“African Americans have on average about 25 percent of European ancestry and this increases their IQs above that of Africans in Africa” – Richard Lynn, Race Differences in Intelligence.
Although it is virtually impossible to get official data that breaks down and compares black student scholastic performance in the US at the level of sub-ethnicity or even just nations of origin (which is why we went to the UK in the first place), there was one rare moment in 2011 when this disaggregation slightly happened with Seattle public schools. The Seattle area apparently has a large African refugee community, which makes it perfect for our social experiment.
Remember our goal. We only need to show that blacks in Africa would have a higher average IQ than native black Americans if they were moved from Africa to America since the African environment clearly depresses IQ, as both environmentalists and hereditarians agree in principle. This result would mean that whatever “problem” the black Americans have that result in such a large and intractable IQ gap with whites and other groups, has nothing whatsoever to do with the genetic evolution of races, especially since they even have more white genes than Africans. It is not their sub-Saharan African (black) genes that are responsible for their chronic academic under-achievement; it has to be a factor that is endemic to African American history.
The data from the Seattle Experiment shows that refugee children speaking different African languages at home in the US perform surprisingly well on the state tests, just like their fellow refugees who went to the UK, where they also start out with a large language barrier. Just like in the UK, they perform below whites (at least before sufficient linguistic assimilation), but still way above what is expected from their estimated national or racial (genotypic) IQs. Their performance above American blacks (labeled as “English-speaking” blacks) defies the common sociologist explanation that higher achieving black immigrants are simply the most driven members of their source populations (some were just in refugee camps), and it equally defies the modern hereditarian argument that they are just the most self-selected in intelligence relative to their source populations, unless we now start extending this cognitive self-selectivity and “assortative mating” quality to people who run to United Nations refugee camps for protection. (It is not necessarily all who were from these camps, but that doesn’t matter since even those who were from there are performing above native black Americans).
The story that reported these results disclosed the many shocked reactions of Americans in the Seattle area when they were exposed to this unexpected data, especially black American parents. The immigrants outperformed the native blacks despite their obvious background of steep poverty (and perhaps even some traumatic experiences from their countries, not to mention the culture shock of suddenly migrating to a first world country). “How is that possible?” one incredulous black American parent reacted when she was shown the results.
Many native black Americans usually attribute the well-known superior academic performance of black African students to the “wealthy families” they supposedly come from in Africa, where their parents allegedly own oil fields and diamond mines in their backyards. Seeing indigent African children outperform them was utterly disillusioning as it instantly shattered all their working rationalizations.
There were no Ghanaian or Nigerian immigrant children in this experiment, but we can logically expect that they would perform above these more disadvantaged refugee children, just as they do in the UK, if anything due to their higher exposure to the English language before migrating.
The source article is worth reading in full, even if just for the amusingly shocked reactions of the people named in the story. The included attempts to give explanations for these surprising results only make the article more enlightening, especially if one wants to see how much most people stick to their ideological positions even in the face of contrary evidence. For example, the conservative scholar who was asked to comment from the Fordham Institute, a “conservative education think tank in Washington, DC,” had no choice but to just stick to the trite “they must have come from wealthy and educated families,” without being bothered with the contradictions.
To his credit, the reporter of the story noticed that this “conservative” response was ridiculous in light of the data. Surely the Somalian refugees coming straight from refugee camps with a large number lacking high school educations were not also selected for their wealth and intelligence inherited through long lines of African elites? Then where on earth can you ever find average Africans?
The other more liberal “experts” consulted were no better, also offering textbook answers that were clearly contradicted by the same story they were commenting on, including the claim that society has just placed low expectations on black American students. And yet this same story shows that this community had even lower expectations for the African refugees since everyone was so shocked by their performance!
Now to the numbers. This research was instituted only for the city’s policy purposes and not for any particular academic purpose, so they did not publish anything in any journals, beyond their few press statements.
However, I found a simple presentation document they archived somewhere on the web that gives an idea of the numbers involved and a breakdown for the performance of other ethnicities, including Hispanics and Chinese in the city.
The fact that these are only group pass rates (on mathematics and reading) does not matter for purposes of ethnic IQ comparison since the pass rate positions correlate perfectly with expected mean IQ score ranks of the groups before disaggregation (that’s the same logic we were using for GCSE pass rate comparisons, especially when mathematics is included).
What was more shocking is that even before they learned to read as “well” as black Americans, most of these African groups beat the black American children in math (Table above). The black American children only managed to beat the Somali kids before they could learn to read, but as soon as they learned some reading, even they too beat the black American children on math (Table below).
To remove any doubt about the authenticity of their performance, these refugee children were actually competing with Hispanics more than with the American blacks.
The Amharic speaking children had a math pass rate of 62 percent, which was not only higher than the math pass rate of their Spanish-speaking-at-home Hispanic peers, but even higher than the pass rate of the assimilated Hispanic kids (those who speak mostly or only English at home)!
Hispanic English speakers versus Spanish speakers at home.
These results also had some other interesting points that are outside the scope of this research,but may be of interest to others in the IQ research community. For example, Hispanic kids who speak English at home do not gain any advantage at all in reading over those who still speak Spanish at home, but they apparently get some advantage in math, which sounds quite counter-intuitive. If this observation is generalizable, then perhaps Hispanic assimilation, as far as it goes, does lead to some elevation in real (g-loaded) intelligence? (If it was the other way around – more intelligent Hispanics assimilating more – their reading pass rate would have probably been higher too.)
The fact that this experiment was done in the top economic city of Washington State (Seattle) makes the results even more emphatic.
Many IQ scholars, including Lynn, have said that blacks in the northern states have an IQ advantage over those in the southern states and they have estimated their average IQs at around 90 and above.
In 2006, HBD blogger “Audacious Epigone” found a way of estimating the black IQs of different states using Lynn’s methods (on NAEP test scores) and he found Washington State on top with an estimated black children IQ of 94.5 (it was just a little lower when he repeated the calculations in 2013 with some slight changes). They were actually number one in the country in those first 2006 estimates:
Black IQs by State, derived from NAEP Scores. Source: Audacious Epigone blog.
On the other hand, Ethiopians test scores are quite at the bottom in Africa, as reported by Lynn (Zambia was always reported as the top scoring sub-Saharan African nation, which is the only reason this author does not actually dislike Richard Lynn).
Source: IQ and the Wealth of Nations, Lynn and Vanhanen, page 62.
The low IQ scores of Ethiopia, using data that is relied on by hereditarians to make their comparative IQ calculations, shows that even if the Ethiopian refugees in Seattle were a slightly cognitively select group from their nation, these would still just be average IQ by African standards. Thus, a full 15 points selection would just bring them to IQ 78 (one IQ point above Zambia), which means the super-selection argument is void from the start.
So, how does one of the lowest IQ scoring groups in Africa, emigrating with the lowest evidence of any selection whatsoever (economically or academically), have their children score above black Americans in one of the highest scoring states for native black Americans, (some) even outscoring Hispanics who are assimilated, before they are even assimilated themselves? How do even the Somalian refugees brought in from a total failed state catastrophe outscore black Americans as soon as they just learn to read some English?
It can certainly not be explained by any of the recent HBD answers, individually or in combination:
- a 12 to 15 point increase in IQ from parents to children due to better nutrition and lower parasite load? Like the UK case, these achievements are true for those children who were already born and living in Africa, as these children were; and they come from countries that were among the most malnourished in Africa.
- Extremely high parental immigrant selection? Refugees from truly troubled countries are not known to be selected for intelligence. Besides, some of these particular groups have the highest number of parents with no high school diplomas.
- Presence of (non-white) Caucasoid genes? They do not outscore other black immigrants in the UK who have no such Caucasoid genes. Also, they are not the ones who have the “smarter” European Caucasian genes – that would be the black Americans.
- High presence of Igbos in their population? No.
[In Part 3 we revisit the UK to close the case there].
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.
Chanda you are completely correct but you should just give up. Not because of anything you did, but because HBD is a cult.
These people will never accept that they’re wrong. They think HBD is some super secret incontrovertible truth that nearly everyone on Earth is suppressing and that everyone secretly agrees with them.
I disagree with many statements which are supported by hardcore hbds, but it doesn't mean that hbd is essentially wrong exactly what you, dishonestly, are trying to do.
HBDers may have some cult type proponents, but we generally follow the evidence, no matter where it goes.
HBDers are the ones who say it is both genes and environment; they are largely responding to the Blank Slaters who say it is all environment and no genetic component.
Keep in mind the limits of this paper, including that it is largely 1-8 grades, where the IQ gap is easiest to close.
http://www.unz.com/article/closing-the-black-white-iq-gap-debate-part-2/#comment-1197823
You make the assumption that the refugees are a representative sample of their home countries’ populations.
In a country like Somalia, getting into a refugee camp may be more desirable than not being in one. And from there to be selected for relocation to America may also be more desirable than not.
As with most desirable things in life, those with a higher IQ or socioeconomic status may be better at working the system to their benefit to get them.
Getting a representative sample is hard problem, one of the hardest in the social sciences. You can’t just take a population and assume they represent anything beyond themselves. It’s true there’s no evidence that they are not representative, but there’s also no evidence that they are. The truth is we don’t know. And that isn’t a solid basis for drawing conclusions.
This doesn’t follow from Africans outperforming black Americans. You would need to show that Africans perform just as well as whites (or Asians or Jews). It is quite possible and even likely for black American underachievement to be the result of both genetic and cultural factors.
This is quite possible. “Micronutrient deficiencies (e.g. in iodine and iron) influence the development of intelligence and remain a problem in the developing world. For example, iodine deficiency causes a fall, in average, of 12 IQ points.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_of_health_on_intelligence
THE ROLE OF NUTRITION IN SECULAR INCREASES IN INTELLIGENCE - RICHARD LYNN page 277
According to your link, 37.5% of Somali immigrants lack a high school diploma, meaning 62.5 have one.
But according to this UNICEF report, if I am reading it correctly (and maybe I am not), only 13.2% of Somali’s will attend high school. (see p.4 and p.7) If so, Somali immigrants to the US are highly selected.
http://www.childinfo.org/files/ESAR_Somalia.pdf
“A further persuasive study using a different methodology is that of Winick, Meyer and Harris (1975) of Korean infants adopted by American parents. One hundred and eleven Korean female babies were classified into 3 groups of malnourished, moderately nourished and well nourished on the basis of their height and weight. They were placed with American adoptive parents before the age of 3 yr. The mean IQs of the 3 groups at the age of around 10 yr were 102 (malnourished), 106 (moderately nourished) and 112 (well nourished), the difference between groups 1 and 3 being statistically significant. It is difficult to see how the results can be plausibly explained except in terms of a permanently adverse effect of poor nutrition in infancy on subsequent intelligence.” [Emphasis added]
THE ROLE OF NUTRITION IN SECULAR INCREASES IN INTELLIGENCE – RICHARD LYNN page 277
Fascinating series. Looking forward to the third installment.
I am a sceptic on most theories which are not thoroughly proved and which don’t have much if any bearing on my interests so I take Richard Lynn’s work as something to leave largely unread and not relied on. However, before I take time to finish reading this piece let me take issue with the logic of something said at the outset.
In summary that you are seeking to show that the persistent IQ gap between African-Americans and whites in the US has nothing to do with the differences in genes between races by showing that, once the environments are equalised for immigrants from Africa by coming to America they do much better on IQ tests and their equivalents than African-Americans who have on average more than 20 per cent European genes. And that your argument is fallacious and should give way to a serious attempt to establish the facts if you think getting it right matters.
It is fallacious because you have no idea of the IQ level of the Europeans who contributed their genes to the African-American gene pool. And it is fallacious because it does not recognise that African genomes are notoriously diverse and that there could easily be the range of average IQs according to class, caste or religion that one sees on other continents.
I'd say one could make a fairly logical inference that it is above 67.
IQ is very useful in the the context of a modern industrialized society, especially in academic professions. But it is much less useful in other contexts. If it worked that way – high IQ people just succeed everywhere and anywhere – all humans would have an IQ of 5000, as through human history only the people with high IQ´s would have survived and reproduced. Life might be an IQ test when you are an engineer in Europe but life is not an IQ test for everybody.
Be or not''Iq is -like- a real life'' or ''iq is not like a real life''
Iq reliability in the task of express quantitatively the level of collective (i mean, contextual average joey) and individuals is likely that varies greatly. I mean, some individuals will have expressed very well its cognitive levels while others not.Iq tests measured cognition and cognitive ability types. Correlates with general intelligence, because general intelligence is general, ;) Iq depending on personality type and/or specially anxiety levels, varies but it doesn't mean that don't exist a ''number'' that will be representative of our cognition quantitative levels. Is not just coincidence that highest fluctuation among iq scores happen during adolescence as well personality turbulations. ''This result would mean that whatever “problem” the black Americans have that result in such a large and intractable IQ gap with whites and other groups, has nothing whatsoever to do with the genetic evolution of races, especially since they even have more white genes than Africans. It is not their sub-Saharan African (black) genes that are responsible for their chronic academic under-achievement; it has to be a factor that is endemic to African American history.'''Say it has nothing to do with genes is idiocy. Everything that is related to biology has to do with '' genes', if this is a semantic proxy for '' behavior or inner disposition '' or '' it depends much more on being than space circumstances ''. Everything has to do with genetics, directly or indirectly. Never in this context does not belong to the real world.
''This result would mean that whatever “problem” the black Americans''
Problem in quotes. Will be by details that we can figure out the ulterior motives of (seems) dishonest people who mask them through semantic manipulations. But I understand in part, because I have to do the same thing when ''they' speak by generalized but predominantly right way about the average behavior of homosexuals. Right now it is not the reason that is predominates, but instinct and emotion, yet they are needed.There is a real problem with black people, ON AVERAGE, in the US (Suriname, Brazil, South Africa, Africa, etc), in fact, there are always problems when we have human beings, the best would be to analyze the smallest proportion of problems than the lack of it, just in a hypothetical community genotypic wises.''Remember our goal.''
Our?
'' We only need to show that blacks in Africa would have a higher average IQ than native black Americans if they were moved from Africa to America since the African environment clearly depresses IQ, as both environmentalists and hereditarians agree in principle. This result would mean that whatever “problem” the black Americans have that result in such a large and intractable IQ gap with whites and other groups, has nothing whatsoever to do with the genetic evolution of races, especially since they even have more white genes than Africans. It is not their sub-Saharan African (black) genes that are responsible for their chronic academic under-achievement; it has to be a factor that is endemic to African American history.''
*You could be more honest and tell us what is your estimate for the genotypic IQ of '' black African ''.Can be?*I'm anxious to know what is your estimativeDifferent personalities explain why albino africans ''looks'' smarter than black africans and why they are treated as smarter, even that their iq tests no have gap.Personality have a huge influence on iq or school achievement. People with dominant personality will be himself dominated by its personality and will tend to live in a short term perspective. I'm like that.
''The data from the Seattle Experiment shows that refugee children speaking different African languages at home in the US perform surprisingly well on the state tests, just like their fellow refugees who went to the UK, where they also start out with a large language barrier. Just like in the UK, they perform below whites (at least before sufficient linguistic assimilation), but still way above what is expected from their estimated national or racial (genotypic) IQs.'' What is the history of these children?They have been selected?
Let's make an analogy'' I see a dead Syrian boy in a Turkish beach ''and you tell me'' Look, this is a refugee who wanted to go to Europe with his family, but the European racism did he perish in these dark sand beaches ''
''The story that reported these results disclosed the many shocked reactions of Americans in the Seattle area when they were exposed to this unexpected data, especially black American parents. The immigrants outperformed the native blacks despite their obvious background of steep poverty (and perhaps even some traumatic experiences from their countries, not to mention the culture shock of suddenly migrating to a first world country). “How is that possible?” one incredulous black American parent reacted when she was shown the results.''
Refugees who may have had a very bad environment scored high on tests compared to black Americans ?? Wow, I thought the worst environment depress '' IQ scores ''.''Many native black Americans usually attribute the well-known superior academic performance of black African students to the “wealthy families” they supposedly come from in Africa, where their parents allegedly own oil fields and diamond mines in their backyards. Seeing indigent African children outperform them was utterly disillusioning as it instantly shattered all their working rationalizations.''
Again, you need not come from a rich environment to be smart, is not?
''The source article is worth reading in full, even if just for the amusingly shocked reactions of the people named in the story. The included attempts to give explanations for these surprising results only make the article more enlightening, especially if one wants to see how much most people stick to their ideological positions even in the face of contrary evidence. For example, the conservative scholar who was asked to comment from the Fordham Institute, a “conservative education think tank in Washington, DC,” had no choice but to just stick to the trite “they must have come from wealthy and educated families,” without being bothered with the contradictions.''
You accuse people of being just biased.... when they are talking about black-WHITE gap, but in fact they are just starting by potential-logical justifications , such as higher income, which consists of proxy for higher IQ, although the relationship is not significant in general terms. Other logic about this explanation is the huge difference between first and third world income. Average nigerian income mean very poor at american standards. Its difficult understand it?I need detailed history of all those searches to infer any more palatable thing above all that I have spoken so far I only have some data, and his words. Where are the sources?
We need to keep in mind that before being a reality, heredity is a probability. It is not uncommon, but it is not the rule, find smart people who came from families dominated by lower intelligence ''genotypes''. I even know a teenage girl who is very cognitively intelligent (she is thin), has a stupid brother (he's fat) and a mixed race mother who seems to be of average intelligence to level average Brazilian underclass. She is more introverted than their brother too.The more variables to intelligence (of any kind ... even if it is necessary to analyze the heredity of each) you and your spouse have, the greater the chances that their children inherit these variables.
Exactly – IQ tests do not test the ability to talk – the ability to converse with others is a major human trait. That ability is a true brain function.
Europeans are great engineers – Africans are great talkers – they must be given credit for that ability.
I don’t know gentlemen, it looks like Chisala just took a copy of The Bell Curve…
AND SLAPPED YOU IN THE NOSES WITH IT!
(Free rhinoplasty, can’t beat it.)
Getting to America is a massively positive life outcome and higher IQs are exceptionally well correlated with positive life outcomes; so it’s crazy to suggest that immigrants to America don’t have higher average IQs than their competitors.
Do you not find it strange that there is no solid evidence that Black Africans have the same average IQs as Euros? That you have to resort to small sample sizes on barely relevant tests and make assumptions that include the idea that in all the high stakes games that life offers immigration is somehow the only one where winning doesn’t correlate with high IQ?
Do you know what a circular argument is?
According to the report, the district pass rates for all races (non-ELL) in reading and math were 78 percent and 70 percent, respectively. For non-ELL black immigrants the reading rates were between 65 and 74 percent, that is, below the district’s overall rate. The corresponding math pass rates were between 47 and 62 percent, also below the district’s overall rate.
White pass rates aren’t reported (they could be calculated, laboriously) but given the figures for other races and the overall demographics described in the report, they must be higher than the overall district pass rates, indicating that there is a substantial test score gap between whites and black immigrants in Seattle.
What was more shocking is that even before they learned to read as “well” as black Americans, most of these African groups beat the black American children in math (Table above)
You are misinterpreting the table. The “including ELL” table contains all students, whether ELL or not. The non-ELL students are a subset of the “including ELL” students. For example, 60 percent (143/238) of the Amharic speakers are non-ELL. The ELL-only pass rates must be calculated separately. Looking at math pass rates, the Amharic ELL-only appear to have a rate of 34% which is lower than the native black rate of 36%. The other black immigrant ELL-only groups lack behind native blacks more.
Whether a student is labeled ELL or not is, of course, mostly a question of his or her proficiency in English. Students who are smarter and can pick up English easier will be more likely to be categorized as non-ELL. This means that the non-ELL students aren’t simply immigrants who have learned English but, to some extent, a cognitively selected subgroup of all immigrants.
The Seattle data, therefore, do not provide much evidence for Chisala’s thesis. We don’t even have to get into the fact that very little information is provided on the actual background of the black immigrants in Seattle, aside from vague claims about refugee camps. Nor is there need to deal with the false assumption that hereditarians believe children’s school achievement to be entirely genetically determined.
What is most troubling about Chisala’s article is his complete omission of John Fuerst’s research on black immigrant IQ in America. Fuerst has showed, using data vastly superior to Chisala’s, that black immigrants to America score below white Americans to approximately the same degree as native-born black Americans do. This research has been brought to Chisala’s attention, so the fact that he doesn’t address it calls the sincerity of his efforts into question.
I did respond to Fuerst himself about that in the comments of my very first article. I question that "vastly superior" evaluation (in this specific context) on the basis that Fuerst is dealing with data that is apparently NOT disaggregated: not on nationality (and certainly not on ethnicity). The whole point of my disaggregation approach, from UK data to US data, is that aggregated African data is not very helpful since there may be vast differences among Africans, from English language exposure to ... other things.
Do you not find it strange that there is no solid evidence that Black Africans have the same average IQs as Euros? That you have to resort to small sample sizes on barely relevant tests and make assumptions that include the idea that in all the high stakes games that life offers immigration is somehow the only one where winning doesn't correlate with high IQ?
I think that I understand your problem. The simple truth is that you’re a very elite Zambian. Your social circle consists of ultra elite people, who probably make you think that you’re middle class, and the non-elite but still top 10-20 percent, who you think are normal or even poor.
You then see immigrants often coming from that group which you consider to be normal or even poor and take them as a representative sample.
They are not. The vast bulk of the population of many African countries are peasants. None of those guys are making it to America as refugees because the vast majority don’t really know what a plane is and would be far too terrified to get on one. Nevermind all of their other misunderstandings. Let’s be honest, many of them have never and may never leave their village.
Even the local town is a bizarre and alien world!
I suppose I can’t blame you, because like most elites the majority of your countrymen are invisible to you.
Yes, the nose-in-the-air, blueblood elites of Zambia with a mean 86 IQ.
These people will never accept that they're wrong. They think HBD is some super secret incontrovertible truth that nearly everyone on Earth is suppressing and that everyone secretly agrees with them.
Typical leftoid ””argument””, i.e, histerical, idiotic arrogant and precociously triumphal ad hominem.
I disagree with many statements which are supported by hardcore hbds, but it doesn’t mean that hbd is essentially wrong exactly what you, dishonestly, are trying to do.
These people will never accept that they're wrong. They think HBD is some super secret incontrovertible truth that nearly everyone on Earth is suppressing and that everyone secretly agrees with them.
This is an interesting article.
HBDers may have some cult type proponents, but we generally follow the evidence, no matter where it goes.
HBDers are the ones who say it is both genes and environment; they are largely responding to the Blank Slaters who say it is all environment and no genetic component.
Keep in mind the limits of this paper, including that it is largely 1-8 grades, where the IQ gap is easiest to close.
African-Americans probably suffer an IQ depression due to crappy culture, yup. I think that is part of what is being argued. Black African immigrants have better motivation and do better.
I don’t think there is any indication that genes have no influence on IQ, though.
(Edit: Also, migrants definitely are a selected group. Somali migrants even ‘from refugee camps’ tend to be middle class, not peasants.)
In summary that you are seeking to show that the persistent IQ gap between African-Americans and whites in the US has nothing to do with the differences in genes between races by showing that, once the environments are equalised for immigrants from Africa by coming to America they do much better on IQ tests and their equivalents than African-Americans who have on average more than 20 per cent European genes. And that your argument is fallacious and should give way to a serious attempt to establish the facts if you think getting it right matters.
It is fallacious because you have no idea of the IQ level of the Europeans who contributed their genes to the African-American gene pool. And it is fallacious because it does not recognise that African genomes are notoriously diverse and that there could easily be the range of average IQs according to class, caste or religion that one sees on other continents.
“It is fallacious because you have no idea of the IQ level of the Europeans who contributed their genes to the African-American gene pool.”
I’d say one could make a fairly logical inference that it is above 67.
“I think that I understand your problem. The simple truth is that you’re a very elite Zambian. Your social circle consists of ultra elite people”
Yes, the nose-in-the-air, blueblood elites of Zambia with a mean 86 IQ.
I think that before we get to the personality attributions, we should wait and see if Chisala addresses it in his later posts.
In discussions, it is generally better to avoid references to the mental states of the participants.
“The data from the Seattle Experiment shows that refugee children speaking different African languages at home in the US perform surprisingly well on the state tests…”
Looks like the experiments were confounded by bilingualism which is known to affect intelligence positively.
Is there any hint as of what is the minimum IQ for those who pass?
And another thing: why is then black-white gap so persistent in US? What is the reason? It can’t be environment, since it’s hard to argue that refugees are coming from better environment; it can’t be racism, since you, Mr Chisala, have hinted that immigrants children also perform quite well, and it would be hard to argue that Jensen’s X factor is racism which uniformly affects every black in American society EXCEPT black immigrant children. So what it would be?
In summary that you are seeking to show that the persistent IQ gap between African-Americans and whites in the US has nothing to do with the differences in genes between races by showing that, once the environments are equalised for immigrants from Africa by coming to America they do much better on IQ tests and their equivalents than African-Americans who have on average more than 20 per cent European genes. And that your argument is fallacious and should give way to a serious attempt to establish the facts if you think getting it right matters.
It is fallacious because you have no idea of the IQ level of the Europeans who contributed their genes to the African-American gene pool. And it is fallacious because it does not recognise that African genomes are notoriously diverse and that there could easily be the range of average IQs according to class, caste or religion that one sees on other continents.
Unless you are arguing that there are (were) sub-ethnic European groups with IQs at African levels (or what Lynn estimates as African levels), it should not matter which Europeans passed their genes to African-Americans. The HBDers assert that “European” genes have something to do with higher IQ vis-a-vis “African” genes; different Europeans may have higher or lower IQs but that’s just natural statistical variance and will in any way be overcome in a couple of generations by regression towards the mean (the topic of Mr. Chisala’s previous article.)
You said you hadn’t finished reading the piece. You should, before you make comments like this.
Why only in Europe?
I'd say one could make a fairly logical inference that it is above 67.
When are you assuming the European genes were introduced on average? And are you, accordingly, making proper allowance for the Flynn effect?
I have seen some asinine comments on these websites, but this one has to take the cake. What desperation and opportunism can explain, you seek to lay at the feet of IQ.
This is a selection process, and there's no reason to think the winners will be representative of the greater population, with respect to IQ or otherwise.
Do you not find it strange that there is no solid evidence that Black Africans have the same average IQs as Euros? That you have to resort to small sample sizes on barely relevant tests and make assumptions that include the idea that in all the high stakes games that life offers immigration is somehow the only one where winning doesn't correlate with high IQ?
The entire body of work on IQ estimates of races and nations uses differences in “life outcome” as the basis for said estimates. There is no other “ground truth” to establish a difference. Now you are saying that the existence of similar “life outcomes” for black immigrants to white countries with the white natives cannot refute the prior estimates of IQ differences, which were arrived at purely by extrapolating from differences in life outcomes, because sample sizes are small and unrepresentative.
Do you know what a circular argument is?
I don't think there is any indication that genes have no influence on IQ, though.(Edit: Also, migrants definitely are a selected group. Somali migrants even 'from refugee camps' tend to be middle class, not peasants.)
He is arguing about persistence racial differences having (or not having) a genetic factor, not that genes and heredity play no role in intelligence. Anyone who doesn’t live in a cave knows that individual people vary in skills and abilities, and that their parentage plays a role.
This is really exacerbated with the modern trend of using post-secondary education venues for assortative mating.
In his previous post, Chisala said that “Africans in the UK who have both low income and low wealth have children performing at the white average or even above (and as I will definitively prove in part 2, this is certainly true of African immigrants in America too)” (emphasis added).
He completely failed to prove, definitively or otherwise, what he said he would prove in Part 2. He only presented some so-so data from Seattle showing that African immigrants score clearly below white Americans. He did not address Fuerst’s paper, even though he knows of it and it directly and comprehensively deals with the topic of this post. He also says that the next post will be about the UK, so he will not discuss Fuerst’s findings there, either.
Chisala has failed to deliver what he promised, and has presented research findings very selectively. That’s a fact.
I am more interested in your re-analysis of the numbers you described in the first comment. Could you publish it somewhere so one can see all the steps?
As in the previous article, the biggest single flaw in this study is the assumption that there is no self-selection bias in your samples of Africans in the United States. This assumption defies belief. Arriving in the US involves a long sequence of events, most of which cannot occur without some voluntary action on the part of the immigrants. Human immigrants are not jellyfish floating at the whim of ocean currents; they act voluntarily to facilitate their movement towards particular places. [I'd point out that the formal explication of this last assertion, the theory/paradox of action, first fully articulated by Talcot is the perhaps most fundamental principal of modern social inquiry.]
As JimC , the tenth commenter on this blog, mentions, Fuerst provides a strong empirical case that African out migrants are strongly self-selecting. The third commenter on this blog, Drake, provides data supporting the conclusion that your particular sample is self-selected. You certainly provide only a weak argument, unsupported by empirical data, against the reasonable assumption that your samples are as self-selecting as every other migrant stream in history, particularly the current stream of African migrants to the USA, and even more particularly your study samples.
That may even indicate a more intelligence-based self-selection process than refugees, people from war zones paying or indebting themselves to smugglers to get them out or simply approaching an aid tent.
These immigrants come from the Horn of Africa: Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Somalia. Sure, they’re “African” but so are immigrants from Malta. Culturally, genetically, and historically, the Horn of Africa is closer to the Middle East than to sub-Saharan Africa.
You’re creating a straw man of “African-ness” that nobody in this debate believes in.
You’re creating a straw man of “African-ness” that nobody in this debate believes in."
Lynn estimates Ethiopian IQ to be 63 - lower than Ghana and Nigeria (places where America's slave descended population originated) .
You’re creating a straw man of “African-ness” that nobody in this debate believes in
This is a bit off. For one thing, the Horn of Africa IS in "sub-Saharan" Africa, making their populations "sub-Saharan" Africans. Just as Malta and Greece have African gene flow, but still remain European, so does the Horn, and it still remains African. And there are plenty f cultural and historical links in Ethiopia not only with Arabia but also with native peoples already in place within the country, the Oromo for example. Matter of fact one of the problems in studying Ethiopians is the continual skewing of sampling towards recently admixed groups (Amhara) while downplaying the native Oromo- a point noted in the literature.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, the data on the Horn is mixed, but the populations there are definitely African as shown by several credible mainstream scholars. For example, cranial studies put the Somalis closer to African populations than others (Hanihara 2003). As far as DNA, Comas 1999, Sanchez 2004, etc etc show Somalis clustering more with Africans than any Middle Easterners.
On the key haplogroup E3b1 for example, a haplogroup originating in Africa with its greatest frequency in Africa, 77.6% of Somalis had it, with other Africans showing higher descending frequencies like Oromo (36%), Sudanese (18%), Kenyans (15%) and Middle easterners (6%) and Europeans (5%) bringing up the rear. (Sanchez 2004- High Frequencies of Y Chromo..) QUOTE:
The data suggest that the male Somali population is a branch of the East African population- closely related to the Oromos in Ethiopia and North Kenya.."
--Sanchez
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Third, the degree of "Middle Eastern: influence varies by era examined. The recent finding at Mota Cave, Ethiopia shows Middle Eastern elements are a relatively recent occurrence archaeologically. (Gallego-Llorente 2015). Other data show a clear preponderance of African genes in Ethiopians (Passrino 1998) and Cavalli-Sforza (1994). Per Cavalli-Sforza:
""The Ethiopians comprise different ethnic groups..and are classified as African, genetically speaking.."
"Given their relationship for more than three thousand years, it is not surprising that the Africans and Ethiopians sit together on the genetic tree.."
--Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza, Francesco Cavalli-Sforza, Sarah Thorne. (1995). The great human diasporas
And the degree of relationship reflects in part the markers chosen for study. As far as Y-chromosomes for example, Ethiopians and Somalians are of clear African provenance. (Richards 2003, Sanchez 2004).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fourth, sampling of Ethiopians often OVER-sample the Amahara who have more recent "Middle Eastern" admixture while downplaying the less admixed native Oromo. This is especially so when samples are drawn from Addis Ababa. Such problems are noted in the scientific literature by Semino (2002) and Pagani (2014).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fifth, the claimed "racially intermediate" positions in some quarters, re Ethiopians- are related not because of any "race mix" per se but their location- in the Out of Africa migrations of anatomically modern humans out of Africa. (Tishkoff 2009)
Sixth as you say southern European locations like Malta show African gene flow- this is true- so does Greece, Italy, Sardinia etc. Indeed, Europeans themselves are hybrids per conservative geneticists like Cavalli-Sforza: (Cavalli-Sforza 1997)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Horn of Africa isn’t even sub-Saharan Africa. It’s a completely different cultural region, as different as the Middle East is from Europe. But even if we look only at sub-Saharan Africa, we see major cultural differences.
Not quite. As already demonstrated, and as can be seen by any map of the Saharan line, the Horn of Africa IS in sub-Saharan Africa. And there are major cultural differences in every continent, and within countries as well- whether it be in Slavic lands or the Mediterranean as regards Europe. They are all still European. It is a distortion to say that because there are cultural differences in some African countries, that this disqualifies them from being African.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-4OHHIoPYpFE/U5aF-9WME4I/AAAAAAAAA_I/gaKr4UIiLXg/s1600/northafricadefinition.jpg
I love IQ articles. They are like those newspaper comics of old printed. Too many people care about test points, when what is important is what you do with your smarts. Seems like most of us are on the dumb side, but we don’t do near the harm that the high IQ types do with their grand ideas.
That's easy to explain: government selects for reasonably intelligent psychopaths and reasonably intelligent psychopaths select for government.
THE ROLE OF NUTRITION IN SECULAR INCREASES IN INTELLIGENCE - RICHARD LYNN page 277
Not really, it could be that the malnourished kids were over represented amongst cognitively challenged birth parents, that dullard parents had less wherewithal to properly feed themselves and their kids. So unless you can control for this, it’s not clear which way the causal arrow points.
That is to say – were the lower IQ Koreans lower IQ because they didn’t get decent diet and their brains didn’t develop properly or because their birth parents were too simply passed on their dullard genes, or is it something of each (which is what I suspect)?
One needs to work out experiments to check this.
There are similar problems with the ATL piece in assuming that the African refugees were representative of their source populations. One cannot just assume this. And absence of evidence that the refugees are selected, is not evidence that they are representative, or as the old canard has it absence of evidence is not evidence of absence!
This is basic stuff.
*Sorry, it is for Chinsala.*
Be or not
”Iq is -like- a real life” or ”iq is not like a real life”
Iq reliability in the task of express quantitatively the level of collective (i mean, contextual average joey) and individuals is likely that varies greatly. I mean, some individuals will have expressed very well its cognitive levels while others not.
Iq tests measured cognition and cognitive ability types. Correlates with general intelligence, because general intelligence is general,
Iq depending on personality type and/or specially anxiety levels, varies but it doesn’t mean that don’t exist a ”number” that will be representative of our cognition quantitative levels. Is not just coincidence that highest fluctuation among iq scores happen during adolescence as well personality turbulations.
”This result would mean that whatever “problem” the black Americans have that result in such a large and intractable IQ gap with whites and other groups, has nothing whatsoever to do with the genetic evolution of races, especially since they even have more white genes than Africans. It is not their sub-Saharan African (black) genes that are responsible for their chronic academic under-achievement; it has to be a factor that is endemic to African American history.”’
Say it has nothing to do with genes is idiocy. Everything that is related to biology has to do with ” genes’, if this is a semantic proxy for ” behavior or inner disposition ” or ” it depends much more on being than space circumstances ”. Everything has to do with genetics, directly or indirectly. Never in this context does not belong to the real world.
”This result would mean that whatever “problem” the black Americans”
Problem in quotes. Will be by details that we can figure out the ulterior motives of (seems) dishonest people who mask them through semantic manipulations. But I understand in part, because I have to do the same thing when ”they’ speak by generalized but predominantly right way about the average behavior of homosexuals. Right now it is not the reason that is predominates, but instinct and emotion, yet they are needed.
There is a real problem with black people, ON AVERAGE, in the US (Suriname, Brazil, South Africa, Africa, etc), in fact, there are always problems when we have human beings, the best would be to analyze the smallest proportion of problems than the lack of it, just in a hypothetical community genotypic wises.
”Remember our goal.”
Our?
” We only need to show that blacks in Africa would have a higher average IQ than native black Americans if they were moved from Africa to America since the African environment clearly depresses IQ, as both environmentalists and hereditarians agree in principle. This result would mean that whatever “problem” the black Americans have that result in such a large and intractable IQ gap with whites and other groups, has nothing whatsoever to do with the genetic evolution of races, especially since they even have more white genes than Africans. It is not their sub-Saharan African (black) genes that are responsible for their chronic academic under-achievement; it has to be a factor that is endemic to African American history.”
*You could be more honest and tell us what is your estimate for the genotypic IQ of ” black African ”.
Can be?*
I’m anxious to know what is your estimative
Different personalities explain why albino africans ”looks” smarter than black africans and why they are treated as smarter, even that their iq tests no have gap.
Personality have a huge influence on iq or school achievement.
People with dominant personality will be himself dominated by its personality and will tend to live in a short term perspective. I’m like that.
”The data from the Seattle Experiment shows that refugee children speaking different African languages at home in the US perform surprisingly well on the state tests, just like their fellow refugees who went to the UK, where they also start out with a large language barrier. Just like in the UK, they perform below whites (at least before sufficient linguistic assimilation), but still way above what is expected from their estimated national or racial (genotypic) IQs.”
What is the history of these children?
They have been selected?
Let’s make an analogy
” I see a dead Syrian boy in a Turkish beach ”
and you tell me
” Look, this is a refugee who wanted to go to Europe with his family, but the European racism did he perish in these dark sand beaches ”
”The story that reported these results disclosed the many shocked reactions of Americans in the Seattle area when they were exposed to this unexpected data, especially black American parents. The immigrants outperformed the native blacks despite their obvious background of steep poverty (and perhaps even some traumatic experiences from their countries, not to mention the culture shock of suddenly migrating to a first world country). “How is that possible?” one incredulous black American parent reacted when she was shown the results.”
