the history of Liberia.

>>9177850

>>9179376
What does this mean?

>>9179381
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229401257_National_IQs_calculated_and_validated_for_108_nations
>Race matters

>>9177879
>So, it was pretty clear that humans in general don't have each one a particular intelligence(as multiple intelligence supporters claim to this day) but rather a general intelligence that influence all those areas
Nonsense, these tests all were about the same/similar kinds of intelligence, that's why the results are correlate.

Or are you claiming that there were tests to measure social or emotional intelligence?

>>9179381
That Africans are just as smart as you and me and all the differences in wealth and social status come down to systematic oppression and institutionalized racism.

Plotting iq against skin color is just asking for racism to blossom
be white->have money and support->get education->high iq
that's it desu famalam

Is there any article with some good tested numbers?

>>9179376
mean is still at 75 iq even including these excluded people. 85 iq for excluded only.

lol

It's obvious. Some races/geographics have shit IQ and bad genetics.

>>9177850
IQ MEGADUMP https://ufile.io/wvhb6

>>9177870
No, niggers are mentally inferior to whites. End of discussion

>>9179202
Scripture,Agriculture and units of time measurement for example spread from the middle east to europe. The middle east is the birth place of civilization

>>9179217
>Someone says something that goes against what I've been spoonfed by the ZOG so therefore they're from /pol/ and are trolling me

>>9179386
>Systematic Oppression
>Institutionalized racism
You probably think only white people can be racist too, don't you

>>9179498
>lol i don't understand how iq is calculated
Lynn study gives RAW figures of famine / war-torn / underdeveloped nations.
To develop meaningful data that proves that the IQ difference is genetic, Murray & Herrnstein (authors of "The Bell Curve") had to adjust the raw figure to answer the question "what would African IQ be if it was on the level of first-world nations?" Thus producing pic related "innate" black IQ of 85 starting from Lynn's base IQ of 69.
But if raw IQ figure was 80 instead, (which is what you get if you don't cherrypick the lowest IQ studies like Lynn & Meisenberg) the "innate" black IQ comes to 95, a statistically insignificant difference and turning Murray's findings into a big nothingburger.
tldr; there is no evidence for racial differences in intelligence or IQ.

>>9179323
>hey bro I got an extra apple, want one?
>sure dude kinda hungry
>ok np just dig through that pile of cowshit, apple is somewhere in there

dude just ignore the cowshit lmao

>>9177850
>hurr durr race maps to rgb triplet of your skin tone
The pic you attached is retarded even by retarded /pol/cuck standards

Genotype != phenotype

>>9177925
>psychology
>science
Wanna know how I know you're from /pol/ and not /sci/?

>>9177919
This.

Sampling and methodology was off, and he failed to mitigate bias in his research.

>>9179604
Why is it all the "race scientists" like Lynn, Rushton, Jensen, Murray, and so on are ALL psychologists and not geneticists? It's almost if being a brainlet is a prerequisite for falling for pseudoscience.

Here's a nice summary:
https://racialreality.blogspot.no/2011/08/devastating-criticism-of-richard-lynn.html?m=1

He flat out falsified data. Confirmation bias at its most insidious.

>>9179580
C+ rationalization

>>9179620
>>9179580
and Rindermann?

>>9179614
because geneticists are too smart to touch this topic

>>9179620
This summary is retarded. Wicherts literally agrees with him

>>9179667
What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

>>9179580
the raw mean is 75, not 80, with excluded people. the results would be still statistically significant.

niggers

>>9177850
I think, if anything, all it does is illustrate the hopelessness in the task of objectively measuring intelligence.

>poorer countries with worse infrastructure have lower iq
Woah

>>9179985
Mongolia has a double the average IQ of Equatorial Guinea.

>>9177850

skin tone is better conceptualized as a confounding variable w/ IQ. It correlatives with high IQ but it has nothing to do with the mechanism.

also, blacks on average have sub 80IQ and PHYSICALLY CAN NOT abstract their actions into past and the future as the average 100IQ can, they are physically incompatible with civilized society and if natural selection were allowed to work unchecked they would go extinct.

t. neuropsych grad student

>>9177870

are you a sociologist? do you literally that mankind transcends its biology? you are a fool. European colonization of Africa didn't lower african IQ, IQ is mostly genetic.

