“It should be noted that a study of black and white Americans is not a study of Negro and Caucasian races in any global sense.” – Thomas Sowell, 1978 (Essays and Data on American Ethnic groups, p. 206).
I will now respond to some hereditarian scholars who wrote some articles in response to my data and arguments on the Black-White IQ Gap (Fuerst, Frost and Thompson). I hope to cover every valid concern brought up so far, including technical issues on data reliability, etc. I will also address some of the alternative explanations that have been suggested for our ethnic data that shows much higher than expected academic performance of Black immigrant children in Western countries, which I have presented as a refutation of the racial genetic hypothesis for Black-White test score differences.
Hereditarian scholar, John “Chuck” Fuerst, has written a lengthy piece responding to my last article, in which he offers to give us a tutorial on how to do rigorous research (like himself!). That’s certainly kind of him. So, in the collegial spirit of academic exchange, I will also present this article as a tutorial on how to employ rigorous common sense in research. This might save us from the endless need to pursue a lot of superfluous data before making intelligent judgments, especially on investigations where perfect data is sparsely available.
The data we have from both the US and the UK concerning school performance of children from different ethnicities is certainly not perfect, but it is more than sufficient when you bring some common sense to the task. For example, we know that under a genetic hypothesis it is extremely unlikely that an African ethnic group could have a high school pass rate that is much higher than the white pass rate or, even more improbable, equal to or higher than the Chinese pass rate, so we can rightly be skeptical about a 2007 report that suggests that a certain Nigerian tribe has accomplished this in the UK. But when we also see another verified report saying that that same tribe has at times produced the top student in the UK, beating every white or Chinese student, common sense should tempt us to reconsider our skepticism in that first report, even if it was only in Powerpoint format!
Super-achieving British Igbo sisters, Chidera and Chindi Ota.
Chidera Ota was the best student in the UK in 2010 and it seems that her sister, Chindi Ota, may have repeated the feat in her own cohort three years later. It is certainly possible for a student to have such an extremely high achievement while her group fails to be anywhere near as impressive, but it is much more likely that a prior report claiming that her group is a super-achiever must be true.
Similarly, when a Nigerian Scrabble player, Wellington Jighere, won the 2015 Scrabble World Championship, it was possible that he was just an anomaly from a country that is not that great at such cognitively intensive games like expert-level Scrabble. However, common sense enjoins us to bet on the more likely proposition: Nigerian Scrabble players can’t be that bad as a group if they can produce an individual world champion, which should also suggest Nigerians can’t be that bad cognitively as a nation. In fact, further Googling confirms that Team Nigeria was indeed the best scoring team in the world at the world Scrabble championships.
The Nigerian performance in Scrabble is worth an article in itself and one can validly use it to cast some very serious doubt on the racial genetic hypothesis for the global black-white test score differences. For example, this is what some psychologists (2014) found on the elite players of games like Scrabble:
“Visuospatial and verbal abilities were measured in elite nationally ranked SCRABBLE and crossword experts and compared with college students matched on quantitative and verbal SAT scores, both exceeding 700 on average. SCRABBLE and crossword experts significantly outperformed college students on all cognitive measures.”
We could end our article right there and those who rely strongly on common sense could instantly see why it should be impossible for Nigeria to not only produce the world champion of scrabble, but to even produce the best team (which still lives in poor Nigeria), if they were as cognitively challenged as HBD tells us!
The trouble with common sense, of course, is that everyone can claim that it is their position that accords more with common sense, even if their analysis clearly contradicts what the eyes can readily see (hence, common sense). Fortunately, even commonsense-derived judgments have to be tested by their logical predictions. This is why we predicted that the performance of African immigrant children in the US should be as “shocking” as that in the UK, if investigated properly. My hereditarian friends have previously looked at data that convinced them that this is not so. They found that African immigrants of different generations, including the well-settled ones, perform quite as badly as native Black Americans. I was obviously skeptical about their research, given all the evidence in the UK and the well-publicized stories in the US, including Black immigrant composition at elite schools and colleges. So we had a clear case of opposition for testing our contesting judgments.
Fuerst is the scholar who previously did some research that found large gaps between Black immigrants and Whites, although he did this by doing some meta-analysis of other data, and inevitably with little disaggregation of Africans by nationality or tribal ethnicity.
Due to my persistent claims here, Fuerst was recently motivated by Peter Frost to do his own direct data analysis of Nigerian performance in the US, using the competitive National Achievement Awards (which permits a very large sample), to test my claim that children of African immigrants in the US do achieve significantly above native Black Americans, resulting in a gap that is ultimately expected to be at least as large as the gap between American Blacks and Whites.
When he informed me about his intention to look into this data, I gladly encouraged him to do so because I expected the data to back me up, especially since he was intending to also specifically look at Nigerian scores, rather than just the aggregated “Black immigrant” group that everyone uses in their analyses.
The reason my research has mostly focused on Nigerians, out of the many African nationalities, is mainly because they are the largest population both in Africa and in the African diaspora, which helps a lot with the difficulty of finding sufficiently large sample sizes in such typically small migrant populations, especially when disaggregated. It’s also helpful that they are the most similar genetically to native Black Americans.
Fuerst’s short paper is as usual quite technical, even though he based his analysis on a similar method used by Ron Unz in his famous investigation into possible bias in Harvard’s ethnic admittance policy. The relevant part for our purpose is his probing question near the end that betrays a hint of some slight intellectual frustration with the results, although he was honest and diligent in his method: “…why do African Blacks do so well? And why do Nigerians apparently do no less well than Whites?”
Fuerst also admits an apparent discrepancy between his new finding and the one he published previously: “Now, I had previously found that all Black immigrants performed between 0.84 (second generation) and 0.99 (first generation) standard deviations below Whites. How can we reconcile that with the finding above?”
As they say, it is no longer a simple black and white issue.
In his response article, Fuerst seems to suggest that Jensen did not really make the prediction on Black Africans that I am claiming has failed. However, it is clear that Jensen made no distinction between Black Africans and Black Americans on genetic intelligence (certainly not in favor of Africans), as the same paper that Fuerst cites (Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability) shows clearly:
“Other culture-only hypotheses have invoked Black role models, test anxiety, self-esteem, and racial stress as causal agents, but none of these have ever been consistently confirmed…Other ideas, such as stereotype threat (Steele, 1997), involuntary-minorities-are-castes (Ogbu, 2002), and race stigma (Loury, 2002), do not explain the low IQ of Africans south of the Sahara, where Blacks are in the majority. ” (My emphasis).
A similar argument making little distinction between American and African Blacks, and thereby using African test performance to refute environmentalist arguments, is made by Murray and Hernstein in the Bell Curve (page 289):
“How Do African-Americans Compare with Blacks in Africa on Cognitive Tests? This question often arises in the context of Black-White comparisons in America, the thought being that the African Black population has not been subjected to the historical legacy of American Black slavery and discrimination and might therefore have higher scores…For our purposes, the main point is that the hypothesis about the special circumstances of American Blacks depressing their test scores is not substantiated by the African data.” (My emphasis).
We are therefore only using the same method they used to test environmental hypotheses, except we are also correcting for present environmental differences between the two groups of Blacks (as they should have done), by observing African immigrants to the West instead.
The mere possibility that the African immigrants in our experiment could be an elite, unrepresentative group does not matter in itself (I don’t know how many ways to emphasize this point, which is the subject of the most popular straw man among those who keep arguing that the immigrants are “not representative” of their source populations). It does not matter *because Jensen gave us a prediction specifically concerning a sample of exclusively elite, “unrepresentative” Blacks.*
Reading from the same Jensen paper, we are told this about elite Black Americans:
“Matching Black and White children for the geographical areas of their homes, the schools they attend, and other finer grade socioeconomic indicators again reduces the mean group IQ difference but does not eliminate it. Black children from the best areas and schools (those producing the highest average scores) still average slightly lower than do White children with the lowest socioeconomic indicators (Herrnstein & Murray, 1994, pp. 286–289; Jensen, 1998b, pp. 357–360). This is an anomaly for the culture-only theory but is explained by genetic theory through regression to the mean.”
Well, the African immigrant children test scores now present an anomaly for the racial genetic theory precisely because of regression to the mean (even if we ignore the more self-damning claim that American Blacks should have even higher intelligence due to their higher white admixture).
We know that children of native Black Americans earning $200,000 a year in family income score lower on SAT scores than children of Whites getting only $20,000 in family income ($10, 000 per parent!). We also know that the Nigerian income in the US is only $57,000, which is lower than the non-Hipspanic white income, and yet their children still score at least as high as children of Whites, which is the opposite of Jensen’s predicted result. For the Jensen prediction to be still true, we would have to assume that the average African immigrant income should in fact be higher by a factor of about 4 if the economic system was fair to them. But this is implausible because of reductio ad absurdum: if the African immigrants were rightly supposed to be higher than (or just equal to) 200,000 in household income (to explain why their children do much better than children of $200,000 Black Americans), then that would give them over twice the average income of the highest income group in America (Immigrant Indian Americans, who are reportedly the most educated group). Jensen therefore remains falsified by his own social status experiment.
Disappointingly, our tutor, Fuerst, is still invoking super-selection as a plausible explanation for why Nigerians or even Ethiopians etc defy this predicted high Jensenian regression for Black Africans, despite his own previous work, still being cited by Peter Frost, showing minimal cognitive selection from Africa. But we have now come to accept that hereditarian empirical findings are quite negotiable, depending on who is asking!
In an article that is supposed to be a tutorial on “rigorous” research, Fuerst informs us that he bases his radical transformation on this decisive question of African selection by taking a “cursory” look at brain drain literature!
Fuerst even makes simple logical errors in arriving at this position. For example, this is how he derived Somali super-selectivity:
“According to the IAB brain-drain data bank’s Emigration rates file, for example, in 1990, 2000 and 2010, respectively, 1.08%, 3.52%, and 4.43% of all Somalis emigrated somewhere, but at the same time 20.03%, 37.72%, and 44.86% of highly educated ones did. Thus educated Somali’s are seemingly massively over-represented in the emigrant pool.”
This conclusion is obviously a non sequitur because the calculation omits the total number of “highly educated” Somalis (and the total number of the Somali emigrants) that would give us their fraction. Furthermore, even if we got this ratio, we should also consider how far above the Somalian mean IQ they are, since “highly educated” could be just a standard deviation above the mean. It is the most common calculation mistake made by hereditarian bloggers and commenters: simply asserting that there are more educated people in the migrant population than in the general population, without considering the IQ gap between the educated and the average, does not prove super-high selectivity.
As for the brain drain claim, here is data reported by hereditarian James Thompson (in his response to my first article) on the occupation classifications of ethnic groups, including Black immigrants to the UK (does common sense tell us that Africa is only or mainly losing its brightest geniuses to Europe when we take a cursory look at this table?):
Socio-economic classification of household reference person by sample members’ ethnic group
Hereditarian scholar and founding member of the HBD movement, Peter Frost, may be the only one who has explicitly rejected immigrant super-selection as the explanation for Nigerian or African super-achievement in the UK. He arrived at this unpopular position by deciding to use some common sense: “You need to get out and meet a few African immigrants,” Frost advised a critic in the comments to his article, “most of them aren’t elite individuals, and many are dirt-poor.”
Unfortunately for Frost, being honest on that selection point means that he still needs a consistent explanation that can withstand the merciless data that we are seeing, without conceding any of the popular assumptions of his HBD system (specifically on the cause of the global Black-White IQ gap). I submit that that is impossible.
Frost has grown from calling Igbos the “Jews of West Africa,” in his response to my first article, to boldly conjecturing that the academic success of any Sub-Saharan African nation can be predicted just by counting how many (migrant) Igbos they have in their own populations: the more Igbos representing your country, the higher your scores in the UK!
In trying to explain the differential achievements of the African nationalities in UK high school tests, Frost confidently asserts: “clearly, high academic achievement is due to something that is very much present in Nigeria, a little bit in Ghana, and not at all in Somalia and Congo. Could this something be the Igbo?”
Not only do the Igbo not explain Africa’s higher than expected performance in the UK, they do not even explain Nigeria’s high performance. The data shows that the Igbo-speakers are a much smaller number compared to the rest of Africans or even Nigerians (combined) in the UK, so that even if they had a 100 percent pass rate, it would have a limited impact on the overall Nigerian pass rate. The data shows that not only are the Yoruba speakers a much larger group than the Igbo speakers in the UK, but that the Yoruba pass rate is sometimes just as impressive as the Igbo one, if not better.
In one of the papers cited in my note to my first article, Strand (Oxford University, 2015) collected some recent data that should put the matter to rest for Frost and Fuerst and other dataphiles. It should also put the matter to similar rest for James Thompson, who expressed skepticism about the reported tribal performance because he did not see the numbers involved or the mean scores from the particular sources I highlighted (he suspected that the actual scores may be very low). Strand’s detailed paper shows that both the Igbo and the Yoruba have a higher mean score than the British Whites (or any white group with a good sample size), not just in the “easy subjects” or in “attendance,” but even in English and mathematics, the two most g-loaded subjects. Their superior pass rate is therefore not a result of some hidden statistical tricks or merely dumbing down the tests, as Thompson seems to insist. Dumbing down the tests may indeed reduce the gap, but it cannot reverse it, certainly not without reversing it for everyone else so that you end up with something like the Irish Travelers outperforming the British White group.
Another point against Thompson’s dumbing down or statistical manipulation charge is that the groups that would benefit most from such things within the African group would not be the ones that are known to be intellectually and socially dominant in their own countries, like the Igbo and Yoruba for Nigeria. It would be random at best. How can reducing the g-loading of the tests just happen to be most helpful to the tribes that already have the best intellectual performance (and social dominance) in Nigeria (or Africa)?
In Strand’s paper, which is a longitudinal study of a cohort that graduated in 2013, the Yoruba actually slightly outperform the Igbo on the GCSEs. Both groups outperform everyone else from Africa, including the group of assimilated Africans who only speak English at home! (It is also noteworthy that the assimilated group of Africans, consisting of all African groups who speak English at home, already outperform the British Whites on both pass rate and mean score).
African pass rate and mean score by language spoken at home.
Yoruba-speaking students have a 76.2% pass rate and the Igbo speakers have 73.9% (page 78). The slight disadvantage faced by the Igbo may be explained by the fact that they had a slightly higher number of more recent immigrant children from Nigeria in this cohort than the Yoruba, indicated by the number of students writing GCSEs who did not write the earlier KS2 tests at 11 years old (page 79). In fact, at that earlier stage before the newer immigrants arrived, it was the Igbo who had a slight pass rate advantage over the Yoruba, which shows how significant this factor is.
There are also other African groups, including those outside West Africa, who do very well on these tests. The Shona-speakers of Zimbabwe in Southern Africa have an incredibly high pass rate, given how many of them migrated after the age of 11. They too beat the White pass rate (and mean score) despite having 30% of them arriving after the age of 11 (not to mention those who arrived after age 4), which might even place their achievement above the Igbo and Yoruba if late migration is controlled for!
The most interesting observation, however, is the total numbers of Igbo compared to Yoruba speakers. Let us pause for a moment and see what that data point implies for the immigrant self-selection debate.
The Igbo are quite a dominant group on many measures of intellectual achievement in Nigeria, as Frost correctly noted and as many other scholars, including Thomas Sowell, have stated, so how can they have a much smaller population than the Yoruba in the UK if the immigration system is highly selective? Their dominance in Nigeria is especially conspicuous at the very top levels of intellectual performance, the most selective levels. I did my own research on this question by simply looking at the names of the students who represented Nigeria at the (extremely selective) 2014 International Math Olympiads.
Oluwasanya Oluwafemi Awe – Yoruba
Chilolum Christopher Uzoma Nwigwe – Ibibio
This is an astonishing over-representation of Igbos, as they are only 18 percent of the Nigerian population, which is smaller than the Yoruba. (We will not be surprised if the Nigerian government begins to regulate tribal composition in future math Olympiads since they are quite obsessed with tribal affirmative action.)
Secondly, one anonymous commenter on James Thompson’s first response article looked at the list of the twelve richest Nigerians and observed that Igbo names represent 50% of the list!
There is also some data that shows that within Nigeria, the Igbo acceptance rate into Nigerian universities is much higher than every other group including the Yoruba.
Frost is therefore justified in his general assessment of average Igbo intellect, but unfortunately for him, their superior performance is insufficient as an explanation of Nigerian overall performance in the UK (and his genetic hypothesis for Igbo intellectual performance is also on very shaky grounds, as I explain later: it seems likely to be just an accidental matter of quite recent history rather than genetic evolution, but in any case, it is irrelevant since their numbers in the UK or the school system do not support his hypothesis).
What is interesting about this data, besides debunking Frost’s Igbo hypothesis, is that it also strikes a devastating blow on the super-selection myth that the other hereditarians are using for final refuge.
Had there been high cognitive selection from Nigeria (or had this been the correct explanation for Nigerian performance on UK GCSEs), the group which is most conspicuous at highest levels of achievement in Nigeria (the Igbo) would have been numerically over-represented in the UK population (or at least on these GCSE numbers), for the same reason that we see Igbo over-representation at the hyper-selective Math Olympiads and other such super-selective metrics. On the UK GCSEs, they actually appear to be under-represented, at least in comparison to the Yoruba. This is a clear case of falsification for the super-selection myth, especially since the Igbos are even over-represented on the high school pass rate within Nigeria (in spite of the affirmative action quota system of Nigeria that aggressively limits numbers of university students from the top performing tribes.)
Students accepted into university in Nigeria by region from 2002-2007. South East is Igbo dominated area. South-South is mainly Yoruba. Source: Nigeriaworld article.
By insisting on his Igbo hypothesis, Frost has inadvertently helped us find one of the strongest arguments against the immigrant super-selection myth. The data above confirms that, contrary to many HBDers’ arbitrary claim, qualification to university in Nigeria, which is 1 Standard deviation above the national mean IQ at most (if we can use Rushton’s research in South Africa as a guide, p262), is far more cognitively selective than getting an air ticket to the UK. But that just sounds like common sense.
Strand’s data also explicitly confirms another commonsense point that we claimed: most of the students in these groups who speak an African language at home were obviously born in Africa (page 66), which is not great news for HBD calculations for explaining away these results.
The African group has the lowest number that was born in the UK, which makes their achievement all the more intriguing. The segment of Black Africans who speak a foreign language are almost all foreign-born, with the majority arriving after the age of 5. We know this because most of the 44.5% in this table who are “UK born” are the ones who speak English at home. The English-speaking group is 38% of Black Africa, according to the GCSE results Table.
Notice how the high-scoring Indian group were over 90% born in the UK. On page 10, Strand tells us that international arrival has been identified as “a key factor” in achievement of EAL groups. The high performance of Africa-born groups makes an already impossible situation even more difficult for HBD defenders.
Fuerst also found something similar in his analysis of African students in the US and noted the problem this presents, especially if the super-selection myth is abandoned:
“The relatively large number of high performing African born students is nonetheless curious given claims that African Black populations in Sub-Saharan Africa are disadvantaged, for example by parasite load or radiation exposure, in biological based intelligence. Why, if so, are so many just-off-the-boat African Blacks performing so well? Either they must not be representative of their region of origin population or their home populations must not be biologically disadvantaged, either environmentally or otherwise.”
There is a third possible option that Fuerst misses here, and it might be the most scary one to HBDers: if the research on nutritional or parasite load impact on IQ is as solid as it seems (presently accepted by both hereditarians and environmentalists), then this “shocking” performance of the African children that we are observing could in fact be before they fully recover from such deleterious effects!
Fuerst also fails to notice how this observation complicates his super selection argument: each of these students who were born in Africa could only have had one parent being selected by the immigration system even if such high selectivity was not a myth (since that’s how the visa system works – one person is accepted and the rest of the family just follows), which makes calculations even harder for hereditarians who have been assuming high selectivity for both parents just to have the slightest chance of the math working.
When you look closely at all the tables in Strand, you can also confirm our earlier reports that some Nigerian tribes can indeed beat the Chinese on average pass rate (in 5 GCSEs including English and Maths), an observation that many readers found very difficult to digest.
It seems from this table (page 46, Strand) that when the Yoruba-speaking (EAL) Nigerians achieved the feat of beating their Igbo-speaking counterparts on pass rate, they also beat the Chinese-speaking (EAL) student pass rate!
The Chinese-speaking students have a 75.3% pass rate which is slightly lower than the Yoruba-speaking pass rate of 76.2%.
Although we do not know the scores of the Igbo or Yoruba who speak English at home (the ones who were most likely born in the UK), it is clear that the Chinese have no obvious pass rate advantage over these two large tribes from the south of Nigeria. The Chinese who speak only English at home beat their less assimilated Chinese peers, but the Yoruba and Igbo who speak English at home (the Chidera Otas) are also expected to score higher than their less assimilated Yoruba and Igbo peers, as Strand himself confirms.
Whatever the case, even if one may insist on some other better performance metric in favor of the Chinese, it is clear that beating the Chinese pass rate itself is not an impossible task. It is rather curious, though, that only African groups seem to have managed to achieve that feat, when they are supposed to be the ones most disadvantaged by genes!
Dr. James Thompson is professor of psychology at University College London and a prominent scholar in the HBD world.
Besides expressing understandable skepticism on the validity of my initial data due to the small (or omitted) sample sizes in some of my cited sources, James Thompson’s instinctive response to my first article was to quickly invoke the usual super-selection argument:
“…As a general rule, single country immigrant histories are only indicators and not always representative, and currently the UK is a magnet for immigrant groups, particularly elites.”
But on the same blog, Thompson summarises for us the conclusions of a paper he published earlier with Heiner Rindermann:
“The natives of the United Kingdom have a competence score of 519 (migrants to UK 499), Germany 516 (migrants to Germany 471), the United States 517 (migrants to US 489). There, in a nutshell, is the problem: those three countries have not selected their migrants for intellectual quality…”
He gets more specific: “Here are the competence scores for some of the countries of origin of the current migrants: Syria 392, Iran 413, Algeria 396, Ghana 277… They vary somewhat, but all will impose at least a two generation disadvantage on the host countries…” (emphasis added).
We also get a table or two for that, converted into IQ score equivalents:
However, we also know that the children of the same Ghanaian immigrants to the UK have an average pass rate that is above British Whites, and we know that this is not due to dumbing down the tests or statistical tricks (as argued above).
In this article, Thompson unequivocally states that the Ghanaian immigrants are imposing “at least a two generation disadvantage” on the UK. That means that they are, at best, representative of their home population in IQ.
So then, is the UK “a magnet for elites” or has the UK “not selected its migrants for intellectual quality” on average when it comes to Ghanaian immigrants etc?
It’s the HBD conundrum: to choose A and lose the immigration debate or choose B and lose the racial intelligence debate?
Thompson’s strong faith in the genetic limitations placed upon the black race by evolution sometimes leads him to not even verify the statements he makes that concern Black societies. For example, in one blog article, he writes: “A marshy island called Singapore ends up rich, and resource-rich Nigeria remains poor (and very populous). Could this be because of any differences between Chinese and African peoples?”
Since he says “…and very populous,” it is clear he is referring to the GDPs of the two countries and not to the GDP per capita. Indeed at the time Lynn and Vanhanen wrote their book, IQ and the Wealth of Nations (2002), which claimed to prove a primary causal link between national IQ and national income, Nigeria had a lower GDP than Singapore, despite the former being “very populous.” Thompson did not bother to check if something may have changed since then because the genetic theory indeed predicts that the situation should not change much, especially in such little time. So, let’s put the GDPs of Nigeria and Singapore into Google’s beautiful public data software and see what has happened since then:
The question of why some societies or groups seem to have higher IQs or better cultures than others is a complex one that requires careful historical research for a particular society before settling for simplistic molecular reductionism.
For example, why do the the Igbo and the Yoruba outperform the populous northern tribes in Nigeria? We do not need to do all the primary historical research ourselves, fortunately. That’s what Thomas Sowell exists for.
Sowell writes in Race and Culture:
As of 1912, for example, there were fewer than a thousand students in elementary school in northern Nigeria, where more than half the population lived, and more than 35,000 in the rest of the country. …
In higher education, the disparities were even greater. As late as 1951, out of the 16 million people in the northern region, only one had a full university degree – and he was a convert to Christianity. …
A simple matter of where the elementary schools were constructed explains the pattern quite well. But why did the south get a lot of schools while the north got only a tiny number? Did their genes resist education while the genes in the south evolved to desire education? Not quite.
The presence of only one university graduate in the north who just happened to also be a Christian convert, is an important commonsense clue. Genes are unlikely to have left only one person free of their negative intellectual effects, but culture could.
Sowell doesn’t leave us guessing:
“Until 1898, all Western education in Nigeria was Christian missionary education – and that remained substantially true as late as 1942… Because education in Nigeria was essentially Christian, European-centered education, it was not welcome in the Moslem northern region of the country, where more than half the population lived…leading to large and lasting disparities in the educational levels of different tribes of Nigerians…” (p 123)
What about the Igbo intellectual advantage in the Nigerian south itself?
“Even within the southern regions, some groups were more receptive than others. Most receptive were the Ibos, a poorer, more fragmented group, once heavily raided by slave hunters, and living in a less fertile part of Nigeria. To the Ibos, Western education was a rare opportunity to be seized.” (p 123)
Igbo serial entrepreneur and Harvard graduate, Chinedu Echureo, was the inventor of HopStop, an application that Apple acquired from him “in the billion dollar range” (Forbes), to use in the iPhone for street navigations.
Frost’s belief in the genetic uniqueness of the Igbos, whom he apparently believes are intellectually like Whites or better, meant that he also had to whitewash their cultural behavior. Thus he also grants a moral superiority to the Igbos, above the other lesser tribes who are supposedly responsible for the corruption of Nigeria. The real picture is more complex than that, of course. The most educated tribes (both Igbos and Yorubas) in fact feature prominently in reports of high level fraud and corruption within and outside Nigeria. A strong hereditarian will find this very difficult to explain (especially since the Igbo are apparently an “outbred” population). Thomas Sowell explains the historical roots of this corrupt culture in another book, (Conquests and Cultures, page 131-132) giving factors that can equally explain pervasive corruption in some white countries, or its extremely low levels in some Black countries like Botswana.
This widespread culture of corruption does not mean that there are no Nigerians who are morally upright or that the educated tribes of Nigeria only invent the infamous internet scams. Some elite individuals also invent some very useful technologies too, especially in the more capitalist Western environment.
None of the following are valid responses to my arguments at this stage:
- The immigrants are not perfectly representative of their home populations? They do not need to be perfectly representative, and there is strong logical evidence against extreme selection. Show your counter-evidence in the real (not abstract) world, quantitatively.
- Something wrong with the tests in the UK? The pattern holds for tests in the US and other European countries.
- GCSEs are not pure IQ Tests? The pattern holds for SATs, CATs, and other tests administered to children. Also, the Africans perform just as well, if not better, on the more g-loaded subjects (math and English). They would have suffered more in those subjects if this was not real intelligence at work (see Arthur Jensen’s now-untenable prediction in his Spearman’s hypothesis and method of correlated vectors).
- Something has just gone wrong in the British white culture? African groups are also beating non-British immigrant Whites in the UK, and their general “over-achievement” is repeated in the US (Fuerst, 2015) and other European countries (Kirkegaard, 2015).
- Nigerian parents tiger mom their children and hire extra tutors? That’s a concession to the culture hypothesis, and it obviously also applies to the Chinese – the inventors of the Tiger Mom.
- What about this new paper showing Black immigrants scoring much lower than Whites? The sampled “Blacks” in that new paper are likely not disaggregated. How many (recent) Somali refugees?
- What if we have a study that directly finds less genes for education in Blacks even if they start showing higher educational achievements than Whites in the same environment? You might as well report finding that Jamaicans have the lowest number of alleles for running fast and expect common sense to trust your impeccable methodology.
- The author of this article is just a …? No clairvoyant statements about the mind or presumable life experiences (and motivations) of the author are intelligent arguments!
It is also important to recognize the limits of the author’s arguments. I am not arguing against the heredity of intelligence in families or tribes or (theoretically) even races. Neither am I arguing that all ethnicities and races on earth necessarily have the same average intelligence, presently or potentially, or that races do not even exist – all straw men that so many commenters have been ascribing to me so that they could enjoy the illusion of making an argument. The average (genetic) potentials of intelligence could indeed be as varied as the heights of different populations. What I have contested is the empirical evidence for the specific genotypic estimates and rankings of the racial cognitive heights, if you will. These unfolding natural social experiments we are observing now, which have not yet even permitted a sufficiently long time for full assimilation of the Black African migrants in Western environments, should put serious doubt in the mind of any honest person who does not merely use science to rationalize his racial ideology.
Chanda Chisala, originally from Zambia, has been a John S. Knight Visiting Fellow at Stanford University, a Visiting Fellow at the Hoover Institution, and a Reagan-Fascell Fellowship at the National Endowment for Democracy.
Save ListCancel
Save ListCancel
If we focus on people like Larry Bird, one would have to conclude whites are just as good in basketball as blacks.
But Bird is relatively rare among whites.
http://www.unz.com/article/closing-the-black-white-iq-gap-debate-part-3/#comment-1253927
Damn, now I can’t wait for the hereditarians response. The whole debate was very informative to me.
Also, I can’t wait for you to post your explanation of the persisting gap within US.
How about we look closer at your claim?
IMO: Nigeria
First participation: 2006.
Number of participations: 9.
Gold medals: 0. Silver medals: 0. Bronze medals: 5. Honourable mentions: 7.
To be fair Nigeria is the best performer from Africa, which don’t say much.
How about those Chinese
First participation: 1985.
Number of participations: 30.
Gold medals: 138. Silver medals: 30. Bronze medals: 6. Honourable mentions: 0.
How about we look even closer? how many ethnic Chinese won gold in just the last 3 year in IMO
2015: 9/39 gold
2014: 20/49 gold
2013: 13/45 gold
….
So stop overstating your claim, it is not even that close. And stop using GCSE stat., which most readers in this blog are not familiar with and way too easy (leveling effect). How about some A-Level (college entrance test) result for 2012/2013?
https://docs.google.com/viewerng/viewer?url=https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/208459/response/565105/attach/3/FOI%25202014%25200059414%2520Littlejohn%2520final.xlsx
Check the result and you will notice that even Irish traveler outscore Black African by a wide margin. And Chinese just blow everybody out of the water.
Anyway, aren't those AAA students the cream of the crop? It is often pointed out that a small shift in the mean of the bell curve is enough to produce large effects in the tails. Therefore, the difference must be well under 1 SD, unless the Black Africans are a selective sample (see my last comment - I don't think they are).
I see that this table replicates my observation that Mixed White & Black African students do much better than Mixed White & Black Caribbean students, and almost as well as White Britons. In this case, it is a non-negligible difference, but AAA is a more stringent standard than A/A* for a single entry. In fact, since Mixed White & Black Africans are less wealthy than the average person, they may be over-performing. I cannot think of an environmental reason why, but a hereditarian explanation seems even more far-fetched.
China is vastly better developed and has a 3000 year start in terms of literate culture.
A few million Nigerians, at most, have had the kind of educational opportunities that would allow a person of sufficient talent to enter a maths Olympiad, versus hundreds of millions of Chinese. The Chinese and Chinese Americans also benefit from a well developed coaching set-up.
You should really compare Nigeria with a small European country - say Belgium.
Panda finally got it, Mr Chisala has different common sense from Panda’s. LOL
Multiple “common senses” are involved in above quoted text:
1. Scrabble competition (participated largely by some Common Wealth nations, being a non-essential fringe of their numerous int’l competition agenda annually) is a typical representatative of world’s intelligence.
2. once an inidvidual champ in Scrabble competition, you are the champ of the entire history of Scrabble competition.
3. an(or some) individual brilliance reflect the group brilliance. So if Panda finds out several grapes are “larger” than some walnuts ( better still, “larger” measured by some obscure methods at a certain year), then the “common sense” of Mr Chisala suugests, that grapes are larger than walnuts. Yay! ROFL
BTW, what is scrabble? It’s the first time Panda heard of it.
On the Singapore Vs Nigeria GDP growth gragh:
What it means? Nothing. There are too many variables such as corresponding population growth, maturity/stages of industrilisation of each, the differences on measurements of GDP, the quality of GDP, etc. rendering such an apple-orange comparison meaningless.
Plus, who contributed mainly to Nigeria’s GDP growth post 2008? Is that possible the impact of the huge investment on rail, oil, infrastructure, agriculture, etc by the Big Brother of Singaporean Chinese – the mainland Chinese? LOL
On the The Impossible Chinese?:
What Mr Chisala answered this time? Nothing new. Repeating that doggy table of 2007 1,000 times without bringing any extra fresh insight of the detailed data behind it, statistical analysis methodology used, and detailed table reporting method, does not somewhow make it a truth.
On Igbo:
Panda is not arguing that Africans are all the same, Igbo probably is one of best tribes within Africa. But again, that’s within Africa. If Igbos are so intelligent as a group, what are/were their techological/civilisational achievements now, 100 years ago, 200 years…500 years, 1,000 years, 2,000 years…5,000 years ago compared to the rest of the world, machetes aside?
Oh, even the machetes, the most technological advanced machetes ever made likely originated in Tang Dynasty of imperial China prior to industrial revolutiuon before they were copies by the nearby Mongols and Japanese etc, instead of Igbos who were still in primitive earlier Bronze Age at least 1,000 years behind the civilisation curve at a time. ROFL
https://africa.uima.uiowa.edu/chapters/ancient-africa/igbo-ukwu/?start=2#essay
I live in and grew up in Sub Saharan Africa with mostly Bantu blacks. I find it very hard to believe an average IQ of 70. I mean there are a lot of uneducated people here and some real brain dead morons sure, but there are plenty of smart people too and mostly average normal people. No way SSA average is anywhere near 70.
In India I sometimes watched in astonishment as the locals would do something so astonishingly silly that it took my breath away. Coming from a developed country, I had only met clever Indians until that point.
On the other hand, I acknowledged that the North Asians were noticeably more sensible than my own mob. They rarely got into drunken fights or made stupid noises on the train.
I'd be interested to hear more about your experiences. I have a feeling that there are other forms of cleverness that are not detected by IQ tests. For example, Australian Aborigines managed to survive for thousands of years in some of the harshest environments on earth - I wonder if stranded Koreans would stand a chance. Perhaps there are different cognitive skills that may be developed as required.
So the Nigerian Scrabble team is on average smarter than the average US college student?
I’m not particularly interested in the rest of your article but I can’t help but notice that this is not a strong argument for anything at all.
More common sense here…
But has Mr Chisala considered that even in a non-Igbo lower avg IQ tribe in Nigeria there are still many members having IQ higher than many Igbos? Isn’t that also common sense?
(Or Mr Chisala’s common sense only means that any Igbo have IQ higher than any non-Igbo in Nigeria?)
So the evidence (assume it is a fact) that lower Igbo % presence in the UK than that in Nigerian universities does not necessarily refute anything.
Therefore the statement that “Nigeria uni qualification is far more cognitively selective than getting an air ticket to the UK” has no leg to stand on really. LOL
But what your little brain needs to understand is that the author's repeated use of the phrase "common sense" was merely an attempt on his part to stoop down to your level and assure you that even little brains like yours can comprehend his points. Though yours apparently did not (perhaps because it didn't want to).
As for the point with which you erroneously imagined you were rebuffing the author with, nowhere did he say or even suggest that other ethnic groups apart from the Igbos didn't have their own cohorts of high performers. His point, which your tiny panda brain seems unable to wrap itself around, is that there has been clearly been an enormous difference between the selective nature of Nigerians migrating to the UK and Nigerians performing highly within Nigeria itself. And that, therefore, the UK cohorts cannot have being selected (much) by the same criteria of intelligence. The fact that other ethnic groups also have high performers is completely irrelevant. Take a few hours to ponder that and I'm sure even your little brain will come to understand that.
Frost needs to go out to Africa and visit the places where the majority of people live and foreigners never go. Then he will know what ‘dirt-poor’ really means.
I got sucked in! Anyway, no idea if your article is true or not but the above argument is nonsense.
Can the bottom half of the African population migrate to the West? Obviously not. Most can’t even leave their own village.
If an Igbo, Chinedu Echureo, is responsible for Apple Maps navigation then I would demand that Trump extends the immigration ban to anyone who eats fufu.
Why is this listed under ‘Science Articles’? Is it because there was no ‘Pseudo Science via Anecdotal Evidence’ heading?
…only if Mr Chisala could go on with his research to google-check super-Igbo-packed Nigerian national team’s rankings in IMO over its entire history:
2015: 88
2014: 82
2013: 84
2012: 67
2011: 78
2010: 84
2009: 90
2008: N/A
2007: 85
2006: 84
Then let’s look at “Impossible Chinese”:
2015: 2
2014: 1
2013: 1
2012: 2
2011: 1
2010: 1
2009: 1
2008: 1
2007: 2
2006: 1
When Super Igbos will be expected to beat “impossible Chinese”? err…9854AD?
Or Super Igbo-free UK’s, shall we>:
2015: 22
2014: 20
2013: 9
2012: 2 2
2011: 17
2010: 25
2009: 19
2008: 23
2007: 28
2006: 19
James Thompson takes note! The common sense here seems to be that the UK should have changed its entire team to its new GCSE intellectual gurus Igbo-Yoruba all stars, and headed towards #85 in the ranking instead. Say how stupid those Brits are!
That, however, depends on what your IQ is, don’t you think so?
Am I to conclude that there is something unusual in the dismal average intellectual level of American blacks? If so, why? Any suggestions?
(The question is not sarcastic: it occurred to me years ago that American blacks, and particularly the males, do so badly that perhaps a quite specific explanation is required.)
An ox is allowed to grow to full maturity before it is castrated and so the farmer benefits from the animal's adult strength without risking his uncontrollable aggressiveness. If a male is castrated in infancy, he never develops his strength but remains a soprano castrato, handy around the harem but useless for field work. The trick then is to breed them for strength, which means selecting for testosterone, while not allowing them to become too unmanageable so as to require castration, since they were valuable as studs. Today of course, we could resort to chemical castration of black rapists and murderers but that would deny them their "right" to commit further acts of mayhem when they are released from jail.
Since 1865, black reproduction practices have been left to their own devises and mating has become based upon aggressiveness on the part of males so consequently, aggressiveness has been selected for in the intervening time. The end result you see before you: aggressive, stupid men.
This selective breeding accounts for their superior performance in e.g. NBA and NFL (compared to their African cousins) as Jimmy the Greek commented on. (Remember when he was genuinely surprised by the reaction to his having expressed this simple truth that everyone knows but which must remain unspoken--the very definition of the word "taboo").
The Southern Planter tried to warn us that just letting Nature take her course would not end well for us. They were very aware that they had been tinkering with genetics and had bred a large, potentially dangerous animal and that only further enlightened, careful selection could keep that animal from reverting to its wild state, with disastrous consequences for the safety of persons who were vulnerable to predation should any of these animals escape captivity. We could call today's black incivility and criminality, "Southern Planter's Revenge".
Why not also castrate white and latino rapists and murderers?
The Yoruba indeed seem to be the larger group in the London Area. The major Nigerian Neighborhood there is called “Little Lagos” (After a city in the Yoruba part of Nigeria) and “Yorubatown”, and is largely Yoruba.
“Little Lagos in south London”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4182341.stm
2.Yes, that's as expected, although the Yoruba are not quite as over-represented, it seems. At least two of the other six names are apparently Hausa, and one is unclear.
The thing that has gone wrong with White British culture is being forced to associate with people such as the above article writer who asserts that our job is to close the gaps otherwise we are white supremacists. If social reformers demand that people who denounce iq tests be able to destroy the lives of people who describe the structure of dna then we really need to have a conversation about social activist privilege. Another thing that has gone wrong with white british culture is being taxed to support universities that give out loans and grants to people who come from foreign countries that have never paid into them and then proceed to complain about white supremacy. We dont have a culture of third world tribalism to even ask such shamelessly dishonest questions. If the gaps werent being closed wouldnt that be described as racist?
“The high performance of Africa-born groups makes an already impossible situation even more difficult for HBD defenders.”
Quite the contrary, this actually supports their super selection theory, assuming of course that black African immigrants of past decades were responding to different selective criteria for immigration then those of today.
Quite the contrary, this actually supports their super selection theory, assuming of course that black African immigrants of past decades were responding to different selective criteria for immigration then those of today."
The high performing African born would have come as children with their families. Their parents and not them would be those immigrants to whom whatever (supposed)selective factors would (most) apply(Children are not the ones who decide to immigrate or must have whatever qualities are selected.)
Regression to the mean (whatever its effect) would apply to foreign born as well as UK born offspring of adult immigrants.
(The question is not sarcastic: it occurred to me years ago that American blacks, and particularly the males, do so badly that perhaps a quite specific explanation is required.)
They (black slaves) were not selected for IQ. Recall the foxes in the domestication experiment in which, after 6 generations of careful culling, the end product was a docile pet. Only in the case of black males, the end product that was sought was a physically imposing draft animal. The more aggressive were breeded out by planters who wanted a docile, domesticated, tractable, ox-like man, but that selection process ended in 1865.
An ox is allowed to grow to full maturity before it is castrated and so the farmer benefits from the animal’s adult strength without risking his uncontrollable aggressiveness. If a male is castrated in infancy, he never develops his strength but remains a soprano castrato, handy around the harem but useless for field work. The trick then is to breed them for strength, which means selecting for testosterone, while not allowing them to become too unmanageable so as to require castration, since they were valuable as studs. Today of course, we could resort to chemical castration of black rapists and murderers but that would deny them their “right” to commit further acts of mayhem when they are released from jail.
Since 1865, black reproduction practices have been left to their own devises and mating has become based upon aggressiveness on the part of males so consequently, aggressiveness has been selected for in the intervening time. The end result you see before you: aggressive, stupid men.
This selective breeding accounts for their superior performance in e.g. NBA and NFL (compared to their African cousins) as Jimmy the Greek commented on. (Remember when he was genuinely surprised by the reaction to his having expressed this simple truth that everyone knows but which must remain unspoken–the very definition of the word “taboo”).
The Southern Planter tried to warn us that just letting Nature take her course would not end well for us. They were very aware that they had been tinkering with genetics and had bred a large, potentially dangerous animal and that only further enlightened, careful selection could keep that animal from reverting to its wild state, with disastrous consequences for the safety of persons who were vulnerable to predation should any of these animals escape captivity. We could call today’s black incivility and criminality, “Southern Planter’s Revenge”.
On the Singapore Vs Nigeria GDP growth gragh:What it means? Nothing. There are too many variables such as corresponding population growth, maturity/stages of industrilisation of each, the differences on measurements of GDP, the quality of GDP, etc. rendering such an apple-orange comparison meaningless.Plus, who contributed mainly to Nigeria's GDP growth post 2008? Is that possible the impact of the huge investment on rail, oil, infrastructure, agriculture, etc by the Big Brother of Singaporean Chinese - the mainland Chinese? LOLOn the The Impossible Chinese?:What Mr Chisala answered this time? Nothing new. Repeating that doggy table of 2007 1,000 times without bringing any extra fresh insight of the detailed data behind it, statistical analysis methodology used, and detailed table reporting method, does not somewhow make it a truth.
