/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9974522
>arguing with subhumans
It's just not worth it, anon.

>>9974522
No-one denies that environment can stop you reaching your upper iq peak. However those environmental elements like iodine presence have been more or less universally removed and now we know the biological limits of all. At some point blacks were on average taller than whites and now with equal diets whites are slightly taller.

However the claim that people in 1910 had much lower IQs is dubious. Firstly we can only infer past a certain date as IQ tests were only first formulated around that time and not widespread. They also changed a bit - the mathematical and abstract reasoning sub sections show people of the era getting comparable scores to us now.

Finally IQ isn't increasing in the west anymore, in fact it's begun to drop.

>>9974542
the tallest nations in 1900 were 5"7

we are just getting smarter and taller over time.

>>9974522

Well, the racial gap is mostly a function of gaps in g-loaded tests (https://benthamopen.com/contents/pdf/TOPSYJ/TOPSYJ-3-9.pdf)) and the Flynn effect's impact is negatively correlated with g-loaded subtests (http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/Is-the-Flynn-effect-on-g-A-meta-analysis.pdf)) so make of that what you will.

>>9974546
Not consistently in the west. Not to say we won't discover more dietary tricks but i think we've found a biological limit around 100 (relative to UK).

>>9974530
Is that Rich Evans on the left?

>>9974522
>/pol/ claims its not real
why are you even posting on /pol/
the flynn effect with regards to the existing data obviously exists, but the assertions made as a result of it are mostly hypothetical (that every third world country across the world will follow the same progression when they become developed). the cultural progression would take far longer than the development of the areas which would lead to IQ scores comparably lagging behind. it's also very possible that there are racial genetic differences in intelligence which account for a smaller part of the difference that would never really be removed unless genetic equality of outcome is mandated which is obviously an absurd notion.

As a person of altaic/anglo decent, I support this image macro as it is true.

>>9974522
The average IQ generation to generation is increasing, but more blacks and Arabs are breeding so the global average is being pulled down.

>>9974530

>>9974522
>mondern day africans have higher IQ than WWI europeans
Oh, you mean those africans who still can't figure out how to manage a farm or properly aerate a plot of land? Fuck off back to /pol/ and stop shitting up this board faggot.

>>9974788

>>9974522
Blacks have contributed very little to the list of memorable human historic events since forever, yet you claim they wuz WW1 europeans? You went full retard there friend. Don't do it again.

>>9974542
>IQ started dropping after WW2.
I wonder what happened after WW2?

>>9974546
>we are just getting smarter and taller over time.
no, the national height average is dropping across the west

>>9975153
Guess which population is sub-replacement rate, and which one is not

>>9974522
It's real, though it appears (and this should be obvious) to be a consequence of environmental factors, not genetic.

This means that a myriad of genes collectively encode for those elements which are relevant to intelligence and in perfect environmental conditions they are perfectly expressed.

Any degree of suboptimal environment will reduce the outcome from a potential maximum.

This is evidenced by the fact that intensive early childhood education programmes, of which there have now been quite a few, consistently have literally no effect on post-pubescent IQ.

IQ, which is a relative measure, originally rises in these kids as they are learning at an accelerated rate comparative to their peers, however, this boost completely disappears by ~18ish, indicating that all the additional education was doing, was speeding up the construction of a structure to an already specified plan.

Like having 6 workers on your house instead of 3 type thing. The outcome is always the same, difference is in how fast it is achieved.

All this is to say nothing of toxins, nutrition and the like, all of which also have an effect.

Though, it does appear that nourishment has less of an effect than might be expected, which is interesting.

The truth really is that basically you can't actually improve your intelligence, you can only attempt to prevent it being worse than it would be under optimal conditions.

The other problem is that people confuse knowledge with intelligence, but that's a conversation for another time.

>>9974522
IQ is renormalized over time meaning a retard today is probably smarter than the retard of yesteryear

>>9974522
No of course not. Humans are exactly as intelligent as they were when they were cavemen. Makes perfect sense.

>>9974522
Not many people know how bad pre Ww1 Europe was back in the day.

>>9975122
He never said that trigger boy.

>>9974995
>Oh, you mean those africans who still can't figure out how to manage a farm or properly aerate a plot of land?

But they can though why the hyperbole.