Blogger Alcoholicwisdom wrote on this blog:
Are there any studies on IQ differences between indian castes?
I am in strong favor of the idea that there are IQ differences between castes, of course we need some studies. In every society there are castes, classes, based on intrinsic abilities and intelligence. Nobody would accept a priest which cannot even understand basic religious subjects. Religion at that time was like philosophy which requires a high intelligence, and the smartest people were probably brahmins. The smartest jews are also from rabbi families (my belief). The priests were like scientists, philosophers of their times. Nowadays, the picture is different, as the religions lost their smartest kids mostly to hardcore sciences.
I would seriously doubt there have been any published studies on IQ and caste in India, but there’s a fabulous expert named rec1man who posted on Steve Sailer’s old blog. rec1man did the following analysis of India’s potential IQ:
25% Dalit and Tribal = 80 IQ
15% Muslim = 85 IQ
40% Backward Caste = 95 IQ
15% Upper Caste = 110 IQ
The only item missing is the 5% brahmins…Making a worst case assumption that
Brahmin IQ is no more than Upper caste IQ , would give a brahmin IQ estimate of 110My private real numbers are a lot higher, but I wont stir up a controversy , until we reach a consensus on average Indian iQ
Average Indian IQ = 0.25*80 + 0.15*85 + 0.40*95 + 0.15*110 + 0.05*110 = 92.75
The upper caste + brahmin segment = 20% of 1.1 billion = 220 million
at near Ashkenazi levels
Note that rec1man is obviously estimating what India’s IQ would be if India had a first-world environment, because India’s actual IQ is 82 not 93. But as I explained in my last post, India, like sub-Saharan Africa, is probably functioning 13 IQ points below its genetic potential because of sub-optimum nutrition, so a genetic IQ in the mid 90s is realistic (just keep in mind that all of rec1man’s numbers are about a dozen points higher than current phenotypes reared in India).
In other words, India’s genetic IQ distribution looks very much like the United States. The U.S. also have an average IQ in the mid-90s (97 to be precise). This may sound confusing to people who are used to reading that America’s IQ is 100 by definition, but rec1man appears to be using the old IQ scale (which has become popular again thanks to scholar Richard Lynn) in-which IQ 100 represents the average of only people’s of Northwestern European ancestry. Since the U.S. is not overwhelmingly Northwestern European, they are 97 on this scale.
The United States also resembles India’s genetic IQ in that the U.S. also has some social groups with IQ’s around 110 and others around 80 in their purest form. For example the New York Times cites research showing Ashkenazi Americans have IQ’s around 110.
The only thing I find strange about rec1man’s numbers is the assertion that Indian Muslims are 8 points lower than the average Indian intelligence. I don’t buy the Islamophobic crap about Islam making people stupid or violent. Not because I’m some liberal, but rather because I believe real intelligence is a biological variable that is virtually insensitive to cultural influences. I could be completely wrong about that, but my belief is based upon research.
If you agree with the New York Times article about some ethnic IQ differences being potentially genetic, you should know that Indians are not exactly one ethnic group. The original Indians were probably proto-Australoids taking the Southern route from sub-Saharan Africa to Australia. Ancient Australoid genes probably drag India’s IQ down because this population branched off the human-evolutionary tree prematurely. According to Richard Lynn Australian aboriginals have an IQ of 62 but in my opinion this is greatly depressed by sub-optimum nutrition.
India’s average IQ got a huge boost when it was invaded by the non-white Caucasoids who genetically mixed with the native proto-Australoids. According to Richard Lynn, non-white Caucasoids have a respectable average IQ of 84 (but even this IQ, high as it is, would be even higher if the Arab world had first-world nutrition which it doesn’t, despite it’s great oil wealth).
India’s IQ might have got yet another boost if there was an Aryan invasion. We don’t know anything about the ethnicity or IQ’s of the ancient Aryans and they probably weren’t exactly white as we define it today, but as stated above, Richard Lynn estimates North-Western Europeans have a mean IQ of 100. If we average all three groups together, we get India’s current IQ of 82.
http://schools.yrdsb.ca/markville.ss/history/religion/caste_stats.pdf
this source has indias caste information, but for percentage of making less than 100$/month.
this might give, after some assumptions the following, IQ vs Caste:
105 brahmin (higher priestly caste)
90 others (buddhist or christians)
70 muslims
65 scheduled tribes (other oppressed groups)
62 scheduled castes (dalits and others)
90 other upper castes(warrior or merchant castes and others)
90 other backward castes(groups that are economically behind)
numbers for dalits and muslims seem quite low. However, gypsies, relative to dalits, probably gained couple of points on the way to europe mixing a bit, reaching 70. But as you said, Australian aboriginals have also 62, it should be higher than that?
Very interesting . The income distribution of various ethnicities likely mirrors their IQ distribution to a large degree…literacy distributions would probably work even better though. I think that’s what rec1man used.
As for gypsies, I think they were likely self-selected for low IQ analogous to how Ashkenazis were self-selected for high IQ. In both cases, their IQ’s diverged from the founding stock
One thing that is definitely holding Muslims back economically compared to Hindus is their higher fertility. It is similar to Jews having a high birthrate in the last decades of the 19th Century.
pumpkinperson said:
According to Richard Lynn Australian aboriginals have an IQ of 62 but in my opinion this is greatly depressed by sub-optimum nutrition.
Chuck of Occidental Ascent criticized Lynn’s aboriginal IQ estimate here.