On Igbo:Panda is not arguing that Africans are all the same, Igbo probably is one of best tribes within Africa. But again, that's within Africa. If Igbos are so intelligent as a group, what are/were their techological/civilisational achievements now, 100 years ago, 200 years...500 years, 1,000 years, 2,000 years...5,000 years ago compared to the rest of the world, machetes aside? Oh, even the machetes, the most technological advanced machetes ever made likely originated in Tang Dynasty of imperial China prior to industrial revolutiuon before they were copies by the nearby Mongols and Japanese etc, instead of Igbos who were still in primitive earlier Bronze Age at least 1,000 years behind the civilisation curve at a time. ROFL
Just a small quibble with your rhetorical question about Igbo achievements over long periods of history. Without agreeing with all his conclusions I would say that Jared Diamond’s “Guns, Germs and Steel” would usefully prompt your imagination to see the fallacy of this part of your case. Consider also how little the high IQs of Ashkenazim contributed to science, technology and industry until the European Enlightenment and the fact that a huge population of potentially inventive Chinese did almost nothing while Europe modernised. Not one of your persuasive arguments.
Indeed it is surely careless of people to bandy about that 70 figure as if it contributes anything much but confusion to the discussion. It needs nuanced introduction to any debate, possibly along the lines of Ron Unz’s demonstration of the naiveté of some Lynn and Vanhenen figures – notably those for the pre Celtic Tiger rustics of Ireland. A moment’s thought suggests one is not comparing apples with apples. Once you knock an SD off the average of 70 you are in the realm of slavering half-wits if they were American whites with that sort of IQ. Of course the point is made more obvious by reference to supposed average IQs for Khoi San and Australian Aboriginal people as low as 57!
See my #20
I won’t make any claim about the article as a whole, but your GDP graph for Nigeria and Singapore is a bit silly.
First, Nigeria is very resource rich and thus always had the potential to dramatically increase its GDP. The money was literally just sitting inside the ground just waiting for someone to pick it up. How do we know whether Western (Chinese?) companies tapped that wealth?
Also, here’s the GDP per capita for the two countries
2011 2012 2013 2014
Nigeria $2,514 $2,740 $2,980 $3,203
Singapore $53,122 $54,578 $55,980 $56,287
Obviously, Nigeria’s GDP per capita is growing more quickly but that’s likely just because it started so low. Regardless, a GDP per capita of $3,203 in 2014 is hardly some sign of a high IQ population, while $56,287 is remarkable.
Another indicator that Nigeria is not a high IQ population, they have a per capita murder rate of 20 per 100,000.
No 1st world high IQ European and Oriental nation has a murder rate that high. Nigeria's per capita murder rate is similar to that of Mexico's.
“….list of the twelve richest Nigerians and observed that Igbo names represent 50% of the list!”
The other 50% is mostly Yoruba (who are 21% of Nigeria’s population).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yoruba_people
As a non-scientist reading this, I have to say I have yet to see where HBD and Mr. Chisala have incompatible positions. Hereditary basis to intelligence appears well established, to include variances in averages between populations. However, when we examine the “at first glance” anomaly of African immigrant achievement, we may be seeing the interplay of some genetic influence (e.g. Igbo over representation?), plus macro-environmental impacts such as influence the supposed Flynn and Super-Flynn phenomena, plus simply the exploding African population that would, when combined with the previous influences, result mathematically in a larger total number of smart Africans.
However, Mr. Chisala has been setting us up for his fourth installment in this series where he will provide his theory of why African-American academic achievement apparently halted decades ago and has yet to reach the average white score for IQ or other academic achievement. I for one am anxious to see what he has to say.
My own pet hypothesis is that development might differ by race. Physical development clearly differs by race, with blacks generally maturing earlier than white with consequent advantage in sports since early advantage in sports leads to early skill development. Perhaps mental development works similarly in some populations; and possibly opposite to physical development? As academic achievement relies upon early school mastery, later development would be little noticed in academia. This may not explain African immigrant data, but might play into African-American experience.
This article, and the intelligent, rigorous discussion that it will doubtless generate, is a prime example of what makes Ron Unz Review required daily reading for me. It stimulates thought while catering neither to Political Correctness nor to my existing unexamined beliefs. I can only grow wiser and my beliefs only approach the Truth more closely through this discussion.
Is that not what we should all be striving for ?
"Little Lagos in south London"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4182341.stm
1.
Thanks for this.
2.
Yes, that’s as expected, although the Yoruba are not quite as over-represented, it seems. At least two of the other six names are apparently Hausa, and one is unclear.
Ugh, I thought Black White IQ gap was already proven to be as close as the Sun and The Earth. But the rebuttal continues.
Reading part 3 after part 2 after 1 is like watching a Monkey show how it’s gonna end or how the story will develop. As of now, neither is likely the case.
Comparing Nigeria GDP to Singapore GDP as an index to disprove Blacks IQ gap is as ridiculous as comparing Caitlyn Jenner with Victoria Models in terms of womanhood. The VM is a model who has to work out her body, tone it down, thigh gap, etc etc to make it as sexy as everyone wants to bed with “A Model”. The other one is just chop off his pen is and “Voila”, Ms Jenner appears.
Nowhere in the world map can we witness an outstanding performance of a city state without resources led by Black, Whites to become truly admired by world leaders. Comparing Singapore and Nigeria is as close as Sri Lanka and the US. We are told that Sri Lanka will become world superpower one day.
Guns Germs and Steel most wholly discredited. Rushton refuted, I believe Jensen did and one other researcher.
2.Yes, that's as expected, although the Yoruba are not quite as over-represented, it seems. At least two of the other six names are apparently Hausa, and one is unclear.
It is very odd that Frost would attribute the “little bit of achievement” in Ghana/Ghanaians to the Igbo (Which I had missed in that article before, but he does). Though there is ( what could be called) an Igbo diaspora in parts of West Africa, Igbo comprise a far too insignificant part of any national population (next to nothing in Ghana as far as I can tell) outside Nigeria to have an effect. Nor are they any part of the Ghanaian immigrant population.
(To be fair, Frost attributes it to the Igbo speculatively, not definitively.)
".....Nor are they any part of the Ghanaian immigrant population, which is mostly Akan/Twi speaking, Ewe, and perhaps some Ga.
And going off that, ANHI lacked any reference to the IQ's of non-Ashkenazi jews, and therefore the original intelligence of the early ashkenazi jewish population. It's basically assumed it was 100 and shot up by 115. If it was a more likely score of the low-mid 100's, it really weakens the hypothesis (among many other things) if their IQ was boosted by just a few to several points, and this idea the Igbo were selected in some way.
And yeah, I'm aware there's claimed IQ data for the Sephardim and Mizrahim- 99 and 91 respectively. 99 for the Sephards is pretty ridiculous and not believable, and 91 for the Mizrahi is just insane (pretty certain it was cooked to fit Lynn's crazy theories about arab intelligence.)
Panda sees where you’re coming from, WoO, thanks for pointing it out but it seems that you misunderstood the low profiled Panda, ROFL , probably due to the bad French? LoL.
See, the point was that if one group is inherently very smart, then there must have been a time in the long river of history (e.g. now, or 100 years ago…500 years ago…till 5,000 years ago…) that it shone compared to the rest of the world, at least once. Jews, Chinese and many other groups have showed/shows this;
On the other hand, if the world has never heard about it in the last 5,000 years including now, the chance that it is brilliant is very but very very slim… C’mon, one thing is to have bad luck sometimes as fate dealt it, whereas another thing being to have “bad luck” all the time? What’s the odd of that happening?
Edit:
(To be fair, Frost attributes it to the Igbo speculatively, not definitively.)
“…..Nor are they any part of the Ghanaian immigrant population, which is mostly Akan/Twi speaking, Ewe, and perhaps some Ga.
It’s easy to ignore the silly off-topic comments, but when they start getting repeated by different people, it’s tempting to respond. (Hopefully it’s not the same person using different names).
1. The Singapore v Nigeria example is not an argument for Black IQ or black anything. Context is clear for those who can read. It was a response to a specific statement by someone, about something, ….
2. The Nigerian Math Olympiad example is not an argument for Black IQ or black anything. Context is clear for those who can read. It was specifically about Igbo over-representation within Nigeria, to contrast with immigration representation to UK (and not to compare with the Chinese team at Math Olympiads that is selected from a 1.3 billion population and is famous for its preps etc… a different discussion for another day).
3. The Scrabble … [Sigh]
Never mind.
2. The Nigerian Math Olympiad example is even much funnier: as you try to have the cake and eat it; after other commenters pointed this out, you basically covered your own eyes saying "what? I had the cake and ate it myself? Noooooo, I haven't seen it! See? I am covering my eyes." ROFL, That's quite an innovative debating style! LOL If you still can't follow, the thing is that while you were excited about Igbo's overwelming composition in the Nigerian national team to justify their IQ this and that, commenters took the very same example telling you with empirical data that this example you raised is about a perfect one to refute your very own final claim of Igbo's high IQ on the world stage. And what did you reply? You basically replied "no no no, this example doesn't count!" ROFL. And yeah right, "IMO is all about preps", ROFL. But how stupid the world is because if that were true, then every country can just outsourcing prep to China and end up being #1 all togther! LOL. Then the question is Igbo's high representative ratio in Nigeria team must be all about preps, too, right? The same with scrabble whatever prep? Hey, at least you gotta be consistent in your own logic. LoL
You overestimate the clarity of your prose. [Mainly because you adulterate your sound arguments with anything you can pull in for a scintilla of support.]
Bearing in mind what the above key HBD paper says about occupational profile, endogamy and reproductive success fostering a high IQ population, it seems to me that Osu are the likely origin of those ‘Igbo’ having much higher intelligence than other Africans.
“The most educated tribes (both Igbos and Yorubas) in fact feature prominently in reports of high level fraud and corruption within and outside Nigeria”. I see no anomaly from an HBD standpoint in brainy people engaging in complex fraud, which would presumably be intellectually demanding.
Very few scientists and no one influential in public life seems to have a racial ideology that is not explicitly egalitarian, are they honest? One should not presume slanting of the evidence and cognitive dissonance is only found in one school of thought. The ideology that is almost entirely powerless to bestow or remove position and prestige (James Watson) may be more solidly based on data than one might think. Racial equalitarianism is the received wisdom in Western society, and it is enforced
IMO: Nigeria
First participation: 2006.
Number of participations: 9.
Gold medals: 0. Silver medals: 0. Bronze medals: 5. Honourable mentions: 7.
To be fair Nigeria is the best performer from Africa, which don't say much.
How about those Chinese
First participation: 1985.
Number of participations: 30.
Gold medals: 138. Silver medals: 30. Bronze medals: 6. Honourable mentions: 0.
How about we look even closer? how many ethnic Chinese won gold in just the last 3 year in IMO
2015: 9/39 gold
2014: 20/49 gold
2013: 13/45 gold
....
So stop overstating your claim, it is not even that close. And stop using GCSE stat., which most readers in this blog are not familiar with and way too easy (leveling effect). How about some A-Level (college entrance test) result for 2012/2013?
https://docs.google.com/viewerng/viewer?url=https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/208459/response/565105/attach/3/FOI%25202014%25200059414%2520Littlejohn%2520final.xlsx
Check the result and you will notice that even Irish traveler outscore Black African by a wide margin. And Chinese just blow everybody out of the water.
So the White British are producing 2.27 times the rate of AAA students (or better) of Black Africans, and the Chinese put out 2.26 that number again. Well, that’s even better than my numbers for the chances of earning A* grades (see my comment on Part 2 – I realise this contains some flaws which I cannot now correct). Note that only a handful of Irish Travellers were even entered.
Anyway, aren’t those AAA students the cream of the crop? It is often pointed out that a small shift in the mean of the bell curve is enough to produce large effects in the tails. Therefore, the difference must be well under 1 SD, unless the Black Africans are a selective sample (see my last comment – I don’t think they are).
I see that this table replicates my observation that Mixed White & Black African students do much better than Mixed White & Black Caribbean students, and almost as well as White Britons. In this case, it is a non-negligible difference, but AAA is a more stringent standard than A/A* for a single entry. In fact, since Mixed White & Black Africans are less wealthy than the average person, they may be over-performing. I cannot think of an environmental reason why, but a hereditarian explanation seems even more far-fetched.
Chanda, I’m the only guy commenting with Rdm, never used other nickname.
Regarding your article on Black White IQ gap, I always thought you should give a more appropriate title “Black IQ gap within Africa”. That will solve the issue.
Chanda, you done impress me.
It’s about time we be enlightened about the Brigroes or bright negroes.
I think we should pay attention to Chanda. He be one essential Gro.
We are familiar with HBD stuff, but it makes too many white folks rest on their laurels and think ‘them negroes be too dumb’. But not all negroes are the same. It be like Apollo Creed didn’t take Rocky too seriously and got hurt real bad.
Not all Negroes are the same. It be like, even though Asians be shorter than whites in general, some Northern Chinese are almost or just as tall as southern Europeans. In good number of cases, even taller. We know from sumo that not all slanty folks be the same. Mongolia has population of under 2 million but their wrestlers be bouncing Japanese wrestlers like ping pong balls.
And we know Africa is a big continent and it done have lots of variety. There be the shortest folks there. The pigromies. There also be the tallest folks called the Watusis. It done have some of the dumbest folks, but also some very smart folks. And Igbos and Yoruba seem smart. As for Yoruba, we can see from their art and sculpture that they be a creative and talented folks. And Igbo done well in trade and stuff.
Some might aks, then why so many American blacks from that part of world be crazy and not so smart? It could be that smarter folks of Igbos and Yorubas set up kingdoms and captured the dumb Nigerian negroes and sold them as slaves.
They done put up signs to Arabs and whites: ‘hey, come here and buy some dumb negroes.’
It’s like this: Suppose American whites were to turn brutal and nasty. Then, the smarter and clever whites will take power ruthlessly, and if they were to deal in slaves, they would capture and sell ‘dumb white trash’ to other folks.
It could be that smart Negroes captured and sold the ‘dumb black trash’ to the Americas.
Also, we have to keep in mind the population explosion of Africa. This means Africa is both getting smarter and dumber. Lots of dumb Africans be having lots of kids, but lots of smart Africans be having kids too. In Africa, both dumb and smart Negroes be having lots of kids. It’s like Obama’s smart daddy done pork lots of women and have lots of kids.
In the West and East Asia, this no longer so. In Europe and America, smart whites not be having lots of kids. And population also decline among dumb whites. And East Asians, smart and dumb, not having kids. I done hear birthrate for Shanghai is 0.8.
That be pitiful.
http://www.amren.com/news/2015/12/it-is-already-too-late-to-scrap-chinas-one-child-policy/
But African men and women be wild and shit when it comes to sex. So, dumb blacks be having kids all over, but also smart blacks be having kids too.
Long ago, population of Africa/Nigeria was relatively small. So, there were limited bunch of black dummies and black smarties. Now, with exploding population, there gonna be lots of more dummies and lots more smarties.
Meanwhile, the West not be having kids. Smart whites grow old and die with shriveled balls and crusty wombs that don’t produce kids.
So, smart African immigrants have chance to gain greater ground in the West cuz smart whites simply not having kids. It might be that way in Japan too as some Nigerian done get best grades in some Japanese college.
http://africanspotlight.com/2015/05/19/nigerian-graduate-emerges-best-student-in-50-years-in-japan-university-builds-car-photos/
That Negro done scare my ass.
When population keep growing like it do in Africa, there gonna be more smarties and more dummies. It be like India. India be filled with lots of dummy dotters, but it also have its share of smarties. India be a place where people of all caste/class still have kids. So, it done have growing number of smarties and growing number of dummies.
With Indian emigration to West, EU and America will get lots of smarties and dummies. Smarties will win spelling bees, and dummies will work as clerk at 7/11 owned by their uncle. Overall, India not a very smart nation, but there be so many people that some of them just gotta be smart.
We see same thing happening with Africa. It done have so many dummies, and they be multiplying like bunners, but there also be some very smart people in Nigeria and Kenya and they be multiplying like bunners too. In the West, it not be dignified for smart white person to be sticking his dong into every pooter. But in polygynic Africa, it not disgraceful for smart dude to be humping every other ho. So, smart genes spread as fast as dumb ones.
Smart people in the West and East Asia are inhibited in their behavior. They believe in monogamy or, even if they done sleep around, they use contraceptives. But smart Negroes in Nigeria and Kenya don’t mind humping every other ho and making her pregnant. This behavior done spread smart genes far and wide, and it could be that certain segment of Africans are getting smarter cuz the smart Negroes be screwing everyone. Imagine if Albert Einstein screwed a 1ooo shikse bimbos. IQ would suddenly go up in the community.
There was a time when Africans were dying like flies cuz of disease and famine and stuff. But with western medicine, so many negroes survive to pass down genes. While dumb negroes have kids too, smart ones have them too.
In the past, a negro in Africa got ahead by being tough and killing a hippo with spear. But in more recent times, African gets ahead and gets female attention by using his brains to make money, criminally or legally. So, smarter negroes now get the attention of most women. And they be acting like Idi Amin in screwing every ho they see. Even smart blacks be acting like Negro athletes who hump every ho. They be dick-centered geeks, or deeks.
So, this has a way of spreading higher IQ among the Jafros very fast.
Imagine if a smart white guy like Ron Unz done screwed a 100 women and made them pregnant. His smart genes would spread far and wide and very fast.
In the past, African polygynic practice favored the warrior genes. Why? Cuz Power and Prestige back then was judged by chucking spears at hippos and buffaloes. But with rise in trade and merchant opportunities, things began to change in parts of Nigeria. Using brains became an advantage. And since Nigerians don’t have much in the way of sexual morality, smart Negroes done screw everyone and spread smart genes faster than it happened among Jews and whites.
Jews and whites mostly done practice monogamy. So, smart Jews and whites depended on one woman to have kids. She might have many kids, but at most, it would be like 8 or 9.
It wouldn’t have been respectable for a smart Englishman or Jew to hump a 100 ho’s and have kids with them. But that is what smart Nigerians do. They be humping everything in sight cuz Negroes just got that sexual healing like Marvin Gaye done sing.
In America, smarter Negroes are more likely to be respectable and not have kids with lots of women. Instead, dumb Negroes act like that in America. It’s like Obama married a single ho and had two kids. His father in Africa, in contrast, had lots of kids with lots of ho’s. So, his smart genes spread far and wide.
In Nigeria, things be the reverse of what happen in black America. Since smart Nigerians have more money, they are more attractive to females. Also, it is socially approved for smart Nigerians to hump everything in sight. Meanwhile, dumb Nigerians are less attractive to women, so they have fewer chance to hump every ho. When smart shameless Nigerian men hump a lot of ho’s while poor Nigerian men hump fewer ho’s, Nigerians are gonna get smarter, and since the effect is polygynic, with some smart Nigerians impregnating a 100 women, higher IQ is gonna spread fast.
It’s the same in sports. Suppose some very strong/fast white athlete doesn’t choose monogamy but humps 200 white women in his community. The athletic ability of his community is gonna change drastically in a single generation. And suppose among his many fast/strong kids, they also hump 200 women each. Soon, it’s gonna be a community of many excellent white athletes.
Now, Nigeria is still a messed up place, and this may have more to do with sociopathy than intelligence. Smart or dumb, Negroes tend to be more jivey, uga and buga, flipping out, hollering, walloping, bongo-funking out, and into mack-daddy behavior.
Take Tommy Sotomayor. He seems like a brigro, and he rags on bad black behavior. But he admits that he is infected with the same emotional problems.
I always said the main problem with blacks isn’t so much their lower IQ but their sociopathy or Negropathy. By nature, Negroes are more self-centered, uninhibited, egotistical, shameless, impulsive, slickity-slack, flippity-flap, yabbity-dabbity, and such. (Such personality might actually give them up a leg up on stuff like rapping and scrabble playing. They have a more intuitive than logical grasp of verbal skills. It’s like Negroes are better at certain kinds of musical creativity and ‘rhythmic intelligence’ than other races are. It’s like Asians play music like they drive cars. Asians be methodical but lack improvisational instinct that Negroes have more of. It’s like Leonard Jeffries say white ice people are logical whereas black sun people be ‘creative’.)
You don’t need high IQ to do well in the West. I know Jews who were never smart–even dumber than myself–but got good jobs and stuff. Why? Cuz they put their hooknoses to the grindstone and did the work.
But there be smart Negroes who have no such focus and prefer to shuck and jive and act crazy. It’s like what the smart Negro says at the end of FOOLEY HIGH: “I can lie and steal too good not to survive.”
That kind of attitude isn’t very constructive in the long run.
FOOLEY HIGH is one of the most honest films about blacks, not least cuz it was made a black auteur. Its lead character got the brains but has the wrong attitude, one shared by so many other brigroes.
This is why, even when a nation has a lot of smart Gros, as Nigeria perhaps does, it faces many problems. It has too many Gros with sociopathy or Negropathy whose attitude is “I can lie and steal too good not to survive.”
With such an attitude prevailing over society, intelligence doesn’t go too far. Too many smart Gros break rules, ignore principles, look out only for #1, don’t care about the common good, and etc.
It may be that one advantage that Nigerian immigrants have in EU and US is they are less likely to seek such excuses. Having seen what a black-run society looks like in Africa, they are grateful to be a society run by sane white folks where rules and regulations do matter, at least more than in Africa.
Also, suppose there are a 1000 Negroes and suppose all of them are smart. But suppose they all suffer from sociopathy and tend to be low in trust and integrity. Despite their intelligence, their low character will prevent them from running a functional society.
Now, suppose a few of those Negroes go to a society that is made up of 1000 white people who are no smarter but possessed of trust, integrity, and etc.
Those Negroes, though sociopathic themselves, may well thrive since white society checks their sociopathy from going out of whack. Since their sociopathy is checked, their intelligence is put to better use. In some ways, their sociopathy may even give them an edge in such a social order since some degree of sociopathy(restrained sufficiently) may lend initiative, creativity, originality, and ambition.
Someone like Steve Jobs in a world of full of Steve Jobs would never get along with anyone. But someone like him in a community of solid workers may see further than most others cuz he has more ego and drive.
That said, black interests are black interests and white interests are white interests.
Why should the white world favor policies that favor blacks over whites?
HBD is a code word for white nationalism. It should really stand for HONKEYS BE DISTRESSED. Distressed by too much immigration, too much diversity, too much anti-white rhetoric.
White nationalism should favor dumb whites over smart non-whites. After all, the leader of Kenya should care about all Kenyans, even dumb ones, than care most about smart people around the world.
Palestinian leadership should care more about dumb Palestinians than about smart Jews.
Nationalism isn’t about intelligence. Having smart people in a nation is a great advantage, but nationalism is about blood and soil. White nationalism must favor even Beavis and Butthead over smarter Fat Albert.
Globalism favors the smart over the dumb around the world. Globalism says the smart set should identify with one another around the world while giving the middle finger to the dummies of all races. So, smart French elites should hang with smart African and Asian elites. As for the French dummies, they should be rendered faceless and interchangeble as labor pool with all the other dummies via open borders.
This emphasis on intelligence is anti-nationalist, and this is why the premise of HBD is fundamentally flawed. HBD argues that white elites should favor whiteness cuz whites are smarter, thus more valuable. But using this logic, it means smart whites should just forget about dumb whites and favor smart yellows, blacks, and etc.
This is just another road to globalism.
Nationalism must be about blood and soil. Smart whites must care about whiteness above all, just like black nationalism should require smart blacks to care about dumb blacks. Imagine Palestinian nationalists who prefer smart Zionists over dumb Palestinians.
Why should whites favor whites? Because they all belong to a racial family of shared genes, history, culture, narrative, identity, and unique beauty. That is why. It’s like one cares about one’s own family even if some family members are not so smart or rich. Race and nation should ideally be like a racial family. It should be organic. In this family, some will be smart, some will be beautiful, some will be dumb, some will be ugly. But they are all part of family. Nationalism is bunkerism. It’s all in the family. It is not meatheadism.
So, it is not the responsibility of whites to make things easy for blacks. Blacks have a giant continent all to themselves. Africa is a great, gigantic, beautiful, and magnificent continent with all sorts of wonders. Blacks have all of that, and they need to make it livable. Blacks must do things that are good for blacks.
And whites must do things that are good for whites. Why should whites do things that are good for blacks? Why should blacks be allowed to rise to the top in UK and France and Holland and etc?
Let’s say everything Chanda says is true. Let’s say blacks are as smart or even smarter than whites(or Chinese). Then, let the smart blacks fix up Africa. Why should they come to the West and take over? One may say that smart blacks can contribute to white society, and when the number is small enough, it’s no problem. But black African wave is huge and keeps coming and coming, especially at a time when whites are not having kids. This bodes badly for the West. West will become an extension of Africa.
Also, black Africans who come to the West maintain their own identity, interests, and narrative. Is Chanda willing to give up his African identity, interests, and pride as a Negro living in the West? No, he is still first and foremost a Afro-centric Negro-minded person, which is why he is beaming with so much black power pride in this article about Brigros.
It’s like Jews gained great power in the West, but do they serve the West? No, they undermine white identity and interests to serve Jewish identity and interests.
Soros freely admits that he is trying to break down borders and flood Europe with non-Europeans. Sure, Jews are smart and talented, but their smarts and talents(upon gaining elite power) work against the interests of whites.
Also, the possibility that blacks are just as smart or even smarter than whites should be even more alarming.
We know for sure that blacks have an advantage in physical power and muscularity. Many blacks are also physically taller. And when it comes to sex stuff, Negroes are considered to have bigger dongs, which is what the much discussed ‘cuck phenomenon’ is about. It’s about white wiberals worshiping the Negro penis humping their white wives.
Now, just think. If Negroes have advantage in muscle, funky music, sports, and dong-size, then there is some degree of compensation for the white man in having superior smarts. So, even though the Negro can whup the white boy’s ass and impress white women with negro dong, the white boy can gain advantage with higher intelligence, college degree, professional skills, and money.
BUT if the Negro is stronger, donger, and smarter, the white guy is really finished.
White guy will be like a native indigenous Mexican male. The native Mexican males were smaller, weaker, and less intelligent to the Spanish Conquistadores. They lost out totally.
If indeed the new batch of Nigerian Negremlins are not only stronger and donger but smarter, then the honker boy is really out of luck(and fuc*).
Worse, due to high birthrates in Nigeria, it means there will be more and more of these smart Negremlins since high IQ Nigerians practice polygyny that makes them hump a 100 ho’s each. Bro-Brain Negremlins will take over the world.
I always thought that no creature would be more frightening than a Jewgro. Brains of Jew and brawn of Negro. But maybe Nigeria is a hatchery of these defacto Jewgroes. Smart and Strong Negroes. That is too much and racially unfair.
So, the Bro-brain Negremlins of Nigeria must stay in Nigeria. The new batches of Negremlins must fix up Africa, not take over the West and maybe even the East, what with the Negremlin beating all the yellows in Japan itself.
I’m beginning to believe Chanda is right. The Combo of High IQ, sociopathy, and polygyny is making Nigeria into a hatchery of ‘Caesars’.
Why is this dangerous? Take CONQUEST OF THE PLANET OF THE APES.
There are humans and apes. Humans are smarter, apes are stronger. But since humans got the higher intelligence, they can control the apes.
But then, Caesar comes along. This isn’t any ordinary ape but a high IQ ape, indeed an ape with IQ possibly higher than human. This high-IQ ape leads the other apes in rebellion and takes over.
And this is the threat posed by the Nigerian Bro-Brain Negremlins. It is the fusion of Negro muscle and Negro mind.
So, HBD needs to stop pussy-footing. In the end, it’s not a matter of intelligence but blood and soil. It’s not about human-bio-diversity but honkeys-be-distressed.
Chanda’s findings are, if anything, more distressing cuz it means whites will lose to blacks physically and intellectually(economically as well).
Why should whites welcome that in white nations? UK should be the land of Britons, the descendants of King Arthur, not of Chief Kukumonga.
There are plenty of smart Chinese, but should Italy be allowed to be flooded by Chinese? No. Italy should be the land of the descendants of Julius Caesar, not Emperor Fu Manchu.
Unlike so many HBD folks who beat around the bush, I say it like it be as I is the only the true race-ist.
Race-ism is the best policy for all peoples. It don’t mean KKK or Nazi stuff.
The common narrative say Nazis were bad cuz they was ‘racists’.
But in fact, Nazis were evil cuz they were imperialist racists than universal race-ists.
A universal race-ist respects the necessary race-ism of each and every nation.
In other words, German nationalism in Germany was not the problem. It was when the German ‘race’ began to invade and oppress the races of other nations. If Germany should be for the German ‘race’, why shouldn’t Poland be for the Polish ‘race’ and why shouldn’t Russia be for the Russian ‘race’? But Hitler violated universal race-ism with imperialist race-ism.
Indeed, all the anti-imperialist struggles after WWII were based on the ideal of universal race-ism. Let Vietnamese rule Vietnam, let Algerians rule Algeria, let black Africans rule their own nations in Africa.
But we need to extend such ideal to the West as well. Let Western white nations preserve themselves as white/European nations. Why should ‘European values’ be about doing favors for blacks, yellows, browns, and etc? Let other peoples take care of themselves. Let other nations harness their talents and energies to build up their own societies. Sure, the world can trade with one another cuz no nation, not even the plentiful US, is fully self-sufficient in everything.
But each nation needs to preserve its race, culture, and land. The idea of letting Africans demographically take over EU is bad stuff. It’s all the worse if, as Chanda says, some Africans are so smart that they routinely outperform whites in the UK and other places. How does it serve the UK to have a black elite with an African identity and set of interests? How would Nigeria like it to have its elite institutions be taken over by whites or Chinese?
Nigerians may contract the Chiners to come and work and build stuff, but surely Nigerians want Nigerian nation and institutions to be ruled by Nigerians(even if Nigerians do a bad job of it due to their Negropathic ways).
In a strange way, white embrace of ‘diversity’ is a roundabout way of ‘return to blood’.
It is part of human nature to want to be part of a blood-and-bone community.
Matters of blood and identity are more stable and substantive than mere ideals. It’s like family ties are deeper than some ideological creed. One can go from this-ism to that-ism, but one’s family is constant. Even if you disagree with your mother, she is still your mother. Even if you disagree with your son or daughter, he or she is still your flesh-and-blood.
Now, mere blood-kin-ship isn’t enough for social progress. It can lead to mindless clan-ism, as with the Hatcoys vs McFields.
The West made great progress by choosing ideation and ideality. Ideality is about principles and rules than primal blood loyalty. But ideality lacks the juice of gut reality. It’s like ideality teaches us that all human lives are equally valuable, but your gut reality makes you more sad over loss of family member, spouse, or close kin. Ideality says all women are equal in worth, but surely your mother means more to you in feelings of gut reality.
White folks used to have a balance of abstract ideality and gut reality. But once Jews took over the media and academia, they spread the notion among whites that any white sense of gut reality is ‘racist’, ‘paranoid’, ‘evil’, ‘atavistic’, ‘rabid’, ‘virulent’, ‘odious’, ‘noxious’, and etc.
So, whites had to choose ONLY ideality. So, white Libs became PC-tards yammering endlessly about equality, tolerance, inclusion, and etc.
And white Cons focused on Christian morals of universalism, libertarian principles of individualism, free market ideology of lower taxes and no tariffs, and etc.
Now, ideality is important, but it’s not enough. People do need a sense of gut reality that comes from family, kin, race, nation, history, identity, culture.
But since whites are not allowed to dwell on this aspect of human nature, they must satisfy their craving for gut reality via the cult of ‘diversity’.
Paradoxically, white embrace of ‘diversity’ isn’t simply about universal ideals and anti-’racism’. It is also a case of whites practicing tribalism and race-ism through the surrogates of Jews, blacks, and other races that are not burdened with feelings of ‘historical guilt’.
White race has become anemic. It is bloodless. It hopes for red blood cells. Whites can have such by romoting their own race, history, identity, and pride. But they are not allowed to cuz such feelings are thought to be ‘racist’, at least among whites.
As white society turned pathologically idealistic(and this was led by northern Europeans, especially Brits and Scandinavians), it became more bloodless, more anemic. It became more principled and idealistic, but the vital blood-and-guts instinct came to be suppressed. (Paradoxically, such attitudes came to be formed because northern Europe was so homogeneous. Diversity leads to distrust and tribalism; homogeneity leads to sense of security and trust, which leads to favoring idealism over tribalism. The more diverse communities of Southern Europe that had been invaded by non-European elements were less into ideality and more into gut reality, which is why Italian sons love their mamas over all else. It’s like in GODFATHER II where Sonny speaks of the importance of blood. The appeal of GODFATHER II was that it allowed bloodless anglo-Americans to feel a sense of gut reality through Sicilian-Americans who were still into kin and tribe.)
And even though white Libs always knock Ethan Edwards in THE SEARCHERS, part of the appeal of that movie even to Libs is that Ethan stands for gut reality. Libs consciously knock him but subconsciously respond to his racial and tribal instinct.
Whites are tribally repressed, like Victorians used to be sexually repressed.
Anyway, since white folks are not allowed to have lots of red blood cells that carry plenty of iron, they need blood transfusions from other people who are not burdened with ‘historical guilt’.
So, white Conservatives get their blood transfusions from Jews, Zionists, and Netanyahu. Paul Ryan rips on Donald Trump for ‘Islamophobia’, but the libertarian tard is all for Jewish Nationalism and race-ism in Israel.
Anemic whites in Minnesota and Maine are not allowed to go ‘back to blood’ because white blood is seen to be tainted with the ‘racist gene’. But their human nature still craves for the ‘back to blood’ gut reality. So, they import all those Somalis and other Negroes from Africa who are allowed to be proudly African, black, historically-minded, culturally rooted, and etc. White folks not only adopt black African babies but adopt black sense of blood-roots.
Whites cannot take pride in white this or white that, but whites in Maine and Minnesota are so proud to see their towns be taken over by AFRICAN this or AFRICAN that. It’s like some whites get dreadlocks, tans, and listen to a lot of reggae and pretend to be ‘Jamaican, man’.
http://www.amren.com/news/2015/12/mayoral-race-in-maine-could-help-define-citys-future-amid-demographic-shift/
This is seen as ‘anti-racist’, but it is actually ‘racism by other means’. Since whites cannot be race-ist for whiteness, they seek blood-transfusion to be race-ist in the name and honor of other groups. It’s like Rachel Dolezal. (The only form of white pride/identity left is homo-ness and trans-gender-ness, but that just pussifies white identity. I mean what real racial pride can there be from celebrating the likes of Bruce ‘Caitlyn’ Jenner?)
White race has gone vegan. Its blood has turned weak and anemic. That’s why whites crave blood transfusions from other races.
Since whites cannot take pride in white power, white wealth, white privilege, and etc. they welcome non-whites to their lands and take surrogate-pride in black achievement, brown fame, and Jewish power. (Yellows may follow in the path of whites since their nations are, like northern Europe, homogeneous, highly educated(indoctrinated), colorless/bland, and status-obsessed. Singapore grows more PC by the day.)
So, we are supposed to be so happy that some Muslim kid ‘invented a clock’.
We are supposed to be so happy that Nigerians are excelling in Britain. (As for all the poor ‘white trash’ girls who got raped by Pakistani men, forget about them. Don’t you see it is soooooo evil for whites to think in terms of white identity or interests?)
We are supposed to be so happy that Jews have so much power, prestige, bombs, money, awards, and etc. It’s pathetic.
White race needs to stop being vegan. It’s time for whites to eat some red meat and have some healthy red blood cells. Time to stop being anemic.
An anemic race becomes not only ashamed of itself but bored with itself. Since it cannot feel passionate about one’s own race, culture, and history, such things just seem lame, boring, dull, old, and tired.
So, the anemic race seeks vigor and vitality from the Other, the exotic, the different, the alien.
It’s like the Apathetics in ZARDOZ draw their energy from Zed cuz they have lost vitality and passion for their own existence and civilization.
Cuck mentality is like this.
There is the organic and synthetic. It is because the white race is no longer allowed to be organic in their race-ism and historical sense that they seek out substitute organic stuff by shopping at WHOLE FOODS. Since they cannot generate organic blood-and-soil feeling from within, they seek such sensation by eating ‘organic tomatoes’ and ‘organic yogurt’ or ‘organic honey’. It’s like white folks who aren’t allowed to white nationalist seek a form of substitute nationalism in kosher-ization. Via kosherism, whites can pretend to have a kind of leap-frogged identity.
When people lose their own race-ism, they seek race-ism-by-other-means through the cult of diversity. A white Christian family that cannot say “we are proud to have WHITE KIDS” can, by adopting from Negrolet from Africa, loudly proclaim “We are proud to raise BLACK KIDS.”
You blindsided the other possibility: the scrawny Jews like anatomical structure infused with Black complexion, crooked nose, short stature combined with Brains of the Blacks, you're seeing a different creature on Earth.
An ox is allowed to grow to full maturity before it is castrated and so the farmer benefits from the animal's adult strength without risking his uncontrollable aggressiveness. If a male is castrated in infancy, he never develops his strength but remains a soprano castrato, handy around the harem but useless for field work. The trick then is to breed them for strength, which means selecting for testosterone, while not allowing them to become too unmanageable so as to require castration, since they were valuable as studs. Today of course, we could resort to chemical castration of black rapists and murderers but that would deny them their "right" to commit further acts of mayhem when they are released from jail.
Since 1865, black reproduction practices have been left to their own devises and mating has become based upon aggressiveness on the part of males so consequently, aggressiveness has been selected for in the intervening time. The end result you see before you: aggressive, stupid men.
This selective breeding accounts for their superior performance in e.g. NBA and NFL (compared to their African cousins) as Jimmy the Greek commented on. (Remember when he was genuinely surprised by the reaction to his having expressed this simple truth that everyone knows but which must remain unspoken--the very definition of the word "taboo").
The Southern Planter tried to warn us that just letting Nature take her course would not end well for us. They were very aware that they had been tinkering with genetics and had bred a large, potentially dangerous animal and that only further enlightened, careful selection could keep that animal from reverting to its wild state, with disastrous consequences for the safety of persons who were vulnerable to predation should any of these animals escape captivity. We could call today's black incivility and criminality, "Southern Planter's Revenge".
Is there any scholarly piece that talks about selection of slaves for better breeding? The most I can find is blogs and biased sites about Africa, is there any journal papers published on the matter?
But in answer to your question, yes, ledger-style records were kept and still exist at former plantations that show which male was bred to which female. You can still see them if you visit reconstructed plantations.
Widow Douglas types will wring their hands at the bluntness of what I wrote above. Widow Douglas was the woman who bedeviled Huck Finn in trying to civilize him. These are the same types who want to expunge the word "niqqer" from Twain's great works--even though Huck almost always uses the word in a gracious sense as when he is complimenting Jim for being a more decent human being than many a white person he could name. The same people will deny these simple historic truths which are simply the starting point from which many black people must begin their Oedipus-like quest in self understanding.
Unfortunately, the widow Douglas lives with us today in the form of Liberals, her great-grand sons and daughters. Twain does a great job of skewering these meddlesome, know-nothing busybodies--which is the real reason liberals want to rewrite his books today.
The Osu were not in general a highly skilled (or unusually so) group. They were generally not allowed to be merchants. As living sacrifices they mainly acted as the keepers of certain shrines, sometimes under the authority of (non-Usu) priests.
A little research suggests the Osu were, and often still are, reproductively isolated with residences near traditional shrines and markets, which are somewhat connected. Historically, they were entitled to the residue of offerings to the shrine, produce from the shrine property and they would even go so far as to enter villagers' houses and take food. Because they were under a deity's protection Osu were not interfered with or punished, and were exempt from taxes and communal labour. Under colonial administration, Osu were notably successful in education (compared to the non-Osu Igbo they lived among*) becoming part of administrative and legal authorities. I think the clever Igbo are mainly crypto Osu. When you put together the privileges, unusual occupational profile, reproductive isolation, and demographic expansion of Osu it seems rather plausible they could have become a clever caste within the Igbo. I think the best evidence I have a good theory is the support from several sources for Osu outdoing other Igbo in educational attainment.
1. The Singapore v Nigeria example is not an argument for Black IQ or black anything. Context is clear for those who can read. It was a response to a specific statement by someone, about something, ....
2. The Nigerian Math Olympiad example is not an argument for Black IQ or black anything. Context is clear for those who can read. It was specifically about Igbo over-representation within Nigeria, to contrast with immigration representation to UK (and not to compare with the Chinese team at Math Olympiads that is selected from a 1.3 billion population and is famous for its preps etc... a different discussion for another day).
3. The Scrabble ... [Sigh]
Never mind.
1. With the Singapore vs Nigeria example , you tried to refute Thompson’s key msg that “one is a resourceless tiny place and somehow gets rich, whereas the other is a resourceful, both natural and human, bigger place and somehow stays poor”. It seemed that there was a reading comprehension problem from your part by asserting Thompson meant GDP instead of GDP per cap. Of course it’s GDP per cap whenever one touches upon adj such as “rich”and “poor”!
Then you dragged that growth map out of nowhere (logically speaking) as an “evidence”… What? LOL . Panda and another commenter just took the advantage of already-there growth map and explained further why so and what are the other numerous variables – which has nothing whatsoever to do with refuting Thompson’s point either way as that point still stands, with or without the post-2008 GDP growth map.
2. The Nigerian Math Olympiad example is even much funnier: as you try to have the cake and eat it; after other commenters pointed this out, you basically covered your own eyes saying “what? I had the cake and ate it myself? Noooooo, I haven’t seen it! See? I am covering my eyes.” ROFL, That’s quite an innovative debating style! LOL
If you still can’t follow, the thing is that while you were excited about Igbo’s overwelming composition in the Nigerian national team to justify their IQ this and that, commenters took the very same example telling you with empirical data that this example you raised is about a perfect one to refute your very own final claim of Igbo’s high IQ on the world stage. And what did you reply? You basically replied “no no no, this example doesn’t count!” ROFL.
And yeah right, “IMO is all about preps”, ROFL. But how stupid the world is because if that were true, then every country can just outsourcing prep to China and end up being #1 all togther! LOL.
Then the question is Igbo’s high representative ratio in Nigeria team must be all about preps, too, right? The same with scrabble whatever prep? Hey, at least you gotta be consistent in your own logic. LoL
Responding to end note 1, using the Fuerst reference in comment 4, on endnote 7:
“African Black emigrants to the West are highly unrepresentative of their origin populations in terms of education. ”
Going to the source on that comment,
http://www.iab.de/en/daten/iab-brain-drain-data.aspx
The data is seperated into “low, medium, high” meaning, primary, highschool, above highschool”
Downloading the brain drain data, going to the USA men tab, going to Nigerian immigration to the USA row, we get, in order of “low, medium, and highly educated”, in the 2010 range;
1786 9632 79943
So for nigerian men who immigrated in that range, 87% came with some form of post highschool education. The previous year ranges for both men and women also have consistently high majorities of post-highschool educational levels.
For a country with a ~60% literacy rate, Im going to call that non-representative of the nigeria population.
It's about time we be enlightened about the Brigroes or bright negroes.
I think we should pay attention to Chanda. He be one essential Gro.
We are familiar with HBD stuff, but it makes too many white folks rest on their laurels and think 'them negroes be too dumb'. But not all negroes are the same. It be like Apollo Creed didn't take Rocky too seriously and got hurt real bad.
Not all Negroes are the same. It be like, even though Asians be shorter than whites in general, some Northern Chinese are almost or just as tall as southern Europeans. In good number of cases, even taller. We know from sumo that not all slanty folks be the same. Mongolia has population of under 2 million but their wrestlers be bouncing Japanese wrestlers like ping pong balls.
And we know Africa is a big continent and it done have lots of variety. There be the shortest folks there. The pigromies. There also be the tallest folks called the Watusis. It done have some of the dumbest folks, but also some very smart folks. And Igbos and Yoruba seem smart. As for Yoruba, we can see from their art and sculpture that they be a creative and talented folks. And Igbo done well in trade and stuff.
