/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.9234514]

what's the best evidence that there is no racial iq gap?

[Anonymous No.9234515]

>>9234514
/pol/

[Anonymous No.9234517]

>>9234515
i want to talk science, not shit on blacks

[Anonymous No.9234523]

[Anonymous No.9234528]

>>9234514
the answer is 5 right?

[Anonymous No.9234532]

>>9234528
i think it is 2

[Anonymous No.9234533]

>>9234514
The fact that that majority-black African countries are just as developed and sophisticated as any European or SE Asian nation.

[Anonymous No.9234537]

Trivial.

Races don't exist thefore there cannot be a gap between things that do not exist.

[Anonymous No.9234552]

>>9234537
WE

[Anonymous No.9234556]

>>9234514
it kinda seems there's a correlation between race and average iq, read Hysenck or however it's written, but there's the chicken and egg problem
answer is 2

[Anonymous No.9234564]

http://www.unz.com/article/the-iq-gap-is-no-longer-a-black-and-white-issue/

[Anonymous No.9234655]

>>9234533
Majority-black African countries like the US?

[Anonymous No.9234681]

>>9234552
WUZ

[Anonymous No.9234685]

>>9234564
Racists BTFO

[Anonymous No.9234700]

>>9234681
KANGZ

[Anonymous No.9234723]

>>9234532
Yeah it's probably 2.

[Anonymous No.9234725]

Whats the pattern?

[Anonymous No.9234733]

>>9234725
sorta hard to explain but here's basically how i grok it. the operation on the dots is contextual depending upon whether either of the cells has dots in the middle. if there are none in either cell, you add the dots. if there are dots in the middle, you perform a subtraction operation on whichever side has more dots.

row 1: subtract left from center
row 2: no dots in center; add all dots
row 3: dots in center, subtract dots in center from left, result = 4 dots, answer 2

column 1: no dots in center; add dots
column 2: dots in upper cell, none in middle, so subtract, resulting in 3 dots
column 3: 1 dot in upper cell, none in middle, so subtract, result = 4 dots, answer 2

[Anonymous No.9234735]

>>9234725
Dots outside the square are like negative numbers

Dots inside the square are like positive numbers

Third column is sum of previous two. I don't think the spatial arrangement of the dots matters, except whether they are outside or inside the boxes

[Anonymous No.9234740]

>>9234735
check out the big brains on brad

[Anonymous No.9234742]

>>9234740
Salty because you couldn't get it on your own?

[Anonymous No.9234745]

>>9234735
[cont]

just realized it works down the columns too, neato

[Anonymous No.9234746]

>>9234742
i got it but didnt realize that it mapped onto negative/positive numbers like that

[Anonymous No.9234757]

>>9234735
>>9234745
>Dots outside the square are like negative numbers
>Dots inside the square are like positive numbers
Actually it's the opposite

[Anonymous No.9234761]

>>9234757
think again

[Anonymous No.9234764]

>>9234761
It was a joke, but it's still true. Whether the dots inside are negative and the ones outside are positive or vice versa does not matter

[Anonymous No.9234771]

>>9234514

That's a tough one. Probably some leftist publication claiming so without any evidence to back their claims. Maybe some intelligent single individuals?

Anyway, none of that matters because it's been well established that the racial iq gaps are very real.

The only problem is that "race" is somewhat poorly defined, but everyone knows what it means in this context.

[Anonymous No.9234772]

>>9234517
But /pol/ is the best evidence. It's a melting pot of users from all over the world, yet their IQ is quite uniform

[Anonymous No.9234791]

>>9234771
It matters from a social justice / intervention perspective. Why are blacks underrepresented in jobs that require high IQ? Either it's systemic oppression, which 50% of the population believes, or its due to innate difference and the nature of bell curves. For two generations now we've been giving blacks special treatment to try to help them catch up, to not much success. For 50% of the population, this just means that blacks are even more oppressed than we thought. Or it simply could be because if the black IQ is a standard deviation below the white IQ, at elite levels blacks will be underrepresented by a factor of 30x or more. This is literally one of the most important topics in American society today and no one wants to talk about it openly.

[Anonymous No.9234804]

>>9234791
it's established that they have lower IQ, the science isn't the problem. The problem is getting people to stop talking about systematic oppression. They don't care about science.

[Anonymous No.9234808]

>>9234771
>>9234791
I think that the gaps exist is pretty firmly established. The pertinent question now is why do those gaps exist. That they persist even when controlling for socioeconomic status, in adoption studies, behave as you would expect in mixed race individuals (IQ in the middle), etc provides strong evidence for a genetic component. The problem for liberals is that politically it is devastating for them if there is any genetic component at all. This forces them into a position that is difficult to support in the face of overwhelming contrary evidence. Even most white nationalists that tout this stuff will concede that environmental differences compromise some part of the gap.