Chuck did a good job debunking that one analysis by Lynn, but he did not debunk the original data Lynn used to arrive at his estimate.
Also the data Chucked looked at were not full-blooded aboriginals suffering malnutrition; they were probably only half-aboriginals reared in good conditions and thus were not at all representative
Why are you taking lynns numbers as a gospel.I suspect the IQ gap between upper castes and lowercastes is greater than white black gap in usa.
The estimates I quoted from rec1man do show huge differences between castes
for some hard data,
In 1911 census, for Tamils,
Brahmin Literacy in English was 22%
Brahmin Literacy in Tamil was 75%
Chettiar ( Tamil Merchant ), literacy in English was 3%
Chettiar literacy in Tamil, was 40%
In 1955, for the 400 Engineering seats in Tamil Nadu, if merit were the criterion
the 3% tamil brahmins would have won 250 seats ( 62% )
By means of brutal quotas, they were rolled back to 72 seats
I strongly disagree with the idea that the Arab world iq is being held down by malnutrition. That is simply not true. Egypt has an IQ of 83 but an obesity rate of 46% for women and Egypt is considered a poorer part of the Middle East. The fact is, IQ is limited in the Middle East by either culture/religion or DNA.
I just want to note that countries like the UAE and Saudi Arabia import millions of Indians (for menial, skilled and engineering work) and Westerners (for very well-paid managerial roles) instead of importing millions of Arabs. Perhaps the Middle East’s low IQ has a huge role in it. Any other explanations?
The average Egyptian young man is 5’7″ compared to 5’10” for young American men. I doubt Arabs are genetically 1.2 SD shorter than Americans, so both their height & IQ are likely depresses to some degree by sub-optimum nutrition
Obesity implies over-nutrition and one could extrapolate that either religion or genetics, not malnutrition, really holds back IQ in the region.
“Obesity implies over-nutrition”
You are correct.
I am Indian too and I would not take recman’s claims very seriously. There is no doubt, upper caste Indians are on average smarter than the lower caste, they are not as smart as the high figure they put out. All of recman’s claims are based on thin air, there are no tests to prove it. I do not understand why people take him that seriously. He is a Tamil brahmin desperate to prove that Brahmins are smarter than Northern Europeans and Northern East Asians and maybe even Ashkenazi based on no research. We Brahmins have this strange belief that we are a kind of unique chosen people smarter than everybody on earth. We brahmins are still coming to terms with the very harsh fact that Europeans have invented the modern world (steam engines, Telephones, semi conductors, automobiles, space travel, flight etc. ) before we could. This is what drives people like Recman.
I think he’s taken seriously because of his expertise on Indian castes. His numbers could be quite wrong but they seem to be based on literacy rates
But Tamil Brahmins have contributed a lot to mankind considering the population. They only make up 2 million in numbers in India, but have won all the Nobel Prizes in Physics and Chemistry, which is 5, that by per capita standards is way more than Ashkenzai Jews, and some of the best mathematicians in history like Ramnujan are Tamil Brahmin too, the world chess champion is a Tamil Brahmin, and its not Brahmins in India that are smarter, its just Tamil and Bengali brahmins, the Bania caste of Gujarat are smart too, and here is proof
http://www.aei-ideas.org/2011/10/the-ashkenazim-of-india/
When you say they’ve won more Physics/chemistry prizes than Ashkenazi Jews, it would make more sense to do the per capita comparison worldwide than just in India.
Tamil Brahmin have won 3 Nobel prizes,not 5 as mentioned by you liar.Also two of them won with American citizenship and C.V Raman won from Bengal.
Bengali Brahmins working in Bengal have produced 3 Nobel prizes-Rabindranath Tagore,Amartya sen and IVF pioneer Subhas Mukhopadhyay.
In USA Bengali Brahmins have 5000 population and from that population we have 1200+ patents which is best in the world.We have also won 2 Pulitzer Prizes in USA and one Nobel laureate signature award winner Anirban Banerjee.
Bengali Brahmin Ashoke Sen working in India won world’s richest science prize Fundamental physics prize.
The other Brahmins are not smart at all, some merchant caste Indians are genetically more r1a than a lot of Indians who are nothing more than Brahmin converts like pathetic UP Brahmins, also the average Indian American iq is 112, which is 2 points higher than Ashkenzai Jews, and a lot of Indian Americans aren’t even Tamil or Bengali Brahmins, here is proof, why do you think Indian kids win all the Scripps Spelling Bees
http://www.forbes.com/2009/02/24/bobby-jindal-indian-americans-opinions-contributors_immigrants_minority.html
Yes I did a whole post on the IQ’s of Indian Americans
https://pumpkinperson.com/2014/09/29/the-incredible-intelligence-of-indian-americans/
you are right! i feel IQ test itself to be biased and doesnt reflect a persons ability..even if it did, simply because of economic and social advantage brahmins outperform the rest..nothibng else can be the reason
The IQ of Ashkenazi jews and Brahmins are about 112-120. This means that Ashkenazi jews claim that they r descenders of Abraham. Jewish Abraham and Hindu Brahma are same people???
Difference between Muslim IQ vs Hindu-Sikh IQ
In UK, the Pakistani are Punjabi muslims peasants
The Sikhs are Punjabi Sikh peasants
The Gujuratis are Patel farmers
Pakistanis score at black levels, while Hindus and Sikhs outperform whites
Muslim problem is inbreeding, cousin marriage is compulsory, drops IQ by 10 points
That’s fascinating. People have long wondered why Indians do so much better than Pakistani despite being of such similar genetic stock. They have argued that this shows the importance of culture. But cousin marriage is very interesting genetic explanation
In fact, Pakistan is far more caucasoid than India. Pakistan was carved out of the muslim majority regions of Indian Punjab. Indian Sikhs and Pakistanis are identical peasants.