>>9180004
African countries are also corrupt as fuck and the government doesn't give a shit about education. I assure you that if Mongolia was half as corrupt as Equatorial Guinea it would also have a low IQ.

>Equatorial Guinea nominal GDP per capita: $14,176
>HDI: 0.592
>Mongolia nominal GDP per capita: $3,660
>HDI: 0.735

And I assure you this happens to every single sub-saharan African country. But let's just blame it all on genetics because lmao niggers xDD

>>9180020
>IQ is mostly genetic
How are people allowed to be this retarded? I thought this was a science board.

>race = skin color
And I thought /pol/tards couldn't get any more retarded

>>9180028

nice peer reviewed article.

>>9180022
>mongolia
>not corrupt as fuck
>unironically believes that IQ isn't genetic
All evidence points to this being the case, there has never been a successful study done showing that IQ is wholly based upon environment, the closest that's ever been done is proving that IQ is only 80% genetically derived.
Most that argue that all races are the same etc don't even try to argue that IQ isn't genetic because they know that such an argument is frankly retarded.

Lookup the Minnesota Trans-racial adoption study some time you willfully ignorant retard.

>>9180022
Also I appreciate that you totally disregarded your point that poor areas have lower IQ's because the existence of Mongolia demolishes such a notion entirely.

>>9180075
>>9180074
Did you read my post? Equatorial Guinea has a much lower HDI than Mongolia even though it has a much higher GDP. If that doesn't prove that Equatorial Guinea is way more corrupt and has way worse infrastructure than Mongolia then I don't know what will.

>>9180074
Also, genetic variability within races also exists. And what you're arguing here is intelligence, not IQ. There is no way IQ is 80% genetically derived because you can literally train yourself for IQ tests.

>>9180083
Perhaps you could actually look up studies on the corruption within Mongolia, you willfully ignorant retard.
Your argument is now not that poor countries having low IQ's but rather that corrupt countries have low IQ's. Mongolia is very corrupt yet it has a higher average IQ than every single country save Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea, Japan, China, Taiwan, Italy, Iceland and Switzerland.

Why is this?
It's far poorer than many of the countries which it has a higher average IQ than.
It's far more corrupt than many of the countries which it has a higher average IQ than.

Why then, does Mongolia have an average IQ of 101, quite coincidentally within the region of nigh on every other east asian nation.

>>9180095
>there is gentic variability among races
No shit, that's your argument?
Really?
That's all you've got?
Point to me where I said that there isn't genetic variation among races, point to me where I said we weren't talking about IQ averages.

IQ is the measure of intelligence you legitimate retard, holy shit.
>you can train yourself for IQ tests
This argues absolutely nothing, you can prepare your mind for strenuous activity, yes, just as you can prepare your body for strenuous activity by stretching, what's your argument here?

>>9180105
Yes, IQ is the abbreviation of "Intelligence Quotient" but I genuinely don't believe it actually measures intelligence itself, because intelligence is an abstract concept. Also, I think you misunderstood my argument. In the first place, I never said I thought intelligence wasn't genetic. I simply believe that enviromental factors matter more. You said that 80% of intelligence is genetic, but that doesn't apply to children who are still being educated aka influenced by enviromental factors. If you take an American graph that separates IQ by race and wealth you are able to observe that IQ differents are minimal, at most around 5 points. Those can easily be explained by the social and cultural differences between blacks and whites. By the way, can you make an argument without calling me a retard every 5 seconds?

>>9180124
>I genuinely don't believe it actually measures intelligence itself
Then what you "believe" is wrong.
> I simply believe that enviromental factors matter more.
Then what you "believe" is again, wrong.
>"but that doesn't apply to children who are still being educated"
Yes it does, education doesn't improve your intelligence, it improves your education. Your intelligence puts a cap on the level to which you can be educated.
>If you take an American graph that separates IQ by race and wealth you are able to observe that IQ differents are minimal
Where is this graph?
>Those can easily be explained by the social and cultural differences between blacks and whites
But what does that have to do with Mongolians having nearly twice the average IQ of Equatorial Guinea?
>By the way, can you make an argument without calling me a retard every 5 seconds?
Can you stop giving me cause to call you retarded?