[Anonymous No.9234822]

>>9234537

races dont exist but genetic clusters exist and they correlate both with IQ differences and with ethnic groups

[Anonymous No.9234825]

>>9234804
yeah but is it established that this is from genetic factors and not environmental factors?

i know there were some adoption studies, that doesn't remove environment completely though. they were still carried to term by a black woman likely living in a bad environment

[Anonymous No.9234826]

>>9234772

[Anonymous No.9234831]

>>9234791

It's hilarious because capitalism would severely punish anyone oppressing black people if blacks were to be as competent as white people are on average.

Everyone not oppressing blacks would have a significant advantage over those who did choose to oppress them, because they'd have a larger supply of competent employees to hire, which would lead to the oppressing companies to dwindle down and die due to not being able to keep up with the fair non-oppressing companies.

It makes zero sense for a company to oppress blacks.

Obviously this would lead to any other oppressing faculties to stop existing, because said powerful tolerant companies would be more than glad to take the oppressed blacks "under their wing" to keep a steady line of competent employees coming to them.

[Anonymous No.9234834]

>>9234825
not firmly established.

>>9234791
Intervention except in the most extreme case is pretty stupid. If blacks have as high IQ, it's still stupid to intervene. As long as we live in a capitalist society, making stupid choices will have effects, a company that discards competent workers for arbitrary reasons will fail and one that makes smart choices will take its place.

[Anonymous No.9234852]

>>9234825
i'd be interested to know whether the minnesota transracial adoption study did any work to screen out children from poor neonatal environments.

there is also the fact that whites from the bottom 20% SES outperform blacks in the top 20% SES, although that assumes that wealthier blacks can properly care for a fetus. who knows, maybe they cant

[Anonymous No.9234897]

>>9234852
>there is also the fact that whites from the bottom 20% SES outperform blacks in the top 20% SES, although that assumes that wealthier blacks can properly care for a fetus. who knows, maybe they cant

I mean I've seen how whites from the bottom 20% of the SES behave and care for children, it's not good. I have a family member who does speech therapy for poor white trash kids, they feed them Mountain Dew out of baby bottles lol

Is it really that bad? Do you have a link to the study(ies) that found this?

[Anonymous No.9234898]

>>9234514
IQ isn't /sci/, but one good thing to point out is that historical IQ in single populations has increased by a larger factor than any currently claimed gap in populations of the world.

[Anonymous No.9234901]

>>9234514
8

[Anonymous No.9234902]

>>9234514
Because /pol/, race isn't a scientific concept.

Genes can obviously correlate to physiological differences, but race has nothing to do with genetics and is simply superficial categorization by laymen. Race is based on the feelings and mood of the racist, nothing else. If they feel you're a a race, then you are that race to them regardless of your genetic makeup.

[Anonymous No.9234904]

>>9234897
here's the cite from Jensen's book The G Factor. there might be newer work, idk

[Anonymous No.9234907]

>>9234898
How does that graph work is it in comparison to the average of the start, because surely that's impossible otherwise

[Anonymous No.9234911]

>>9234902
race has nothing to do with genetics?

look, i understand that the scientific concept of race is different than the social, and that humans don't really qualify as the former. however, there are certainly ethnic groups that have different phenotypes in humanity. there are genetic differences that will, at least roughly, map to different "races"

[Anonymous No.9234912]

>>9234902
so call it genetic ancestry or base it off self-reporting you pedantic fuckwit. the gaps dont go away when you redefine the problem.

[Anonymous No.9234919]

>>9234907
Just look at the black line, according to the chart, IQ rose 30 points over 100 years. That's only 3-4 generations. The other graph
>>9234904
shows a 20-30 point rise apparently due to socioeconomic status in "whites". Note that poor blacks and poor whites score the same on that graph. Obviously there's loads of factors that affect this shitty metric, it's psuedo-science.

[Anonymous No.9234925]

>>9234791
>Either it's systemic oppression, which 50% of the population believes, or its due to innate difference and the nature of bell curves.
I'm taking the bait but what is this shitty false dichotomy...

[Anonymous No.9234930]

>>9234514
>>9234528
>>9234532
>>9234556
>>9234723
>>9234725
>>9234733
>>9234735
>>9234757
>>9234761
>>9234764
>>9234901
Correct answer is actually this. Trick question. Enjoy your sub-150 IQs bros.