First Advantage is lack of Inbreeding for Hindu-Sikh Punjabis, this gives a 10 point IQ boost for Indians. Next Advantage, among the castes which converted to islam, very few were the IQ elite – Brahmins and Merchants. Bobby Jindal is a Merchant Caste Punjabi from a Hindu family. Next, islam suppresses IQ, ban on women education, ban on free thinking, brainwashing in madrasa etc
In India, muslims are a different race. They have Mughal( turks/iranian/uzbek)blood in them. Some times they have distinguishable facial features.
Some brahmin celebrities
South Indian Brahmins
Mathematician – Ramanujam
Chess – Vish Anand
Nobel Prize ( black holes ) – Subrahmanya Chandrasekar
Vikram Pandit
Indra Nooyi
Bloom Energy – Sridhar
North Indian Brahmin
Neil Kashkari
This is an interesting blog. What I’d like to point out, however, is that there is quite a bit of misinformation regarding the genetic makeup/ancestry of races and ethnic groups/castes found in India on this blog. I noticed you implied in some of your posts here that Indians are hybrid population between two groups, one most similar to present-day non-White Caucasoids, and one most similar to Australian Aboriginals — this is pseudoscience and completely inaccurate. Let me explain what the genetic/latest research has actually shown, as far as India’s demographics, and the genetic composition of its castes is concerned. What follows is a detailed explanation of South Asian genetics and therefore, I must warn you, it is a long wall of text, but completely accurate and supported by the latest research, despite containing a lot of jargon that may give you a headache. Bear with me here.
Indians are composed of two composite groups: ANI or the Ancestral North Indians, a group which itself is a composite of two or more different Caucasoid populations, that are on average, closest to present-day Georgians in genetic makeup, and ASI, or the Ancestral South Indians, a group which is also a composite of two or more different populations, at least half of which is Caucasoid in nature, with the other half varying in composition from one ethnic group to another; in other words, while ANI is completely Caucasoid in nature, ASI is 50-60% Caucasoid in nature, depending on the caste in question, and the remainder of ASI ancestry is either composed of Mongoloid, proto-Mongoloid, proto-Caucasoid or in exceptionally rare, isolated cases like the Paniya tribe of South India, of proto-Australoid-like ancestry, which still isn’t the same as having Australoid ancestry. Keep in mind that Australoids themselves are at least 80% Mongoloid in genetic makeup and are considered to be archaic Whites themselves. They are also the furthest group genetically on Earth, from the Negroids/Congoids/Bantuids of Sub-Saharan Africa. So, apart from a minority of untouchables of South India and parts of East India, who are not even a part of the Caste system to begin with, NO other group in South Asia has any proto-Australoid-like admixture to speak of. And Indians are predominantly Caucasoid and group with other Caucasoids according to every genetic test/anthropometric study since the dawn of time. More information:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/49/Neighbor-joining_Tree.svg
http://archive.org/stream/racesofeurope031695mbp#page/n529/mode/2up
https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/2012/03/12/are-the-people-of-india-caucasians-yes/
It is crucial to remember that Indians have nothing to do with Australoids — those people are completely different apart from a very few isolated tribes in India that have real proto-Australoid-like admixture due to their status and extreme isolation, and this admixture has nothing to do with ASI admixture — ASI is just like the paleolithic ANE influence in Europeans, and half of it is Caucasian (at least half, if not more, it varies for different people in India) and it is a composite just like ANI is, with different components for different people/castes in India. The Reich et al paper even pointed out that the Onge were at BEST, a poor proxy to get something without ANI admixture, and little ASI admixture, and even then, it was a worse proxy than the Han Chinese. In other words, East Asians were a better proxy than the Onge themselves. The reason they picked the Onge as a (poor) proxy was because they were the only group they could find in that region without ANI admixture, and because they are such an old population that has been isolated and separated from mainland populations for a very long period of time; they also have very few individuals left, so owing to the problems of genetic drift, they assume ownership of a component and the admixture program tries to force the Onge component in an admixture model of South Asians. In more recent papers, this has been clarified further and it has been stated that they were simply making a poor guess when using the Onge as a proxy in the model.
More information here: http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php/39141-ASI-%28ancestral-south-indian%29-is-not-related-to-Onge-negritos-australoids?p=1050864&viewfull=1#post1050864
and
http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php/39141-ASI-%28ancestral-south-indian%29-is-not-related-to-Onge-negritos-australoids?p=1061499&viewfull=1#post1061499
Furthermore, to illustrate just how poor of a guess it was, they pointed out that ASI is massively separated from the Onge; in fact, ASI is just as far from the Onge as the Utah Whites (a group of random Euro-descent samples from Utah in the States) are from the Onge, indicating that ASI is as related to Onge as Utah Whites are. More here: http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/showthread.php/39141-ASI-%28ancestral-south-indian%29-is-not-related-to-Onge-negritos-australoids?p=1054161&viewfull=1#post1054161
Papuans and Onge have no relation to India at all — the Onge are in SE Asia. Han are a much better proxy. In addition, Indians lack Denisovan admixture and other crucial haplogroups found commonly in the Onge as well. It must also be said that if Indians are erroneously assumed to have proto-Australoid-like ancestry, so are Europeans. You might be under the false assumption that Europeans are somehow a “pure” Caucasoid population, when in fact that couldn’t be further from the truth. Not only has the latest genetic research conclusively shown that Europeans are all admixed to different degrees between AT LEAST four main populations of people: West European Hunter-Gatherer (WHG), Early European Farmer (EEF), Scandinavian Hunter-Gatherer (SHG), and Ancient North Eurasian (ANE).