>>9177870
There were niggers in Nortg Africa long before the ancestors of Egyptians migrated from the ME to North Africa. So niggers could have built civilization way before anyone but didnt because they are retarded savages.

>>9180022
Education is a meme retard your IQ determines if you can even be educated. Blacks have shit schools because they are too retarded to pass any grade above 5 at adulthood. Blacks fail because they are stupid end of discussion.

>>9177850
>Israel
Smart jews is a meme kek.

>>9180187
they are mostly stupid as any arab. the smart ones are in usa

>>9179831
No. It's 75 if you use every study.
But not every study should be used, both high and low. For example the "draw a man" iq test given to a bunch of children who have never used a pencil is obviously not going to produce a meaningful result.
Yet Lynn included it in his calculations, why? Because it had the result he needed.
An independent trio of scientists led by weicherts analyzed the studies ("dangers of unsystematic methodology" or something like that) and came up with raw IQ base of 80.

>>9179646
>I concede

>>9179560
fug

>>9179667
>Wicherts literally agrees with him
No.

>>9177850
repost from other thread

all these bell curve studies
comparing everyone to everyone else
but what about comparing themselves to themselves.
I wonder; while the race/phrenology touters will say there difference in intelligence between races and whatever.
I wonder if the race themselves are smarted than they were 20 years ago.
Like I know abbos, and africian tribals are dumber than white people
but are those abbos and african tribals smarter now than they were 20 years ago?
I think that is something those "race realists" don't really talk about

>>9180017
>blacks on average have sub 80 IQ

Source? Are we referring to those in Africa or Western Blacks? That seems absurdly low to me for an average.

>>9180687
see >>9179560
basically every other document

>>9177870
Black Lives Matter pls, go clog an airport or something

>>9180479
Wtf? the flynn effect is well known.

>>9181433
even if the flynn effect is real, i dont think there is any consensus on whether it reflects actual gains in IQ or just test bias

>>9177900
Because whites in differences with Asians are insignificant, but our creativity massive exceeds what's Asians are capable of.

>>9177912
Science proves pol right.

>>9180687
They are high functioning retards like most nonhuman animaks anon. They can do motor actions fine but thinky thinky is impossible for them. Thats why niggers act so different from retarded whites or asians.

>>9181438
The only IQ test we have, only tests for simple pattern recognition and number memory. Taking it multiple times in a row increases the score, hence why you can only take one such valid test a year. In twins studies, the educated twin always scores better than the uneducated twin, because education entails nothing but pattern recognition and memory. Similarly, those that play puzzle games score better than those who do not. Of course, as more and more of the population have occupations that depend on pattern recognition and memory, and as more and more of the population is more thoroughly educated, and as more and more of the population plays games centering around pattern recognition in memory, IQ test scores are going to go up.

That's all because IQ tests don't actually test intelligence. They only test how quickly you can shuffle red and white marked boxes into set patterns and how many numbers you can recite. Psychometry is psychology, and psychology is not science.

We can revisit this when we have a neurological based test that remains consistent, rather than a Myers-Briggs tier test that was originally designed to make emotionally troubled students feel better about themselves that's expected to vary by as much as fifty points each year, by who administers it, and by how long it was since the test subject ate something and what they ate.

>>9178537
Fuck yeah, Jews!

JEW.S.A! JEW.S.A! JEW.S.A!

>>9178623
The raw numbers come from a flawed copy of the dataset

Ireland, Sierra Leonne, and a few others are incorrect numbers, but the map shadings are correct. The IQ map was made with the correct dataset

>>9181438
>>9182098
You know, if all else fails, there's still SAT scores. They aren't made for measuring intelligence but, from what I've seen, they're pretty damn good at it.