Refugees who may have had a very bad environment scored high on tests compared to black Americans ?? Wow, I thought the worst environment depress ” IQ scores ”.
”Many native black Americans usually attribute the well-known superior academic performance of black African students to the “wealthy families” they supposedly come from in Africa, where their parents allegedly own oil fields and diamond mines in their backyards. Seeing indigent African children outperform them was utterly disillusioning as it instantly shattered all their working rationalizations.”
Again, you need not come from a rich environment to be smart, is not?
”The source article is worth reading in full, even if just for the amusingly shocked reactions of the people named in the story. The included attempts to give explanations for these surprising results only make the article more enlightening, especially if one wants to see how much most people stick to their ideological positions even in the face of contrary evidence. For example, the conservative scholar who was asked to comment from the Fordham Institute, a “conservative education think tank in Washington, DC,” had no choice but to just stick to the trite “they must have come from wealthy and educated families,” without being bothered with the contradictions.”
You accuse people of being just biased…. when they are talking about black-WHITE gap, but in fact they are just starting by potential-logical justifications , such as higher income, which consists of proxy for higher IQ, although the relationship is not significant in general terms. Other logic about this explanation is the huge difference between first and third world income. Average nigerian income mean very poor at american standards. Its difficult understand it?
I need detailed history of all those searches to infer any more palatable thing above all that I have spoken so far I only have some data, and his words. Where are the sources?
We need to keep in mind that before being a reality, heredity is a probability. It is not uncommon, but it is not the rule, find smart people who came from families dominated by lower intelligence ”genotypes”. I even know a teenage girl who is very cognitively intelligent (she is thin), has a stupid brother (he’s fat) and a mixed race mother who seems to be of average intelligence to level average Brazilian underclass. She is more introverted than their brother too.
The more variables to intelligence (of any kind … even if it is necessary to analyze the heredity of each) you and your spouse have, the greater the chances that their children inherit these variables.
It depends. Vietnamese refugees, at least in the early years, were culled from the upper levels of society. Do we have any reason to believe this isn’t the case with Somalis?
A contradiction isn’t an argument. Do you have an argument to counter his speculation, which almost certainly has historical precedents? It certainly does in the case of Vietnamese refugees who came from the upper class of S. Vietnamese society.
Do you know what a circular argument is?
Darwin’s theory, and its consistency and coherence with the observable world including among other mammals, makes it expected and forms one ‘ground truth’ that you believe doesn’t exist. Darwin, of course, believed his theory explained the cultural achievement gap between the people’s of the world. The real question is why you superstitious egalitarians hold to your beliefs despite no evidence whatsoever to support you religious fantasies that the historically separated populations of this world are clones? As Stephen Pinker has said, people are not clones. Not individually not as arranged in historically separated populations.
I wish the author would stop posting pictures of smart black students at good schools in his articles. He doesn’t seem to realize that it’s sort of working against him, to a degree. Everybody knows there are smart and exceptional black people. That’s not the point. Individuals and populations are very different things. It would be like me putting pictures of my middle-schoolers who are in gifted placement classes in my comments. Kinda weird.
I will just address the question of selection for now because it keeps coming back.
Take a country with IQ 63. Let’s grant that the refugees are as high as 1 SD selected above the mean (because to get into a refugee camp is harder than to get into a local university, apparently). That ridiculous selection level would STILL just be only IQ 78!
Is that the level of selection that you believe explains our data, especially given that their children would even have to regress downwards? How do they get to beat people with at least IQ 90?
Or you believe it should be even higher than 1 SD?
It is not enough to just keep saying “there is some selection here”, “this population is not really representative,” “they have more high school grads than the general population”, etc etc. The important question is what is that level of selection that you believe these humanitarian refugees represent? Present your selection estimate that explains the data away so that we can all go home.
(But we may not go home so quickly if you give us practically confused estimates. For example, if the humanitarian refugees end up being more intellectually selected than the emigrating surgeons!)
I've never seen it...so why are you arguing against it? No-one believes it.
If some ethnic groups in Africa have higher than average IQ, say 90, then immigrants from those groups would be around 97.5-105.
All of this is plausible and fits with the data.
Without denying that, just possibly, someone has administered a plausibly valid IQ test to a plausibly representative sample of the citizenry of some country and got a result of 63 for the average, is it even remotely sensible to regard this as measuring something on the same scale as measures IQs in Europe where the average is 100?
As I put it to Phil Rushton concerning similar or lower figures for Australian Aborigines you had to believe that at least a quarter of the population had IQs of the order of 50 or below and believe that they are not too retarded to feed themselves, let alone earn any kind of living. Obviously whatever is being measured is not what is being measured in Europeans.
You're creating a straw man of "African-ness" that nobody in this debate believes in.
” historically, the Horn of Africa is closer to the Middle East than to sub-Saharan Africa.
You’re creating a straw man of “African-ness” that nobody in this debate believes in.”
Lynn estimates Ethiopian IQ to be 63 – lower than Ghana and Nigeria (places where America’s slave descended population originated) .
When Communists take over a country, you can expect the upper classes to leave, because their interests are inimical to the interests of Communists. I’m not an expert on Somalia, but I doubt that what’s been going on there for the past few decades has any relation to a Cold War-style class struggle between the elite and the lower orders.
What if you don’t use Lynn’s particularly low estimates of Sub-Saharan African IQ? What if you start with, say, Wicherts et al., who put it ~80? (Of course, the Wicherts estimate poses its own problems for HBD, since, given European admixture in African-Americans and the environmental extremities in Sub-Saharan Africa, SSA IQ shouldn’t be so close to African-American IQ on the hereditarian hypothesis).
The Somali refugees in the US are mostly from camps in Kenya. Whole villages decamped to Kenya from Somalia during the 90s. AFAIK the allocation for resettlement is a FIFO without tests. Certainly many of the arrivals are illiterate (in Somali).
Now, if the average Somali IQ is 63 and their kids are performing better than US blacks (IQ 94) the IQ lift of “selection” for resettlement + US nutrition/healthcare is greater than 30 points.
Is essentially about egocentrism. Iq legitimates personal megalomaniac and wrong beliefs of many people.
If indeed there was real discrimination against black people, on average and in general, that would be better, the supposed ”average black African” that you are looking for, I would be among the first to realize, you can be assured. However, the country where I live, the descendants of Africans living here, (and I’m one of them, but with Caucasian appearance) does not look better as ”non-selected community” or ”natural demographic proportion of types” in relation to other ethnic groups . I’m not putting the ‘white man’ ‘on a pedestal, or the’ Asian man”.
To be honest, I hate all human groups and their cultures. They are all severely stupid at some very important aspect of harmonic existence. But there is no doubt, at least in the environment where I am there is a significant proportion of blacks and mulattos who are dysfunctional, for any context, and the explanation for this is not the race itself, but the mental race which is present in all human groups, the spectrum of anti-social behavior. The spectrum of anti-social (potentially violent-criminous) behavior is much more common among blacks than among modern whites and East Asians and Darwinian explanation is that different selective pressures have molded the 3 most explicit racial trunks where that in an environment of very harsh climate or other disadvantageous long term situation, cooperation has been the key to survival, while in tropical environments, there has been a significant need for cooperation. Of course it is not just that, but it makes a lot of sense.
Modern society is an example of relaxation for the selection of cooperative behavior, where we have the potentially exponential increase in anti-social types, if there is no further need to survive in the short term. What our friendly morons ideologues call ” tolerance ”. The victory of ‘alpha men” will mean less cooperation/less empathy.
Last observations by now
”Presence of (non-white) Caucasoid genes? They do not outscore other black immigrants in the UK who have no such Caucasoid genes. Also, they are not the ones who have the “smarter” European Caucasian genes – that would be the black Americans.”
You are entering contradiction to raise this question, if black Americans are predominantly African, anyway. And again, ” European genes ” can mean anything. If you had genetic pairing long term between the two groups, it could take some similar conclusion you arrived at this excerpt from his text.
Not only have ” European genes’ to be smart, ask for irish travelers.
”Extremely high parental immigrant selection? Refugees from truly troubled countries are not known to be selected for intelligence. Besides, some of these particular groups have the highest number of parents with no high school diplomas.”
Any people coming out of a place to go to another place is selected. Even a population of slaves, i.e. involuntary imigration.
There are people who have great desire to leave their country and this can tell a lot about their behavioral characteristics.
The average Nigerian has a income very lower, which makes it unlikely to be able leave your country with no job security or stability in other regions.
Geographic proximity explain differences in selection. Muslim immigrants who go to the US tend to be more ” selected ” (self-selected) than those who go to the UK.
Differences in standard of living and culture also explain differences in self-selections.
If circumstances are favorable, you will see the transplant joey average from one region to another, see France and maghrebians.
So basically students who speak a foreign language in the home but are not enrolled in ELL programs are more successful on standardized tests than those who are enrolled in ELL.
Well that’s just shocking.
I can’t believe anyone would try to argue this has any bearing on the heredity of IQ.
CC, in the name of all that is good and holy and for the sake of your immortal soul, get ACTUAL DATA before you write another article about African immigrant IQ.
Yes, the nose-in-the-air, blueblood elites of Zambia with a mean 86 IQ.
Obviously I am not referring to a group with a mean IQ of 86…being as educated and travelled as our author is, what do you think is the smallest fraction that would refer to him and his peers in Zambia?
The top 0.1 percent, 0.01 percent or even the top 0.0001 percent?
Let’s be honest, there’s a large group of Africans, although minute as a percentage of their different home countries’ populations, who go and get great credentials at the best Western universities and then, if they go back, they sit in their clubs, eat imported food and remain entirely disengaged from the 99.99 percent of their countrymen, all the while considering themselves middle class because one of their acquaintances is even richer and even more isolated than them.
This group obviously has an IQ higher than 86. It is representative of the tiniest sliver of the population and to this group, as to the author, the top ten percent of the African population, those with indoor plumbing, are somehow average people. Hence the confusion over whether African immigrants to the West are a representative sample or not.
Not that their high IQ means that this group ever achieves anything significant, but that’s another topic.
.01% of that is 14,500
.001% of that is 1,450
.0001% of that is 145
How cloistered are these people? Are they living in Mensa monasteries? I don't doubt your description of a certain class of of people acting like this, but I doubt they can be entirely oblivious of how much smarter than the lower class masses they are. That's something every elite throughout history has known and prided itself on.
And they can't be that insulated from it because there are a lot of stupid people who still end up in positions of power and influence. Idi Amin was a moron, Bokassa was a moron, lots of powerful people in Africa aren't really intellectuals or sophisticates.
I can understand the intellectual elites keeping these sorts of people outside their social circles as well, but it's impossible not to at least notice them at some point.
The U.S. black-white gap might be due to the welfare state. The availability of welfare over multiple generations might have had a negative effect on the black work ethic here. This negative effect might not have had a major influence yet on blacks who have just arrived from Africa. If IQ is genetic instead of environmental, then the welfare state here could still be having an effect by allowing low IQ blacks in the U.S. to have more children than they would in Africa where there is no extensive welfare state. That would have an IQ lowering effect on the black population here.
Has anyone ever thought that mean black African IQ, given a first world environment, would be even close to as low as 68?
I’ve never seen it…so why are you arguing against it? No-one believes it.
http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/lynn2010.pdf
You’re creating a straw man of “African-ness” that nobody in this debate believes in."
Lynn estimates Ethiopian IQ to be 63 - lower than Ghana and Nigeria (places where America's slave descended population originated) .
Lynn’s “estimates” are untrustworthy. He is not the Grand High Priest of “HBD” as some seem to want him to be.
People marry within a narrow range of IQ points of themselves, probably less than half a standard deviation. So it would seem that over time ancestry would have an effect.
This is really exacerbated with the modern trend of using post-secondary education venues for assortative mating.
Geography, climate, sure, I can believe that, though every geographical condition on earth poses unique challenges to its human inhabitants, so saying that people in cold regions evolved higher intelligence to survive the harsh winters is something I find dubious. After a founding population has figured out clothing and shelter tricks, that knowledge just need be passed down the generations; the kids and grand-kids don't need to be especially intelligent to understand how grandpa's dicta will help them survive the winter.
I don’t know, I’d like to see studies or statistical techniques that control for variables and show refugees and their source populations to be different or the same.
Also data that looks at cultural effects.
You're creating a straw man of "African-ness" that nobody in this debate believes in.
Respectfully, that “straw man” was present in your own article when you wrote:
Unless Igbo presence/absence can be used to explain the academic achievement of Middle East cultures?
I know that it is off-topic but I would like to add something because I don’t like the way my points are coming across. They have none of the balance which I prefer:
Black Africans need not be depressed by these arguments.
First, everyone is an individual and only has their own genes. Race is a somewhat useful category but only when looking at big effects and no-one should ever take it personally or be personally affected by it, time permitting.
Second, Africa is home to many groups and, although it can be a useful shortcut to talk of those groups as a whole, doing so really dulls the diversity of the place. Some groups may perform well-above the continental mean, and may indeed perform as well as any group in the world.
Third, IQ is very far from everything. Other qualities such as extraversion, joie de vivre and more, matter too. Clearly black Africans are higher in some qualities and lower in others, on average of course. I find the Chinese generally boring and Africans generally bright.
Fourth, the IQ gap is not huge once environmental facts are taken into account. While it certainly has some explanatory power and is significant it does not doom Africa to endless poverty and failure. If the smartest fraction of a country offers the right leadership then the country can shine.
Fifth, average genetic IQ can change rapidly. There are endless possibilities for how to pursue eugenic projects and these could, if extreme enough, transform a population in just one generation.
So really no-one should be disheartened. Your IQ does not reflect your group’s average and your group’s average is not fixed by anything except your own lack of imagination. This is why HBD matters: to fix a problem we must first recognise it.
You found that supposed random Africans refugees score higher than African Americans in Seattle where Audacious Epigone estimate that average IQ of them would be among 94.
So based on your thinking lines every group of non-selected ( and non-specified) afro-Americans who live in Seattle will score around 94??
“Life might be an IQ test when you are an engineer in Europe but life is not an IQ test for everybody.”
Exactly – IQ tests do not test the ability to talk – the ability to converse with others is a major human trait. That ability is a true brain function.
Europeans are great engineers – Africans are great talkers – they must be given credit for that ability.
But they have no idea what they are talking about.
Some people will be better at taking advantage of opportunities than other. Some people will be more effective achieving their goals in the face of desperation than others.
This is a selection process, and there’s no reason to think the winners will be representative of the greater population, with respect to IQ or otherwise.
Black American IQ is 85. African IQ, if it weren’t depressed by the environment, would be around 80. Assuming selection of .5 to 1 SD, African immigrants would have an IQ of 87.5 – 95.
If some ethnic groups in Africa have higher than average IQ, say 90, then immigrants from those groups would be around 97.5-105.
All of this is plausible and fits with the data.
If we accept your numbers above without too much quibbling, for example, there will still be only one refugee parent who will be selected by this selective immigration process. That's how the system works. The other parent and the children just come along once one is admitted. This will necessarily mean that the other parent will be the cause of offspring regression (before we even talk about any other sources of regression).
If you do the math now, you will fail to explain the performance of their children in Seattle and elsewhere. The other higher IQ ethnic immigrant example you gave will also fail to produce children who will equal the white mean (in the UK or something), if that's what you meant.
It is at this point that many people now just start proposing random selection measures, by working backwards from the answer, that start getting absurd. Whatever selection measures you propose have to make sense in the real world. If your numbers start looking like the Somalian refugees have the IQs of Somalian medical doctors and yet you know, for example, that they commit many crimes and have other characteristics in the US that reflect more of a much lower IQ, according to your own theory, then you have some big contradiction.
Or it might be that your numbers suggest that the era when only Somalian students on university scholarships were being admitted to the US now appears much less selected than the era when the US started accepting anyone from Somalia, which is absurd. The burden of proof is therefore on you if you are claiming high selection.
Respectfully, that “straw man” was present in your own article when you wrote:
Unless Igbo presence/absence can be used to explain the academic achievement of Middle East cultures?
First, I don’t believe humans are genetically uniform on any continent, let alone Africa. We know that intellectual capacity is determined by many genes, possibly thousands. If the “HBD position” postulates that these genes vary between large continental populations (e.g., sub-Saharan Africans versus Europeans), why would they not also vary over a smaller geographic scale?
If, as seems likely, Ashkenazi Jews have a higher mean IQ than do non-Jewish Europeans (and even Sephardic Jews), why would this sort of variation be absent from sub-Saharan Africa?
The Horn of Africa isn’t even sub-Saharan Africa. It’s a completely different cultural region, as different as the Middle East is from Europe. But even if we look only at sub-Saharan Africa, we see major cultural differences. And over time cultural differences tend to produce genetic differences. We adapt just as much to our cultural environment as we do to our natural environment. More so, in fact.
On the English GCSE, Somali students do worse than Nigerian (Igbo) students but not as badly as Congolese students. This is very roughly what I would expect. Keep in mind that we are trying to measure innate intellectual capacity with very imperfect instruments. GSCE is an imperfect proxy for IQ, and IQ is an imperfect proxy for innate intellectual capacity. So we are two steps removed from what we are trying to measure.
Please don’t quote Lynn to me. HBD is not a religion, and Lynn isn’t Jesus. There have been two surveys of the literature since Lynn. Wicherts et al. (2010) suggests a mean IQ of 82 for sub-Saharan Africa and Rindermann (2013) makes a “best guess” of 75. I suspect intellectual capacity varies clinally throughout sub-Saharan Africa, with the Horn of Africa occupying an intermediate position between sub-Saharan Africa and the Middle East (where mean IQs are about 90 or in the low 90s).
Clearly, you have no idea about what HBDers think. There are no “white genes” which magically raise IQ of every each white guy. Rather, the genes responsible for higher IQ, and they may be tens of thousands of them, are in higher frequencies in Europeans.
And that is why Europeans, who are white, have on average a significantly higher IQ than sub-Saharan Africans.
Exactly – IQ tests do not test the ability to talk – the ability to converse with others is a major human trait. That ability is a true brain function.
Europeans are great engineers – Africans are great talkers – they must be given credit for that ability.
So? These are a people who weren’t bright enough to invent the wheel or develop something resembling a civilization and what they did have, they turned into a cess pit that even animals didn’t want.
William Shockley pointed out decades ago that blacks in America were undergoing dysgenic selection pressures at an astounding rate.
I think that the author is criticizing an older view of HBD, which said that the races split up and we need to go 10s of thousands of years in the past to find origins of differences. People like Greg Chochrane, Henry Harpending, and Nicholas Wade have pointed out that all the evidence shows that evolution happens much more quickly than previously thought.
In other words, modern-day Africans might not tell us much about American blacks and vice versa.
Anyway, you’re talking about a few hundred students among the well-performing groups, and God knows the selection pressures that got them to Seattle in the first place. On the other hand, we have 100 years of intelligence testing and standardized test scores of a black population in the tens of millions, with massive efforts going towards trying to raise their standardized test scores.
Do you know what a circular argument is?
Have you actually read Lynn? Or even Wechsler’s refutation of Lynn’s data? The IQ is based not on the outcomes, but on the results of many IQ tests + tests from which you can estimate IQ (as PISA or TIMSS). It’s not using only PISA or using only IQ; it’s getting similar results no matter whether you use PISA or IQ. Since IQ predicts success in life (i.e. when you test IQ early in childhood), including achievements in education, it’s really hard to argue that results of IQ tests or PISA is simply measuring “outcomes”.
Bingo. Sailer pointed out at some point that “ELL” in California basically has come to mean Hispanic kids who aren’t very bright.
This is really exacerbated with the modern trend of using post-secondary education venues for assortative mating.
That may be true in modern Western (or Western-influenced) societies where everyone is free to choose their marriage partners after extensive “testing the waters”. For 99% of human history and for 99% of the world’s population, marriages were arranged for property, cultural, and kinship (clan, caste, guild) reasons. Marriages were contracted expressly for the purpose of running households and reproduction, not for companionship (one got that from friends and the “community”.) So I just cannot believe that marital selection has had any role in the evolution of intelligence.
Geography, climate, sure, I can believe that, though every geographical condition on earth poses unique challenges to its human inhabitants, so saying that people in cold regions evolved higher intelligence to survive the harsh winters is something I find dubious. After a founding population has figured out clothing and shelter tricks, that knowledge just need be passed down the generations; the kids and grand-kids don’t need to be especially intelligent to understand how grandpa’s dicta will help them survive the winter.
“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.”
What were her degree’s in ? I’m betting soft (pseudo) science, psychology, sociology…..
Exactly – IQ tests do not test the ability to talk – the ability to converse with others is a major human trait. That ability is a true brain function.
Europeans are great engineers – Africans are great talkers – they must be given credit for that ability.
” Africans are great talkers ”
But they have no idea what they are talking about.
“Rather, the genes responsible for higher IQ, and they may be tens of thousands of them, are in higher frequencies in Europeans.”
And that is why Europeans, who are white, have on average a significantly higher IQ than sub-Saharan Africans.
What were her degree's in ? I'm betting soft (pseudo) science, psychology, sociology.....
“What were her degree’s in ? I’m betting soft (pseudo) science, psychology, sociology…..”
She is a he. And he is a biochemist
What were her degree's in ? I'm betting soft (pseudo) science, psychology, sociology.....
At least get the gender right.
You think that black people were as smart, or smarter than white people in 1750?
You're creating a straw man of "African-ness" that nobody in this debate believes in.
Then why are the accepted IQ scores about the same?
“Seems like most of us are on the dumb side, but we don’t do near the harm that the high IQ types do with their grand ideas.”
That’s easy to explain: government selects for reasonably intelligent psychopaths and reasonably intelligent psychopaths select for government.
Huh? Why is that a goal?
Why? Can we declare a priori that these refugees are representative of their home populations?
Daniel Dennett once said that the word “surely” is a tell that the author of a piece is making a claim on very shaking ground. This is the quintessential example.
Look, you’re taking ridiculous and foolish shortcuts. Given the weight of the evidence, if these refugees perform above average, then Occam’s Razor would lead us to suspect first that they are an elite sample. Instead of carelessly assuming that they’re not, would it not be better to be thorough and find out first before declaring victory for your rather silly claims?
Again, why? Do you have any idea how select these refugees are? Holy cow man.
At the very least, some background on the refugees and their origins in Africa would be helpful – something a bit less superficial, I mean.
I’m taking it your another expert on Africa who has never been there?
Respectfully, that “straw man” was present in your own article when you wrote:
You just got dropped, Pete; you and David Lemieux in less than a week. It’s been an epoch to forget for the poutine-eaters.
…but you did get Trudeau in office…there’s that.
No, I’ve been there and I doubt you have. I’m sure Mr Chisala recognises my first hand experience. Although who knows how much he agrees with the perceptions I’ve formed from them. Nonetheless, they are my perceptions, honestly formed and without malice.
I assume you’re another black American who thinks that he gets Africa because he’s black. Sort of like how Rastafarians bizarrely made a God out of the Ethiopian King and often visit Ethiopia where they’re thought of as nothing more than a bunch of total freaks.
Or if we’re really playing the random assumptions game, I assume that you think that every December every African family celebrates Kwanza with their aunt La-sha and uncle Deshawntavious. Yes, I assume you’re another one of them.
So there it is.
You all a bunch of racist. Blacks are better in every way than whites or any other group. For sure in sports and music an we would be in IQ tests if the tests were made up by Blacks. But whites make the tests so that whites can do best. The answer is hard quotas for colleges and hiring. And for test sores. Or let Blacks make the tests and then we see who be the genius. Or something…
I've never seen it...so why are you arguing against it? No-one believes it.
Lynn has argued that exact thing, so have others. As seen in this paper of Lynn’s
http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/lynn2010.pdf
this was meant as an example. What I wanted to say: IQ tends to be more relevant in developed countries and IQ tends to be more relevant in specific professions. Of course becoming a good engineer requires a high IQ everywhere in the world.
But they have no idea what they are talking about.
that is exactly what makes somebody a good talker. and this a real, valuable quality!
http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/lynn2010.pdf
Nope. That is not what the paper says. It does not say that any mean IQ would be even near to 68 given a first world environment….why waste my time like that?
Look, you're taking ridiculous and foolish shortcuts. Given the weight of the evidence, if these refugees perform above average, then Occam's Razor would lead us to suspect first that they are an elite sample. Instead of carelessly assuming that they're not, would it not be better to be thorough and find out first before declaring victory for your rather silly claims?Again, why? Do you have any idea how select these refugees are? Holy cow man.
At the very least, some background on the refugees and their origins in Africa would be helpful – something a bit less superficial, I mean.
@ Jayman, please don’t comment here again, or on any of my articles. (And I won’t comment on your blog posts either, obviously). Thanks.
As for the other commenters, let’s try to keep a civil and respectful tone as much as possible if you wish the person you’re addressing to engage you in a rational exchange (especially the writer of the article — obviously). There are many others (on both sides of the debate) who are taking this issue seriously, so if you believe it is somehow beneath you, it is easy to just stay away, no?
Secondly (for the remaining commenters again), please also try to avoid the easy fallacies committed by some others here who obviously do not understand how logic works.
If I make a claim based on some evidence about something and you believe there is something else that negates my claim, it is your duty to prove your counter-claim with evidence (which I can then also attack if it is inconsistent with your own claims/premises/further evidence, and so on); it is not my duty to start looking for evidence that your arbitrary counter-claim is untrue.
For example, if you believe that my claims are easily falsified by the “fact” that there is very high selectivity among Somalian refugees, the burden of proof is on you to present your evidence for this clearly positive claim or “fact” and not on me to prove that your arbitrary counter-intuitive “fact” is untrue.
And your counter-“fact” is obviously not proved by its consistency with the rest of your system of models or claims, no matter how much you imagine that it has lots and lots of evidence. That’s called a circular argument, and to maintain your system of models by that method makes it (look like) a pseudoscience – it is unfalsifiable – since it rejects all possible negation a priori, like some epistemological axiom.
In real science, it can take only ONE instance to disprove what you thought was universally proven. Or at least to make you rethink an aspect of it.
Thank you.
move and concrete possibilities of doing so.Table 20 illustrates that roughly 16% of interviewees envisage remaining in the host country in coming years, while another 16% plan to return to their country of origin. At the same time,
a significant proportion of interviewees (42%) wish to live elsewhere, in
places such as North America (46%), Europe (34%), Gulf States or Egypt
(3%), Australia (3%), other African countries (1%), or in a yet unknown or 22% of those hoping to move farther have the actual resources and strategy to undertake their journey. It is quite clear from these figures that a majority of all those wishing to move further will not be able to achieve their desire to do
so simply because they lack the financial and material plans necessary to organize such a journey.'Do I also have to prove that having strategy and resources correlates with IQ?https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.unhcr.org/50aa0d6f9.pdf&ved=0CCEQFjABahUKEwj9x6yAidjIAhVD1BoKHVBdDbM&usg=AFQjCNEk5CWcncLtO-rAYa9WuI2jggNOPA&sig2=bv8AXYJVzxhbA7kenon_pQ
Your claims re. philosophy of science are too strong, too 'Popperian'. In reality, a single piece of evidence inconsistent or improbable with a larger system of beliefs does not refute the larger system. Reasonable people do not just drop an entire system of beliefs when they find one piece that doesn't fit. In general, the first thing they do is to evaluate the odd piece critically. Of course, if done to extreme levels, this would mean the system is unfalsifiable, but usually it is not taken to that extreme. Justification is about coherence/consilience of many beliefs.
For instance, for many years the movement of Mercury was known to not fit with predictions from Newtonian mechanics. Many attempts within the Newtonian system were made to explain this, tho arguably none were successful. Still, experts did not just drop their belief in Newtonian mechanics based on the single odd piece and they were right not to do so. Eventually, Einsteinian physics came and successfully explained the odd movement of Mercury.
I recommend reading Sokal's writings on philosophy of science. It is the best writing on philosophy of science that I have read. It can be found on libgen for free:
http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=c26c837ae373d43540c878379b1daad2
Being a good talker basically relies on the intellectual factor of general retrieval capacity. In one study, American Negroes were .3 s.d. above U.S. whites on this factor. It explains why negroes do so well at extemperaneousness (noted by Stave Sailer).
Well it looks like one thing both sides agree on – Lynn’s IQ estimates are hopelessly off the mark.
http://www.unz.com/runz/unz-on-raceiq-response-to-lynn-and-nyborg/
But I wonder if Lynn's claims of current African IQs sometimes being as low as 65-70 are actually so totally absurd as most commenters seem to think.
For example, there seems a great deal of solid testing evidence indicating that the IQs of Italian-Americans in the early decades of the 20th century were generally around 75-80 relative to a mainstream white mean of 100. So if Italians living in America then had IQs as low as 75, is it really so utterly ridiculous that African villagers living in the rural Congo today might have IQs as low as 65?
Much of this early 20th century IQ testing data was collected by Dr. Clifford Kirkpatrick, which I found very helpful and interesting a couple of years ago, and you can apparently buy his republished book on Amazon for as little as $4.67. So maybe someone should do that and see what they think:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/040500558X
As you almost surruptitiously recognize, who has the burden of proof really depends on whether the “fact” relied on is plausible. That’s what’s apparently being debated here. Jayman more than others made that clear: banning him does not serve inquiry.
JayMan and others have not offered a plausible explanation as to what would be the factors for such high selectivity, rather they've simply assumed that it must be so because they don't like the results of the data.
Now, I happen to be one of those people who notice any small contradictions very quickly, and I obviously don't mind innocent contradictions in argument. But I absolutely detest anything that looks like hypocrisy.
This is what that same person wrote on his own first blog post at Unz, about how he wants commenters on his blog to behave:
I think Chanda wants to have a debate with people who agree with his premises.
And to be fair, it would make the debate go much smoother for him.
(Having said that, JayMan has a history of doing the exact same thing at his website, so perhaps Chanda and JayMan deserve each other.)
If some ethnic groups in Africa have higher than average IQ, say 90, then immigrants from those groups would be around 97.5-105.
All of this is plausible and fits with the data.
Yes, but it takes us back to where we started: regression to the mean. The point of my first article was that if the black immigrants from very low IQ nations are just barely making it into these first world IQs due to high selection from their low IQ populations, then regression to the mean will ensure that their children will fall way below that threshold. It is therefore not expected of them to also have children who equally “make it.”
If we accept your numbers above without too much quibbling, for example, there will still be only one refugee parent who will be selected by this selective immigration process. That’s how the system works. The other parent and the children just come along once one is admitted. This will necessarily mean that the other parent will be the cause of offspring regression (before we even talk about any other sources of regression).
If you do the math now, you will fail to explain the performance of their children in Seattle and elsewhere. The other higher IQ ethnic immigrant example you gave will also fail to produce children who will equal the white mean (in the UK or something), if that’s what you meant.
It is at this point that many people now just start proposing random selection measures, by working backwards from the answer, that start getting absurd. Whatever selection measures you propose have to make sense in the real world. If your numbers start looking like the Somalian refugees have the IQs of Somalian medical doctors and yet you know, for example, that they commit many crimes and have other characteristics in the US that reflect more of a much lower IQ, according to your own theory, then you have some big contradiction.
Or it might be that your numbers suggest that the era when only Somalian students on university scholarships were being admitted to the US now appears much less selected than the era when the US started accepting anyone from Somalia, which is absurd. The burden of proof is therefore on you if you are claiming high selection.
Explain how you think it’s plausible that these Ethiopian and Somali refugees were selected to the nth degree for high IQ, the elite of the elite as JayMan implied. How hard would it have to be to get into a refugee camp to produce an average IQ two standard deviations above the norm?
JayMan and others have not offered a plausible explanation as to what would be the factors for such high selectivity, rather they’ve simply assumed that it must be so because they don’t like the results of the data.
I enjoyed your thoughtful and non-polemical discussion of this important issue.
What is your opinion on directly studying this issue through the analysis of genes? I.e. doing a GWAS for IQ with different groups and seeing how the frequency of relevant genes differs. I feel like this is more likely to give a conclusive answer than these sorts of social analyses, which tend to make a lot of assumptions.
However, there are lots of problems with this such as spatial autocorrelation (genetic drift) and differential linkage disequilibrium patterns meaning that the SNPs that correlate with causal variants in Europeans often don't do so in Africans, or at least, we don't know whether they do or not.
Currently, we are waiting for the results of the newest GWAS to come out. It found about 70-80 SNPs, much larger than the previous one. This will solve the sampling problem if using only SNPs with p < alpha. One can also use the polygenic scores which avoid the NHST approach. We have done this with the current SNP betas (Rietveld et al, 2013) and results were also in line with global hereditarianism. This analysis is still unpublished however and it needs SAC analysis.
See my recent commentary paper: https://thewinnower.com/papers/2735-polygenic-scores-genetic-engineering-validity-of-gwas-results-across-major-racial-groups-and-the-piffer-method
The population of Zambia is 14.5 million.
.01% of that is 14,500
.001% of that is 1,450
.0001% of that is 145
How cloistered are these people? Are they living in Mensa monasteries? I don’t doubt your description of a certain class of of people acting like this, but I doubt they can be entirely oblivious of how much smarter than the lower class masses they are. That’s something every elite throughout history has known and prided itself on.
And they can’t be that insulated from it because there are a lot of stupid people who still end up in positions of power and influence. Idi Amin was a moron, Bokassa was a moron, lots of powerful people in Africa aren’t really intellectuals or sophisticates.
I can understand the intellectual elites keeping these sorts of people outside their social circles as well, but it’s impossible not to at least notice them at some point.
I can’t “ban” someone for debate, I love debate! He was using unnecessarily disrespectful terms like “foolish” and “silly” etc in his post, just out of nowhere! And he was just making a basic point that I’ve in fact already addressed from other commenters here.
Now, I happen to be one of those people who notice any small contradictions very quickly, and I obviously don’t mind innocent contradictions in argument. But I absolutely detest anything that looks like hypocrisy.
This is what that same person wrote on his own first blog post at Unz, about how he wants commenters on his blog to behave:
But to exclude someone from the discussion for such mild shows of disrespect amount to excluding commenters with somewhat disagreeable personalities. I don't think any disrespect was intended, just bad manners not outside the norm.
Perhaps it's OK to ban people for minor shows of disrespect - but only if the ban hammer is wielded objectively. Would you have banned him for showing similar disrespect to some other commenter? I don't think so; some commenters have demonstrated greater levels of disrespect (to others) without consequence.
You can't have fair debate when special standards apply to how commenters treat you.
As I’m ignorant of the facts on the ground, I don’t have a plausibility assessment. That’s why I find reading the debate useful. Unfortunately, it’s now impossible to address this question to Jayman.
However, the debate is stymied because both sides wrongly claim the support of logic and scientific method. Jayman invokes Occam’s Razor; Chanda invokes the duty to defend “clearly positive” claims. These are mantras people recite when they can’t win the argument on the substance.
I think Jayman was being respectful, though disagreeing. Such criticism should be welcomed, certainly not banned (banning should be reserved for people who lack civility, eg, go ad hominem, use foul language, suggest doxing). No big argument can explain ‘all the facts’, because 1) all the ‘facts’ aren’t really true, and 2) there’s noise in those facts, so arguments will always persist. Bloggers at Unz should be used to skepticism.
The point is whether your main argument is true or not. Truth comes out of argument by a bunch of biased individuals. We all have our priors.
Chisala says:
“African Americans have on average about 25 percent of European ancestry and this increases their IQs above that of Africans in Africa” – Richard Lynn, Race Differences in Intelligence.
This “white blood” theory is comprehensively debunked not only by CHisala, but by conservative Thomas Sowell as well. See his Knowledge and Decisions 1983. The black immigrants from places like Nigeria for example have little “white blood” – yet outperform native Black Americans who on average have some 13-20% European genetic material. In addition, the African immigrants face language barriers that the American natives do not face- so right off the plane they are handicapped. Nor are Africans a special case. Immigrants from the black Caribbean, who have much less white blood than native blacks, have long outperformed native US blacks earning such derogatory titles as JEW-Maican from the natives. As Thomas Sowell showed way back in 1981′s book Markets and Minorities, some of these immigrants had already surpassed the general white average in income and education. (Sowell 1981)
This in part, contradicts the “immigrant supermen” theory for when the black Caribbean folks were compared to white people who were also “SELECTIVE” immigrants. Whites coming to America were also “selected”- they were the more driven whites wanting to escape the bleak prospects of “Old Europe.” SO the immigrant drive notion cuts both ways- white Americans are ALSO a “select” group, but they STILL, in some cases, fall below the Africans and Caribbean’s, and in general, the selected white American immigrants, fall below Asian performance. SO much for the “magic whitening drops” of popular “HBD” lore.
——————————————————————————-
Their performance above American blacks (labeled as “English-speaking” blacks) defies the common sociologist explanation that higher achieving black immigrants are simply the most driven members of their source populations (some were just in refugee camps), and it equally defies the modern hereditarian argument that they are just the most self-selected in intelligence relative to their source populations, unless we now start extending this cognitive self-selectivity and “assortative mating” quality to people who run to United Nations refugee camps for protection. (It is not necessarily all who were from these camps, but that doesn’t matter since even those who were from there are performing above native black Americans).
Indeed. Even if they were self-selected, they on average come from much poorer backgrounds than the Black American upper classes making all the big money. In short, the poorer African immigrants, outperform the richer Black Americans, and in some cases whites. In England, on some measures, they outperform on average, native whites, who have all the advantages and are not in coming from refugee camps.