Some might aks, then why so many American blacks from that part of world be crazy and not so smart? It could be that smarter folks of Igbos and Yorubas set up kingdoms and captured the dumb Nigerian negroes and sold them as slaves.
They done put up signs to Arabs and whites: 'hey, come here and buy some dumb negroes.'
It's like this: Suppose American whites were to turn brutal and nasty. Then, the smarter and clever whites will take power ruthlessly, and if they were to deal in slaves, they would capture and sell 'dumb white trash' to other folks.
It could be that smart Negroes captured and sold the 'dumb black trash' to the Americas.
Also, we have to keep in mind the population explosion of Africa. This means Africa is both getting smarter and dumber. Lots of dumb Africans be having lots of kids, but lots of smart Africans be having kids too. In Africa, both dumb and smart Negroes be having lots of kids. It's like Obama's smart daddy done pork lots of women and have lots of kids.
In the West and East Asia, this no longer so. In Europe and America, smart whites not be having lots of kids. And population also decline among dumb whites. And East Asians, smart and dumb, not having kids. I done hear birthrate for Shanghai is 0.8.
That be pitiful.
http://www.amren.com/news/2015/12/it-is-already-too-late-to-scrap-chinas-one-child-policy/
But African men and women be wild and shit when it comes to sex. So, dumb blacks be having kids all over, but also smart blacks be having kids too.
Long ago, population of Africa/Nigeria was relatively small. So, there were limited bunch of black dummies and black smarties. Now, with exploding population, there gonna be lots of more dummies and lots more smarties.
Meanwhile, the West not be having kids. Smart whites grow old and die with shriveled balls and crusty wombs that don't produce kids.
So, smart African immigrants have chance to gain greater ground in the West cuz smart whites simply not having kids. It might be that way in Japan too as some Nigerian done get best grades in some Japanese college.
http://africanspotlight.com/2015/05/19/nigerian-graduate-emerges-best-student-in-50-years-in-japan-university-builds-car-photos/
That Negro done scare my ass.
When population keep growing like it do in Africa, there gonna be more smarties and more dummies. It be like India. India be filled with lots of dummy dotters, but it also have its share of smarties. India be a place where people of all caste/class still have kids. So, it done have growing number of smarties and growing number of dummies.
With Indian emigration to West, EU and America will get lots of smarties and dummies. Smarties will win spelling bees, and dummies will work as clerk at 7/11 owned by their uncle. Overall, India not a very smart nation, but there be so many people that some of them just gotta be smart.
We see same thing happening with Africa. It done have so many dummies, and they be multiplying like bunners, but there also be some very smart people in Nigeria and Kenya and they be multiplying like bunners too. In the West, it not be dignified for smart white person to be sticking his dong into every pooter. But in polygynic Africa, it not disgraceful for smart dude to be humping every other ho. So, smart genes spread as fast as dumb ones.
Smart people in the West and East Asia are inhibited in their behavior. They believe in monogamy or, even if they done sleep around, they use contraceptives. But smart Negroes in Nigeria and Kenya don't mind humping every other ho and making her pregnant. This behavior done spread smart genes far and wide, and it could be that certain segment of Africans are getting smarter cuz the smart Negroes be screwing everyone. Imagine if Albert Einstein screwed a 1ooo shikse bimbos. IQ would suddenly go up in the community.
There was a time when Africans were dying like flies cuz of disease and famine and stuff. But with western medicine, so many negroes survive to pass down genes. While dumb negroes have kids too, smart ones have them too.
In the past, a negro in Africa got ahead by being tough and killing a hippo with spear. But in more recent times, African gets ahead and gets female attention by using his brains to make money, criminally or legally. So, smarter negroes now get the attention of most women. And they be acting like Idi Amin in screwing every ho they see. Even smart blacks be acting like Negro athletes who hump every ho. They be dick-centered geeks, or deeks.
So, this has a way of spreading higher IQ among the Jafros very fast.
Imagine if a smart white guy like Ron Unz done screwed a 100 women and made them pregnant. His smart genes would spread far and wide and very fast.
In the past, African polygynic practice favored the warrior genes. Why? Cuz Power and Prestige back then was judged by chucking spears at hippos and buffaloes. But with rise in trade and merchant opportunities, things began to change in parts of Nigeria. Using brains became an advantage. And since Nigerians don't have much in the way of sexual morality, smart Negroes done screw everyone and spread smart genes faster than it happened among Jews and whites.
Jews and whites mostly done practice monogamy. So, smart Jews and whites depended on one woman to have kids. She might have many kids, but at most, it would be like 8 or 9.
It wouldn't have been respectable for a smart Englishman or Jew to hump a 100 ho's and have kids with them. But that is what smart Nigerians do. They be humping everything in sight cuz Negroes just got that sexual healing like Marvin Gaye done sing.
In America, smarter Negroes are more likely to be respectable and not have kids with lots of women. Instead, dumb Negroes act like that in America. It's like Obama married a single ho and had two kids. His father in Africa, in contrast, had lots of kids with lots of ho's. So, his smart genes spread far and wide.
In Nigeria, things be the reverse of what happen in black America. Since smart Nigerians have more money, they are more attractive to females. Also, it is socially approved for smart Nigerians to hump everything in sight. Meanwhile, dumb Nigerians are less attractive to women, so they have fewer chance to hump every ho. When smart shameless Nigerian men hump a lot of ho's while poor Nigerian men hump fewer ho's, Nigerians are gonna get smarter, and since the effect is polygynic, with some smart Nigerians impregnating a 100 women, higher IQ is gonna spread fast.
It's the same in sports. Suppose some very strong/fast white athlete doesn't choose monogamy but humps 200 white women in his community. The athletic ability of his community is gonna change drastically in a single generation. And suppose among his many fast/strong kids, they also hump 200 women each. Soon, it's gonna be a community of many excellent white athletes.
Now, Nigeria is still a messed up place, and this may have more to do with sociopathy than intelligence. Smart or dumb, Negroes tend to be more jivey, uga and buga, flipping out, hollering, walloping, bongo-funking out, and into mack-daddy behavior.
Take Tommy Sotomayor. He seems like a brigro, and he rags on bad black behavior. But he admits that he is infected with the same emotional problems.
https://youtu.be/oMopWm8Zb6I?t=59s
I always said the main problem with blacks isn't so much their lower IQ but their sociopathy or Negropathy. By nature, Negroes are more self-centered, uninhibited, egotistical, shameless, impulsive, slickity-slack, flippity-flap, yabbity-dabbity, and such. (Such personality might actually give them up a leg up on stuff like rapping and scrabble playing. They have a more intuitive than logical grasp of verbal skills. It's like Negroes are better at certain kinds of musical creativity and 'rhythmic intelligence' than other races are. It's like Asians play music like they drive cars. Asians be methodical but lack improvisational instinct that Negroes have more of. It's like Leonard Jeffries say white ice people are logical whereas black sun people be 'creative'.)
You don't need high IQ to do well in the West. I know Jews who were never smart--even dumber than myself--but got good jobs and stuff. Why? Cuz they put their hooknoses to the grindstone and did the work.
But there be smart Negroes who have no such focus and prefer to shuck and jive and act crazy. It's like what the smart Negro says at the end of FOOLEY HIGH: "I can lie and steal too good not to survive."
That kind of attitude isn't very constructive in the long run.
https://youtu.be/6bYjuZ3763Q?t=3m36s
FOOLEY HIGH is one of the most honest films about blacks, not least cuz it was made a black auteur. Its lead character got the brains but has the wrong attitude, one shared by so many other brigroes.
This is why, even when a nation has a lot of smart Gros, as Nigeria perhaps does, it faces many problems. It has too many Gros with sociopathy or Negropathy whose attitude is "I can lie and steal too good not to survive."
With such an attitude prevailing over society, intelligence doesn't go too far. Too many smart Gros break rules, ignore principles, look out only for #1, don't care about the common good, and etc.
It may be that one advantage that Nigerian immigrants have in EU and US is they are less likely to seek such excuses. Having seen what a black-run society looks like in Africa, they are grateful to be a society run by sane white folks where rules and regulations do matter, at least more than in Africa.
Also, suppose there are a 1000 Negroes and suppose all of them are smart. But suppose they all suffer from sociopathy and tend to be low in trust and integrity. Despite their intelligence, their low character will prevent them from running a functional society.
Now, suppose a few of those Negroes go to a society that is made up of 1000 white people who are no smarter but possessed of trust, integrity, and etc.
Those Negroes, though sociopathic themselves, may well thrive since white society checks their sociopathy from going out of whack. Since their sociopathy is checked, their intelligence is put to better use. In some ways, their sociopathy may even give them an edge in such a social order since some degree of sociopathy(restrained sufficiently) may lend initiative, creativity, originality, and ambition.
Someone like Steve Jobs in a world of full of Steve Jobs would never get along with anyone. But someone like him in a community of solid workers may see further than most others cuz he has more ego and drive.
That said, black interests are black interests and white interests are white interests.
Why should the white world favor policies that favor blacks over whites?
HBD is a code word for white nationalism. It should really stand for HONKEYS BE DISTRESSED. Distressed by too much immigration, too much diversity, too much anti-white rhetoric.
White nationalism should favor dumb whites over smart non-whites. After all, the leader of Kenya should care about all Kenyans, even dumb ones, than care most about smart people around the world.
Palestinian leadership should care more about dumb Palestinians than about smart Jews.
Nationalism isn't about intelligence. Having smart people in a nation is a great advantage, but nationalism is about blood and soil. White nationalism must favor even Beavis and Butthead over smarter Fat Albert.
Globalism favors the smart over the dumb around the world. Globalism says the smart set should identify with one another around the world while giving the middle finger to the dummies of all races. So, smart French elites should hang with smart African and Asian elites. As for the French dummies, they should be rendered faceless and interchangeble as labor pool with all the other dummies via open borders.
This emphasis on intelligence is anti-nationalist, and this is why the premise of HBD is fundamentally flawed. HBD argues that white elites should favor whiteness cuz whites are smarter, thus more valuable. But using this logic, it means smart whites should just forget about dumb whites and favor smart yellows, blacks, and etc.
This is just another road to globalism.
Nationalism must be about blood and soil. Smart whites must care about whiteness above all, just like black nationalism should require smart blacks to care about dumb blacks. Imagine Palestinian nationalists who prefer smart Zionists over dumb Palestinians.
Why should whites favor whites? Because they all belong to a racial family of shared genes, history, culture, narrative, identity, and unique beauty. That is why. It's like one cares about one's own family even if some family members are not so smart or rich. Race and nation should ideally be like a racial family. It should be organic. In this family, some will be smart, some will be beautiful, some will be dumb, some will be ugly. But they are all part of family. Nationalism is bunkerism. It's all in the family. It is not meatheadism.
So, it is not the responsibility of whites to make things easy for blacks. Blacks have a giant continent all to themselves. Africa is a great, gigantic, beautiful, and magnificent continent with all sorts of wonders. Blacks have all of that, and they need to make it livable. Blacks must do things that are good for blacks.
And whites must do things that are good for whites. Why should whites do things that are good for blacks? Why should blacks be allowed to rise to the top in UK and France and Holland and etc?
Let's say everything Chanda says is true. Let's say blacks are as smart or even smarter than whites(or Chinese). Then, let the smart blacks fix up Africa. Why should they come to the West and take over? One may say that smart blacks can contribute to white society, and when the number is small enough, it's no problem. But black African wave is huge and keeps coming and coming, especially at a time when whites are not having kids. This bodes badly for the West. West will become an extension of Africa.
Also, black Africans who come to the West maintain their own identity, interests, and narrative. Is Chanda willing to give up his African identity, interests, and pride as a Negro living in the West? No, he is still first and foremost a Afro-centric Negro-minded person, which is why he is beaming with so much black power pride in this article about Brigros.
It's like Jews gained great power in the West, but do they serve the West? No, they undermine white identity and interests to serve Jewish identity and interests.
Soros freely admits that he is trying to break down borders and flood Europe with non-Europeans. Sure, Jews are smart and talented, but their smarts and talents(upon gaining elite power) work against the interests of whites.
Also, the possibility that blacks are just as smart or even smarter than whites should be even more alarming.
We know for sure that blacks have an advantage in physical power and muscularity. Many blacks are also physically taller. And when it comes to sex stuff, Negroes are considered to have bigger dongs, which is what the much discussed 'cuck phenomenon' is about. It's about white wiberals worshiping the Negro penis humping their white wives.
Now, just think. If Negroes have advantage in muscle, funky music, sports, and dong-size, then there is some degree of compensation for the white man in having superior smarts. So, even though the Negro can whup the white boy's ass and impress white women with negro dong, the white boy can gain advantage with higher intelligence, college degree, professional skills, and money.
BUT if the Negro is stronger, donger, and smarter, the white guy is really finished.
White guy will be like a native indigenous Mexican male. The native Mexican males were smaller, weaker, and less intelligent to the Spanish Conquistadores. They lost out totally.
If indeed the new batch of Nigerian Negremlins are not only stronger and donger but smarter, then the honker boy is really out of luck(and fuc*).
Worse, due to high birthrates in Nigeria, it means there will be more and more of these smart Negremlins since high IQ Nigerians practice polygyny that makes them hump a 100 ho's each. Bro-Brain Negremlins will take over the world.
https://youtu.be/ldzFpakc-Jo?t=2m43s
I always thought that no creature would be more frightening than a Jewgro. Brains of Jew and brawn of Negro. But maybe Nigeria is a hatchery of these defacto Jewgroes. Smart and Strong Negroes. That is too much and racially unfair.
So, the Bro-brain Negremlins of Nigeria must stay in Nigeria. The new batches of Negremlins must fix up Africa, not take over the West and maybe even the East, what with the Negremlin beating all the yellows in Japan itself.
I'm beginning to believe Chanda is right. The Combo of High IQ, sociopathy, and polygyny is making Nigeria into a hatchery of 'Caesars'.
Why is this dangerous? Take CONQUEST OF THE PLANET OF THE APES.
There are humans and apes. Humans are smarter, apes are stronger. But since humans got the higher intelligence, they can control the apes.
But then, Caesar comes along. This isn't any ordinary ape but a high IQ ape, indeed an ape with IQ possibly higher than human. This high-IQ ape leads the other apes in rebellion and takes over.
And this is the threat posed by the Nigerian Bro-Brain Negremlins. It is the fusion of Negro muscle and Negro mind.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urtMnKRx4XA
So, HBD needs to stop pussy-footing. In the end, it's not a matter of intelligence but blood and soil. It's not about human-bio-diversity but honkeys-be-distressed.
Chanda's findings are, if anything, more distressing cuz it means whites will lose to blacks physically and intellectually(economically as well).
Why should whites welcome that in white nations? UK should be the land of Britons, the descendants of King Arthur, not of Chief Kukumonga.
There are plenty of smart Chinese, but should Italy be allowed to be flooded by Chinese? No. Italy should be the land of the descendants of Julius Caesar, not Emperor Fu Manchu.
Unlike so many HBD folks who beat around the bush, I say it like it be as I is the only the true race-ist.
Race-ism is the best policy for all peoples. It don't mean KKK or Nazi stuff.
The common narrative say Nazis were bad cuz they was 'racists'.
But in fact, Nazis were evil cuz they were imperialist racists than universal race-ists.
A universal race-ist respects the necessary race-ism of each and every nation.
In other words, German nationalism in Germany was not the problem. It was when the German 'race' began to invade and oppress the races of other nations. If Germany should be for the German 'race', why shouldn't Poland be for the Polish 'race' and why shouldn't Russia be for the Russian 'race'? But Hitler violated universal race-ism with imperialist race-ism.
Indeed, all the anti-imperialist struggles after WWII were based on the ideal of universal race-ism. Let Vietnamese rule Vietnam, let Algerians rule Algeria, let black Africans rule their own nations in Africa.
But we need to extend such ideal to the West as well. Let Western white nations preserve themselves as white/European nations. Why should 'European values' be about doing favors for blacks, yellows, browns, and etc? Let other peoples take care of themselves. Let other nations harness their talents and energies to build up their own societies. Sure, the world can trade with one another cuz no nation, not even the plentiful US, is fully self-sufficient in everything.
But each nation needs to preserve its race, culture, and land. The idea of letting Africans demographically take over EU is bad stuff. It's all the worse if, as Chanda says, some Africans are so smart that they routinely outperform whites in the UK and other places. How does it serve the UK to have a black elite with an African identity and set of interests? How would Nigeria like it to have its elite institutions be taken over by whites or Chinese?
Nigerians may contract the Chiners to come and work and build stuff, but surely Nigerians want Nigerian nation and institutions to be ruled by Nigerians(even if Nigerians do a bad job of it due to their Negropathic ways).
In a strange way, white embrace of 'diversity' is a roundabout way of 'return to blood'.
It is part of human nature to want to be part of a blood-and-bone community.
Matters of blood and identity are more stable and substantive than mere ideals. It's like family ties are deeper than some ideological creed. One can go from this-ism to that-ism, but one's family is constant. Even if you disagree with your mother, she is still your mother. Even if you disagree with your son or daughter, he or she is still your flesh-and-blood.
Now, mere blood-kin-ship isn't enough for social progress. It can lead to mindless clan-ism, as with the Hatcoys vs McFields.
The West made great progress by choosing ideation and ideality. Ideality is about principles and rules than primal blood loyalty. But ideality lacks the juice of gut reality. It's like ideality teaches us that all human lives are equally valuable, but your gut reality makes you more sad over loss of family member, spouse, or close kin. Ideality says all women are equal in worth, but surely your mother means more to you in feelings of gut reality.
White folks used to have a balance of abstract ideality and gut reality. But once Jews took over the media and academia, they spread the notion among whites that any white sense of gut reality is 'racist', 'paranoid', 'evil', 'atavistic', 'rabid', 'virulent', 'odious', 'noxious', and etc.
So, whites had to choose ONLY ideality. So, white Libs became PC-tards yammering endlessly about equality, tolerance, inclusion, and etc.
And white Cons focused on Christian morals of universalism, libertarian principles of individualism, free market ideology of lower taxes and no tariffs, and etc.
Now, ideality is important, but it's not enough. People do need a sense of gut reality that comes from family, kin, race, nation, history, identity, culture.
But since whites are not allowed to dwell on this aspect of human nature, they must satisfy their craving for gut reality via the cult of 'diversity'.
Paradoxically, white embrace of 'diversity' isn't simply about universal ideals and anti-'racism'. It is also a case of whites practicing tribalism and race-ism through the surrogates of Jews, blacks, and other races that are not burdened with feelings of 'historical guilt'.
White race has become anemic. It is bloodless. It hopes for red blood cells. Whites can have such by romoting their own race, history, identity, and pride. But they are not allowed to cuz such feelings are thought to be 'racist', at least among whites.
As white society turned pathologically idealistic(and this was led by northern Europeans, especially Brits and Scandinavians), it became more bloodless, more anemic. It became more principled and idealistic, but the vital blood-and-guts instinct came to be suppressed. (Paradoxically, such attitudes came to be formed because northern Europe was so homogeneous. Diversity leads to distrust and tribalism; homogeneity leads to sense of security and trust, which leads to favoring idealism over tribalism. The more diverse communities of Southern Europe that had been invaded by non-European elements were less into ideality and more into gut reality, which is why Italian sons love their mamas over all else. It's like in GODFATHER II where Sonny speaks of the importance of blood. The appeal of GODFATHER II was that it allowed bloodless anglo-Americans to feel a sense of gut reality through Sicilian-Americans who were still into kin and tribe.)
https://youtu.be/r-I4VIR5yGg?t=1m13s
And even though white Libs always knock Ethan Edwards in THE SEARCHERS, part of the appeal of that movie even to Libs is that Ethan stands for gut reality. Libs consciously knock him but subconsciously respond to his racial and tribal instinct.
Whites are tribally repressed, like Victorians used to be sexually repressed.
Anyway, since white folks are not allowed to have lots of red blood cells that carry plenty of iron, they need blood transfusions from other people who are not burdened with 'historical guilt'.
So, white Conservatives get their blood transfusions from Jews, Zionists, and Netanyahu. Paul Ryan rips on Donald Trump for 'Islamophobia', but the libertarian tard is all for Jewish Nationalism and race-ism in Israel.
Anemic whites in Minnesota and Maine are not allowed to go 'back to blood' because white blood is seen to be tainted with the 'racist gene'. But their human nature still craves for the 'back to blood' gut reality. So, they import all those Somalis and other Negroes from Africa who are allowed to be proudly African, black, historically-minded, culturally rooted, and etc. White folks not only adopt black African babies but adopt black sense of blood-roots.
Whites cannot take pride in white this or white that, but whites in Maine and Minnesota are so proud to see their towns be taken over by AFRICAN this or AFRICAN that. It's like some whites get dreadlocks, tans, and listen to a lot of reggae and pretend to be 'Jamaican, man'.
http://www.amren.com/news/2015/12/mayoral-race-in-maine-could-help-define-citys-future-amid-demographic-shift/
This is seen as 'anti-racist', but it is actually 'racism by other means'. Since whites cannot be race-ist for whiteness, they seek blood-transfusion to be race-ist in the name and honor of other groups. It's like Rachel Dolezal. (The only form of white pride/identity left is homo-ness and trans-gender-ness, but that just pussifies white identity. I mean what real racial pride can there be from celebrating the likes of Bruce 'Caitlyn' Jenner?)
White race has gone vegan. Its blood has turned weak and anemic. That's why whites crave blood transfusions from other races.
Since whites cannot take pride in white power, white wealth, white privilege, and etc. they welcome non-whites to their lands and take surrogate-pride in black achievement, brown fame, and Jewish power. (Yellows may follow in the path of whites since their nations are, like northern Europe, homogeneous, highly educated(indoctrinated), colorless/bland, and status-obsessed. Singapore grows more PC by the day.)
So, we are supposed to be so happy that some Muslim kid 'invented a clock'.
We are supposed to be so happy that Nigerians are excelling in Britain. (As for all the poor 'white trash' girls who got raped by Pakistani men, forget about them. Don't you see it is soooooo evil for whites to think in terms of white identity or interests?)
We are supposed to be so happy that Jews have so much power, prestige, bombs, money, awards, and etc. It's pathetic.
White race needs to stop being vegan. It's time for whites to eat some red meat and have some healthy red blood cells. Time to stop being anemic.
An anemic race becomes not only ashamed of itself but bored with itself. Since it cannot feel passionate about one's own race, culture, and history, such things just seem lame, boring, dull, old, and tired.
So, the anemic race seeks vigor and vitality from the Other, the exotic, the different, the alien.
It's like the Apathetics in ZARDOZ draw their energy from Zed cuz they have lost vitality and passion for their own existence and civilization.
Cuck mentality is like this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbGVIdA3dx0
There is the organic and synthetic. It is because the white race is no longer allowed to be organic in their race-ism and historical sense that they seek out substitute organic stuff by shopping at WHOLE FOODS. Since they cannot generate organic blood-and-soil feeling from within, they seek such sensation by eating 'organic tomatoes' and 'organic yogurt' or 'organic honey'. It's like white folks who aren't allowed to white nationalist seek a form of substitute nationalism in kosher-ization. Via kosherism, whites can pretend to have a kind of leap-frogged identity.
When people lose their own race-ism, they seek race-ism-by-other-means through the cult of diversity. A white Christian family that cannot say "we are proud to have WHITE KIDS" can, by adopting from Negrolet from Africa, loudly proclaim "We are proud to raise BLACK KIDS."
Take a sip of water, Prissy. You’ve been talking too long.
Why don’t White America change their narrative? Practicing Polygamy is fine and dandy then? Why don’t they? Yeah, all traveling around the world, adopting one after another, even multiple one-night stands don’t count as “screwing around”. You’re just wasting your orgasmic energy. Nothing more.
I laugh at that.
You blindsided the other possibility: the scrawny Jews like anatomical structure infused with Black complexion, crooked nose, short stature combined with Brains of the Blacks, you’re seeing a different creature on Earth.
your article is incorrect where it states that the SS is Yoruba. Yoruba are from the SW, SS has many diverse tribes more similar to igbos in culture.
Half of the Yoruba population is also muslim, that might have some effect on lowering their performance in Nigeria compared to the fully Christian SS and SE.
I have the impression that the debate often revolves around the crucial question: who has got the burden of proof? The HBD position says: the dogmatic antiracist shall prove that race does not exist and does matter everywhere and anytime. So the HBD position is that by giving at least one counter example (that is one case of racial differences which cannot described by environment) the mission might already be accomplished. The Anti-HBD position says: the HBD position has to prove that the population differences they are talking about are true everywhere and anytime. So by giving one counter-example the whole concept of HBD is disproven.
In the article above this problem seems to be solved, as the author makes clear that does not even want to disprove the whole idea of HBD. As far as I understand it he thinks it is possible (yet up to date unknown with certainty) that there are IQ differences between different populations and races. But he shows that it is almost impossible that subsaharan Africa as a whole actually has an average IQ of 70-75 or something like that.
The examples given in this series of articles are in my opinion really important because of the tail effects regarding the normal distribution of the IQ. Under the assumption that all Nigerian subgroups have an average IQ of 75 it is extremely unlikely that some Nigerians obviously have a Genius-IQ. The „selected immigration“ argument is rather weak as for example Nigeria is known as a very corrupt country. Such a corrupt country is not meritocratic regarding IQ, since getting good things like educational degrees, visa etc. often rather depends on bribing the right person than on actually having a IQ. Though one thing one has to keep in mind is the extreme population explosion in Nigeria. In the nineties there were already around as many children born in Nigeria as in the whole european Union. So a scrabble team from Nigeria could population-wise compete with a combines EU-scrabble team. Still under the assumption of an very low average IQ those results would be unlikely.
From a HBD perspective it will also be very difficult to explain the apparently outstanding accomplishments of subpopulations the Igbo. The whole point of HBD is that big natural barriers like oceans, the Sahara etc. made it possible for different major races to develop differently. Of course there is the exception of Ashkenazi intelligence, but I can´t imagine selectional forces as strong as those in the case of Ashkenazim working in West Africa.
The issue isn’t Brain Drain but Head Spread.
The smart Gros of Nigeria are sexually uninhibited and spreading their seeds all over the place by banging every ho’. It’s like the Guinness Book of World Record in spreading smart genes. It’s like Einstein + Wilt Chamberlain.
They are acting like Eddie Murphy as the slim-stud in NUTTY PROFESSOR.
Quite the contrary, this actually supports their super selection theory, assuming of course that black African immigrants of past decades were responding to different selective criteria for immigration then those of today.
““The high performance of Africa-born groups makes an already impossible situation even more difficult for HBD defenders.”
Quite the contrary, this actually supports their super selection theory, assuming of course that black African immigrants of past decades were responding to different selective criteria for immigration then those of today.”
The high performing African born would have come as children with their families. Their parents and not them would be those immigrants to whom whatever (supposed)selective factors would (most) apply(Children are not the ones who decide to immigrate or must have whatever qualities are selected.)
Regression to the mean (whatever its effect) would apply to foreign born as well as UK born offspring of adult immigrants.
This is a brilliant refutation of a strawman argument: that there are no smart black people.
Nobody serious thinks this.
As a refutation of the existence of a persistent and intractable black/white IQ gap, it is very thinly researched, filled with iffy logical arguments, and completely unpersuasive.
The existence of a few anecdotal outliers does not prove anything.
=Yao Ming is 7’6”. Very few people on the planet have ever been much taller. He’s in the 99.999th percent for height.
But so what?
Chinese people are shorter than European people. Changing their diet might make them a bit taller, but after thousands of years of evolution, they ain’t gonna catch up.
edit: …Regression to the mean (whatever its extent)….
It's about time we be enlightened about the Brigroes or bright negroes.
I think we should pay attention to Chanda. He be one essential Gro.
We are familiar with HBD stuff, but it makes too many white folks rest on their laurels and think 'them negroes be too dumb'. But not all negroes are the same. It be like Apollo Creed didn't take Rocky too seriously and got hurt real bad.
Not all Negroes are the same. It be like, even though Asians be shorter than whites in general, some Northern Chinese are almost or just as tall as southern Europeans. In good number of cases, even taller. We know from sumo that not all slanty folks be the same. Mongolia has population of under 2 million but their wrestlers be bouncing Japanese wrestlers like ping pong balls.
And we know Africa is a big continent and it done have lots of variety. There be the shortest folks there. The pigromies. There also be the tallest folks called the Watusis. It done have some of the dumbest folks, but also some very smart folks. And Igbos and Yoruba seem smart. As for Yoruba, we can see from their art and sculpture that they be a creative and talented folks. And Igbo done well in trade and stuff.
Some might aks, then why so many American blacks from that part of world be crazy and not so smart? It could be that smarter folks of Igbos and Yorubas set up kingdoms and captured the dumb Nigerian negroes and sold them as slaves.
They done put up signs to Arabs and whites: 'hey, come here and buy some dumb negroes.'
It's like this: Suppose American whites were to turn brutal and nasty. Then, the smarter and clever whites will take power ruthlessly, and if they were to deal in slaves, they would capture and sell 'dumb white trash' to other folks.
It could be that smart Negroes captured and sold the 'dumb black trash' to the Americas.
Also, we have to keep in mind the population explosion of Africa. This means Africa is both getting smarter and dumber. Lots of dumb Africans be having lots of kids, but lots of smart Africans be having kids too. In Africa, both dumb and smart Negroes be having lots of kids. It's like Obama's smart daddy done pork lots of women and have lots of kids.
In the West and East Asia, this no longer so. In Europe and America, smart whites not be having lots of kids. And population also decline among dumb whites. And East Asians, smart and dumb, not having kids. I done hear birthrate for Shanghai is 0.8.
That be pitiful.
http://www.amren.com/news/2015/12/it-is-already-too-late-to-scrap-chinas-one-child-policy/
But African men and women be wild and shit when it comes to sex. So, dumb blacks be having kids all over, but also smart blacks be having kids too.
Long ago, population of Africa/Nigeria was relatively small. So, there were limited bunch of black dummies and black smarties. Now, with exploding population, there gonna be lots of more dummies and lots more smarties.
Meanwhile, the West not be having kids. Smart whites grow old and die with shriveled balls and crusty wombs that don't produce kids.
So, smart African immigrants have chance to gain greater ground in the West cuz smart whites simply not having kids. It might be that way in Japan too as some Nigerian done get best grades in some Japanese college.
http://africanspotlight.com/2015/05/19/nigerian-graduate-emerges-best-student-in-50-years-in-japan-university-builds-car-photos/
That Negro done scare my ass.
When population keep growing like it do in Africa, there gonna be more smarties and more dummies. It be like India. India be filled with lots of dummy dotters, but it also have its share of smarties. India be a place where people of all caste/class still have kids. So, it done have growing number of smarties and growing number of dummies.
With Indian emigration to West, EU and America will get lots of smarties and dummies. Smarties will win spelling bees, and dummies will work as clerk at 7/11 owned by their uncle. Overall, India not a very smart nation, but there be so many people that some of them just gotta be smart.
We see same thing happening with Africa. It done have so many dummies, and they be multiplying like bunners, but there also be some very smart people in Nigeria and Kenya and they be multiplying like bunners too. In the West, it not be dignified for smart white person to be sticking his dong into every pooter. But in polygynic Africa, it not disgraceful for smart dude to be humping every other ho. So, smart genes spread as fast as dumb ones.
Smart people in the West and East Asia are inhibited in their behavior. They believe in monogamy or, even if they done sleep around, they use contraceptives. But smart Negroes in Nigeria and Kenya don't mind humping every other ho and making her pregnant. This behavior done spread smart genes far and wide, and it could be that certain segment of Africans are getting smarter cuz the smart Negroes be screwing everyone. Imagine if Albert Einstein screwed a 1ooo shikse bimbos. IQ would suddenly go up in the community.
There was a time when Africans were dying like flies cuz of disease and famine and stuff. But with western medicine, so many negroes survive to pass down genes. While dumb negroes have kids too, smart ones have them too.
In the past, a negro in Africa got ahead by being tough and killing a hippo with spear. But in more recent times, African gets ahead and gets female attention by using his brains to make money, criminally or legally. So, smarter negroes now get the attention of most women. And they be acting like Idi Amin in screwing every ho they see. Even smart blacks be acting like Negro athletes who hump every ho. They be dick-centered geeks, or deeks.
So, this has a way of spreading higher IQ among the Jafros very fast.
Imagine if a smart white guy like Ron Unz done screwed a 100 women and made them pregnant. His smart genes would spread far and wide and very fast.
In the past, African polygynic practice favored the warrior genes. Why? Cuz Power and Prestige back then was judged by chucking spears at hippos and buffaloes. But with rise in trade and merchant opportunities, things began to change in parts of Nigeria. Using brains became an advantage. And since Nigerians don't have much in the way of sexual morality, smart Negroes done screw everyone and spread smart genes faster than it happened among Jews and whites.
Jews and whites mostly done practice monogamy. So, smart Jews and whites depended on one woman to have kids. She might have many kids, but at most, it would be like 8 or 9.
It wouldn't have been respectable for a smart Englishman or Jew to hump a 100 ho's and have kids with them. But that is what smart Nigerians do. They be humping everything in sight cuz Negroes just got that sexual healing like Marvin Gaye done sing.
In America, smarter Negroes are more likely to be respectable and not have kids with lots of women. Instead, dumb Negroes act like that in America. It's like Obama married a single ho and had two kids. His father in Africa, in contrast, had lots of kids with lots of ho's. So, his smart genes spread far and wide.
In Nigeria, things be the reverse of what happen in black America. Since smart Nigerians have more money, they are more attractive to females. Also, it is socially approved for smart Nigerians to hump everything in sight. Meanwhile, dumb Nigerians are less attractive to women, so they have fewer chance to hump every ho. When smart shameless Nigerian men hump a lot of ho's while poor Nigerian men hump fewer ho's, Nigerians are gonna get smarter, and since the effect is polygynic, with some smart Nigerians impregnating a 100 women, higher IQ is gonna spread fast.
It's the same in sports. Suppose some very strong/fast white athlete doesn't choose monogamy but humps 200 white women in his community. The athletic ability of his community is gonna change drastically in a single generation. And suppose among his many fast/strong kids, they also hump 200 women each. Soon, it's gonna be a community of many excellent white athletes.
Now, Nigeria is still a messed up place, and this may have more to do with sociopathy than intelligence. Smart or dumb, Negroes tend to be more jivey, uga and buga, flipping out, hollering, walloping, bongo-funking out, and into mack-daddy behavior.
Take Tommy Sotomayor. He seems like a brigro, and he rags on bad black behavior. But he admits that he is infected with the same emotional problems.
https://youtu.be/oMopWm8Zb6I?t=59s
I always said the main problem with blacks isn't so much their lower IQ but their sociopathy or Negropathy. By nature, Negroes are more self-centered, uninhibited, egotistical, shameless, impulsive, slickity-slack, flippity-flap, yabbity-dabbity, and such. (Such personality might actually give them up a leg up on stuff like rapping and scrabble playing. They have a more intuitive than logical grasp of verbal skills. It's like Negroes are better at certain kinds of musical creativity and 'rhythmic intelligence' than other races are. It's like Asians play music like they drive cars. Asians be methodical but lack improvisational instinct that Negroes have more of. It's like Leonard Jeffries say white ice people are logical whereas black sun people be 'creative'.)
You don't need high IQ to do well in the West. I know Jews who were never smart--even dumber than myself--but got good jobs and stuff. Why? Cuz they put their hooknoses to the grindstone and did the work.
But there be smart Negroes who have no such focus and prefer to shuck and jive and act crazy. It's like what the smart Negro says at the end of FOOLEY HIGH: "I can lie and steal too good not to survive."
That kind of attitude isn't very constructive in the long run.
https://youtu.be/6bYjuZ3763Q?t=3m36s
FOOLEY HIGH is one of the most honest films about blacks, not least cuz it was made a black auteur. Its lead character got the brains but has the wrong attitude, one shared by so many other brigroes.
This is why, even when a nation has a lot of smart Gros, as Nigeria perhaps does, it faces many problems. It has too many Gros with sociopathy or Negropathy whose attitude is "I can lie and steal too good not to survive."
With such an attitude prevailing over society, intelligence doesn't go too far. Too many smart Gros break rules, ignore principles, look out only for #1, don't care about the common good, and etc.
It may be that one advantage that Nigerian immigrants have in EU and US is they are less likely to seek such excuses. Having seen what a black-run society looks like in Africa, they are grateful to be a society run by sane white folks where rules and regulations do matter, at least more than in Africa.
Also, suppose there are a 1000 Negroes and suppose all of them are smart. But suppose they all suffer from sociopathy and tend to be low in trust and integrity. Despite their intelligence, their low character will prevent them from running a functional society.
Now, suppose a few of those Negroes go to a society that is made up of 1000 white people who are no smarter but possessed of trust, integrity, and etc.
Those Negroes, though sociopathic themselves, may well thrive since white society checks their sociopathy from going out of whack. Since their sociopathy is checked, their intelligence is put to better use. In some ways, their sociopathy may even give them an edge in such a social order since some degree of sociopathy(restrained sufficiently) may lend initiative, creativity, originality, and ambition.
Someone like Steve Jobs in a world of full of Steve Jobs would never get along with anyone. But someone like him in a community of solid workers may see further than most others cuz he has more ego and drive.
That said, black interests are black interests and white interests are white interests.
Why should the white world favor policies that favor blacks over whites?
HBD is a code word for white nationalism. It should really stand for HONKEYS BE DISTRESSED. Distressed by too much immigration, too much diversity, too much anti-white rhetoric.
White nationalism should favor dumb whites over smart non-whites. After all, the leader of Kenya should care about all Kenyans, even dumb ones, than care most about smart people around the world.
Palestinian leadership should care more about dumb Palestinians than about smart Jews.
Nationalism isn't about intelligence. Having smart people in a nation is a great advantage, but nationalism is about blood and soil. White nationalism must favor even Beavis and Butthead over smarter Fat Albert.
Globalism favors the smart over the dumb around the world. Globalism says the smart set should identify with one another around the world while giving the middle finger to the dummies of all races. So, smart French elites should hang with smart African and Asian elites. As for the French dummies, they should be rendered faceless and interchangeble as labor pool with all the other dummies via open borders.
This emphasis on intelligence is anti-nationalist, and this is why the premise of HBD is fundamentally flawed. HBD argues that white elites should favor whiteness cuz whites are smarter, thus more valuable. But using this logic, it means smart whites should just forget about dumb whites and favor smart yellows, blacks, and etc.
This is just another road to globalism.
Nationalism must be about blood and soil. Smart whites must care about whiteness above all, just like black nationalism should require smart blacks to care about dumb blacks. Imagine Palestinian nationalists who prefer smart Zionists over dumb Palestinians.
Why should whites favor whites? Because they all belong to a racial family of shared genes, history, culture, narrative, identity, and unique beauty. That is why. It's like one cares about one's own family even if some family members are not so smart or rich. Race and nation should ideally be like a racial family. It should be organic. In this family, some will be smart, some will be beautiful, some will be dumb, some will be ugly. But they are all part of family. Nationalism is bunkerism. It's all in the family. It is not meatheadism.
So, it is not the responsibility of whites to make things easy for blacks. Blacks have a giant continent all to themselves. Africa is a great, gigantic, beautiful, and magnificent continent with all sorts of wonders. Blacks have all of that, and they need to make it livable. Blacks must do things that are good for blacks.
And whites must do things that are good for whites. Why should whites do things that are good for blacks? Why should blacks be allowed to rise to the top in UK and France and Holland and etc?
Let's say everything Chanda says is true. Let's say blacks are as smart or even smarter than whites(or Chinese). Then, let the smart blacks fix up Africa. Why should they come to the West and take over? One may say that smart blacks can contribute to white society, and when the number is small enough, it's no problem. But black African wave is huge and keeps coming and coming, especially at a time when whites are not having kids. This bodes badly for the West. West will become an extension of Africa.
Also, black Africans who come to the West maintain their own identity, interests, and narrative. Is Chanda willing to give up his African identity, interests, and pride as a Negro living in the West? No, he is still first and foremost a Afro-centric Negro-minded person, which is why he is beaming with so much black power pride in this article about Brigros.
It's like Jews gained great power in the West, but do they serve the West? No, they undermine white identity and interests to serve Jewish identity and interests.
Soros freely admits that he is trying to break down borders and flood Europe with non-Europeans. Sure, Jews are smart and talented, but their smarts and talents(upon gaining elite power) work against the interests of whites.
Also, the possibility that blacks are just as smart or even smarter than whites should be even more alarming.
We know for sure that blacks have an advantage in physical power and muscularity. Many blacks are also physically taller. And when it comes to sex stuff, Negroes are considered to have bigger dongs, which is what the much discussed 'cuck phenomenon' is about. It's about white wiberals worshiping the Negro penis humping their white wives.
Now, just think. If Negroes have advantage in muscle, funky music, sports, and dong-size, then there is some degree of compensation for the white man in having superior smarts. So, even though the Negro can whup the white boy's ass and impress white women with negro dong, the white boy can gain advantage with higher intelligence, college degree, professional skills, and money.
BUT if the Negro is stronger, donger, and smarter, the white guy is really finished.
White guy will be like a native indigenous Mexican male. The native Mexican males were smaller, weaker, and less intelligent to the Spanish Conquistadores. They lost out totally.
If indeed the new batch of Nigerian Negremlins are not only stronger and donger but smarter, then the honker boy is really out of luck(and fuc*).
Worse, due to high birthrates in Nigeria, it means there will be more and more of these smart Negremlins since high IQ Nigerians practice polygyny that makes them hump a 100 ho's each. Bro-Brain Negremlins will take over the world.
https://youtu.be/ldzFpakc-Jo?t=2m43s
I always thought that no creature would be more frightening than a Jewgro. Brains of Jew and brawn of Negro. But maybe Nigeria is a hatchery of these defacto Jewgroes. Smart and Strong Negroes. That is too much and racially unfair.
So, the Bro-brain Negremlins of Nigeria must stay in Nigeria. The new batches of Negremlins must fix up Africa, not take over the West and maybe even the East, what with the Negremlin beating all the yellows in Japan itself.
I'm beginning to believe Chanda is right. The Combo of High IQ, sociopathy, and polygyny is making Nigeria into a hatchery of 'Caesars'.
Why is this dangerous? Take CONQUEST OF THE PLANET OF THE APES.
There are humans and apes. Humans are smarter, apes are stronger. But since humans got the higher intelligence, they can control the apes.
But then, Caesar comes along. This isn't any ordinary ape but a high IQ ape, indeed an ape with IQ possibly higher than human. This high-IQ ape leads the other apes in rebellion and takes over.
And this is the threat posed by the Nigerian Bro-Brain Negremlins. It is the fusion of Negro muscle and Negro mind.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urtMnKRx4XA
So, HBD needs to stop pussy-footing. In the end, it's not a matter of intelligence but blood and soil. It's not about human-bio-diversity but honkeys-be-distressed.
Chanda's findings are, if anything, more distressing cuz it means whites will lose to blacks physically and intellectually(economically as well).
Why should whites welcome that in white nations? UK should be the land of Britons, the descendants of King Arthur, not of Chief Kukumonga.
There are plenty of smart Chinese, but should Italy be allowed to be flooded by Chinese? No. Italy should be the land of the descendants of Julius Caesar, not Emperor Fu Manchu.
Unlike so many HBD folks who beat around the bush, I say it like it be as I is the only the true race-ist.
