[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math


View post   

File: 26 KB, 600x405, 1418145942618.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7181295 No.7181295[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Why does /sci/ refuse to acknowledge racial intelligence differences?

>> No.7181300

1. These differences don't exist.
2. Intelligence means nothing. Just because some people are not good at thinking, that doesn't mean they're dumb.

>> No.7181305

>>7181295
Pretty sure the difference is around like half a standard deviation between white and blacks now. That graphs is pretty old.

>> No.7181308

>>7181305
In fact scratch that, it's now around 0.33 of a standard deviation, meaning the difference in average is about 5 IQ points.

http://people.virginia.edu/~ent3c/papers2/nisbett2012int.pdf

>> No.7181309

>>7181295
I can see the xerox

>> No.7181311

>>7181300
>1. These differences don't exist.

Burden of proof is on you.

>2. Intelligence means nothing. Just because some people are not good at thinking, that doesn't mean they're dumb.

I don't even feel it's necessary to deconstruct this sentence.

>>7181305
Source?

>> No.7181321

>>7181295
1. Because those studies are too fucking old to be relevant.
2. Because the distributions are much closer now.
3. Because you will never be able to pass a judgement on an individual according to the "likelihood" of a race.

Whites are also most likely to be uneducated rednecks, which you probably are OP.

>> No.7181322

I wonder how many times I've seen that same unsourced graph with the weird jagged curve.

>> No.7181323

>>7181321
>Because the distributions are much closer now.
Have you been to Sub Saharan Africa lately

>> No.7181324
File: 1.23 MB, 960x396, pol_enters_the_board.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7181324

>>7181295
...Yet more shit stormfront sourcing...

...Yet more refusal to put the Asian and Jew curves over that...

>> No.7181327

>>7181308

The only mentions in that article considering a closing gap:

Black gains in IQ.
Dickens and Flynn (2006a)
analyzed data from nine standardization samples for four
major tests of cognitive ability. They found that Blacks
gained 5.5 IQ points on Whites between 1972 and 2002.
The gap between Blacks and Whites on a measure of
g
had narrowed almost to the same degree, that is, by 5.13
points.
This reduction in the measured
g
gap occurred even
though the magnitude of Black gains on Whites by subtest
did not correlate highly with Wechsler subtest
g
loadings.
This is scarcely surprising, because the
g
loadings of
Wechsler subtests are very similar. If one multiplies the
Black on White gains by the
g
loadings of the subtests, and
then takes a weighted average, the downward shift from IQ
to “
g
Q” is very slight. Because all subtests measure
g
either
directly or indirectly, Blacks simply could not have gained
on Whites unless they had also gained in measured
g
.

>> No.7181328

>>7181327
If
Blacks eliminate the racial IQ gap, the measured
g
gap
must at least be greatly reduced. Evidence for this comes
from Eyferth (1961), who compared the children fathered
by Black and White U.S. soldiers in Germany after World
War II. His data show that the half-Black children matched
the White children not only for IQ but also for measured
g
(J. R. Flynn, 2008).
It is important to note that there is a dramatic decline
of Black IQ with age. Four-year-old Blacks are only about
5 points below Whites of the same age, whereas at age 24,
Blacks are 17 points below Whites. This could be, as it
seems, a loss with age. But it could be that younger cohortsof Blacks (those born five years ago) have had more fa-
vorable life histories than older cohorts of Blacks (born 24
years ago). If it is an age effect, it could have either
environmental causes (the Black environment becomes
progressively worse and worse relative to the White envi-
ronment) or genetic causes (genes dictate that Black cog-
nitive growth with age is slower than that of Whites).
The evidence for Black gains on Whites has been
challenged in terms of the selection of studies, the magni-
tude of the gains, and their implications. Readers are di-
rected to the exchange between Rushton and Jensen (2006)
and Dickens and Flynn (2006b). A major objection of
Rushton and Jensen was that Dickens and Flynn failed to
analyze the standardization sample of the Woodcock-John-
son III IQ test. Murray (2006) did that analysis and found

>> No.7181332

>>7181328
Black gains of a magnitude similar to those found by
Dickens and Flynn on the four other tests, though the gains
on the Woodcock-Johnson test came at an earlier time
period than those on the other tests.
One other recent study supports an environmental
hypothesis. Fagan and Holland (2007) studied different
samples of Blacks and Whites and found that whereas the
Blacks were substantially lower than the Whites in word
knowledge, they were equally capable of learning new
concepts and of making inferences. It may be that knowl-
edge is more influenced by environmental factors than are
learning or inferential ability. This result seems to contra-
dict the finding that Blacks tend to underperform Whites on
more heavily
-loaded tasks such as Raven’s Progressive
Matrices
So basically, there's evidence the gap may have lessened by about 5.13 points between 1972 and 2002 (The Bell Curve my graph is from was written in 1994). I'd be interested to know the decline of white IQs vs raising of black IQs and how that might affect it.