——————————————————————-
In 2006, HBD blogger “Audacious Epigone” found a way of estimating the black IQs of different states using Lynn’s methods (on NAEP test scores) and he found Washington State on top with an estimated black children IQ of 94.5 (it was just a little lower when he repeated the calculations in 2013 with some slight changes). They were actually number one in the country in those first 2006 estimates
And this tracks with the data from the UK and the US re the African immigrants.
——————————————————————-
On the other hand, Ethiopians test scores are quite at the bottom in Africa, as reported by Lynn (Zambia was always reported as the top scoring sub-Saharan African nation,
Indeed. This too debunks the “white blood magic” myth of HBD lore, that claims Ethiopians are a “mixed race” population from the Italian occupation, or various Caucasoid Middle Eastern immigrations. Well all this “Caucasoid blood” should make the Ethiopians show up superior in the sweepstakes. Only they don’t- again debunking the HBD claim.
And Afro-Caribbeans only surpassed Whites in education, not income.
And who are the top-performing ethnic groups in the Seattle sample, man? Ethiopian and Eritrean ones! Totally contradicting your point! BTW, I think that's absolutely meaningless. Yemenis are not that intelligent, on average.
However, the debate is stymied because both sides wrongly claim the support of logic and scientific method. Jayman invokes Occam's Razor; Chanda invokes the duty to defend "clearly positive" claims. These are mantras people recite when they can't win the argument on the substance.
Chanda posted a study and offered a serious argument, JayMan said the words “Occam’s Razor” and offered nothing to back it up. A misuse of it anyway, as he’s now proposing there’s some complex, or at the very least non self-evident mechanism causing refugee camps to select for those of exceptional intelligence.
Now, I happen to be one of those people who notice any small contradictions very quickly, and I obviously don't mind innocent contradictions in argument. But I absolutely detest anything that looks like hypocrisy.
This is what that same person wrote on his own first blog post at Unz, about how he wants commenters on his blog to behave:
Well, I’m convinced he really thinks that you’re contentions deserve that description. I agree that, even so, it is disrespectful. I think it that the first word he posted, “huh,” is even more disrespectful.
But to exclude someone from the discussion for such mild shows of disrespect amount to excluding commenters with somewhat disagreeable personalities. I don’t think any disrespect was intended, just bad manners not outside the norm.
Perhaps it’s OK to ban people for minor shows of disrespect – but only if the ban hammer is wielded objectively. Would you have banned him for showing similar disrespect to some other commenter? I don’t think so; some commenters have demonstrated greater levels of disrespect (to others) without consequence.
You can’t have fair debate when special standards apply to how commenters treat you.
Stephen says:
However, the debate is stymied because both sides wrongly claim the support of logic and scientific method. Jayman invokes Occam’s Razor; Chanda invokes the duty to defend “clearly positive” claims. These are mantras people recite when they can’t win the argument on the substance.
Not really. There is no so-called “styming” of any debate. Jayman made his claim, and it was shown in detail to have several weaknesses. Some other folks have debated Jayman before and he is often the first on his own blog to delete people’s comments when he is getting the worse of an exchange, or when people don’t agree with him. As can be seen above, Chanda has done nothing fo the sort. All are free to go back and make a fresh case, if they can. What “stymied” debate?
And one of Jayman’s markers is the sweeping, sometimes messianic nature of his statements, as if only he has “discovered” such and such “truth” and all who disagree are “wrong” – as if he, an amateur blogger at random, possessed such special insight over and above numerous serious mainstream scholars. Note- too often, it is not solid logic and data being presented in reply, but said sweeping declarations, including the tactic of throwing out claims and leaving them for opponents to refute rather than put forward a credible argument up front.
—————————————————————————————-
Chisala says:
If I make a claim based on some evidence about something and you believe there is something else that negates my claim, it is your duty to prove your counter-claim with evidence (which I can then also attack if it is inconsistent with your own claims/premises/further evidence, and so on); it is not my duty to start looking for evidence that your arbitrary counter-claim is untrue. For example, if you believe that my claims are easily falsified by the “fact” that there is very high selectivity among Somalian refugees, the burden of proof is on you to present your evidence for this clearly positive claim or “fact” and not on me to prove that your arbitrary counter-intuitive “fact” is untrue.
Indeed. Less sweeping declarations of HBD “truth” and more credible argument would help his case. But he usually doesn’t stick around long when contradicted.
—————————————————————————————-
The point of my first article was that if the black immigrants from very low IQ nations are just barely making it into these first world IQs due to high selection from their low IQ populations, then regression to the mean will ensure that their children will fall way below that threshold. It is therefore not expected of them to also have children who equally “make it.”
In addition to a much poorer background than “First World” people, the Black Africans also face a language barrier upon arrival, which the Black Americans, and the white Americans that the Africans sometimes outperform, do not have. And yes, some of these refugees who are making good HAVE literally come from refugee camps. Case in point Mawi Asgedom. See his book: “Of Beetles and Angels: A Boy’s Remarkable Journey from a Refugee Camp to Harvard” 2002. He grew up playing soccer with rocks and later fled on a long trek from his native country during a civil war, living in a refugee camp for 3 years with his family, even as some fellow refugees died from hunger and disease. His father was no high powered bureaucrat or politician, or businessman, or professional like a doctor, but a medical assistant of modest means. Nor was his mother anything special. The family sold their 6 goats to finance the long wilderness trek out of the war zone.
Frankly, if you or the author can't handle Jayman'a rather mild rhetorical style, it says everything about you and your intellectual confidence and nothing about Jayman. The author threw a tantrum and demanded Jayman leave the debate. That was his choice and he is the one responsible for buggering the debate. It's fair to suspect that it was intentional.
Well, I really can’t involved in this long discussion thread, and I certainly haven’t studied the issues. I’ve also been quite critical of some of Lynn’s analyses in the past:
http://www.unz.com/runz/unz-on-raceiq-response-to-lynn-and-nyborg/
But I wonder if Lynn’s claims of current African IQs sometimes being as low as 65-70 are actually so totally absurd as most commenters seem to think.
For example, there seems a great deal of solid testing evidence indicating that the IQs of Italian-Americans in the early decades of the 20th century were generally around 75-80 relative to a mainstream white mean of 100. So if Italians living in America then had IQs as low as 75, is it really so utterly ridiculous that African villagers living in the rural Congo today might have IQs as low as 65?
Much of this early 20th century IQ testing data was collected by Dr. Clifford Kirkpatrick, which I found very helpful and interesting a couple of years ago, and you can apparently buy his republished book on Amazon for as little as $4.67. So maybe someone should do that and see what they think:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/040500558X
“Her mother and father… came to the U.S. from Ethiopia in 1983 with no education or job.”
Okay, Biiftu Dureso’s father arrived with no education. But if his daughter is so naturally smart, how come he’s still only a janitor after 32 years in this country?
I’m not being totally facetious here. This example is pretty odd in light of the first article’s claim that we are not witnessing regression to the mean among immigrants from these groups. Here, at first glance, one might guess that Biiftu’s father was an outlier and a sharp regression occurred in the upward direction.
If African immigrants are high-achievers but we do not witness a noticeable downward regression, a natural question follows: there some other factor impeding first-generation immigrants that is not impeding their children? It sounds like we are not often measuring the cognitive abilities of the first-generation immigrants since they are often older than high-school-aged when they arrive, so their abilities are estimated by their life outcomes, while their children are enrolled in school and so their cognitive abilities can be estimated from standardized tests and school performance. We clearly see radically different life outcomes between Biiftu and her father. Is there a factor that especially affects the life outcomes of African immigrants lacking schooling credentials from their host country?
“African Americans have on average about 25 percent of European ancestry and this increases their IQs above that of Africans in Africa” – Richard Lynn, Race Differences in Intelligence.
This "white blood" theory is comprehensively debunked not only by CHisala, but by conservative Thomas Sowell as well. See his Knowledge and Decisions 1983. The black immigrants from places like Nigeria for example have little "white blood" - yet outperform native Black Americans who on average have some 13-20% European genetic material. In addition, the African immigrants face language barriers that the American natives do not face- so right off the plane they are handicapped. Nor are Africans a special case. Immigrants from the black Caribbean, who have much less white blood than native blacks, have long outperformed native US blacks earning such derogatory titles as JEW-Maican from the natives. As Thomas Sowell showed way back in 1981's book Markets and Minorities, some of these immigrants had already surpassed the general white average in income and education. (Sowell 1981)
This in part, contradicts the "immigrant supermen" theory for when the black Caribbean folks were compared to white people who were also "SELECTIVE" immigrants. Whites coming to America were also "selected"- they were the more driven whites wanting to escape the bleak prospects of "Old Europe." SO the immigrant drive notion cuts both ways- white Americans are ALSO a "select" group, but they STILL, in some cases, fall below the Africans and Caribbean's, and in general, the selected white American immigrants, fall below Asian performance. SO much for the "magic whitening drops" of popular "HBD" lore.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Their performance above American blacks (labeled as “English-speaking” blacks) defies the common sociologist explanation that higher achieving black immigrants are simply the most driven members of their source populations (some were just in refugee camps), and it equally defies the modern hereditarian argument that they are just the most self-selected in intelligence relative to their source populations, unless we now start extending this cognitive self-selectivity and “assortative mating” quality to people who run to United Nations refugee camps for protection. (It is not necessarily all who were from these camps, but that doesn’t matter since even those who were from there are performing above native black Americans).
Indeed. Even if they were self-selected, they on average come from much poorer backgrounds than the Black American upper classes making all the big money. In short, the poorer African immigrants, outperform the richer Black Americans, and in some cases whites. In England, on some measures, they outperform on average, native whites, who have all the advantages and are not in coming from refugee camps.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2006, HBD blogger “Audacious Epigone” found a way of estimating the black IQs of different states using Lynn’s methods (on NAEP test scores) and he found Washington State on top with an estimated black children IQ of 94.5 (it was just a little lower when he repeated the calculations in 2013 with some slight changes). They were actually number one in the country in those first 2006 estimates
And this tracks with the data from the UK and the US re the African immigrants.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
On the other hand, Ethiopians test scores are quite at the bottom in Africa, as reported by Lynn (Zambia was always reported as the top scoring sub-Saharan African nation,
Indeed. This too debunks the "white blood magic" myth of HBD lore, that claims Ethiopians are a "mixed race" population from the Italian occupation, or various Caucasoid Middle Eastern immigrations. Well all this "Caucasoid blood" should make the Ethiopians show up superior in the sweepstakes. Only they don't- again debunking the HBD claim.
By God, man. You do know 50% of Nigerian-American adults have PhDs. 50% of Nigerians do not have PhDs. What can’t you get about that?
And Afro-Caribbeans only surpassed Whites in education, not income.
And who are the top-performing ethnic groups in the Seattle sample, man? Ethiopian and Eritrean ones! Totally contradicting your point! BTW, I think that’s absolutely meaningless. Yemenis are not that intelligent, on average.
Re Afro-Caribbeans, as I cited, Sowell 1981, Markets and Minorities shows that some of these immigrants, namely urban second generation children, surpassed the general white average in terms of BOTH income and education. There is a reason the natives called the Caribbean folk- JEW-MAICAN or said that "Only the Bajan can withstand the Jew."
And as for the Ethiopians, their overall national IQ scores if we go by those, are unimpressive, behind other West Africans, as Chisala shows above. This should not be the case if putative "white blood" was working its alleged magic.
I live in Seattle. The black population of this city is around 8% with around 30% coming from Africa.
One thing to consider when using Seattle as the basis of any thesis is this city’s demographics have been changing rapidly. The African American middle class has been leaving Seattle for some time. This is not unique to Seattle, it was happening in San Francisco when I lived there too. Many employed blacks who cannot qualify for subsidized housing leave, forced out by gentrification. The remaining fraction might not average 94 IQ as quoted in this blog entry.
I found this article from last year discussing gentrification from the same newspaper whose report forms the basis of this blog entry:
http://blogs.seattletimes.com/fyi-guy/2014/11/12/as-seattle-gets-richer-the-citys-black-households-get-poorer/
While Seattle’s median household income soared to an all-time high of $70,200 last year, wages for blacks nose-dived to $25,700 — a 13.5 percent drop from 2012. Among the 50 largest U.S. cities, Seattle now has the ninth lowest income for black households.
Seattle, which has the largest black community in the Pacific Northwest, also lags the country as a whole. Nationally, black households have median earnings of $34,800 — 35 percent higher than Seattle.
While last year’s decline is particularly dramatic, black household wealth in Seattle has in fact been spiraling downward for years. Remarkably, the earnings were higher in 2000 than they are today, before adjusting for inflation: The 2000 household median was $32,000, equal to $44,800 in 2013 dollars.
Also, the rate of homeownership has dropped by nearly half since 2000. Today, just one out of five black households in Seattle own its home. (The census defines a black household as one in which the person identified on census forms as “householder” is black.)
As the article above indicates when read in full, the remaining blacks are poorer due to being 30 percent African immigrants and the loss of the black middle class to surrounding cities.
“if the good guys won, how come everything gets worse?”
However, the debate is stymied because both sides wrongly claim the support of logic and scientific method. Jayman invokes Occam’s Razor; Chanda invokes the duty to defend “clearly positive” claims. These are mantras people recite when they can’t win the argument on the substance.Not really. There is no so-called "styming" of any debate. Jayman made his claim, and it was shown in detail to have several weaknesses. Some other folks have debated Jayman before and he is often the first on his own blog to delete people's comments when he is getting the worse of an exchange, or when people don't agree with him. As can be seen above, Chanda has done nothing fo the sort. All are free to go back and make a fresh case, if they can. What "stymied" debate? And one of Jayman's markers is the sweeping, sometimes messianic nature of his statements, as if only he has "discovered" such and such "truth" and all who disagree are "wrong" - as if he, an amateur blogger at random, possessed such special insight over and above numerous serious mainstream scholars. Note- too often, it is not solid logic and data being presented in reply, but said sweeping declarations, including the tactic of throwing out claims and leaving them for opponents to refute rather than put forward a credible argument up front. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chisala says:
If I make a claim based on some evidence about something and you believe there is something else that negates my claim, it is your duty to prove your counter-claim with evidence (which I can then also attack if it is inconsistent with your own claims/premises/further evidence, and so on); it is not my duty to start looking for evidence that your arbitrary counter-claim is untrue. For example, if you believe that my claims are easily falsified by the “fact” that there is very high selectivity among Somalian refugees, the burden of proof is on you to present your evidence for this clearly positive claim or “fact” and not on me to prove that your arbitrary counter-intuitive “fact” is untrue. Indeed. Less sweeping declarations of HBD "truth" and more credible argument would help his case. But he usually doesn't stick around long when contradicted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The point of my first article was that if the black immigrants from very low IQ nations are just barely making it into these first world IQs due to high selection from their low IQ populations, then regression to the mean will ensure that their children will fall way below that threshold. It is therefore not expected of them to also have children who equally “make it.” In addition to a much poorer background than "First World" people, the Black Africans also face a language barrier upon arrival, which the Black Americans, and the white Americans that the Africans sometimes outperform, do not have. And yes, some of these refugees who are making good HAVE literally come from refugee camps. Case in point Mawi Asgedom. See his book: "Of Beetles and Angels: A Boy's Remarkable Journey from a Refugee Camp to Harvard" 2002. He grew up playing soccer with rocks and later fled on a long trek from his native country during a civil war, living in a refugee camp for 3 years with his family, even as some fellow refugees died from hunger and disease. His father was no high powered bureaucrat or politician, or businessman, or professional like a doctor, but a medical assistant of modest means. Nor was his mother anything special. The family sold their 6 goats to finance the long wilderness trek out of the war zone.
Intellectually stymied, not suppressed (that came later).
You make an extraordinary claim. That Somalians who make it to America are not selected for intelligence and then insist that others disprove it.
Oh well…
‘The most intriguing finding concerns the difference between the desire to
move and concrete possibilities of doing so.
Table 20 illustrates that roughly 16% of interviewees envisage remaining in the host country in coming years, while another 16% plan to return to their country of origin.
At the same time,
a significant proportion of interviewees (42%) wish to live elsewhere, in
places such as North America (46%), Europe (34%), Gulf States or Egypt
(3%), Australia (3%), other African countries (1%), or in a yet unknown or 22% of those hoping to move farther have the actual resources and strategy to undertake their journey.
It is quite clear from these figures that a majority of all those wishing to move further will not be able to achieve their desire to do
so simply because they lack the financial and material plans necessary to organize such a journey.’
Do I also have to prove that having strategy and resources correlates with IQ?
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.unhcr.org/50aa0d6f9.pdf&ved=0CCEQFjABahUKEwj9x6yAidjIAhVD1BoKHVBdDbM&usg=AFQjCNEk5CWcncLtO-rAYa9WuI2jggNOPA&sig2=bv8AXYJVzxhbA7kenon_pQ
I saw David Copperfield fly once. I don’tknow how he did it. I guess I’m no longer allowed to believe in gravity?
JayMan and others have not offered a plausible explanation as to what would be the factors for such high selectivity, rather they've simply assumed that it must be so because they don't like the results of the data.
It’s not just getting across a border to a refugee camp. It’s having the strategy and resources to move from that refugee camp to America.
Considering the difficulty those hosting these refugees have in repatriating them, both steps are considered highly desirable.
In a country of origin where the majority of people don’t leave their village or part of town, these two steps represent an immense challenge and are therefore immensely selective.
Don’t worry, I have also posted an excerpt from a UN report that concurs with what I am saying in a separate post.
Perhaps what we ought to do then is find a case in which we can compare the children of African immigrants to a highly selected pool of American blacks.
My father is a Ghanaian immigrant who came to the US in 1962, and has returned at least 20 times. I am actually, technically, next in line to be a village chief, when he dies, although it will never happen.
So there it is.
Although, I did not notice that you omitted whether you had ever been to Ghana or not. I imagine that I'm reading too much into it when I entertain the idea that you've never been there, but just to check, have you?
Also, thanks for another datapoint for my argument that African immigrants to the West are under severe selective pressure.
Fun fact: in 1962 Ghana had the same GDP per capita as Italy, but it's now something like ten times lower.
.01% of that is 14,500
.001% of that is 1,450
.0001% of that is 145
How cloistered are these people? Are they living in Mensa monasteries? I don't doubt your description of a certain class of of people acting like this, but I doubt they can be entirely oblivious of how much smarter than the lower class masses they are. That's something every elite throughout history has known and prided itself on.
And they can't be that insulated from it because there are a lot of stupid people who still end up in positions of power and influence. Idi Amin was a moron, Bokassa was a moron, lots of powerful people in Africa aren't really intellectuals or sophisticates.
I can understand the intellectual elites keeping these sorts of people outside their social circles as well, but it's impossible not to at least notice them at some point.
Amin may have been a ‘moron’ but he was one of the first two Ugandans to receive an Army commission from Britain.
And that wasn’t a fluke, he promoted all the way from assistant cook up every step incredibly fast.
He thus easily proved himself as one of the most capable among his peers.
When they see someone with indoor plumbing as normal or even poor yet those with indoor plumbing are in the top 10 percent of the country socio-economically, I have to say that these guys are extremely cloistered.
It’d be like a Brit believing that most people who go to private schools are normal or even poor.
And if Brits were refugees it’d be like someone saying that his fellow refugees were not selected because look at them, some didn’t even go to Eton.
OG Griffith, 1969 despatch on Amin's promotion to major, released by Public Record Office. Amin hailed as splendid, but not very bright, June 23, 2000, Richard Norton Taylor, The Guardian.
"Idi Amin is a splendid type and a good [rugby] player … but virtually bone from the neck up, and needs things explained in words of one letter."
Document from Public Record Office quoting "a British official", August 18, 2003, Anton La Guardia, Daily Telegraph.
Success is not a universal indicator for intellectual superiority.
That doesn't mean much cognitively. The British kept the more civilised (and pre-colonial politically dominant) Bantu peoples from the South out of the army. They deliberately recruited from the more primitive Nilotics of the North, who were considered more biddable.
Amin, in particular, ingratiated himself via his rugby prowess and his knack for killing Mau Mau prisoners by stuffing socks into their oesophagus.
Perhaps, but personality attributions almost never have a positive impact on a discussion.
I am more interested in your re-analysis of the numbers you described in the first comment. Could you publish it somewhere so one can see all the steps?
However, the debate is stymied because both sides wrongly claim the support of logic and scientific method. Jayman invokes Occam’s Razor; Chanda invokes the duty to defend “clearly positive” claims. These are mantras people recite when they can’t win the argument on the substance.Not really. There is no so-called "styming" of any debate. Jayman made his claim, and it was shown in detail to have several weaknesses. Some other folks have debated Jayman before and he is often the first on his own blog to delete people's comments when he is getting the worse of an exchange, or when people don't agree with him. As can be seen above, Chanda has done nothing fo the sort. All are free to go back and make a fresh case, if they can. What "stymied" debate? And one of Jayman's markers is the sweeping, sometimes messianic nature of his statements, as if only he has "discovered" such and such "truth" and all who disagree are "wrong" - as if he, an amateur blogger at random, possessed such special insight over and above numerous serious mainstream scholars. Note- too often, it is not solid logic and data being presented in reply, but said sweeping declarations, including the tactic of throwing out claims and leaving them for opponents to refute rather than put forward a credible argument up front. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chisala says:
If I make a claim based on some evidence about something and you believe there is something else that negates my claim, it is your duty to prove your counter-claim with evidence (which I can then also attack if it is inconsistent with your own claims/premises/further evidence, and so on); it is not my duty to start looking for evidence that your arbitrary counter-claim is untrue. For example, if you believe that my claims are easily falsified by the “fact” that there is very high selectivity among Somalian refugees, the burden of proof is on you to present your evidence for this clearly positive claim or “fact” and not on me to prove that your arbitrary counter-intuitive “fact” is untrue. Indeed. Less sweeping declarations of HBD "truth" and more credible argument would help his case. But he usually doesn't stick around long when contradicted.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The point of my first article was that if the black immigrants from very low IQ nations are just barely making it into these first world IQs due to high selection from their low IQ populations, then regression to the mean will ensure that their children will fall way below that threshold. It is therefore not expected of them to also have children who equally “make it.” In addition to a much poorer background than "First World" people, the Black Africans also face a language barrier upon arrival, which the Black Americans, and the white Americans that the Africans sometimes outperform, do not have. And yes, some of these refugees who are making good HAVE literally come from refugee camps. Case in point Mawi Asgedom. See his book: "Of Beetles and Angels: A Boy's Remarkable Journey from a Refugee Camp to Harvard" 2002. He grew up playing soccer with rocks and later fled on a long trek from his native country during a civil war, living in a refugee camp for 3 years with his family, even as some fellow refugees died from hunger and disease. His father was no high powered bureaucrat or politician, or businessman, or professional like a doctor, but a medical assistant of modest means. Nor was his mother anything special. The family sold their 6 goats to finance the long wilderness trek out of the war zone.
I call bravo sierra on this. What I’m seeing is the author claiming to welcome criticisms and then erecting a bunch of arbitrary and obscure rules that critics must follow. Otherwise, the author is free to dismiss them. In your case, you are using the tactic of disparaging the motivations of the critic to dismiss his arguments.
Frankly, if you or the author can’t handle Jayman’a rather mild rhetorical style, it says everything about you and your intellectual confidence and nothing about Jayman. The author threw a tantrum and demanded Jayman leave the debate. That was his choice and he is the one responsible for buggering the debate. It’s fair to suspect that it was intentional.
Chanda,
Your claims re. philosophy of science are too strong, too ‘Popperian’. In reality, a single piece of evidence inconsistent or improbable with a larger system of beliefs does not refute the larger system. Reasonable people do not just drop an entire system of beliefs when they find one piece that doesn’t fit. In general, the first thing they do is to evaluate the odd piece critically. Of course, if done to extreme levels, this would mean the system is unfalsifiable, but usually it is not taken to that extreme. Justification is about coherence/consilience of many beliefs.
For instance, for many years the movement of Mercury was known to not fit with predictions from Newtonian mechanics. Many attempts within the Newtonian system were made to explain this, tho arguably none were successful. Still, experts did not just drop their belief in Newtonian mechanics based on the single odd piece and they were right not to do so. Eventually, Einsteinian physics came and successfully explained the odd movement of Mercury.
I recommend reading Sokal’s writings on philosophy of science. It is the best writing on philosophy of science that I have read. It can be found on libgen for free:
http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=c26c837ae373d43540c878379b1daad2
What is your opinion on directly studying this issue through the analysis of genes? I.e. doing a GWAS for IQ with different groups and seeing how the frequency of relevant genes differs. I feel like this is more likely to give a conclusive answer than these sorts of social analyses, which tend to make a lot of assumptions.
We, as in Davide Piffer and most (mostly Piffer), have already analyzed the GWAS results in the fashion you propose. They do support global hereditarianism in that the SNP score correlates .8 or .9 with Lynn’s IQs.
However, there are lots of problems with this such as spatial autocorrelation (genetic drift) and differential linkage disequilibrium patterns meaning that the SNPs that correlate with causal variants in Europeans often don’t do so in Africans, or at least, we don’t know whether they do or not.
Currently, we are waiting for the results of the newest GWAS to come out. It found about 70-80 SNPs, much larger than the previous one. This will solve the sampling problem if using only SNPs with p < alpha. One can also use the polygenic scores which avoid the NHST approach. We have done this with the current SNP betas (Rietveld et al, 2013) and results were also in line with global hereditarianism. This analysis is still unpublished however and it needs SAC analysis.
See my recent commentary paper: https://thewinnower.com/papers/2735-polygenic-scores-genetic-engineering-validity-of-gwas-results-across-major-racial-groups-and-the-piffer-method
So there it is.
Wow, my flippant assumptions were as wrong as were yours!
Although, I did not notice that you omitted whether you had ever been to Ghana or not. I imagine that I’m reading too much into it when I entertain the idea that you’ve never been there, but just to check, have you?
Also, thanks for another datapoint for my argument that African immigrants to the West are under severe selective pressure.
Fun fact: in 1962 Ghana had the same GDP per capita as Italy, but it’s now something like ten times lower.
Your claims re. philosophy of science are too strong, too 'Popperian'. In reality, a single piece of evidence inconsistent or improbable with a larger system of beliefs does not refute the larger system. Reasonable people do not just drop an entire system of beliefs when they find one piece that doesn't fit. In general, the first thing they do is to evaluate the odd piece critically. Of course, if done to extreme levels, this would mean the system is unfalsifiable, but usually it is not taken to that extreme. Justification is about coherence/consilience of many beliefs.
For instance, for many years the movement of Mercury was known to not fit with predictions from Newtonian mechanics. Many attempts within the Newtonian system were made to explain this, tho arguably none were successful. Still, experts did not just drop their belief in Newtonian mechanics based on the single odd piece and they were right not to do so. Eventually, Einsteinian physics came and successfully explained the odd movement of Mercury.
I recommend reading Sokal's writings on philosophy of science. It is the best writing on philosophy of science that I have read. It can be found on libgen for free:
http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=c26c837ae373d43540c878379b1daad2
That’s a very educated way of saying ‘you can only pick the theory that best fits.’
On the other hand, Ethiopians test scores are quite at the bottom in Africa, as reported by Lynn (Zambia was always reported as the top scoring sub-Saharan African nation
We have no good IQ data from Ethiopia. There is a study of 134 children in an orphanage:
Aboud, F., Samuel, M., Hadera, A. & Addus, A. (1991). Intellectual, social, and nutritional status of children in an Ethiopian orphanage. Social Science and Medicine, 33, pp. 1275-1280.
I haven’t been able to locate this study, but orphans are hardly a representative sample of a population. The same criticism can be made of other studies cited by Lynn with respect to Africa. The datasets are small and probably not representative.
I understand that Richard Lynn is greatly admired by many people here, but his estimate of mean sub-Saharan IQ has been challenged by Heiner Rindermann, who is an HBD-friendly researcher. In general, there is a tendency on both sides of this debate to make claims that are not justified by the limited data available.
I’m not challenging the conclusion that mean IQ is low in sub-Saharan Africa. That, in itself, seems to be a robust finding. In particular, it is supported by data on IQ-related alleles. But it’s a lot harder to get good data on national differences. It is especially difficult, and downright strange, to extrapolate the general finding of low sub-Saharan IQ to a region that lies outside sub-Saharan Africa and for which we have limited data.
There's no evidence that in terms of actual native intelligence, that Africans are less intelligent than any other human group or race.This is laughable pseudoscience. If Africans weren't endowed with "IQ related alleles" there wouldn't be a single intelligent African on the planet. I think you need to familiarize yourself with how nature works. You are asserting a hard, discrete demarcation between Africans and others in terms of the genes that regulate intelligence. Well, I can introduce Africans that are smarter than you and everyone you know. How did they achieve that intelligence in the absence of said genes?
Although, I did not notice that you omitted whether you had ever been to Ghana or not. I imagine that I'm reading too much into it when I entertain the idea that you've never been there, but just to check, have you?
Also, thanks for another datapoint for my argument that African immigrants to the West are under severe selective pressure.
Fun fact: in 1962 Ghana had the same GDP per capita as Italy, but it's now something like ten times lower.
Went once as a child, have not been as an adult. There is no selective pressure, tribal titles are passed from generation to generation, and do not imply any sort of meritocracy, which is one of the problems in Africa. My father was able to immigrate to the US before the change in immigration law in ’65, simply because he worked for a shipping company.
It would just be felt through the selection of his wife. Love matches are very normal traditionally all over Africa and so the chief would be assortatively mated - smart chicks want to marry the Chief. Even where they are not and it is the wife's family that is picked, there is just as much selection pressure - smart mothers marry their daughter to the Chief.
And even if all of this is nonsense, I bet not many of the people in the village were successful and intelligent enough to work for a shipping country and immigrate to America! Otherwise the village would be empty by now.
“Amin is a splendid man by any standards and is held in great respect and affection by his British colleagues. … He is tough and fearless and in the judgment of everybody … completely reliable. Against this he is not very bright and will probably find difficulty in dealing with the administrative side of command.”
OG Griffith, 1969 despatch on Amin’s promotion to major, released by Public Record Office. Amin hailed as splendid, but not very bright, June 23, 2000, Richard Norton Taylor, The Guardian.
“Idi Amin is a splendid type and a good [rugby] player … but virtually bone from the neck up, and needs things explained in words of one letter.”
Document from Public Record Office quoting “a British official”, August 18, 2003, Anton La Guardia, Daily Telegraph.
Success is not a universal indicator for intellectual superiority.
Thanks for posting that.
Perhaps what we ought to do then is find a case in which we can compare the children of African immigrants to a highly selected pool of American blacks.
Even if the titles were strictly hereditary, went straight to the first son, and no-one ever lost their title through their own idiocy then there would still be a lot of selective pressure.
It would just be felt through the selection of his wife. Love matches are very normal traditionally all over Africa and so the chief would be assortatively mated – smart chicks want to marry the Chief. Even where they are not and it is the wife’s family that is picked, there is just as much selection pressure – smart mothers marry their daughter to the Chief.
And even if all of this is nonsense, I bet not many of the people in the village were successful and intelligent enough to work for a shipping country and immigrate to America! Otherwise the village would be empty by now.
OG Griffith, 1969 despatch on Amin's promotion to major, released by Public Record Office. Amin hailed as splendid, but not very bright, June 23, 2000, Richard Norton Taylor, The Guardian.
"Idi Amin is a splendid type and a good [rugby] player … but virtually bone from the neck up, and needs things explained in words of one letter."
Document from Public Record Office quoting "a British official", August 18, 2003, Anton La Guardia, Daily Telegraph.
Success is not a universal indicator for intellectual superiority.
The question is not whether you would find him smart but whether he was smarter than the majority of his countrymen.
Of course it is not, but it has excellent predictive power. Why else would every modern military use IQ tests as one of their first filters and main factors in deciding what role an applicant should be given?
Where does disrespect come from?
I will try to summarize your post Chisandra, politely…
” Few ”evidences” prove that average subsaharian is not just smarter than average afro-americans* but equally smarter to average white north europeans” (and ”east asians”…)
Chisandra,
again, please, we have to be objective here, tell us your estimative for ”genotypical/real iq” of subsaharian africans, aka, the averages (and not super-mega-ultra-master-plus selected elites).
Sorry if i was bad mannered, i’m try to help!
Your claims re. philosophy of science are too strong, too 'Popperian'. In reality, a single piece of evidence inconsistent or improbable with a larger system of beliefs does not refute the larger system. Reasonable people do not just drop an entire system of beliefs when they find one piece that doesn't fit. In general, the first thing they do is to evaluate the odd piece critically. Of course, if done to extreme levels, this would mean the system is unfalsifiable, but usually it is not taken to that extreme. Justification is about coherence/consilience of many beliefs.
For instance, for many years the movement of Mercury was known to not fit with predictions from Newtonian mechanics. Many attempts within the Newtonian system were made to explain this, tho arguably none were successful. Still, experts did not just drop their belief in Newtonian mechanics based on the single odd piece and they were right not to do so. Eventually, Einsteinian physics came and successfully explained the odd movement of Mercury.
I recommend reading Sokal's writings on philosophy of science. It is the best writing on philosophy of science that I have read. It can be found on libgen for free:
http://gen.lib.rus.ec/book/index.php?md5=c26c837ae373d43540c878379b1daad2
I absolutely believe that too. Which is why I chose my words carefully. It CAN take only one instance to disprove your position. That’s a fact and it does not disagree with what you’ve just written. The key word is “disprove”, not just being “inconstent or improbable with a larger system of beliefs.” That’s why debate is highly encouraged, to establish that this inconsistency does rise to the level of refutation (as I contend, in this case).
The attitude I was rejecting is the one by that individual I banned, which is very different from what you are saying. He believes you shouldn’t even pay attention to someone who brings such an empirical challenge just because Occam’s razor says he is likely wrong.
And it is not the first time he is trying to stop debate on that basis. This is what he wrote about this in the blog comments of Peter Frost’s article:
Setting aside the hypocrisy of saying there should be no attention given to my articles and he didn’t “bother with it,” while he keeps coming to comment on them (on UNZ and other forums!), these statements certainly do not sound like encouraging people to “evaluate the odd piece critically.”
And of course I am not challenging “behavioral genetics and the breeder’s equation” etc, as I have made clear, but a straw man is always easier to beat.
The point of contention seems to be just one: how much immigrant selection is coming from Africa. If it is not super-high, then a concrete assumption among HBD racial scientists will be difficult to sustain: the idea that the IQ gap that exists between blacks and whites (and others) is (ultimately) a result of the differential evolution of the major races – giving whites and Asians a genetic advantage in intelligence through bigger brains, etc etc.
Whether there is high immigrant selection or not is an empirical quantitative question. You do not make your case by just saying, “are you saying there is no selection at all” (a false dichotomy) or “prove that there is no high selection” (shifting burden of proof – prove that God does not exist), etc. And you do not just bring some little calculation of how select the immigrants are in theory (worked backwards from the answer) and say “there, look – I was able to pick apart the key flaws in one comment” – because that is just standard circular reasoning.
And of course, you don’t then just come out with a condescending “huh?… this is silly… foolish…why?… huh…” to an outside challenger, when the assumption you are insulting him for (that there is no high cognitive selection among refugees from Africa that we can see in the real world – but you are free to show us) has ALSO been made by your own HBD scholars who know that you can not just work backwards from the desired answers. Frost does not believe there is any high selection from Africa. Neither does Fuerst (from his research) or, apparently, Charles Murray (according to The Bell Curve), and others. Is it rational to be utterly disrespectful to an outsider for sharing that same opinion in his analysis?
So, even without Karl Popper’s formulation of the falsification standard, I am sure you can agree that if this became a common attitude among HBD scholars to instances of possible counter-evidence, it would certainly look like we are dealing with a pseudo or cult science that is dominated by infantile rationalists.
Good comment. I have gone through a more elaborate description of the reasoning your post is based on, and there are a number of ways to think about it, including ways for it to fit with non-zero between group heritability. However, I shall detail it on my own blog. I'll let you know when I'm done.
And it is not the first time he is trying to stop debate on that basis. This is what [Jayman] wrote about this in the blog comments of Peter Frost’s article:
-----------------------------------------------------------
My thought on Chisala’s piece is that there is simply no there there. I didn’t bother much with it because it is clear that, quite frankly, he hasn’t the foggiest idea what he’s talking about. I was able to pick apart the key flaws with one comment, both to this piece and his previous. It’s not worth the attention being given to it...
.
The above illustrates Jayman's typical "debating" style- namely sweeping generalizations and declarations, some of messianic flavor as if only he knows the "truth," but with little substance in support. When put to the test, he invariably exits the field. He didn't "pick apart" any flaws. He proffered a quick opinion bout "Occam's Razor" - offered little supporting detail, and exited as usual. Even without the clash above, this is the typical pattern. And most parsimonious explanation is not necessarily what Jayman claims it is.He urges Chisala to "find out first." But Chisala already indicated in Part 1 and 2: (a) the less affluent background of the migrants vis a vis Westerners, (b) the fact that some were refugees- that is people from very dire and challenging circumstances, such as Mawi Asgedom, whose family background is rather modest.
No one disputes that those best equipped to immigrate will usually be first out of the pack. The question is whether such are "unrepresentative exceptions" of people in their homelands. As demonstrated below they are fairly representative because they are the exact same native stock as everyone else that took advantage of local educational opportunities as they came, got lucky in immigration lotteries and also proceeded to extend their education AFTER they reached their new countries. Second, they are a diverse lot- everything from temporary students to refugees forcibly displaced and made to flee via migration. Third, sweeping claims about being "unrepresentative" must be anchored in a true cross-section of the immigrants and their educational attainments before and after they arrived- something assorted claimants repeatedly fail to do. But let's take just a quick look at the case - it suffers from at least 4 weaknesses:
1. Failure of many studies to capture a reasonable cross-section of the African immigrant population.
Immigration by an "opportunity driven" selection of people can be present in many migrant movements, BUT ALSO, so is more involuntary movement by people forced out by disasters - man-made or natural- from famine to war. There are about 1.6 million African immigrants in the US. Any claims relating to such a number must be based on a reasonable cross-section capturing the full diversity of the pool, whether they be a refugee selling his last 6 goats to flee into the Sudan to escape a war-zone, or high level academic professionals wanting higher level education and training outside their countries. In fact, the 1.6 million African immigrants to the US are a diverse lot. They include refugees, immigrants, temporary migrants, and illegal aliens. Trying to make out all such diversity as a matter of merely "cognitive elites" migrating is yet another "HBD" distortion of the overall picture.