Race-ism is the best policy for all peoples. It don't mean KKK or Nazi stuff.
The common narrative say Nazis were bad cuz they was 'racists'.
But in fact, Nazis were evil cuz they were imperialist racists than universal race-ists.
A universal race-ist respects the necessary race-ism of each and every nation.
In other words, German nationalism in Germany was not the problem. It was when the German 'race' began to invade and oppress the races of other nations. If Germany should be for the German 'race', why shouldn't Poland be for the Polish 'race' and why shouldn't Russia be for the Russian 'race'? But Hitler violated universal race-ism with imperialist race-ism.
Indeed, all the anti-imperialist struggles after WWII were based on the ideal of universal race-ism. Let Vietnamese rule Vietnam, let Algerians rule Algeria, let black Africans rule their own nations in Africa.
But we need to extend such ideal to the West as well. Let Western white nations preserve themselves as white/European nations. Why should 'European values' be about doing favors for blacks, yellows, browns, and etc? Let other peoples take care of themselves. Let other nations harness their talents and energies to build up their own societies. Sure, the world can trade with one another cuz no nation, not even the plentiful US, is fully self-sufficient in everything.
But each nation needs to preserve its race, culture, and land. The idea of letting Africans demographically take over EU is bad stuff. It's all the worse if, as Chanda says, some Africans are so smart that they routinely outperform whites in the UK and other places. How does it serve the UK to have a black elite with an African identity and set of interests? How would Nigeria like it to have its elite institutions be taken over by whites or Chinese?
Nigerians may contract the Chiners to come and work and build stuff, but surely Nigerians want Nigerian nation and institutions to be ruled by Nigerians(even if Nigerians do a bad job of it due to their Negropathic ways).
In a strange way, white embrace of 'diversity' is a roundabout way of 'return to blood'.
It is part of human nature to want to be part of a blood-and-bone community.
Matters of blood and identity are more stable and substantive than mere ideals. It's like family ties are deeper than some ideological creed. One can go from this-ism to that-ism, but one's family is constant. Even if you disagree with your mother, she is still your mother. Even if you disagree with your son or daughter, he or she is still your flesh-and-blood.
Now, mere blood-kin-ship isn't enough for social progress. It can lead to mindless clan-ism, as with the Hatcoys vs McFields.
The West made great progress by choosing ideation and ideality. Ideality is about principles and rules than primal blood loyalty. But ideality lacks the juice of gut reality. It's like ideality teaches us that all human lives are equally valuable, but your gut reality makes you more sad over loss of family member, spouse, or close kin. Ideality says all women are equal in worth, but surely your mother means more to you in feelings of gut reality.
White folks used to have a balance of abstract ideality and gut reality. But once Jews took over the media and academia, they spread the notion among whites that any white sense of gut reality is 'racist', 'paranoid', 'evil', 'atavistic', 'rabid', 'virulent', 'odious', 'noxious', and etc.
So, whites had to choose ONLY ideality. So, white Libs became PC-tards yammering endlessly about equality, tolerance, inclusion, and etc.
And white Cons focused on Christian morals of universalism, libertarian principles of individualism, free market ideology of lower taxes and no tariffs, and etc.
Now, ideality is important, but it's not enough. People do need a sense of gut reality that comes from family, kin, race, nation, history, identity, culture.
But since whites are not allowed to dwell on this aspect of human nature, they must satisfy their craving for gut reality via the cult of 'diversity'.
Paradoxically, white embrace of 'diversity' isn't simply about universal ideals and anti-'racism'. It is also a case of whites practicing tribalism and race-ism through the surrogates of Jews, blacks, and other races that are not burdened with feelings of 'historical guilt'.
White race has become anemic. It is bloodless. It hopes for red blood cells. Whites can have such by romoting their own race, history, identity, and pride. But they are not allowed to cuz such feelings are thought to be 'racist', at least among whites.
As white society turned pathologically idealistic(and this was led by northern Europeans, especially Brits and Scandinavians), it became more bloodless, more anemic. It became more principled and idealistic, but the vital blood-and-guts instinct came to be suppressed. (Paradoxically, such attitudes came to be formed because northern Europe was so homogeneous. Diversity leads to distrust and tribalism; homogeneity leads to sense of security and trust, which leads to favoring idealism over tribalism. The more diverse communities of Southern Europe that had been invaded by non-European elements were less into ideality and more into gut reality, which is why Italian sons love their mamas over all else. It's like in GODFATHER II where Sonny speaks of the importance of blood. The appeal of GODFATHER II was that it allowed bloodless anglo-Americans to feel a sense of gut reality through Sicilian-Americans who were still into kin and tribe.)
https://youtu.be/r-I4VIR5yGg?t=1m13s
And even though white Libs always knock Ethan Edwards in THE SEARCHERS, part of the appeal of that movie even to Libs is that Ethan stands for gut reality. Libs consciously knock him but subconsciously respond to his racial and tribal instinct.
Whites are tribally repressed, like Victorians used to be sexually repressed.
Anyway, since white folks are not allowed to have lots of red blood cells that carry plenty of iron, they need blood transfusions from other people who are not burdened with 'historical guilt'.
So, white Conservatives get their blood transfusions from Jews, Zionists, and Netanyahu. Paul Ryan rips on Donald Trump for 'Islamophobia', but the libertarian tard is all for Jewish Nationalism and race-ism in Israel.
Anemic whites in Minnesota and Maine are not allowed to go 'back to blood' because white blood is seen to be tainted with the 'racist gene'. But their human nature still craves for the 'back to blood' gut reality. So, they import all those Somalis and other Negroes from Africa who are allowed to be proudly African, black, historically-minded, culturally rooted, and etc. White folks not only adopt black African babies but adopt black sense of blood-roots.
Whites cannot take pride in white this or white that, but whites in Maine and Minnesota are so proud to see their towns be taken over by AFRICAN this or AFRICAN that. It's like some whites get dreadlocks, tans, and listen to a lot of reggae and pretend to be 'Jamaican, man'.
http://www.amren.com/news/2015/12/mayoral-race-in-maine-could-help-define-citys-future-amid-demographic-shift/
This is seen as 'anti-racist', but it is actually 'racism by other means'. Since whites cannot be race-ist for whiteness, they seek blood-transfusion to be race-ist in the name and honor of other groups. It's like Rachel Dolezal. (The only form of white pride/identity left is homo-ness and trans-gender-ness, but that just pussifies white identity. I mean what real racial pride can there be from celebrating the likes of Bruce 'Caitlyn' Jenner?)
White race has gone vegan. Its blood has turned weak and anemic. That's why whites crave blood transfusions from other races.
Since whites cannot take pride in white power, white wealth, white privilege, and etc. they welcome non-whites to their lands and take surrogate-pride in black achievement, brown fame, and Jewish power. (Yellows may follow in the path of whites since their nations are, like northern Europe, homogeneous, highly educated(indoctrinated), colorless/bland, and status-obsessed. Singapore grows more PC by the day.)
So, we are supposed to be so happy that some Muslim kid 'invented a clock'.
We are supposed to be so happy that Nigerians are excelling in Britain. (As for all the poor 'white trash' girls who got raped by Pakistani men, forget about them. Don't you see it is soooooo evil for whites to think in terms of white identity or interests?)
We are supposed to be so happy that Jews have so much power, prestige, bombs, money, awards, and etc. It's pathetic.
White race needs to stop being vegan. It's time for whites to eat some red meat and have some healthy red blood cells. Time to stop being anemic.
An anemic race becomes not only ashamed of itself but bored with itself. Since it cannot feel passionate about one's own race, culture, and history, such things just seem lame, boring, dull, old, and tired.
So, the anemic race seeks vigor and vitality from the Other, the exotic, the different, the alien.
It's like the Apathetics in ZARDOZ draw their energy from Zed cuz they have lost vitality and passion for their own existence and civilization.
Cuck mentality is like this.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kbGVIdA3dx0
There is the organic and synthetic. It is because the white race is no longer allowed to be organic in their race-ism and historical sense that they seek out substitute organic stuff by shopping at WHOLE FOODS. Since they cannot generate organic blood-and-soil feeling from within, they seek such sensation by eating 'organic tomatoes' and 'organic yogurt' or 'organic honey'. It's like white folks who aren't allowed to white nationalist seek a form of substitute nationalism in kosher-ization. Via kosherism, whites can pretend to have a kind of leap-frogged identity.
When people lose their own race-ism, they seek race-ism-by-other-means through the cult of diversity. A white Christian family that cannot say "we are proud to have WHITE KIDS" can, by adopting from Negrolet from Africa, loudly proclaim "We are proud to raise BLACK KIDS."
Interesting comments. Funny. Insightful.
There doesn’t need to be a “scholarly piece that talks about selection of slaves for better breeding”. Every farmer knows that his animals differ in character as well as every other behavioral trait according to its pedigree. Only a fool-headed, city-bred, college-edumacated “scholar” could possible doubt the truth of this. Remember, the planters in question had centuries of experience in breeding thoroughbred racing horses, Morgan horses, draft horses, dogs, chickens, swine, sheep and goats etc. and knew what they were about.
But in answer to your question, yes, ledger-style records were kept and still exist at former plantations that show which male was bred to which female. You can still see them if you visit reconstructed plantations.
Widow Douglas types will wring their hands at the bluntness of what I wrote above. Widow Douglas was the woman who bedeviled Huck Finn in trying to civilize him. These are the same types who want to expunge the word “niqqer” from Twain’s great works–even though Huck almost always uses the word in a gracious sense as when he is complimenting Jim for being a more decent human being than many a white person he could name. The same people will deny these simple historic truths which are simply the starting point from which many black people must begin their Oedipus-like quest in self understanding.
Unfortunately, the widow Douglas lives with us today in the form of Liberals, her great-grand sons and daughters. Twain does a great job of skewering these meddlesome, know-nothing busybodies–which is the real reason liberals want to rewrite his books today.
http://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/ajet/13-1_026.pdf
A little research suggests the Osu were, and often still are, reproductively isolated with residences near traditional shrines and markets, which are somewhat connected. Historically, they were entitled to the residue of offerings to the shrine, produce from the shrine property and they would even go so far as to enter villagers’ houses and take food. Because they were under a deity’s protection Osu were not interfered with or punished, and were exempt from taxes and communal labour. Under colonial administration, Osu were notably successful in education (compared to the non-Osu Igbo they lived among*) becoming part of administrative and legal authorities. I think the clever Igbo are mainly crypto Osu. When you put together the privileges, unusual occupational profile, reproductive isolation, and demographic expansion of Osu it seems rather plausible they could have become a clever caste within the Igbo. I think the best evidence I have a good theory is the support from several sources for Osu outdoing other Igbo in educational attainment.
Many elite Igbos are nouveau riche, but some descend from earlier elites; merchants and "titled men"(some of whom were also merchants/wealthy farmers) including members of the semi-hereditary Ozo society(other titles were often not hereditary)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nze_na_Ozo
Crypto Osu would not be endogamous (since Osu, especially Christian Osu having left the old ways, had no incentive to preserve their identity, which was stigmatized), but rather likely prefer to intermix with non Osu, as long as they kept their Osu origins secret.
You have not provided "several" such sources, only one, un-cited regarding " many of Igboland's prominent families" . Igbo culture was broad and varied (by region) in some areas there were few Osu. In general they were a small group and cannot account for Igbo achievement (not to say subgroups of them may not be high achieving, though it seems that most are poor) .
General labor slaves called Ohu also existed in some places.
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=ohu+slaves&tbm=bks
You did not give "several sources", but only one link to an un-cited statement regarding the Osu origins of "many of Igboland's most prominent families. Igbo culture is broad and diverse and in some regions had few to no Osu. They were a small group and cannot account for Igbo achievement.
Igboland also had a class of general labor slaves called Ohu (on a perhaps unrelated note).
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=ohu+slaves&tbm=bks
A little research suggests the Osu were, and often still are, reproductively isolated with residences near traditional shrines and markets, which are somewhat connected. Historically, they were entitled to the residue of offerings to the shrine, produce from the shrine property and they would even go so far as to enter villagers' houses and take food. Because they were under a deity's protection Osu were not interfered with or punished, and were exempt from taxes and communal labour. Under colonial administration, Osu were notably successful in education (compared to the non-Osu Igbo they lived among*) becoming part of administrative and legal authorities. I think the clever Igbo are mainly crypto Osu. When you put together the privileges, unusual occupational profile, reproductive isolation, and demographic expansion of Osu it seems rather plausible they could have become a clever caste within the Igbo. I think the best evidence I have a good theory is the support from several sources for Osu outdoing other Igbo in educational attainment.
There is no evidence to suggest that Osu actually took part in commerce despite sometimes living near markets, though a fraction may have become prosperous from shrine offerings, as you suggest.
Many elite Igbos are nouveau riche, but some descend from earlier elites; merchants and “titled men”(some of whom were also merchants/wealthy farmers) including members of the semi-hereditary Ozo society(other titles were often not hereditary)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nze_na_Ozo
Crypto Osu would not be endogamous (since Osu, especially Christian Osu having left the old ways, had no incentive to preserve their identity, which was stigmatized), but rather likely prefer to intermix with non Osu, as long as they kept their Osu origins secret.
Many elite Igbos are nouveau riche, but some descend from earlier elites; merchants and "titled men"(some of whom were also merchants/wealthy farmers) including members of the semi-hereditary Ozo society(other titles were often not hereditary)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nze_na_Ozo
Crypto Osu would not be endogamous (since Osu, especially Christian Osu having left the old ways, had no incentive to preserve their identity, which was stigmatized), but rather likely prefer to intermix with non Osu, as long as they kept their Osu origins secret.
Edit: “…but rather likely to intermix with non Osu (perhaps as quickly as possible), as long as they managed to hide their Osu origins .
A little research suggests the Osu were, and often still are, reproductively isolated with residences near traditional shrines and markets, which are somewhat connected. Historically, they were entitled to the residue of offerings to the shrine, produce from the shrine property and they would even go so far as to enter villagers' houses and take food. Because they were under a deity's protection Osu were not interfered with or punished, and were exempt from taxes and communal labour. Under colonial administration, Osu were notably successful in education (compared to the non-Osu Igbo they lived among*) becoming part of administrative and legal authorities. I think the clever Igbo are mainly crypto Osu. When you put together the privileges, unusual occupational profile, reproductive isolation, and demographic expansion of Osu it seems rather plausible they could have become a clever caste within the Igbo. I think the best evidence I have a good theory is the support from several sources for Osu outdoing other Igbo in educational attainment.
“…is the support from several sources for Osu outdoing other Igbo in educational attainment.”
You have not provided “several” such sources, only one, un-cited regarding ” many of Igboland’s prominent families” . Igbo culture was broad and varied (by region) in some areas there were few Osu. In general they were a small group and cannot account for Igbo achievement (not to say subgroups of them may not be high achieving, though it seems that most are poor) .
General labor slaves called Ohu also existed in some places.
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=ohu+slaves&tbm=bks
Many elite Igbos are nouveau riche, but some descend from earlier elites; merchants and "titled men"(some of whom were also merchants/wealthy farmers) including members of the semi-hereditary Ozo society(other titles were often not hereditary)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nze_na_Ozo
Crypto Osu would not be endogamous (since Osu, especially Christian Osu having left the old ways, had no incentive to preserve their identity, which was stigmatized), but rather likely prefer to intermix with non Osu, as long as they kept their Osu origins secret.
“…There is no evidence to suggest that Osu actually took part in commerce or in the skilled trades…”
A little research suggests the Osu were, and often still are, reproductively isolated with residences near traditional shrines and markets, which are somewhat connected. Historically, they were entitled to the residue of offerings to the shrine, produce from the shrine property and they would even go so far as to enter villagers' houses and take food. Because they were under a deity's protection Osu were not interfered with or punished, and were exempt from taxes and communal labour. Under colonial administration, Osu were notably successful in education (compared to the non-Osu Igbo they lived among*) becoming part of administrative and legal authorities. I think the clever Igbo are mainly crypto Osu. When you put together the privileges, unusual occupational profile, reproductive isolation, and demographic expansion of Osu it seems rather plausible they could have become a clever caste within the Igbo. I think the best evidence I have a good theory is the support from several sources for Osu outdoing other Igbo in educational attainment.
“I think the best evidence I have a good theory is the support from several sources for Osu outdoing other Igbo in educational attainment.”
You did not give “several sources”, but only one link to an un-cited statement regarding the Osu origins of “many of Igboland’s most prominent families. Igbo culture is broad and diverse and in some regions had few to no Osu. They were a small group and cannot account for Igbo achievement.
Igboland also had a class of general labor slaves called Ohu (on a perhaps unrelated note).
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=ohu+slaves&tbm=bks
In order to illustrate how poorly blacks test, I always compare them to free/reduced lunch students. On the A-levels the best performing free school meal students outperform all black groupings except for black African where the results are about even.
Blacks should outscore low-income students since “black” includes all income groups and should get a boost by the wealthier students, but that doesn’t happen.
On the SAT:
black 1278/2400
low-income 1324/2400
The ACT exam:
5% of blacks met all four benchmarks (62% met none)
11% of low-income met all four benchmarks (45% met none)
9% of first-generation met all four benchmarks (52% met none)
(Benchmarks are minimum scores in English, reading, science, and math.)
There is no real reason for black Africans to regress to the mean in the US. They have fairly large communities, no need to marry out or at least down, unique names, and can easily keep in touch with the homeland. They won’t just blend in like the black Caribbeans have done.
https://docs.google.com/viewerng/viewer?url=https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/208459/response/565105/attach/3/FOI%25202014%25200059414%2520Littlejohn%2520final.xlsx
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2014/10/07/sat-scores-and-income-inequality-how-wealthier-kids-rank-high
https://secure-media.collegeboard.org/digitalServices/pdf/sat/sat-percentile-ranks-gender-ethnicity-2014.pdfer/
http://www.act.org/newsroom/data/2014/states/africanamerican.html
In the public realm, it’s uncivilized – nepotistic – to put your family above outsiders. What makes it acceptable when race is substituted for kin?
White nationalism is primitive clannishness turned into a universalistic principle. It carries the worst of both. If NE caucasions have moved too far from a golden mean on degree of clannishness (this is the theory I extract from Steve Sailer), a universalistic (fascist) form of clannishness isn’t the antidote. It’s merely a regressive reaction rather than a true adjustment.
First, Nigeria is very resource rich and thus always had the potential to dramatically increase its GDP. The money was literally just sitting inside the ground just waiting for someone to pick it up. How do we know whether Western (Chinese?) companies tapped that wealth?
Also, here's the GDP per capita for the two countries
2011 2012 2013 2014
Nigeria $2,514 $2,740 $2,980 $3,203
Singapore $53,122 $54,578 $55,980 $56,287
Obviously, Nigeria's GDP per capita is growing more quickly but that's likely just because it started so low. Regardless, a GDP per capita of $3,203 in 2014 is hardly some sign of a high IQ population, while $56,287 is remarkable.
“Regardless, a GDP per capita of $3,203 in 2014 is hardly some sign of a high IQ population, while $56,287 is remarkable.”
Another indicator that Nigeria is not a high IQ population, they have a per capita murder rate of 20 per 100,000.
No 1st world high IQ European and Oriental nation has a murder rate that high. Nigeria’s per capita murder rate is similar to that of Mexico’s.
Same deal with the Māori of New Zealand.
Additionally, why is Barbados' homicide rate so much lower than Jamaica's in spite of both nations being predominately black in racial and ethnic composition (and while having similar IQ ratings)?
IMO: Nigeria
First participation: 2006.
Number of participations: 9.
Gold medals: 0. Silver medals: 0. Bronze medals: 5. Honourable mentions: 7.
To be fair Nigeria is the best performer from Africa, which don't say much.
How about those Chinese
First participation: 1985.
Number of participations: 30.
Gold medals: 138. Silver medals: 30. Bronze medals: 6. Honourable mentions: 0.
How about we look even closer? how many ethnic Chinese won gold in just the last 3 year in IMO
2015: 9/39 gold
2014: 20/49 gold
2013: 13/45 gold
....
So stop overstating your claim, it is not even that close. And stop using GCSE stat., which most readers in this blog are not familiar with and way too easy (leveling effect). How about some A-Level (college entrance test) result for 2012/2013?
https://docs.google.com/viewerng/viewer?url=https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/208459/response/565105/attach/3/FOI%25202014%25200059414%2520Littlejohn%2520final.xlsx
Check the result and you will notice that even Irish traveler outscore Black African by a wide margin. And Chinese just blow everybody out of the water.
I’m an Irish traveler and my I.Q. is stratospheric, 140 plus, and there are several hundred thousand just like me, you fucking moron. While your pea brain contemplates this, have a nice day!
I’ve spoken to Jared Diamond, hosted a lunch for Art Jensen and corresponded with Philippe Rushton – on the issue of supposed IQs averaging 57 as it happens – so you are pressing the right buttons for me. But I would like chapter and verse on the refutation of Guns, Germs and Steel on relevant points. I thought while reading that very readable and stimulating book many years ago that JD was genially naive about his P-NG friend but I also thought there were facts which spoke for themselves. The ancient relations of horses, beef cattle and sheep surely gave the Eurasians advantages especially when added to some immunity to the diseases they took to the Americas and Australia.
http://www.arthurhu.com/99/04/diamond.txt
I have observed the behaviour of south Asian tropical people who have fish almost leaping out of the sea at them and fruit and coconuts available without effort. I am not at all sure that the Igbo would have had reason to do more than, say, the Jews of Eastern Europe did in small towns amongst the local Slavs when many were modestly prosperous illiterate tinkers or cobblers despite bearing the genes which earned Nobel Prizes in New York. So I’ll remain keen on hard evidence before totally dismissing the idea that the Igbo or some sub group of them have significantly higher average IQs than their neighbours.
---
Re. "Lynn’s crazy theories". He is the whipping boy for equalitarian racial theorists (yes, equality is a theory). In that Norwegian documentary the filmmaker laughed at Lynn for being 'far fetched'. He didn't laugh at Charles Murray though. If Lynn is so wrong, Murray is too. Why don't we read more about Charles Murray?" Sowell: When European immigrant groups in the United States scored below the national average on mental tests, they scored lowest on the abstract parts of those tests. So did white mountaineer children in the United States tested back in the early 1930s. ... Strangely, Herrnstein and Murray refer to "folklore" that "Jews and other immigrant groups were thought to be below average in intelligence." It was neither folklore nor anything as subjective as thoughts. It was based on hard data, as hard as any data in The Bell Curve. These groups repeatedly tested below average on the mental tests of the World War I era, both in the army and in civilian life. For Jews, it is clear that later tests showed radically different results—during an era when there was very little intermarriage to change the genetic makeup of American Jews.[25]"Sowell is talking Lamarckian mechanisms in the above. That, 'should put serious doubt in the mind of any honest person who does not merely use science to rationalize his racial ideology'.
Did your granny ever tell you what your Igbo grandpa’s IQ had been measured at?
Another strong essay by Mr. Chisala, and thanks to Mr. Unz for continuing to publish this, and other (locally) heterodox opinions. It would be nice if commenters would try to understand and engage with the points he has actually made, rather than those he made in your imagination (hint: Igbo != Nigerian != black/African. This is important, and nowhere near as difficult to understand as you are making it seem). Perhaps Mr. Unz could nominate one of his HDB writers to take the contrary/sceptical position?
Black White IQ Gap, then Chanda pulled up all GCSE tests results and most of his pictures retrieved to show off high achieving Blacks in the States or the UK have been largely due to Nigerian.
If Igbo!=Nigerian!=Black/African, we won't be having this discussion AT ALL. We are having this discussion solely due to the fact that Igbo share some sort of Genetic factor among Blacks in Africa than Igbo share majority of their genes with Northwestern Europeans nor Northeastern Asians.
If you still don't get it, here's the bottom line. The title of the post is "Black White IQ gap", not "Nigerian White IQ gap". No where do we observe those high achieving Blacks coming from Mali, South Sudan, Zambia, etc etc etc. Mostly have been from Nigeria. What does that tell you?
I once asked Chanda to change the title to "Blacks IQ Gap within Africa".
Peter is really big on them being some of the most intelligent africans, and tying this into their history as merchants/traders, trying to further corroborate ANHI’s idea as this being a focal point of selection. ANHI of course has seen next to no real corroboration in over 10 years (with the only actual critique, Brian Ferguson’s, waved off by C&H and Peter), with Lynn’s analysis pointing strongly to their IQ being 110, which is a good deal lower than common old estimates of 115. I do think it’s likely the Igbo are more intelligent than other Nigerians, but not substantially so, and I think the same could be said of the Ashkenazi vs. non-ashkenazi jews. The sephardic and mizrahi/yemeni jews also have a considerable history of disproportionate achievement, and most every bit of sane evidence points to their IQ’s being above 100. Not on par with the Askhenazi, but probably a few to several points less. The ashkenazi were in an arguably more complex environment than the igbo (given they had literacy), so it really doesn’t give much hope for their status as merchants being the driver for their possible higher intelligence.
And going off that, ANHI lacked any reference to the IQ’s of non-Ashkenazi jews, and therefore the original intelligence of the early ashkenazi jewish population. It’s basically assumed it was 100 and shot up by 115. If it was a more likely score of the low-mid 100′s, it really weakens the hypothesis (among many other things) if their IQ was boosted by just a few to several points, and this idea the Igbo were selected in some way.
And yeah, I’m aware there’s claimed IQ data for the Sephardim and Mizrahim- 99 and 91 respectively. 99 for the Sephards is pretty ridiculous and not believable, and 91 for the Mizrahi is just insane (pretty certain it was cooked to fit Lynn’s crazy theories about arab intelligence.)
I adopted the C & H assumption that Jews weren't specially smart before the early Middle Ages though I doubt that because of their literacy and mentally demanding culture from at latest 500 BC. The end of the IQ ascent seems to have been very approx. about 1650 by which time Jewish numbers were rising well beyond what might have been possible if successful businessmen's children marrying the rabbi's children was the key paradigm. By the end of the 19th century Eastern Europe was exporting many illiterate Jews who were generations away from ancestors who may have managed Polish nobles' estates or lent money to them.
I know nothing of Mizrahi history but would take little persuading that the true ex-Iberian Sephardi had also evolved high IQs. But for both I would be pleased to be given some account of when snd where and how a putatively > 100 average IQ evolved, even a plausible Just So story.
http://www.ncas.rutgers.edu/sites/fasn/files/How%20Jews%20Became%20Smart%20(2008).pdf
I believe the are currently also 104-7 in Israel(though the above link does not concern Israel, but mostly Ashkenazim in the US).
(by Brian Ferguson)
http://www.ncas.rutgers.edu/sites/fasn/files/How%20Jews%20Became%20Smart%20(2008).pdf
(I re-post because the first link didn't show properly)
but I now see you mention him in your post.
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=9042969
https://books.google.com/books?id=IjlzSYnAKdQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=yoruba+traders+ghana&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj486zmndHJAhWDVyYKHSJECikQ6AEILzAA#v=onepage&q=yoruba%20traders%20ghana&f=false
Some other tribes of S.E. Nigeria (near the Igbo) were said to be skilled in commerce.
Amaury Talbot said of the Kalabari (an Efik subgroup) that they had a "genius for commerce and
"could compete on equal terms with the Jew or China man" (Talbot, 1932,
Some S. Eastern tribes (and the southern Igbo) used an ideographic script called Nsibidi, but it was restricted (in its full form) to the elite and members of secret societies(unlike w/ Ashkenazim, for whom literacy among men was near universal).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nsibidi
Anti-”Natural History of Ashkenazi Intelligence” pdf (by Brian Ferguson)
http://www.ncas.rutgers.edu/sites/fasn/files/How%20Jews%20Became%20Smart%20(2008).pdf
another interesting link re: Jewish history (and inc. Sephardim/Misraitic Jews) http://utne.nvg.org/j/metzenberg.html
The Yoruba(certain subgroups at least), especially those of the Ijebu region, had a tradition of being merchants(though perhaps not as much as the Igbo. ), and certain other w. African tribes (t0 a lesser extent like the Ewe, the Djula, and some Hausa subgroups)
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=9042969
https://books.google.com/books?id=IjlzSYnAKdQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=yoruba+traders+ghana&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj486zmndHJAhWDVyYKHSJECikQ6AEILzAA#v=onepage&q=yoruba%20traders%20gha
Some other tribes of S.E. Nigeria (near the Igbo) were said to be skilled in commerce. Amaury Talbot said of the Kalabari (an Efik subgroup) that they had a “genius for commerce and “could compete on equal terms with the Jew or China man” (Talbot, 1932,
What south asian tropical people are you talking about? What behavior of theirs stood out to you?
Is this that whole thing about tropical environments being mentally undemanding? I really love how that whole thing is trotted out, especially in regards to Africa- it usually goes something like this:
“Africa is a very cognitively undemanding environment. Food is bountiful and grows year around. All you have to do is climb up a tree and fruit is readily available. It’s so idyllic that women do most of the agricultural work! *can’t name a single large part of africa resembling this, is reiterating largely made up BS from Rushton*”
I mean, it’s true that women generally do most of the food gathering in SS africa, but that entails agriculture, which is near universal in SS africa and has been widespread for a long time (along with iron smelting). You’d know this if you bothered to study their history, along with how widespread urbanization was in West Africa, and even advanced art. Why did they so readily take to these things if they had enough in their ancestral environments? Why have other tropical peoples, including papuans/melanesians taken to agriculture? I’ve come across little real evidence of any environments in SS africa that have widely, readily available food without agriculture. I don’t think the possible higher intelligence of the Igbo was due to mercantilism or whatever, but I don’t think there was anything inherent in africa that was readily retarding towards intelligence or altruism. People who trot out these explanations almost never bother to look at the behaviors of modern/historic far northern/arctic populations (Rushton from what I can tell has NEVER done this)- the mongols and the huns, modern central asia, the russian far east, the ainu, inuits… none of those groups support the idea of cold environments selecting for anything like altruism. Intelligence is sketchier, but the paleolithic skull record doesn’t support it either.
I am curious about these south asian people you mention, but I you’re simply wrong to draw that conclusion about those environments.
I have also been to Amazonia and seen the wide variety of fruit trees left over from the large populations before the Iberians brought disease in the 16th century. There were and are still plenty of fish in the Amazon and tributaries though I recommend making a soup of Piranha rather than spending days filetting them.My observations are consistent with it being possible to live on food very easily gathered in the equatorial tropics elsewhere and with evidence about polygynous societies in the tropics. You make a point about what you term "agriculture" which does mot I think stand up to examination. In the first place what is done by Papuans and Torres Strait Islanders is generally called and classed as gardening which gives some indication of its physical demands. Second, agriculture doesn't need to be a time consuming or strenuous activity if there is plenty of water and fertile soil in the tropics and the food produced is not substantially for sale beyond the extended family.
Rushton brings up the Inuit in this article about Lynn's book.
>Lynn also notes some anomalies in the cold winter theory of intelligence. The most striking: the Inuit, exposed to the coldest winter temperatures, have a brain size equal to East Asians, and yet have an average IQ of only 91. To explain this anomaly, Lynn proposes that additional genetic processes are important—such as population size. The larger the network of co-operating and competing population groups (“demes”), the faster any mutations for advantageous alleles can spread. So large landmass groups like East Asians and Europeans average higher IQs than isolated hunter-gatherer groups like the Inuit.
http://www.vdare.com/articles/winters-are-good-for-your-genes-lynn-book-finds-world-average-iq-90-declining-from-north-to
Obviously, anomalies happen.
It’s certainly interesting.
However, I should still caution that there is likely an inexhaustible number of variables that could lead to an elite group of academically successful children. Not that Mr. Chisala is necessarily wrong, but what would be more convincing is still, and overall improvement in wealth and living standards in black-majority countries.
If he is right, then I welcome successful future African men. I only hope they are intelligent enough not to buy into the western sociopolitical worldview.
Another indicator that Nigeria is not a high IQ population, they have a per capita murder rate of 20 per 100,000.
No 1st world high IQ European and Oriental nation has a murder rate that high. Nigeria's per capita murder rate is similar to that of Mexico's.
Europeans don’t have high average IQ. It’s around 98-99, which isn’t even the lowest level university causes like social work.
https://jakubmarian.com/average-iq-in-europe-by-country-map/
Some European countries are well below 90 lol.
High IQ is above 115 at least.
I guess some were also Jews, but I don't know. Certainly a lot who took the test and administered it were Jewish because years ago I knew an elderly Jewis man who had been in a special high IQ class during the 1930s.
@ Wizard of Oz,
From memory Rushton’s article on GGS focussed on the dismissal of psychometrics and the likelihood that different environments would have also favored selection for different traits.
http://philipperushton.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/iq-race-book-rev-diamond-rushton-population-environment-9-1999.pdf
Chapter 24 of Michael Hart’s ‘Understanding Human History’ points out that the developments in Mesoamerica relative to Sub-Saharan Africa seem to contradict Diamond’s arguments.
https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/hart_-_understanding_human_history-1.pdf
Another indicator that Nigeria is not a high IQ population, they have a per capita murder rate of 20 per 100,000.
No 1st world high IQ European and Oriental nation has a murder rate that high. Nigeria's per capita murder rate is similar to that of Mexico's.
I think you need to develop that argument about IQ and homicide and Nigeria a bit more carefully. Your theory needs to allow for the homicide rate in New York City exceeding 30 in 100,000 for some period in the late 1980s to 1990s.
Another indicator that Nigeria is not a high IQ population, they have a per capita murder rate of 20 per 100,000.
No 1st world high IQ European and Oriental nation has a murder rate that high. Nigeria's per capita murder rate is similar to that of Mexico's.
What’s your explanation for the violent behavior of Canadian Aboriginals? They have higher IQ scores than Albanians yet their murder rates make the denizens of Albania look like timid puppy dogs in comparison.
Same deal with the Māori of New Zealand.
Additionally, why is Barbados’ homicide rate so much lower than Jamaica’s in spite of both nations being predominately black in racial and ethnic composition (and while having similar IQ ratings)?
In the article above this problem seems to be solved, as the author makes clear that does not even want to disprove the whole idea of HBD. As far as I understand it he thinks it is possible (yet up to date unknown with certainty) that there are IQ differences between different populations and races. But he shows that it is almost impossible that subsaharan Africa as a whole actually has an average IQ of 70-75 or something like that.
The examples given in this series of articles are in my opinion really important because of the tail effects regarding the normal distribution of the IQ. Under the assumption that all Nigerian subgroups have an average IQ of 75 it is extremely unlikely that some Nigerians obviously have a Genius-IQ. The „selected immigration“ argument is rather weak as for example Nigeria is known as a very corrupt country. Such a corrupt country is not meritocratic regarding IQ, since getting good things like educational degrees, visa etc. often rather depends on bribing the right person than on actually having a IQ. Though one thing one has to keep in mind is the extreme population explosion in Nigeria. In the nineties there were already around as many children born in Nigeria as in the whole european Union. So a scrabble team from Nigeria could population-wise compete with a combines EU-scrabble team. Still under the assumption of an very low average IQ those results would be unlikely.
From a HBD perspective it will also be very difficult to explain the apparently outstanding accomplishments of subpopulations the Igbo. The whole point of HBD is that big natural barriers like oceans, the Sahara etc. made it possible for different major races to develop differently. Of course there is the exception of Ashkenazi intelligence, but I can´t imagine selectional forces as strong as those in the case of Ashkenazim working in West Africa.
Having a high IQ is very useful for navigating corruption and navigating corruption well in a country like Nigeria is highly desirable.
Sounds reasonable on the surface, but there are multiple X multiple of small issues could be picked on from here…
1, fish, fruits, coconuts could be kinda of “prohibitor excuse”in the very starting point of the primitive societies, but not soon after it, because if an high IQ North Asian had been transplanted into that position, he would have soon realised it’s not good, fun, exciting or even healthy to have fish, fruits coconuts for breakfast, lunch, dinner, snags and holiday celebrations 24*365 all years along. He would have been thinking about trading, growing more varieties of food, manufactoring, building technologies, making arts, music, etc etc.
In short, easily avaliable fish-fruits-coconuts should not be the pathetic excuse for not being able to advance IQ, sometimes dramatically, on an ongoing basis. Many modern humans have easy food available at the doorsteps, but it seems that 7/11 corner stores haven’t stopped these people from playing Mozart to building spaceships to the Moon, have they?
2. but why the South Asian keeps doing such ? Is that because the bulk of IQ had already been formed before he encountered fish-fruit-coconuts paradise? Or fish-fruit-coconuts paradise and lower IQ folks are indeed a chichen-egg loop and match-made-in-heaven? Either way, extreme-cold-weather theory?
Have Igbo people went to extreme-cold-weather selection like northern people did? What is avg brain size , or dick size for that matter as well lol, of Igbo? What are the other physical/mental characteristics that match/cope with high intelligence to the level of Northern people, in line with Rushton’s theory?… the remaining hard questions are numerous…
…No, no more evidence, except 1 mythtically dodgy table 0f 2007 UK GCSE , a scranbble trophy of 2014, a crappy small bronze relic (from Peter Frost’s entry) made in 10th century calling it “impressively creative tech & art” (when imperial China , with IQ 100+ to give you a comparison, at a time had been making pretty refined steel already for about 1,000 years ), and several post-modern AA poster kids with a big smile, yeah beautiful teeth, then Voila, we have a high IQ race! Do you take Panda as a fool? ROFL
3. your analogy with Jews here is kinda of “cheating”: LOL
The ancestors of Jews went through extreme-cold-weather to start with, so did Igbo people? The Jews went from the normal beginning as illiterate tinkers in E europe to merchants of Venice, to centries of prosecutions everywhere,… to Nobel Prize now, there have been abundant historical evidences showing that they were shining on the world stage in multiple natural and social sciences, other than scrabble, in the last several thousands years…
whereas in analogy with the Igbos, you have conveniently ignored their next-to-zero brilliance comparing to the rest of the world in its entire history till now, and hoping there could be in the unforseeable future like a gambler wishing to hit a 1-billion-bucks jackpot.
All other established high IQ races, you name it, had/have shone at least once in history on the world stage, because 5,000 history is long enough to contain countless golden opportunities (mathematically impossible for any high IQ people to miss them all together) and reference points to easily make a statistically very, but very, significant case… well, except Igbos? ROFL
You are comparing apple and orange in entirely different time frames! Isn’t that a “cheating”? LOL
4, actually there are 2 contention points here, instead of one.
“Igbo has significantly higher IQ than the rest Nigeria” ( the bomb under it: the rest of Nigeria IQ is very low. Shocking, huh? )
and “Igno IQ = Nigeria IQ = Africa IQ, hence Cloising the Black-White IQ gap central logic” ,
Chisala has managed to interchange both , and parts of both, seeminglessly at his will particularly when his “common sense” sparks, contradicting himself back and forth repeatedly with (fill in here your magic number) logical fallacies, gross inaccuracies and outright strawmen, making the essay a big mish mash of Allah dunno what, let alone Panda. ROFL.
5, 6, 7, 8… (excuse Panda is in a hurry…)
And going off that, ANHI lacked any reference to the IQ's of non-Ashkenazi jews, and therefore the original intelligence of the early ashkenazi jewish population. It's basically assumed it was 100 and shot up by 115. If it was a more likely score of the low-mid 100's, it really weakens the hypothesis (among many other things) if their IQ was boosted by just a few to several points, and this idea the Igbo were selected in some way.
And yeah, I'm aware there's claimed IQ data for the Sephardim and Mizrahim- 99 and 91 respectively. 99 for the Sephards is pretty ridiculous and not believable, and 91 for the Mizrahi is just insane (pretty certain it was cooked to fit Lynn's crazy theories about arab intelligence.)
Greg Cochran dismissed without argument but some disdain my suggestion that his and co-author’s emphasis on the right hand end of the bell curve was not the whole story. I showed on simple uncontroversial assumptions about heritability that simply preventing under 70 (or maybe it was 80 and maybe I scaled it to change over time but my point now is unaffected) IQ Jews from mating for 500 years would bring an average of 100 up to 115 in 500 years. As it was clear that considerable community control was exercised over marriage and being a dumb boy who would disgrace himself at a Bar Mitzvah would surely rule him out as breeding stock I envisaged his like mating with the slavic peasantry or with luck being taken on by the 35 year old widow who had born all the children she was going to have so he could do the heavy work round her inn.
I adopted the C & H assumption that Jews weren’t specially smart before the early Middle Ages though I doubt that because of their literacy and mentally demanding culture from at latest 500 BC. The end of the IQ ascent seems to have been very approx. about 1650 by which time Jewish numbers were rising well beyond what might have been possible if successful businessmen’s children marrying the rabbi’s children was the key paradigm. By the end of the 19th century Eastern Europe was exporting many illiterate Jews who were generations away from ancestors who may have managed Polish nobles’ estates or lent money to them.
I know nothing of Mizrahi history but would take little persuading that the true ex-Iberian Sephardi had also evolved high IQs. But for both I would be pleased to be given some account of when snd where and how a putatively > 100 average IQ evolved, even a plausible Just So story.
On the heredity issue, one thought that crossed my mind is the Ashkenazi could be a little like savants. Genetic diseases and physical disabilities could contribute to a higher focus on intellectual pursuits. Other than that, psychosocial environmental conditions are clearly evident when reading the literature about Jews.
From observation and reading various studies, cognitive development potential appears to be conditional upon neural pathway development that is contingent upon nutrition and stimulation from the psychosocial environment within the foundation years of childhood. Individual teleological apperception then becomes the governing paradigmatic process contributing to the heights of achievement that will be experienced in chosen fields of enterprise as an adult; which can be adversely affected by environmental and internalized variability when luck departs. Although luck, more often than not, is attributable to determination.
Regarding breeding blacks, what is overlooked is the psychosocial attitudes within the family. More docile children are raised from docile parents, but this is a psychological and behavioral disposition, not a genetic matter. Same applies to animals, but not plants or molecular cultures. Various discomforting externalities can arouse anxieties and create pathogenic antisocial attitudes within individuals. Emphasis on genes for producing thoughts is a moribund exercise of futility conducted at the expense of better scientific pursuits.
Although, I would settle for life in paradise on a coral island not threatened by typhoons, tsunamis or volcanoes and enjoying tranquil environs as Adam enjoying the delights of Eve.
And going off that, ANHI lacked any reference to the IQ's of non-Ashkenazi jews, and therefore the original intelligence of the early ashkenazi jewish population. It's basically assumed it was 100 and shot up by 115. If it was a more likely score of the low-mid 100's, it really weakens the hypothesis (among many other things) if their IQ was boosted by just a few to several points, and this idea the Igbo were selected in some way.
And yeah, I'm aware there's claimed IQ data for the Sephardim and Mizrahim- 99 and 91 respectively. 99 for the Sephards is pretty ridiculous and not believable, and 91 for the Mizrahi is just insane (pretty certain it was cooked to fit Lynn's crazy theories about arab intelligence.)
From what I’ve seen, The more reliable figures (from what I’ve seen) for Ashkenazi iq are closer to 104-7 than 115
http://www.ncas.rutgers.edu/sites/fasn/files/How%20Jews%20Became%20Smart%20(2008).pdf
I believe the are currently also 104-7 in Israel(though the above link does not concern Israel, but mostly Ashkenazim in the US).
http://utne.nvg.org/j/metzenberg.html
http://www.ncas.rutgers.edu/sites/fasn/files/How%20Jews%20Became%20Smart%20(2008).pdf
I believe the are currently also 104-7 in Israel(though the above link does not concern Israel, but mostly Ashkenazim in the US).
another interesting link re: Jewish history (and inc. Sephardim/Misraitic Jews)
http://utne.nvg.org/j/metzenberg.html
And going off that, ANHI lacked any reference to the IQ's of non-Ashkenazi jews, and therefore the original intelligence of the early ashkenazi jewish population. It's basically assumed it was 100 and shot up by 115. If it was a more likely score of the low-mid 100's, it really weakens the hypothesis (among many other things) if their IQ was boosted by just a few to several points, and this idea the Igbo were selected in some way.