>> No.7181334

>>7181311
>shifting the burden of proof

>> No.7181338
File: 110 KB, 764x399, iq correlation.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7181338

>>7181324
That's because the purpose of the study that chart is from is comparing blacks and whites.

Whatever helps you feel better doe

>>7181321
>1. Because those studies are too fucking old to be relevant.

Research continues to be done. I'd like some evidence that can debunk it if you're going to claim it's "not relevant".

>2. Because the distributions are much closer now.

Apparantly at best a 5 point lesser difference.

>3. Because you will never be able to pass a judgement on an individual according to the "likelihood" of a race.

I never said anything about judging anyone. This is about racial IQ differences, which are scientific fact.

>>7181322
It's from The Bell Curve.

Pic related also from the Bell Curve showing the correlation of IQ and factors of social success among strictly whites. Notice how the same problems rampant in the black community are akin to those among low-IQ whites?

>> No.7181393

>>7181338
Short answer: it's caused by racial discrimination in the past.

>> No.7181403
File: 73 KB, 400x241, 1424610979085.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7181403

>>7181393
>it's whitey's fault!

These differences are even more extreme outside of America, American have upwards of 12-25% white ancestry, the average IQ of a sub-Saharan African is a full standard deviation lower than American blacks, which is a full standard deviation below the White average.

Please I'm interested, what past racial discrimination accounts for racial IQ and school performance disparities in the present? The Chinese faced plenty of racial discrimination and they test higher than Whites.

>> No.7181446

>>7181295
it makes for awful threads and it attract /pol/tards who don't know the first thing about science

>> No.7181449

>>7181403
it has been demonstrated that the lower IQs reproduce more and since it is a hereditary trait(~70%) could influence how that is distributed

>> No.7181456

>>7181403
If there's wider variation between people of the same race in different countries than between people of the difference races in the same country, doesn't that tell you that IQ is more affected by culture and affluence than by genetics?

>> No.7181485

>>7181323
Have you?

>> No.7181522

>>7181295
1. There is growing evidence that IQ is as much or more affected by nutrition and environment during childhood than by genetics.
2. You're a bad person, and you should FEEL bad.

>> No.7181526

racism goes to >>>/pol/

>> No.7181531

>>7181526
Racism goes to >>>/trash/
>yeah yeah I know same difference

>> No.7181580

>evolution is real
>theres no possible way innate difference can occur
>we're all equal and the same
>but diversity is good and important

Why is the environmental hypothesis unreasonable?

Acclimating to Africa demands traits that are not identical to acclimating to Europe, Asia, etc.

>> No.7181610
File: 56 KB, 700x525, copiando.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7181610

>>7181332

Obviously what's happening is that Asians have taught Blacks how to cheat on standardized tests.

>> No.7181614
File: 145 KB, 1049x929, Templeton_1999_AA_Fig1_Fst_for_humans_mammals_compared.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7181614

>>7181580
>Acclimating to Africa demands traits that are not identical to acclimating to Europe, Asia, etc.

The main problem with human diversity theories is that humans are just not very diverse.

>> No.7181642

>>7181311
>Burden of proof is on you.
That's not how that works.
Burden of proof is not on him. You must prove that they exist before you can have this argument. There is no reason for them to inherently exist, so if they do exist, it's your job to prove it.

>> No.7181677

>>7181580
>>7181403

You know nothing of recent history if you think that continental Africans had it any better than African-Americans during the colonial period (late 1800s-1980s). The gap between your assumptions and reality is too vast for me to begin to summarize.

In order to get an accurate assessment of natural black IQ you would need to study a first-world population that had never been enslaved or colonized. There aren't any. Europe butchered Africa and pulped the corpse for every drop of blood.

You'd have to restrict your sample to native Ethiopian Africans and sift out the descendants of black refugees from literally everywhere else.

>> No.7181685

>>7181677
>muh oppression
fuck off with that shit back to English class.
come back when you have some real empiricism.

>> No.7181691

>>7181677 contd

At any rate: the gap isn't consistent across all environments. Racial IQ gap exists in the the same way that gendered mathmatical aptitude exists; women from cultures in which girls and boys are expected to have equal skills in mathematics tend to have math skills equal to (or greater than) those of their male peers. And minorities in racially mixed cultures tend to score lower, overall, than the dominant social group or the majority. (The exception, of course, is when the minority dominates the majority. See: the creation of South Africa.)