2. Failure to account for the diversity of Africans.
Various studies often fail to clearly differentiate between the categories above, focusing sometimes on high level bureaucrats, or voluntary-legal migrants such as college students coming to study in the US or Britain- Obama's father being an example of such. One study for example (Kamya 1997) used a sample of people from religious organizations who mainly came West to further their education. This does not at all give a fair picture of the range of African immigrants. Alolayan 2002 likewise studied high-achieving Nigerian immigrants, but his sample is mostly of high level civil servant and academic types, not a true-cross section of the 1.6 million African immigrants in the US. Yet another study, Obiakor et al 2000 found moderate to high levels of education among African immigrants and an almost religious devotion to education by respondents. But the sample size in question was a mere 16 immigrants- hardly a reasonable cross-section of a data-pool numbering over 1.6 million people.
3. Failure to demonstrate the alleged massive flow or over-representation of alleged African "cognitive elites."
US Census estimates in the late 1990s (1997) show about 49% of African immigrants having degrees, but this lump sum percentage relates to Africans ALREADY living in the United States. It does not say how many of that 49 CAME INITIALLY with such degrees, or whether, as permanent residents, or temporary students, or refugees, they earned said degrees AFTER their arrival in the US. Some African high school grads landing in the US then going on to earn a college degree afterward are hardly the "exceptional" supermen some make them out to be.
A cross-check with Britain in the 1990s also suggests that the incoming immigrants were hardly overloaded with "exceptions" and "elites." According to the 1991 British Census, 26.5 percent of black Britons who were born in Africa had at least some college education. In contrast, only 13.4 percent of white Britons had gone to college. (JBHE 2000) This figure, again, like the US figure, does not say how many earned their degrees AFTER landing in Britain.
In any event, EVEN IF we consider the 49% a putative "cognitive elite" that still leaves the majority- 51% - a NON cognitive elite. Likewise for England, even if we grant that the 27% who came with degrees or SOME college are the alleged "elites", this still leaves 73% NON "elites." Either way, the data debunks distorted claims of "massive" over-representation of alleged "elites" in the immigration pool.
3. "Brain drain" arguments based on occupation likewise fail to establish any massive movement of "exceptional" Africans.
The United States "Diversity Visa" only requires a high school diploma and 2 years of work experience- hardly a call for earth-shattering exceptionalism. Rotimi 2005 re ""brain drain" says that African immigrants are about 44% in professional, managerial and technical (PMT) occupations" --44% compared to 34% of all immigrants. But "managerial" and "technical" could include everything from managing a hamburger stand to skilled but low level production work in a factory or auto repair shop. Even if we credit the 44% with being an "exceptional elite" (a doubtful case but lets go with it for the sake of argument), that still leaves a majority of African immigrants- 56% who are in the NON "e-lite" categories above.
And the alleged "massive flow" is less than advertised. Putative earth-shattering numbers of PMT "e-lites" - according to statistics from the US Immigration Service weight in at 24,095 for 2002, and 27,906 for 2004. This is rather small beer for an immigrant pool of 1.6 million people. Where are these putative hordes of "cognitive elites"?
Chanda Chisala,
I hope you won’t get angry because I repeat my question. There is no hidden meaning in those questions, I am genuinely interested in your answers.
Assume you are right, and black immigrants and their children have much better educational outcomes than American blacks. What is the reason of white-black gap in US then?
(1) It can’t be poverty
(2) Can’t be parasite load
(3) can’t be poor nutrition
(4) and, that would also definetely prove that it cannot possibly be racism.
What would be then your opinion what causes the persistent white-black gap in USA? Lack of motivation? Entitlement culture? Despise for education seen as “white”? Rap? This had to be one factor which impacts all blacks in USA, does not impact whites or asians, and does not impact black immigrants. Then, what is it?!
Egad. This thread is nothing but people with no direct or reliable evidence of the IQ of African immigrants pointing to their detractors saying I’m right unless you can produce reliable evidence that I’m wrong.
Repent sinners! The lord’s wrath awaits you all!
(2) Can't be parasite load
(3) can't be poor nutrition
(4) and, that would also definetely prove that it cannot possibly be racism.What would be then your opinion what causes the persistent white-black gap in USA? Lack of motivation? Entitlement culture? Despise for education seen as "white"? Rap? This had to be one factor which impacts all blacks in USA, does not impact whites or asians, and does not impact black immigrants. Then, what is it?!
My answer to that will be the subject of my last article (the one after the next one).
Chanda,
Good comment. I have gone through a more elaborate description of the reasoning your post is based on, and there are a number of ways to think about it, including ways for it to fit with non-zero between group heritability. However, I shall detail it on my own blog. I’ll let you know when I’m done.
“Amin may have been a ‘moron’ but he was one of the first two Ugandans to receive an Army commission from Britain.”
That doesn’t mean much cognitively. The British kept the more civilised (and pre-colonial politically dominant) Bantu peoples from the South out of the army. They deliberately recruited from the more primitive Nilotics of the North, who were considered more biddable.
Amin, in particular, ingratiated himself via his rugby prowess and his knack for killing Mau Mau prisoners by stuffing socks into their oesophagus.
African children that come to America are smarter the American’s resident black children – that is the crux of this article.
If this is true – then one can come to only one conclusion – American makes its black children dumb. Same genetics – yet one is smarter than the other.
Hmm – must be – growing up black in America makes you dumb.
It is a fact, that early childhood trauma stunts intellectual growth. America’s black children grow up surrounded by family and cultural trauma —– end of story.
What do you say America?
.1. Government enforced Affirmative Action for Afro-blacks
2. Government set-aside contracts for Afro-black owned businesses
3. Deliberate media and government misrepresentation of massive Afro-black crime wave
4. Frequent mass Afro-black rioting, assaulting, looting and arson without prosecution or suppression
5. Afro-Black terrorists organizations operate freely in public (Black Panthers, BLM, Blood and Crips, Nation of Islam, Million Man March)
6. Servile government support for historically black colleges and special afro-black benefit programs
7. Unrestrained afro-black Panther intimidation of voters at polls
8. Politically partisan Afro-black churches and associations granted tax exempt status
9. Most Afro-black children’s welfare financed by taxpayers
10.Government anti-discrimination laws for Afro-blacks
11.Hate speech law prosecutions in favor of Afro-blacks, and other protected classes
12.Preferential immigration, asylum, and citizenship for Afro-blacks
13. Disproportionate number of Afro-blacks in cushy government employment
14. Afro-black voters not required to display photo ID
15. Unrealistic portrayal of Afro-blacks in movies and TV
16. Afro-black civil right organizations financed and led by filthy rich diversity people
17. Election of the most unbelievably stupid members of the US congress
18. Afro-black majority city's bailout by state and federal govt taxpayer
19. Afro-black history month
20. Ridiculous Afro-black studies in public schools and colleges
21. Astronomical Afro-black STD and HIV rates are not a controlled public health hazard
22. Banks forced to give loans to Afro-blacks with bad credit
23. White supremacists blamed for Afro-black crimes
24. At least 70% of afro-black children are bastards
25. Afro-black Caucus in the US congress
26. Sanctuary cities for Afro-blacks, and other protected classes
27. Afro-black diversity scheme imposed on white majority nations
28. Afro-black athletes glorified by mass media
29. Afro-black on white people violent crime rate is disproportionate
30. President of the US promotes undue privileges for Afro-blacks and other diversity people
Black americans were ''traumatized''... black africans not?? ;)
''black americans'' were traumatized... but you have a sucessive generations of individuals who born in different periods of space and time....
''black americans were traumatized'' aphoristic phrase
cognitive bias detected
who??
blacks who born in the 20's in NY?
in the 30's in Alabama?
in the 50's in California?
in the 70's in South Carolina?
Art,
you do work with arts??
What average black hardly to be is hypersensible! ;)
hyperreactive is different than hypersensible
hypersensible internalize.... hyperreactive (many blacks are) extrapolate feelings ''or'' emotions.
Chisala wrote:
And it is not the first time he is trying to stop debate on that basis. This is what [Jayman] wrote about this in the blog comments of Peter Frost’s article:
———————————————————–
My thought on Chisala’s piece is that there is simply no there there. I didn’t bother much with it because it is clear that, quite frankly, he hasn’t the foggiest idea what he’s talking about. I was able to pick apart the key flaws with one comment, both to this piece and his previous. It’s not worth the attention being given to it…
.
The above illustrates Jayman’s typical “debating” style- namely sweeping generalizations and declarations, some of messianic flavor as if only he knows the “truth,” but with little substance in support. When put to the test, he invariably exits the field. He didn’t “pick apart” any flaws. He proffered a quick opinion bout “Occam’s Razor” – offered little supporting detail, and exited as usual. Even without the clash above, this is the typical pattern. And most parsimonious explanation is not necessarily what Jayman claims it is.He urges Chisala to “find out first.” But Chisala already indicated in Part 1 and 2: (a) the less affluent background of the migrants vis a vis Westerners, (b) the fact that some were refugees- that is people from very dire and challenging circumstances, such as Mawi Asgedom, whose family background is rather modest.
No one disputes that those best equipped to immigrate will usually be first out of the pack. The question is whether such are “unrepresentative exceptions” of people in their homelands. As demonstrated below they are fairly representative because they are the exact same native stock as everyone else that took advantage of local educational opportunities as they came, got lucky in immigration lotteries and also proceeded to extend their education AFTER they reached their new countries. Second, they are a diverse lot- everything from temporary students to refugees forcibly displaced and made to flee via migration. Third, sweeping claims about being “unrepresentative” must be anchored in a true cross-section of the immigrants and their educational attainments before and after they arrived- something assorted claimants repeatedly fail to do. But let’s take just a quick look at the case – it suffers from at least 4 weaknesses:
1. Failure of many studies to capture a reasonable cross-section of the African immigrant population.
Immigration by an “opportunity driven” selection of people can be present in many migrant movements, BUT ALSO, so is more involuntary movement by people forced out by disasters – man-made or natural- from famine to war. There are about 1.6 million African immigrants in the US. Any claims relating to such a number must be based on a reasonable cross-section capturing the full diversity of the pool, whether they be a refugee selling his last 6 goats to flee into the Sudan to escape a war-zone, or high level academic professionals wanting higher level education and training outside their countries. In fact, the 1.6 million African immigrants to the US are a diverse lot. They include refugees, immigrants, temporary migrants, and illegal aliens. Trying to make out all such diversity as a matter of merely “cognitive elites” migrating is yet another “HBD” distortion of the overall picture.
2. Failure to account for the diversity of Africans.
Various studies often fail to clearly differentiate between the categories above, focusing sometimes on high level bureaucrats, or voluntary-legal migrants such as college students coming to study in the US or Britain- Obama’s father being an example of such. One study for example (Kamya 1997) used a sample of people from religious organizations who mainly came West to further their education. This does not at all give a fair picture of the range of African immigrants. Alolayan 2002 likewise studied high-achieving Nigerian immigrants, but his sample is mostly of high level civil servant and academic types, not a true-cross section of the 1.6 million African immigrants in the US. Yet another study, Obiakor et al 2000 found moderate to high levels of education among African immigrants and an almost religious devotion to education by respondents. But the sample size in question was a mere 16 immigrants- hardly a reasonable cross-section of a data-pool numbering over 1.6 million people.
3. Failure to demonstrate the alleged massive flow or over-representation of alleged African “cognitive elites.”
US Census estimates in the late 1990s (1997) show about 49% of African immigrants having degrees, but this lump sum percentage relates to Africans ALREADY living in the United States. It does not say how many of that 49 CAME INITIALLY with such degrees, or whether, as permanent residents, or temporary students, or refugees, they earned said degrees AFTER their arrival in the US. Some African high school grads landing in the US then going on to earn a college degree afterward are hardly the “exceptional” supermen some make them out to be.
A cross-check with Britain in the 1990s also suggests that the incoming immigrants were hardly overloaded with “exceptions” and “elites.” According to the 1991 British Census, 26.5 percent of black Britons who were born in Africa had at least some college education. In contrast, only 13.4 percent of white Britons had gone to college. (JBHE 2000) This figure, again, like the US figure, does not say how many earned their degrees AFTER landing in Britain.
In any event, EVEN IF we consider the 49% a putative “cognitive elite” that still leaves the majority- 51% – a NON cognitive elite. Likewise for England, even if we grant that the 27% who came with degrees or SOME college are the alleged “elites”, this still leaves 73% NON “elites.” Either way, the data debunks distorted claims of “massive” over-representation of alleged “elites” in the immigration pool.
3. “Brain drain” arguments based on occupation likewise fail to establish any massive movement of “exceptional” Africans.
The United States “Diversity Visa” only requires a high school diploma and 2 years of work experience- hardly a call for earth-shattering exceptionalism. Rotimi 2005 re “”brain drain” says that African immigrants are about 44% in professional, managerial and technical (PMT) occupations” –44% compared to 34% of all immigrants. But “managerial” and “technical” could include everything from managing a hamburger stand to skilled but low level production work in a factory or auto repair shop. Even if we credit the 44% with being an “exceptional elite” (a doubtful case but lets go with it for the sake of argument), that still leaves a majority of African immigrants- 56% who are in the NON “e-lite” categories above.
And the alleged “massive flow” is less than advertised. Putative earth-shattering numbers of PMT “e-lites” – according to statistics from the US Immigration Service weight in at 24,095 for 2002, and 27,906 for 2004. This is rather small beer for an immigrant pool of 1.6 million people. Where are these putative hordes of “cognitive elites”?
You're creating a straw man of "African-ness" that nobody in this debate believes in.
Culturally, genetically, and historically, the Horn of Africa is closer to the Middle East than to sub-Saharan Africa.
You’re creating a straw man of “African-ness” that nobody in this debate believes in
This is a bit off. For one thing, the Horn of Africa IS in “sub-Saharan” Africa, making their populations “sub-Saharan” Africans. Just as Malta and Greece have African gene flow, but still remain European, so does the Horn, and it still remains African. And there are plenty f cultural and historical links in Ethiopia not only with Arabia but also with native peoples already in place within the country, the Oromo for example. Matter of fact one of the problems in studying Ethiopians is the continual skewing of sampling towards recently admixed groups (Amhara) while downplaying the native Oromo- a point noted in the literature.
———————————————————————————–
Second, the data on the Horn is mixed, but the populations there are definitely African as shown by several credible mainstream scholars. For example, cranial studies put the Somalis closer to African populations than others (Hanihara 2003). As far as DNA, Comas 1999, Sanchez 2004, etc etc show Somalis clustering more with Africans than any Middle Easterners.
On the key haplogroup E3b1 for example, a haplogroup originating in Africa with its greatest frequency in Africa, 77.6% of Somalis had it, with other Africans showing higher descending frequencies like Oromo (36%), Sudanese (18%), Kenyans (15%) and Middle easterners (6%) and Europeans (5%) bringing up the rear. (Sanchez 2004- High Frequencies of Y Chromo..) QUOTE:
The data suggest that the male Somali population is a branch of the East African population- closely related to the Oromos in Ethiopia and North Kenya..”
–Sanchez
———————————————————————————–
Third, the degree of “Middle Eastern: influence varies by era examined. The recent finding at Mota Cave, Ethiopia shows Middle Eastern elements are a relatively recent occurrence archaeologically. (Gallego-Llorente 2015). Other data show a clear preponderance of African genes in Ethiopians (Passrino 1998) and Cavalli-Sforza (1994). Per Cavalli-Sforza:
“”The Ethiopians comprise different ethnic groups..and are classified as African, genetically speaking..”
“Given their relationship for more than three thousand years, it is not surprising that the Africans and Ethiopians sit together on the genetic tree..”
–Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza, Francesco Cavalli-Sforza, Sarah Thorne. (1995). The great human diasporas
And the degree of relationship reflects in part the markers chosen for study. As far as Y-chromosomes for example, Ethiopians and Somalians are of clear African provenance. (Richards 2003, Sanchez 2004).
———————————————————————————–
Fourth, sampling of Ethiopians often OVER-sample the Amahara who have more recent “Middle Eastern” admixture while downplaying the less admixed native Oromo. This is especially so when samples are drawn from Addis Ababa. Such problems are noted in the scientific literature by Semino (2002) and Pagani (2014).
———————————————————————————–
Fifth, the claimed “racially intermediate” positions in some quarters, re Ethiopians- are related not because of any “race mix” per se but their location- in the Out of Africa migrations of anatomically modern humans out of Africa. (Tishkoff 2009)
Sixth as you say southern European locations like Malta show African gene flow- this is true- so does Greece, Italy, Sardinia etc. Indeed, Europeans themselves are hybrids per conservative geneticists like Cavalli-Sforza: (Cavalli-Sforza 1997)
———————————————————————————–
The Horn of Africa isn’t even sub-Saharan Africa. It’s a completely different cultural region, as different as the Middle East is from Europe. But even if we look only at sub-Saharan Africa, we see major cultural differences.
Not quite. As already demonstrated, and as can be seen by any map of the Saharan line, the Horn of Africa IS in sub-Saharan Africa. And there are major cultural differences in every continent, and within countries as well- whether it be in Slavic lands or the Mediterranean as regards Europe. They are all still European. It is a distortion to say that because there are cultural differences in some African countries, that this disqualifies them from being African.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-4OHHIoPYpFE/U5aF-9WME4I/AAAAAAAAA_I/gaKr4UIiLXg/s1600/northafricadefinition.jpg
Since I am not a geneticist, I suppose I will refer to Razib Khan (the only one I read) and see what he says about the Greeks.
And Afro-Caribbeans only surpassed Whites in education, not income.
And who are the top-performing ethnic groups in the Seattle sample, man? Ethiopian and Eritrean ones! Totally contradicting your point! BTW, I think that's absolutely meaningless. Yemenis are not that intelligent, on average.
What source says that 50% of Nigerian-American aduls have PhDs? And even if true this does not demonstrate any migration of “cognitive elites” or “exceptions.” How many of those were high school grads off the plane who earned their Phds AFTER living in the US with its greater opportunities? The immigrant who sold the 6 goats and fled with his family from the warzone to the refugee camp above was nothing special- just a medical assistant. His children attained their high educational status AFTER living on US soil for many years. They did not arrive as any sort of exceptional “elite.”
Re Afro-Caribbeans, as I cited, Sowell 1981, Markets and Minorities shows that some of these immigrants, namely urban second generation children, surpassed the general white average in terms of BOTH income and education. There is a reason the natives called the Caribbean folk- JEW-MAICAN or said that “Only the Bajan can withstand the Jew.”
And as for the Ethiopians, their overall national IQ scores if we go by those, are unimpressive, behind other West Africans, as Chisala shows above. This should not be the case if putative “white blood” was working its alleged magic.
http://www.unz.com/runz/unz-on-raceiq-response-to-lynn-and-nyborg/
But I wonder if Lynn's claims of current African IQs sometimes being as low as 65-70 are actually so totally absurd as most commenters seem to think.
For example, there seems a great deal of solid testing evidence indicating that the IQs of Italian-Americans in the early decades of the 20th century were generally around 75-80 relative to a mainstream white mean of 100. So if Italians living in America then had IQs as low as 75, is it really so utterly ridiculous that African villagers living in the rural Congo today might have IQs as low as 65?
Much of this early 20th century IQ testing data was collected by Dr. Clifford Kirkpatrick, which I found very helpful and interesting a couple of years ago, and you can apparently buy his republished book on Amazon for as little as $4.67. So maybe someone should do that and see what they think:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/040500558X
Yeah, I think most people don’t really understand just how bad the African environment generally is. So, ironically, Lynn et al may be the ones shedding the most accurate light on the catastrophic emergency that is Africa.
But very bad environment still don't prove your point, just precise evidences like greater representative sample, detailed study, etc...
You can see my arguments as ''cognitively bias'' and may be right about it. But i just ''believe'' in what i can see, specially in long term. You are fighting against a internacional chain of similar/quasi-identical situations where a randomized subsaharian population will be on average dysfunctional if compared with other populations.
Of course very bad environment is likely that will depress biological optimum (specially with people with autoimmune weaknesses) but seems that every population, not just human ones, have their ceilling. In the perfect conditions, different populations will tend to be different biological optimum.
Brazilian africans lived very bad during slavery (partially true, specially because lack of liberty, but not so different that europeans vassals in middle ages).... 45% of brazilian people are phenotypically mulatto. brazilian environment for blacks and mulattos (and for poor whites) improve very well in the last decades, but since the end of slavery, social environment in Brazil have improved significantly specially for someone that before lived captive and after free.
Black slaves also were well nourished to the work.
''Slaves for work'' were well selected, better health, and ''well treated'' (by certain perspectives only) for give good work to their masters, specially the docile types.
The hypothesis '' just environmental conditions is the cause for black-white gap in iq'' and specially in the case of subsaharian is a sofisticated way to repeat the liberal narrative about ''white guilty'' but using pre-possible-evidences than mantras.
''Catastrophic emergency in Africa'', even in countries like South Africa is not caused just/or fundamentally by ''white man'' but by own people who live there. Take responsibility for himself first is a sign of maturity.
Albino persecution, a kind of catastrophic emergency, wasn't invented by european stupid shamans. Is just the level of abstract thinking in larger regions in Africa. Don't worry, many original westerners, aka, white europeans, think that explicit visible differences among humans are just ''social'' construction.
I need precision to avoid believe wrongly in this example below
http://www.salon.com/2015/04/22/americas_real_education_scandal_teachers_go_to_jail_while_dysfunctional_charter_schools_get_a_pass_partner/
I asked a question to you and would like a response. What is your estimate for the genotypic IQ of the average subsaharian African in much better environment , according to their studies? Is like average african-americans??
And remember, debate is different than force people to believe in you.
If this is true – then one can come to only one conclusion – American makes its black children dumb. Same genetics – yet one is smarter than the other.
Hmm – must be - growing up black in America makes you dumb.
It is a fact, that early childhood trauma stunts intellectual growth. America’s black children grow up surrounded by family and cultural trauma ----- end of story.
What do you say America?
The crux of the article is that the sources of intelligence are a lot more complicated than either side wants to believe. But that seems to be deeply dis satisfactory to HBDers, who seem to desperately want skin color and facial features to be proxies for one’s cognitive abilities, presumably so they can make snap judgments about someone by looking at them, and also to bolster their political agendas.
If this is true – then one can come to only one conclusion – American makes its black children dumb. Same genetics – yet one is smarter than the other.
Hmm – must be - growing up black in America makes you dumb.
It is a fact, that early childhood trauma stunts intellectual growth. America’s black children grow up surrounded by family and cultural trauma ----- end of story.
What do you say America?
I’d say you won’t find a more privileged-by-law bunch of African people in the world than a Afro-American:
.1. Government enforced Affirmative Action for Afro-blacks
2. Government set-aside contracts for Afro-black owned businesses
3. Deliberate media and government misrepresentation of massive Afro-black crime wave
4. Frequent mass Afro-black rioting, assaulting, looting and arson without prosecution or suppression
5. Afro-Black terrorists organizations operate freely in public (Black Panthers, BLM, Blood and Crips, Nation of Islam, Million Man March)
6. Servile government support for historically black colleges and special afro-black benefit programs
7. Unrestrained afro-black Panther intimidation of voters at polls
8. Politically partisan Afro-black churches and associations granted tax exempt status
9. Most Afro-black children’s welfare financed by taxpayers
10.Government anti-discrimination laws for Afro-blacks
11.Hate speech law prosecutions in favor of Afro-blacks, and other protected classes
12.Preferential immigration, asylum, and citizenship for Afro-blacks
13. Disproportionate number of Afro-blacks in cushy government employment
14. Afro-black voters not required to display photo ID
15. Unrealistic portrayal of Afro-blacks in movies and TV
16. Afro-black civil right organizations financed and led by filthy rich diversity people
17. Election of the most unbelievably stupid members of the US congress
18. Afro-black majority city’s bailout by state and federal govt taxpayer
19. Afro-black history month
20. Ridiculous Afro-black studies in public schools and colleges
21. Astronomical Afro-black STD and HIV rates are not a controlled public health hazard
22. Banks forced to give loans to Afro-blacks with bad credit
23. White supremacists blamed for Afro-black crimes
24. At least 70% of afro-black children are bastards
25. Afro-black Caucus in the US congress
26. Sanctuary cities for Afro-blacks, and other protected classes
27. Afro-black diversity scheme imposed on white majority nations
28. Afro-black athletes glorified by mass media
29. Afro-black on white people violent crime rate is disproportionate
30. President of the US promotes undue privileges for Afro-blacks and other diversity people
So uh, you mean like the right to vote is a 'special privilege' given to the 'Afro-blacks'? And here most Americans are thinking that it is a right of *all* citizens. Well, well, well.. the racists finally take off their masks..
As for your other 'points' they are mostly rubbish. Just a few observations will suffice. The biggest beneficiaries of your 'affirmative action' are white people, particularly white women. And several of the 'giveaways' you are so upset about also mostly benefit white people. In states for example where there are more white beneficiaries, welfare payments are *higher* even though whites are much more wealthy than blacks and earn much more. You lament about 'college giveways' but this too is rubbish. Most blacks began to attend college courtesy of the American GI Bill after WW2, which applied to *all" American veterans who had served their country. Despite opposition in the racist south, and sidetracking of the black veterans into some inferior or dead end schools, most of the black veterans were able for the first time able to attend college, just like *other* Americans. Wow. But apparently if black people benefit just like other Americans you are shocked, shocked...
Finally your #28 seems curiously bitter. You seem to be upset because some Americans admire and celebrate the accomplishments of black athletes on the field. Good heavens man! Feeling a bit bitter are we? Were you the loser nobody chose when teams were picked on the school yard? Now bitterboy spends his time writing 'numbered points' against the 'Afro-blacks'.. lol...
"Privileged-by-law" ---- Yaaaaa! In US Jails!
The US refugee system has been importing Somali Bantus who didn’t even know what a toilet was before coming to the USA. Many of the Sudanese refugees were similarly backwards. Outside of Ghana, Nigeria and very random spots here and there most of Africa is extremely backwards. So any African that makes it to a refugee camp is more likely to be backwards. The elite would have fled by air long ago.
Geography, climate, sure, I can believe that, though every geographical condition on earth poses unique challenges to its human inhabitants, so saying that people in cold regions evolved higher intelligence to survive the harsh winters is something I find dubious. After a founding population has figured out clothing and shelter tricks, that knowledge just need be passed down the generations; the kids and grand-kids don't need to be especially intelligent to understand how grandpa's dicta will help them survive the winter.
I suspect that arranged marriages would make for even more assortative mating then in the modern West. What incentive would a wealthy father have to arrange to marry off his daughter to a poor man? People arranged themselves in common groups so while mating for intelligence may not have been explicit in practice that’s how things worked.
If this is true – then one can come to only one conclusion – American makes its black children dumb. Same genetics – yet one is smarter than the other.
Hmm – must be - growing up black in America makes you dumb.
It is a fact, that early childhood trauma stunts intellectual growth. America’s black children grow up surrounded by family and cultural trauma ----- end of story.
What do you say America?
People who don’t know black A-V-E-R-A-G-E nature….
Black americans were ”traumatized”… black africans not??
”black americans” were traumatized… but you have a sucessive generations of individuals who born in different periods of space and time….
”black americans were traumatized” aphoristic phrase
cognitive bias detected
who??
blacks who born in the 20′s in NY?
in the 30′s in Alabama?
in the 50′s in California?
in the 70′s in South Carolina?
Art,
you do work with arts??
What average black hardly to be is hypersensible!
hyperreactive is different than hypersensible
hypersensible internalize…. hyperreactive (many blacks are) extrapolate feelings ”or” emotions.
I've never seen a serious discussion of this possibility.
Not by a different majority race that looked down on them.
So there it is.
Cool. My dad immigrated in 1974 & my mom in ’76 from Ghana. Only went to Ghana as a kid once as a kid but I’d like to go back soon. Father and mother, since divorced, each go back regularly.
JayMan and others have not offered a plausible explanation as to what would be the factors for such high selectivity, rather they've simply assumed that it must be so because they don't like the results of the data.
Doesn’t make any sense. The elite of the elite of Somalia or Ethiopia would already be in Europe or the USA by now or have the means to leave if they need to. Think Iman the model, whose father was a Somali diplomat. There are no barriers to enter a refugee camp so once word spread that food and safety could be obtained there any physically able adult would migrate there. The notion that mostly intelligent people would go to the refugee camp while the dullards stayed behind runs counter to common sense frankly.
What’s actually more likely to happen and we are seeing this in Syria is that the poorer refugees end up in the camps while the middle class and above secures accommodations in town or simply finds a way to more attractive destinations.
Chisala,
But very bad environment still don’t prove your point, just precise evidences like greater representative sample, detailed study, etc…
You can see my arguments as ”cognitively bias” and may be right about it. But i just ”believe” in what i can see, specially in long term. You are fighting against a internacional chain of similar/quasi-identical situations where a randomized subsaharian population will be on average dysfunctional if compared with other populations.
Of course very bad environment is likely that will depress biological optimum (specially with people with autoimmune weaknesses) but seems that every population, not just human ones, have their ceilling. In the perfect conditions, different populations will tend to be different biological optimum.
Brazilian africans lived very bad during slavery (partially true, specially because lack of liberty, but not so different that europeans vassals in middle ages)…. 45% of brazilian people are phenotypically mulatto. brazilian environment for blacks and mulattos (and for poor whites) improve very well in the last decades, but since the end of slavery, social environment in Brazil have improved significantly specially for someone that before lived captive and after free.
Black slaves also were well nourished to the work.
”Slaves for work” were well selected, better health, and ”well treated” (by certain perspectives only) for give good work to their masters, specially the docile types.
The hypothesis ” just environmental conditions is the cause for black-white gap in iq” and specially in the case of subsaharian is a sofisticated way to repeat the liberal narrative about ”white guilty” but using pre-possible-evidences than mantras.
”Catastrophic emergency in Africa”, even in countries like South Africa is not caused just/or fundamentally by ”white man” but by own people who live there. Take responsibility for himself first is a sign of maturity.
Albino persecution, a kind of catastrophic emergency, wasn’t invented by european stupid shamans. Is just the level of abstract thinking in larger regions in Africa. Don’t worry, many original westerners, aka, white europeans, think that explicit visible differences among humans are just ”social” construction.
I need precision to avoid believe wrongly in this example below
http://www.salon.com/2015/04/22/americas_real_education_scandal_teachers_go_to_jail_while_dysfunctional_charter_schools_get_a_pass_partner/
I asked a question to you and would like a response. What is your estimate for the genotypic IQ of the average subsaharian African in much better environment , according to their studies? Is like average african-americans??
And remember, debate is different than force people to believe in you.
.1. Government enforced Affirmative Action for Afro-blacks
2. Government set-aside contracts for Afro-black owned businesses
3. Deliberate media and government misrepresentation of massive Afro-black crime wave
4. Frequent mass Afro-black rioting, assaulting, looting and arson without prosecution or suppression
5. Afro-Black terrorists organizations operate freely in public (Black Panthers, BLM, Blood and Crips, Nation of Islam, Million Man March)
6. Servile government support for historically black colleges and special afro-black benefit programs
7. Unrestrained afro-black Panther intimidation of voters at polls
8. Politically partisan Afro-black churches and associations granted tax exempt status
9. Most Afro-black children’s welfare financed by taxpayers
10.Government anti-discrimination laws for Afro-blacks
11.Hate speech law prosecutions in favor of Afro-blacks, and other protected classes
12.Preferential immigration, asylum, and citizenship for Afro-blacks
13. Disproportionate number of Afro-blacks in cushy government employment
14. Afro-black voters not required to display photo ID
15. Unrealistic portrayal of Afro-blacks in movies and TV
16. Afro-black civil right organizations financed and led by filthy rich diversity people
17. Election of the most unbelievably stupid members of the US congress
18. Afro-black majority city's bailout by state and federal govt taxpayer
19. Afro-black history month
20. Ridiculous Afro-black studies in public schools and colleges
21. Astronomical Afro-black STD and HIV rates are not a controlled public health hazard
22. Banks forced to give loans to Afro-blacks with bad credit
23. White supremacists blamed for Afro-black crimes
24. At least 70% of afro-black children are bastards
25. Afro-black Caucus in the US congress
26. Sanctuary cities for Afro-blacks, and other protected classes
27. Afro-black diversity scheme imposed on white majority nations
28. Afro-black athletes glorified by mass media
29. Afro-black on white people violent crime rate is disproportionate
30. President of the US promotes undue privileges for Afro-blacks and other diversity people
Oh wow.. A bright lad like you couldn’t come up with an even 50 ‘numbered points’? What is this? A slow day down at the Klavern’s beer hall? I am shocked you didn’t manage to work in something about how ‘the Jews’ are to blame… Slipping are we lad?.. Number 10 says it all though, and demonstrates your ignorant, racist mentality. Among the ‘privileged by law’ points is ‘Government anti-discrimination laws for Afro-Blacks’ Wow.
So uh, you mean like the right to vote is a ‘special privilege’ given to the ‘Afro-blacks’? And here most Americans are thinking that it is a right of *all* citizens. Well, well, well.. the racists finally take off their masks..
As for your other ‘points’ they are mostly rubbish. Just a few observations will suffice. The biggest beneficiaries of your ‘affirmative action’ are white people, particularly white women. And several of the ‘giveaways’ you are so upset about also mostly benefit white people. In states for example where there are more white beneficiaries, welfare payments are *higher* even though whites are much more wealthy than blacks and earn much more. You lament about ‘college giveways’ but this too is rubbish. Most blacks began to attend college courtesy of the American GI Bill after WW2, which applied to *all” American veterans who had served their country. Despite opposition in the racist south, and sidetracking of the black veterans into some inferior or dead end schools, most of the black veterans were able for the first time able to attend college, just like *other* Americans. Wow. But apparently if black people benefit just like other Americans you are shocked, shocked…
Finally your #28 seems curiously bitter. You seem to be upset because some Americans admire and celebrate the accomplishments of black athletes on the field. Good heavens man! Feeling a bit bitter are we? Were you the loser nobody chose when teams were picked on the school yard? Now bitterboy spends his time writing ‘numbered points’ against the ‘Afro-blacks’.. lol…
You are correlating wealth with intelligence in societies that were not close to being any kinds of meritocracies. In the absence of conquest and subsequent redistribution of property, most people just did the jobs their ancestors did for very similar rewards regardless of performance. Sure, any father (wealthy or not) would not have arranged for his daughter to marry a total derelict, but otherwise basic clan rules of marriage (within kin, caste, or guild) would have prevailed. That state of affairs might also account for the low speed of innovation until, say, the Renaissance period; barring military conquest or rebellion, most normal people were guaranteed inheritances, trade secrets, and spouses, and return for just following their society-mandated duties.
Jayman being respectful?
Any comments critiquing, debunking Jayman assertion, you’ll be banned, forced to read his very first articles in other blogs. Even if you have read those, which you can’t provide any evidence, but as long as you’re still debunking his assertion with multiple scenarios, you’ll be banned.
It’s like I’m rebutting Chanda post here in Part 2, but I will be banned and forced to read his Part I. And after reading Part I, I still debunk Chanda assertion in Part 2, but I will be banned because Chanda thinks I haven’t fully read Part I which makes me arguing in Part 2. And the cycle continues.
The only evidence that you have read Part 1 is when you agree Part 2. That’s Jayman’s style.
Re Afro-Caribbeans, as I cited, Sowell 1981, Markets and Minorities shows that some of these immigrants, namely urban second generation children, surpassed the general white average in terms of BOTH income and education. There is a reason the natives called the Caribbean folk- JEW-MAICAN or said that "Only the Bajan can withstand the Jew."
And as for the Ethiopians, their overall national IQ scores if we go by those, are unimpressive, behind other West Africans, as Chisala shows above. This should not be the case if putative "white blood" was working its alleged magic.
If 50% of Nigerian Americans have PhDs, you deny even this would suggest that the migrants were elite? When the average IQ of a Ph.D. is 123?
Black americans were ''traumatized''... black africans not?? ;)
''black americans'' were traumatized... but you have a sucessive generations of individuals who born in different periods of space and time....
''black americans were traumatized'' aphoristic phrase
cognitive bias detected
who??
blacks who born in the 20's in NY?
in the 30's in Alabama?
in the 50's in California?
in the 70's in South Carolina?
Art,
you do work with arts??
What average black hardly to be is hypersensible! ;)
hyperreactive is different than hypersensible
hypersensible internalize.... hyperreactive (many blacks are) extrapolate feelings ''or'' emotions.
Did slavery select against intelligence? Seems likely, and among agriculturists and breeders as slaveowners were, perhaps intentionally.
I’ve never seen a serious discussion of this possibility.
Though I see problems with this analysis, I fail to see the importance of the White-Black IQ centered HBD discussion in general beyond a simplified “give us more rent because blank slate IQ + unequal outcomes = racism” and the response of “we don’t believe in blank slate theory and so = no rent”.