And yeah, I'm aware there's claimed IQ data for the Sephardim and Mizrahim- 99 and 91 respectively. 99 for the Sephards is pretty ridiculous and not believable, and 91 for the Mizrahi is just insane (pretty certain it was cooked to fit Lynn's crazy theories about arab intelligence.)
The first link I posted was “How Jews Became Smart: Anti-”Natural History of Ashkenazi Intelligence” pdf
(by Brian Ferguson)
http://www.ncas.rutgers.edu/sites/fasn/files/How%20Jews%20Became%20Smart%20(2008).pdf
(I re-post because the first link didn’t show properly)
but I now see you mention him in your post.
And going off that, ANHI lacked any reference to the IQ's of non-Ashkenazi jews, and therefore the original intelligence of the early ashkenazi jewish population. It's basically assumed it was 100 and shot up by 115. If it was a more likely score of the low-mid 100's, it really weakens the hypothesis (among many other things) if their IQ was boosted by just a few to several points, and this idea the Igbo were selected in some way.
And yeah, I'm aware there's claimed IQ data for the Sephardim and Mizrahim- 99 and 91 respectively. 99 for the Sephards is pretty ridiculous and not believable, and 91 for the Mizrahi is just insane (pretty certain it was cooked to fit Lynn's crazy theories about arab intelligence.)
The Yoruba(certain subgroups at least), especially those of the Ijebu region, had a tradition of being merchants(though perhaps not as much as the Igbo.
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=9042969
https://books.google.com/books?id=IjlzSYnAKdQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=yoruba+traders+ghana&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj486zmndHJAhWDVyYKHSJECikQ6AEILzAA#v=onepage&q=yoruba%20traders%20ghana&f=false
Some other tribes of S.E. Nigeria (near the Igbo) were said to be skilled in commerce.
Amaury Talbot said of the Kalabari (an Efik subgroup) that they had a “genius for commerce and
“could compete on equal terms with the Jew or China man” (Talbot, 1932,
And going off that, ANHI lacked any reference to the IQ's of non-Ashkenazi jews, and therefore the original intelligence of the early ashkenazi jewish population. It's basically assumed it was 100 and shot up by 115. If it was a more likely score of the low-mid 100's, it really weakens the hypothesis (among many other things) if their IQ was boosted by just a few to several points, and this idea the Igbo were selected in some way.
And yeah, I'm aware there's claimed IQ data for the Sephardim and Mizrahim- 99 and 91 respectively. 99 for the Sephards is pretty ridiculous and not believable, and 91 for the Mizrahi is just insane (pretty certain it was cooked to fit Lynn's crazy theories about arab intelligence.)
“The ashkenazi were in an arguably more complex environment than the igbo (given they had literacy)”
Some S. Eastern tribes (and the southern Igbo) used an ideographic script called Nsibidi, but it was restricted (in its full form) to the elite and members of secret societies(unlike w/ Ashkenazim, for whom literacy among men was near universal).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nsibidi
And going off that, ANHI lacked any reference to the IQ's of non-Ashkenazi jews, and therefore the original intelligence of the early ashkenazi jewish population. It's basically assumed it was 100 and shot up by 115. If it was a more likely score of the low-mid 100's, it really weakens the hypothesis (among many other things) if their IQ was boosted by just a few to several points, and this idea the Igbo were selected in some way.
And yeah, I'm aware there's claimed IQ data for the Sephardim and Mizrahim- 99 and 91 respectively. 99 for the Sephards is pretty ridiculous and not believable, and 91 for the Mizrahi is just insane (pretty certain it was cooked to fit Lynn's crazy theories about arab intelligence.)
From what I’ve seen, The more reliable figures (from what I’ve seen) for Ashkenazi iq are closer to 104-7 than 115
Anti-”Natural History of Ashkenazi Intelligence” pdf (by Brian Ferguson)
http://www.ncas.rutgers.edu/sites/fasn/files/How%20Jews%20Became%20Smart%20(2008).pdf
another interesting link re: Jewish history (and inc. Sephardim/Misraitic Jews) http://utne.nvg.org/j/metzenberg.html
The Yoruba(certain subgroups at least), especially those of the Ijebu region, had a tradition of being merchants(though perhaps not as much as the Igbo. ), and certain other w. African tribes (t0 a lesser extent like the Ewe, the Djula, and some Hausa subgroups)
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=9042969
https://books.google.com/books?id=IjlzSYnAKdQC&printsec=frontcover&dq=yoruba+traders+ghana&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj486zmndHJAhWDVyYKHSJECikQ6AEILzAA#v=onepage&q=yoruba%20traders%20gha
Some other tribes of S.E. Nigeria (near the Igbo) were said to be skilled in commerce. Amaury Talbot said of the Kalabari (an Efik subgroup) that they had a “genius for commerce and “could compete on equal terms with the Jew or China man” (Talbot, 1932,
If Igbos have similar merchant prototypes than patho… oops, ashkenazis, then they logically speaking should show similar unbalanced cognitive profile, higher verbal and or mathematical ability and lower spatial. What is interesting to note about ashkenazi profile is that their spatial intelligence is not super lower, 95-97 on average***
What seems made ashkenazis (seems, relatively or predominantly) bad on spatial skills is not their relative lower spatial intelligence but greater discrepancy between verbal and general intelligence.
95-97 spatial iq is the new ”lower” as well orange is the new black.
If someone understand… ;)(;
[I might be reading more into your point than intended.]
And going off that, ANHI lacked any reference to the IQ's of non-Ashkenazi jews, and therefore the original intelligence of the early ashkenazi jewish population. It's basically assumed it was 100 and shot up by 115. If it was a more likely score of the low-mid 100's, it really weakens the hypothesis (among many other things) if their IQ was boosted by just a few to several points, and this idea the Igbo were selected in some way.
And yeah, I'm aware there's claimed IQ data for the Sephardim and Mizrahim- 99 and 91 respectively. 99 for the Sephards is pretty ridiculous and not believable, and 91 for the Mizrahi is just insane (pretty certain it was cooked to fit Lynn's crazy theories about arab intelligence.)
A lot of little fragments about Osu, but the interpretation of Osu being outcast or slaves is supposed to be a colonial-missionary period one. Some in Nigeria allege the Osu were involved in selling Dialas (so called freeborne Igbo) for the transatlantic slave trade. Slaves in Igboland were usually obtained by them being pawned or sold by parents rather than taken by force. Osu seem to have been better off in some regions than others and in a limited area those called Osu were affluent.
Part of your second link is blank and does not say what you claim it does.
The stigmatization of the Osu was part of traditional religion and has nothing to do with missionaries of colonialism. The ancestors of Osu were slaves dedicated to the gods(like a living human scapegoat), so the creation of Osu may have increases at the t imd of the transatlantic slave trade. It is not known how far the tradition (of Osu goes exactly, but slavery(and indentured servitude in Igbo-land and West Africa had existed (at least )for centuries prior.
The Osu did not own slaves(or very rarely, so it is unlikely they sold them. As mentioned, they were not involved traditionally in commerce, the skilled trades, or in leadership roles. Titled, men, plutocrats(such as they existed) and priests such as the Aro priest hood of South Igbo-land were more likely to sell slaves.
"The chief point of interest in this case is that the priest is called “Osu”, and that he has maintained his authority. Further, that is a profitable profession, so much so, that there is no lack of candidates especially from among the younger sons of chiefs The prospective returns are sufficiently attractive to induce young men to take any risk involved."
The following paragraph (rest of the quote):
"This instance of the predominance of "Osu" practice appears to be an isolated one. It may probably be accounted for by the failure to distinguish between the priest and the sacrifices presented to the god. The priest may be loosely termed "Osu" as the one at the water "Di-Awo" near Umuchu (p.41), while the offerings. particularly the human ones, are the real "osus"."
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=qKNOfk4pmmMC&pg=PA252&dq=osu+profitable+profession&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiRy9-ls9HJAhXCWxoKHcrxCu0Q6AEIJTAB#v=onepage&q=osu%20profitable%20profession&f=false
There are so many problems here I’m getting light headed. Let’s start with the most obvious. We know that black migration out of Africa is not random now and has never been random. In the colonial period, high aptitude blacks were selected out for special opportunities in the indigenous schools, often run by religious groups. They would also be “sponsored” to continue their education in Europe. It’s not an accident that with rare exception the post-colonial ruling elites in Africa were men who spent extended time in the West.
Today, church groups and refugee groups select for people who can have some chance to succeed in the West. There are groups in the US, for example, who work the refugee system looking for potential college athletes. They work with American prep schools to get these kids into the US with their families and into private academies where they play a sport and prep for an American college. I personally know an American based in Australia who runs a non-profit for this purpose.
There’s that and then there is the comment from someone that American slave holders bred their slaves like draft animals. There’s no evidence of this and no evidence they thought much about it. Slave holders did not view slaves as farm animals. They perfectly well knew that slaves were rational humans. They no more viewed slaves as draft animals than as food animals. It’s impossible for us to comprehend, but slave owners felt a moral responsibility toward their slaves that they could never feel toward a mule or a horse.
Finally, the author confuses quantity with quality. This is a very African habit. Instead of making one or two well reasoned and documented points, he floods the zone thinking a 6,000 word article is less wrong than a 5,000 article. Limit the length to 1200 words and narrow the focus to one or two points.
What’s the point actually then?
Black White IQ Gap, then Chanda pulled up all GCSE tests results and most of his pictures retrieved to show off high achieving Blacks in the States or the UK have been largely due to Nigerian.
If Igbo!=Nigerian!=Black/African, we won’t be having this discussion AT ALL. We are having this discussion solely due to the fact that Igbo share some sort of Genetic factor among Blacks in Africa than Igbo share majority of their genes with Northwestern Europeans nor Northeastern Asians.
If you still don’t get it, here’s the bottom line. The title of the post is “Black White IQ gap”, not “Nigerian White IQ gap”. No where do we observe those high achieving Blacks coming from Mali, South Sudan, Zambia, etc etc etc. Mostly have been from Nigeria. What does that tell you?
I once asked Chanda to change the title to “Blacks IQ Gap within Africa”.
Steve Sailer, on this very website, made the trechant observation that political correctness is the discipline of not noticing things (paraphrase). There are very few spaces in public discourse where one is truly allowed to notice uncomfortable things; unz.com could be such a space, and this could be very valuable. It can't get there by being a place where you are allowed to notice un-pc things AND NOTHING ELSE. The topic of human achievement/potential/whatever is necessarily going to be very complex, difficult to quantify, and resistant to simple explanation [citation needed]. The sooner you can resign yourself to this the sooner your blood pressure will return to a healthy level. Namaste.
Indeed I was the beneficiary of many pearls of wisdom from my granny. Both grannies actually, and I was enriched by them. We Celts regard these blood relationships as sacred and we will brook no insolence from the likes of you. You present as most likely unaware of your father’s identity, thereby precluding any knowledge of your ancestry, a mercy bestowed upon you by your mother. I stand 6’2″, have blue eyes and was blond and ruggedly handsome in my swain days. I stopped counting female conquests at 250 while in my mid twenties. While I was making the fairer sex happy, I sense that you were abusing yourself whilst locked away in a darkened room, consumed with guilt and shame as you fantasized trysts with public school cronies. I can imagine Jared Diamond, Art Jensen and Philipe Rushton bristling in contempt at having their good names appropriated by a poseur such as yourself. Name dropping, distasteful at the best of times, equates with eclat by association and it is manifestly evident that you bring zero; nothing of any value to the table. They likely view you as an embarrassment, and nowhere in their writings do we see your name mentioned. Hopefully and probably your bald and scrawny self could have never attracted even the most desperate of women, and the gene pool is enriched by subtraction.
“A lot of little fragments about Osu, but the interpretation of Osu being outcast or slaves is supposed to be a colonial-missionary period one. Some in Nigeria allege the Osu were involved in selling Dialas (so called freeborne Igbo) for the transatlantic slave trade.”
Part of your second link is blank and does not say what you claim it does.
The stigmatization of the Osu was part of traditional religion and has nothing to do with missionaries of colonialism. The ancestors of Osu were slaves dedicated to the gods(like a living human scapegoat), so the creation of Osu may have increases at the t imd of the transatlantic slave trade. It is not known how far the tradition (of Osu goes exactly, but slavery(and indentured servitude in Igbo-land and West Africa had existed (at least )for centuries prior.
The Osu did not own slaves(or very rarely, so it is unlikely they sold them. As mentioned, they were not involved traditionally in commerce, the skilled trades, or in leadership roles. Titled, men, plutocrats(such as they existed) and priests such as the Aro priest hood of South Igbo-land were more likely to sell slaves.
Blacks should outscore low-income students since "black" includes all income groups and should get a boost by the wealthier students, but that doesn't happen.
On the SAT:
black 1278/2400
low-income 1324/2400
The ACT exam:
5% of blacks met all four benchmarks (62% met none)
11% of low-income met all four benchmarks (45% met none)
9% of first-generation met all four benchmarks (52% met none)
(Benchmarks are minimum scores in English, reading, science, and math.)
There is no real reason for black Africans to regress to the mean in the US. They have fairly large communities, no need to marry out or at least down, unique names, and can easily keep in touch with the homeland. They won't just blend in like the black Caribbeans have done.
https://docs.google.com/viewerng/viewer?url=https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/208459/response/565105/attach/3/FOI%25202014%25200059414%2520Littlejohn%2520final.xlsx
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2014/10/07/sat-scores-and-income-inequality-how-wealthier-kids-rank-high
https://secure-media.collegeboard.org/digitalServices/pdf/sat/sat-percentile-ranks-gender-ethnicity-2014.pdfer/
http://www.act.org/newsroom/data/2014/states/africanamerican.html
Only 7.74% of the A-Level sample were eligible for FSM, according to your table. In secondary schools, the figure was 16.3% (https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/schools-pupils-and-their-characteristics-january-2013). Therefore, the FSM students are a much more selective sample than the Black Africans, whose representation is roughly proportional. This is consistent with what we know from CAT3 and GCSE scores.
@Pseudo Irish Pretender
The honour of my Irish forebears, not least those transported for acts of rebellion against the Anglo-Norman-Scottish landlords, demands that I expose the pretender. I had thought you just one quarter Igbo but now that you mention the 250 I am able to update the reader with the certain knowledge that it is the total absence of a faithful worshipper of Mary the Mother of God as your wavy haired freckled pale skinned Irish mother that allowed the license from your 100 per cent African genes to emerge from the end of your favourite organ. No need for pretense about your appearance. Of your everyday visible features which so attracts your lovers of both sexes it is the smooth darkness of your skin, the gleam of your contrasting teeth and the height which you accurately state that delivers them to you.
But I will concede a traditional Irishry to your ignorance. It is indeed pig ignorance to bandy about the names of H-bd contributors you had perhaps never heard of as if they were alive. Sadly I had to stop corresponding with AJ and PR because they died some years ago.
Nonetheless the decisive clue that you lack a proper modest Irish granny is that you butt in on someone else’s conversation, one in which intelligent observation could have informed you that a warning shot across the bows was being fired to reduce the chances of any follow up being more general blather and mere assertion.
See #85
The Bell curve says it all. Mr Sowell has a higher IQ than most whites but does not represent most blacks. IQ is overrated as there are many other factors that make up a personality’
My observations have been made principally in equatorial Sri Lanka. No cyclones/hurricanes. No eathquakes or volcanoes. Droughts very rare. No need for heating or even clothes before religion or custom enjoined modesty. Abundant fish and abundant fruit and coconuts even without planting crops. One of the results is that when I told a local expat that I had had a small job done very quickly and efficiently (at only twice the local mates’ rate
he opined “they must be Tamils, or maybe Muslims”.
I have also been to Amazonia and seen the wide variety of fruit trees left over from the large populations before the Iberians brought disease in the 16th century. There were and are still plenty of fish in the Amazon and tributaries though I recommend making a soup of Piranha rather than spending days filetting them.
My observations are consistent with it being possible to live on food very easily gathered in the equatorial tropics elsewhere and with evidence about polygynous societies in the tropics. You make a point about what you term “agriculture” which does mot I think stand up to examination. In the first place what is done by Papuans and Torres Strait Islanders is generally called and classed as gardening which gives some indication of its physical demands. Second, agriculture doesn’t need to be a time consuming or strenuous activity if there is plenty of water and fertile soil in the tropics and the food produced is not substantially for sale beyond the extended family.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2002/03/1491/302445/""Landscape" in this case is meant exactly—Amazonian Indians literally created the ground beneath their feet. According to William I. Woods, a soil geographer at Southern Illinois University, ecologists' claims about terrible Amazonian land were based on very little data. In the late 1990s Woods and others began careful measurements in the lower Amazon. They indeed found lots of inhospitable terrain. But they also discovered swaths of terra preta—rich, fertile "black earth" that anthropologists increasingly believe was created by human beings.Terra preta, Woods guesses, covers at least 10 percent of Amazonia, an area the size of France. It has amazing properties, he says. Tropical rain doesn't leach nutrients from terra preta fields; instead the soil, so to speak, fights back. Not far from Painted Rock Cave is a 300-acre area with a two-foot layer of terra preta quarried by locals for potting soil. The bottom third of the layer is never removed, workers there explain, because over time it will re-create the original soil layer in its initial thickness. The reason, scientists suspect, is that terra preta is generated by a special suite of microorganisms that resists depletion. "Apparently," Woods and the Wisconsin geographer Joseph M. McCann argued in a presentation last summer, "at some threshold level ... dark earth attains the capacity to perpetuate—even regenerate itself—thus behaving more like a living 'super'-organism than an inert material.""So again, it's questionable where all those fruits came from, and both of these things come down to the fact humans clearly showed initiative in building more advanced societies and even civilization. Regardless of complexity in the case of melanesia, it stands that they were atleast able to go beyond what was readily available to them and required some work, and more extensive examples abound of people in tropical climates who were more than capable of building complex societies and advanced civilizations. I have come across a couple of people who have articulated similar things about SS africa, one of them I think about the supposed numbers of readily available, edible roots in the kalahari that the bushmen fed upon. I don't know how reliable that was though. This whole thing of so much of Africa being idyllic with readily available food (or where the food in question wasn't introduced by human intervention via agriculture) is something I have never seen any real corroboration for, and I get the feeling it's true of other tropical regions. And again, those polygamy rates could not exist without that sort of agriculture, which isn't exactly undemanding either.
Few Ashkenazi Jewish cobblers were illiterate, which would be considered a disgrace in a community, where Talmudic scholarship was valued as the supreme accomplishment. A number of eminent Ashkenazi Jews (Freud and Marx) had descent from lines of Rabbis. By the way, an Ashkenazi noted as a scholar would receive a range of valuable emoluments.
1. A wealthy man’s daughter as wife.
2. Extremely high status in the community of a kind which brought economic benefits.For example a ruling granted business monopolies on trade with gentiles to eminent scholars.
3. Gifts, even if a scholar was well-off.
4.Protection from anyone speaking against him. This was enforced by bans and fines.
No small advantages, and somewhat reminiscent of the special position of the Osu.
—
Re. “Lynn’s crazy theories”. He is the whipping boy for equalitarian racial theorists (yes, equality is a theory). In that Norwegian documentary the filmmaker laughed at Lynn for being ‘far fetched’. He didn’t laugh at Charles Murray though. If Lynn is so wrong, Murray is too. Why don’t we read more about Charles Murray?
” Sowell: When European immigrant groups in the United States scored below the national average on mental tests, they scored lowest on the abstract parts of those tests. So did white mountaineer children in the United States tested back in the early 1930s. … Strangely, Herrnstein and Murray refer to “folklore” that “Jews and other immigrant groups were thought to be below average in intelligence.” It was neither folklore nor anything as subjective as thoughts. It was based on hard data, as hard as any data in The Bell Curve. These groups repeatedly tested below average on the mental tests of the World War I era, both in the army and in civilian life. For Jews, it is clear that later tests showed radically different results—during an era when there was very little intermarriage to change the genetic makeup of American Jews.[25]”
Sowell is talking Lamarckian mechanisms in the above. That, ‘should put serious doubt in the mind of any honest person who does not merely use science to rationalize his racial ideology’.
“Have Igbo people went to extreme-cold-weather selection like northern people did? What is avg brain size , or dick size for that matter as well lol, of Igbo? What are the other physical/mental characteristics that match/cope with high intelligence to the level of Northern people, in line with Rushton’s theory?… the remaining hard questions are numerous…”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Carleton_S._Coon#Coon_was_not_a_racist_in_the_pejorative_sense
This is apparently from Carleton Coon’s son:
“In other words, my father was an elitist but not a racist, not in the present pejorative sense. But how about that opening reference to “most if not all races”? I am quite confident, on the basis of my recollection of my discussions with him, that he did not mean to include all negroes, or Congoids, or sub-Saharan Africans, as a blanket category incapable of producing superior minds. Africa being the cradle, there is probably at least as much racial variation within the region as outside it, and generalizations about race within the region always troubled him. (I recall his commenting on the large cranial capacity of the Ibo, for example). I infer that his phrase “most if not all races” referred to subgroups, perhaps some very minor groups, not to any of his five major categories.”
I’ve seen only one CC estimate on the Igbo (a recent one) that was pretty low, but still worth looking into.
“…No, no more evidence, except 1 mythtically dodgy table 0f 2007 UK GCSE , a scranbble trophy of 2014, a crappy small bronze relic (from Peter Frost’s entry) made in 10th century calling it “impressively creative tech & art” (when imperial China , with IQ 100+ to give you a comparison, at a time had been making pretty refined steel already for about 1,000 years ), and several post-modern AA poster kids with a big smile, yeah beautiful teeth, then Voila, we have a high IQ race! Do you take Panda as a fool? ROFL”
There has been a considerable amount of evidence- graduation rates in the UK and America, Nigeria, and more. While I am not sold on the Igbo having the highest IQ in Nigeria or whatever, or being especially smarter than other Nigerians, your dismissals are worthless- it was made more than clear how advanced Igbo art was in the other thread (which consisted of more than one piece of art), and here you are still trashing it, particularly because it was compared to ancient Chinese bronzes, and that really gets to your ethnic pride. “Several post-modern AA post kids?” You don’t have a shred of evidence any of them are AA, many of the Igbo presented so far are adults, and it’s more than just several. And it’s rather doubtful China’s IQ even now is above 100- not saying it’s any lower, but here’s what Jason Malloy, in contrast to Lynn’s asiaphilic figures, has turned up: http://humanvarieties.org/2014/06/06/hvgiq-burma/#comment-369
“A long time ago I checked through his China references and almost none of them even contained IQ data! It was totally baffling. I have 100s of Chinese studies, many of them in Chinese. I would love to start working on the China post, but it would be a crazy amount of work, and I would probably need a good Chinese collaborator.
You are right, though. I have not carefully examined them, but many studies from rural China report IQ scores in the 90s, 80s and lower.”
And your characteristic talking in the third person- why do you do that? Do you have any idea how bizarre and offputting it is? Do you have aspergers or tourettes or something?
“You think Panda, china superman, impressed by negro Igbo? Their art NOTHING compared to China, and these just AA kids. You take Panda as fool? LOOOOOL”
I adopted the C & H assumption that Jews weren't specially smart before the early Middle Ages though I doubt that because of their literacy and mentally demanding culture from at latest 500 BC. The end of the IQ ascent seems to have been very approx. about 1650 by which time Jewish numbers were rising well beyond what might have been possible if successful businessmen's children marrying the rabbi's children was the key paradigm. By the end of the 19th century Eastern Europe was exporting many illiterate Jews who were generations away from ancestors who may have managed Polish nobles' estates or lent money to them.
I know nothing of Mizrahi history but would take little persuading that the true ex-Iberian Sephardi had also evolved high IQs. But for both I would be pleased to be given some account of when snd where and how a putatively > 100 average IQ evolved, even a plausible Just So story.
Yeah, that doesn’t surprise me. Cochran is someone who doesn’t seem to like admitting when he’s wrong or giving into debate.
I forgot C&H argued the Ashkenazi weren’t particularly smart before selection, but I don’t recall them having any evidence for this or good reason to believe so. Sephardic achievement was apparent well before the Ashkenazi rose to prominence (Maimonides, Spinoza, and I imagine more), and I really don’t see any reason to believe, given aspects of their history and isolation, jews have for a long time been generally around 100 in IQ. For the Mizrahi, just look at their wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mizrahi_Jews#Notable_Mizrahim
2 of the nobelists listed are classified as Sephardic, and are therefore likely of partial Mizrahi ancestry, but still. The list of notable Persian jews is also worth noting: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_Jews#Notable_Persian_Jews
I am still curious about this south asian group you describe and your thoughts about climate selection.
Jm8:
Thanks for the references, but you really could have done with grouping all of those comments together. I’m surprise they let this many comments in succession go through.
I believe 110 is the most reliable estimate for the Ashkenazi jews, and it comes from Lynn’s book on them http://www.amazon.com/The-Chosen-People-Intelligence-Achievement/dp/1593680368). 107 seems unlikely, but 104 is simply too low. I’m aware Lynn’s book also includes the absurd figures for non-ashkenazi jews, but I think his analysis of the Ashkenazi is solid.
I’m aware of Nsibidi, and I addressed it in the Peter thread- it wasn’t even a full proto-script and we don’t totally know who invented it.
I’m aware of Nsibidi, and I addressed it in the Peter thread- it wasn’t even a full proto-script and we don’t totally know who invented it."
I believe the Askenazic iq in Isreal is 107, but I cannot find the reference at the moment.
The oldest evidence of Nsibidi comes from ceramics dating from 400-1500 ad in S.E. Nigeria. It is believed to be/shows every sign of being indigenous, having no resemblance to other scripts.
"Iconography and Continuity in West Africa: Calabar Terracottas and the Arts of the Cross River Region of Nigeria/Cameroon"
Nsibidi was a full script, in the form used by members of the secret societies(and not the incomplete form used by commoners.) and was used to record syntactical language e.g.: court cases. In this it way it was different from Ashanti adinkra (for instance), which was a system of symbols/proto ideograms and not a full script.
http://pumpkinperson.com/2015/06/12/jewish-iq-in-israel-vs-america/
Also being in a hurry I note that in your haste you seemed to think I meant more than I said about my observations of easy living in (equatorial) tropical south Asia. I meant nothing about their intelligence, only that living comfortably could be very undemanding – as also on the Amazon, as I noted later. If Africans enjoyed the same easy lives it is reasonable to assume that they would engage in some undemanding trade to add a bit of variety, especially to their diet. After all Australuan Aborigines did that over quite large distances though in their case not so much for food as for such materials as may have aided their leisure activities in dance, music, scupture and painting. These I suggest may be undemanding agreeable ways to fill in time with some sexual selection implications perhaps. There is no reason to suggest that they would assist in selection for cognitive ability. The general rules for polygynous societies would apply in the form of slavery and slave trading and selection for fighting strength.
Thank you, Chanda Chisala, for this latest installment. I must read them all with proper attention and focus to make sure I feel even remotely prepared to weigh in (not that anyone cares). In any case, though, I’m just commenting to say I hope you will not be discouraged by the many many lazy comments. If conventional discourse suffers from being fanatical about the no-differences-between-groups dogma, most of the commenters above suffer from dogmas of their own, many of which are hopelessly one-dimensional. They will continue to attack straw men.
---
Re. "Lynn’s crazy theories". He is the whipping boy for equalitarian racial theorists (yes, equality is a theory). In that Norwegian documentary the filmmaker laughed at Lynn for being 'far fetched'. He didn't laugh at Charles Murray though. If Lynn is so wrong, Murray is too. Why don't we read more about Charles Murray?" Sowell: When European immigrant groups in the United States scored below the national average on mental tests, they scored lowest on the abstract parts of those tests. So did white mountaineer children in the United States tested back in the early 1930s. ... Strangely, Herrnstein and Murray refer to "folklore" that "Jews and other immigrant groups were thought to be below average in intelligence." It was neither folklore nor anything as subjective as thoughts. It was based on hard data, as hard as any data in The Bell Curve. These groups repeatedly tested below average on the mental tests of the World War I era, both in the army and in civilian life. For Jews, it is clear that later tests showed radically different results—during an era when there was very little intermarriage to change the genetic makeup of American Jews.[25]"Sowell is talking Lamarckian mechanisms in the above. That, 'should put serious doubt in the mind of any honest person who does not merely use science to rationalize his racial ideology'.
“Re. “Lynn’s crazy theories”. He is the whipping boy for equalitarian racial theorists (yes, equality is a theory). In that Norwegian documentary the filmmaker laughed at Lynn for being ‘far fetched’. He didn’t laugh at Charles Murray though. If Lynn is so wrong, Murray is too. Why don’t we read more about Charles Murray?”
Lynn is largely a charlatan. He has produced countless numbers of questionable, sketchy figures over the years, which often turn out to be based on shoddy measurements (like his early claims of Japan having an IQ of 110, or what he exhibited in the original IQ&TWON) or outright fraud, like his score on Equatorial Guinea. He and his academic cohorts are obsessed with intellectual achievement tests like the TIMSS and PERLS being perfect measures of intelligence. He with the exception of the Ashkenazi Jews is deadset on “cold climates” as being the sole detriment of intelligence differences. He thinks the supposed low IQ’s of southern Europeans can be due ONLY to non-white admixture, and that includes arguing Sicilians have an IQ of 90 (despite their admixture from them being nowhere near high enough to produce an IQ this low, assuming arab IQ is as low as he claims), and Albanians have an IQ of 80, with nearby countries also scoring in the low 80′s, all of them even lower than the Turks. His scores have been known to change drastically based on meager evidence, but that hasn’t stopped countless weirdos, cranks, fools etc. over the years to swallow whatever figures he churns out and fight zealously to corroborate them, whether his legions of fans on the internet or fellow “researchers.”
As I pointed out in a link to Panda, Jason Malloy has found strong evidence that China’s IQ is not as high as what he claims, and other posts on HV show his scores for southeast asian countries are very likely underestimates (and based on shoddy or dishonest evidence.)
He also praised the deeply insane, psychotic book Erectus Walks Amongst Us, an extreme multiregionalist work that argues africans and similar groups aren’t fully human (and also heavily cites Arthur Kemp’s work): http://www.amazon.com/gp/customer-reviews/R1UPJ7O796W6VI/ref=cm_cr_pr_rvw_ttl?ie=UTF8&ASIN=1604581212
His claim that the Mizrahi have an IQ of 91 ties into his fixations on middle easterners having low IQ’s. There is no real line of evidence to suggest the Mizrahi are that low, and the fact he’d even argue that is nuts. It’s simply cooked to fit his theories.
Great reasoning by the way- “If you think Lynn is full of it, you have to think Murray is too.” No? I’m not favorable towards Murray, but he doesn’t seem as dishonest as Lynn (though he is a libertarian IQ fetishist.)
I did glance at Erectus Walks Amonst Us (there can't be another work that rings the same bell can there?) on line and got the guilty amusement from that glance that I think my H-bd correspondent expected (it may have been Ron) but now I rember it as a perfect tool for committing imaginative microaggressions at third rate tertiary institutions anfd the formally first rate reduced by determined diversity.
Lynn just gives "the answer to the question".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZ1hK5WsHZ4&t=33m44s
Murray purrs like a oily car salesman, I think he is not being frank about what he really thinks.
I think it unlikely that Lynn is consciously lying, unless he is a undercover egalitarian there would be no purpose in trumpeting out on a limb hereditarian conclusions. No, I feel he is simply stating whatever he thinks the properly interpreted data justify without worrying what impression he makes, or whether it is scientifically definitive and final (no theory is). Lynn is most notorious for what he says about low Irish IQ (and high rates of schizophrenia in Irish everywhere, which few people seriously doubt). I think his explanation for lower IQ pointed to clerical celibacy, more common in Catholic countries like Ireland (and south Europe) as important. I don't think Ashkenazim were not of north Europe. The fertility of religious functionaries has influenced IQ in many countries: Rabbis, Priests, and if I am correct Osu too.
Again, Murray is saying that IQ egalitarians are going to be terribly disappointed in the near future. He does not seem any less certain than Lynn. Murray pays lip service to not being certain of the prime role of genes in IQ, but it sounds like dissimulation and his conclusions are not really different to Lynn as far as I can see.
Black White IQ Gap, then Chanda pulled up all GCSE tests results and most of his pictures retrieved to show off high achieving Blacks in the States or the UK have been largely due to Nigerian.
If Igbo!=Nigerian!=Black/African, we won't be having this discussion AT ALL. We are having this discussion solely due to the fact that Igbo share some sort of Genetic factor among Blacks in Africa than Igbo share majority of their genes with Northwestern Europeans nor Northeastern Asians.
If you still don't get it, here's the bottom line. The title of the post is "Black White IQ gap", not "Nigerian White IQ gap". No where do we observe those high achieving Blacks coming from Mali, South Sudan, Zambia, etc etc etc. Mostly have been from Nigeria. What does that tell you?
I once asked Chanda to change the title to "Blacks IQ Gap within Africa".
Wut.
But that’s not what this is really about. There are certain claims/assumptions about group iq made by proponents of “strong hbd”, which are very difficult to reconcile with real-world observations about Igbo, (south) Nigerian, and African immigrants generally, without making extraordinary assumptions about migration, etc. (Now, these assumptions may well be true, but they do require evidence beyond “because it is consistent with my other beliefs”.) Again, I really don’t think this is as confusing as some people are making it out to be. I’m not a genius, let alone a Igbo, and I can follow it fine. I believe in you Bro.
Steve Sailer, on this very website, made the trechant observation that political correctness is the discipline of not noticing things (paraphrase). There are very few spaces in public discourse where one is truly allowed to notice uncomfortable things; unz.com could be such a space, and this could be very valuable. It can’t get there by being a place where you are allowed to notice un-pc things AND NOTHING ELSE. The topic of human achievement/potential/whatever is necessarily going to be very complex, difficult to quantify, and resistant to simple explanation [citation needed]. The sooner you can resign yourself to this the sooner your blood pressure will return to a healthy level. Namaste.
I have also been to Amazonia and seen the wide variety of fruit trees left over from the large populations before the Iberians brought disease in the 16th century. There were and are still plenty of fish in the Amazon and tributaries though I recommend making a soup of Piranha rather than spending days filetting them.My observations are consistent with it being possible to live on food very easily gathered in the equatorial tropics elsewhere and with evidence about polygynous societies in the tropics. You make a point about what you term "agriculture" which does mot I think stand up to examination. In the first place what is done by Papuans and Torres Strait Islanders is generally called and classed as gardening which gives some indication of its physical demands. Second, agriculture doesn't need to be a time consuming or strenuous activity if there is plenty of water and fertile soil in the tropics and the food produced is not substantially for sale beyond the extended family.
Your observations and what they possibly indicate don’t match up with the history of those regions though. Sri Lanka has a long history of literate civilization, advanced architecture and more. It is also quite likely many of the fruits you saw were introduced well after the people lived at a tribal level and came with human intervention. In the amazon, which I learned recently myself, there were a sizable number of large population centers, even cities and other large-scale architecture, that existed before european contact, nevermind how much the amazon itself was shaped by human intervention: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2010/09/03/GR2010090305190.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/03/AR2010090302302.html
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2002/03/1491/302445/
“”Landscape” in this case is meant exactly—Amazonian Indians literally created the ground beneath their feet. According to William I. Woods, a soil geographer at Southern Illinois University, ecologists’ claims about terrible Amazonian land were based on very little data. In the late 1990s Woods and others began careful measurements in the lower Amazon. They indeed found lots of inhospitable terrain. But they also discovered swaths of terra preta—rich, fertile “black earth” that anthropologists increasingly believe was created by human beings.
Terra preta, Woods guesses, covers at least 10 percent of Amazonia, an area the size of France. It has amazing properties, he says. Tropical rain doesn’t leach nutrients from terra preta fields; instead the soil, so to speak, fights back. Not far from Painted Rock Cave is a 300-acre area with a two-foot layer of terra preta quarried by locals for potting soil. The bottom third of the layer is never removed, workers there explain, because over time it will re-create the original soil layer in its initial thickness. The reason, scientists suspect, is that terra preta is generated by a special suite of microorganisms that resists depletion. “Apparently,” Woods and the Wisconsin geographer Joseph M. McCann argued in a presentation last summer, “at some threshold level … dark earth attains the capacity to perpetuate—even regenerate itself—thus behaving more like a living ‘super’-organism than an inert material.””
So again, it’s questionable where all those fruits came from, and both of these things come down to the fact humans clearly showed initiative in building more advanced societies and even civilization. Regardless of complexity in the case of melanesia, it stands that they were atleast able to go beyond what was readily available to them and required some work, and more extensive examples abound of people in tropical climates who were more than capable of building complex societies and advanced civilizations.
I have come across a couple of people who have articulated similar things about SS africa, one of them I think about the supposed numbers of readily available, edible roots in the kalahari that the bushmen fed upon. I don’t know how reliable that was though. This whole thing of so much of Africa being idyllic with readily available food (or where the food in question wasn’t introduced by human intervention via agriculture) is something I have never seen any real corroboration for, and I get the feeling it’s true of other tropical regions. And again, those polygamy rates could not exist without that sort of agriculture, which isn’t exactly undemanding either.
I am not sure that you are sdding to the reasons for leaving “IQ and Global Inequality” lying on a mantelpiece unopened looking accusingly at me for the 7 or so years since I bought it but you fortify its chances of remaining at rest. What I read quoted from it about average IQs in the 60s and below kept me going until Ron’s good work finally put to rest any sense of urgency to know even what the Finnish PM’s father wrote about IQ.
I did glance at Erectus Walks Amonst Us (there can’t be another work that rings the same bell can there?) on line and got the guilty amusement from that glance that I think my H-bd correspondent expected (it may have been Ron) but now I rember it as a perfect tool for committing imaginative microaggressions at third rate tertiary institutions anfd the formally first rate reduced by determined diversity.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2002/03/1491/302445/""Landscape" in this case is meant exactly—Amazonian Indians literally created the ground beneath their feet. According to William I. Woods, a soil geographer at Southern Illinois University, ecologists' claims about terrible Amazonian land were based on very little data. In the late 1990s Woods and others began careful measurements in the lower Amazon. They indeed found lots of inhospitable terrain. But they also discovered swaths of terra preta—rich, fertile "black earth" that anthropologists increasingly believe was created by human beings.Terra preta, Woods guesses, covers at least 10 percent of Amazonia, an area the size of France. It has amazing properties, he says. Tropical rain doesn't leach nutrients from terra preta fields; instead the soil, so to speak, fights back. Not far from Painted Rock Cave is a 300-acre area with a two-foot layer of terra preta quarried by locals for potting soil. The bottom third of the layer is never removed, workers there explain, because over time it will re-create the original soil layer in its initial thickness. The reason, scientists suspect, is that terra preta is generated by a special suite of microorganisms that resists depletion. "Apparently," Woods and the Wisconsin geographer Joseph M. McCann argued in a presentation last summer, "at some threshold level ... dark earth attains the capacity to perpetuate—even regenerate itself—thus behaving more like a living 'super'-organism than an inert material.""So again, it's questionable where all those fruits came from, and both of these things come down to the fact humans clearly showed initiative in building more advanced societies and even civilization. Regardless of complexity in the case of melanesia, it stands that they were atleast able to go beyond what was readily available to them and required some work, and more extensive examples abound of people in tropical climates who were more than capable of building complex societies and advanced civilizations. I have come across a couple of people who have articulated similar things about SS africa, one of them I think about the supposed numbers of readily available, edible roots in the kalahari that the bushmen fed upon. I don't know how reliable that was though. This whole thing of so much of Africa being idyllic with readily available food (or where the food in question wasn't introduced by human intervention via agriculture) is something I have never seen any real corroboration for, and I get the feeling it's true of other tropical regions. And again, those polygamy rates could not exist without that sort of agriculture, which isn't exactly undemanding either.
Interesting and consistent with my existing modest amounts of information about those subjects.
I may have lost sight of the points in issue as I lazily allow, like someone in the tropics with no pressing need to exert himself, the dawn light to enter my room before I have actually gone to sleep. Certainly I know of the many civilisational imprints overlaying the huge variety of Sri Lanka where there are I understand still remnants of ancient aboriginal people as also in Taiwan, India and elsewhere in Asia. My observations, added to my driver of about 5 years ago telling me that one could live on what then translated to $US0.30 a day, led me to see merit in tje idea that equatorial coastal areas could be remarkably free of stress and challenge. There’s a big difference between telling kids to go and have a bit of fun with paint or tools in the art room and going to compete in a maths test for the right to stay in a school they love. Equally I think the challenges for the Ice People were of a totally different cognitive order from those confronting people who might think it fun to see if they could find some new fruit in the forest or hybridise ones they already had by a well known method discovered generations before. But what of the challenges of increasing population before they discovered the joys of genocidal warfare and slave trading? They just kept moving on. First just out of Africa but eventually on to Australia until they reached its furthest extremity. Australia offered very little to top up hunter gatherer subsistence with luxury but one fact supporting my thesis is, as Geoffrey Blainey showed in The Triumph of the Nomads, that Aborigines led an extremely simple but amply nourished life that gave them plenty of leisure time and opportunity to engage in dance and artistic activities – never extended to writing or any other cognitivelybdemanding activity.
>the mongols and the huns, modern central asia, the russian far east, the ainu, inuits… none of those groups support the idea of cold environments selecting for anything like altruism.
Rushton brings up the Inuit in this article about Lynn’s book.
>Lynn also notes some anomalies in the cold winter theory of intelligence. The most striking: the Inuit, exposed to the coldest winter temperatures, have a brain size equal to East Asians, and yet have an average IQ of only 91. To explain this anomaly, Lynn proposes that additional genetic processes are important—such as population size. The larger the network of co-operating and competing population groups (“demes”), the faster any mutations for advantageous alleles can spread. So large landmass groups like East Asians and Europeans average higher IQs than isolated hunter-gatherer groups like the Inuit.
http://www.vdare.com/articles/winters-are-good-for-your-genes-lynn-book-finds-world-average-iq-90-declining-from-north-to
Obviously, anomalies happen.
I don't think Lynn has any evidence for this claim of population size. Since the ancestors of east asians/far nothern mongoloids in Asia would have lived in even harsher climates during the ice age, wouldn't their population numbers be smaller? Nevermind the issue of claimed "large landmass"- arctic north america (nevermind ice age north america) covers a huge area too, so there isn't readily any reason this would be a factor. This is a feeble explanation.
The only arctic people I can think of that might be of low intelligence are the ainu, but the evidence against the arctic being a selector for intelligence has more to do with the records of paleolithic brain size we have, given brain size worldwide was much larger in the distant past, including africa and australia. The oldest identifiably negroid skull, asselar man, was also quite large, and only several thousand years old.
And through all this, my point of talking about modern arctic/far northern people is more about behavior. Next to none of the places inhabited by these people or their historical behavior screams "higher altruism" or lower rates of violence and other pathologies.