>>9177867
IQ is a statistically rigorous construct and the most predictively valid construct in the entire field of psychology. But I see you didn't define "scientifically rigorous" so now you can go ahead and move the goal-post, and then when I show you that IQ meets your stupid extra criteria you can move the goal post again. Deniers gonna deny

>>9177870
>gives no definition or measurement of capability or potential
>gives no example of any historical negro population with exceptional cognitive ability, despite negros populating 3 continents for 4 hundred years

>>9179573
I think he was being facetious

>>9179620
>racialreality.blogspot.no

>>9182282
If only I had seen sooner the link name I would have realized that alone invalidates everything in it by default. Even the studies presented.

Thanks for the crushing argument, anon. At last I truly see.

>>9179566
Blacks and whites don't exist

Post the updated list of IQ tests, you moron
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3c4TxciNeJZNUVaZ0VhZ3dUMkk/view

>>9182237
>Atlantis
>>>/x/

>>9177850
btw, norway is 100 because its 20% invaders/immigrants

>>9177900
>how to destroy /pol/ in one post

>>9179580
Murray & Herrnstein never "adjusted raw figures to answer the question what would African IQ be if it was on the level of first-world nations" you fucking retard

Your pic comes from IQ scores of blacks [math]in\textrm{ }first\textrm{ }world\textrm{ }nations.[/math]

>>9177850

>sierra leone only 4 points below israel

>>9183210
Sierra Leone never got a score of 91
That's a typo that has been copied now thousands of times and that iq-research.info refuses to correct

>>9177900
>t-this will make people forget that we're at the bottom of the IQ list.
That damn /pol/ keeps tricking the people that you're as retarded as you sound just because you suck at global IQ tests too

>>9177850
With America having such racial diversity, like 20% something black, I'm skeptical it would be as white as depicted. Unless they only tested white people which would cause skewed results.

>>9177850
the IQ scores pretty much align with the historical and modern accomplishments of those countries.
You can't expect people to do great things if they can't even beat IQ tests.

>>9183224
It's 14% black at best and even that can vary lower!

>>9182213
Sat's are all about how much money you can dump into abkid education as a parent and how prepared you school can be at teaching kids the test.

>>9177867
Scientifically it's the brainlet level

>>9183190
>he hasn't even read the bell curve

>>9182098
Pattern detection is the easiest way to find retards and smart people. Seeing patterns like cause and effect are things intelligent people do. Retards like niggers just stare at the pattern for 10 minutes.

E.g any smart person will notice the pattern with niggers and violent crime, but a moron would never notice this thats why most blacks literally cant understand why their areas are violent.

>>9177850
>Majority of worlds population has sub 90 IQ
>Somehow mathematically this makes sense when IQ100 is supposed to be average

speaking of pattern recognition is it ever correct in the IQ test to go back over the pattern section to see if there's an over reaching pattern that exists in all the questions effectively changing the answer on some?

>>9183561
100 is the average IQ the country IQ was invented in
The average IQ of the world is about 90 (and it's declining thanks to Africa's population growth)

>>9182098
still more of a science than "climate science" studies is

>>9182098
still more of a science than "climate science" is

https://ourworldindata.org/intelligence/

>The methodology of their research has been heavily criticized for not having consistent measures of IQ across countries and for the way estimates were generated. For example, the average IQ of countries without data is reported as the average of neighboring or comparable countries. In addition to this, the way in which samples were either included or excluded in their analysis is unsystematic, potentially biasing their results. Thomas Nechyba’s review in the Journal of Economic Literature points out the following flaw:12

>The degree of IQ heritability, however, has no logical bearing on this issue. Even if we take the authors’ reading of the literature as given and assume that 80 percent of IQ is heritable, the entire observed cross country difference in IQ may be environmentally rather than genetically driven. Consider, for instance, a plant variety whose size is known to be 80 percent heritable. If we grow genetically identical seeds of this plant in two plots under the same initial soil conditions and then fertilize only one plot, the dramatic differences in plant height that emerge will be entirely driven by environmental factors despite the high heritability of plant height. The fact that some countries score lower on IQ tests than others thus has nothing to say about the degree to which IQ scores are genetically predetermined or the degree to which they will change under different circumstances. Developed countries may simply be like the plants that received fertilizer earlier for reasons having nothing to do with IQ.

>>9183596
ctrl-f Rindermann
>0 results

into the trash it goes

>>9183596
>IQ is not genetic
>Monkeys are always dumber than humans no matter how much they study.