That’s literally the subtext of all of this discussion. There isn’t anything else of significance. People are going to intermix regardless of IQ differences, or not intermix because of IQ differences that predict compatibility and culture differences. Both phenomenon exist and very few people will change their behavior because HBD is proven real or not. Thus, it is largely an insignificant discussion. Race mixing is not an insignificant discussion, but HBD plays a very small practical part despite the outsized attention that it receives. Sure, informed people would not logically wish for family interbreeding with theoretically lower IQ populations. However, few people are aware of this perspective and those that are tend to have reasons that extend beyond IQ comparisons.
What is significant to the race discussion, if not IQ? Behavior. Your Black neighbor could have a 90 IQ or a 130 IQ, and the difference to your life is likely to be minimal if he or she is well behaved and, if you are lucky, contributes to the community. However, there is a difference when population behavior is accounted for. The fact remains that behavior (crime) differences exist between Whites and most of these groups, even the ones that the article author singles out for her NAXALT argument. This difference is a much more significant reason for the refutation of Blank Slate theory and the rejection of the resultant rent seeking. It’s also a more significant reason to justify segregation of populations.
Last, these arguments are ultimately all secondary to the fact that many Whites simply do not want to put up with any alien population within their communities whatsoever, as any of these populations will generally move politically against the interests of the majority population. It’s a political decision that takes into account behavioral politics, formal politics, and rent seeking. No other reasons are really required beside the justified rejection of behaviorally and politically hostile minorities. NAXALT be damned.
Hehe, the desperation by the racists. Its funny.
As an aside, my personal experience with having dated a Black woman and having friends who keep Black friends is that there are significant emotional differences between Whites and Blacks. First, I wasn’t before aware of the Black propensity to want digest particularly brutal real life violence for entertainment. I noticed the trend across genders, even for smart Blacks, to want to watch such things as street fights, sometimes with an elderly victim, on youtube for casual entertainment. I’ve never before met a woman who wouldn’t be repulsed at such a thing let alone who would seek it out. They also seem much more immune to emotional pain. They don’t seem to be cognitively the same as your average Northern European, IQ differences aside. Last, its crystal clear from their untrained musculature and sexual behavior that Black women have almost White male levels of testosterone in their systems. There are, indeed, crucial differences between races.
Well we have a lot in common, my father and mother (a Harlemite) rather quickly discovered they were quite different, and he married a Ghanaian woman (from a different tribe). So they each return at least once a year as well.
.1. Government enforced Affirmative Action for Afro-blacks
2. Government set-aside contracts for Afro-black owned businesses
3. Deliberate media and government misrepresentation of massive Afro-black crime wave
4. Frequent mass Afro-black rioting, assaulting, looting and arson without prosecution or suppression
5. Afro-Black terrorists organizations operate freely in public (Black Panthers, BLM, Blood and Crips, Nation of Islam, Million Man March)
6. Servile government support for historically black colleges and special afro-black benefit programs
7. Unrestrained afro-black Panther intimidation of voters at polls
8. Politically partisan Afro-black churches and associations granted tax exempt status
9. Most Afro-black children’s welfare financed by taxpayers
10.Government anti-discrimination laws for Afro-blacks
11.Hate speech law prosecutions in favor of Afro-blacks, and other protected classes
12.Preferential immigration, asylum, and citizenship for Afro-blacks
13. Disproportionate number of Afro-blacks in cushy government employment
14. Afro-black voters not required to display photo ID
15. Unrealistic portrayal of Afro-blacks in movies and TV
16. Afro-black civil right organizations financed and led by filthy rich diversity people
17. Election of the most unbelievably stupid members of the US congress
18. Afro-black majority city's bailout by state and federal govt taxpayer
19. Afro-black history month
20. Ridiculous Afro-black studies in public schools and colleges
21. Astronomical Afro-black STD and HIV rates are not a controlled public health hazard
22. Banks forced to give loans to Afro-blacks with bad credit
23. White supremacists blamed for Afro-black crimes
24. At least 70% of afro-black children are bastards
25. Afro-black Caucus in the US congress
26. Sanctuary cities for Afro-blacks, and other protected classes
27. Afro-black diversity scheme imposed on white majority nations
28. Afro-black athletes glorified by mass media
29. Afro-black on white people violent crime rate is disproportionate
30. President of the US promotes undue privileges for Afro-blacks and other diversity people
“I’d say you won’t find a more privileged-by-law bunch of African people in the world than a Afro-American:”
“Privileged-by-law” —- Yaaaaa! In US Jails!
I've never seen a serious discussion of this possibility.
I think nor select nor deselect, select better health, i mean, sportists,
I think it selected for a strong fight or flight reflex, that is, for fear and anger – because fear, under the circumstances, was dominant. That is, under slavery, a strong fight or flight reflex translates to fearfulness; under freedom, to aggressiveness. I recall from a Faulkner novel the readiness for negroes to run when they could have, with a second’s thought, have rode by horse to escape a threat. The flight reaction was too strong for forethought.
This emotionality depresses American Negro IQ scores somewhat to below their actual intelligence. But it also correlates with actual lower intelligence. So selection for apparent docility would be selection for low intelligence.
This might all be fantasy. I’m not a scholar of the slavery period. But I don’t think the fearfulness of the American Negro is noted among Africans.
And as for emotionalism, this is no monopoly of Africans. Some of the most emotional people of all time are white- you know them, the white Irish. And a whole lot of others...
You say as to your claim:
This might all be fantasy.
Damn straight.. both fantasy and BS..
But albino africans seems show us something interesting about influence of personality/personal interests in cognition.
People with exactly same iq (i mean, every psychometric trait), in my opinion, with different personality profiles, specially those with very explicit impulsive/strong personality and with very explicit (low end of this spectrum) self controlled/docile personality, will tend to have different academic/or intelectual/ or technically cognitive results in real life.
Is important had in mind that ''africans'' are very diverse group, of course, some groups seems to be demographically prevalent, but still will have many outliers in the continent.
''So selection for apparent docility would be selection for low intelligence.''
Not exactly because (seems) every iq range will be its personality variation, but seems east asians on average, appear more docile than any other human population and they 'are' cognitively smarter too.
And among blacks, same trends happen where smarter will be more docile, less agressive, because rationality tend to produce less instinctive behavior.
Black americans were ''traumatized''... black africans not?? ;)
''black americans'' were traumatized... but you have a sucessive generations of individuals who born in different periods of space and time....
''black americans were traumatized'' aphoristic phrase
cognitive bias detected
who??
blacks who born in the 20's in NY?
in the 30's in Alabama?
in the 50's in California?
in the 70's in South Carolina?
Art,
you do work with arts??
What average black hardly to be is hypersensible! ;)
hyperreactive is different than hypersensible
hypersensible internalize.... hyperreactive (many blacks are) extrapolate feelings ''or'' emotions.
“Black americans were ”traumatized”… black africans not??”
Not by a different majority race that looked down on them.
I never said 50% of the Nigerians have a Phd. The number sounds bogus, hence I asked the original poster for credible proof. He has since gone silent, predictably, with little to put on the table. As for the Phds, as noted above, no one here has yet produced credible evidence as to whether the immigrants ORIGINALLY CAME with those degrees or whether they earned them AFTER in the US. African students with high school diplomas coming to the US and then going on later to earn more advanced degrees like bachelors, Masters and Phds are nothing special, and don’t necessarily indicate any “elite” arriving on US shores. It is highly unlikely that 50% of Nigerian immigrants would arrive on US shores with Phds. The sources already referenced above show no such proportion. Any notion you have of a so-called “cognitive elite” based on these Phds is false.
What a crock of bullshiit. You simply do not know what you are talking about. Under slavery there was plenty of aggressiveness- which is why slave owners lived in constant fear, and why they deployed extensive security patrols and measures, and why there were numerous slave revolts, both in the US and around the Caribbean. Ever heard of the aggressive Maroons of Jamaica? The quilombos of Brazil? The Saramaca of Surinam?
And as for emotionalism, this is no monopoly of Africans. Some of the most emotional people of all time are white- you know them, the white Irish. And a whole lot of others…
You say as to your claim:
This might all be fantasy.
Damn straight.. both fantasy and BS..
Of course a plenty of revolts happened but it wasn't the rule if not slavery system would had been destroyed before but crap human history show us that it was very stable and lucrative.
Just kill or subvert the leaders and rest of population will conform to the actual circumstances. Look for whites now.
I never said you claimed that 50% have Ph.Ds. I quoted you as saying that even if this were the case, it would prove nothing! At that point, any confidence I had in your objectivity was eradicated. I wish you would at least admit a mistake. Is there no intellectual honesty on these premises?
"How many of those were high school grads off the plane who earned their Phds AFTER living in the US with its greater opportunities?"Are they a cognitive elite on arrival, or people who, coming with a strong dedication to education, utilized the greater opportunities and resources of America to go on and attain higher educational levels? People who go on to higher levels include refugees of low status who strived hard to push their children up the educational ladder. This "striver" pattern is seen among individuals in almost ALL immigrant groups to the US. It certainly typifies a dedication to hard work and sacrifice, BUT being a "striver" does not define either a cognitive elite, or even a socio-economic elite. In fact it may sometimes describe the opposite- as the "poorer classes" migrate out in search of better opportunities while their betters remain behind. See various books of Thomas Sowell on this such as Migration and Culture.African immigrants to the US are a diverse lot, from over 2 dozen countries, with multiple languages and also include many refugees. In the mid to late 2000s the Nigerian proportions were actually going down, as refugees from war-torn Somalia, Ethiopia, Sierra Leone, Central Africa etc made up more of the mix. Even in the more selective US Diversity Visa, which is separate from the regular immigration process, only about 24% of those immigrants report a managerial or professional occupation. This leaves 76% NOT in the higher end category. Regular immigrants to the US by contrast, only report managerial and professional occupations about 10% of the time. (Data from Congressional Research Service, 2011.) In short, while immigration does have SOME selective impact, the alleged flood or massive over-representation of high powered "elites" simply does not exist.
I have the opinion that personality (brain traits, chemical hormonal patterns) have huge impact on personal interests and in turn have huge impact on cognition and intelligence. If were possible neutralize/isolate personality (personal interests) than cognition, we may could see the real average intelligence of many people with this strong impulsive dispositions like happen with many blacks.
But albino africans seems show us something interesting about influence of personality/personal interests in cognition.
People with exactly same iq (i mean, every psychometric trait), in my opinion, with different personality profiles, specially those with very explicit impulsive/strong personality and with very explicit (low end of this spectrum) self controlled/docile personality, will tend to have different academic/or intelectual/ or technically cognitive results in real life.
Is important had in mind that ”africans” are very diverse group, of course, some groups seems to be demographically prevalent, but still will have many outliers in the continent.
”So selection for apparent docility would be selection for low intelligence.”
Not exactly because (seems) every iq range will be its personality variation, but seems east asians on average, appear more docile than any other human population and they ‘are’ cognitively smarter too.
And among blacks, same trends happen where smarter will be more docile, less agressive, because rationality tend to produce less instinctive behavior.
However, it does seem as though East Asian docility is different from American Negro docility, in that the former doesn't seem to be based on a strengthend fight or flight reflex. [I would guess that today less docile East Asians are more successful than the more docile; the reverse for negroes.]
But albino africans seems show us something interesting about influence of personality/personal interests in cognition.
People with exactly same iq (i mean, every psychometric trait), in my opinion, with different personality profiles, specially those with very explicit impulsive/strong personality and with very explicit (low end of this spectrum) self controlled/docile personality, will tend to have different academic/or intelectual/ or technically cognitive results in real life.
Is important had in mind that ''africans'' are very diverse group, of course, some groups seems to be demographically prevalent, but still will have many outliers in the continent.
''So selection for apparent docility would be selection for low intelligence.''
Not exactly because (seems) every iq range will be its personality variation, but seems east asians on average, appear more docile than any other human population and they 'are' cognitively smarter too.
And among blacks, same trends happen where smarter will be more docile, less agressive, because rationality tend to produce less instinctive behavior.
But every phenotype may can be done via differential or enphasized selection.
And as for emotionalism, this is no monopoly of Africans. Some of the most emotional people of all time are white- you know them, the white Irish. And a whole lot of others...
You say as to your claim:
This might all be fantasy.
Damn straight.. both fantasy and BS..
How explain that 15 million whites had dominated twice its own population in South Africa??
Of course a plenty of revolts happened but it wasn’t the rule if not slavery system would had been destroyed before but crap human history show us that it was very stable and lucrative.
Just kill or subvert the leaders and rest of population will conform to the actual circumstances. Look for whites now.
You’re creating a straw man of “African-ness” that nobody in this debate believes in
This is a bit off. For one thing, the Horn of Africa IS in "sub-Saharan" Africa, making their populations "sub-Saharan" Africans. Just as Malta and Greece have African gene flow, but still remain European, so does the Horn, and it still remains African. And there are plenty f cultural and historical links in Ethiopia not only with Arabia but also with native peoples already in place within the country, the Oromo for example. Matter of fact one of the problems in studying Ethiopians is the continual skewing of sampling towards recently admixed groups (Amhara) while downplaying the native Oromo- a point noted in the literature.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, the data on the Horn is mixed, but the populations there are definitely African as shown by several credible mainstream scholars. For example, cranial studies put the Somalis closer to African populations than others (Hanihara 2003). As far as DNA, Comas 1999, Sanchez 2004, etc etc show Somalis clustering more with Africans than any Middle Easterners.
On the key haplogroup E3b1 for example, a haplogroup originating in Africa with its greatest frequency in Africa, 77.6% of Somalis had it, with other Africans showing higher descending frequencies like Oromo (36%), Sudanese (18%), Kenyans (15%) and Middle easterners (6%) and Europeans (5%) bringing up the rear. (Sanchez 2004- High Frequencies of Y Chromo..) QUOTE:
The data suggest that the male Somali population is a branch of the East African population- closely related to the Oromos in Ethiopia and North Kenya.."
--Sanchez
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Third, the degree of "Middle Eastern: influence varies by era examined. The recent finding at Mota Cave, Ethiopia shows Middle Eastern elements are a relatively recent occurrence archaeologically. (Gallego-Llorente 2015). Other data show a clear preponderance of African genes in Ethiopians (Passrino 1998) and Cavalli-Sforza (1994). Per Cavalli-Sforza:
""The Ethiopians comprise different ethnic groups..and are classified as African, genetically speaking.."
"Given their relationship for more than three thousand years, it is not surprising that the Africans and Ethiopians sit together on the genetic tree.."
--Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza, Francesco Cavalli-Sforza, Sarah Thorne. (1995). The great human diasporas
And the degree of relationship reflects in part the markers chosen for study. As far as Y-chromosomes for example, Ethiopians and Somalians are of clear African provenance. (Richards 2003, Sanchez 2004).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fourth, sampling of Ethiopians often OVER-sample the Amahara who have more recent "Middle Eastern" admixture while downplaying the less admixed native Oromo. This is especially so when samples are drawn from Addis Ababa. Such problems are noted in the scientific literature by Semino (2002) and Pagani (2014).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fifth, the claimed "racially intermediate" positions in some quarters, re Ethiopians- are related not because of any "race mix" per se but their location- in the Out of Africa migrations of anatomically modern humans out of Africa. (Tishkoff 2009)
Sixth as you say southern European locations like Malta show African gene flow- this is true- so does Greece, Italy, Sardinia etc. Indeed, Europeans themselves are hybrids per conservative geneticists like Cavalli-Sforza: (Cavalli-Sforza 1997)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Horn of Africa isn’t even sub-Saharan Africa. It’s a completely different cultural region, as different as the Middle East is from Europe. But even if we look only at sub-Saharan Africa, we see major cultural differences.
Not quite. As already demonstrated, and as can be seen by any map of the Saharan line, the Horn of Africa IS in sub-Saharan Africa. And there are major cultural differences in every continent, and within countries as well- whether it be in Slavic lands or the Mediterranean as regards Europe. They are all still European. It is a distortion to say that because there are cultural differences in some African countries, that this disqualifies them from being African.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-4OHHIoPYpFE/U5aF-9WME4I/AAAAAAAAA_I/gaKr4UIiLXg/s1600/northafricadefinition.jpg
I’ve been wondering about that “African gene flow” that is supposed to have been in ancient Greece. I read that more recent genetic studies show virtually no sub-Saharan African gene flow into Greece at that time, nor any significant even today. This was a stunning turn-around, and showed how deeply this has been studied. This theory, I read, was put forward by an obscure scientist from Spain during the mid-1990s. It’s not surprising really. Putting blacks everywhere as participants in European history, whether they were there nor not, just might force a European to question their own whiteness. There was a black lady in England who was always trying to find black ancestors of famous Europeans in history. One was a princess known to be of middle eastern descent partially, and who had an olive complexion. Naturally, for this black lady, this princess was “African.” They really can be that irrational. And no, the princess was not George III’s wife.
Since I am not a geneticist, I suppose I will refer to Razib Khan (the only one I read) and see what he says about the Greeks.
Well IF this were the case, where half of all Nigerian immigrants had Phd’s sure, people might make a case of an elite. But the reality is NOWHERE near this, and assorted claimants here, completely fail to back up their claim. And as to what I said:
The crucial part is –
“How many of those were high school grads off the plane who earned their Phds AFTER living in the US with its greater opportunities?”
Are they a cognitive elite on arrival, or people who, coming with a strong dedication to education, utilized the greater opportunities and resources of America to go on and attain higher educational levels? People who go on to higher levels include refugees of low status who strived hard to push their children up the educational ladder. This “striver” pattern is seen among individuals in almost ALL immigrant groups to the US. It certainly typifies a dedication to hard work and sacrifice, BUT being a “striver” does not define either a cognitive elite, or even a socio-economic elite. In fact it may sometimes describe the opposite- as the “poorer classes” migrate out in search of better opportunities while their betters remain behind. See various books of Thomas Sowell on this such as Migration and Culture.
African immigrants to the US are a diverse lot, from over 2 dozen countries, with multiple languages and also include many refugees. In the mid to late 2000s the Nigerian proportions were actually going down, as refugees from war-torn Somalia, Ethiopia, Sierra Leone, Central Africa etc made up more of the mix. Even in the more selective US Diversity Visa, which is separate from the regular immigration process, only about 24% of those immigrants report a managerial or professional occupation. This leaves 76% NOT in the higher end category. Regular immigrants to the US by contrast, only report managerial and professional occupations about 10% of the time. (Data from Congressional Research Service, 2011.) In short, while immigration does have SOME selective impact, the alleged flood or massive over-representation of high powered “elites” simply does not exist.
You say that. The UN says otherwise.
I think you might have dated a weird one.
Dude, that couldn’t have worked out too well for you in the boudoir.
[…] and time. Cometary alcohol. The anatomy of intelligence and the Internet. The intractable brain. Contesting the gap. For all your periodic tables needs. “Ebola was a warning we have yet to heed.” […]
You say “Take a country with IQ 63″. But isn’t that nonsensical?
Without denying that, just possibly, someone has administered a plausibly valid IQ test to a plausibly representative sample of the citizenry of some country and got a result of 63 for the average, is it even remotely sensible to regard this as measuring something on the same scale as measures IQs in Europe where the average is 100?
As I put it to Phil Rushton concerning similar or lower figures for Australian Aborigines you had to believe that at least a quarter of the population had IQs of the order of 50 or below and believe that they are not too retarded to feed themselves, let alone earn any kind of living. Obviously whatever is being measured is not what is being measured in Europeans.
http://www.unz.com/runz/unz-on-raceiq-response-to-lynn-and-nyborg/
But I wonder if Lynn's claims of current African IQs sometimes being as low as 65-70 are actually so totally absurd as most commenters seem to think.
For example, there seems a great deal of solid testing evidence indicating that the IQs of Italian-Americans in the early decades of the 20th century were generally around 75-80 relative to a mainstream white mean of 100. So if Italians living in America then had IQs as low as 75, is it really so utterly ridiculous that African villagers living in the rural Congo today might have IQs as low as 65?
Much of this early 20th century IQ testing data was collected by Dr. Clifford Kirkpatrick, which I found very helpful and interesting a couple of years ago, and you can apparently buy his republished book on Amazon for as little as $4.67. So maybe someone should do that and see what they think:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/040500558X
Yes…but… As I have just suggested to Chanda Chisala it doesn’t seem sensible to regard those measurements of average IQs of much below 70 (or maybe 80) as making measurements that can be confidently compared with typical measurements of European IQ other than in the crudest way. Your own analysis in your excellent piece for TAC supports that view I think.
My main argument had been that there's no particular reason to believe that different peoples might not have significantly different IQs, just like Sicilians and Swedes have very different environment-equalized heights. But it seems pretty likely to me that a large part of the really huge IQ differences we see are environmental, more likely due to "cultural deprivation" than any sort of physical cause such as nutrition or parasitic infection. Put another way, I'd be willing to bet serious money that if a bunch of those ultra-low-IQ rural Congolese were adopted into Western middle-class families, their tested IQs would turn out to be a *whole* lot higher...
But albino africans seems show us something interesting about influence of personality/personal interests in cognition.
People with exactly same iq (i mean, every psychometric trait), in my opinion, with different personality profiles, specially those with very explicit impulsive/strong personality and with very explicit (low end of this spectrum) self controlled/docile personality, will tend to have different academic/or intelectual/ or technically cognitive results in real life.
Is important had in mind that ''africans'' are very diverse group, of course, some groups seems to be demographically prevalent, but still will have many outliers in the continent.
''So selection for apparent docility would be selection for low intelligence.''
Not exactly because (seems) every iq range will be its personality variation, but seems east asians on average, appear more docile than any other human population and they 'are' cognitively smarter too.
And among blacks, same trends happen where smarter will be more docile, less agressive, because rationality tend to produce less instinctive behavior.
The fact that an intelligent race is docile doesn’t mean that selection for docility isn’t selection against intelligence.
However, it does seem as though East Asian docility is different from American Negro docility, in that the former doesn’t seem to be based on a strengthend fight or flight reflex. [I would guess that today less docile East Asians are more successful than the more docile; the reverse for negroes.]
''The fact that an intelligent race is docile doesn’t mean that selection for docility isn’t selection against intelligence.''
Yes, it was what i write in the subsequent comment.
However, it does seem as though East Asian docility is different from American Negro docility, in that the former doesn't seem to be based on a strengthend fight or flight reflex. [I would guess that today less docile East Asians are more successful than the more docile; the reverse for negroes.]
I don’t think that overrepresentation in crimes to be a sign of docility. Blacks are the burakumin ones of the USA (… and other western nations)
”The fact that an intelligent race is docile doesn’t mean that selection for docility isn’t selection against intelligence.”
Yes, it was what i write in the subsequent comment.
But in an environment where fear isn't pervasive, the avoidance-flight tendency is dominated by the confront-fight tendency.
''The fact that an intelligent race is docile doesn’t mean that selection for docility isn’t selection against intelligence.''
Yes, it was what i write in the subsequent comment.
The docility came from selecting for the flight or fight reflex. Slaveowners had to maintain constant armed vigilance, not only because they were afraid but because the slaves had to be kept afraid – ready to withdraw from any conflict, and if needed, at least flee rather than attack.
But in an environment where fear isn’t pervasive, the avoidance-flight tendency is dominated by the confront-fight tendency.
Well, I’m somewhat agnostic regarding the interpretion of such ultra-low IQs. I’m pretty sure I’d actually referenced those extremely low Italian-American IQs in my big Race/IQ article, and although I’ve never investigated the African IQs, I’d strongly suspect that those ultra-low scores have very similar causes.
My main argument had been that there’s no particular reason to believe that different peoples might not have significantly different IQs, just like Sicilians and Swedes have very different environment-equalized heights. But it seems pretty likely to me that a large part of the really huge IQ differences we see are environmental, more likely due to “cultural deprivation” than any sort of physical cause such as nutrition or parasitic infection. Put another way, I’d be willing to bet serious money that if a bunch of those ultra-low-IQ rural Congolese were adopted into Western middle-class families, their tested IQs would turn out to be a *whole* lot higher…
Other bugs case that Chisala seems that won't study,
- gypsies
- irish travellers
''Very lower iq but functional'' are, comparatively speaking, so dumb that they tend to have little knowledge about personal hygiene and health care. Its a natural cicle of poverty or older cicle of life (lifestyle).
Other interesting incongruency with this forced theory that every human in every/any space and time ''with'' iq score below 80&70 and ''reasonably'' (comparatively speaking with domestic&civilized ones) functional behavior is impossible.
Older human beings. They were ''retarded''?? No doubt (seems... again) that they would score lower in modern iq tests even with exposure of accumulated (prior) knowledge.
While some people are studying or thinking about the mistery of stars other people are thinking with very very comparatively ''primitive'' stuff.
All of it prove that is possible you have a person with very lower general psychometric intelligence FOR ''civilized'' demand but not FOR other environment.
That doesn't mean much cognitively. The British kept the more civilised (and pre-colonial politically dominant) Bantu peoples from the South out of the army. They deliberately recruited from the more primitive Nilotics of the North, who were considered more biddable.
Amin, in particular, ingratiated himself via his rugby prowess and his knack for killing Mau Mau prisoners by stuffing socks into their oesophagus.
Are you implying that the British colonial administrators found or thought the Nilotics to be less intelligent than the Bantu? That would surprise me based on only slight evidence beyond what we all probably know about the President’s Luo relations. I recall a tall good looking very black Kenyan Luo MP looking around disdainfully at a number of other African and Caribbean parliamentarians and saying with obvious disdain “they are Bantu; I am Nilotic”. Almost no evidence of course but enough to make me wonder about the received colonialists’ view of the Nilotics…
My main argument had been that there's no particular reason to believe that different peoples might not have significantly different IQs, just like Sicilians and Swedes have very different environment-equalized heights. But it seems pretty likely to me that a large part of the really huge IQ differences we see are environmental, more likely due to "cultural deprivation" than any sort of physical cause such as nutrition or parasitic infection. Put another way, I'd be willing to bet serious money that if a bunch of those ultra-low-IQ rural Congolese were adopted into Western middle-class families, their tested IQs would turn out to be a *whole* lot higher...
Wending my way from your agnosticism on the “interpretation” of “such ultra low IQs” – scil. the test results – to your willingness to bet on the IQs in the sense of the cognitive ability conferred largely by genes I am with you. If only we could find a Marxist sociologist or anthropologist to take the serious money I would also bet. Sadly not a chance, but I don’t mind taking money off dumb rightwingers. Put me down for $xfygzh at even money.
My main argument had been that there's no particular reason to believe that different peoples might not have significantly different IQs, just like Sicilians and Swedes have very different environment-equalized heights. But it seems pretty likely to me that a large part of the really huge IQ differences we see are environmental, more likely due to "cultural deprivation" than any sort of physical cause such as nutrition or parasitic infection. Put another way, I'd be willing to bet serious money that if a bunch of those ultra-low-IQ rural Congolese were adopted into Western middle-class families, their tested IQs would turn out to be a *whole* lot higher...
The major bug of all (seems) are the aboriginals (sam people too ?). Is true that they ,on average, score astonishingly higher in visual memory and with very (comparative) lower general iq??
Other bugs case that Chisala seems that won’t study,
- gypsies
- irish travellers
”Very lower iq but functional” are, comparatively speaking, so dumb that they tend to have little knowledge about personal hygiene and health care. Its a natural cicle of poverty or older cicle of life (lifestyle).
Other interesting incongruency with this forced theory that every human in every/any space and time ”with” iq score below 80&70 and ”reasonably” (comparatively speaking with domestic&civilized ones) functional behavior is impossible.
Older human beings. They were ”retarded”?? No doubt (seems… again) that they would score lower in modern iq tests even with exposure of accumulated (prior) knowledge.
While some people are studying or thinking about the mistery of stars other people are thinking with very very comparatively ”primitive” stuff.
All of it prove that is possible you have a person with very lower general psychometric intelligence FOR ”civilized” demand but not FOR other environment.
You are misinterpreting my interpretation of the table.
As a combined group, including ELL, they do not read as well as black Americans. So, you can say “before they learn to read as well as black Americans” for this group.
As Emil has advised you, why go all the way to assessing my integrity when you can just ask about that!?
I did respond to Fuerst himself about that in the comments of my very first article. I question that “vastly superior” evaluation (in this specific context) on the basis that Fuerst is dealing with data that is apparently NOT disaggregated: not on nationality (and certainly not on ethnicity). The whole point of my disaggregation approach, from UK data to US data, is that aggregated African data is not very helpful since there may be vast differences among Africans, from English language exposure to … other things.
HBDers may have some cult type proponents, but we generally follow the evidence, no matter where it goes.
HBDers are the ones who say it is both genes and environment; they are largely responding to the Blank Slaters who say it is all environment and no genetic component.
Keep in mind the limits of this paper, including that it is largely 1-8 grades, where the IQ gap is easiest to close.
I don’t know if it’s a uniform HBD position, but many claim that it is not (at all) shared environment.
This has been a fascinating series of articles and I thoroughly enjoyed it. With that said, I like to point out where this article goes wrong because it totally confused me and went against what I knew from Jenson’s arguments and data. I didn’t have time to read through all the previous comments so I hope this argument hasn’t been brought up already.
The main trust of the argument was that different rates of regression among African immigrants and African Americans in terms of IQ and academic achievement shatter the argument that the white-black IQ gap is due to genetics and not environmental factors. You point out correctly that selection alone couldn’t explain why immigrants from Nigeria ended up with kids that achieved much higher than their African American counterparts and even higher than their white counterparts, scoring as high or even higher than immigrants from Asian countries that must be selected for in similar ways with much higher mean IQ scores. This spells out that the argument from racial differences due to genetic differences must be wrong to you. I’m just going to assume on good faith that the data you present is reliable and the criticism you applied to Jayman and other blogger’s calculation using breeder’s equation are right. I am too lazy to do the math and check myself. But where this argument goes wrong is the following, you fail to consider other possible causes for differences besides the argument that immigrants from such African countries are highly selected. I agree that is wrong, or at least incomplete. Consider this, when slavery was first instituted, who were the people that were kidnapped to be slaves? I’m not much of a historian, but I bet that the people who were taken from Africa due to being defeated in wars with other African tribes that were sold to European slavers were not the brightest of the lot. Selection pressure probably happened to some extent to the Africans that were taken to Americas to begin with. Next, a few hundred years of slavery probably didn’t do much to help that either. IF anything, slavery should have actively selected against the smart ones. Who do you think is likely to rebel and make trouble against the plantation overseers and owners? So in light of this mental model, your data isn’t so much an argument against genetics differences as you think it is. If you are advocating that immigrants from certain regions of Africa are not included under the “black-white” gap, no one would disagree. If you are saying that black people can be as smart or even smarter than white folks, no one would disagree again. But you take the data too far in implying that just because some immigrants from Africa can be super smart and achieve a ton that this would mean the black-white gap here in America doesn’t really exist. But don’t just take my word for it. We live in an age where people are doing amazing things with genetics. My hypothesis here is directly testable. We already have GWAS studies with SNPs for cognitive ability and academic achievement and with larger studies we are getting closer to finding most of them. My hypothesis is that the population IQ mean of these immigrant groups is much higher than African Americans, even the elite ones. And you should be able to find SNPs for cognitive ability that agree with this. Meaning that these differences are genetic and not due to environment. Full stop. End of argument.
Perhaps I missed it, but did you explain what the “ELL” category meant? Checking the article, those were students who performed particularly poorly on English language proficiency tests. You seem to interpret that as students who had not yet gotten around to learning English. But an alternative would be that they are less able students, whether for environmental or genetic reasons.
If so, the figures that do not include them are comparing the abler fraction of the immigrant groups with all of the non-immigrant group, since none of the English speakers and roughly half of the non-English speakers are ELL, not surprisingly. So your argument works for the table that includes ELL students, is shaky for the table that doesn’t.
However, assuming your alternative interpretation, "genetic reasons" for less ability would be difficult to defend.
In the table that includes ELL students, the "non-immigrant group" outperforms only one of the four ethnic groups in math (while beating all of them in English language proficiency). The relevant genetic reasons would have similarly affected the relative math performance of the other three groups, so it leaves only environmental reasons since that's the only significant difference among the four immigrant groups. But environmental reasons are fine for my argument.
If we accept your numbers above without too much quibbling, for example, there will still be only one refugee parent who will be selected by this selective immigration process. That's how the system works. The other parent and the children just come along once one is admitted. This will necessarily mean that the other parent will be the cause of offspring regression (before we even talk about any other sources of regression).
If you do the math now, you will fail to explain the performance of their children in Seattle and elsewhere. The other higher IQ ethnic immigrant example you gave will also fail to produce children who will equal the white mean (in the UK or something), if that's what you meant.
It is at this point that many people now just start proposing random selection measures, by working backwards from the answer, that start getting absurd. Whatever selection measures you propose have to make sense in the real world. If your numbers start looking like the Somalian refugees have the IQs of Somalian medical doctors and yet you know, for example, that they commit many crimes and have other characteristics in the US that reflect more of a much lower IQ, according to your own theory, then you have some big contradiction.
Or it might be that your numbers suggest that the era when only Somalian students on university scholarships were being admitted to the US now appears much less selected than the era when the US started accepting anyone from Somalia, which is absurd. The burden of proof is therefore on you if you are claiming high selection.
As a former Somali refugee and a member of the educated class of that country, I can attest that most of my social class who could afford to left the country on international flights out of Mogadisho in the late 80s and including up to the collapse of the Barre regime in early 1991. After 1991 most upper and middle class Somalis went straight to regional urban centres like Nairobi, Addis Ababa, Djibouti, and Mombasa and from there to Dubai and other Gulf countries and then on to Europe, North America, and Australia. So these Somali elites either entirely by-passed refugee camps in Kenya and Ethiopia or spent very little time in them due to the extremely harsh conditions and also because they had the means to move to more comfortable locations like the places mentioned above. So my argument is that most of the Somali refugees who were brought to America directly from refugee camps where precisely those peasants Mr. Frost speaks of. Many of them illiterate farmers and pastoralists with a significant population of Somali Bantus who are among the most disadvantaged groups inside Somalia. For your information, Somali Bantus have no “caucasoid genes” (whatever that is supposed to mean, trust me I have no caucasoid genes and I am a Cushitic Somali). Somali Bantus are as pure “negroid” as one can get (unbelievable that people are still using these terms). I wonder what sort of “high iq” and “selective immigration process” is required to walk hundreds of miles in the scorching sun to get to desolate desert refugee camp like Dadaab in northern Kenya? Do you people even read the nonsense you write? The process of resettling refugees from places like Dadaab have nothing to do with IQ, social class, or any other socioeconomic indicator. It is purely driven by the level of threat these people face if they returned to their home country. Hence why you have a disproportionate number of persecuted minority groups like the Somali Bantus being resettled in America. Lastly, just a teeny weenie correction for Chanda, there is no such thing as a “Somalian” the correct name is Somali or Somalis. Otherwise keep up the good work exposing these White Supremacists.
And yes, thanks for the "teeny weenie correction," I was using 'Somali' interchangeably with 'Somalian'. I read in one dictionary (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Somalian) that they are interchangeable, but I agree that normal convention is 'Somali.' Thank you.
move and concrete possibilities of doing so.Table 20 illustrates that roughly 16% of interviewees envisage remaining in the host country in coming years, while another 16% plan to return to their country of origin. At the same time,
a significant proportion of interviewees (42%) wish to live elsewhere, in
places such as North America (46%), Europe (34%), Gulf States or Egypt
(3%), Australia (3%), other African countries (1%), or in a yet unknown or 22% of those hoping to move farther have the actual resources and strategy to undertake their journey. It is quite clear from these figures that a majority of all those wishing to move further will not be able to achieve their desire to do
so simply because they lack the financial and material plans necessary to organize such a journey.'Do I also have to prove that having strategy and resources correlates with IQ?https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.unhcr.org/50aa0d6f9.pdf&ved=0CCEQFjABahUKEwj9x6yAidjIAhVD1BoKHVBdDbM&usg=AFQjCNEk5CWcncLtO-rAYa9WuI2jggNOPA&sig2=bv8AXYJVzxhbA7kenon_pQ
I think you are muddying the waters on purpose here. I believe Chanda is talking about refugees who came to the USA via the refugee resettlement program which by the way make up the bulk of Somali refugees who came to america in the last 20 years. This group was not ” selected for intelligence” in any way or form. They were selected for resettlement purely on the merits of their refugee asylum case (level fear or danger to themselves or their loved ones etc…). Now you could make an argument that Somalis who came to America on their own without the help of government, Church, or international agencies who then sponsored their relatives through the family reunification program (like myself) where members of the educated elite. Then I would argue some are but they are a very small group in comparison to the thousands who came to the country through the official refugee resettlement program. Not to mention the educated urban Somali elites were always a tiny proportion of the overall Somali population and there is no evidence that such a small group of people could fill the sprawling refugee camps in Kenya not to mention somehow manipulate UN agencies, Churches, and the US government to put them in the resettlement program disproportionate to their actual numbers. Anyone who claims refugees are resettled according to “intelligence” either is totally ignorant of the refugee resettlement process or is intentionally muddying the waters with such ridiculous claims in order to justify their racist theories. So which is it?
You’re creating a straw man of “African-ness” that nobody in this debate believes in
This is a bit off. For one thing, the Horn of Africa IS in "sub-Saharan" Africa, making their populations "sub-Saharan" Africans. Just as Malta and Greece have African gene flow, but still remain European, so does the Horn, and it still remains African. And there are plenty f cultural and historical links in Ethiopia not only with Arabia but also with native peoples already in place within the country, the Oromo for example. Matter of fact one of the problems in studying Ethiopians is the continual skewing of sampling towards recently admixed groups (Amhara) while downplaying the native Oromo- a point noted in the literature.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second, the data on the Horn is mixed, but the populations there are definitely African as shown by several credible mainstream scholars. For example, cranial studies put the Somalis closer to African populations than others (Hanihara 2003). As far as DNA, Comas 1999, Sanchez 2004, etc etc show Somalis clustering more with Africans than any Middle Easterners.