[Anonymous No.9234932]

>>9234723
>>9234725
you can justify any pattern, for any set of data points there is a function that describes them

[Anonymous No.9234936]

>>9234932
Found the brainlet

[Anonymous No.9234940]

>>9234919
muh myers briggs!

[Anonymous No.9234980]

>>9234936
>brainlet
oh no :(

[Anonymous No.9234989]

>more IQ threads
thank goodness there's always someone like >>9234919 here to clear things up.

[Anonymous No.9235000]

>>9234936
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagrange_polynomial
>>9234936
https://books.google.com/books?id=kwBpDQAAQBAJ&lpg=PA242&ots=QD-kJm5XD3&dq=leibniz%20formula%20that%20goes%20through%20set%20of%20points%20ink&pg=PA242#v=onepage&q=distinguish%20between%20points%20that%20are%20chosen%20at%20random%20and%20those%20that%20obey%20some%20kind%20of%20a%20scientific%20law&f=false

[Anonymous No.9235013]

>>9234930
I wonder how many people on here actually have >150 IQ. I've been tested, by a psychologist, not online, to be as high as 160 and I know there are people on here who are better at math than me, and are likely smarter than me in general.

[Anonymous No.9235015]

>>9235000
But Mr Brainlet. Some answers are more likely than others. The probability that your answer is the right answers decreases with the complexity of your answer.

The obvious sequent of the sequence 1 2 3 4 is 5. It's not 2231/343 for some shitty whack polynomial. And it's not 7 even though 1 2 3 4 5 7 is perfectly valid sequence.

The interesting thing would having a good measure of complexity and arbitrariness of a rule. Kolmogorov complexity somewhat covers that.

[Anonymous No.9235022]

>>9235015
> philosophy

[Anonymous No.9235030]

>>9235015
What I said can has obvious rigorous direct approaches. If you want to dismiss it as philosophy...

[Anonymous No.9235233]

>>9234919
> psuedo-science
aka science i dont like
contrast with
> real science
which means science i like

its no worse no better than most other social science research

[Anonymous No.9235355]

>>9234930
How did you arrive at that result my <150 IQ friend?

[Anonymous No.9235544]

>>9234514
recent study on Syrian refugees and their change in IQ etc

a lot of measured intelligence is exposure to patterns, and gaming

the rest is will power and discipline

genius is the only magic

[Anonymous No.9235554]

there's no point in talking to these kinds of people in my experience (iq gloaters) because they waste most of their lives stuck in autistic loops like most brainlets

they'll publish a few white papers no one reads, they will rarely ever challenge themselves, they won't have a strong social network or well developed family nucleus and don't care for it

they won't pursue creativity because they just wanna jerk off most of the time like the rest of us :(

[Anonymous No.9235606]

>>9234930
nice trick bro, but see what do you make of these

[Anonymous No.9235621]

>>9234533
Ahahahahahahhahaha
Not even close

Captcha: park WRONG

[Anonymous No.9235852]

>>9235606
this one has been cracking me up for several years now

[Anonymous No.9235871]

>>9234514
You ask that question like you want to BELIEVE! before looking at the evidence.

[Anonymous No.9235874]

>>9234514
dots outside = +
dots inside = -

Row 1 = +4 + (-5) = -1
etc for rows and columns

row 3 = +7 + (-3) = +4 = 4 dots outside: Only distribution pattern shown is in first square and only possible answer

brainlets

[Anonymous No.9235878]

>>9235871
OP here. i've looked at a ton of evidence at it points me at there being both a genetic and environmental explanation. probably around 50% but who knows. it's really destroying me inside though. i want to take the fucking blue pill. :(

[Anonymous No.9235882]

>>9235355
He did it by making shit up

[Anonymous No.9235917]

I'd wager the "genetic" difference is due to epigenetics. A black baby whose parents lived in the ghetto doing drugs and living like animals is going to have the favorable genes switched off (eg: work ethic, thinking things through, etc.), regardless of the environment. When living in a place with good values and priorities, the difference will disappear after a few generations. "Race" isn't the factor insomuch as third-world ghettos here in America are correlated with it because history.
Just my take.

[Anonymous No.9235936]

>>9235878
I know, it's not pleasant to think about. Fortunately, if there is a substantial genetic component we should be able to fix it in the not too distant future.

[Anonymous No.9235941]

>>9235874
I also followed this logic however I would say it is on a per-side basis based on the given examples and the correct shape is not shown. Or alternatively there are multiple correct answers. I'd argue its a bad question.