More at link: http://eurogenes.blogspot.com.au/2013/12/ancient-human-genomes-suggest-three.html
It has also conclusively shown that ALL populations of Europeans and other “White” Caucasoids have significant to HUGE amounts of non-Caucasoid ancestry due to the fact that the ANE/Ancient North Eurasian component is at least 45% East Asian/Mongoloid in ancestry. The ANE component is based on the genome of the infamous Mal’ta boy or MA-1 (see here). In Europe today it peaks among Estonians at just over 18%, and, intriguingly, reaches a similar level among Scots. Finns, Russians and Mordovians, also carry very high ANE, in addition to very high amounts of much more recent Siberian admixture. What’s even more interesting is that this ANE influence is the very influence found among South Asians, albeit in a slightly different variety known as ASI. Here is a graph explaining this in a simple manner: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-b_OUyvAOJfo/UH6mOGV0OII/AAAAAAAAG9U/tP3lG_BxQ20/s640/tangledweb.gif
What the aforementioned information means is the following: Indians are NOT a hybrid population between Caucasoids and Australoids. In reality, the vast majority of Indians are an admixed population between Caucasoids and Mongoloids — except in this case, the Mongoloids are most similar in phenotype and genotype to SE Asians like the Thai. According to the latest research, the average Indian is at least 75% Caucasian and 25% Asian — these figures have been substantiated by multiple reports, including the National Geographic Project’s Geno 2.0 DNA ancestry test samples, the 23andme test samples, and even the Reich et. al paper published in the highly-cited/high impact factor scientific journal Nature. It has been conclusively proven that South Asians/Indians range from 5-10% Asian to 35% Asian, or in other words, from 65% Caucasian to 95% Caucasian. The most Caucasian people are from the northwest of the Indian subcontinent, and the least Caucasian people are from the east and south. Only one person broke the magic 35% barrier, and he was a Bangladeshi (38%). If you’d like a layman’s interpretation of the data in the aforementioned sources, check out this article by Razib Khan, one of the pioneers in the field of population genetics, particularly as it pertains to the archaeogenetics of South Asia as a whole — he writes articles for Discover Magazine, which is a well respected source. He is also a PhD student at UC Davis. Here is a post describing the general findings of genetic research into South Asian populations: http://genomesunzipped.org/2011/02/guest-post-by-razib-khan-my-personal-genome.php
In addition to the Reich et. al paper, and other landmark papers in this field, the Harappa Ancestry Project (link to the project: http://www.harappadna.org/2012/05/harappaworld-admixture/), which is helmed by a genetic expert, and is working in combination with Reich’s data, is also another landmark study into the archaeogenetics of South Asia. It has conclusively proven and further substantiated the results I aforementioned. According to the samples collected by the project, there is a sharp correlation between Caste/Location and Caucasian ancestry in India, with the upper castes in all parts of India being significantly more Caucasian in nature than the lower castes, and the North-West Indian/South Asian upper Castes being the most Caucasian of all — up to 95%. All of the North-West Indian/Pakistani/Nepali/Afghani upper castes are between 5-18% admixed with East Eurasians/Mongoloids; in other words all of them are between 82-95% Caucasian. These castes would include the Rajputs, Jatts, Khatris, Gujjars, Sindhis, Brahmins, Bhumihars, Balochis, Brahuis, and certain upper caste Punjabis, and Pathans. Note that this is only applicable to the upper castes aforementioned that are in the North and North-West of India, as well as Pakistan and Nepal. As for the rest of India (and Bangladesh/Sri Lanka), as I mentioned earlier, the average South Asian is 75% Caucasian and 25% Asian, so a good amount of South Asians are more Caucasian than 75%, and a good amount are less Caucasian.
For instance, the average Tamil (from South India, and well represented in the diaspora in the USA as the “typical Indian” stereotype) is 33-34% non-Caucasian, and the average Bengali/Bangaladeshi is closer to 55-60% Caucasian. The dalits of Tamil Nadu (also well represented in the States) or the lowest caste Tamils, are at least 40% non-Caucasian. The lowest castes of India, the Chamars, who are found all over India, (also in the States) are also in the 50-60% Caucasian range. Upper Caste Indians in the rest of India (apart from the North-West) tend to be 70-80% Caucasian. If you’d like to see the data for yourself, here is the link to the spreadsheet: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1l87nGSIYTP-h7m-VKjB-BZcuEoWdz765nU4f_krOdd4/edit?pli=1#gid=0
For reference, the “South Indian” component is 50-60% Caucasian, and the ANE/NE Asian component is 45% non-Caucasian. The SE Asian, Siberian, Papuan, American and Beringian components are all Mongoloid in nature, and the E African, San, Pygmy and W African components are all Negroid in nature. Keep in mind that the data here is accurate only for South Asians, other regions are too under sampled in the project.