>> No.7181695

>>7181642
>There is no reason for them to inherently exist
There is no reason for chimps to be dumber than humans though so intelligence differences in animals is a very real thing retard

>> No.7181702

>>7181677
>In order to get an accurate assessment of natural black IQ you would need to study a first-world population that had never been enslaved or colonized. There aren't any.

then who gives a shit what "natural black iq" is. would be equally useful to ask what the average iq of a hobbit is

>> No.7181713

>>7181685
>>7181685

idiot incapable of grasping causality detected

It's called epigenetics and common sense, you illiterate pedant. Guess what happens when you enslave and kill 20,000,000 adults, torture and starve the remaining population, destroy their agriculture, and harvest all the profitable local plant life to the point of extinction in exchange for a fistful of glass beads and an inch of copper wire?

The DRC is what happens.

Repeat ad nauseum for the rest of the continent, save for Ethiopia.

>> No.7181715

>>7181695
Not him but you are really retarded.

>> No.7181716

>>7181677
>In order to get an accurate assessment of natural black IQ you would need to study a first-world population that had never been enslaved or colonized. There aren't any. Europe butchered Africa and pulped the corpse for every drop of blood.

Well.

http://www.chron.com/news/article/Data-show-Nigerians-the-most-educated-in-the-U-S-1600808.php#src=fb

>> No.7181730

>>7181695
there isn't really much of an intelligence difference. on the IQ scale the difference in the image is marginal from an ecological standpoint.

i think it's worth considering sociocultural factors in an analysis regarding such a sociocultural subject as race. like access to decent education or a cultural emphasis on academic achievement. then if we seek out where those problems stem from we can formulate a strategy to close that gap, which is pretty compelling imo.

>> No.7181742

>>7181730
Black didnt invent jackshit in their 10000 year existence thats all the proof needed to show they are stupid fucks on average.Even the native americans in South America developed advanced architecture and they still have lower IQs than European whites.

The average African IQ is also around 72 thats how fucking stupid niggers are they are literally the level of intellect where a white would be diagnosed a retard.

>> No.7181745

>>7181742
>>>/pol/ is that way

>> No.7181751

>>7181702

the point is that correlation is not equal to causation

"being black is correlated with lower IQ... must be because they're black!"

>> No.7181755

>>7181716
That's a skewed population though. Most Nigerians who get into the US get in through the H-1B visa which requires a bachelor's or master's depending on where you are (in the case of nigeria it's a masters) and even then you have to meet these pretty demanding school and work requirements if you want to stay in the US. So of course most of the Nigerians who are in the US are high-achieving.

Off-topic, I knew a first generation Nigerian kid in my high school who was super fucking smart and ended up going to some ivy league, Cornell for math and EE I think. Also there's a good deal of PhD students at my school (U of Minnesota) from Nigeria

>> No.7181788
File: 17 KB, 429x241, male_female_bell_curve_.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7181788

>>7181295
Brainwashing.

>> No.7181858

>>7181300
God bless you, sir.

>> No.7181926

>>7181642
Different anon, the default theory is that everything is different from everything else. Any two real objects you call the same can be easily examined to find differences. This means the burden of proof is on him to show that either a) there are no differences between humans or b) the differences that do exist are negligible and thus not worth considering.

However, there is also a burden of proof on racists for a similar reason. They have to prove that the differences which exist are ordered instead of chaotic (ie whites are less different than other whites compared to non-whites).

>> No.7181931

>>7181295
Isnt it something like a .2 correlation between race and IQ? That isnt shit. It's nothing.

Take your bullshit elsewhere OP.

>> No.7181995

>>7181788
>Muh facts.
Rapist detected.

>> No.7182027

>>7181995
it's still real.
go back to tumblr if you didn't want to be offended

>> No.7182106

>>7181614
>FST between human race is ~.15
>FST between breeds of dogs is ~.15

>> No.7182121

>>7181295
i bet this gap wouldnt exist if americans actually tried to integrate slaves back into society 150 years ago

>> No.7182137

>>7181295
Who fucking cares, nerd? Go back to, /pol/, I have more important stuff to worry about.

>> No.7182141

>>7182121
You must be poor because you do not seem wise concerning money management.

>> No.7182144

>>7181300
Unfortunately they do. But possibly not between races but among us humans. I find that fucking unfair. Fuck evolution. Why are there people smarter than me? Why couldn't I have had those genes?

>> No.7182150
File: 26 KB, 811x603, Chromosome_Numbers_in_Different_Species.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7182150

>>7182106
>FST between breeds of dogs is ~.15

Nope.

https://www.princeton.edu/genomics/kruglyak/publication/PDF/2004_Parker_Genetic.pdf

>> No.7182151

>>7182106
But that's wrong you retard.

>> No.7182196

You don't have to be a genius to realize that blacks are dumber yet most of the above average intellect people on this board cant see that...or refuse to admit that.

>> No.7182203

i heard there was a race thread here so i came from pol to check it out

i dunno about iq, but how do you guys look at skeleton differences and not arrive at the conclusion that human races do indeed differ? how can you do any amount of studying into biological anthropology and not see major differences?