“I believe 110 is the most reliable estimate for the Ashkenazi jews, and it comes from Lynn’s book on them http://www.amazon.com/The-Chosen-People-Intelligence-Achievement/dp/1593680368). 107 seems unlikely, but 104 is simply too low. I’m aware Lynn’s book also includes the absurd figures for non-ashkenazi jews, but I think his analysis of the Ashkenazi is solid.”
I’m aware of Nsibidi, and I addressed it in the Peter thread- it wasn’t even a full proto-script and we don’t totally know who invented it.”
I believe the Askenazic iq in Isreal is 107, but I cannot find the reference at the moment.
The oldest evidence of Nsibidi comes from ceramics dating from 400-1500 ad in S.E. Nigeria. It is believed to be/shows every sign of being indigenous, having no resemblance to other scripts.
“Iconography and Continuity in West Africa: Calabar Terracottas and the Arts of the Cross River Region of Nigeria/Cameroon”
Nsibidi was a full script, in the form used by members of the secret societies(and not the incomplete form used by commoners.) and was used to record syntactical language e.g.: court cases. In this it way it was different from Ashanti adinkra (for instance), which was a system of symbols/proto ideograms and not a full script.
". Nsibidi has been described as a "fluid system" of communication consisting of hundreds of abstract and pictographic signs. Nsibidi was described in the colonial era by P.A. Talbot as "a kind of primitive secret writing", Talbot explained that nsibidi was used for messages "cut or painted on split palm stems". J.K. Macgregor's view was that "The use of nsibidi is that of ordinary writing. I have in my possession a copy of the record of a court case from a town of Enion [Enyong] taken down in it, and every detail ... is most graphically described". Nsibidi crossed ethnic lines and was a uniting factor among ethnic groups in the Cross River region.[5]"
"Nsibidi was used in judgement cases known as 'Ikpe' in some Cross River communities. Macgregor was able to retrieve and translate an nsibidi record from Enyong of an ikpe judgement."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nsibidi
Rushton brings up the Inuit in this article about Lynn's book.
>Lynn also notes some anomalies in the cold winter theory of intelligence. The most striking: the Inuit, exposed to the coldest winter temperatures, have a brain size equal to East Asians, and yet have an average IQ of only 91. To explain this anomaly, Lynn proposes that additional genetic processes are important—such as population size. The larger the network of co-operating and competing population groups (“demes”), the faster any mutations for advantageous alleles can spread. So large landmass groups like East Asians and Europeans average higher IQs than isolated hunter-gatherer groups like the Inuit.
http://www.vdare.com/articles/winters-are-good-for-your-genes-lynn-book-finds-world-average-iq-90-declining-from-north-to
Obviously, anomalies happen.
I don’t think those figures for the inuit are reliable though (I’m sure they’re higher), and given what’s been claimed about arctic/far northern climates, we would expect all peoples to have similarly high IQ’s. The inuits would be an incredible anomaly given how widespread they are in the arctic of northern america.
I don’t think Lynn has any evidence for this claim of population size. Since the ancestors of east asians/far nothern mongoloids in Asia would have lived in even harsher climates during the ice age, wouldn’t their population numbers be smaller? Nevermind the issue of claimed “large landmass”- arctic north america (nevermind ice age north america) covers a huge area too, so there isn’t readily any reason this would be a factor. This is a feeble explanation.
The only arctic people I can think of that might be of low intelligence are the ainu, but the evidence against the arctic being a selector for intelligence has more to do with the records of paleolithic brain size we have, given brain size worldwide was much larger in the distant past, including africa and australia. The oldest identifiably negroid skull, asselar man, was also quite large, and only several thousand years old.
And through all this, my point of talking about modern arctic/far northern people is more about behavior. Next to none of the places inhabited by these people or their historical behavior screams “higher altruism” or lower rates of violence and other pathologies.
I’m aware of Nsibidi, and I addressed it in the Peter thread- it wasn’t even a full proto-script and we don’t totally know who invented it."
I believe the Askenazic iq in Isreal is 107, but I cannot find the reference at the moment.
The oldest evidence of Nsibidi comes from ceramics dating from 400-1500 ad in S.E. Nigeria. It is believed to be/shows every sign of being indigenous, having no resemblance to other scripts.
"Iconography and Continuity in West Africa: Calabar Terracottas and the Arts of the Cross River Region of Nigeria/Cameroon"
Nsibidi was a full script, in the form used by members of the secret societies(and not the incomplete form used by commoners.) and was used to record syntactical language e.g.: court cases. In this it way it was different from Ashanti adinkra (for instance), which was a system of symbols/proto ideograms and not a full script.
re: nsibidi
“. Nsibidi has been described as a “fluid system” of communication consisting of hundreds of abstract and pictographic signs. Nsibidi was described in the colonial era by P.A. Talbot as “a kind of primitive secret writing”, Talbot explained that nsibidi was used for messages “cut or painted on split palm stems”. J.K. Macgregor’s view was that “The use of nsibidi is that of ordinary writing. I have in my possession a copy of the record of a court case from a town of Enion [Enyong] taken down in it, and every detail … is most graphically described”. Nsibidi crossed ethnic lines and was a uniting factor among ethnic groups in the Cross River region.[5]”
“Nsibidi was used in judgement cases known as ‘Ikpe’ in some Cross River communities. Macgregor was able to retrieve and translate an nsibidi record from Enyong of an ikpe judgement.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nsibidi
What seems made ashkenazis (seems, relatively or predominantly) bad on spatial skills is not their relative lower spatial intelligence but greater discrepancy between verbal and general intelligence.
95-97 spatial iq is the new ''lower'' as well orange is the new black.
If someone understand... ;)(;
The question of whether a group (or individual) has a spatial deficit as opposed to a verbal advantage is not addressed by the level of spatial ability. It is addressed by the distribution of abilities other than spatial and verbal. For example, fluid intelligence (especially), working memory, and cognitive speed.
[I might be reading more into your point than intended.]
1. The Singapore v Nigeria example is not an argument for Black IQ or black anything. Context is clear for those who can read. It was a response to a specific statement by someone, about something, ....
2. The Nigerian Math Olympiad example is not an argument for Black IQ or black anything. Context is clear for those who can read. It was specifically about Igbo over-representation within Nigeria, to contrast with immigration representation to UK (and not to compare with the Chinese team at Math Olympiads that is selected from a 1.3 billion population and is famous for its preps etc... a different discussion for another day).
3. The Scrabble ... [Sigh]
Never mind.
It is clear! It is clear!
You overestimate the clarity of your prose. [Mainly because you adulterate your sound arguments with anything you can pull in for a scintilla of support.]
Which part has you refuted Panda? or try to refute?
Nothing! ROFL. Your lengthy quote only states that
1. do not take all Africa as a whole. But Panda never did.
And 2. every race is capable of producing smart people. Of course! That’s not the point though. The point has always been how many… %… bell curves… Hello?? ROFL
in the UK? that dodgy 2007 UK GCSE table? LoL
And America? Where?
Nigeria? Brilliant! So graduation rates in Nigeria shows that Nigerians are smart? Right… please go on, try to enlighten Panda on this one. LoL
And more? Where? Jupiter? LoL
So you don’t think the Igbo have the highest avg IQ in Nigeria? and significantly smarter than the rest? Please go ahead then argue with Chisala, not Panda. You are barking at the wrong tree, my man! ROFL
Yes whatever you say, my lord. Panda’s dismissals are worthless. ROFL
OK, so there are more than one piece of “art”. That’s refreshing.
And knock! knock! Reading comprehension again? It was ancient Chinese steel, not Igbo bronzes which were a good 1,000 years behind the technological curve at a time, mind you!
Neither do you that they are not. You could be the lawyer of Obama though.
Who is Jason Malloy? Another lord-wannabe? ROFL
To sum it up, your lengthy reply refuted nothing, not even a sentence of Panda. Thank you and come again! ^-^
The influence of traditional racism with its categorical (rather than familial) concept of race can be seen in "race realism" by the strength of its temptation to generalize to all Africa: negroes are low g. This is propped up by the notion (arrived at by circular reasoning) that warm climates uniformly fail to challenge the intellect.
It's not just the GSCE rates or graduation rates in Nigeria. You don't have to look far in these posts by Chanda and others on this site to see what I mean. But it's clear you don't care. Chanda never explicitly claimed the Igbo are significantly smarter than other Nigerians either- that's mainly Frost who's claimed that.
You were originally arguing with others on the Frost post that Igbo bronzes were inferior to Chinese ones, but I won't deny the Chinese were clearly more advanced that they were manufacturing steel, among many other things. The way you went back to that gave the impression you were still obsessed over who made better bronze, but I'm glad you finally concede the original idea.
You're right- I don't know the full background of these people in question. But claims of AA is often a subterfuge for people who write off any successful, accomplished black person, and many things indicate african ethnic groups such as this do not benefit from AA, so this is just another feeble argument of yours.
Jason Malloy is an independent researcher* who's been apart of "HBD" blogging for a very long time, and at Humanvarieties.org has been doing international IQ research of his own and heavily re-evaluating Lynn's work. He has been finding out, contrary to once being a huge fan of Lynn, how riddled with errors and dishonesty Lynn's work truly is. Among them is Lynn seems to have clearly exaggerated the IQ's of China. I do not believe China's IQ is really any less than 100, but an IQ above 100- especially the figures of 105-108 trotted out for them and east asia as a whole- is ridiculous. It ties into the asiaphilia of people like Lynn and co who are obsessed with the idea of the asian-american population being perfectly representative of their homelands. That group, which has long been mostly chinese, heavily from Hong Kong and Taiwan, and significantly selected, has too readily been treated as the basic standard for asian IQ by HBD types. Lynn's figures on China rely heavily on urban samples and such. I imagine many of those rural samples Malloy mentions are environmentally depressed, but I've seen plenty of HBD types (including researchers) who claim 100+ is what you'll find in the most destitute, backwater parts of China.
You can take it up with him if you want, but you behaving how you do here, saying something like "You think China no so smart? PANDA NOT AMUSED!" isn't going to go well with him.
But at the end of the day, it was a huge mistake to engage with you again. You seem more interested in behaving like and articulating yourself as a cartoon character more than anything. You're a spastic nutcase who's easily one of the worst posters on Unz, and as low as the standards for discussion are on Unz, I'm surprised you haven't been banned yet.
*Lynn's background in psychology hasn't saved him from being as piss-poor as he is with IQ research in general. Even essential laymen can easily see flaws in Lynn's work. The problem is that nobody has back-checked the full scope of his work quite like Malloy has. You can look at his many other posts on national IQ (especially southeast asia) to see what I mean.
Jm8: Perhaps you're right that Nsibidi was more developed than I thought. I'll have to look into it more.
That link you posted about Ashkenazi in Israel has no sources, and I've heard such claims before. I don't take them too seriously given Lynn's unreliability on other jews.
Blacks in UK have been closing the A level gap though. The gap was 123 or something in 2006 and is 82 in 2012/2013.
Scores from 2005-2010:
http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/viewFullDataset.do?JSAllowed=true&Function=&%24ph=61&CurrentPageId=63&step=4&productId=1650&instanceSelection=028045&timeId=335&containerAreaId=276699&startColumn=1&revisionStatus=&numberOfColumns=8&javaScriptEnabled=true&selectable=false&metadataInNewWindow=true&optionalMetadataShown=true&disclaimerShown=false&headingTruncationEnabled=true&dropdownSelectionEnabled=true&overrideCellFormat=&footnoteDisplayEnabled=true&language=English&areaChangedTitleShown=false&showTotals=false&unhide=false&paginate=off&paginateCols=6&page=1&sortId=0&sortFunction=off&sortType=0&sortOrder=0&lastCutID=&lastCutType=&tableTitle=&selectedType=&selectedID=&Back.x=33&Back.y=19
The latest I could find 2012/2013:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/208459/response/514705/attach/html/3/A%20levels%20by%20ethnicity.xlsx.html
Gap has closed pretty steadily. No breakdown by specific ethnicity though. South Asians have closed the gap too. Overall mixed kids(which are mostly black+white+South Asian in UK) have erased the gap and look like they are opening up a lead.
http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/viewFullDataset.do?JSAllowed=true&Function=&%24ph=61&CurrentPageId=63&step=4&productId=1650&instanceSelection=028045&timeId=335&containerAreaId=276699&startColumn=1&revisionStatus=&numberOfColumns=8&javaScriptEnabled=true&selectable=false&metadataInNewWindow=true&optionalMetadataShown=true&disclaimerShown=false&headingTruncationEnabled=true&dropdownSelectionEnabled=true&overrideCellFormat=&footnoteDisplayEnabled=true&language=English&areaChangedTitleShown=false&showTotals=false&unhide=false&paginate=off&paginateCols=6&page=1&sortId=0&sortFunction=off&sortType=0&sortOrder=0&lastCutID=&lastCutType=&tableTitle=&selectedType=&selectedID=&Back.x=33&Back.y=19The latest I could find 2012/2013:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/208459/response/514705/attach/html/3/A%20levels%20by%20ethnicity.xlsx.htmlGap has closed pretty steadily. No breakdown by specific ethnicity though. South Asians have closed the gap too. Overall mixed kids(which are mostly black+white+South Asian in UK) have erased the gap and look like they are opening up a lead.
What? the UK again? ROFL
Panda thinks that Dr James Thompson has a moral obligation here to clear up this UK exam reporting mess before it goes well beyond wild, by giving them a proper abc tutorial on how to conduct statistically valid samplings and results-reporting.
I for one am not concerned with what “panda” thinks; since “panda” is little concerned with making itself intelligible, I’m uninterested in trying. But this point is significant because whatever “panda” might think, traditional racism upholds a qualitative distinction between races. (Only dasein, among commenters, has defended the concept of racial souls.) “Race realism” equivocates by accepting the traditional connotation of the races as natural kinds rather than as lineages. Lineages produce (appropriately enough) “family resemblances” rather than hierarchical categories.
The influence of traditional racism with its categorical (rather than familial) concept of race can be seen in “race realism” by the strength of its temptation to generalize to all Africa: negroes are low g. This is propped up by the notion (arrived at by circular reasoning) that warm climates uniformly fail to challenge the intellect.
IMO: Nigeria
First participation: 2006.
Number of participations: 9.
Gold medals: 0. Silver medals: 0. Bronze medals: 5. Honourable mentions: 7.
To be fair Nigeria is the best performer from Africa, which don't say much.
How about those Chinese
First participation: 1985.
Number of participations: 30.
Gold medals: 138. Silver medals: 30. Bronze medals: 6. Honourable mentions: 0.
How about we look even closer? how many ethnic Chinese won gold in just the last 3 year in IMO
2015: 9/39 gold
2014: 20/49 gold
2013: 13/45 gold
....
So stop overstating your claim, it is not even that close. And stop using GCSE stat., which most readers in this blog are not familiar with and way too easy (leveling effect). How about some A-Level (college entrance test) result for 2012/2013?
https://docs.google.com/viewerng/viewer?url=https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/208459/response/565105/attach/3/FOI%25202014%25200059414%2520Littlejohn%2520final.xlsx
Check the result and you will notice that even Irish traveler outscore Black African by a wide margin. And Chinese just blow everybody out of the water.
Those are actually better numbers for Nigeria than I would have guessed.
China is vastly better developed and has a 3000 year start in terms of literate culture.
A few million Nigerians, at most, have had the kind of educational opportunities that would allow a person of sufficient talent to enter a maths Olympiad, versus hundreds of millions of Chinese. The Chinese and Chinese Americans also benefit from a well developed coaching set-up.
You should really compare Nigeria with a small European country – say Belgium.
Nigeria: 182 millions.
Belgium: 11 millions.
Belgium:
Gold medals: 1. Silver medals: 15. Bronze medals: 53. Honourable mentions: 53.
Nigeria:
Gold medals: 0. Silver medals: 0. Bronze medals: 5. Honourable mentions: 7.
(https://www.imo-official.org/country_info.aspx?code=NGA)
It's not really fair, since Belgium participated since 1969, and Nigeria since 2006, but still...
Try again.
Below is a note on Ashkenazi iq in Israel vs the US. Apparently it is about 103 in Israel (at least according to some measures) The author believes higher iq Jews may have been more likely to immigrate to the US. I still could not find the original source (of the figure) however, it is not linked.
http://pumpkinperson.com/2015/06/12/jewish-iq-in-israel-vs-america/
High average means high comparatively — and compared to whom? Take your pick. “100″ is average because that was the mean for white kids when iq testing began and all the people who created the whole were white. It’s not the average for the whole world.
I guess some were also Jews, but I don’t know. Certainly a lot who took the test and administered it were Jewish because years ago I knew an elderly Jewis man who had been in a special high IQ class during the 1930s.
Okay, now please give us a part four where you explain what theories can or can’t explain the poor performance of blacks in the United States. Then I can never have to think about this again and be happy, instead of feeling mind crippling shame and sadness and anger. Is it possible that slavery caused selection for lower intelligence? Or should we blame racism? Or is it a poverty thing (this seems unlikely given the performance of the African immigrants?)? Or is it black or US culture? Or something else? We don’t need conclusive answers, just your best guess. I now trust your judgment since this is a great series of essays so far.
China is vastly better developed and has a 3000 year start in terms of literate culture.
A few million Nigerians, at most, have had the kind of educational opportunities that would allow a person of sufficient talent to enter a maths Olympiad, versus hundreds of millions of Chinese. The Chinese and Chinese Americans also benefit from a well developed coaching set-up.
You should really compare Nigeria with a small European country - say Belgium.
Population:
Nigeria: 182 millions.
Belgium: 11 millions.
Belgium:
Gold medals: 1. Silver medals: 15. Bronze medals: 53. Honourable mentions: 53.
Nigeria:
Gold medals: 0. Silver medals: 0. Bronze medals: 5. Honourable mentions: 7.
(https://www.imo-official.org/country_info.aspx?code=NGA)
It’s not really fair, since Belgium participated since 1969, and Nigeria since 2006, but still…
Try again.
Gold medals: 1. Silver medals: 15. Bronze medals: 53. Honourable mentions: 53.
Nigeria:
Gold medals: 0. Silver medals: 0. Bronze medals: 5. Honourable mentions: 7.
(https://www.imo-official.org/country_info.aspx?code=NGA)
It’s not really fair, since Belgium participated since 1969, and Nigeria since 2006,"
2006-2015=10 years. 1969-2015=47 years.
So, correcting Belgium's numbers and rounding:
Gold medals: 0. Silver medals: 3. Bronze medals: 11. Honourable mentions: 11.
Belgium is still ahead. But Belgium has a few decent universities Louvain, Leuven, Ghent, and, of course, Belgians have easy access to French, Dutch and German universities. And I suspect they have a fairly sophisticated maths Olympiad coaching set-up.
So, Nigeria is not doing that badly.
Can someone describe what the bottom half of the bell curve live like in Africa?
My first-hand impression is that they live in villages or more rarely in slums. They cannot really read or write, maybe they can recognise some words and sign their names. They live off a dollar a day if they even use money regularly and if they live in villages they essentially don’t travel.
As long as the climate is decent, I find that the village dwellers live good lives. It is a major problem if they get sick but both men and women have a surprisingly good standard of living. The women are exceptionally busy with domestic work and the men have genuine responsibility but also time to sit around. I think both men and women suit these roles very well! It seems to be a source of considerable happiness.
Mobile phones can be had but electricity is hard to find. Saving up for a mobile is a major life investment that allows the young to build social networks quickly and over greater distances. Even to the nearest town and city.
The people come across as bright and characterful, but they are not engaged in any particular learning or invention. Even relatively simple labour saving devices remain uninvented…but then people living like that don’t tend to invent much anywhere.
Anyway, people like this represent a very signficant majority of SS Africa’s population and it it also inconceivable for them to migrate to Europe or America. Not just because they lack the resources and knowledge but also because they really wouldn’t want to. Even getting on a plane would be terrifying. They don’t even tend to leave their villages…
This means that while African migration to the West is not always oil oligarchs, the ‘normal’ people we have arriving, the ones with shops back home and small businesses, actually represent a very thin sliver of the African population. They absolutely are an elite. They have maids and cooks and guards back home and even their maids and cooks and guards are an elite of sorts.
This means that they are two classes removed from the African norm. These supposedly normal and representative samples of people.
What does this mean for this article? It refutes it completely. The methodology requires that the sample is representative but it very clearly is not.
Anyone with a cursory first-hand knowledge of this area can tell you that, otherwise they are disingenuous indeed.
What it does not do is say anything about African IQ. I fear the only way to do that is to run a large scale controlled study in Africa.
The influence of traditional racism with its categorical (rather than familial) concept of race can be seen in "race realism" by the strength of its temptation to generalize to all Africa: negroes are low g. This is propped up by the notion (arrived at by circular reasoning) that warm climates uniformly fail to challenge the intellect.
Panda for two is concerned with the question Are You Oke? ROFL
So you’re very crossed that Panda courageously pissed on this no-hold-barred naked parade? LoL
Then please at least put on some underwears and stop that ridiculous comparison with the Chinese!
We Chinese in general are humble people giving your face in almost all occasions by being silent observers…
…but don’t take that as weakness or low “EQ” (ROFL) after your fantasy runs wild by over-strenching pea-sized intellect as you don’t stand a chance in the long run, with whatever “Prize” or not.
Attack Panda’s points with your full g if you can find some, not attack Panda’s personality waving your forever self-righteous (aka self-preservation on the expense of others) political strawman.
Thank you and come again! ^-^
Mr Chanda raises important points, but he doesn’t convince me.
Let me make a few points.
1) Are the datas used by Mr Chanda representative of the entire african immigrant population? For example, the GCSE is usually taken at the age of 16. It could be that a high proportion of african immigrants already dropped out of school by that age, and therefore the sample would not be representative. More in general, are the datas he refers to statistically suitable for inference to the whole african immigrant population? The datas used by hereditarians are usually very solid from a statistical point of view. Are the datas used by Mr Chanda equally good from this point of view? If not, you can’t expect me to throw away the conclusions of Murray and Herrnstein, who worked mostly on statistically solid datas.
2) Nobody thinks that intellectual achievements depend only on genetics. Personal effort also plays a role. We know that many african americans are absorbed by a gangsta-rapper culture that consider studying a “white thing”, and so they likely perfom lower than they could. On the contrary, it might be that many african immigrants in the USA and in UK are very motivated and therefore perform higher than they would if they put the same effort in studying than the average white american or briton does. But this doesn’t prove that the black-white gap isn’t genetic. It just proves that intellectual achievements are partly due to environment, which is something that every hereditarian can agree on. What hereditarians claim is that genetic also plays a significant role, and the fact that “pure” africans are overperforming african americans who have some white DNA doesn’t prove that hereditarian theory is wrong.
3) How does Mr Chanda explain the fact that american blacks still perform poorly even after controlling for every possible imaginable environmental factor? I mean, he completely ignores this fact, while it actually is the elephant in the room. If you say that the black-white gap isn’t genetic, than you have to come up with a convincing explanation for the persistent racial gap in IQ even after controlling for environmental factors. What I said at point (2) (many african americans put low effort in studying) can be a partial explanation, but it’s not sufficient. Not at all. The gap is too wide to be completely justified in this way. Also because american blacks also perform poor in test took at a very young age, that have little to do with the amount of effort put in studying.
4) I quote: “right wingers are not with themselves. They want to have their cake and eat it. They say the immigration system is so broken that it does not select for the best. When the topic changes to the question of intelligence and it is pointed out that the immigrants’ children appear to be very smart, then suddenly many of the same people start saying “oh, what do you expect when Africa is just sending their PhD’s and doctors and engineers?”
Well, even you admitted that black immigrants as whole perform lower than whites in USA and UK. Only a few groups, like Nigerians, perform like or better than whites. So yes, you can say both things, that some immigrant groups are made up of intellectual elites in their country of origin, and that the immigration system in general does not select for the best, without contradicting yourself
Chisala also mentions Shona-speakers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_immigration_to_the_United_States#Educational_attainmentNote the lowest ones are from racially mixed areas. I believe Somalia comes right after Mauritania though. Somalians aren't the largest african group in the US, but I feel they often muddle results. Cape Verdeans also number over 100,000, though Mauritanians in america are neglibable (4,000-something.)I think Frost once claimed their IQ was 95 though.
My first-hand impression is that they live in villages or more rarely in slums. They cannot really read or write, maybe they can recognise some words and sign their names. They live off a dollar a day if they even use money regularly and if they live in villages they essentially don't travel.
As long as the climate is decent, I find that the village dwellers live good lives. It is a major problem if they get sick but both men and women have a surprisingly good standard of living. The women are exceptionally busy with domestic work and the men have genuine responsibility but also time to sit around. I think both men and women suit these roles very well! It seems to be a source of considerable happiness.
Mobile phones can be had but electricity is hard to find. Saving up for a mobile is a major life investment that allows the young to build social networks quickly and over greater distances. Even to the nearest town and city.
The people come across as bright and characterful, but they are not engaged in any particular learning or invention. Even relatively simple labour saving devices remain uninvented...but then people living like that don't tend to invent much anywhere.
Anyway, people like this represent a very signficant majority of SS Africa's population and it it also inconceivable for them to migrate to Europe or America. Not just because they lack the resources and knowledge but also because they really wouldn't want to. Even getting on a plane would be terrifying. They don't even tend to leave their villages...
This means that while African migration to the West is not always oil oligarchs, the 'normal' people we have arriving, the ones with shops back home and small businesses, actually represent a very thin sliver of the African population. They absolutely are an elite. They have maids and cooks and guards back home and even their maids and cooks and guards are an elite of sorts.
This means that they are two classes removed from the African norm. These supposedly normal and representative samples of people.
What does this mean for this article? It refutes it completely. The methodology requires that the sample is representative but it very clearly is not.
Anyone with a cursory first-hand knowledge of this area can tell you that, otherwise they are disingenuous indeed.
What it does not do is say anything about African IQ. I fear the only way to do that is to run a large scale controlled study in Africa.
In short, no. Read previous installments. It’s unlikely that immigrants are THAT superselected.
What part of my post did you disagree with?
Either the part where I described the realities of life for the majority of the African population?
Or where I argued that the majority I described were completely unable to migrate to the West?
The first part is obvious to anyone with real knowledge of Africa. The second part is just plain common sense. I’m very interested in how you can object to this.
You are presenting a hypothetical example, while Chisala presented real data. First read the data, then point why the real examples Chisala presented were compatible with your musings. Otherwise it does not add much to the discussion.
Me quoting that was purely in reference to him claiming the Igbo had larger cranial capacity. You waste your time fixating on every other part of it. I thought that was clear enough.
It’s not just the GSCE rates or graduation rates in Nigeria. You don’t have to look far in these posts by Chanda and others on this site to see what I mean. But it’s clear you don’t care. Chanda never explicitly claimed the Igbo are significantly smarter than other Nigerians either- that’s mainly Frost who’s claimed that.
You were originally arguing with others on the Frost post that Igbo bronzes were inferior to Chinese ones, but I won’t deny the Chinese were clearly more advanced that they were manufacturing steel, among many other things. The way you went back to that gave the impression you were still obsessed over who made better bronze, but I’m glad you finally concede the original idea.
You’re right- I don’t know the full background of these people in question. But claims of AA is often a subterfuge for people who write off any successful, accomplished black person, and many things indicate african ethnic groups such as this do not benefit from AA, so this is just another feeble argument of yours.
Jason Malloy is an independent researcher* who’s been apart of “HBD” blogging for a very long time, and at Humanvarieties.org has been doing international IQ research of his own and heavily re-evaluating Lynn’s work. He has been finding out, contrary to once being a huge fan of Lynn, how riddled with errors and dishonesty Lynn’s work truly is. Among them is Lynn seems to have clearly exaggerated the IQ’s of China. I do not believe China’s IQ is really any less than 100, but an IQ above 100- especially the figures of 105-108 trotted out for them and east asia as a whole- is ridiculous. It ties into the asiaphilia of people like Lynn and co who are obsessed with the idea of the asian-american population being perfectly representative of their homelands. That group, which has long been mostly chinese, heavily from Hong Kong and Taiwan, and significantly selected, has too readily been treated as the basic standard for asian IQ by HBD types. Lynn’s figures on China rely heavily on urban samples and such. I imagine many of those rural samples Malloy mentions are environmentally depressed, but I’ve seen plenty of HBD types (including researchers) who claim 100+ is what you’ll find in the most destitute, backwater parts of China.
You can take it up with him if you want, but you behaving how you do here, saying something like “You think China no so smart? PANDA NOT AMUSED!” isn’t going to go well with him.
But at the end of the day, it was a huge mistake to engage with you again. You seem more interested in behaving like and articulating yourself as a cartoon character more than anything. You’re a spastic nutcase who’s easily one of the worst posters on Unz, and as low as the standards for discussion are on Unz, I’m surprised you haven’t been banned yet.
*Lynn’s background in psychology hasn’t saved him from being as piss-poor as he is with IQ research in general. Even essential laymen can easily see flaws in Lynn’s work. The problem is that nobody has back-checked the full scope of his work quite like Malloy has. You can look at his many other posts on national IQ (especially southeast asia) to see what I mean.
Jm8: Perhaps you’re right that Nsibidi was more developed than I thought. I’ll have to look into it more.
That link you posted about Ashkenazi in Israel has no sources, and I’ve heard such claims before. I don’t take them too seriously given Lynn’s unreliability on other jews.
Nonetheless the point is the same as my critique of Chanda. Both push forward a population of the equivalent of people who went to Brown (University) and say 'look, they are not elite...they did not even go to Harvard...they don't all have PHDs and build rocket ships and blah blah blah.'
It is an extremely disingenuous tactic which relies on their opponents' unfamiliarity with China and Africa to obfuscate the fact that the samples are still extremely unrepresentative. Brown University graduates do not represent the American mean and neither do Chinese or African migrants to the West represent the mean for their homelands.
This is painfully obvious to anyone who has any idea about those lands and the practical, mental and financial difficulties of migrating. Because let's be honest, if there were no obstacles to overcome, China and Africa would be empty and America would have a billion extra citizens from each of those continents.
As for how Panda addresses himself, what Panda has for breakfast, or if Panda is a bad cartoon character, or engaging on cross-dressing at the weekends or not are none of your friggin business, are we clear? LOL
Let me make a few points.
1) Are the datas used by Mr Chanda representative of the entire african immigrant population? For example, the GCSE is usually taken at the age of 16. It could be that a high proportion of african immigrants already dropped out of school by that age, and therefore the sample would not be representative. More in general, are the datas he refers to statistically suitable for inference to the whole african immigrant population? The datas used by hereditarians are usually very solid from a statistical point of view. Are the datas used by Mr Chanda equally good from this point of view? If not, you can't expect me to throw away the conclusions of Murray and Herrnstein, who worked mostly on statistically solid datas.
2) Nobody thinks that intellectual achievements depend only on genetics. Personal effort also plays a role. We know that many african americans are absorbed by a gangsta-rapper culture that consider studying a "white thing", and so they likely perfom lower than they could. On the contrary, it might be that many african immigrants in the USA and in UK are very motivated and therefore perform higher than they would if they put the same effort in studying than the average white american or briton does. But this doesn't prove that the black-white gap isn't genetic. It just proves that intellectual achievements are partly due to environment, which is something that every hereditarian can agree on. What hereditarians claim is that genetic also plays a significant role, and the fact that "pure" africans are overperforming african americans who have some white DNA doesn't prove that hereditarian theory is wrong.
3) How does Mr Chanda explain the fact that american blacks still perform poorly even after controlling for every possible imaginable environmental factor? I mean, he completely ignores this fact, while it actually is the elephant in the room. If you say that the black-white gap isn't genetic, than you have to come up with a convincing explanation for the persistent racial gap in IQ even after controlling for environmental factors. What I said at point (2) (many african americans put low effort in studying) can be a partial explanation, but it's not sufficient. Not at all. The gap is too wide to be completely justified in this way. Also because american blacks also perform poor in test took at a very young age, that have little to do with the amount of effort put in studying.
4) I quote: "right wingers are not with themselves. They want to have their cake and eat it. They say the immigration system is so broken that it does not select for the best. When the topic changes to the question of intelligence and it is pointed out that the immigrants’ children appear to be very smart, then suddenly many of the same people start saying “oh, what do you expect when Africa is just sending their PhD’s and doctors and engineers?”
Well, even you admitted that black immigrants as whole perform lower than whites in USA and UK. Only a few groups, like Nigerians, perform like or better than whites. So yes, you can say both things, that some immigrant groups are made up of intellectual elites in their country of origin, and that the immigration system in general does not select for the best, without contradicting yourself
“Well, even you admitted that black immigrants as whole perform lower than whites in USA and UK. Only a few groups, like Nigerians, perform like or better than whites. So yes, you can say both things, that some immigrant groups are made up of intellectual elites in their country of origin, and that the immigration system in general does not select for the best, without contradicting yourself”
African immigrant groups generally perform above whites, from what I’ve seen.
Chisala also mentions Shona-speakers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_immigration_to_the_United_States#Educational_attainment
Note the lowest ones are from racially mixed areas. I believe Somalia comes right after Mauritania though. Somalians aren’t the largest african group in the US, but I feel they often muddle results. Cape Verdeans also number over 100,000, though Mauritanians in america are neglibable (4,000-something.)
I think Frost once claimed their IQ was 95 though.
http://www.cis.org/sites/cis.org/files/articles/2012/immigrants-in-the-united-states-2012.pdf
And this does not consider the fact that a degree from an american college and a degree from an african college are not exactly the same thing...
It's not just the GSCE rates or graduation rates in Nigeria. You don't have to look far in these posts by Chanda and others on this site to see what I mean. But it's clear you don't care. Chanda never explicitly claimed the Igbo are significantly smarter than other Nigerians either- that's mainly Frost who's claimed that.
You were originally arguing with others on the Frost post that Igbo bronzes were inferior to Chinese ones, but I won't deny the Chinese were clearly more advanced that they were manufacturing steel, among many other things. The way you went back to that gave the impression you were still obsessed over who made better bronze, but I'm glad you finally concede the original idea.
You're right- I don't know the full background of these people in question. But claims of AA is often a subterfuge for people who write off any successful, accomplished black person, and many things indicate african ethnic groups such as this do not benefit from AA, so this is just another feeble argument of yours.
Jason Malloy is an independent researcher* who's been apart of "HBD" blogging for a very long time, and at Humanvarieties.org has been doing international IQ research of his own and heavily re-evaluating Lynn's work. He has been finding out, contrary to once being a huge fan of Lynn, how riddled with errors and dishonesty Lynn's work truly is. Among them is Lynn seems to have clearly exaggerated the IQ's of China. I do not believe China's IQ is really any less than 100, but an IQ above 100- especially the figures of 105-108 trotted out for them and east asia as a whole- is ridiculous. It ties into the asiaphilia of people like Lynn and co who are obsessed with the idea of the asian-american population being perfectly representative of their homelands. That group, which has long been mostly chinese, heavily from Hong Kong and Taiwan, and significantly selected, has too readily been treated as the basic standard for asian IQ by HBD types. Lynn's figures on China rely heavily on urban samples and such. I imagine many of those rural samples Malloy mentions are environmentally depressed, but I've seen plenty of HBD types (including researchers) who claim 100+ is what you'll find in the most destitute, backwater parts of China.
You can take it up with him if you want, but you behaving how you do here, saying something like "You think China no so smart? PANDA NOT AMUSED!" isn't going to go well with him.
But at the end of the day, it was a huge mistake to engage with you again. You seem more interested in behaving like and articulating yourself as a cartoon character more than anything. You're a spastic nutcase who's easily one of the worst posters on Unz, and as low as the standards for discussion are on Unz, I'm surprised you haven't been banned yet.
*Lynn's background in psychology hasn't saved him from being as piss-poor as he is with IQ research in general. Even essential laymen can easily see flaws in Lynn's work. The problem is that nobody has back-checked the full scope of his work quite like Malloy has. You can look at his many other posts on national IQ (especially southeast asia) to see what I mean.
Jm8: Perhaps you're right that Nsibidi was more developed than I thought. I'll have to look into it more.
That link you posted about Ashkenazi in Israel has no sources, and I've heard such claims before. I don't take them too seriously given Lynn's unreliability on other jews.
Panda knows that the IQ tests which claim to show China’s average are not run in tier 2 and 3 cities, nevermind the villages. These combined make up the bulk of the Chinese population. Panda must know because Panda must be able to see that Chinese people in America act like elite Chinese people in China and nothing like the great unwashed Chinese masses. The latter can be crude and vulgar and often have to be taught basics like not to defecate in the street. I’ve never seen Africans who have to be taught that!
Nonetheless the point is the same as my critique of Chanda. Both push forward a population of the equivalent of people who went to Brown (University) and say ‘look, they are not elite…they did not even go to Harvard…they don’t all have PHDs and build rocket ships and blah blah blah.’
It is an extremely disingenuous tactic which relies on their opponents’ unfamiliarity with China and Africa to obfuscate the fact that the samples are still extremely unrepresentative. Brown University graduates do not represent the American mean and neither do Chinese or African migrants to the West represent the mean for their homelands.
This is painfully obvious to anyone who has any idea about those lands and the practical, mental and financial difficulties of migrating. Because let’s be honest, if there were no obstacles to overcome, China and Africa would be empty and America would have a billion extra citizens from each of those continents.
Chisala also mentions Shona-speakers.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_immigration_to_the_United_States#Educational_attainmentNote the lowest ones are from racially mixed areas. I believe Somalia comes right after Mauritania though. Somalians aren't the largest african group in the US, but I feel they often muddle results. Cape Verdeans also number over 100,000, though Mauritanians in america are neglibable (4,000-something.)I think Frost once claimed their IQ was 95 though.
According to the Center for Immigration studies, in 2011 30,5% of black immigrants had a bachelor degree or more, against 32,8% of all native population, 36,2% of native white population and 57,2% of native asian population (page 56):
http://www.cis.org/sites/cis.org/files/articles/2012/immigrants-in-the-united-states-2012.pdf
And this does not consider the fact that a degree from an american college and a degree from an african college are not exactly the same thing…
I assumed this included immigrants from the caribbean, and I was right: http://i.imgur.com/jMxiWmS.png
Try again.
It's not just the GSCE rates or graduation rates in Nigeria. You don't have to look far in these posts by Chanda and others on this site to see what I mean. But it's clear you don't care. Chanda never explicitly claimed the Igbo are significantly smarter than other Nigerians either- that's mainly Frost who's claimed that.
You were originally arguing with others on the Frost post that Igbo bronzes were inferior to Chinese ones, but I won't deny the Chinese were clearly more advanced that they were manufacturing steel, among many other things. The way you went back to that gave the impression you were still obsessed over who made better bronze, but I'm glad you finally concede the original idea.
You're right- I don't know the full background of these people in question. But claims of AA is often a subterfuge for people who write off any successful, accomplished black person, and many things indicate african ethnic groups such as this do not benefit from AA, so this is just another feeble argument of yours.
Jason Malloy is an independent researcher* who's been apart of "HBD" blogging for a very long time, and at Humanvarieties.org has been doing international IQ research of his own and heavily re-evaluating Lynn's work. He has been finding out, contrary to once being a huge fan of Lynn, how riddled with errors and dishonesty Lynn's work truly is. Among them is Lynn seems to have clearly exaggerated the IQ's of China. I do not believe China's IQ is really any less than 100, but an IQ above 100- especially the figures of 105-108 trotted out for them and east asia as a whole- is ridiculous. It ties into the asiaphilia of people like Lynn and co who are obsessed with the idea of the asian-american population being perfectly representative of their homelands. That group, which has long been mostly chinese, heavily from Hong Kong and Taiwan, and significantly selected, has too readily been treated as the basic standard for asian IQ by HBD types. Lynn's figures on China rely heavily on urban samples and such. I imagine many of those rural samples Malloy mentions are environmentally depressed, but I've seen plenty of HBD types (including researchers) who claim 100+ is what you'll find in the most destitute, backwater parts of China.
You can take it up with him if you want, but you behaving how you do here, saying something like "You think China no so smart? PANDA NOT AMUSED!" isn't going to go well with him.
But at the end of the day, it was a huge mistake to engage with you again. You seem more interested in behaving like and articulating yourself as a cartoon character more than anything. You're a spastic nutcase who's easily one of the worst posters on Unz, and as low as the standards for discussion are on Unz, I'm surprised you haven't been banned yet.
*Lynn's background in psychology hasn't saved him from being as piss-poor as he is with IQ research in general. Even essential laymen can easily see flaws in Lynn's work. The problem is that nobody has back-checked the full scope of his work quite like Malloy has. You can look at his many other posts on national IQ (especially southeast asia) to see what I mean.
Jm8: Perhaps you're right that Nsibidi was more developed than I thought. I'll have to look into it more.
That link you posted about Ashkenazi in Israel has no sources, and I've heard such claims before. I don't take them too seriously given Lynn's unreliability on other jews.
Again, please try to address Panda’s points instead of assassinating Panda’s character – in case you’re not educated enough to know what “points” mean: try to find question marks in Panda’s posts, and then try to give an honest and direct answer to each, ok? Is that too much to ask for? ROFL
As for how Panda addresses himself, what Panda has for breakfast, or if Panda is a bad cartoon character, or engaging on cross-dressing at the weekends or not are none of your friggin business, are we clear? LOL
Nonetheless the point is the same as my critique of Chanda. Both push forward a population of the equivalent of people who went to Brown (University) and say 'look, they are not elite...they did not even go to Harvard...they don't all have PHDs and build rocket ships and blah blah blah.'
It is an extremely disingenuous tactic which relies on their opponents' unfamiliarity with China and Africa to obfuscate the fact that the samples are still extremely unrepresentative. Brown University graduates do not represent the American mean and neither do Chinese or African migrants to the West represent the mean for their homelands.
This is painfully obvious to anyone who has any idea about those lands and the practical, mental and financial difficulties of migrating. Because let's be honest, if there were no obstacles to overcome, China and Africa would be empty and America would have a billion extra citizens from each of those continents.
But Panda doesn’t know it. So you’ve made it all up at your free will in your trash van without consulting Panda? ROFL
Nonetheless the point is the same as my critique of Chanda. Both push forward a population of the equivalent of people who went to Brown (University) and say 'look, they are not elite...they did not even go to Harvard...they don't all have PHDs and build rocket ships and blah blah blah.'
It is an extremely disingenuous tactic which relies on their opponents' unfamiliarity with China and Africa to obfuscate the fact that the samples are still extremely unrepresentative. Brown University graduates do not represent the American mean and neither do Chinese or African migrants to the West represent the mean for their homelands.
This is painfully obvious to anyone who has any idea about those lands and the practical, mental and financial difficulties of migrating. Because let's be honest, if there were no obstacles to overcome, China and Africa would be empty and America would have a billion extra citizens from each of those continents.
The rule of thumb:
For the Chinese migrants to the West who are filthily rich upon arrival, the chance that they are below China’s mean IQ is quite high, because most of them are likely the relatives of some very corrupted Chinese CCP officials, who by defintion have avg IQ below China’s mean as truly high IQ Chinese people (half if not majority of them reside in China’s countryside, instead of cities as some tin pot self-claimed “experts” assert) mostly do not thrive in CCP environment.
For the Chinese migrants who are moderate studs to start with, the chance that they are above China’s mean IQ, or well above it in many cases, is very high.
Try again.
It includes caribbean; so what? I said that if we look at all black immigrants, we find out that they are, on average, less skilled than the US native population, and the gap widens if we consider native white or asian population. And datas prove me right. Actually, even if we consider the total immigrant population and we compare with the total native US population, the first is on average less skilled than the second. So, “try again” what?
Either the part where I described the realities of life for the majority of the African population?
Or where I argued that the majority I described were completely unable to migrate to the West?