Now you might be wondering, if South Asians, particularly the upper castes in the North and North-West, are between 5-18% admixed, are they alone in this predicament? As I alluded to earlier, they are anything BUT alone. Lets start with Middle Easterners and Northern Africans. Egyptians, Moroccans, Libyans, and other North Africans are on AVERAGE, 15% Black/Negroid admixed. In fact, according to the latest research, the average North African is 15-16% black, and individual countries like Egypt and Tunisia are 18-21% Black on AVERAGE — so some would be MORE than 21% black, some less. The highest admixture is found among Moroccans and Berbers who can be up to 30% Black/Negroid admixed ON AVERAGE. As far as the Middle East goes, Yemeni people have been shown to be 18-19% black ON AVERAGE, and the Bedouin tribes have been shown to be 16-18% Black on average as well. Qataris are 12-16% Black, and Saudi Arabians range from 14-18% black as well, on average. Jews, particularly the Ashkenazim, have also been shown to be 16.5% admixed with Mongoloid and Black/Negroid on average. So on average, MENA people are 75-85% Caucasoid and 15-25% Black/Negroid admixed, therefore its safe to say that MENA people are Caucasoid-Negroid hybrids, with some groups being more Negroid than Caucasoid. All these figures have been collected by National Geographic and many other researchers, but I’ll give you a link to the Nat Geo data here: https://robertlindsay.wordpress.com/category/raceethnicity/central-asians/
As far as West Asians/Central Asians are concerned, they show significant amounts of Mongoloid admixture on average.Tajiks have 15% Mongoloid admixture on average, while Turkmens have 16% Mongoloid admixture on average; However, some groups of Turkmen average 27% Mongoloid, and some are 35 – 56% Mongoloid. Southern Turkmens on average are only 1/8 to 1/3 Mongoloid or better said 13-31% Mongoloid. However in some parts of Turkmenenistan, like the Northern and Eastern parts, the Mongoloid DNA reaches 33-55% Other parts of Turkmenistan are 33-55% Mongoloid. Even Turkish many people are 10-20% Mongoloid, and 15% Mongoloid on average. Iranians are also Mongoloid admixed — up to 10% on average, with the Azeris of Iran being even more admixed. Tatars are 16% Mongoloid admixed on average. So, its safe to say that most West Asian groups are a hybrid of Mongoloids and Caucasoids, with some leaning more towards Mongoloid, and being on average, 80-85% Caucasian, and 15-20% Mongoloid, with some groups being much less Caucasian and much more Mongoloid.
Now, lets look at the European data. All non-Sardinian Europeans have been shown to have significant amounts of ANE ancestry due to the Malt’a boy mentioned earlier, and this ANE ancestry is related to/is the same as ASI ancestry in South Asians, relating Europeans to Amerindians and East Asians. The ANE component is composed of 45% Mongoloid and Australoid-like ancestry (similar to the distant relation that some South Asians have to proto-Australoids), and the Malt’a boy also has a proto-Australoid ASE component on the order of 10%.
This ANE component peaks in the Karitiana Indians of South America: https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-EiT2DbpCI90/VA5ZPZgLHmI/AAAAAAAABVI/iSDLST-Boic/w1001-h199-no/Table_S14.12.png
More info about ANE’s relationship to ASI is available at this link: http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2012/10/the-tangled-web-of-humanity.html
Which itself references this landmark paper: http://www.genetics.org/content/early/2012/09/06/genetics.112.145037
It is also pertinent to point out the fact that ANE ancestry in all Europeans with the exception of Sardinians (who have very minor ANE ancestry) is mostly (45-55%) non-Caucasoid in nature, and DOES NOT include SEPARATE, ADDITIONAL East Asian ancestry that is due to much more recent admixture with Mongoloids due to the Golden Horde and other admixture events. ANE or NE Asian is best thought of as very ancient Asian admixture, while the recent admixture is added separately. A recent landmark paper definitively showed a clear signal of admixture in Northern Europe, represented by the ANE/NE Asian component. Here is the link to the paper: http://www.genetics.org/content/early/2012/09/06/genetics.112.145037.abstract and here is a link to the layman’s explanation of it: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2012/09/across-the-sea-of-grass-how-northern-europeans-got-to-be-10-northeast-asian/#.Ve77Xs44JNY
What this paper definitively shows (as do successive papers recently released after it) is that Europeans, especially Northern Europeans, have huge amounts of NE Asian, also known as ANE, admixture. This is because they are descended in part from an Amerindian population. What is the actual amount? Well, remember that ANE or NE Asian is made up of two components — one is Caucasian in nature and related to Levantine ancestry, and the other is related to NE Asia/Siberians and the American Indians, peaking in the Karitiana Indians of South America. Therefore,
according to the research data in the latest papers, Northern Europeans are 5-18% admixed with Mongoloids, or in other words, Northern Europeans are 5-18% Non-Caucasoid, and the authors pointed out that this is actually a conservative estimate, one that is lower than what the actual value is likely to be — which is purported to be even higher than the 5-18% range, easily crossing over into the 10-20%+ non-Caucasoid range.