[Anonymous No.9235944]

>>9235606
but the gray square thing is true

[Anonymous No.9236196]

>>9234514
There is a racial IQ gap though
Look how subsaharan african countries get Tons of foreign aid and still cant really build a Basic house or Farm on their rich soil, meanwhile debt slave bitch Japan is over 200% in debt But they still have infrastructure and food

[Anonymous No.9236232]

>>9234733
also you could just say:
-dots outside the square are negative
-dots inside are positive
-third square is their sum

[Anonymous No.9236235]

>>9235878
OP, just because niggers have on average lower IQs than whites, doesn't mean all blacks are unintelligent. There are many blacks who are smarter than most whites, but that doesn't change the average. Does it upset you that Asians are on average smarter than whites? Doesn't bother me one bit, not sure why nigs get so butthurt about it.

[Anonymous No.9236243]

>>9234825
It's pretty well established that a large component of it is genetic. Anybody who says otherwise is seriously deluded. If there were no genetic limitations, race did not exist, and everything was environmental, the comforts of suburbia would turn all blacks into 130+ IQ professionals in a generation.

Of course environment plays a role, but let's not overemphasize it.

[Anonymous No.9236245]

>>9236235
This. People get wwwaayyy too emotional about this topic. It is clear that some people cling to "racial creationism": the belief that all races simply fell out of the sky, and their differences are only skin deep. It seems rather cultish to me.

Propaganda is very effective. Humans are emotional creatures, and the elites have mastered manipulating the heartstrings of the masses.

[Anonymous No.9236289]

>>9234564
Fuck that's a good article

[Anonymous No.9236331]

>>9235606
Fuck I love that pic

[Anonymous No.9236562]

>>9235917
>>9235917
>Racial IQ gap inquiries usually involve a black/white comparison, so we'll just cover that.

I'd wager with a few more generations of degeneracy (because solutions are racist, also KANGS), they'll have no hope of recovery even with possibility of epigenetics. Inbreeding is evident in U.S. black minority and that's a permanent fuck up right there.

Add to this that African genetic stock is not predisposed to select for intelligence and it's a tough call.
>Africa is rich in resources, so why plan for the long term? It will be given to me.
That mindset is ingrained in many African countries, if not all. Not particularly smart.

>Back to America
Basically, most prolific gangbanger is king and breeds the women there. Those children interbreed and rarely travel outside their ghetto. Generations are short as teen pregnancies are a common sight. With a disproportionately high number of fatherless homes and women that are somehow even dumber than the gangbangers they fuck, the lack of guidance is a feedback loop that fast-tracks what we know happens to inbred groups.

For mental health and cognitive capabilities, the endgame case study is already in Islamic countries where incest has been a continual problem for decades. Even average is low functioning and characteristically aggressive (utilizing an axiom that the dumb must be tough and weak must be smart, both are successful strategies in their own way). Take note that the current flavor of extremism that stoked those flames is under a hundred years old.

The black minority in the U.S. is nearly 60 years strong into these shenanigans since the welfare state. It's not long before the staggering majority will have no choice but to become a perpetual underclass. They will not be able to make up for it even if they wanted to.

tl;dr - IQ gap will grow and nothing can stop it.

You can tell it gets worse by watching the progression of WorldStarHipHop year by year. The savagery only gets worse.

[Anonymous No.9236572]

>>9236235
I guess it comes down to wanting to be plugged back into the matrix. I have a very liberal gf who has bought in hook line and sinker into the systemic oppression myth. Good fucking luck trying to even mention that there could be the possibility of some innate differences causing aggregate differences in outcome. Regardless of whether there are some exceptional blacks at the far tails. Most people, especially liberals, seem to have a difficult time reasoning about claims made about populations, and instead project those claims onto every member of the population.

[Anonymous No.9236600]

>>9235013
Over 145 seems to be pretty meaningless to me, too many minute disturbances in testing can fuck shit up.
Honestly IQ seems most relevant between 85 and 115. That's where shit radically changes the trajectory of your life. If you have over a 120, you can do like 90% of career paths, and 125 is like 99% if you worked hard, so even if you legit had a 160, it probably won't change much for you without actually working at shit.

[Anonymous No.9236605]

>>9235917
You seem to be falling into the wishful thinking I used to.
Just because something could be a factor, which I guarantee epigenetics is, doesn't mean that genetics won't also be a factor.
And considering basically anything about humans we can measure shows some slight trends with race (not discounting the whole more variation within a race than between them thing that we all fucking know about) and how demonstrably proven it is that genetics hugely affects IQ, it would be shocking if there WEREN'T slight differences.
Probably not the literal race of retards differences purported by the alt right and those cunts, but probably something big enough to measure.