>>9183607
you know how i can tell you're from pol?

>>9183620
because you have to go back?

>>9183626
because you cant understand what you dont want to.

When you approach adversity, your eyes stop seeing, your ears stop listening, and you just start screaming like a retard until people ignore you, and if people wont prove you wrong, you must be right.

>>9183626
(i wasn't to whom you replied, btw; just wanted to bring the bantz)

>>9183607
I don't see how the least genetically diverse primate not having giant, walled off genetic variance in intelligence directly relating to the geography precludes monkeys being below us in base intelligence?

james damore has struck me as quite knowledgable. tonight he claimed that he didnt think that biology had any responsibility for racial disparities. was he just avoiding a landmine or is this what he truly believes? is he right?

>>9183368
Not true at all. All the studying in the world isn't gonna get a brainlet a good score. Smart people do well regardless of other factors. I did the least studying (none) and got the second-highest score out of all my peers. The one who beat me did so just barely, and was acknowledged as being as smart as I was but with a better work ethic.

>>9177850
I think he under-estimates sub-saharan Africa, their IQs are low but I find it hard to believe the AVERAGE is 65. I could see something like 75-80, since black Americans have around 85-88 and have white admixture

>>9183753
some things are still verboten to say with your name attached to it if you don't want the mob to come after you

>>9184212
>Smart people do well regardless of other factors.

This just isn't true--SAT verbal directly tests a person's vocabulary, which has everything to do with what material the person has been exposed to.

>>9184478
I disagree. Smarter people have a greater capacity for retaining that information, and they can also pick up the material more quickly and with much less exposure.

Everyone has the opportunity to expand their vocabulary, to a good extent. Introspective kids will read and write; sociable kids will converse and learn through experience.

If you're unable to have constructive conversations, or you can't even pick up a book on your own, you probably have no business taking the SAT.

>>9179580
shitty graph, the hightest iq are white,

>>9183596
>Lynn and Vanhanen subscribe to the view that IQ is mainly inherited and argue that the lower IQ of these nations is what holds back development. To support this claim they make use of the correlations between standard of living measures and IQ. This conclusion rests on the direction of causality; if low economic development has held back the Flynn effect and prevented intelligence growth, the results of the study are flawed.

if they're suggesting the opposite direction of causality, you'd think they would have at least one example to point to. that is, some nation with high average iq and low development. armchair critics.

>>9179985
>lower iq results in poorer countries with worse infrastructure
Woah

>>9182249

In his defence I believe the Igbo have a fairly high iq (although I could be dead wrong).

Additionally, Sub-saharan Africa has a great deal of genetic diversity. Maybe something good in some corner of the continent came from that?

>>9183561

>Somehow mathematically this makes sense when IQ100 is supposed to be average

Yes, you're quite right. The mean IQ is a fair way below 100. However, because these scientists are Euro-centric (that's not necessarily a bad thing, mind you) it would make sense that they would try and understand the intelligence of other peoples as relative to Europeans. So they took the average score of Europeans, placed it at an attractive number, in this case '100' and judged the rest of the world off of it.

>>9183579

Also this.

>>9183596
>Lynn and Vanhanen subscribe to the view that IQ is mainly inherited and argue that the lower IQ of these nations is what holds back development. To support this claim they make use of the correlations between standard of living measures and IQ. This conclusion rests on the direction of causality; if low economic development has held back the Flynn effect and prevented intelligence growth, the results of the study are flawed.

if they're suggesting the opposite direction of causality, you'd think they would have at least one example to point to. that is, some nation with high development and low iq*. armchair critics.


*corrected.

>>9179571
You just can't help yoursef can you?