Keeping in mind that in Europe, among Lezgins and Chechens and Ossetians. ANE is in the 23-27%+ range, this means that other Eastern Europeans, not residing in Northern Europe, are also heavily admixed with non-Caucasian ANE ancestry as well. The ANE ancestry is 45% East Asian/Amerindian in composition, and 10% SE Asian in ancestry, so 55% non-Caucasian and ANE ancestry ranges from 8-21%+ in almost all Europeans except Sardinians. A table with ANE scores from a recent paper: http://i.imgur.com/R70lWOG.png Remember how I mentioned earlier that this ANE non-Caucasoid ancestry did NOT include additional, more recent, non-Caucasoid East Asian ancestry? Well lets take a look at that data as well. Russians and Finns, are 80-88% Caucasian depending on the person (NOT including non-Caucasoid ANE admixture, which would make them even less Caucasoid) because of much more recent East Asian admixture and the areas with the higher non-Caucasian mixture in the 12-20% range is around Leningrad and other areas around Russia. Finnish people, according to the latest genetic study, are AT LEAST 13 to 17% East Asian, and Russians, according to the latest genetic study, are 12 to 18% East Asian. More info here: https://genetiker.wordpress.com/2013/08/28/mongoloid-admixture-in-russians/
Lithuanians and Swedes are at least 10%-20% admixed with recent East/Mongoloid mixture. If we add this recent Mongoloid admixture to the more ancient ANE ancestry in Europeans, we get the following numbers: Russians and Finns and Swedes are 17-30% Mongoloid/Non-Caucasoid and 70-83% Caucasoid. Because of this, Finns have been found to be distinct from other Europeans and don’t cluster as close to them. Russians in the North are much the same way. Therefore we can sum up the above with the following three sentences:
Proto West Eurasians + ANE/ASI-like = Europeans and Latin Americans
Proto West Eurasians + ASI /ANE-like= South Asians and Central and West Asians
Proto West Eurasians + African = Middle Easterners and Northern Africans
And since everyone in these regions can be as much as 30% non-Caucasoid due to either Mongoloid or Negroid ancestry, (but closer to 20-25% non-Caucasoid) Indians are definitely not alone in being admixed Caucasoids on this planet. They are actually part of the norm, being on average, 75% Caucasian and 25% Asian, So the next time you present Indians as being unique in being admixed, or Europeans as being unique in being pure, think again — for that has no basis in reality. The data clearly shows that Indians are as admixed as other Caucasian groups throughout the world, and in some causes, purer, particularly in the case of the upper Caste North and North-West Indians, who are at most, 18% admixed or less, and thus 82-95% Caucasian.
Ashkenazi Jews actually are brahmin. Not khazar. They came from India early.http://jewishtimes.com/16697/are-jews-from-india/opinion/ and http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=14957
I wanted so badly…but I get so many channels…
peepee is such a fucking prole it’s nauseating.
i threw out my tv several years ago after watching the olympics.
a tv of any kind, let alone a huge “big screen” tv…anyone with such is such a prole he or she should be gassed summarily.
a tv is good for the olympics and the world cup. that’s it.
Read thisblog:Indian/Chinese IQ puzzle.
The average IQ of Indian Brahmin is 110.The Bengali Brahmins have the highest IQ among all Indian Brahmins with IQ varying 115-122.
For example in USA Bengali Brahmins have 5000+ population and from that population we have 1200+ patents which is the best in the world.Also there are more than dozen grammy awards winner from Bengali Brahmin and 2 Pulitzer winners.Nobel laureate Amartya Sen also teaches at Harvard.
If you search all Brahmins in India,then Bengali Brahmin and Tamil Brahmin are people who have produced several intellectuals.
There are 3 Bengali Brahmin inventors in USA who will go down 3 of the greatest in history.
Inventor Arpan Chakraborty-at age of 32 he has made 192 patents.
inventor Amit Chakraborty-He currently has 114 patents.
Inventor Soma Chakraborty-In just 4 years she has made 96 patents.
Here are few more famous Bengali Brahmin:
Aryabhatta-the man who invented zero and decimal system and predicted 1500 years ago that earth revolves around sun and many other things.
Then Mathematician Radhanath Sikdar who calculated height of Mount Everest using spherical Trigonometry.
Statistician Prasanta Chandra Mahalanobis who created Indian statistical institute.
Sir U.N Bramhachari who discovered Urea stibamine & 3 Nobel laureates.
the average brahmin iq is approximately 125 in the americas.
First of all, there are IQ studies on Indian Castes. Lynn’s IQ data-set on India is mostly “lower caste IQ sample”.
Read my answer: https://www.quora.com/Why-China-has-a-higher-average-iq-than-India/answer/Aron-Deon
Mohanty and Babu 1983 (Average IQ: 79):-
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/239801334_Bilingualism_and_Metalinguistic_Ability_among_Kond_Tribals_in_Orissa_India
“As mentioned in the topic of the research article, the sample has been conducted on “Tribal population” in Orissa.”
Afzal 1988 (IQ of 79, studies conducted in Urdu):
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/19964938_Consquences_of_consanguinity_on_cognitive_behavior
“In order to study the effects of consanguinity on IQ, a survey was conducted among the Ansari Muslims of Bhagalpur residing in suburban and rural areas. Both outbred (N=390 from suburban areas and N=358 from rural areas) and inbred (N’s=300 and 266, respectively) children aged 9 to 12 years from socioeconomically middle-class families were administered the Weschler Intelligence Scale for Children—Revised.”
Sinha 1968 (Average IQ of 78):-
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01068128
“Indian Muslim school boys, ages 13 to 15 years, whose parents are first cousins, were compared with classmates whose parents are genetically unrelated on the Raven Standard Progressive Matrices, a nonverbal test of intelligence.”
Majumdar, P. K., and Nundi, P. C. (1971)
http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1974-10149-001
“Compared scores of 2 geographically separated Bengali-speaking groups of schoolchildren, grades IX-XI, on Raven’s Standard Progressive Matrices. 2,836 Ss from Calcutta and 2,100 Ss from Agartala were tested. Ss from Calcutta were superior to those from Agartala by an average of 7 points.”
Agrawal, N., Sinha, S. N., and Jensen, A. R. (1984). Effects of inbreeding on Raven matrices. Behavior Genetics, 14, 579-585.
