Actually all the data points to racial differences which do point to what one could ascertain as "superior" races, although this depends greatly on your utility measurement model. Of course race models aren't very rigorous, and there's a few gaps in some of the studies, but there are areas where on a racial analysis level people are actually better on average than others. Example: long distance running for Sub saharan Africans, better visual spatial mental scoring in east Asians. There's also cranial capacity cm³ differences on average, which correlate heavily with a larger cerebral cortex with a great goodness of fit within various models. So you should (without emotional bias) include that some races are better than others at things on average. As for the concept of superiority, one could make a rigorous claim for this using economic utility models, and happiness derived from higher income relative to intellectual capacity or emotional intelligence. Conventional liberal doctrine in universities (especially in the USA) have done away with racial difference models as a modicum of respect between racial identity, but they certainly aren't useless models, and within neuroscience and psychology are still a useful model to test hypotheses.