>>9177850
In the last study with the WISC-R in Africa that Lynn (and
Vanhanen) reported to substantiate their claim of low IQ
among Africans, the IQ of a small sample 10–14 year-old
childrenwas found to be around 60 (Lynn & Vanhanen, 2002).
However, the use of this sample is an error. The average IQ of
the people of Equatorial Guinea is based on a lengthy book
chapter (Fernández-Ballesteros et al., 1997). Although this
chapter reports research conducted among members of an
illiterate tribe in Equatorial Guinea, the WISC-R was not
administered to these Africans. The forty-eight children, to
whom the WISC (not the WISC-R) was administered, were
from Spain, not from Equatorial Guinea. Clearly, Lynn (and
Vanhanen) made a mistake in using this sample to estimate
average IQ of Africans.
The chapter clearly indicates that this study with 48 subjects was
conducted in Spain. The mean IQ is mentioned two times, the first time as
follows: “A similar design was used in our second experiment with fortyeight
subjects, 10 to 14-year-olds, attending a school for handicapped
children (63.025 IQ mean)” (Fernández-Ballesteros et al., 1997, p. 253). In a
later part of the chapter, the text clearly states that half of the subjects were
diagnosed as having brain organic disorders. The lead author (R. Fernández-
Ballesteros, personal communication, May 29th, 2007) indeed indicated to
us that this sample was Spanish.
Fernández-Ballesteros, R., Juan Espinosa, M., Colom, R., & Calero, M. D. (1997).
Contextual and personal sources of individual differences in intelligence:
Empirical results. In J. S. Carlson, J. Kingma, & W. Tomic (Eds.), Advances
in cognition and educational practice: Reflections on the concept of
intelligence, Vol. 4. (pp. 221−274)London, England: JAI Press Inc.

Why is North Korea colored in on Lynn's map? Are you telling me they've legitimately done IQ tests on the North Korean populace?

>>9185144
Kim Jong-un was tested as having an IQ of approximately 2.7 billion, so considering North Korea has 25 million people the mean IQ is clearly greater than 105 no matter how low the IQ of the general population.

>>9183543
>correlations
Not actually causation facts.

>>9178481
>innovations and revisionism are somehow what smart people do
Nope. Isn't IQ a valid measurement now?

If we are going to measure ethnic achievements and technological progress, then Amerindians are superior to europeans.

>>9186825
indulge me

>>9186831
Simple.
Europeans settle on europe: 40000BC
Amerindians reached Canada: 25000BC; then after the deglaciation (10000 years later) populated the rest of the continent in 15000BC

European crops date from 10000BC.
Amerindian crops date from 6000BC.

Europeans getting the bronze from other culture in 3200BC.
Amerindians reached the bronze age in 500BC approximately.

Also as a great factor:
Horse domesticated in 3000BC approximately.

Knowing that the rests of all amerindian populations of 14000BC to 10000BC were pretty much paleolithical-tier and all lived as nomads, practiced some artistic manifestations as european paleo-populations. It's safe to assume they started again in the paleolithic and had to morph the environment of woods, jungles and coasts to their convenience, the same the europeans did with their environment for thousands of years before the Neolithic.

Then let's compare:
Europeans lurking around as nomads: 30000 years.
Amerindians lurking around as nomads: 9000 years.

Europeans reaching the bronze age from other cultures after the Neolithic stage: 6800 years.
Amerindians reaching the bronze age by themselves without the influence of a culture thousands of years ahead of development: 5500 years.

Let's check also how many years have humans modifyed the horse population and environment: 37000 years.
Let's check how many years have amerindians affected the camelids of South-America, when the spaniards came: 16500 years. They had less than half the time, yet they already domesticated diverse species for food and whool. Llamas can carry up to 50 Kg.

And I didn't mention the disadvantages such as continental isolation (north-south and east-west), Niño fenomena that destroys coastal villages, less cultures to trade with, and no naval technology, iron, horses, wheel, and writting from north-african nor anatolian cultures.

Thus, Incas were superior to europeans. Their higher development rate was superior to europeans'.

>>9177867
IQ gauges your ability to perform well on IQ tests. it does NOT gauge any sort of inherent intelligence or learned knowledge, nor is it capable of distinguishing between the two.
that map shows us EXACTLY what we would expect: places with poorer education have poorer IQ scores. it's unfortunate that there is a correlation of skin tone and poor education.
concluding that skin tone might mean a lower IQ is fine, but concluding that skin tone causes or is caused by low IQ is idotic.

>>9186864
>it does NOT gauge any sort of inherent intelligence or learned knowledge
whoops, meant to say that all it gauges is learned knowledge.