Source: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF01068128
“Indian Muslim school boys, ages 13 to 15 years, whose parents are first cousins, were compared with classmates whose parents are genitically unrelated on the Raven Standard Progressive Matrices, a nonverbal test of intelligence.”
There you go. 5/13 samples that are cited are taken on “tribals, muslims and asians” minority sub-groups in india, not even on the general population. It is well known that Tribals and Muslims have much lower IQ.
On the contrary, there are high IQ studies on India:-
IQ of Lucknow (Sample Size: 429):-
http://fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/khan-2015.pdf
Average IQ in non-flourosis region in Lucknow was found to be 110.
IQ of Ahmedabad (sample size: 190):-
http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-content/uploads/trivedi-2007.pdf
Average IQ in Chandlodia district of Ahmedabad was found to be 104.
Average IQ in Shandong province of China:-
Source: http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-…
Average IQ: 81 and 76
Source: http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-…
Average IQ fluctuates between 65 and 82 for china, depending on amount of fluoride in water. Shandong province, china.
Source: http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-…
Average iq is in between 79 and 89 for china. Guizhou province, china.
Source: http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-…
Average IQ for china is 76 and 81. Jinan, China.
Source: http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-…
Average IQ for china is 76 and 84. Guyang county, inner Mongolia.
Source: http://www.fluoridealert.org/wp-…fluoridealert.org
Average IQ for china is 76 and 81. Hunan province, china.
Based on 7 studies, average IQ was found to be 82 in China even in optimum living conditions. And 75 IQ in fluoride regions.
http://000do4q.myregisteredwp.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/1836/2016/05/china-iodine-study.pdf
Figure 1, 2 and 3.
Average IQ in China:-
Iodine sufficient (optimum conditions):-
84.7, 86.9, 87.2, 75.1, 75.1, 88.34, 85.15, 86.9, 88.65, 90.89, 87.56, 87.31, 97.8, 81.44
These are 20 research articles on China covering low IQ <90.
In total, there are upto 36 research articles on China's population showing average IQ below 85.
Does the Western world care about low IQ datasets on China. Or are they going to bend down backwards because of 10 high IQ studies ?
W1 Wang D, Qi SP, Chen ZP. [A report of China Binet Scale
applied in clinic trial]. Xin Li Tong Xun (Chinese,
ISSN1000-6648) 1986; 41 (3): 39-43.
W2 Wang D, Chen ZP, Wang H, Fu HY, Wang HX, Liu DF.
[Intelligence problems of "normal" children in iodine
deficiency areas]. Zhong Guo Di Fang Bing Xue Za Zhi
(Chinese, ISSN1000-4955) 1987; 6 (3): 137-140.
W3 Ma XY, Yiu ZS, Chen ZH, Zheng JY, Huang CY, Huang
FM, et al. [Study of endemic sub-clinical cretinism in
Fujian province]. Zhong Guo Di Fang Bing Xue Za Zhi
(Chinese, ISSN1000-4955) 1988;5(7):266-269.
W4 Wang YH, Sun HG, Tang MZ, Liu YX, Zhang HY, Xiao
KH, et al. [Survey of Intelligence and Physical
Development of Children aged 7-14 at Huangshan of
Chaohu, Anhui Province]. An Hui Yi Xue (Chinese)
1990;11(3):6-10.
W5 Wang FB, Cao ZM, Yao CX, Ha HX, Ma CY, Mao CT, et
al. [Survey of Children's Intelligence Improved in IDD
Area after Intervention of Salt Iodization]. Nin Xia Yi Xue
Za Zhi (Chinese) 1992;14(3):168-170.
W6 Wang D, Chen ZP, Dong L. Influence of Iodine Deficiency
on Children's Development of Intelligence And Physique –
A Survey Report of Children at Lamasi of Chengde.
Tianjin Yi Ke Da Xue Xue Bao (Chinese) 1984;8(3):4-7.
W7 Wang D, Chen ZP, Wang H, Fu HY, Wang HX, Liu DF.
[Intelligence problems of "normal" children in iodine
deficiency areas]. Zhong Guo Di Fang Bing Xue Za Zhi
(Chinese, ISSN1000-4955) 1987;6(3):137-140.
W8 Xie ZH, Yuan JB, Ye SB, Wen GX, Aierkeng, Liang SC,
Wen GX, et al. Effect of iodine deficiency on individual's
intelligence. Di Fang Bing Tong Xun (Chinese, ISSN1000-
3711) 1991;6(1):76-78.
W9 Geng PB, Zhu JX, Xu LZ, Hu CK, et al. [Survey of
intelligence development among children aged 7-14 in IDD
areas]. Symposium of the Third Chinese Endemic Goiter
and Cretinism (Chinese) 1987.11;66-68.
W10 Hunan study group of subcretinism. [Study of Endemic
Sub-clinical of Children Aged 7-10 in IDD Area of
Xiangxibei]. Zhong Guo Di Fang Bing Fang Zhi Za Zi
(Chinese, ISSN1001-1889) 1987;3(6);170-172.
W11 Dong HT, Dang FZ, Tan ZJ, Jia GQ, Xu HF, Liu RH, et al.
[Iodine deficiency influence on children mental
development in IDD areas]. Zhong Guo Di Fang Bing Xue
Za Zhi (Chinese, ISSN1000-4955) 1991;10(1):51-53.
W12 Dai HX, Dai JL, Huang ZX, Wang QL, Ma GS, Wu Y.