On the key haplogroup E3b1 for example, a haplogroup originating in Africa with its greatest frequency in Africa, 77.6% of Somalis had it, with other Africans showing higher descending frequencies like Oromo (36%), Sudanese (18%), Kenyans (15%) and Middle easterners (6%) and Europeans (5%) bringing up the rear. (Sanchez 2004- High Frequencies of Y Chromo..) QUOTE:
The data suggest that the male Somali population is a branch of the East African population- closely related to the Oromos in Ethiopia and North Kenya.."
--Sanchez
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Third, the degree of "Middle Eastern: influence varies by era examined. The recent finding at Mota Cave, Ethiopia shows Middle Eastern elements are a relatively recent occurrence archaeologically. (Gallego-Llorente 2015). Other data show a clear preponderance of African genes in Ethiopians (Passrino 1998) and Cavalli-Sforza (1994). Per Cavalli-Sforza:
""The Ethiopians comprise different ethnic groups..and are classified as African, genetically speaking.."
"Given their relationship for more than three thousand years, it is not surprising that the Africans and Ethiopians sit together on the genetic tree.."
--Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza, Francesco Cavalli-Sforza, Sarah Thorne. (1995). The great human diasporas
And the degree of relationship reflects in part the markers chosen for study. As far as Y-chromosomes for example, Ethiopians and Somalians are of clear African provenance. (Richards 2003, Sanchez 2004).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fourth, sampling of Ethiopians often OVER-sample the Amahara who have more recent "Middle Eastern" admixture while downplaying the less admixed native Oromo. This is especially so when samples are drawn from Addis Ababa. Such problems are noted in the scientific literature by Semino (2002) and Pagani (2014).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fifth, the claimed "racially intermediate" positions in some quarters, re Ethiopians- are related not because of any "race mix" per se but their location- in the Out of Africa migrations of anatomically modern humans out of Africa. (Tishkoff 2009)
Sixth as you say southern European locations like Malta show African gene flow- this is true- so does Greece, Italy, Sardinia etc. Indeed, Europeans themselves are hybrids per conservative geneticists like Cavalli-Sforza: (Cavalli-Sforza 1997)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Horn of Africa isn’t even sub-Saharan Africa. It’s a completely different cultural region, as different as the Middle East is from Europe. But even if we look only at sub-Saharan Africa, we see major cultural differences.
Not quite. As already demonstrated, and as can be seen by any map of the Saharan line, the Horn of Africa IS in sub-Saharan Africa. And there are major cultural differences in every continent, and within countries as well- whether it be in Slavic lands or the Mediterranean as regards Europe. They are all still European. It is a distortion to say that because there are cultural differences in some African countries, that this disqualifies them from being African.
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-4OHHIoPYpFE/U5aF-9WME4I/AAAAAAAAA_I/gaKr4UIiLXg/s1600/northafricadefinition.jpg
Finally some sense. Thank you Enrique
The main trust of the argument was that different rates of regression among African immigrants and African Americans in terms of IQ and academic achievement shatter the argument that the white-black IQ gap is due to genetics and not environmental factors. You point out correctly that selection alone couldn't explain why immigrants from Nigeria ended up with kids that achieved much higher than their African American counterparts and even higher than their white counterparts, scoring as high or even higher than immigrants from Asian countries that must be selected for in similar ways with much higher mean IQ scores. This spells out that the argument from racial differences due to genetic differences must be wrong to you. I'm just going to assume on good faith that the data you present is reliable and the criticism you applied to Jayman and other blogger's calculation using breeder's equation are right. I am too lazy to do the math and check myself. But where this argument goes wrong is the following, you fail to consider other possible causes for differences besides the argument that immigrants from such African countries are highly selected. I agree that is wrong, or at least incomplete. Consider this, when slavery was first instituted, who were the people that were kidnapped to be slaves? I'm not much of a historian, but I bet that the people who were taken from Africa due to being defeated in wars with other African tribes that were sold to European slavers were not the brightest of the lot. Selection pressure probably happened to some extent to the Africans that were taken to Americas to begin with. Next, a few hundred years of slavery probably didn't do much to help that either. IF anything, slavery should have actively selected against the smart ones. Who do you think is likely to rebel and make trouble against the plantation overseers and owners? So in light of this mental model, your data isn't so much an argument against genetics differences as you think it is. If you are advocating that immigrants from certain regions of Africa are not included under the "black-white" gap, no one would disagree. If you are saying that black people can be as smart or even smarter than white folks, no one would disagree again. But you take the data too far in implying that just because some immigrants from Africa can be super smart and achieve a ton that this would mean the black-white gap here in America doesn't really exist. But don't just take my word for it. We live in an age where people are doing amazing things with genetics. My hypothesis here is directly testable. We already have GWAS studies with SNPs for cognitive ability and academic achievement and with larger studies we are getting closer to finding most of them. My hypothesis is that the population IQ mean of these immigrant groups is much higher than African Americans, even the elite ones. And you should be able to find SNPs for cognitive ability that agree with this. Meaning that these differences are genetic and not due to environment. Full stop. End of argument.
But he hasn’t yet addressed blacks in America!
I’ve expressed the same suspicion. Their owners were, after all, professional agriculturalists and breeders.
Making the "dumb ones were slaves" argument simply reveals a tremendous level of historical ignorance and confusion about the demographic picture of slavery in post-colonial America.
No, their owners weren’t. The historical slave owners are a lot of things, but they weren’t as a group terribly professional about their slave ownership or their plantation management. And that’s without getting into how few plantations with 100 or more slaves there were in the first place.
Making the “dumb ones were slaves” argument simply reveals a tremendous level of historical ignorance and confusion about the demographic picture of slavery in post-colonial America.
Thank you for that detailed firsthand confirmation of the Somali refugee system and situation. Yes, I was surprised to hear people arguing that even Somalis in refugee camps are a highly select elite group — it was the last level of evasion I was expecting.
And yes, thanks for the “teeny weenie correction,” I was using ‘Somali’ interchangeably with ‘Somalian’. I read in one dictionary (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Somalian) that they are interchangeable, but I agree that normal convention is ‘Somali.’ Thank you.
And yes, thanks for the "teeny weenie correction," I was using 'Somali' interchangeably with 'Somalian'. I read in one dictionary (http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Somalian) that they are interchangeable, but I agree that normal convention is 'Somali.' Thank you.
De nada amigo. It is amazing that people think refugees are selected according to their intelligence. I wonder if these guys think the UNHCR is administering IQ tests at refugee in-take centres while they hand out ration cards to starving people. Breathtaking ignorance rooted in white privilege.
Good point.
However, assuming your alternative interpretation, “genetic reasons” for less ability would be difficult to defend.
In the table that includes ELL students, the “non-immigrant group” outperforms only one of the four ethnic groups in math (while beating all of them in English language proficiency). The relevant genetic reasons would have similarly affected the relative math performance of the other three groups, so it leaves only environmental reasons since that’s the only significant difference among the four immigrant groups. But environmental reasons are fine for my argument.
Well, don’t we get something for coming up with UNHCR, ration cards, refugee centers and planes to take refugees to countries founded and developed by whites where refugees can have safety and obtain shelter, food, clothing, etc.?
It is quite funny you think “you” people created all those things by yourselves. As if the rest of humanity did not exist and Europe just developed all on their own without borrowing ideas from other parts of the world. But let`s say for argument`s sake you did come up with all those things. Then according to that logic you would also have to take credit for generating these refugees in the first place with your imperialist wars, no? Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, and most recently Syria all have Western meddling as the main cause of these tragedies. Does that also mean we have to put up with imbecilic arguments from some of “your” guys claiming that Somali refugees were selected according to their intelligence in order justify their white supremacist theories? Even when represented with irrefutable evidence by Chanda Chisala some of “you” guys still insist that African refugee camps are teeming with affluent middle class university graduates waiting to be resettled in America. I guess that is your idea of superior white intelligence that created “the UNHCR, ration cards, refugee center etc …” LOL
our??? Or the weshtern elites who you are crazy to stablish contact and connections??
''It is quite funny you think “you” people created all those things by yourselves.''
An individual who can have great ideas, it is clear that he/she will be in its own right. People who take the individual value of a great thinker and plays into the hands of any abstract thing, '' history '', '' transfer or cultural exchanges, '' do not know about intelligence, creativity, wisdom, anything that is inextricably linked it. If it were that simple, we not would have a small percentage of people who can capture and match details and give them a new and valuable meaning.
Your pseudo-moral little speech here completely changes when we change the name of the actors.It is called dishonesty and is completely unnecessary in a potentially rich debate.
Anyone who buys without any trial or analysis of leftist nonsense, is a potential insane and unable to understand and accept the patterns that are independent of their guesses.
''Even when represented with irrefutable evidence by Chanda Chisala some of “you” guys still insist that African refugee camps are teeming with affluent middle class university graduates waiting to be resettled in America.''
You do not seem to understand what the term irrefutable mean.
”your imperialist wars”
our??? Or the weshtern elites who you are crazy to stablish contact and connections??
”It is quite funny you think “you” people created all those things by yourselves.”
An individual who can have great ideas, it is clear that he/she will be in its own right. People who take the individual value of a great thinker and plays into the hands of any abstract thing, ” history ”, ” transfer or cultural exchanges, ” do not know about intelligence, creativity, wisdom, anything that is inextricably linked it. If it were that simple, we not would have a small percentage of people who can capture and match details and give them a new and valuable meaning.
Your pseudo-moral little speech here completely changes when we change the name of the actors.It is called dishonesty and is completely unnecessary in a potentially rich debate.
Anyone who buys without any trial or analysis of leftist nonsense, is a potential insane and unable to understand and accept the patterns that are independent of their guesses.
”Even when represented with irrefutable evidence by Chanda Chisala some of “you” guys still insist that African refugee camps are teeming with affluent middle class university graduates waiting to be resettled in America.”
You do not seem to understand what the term irrefutable mean.
"our??? Or the weshtern elites who you are crazy to stablish contact and connections??"
I wish no desire or no connections with your "western elites". I wish to be left alone to develop my country as I see fit without your imperialist noses in it. But of course if you people keep militarily attacking my country (since the late 1800s in my country) then naturally I will migrate to your "countries" North America, Australia, and New Zealand.
"If it were that simple, we not would have a small percentage of people who can capture and match details and give them a new and valuable meaning."
LOL! Man its lovely to see racist morons expose themselves like this. Okay, genius so if only a small percentace of people (which u mean assume only white people can "match details and give them a new and valuable meaning") how come Japanese, Indian, Mayan, Ancient Zimbabwe among others were able to do those things and even more to the point your "white boys" in many cases were just plain and simple copycats.
I think you trouble understanding the concept of facts in general. For facts seem to be subjective (anything that supports my racist theories) LOL!
our??? Or the weshtern elites who you are crazy to stablish contact and connections??
''It is quite funny you think “you” people created all those things by yourselves.''
An individual who can have great ideas, it is clear that he/she will be in its own right. People who take the individual value of a great thinker and plays into the hands of any abstract thing, '' history '', '' transfer or cultural exchanges, '' do not know about intelligence, creativity, wisdom, anything that is inextricably linked it. If it were that simple, we not would have a small percentage of people who can capture and match details and give them a new and valuable meaning.
Your pseudo-moral little speech here completely changes when we change the name of the actors.It is called dishonesty and is completely unnecessary in a potentially rich debate.
Anyone who buys without any trial or analysis of leftist nonsense, is a potential insane and unable to understand and accept the patterns that are independent of their guesses.
''Even when represented with irrefutable evidence by Chanda Chisala some of “you” guys still insist that African refugee camps are teeming with affluent middle class university graduates waiting to be resettled in America.''
You do not seem to understand what the term irrefutable mean.
So you think Somali refugees are selected for resettlement according to their IQ level or some other western arbitrary “intelligence” measurement?
You guys are not being objectives with the main hypothesis, why can not you be more objective / honest **
Simple, just say so
'' I think the average Sub-Saharan African have the same level of intelligence that Europeans ''
I do not think it, but I'm not putting the average European on a pedestal. I'm just trying to give the right weight to things.
Severe malnutrition, logically speaking, is related to small brain in infants. But modern Western diet should not be taken as a universal parameter, because it is very wrong, exaggerated. I also believe that European colonialism was not that bad to completely depress African capacity nor the cause for severe malnutrition crisis, the main causes were disastrous combinations of drought and changes in African societies structures, specially during 80's as well conflicts, created by colonizers and sustained by ''colonized''.
You guys are using small, weak evidence, to corroborate this hypothesis. By itself it is already wrong.
tell me what are your impressions of the population from which you came.
You guys are using terms very suspicious that show which school you guys been drinking, cultural Marxism. You can have the best arguments, just use the term 'white privilege' 'in response to all that is related to cognitive differences between whites and blacks, and you will have already condemned, in my eyes, at least.
People who do well in school is common worldwide, which has differentiated the rest of the West, is not this kind, but one that transcends the average level of knowledge. In Brazil, I could take a group of children and adolescents who come from poor families and are good students and note
'' look, these children and adolescents are a faithful representation of the average Brazilian ''
I'd be lying, there are many more people who are going relatively well in school, have adequate personality profile, they are workers like to learn, here in my country, whose average intelligence is 87-90. That still does not mean I can extrapolate these examples as representing the majority.
Up close, there is much more cognitive diversity than we think, the bell curve is not meant to represent. But that still does not prove anything to the contrary. Only those who tend to understand the statistical averages of literal and misguided way, will be impressed with what they can find.
But at least in this context, IQ isn't an arbitrary measurement. To the extent that becoming a refugee requires negotiating complexity, it will select for IQ. (But the countervailing pressure is that those who have failed to negotiate some complexity end up being refugees, and we don't know which is stronger.)
Refugees are not some kind of representative or random sample from their populations. We don't know how they differ, although it seems safe to say (at least prima facie) that they aren't two standard deviations above the mean, as some of the extreme nativists require.
our??? Or the weshtern elites who you are crazy to stablish contact and connections??
''It is quite funny you think “you” people created all those things by yourselves.''
An individual who can have great ideas, it is clear that he/she will be in its own right. People who take the individual value of a great thinker and plays into the hands of any abstract thing, '' history '', '' transfer or cultural exchanges, '' do not know about intelligence, creativity, wisdom, anything that is inextricably linked it. If it were that simple, we not would have a small percentage of people who can capture and match details and give them a new and valuable meaning.
Your pseudo-moral little speech here completely changes when we change the name of the actors.It is called dishonesty and is completely unnecessary in a potentially rich debate.
Anyone who buys without any trial or analysis of leftist nonsense, is a potential insane and unable to understand and accept the patterns that are independent of their guesses.
''Even when represented with irrefutable evidence by Chanda Chisala some of “you” guys still insist that African refugee camps are teeming with affluent middle class university graduates waiting to be resettled in America.''
You do not seem to understand what the term irrefutable mean.
So you think Somali refugees are selected for resettlement according to their intelligence? If you believe that then that shows how far racist delusions have taken you.
“our??? Or the weshtern elites who you are crazy to stablish contact and connections??”
I wish no desire or no connections with your “western elites”. I wish to be left alone to develop my country as I see fit without your imperialist noses in it. But of course if you people keep militarily attacking my country (since the late 1800s in my country) then naturally I will migrate to your “countries” North America, Australia, and New Zealand.
“If it were that simple, we not would have a small percentage of people who can capture and match details and give them a new and valuable meaning.”
LOL! Man its lovely to see racist morons expose themselves like this. Okay, genius so if only a small percentace of people (which u mean assume only white people can “match details and give them a new and valuable meaning”) how come Japanese, Indian, Mayan, Ancient Zimbabwe among others were able to do those things and even more to the point your “white boys” in many cases were just plain and simple copycats.
I think you trouble understanding the concept of facts in general. For facts seem to be subjective (anything that supports my racist theories) LOL!
our??? Or the weshtern elites who you are crazy to stablish contact and connections??
''It is quite funny you think “you” people created all those things by yourselves.''
An individual who can have great ideas, it is clear that he/she will be in its own right. People who take the individual value of a great thinker and plays into the hands of any abstract thing, '' history '', '' transfer or cultural exchanges, '' do not know about intelligence, creativity, wisdom, anything that is inextricably linked it. If it were that simple, we not would have a small percentage of people who can capture and match details and give them a new and valuable meaning.
Your pseudo-moral little speech here completely changes when we change the name of the actors.It is called dishonesty and is completely unnecessary in a potentially rich debate.
Anyone who buys without any trial or analysis of leftist nonsense, is a potential insane and unable to understand and accept the patterns that are independent of their guesses.
''Even when represented with irrefutable evidence by Chanda Chisala some of “you” guys still insist that African refugee camps are teeming with affluent middle class university graduates waiting to be resettled in America.''
You do not seem to understand what the term irrefutable mean.
So you think Somali refugees are selected for resettlement according to their intelligence? If you believe that then that shows how far racist delusions have taken you.
“our??? Or the weshtern elites who you are crazy to stablish contact and connections??”
I wish no desire or no connections with your “western elites”. I wish to be left alone to develop my country as I see fit without your imperialist noses in it. But of course if you people keep militarily attacking my country (since the late 1800s in my country) then naturally I will migrate to your “countries” North America, Australia, and New Zealand.
“If it were that simple, we not would have a small percentage of people who can capture and match details and give them a new and valuable meaning.”
LOL! Man its lovely to see racist morons expose themselves like this. Okay, genius so if only a small percentage of people (which u mean assume only white people can “match details and give them a new and valuable meaning”) how come Japanese, Indian, Mayan, Ancient Zimbabwe among others were able to do those things and even more to the point your “white boys” in many cases were just plain and simple copycats.
I think you have trouble understanding the concept of facts in general. For facts seem to be subjective (anything that supports my racist theories) LOL!
My '' racial illusions' ' can be summarized by the young' rebels' 'doing anywhere a worse place. The worst thing a human being can do is be violent, manipulative. And there are MANY black people are like that.
There are lots of decent blacks, it does not prove the rule, will we have to repeat this as many times** The averages white and east asians also are not sooo good, just morally mediocre.
''I wish no desire or no connections with your “western elites”. I wish to be left alone to develop my country as I see fit without your imperialist noses in it. But of course if you people keep militarily attacking my country (since the late 1800s in my country) then naturally I will migrate to your “countries” North America, Australia, and New Zealand.''
First, I am Brazilian, I was supposedly in the same situation as yours.
Second, fully take the blame '' his people '' the situation in his country is not correct to do. from what little I've read about the Somali situation it is that after years of incompetent governments,civil wars, usual in Africa, the country was lost completely and became a total anarchy.
I agree that American imperialism, European and Jewish, are terrible and have a good deal of guilt about many problems in the Third World, but can not be ignored other factors, should not be.
In my country, the arms of the sodium-American empire can be shown by a TV network, the most influential in the country, and that is feverishly in his globalist ideology.
You have the geopolitical factor: foreign interference in national politics.
And there's other factors like low intellectual and critical capacity of '' average brazilian '' to fight against the implicit tyranny this television station.
The Brazilian people, on average, are corruptible and not just the culture that causes this, but mostly the character of many Brazilians. However, there is a universal problem within human societies, their hierarchical nature, favoring those who want to hold power, rather than those who want to use it aimed at non-egocentric attitudes. In Africa, Brazil, Norway, everywhere is the same.
''LOL! Man its lovely to see racist morons expose themselves like this. Okay, genius so if only a small percentage of people (which u mean assume only white people can “match details and give them a new and valuable meaning”) how come Japanese, Indian, Mayan, Ancient Zimbabwe among others were able to do those things and even more to the point your “white boys” in many cases were just plain and simple copycats.''
Why do you always deny what the 'white man' 'made **
You are just stupid or dishonest * do not realize their own contradictions.
Another contradiction supposedly in your '' smart '' head is think that is morally superior defend the '' black cause ''. Okay, but you do not realize that the way you defend is identical to the one the white nationalists do about their white race **
You appear morally superior just because idiopathic Western elite want to appear to be so, but in reality, you are identical to a white nationalist. Stupid, dishonest or both *
You take a piece of my review and manipulate it to look like I meant that only white people can be brilliant. No, but most creative geniuses have come from Europe or Caucasian race. UNZ is filling up with hysterical Afrocentric, and we are boring them.
''I think you have trouble understanding the concept of facts in general. For facts seem to be subjective (anything that supports my racist theories) LOL!''
dur.
You're hysterical, emotionally unbalanced and did not present any serious argument, only reveals his incompetence to
honesty (extremely important)
maturity
to be objective and accept the reality of the facts.
Let's hope for more ''ad hominem''.
However, assuming your alternative interpretation, "genetic reasons" for less ability would be difficult to defend.
In the table that includes ELL students, the "non-immigrant group" outperforms only one of the four ethnic groups in math (while beating all of them in English language proficiency). The relevant genetic reasons would have similarly affected the relative math performance of the other three groups, so it leaves only environmental reasons since that's the only significant difference among the four immigrant groups. But environmental reasons are fine for my argument.
Chanda must be a good christian to put up these racist idiots
"our??? Or the weshtern elites who you are crazy to stablish contact and connections??"
I wish no desire or no connections with your "western elites". I wish to be left alone to develop my country as I see fit without your imperialist noses in it. But of course if you people keep militarily attacking my country (since the late 1800s in my country) then naturally I will migrate to your "countries" North America, Australia, and New Zealand.
"If it were that simple, we not would have a small percentage of people who can capture and match details and give them a new and valuable meaning."
LOL! Man its lovely to see racist morons expose themselves like this. Okay, genius so if only a small percentace of people (which u mean assume only white people can "match details and give them a new and valuable meaning") how come Japanese, Indian, Mayan, Ancient Zimbabwe among others were able to do those things and even more to the point your "white boys" in many cases were just plain and simple copycats.
I think you trouble understanding the concept of facts in general. For facts seem to be subjective (anything that supports my racist theories) LOL!
Sorry for the typos and reps.
I hope everyone reads this article! Nigerians are also achieving in Japan. At Takao university Ufot Ekong, a Nigerian, solved a math problem no one else was able to solve for 30 years. He also scored the highest grades in 50 years.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/nigerian-student-ufot-ekong-solves-30-year-old-maths-equation-and-breaks-academic-record-at-japanese-10303064.html
No, I think it is too early to draw any conclusions about it.
You guys are not being objectives with the main hypothesis, why can not you be more objective / honest **
Simple, just say so
” I think the average Sub-Saharan African have the same level of intelligence that Europeans ”
I do not think it, but I’m not putting the average European on a pedestal. I’m just trying to give the right weight to things.
Severe malnutrition, logically speaking, is related to small brain in infants. But modern Western diet should not be taken as a universal parameter, because it is very wrong, exaggerated. I also believe that European colonialism was not that bad to completely depress African capacity nor the cause for severe malnutrition crisis, the main causes were disastrous combinations of drought and changes in African societies structures, specially during 80′s as well conflicts, created by colonizers and sustained by ”colonized”.
You guys are using small, weak evidence, to corroborate this hypothesis. By itself it is already wrong.
tell me what are your impressions of the population from which you came.
You guys are using terms very suspicious that show which school you guys been drinking, cultural Marxism. You can have the best arguments, just use the term ‘white privilege’ ‘in response to all that is related to cognitive differences between whites and blacks, and you will have already condemned, in my eyes, at least.
People who do well in school is common worldwide, which has differentiated the rest of the West, is not this kind, but one that transcends the average level of knowledge. In Brazil, I could take a group of children and adolescents who come from poor families and are good students and note
” look, these children and adolescents are a faithful representation of the average Brazilian ”
I’d be lying, there are many more people who are going relatively well in school, have adequate personality profile, they are workers like to learn, here in my country, whose average intelligence is 87-90. That still does not mean I can extrapolate these examples as representing the majority.
Up close, there is much more cognitive diversity than we think, the bell curve is not meant to represent. But that still does not prove anything to the contrary. Only those who tend to understand the statistical averages of literal and misguided way, will be impressed with what they can find.
What seems unlikely (hence contrived) is the amount of IQ disparity that would be required.
But at least in this context, IQ isn’t an arbitrary measurement. To the extent that becoming a refugee requires negotiating complexity, it will select for IQ. (But the countervailing pressure is that those who have failed to negotiate some complexity end up being refugees, and we don’t know which is stronger.)
Refugees are not some kind of representative or random sample from their populations. We don’t know how they differ, although it seems safe to say (at least prima facie) that they aren’t two standard deviations above the mean, as some of the extreme nativists require.
”So you think Somali refugees are selected for resettlement according to their intelligence? If you believe that then that shows how far racist delusions have taken you.”
My ” racial illusions’ ‘ can be summarized by the young’ rebels’ ‘doing anywhere a worse place. The worst thing a human being can do is be violent, manipulative. And there are MANY black people are like that.
There are lots of decent blacks, it does not prove the rule, will we have to repeat this as many times** The averages white and east asians also are not sooo good, just morally mediocre.
”I wish no desire or no connections with your “western elites”. I wish to be left alone to develop my country as I see fit without your imperialist noses in it. But of course if you people keep militarily attacking my country (since the late 1800s in my country) then naturally I will migrate to your “countries” North America, Australia, and New Zealand.”
First, I am Brazilian, I was supposedly in the same situation as yours.
Second, fully take the blame ” his people ” the situation in his country is not correct to do. from what little I’ve read about the Somali situation it is that after years of incompetent governments,civil wars, usual in Africa, the country was lost completely and became a total anarchy.
I agree that American imperialism, European and Jewish, are terrible and have a good deal of guilt about many problems in the Third World, but can not be ignored other factors, should not be.
In my country, the arms of the sodium-American empire can be shown by a TV network, the most influential in the country, and that is feverishly in his globalist ideology.
You have the geopolitical factor: foreign interference in national politics.
And there’s other factors like low intellectual and critical capacity of ” average brazilian ” to fight against the implicit tyranny this television station.
The Brazilian people, on average, are corruptible and not just the culture that causes this, but mostly the character of many Brazilians. However, there is a universal problem within human societies, their hierarchical nature, favoring those who want to hold power, rather than those who want to use it aimed at non-egocentric attitudes. In Africa, Brazil, Norway, everywhere is the same.
”LOL! Man its lovely to see racist morons expose themselves like this. Okay, genius so if only a small percentage of people (which u mean assume only white people can “match details and give them a new and valuable meaning”) how come Japanese, Indian, Mayan, Ancient Zimbabwe among others were able to do those things and even more to the point your “white boys” in many cases were just plain and simple copycats.”
Why do you always deny what the ‘white man’ ‘made **
You are just stupid or dishonest * do not realize their own contradictions.
Another contradiction supposedly in your ” smart ” head is think that is morally superior defend the ” black cause ”. Okay, but you do not realize that the way you defend is identical to the one the white nationalists do about their white race **
You appear morally superior just because idiopathic Western elite want to appear to be so, but in reality, you are identical to a white nationalist. Stupid, dishonest or both *
You take a piece of my review and manipulate it to look like I meant that only white people can be brilliant. No, but most creative geniuses have come from Europe or Caucasian race. UNZ is filling up with hysterical Afrocentric, and we are boring them.
”I think you have trouble understanding the concept of facts in general. For facts seem to be subjective (anything that supports my racist theories) LOL!”
dur.
You’re hysterical, emotionally unbalanced and did not present any serious argument, only reveals his incompetence to
honesty (extremely important)
maturity
to be objective and accept the reality of the facts.
Let’s hope for more ”ad hominem”.
"First, I am Brazilian, I was supposedly in the same situation as yours."
So what? You are still a racist and most likely of European descent.
You say:
"Second, fully take the blame ” his people ” the situation in his country is not correct to do. from what little I’ve read about the Somali situation it is that after years of incompetent governments,civil wars, usual in Africa, the country was lost completely and became a total anarchy."
Again you show your utter ignorance without even bothering to do a little google search. You would know that the entire southern half of the country including the capital Mogadisho is occupied by Western backed foreign troops. In the early 1990s you Whites invaded with your own troops but after the humiliation of Black Hawk Down you decided to pay your African "allies" as mercenaries you know that old European tradition divide and rule "let the niggers kill themselves". But there are still many White CIA, military contractors, Special forces etc... Read this book to educate yourself a bit http://www.amazon.co.jp/Dirty-Wars-The-World-Battlefield/dp/156858671X In the northern half of the country, Somaliland, the situation is much different http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/mobile/africa/7365002.stm mainly because they have been lucky enough to escape western meddling. Notice a pattern, the more meddling by Whites the more misery there is in a given country. Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, and southern Somalia are some bright examples. Whereas with less foreign (white) meddling the situation is much more stable like Somaliland in northern Somalia for example.
You said:
"I agree that American imperialism, European and Jewish, are terrible and have a good deal of guilt about many problems in the Third World, but can not be ignored other factors, should not be."
I never ignored that so stop putting words in my mouth. I don`t know about the rest of the so called "Third World" but in my country there is direct Western backed military occupation that is causing much of the problem. There can be no development or progress when people are under military attack. As I have pointed out earlier, in the parts of Somalia where there is less foreign meddling there is substantial progress going on. So please just go away and I promise I will hand back my passport too LOL!
You said:
"Why do you always deny what the ‘white man’ ‘made **"
Again with the strawman arguments. I did no such thing. I just pointed out that White Europeans are not as "superior" as they claim and you seem to be proving my point again and again. Thank you very much. LOL
You said:
"Another contradiction supposedly in your ” smart ” head is think that is morally superior defend the ” black cause ”. Okay, but you do not realize that the way you defend is identical to the one the white nationalists do about their white race **"
Again putting words into my mouth. Where did I say I was "morally superior" or "defend the black cause"? Please stop inferring your own bias into my arguments and deal with my actual statements and arguments.
"You appear morally superior just because idiopathic Western elite want to appear to be so, but in reality, you are identical to a white nationalist. Stupid, dishonest or both *"
Dude! You`re losing the plot. Try to stay on topic here. Or is it that amazing "superior White IQ" at work again? LOL!
You said:
"You take a piece of my review and manipulate it to look like I meant that only white people can be brilliant. No, but most creative geniuses have come from Europe or Caucasian race. UNZ is filling up with hysterical Afrocentric, and we are boring them."
Now who is being dishonest here. You did not only argue that "most creative geniuses have come from Europe or Caucasian race" you conveniently left out the part where you and your buddies were arguing that Whites are genetically superior to Blacks to the point of arguing that refugee kids who excel are some sort of select illuminati elite in their home countries. LOL!
You said:
"You’re hysterical, emotionally unbalanced and did not present any serious argument, only reveals his incompetence to
honesty (extremely important)
maturity
to be objective and accept the reality of the facts.
Let’s hope for more ”ad hominem”."
Projecting much there buddy? LOL! Well it`s kinda hard to take you seriously when you say stuff like "I have no doubt that the one of the main reason for the problems in Brazil, more than anything else is the large black population have here." and then complain about me attacking you with ad hominems because I pointed out that you are a raving lunatic racist and a pretty dumb one to boot. LOL! It is really weird to see White racists complain about black "antisocial behaviour" or "violence" especially in countries like Brazil or the US where some the most brutal chattel slavery, lynchings and other violence against black people occurred and still happens not to mention the ongoing genocide of the indigenous people there. The most violent people on the planet bar none have been White Europeans and some of you guys have the gall to call Blacks the violent ones the same blacks who have been the biggest victims of European violence especially in a country like Brazil. Absolutely shameless! But then again these are the Einsteins who argued that Somali refugees are selected according to intelligence. LOL
I have no doubt that the one of the main reason for the problems in Brazil, more than anything else is the large black population have here. Yes, you can control human behavior, enforcing laws, using religion. But nothing wiser than selecting by people that do not need chantage disguised as ” education ” to find out what is right and wrong, by themselves.
If your breed had dominated the world before his arrogance and moral insanity or dishonesty here, I would pretty sure you would be right now forcing others to accept their supremacist ‘theories’.
I’m not nationalist white, I’m just trying to understand reality, but one thing that I have I’m sure, is that human populations differ in intelligence and behavior and that black people are, on average, worse than the most other breeds, but the explanation is not the biology itself, the physical phenotype, but the ” mental race ‘called psychopathy. There is an average, in not all black populations, a large proportion of people with antisocial personality.
This proves that white people on average are perfect compared to black * No, but it proves that although not perfect, are much better. Individually, a decent black is much more valuable than a white or other with bad character.
My favorite is the Japanese people, the most honest and noble of all, but collectivities are mediocre and in war times all them showing explicitly their inferiority.
However, antisocial personality disorder and psychopathy are far from identical, and no doubt (speaking only about U.S. blacks, as I am familiar with no others) antisocial personality (an artifical psychiatric construct, unlike psychopathy) is more prevalent among negroes.
U.S. blacks are not without conscience. My impression is that have (on average) a stronger fight-flight reflex. (This can lead to the Antisocial Personality dx.) Negro violence is emotional violence, not cold-blooded psychopathic violence, which is more the white man's domain (and the Mexican's).
[Incidentally, American Negroes on average are a bit dimmer than whites (this is opinion), but a far cry from the 85 the tests indicate. Even Jenson thought the tests underestimated them. And they are superior to whites on the semi-important factor of ideational fluency/general retrieval capacity.]
You guys are not being objectives with the main hypothesis, why can not you be more objective / honest **
Simple, just say so
'' I think the average Sub-Saharan African have the same level of intelligence that Europeans ''
I do not think it, but I'm not putting the average European on a pedestal. I'm just trying to give the right weight to things.
Severe malnutrition, logically speaking, is related to small brain in infants. But modern Western diet should not be taken as a universal parameter, because it is very wrong, exaggerated. I also believe that European colonialism was not that bad to completely depress African capacity nor the cause for severe malnutrition crisis, the main causes were disastrous combinations of drought and changes in African societies structures, specially during 80's as well conflicts, created by colonizers and sustained by ''colonized''.
You guys are using small, weak evidence, to corroborate this hypothesis. By itself it is already wrong.
tell me what are your impressions of the population from which you came.
You guys are using terms very suspicious that show which school you guys been drinking, cultural Marxism. You can have the best arguments, just use the term 'white privilege' 'in response to all that is related to cognitive differences between whites and blacks, and you will have already condemned, in my eyes, at least.
People who do well in school is common worldwide, which has differentiated the rest of the West, is not this kind, but one that transcends the average level of knowledge. In Brazil, I could take a group of children and adolescents who come from poor families and are good students and note
'' look, these children and adolescents are a faithful representation of the average Brazilian ''
I'd be lying, there are many more people who are going relatively well in school, have adequate personality profile, they are workers like to learn, here in my country, whose average intelligence is 87-90. That still does not mean I can extrapolate these examples as representing the majority.
Up close, there is much more cognitive diversity than we think, the bell curve is not meant to represent. But that still does not prove anything to the contrary. Only those who tend to understand the statistical averages of literal and misguided way, will be impressed with what they can find.
What “cultural marxism” are you talking about? Chanda is a self-identified “radical capitalist” and yes it is the height of white privilege and the ignorance that comes with it to try to justify your racial hatred with science. I don`t know if u were among the people here arguing that Somali refugees were selected according to their intelligence when faced with Chanda`s facts but if u were then you definitely have some serious cognitive dissonance due to your white privilege. Your insane racist superiority complex has blinded you to some basic common sense like claiming “somali refugees are a elite select group”. What kind of intelligence does it take to flee to a refugee camp in the middle of the Kenyan desert? Jesus! Is this the “superior European IQ” you were talking about?” LOL
Stupid, dishonest or both**
I repeat here, stop this childish histeria and start to comment on how a mature man. My patience with irrational emotional attacks like this have been exhausted. I do not want more questions, I want answers, but I think you have no ability to do so.
The last warning and the next time I'll get to despise these ad hominem their pseudo-arguments full of the type '' his hatred of science, '' who are you to say that about me ** Your crazy.
But at least in this context, IQ isn't an arbitrary measurement. To the extent that becoming a refugee requires negotiating complexity, it will select for IQ. (But the countervailing pressure is that those who have failed to negotiate some complexity end up being refugees, and we don't know which is stronger.)
Refugees are not some kind of representative or random sample from their populations. We don't know how they differ, although it seems safe to say (at least prima facie) that they aren't two standard deviations above the mean, as some of the extreme nativists require.
In my experience most of the people in refugee camps tend to be the poorest of the poor who have no where else to go to. Of course there are some middle class city dwellers among them but they tend to move on to more comfortable environs like Nairobi. The ones who stay in the camps tend to be farmers and nomads and hence ending up first on the list for resettlement. That is why you have a disproportionate number of minority groups like the Somali Bantus being resettled in the US.
My '' racial illusions' ' can be summarized by the young' rebels' 'doing anywhere a worse place. The worst thing a human being can do is be violent, manipulative. And there are MANY black people are like that.
There are lots of decent blacks, it does not prove the rule, will we have to repeat this as many times** The averages white and east asians also are not sooo good, just morally mediocre.
''I wish no desire or no connections with your “western elites”. I wish to be left alone to develop my country as I see fit without your imperialist noses in it. But of course if you people keep militarily attacking my country (since the late 1800s in my country) then naturally I will migrate to your “countries” North America, Australia, and New Zealand.''
First, I am Brazilian, I was supposedly in the same situation as yours.
Second, fully take the blame '' his people '' the situation in his country is not correct to do. from what little I've read about the Somali situation it is that after years of incompetent governments,civil wars, usual in Africa, the country was lost completely and became a total anarchy.
I agree that American imperialism, European and Jewish, are terrible and have a good deal of guilt about many problems in the Third World, but can not be ignored other factors, should not be.
In my country, the arms of the sodium-American empire can be shown by a TV network, the most influential in the country, and that is feverishly in his globalist ideology.
You have the geopolitical factor: foreign interference in national politics.
And there's other factors like low intellectual and critical capacity of '' average brazilian '' to fight against the implicit tyranny this television station.