>>9186867
Um no?

>>9186867
Raven progressive matrices are the exact opposite of what you're talking about.

>>9186848
makes sense actually

>>9186848
i disagree on them having only half the time/less, they would also be subject to progress on their way to reach the Americas. and given this perspective, the ratios seems closer to 1

maybe, if we went from the time that man left africa?

>>9177850
you mean flynn right?

unnormalized IQ scores have been constantly increasing, undeveloped countries/minorities just havent gotten the increases.

If you take the median IQ score from the 30s and normalized it with data from modern IQ tests, it would be sub 2-3 standard deviations.

were your grandparents retarded? quality of education at all levels got better.

>>9177870
The biggest problem with Africa is that long term agriculture is impossible.

Lack of mountains means rain just drops where it wants and if you don't get any your crops die, Egypt benefited from the massive nile floods that happened every year - no matter what.

Sub Saharan africans were forced to remain hunter gathers at the least and cattle farmers at the most.

>>9187023
No blacks are simply too impulsive fir agriculture.

You could put niggers in fucking Kansas wilderness and all they would make is savage paleolithic tribes.

>>9186883
>>9186887
>fluid and crystallized intelligence pseudoscience again
i want psychologists to leave.
even if your bullshit terms existed, the mere fact that i can study for IQ tests and improve my score by doing so discredits them as any good measure of "fluid intelligence"

>>9187029
They're so dumb omg! Ugh

>>9186848

But the Africans beat them to Iron

>>9184666
Kek trips, why are you trying to lead us astray?

Occam's Razor leads to the conclusion Africans are in general, less intelligent and more violent.

The mental gymnastics people go through to argue against this always amaze me.

I don't rule out the possibility of equal intelligence but I rule out the idea that we should make decisions based upon such a belief.

>>9183596
>The Global chart is copypasted from the Oceania chart
What the fuck is this

>>9187323
Because the statement 'africans are less intelligent' does not follow into 'africans are less intelligent because they are african'

>>9187323
We should decisions based on Occam's razor rather than scientific consensus?

>>9187333

Sure but you don't make decisions based upon the idea they are equal before it is in fact proven.

>>9187336

When it comes to making policy, yes.

>>9187343
>Sure but you don't make decisions based upon the idea they are equal before it is in fact proven.
Wew lad.

>>9186952
>not amerindians
If we are comparing ethnic groups, then Amerindians started existing in 25000BC. At that time they had worse technology than 30000BC europe. The comparison is legit.

>>9187333
Europeans 700 years ago were about as dumb as niggers are today, but the Catholic church forced them into eugenic breeding patterns

If you want the nigger population to become more intelligent, then you need to cut them off from welfare which encourages dysgenic breeding

US being so low isn't surprising but it's still disappointing nonetheless.

>>9187387
>the Catholic church forced them into eugenic breeding patterns
How so? If anything the pattern would be dysgenic, since intelligent people would get sucked up into the priestly class and so not procreate.

>>9187387
Um no AFRICAN niggers have IQs of 68 on average where as the average white medieval moron was 89.

You really have no clue how braindead negros are COMPARED TO ALL EURASIANS.

Euros didnt do no eugenics to get smart they simply got their intelligence from ice age mutations.

>>9187819
>Um no AFRICAN niggers have IQs of 68 on average
Fake news
>>9179376

>>9187824
You cant be suggesting that negros are even as smart as Native Americans.

Everywhere these things exist they are always the dumbest most subhuman pieces of shit in the country.

>>9177850
Group differences in intelligence has reached a scientific consensus outside of America.There is nothing to debate.

>>9187819
Where is the source on this?

>>9186864
This is beyond stupid, and your inability to formulate your argument makes me suspect that you borderline the ability level required to solve the captcha.

>>9187880
Not him but elaborate why

ever heard of lunaticoutpost? best damm site for all things conspiracy.

http://lunaticoutpost.com

>>9187828
>he didn't even read the thread
Found the dumb fucking nigger

>never practice thinking your whole life
>suck at IQ tests
..yes?

>>9184496
Come back when you have a version of the SAT that doesn't require any education.