The first part is obvious to anyone with real knowledge of Africa. The second part is just plain common sense. I'm very interested in how you can object to this.
In one part of his installments Chandy Chisala pointed to the example of refugees, where whole villages were resettled. It’s rather unlikely that those people were super-selected. And they would have to be really super-selected (just selecting people somehow more intelligent doesn’t cut) in order to the results Chisala presented to be compatible with very low African IQ.
You are presenting a hypothetical example, while Chisala presented real data. First read the data, then point why the real examples Chisala presented were compatible with your musings. Otherwise it does not add much to the discussion.
Indeed as a poster replied to Chanda on the other thread those refugees who manage to get to the West have been idensities by the UN has having significant extra ability and resources.Everything I've written is basic common sense born of genuine knowledge of the African norm. Others on this thread have proven me right by comparing the education backgrounds of migrants to the norm in their homelands.
This stuff really is undeniable and everything Chandy has written is hot air in light of it.
I very much appreciate why he wants to make this point and I will not say he is wrong. Nonetheless he has put forward a very flawed argument based on very unrepresentative samples. Arguing around the edges does nothing to change that.
It is a very major test of intelligence to get to the West because it is very desirable. How can anyone not see this?
I would love to see an IQ study run in somewhere like South Africa with a cross-section of the nation's students. I suspect the results would be not bad.
I guess Panda doesn’t go to second and third tier towns. This is quite normal for wealthy Chinese.
Lynn just gives “the answer to the question”.
Murray purrs like a oily car salesman, I think he is not being frank about what he really thinks.
I think it unlikely that Lynn is consciously lying, unless he is a undercover egalitarian there would be no purpose in trumpeting out on a limb hereditarian conclusions. No, I feel he is simply stating whatever he thinks the properly interpreted data justify without worrying what impression he makes, or whether it is scientifically definitive and final (no theory is). Lynn is most notorious for what he says about low Irish IQ (and high rates of schizophrenia in Irish everywhere, which few people seriously doubt). I think his explanation for lower IQ pointed to clerical celibacy, more common in Catholic countries like Ireland (and south Europe) as important. I don’t think Ashkenazim were not of north Europe. The fertility of religious functionaries has influenced IQ in many countries: Rabbis, Priests, and if I am correct Osu too.
Again, Murray is saying that IQ egalitarians are going to be terribly disappointed in the near future. He does not seem any less certain than Lynn. Murray pays lip service to not being certain of the prime role of genes in IQ, but it sounds like dissimulation and his conclusions are not really different to Lynn as far as I can see.
Lynn doesn't seem like he's lying, but in that clip he seems like he's amusing himself with classic dry British humor with his deadpan, exaggerated explanation of the kind of work garbage men do.
You know, maybe Albert Brooks is right.
In the ending of REAL LIFE, he tells a Negro that blacks are stronger and smarter.
And in DEFENDING YOUR LIFE, a Negro has the biggest brain.
You are presenting a hypothetical example, while Chisala presented real data. First read the data, then point why the real examples Chisala presented were compatible with your musings. Otherwise it does not add much to the discussion.
Refugees are a minority of Africans moving to the West and zero African villages are wholly resettled here.
Indeed as a poster replied to Chanda on the other thread those refugees who manage to get to the West have been idensities by the UN has having significant extra ability and resources.
Everything I’ve written is basic common sense born of genuine knowledge of the African norm. Others on this thread have proven me right by comparing the education backgrounds of migrants to the norm in their homelands.
This stuff really is undeniable and everything Chandy has written is hot air in light of it.
I very much appreciate why he wants to make this point and I will not say he is wrong. Nonetheless he has put forward a very flawed argument based on very unrepresentative samples. Arguing around the edges does nothing to change that.
It is a very major test of intelligence to get to the West because it is very desirable. How can anyone not see this?
I would love to see an IQ study run in somewhere like South Africa with a cross-section of the nation’s students. I suspect the results would be not bad.
I would point out that Lynn’s critics are in effect espousing a thoroughgoing Lamarckism in relation to IQ, by asserting that populations with low IQ in their homeland or poverty have raised IQ after living in affluent conditions or America for a few generations. According to the author of this post unspecified mechanisms of assimilation over time that raise IQ to a universal level (what could this be but Lamarckian inheritance) are the only thing a honest person can believe in.
Is Lynn’s work on the role of nutrition for IQ scientifically credible?
>Compared to those in the control group – the group that did not suffer from nutritional deficiencies – malnourished children showed a 41 percent increase in aggression at age 8, a 10 percent increase in aggression and delinquency at age 11 and a 51 percent increase in violent and antisocial behavior at age 17.
>"Poor nutrition, characterized by zinc, iron, vitamin B and protein deficiencies, leads to low IQ, which leads to later antisocial behavior," he said. "These are all nutrients linked to brain development."
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/11/041117005027.htm
I don't think Lynn has any evidence for this claim of population size. Since the ancestors of east asians/far nothern mongoloids in Asia would have lived in even harsher climates during the ice age, wouldn't their population numbers be smaller? Nevermind the issue of claimed "large landmass"- arctic north america (nevermind ice age north america) covers a huge area too, so there isn't readily any reason this would be a factor. This is a feeble explanation.
The only arctic people I can think of that might be of low intelligence are the ainu, but the evidence against the arctic being a selector for intelligence has more to do with the records of paleolithic brain size we have, given brain size worldwide was much larger in the distant past, including africa and australia. The oldest identifiably negroid skull, asselar man, was also quite large, and only several thousand years old.
And through all this, my point of talking about modern arctic/far northern people is more about behavior. Next to none of the places inhabited by these people or their historical behavior screams "higher altruism" or lower rates of violence and other pathologies.
I don’t think the Ainu are actually considered an Arctic population. It’s believed that they inhabited milder refugia in the northern Pacific during the Ice Age.
Lynn just gives "the answer to the question".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZ1hK5WsHZ4&t=33m44s
Murray purrs like a oily car salesman, I think he is not being frank about what he really thinks.
I think it unlikely that Lynn is consciously lying, unless he is a undercover egalitarian there would be no purpose in trumpeting out on a limb hereditarian conclusions. No, I feel he is simply stating whatever he thinks the properly interpreted data justify without worrying what impression he makes, or whether it is scientifically definitive and final (no theory is). Lynn is most notorious for what he says about low Irish IQ (and high rates of schizophrenia in Irish everywhere, which few people seriously doubt). I think his explanation for lower IQ pointed to clerical celibacy, more common in Catholic countries like Ireland (and south Europe) as important. I don't think Ashkenazim were not of north Europe. The fertility of religious functionaries has influenced IQ in many countries: Rabbis, Priests, and if I am correct Osu too.
Again, Murray is saying that IQ egalitarians are going to be terribly disappointed in the near future. He does not seem any less certain than Lynn. Murray pays lip service to not being certain of the prime role of genes in IQ, but it sounds like dissimulation and his conclusions are not really different to Lynn as far as I can see.
You’re right that Murray comes across as an oily salesman who’s not being completely frank. But note that he’s spent most of his career in research at public policy think tanks, which are political organizations to some degree, so he’s used to having to be or trying to be politic.
Lynn doesn’t seem like he’s lying, but in that clip he seems like he’s amusing himself with classic dry British humor with his deadpan, exaggerated explanation of the kind of work garbage men do.
Nigeria: 182 millions.
Belgium: 11 millions.
Belgium:
Gold medals: 1. Silver medals: 15. Bronze medals: 53. Honourable mentions: 53.
Nigeria:
Gold medals: 0. Silver medals: 0. Bronze medals: 5. Honourable mentions: 7.
(https://www.imo-official.org/country_info.aspx?code=NGA)
It's not really fair, since Belgium participated since 1969, and Nigeria since 2006, but still...
Try again.
“Belgium:
Gold medals: 1. Silver medals: 15. Bronze medals: 53. Honourable mentions: 53.
Nigeria:
Gold medals: 0. Silver medals: 0. Bronze medals: 5. Honourable mentions: 7.
(https://www.imo-official.org/country_info.aspx?code=NGA)
It’s not really fair, since Belgium participated since 1969, and Nigeria since 2006,”
2006-2015=10 years. 1969-2015=47 years.
So, correcting Belgium’s numbers and rounding:
Gold medals: 0. Silver medals: 3. Bronze medals: 11. Honourable mentions: 11.
Belgium is still ahead. But Belgium has a few decent universities Louvain, Leuven, Ghent, and, of course, Belgians have easy access to French, Dutch and German universities. And I suspect they have a fairly sophisticated maths Olympiad coaching set-up.
So, Nigeria is not doing that badly.
Belgium has 16.5 times smaller population than Nigeria (Belgium: 11 milions, Nigeria: 182 millions).
So 53 honourable mentions...
(53/47)*10 = 11.27*16.5 = 181.5
Silver medals:
(3/47)*10*16.5 = 52 silver medals.
In other words, after correcting for the numbers, Belgium has 36 times more bronze medals.
1) For one thing, neither Belgium nor Nigeria participate in the competition every year.
Belgium
https://www.imo-official.org/country_info.aspx?code=BEL
Nigeria
https://www.imo-official.org/country_info.aspx?code=NGA
So plugging in 37 and 9 in your equation instead of 47 and 10, we get Belgium's adjusted numbers as follows:
Gold medals: 0. Silver medals: 4. Bronze medals: 13. Honourable mentions: 13.
2) The real flaw in your logic, though, is not accounting for the population size:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_population
Since Nigeria has a population that's 16 times that of Belgium, the latter's adjusted medal count should be multiplied by several orders of magnitude. Maybe not 16, but one that's going to increase the gap substantially. It should be clear by now that Nigeria is way, way behind Belgium as far as performance in the Math Olympiad is concerned.
How about we take the years when Nigeria participated and compare its performance to other countries that have comparable population? Instead of counting the medals, I took the country rankings from this list.
https://www.imo-official.org/results.aspx
Country - Population - Ranking from 2015 to 2006 (excluding 2008 since Nigeria did not participate)
Brazil - 205,319,000 - 22 - 34 - 28 - 19 - 20 - 35 - 17 - 24 - 29
Pakistan - 192,180,908 - 85 - 75 - 79 - 73 - 81 - 89 - 85 - 78 - 76
Nigeria - 182,202,000 - 88 - 82 - 84 - 67 - 78 - 84 - 90 - 85 - 84
Bangladesh, 159,517,000 - 33 - 53 - 61 - 54 - 72 - 69 - 58 - 80 - 80
Russia - 146,464,030 - 8 - 4 - 4 - 4 - 4 - 2 - 3 - 1 - 2
Japan - 126,890,000 - 22 - 5 - 11 - 17 - 12 - 7 - 2 - 6 - 7
Belgium - 11,280,134 - 56 - 59 - 44 - 38 - 43 - 60 - 38 - 45 - 52
As you can see Nigeria is on the same level as Pakistan but consistently behind Bangladesh. It has to be pointed out: Both Pakistan and Bangladesh often field less than the allowed 6 contestants which hurt their country rankings. Brazil -- not known as an intellectual powerhouse -- is way ahead of all 3 countries. This is even more true for Russia and Japan. Russia's been on a slow decline lately but is never out of the top 10. Japan does well but is an underperformer by asian standards.
Because this discussion is about african immigrants and not caribbean ones or the entire immigrant population?
You respondend to this part of my first comment:
"Well, even you admitted that black immigrants as whole perform lower than whites in USA and UK. Only a few groups, like Nigerians, perform like or better than whites. So yes, you can say both things, that some immigrant groups are made up of intellectual elites in their country of origin, and that the immigration system in general does not select for the best, without contradicting yourself"
which I wrote in response to these words that Chanda wrote:
"right wingers are not with themselves. They want to have their cake and eat it. They say the immigration system is so broken that it does not select for the best. When the topic changes to the question of intelligence and it is pointed out that the immigrants’ children appear to be very smart, then suddenly many of the same people start saying “oh, what do you expect when Africa is just sending their PhD’s and doctors and engineers?"
So my point was that you can say that the immigration system, in general, does not select for the best people, and also that a specific group of immigrants, namely those from Africa, are made up of intellectual elites. The two things do not contradict each other. The fact that a small part of immigrants are super-selected does not change the fact that if you look at all immigrants you find that the average intellectual level is quite low.
Lynn just gives "the answer to the question".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZ1hK5WsHZ4&t=33m44s
Murray purrs like a oily car salesman, I think he is not being frank about what he really thinks.
I think it unlikely that Lynn is consciously lying, unless he is a undercover egalitarian there would be no purpose in trumpeting out on a limb hereditarian conclusions. No, I feel he is simply stating whatever he thinks the properly interpreted data justify without worrying what impression he makes, or whether it is scientifically definitive and final (no theory is). Lynn is most notorious for what he says about low Irish IQ (and high rates of schizophrenia in Irish everywhere, which few people seriously doubt). I think his explanation for lower IQ pointed to clerical celibacy, more common in Catholic countries like Ireland (and south Europe) as important. I don't think Ashkenazim were not of north Europe. The fertility of religious functionaries has influenced IQ in many countries: Rabbis, Priests, and if I am correct Osu too.
Again, Murray is saying that IQ egalitarians are going to be terribly disappointed in the near future. He does not seem any less certain than Lynn. Murray pays lip service to not being certain of the prime role of genes in IQ, but it sounds like dissimulation and his conclusions are not really different to Lynn as far as I can see.
I don’t trust Murray either (but probably for different reasons than you.) He’s a libertarian, which is a very dysfunctional political ideology that attracts all sorts of strange or extreme characters, from liberal universalist aspies like Bryan Caplan to foaming at the mouth white supremacists. Even those that aren’t out and out white supremacist, like Murray, can be fairly extreme, given his IQ fetishism. I feel he promotes a very peculiar, idealistic framing of intelligence and it’s correlations with interdependence, morality etc. that I see crop up among other people with similar ideas (like Linda Gottfredson, who is another IQ fetishist and just obnoxious, and also a fan of Rushton and Lynn’s theories.) I’ve never read the Bell Curve in full, but I was never impressed with what I did read, and I think it’s fair to say his work ignores many things that call into question his ideas of IQ and functioning (or atleast as narrow as he argued.)
Lynn can easily by lying or be dishonest for other reasons, like a political agenda (like white nationalism, which he’s closely associated with, and his buddy Rushton promoted a scientific basis for it- oh, and they were big time associates of Amren and other nationalist outlets) or just that there’s something wrong with him. You could be right it’s just what he thinks, but then there’s the issue of his sloppiness and carelessness, and I think there’s plenty of evidence of plain dishonesty.
Lynn is notorious for many other things, but the IQ of the Irish is certainly one of them. I don’t believe his scores for Ireland are reliable, and I have no idea what you mean about the Irish having high rates of schizophrenia. First time I’ve ever heard of that.
He should really be getting more flak for his claims of IQ in Albania and adjacent countries- he seriously puts them at significantly lower than Turkey (which I doubt is that low either.) How can anyone take someone like this that seriously?
People who say that aren’t being lamarckian about IQ at all- why do you think that resembles lamarckinism? That just means the environmental conditions that depress IQ take time to multiple generations to be alleviated fully, that each generation isn’t being exposed to full benefits, not that they’re being affected on a genetic level.
Stephen R. Diamond:
I suppose so, but I get the impression Lynn can’t seem to make up his mind on how much he thinks national IQ’s are depressed environmentally.
Anonymous:
The ainu are best understood to be a remnant population of early mongoloid peoples. They share features with native americans, who are also of proto-mongoloid descent. I think people exaggerate how “caucasoid” they look, they seem fairly diverse, and they also aren’t as hairy as is often claimed (this was mainly in contrast to the Japanese- I doubt they’re really the hairiest people on Earth), but their features harken back to when caucasoid-mongoloid peoples weren’t as differentiated, and I’d imagine they were exposed to pretty much the same arctic conditions. They inhabited Japan long before the Japanese themselves, and mostly inhabited northern Honsu and Hokkaido (not colonized by the Japanese in substantial numbers until the past few centuries) and they also lived in Sakhalin, the Kuril Islands, and Kamchatka), so they seem like they and their ancestors have long been exposed to extreme arctic conditions. Nonetheless, the Japanese always regarded them as less intelligent (and less attractive than themselves), and while it’s doubtful they really are substantially less intelligent than the Japanese, they probably do have lower IQ’s (and I doubt the Japanese IQ is any higher than 100, in all honesty.)
I’m also aware there’s speculation that the ainu formed the early samurai class and therefore the upper classes of Japan- I don’t know much about it, but I’ve gotten the impression it has little real basis. That seems mainly popular among white racialists. I don’t know- out of curiosity, I looked up all of Japan’s nobel laureates in science, and none of them looked like they were the more ainu/”caucasoid” japanese. The japanese having some ainu ancestry has also been thrown out for why they in recent times have been so proficient. All of it kind of seems to ignore the backwards position of “pure” ainu throughout history, from being far less technologically and socially advanced to being completely subjugated and enslaved. I don’t think the absorption of Ainu in recent times in northern Japan has done much either- people of visible Ainu descent seem to be pretty marginalized and destitute. It’s possible there’s a south-north gradient in IQ Japan (it seems exaggerated, that’s for sure), and if there is, I’d imagine Hokkaido’s possible higher IQ is due to more selective migration.
I’m not saying the Ainu alone disprove the “cold climates=higher IQ” thing, but really, the idea it promotes altruism falls apart if you look at near-any number of people from that region, and an association between brain size/IQ is probably a rough leftover of a phenomenon that was seen worldwide in the paleolithic.
Lynn, like Rushton, has never really bothered to look at pre-modern skull sizes to support his evolutionary theories either. Why?
http://evoandproud.blogspot.dk/2011/07/brain-size-and-latitude-why-correlation.html
Of course it is. Lack of iron, zinc, certain B vitamins, and lack of protein all impede brain development, as well as IQ.
>Compared to those in the control group – the group that did not suffer from nutritional deficiencies – malnourished children showed a 41 percent increase in aggression at age 8, a 10 percent increase in aggression and delinquency at age 11 and a 51 percent increase in violent and antisocial behavior at age 17.
>”Poor nutrition, characterized by zinc, iron, vitamin B and protein deficiencies, leads to low IQ, which leads to later antisocial behavior,” he said. “These are all nutrients linked to brain development.”
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/11/041117005027.htm
That’s not relevant. What matters is that there is a large sample size. The Irish Travelers’ data is useless because of the small sample size. No research could be conducted if groups being compared had to remain in exact proportion to one another from the beginning of a study to the end.
Why are you guys forgetting about the South Asians? Some of them are from peasant immigrants eg: Bangladeshis.
You see the gain they made? Bangladeshis have totally erased and opened a gap in the GCSE scores and are very close to erasing the A level gaps. Pakistanis have almost erased the gaps. Indians who are also less selected than in USA are doing just as well. Other South Asians like from 79 average IQ Sri Lanka are above whites in both Al levels and GCSE.
Why you guys forgetting about them? Too much? Overkill? Awwwwww.
HBD is a joke. It’s basically a bunch of retarded autistic people who have no clue wtf they are talking about. They also in great denial that all their evidence is pseudoscience from quacks.
In America, the cities that have spent the most on education for blacks (with all-black school boards and municipal government, such as Washington, D.C.) still have the lowest results for blacks. Blacks from families making $70,000 plus score the same as whites whose families make $20,000. That is well known and has not changed. Very few blacks get into universities without affirmative action. They even did away with the civil service exams in America in the late 70s, because too few blacks could score high enough to enter at all, much less at the higher levels they wanted. Hasn't changed. Obviously some do very well, and if you restricted any testing to them, the results of race comparisons would show amazing and unexpected things.
Whatever British results show, it really doesn't matter. England doesn't need more"vibrancy." It did incredible, if controversial things, for centuries with just northern people, if you take my meaning. It's declining now. Only the cuisine is more varied if that's an improvement.
Basically, England needs these Africans, however, smart, like it needs hole in the head. Smart blacks, are, however, very needed in their own ancestral countries. Whites really need to just keep out of the southern half of the world. They always stick to the soles and never leave no matter how "oppressed."
I’ve never been to Africa but I am otherwise well travelled. Everywhere I’ve ever been, the observable behavior, on averages, matches what one might expect academically.
In India I sometimes watched in astonishment as the locals would do something so astonishingly silly that it took my breath away. Coming from a developed country, I had only met clever Indians until that point.
On the other hand, I acknowledged that the North Asians were noticeably more sensible than my own mob. They rarely got into drunken fights or made stupid noises on the train.
I’d be interested to hear more about your experiences. I have a feeling that there are other forms of cleverness that are not detected by IQ tests. For example, Australian Aborigines managed to survive for thousands of years in some of the harshest environments on earth – I wonder if stranded Koreans would stand a chance. Perhaps there are different cognitive skills that may be developed as required.
I will try to explain you one last time before assuming that you are just trolling.
You respondend to this part of my first comment:
“Well, even you admitted that black immigrants as whole perform lower than whites in USA and UK. Only a few groups, like Nigerians, perform like or better than whites. So yes, you can say both things, that some immigrant groups are made up of intellectual elites in their country of origin, and that the immigration system in general does not select for the best, without contradicting yourself”
which I wrote in response to these words that Chanda wrote:
“right wingers are not with themselves. They want to have their cake and eat it. They say the immigration system is so broken that it does not select for the best. When the topic changes to the question of intelligence and it is pointed out that the immigrants’ children appear to be very smart, then suddenly many of the same people start saying “oh, what do you expect when Africa is just sending their PhD’s and doctors and engineers?”
So my point was that you can say that the immigration system, in general, does not select for the best people, and also that a specific group of immigrants, namely those from Africa, are made up of intellectual elites. The two things do not contradict each other. The fact that a small part of immigrants are super-selected does not change the fact that if you look at all immigrants you find that the average intellectual level is quite low.
Post ending:
Racism = zenite gas and we know we live in a pernicious ether of white discrimination against blacks because the US black- white gap functions as a racism detector and has been stable for several years. This view is in fact the received wisdom in Western society because the leadership class of the whites like it that way.
Whether a group have lacked enough expose recently to an environment for developing acquired characteristics (Lamarckian inheritance) or a racially discriminatory miasma is responsible for them lagging behind another group’s average, as Michael Levin has said, Smith cannot sue Jones for damaging his leg and permanently disabling him while insisting no one mention his crippled leg in the proceedings. Smith has the the right to bring forward witnesses that Jones’s action was responsible for the disability, but equitable justice demands that Jones can call witnesses to defend himself . For example, Jones ought to be able to advance evidence that he has never hurt Smith, who has always had a bad leg like his parents, so it appears to be hereditary.
People like Richard Nisbett are only one side of an argument although they appear to think the White masses already stand convicted of damaging all groups they exceed in IQ , and is outraged because a tiny minority of scientists such as Lynn bring up the apparently genetic nature of the IQ difference. Challenging the egalitarian principle that all races must be assumed to be equal intelligence seems quite in order, the post author admits as much and Lynn is just as qualified as Nisbett to give an opinion. White equalitarians such as Nisbett cannot be prosecutor, judge, and jury and still expect no defence attorney to point out the holes in their racial hypothesis of a universal IQ average for all human races including Australian Aborigines and Kalahari Bushmen.
Lynn is acting for the defence of white masses, which have not had benefit of counsel, because their own elites have been with the prosecution, and his case for IQ differences draws on natural selection theory, which is widely accepted in every other context. It is not clear that Lynn’s detractors have any equivalent theory to account for the stubborn IQ gap that Lynn and a very few others have the bad taste to mention. I started this comment by quoting Chanda Chisala saying there has not been “a sufficiently long time for full assimilation of the Black African migrants in Western environments” and pleading for a less dogmatic racial ideology. Very well if African migrants assimilate over a few generations that seems to suggest Lamarckian inheritance of a immunity to factors that depress IQ.
There is some good evidence for Chisala’s views, but there is also some good evidence for ESP. The trouble with ESP is not evidence, but having no good theory that can begin to explain how it works; how can we accept Chisala’ assimilation hypothesis without any proposed explanation of how IQ goes up with generations of habituation to an environment? The main selling point of equalitarianism has always been consistency with an ideology among elite intellectual sectors that has permeated through society by cultural diffusion. When was the last time you saw a film or TV program that suggested genetic influence on IQ gaps between groups, even within whites? The child of two professors is going to be no cleverer that anyone else according to the wisdom we get from the shadow show of entertainment. Moreover, when was the last time you watched a news report or drama in which Black Africans in white societies were not portrayed as having to overcome white prejudice and being at least as good as any white? In everything I have seen only stupid whites doubt the equalitarian principle and they get humiliated by the denouement.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let_That_Be_Your_Last_Battlefield
“I knew a very wise man so much of Sir Christopher’s sentiment, that he believed if a man were permitted to make all the ballads, he need not care who should make the laws of a nation.”Andrew Fletcher (1655 – 1716)
Gold medals: 1. Silver medals: 15. Bronze medals: 53. Honourable mentions: 53.
Nigeria:
Gold medals: 0. Silver medals: 0. Bronze medals: 5. Honourable mentions: 7.
(https://www.imo-official.org/country_info.aspx?code=NGA)
It’s not really fair, since Belgium participated since 1969, and Nigeria since 2006,"
2006-2015=10 years. 1969-2015=47 years.
So, correcting Belgium's numbers and rounding:
Gold medals: 0. Silver medals: 3. Bronze medals: 11. Honourable mentions: 11.
Belgium is still ahead. But Belgium has a few decent universities Louvain, Leuven, Ghent, and, of course, Belgians have easy access to French, Dutch and German universities. And I suspect they have a fairly sophisticated maths Olympiad coaching set-up.
So, Nigeria is not doing that badly.
How did you correct for the numbers?
Belgium has 16.5 times smaller population than Nigeria (Belgium: 11 milions, Nigeria: 182 millions).
So 53 honourable mentions…
(53/47)*10 = 11.27*16.5 = 181.5
Silver medals:
(3/47)*10*16.5 = 52 silver medals.
In other words, after correcting for the numbers, Belgium has 36 times more bronze medals.
Indeed as a poster replied to Chanda on the other thread those refugees who manage to get to the West have been idensities by the UN has having significant extra ability and resources.Everything I've written is basic common sense born of genuine knowledge of the African norm. Others on this thread have proven me right by comparing the education backgrounds of migrants to the norm in their homelands.
This stuff really is undeniable and everything Chandy has written is hot air in light of it.
I very much appreciate why he wants to make this point and I will not say he is wrong. Nonetheless he has put forward a very flawed argument based on very unrepresentative samples. Arguing around the edges does nothing to change that.
It is a very major test of intelligence to get to the West because it is very desirable. How can anyone not see this?
I would love to see an IQ study run in somewhere like South Africa with a cross-section of the nation's students. I suspect the results would be not bad.
The point is not whether emigrants are selected. The point is whether they are selected enough to see what Chisala presented. It’s not enough to get the top 50%. If the African population IQ is around 70, then to see what he presented, immigrants would have to be at least 2SD above the mean, which is top 3%. Even 1SD above the mean would mean top 15%, and it would be not enough (see the part about regression to the mean). Either African population IQ is above 70, or imigrants came from genetically differentiated sub-groups which have higher IQ than African average.
No one denies that given western conditions the African population would have an IQ above 70...
Gold medals: 1. Silver medals: 15. Bronze medals: 53. Honourable mentions: 53.
Nigeria:
Gold medals: 0. Silver medals: 0. Bronze medals: 5. Honourable mentions: 7.
(https://www.imo-official.org/country_info.aspx?code=NGA)
It’s not really fair, since Belgium participated since 1969, and Nigeria since 2006,"
2006-2015=10 years. 1969-2015=47 years.
So, correcting Belgium's numbers and rounding:
Gold medals: 0. Silver medals: 3. Bronze medals: 11. Honourable mentions: 11.
Belgium is still ahead. But Belgium has a few decent universities Louvain, Leuven, Ghent, and, of course, Belgians have easy access to French, Dutch and German universities. And I suspect they have a fairly sophisticated maths Olympiad coaching set-up.
So, Nigeria is not doing that badly.
Comparing performances accross time is always a tricky proposition. As more countries participate, the standard of competition has risen over the years. But even if we assume that results from one year are comparable to another, your numbers still need some tweaking.
1) For one thing, neither Belgium nor Nigeria participate in the competition every year.
Belgium
https://www.imo-official.org/country_info.aspx?code=BEL
Nigeria
https://www.imo-official.org/country_info.aspx?code=NGA
So plugging in 37 and 9 in your equation instead of 47 and 10, we get Belgium’s adjusted numbers as follows:
Gold medals: 0. Silver medals: 4. Bronze medals: 13. Honourable mentions: 13.
2) The real flaw in your logic, though, is not accounting for the population size:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_population
Since Nigeria has a population that’s 16 times that of Belgium, the latter’s adjusted medal count should be multiplied by several orders of magnitude. Maybe not 16, but one that’s going to increase the gap substantially. It should be clear by now that Nigeria is way, way behind Belgium as far as performance in the Math Olympiad is concerned.
How about we take the years when Nigeria participated and compare its performance to other countries that have comparable population? Instead of counting the medals, I took the country rankings from this list.
https://www.imo-official.org/results.aspx
Country – Population – Ranking from 2015 to 2006 (excluding 2008 since Nigeria did not participate)
Brazil – 205,319,000 – 22 – 34 – 28 – 19 – 20 – 35 – 17 – 24 – 29
Pakistan – 192,180,908 – 85 – 75 – 79 – 73 – 81 – 89 – 85 – 78 – 76
Nigeria – 182,202,000 – 88 – 82 – 84 – 67 – 78 – 84 – 90 – 85 – 84
Bangladesh, 159,517,000 – 33 – 53 – 61 – 54 – 72 – 69 – 58 – 80 – 80
Russia – 146,464,030 – 8 – 4 – 4 – 4 – 4 – 2 – 3 – 1 – 2
Japan – 126,890,000 – 22 – 5 – 11 – 17 – 12 – 7 – 2 – 6 – 7
Belgium – 11,280,134 – 56 – 59 – 44 – 38 – 43 – 60 – 38 – 45 – 52
As you can see Nigeria is on the same level as Pakistan but consistently behind Bangladesh. It has to be pointed out: Both Pakistan and Bangladesh often field less than the allowed 6 contestants which hurt their country rankings. Brazil — not known as an intellectual powerhouse — is way ahead of all 3 countries. This is even more true for Russia and Japan. Russia’s been on a slow decline lately but is never out of the top 10. Japan does well but is an underperformer by asian standards.
"A few million Nigerians, at most, have had the kind of educational opportunities that would allow a person of sufficient talent to enter a maths Olympiad"
The point is that in Belgium 100% of children have access to secondary education, and close to 100% of gifted mathematicians will go to very good universities.
In Nigeria half the kids have no *primary* education. Few receive secondary education and universities are nowhere near European, American or Asian standards. That's why I'm surprised they are doing as well as they are in the maths Olympiads. It indicates that the smart fraction is not negligibly small.
You quoted from Basden:
“The chief point of interest in this case is that the priest is called “Osu”, and that he has maintained his authority. Further, that is a profitable profession, so much so, that there is no lack of candidates especially from among the younger sons of chiefs The prospective returns are sufficiently attractive to induce young men to take any risk involved.”
The following paragraph (rest of the quote):
“This instance of the predominance of “Osu” practice appears to be an isolated one. It may probably be accounted for by the failure to distinguish between the priest and the sacrifices presented to the god. The priest may be loosely termed “Osu” as the one at the water “Di-Awo” near Umuchu (p.41), while the offerings. particularly the human ones, are the real “osus”.”
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=qKNOfk4pmmMC&pg=PA252&dq=osu+profitable+profession&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiRy9-ls9HJAhXCWxoKHcrxCu0Q6AEIJTAB#v=onepage&q=osu%20profitable%20profession&f=false
If you believe so, you’re throwing out all selection arguments, including those needed to explain the Yoruba getting better GCSEs than the Chinese. However, we know that FSM students score worse than Black Africans on both the CAT3, by a small margin, and the GCSEs, by a large margin. Either they went through a cognitive growth spurt between the ages of 16 and 18, or they are not a representative sample. We have no evidence for the former, but we do have evidence for the latter.
Also, you should look through more of your data. The Bangladeshis started out worse than the Black Africans before making large improvements, while the Mixed White & Black Africans (CAT3 = 100.8) have generally lagged only a little behind the White British, equalling them in 2011/2012. And again, the numbers for AAA+ students are drawn from the bell curve’s right-hand tail, which accentuates small differences in the mean.
I won’t claim to be able to explain the SAT data. However, in the UK, it appears that even Black Caribbeans have better GCSEs than White Britons of comparable (low) wealth. There is a government report on this subject (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmselect/cmeduc/142/142.pdf).
More recent studies estimate an average IQ of around 80 for sub-saharan africans. Considering the improvements in nutrition and education that took place in the recent years, it might be that these estimates are more reliable than the older ones. If we accept that the “true” (and with “true” I mean not considerably depressed by environmental factors such as malnutrition) average IQ of sub-saharan africans is 80, the numbers presented by Chisala become much less difficult to explain.
The more recent estimates (if they are what I am thinking of) are not necessarily more recent, but re-analysis of much of the same material used by Lynn (e.g.: by Wincherts who finds 81). John Fuerst finds about 75-77.
Another analysis using data from using Lynn and Wincherts:
https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2015/08/01/west-africas-mean-iq-lets-talk-about-the-numbers-by-afrosapiens/
Iq levels (of 80) are just as likely to be depressed considerably(up to 15 or so points as Lynn and others propose) by environmental factors.
There is some evidenceof recent rising means in Kenya(to low-high 90's)
also see comments
https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2012/06/03/massive-flynn-gains-in-kenya/
Bermudans, who are at least 50% black (perhaps more in my opinion) have begun to score at about the white average on highly g loaded tests.
https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2015/08/13/bermudian-blacks-close-the-black-white-iq-gap/
Bahamian blacks who average 83-7% African, score at a 93 iq. (for this, see comments to the above post as well as link below)
http://humanvarieties.org/2013/03/12/hvgiq-the-bahamas/
Even many wealthier tropical nations( e.g.: in the caribbean) likely have a disease burden(malaria is still fairly common in Trinidad for example and can depress iq) significantly greater than the west.
And from the same page of Basden preceding your (Sean’s) quote:
“One cannot overlook the fact that very many “osus” were devoted to the “alisi” when little children, who could not possibly be thought of as sacrificing priests. Another fact should be noticed, namely, that the “osu” seems to have no place on the western side of the Niger. Its is widely spread on the eastern side, with special prominence in the Owerri and Okigwi Districts.
There is a small area where certain “osus” seem to enjoy privileges similar to this stated to have originally belonged to the priests in the Owerri and Okigwi Districts.”
Among the Ibos of Nigeria 1912: 1912
By G.T. Basden, p.252
That answer is easy.
No one denies that given western conditions the African population would have an IQ above 70…
“….More recent studies estimate an average IQ of around 80 for sub-saharan africans. ”
The more recent estimates (if they are what I am thinking of) are not necessarily more recent, but re-analysis of much of the same material used by Lynn (e.g.: by Wincherts who finds 81). John Fuerst finds about 75-77.
Another analysis using data from using Lynn and Wincherts:
https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2015/08/01/west-africas-mean-iq-lets-talk-about-the-numbers-by-afrosapiens/
Iq levels (of 80) are just as likely to be depressed considerably(up to 15 or so points as Lynn and others propose) by environmental factors.
There is some evidenceof recent rising means in Kenya(to low-high 90′s)
also see comments
https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2012/06/03/massive-flynn-gains-in-kenya/
Bermudans, who are at least 50% black (perhaps more in my opinion) have begun to score at about the white average on highly g loaded tests.
https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2015/08/13/bermudian-blacks-close-the-black-white-iq-gap/
Bahamian blacks who average 83-7% African, score at a 93 iq. (for this, see comments to the above post as well as link below)
http://humanvarieties.org/2013/03/12/hvgiq-the-bahamas/
Even many wealthier tropical nations( e.g.: in the caribbean) likely have a disease burden(malaria is still fairly common in Trinidad for example and can depress iq) significantly greater than the west.
Is “autistic” the new “racist” word? Sometime ago it was “old.” Insult trends are always interesting because the words seem to be ‘bot’ driven, and bear little pertinence to their targets.
The critical observations here, are from people whose race has been blamed for the academic failures of others, in spite of their tax money providing access to education for everyone from 5-18. Nobody who has been in a classroom, or just around, a lot of the people being discussed (I’m not talking about a handful of highly selected academics) can believe they will ever improve much. Why should one expect it? If they were all that, we’d have seen the results by now. Indeed, in the case of hispanics, the best generation is the first to be born here. After that, it’s downhill.
In America, the cities that have spent the most on education for blacks (with all-black school boards and municipal government, such as Washington, D.C.) still have the lowest results for blacks. Blacks from families making $70,000 plus score the same as whites whose families make $20,000. That is well known and has not changed. Very few blacks get into universities without affirmative action. They even did away with the civil service exams in America in the late 70s, because too few blacks could score high enough to enter at all, much less at the higher levels they wanted. Hasn’t changed. Obviously some do very well, and if you restricted any testing to them, the results of race comparisons would show amazing and unexpected things.
Whatever British results show, it really doesn’t matter. England doesn’t need more”vibrancy.” It did incredible, if controversial things, for centuries with just northern people, if you take my meaning. It’s declining now. Only the cuisine is more varied if that’s an improvement.
Basically, England needs these Africans, however, smart, like it needs hole in the head. Smart blacks, are, however, very needed in their own ancestral countries. Whites really need to just keep out of the southern half of the world. They always stick to the soles and never leave no matter how “oppressed.”
"The chief point of interest in this case is that the priest is called “Osu”, and that he has maintained his authority. Further, that is a profitable profession, so much so, that there is no lack of candidates especially from among the younger sons of chiefs The prospective returns are sufficiently attractive to induce young men to take any risk involved."
The following paragraph (rest of the quote):
"This instance of the predominance of "Osu" practice appears to be an isolated one. It may probably be accounted for by the failure to distinguish between the priest and the sacrifices presented to the god. The priest may be loosely termed "Osu" as the one at the water "Di-Awo" near Umuchu (p.41), while the offerings. particularly the human ones, are the real "osus"."
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=qKNOfk4pmmMC&pg=PA252&dq=osu+profitable+profession&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiRy9-ls9HJAhXCWxoKHcrxCu0Q6AEIJTAB#v=onepage&q=osu%20profitable%20profession&f=false
There is no doubt about Osu being in reproductive isolation and having a different means of subsistance to other Igbo. Theories about Osu origins vary, the one about them being an untouchable caste is rather misleading. They used their privileges in way that may have enabled the accumulation of more resources than the so called freeborn. In any case I think it clear that a perception of Osu as exceeding the Igbo in educational attainment is widespread among Nigerians. Several sources say the Osu are overrepresented among prominent Nigerian families.
Their "privileges" were in only in a few regions of Igboland, as Basden describes. The Igbo, like the Yoruba, are culturally carried, being grouped in several city/town state subgroups ( a bit like the ancient Greeks). Osu may have been as you say(privileged) in a minority or regions, but not broadly.
"In any case I think it clear that a perception of Osu as exceeding the Igbo in educational attainment is widespread among Nigerians. Several sources say the Osu are overrepresented among prominent Nigerian families."
Two sources, recounting a (supposed) popular perception. If true it is (probably) mostly because they adopted western education earlier on average than other Igbo ,unsurprisingly since it helped them escape aspects of Osu- status restrictions (introduced other forms of work etc.).
As for reproductive isolation:
Osu were isolated historically(usually due to societal rejection), but Osu status only required one osu parent/grandparent or even ancestor(like certain stigmatized caste/caste-like statuses elsewhere e.g.: untouchability in India or "blackness" in the US by one-drop rule). Those with secret Osu ancestry (vulnerable to being considered "osu" if discovered) are not necessarily of purely or predominantly precolonial osu ancestry, esp. given the incentive to disassociate from the stigmatized status(by marrying out).
A closer parallel to untouchables in terms of overall role, would be the class of "ohu" slaves, sometimes owned by individuals/households, sometimes grouped in settlements like serfs. But they were more class than caste. Children of free fathers and ohu mothers were not slaves (I believe). Slave castes existed in parts of Mali (jonow caste) and Senegal (jaam caste).
“..They used their privileges in way that may have enabled the accumulation of more resources than the so called freeborn.”
Their “privileges” were in only in a few regions of Igboland, as Basden describes. The Igbo, like the Yoruba, are culturally carried, being grouped in several city/town state subgroups ( a bit like the ancient Greeks). Osu may have been as you say(privileged) in a minority or regions, but not broadly.
“In any case I think it clear that a perception of Osu as exceeding the Igbo in educational attainment is widespread among Nigerians. Several sources say the Osu are overrepresented among prominent Nigerian families.”
Two sources, recounting a (supposed) popular perception. If true it is (probably) mostly because they adopted western education earlier on average than other Igbo ,unsurprisingly since it helped them escape aspects of Osu- status restrictions (introduced other forms of work etc.).
As for reproductive isolation:
Osu were isolated historically(usually due to societal rejection), but Osu status only required one osu parent/grandparent or even ancestor(like certain stigmatized caste/caste-like statuses elsewhere e.g.: untouchability in India or “blackness” in the US by one-drop rule). Those with secret Osu ancestry (vulnerable to being considered “osu” if discovered) are not necessarily of purely or predominantly precolonial osu ancestry, esp. given the incentive to disassociate from the stigmatized status(by marrying out).
A closer parallel to untouchables in terms of overall role, would be the class of “ohu” slaves, sometimes owned by individuals/households, sometimes grouped in settlements like serfs. But they were more class than caste. Children of free fathers and ohu mothers were not slaves (I believe). Slave castes existed in parts of Mali (jonow caste) and Senegal (jaam caste).
"Osu may have been as you say(privileged) in a minority of regions, but not broadly."
Their "privileges" were in only in a few regions of Igboland, as Basden describes. The Igbo, like the Yoruba, are culturally carried, being grouped in several city/town state subgroups ( a bit like the ancient Greeks). Osu may have been as you say(privileged) in a minority or regions, but not broadly.
"In any case I think it clear that a perception of Osu as exceeding the Igbo in educational attainment is widespread among Nigerians. Several sources say the Osu are overrepresented among prominent Nigerian families."
Two sources, recounting a (supposed) popular perception. If true it is (probably) mostly because they adopted western education earlier on average than other Igbo ,unsurprisingly since it helped them escape aspects of Osu- status restrictions (introduced other forms of work etc.).
As for reproductive isolation:
Osu were isolated historically(usually due to societal rejection), but Osu status only required one osu parent/grandparent or even ancestor(like certain stigmatized caste/caste-like statuses elsewhere e.g.: untouchability in India or "blackness" in the US by one-drop rule). Those with secret Osu ancestry (vulnerable to being considered "osu" if discovered) are not necessarily of purely or predominantly precolonial osu ancestry, esp. given the incentive to disassociate from the stigmatized status(by marrying out).
A closer parallel to untouchables in terms of overall role, would be the class of "ohu" slaves, sometimes owned by individuals/households, sometimes grouped in settlements like serfs. But they were more class than caste. Children of free fathers and ohu mothers were not slaves (I believe). Slave castes existed in parts of Mali (jonow caste) and Senegal (jaam caste).
Correction:
“Osu may have been as you say(privileged) in a minority of regions, but not broadly.”
"Osu may have been as you say(privileged) in a minority of regions, but not broadly."
Correction: “The Igbo, like the Yoruba, are culturally varied”
1) For one thing, neither Belgium nor Nigeria participate in the competition every year.