The Brazilian people, on average, are corruptible and not just the culture that causes this, but mostly the character of many Brazilians. However, there is a universal problem within human societies, their hierarchical nature, favoring those who want to hold power, rather than those who want to use it aimed at non-egocentric attitudes. In Africa, Brazil, Norway, everywhere is the same.
''LOL! Man its lovely to see racist morons expose themselves like this. Okay, genius so if only a small percentage of people (which u mean assume only white people can “match details and give them a new and valuable meaning”) how come Japanese, Indian, Mayan, Ancient Zimbabwe among others were able to do those things and even more to the point your “white boys” in many cases were just plain and simple copycats.''
Why do you always deny what the 'white man' 'made **
You are just stupid or dishonest * do not realize their own contradictions.
Another contradiction supposedly in your '' smart '' head is think that is morally superior defend the '' black cause ''. Okay, but you do not realize that the way you defend is identical to the one the white nationalists do about their white race **
You appear morally superior just because idiopathic Western elite want to appear to be so, but in reality, you are identical to a white nationalist. Stupid, dishonest or both *
You take a piece of my review and manipulate it to look like I meant that only white people can be brilliant. No, but most creative geniuses have come from Europe or Caucasian race. UNZ is filling up with hysterical Afrocentric, and we are boring them.
''I think you have trouble understanding the concept of facts in general. For facts seem to be subjective (anything that supports my racist theories) LOL!''
dur.
You're hysterical, emotionally unbalanced and did not present any serious argument, only reveals his incompetence to
honesty (extremely important)
maturity
to be objective and accept the reality of the facts.
Let's hope for more ''ad hominem''.
You say:
“First, I am Brazilian, I was supposedly in the same situation as yours.”
So what? You are still a racist and most likely of European descent.
You say:
“Second, fully take the blame ” his people ” the situation in his country is not correct to do. from what little I’ve read about the Somali situation it is that after years of incompetent governments,civil wars, usual in Africa, the country was lost completely and became a total anarchy.”
Again you show your utter ignorance without even bothering to do a little google search. You would know that the entire southern half of the country including the capital Mogadisho is occupied by Western backed foreign troops. In the early 1990s you Whites invaded with your own troops but after the humiliation of Black Hawk Down you decided to pay your African “allies” as mercenaries you know that old European tradition divide and rule “let the niggers kill themselves”. But there are still many White CIA, military contractors, Special forces etc… Read this book to educate yourself a bit http://www.amazon.co.jp/Dirty-Wars-The-World-Battlefield/dp/156858671X In the northern half of the country, Somaliland, the situation is much different http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/mobile/africa/7365002.stm mainly because they have been lucky enough to escape western meddling. Notice a pattern, the more meddling by Whites the more misery there is in a given country. Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq, and southern Somalia are some bright examples. Whereas with less foreign (white) meddling the situation is much more stable like Somaliland in northern Somalia for example.
You said:
“I agree that American imperialism, European and Jewish, are terrible and have a good deal of guilt about many problems in the Third World, but can not be ignored other factors, should not be.”
I never ignored that so stop putting words in my mouth. I don`t know about the rest of the so called “Third World” but in my country there is direct Western backed military occupation that is causing much of the problem. There can be no development or progress when people are under military attack. As I have pointed out earlier, in the parts of Somalia where there is less foreign meddling there is substantial progress going on. So please just go away and I promise I will hand back my passport too LOL!
You said:
“Why do you always deny what the ‘white man’ ‘made **”
Again with the strawman arguments. I did no such thing. I just pointed out that White Europeans are not as “superior” as they claim and you seem to be proving my point again and again. Thank you very much. LOL
You said:
“Another contradiction supposedly in your ” smart ” head is think that is morally superior defend the ” black cause ”. Okay, but you do not realize that the way you defend is identical to the one the white nationalists do about their white race **”
Again putting words into my mouth. Where did I say I was “morally superior” or “defend the black cause”? Please stop inferring your own bias into my arguments and deal with my actual statements and arguments.
“You appear morally superior just because idiopathic Western elite want to appear to be so, but in reality, you are identical to a white nationalist. Stupid, dishonest or both *”
Dude! You`re losing the plot. Try to stay on topic here. Or is it that amazing “superior White IQ” at work again? LOL!
You said:
“You take a piece of my review and manipulate it to look like I meant that only white people can be brilliant. No, but most creative geniuses have come from Europe or Caucasian race. UNZ is filling up with hysterical Afrocentric, and we are boring them.”
Now who is being dishonest here. You did not only argue that “most creative geniuses have come from Europe or Caucasian race” you conveniently left out the part where you and your buddies were arguing that Whites are genetically superior to Blacks to the point of arguing that refugee kids who excel are some sort of select illuminati elite in their home countries. LOL!
You said:
“You’re hysterical, emotionally unbalanced and did not present any serious argument, only reveals his incompetence to
honesty (extremely important)
maturity
to be objective and accept the reality of the facts.
Let’s hope for more ”ad hominem”.”
Projecting much there buddy? LOL! Well it`s kinda hard to take you seriously when you say stuff like “I have no doubt that the one of the main reason for the problems in Brazil, more than anything else is the large black population have here.” and then complain about me attacking you with ad hominems because I pointed out that you are a raving lunatic racist and a pretty dumb one to boot. LOL! It is really weird to see White racists complain about black “antisocial behaviour” or “violence” especially in countries like Brazil or the US where some the most brutal chattel slavery, lynchings and other violence against black people occurred and still happens not to mention the ongoing genocide of the indigenous people there. The most violent people on the planet bar none have been White Europeans and some of you guys have the gall to call Blacks the violent ones the same blacks who have been the biggest victims of European violence especially in a country like Brazil. Absolutely shameless! But then again these are the Einsteins who argued that Somali refugees are selected according to intelligence. LOL
If your breed had dominated the world before his arrogance and moral insanity or dishonesty here, I would pretty sure you would be right now forcing others to accept their supremacist 'theories'.
I'm not nationalist white, I'm just trying to understand reality, but one thing that I have I'm sure, is that human populations differ in intelligence and behavior and that black people are, on average, worse than the most other breeds, but the explanation is not the biology itself, the physical phenotype, but the '' mental race 'called psychopathy. There is an average, in not all black populations, a large proportion of people with antisocial personality.
This proves that white people on average are perfect compared to black * No, but it proves that although not perfect, are much better. Individually, a decent black is much more valuable than a white or other with bad character.
My favorite is the Japanese people, the most honest and noble of all, but collectivities are mediocre and in war times all them showing explicitly their inferiority.
Listen to this guy:
“If your breed had dominated the world before his arrogance and moral insanity or dishonesty here, I would pretty sure you would be right now forcing others to accept their supremacist ‘theories’.”
If that is not a classic example of psychological projection I dunno what is. LOL! He claims he`s not a “white nationalist” He just happens to think that Black people are “violent”, “antisocial”, and have “low IQs” compared to his own White tribe. But hey I`m not a “white nationalist” just being “honest” you know that same “honesty” that led me and my buddies to argue that Somali refugee kids in Seattle come from elite families. LOL!
Listen to him twist himself into knots:
“This proves that white people on average are perfect compared to black * No, but it proves that although not perfect, are much better. Individually, a decent black is much more valuable than a white or other with bad character.”
Translation: White people good Black people bad but some individual blacks okay as long as they know their place and are not “arrogant” enough to call me on my racism and stupidity. Oh! what a web we weave when we practice to deceive. LOL!
This is the best quote of all:
“My favorite is the Japanese people, the most honest and noble of all, but collectivities are mediocre and in war times all them showing explicitly their inferiority.”
What the hell is that?! I`m speechless. There you have HBD pseudo-scientific racism in a nutshell. LOL Thanks for the laugh Santo.
Would you please shut up when speak about science. Words are like poison in the mouths of you, use them not for good purposes.
I did some very obvious and objective questions here.
Be a man, and answer like a man.
The AVERAGE SUBSAHARIAN has the same intelligence that the AVERAGE EUROPEAN **
Answer that so polite (and not as jungle moda), objective and detailed if you can.
Who is making a fool character here, is you.
I want objective responses, new children's emotional histeria like this SHIT and I will leave you talking to the computer screen.
But at least in this context, IQ isn't an arbitrary measurement. To the extent that becoming a refugee requires negotiating complexity, it will select for IQ. (But the countervailing pressure is that those who have failed to negotiate some complexity end up being refugees, and we don't know which is stronger.)
Refugees are not some kind of representative or random sample from their populations. We don't know how they differ, although it seems safe to say (at least prima facie) that they aren't two standard deviations above the mean, as some of the extreme nativists require.
I wonder what sort of “negotiating complexity” or IQ it takes to flee fighting in your village or town and walk for miles in the scorching African sun to make it to an equally miserable camp in the middle of the desert? Sounds like pretty straightforward fight or flee instinct to me. Most people run to safety with their families when fighting breaks out that is just human survival instinct. It requires no special IQ to “negotiate complexity”
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/nigerian-student-ufot-ekong-solves-30-year-old-maths-equation-and-breaks-academic-record-at-japanese-10303064.html
Oh! but wait for the excuses and evasions like “he must be from an elite Nigerian family” or “he`s not representative of Nigerians” or the best one of all “he must have some White genes in his family” LOL
”What “cultural marxism” are you talking about? Chanda is a self-identified “radical capitalist” and yes it is the height of white privilege and the ignorance that comes with it to try to justify your racial hatred with science.”
Stupid, dishonest or both**
I repeat here, stop this childish histeria and start to comment on how a mature man. My patience with irrational emotional attacks like this have been exhausted. I do not want more questions, I want answers, but I think you have no ability to do so.
The last warning and the next time I’ll get to despise these ad hominem their pseudo-arguments full of the type ” his hatred of science, ” who are you to say that about me ** Your crazy.
May I suggest you get some serious help for your anger issues, Santo? You seem to be losing that "brilliant White mind of yours" LOL
Are 3 Afrocentrists in hbdsphere, Chisala, you and another lunatic called ” afrosapiens ”.
Would you please shut up when speak about science. Words are like poison in the mouths of you, use them not for good purposes.
I did some very obvious and objective questions here.
Be a man, and answer like a man.
The AVERAGE SUBSAHARIAN has the same intelligence that the AVERAGE EUROPEAN **
Answer that so polite (and not as jungle moda), objective and detailed if you can.
Who is making a fool character here, is you.
I want objective responses, new children’s emotional histeria like this SHIT and I will leave you talking to the computer screen.
Dude you need to work on your insults. You see as a Somali I`m from the desert so "jungle moda" doesn`t quite apply so to speak. Try "sandnigger" or something along those lines. LOL!
What’s wrong with having some white genes?
REAL insane people need medications and therapy, not try to lost time with this histerical idiocy.
From the standpoint of a psychologist interested in the effects consequences of IQ in practical life, it would be valid question to what extent IQ predicts survival when there’s societal chaos. And survival sometimes depends on foreseeing that fighting will break out before it does, a high IQ task.
From the standpoint of sampling theory, even the ability to survive under purely physical constraints has some correlation with IQ. (Even if for reasons having nothing to do with intelligence as such – for example, the small correlation between physical ability and IQ.)
You guys are not being objectives with the main hypothesis, why can not you be more objective / honest **
Simple, just say so
'' I think the average Sub-Saharan African have the same level of intelligence that Europeans ''
I do not think it, but I'm not putting the average European on a pedestal. I'm just trying to give the right weight to things.
Severe malnutrition, logically speaking, is related to small brain in infants. But modern Western diet should not be taken as a universal parameter, because it is very wrong, exaggerated. I also believe that European colonialism was not that bad to completely depress African capacity nor the cause for severe malnutrition crisis, the main causes were disastrous combinations of drought and changes in African societies structures, specially during 80's as well conflicts, created by colonizers and sustained by ''colonized''.
You guys are using small, weak evidence, to corroborate this hypothesis. By itself it is already wrong.
tell me what are your impressions of the population from which you came.
You guys are using terms very suspicious that show which school you guys been drinking, cultural Marxism. You can have the best arguments, just use the term 'white privilege' 'in response to all that is related to cognitive differences between whites and blacks, and you will have already condemned, in my eyes, at least.
People who do well in school is common worldwide, which has differentiated the rest of the West, is not this kind, but one that transcends the average level of knowledge. In Brazil, I could take a group of children and adolescents who come from poor families and are good students and note
'' look, these children and adolescents are a faithful representation of the average Brazilian ''
I'd be lying, there are many more people who are going relatively well in school, have adequate personality profile, they are workers like to learn, here in my country, whose average intelligence is 87-90. That still does not mean I can extrapolate these examples as representing the majority.
Up close, there is much more cognitive diversity than we think, the bell curve is not meant to represent. But that still does not prove anything to the contrary. Only those who tend to understand the statistical averages of literal and misguided way, will be impressed with what they can find.
But you are ready to draw conclusions about many other speculative matters! Why not admit that the weight of the evidence is that low subSaharan IQ is in some measure due to environment?
On a tangent: “cultural marxism” refers to a ridiculous conspiracy theory of the retro-conservatives. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frankfurt_School#Cultural_Marxism_conspiracy_theory)
[The ideology of political correctness conforms to the interests of transnational capital, not the navel-gazing of an obscure pseudo-Marxist sect - seized upon because of its allowing "Jewish" imputations.]
Now I realize why Santo is so unhinged. LOL!
SOME, define it.
No doubt about SEVERE moral and reasoning deficits of this leftoid mattoids.
rampant dishonesty!!!!
thanks ''mother nature''!!!!
''But you are ready to draw conclusions about many other speculative matters! Why not admit that the weight of the evidence is that low subSaharan IQ is in some measure due to environment?''
Chisala don't show any significative ''evidences'' (long term, greater representative sample).
He believe that ''white racism'' were responsible for lower average intelligence of afro-americans.
Real evidences would be, hypothetically speaking, if:
black poverty in America's although their GOOD (AVERAGE) BEHAVIOR and SIMILAR SCHOOL GRADES, SAT and iq scores between (of course) black and WHITE.
If black disfunctionality weren't caused by own black (average or in many subgroups) behavior.
But there are a causality of ''black behavior'' and their disfunctionalities. Human-kaind is really idiotic, specially precious whitey.
I never said that environmental factors do not interfere, although no one has produced overwhelming evidence about it yet. But you want force me to agree that improving the environment will transform a population that I see in loco which is very dysfunctional, with its exceptions, in beings as or better than whites.
3 Chisala texts, has an excess of ad hominem, attacking all racial groups that are known to be more intelligent than blacks, specifically, Chinese and whites. He is charged with sentimentality, anger in his words and his evidence is not significative evidence, are clues that corroborate weakly with his theory, that is, the modern hypothesis of Afrocentric.
He found a possible bug and only with this, he wants to use it as evidence to prove against a systematic chain of similarities.
I may be wrong * There is a possibility yes, partially, but I doubt very much that the average Sub-Saharan, is just a European with black skin and that's not 'personal guesses''
Real evidences are being shown by Sailer here all the time, since when Bell Curve book was released.
just use terms like
conspiracy
and
''jewish''
is enough to invalidate almost all of your comments now, sorry, i no have time/patience to ''human trash modus operandi'', :(:
I never needed statistics to understand the reality my dear.
Manipulate my words the way you want, but you will do it alone.
I will not comment on any text Chisala because I am extremely allergic to irrationality, misuse of words and overly aggressive texts that are evidence ... other things.
Stupid, dishonest or both**
I repeat here, stop this childish histeria and start to comment on how a mature man. My patience with irrational emotional attacks like this have been exhausted. I do not want more questions, I want answers, but I think you have no ability to do so.
The last warning and the next time I'll get to despise these ad hominem their pseudo-arguments full of the type '' his hatred of science, '' who are you to say that about me ** Your crazy.
LoL! Wow! You really are deranged aren`t you, Santo? Let me help you out there “chandachisala.com | The African Radical Capitalist!” so much for your “cultural marxism. ” The feeling is mutual mate. I also despise lunatic racists like yourself.
“REAL insane people need medications and therapy, not try to lost time with this histerical idiocy.”
You love projecting eh Santo? LOL! Oh that`s quite rich coming from the one who has been entertaining us with something akin to the ravings of a schizophrenic homeless man.
May I suggest you get some serious help for your anger issues, Santo? You seem to be losing that “brilliant White mind of yours” LOL
“What’s wrong with having some white genes?”
Never said there was anything wrong with having “white genes” so please stop trying to project your racism into my arguments. You guys are the ones arguing that Whites are genetically superior, not me. Every time you come across FACTS like the young Nigerian or the Seattle students you revert to the evasions and excuses I highlighted above. I guess that is what Santo calls “objective responses” and “science” but more like “children’s emotional histeria like this SHIT” to me. IMHO
Obviously you have not had to flee for your life in a civil war situation. As I said before, many of the upper and middle class elites did “foresee” that trouble was ahead and left on international flight prior to the state collapse in 1991 but they were a tiny fraction of the total population. Yet many other elites (especially those tied to the Barre regime) could not afford or refused to do that and had to flee across the borders by car, camel, donkey, and foot like the rest of the masses. Even so it is impossible for these elites to have been the main beneficiaries of resettlement in the West (camp based refugees got first dibs on resettlement) since they either by-passed the camps or were a tiny proportion of camp residents roughly corresponding to their actual numbers in the population at large. So many of those refugee kids in Seattle are most likely the progeny of nomads and farmers not elites. My argument here is that it requires no special intelligence to flee conflict just survival instincts and all people have that in common not just some select high IQ elites. Trust me when fighting breaks out no one dumb or smart sticks around to see who wins. It is a wholesale exodus a sort of social equalizer you could say. As for the “correlation between physical ability and IQ” many of the rural Somalis who made up the bulk of the refugees in the camps were stunted by years of malnutrition in comparison to their relatively well fed urban counterparts. It would be interesting to see a study on that in this specific case.
Would you please shut up when speak about science. Words are like poison in the mouths of you, use them not for good purposes.
I did some very obvious and objective questions here.
Be a man, and answer like a man.
The AVERAGE SUBSAHARIAN has the same intelligence that the AVERAGE EUROPEAN **
Answer that so polite (and not as jungle moda), objective and detailed if you can.
Who is making a fool character here, is you.
I want objective responses, new children's emotional histeria like this SHIT and I will leave you talking to the computer screen.
“Answer that so polite (and not as jungle moda), objective and detailed if you can”
Dude you need to work on your insults. You see as a Somali I`m from the desert so “jungle moda” doesn`t quite apply so to speak. Try “sandnigger” or something along those lines. LOL!
Sandnigger is for people who are not Negro.
Nice to see that you have a sense of humor.
I don't consider myself a racist, at least not the bad kind.
You lumped all whites together when you used the term white privilege, and since you lumped all of us together, I wanted to point out that the UN was the creation of white people.
“cultural marxism” featured prominently in the Norwegian mass murderer Anders Breivik`s manifesto https://publicintelligence.net/anders-behring-breiviks-complete-manifesto-2083-a-european-declaration-of-independence/
Now I realize why Santo is so unhinged. LOL!
If your breed had dominated the world before his arrogance and moral insanity or dishonesty here, I would pretty sure you would be right now forcing others to accept their supremacist 'theories'.
I'm not nationalist white, I'm just trying to understand reality, but one thing that I have I'm sure, is that human populations differ in intelligence and behavior and that black people are, on average, worse than the most other breeds, but the explanation is not the biology itself, the physical phenotype, but the '' mental race 'called psychopathy. There is an average, in not all black populations, a large proportion of people with antisocial personality.
This proves that white people on average are perfect compared to black * No, but it proves that although not perfect, are much better. Individually, a decent black is much more valuable than a white or other with bad character.
My favorite is the Japanese people, the most honest and noble of all, but collectivities are mediocre and in war times all them showing explicitly their inferiority.
I don’t know how much you can generalize from one negro population to another. But I think the odds are against psychopathy being more prevalent among blacks. One clue is that blue eyes appear to be associated with psychopathy. (The psychopathic gunslingers of the American Old West all had blue eyes.)
However, antisocial personality disorder and psychopathy are far from identical, and no doubt (speaking only about U.S. blacks, as I am familiar with no others) antisocial personality (an artifical psychiatric construct, unlike psychopathy) is more prevalent among negroes.
U.S. blacks are not without conscience. My impression is that have (on average) a stronger fight-flight reflex. (This can lead to the Antisocial Personality dx.) Negro violence is emotional violence, not cold-blooded psychopathic violence, which is more the white man’s domain (and the Mexican’s).
[Incidentally, American Negroes on average are a bit dimmer than whites (this is opinion), but a far cry from the 85 the tests indicate. Even Jenson thought the tests underestimated them. And they are superior to whites on the semi-important factor of ideational fluency/general retrieval capacity.]
It's unbelievable. I was the first (what i know) in the hbd sphere to postulate that the black anti-social behavior, which is very common, is not caused primarily by the '' physiological race '', but mental, because the personality could be understood as a form of '' race '', only without the physiological and phenotypic component. In other words, it is not intrinsic to the black, but proportionally/statistically correlative. I should win a Nobel Peace so;)
Only one neurotypical black that is not psychopathic / sociopathic and that is racially pure, prove my point.
By my understanding, psychopathy would be less impulsive and more strategic, cold, whereas sociopathy would be a mixture of anti-social personality with openess, a kind of extreme extraversion, the most common manifestation of anti-social personality in blacks, of course, because they are on average, the most extroverted human race.
” in some measure due to environment?”
SOME, define it.
No doubt about SEVERE moral and reasoning deficits of this leftoid mattoids.
rampant dishonesty!!!!
thanks ”mother nature”!!!!
”But you are ready to draw conclusions about many other speculative matters! Why not admit that the weight of the evidence is that low subSaharan IQ is in some measure due to environment?”
Chisala don’t show any significative ”evidences” (long term, greater representative sample).
He believe that ”white racism” were responsible for lower average intelligence of afro-americans.
Real evidences would be, hypothetically speaking, if:
black poverty in America’s although their GOOD (AVERAGE) BEHAVIOR and SIMILAR SCHOOL GRADES, SAT and iq scores between (of course) black and WHITE.
If black disfunctionality weren’t caused by own black (average or in many subgroups) behavior.
But there are a causality of ”black behavior” and their disfunctionalities. Human-kaind is really idiotic, specially precious whitey.
I never said that environmental factors do not interfere, although no one has produced overwhelming evidence about it yet. But you want force me to agree that improving the environment will transform a population that I see in loco which is very dysfunctional, with its exceptions, in beings as or better than whites.
3 Chisala texts, has an excess of ad hominem, attacking all racial groups that are known to be more intelligent than blacks, specifically, Chinese and whites. He is charged with sentimentality, anger in his words and his evidence is not significative evidence, are clues that corroborate weakly with his theory, that is, the modern hypothesis of Afrocentric.
He found a possible bug and only with this, he wants to use it as evidence to prove against a systematic chain of similarities.
I may be wrong * There is a possibility yes, partially, but I doubt very much that the average Sub-Saharan, is just a European with black skin and that’s not ‘personal guesses”
Real evidences are being shown by Sailer here all the time, since when Bell Curve book was released.
just use terms like
conspiracy
and
”jewish”
is enough to invalidate almost all of your comments now, sorry, i no have time/patience to ”human trash modus operandi”, :(:
I never needed statistics to understand the reality my dear.
Manipulate my words the way you want, but you will do it alone.
I will not comment on any text Chisala because I am extremely allergic to irrationality, misuse of words and overly aggressive texts that are evidence … other things.
Certain hdbs (not sure if all of them) -- e.g. Jayman -- claim that there so literally zero shared environment effect on IQ.
It's called rejecting the null hypothesis.
You shout "dishonest" every opportunity. You have no self-awareness. At least the politically correct are aware of their hypocrisy. You prove your own dishonesty because you shout dishonest without even stopping to investigate.
I doubt you're worth discussing with. (But everyone has their insanity.) I'll look at one more of your responses.
However, antisocial personality disorder and psychopathy are far from identical, and no doubt (speaking only about U.S. blacks, as I am familiar with no others) antisocial personality (an artifical psychiatric construct, unlike psychopathy) is more prevalent among negroes.
U.S. blacks are not without conscience. My impression is that have (on average) a stronger fight-flight reflex. (This can lead to the Antisocial Personality dx.) Negro violence is emotional violence, not cold-blooded psychopathic violence, which is more the white man's domain (and the Mexican's).
[Incidentally, American Negroes on average are a bit dimmer than whites (this is opinion), but a far cry from the 85 the tests indicate. Even Jenson thought the tests underestimated them. And they are superior to whites on the semi-important factor of ideational fluency/general retrieval capacity.]
Finally a reasonable comment now.
It’s unbelievable. I was the first (what i know) in the hbd sphere to postulate that the black anti-social behavior, which is very common, is not caused primarily by the ” physiological race ”, but mental, because the personality could be understood as a form of ” race ”, only without the physiological and phenotypic component. In other words, it is not intrinsic to the black, but proportionally/statistically correlative. I should win a Nobel Peace so;)
Only one neurotypical black that is not psychopathic / sociopathic and that is racially pure, prove my point.
By my understanding, psychopathy would be less impulsive and more strategic, cold, whereas sociopathy would be a mixture of anti-social personality with openess, a kind of extreme extraversion, the most common manifestation of anti-social personality in blacks, of course, because they are on average, the most extroverted human race.
Man from Nigeria breaks record, highest GPA in Russia studying medicine
http://www.edufrica.com/2015/07/another-whiz-kid-nigerian-graduates-as-best-medical-student-in-a-russian-university-with-5-0-gpa/
Dude you need to work on your insults. You see as a Somali I`m from the desert so "jungle moda" doesn`t quite apply so to speak. Try "sandnigger" or something along those lines. LOL!
Doesn’t quite apply.
Sandnigger is for people who are not Negro.
Nice to see that you have a sense of humor.
I don’t consider myself a racist, at least not the bad kind.
You lumped all whites together when you used the term white privilege, and since you lumped all of us together, I wanted to point out that the UN was the creation of white people.
SOME, define it.
No doubt about SEVERE moral and reasoning deficits of this leftoid mattoids.
rampant dishonesty!!!!
thanks ''mother nature''!!!!
''But you are ready to draw conclusions about many other speculative matters! Why not admit that the weight of the evidence is that low subSaharan IQ is in some measure due to environment?''
Chisala don't show any significative ''evidences'' (long term, greater representative sample).
He believe that ''white racism'' were responsible for lower average intelligence of afro-americans.
Real evidences would be, hypothetically speaking, if:
black poverty in America's although their GOOD (AVERAGE) BEHAVIOR and SIMILAR SCHOOL GRADES, SAT and iq scores between (of course) black and WHITE.
If black disfunctionality weren't caused by own black (average or in many subgroups) behavior.
But there are a causality of ''black behavior'' and their disfunctionalities. Human-kaind is really idiotic, specially precious whitey.
I never said that environmental factors do not interfere, although no one has produced overwhelming evidence about it yet. But you want force me to agree that improving the environment will transform a population that I see in loco which is very dysfunctional, with its exceptions, in beings as or better than whites.
3 Chisala texts, has an excess of ad hominem, attacking all racial groups that are known to be more intelligent than blacks, specifically, Chinese and whites. He is charged with sentimentality, anger in his words and his evidence is not significative evidence, are clues that corroborate weakly with his theory, that is, the modern hypothesis of Afrocentric.
He found a possible bug and only with this, he wants to use it as evidence to prove against a systematic chain of similarities.
I may be wrong * There is a possibility yes, partially, but I doubt very much that the average Sub-Saharan, is just a European with black skin and that's not 'personal guesses''
Real evidences are being shown by Sailer here all the time, since when Bell Curve book was released.
just use terms like
conspiracy
and
''jewish''
is enough to invalidate almost all of your comments now, sorry, i no have time/patience to ''human trash modus operandi'', :(:
I never needed statistics to understand the reality my dear.
Manipulate my words the way you want, but you will do it alone.
I will not comment on any text Chisala because I am extremely allergic to irrationality, misuse of words and overly aggressive texts that are evidence ... other things.
That’s exactly the reasoning of your ilk (retro-conservative phrasemongers who think they’re, of all things, honest). Use the right cat calls is what counts. No different from the social justice workers, only somewhat lower IQ.
Ouch! I can see Santo throwing a fit right about now. "That bloody Jew Diamond and Somali nigger Osman just handed me my balls in a jar" LOL
SOME, define it.
No doubt about SEVERE moral and reasoning deficits of this leftoid mattoids.
rampant dishonesty!!!!
thanks ''mother nature''!!!!
''But you are ready to draw conclusions about many other speculative matters! Why not admit that the weight of the evidence is that low subSaharan IQ is in some measure due to environment?''
Chisala don't show any significative ''evidences'' (long term, greater representative sample).
He believe that ''white racism'' were responsible for lower average intelligence of afro-americans.
Real evidences would be, hypothetically speaking, if:
black poverty in America's although their GOOD (AVERAGE) BEHAVIOR and SIMILAR SCHOOL GRADES, SAT and iq scores between (of course) black and WHITE.
If black disfunctionality weren't caused by own black (average or in many subgroups) behavior.
But there are a causality of ''black behavior'' and their disfunctionalities. Human-kaind is really idiotic, specially precious whitey.
I never said that environmental factors do not interfere, although no one has produced overwhelming evidence about it yet. But you want force me to agree that improving the environment will transform a population that I see in loco which is very dysfunctional, with its exceptions, in beings as or better than whites.
3 Chisala texts, has an excess of ad hominem, attacking all racial groups that are known to be more intelligent than blacks, specifically, Chinese and whites. He is charged with sentimentality, anger in his words and his evidence is not significative evidence, are clues that corroborate weakly with his theory, that is, the modern hypothesis of Afrocentric.
He found a possible bug and only with this, he wants to use it as evidence to prove against a systematic chain of similarities.
I may be wrong * There is a possibility yes, partially, but I doubt very much that the average Sub-Saharan, is just a European with black skin and that's not 'personal guesses''
Real evidences are being shown by Sailer here all the time, since when Bell Curve book was released.
just use terms like
conspiracy
and
''jewish''
is enough to invalidate almost all of your comments now, sorry, i no have time/patience to ''human trash modus operandi'', :(:
I never needed statistics to understand the reality my dear.
Manipulate my words the way you want, but you will do it alone.
I will not comment on any text Chisala because I am extremely allergic to irrationality, misuse of words and overly aggressive texts that are evidence ... other things.
Less than zero. Very simple.
Certain hdbs (not sure if all of them) — e.g. Jayman — claim that there so literally zero shared environment effect on IQ.
It’s called rejecting the null hypothesis.
You shout “dishonest” every opportunity. You have no self-awareness. At least the politically correct are aware of their hypocrisy. You prove your own dishonesty because you shout dishonest without even stopping to investigate.
I doubt you’re worth discussing with. (But everyone has their insanity.) I’ll look at one more of your responses.
Before, was the magic factoid ''white privilege'' for explain systematic black dysfunctionality around the world. Now, the magic factoid for explain everything included expected miracles is ''nutrition''.
I live in a country where i'm forced to live with mulato and black people all the time, and i'm a hypo-afro-descendent myself. Ok, it don't make me immediately a specialist in human behavior because i have a leftoid brother.
I'm not the smartest one, i'm just the guy who look for events/phenomenology that makes sense.
I'm looking for reality and she's so much simple that you buzztard are thinking.
The leftoid ''tacticts'' to manipulate and use all of dirty tools in debate are extremely similar with the tacticts that EVERY dogmatoid ''religious'' people use, why**
Because leftoidism is itself a cult, a religion, but they use science to ''prove'' their validity.
Take an sacred bible, separate the ''good teachings'' from ''bad teachings'' (that made bible a extremely contraditory fairy tale), you will have
weshtern buddism
leftoidism
The reality is not just observable but she's all the time interacting with us and dangerous reality created by problematic people also is interacting with us.
Conservatoidism is pure trash but at least in terms of instinctive responses, they are right, the rest is so pure white trash evil than ''socialismus''.
Pure white trash as you ''diamond''
"“My favorite is the Japanese people, the most honest and noble of all, but collectivities are mediocre and in war times all them showing explicitly their inferiority.”
That`s Santo`s idea of scientific inquiry. LOL!
It's unbelievable. I was the first (what i know) in the hbd sphere to postulate that the black anti-social behavior, which is very common, is not caused primarily by the '' physiological race '', but mental, because the personality could be understood as a form of '' race '', only without the physiological and phenotypic component. In other words, it is not intrinsic to the black, but proportionally/statistically correlative. I should win a Nobel Peace so;)
Only one neurotypical black that is not psychopathic / sociopathic and that is racially pure, prove my point.
By my understanding, psychopathy would be less impulsive and more strategic, cold, whereas sociopathy would be a mixture of anti-social personality with openess, a kind of extreme extraversion, the most common manifestation of anti-social personality in blacks, of course, because they are on average, the most extroverted human race.
It’s a “reasonable comment” because you agree with it. You’re very lax with yourself to allow yourself such gross prejudice – seemingly of all varieties, from racial to egocentric.
You need admit for yourself that you are not good to understand human behavior as you think. Its is the begining to the true intelligence, called perception and accept things that your defected brain don't want accept. Is hour for you grow. But i think is near to impossible for you become a real man.
I’ve noticed that one can substitute bogeyman for cultural Marxist and frequently the article will be just fine. A lot of people seem to be good at observation or analysis and can point out the bad trends; they are very good at the what. It usually falls off a cliff from there; they have no clue as to the why and just throw out bogeyman to complete their thesis or idea.
Maybe the anti intellectual subculture of American Blacks has selected for bad qualities over the years of mate selection. I of course don’t know. Could be that the places in Africa from which the slaves were captured had tribes of sub standard intelligence. Maybe one could go back there and do some sampling and see if this is true. I think it is years of people blaming racism, and this removed all pressure to excel with a convenient excuse, and with welfare etc, there is no advantage to enterprise, and that might lead to generic selection for qualities other than intellect or enterprise except whining about racism.
retro-conservative
I am not familiar with this term. Will you elaborate, in particular, do they also claim that they are the real conservatives?
Its reasonable because fit with real world, where babies like you have ”fear”.
You need admit for yourself that you are not good to understand human behavior as you think. Its is the begining to the true intelligence, called perception and accept things that your defected brain don’t want accept. Is hour for you grow. But i think is near to impossible for you become a real man.
What`s all this "real man" bravado? I thought you abhorred this sort of macho behaviour? But then again you are a "violent" Brazilian bred on "machismo". How do u like my foray into HBD pseudo-scientific stereoptyping? LOL
"The last warning and the next time I’ll get to despise these ad hominem their pseudo-arguments full of the type ” his hatred of science, ” who are you to say that about me ** Your crazy."
Insanity 101 exhibit A Santo the Brazilian nutter. I rest my case.
Certain hdbs (not sure if all of them) -- e.g. Jayman -- claim that there so literally zero shared environment effect on IQ.
It's called rejecting the null hypothesis.
You shout "dishonest" every opportunity. You have no self-awareness. At least the politically correct are aware of their hypocrisy. You prove your own dishonesty because you shout dishonest without even stopping to investigate.
I doubt you're worth discussing with. (But everyone has their insanity.) I'll look at one more of your responses.
Of course, more than a half of supposed ”arguments” of leftoids with defective brains are based on ad hominem and contradictory and non-linear arguments.
Before, was the magic factoid ”white privilege” for explain systematic black dysfunctionality around the world. Now, the magic factoid for explain everything included expected miracles is ”nutrition”.
I live in a country where i’m forced to live with mulato and black people all the time, and i’m a hypo-afro-descendent myself. Ok, it don’t make me immediately a specialist in human behavior because i have a leftoid brother.
I’m not the smartest one, i’m just the guy who look for events/phenomenology that makes sense.
I’m looking for reality and she’s so much simple that you buzztard are thinking.
The leftoid ”tacticts” to manipulate and use all of dirty tools in debate are extremely similar with the tacticts that EVERY dogmatoid ”religious” people use, why**
Because leftoidism is itself a cult, a religion, but they use science to ”prove” their validity.
Take an sacred bible, separate the ”good teachings” from ”bad teachings” (that made bible a extremely contraditory fairy tale), you will have
weshtern buddism
leftoidism
The reality is not just observable but she’s all the time interacting with us and dangerous reality created by problematic people also is interacting with us.
Conservatoidism is pure trash but at least in terms of instinctive responses, they are right, the rest is so pure white trash evil than ”socialismus”.
Pure white trash as you ”diamond”
Sandnigger is for people who are not Negro.
Nice to see that you have a sense of humor.
I don't consider myself a racist, at least not the bad kind.
You lumped all whites together when you used the term white privilege, and since you lumped all of us together, I wanted to point out that the UN was the creation of white people.
Glad you don`t consider yourself a racist. “Your best friend must be a black guy” too. I didn`t lump anyone together. You did. All I said was anyone who believes refugee children who excel in school must somehow come from elite families selected for their intelligence is either being evasive and or in denial or more likely just plain old ignorant mainly due to his/her racial superiority complex which is definitely rooted in white privilege. Great! Thank you for the UN oh great white master! Does that make u feel better now? Maybe feeling a tad “superior” eh Iffen? LOL Jeesh! You people are pathetic.
You do lump whites together when you use “white privilege” and “you people.”
You are lumping a lot of different commenters together when it is very clear what each has written. I have not written anything about refugee children and their academic endeavors.
I do not feel superior to anyone. Why do you impute these motivations to anyone who disagrees with you? Why do you bring in terms like “great white master?”
Most African Americans are descendants of slaves from West Africa and as Chanda has eloquently demonstrated some of the most high achieving people in the UK and North America are Nigerians and Ghanaians, who are closely related to Black Americans. So something else is going on in America. “whining about racism” I think if the shoe was on the other foot people like you would be doing way worse things than just “whining” the IRA, ETA, neo-nazi gangs come to mind.