The trick is to measure raw neurological potential, so that you can detect genetic and neurochemical environmental issues, while ruling out social changes, like, well, study habits or other factors, like self-discipline. In other words, to create an objective as possible Intelligence Quotient, worthy of the name.

IQ tests fail to do this, but SAT tests are even further removed from that goal.

On the other hand, I'll certainly agree that SAT tests are far more comprehensive and better predictors of performance (partly because they also open the doors to more education and better qualifications directly), but they depend on a much greater number of external factors than IQ tests do, and thus are even more useless when it comes to analysis of environmental factors.

Ya really need a test based around biology rather than psychology. Ideally, it'd let you compare the intelligence of animals to one another as well - even ones of the same species and breed. Preferably without killing them in the process.

>>9188002
>Ya really need a test based around biology rather than psychology
They are doing this by data mining the DNA of millions of individuals, thousands of which has been classified with high IQ. It doesn't matter if the IQ test is not perfect, or if there is an environmental dimension to IQ. As long as the sample is large enough they will manage to infer the DNA rules that account for intelligence.

>>9188002

This is dumb. If you get rid of the 'cultural' component of IQ tests, then you effectively have no way of measuring a core component of intelligent: how well you learn over longer periods of time. You can have someone with an excellent short term memory and ability to manipulate information in the moment, who is really shit at building up knowledge over years due to for example neuronal connections adapting too easily to short-term needs instead of having an effective balance of short and long-term adaptations.

>>9188377
there's a reason why Arthur Jensen refused to use the word "intelligence": because in 100 years no one has been able to effectively define it for purposes of rigorously studying it

>>9188387
Intelligence is the rate at which your brain processes and analyzes new information. This is why geniuses are basically computers in human bodies because of how fast their brain processes information. Brains have limits to how complex the information is they can process thats why a retard wont know long division, a moron wont know algebra, and an above average cant grasp quantum physics.

>>9188559

Bump

>>9187828
>most subhuman
Those would be europeans though.

>>9187877

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9vpqilhW9uI

hes lying.

>>9187828
one smelted iron, the other still used rocks

bump :^)

>>9177850
Why does sierra leone score 91? this seemes questionable...

>>9179614
>>9179664


Because IQ is in the domain of psychology you dumbfucks. What a surprise, the intelligence researchers who emerged from psychology happened to be psychologist using a construct developed by a psychologist.

In fact, the simple fact that racial differences in IQ is at best, only a strong statistical and predictable construct gives gene deniers a breath of relief because they realize that such information isn't super practical, nor is it definitive proof that race differences in IQ are biological. That's why they say arguments like "find the gene". They know their opponents can never find the gene that causes races to differ in IQ because nobody knows.

That's changing, and intelligence researchers and behavioral geneticist are teaming up with geneticist to start doing studies that used to cost thousands of dollars a decade ago to begin finding genetic correlates with intelligence. And guess what measure geneticist are using to find those correlates? IQ and academic success.

>>9183753
thats a big nose

>>9186864
Why do you keep repeating shit you don't understand? IQ is highly g-loaded, so it can be said that IQ is a very good proxy for intelligence as most people understand it.

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/1756-0500-3-206

Sadly, there has only been small study that looked at brain scans and psychometric cognitive test, but there are strong correlates between these cognitive tests and gray matter. .

>>9188002
IQ and specialized psychometric subtests are the closet thing in this world to a biological test of intelligence you're gonna get.

>>9190376
Hello IQ denier. I have a question. Why do you guys like to shit on Richard Lynn, Charles Murray and Hernstien...even though its those three who discovered and coined the term "Flynn effect" in the Bell Curve. What, did you think James Flynn discovered it? Why? Is their discovery that IQ has risen over time good for you because it feeds into your environmentalist determinism worldview so you accept it, while you trash them for evidence that races aren't equal. Go fuck yourself and your retarded "le inca are superior to europeans" way of thinking since I know its the same IQ denying twat that I always keep seeing pop in this thread.

If Incas were superior to Europeans because of the "speed" of their invention, then how come they didn't quickly adapt to European invention and become a world power? More importantly, this has no relevance to IQ and genetic differences in behavior.