Belgium
https://www.imo-official.org/country_info.aspx?code=BEL
Nigeria
https://www.imo-official.org/country_info.aspx?code=NGA
So plugging in 37 and 9 in your equation instead of 47 and 10, we get Belgium's adjusted numbers as follows:
Gold medals: 0. Silver medals: 4. Bronze medals: 13. Honourable mentions: 13.
2) The real flaw in your logic, though, is not accounting for the population size:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependencies_by_population
Since Nigeria has a population that's 16 times that of Belgium, the latter's adjusted medal count should be multiplied by several orders of magnitude. Maybe not 16, but one that's going to increase the gap substantially. It should be clear by now that Nigeria is way, way behind Belgium as far as performance in the Math Olympiad is concerned.
How about we take the years when Nigeria participated and compare its performance to other countries that have comparable population? Instead of counting the medals, I took the country rankings from this list.
https://www.imo-official.org/results.aspx
Country - Population - Ranking from 2015 to 2006 (excluding 2008 since Nigeria did not participate)
Brazil - 205,319,000 - 22 - 34 - 28 - 19 - 20 - 35 - 17 - 24 - 29
Pakistan - 192,180,908 - 85 - 75 - 79 - 73 - 81 - 89 - 85 - 78 - 76
Nigeria - 182,202,000 - 88 - 82 - 84 - 67 - 78 - 84 - 90 - 85 - 84
Bangladesh, 159,517,000 - 33 - 53 - 61 - 54 - 72 - 69 - 58 - 80 - 80
Russia - 146,464,030 - 8 - 4 - 4 - 4 - 4 - 2 - 3 - 1 - 2
Japan - 126,890,000 - 22 - 5 - 11 - 17 - 12 - 7 - 2 - 6 - 7
Belgium - 11,280,134 - 56 - 59 - 44 - 38 - 43 - 60 - 38 - 45 - 52
As you can see Nigeria is on the same level as Pakistan but consistently behind Bangladesh. It has to be pointed out: Both Pakistan and Bangladesh often field less than the allowed 6 contestants which hurt their country rankings. Brazil -- not known as an intellectual powerhouse -- is way ahead of all 3 countries. This is even more true for Russia and Japan. Russia's been on a slow decline lately but is never out of the top 10. Japan does well but is an underperformer by asian standards.
As I said originally:
“A few million Nigerians, at most, have had the kind of educational opportunities that would allow a person of sufficient talent to enter a maths Olympiad”
The point is that in Belgium 100% of children have access to secondary education, and close to 100% of gifted mathematicians will go to very good universities.
In Nigeria half the kids have no *primary* education. Few receive secondary education and universities are nowhere near European, American or Asian standards. That’s why I’m surprised they are doing as well as they are in the maths Olympiads. It indicates that the smart fraction is not negligibly small.
Osu are nothing like the untouchable caste of India. Historically, Osu in all regions were not molested whatever they did and could take things from the so called freeborn, sometimes even their land, while being exempt from communal labour and taxes. Those were privileges. The Osu from the earliest colonial time greatly exceeded the other Igbo in educational attainment according to several sources. All in all they were a privileged group in Igboland that had a special means of subsistence, reproductive isolation, and now are talked about as a concealed overclass of the Igbo. How can they not be of superior IQ?
Contact with them was considered defiling(hence the avoidance of them objects certain objects considered "contaminated" by them). They were not exactly like Hindu dalits, their role was much more specialized and of a different origin. There was no class/caste in Igboland exaclty/very closely corresponding to dalits/untouchables. I have seen no evidence that they could take land or things of great value( or in fact own land at all). Fringe benefits do not translate to privilege or a position of significant power in society.
“Historically, Osu in all regions were not molested whatever they did and could take things from the so called freeborn, sometimes even their land, while being exempt from communal labour and taxes. Those were privileges. ”
Contact with them was considered defiling(hence the avoidance of them objects certain objects considered “contaminated” by them). They were not exactly like Hindu dalits, their role was much more specialized and of a different origin. There was no class/caste in Igboland exaclty/very closely corresponding to dalits/untouchables. I have seen no evidence that they could take land or things of great value( or in fact own land at all). Fringe benefits do not translate to privilege or a position of significant power in society.
You respondend to this part of my first comment:
"Well, even you admitted that black immigrants as whole perform lower than whites in USA and UK. Only a few groups, like Nigerians, perform like or better than whites. So yes, you can say both things, that some immigrant groups are made up of intellectual elites in their country of origin, and that the immigration system in general does not select for the best, without contradicting yourself"
which I wrote in response to these words that Chanda wrote:
"right wingers are not with themselves. They want to have their cake and eat it. They say the immigration system is so broken that it does not select for the best. When the topic changes to the question of intelligence and it is pointed out that the immigrants’ children appear to be very smart, then suddenly many of the same people start saying “oh, what do you expect when Africa is just sending their PhD’s and doctors and engineers?"
So my point was that you can say that the immigration system, in general, does not select for the best people, and also that a specific group of immigrants, namely those from Africa, are made up of intellectual elites. The two things do not contradict each other. The fact that a small part of immigrants are super-selected does not change the fact that if you look at all immigrants you find that the average intellectual level is quite low.
Hmm… Can you name those hereditarians/HBDers who say that the US/UK immigration system is (qualitatively) bad, except with regards to African immigrants (a good chunk of whom come to the US through random green card lotteries, refugee schemes, family reunifications, etc)? Which HBDers say that that system works just fine (when the topic under discussion is immigration system)?
Fair enough. I guess it boils down to what impresses you. In the last olympiad, Nigeria is ranked 88 out of 104 countries. The countries that do fall below it are mostly african countries or very small countries. Look, I like a good underdog-winning-against-all-odds story myself but I prefer to aim a little higher. Iran is ranked 7 this year and often figure in the top 10 in other years. They do decently well in other competitions too — physics, chemistry, computer programming, etc. Not spectacularly well but decent nonetheless. Islamic countries usually don’t do well at all so Iran is always a surprise. And despite Islam’s reputation for misogyny, an Iranian woman became the first female Fields medalist last year. There are other poor countries in the top 10 : Vietnam is ranked number 5 and is a frequent fixture in the top 10. But the true head-scratcher is North Korea at Number 4, a country of only 24 million people that’s among the world’s poorest, most isolated and most mismanaged economies. There are constant reports of famine and malnourishment. Supposedly, North Korean adults are 1-3 inches shorter than their Southern counterparts due to poor diet. Like Nigeria, it only started joining the competition recently, but it’s been in the top 10 in 6 of the 9 years it participated. And despite being a smaller and a much poorer country than South Korea (rank 3 this year), its performance doesn’t vary much from their southern kin.
Unfortunately, good variance data at the national level is hard to come by, so one cannot easily test these smart fraction theories. All the previous studies use PISA data, as far as I know.
““According to the IAB brain-drain data bank’s Emigration rates file, for example, in 1990, 2000 and 2010, respectively, 1.08%, 3.52%, and 4.43% of all Somalis emigrated somewhere, but at the same time 20.03%, 37.72%, and 44.86% of highly educated ones did. Thus educated Somali’s are seemingly massively over-represented in the emigrant pool.”
This conclusion is obviously a non sequitur because the calculation omits the total number of “highly educated” Somalis (and the total number of the Somali emigrants) that would give us their fraction.”
The fraction of highly educated Somalis is likely very small. According to 2014 data on Somalis(in Somalia) ages 15-14, 3% have completed secondary school, and 1% have post secondary education.
“Somalia National Education Profile”
http://www.% pdc.org/sites/default/files/documents/EPDC%20NEP_Somalia.pdf
http://www.epdc.org/sites/default/files/documents/EPDC%20NEP_Somalia.pdf
This conclusion is obviously a non sequitur because the calculation omits the total number of “highly educated” Somalis (and the total number of the Somali emigrants) that would give us their fraction."
The fraction of highly educated Somalis is likely very small. According to 2014 data on Somalis(in Somalia) ages 15-14, 3% have completed secondary school, and 1% have post secondary education.
"Somalia National Education Profile"
http://www.% pdc.org/sites/default/files/documents/EPDC%20NEP_Somalia.pdf
(hopefully) corrected Somali education link:
http://www.epdc.org/sites/default/files/documents/EPDC%20NEP_Somalia.pdf
The education Somali education data is for ages 15-24;
"....According to 2014 data on Somalis(in Somalia) ages 15-24,..."
http://www.epdc.org/sites/default/files/documents/EPDC%20NEP_Somalia.pdf
Correction:
The education Somali education data is for ages 15-24;
“….According to 2014 data on Somalis(in Somalia) ages 15-24,…”
This conclusion is obviously a non sequitur because the calculation omits the total number of “highly educated” Somalis (and the total number of the Somali emigrants) that would give us their fraction."
The fraction of highly educated Somalis is likely very small. According to 2014 data on Somalis(in Somalia) ages 15-14, 3% have completed secondary school, and 1% have post secondary education.
"Somalia National Education Profile"
http://www.% pdc.org/sites/default/files/documents/EPDC%20NEP_Somalia.pdf
Thanks for this, Jm!
On the Singapore Vs Nigeria GDP growth gragh:What it means? Nothing. There are too many variables such as corresponding population growth, maturity/stages of industrilisation of each, the differences on measurements of GDP, the quality of GDP, etc. rendering such an apple-orange comparison meaningless.Plus, who contributed mainly to Nigeria's GDP growth post 2008? Is that possible the impact of the huge investment on rail, oil, infrastructure, agriculture, etc by the Big Brother of Singaporean Chinese - the mainland Chinese? LOLOn the The Impossible Chinese?:What Mr Chisala answered this time? Nothing new. Repeating that doggy table of 2007 1,000 times without bringing any extra fresh insight of the detailed data behind it, statistical analysis methodology used, and detailed table reporting method, does not somewhow make it a truth.
On Igbo:Panda is not arguing that Africans are all the same, Igbo probably is one of best tribes within Africa. But again, that's within Africa. If Igbos are so intelligent as a group, what are/were their techological/civilisational achievements now, 100 years ago, 200 years...500 years, 1,000 years, 2,000 years...5,000 years ago compared to the rest of the world, machetes aside? Oh, even the machetes, the most technological advanced machetes ever made likely originated in Tang Dynasty of imperial China prior to industrial revolutiuon before they were copies by the nearby Mongols and Japanese etc, instead of Igbos who were still in primitive earlier Bronze Age at least 1,000 years behind the civilisation curve at a time. ROFL
Metal casting by the Igbo and other ethnic groups were at a higher level than western Europe before the Renaissance. In fact most experts say that some of the most sophisticated sculpture in the world was made in Nigeria
https://africa.uima.uiowa.edu/chapters/ancient-africa/igbo-ukwu/?start=2#essay
similar items reflecting entirely different stages of technologies when they were from different historical stages, e.g. one from 500BC where as another from 1,000AD2. the sizes of each :how big are they, or how small are they , compared to others?sizes matter in terms of reflecting technological knowhow? similar items with similar carvings are of entirely different technologies if one is of normal baseball size, another is of small car size, or another is of nail size.3. the detail analysis of the bronze involved:not all bronze are the same, just as not all gold are the size ( 24k, 12k, 18k?... right, genius). With naked eyes average observer just can not tell the differences of detail compositions & technolgies involved in the bronze works which reflect entirely different technologies, until such a compararison analysis are provided.4. Comparison to others:Everthing is relative. Without giving detailed comparison to others of the same era, no one, "experts"of Uni Iowa or not, can claim that these Igbo artifacts are such and such unless they are complete idiots and trolls. Without comparison, anyone here in the forum can claim that he is one of the smartest beings of the universe!Google up "ancient Chinese bronze artifacts" photo pages to have a simple comparison shall we? ROFL The varieties of artistic designs, technological qualities (for instance,look into the detailed tech & composition analysis of bronze works of terracotta army 200BC), sizes, functions, colours, numbers, historic stages, etc make those Igbo ones look like results from 5-year-olds playing dirts at roadsides, if one is trying to be honest. ROFL
But Bird is relatively rare among whites.
And pro basketball players are relatively rare among blacks too. Next!
https://africa.uima.uiowa.edu/chapters/ancient-africa/igbo-ukwu/?start=2#essay
ROFL!
Says who? you? or a couple of guys from University of Iowa Africa Studies ( yay, sounds cutting edge huh) ?
And since when they represent most experts in the industry?
And which industry? PC Equality Industry? LoL
The link items and explaination you quoted, provided by Uni Iowa, are so low IQ that are not even funny, because they lack 4 key info which make them not even comparable but positively missleading:
1. the timing of casting for each:
similar items reflecting entirely different stages of technologies when they were from different historical stages, e.g. one from 500BC where as another from 1,000AD
2. the sizes of each :
how big are they, or how small are they , compared to others?
sizes matter in terms of reflecting technological knowhow? similar items with similar carvings are of entirely different technologies if one is of normal baseball size, another is of small car size, or another is of nail size.
3. the detail analysis of the bronze involved:
not all bronze are the same, just as not all gold are the size ( 24k, 12k, 18k?… right, genius). With naked eyes average observer just can not tell the differences of detail compositions & technolgies involved in the bronze works which reflect entirely different technologies, until such a compararison analysis are provided.
4. Comparison to others:
Everthing is relative. Without giving detailed comparison to others of the same era, no one, “experts”of Uni Iowa or not, can claim that these Igbo artifacts are such and such unless they are complete idiots and trolls.
Without comparison, anyone here in the forum can claim that he is one of the smartest beings of the universe!
Google up “ancient Chinese bronze artifacts” photo pages to have a simple comparison shall we? ROFL The varieties of artistic designs, technological qualities (for instance,look into the detailed tech & composition analysis of bronze works of terracotta army 200BC), sizes, functions, colours, numbers, historic stages, etc make those Igbo ones look like results from 5-year-olds playing dirts at roadsides, if one is trying to be honest. ROFL
similar items reflecting entirely different stages of technologies when they were from different historical stages, e.g. one from 500BC where as another from 1,000AD2. the sizes of each :how big are they, or how small are they , compared to others?sizes matter in terms of reflecting technological knowhow? similar items with similar carvings are of entirely different technologies if one is of normal baseball size, another is of small car size, or another is of nail size.3. the detail analysis of the bronze involved:not all bronze are the same, just as not all gold are the size ( 24k, 12k, 18k?... right, genius). With naked eyes average observer just can not tell the differences of detail compositions & technolgies involved in the bronze works which reflect entirely different technologies, until such a compararison analysis are provided.4. Comparison to others:Everthing is relative. Without giving detailed comparison to others of the same era, no one, "experts"of Uni Iowa or not, can claim that these Igbo artifacts are such and such unless they are complete idiots and trolls. Without comparison, anyone here in the forum can claim that he is one of the smartest beings of the universe!Google up "ancient Chinese bronze artifacts" photo pages to have a simple comparison shall we? ROFL The varieties of artistic designs, technological qualities (for instance,look into the detailed tech & composition analysis of bronze works of terracotta army 200BC), sizes, functions, colours, numbers, historic stages, etc make those Igbo ones look like results from 5-year-olds playing dirts at roadsides, if one is trying to be honest. ROFL
Furthermore, one can not just take it for certain that some of those items, or even any to the extreme, were made by Igbos themselves just because they were dug out in that area and of some Igbo traditional patterns on top. One needs to present more evidences.
It is hard for Panda to imagine if some people have never developed wheels for transport, domesticated farm animals for food, built more than 2-story high houses, and developed a written language, let alone a wrtten-down history etc had intellectual curiosities and capabilities developing bronze melting tech and factories out of blue. This is just not intuitively logical to Panda since human technological development has always been linear with one standing on the shouders of another.
Were some of them made by the Arabs instead at about 10th century and onwards when they made inroad into the region and developed trade relationship with the locals such as Igbos? Are there any from prior to 10th century era or much earlier AD? or from BC era when the rest of the world at large was in the comparable Bronze Age?
http://www.mozambiquehistory.net/arts/artes_plasticas/19830414_smiths_of_igbo_ukwo.pdf
They have.
http://evoandproud.blogspot.dk/2011/07/brain-size-and-latitude-why-correlation.html
I suspect Iran has some caste-like higher cognitive ability groups that mostly just interact with each other. At one point when I lived at the student dorm, an Iranian came as an exchange student. Actually, he was finishing up his 2nd master’s degree in hard science (physical chemistry). When I told him about the IQ results for Iran, he was surprised. He was actually the teacher of Iran’s math team too.
Unfortunately, good variance data at the national level is hard to come by, so one cannot easily test these smart fraction theories. All the previous studies use PISA data, as far as I know.
Most experts do say that the objects were of very high quality. No one has been able to make a link with Arabs but new archeological discoveries may show that there was outside influence, just the same way that Europe received outside influence. Also most Africans had domesticated animals for food
http://www.mozambiquehistory.net/arts/artes_plasticas/19830414_smiths_of_igbo_ukwo.pdf
The brass artwork is preceded by an art tradition going back 3,000 years ago called the Nok culture
http://www.mozambiquehistory.net/arts/artes_plasticas/19830414_smiths_of_igbo_ukwo.pdf
Still, you haven’t addressed most part of Panda’s previous 4 points in detail.
Moreover, “there was outside influence” is very sketchy. What “influence”? Made-in-Outside as per requests/specifications of Igbos then trade? Or Technology Transfer (TT) from outside and Made-by-Igbo? There are subtle differences. You know, India nowadays makes Boeing Aircraft, too!, parts of it, after Boeing made some TT to India. That, however, doesn’t credit Boeing technologies as Indian achievements. There still are a lot to be proved here for the Igbo bronze items.
More importantly, you haven’t addressed Panda’s logical puzzle yet:
how Igbo’s bronze works came all of a sudden from no where, without beginning (earlier step-by-step must-have technological foundations) and without follow-up continuity?
It’s like a guy without proven record of knowing basic maths such as plus/menus/multiply etc. knowledge of primary schools, suddenly came out with a “very high quality” idea of Limits and infinitesimals of Junior Highs, but you never see him continuing doing any work on Differential or Integral Calculus of high schools or earlier university as the logical next natual organic developmental move that one would have expected. Does it strike you that something is very fishy here? This tells much about the level of “most experts in the industry”. ROFL
I said there may have been some outside influence not that it was certain. There were thousands of objects made of brass looted from Benin city when it was looted in 1896 and it was certainly made by the native people living there
Maybe further archeological evidence will show an earlier brass industry. There was certainly an ancient art tradition in the region with the Nok culture
A reply to 2 points raised by Chanda Chisala http://drjamesthompson.blogspot.co.uk/2015/12/chanda-chisala-and-african-heredity.html
I lost interest in this discussion, and especially debating “Panda” anymore, but I found this post to be hard to pass up. Panda has now gone to the low of bandying some of the most tired, clueless memes about african history that have even been repeated by learned academics (like good old Rushton, Lynn, and Jensen.)
“It is hard for Panda to imagine if some people have never developed wheels for transport, ”
Wheels for transport aren’t of much use if you don’t have domesticated animals to pull contraptions with them. Still, I really love “the wheel” as the ultimate measure of achievement for an early, primitive civilization/culture. You could look at a people like the Aztecs/Mayans, who made incredible architectural and mathematical achievements, but you’ll still have some fool who will chime “BUT THEY DIDN’T INVENT THE WHEEL!!!” In the context of a that, it’s a tremendously overrated invention, and can be seen in the context of how many other seemingly easy, basic inventions have been overlooked by many civilizations, or weren’t invented until much later. There’s no real basis to hyping up the wheel in an early, primitive context as such an incredible accomplishment. It’s mainly a popular myth that’s become ingrained in people’s minds, even those who should really know better.
“domesticated farm animals for food,”
The guinea fowl was domesticated in SS africa, and SS africans widely made use of cows, goats (pygmy goats are native to west africa), dogs, and even horses. Lactose tolerance rates are higher in many parts of SS africa than in east asia (where it is rare.)
“built more than 2-story high houses, ”
I do not understand where this particular meme comes from- it’s mainly taken the form of “never/rarely built buildings higher than 1 story.” Multi-story buildings have hardly been uncommon in SS africa. The tellem/tolloy people of Mali multi-storied buildings out of stone and in cliff sides, and the dogon people who succeeded them widely built 2 story and up buildings (and often out of stone, which is widely available, in contrast to the rest of west africa.) The akan people also made buildings that were up to 3 stories and possibly higher: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1687307
Multi-storied buildings were also found among the Igbo: http://www.nairaland.com/1005808/igbo-architecture-ulo-ome-nigbo
This idea africans rarely or never built buildings more than 1 story in height is really bizarre, but then again, people often believe they were all stone age or never had agriculture (when virtually the opposite was true.)
“and developed a written language, ”
Ge’ez was technically developed in SS africa, and the igbo and other people seemed to have the beginnings of a proto-script was nsibidi. Regardless, it’s true no wholly indigenous script ever developed in SS africa, but full written language has only ever arisen in a handful of places in the world. Europe itself never developed it’s own wholly original language. That doesn’t stop people from singling out Africa.
“intellectual curiosities and capabilities developing bronze melting tech and factories out of blue. This is just not intuitively logical to Panda since human technological development has always been linear with one standing on the shouders of another.”
It’s not intuitively logical to Panda because he’s mentally disabled in some way, and he forgot that iron smelting was independently developed in southern Nigeria up to 4,000 years ago, and possibly elsewhere in west africa: http://www.unz.com/pfrost/the-jews-of-west-africa/
“Were some of them made by the Arabs instead at about 10th century and onwards when they made inroad into the region and developed trade relationship with the locals such as Igbos? Are there any from prior to 10th century era or much earlier AD? or from BC era when the rest of the world at large was in the comparable Bronze Age?”
And now Panda resorts to the timeless kneejerk reaction of racialist morons in excusing any and all achievements in SS africa- arabs (or berbers.) Putting aside how old iron smelting is in west africa, extensive urban development long predates them (ignore the stupid title): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b9LkpJdll9A
Or that sahel west africa is home to some of the darkest africans and the few racially mixed populations (like the tuareg and berber) have long remained overwhelmingly nomads, and today, the tuareg are still few in number (and not infrequently of overwhelmingly negroid ancestry.), so it’s pretty much impossible these civilizations were founded by non-blacks or ruled over by them. Besides, southern nigeria, where the Igbo and such are from, had little influence from muslims, and Igbo/Benin/Yoruba art bares no resemblance to Islamic art, and follows in the tradition of Nok art, also long predating muslim contact. I do not know the exact precedent to the art of Igbo-Ukwu, but advanced art predating outside contact (or any significant outside influence) was definitely found in Nigeria before the Igbo’s peak artistic achievements.
We can however talk about how early Chinese civilization was influenced by groups like the Tocharians, who introduced horses and other technologies to them. I’m not one of those people who thinks early chinese civ was ruled over by them (and those people often forget the most backwards parts of china are inhabited by them), but there’s about just as much evidence of early chinese civilization being influenced by outsiders compared to ancient west africa and southern nigeria.
Emil OW Kirkegaard: Beals’ data deals purely with modern groups. The ONLY time I am aware of Rushton and co referring to pre-modern skull data was in responding to Nisbett referring to, and they resort to the faulty “adjusting for body size”, which is a crude, misunderstood measurement that’s often been used by people like Nisbett to argue brain size has nothing to do with intelligence (and is just related to motor control for a larger body), but use that reasoning to explain away this inconvenience.
To repeat- brain size worldwide in the late paleolithic was larger than it is now, including africa and australia. Early australian skulls were comparable to cro-magnon/neanderthal skulls, as were early africa ones, like h. sapiens idaltu and the boskops. Even the earliest negroid skull on record, asselar man, was in that range, and is only several thousand years old.
It’s still incredible how Rushton, Lynn etc. get off on peddling their theories while not bothering to muster any honest archaeological support, and how few people have noticed this.
I adopted the C & H assumption that Jews weren't specially smart before the early Middle Ages though I doubt that because of their literacy and mentally demanding culture from at latest 500 BC. The end of the IQ ascent seems to have been very approx. about 1650 by which time Jewish numbers were rising well beyond what might have been possible if successful businessmen's children marrying the rabbi's children was the key paradigm. By the end of the 19th century Eastern Europe was exporting many illiterate Jews who were generations away from ancestors who may have managed Polish nobles' estates or lent money to them.
I know nothing of Mizrahi history but would take little persuading that the true ex-Iberian Sephardi had also evolved high IQs. But for both I would be pleased to be given some account of when snd where and how a putatively > 100 average IQ evolved, even a plausible Just So story.
Thomas Sowell’s contention is essentially the psychosocial environment in which an individual is raised is the precursor of intelligence; clearly evident in the figures quoted (Caribbean blacks vs African blacks). Indian and Chinese culture is highly geared towards cognitive development, as is the Jewish culture.
On the heredity issue, one thought that crossed my mind is the Ashkenazi could be a little like savants. Genetic diseases and physical disabilities could contribute to a higher focus on intellectual pursuits. Other than that, psychosocial environmental conditions are clearly evident when reading the literature about Jews.
From observation and reading various studies, cognitive development potential appears to be conditional upon neural pathway development that is contingent upon nutrition and stimulation from the psychosocial environment within the foundation years of childhood. Individual teleological apperception then becomes the governing paradigmatic process contributing to the heights of achievement that will be experienced in chosen fields of enterprise as an adult; which can be adversely affected by environmental and internalized variability when luck departs. Although luck, more often than not, is attributable to determination.
Regarding breeding blacks, what is overlooked is the psychosocial attitudes within the family. More docile children are raised from docile parents, but this is a psychological and behavioral disposition, not a genetic matter. Same applies to animals, but not plants or molecular cultures. Various discomforting externalities can arouse anxieties and create pathogenic antisocial attitudes within individuals. Emphasis on genes for producing thoughts is a moribund exercise of futility conducted at the expense of better scientific pursuits.
Although, I would settle for life in paradise on a coral island not threatened by typhoons, tsunamis or volcanoes and enjoying tranquil environs as Adam enjoying the delights of Eve.
About military technology this talks about Aztec and Central African Zande weapons
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arYpVhOHWKo
On the heredity issue, one thought that crossed my mind is the Ashkenazi could be a little like savants. Genetic diseases and physical disabilities could contribute to a higher focus on intellectual pursuits. Other than that, psychosocial environmental conditions are clearly evident when reading the literature about Jews.
From observation and reading various studies, cognitive development potential appears to be conditional upon neural pathway development that is contingent upon nutrition and stimulation from the psychosocial environment within the foundation years of childhood. Individual teleological apperception then becomes the governing paradigmatic process contributing to the heights of achievement that will be experienced in chosen fields of enterprise as an adult; which can be adversely affected by environmental and internalized variability when luck departs. Although luck, more often than not, is attributable to determination.
Regarding breeding blacks, what is overlooked is the psychosocial attitudes within the family. More docile children are raised from docile parents, but this is a psychological and behavioral disposition, not a genetic matter. Same applies to animals, but not plants or molecular cultures. Various discomforting externalities can arouse anxieties and create pathogenic antisocial attitudes within individuals. Emphasis on genes for producing thoughts is a moribund exercise of futility conducted at the expense of better scientific pursuits.
Although, I would settle for life in paradise on a coral island not threatened by typhoons, tsunamis or volcanoes and enjoying tranquil environs as Adam enjoying the delights of Eve.
Behavioral dispositions or PRE-dispositions ARE genetics (physical that express itself as action and reaction), behavioral genes are relatively metamorphic. No there a ”behavioral gene” FOR depression but a bunch of genes that ”even” combine with other genes and interactions with social environment may can disrupt this condition or not. Obviously will have a diversity of disposition intensities, some people just will born pre-depressed (or other similar condition like melancholy) and other people simply will be very difficult to develop depression, and for all rules always will be exceptions. We internalize ”certainties” about life and ourselves, in extreme and disadvantageous situations, different people will react differently, on average, because we are very behaviorally predictable, specially the average joeys. Thoughts is addict(able) and nurture our hunger for certainties. And we are highly suscetible to engage into a certain belief systems than others, the boring dichotomy ”right versus left”. Every piece created by humans have roots directly in the nature, even in the non-life nature.
Boskop master race
Extremely intelligent supermen that lived in South Africa thousands of years ago with massive brains (Apparent average IQ of 150)
http://discovermagazine.com/2009/the-brain-2/28-what-happened-to-hominids-who-were-smarter-than-us
The post is a joke just in case people didn’t know
Found this fascinating, according to John Hawks Homo Sapiens at one point had brains bigger than Neanderthals. The ancestors of San Bushmen also had massive brains
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CUo6cop4vXg
Also from the Somalian education document; In addition to only 1% of 15-24 year olds having post secondary education(and 3% having completed secondary), most have not completed primary education.)
“Figure 3 shows the highest level of education reached by youth ages 15-24 in Somalia. Although youth in this age group may still be in school and working towards their educational goals, it is notable that approximately 69% of youth have no formal education and 18% of youth have attained at most incomplete primary education, meaning that in total 86% of 15-24 year olds have not completed primary education in Somalia.”
http://www.epdc.org/sites/default/files/documents/EPDC%20NEP_Somalia.pdf
http://www.hirhome.com/rr/rrintro.htm
This series of articles does a great job of demonstrating a few of the following claims:
1. The main institutions that fund research into the supposed “black-white IQ gap” are descended from or receive most of their funding from, organisations that supported, promoted and funded eugenics in the US in the 1930s.
2. The IQ test itself was designed intentionally to make whites appear superior in intelligence in the first place.
3. That an African-American scores lower on an IQ test than a white American says nothing about genetic differences, because the amount of genetic variance between two black Africans is often *higher* than the genetic variance between a black African and a white European!
Chanda Chisala, great finding. I hope you can devote some time to convert this acticle to a paper form, and to publish in a journal. In doing so, it will become more widely seen, and more scholars can join the debate.
But Bird is relatively rare among whites.
What’s even rarer are great basketball teams in Africa. In the last Olympics the Nigerians lost by 83 points to the U.S. And black African basketball teams are routinely demolished by all-white teams in international competition.
This goes to demonstrate the idiocy of so-called HBD. Its adherents are myopically focused on the United States to the exclusion of the rest of the world. And they insist that virtually everything that happens in the U.S. is driven by genetic factors. Well, the purest blacks there are, black Africans, actually suck at basketball. Why? Because they don’t have a culture of basketball as deeply ingrained as in U.S, parts of Europe and parts of South America. The key word here is CULTURE.That’s what really drives virtually all human activity and outcomes. It is not genetics.
I appreciate your point but I wonder what drives culture?
Well we know it ain’t genetics. Arabs were leaders in scientific discovery, but their culture changed. Europeans were mired in dark ages superstition and backwardness, but their culture changed.
Also, who says their genotype hasn't changed significantly since? Their culture encourages certain types of people to have many more children than the average those people ain't the smart ones.
That’s not really true is it though. The Arabs were never very impressive. Sure they read a few old Greek books and made a couple of minor advances, but it was hardly the industrial revolution. Basically a handful of Arabs made a handful of interesting advances…
Also, who says their genotype hasn’t changed significantly since? Their culture encourages certain types of people to have many more children than the average those people ain’t the smart ones.
Also, who says their genotype hasn't changed significantly since? Their culture encourages certain types of people to have many more children than the average those people ain't the smart ones.
Without the Arab/Muslims it’s safe to say you and I wouldn’t have the technology we’re using to have this discussion. And there would be no European Enlightenment and industrial revolution absent the Arab/Muslim influence. I’d say that’s plenty impressive.
Ridiculous. People are driven to have sex at every opportunity. There’s no social planning as such. The genes remain the same, only culture changes. Arab immigration to a more conducive environment like America provides a natural experiment. Generally, they grossly outperform the native whites. Imagine Steve Jobs in Syria, where his father was from. He wouldn’t be Steve Jobs and we would never have heard of him. Ditto if Sergey Brin of Google had never immigrated from Russia at age 6. But as we know, it’s inevitable that cultures change over time. It could be that in the future your great-grand children will have to immigrate to the Middle East or Africa in order to fully realize their potential.
That’s wrong.
The first 2 points here are wrong too.
Genes do change. Blue eyes, lactose tolerance…these are two blatant examples. There are many, many more.
Arabs in the West have generally been awful immigrants. Visit France.
The last one is sort of true but not for the reason you imply. Cecil Rhodes had to go to Africa to fulfil his full potential, I guess.
You have simply regurgitated a few popular talking points. They are what we tell ourselves because we are politically correct. Nothing more. Don’t you feel ridiculous drawing a lesson about genes across billions of people from the example of one person? I’m agnostic on this issue but every time I discuss it all of the clever thinking is not from your side. From your side I just get random assertions and ill thought out regurgitation.
Try to think through your points yourself before you write and see if they make sense to you first. The point is not to just drone through the dogma to show how holy you are. The point is to try to understand the truth, whatever it turns out to be.
The Europeans of the dark ages already had blue eyes and lactose tolerance. The Europeans of the dark ages period and today's Europeans are, genetically, the same people. Ditto the Arabs. I can't believe you're seriously arguing this point.
Yes, Cecil Rhodes went to Africa to fulfill his potential, much like a bank robber goes into a bank to fulfill his.
Please stop citing political correctness. That's the fallback position you guys always use whenever your theories hit a brick wall, which is most of the time. Political correctness can't touch real scientific truths. For example, the law of gravity laughs at political correctness. If political correctness is a threat to your "science" then you do not have sound, verifiable and repeatable scientific principles. You have conjecture, theories, confirmation biases and cherrypicked correlations. And whatever you assert or present can be comprehensively rebutted with counter examples. Try rebutting the law of gravity or the law of thermodynamics. It's impossible.
You've said or denied things which leads me to believe that you're not serious. One only needs to look at the rise and fall of civilizations and empires to determine that cultural changes (whether internal or external) can have far reaching consequences while DNA stays more or less neutral. While there were advanced civilizations elsewhere, Northwestern Europeans had no writing, no technology, no architecture, no engineering, no sophistication, no science, nothing. Middle Ages Europe was many hundreds of years behind their contemporaries elsewhere. They would in a few hundred years dominate the world. They did not evolve or undergo radical genetic mutations. What changed was their culture, knowledge and influences (Muslims being a prime contributor).
France is not the United States. Again, environment.
The Europeans of the dark ages already had blue eyes and lactose tolerance. The Europeans of the dark ages period and today’s Europeans are, genetically, the same people. Ditto the Arabs. I can’t believe you’re seriously arguing this point.
Yes, Cecil Rhodes went to Africa to fulfill his potential, much like a bank robber goes into a bank to fulfill his.
Please stop citing political correctness. That’s the fallback position you guys always use whenever your theories hit a brick wall, which is most of the time. Political correctness can’t touch real scientific truths. For example, the law of gravity laughs at political correctness. If political correctness is a threat to your “science” then you do not have sound, verifiable and repeatable scientific principles. You have conjecture, theories, confirmation biases and cherrypicked correlations. And whatever you assert or present can be comprehensively rebutted with counter examples. Try rebutting the law of gravity or the law of thermodynamics. It’s impossible.
You’ve said or denied things which leads me to believe that you’re not serious. One only needs to look at the rise and fall of civilizations and empires to determine that cultural changes (whether internal or external) can have far reaching consequences while DNA stays more or less neutral. While there were advanced civilizations elsewhere, Northwestern Europeans had no writing, no technology, no architecture, no engineering, no sophistication, no science, nothing. Middle Ages Europe was many hundreds of years behind their contemporaries elsewhere. They would in a few hundred years dominate the world. They did not evolve or undergo radical genetic mutations. What changed was their culture, knowledge and influences (Muslims being a prime contributor).
Here is Rushton’s refutation.
http://www.arthurhu.com/99/04/diamond.txt
You need to take the UK education results with a very large pinch of salt.
The problem is that in order to close the achievement gap educational reports over here will compare the results of black British with those of native British students in receipt of free school meals. They will intentionally omit the ‘in receipt of free schools meals’ bit from all graphs and bury the mention of this fact somewhere in the body of the paper that hardly anyone ever reads.
It is really not a good idea to get into imaginary intellectual tussles with people that are clearly many times smarter than you have any hope of ever being, especially if you are going to add “LOL” at the end of your ‘rejoinder’. Apparently, Mr Chisala’s repeated use of the phrase “common sense” registered itself on your small brain as being an invitation to ridicule his argument that accompanied it and thereby cease an opportunity to pretend to knock down a pin that was threatening the existence of the little bubble of fabricated racial self-esteem you live in. And your small panda brain repeatedly saw his repeated use of the phrase as an opportunity for such precisely because your little brain has been fed with what it regards to be an elite notion that common sense is characteristically flawed and merely characteristic of the common man (or panda) which your little ego likes to believe it isn’t part of. It also suggested itself to your little panda brain as a seeming opportunity to “put this uppity (threatening) African in his place”.
But what your little brain needs to understand is that the author’s repeated use of the phrase “common sense” was merely an attempt on his part to stoop down to your level and assure you that even little brains like yours can comprehend his points. Though yours apparently did not (perhaps because it didn’t want to).
As for the point with which you erroneously imagined you were rebuffing the author with, nowhere did he say or even suggest that other ethnic groups apart from the Igbos didn’t have their own cohorts of high performers. His point, which your tiny panda brain seems unable to wrap itself around, is that there has been clearly been an enormous difference between the selective nature of Nigerians migrating to the UK and Nigerians performing highly within Nigeria itself. And that, therefore, the UK cohorts cannot have being selected (much) by the same criteria of intelligence. The fact that other ethnic groups also have high performers is completely irrelevant. Take a few hours to ponder that and I’m sure even your little brain will come to understand that.
(The question is not sarcastic: it occurred to me years ago that American blacks, and particularly the males, do so badly that perhaps a quite specific explanation is required.)
“Today of course, we could resort to chemical castration of black rapists and murderers but that would deny them their “right” to commit further acts of mayhem when they are released from jail.”
Why not also castrate white and latino rapists and murderers?
I find it really amazing the level of stupidity the majority of white commenters on this article are displaying. In an ironic way, this in itself serves to corroborate the fundamental point of Chisala’s article. These respondents clearly do not understand the arguments that were made in the article. Either because they are way beyond their level of comprehension or because they simply did not want to understand them. It’s as though their eyes simply glazed over the article, skimming it in a highly superficial manner and cherrypicking what they thought they saw to be the arguments that they could recast and refute.
The most common daft rejoinder by these people is essentially “anecdotal evidence is unconvincing” or “one exception does not prove the rule”. Yet the arguments have absolutely nothing to do with anecdotal evidence or ‘exceptions’. In fact, it is actually the opposite. The precise point is that high performance among black Africans in western countries (not just UK, as these people tend to forget) is a trend…an actual factual statistical trend. FAR from being ‘anecdotal’ or an ‘exception’. And that is in spite of low cognitive selection, as the article outlines. Furthermore, these people tend to miss the even more crucial point that the argument pertains specifically to the CHILDREN of the African immigrants and not the immigrants themselves. It’s as though they did not read the whole discussion in the article about regression to the mean.
The funny thing is that in the act of making these daft responses, they tend to do so in a haughty and contemptuous manner, making pretenses of an intellectual superiority to the author of the article that they are CLEARLY not even fractionally close to having. One wonders if this attitude is a result of the fact that the author is an African and thus they instinctively perceive his writings to be a direct threat to their cherished beliefs.
First of all, the assumptions here are correct. No race or ethnicity will score “100 IQ on modern day norms of UK” without proper iodine consumption or mal-nourishment and I mean it.
Even the Chinese score in low 80 IQs and even below, if you look at IQ samples from China in 1990-2000 when nutritional status was not good.
Although the IQ samples are supposedly thrown by Lynn, but it can be seen on Malloy’s blogs.
Here are such IQ samples:-
Wang, 2001 (Average IQ of 76-81)
Source: http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/wang-2001.pdf
Shandong province, china.
Hong, 2001 (Average IQ of 65-82)
Source: http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/hong-2001.pdf
Shandong province, china.
Li, 1995 (Average IQ of 79-89)
Source: http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/li-1995.pdf
Guizhou province, china.
Yang, 1994 (Average IQ of 76,81)
Source: http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/yang-1994.pdf
Jinan, China.
An, 1992 (Average IQ of 76,84)
Source: http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/an-1992.pdf
Guyang county, inner Mongolia.
Guo, 1991 (Average IQ of 76,81)
Source: http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/guo-1991.pdf
Hunan province, china.
Fan, 2007 (Average IQ of 96, 98)
http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/fan-2007.pdf
Pucheng County, Shaanxi Province, China
Li, 2003 (Average IQ of 92)
http://www.fluorideresearch.org/412/files/FJ2008_v41_n2_p161-164.pdf
Baotou, Inner Mongolia, China
Zhang, 1998 (Average IQ of 80,85,87)
http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/zhang-1998.pdf
Kuitun region, Urumqi, China
Yao, 1997 (Average IQ of 92-100)
http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/yao-1997.pdf
Chaoyang City, Liaoning Province, China
Yao, 1996 (Average IQ of 92-98)
http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/yao-1996.pdf
Chaoyang City, Liaoning Province, China
Duan, 1995 (Average IQ of 71-99)
http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/duan-1995.pdf
Guiyang, Guizhou Province, China
Xu, 1994 (Average IQ of 69-83)
http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/xu-1994.pdf
Shandong Province, China
Sun, 1991 (Average IQ of 69-85)
http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/sun-1991.pdf
Guizhou Province, China
Ren, 1989 (Average IQ of 75-85 appx.)
http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/ren-1989.pdf
Shandong Province, China
Lin, 1991 (Average IQ of 71, 77, 79, 96)
http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/lin-1991.pdf
Hetian prefecture, Xinjiang, China
14 more IQ studies showing low average IQ on China:-
Qian, 2009 (14 IQ studies showing 81-90 average IQ)
http://000do4q.myregisteredwp.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/1836/2016/05/china-iodine-study.pdf
Overall IQ result:- Iodine sufficient (optimum conditions):-
84.7, 86.9, 87.2, 75.1, 75.1, 88.34, 85.15, 86.9, 88.65, 90.89, 87.56, 87.31, 97.8, 81.44
Even UK will score 80 IQ on modern day UK’s norms with similar iodine and mal-nourishment. And it is actually true as UK’s average person in 1960 has same IQ as 84 IQ guy today.
So, any IQ analysis without discussing iodine and mal-nourishment status across nations is pseudo-science.
Secondly, even in Africa the average IQ between nations is correlated to iodine consumption and mal-nourishment.
Here are 2 blogs which discuss this in greatest details:-
https://iqincrease.quora.com/
https://africaiq.quora.com/
Average IQ of 850 million people in Africa is discussed and potential geno-typic IQ is calculated using “iodine and mal-nourishment corrections”.
On the other blog, IQ of African nations using “varying iodine consumption” and “mal-nourishment” is calculated to see if there is any variation or not.
Most importantly, IQ of African nations is heavily correlated to iodine consumption.
Nations like Tunisia where “iodine consumption is 96%” already score around 89 IQ as evident in TIMSS and PISA.
While nations like Ethiopia where “iodine consumption” is 19% score 76 IQ.
Similar trends are seen in India and Caribbean nations.
In Caribbean nations,
https://iqsouthamerica.quora.com/
Guyana has lowest iodine consumption (10%) and lowest CXC scores.
Even if you look at white Caucasians,
http://www.ign.org/cm_data/Scorecard_2015_August_26_new_intake.pdf
Average iodine consumption is much higher in USA and Canada. While in UK, it is low.
Hence you can expect American and Canadian whites to outscore UK whites on PISA and TIMSS by as much as 5 IQ or 30 points. Which is actually true.
Environmentalist: 1, hereditarian: 0