[Anonymous No.9236618]

>>9234791
Source?

[Anonymous No.9236620]

>>9234831
>exploiting underskilled labour as more or less every company does
>makes no sense

[Anonymous No.9236984]

>>9235606
this was confusing at first because the checkerboard one is real

cut out a block in paint and move it to the other square. its exactly the same color

[Anonymous No.9237002]

>>9236618
Source for what claim specifically?

[Anonymous No.9237026]

>>9234772
But pol isn't white, therefore nonwhites are dumb

[Anonymous No.9237150]

>>9234564
Brilliant article, thanks based anon

[Anonymous No.9237198]

>>9236232
this is what I did but the answer I came to is not listed...

[Anonymous No.9237220]

>>9234514
>not coming up with your own logic ruleset and an answer that is not in the set of possible answers
poor turbobrainlets.

[Anonymous No.9237238]

>>9235233
actually, no. read karl popper

[Anonymous No.9237242]

>>9234514
Nigerians in America

[Anonymous No.9237285]

>>9235621
I think that was the intention of his post

[Anonymous No.9237294]

>>9237150
I don't think it rules out genetics by any means by rather provides additional weighting towards the environmental part of the equation.

[Anonymous No.9237385]

Look at this thread on a science boar where no scientifically answer is given only
>MUH FEELINGS

You’re all pathetic

[Anonymous No.9237408]

>>9237198
4+(-5)=-1
3+2=5
7+(-3)=?

you clearly had a brainfart try again

[Anonymous No.9237512]

>>9237385
Yup. This board is all about muh feels now. Data means nothing to them

[Anonymous No.9238481]

>>9237385
Fucker, did you even check the sources on the picture or did you just save a cute pic to justify whatever beliefs you have?

[Anonymous No.9238485]

>>9234733
>>9236232
Cool. That was hard to notice!

[Anonymous No.9238504]

>>9237220
>not rotating the internal dots 90 degrees clockwise before applying the rule
Who's the brainlet now.

[Anonymous No.9238509]

>>9234514
First prove IQ tests can definitively restrict intelligence in terms of genetically similar groups while accounting for environmental factors that could potentially play a large role in how one might perform on said tests and therefore eliminate any provable genetics to intelligence correlation when using only those tests to prove that correlation.

[Anonymous No.9238514]

>>9238509
point being no one's been able to prove that, meaning IQ tests aren't a valid or scientific metric of "intrinsic" intelligence, at least in terms of genetics.

[Anonymous No.9239253]

>>9236562 is right. Seems to be the only person looking up from the graphs to see the context. If the resources provide for generations without stop, there is no true concern as to the future. The rough atmosphere in the caucus is a trial to live in in comparison to Africa.

/Sci/ is still no different then /pol/ in that they both completely ignore the simple conclusion in exchange for the opportunity that data provides to condemn they're undesirables. They also want to feel as distant from these issues as possible while still giving input. Who is going to get an African to sit down at will and tell them to look at charts A, B, and C and tell D's pattern based off of its predecessors with full expectation of a care in the solar system? The only way an IQ gap could be detected is through a time-traveling MENSA rep. to pre-colonial sub-Saharan Africa. Only the Nigerian immigrant with full bearing would be willing. The rest of the plant-picker's children give no fucks about the projects their former owners have for them. The only thing motivating the incredibly small stock of blacks that succeed in America regardless of IQ is class shaming and or pride issues. The rest can exploit the system with no true need to think at all. The conclusion is there is no measurement on IQ without incentive.

[Anonymous No.9239256]

>>9234514
>we all have the exact same pattern recognition abilities
nah.

[Anonymous No.9239392]

>>9237294
Most reliable testing for Blacks is done on Black Americans since they are the most notable black population in a western nation. Said population having a pretty fucked up history that's pretty unique to it. Black immigrants (including those whose ancestors were shipped to the new world then came back to Africa then immigrated to the U.S) do better then Afro-Americans because they don't have all that history of being in the states and all the bullshit accumulated from it that led to the problems of today. Same for European immigrants and white Americans.

[Anonymous No.9239449]

>>9237385
>Indian IQ
>Suspiciously low, compared to neighbours.
Did you lose your job to offshoring??

[Anonymous No.9239462]

>>9234514
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyferth_study

[Anonymous No.9239473]

>>9234919
So 100 years ago the average person was clinically retarded?

[Anonymous No.9239610]

>>9239462
elite sampling of blacks: those with IQ <70 would have been excluded by the military

[Anonymous No.9239624]

>>9239392
>not genetics
>not systemic racism
so you're saying domestic blacks are just lazy