Certain hdbs (not sure if all of them) -- e.g. Jayman -- claim that there so literally zero shared environment effect on IQ.
It's called rejecting the null hypothesis.
You shout "dishonest" every opportunity. You have no self-awareness. At least the politically correct are aware of their hypocrisy. You prove your own dishonesty because you shout dishonest without even stopping to investigate.
I doubt you're worth discussing with. (But everyone has their insanity.) I'll look at one more of your responses.
What do you expect from someone who said this:
““My favorite is the Japanese people, the most honest and noble of all, but collectivities are mediocre and in war times all them showing explicitly their inferiority.”
That`s Santo`s idea of scientific inquiry. LOL!
Before, was the magic factoid ''white privilege'' for explain systematic black dysfunctionality around the world. Now, the magic factoid for explain everything included expected miracles is ''nutrition''.
I live in a country where i'm forced to live with mulato and black people all the time, and i'm a hypo-afro-descendent myself. Ok, it don't make me immediately a specialist in human behavior because i have a leftoid brother.
I'm not the smartest one, i'm just the guy who look for events/phenomenology that makes sense.
I'm looking for reality and she's so much simple that you buzztard are thinking.
The leftoid ''tacticts'' to manipulate and use all of dirty tools in debate are extremely similar with the tacticts that EVERY dogmatoid ''religious'' people use, why**
Because leftoidism is itself a cult, a religion, but they use science to ''prove'' their validity.
Take an sacred bible, separate the ''good teachings'' from ''bad teachings'' (that made bible a extremely contraditory fairy tale), you will have
weshtern buddism
leftoidism
The reality is not just observable but she's all the time interacting with us and dangerous reality created by problematic people also is interacting with us.
Conservatoidism is pure trash but at least in terms of instinctive responses, they are right, the rest is so pure white trash evil than ''socialismus''.
Pure white trash as you ''diamond''
“I live in a country where i’m forced to live with mulato and black people all the time, and i’m a hypo-afro-descendent myself.”
Aah! No I`m starting to see Santo`s pathology. The poor guy is suffering from some serious low self-esteem. LOL! Not to worry Santo help is on the way https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/shift-mind/201307/low-self-esteem-missed-diagnosis
I'm arrogant or with low self esteem**
need choice.
I still continue expecting adult, mature answer for you OZman.
[Instead of producing a large number of short comments, it's far better to combine them into one or two much longer and more substantial ones.]
Ouch! I can see Santo throwing a fit right about now. “That bloody Jew Diamond and Somali nigger Osman just handed me my balls in a jar” LOL
It's unbelievable. I was the first (what i know) in the hbd sphere to postulate that the black anti-social behavior, which is very common, is not caused primarily by the '' physiological race '', but mental, because the personality could be understood as a form of '' race '', only without the physiological and phenotypic component. In other words, it is not intrinsic to the black, but proportionally/statistically correlative. I should win a Nobel Peace so;)
Only one neurotypical black that is not psychopathic / sociopathic and that is racially pure, prove my point.
By my understanding, psychopathy would be less impulsive and more strategic, cold, whereas sociopathy would be a mixture of anti-social personality with openess, a kind of extreme extraversion, the most common manifestation of anti-social personality in blacks, of course, because they are on average, the most extroverted human race.
What could be more “psychopathic” than the wholesale slaughter and genocide of entire peoples around the world by White Europeans? When we consider this violent behaviour is still going on to the present-day that would make it the longest running and worst case of aggression by one human group against the rest of humanity in scale and scope. You of all people in Brazil should be quite familiar with this violence since your people are now in the process of wiping out the last of the Amazonian Indians http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/1818305/genocide_in_northeastern_brazil_when_will_it_end.html
What astounds me the most is the lack of self-awareness among these racist morons and the gall they have to accuse others of being “psychopaths” or “violent”. This is classic psychological projections https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection
You are a lost of time.
Sooo idiotic that perceive it.
Self awareness is just for very mentally advanced minds, what you never will touch.
And is wise to say the true for real untermeschen specially when they are soo psychotic as you.
The problem in the world has been the silence of wise man.
Of course, EVERY people who are not precious as your ''bro'' ''blacklivematter'' you can be put in the ''bad/realistic light'', everyone, less the little satan as bibi said.
''psychopath''
''violent''
''YOU''
You need admit for yourself that you are not good to understand human behavior as you think. Its is the begining to the true intelligence, called perception and accept things that your defected brain don't want accept. Is hour for you grow. But i think is near to impossible for you become a real man.
“But i think is near to impossible for you become a real man.”
What`s all this “real man” bravado? I thought you abhorred this sort of macho behaviour? But then again you are a “violent” Brazilian bred on “machismo”. How do u like my foray into HBD pseudo-scientific stereoptyping? LOL
“The last warning and the next time I’ll get to despise these ad hominem their pseudo-arguments full of the type ” his hatred of science, ” who are you to say that about me ** Your crazy.”
Insanity 101 exhibit A Santo the Brazilian nutter. I rest my case.
Nope, mentally handicrap, man is someone who are corageous, responsible and mature to accept reality wherever what she will be, reveal ''for'' you, archaic ''man''.
''Your'' iq don't mean NOTHING if you have mental age of 12 years old. OZ-man.
Someone who use psychological today as ”argument” (idiotic sycho magazine with more than a half of pure magic thinking matoid style that prevail in freudian sychology) is a complete R E T A R D.
I’m arrogant or with low self esteem**
need choice.
I still continue expecting adult, mature answer for you OZman.
What`s all this "real man" bravado? I thought you abhorred this sort of macho behaviour? But then again you are a "violent" Brazilian bred on "machismo". How do u like my foray into HBD pseudo-scientific stereoptyping? LOL
"The last warning and the next time I’ll get to despise these ad hominem their pseudo-arguments full of the type ” his hatred of science, ” who are you to say that about me ** Your crazy."
Insanity 101 exhibit A Santo the Brazilian nutter. I rest my case.
you are soo idiotic that don’t know what is the traits that made a real man.
Nope, mentally handicrap, man is someone who are corageous, responsible and mature to accept reality wherever what she will be, reveal ”for” you, archaic ”man”.
”Your” iq don’t mean NOTHING if you have mental age of 12 years old. OZ-man.
Beasts as you should be prohibited to develop a vocabulary, words are just sluts in your archaic mouth.
You are a lost of time.
Sooo idiotic that perceive it.
Self awareness is just for very mentally advanced minds, what you never will touch.
And is wise to say the true for real untermeschen specially when they are soo psychotic as you.
The problem in the world has been the silence of wise man.
Of course, EVERY people who are not precious as your ”bro” ”blacklivematter” you can be put in the ”bad/realistic light”, everyone, less the little satan as bibi said.
”psychopath”
”violent”
”YOU”
The more I read Santoculto’s comments the more I think he’s retarded. As in literally mentally handicapped.
I will leave you talking/writing shit alone and ”thinking” that you ”win” this ””deebate””, bro.
[Endless random name-calling just clutters up a comment-thread with nonsense.]
[Endless random name-calling just clutters up a comment-thread with nonsense.]
No black best friend, and if I did have one he couldn’t marry my sister because she is already married.
You do lump whites together when you use “white privilege” and “you people.”
You are lumping a lot of different commenters together when it is very clear what each has written. I have not written anything about refugee children and their academic endeavors.
I do not feel superior to anyone. Why do you impute these motivations to anyone who disagrees with you? Why do you bring in terms like “great white master?”
You do lump whites together when you use “white privilege” and “you people.”
You are lumping a lot of different commenters together when it is very clear what each has written. I have not written anything about refugee children and their academic endeavors.
I do not feel superior to anyone. Why do you impute these motivations to anyone who disagrees with you? Why do you bring in terms like “great white master?”
Why are u so perturbed by the term white privilege? It`s pretty established fact in the West and I might even argue globally due to centuries of European colonialism and now neo-imperialism. Don`t be so defensive enjoy that privilege while it lasts and have a cold one for me LOL! If I remember correctly “you people” was in reference to the racist posters here who believe Black people are genetically inferior to Whites like Santo (I have a hunch u might be one of them too) so forgive me for not showing enough deference to hate spewing racist lunatics. Great! I`m glad u don`t feel superior to anyone. Do u consider Black people to be genetically inferior in intelligence in comparison to whites? A simple yes or no answer will do. Why do u need to make silly non-sequiturs like “White people created the UN, planes etc…”? Does making silly diversionary comments like that make u feel better about yourself? Considering the topic was about high achieving refugee kids in Seattle and the silly evasions and excuses by some racist individuals here claiming that these kids and their families were some elite group selected for their intelligence when in reality most of these kids are the offspring of farmers and pastoralists. In other words just making up any old excuse to deflect from any facts that run counter to their pseudo-scientific racist narrative.
[Basically, I'm against rhetoric that pits race against race. I'm a class-against-class guy.]
[The retro-conservatives (by which I mean essentially the paleo-conservatives plus the neo-reactionaries), as I've pointed out, have this shibboleth about the term "white privilege" that they trace to what they call "cultural marxism," which means the obscure "Frankfurt School." My objections, needless to say, are different.]
Yes.
Black Americans as a group score lower on IQ tests than white Americans as a group.
The relative success of Africans and blacks from the Caribbean when they come as immigrants show that there is no white privilege. Thug culture is what brings down African American success. There is also internalized racism of African Americans but that can be changed with a simple change in thinking
Nigerian students are breaking records and at the top of their class all over the world. If African countries embrace free market capitalism they will inherent the world
Let me say that I rather detest the term “white privilege,” which implies white people generally should be stripped of some rights. The typical white American (for example) is not today “privileged.’ America is a hell hole for many white people – and an even higher percentage of negroes; not suffering quite as much shouldn’t be equated with “privilege.”
[Basically, I'm against rhetoric that pits race against race. I'm a class-against-class guy.]
[The retro-conservatives (by which I mean essentially the paleo-conservatives plus the neo-reactionaries), as I've pointed out, have this shibboleth about the term "white privilege" that they trace to what they call "cultural marxism," which means the obscure "Frankfurt School." My objections, needless to say, are different.]
The crime gaps have close since the 1990s by a very very large scale. You do some work on that Chanda.
Its closed on all age cohorts. Also gaps in things like fertility rate, abortion rates etc have closed since their peak during the crack epidemic.
http://openpsych.net/forum/showthread.php?tid=211
Black Americans as a group score lower on IQ tests than white Americans as a group.
I didn`t ask you about Black Americans only and their IQ compared to whites. I asked you a specific question. Anyway you strike me as a racist and not a very clever one either but definitely brighter than our Brazilian clown Santo. LOL
I am unsure of how I can further clarify this for you.
[Basically, I'm against rhetoric that pits race against race. I'm a class-against-class guy.]
[The retro-conservatives (by which I mean essentially the paleo-conservatives plus the neo-reactionaries), as I've pointed out, have this shibboleth about the term "white privilege" that they trace to what they call "cultural marxism," which means the obscure "Frankfurt School." My objections, needless to say, are different.]
Do you not think that White privilege exists in America for instance in regards to disproportionate incarceration rates for people who commit the same crimes but receive harsher sentences? And also police surveillance and violence?
I think “white privilege” suggests that whites in general derive an advantage from these disparities. The cops tyrannize over whites too, although not so obscenely much as they do blacks. Which is to say that while the incarceration rate of negroes is astronomic, a lot of whites are unnecessarily and excessively imprisoned too.
[This is semantics, but it expresses a different emphasis.]
The hbders argue that the incarceration rates of negroes reflect genetic proclivity to violence. There seems reason to think that the American Negro does respond more extrapunitively to stress than, say, Europeans, who are more likely to respond intrapunitively instead (as by depression and suicide). So, there may inevitably be a higher percentage of negroes in prison than whites. (I’m not for racial quotas for imprisonment any more than anything else.) But that doesn’t justify astronomical incarceration rates. (Society must find a way to adapt to difficult genetic proclivities besides by punishment.)
Another retro-censervative argument is that decreasing incarceration will increase crime. Again, why do they ignore the economic stressors and instead opt for “law enforcement”?
Yes, assuming that scoring lower as a group on IQ tests is considered inferior.
I am unsure of how I can further clarify this for you.
Scoring lower on average does not mean blacks are inferior to whites in intelligence genetically, especially since no part of the average is proven to be genetic yet.
Plenty of blacks are genetically superior in intelligence to whites. Thats why its called an average. That word “average” and also “genetically unproven” makes a gigantic difference. Genetically unproven for over 100 years actually. Not even 1% of the difference is proven… not even 0.0001%. Nothing, zero, thats how much is proven lol.
Also a larger population with a lower average can actually have a much larger number of smarter people than the higher average group. In effect being superior.
“5-Yr-old Nigerian Passes London GCE”
http://www.thisdaylive.com/articles/5-yr-old-nigerian-passes-london-gce/80060/
Dee Alli is the youngest person to pass the GCE, she is of Nigerian descent and wants to be a banker. Nigerians are dangerous and going to take over the world.
She said “I want to be a princess that lives in a big house so I can count my money”
I am unsure of how I can further clarify this for you.
I asked u about Black people not only Black Americans. Can u read? No one is arguing that Black Americans score lower on IQ tests than White Americans (personally I`m sceptical of the accuracy of IQ tests to determine a person`s intelligence) nevertheless you are avoiding the elephant in the room about all those high achieving African kids from the West Africans in the UK to the Horn of African refugee kids in Seattle. You guys seem to run from anything that contradicts your racist theories.
“There seems reason to think that the American Negro does respond more extrapunitively to stress than, say, Europeans, who are more likely to respond intrapunitively instead (as by depression and suicide). So, there may inevitably be a higher percentage of negroes in prison than whites.”
With all due respect Stephen, this doesn`t explain why Black defendants are more likely to receive harsher sentences even the death penalty for the same crime as White defendants. Something other than behavioral traits is behind this phenomena. Could it be gasp! White privilege inherited from centuries of slavery and Jim Crow? https://www.aclu.org/sites/default/files/assets/141027_iachr_racial_disparities_aclu_submission_0.pdf
Nigerian students are breaking records and at the top of their class all over the world. If African countries embrace free market capitalism they will inherent the world
Not only Nigerians and Caribbeans are breaking records http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/13/opinion/sunday/nicholas-kristof-from-somaliland-to-harvard.html?_r=0
[…] around the academy are better at fraud than anything academic. Take for example this guy who did a guest post on the Ron Unz site. Ron posted it mostly because it conforms to his view that biology does not […]
Is that you Santoculto? With a new handle name? If it is Santo just spit it out dude so we can read your comment. It looks like a cat got your tongue LOL!
The birthplace of human cognition is in Africa, including the first long range weapons and other innovations occurred in Africa thousands of years before Europe.
This is for people who believe that Africand didn’t have early innovation
“Africans the first nerds”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2243946/How-ancient-Africans-nerds-Birth-technology-traced-70-000-years-continents-southern-tip.html
[…] discussion of the performance of African immigrants led by Chanda Chisala has been of unusually poor quality. As such, I thought that I might write a brief tutorial post on […]
Nothing new here just more junk science from racist HBD cult members. The entire world scientific community have rejected these racist kooks. So let them bark and scribble nonsense and biased manipulated statistics all they want.
Silly and petty personal attacks against Chanda without dealing with his actual findings and arguments. Typical insecure HBDer.
When is part 3 coming out?
http://screenrant.com/tag/planet-of-the-apes-3/
Yes, we want part 3!
Sorry, Panda arrived late to this discussion.
After quite a struggle, Panda has safely identified that below paragragh being the central theme of the article. |
No wonder Mr Chisala is a deep writer, as he has managed to completely lost Panda ever since this, not to mentioned the following “data” “analysis”.
Is there anyone in the forum who can slowly decode above highlighted fanscinating private codes to Panda in a logical manner that is undestandable by the Earthners?
Panda didn’t know that Mr Chisala is a closet Black Supermacist, since he is arguing that the Black are supermen having bigger muscles, longest dicks, being smoother talkers and high IQ as well, of which Hitler would be proud.
A philosophical issue for Mr Chisala is that why Africa environment only depresses IQ but not dicks? Both of them are genetics, right?
Errrr… 2017!
http://screenrant.com/tag/planet-of-the-apes-3/
I can understand him a lot better than I can understand Panda, who fetishizes illiteracy.
So you emphasise that 1+1=3 is easier for your hard drive than 1+1/3 ^3^(-1)?
Well, that’s true, brids…feather…together? hmmm, a rare promising start of common sense and honesty!
Please go on? ROFL
Racist HBDers talking about honesty after you have been reduced to arguing refugees are “selected for their intelligence”? Please gimme a break LOL!
I threw together this video and used this article as a source
Be or not''Iq is -like- a real life'' or ''iq is not like a real life''
Iq reliability in the task of express quantitatively the level of collective (i mean, contextual average joey) and individuals is likely that varies greatly. I mean, some individuals will have expressed very well its cognitive levels while others not.Iq tests measured cognition and cognitive ability types. Correlates with general intelligence, because general intelligence is general, ;) Iq depending on personality type and/or specially anxiety levels, varies but it doesn't mean that don't exist a ''number'' that will be representative of our cognition quantitative levels. Is not just coincidence that highest fluctuation among iq scores happen during adolescence as well personality turbulations. ''This result would mean that whatever “problem” the black Americans have that result in such a large and intractable IQ gap with whites and other groups, has nothing whatsoever to do with the genetic evolution of races, especially since they even have more white genes than Africans. It is not their sub-Saharan African (black) genes that are responsible for their chronic academic under-achievement; it has to be a factor that is endemic to African American history.'''Say it has nothing to do with genes is idiocy. Everything that is related to biology has to do with '' genes', if this is a semantic proxy for '' behavior or inner disposition '' or '' it depends much more on being than space circumstances ''. Everything has to do with genetics, directly or indirectly. Never in this context does not belong to the real world.
''This result would mean that whatever “problem” the black Americans''
Problem in quotes. Will be by details that we can figure out the ulterior motives of (seems) dishonest people who mask them through semantic manipulations. But I understand in part, because I have to do the same thing when ''they' speak by generalized but predominantly right way about the average behavior of homosexuals. Right now it is not the reason that is predominates, but instinct and emotion, yet they are needed.There is a real problem with black people, ON AVERAGE, in the US (Suriname, Brazil, South Africa, Africa, etc), in fact, there are always problems when we have human beings, the best would be to analyze the smallest proportion of problems than the lack of it, just in a hypothetical community genotypic wises.''Remember our goal.''
Our?
'' We only need to show that blacks in Africa would have a higher average IQ than native black Americans if they were moved from Africa to America since the African environment clearly depresses IQ, as both environmentalists and hereditarians agree in principle. This result would mean that whatever “problem” the black Americans have that result in such a large and intractable IQ gap with whites and other groups, has nothing whatsoever to do with the genetic evolution of races, especially since they even have more white genes than Africans. It is not their sub-Saharan African (black) genes that are responsible for their chronic academic under-achievement; it has to be a factor that is endemic to African American history.''
*You could be more honest and tell us what is your estimate for the genotypic IQ of '' black African ''.Can be?*I'm anxious to know what is your estimativeDifferent personalities explain why albino africans ''looks'' smarter than black africans and why they are treated as smarter, even that their iq tests no have gap.Personality have a huge influence on iq or school achievement. People with dominant personality will be himself dominated by its personality and will tend to live in a short term perspective. I'm like that.
''The data from the Seattle Experiment shows that refugee children speaking different African languages at home in the US perform surprisingly well on the state tests, just like their fellow refugees who went to the UK, where they also start out with a large language barrier. Just like in the UK, they perform below whites (at least before sufficient linguistic assimilation), but still way above what is expected from their estimated national or racial (genotypic) IQs.'' What is the history of these children?They have been selected?
Let's make an analogy'' I see a dead Syrian boy in a Turkish beach ''and you tell me'' Look, this is a refugee who wanted to go to Europe with his family, but the European racism did he perish in these dark sand beaches ''
''The story that reported these results disclosed the many shocked reactions of Americans in the Seattle area when they were exposed to this unexpected data, especially black American parents. The immigrants outperformed the native blacks despite their obvious background of steep poverty (and perhaps even some traumatic experiences from their countries, not to mention the culture shock of suddenly migrating to a first world country). “How is that possible?” one incredulous black American parent reacted when she was shown the results.''
Refugees who may have had a very bad environment scored high on tests compared to black Americans ?? Wow, I thought the worst environment depress '' IQ scores ''.''Many native black Americans usually attribute the well-known superior academic performance of black African students to the “wealthy families” they supposedly come from in Africa, where their parents allegedly own oil fields and diamond mines in their backyards. Seeing indigent African children outperform them was utterly disillusioning as it instantly shattered all their working rationalizations.''
Again, you need not come from a rich environment to be smart, is not?
''The source article is worth reading in full, even if just for the amusingly shocked reactions of the people named in the story. The included attempts to give explanations for these surprising results only make the article more enlightening, especially if one wants to see how much most people stick to their ideological positions even in the face of contrary evidence. For example, the conservative scholar who was asked to comment from the Fordham Institute, a “conservative education think tank in Washington, DC,” had no choice but to just stick to the trite “they must have come from wealthy and educated families,” without being bothered with the contradictions.''
You accuse people of being just biased.... when they are talking about black-WHITE gap, but in fact they are just starting by potential-logical justifications , such as higher income, which consists of proxy for higher IQ, although the relationship is not significant in general terms. Other logic about this explanation is the huge difference between first and third world income. Average nigerian income mean very poor at american standards. Its difficult understand it?I need detailed history of all those searches to infer any more palatable thing above all that I have spoken so far I only have some data, and his words. Where are the sources?
We need to keep in mind that before being a reality, heredity is a probability. It is not uncommon, but it is not the rule, find smart people who came from families dominated by lower intelligence ''genotypes''. I even know a teenage girl who is very cognitively intelligent (she is thin), has a stupid brother (he's fat) and a mixed race mother who seems to be of average intelligence to level average Brazilian underclass. She is more introverted than their brother too.The more variables to intelligence (of any kind ... even if it is necessary to analyze the heredity of each) you and your spouse have, the greater the chances that their children inherit these variables.
“Refugees who may have had a very bad environment scored high on tests compared to black Americans ?? Wow, I thought the worst environment depress ” IQ scores ”.”
An obvious interpretation is that many black American populations are experiencing certain environmental conditions that are worse than some refugee populations. This is a reasonable conclusion. Consider the fact that the poorest black American neighborhoods have higher mortality rates than many poor developing countries.
Also, consider the fact of the high rates of heavy metal toxicity that are found among black Americans. Heavy metal toxicity, by the way, is a known direct cause of numerous health, cognitive, and behavioral issues, relevant toxicity effects being stunted brain development and lowered IQ, impaired impulse control and aggressive behavior.
Heavy metal toxicity is a strange phenomenon. Earlier last century when white Americans were around a lot of lead through paint and farm chemicals, many white populations had higher rates of violent crime and lower rates of average IQ. So, it isn’t as if it’s just a race issue. As lead toxicity rates have gone down (because of environmental regulations), violent crime rates have gone down for all races.
What is interesting is that these toxicity-related problems are the result of a highly developed and industrialized country. If you live in a poor undeveloped country, especially if in a rural area, you have little worries about such things as heavy metal toxicity. Even in developed countries, you tend to only find high toxicity rates in old urban areas both where decades of toxins have accumulated and where minorities have become concentrated because of generations of racist housing practices.
Of course, poor undeveloped countries have other problems that also can impair or stunt cognitive development and cause other problems: malnutrition, starvation, lack of healthcare, high parasite load, violence and war, lack of education and other resources, etc. Some of these negative effects can even be passed on to following generations through epigenetics, although that field is still young. Obesity, for example, is one kind of epigenetic effect children can inherit from parents who experienced starvation or stress, even if the event happened years before the pregnancy.
I was arguing with a couple of hereditarians on another website, and did some investigation on this topic. That debate has died down, but I decided to take my speculations here. Let’s start with a chart relating an area’s deprivation (IDACI) to Mean Best 8 GCSE scores amongst different ethnicities:
1. Black Africans do better than Black Caribbeans at all levels, and stay close to Pakistanis.
2. White Britons start as the lowest achievers but overtake Black Caribbeans at the 5th decile or so. They benefit more from wealth, and suffer more from deprivation.
3. Indians come close to Chinese in the wealthiest areas.
Here is a table of average Mean Best 8 vs. CAT3 scores from GL Assessment:
If you want to find those numbers again, you’ll need to use Archive.Org to find the old CAT3 webpages, from which you can download spreadsheets. Anyway, I decided to eyeball the IDACI vs. Mean Best 8 chart to get rough estimates of how the CAT3 relates to IDACI in different ethnicities:
1. If a group worked harder than the average student, their estimated score should be too high. If a group fell behind during the 11-16 age range (e.g. earlier maturation), their estimated score should be too low.
2. To me, only the scores for the British Indians, Pakistanis and Chinese appear to be over-estimated. So these correspond well with the CAT3 taken in Year 7. Also, compare the +1 SD and -1 SD IDACI entries for the CAT3.
3. Black Africans, Black Caribbeans and Bangladeshis sit on the deprived end of the IDACI scale (http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/9431/1/DCSF-RTP-09-01.pdf – see p.20/21, Figures 3-9/3-10). I suspect the former has a lot to do with Somalis and such.
4. White Britons, Mixed Britons and Black Caribbeans spend less time on homework than other ethnicities; I think Black Caribbean attitudes towards education are similar to White Britons, who are major underachievers in working-class areas (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201415/cmselect/cmeduc/142/142.pdf – see Table 9).
It had been said that A-Levels might be a more accurate measure, especially if there are different developmental trajectories in play, so I looked for useful data. It was difficult to find statistics that broke down all of the relevant categories. Here are some figures from 2010:
This is a report on the accuracy of predicted grades. In summary, teachers tend to be over-optimistic when assigning predicted grades, and this applies more for students belonging to lower-achieving categories (of any kind).
I needed to know whether these were representative samples, so I searched for a demographic breakdown by age. I ended up getting a table for ethnic composition in the 18-19 age range for 2011, which is close enough, and converted it to percentages:
These are the percentages amongst 2010 UCAS A-Level student applicants:
It looks like the A-Level student breakdown is mostly proportional to the rest of the young adult population. While this shows that the Black British categories achieve fewer high grades, I should point out a few things:
1. It seems reasonable to suggest +1 SD as a watermark for students getting high A-Level grades. Yet with equal numbers, you’d have a ratio of 1.9-2.4 white students per black student for A grades or better; or a ratio of 2.8-3.4 for A* grades only. So you’re not looking at -1 SD, I think, but more like -2/3 SD or less. I believe this is consistent both with the CAT3 and my estimated Mean Best 8 vs. CAT3 vs. IDACI scores.
2. The mixed categories show large discrepancies. The frequencies for White and Mixed White & Black African are almost indistinguishable with just a 0.4% difference, whereas Mixed White & Black Caribbeans are midway between their parent groups. It’s similar if you accept A* grades only. I cannot think of any sensible explanation for this effect.
3. Bangladeshis and Black Africans can be considered comparable in terms of CAT3, IDACI, work ethic (homework) and immigrant background (which leads to, e.g. taking more science subjects). Indeed, they only differ by a 1.4% margin. If we assume the demographics did not change between 2010 and 2011, then we can even argue that it’s down to a higher rate of Black Africans taking A-Level exams.
4. However, this is a flawed statement in that Black Africans are not monolithic. Somalis are a very poor and low-performing group, for example, which will pull down the scores we see here, but they may also be less represented amongst A-Level students. But I think if you are comparing South Asians to Black Africans at all, it means there’s little need to worry about, say, whether the latter group can supply enough highly-skilled professionals.
To be honest, I hate all human groups and their cultures. They are all severely stupid at some very important aspect of harmonic existence. But there is no doubt, at least in the environment where I am there is a significant proportion of blacks and mulattos who are dysfunctional, for any context, and the explanation for this is not the race itself, but the mental race which is present in all human groups, the spectrum of anti-social behavior. The spectrum of anti-social (potentially violent-criminous) behavior is much more common among blacks than among modern whites and East Asians and Darwinian explanation is that different selective pressures have molded the 3 most explicit racial trunks where that in an environment of very harsh climate or other disadvantageous long term situation, cooperation has been the key to survival, while in tropical environments, there has been a significant need for cooperation. Of course it is not just that, but it makes a lot of sense.
Modern society is an example of relaxation for the selection of cooperative behavior, where we have the potentially exponential increase in anti-social types, if there is no further need to survive in the short term. What our friendly morons ideologues call '' tolerance ''. The victory of 'alpha men'' will mean less cooperation/less empathy.
Last observations by now
''Presence of (non-white) Caucasoid genes? They do not outscore other black immigrants in the UK who have no such Caucasoid genes. Also, they are not the ones who have the “smarter” European Caucasian genes – that would be the black Americans.''
You are entering contradiction to raise this question, if black Americans are predominantly African, anyway. And again, '' European genes '' can mean anything. If you had genetic pairing long term between the two groups, it could take some similar conclusion you arrived at this excerpt from his text.
Not only have '' European genes' to be smart, ask for irish travelers.
''Extremely high parental immigrant selection? Refugees from truly troubled countries are not known to be selected for intelligence. Besides, some of these particular groups have the highest number of parents with no high school diplomas.''
Any people coming out of a place to go to another place is selected. Even a population of slaves, i.e. involuntary imigration.
There are people who have great desire to leave their country and this can tell a lot about their behavioral characteristics.
The average Nigerian has a income very lower, which makes it unlikely to be able leave your country with no job security or stability in other regions.
Geographic proximity explain differences in selection. Muslim immigrants who go to the US tend to be more '' selected '' (self-selected) than those who go to the UK.
Differences in standard of living and culture also explain differences in self-selections.
If circumstances are favorable, you will see the transplant joey average from one region to another, see France and maghrebians.
Hey Santocult0, I want to debate you about this stuff on youtube; could you please come to youtube if any have any spare time by any chance?
Since I am not a geneticist, I suppose I will refer to Razib Khan (the only one I read) and see what he says about the Greeks.
Dienekes tackles that. The assertion is wrong, Greeks cluster with Europeans, nowhere near Africans. I’ll get the study in the morning.
Im down for debate. Where?
As JimC , the tenth commenter on this blog, mentions, Fuerst provides a strong empirical case that African out migrants are strongly self-selecting. The third commenter on this blog, Drake, provides data supporting the conclusion that your particular sample is self-selected. You certainly provide only a weak argument, unsupported by empirical data, against the reasonable assumption that your samples are as self-selecting as every other migrant stream in history, particularly the current stream of African migrants to the USA, and even more particularly your study samples.
You’re forgetting that black Americans outside of original slave states are there because their ancestors practiced self selection in leaving the deep, rural south. They moved north in the 40s on their own dollar, in search of industrial labor, and to escape poverty and racism in the Jim Crow south, and created urban enclaves in places like Chicago that thought themselves far removed from the unsophisticated ‘country’ types they left behind. There weren’t plantations in Washington state, US blacks in Seattle had to travel there.
That may even indicate a more intelligence-based self-selection process than refugees, people from war zones paying or indebting themselves to smugglers to get them out or simply approaching an aid tent.
The immigration process does not select for intelligence. African immigrants represent a cross-section of the population, not some elite. First and foremost, an immigrant needs assistance from family in the host country. Family members do not give intelligence exams to prospective immigrants. We have a huge clan here in America from Nigeria. It is a chain that stretches from the 1960′s to the present day of family members helping other family members to immigrate. We passed over many of the smartest and truly gifted because they either weren’t members of our family or weren’t closely related.
Many of our people that arrived in the 60′s and 70′s are now parents and grandfathers of American born children, who are even more successful than they were. I would pit our particular clan of a few hundred individuals against any other extended family or clan (regardless of race) in terms of educational and occupational attainment. In most cases, I believe we would come out ahead.
Immigration process does select for intelligence, and no, it does not represent a cross selection of either applicants or citizens of your country. It is simply a math equation that when added up if it equals or exceeds the threshold, you get put on the list. "Sponsored Immigration" is different. Having lived and worked in Nigeria for 4 years, and being able to speak Yoruba and Igbo conversationally fluent, along with some Hausa and Fulani, I see you immediately default to what destroys Nigeria and Africa, tribalism.
" I would pit our particular clan of a few hundred individuals against any other extended family or clan (regardless of race) in terms of educational and occupational attainment. In most cases, I believe we would come out ahead."
We have no good IQ data from Ethiopia. There is a study of 134 children in an orphanage:
Aboud, F., Samuel, M., Hadera, A. & Addus, A. (1991). Intellectual, social, and nutritional status of children in an Ethiopian orphanage. Social Science and Medicine, 33, pp. 1275-1280.
I haven't been able to locate this study, but orphans are hardly a representative sample of a population. The same criticism can be made of other studies cited by Lynn with respect to Africa. The datasets are small and probably not representative.
I understand that Richard Lynn is greatly admired by many people here, but his estimate of mean sub-Saharan IQ has been challenged by Heiner Rindermann, who is an HBD-friendly researcher. In general, there is a tendency on both sides of this debate to make claims that are not justified by the limited data available.
I'm not challenging the conclusion that mean IQ is low in sub-Saharan Africa. That, in itself, seems to be a robust finding. In particular, it is supported by data on IQ-related alleles. But it's a lot harder to get good data on national differences. It is especially difficult, and downright strange, to extrapolate the general finding of low sub-Saharan IQ to a region that lies outside sub-Saharan Africa and for which we have limited data.
First you say the research is fraudulent, then you say the findings are robust. A glaring contradiction
There’s no evidence that in terms of actual native intelligence, that Africans are less intelligent than any other human group or race.
This is laughable pseudoscience. If Africans weren’t endowed with “IQ related alleles” there wouldn’t be a single intelligent African on the planet. I think you need to familiarize yourself with how nature works. You are asserting a hard, discrete demarcation between Africans and others in terms of the genes that regulate intelligence. Well, I can introduce Africans that are smarter than you and everyone you know. How did they achieve that intelligence in the absence of said genes?
[…] difficult to trace references back to the published source. Call it “Powerpoint Publishing”. http://www.unz.com/article/closing-the-black-white-iq-gap-debate-part-2/ Chisala summarises his argument thus: Remember our goal. We only need to show that blacks in Africa […]
In summary that you are seeking to show that the persistent IQ gap between African-Americans and whites in the US has nothing to do with the differences in genes between races by showing that, once the environments are equalised for immigrants from Africa by coming to America they do much better on IQ tests and their equivalents than African-Americans who have on average more than 20 per cent European genes. And that your argument is fallacious and should give way to a serious attempt to establish the facts if you think getting it right matters.
It is fallacious because you have no idea of the IQ level of the Europeans who contributed their genes to the African-American gene pool. And it is fallacious because it does not recognise that African genomes are notoriously diverse and that there could easily be the range of average IQs according to class, caste or religion that one sees on other continents.
Overall, her article is highly flawed, it reminds me of the hundreds, perhaps thousands of “Arts” students that I have seen take science faculty courses and have written an academic paper in an area of science using a methodology learned in a Social Science, Humanities or similar soft standards programs. Her understanding of statistics and her method of selecting references can best be described as “what best works for her hypothesis”. “White” she generically lumped into a homogenous category while she subdivides africa up into defined ethnic/tribal groups.
The bulk of sub saharan negro slaves in the Western Hemisphere did not come from Africa but were the result of breeding programs. Historic literature shows that large strong Irishmen were selected to be the male end of the program. IQ studies show that the Irish are the lowest IQ people amongst European Caucasians. Contrary to what people believe about genetics and shared genes, people are not peas or drosophila melanogaster and “penetrance” and “expressivity” can make changes in genetics over many generations and not all genes can be watered down or bred out over time. All first generation admixture would create a “mulatto” and successive breeding could produce a “quadroon, octoroon, quintroon”. After the abolition of slavery, more African genes were bred into the “black” population as breeding programs ended. The assumption that the average AA who is 25% caucasian according to the NIH NLM has 25% of genetic penetrance of the Irish European is highly flawed, it is in fact incorrect.
If the abolition of slavery saw a quintroon (“6% African, 94% European Caucasian”) breed with a AA who has a higher percentage of African genes, although the offspring would have a proportionately higher number of “African” genes, there is no formulaic method to calculate diminution of any specific gene. The belief that your parents lose “50%” of each of their genes and that the offspring has 50% of each parent is Mendel’s pea model of genetics, it does not apply to polygenetic systems. Specific genes can be 100% retained in a genome despite passing down generation after generation and not “dividing”.
Genes have been identified that limit brain development, these are over represented in Sub Saharan Africans of E1b1a Y chromosome parentage. But West Africans are not a homogenous group, the coastal West Africans have 1100 years of Arab occupation and 600 years of exposure to western europeans. I am always amused when I watch youtube videos where Nigerians are shocked that they have European genes.
To become an immigrant to the USA your application is based on points awarded to age, sex, education, work experience, criminal history and language spoken, nothing else. Immigration is based on the need of the country accepting the immigrant. If you do not add up to a certain threshold, you do not get to emigrate. There are minimal scores in all categories that exclude you if you do not meet them. The rankings of each category are changed and weighted differently over time. For example, if there is building boom and more brick layers are needed, extra weighting goes to bricklayers.
Immigration process does select for intelligence, and no, it does not represent a cross selection of either applicants or citizens of your country. It is simply a math equation that when added up if it equals or exceeds the threshold, you get put on the list. “Sponsored Immigration” is different. Having lived and worked in Nigeria for 4 years, and being able to speak Yoruba and Igbo conversationally fluent, along with some Hausa and Fulani, I see you immediately default to what destroys Nigeria and Africa, tribalism.
” I would pit our particular clan of a few hundred individuals against any other extended family or clan (regardless of race) in terms of educational and occupational attainment. In most cases, I believe we would come out ahead.”