[Sampling survey about 7-14 years old in IDD areas after
implementing salt iodization]. Zhong Guo Di Fang Bing
Fang Zhi Za Zhi (Chinese, ISSN1001-1889)
1991;6(Suppl):66-67.
W13 Wang Y, Liu ZT, Yu HY, Wang YC, Zheng HM, Zheng S,
et al. [A survey of endemic sub-clinical cretinism in
Lushan county of Henan Province]. Zhong Guo Di Fang
Bing Fang Zhi Za Zhi (Chinese, ISSN1001-1889)
1991;6(Suppl):11-13.
W14 Shu YQ. [Analysis of children intelligence in IDD areas
after correction of iodine deficiency]. Symposium of the
Third Chinese Endemic Goiter and Cretinism (Chinese)
1987:197-198.
W15 Zeng GH. [Prevention effect of salt iodization on mild
damage of neural system among children in IDD areas].
Zhong Guo Di Fang Bing Xue Za Zhi (Chinese, ISSN1000-
4955) 1991;10(Suppl: Symposium of the Forth Chinese
IDD):129-132.
W16 Zuo SM, Zhu CK, Ke JJ, Zhou YF, Sun HQ. [Survey and
analysis of intelligence development and bone age among
children after iodine implementation 13 years later in IDD
areas]. Zhong Guo Di Fang Bing Xue Za Zhi (Chinese,
ISSN1000-4955) 1996;15(4):231-233.
W17 Zhu CK, Zhang TW, Ke JJ, Ma QL, Zuo SM, Shi ZF.
[Edible salt iodization effect on mental development among
children in IDD areas]. Di Fang Bing Tong Xun (Chinese,
ISSN1000-3711) 1993;8(3):35-38.
W18 Shen JZ. [Effect of iodine intervention on intelligence of
rural children in iodine deficiency areas]. Zhong Guo Di
Fang Bing Fang Zhi Za Zhi (Chinese, ISSN1001-1889)
1991;6(Suppl):19-21.
W19 Li JQ, Yan YQ, Zhang ZJ. [Iodine Deficiency Influence on
Physical And Psychological Development]. Zhong Guo Di
Fang Bing Fang Zhi Za Zhi (Chinese, ISSN1001-1889)
1991;6(Suppl):1-3.
W20 Wang H, Shi FK, Li KD, Wang D. [A survey report of
intelligence of children born after and before salt iodization
IDD areas]. Zhong Guo Di Fang Bing Xue Za Zhi (Chinese,
ISSN1000-4955) 1987;6(3);144-146.
W21 Fu LX, Zeng QZ, Deng LQ, Chen QF. The effect of
prevention of iodised salt on intelligency and physical
development in endimic critinism of Changping of
Guangdong. Symposium of the Third Chinese Endemic
Goiter and Cretinism (Chinese) 1987;153-155.
W22 Chen ZP, Liu XL, Lin XY, Wang D, Pei KF, Zou LY, et al.
[Evaluation of intelligence of children born after salt
iodization intervention in IDD areas]. Zhong Guo Di Fang
Bing Xue Za Zhi (Chinese, ISSN1000-4955)
1991;10(Suppl):13-16.
W23 He SJ, Yang ZG, Zhang BC, Long SF, Zhou WX.
[Comparison analysis of children intelligence among
minority of Miao, Dong, Han in Qiandongnan state]. Zhong
Guo Di Fang Bing Xue Za Zhi (Chinese, ISSN1000-4955)
1993;12(1):38-40.
W24 O'Donnell, K.J., Rakeman, M.A., Dou, Z.H., Cao, X.Y.,
Zeng, Y.M., DeLong, N., Brenner, G., Ma, T., Wang, Dong.,
DeLong, G.R.. Effects of Iodine Supplementation druing
Pregnancy on Child Growth and Development at School
Age. Developmental Medicine Child Neurology 2000;
44:76-81.
Has it occurred to you that conversion to Islam does not take place at random?
well , with average IQ of 82 , I can know why India is still stuck in a socialist hellpot
“The only thing I find strange about rec1man’s numbers is the assertion that Indian Muslims are 8 points lower than the average Indian intelligence. I don’t buy the Islamophobic crap about Islam making people stupid or violent. Not because I’m some liberal, but rather because I believe real intelligence is a biological variable that is virtually insensitive to cultural influences. I could be completely wrong about that, but my belief is based upon research.”
Stupid and violent people are attracted to Islam, mostly due to how inbred Arabs are. This is kinda like the obesity conundrum. Becoming fat doesn’t make you stupid (though dietary choices can lower IQ), stupid people are more likely to become fat. On the flip, converting to Islam doesn’t depress IQ, the low IQ people are attracted to it. I give good examples in my articles on the matter.
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/03/27/evolutionary-reasons-for-suicide-bombings/
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2016/05/30/islam-suicide-bombings-iq-and-consanguinity/
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2015/12/14/iq-inbreeding-and-clannishness/
What are your thoughts on suicide bombing increasing inclusive fitness for Arabs?
RR, do you have any ideas what Indian IQ would look like when nutrition is optimal and inbreeding absent? It seems no one really has an answer.
It depends what nutrients they’re deficient in. Vit C has been seen to boost IQ by 11 points when one is deficient. I know of a few more vits that boost IQ when one is deficient in some vits.
Razib says inbreeding can depress IQ 2.5 to 10 points.
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2012/07/cousin-marriage-can-reduce-i-q-a-lot/
So—and I’m estimating here—I’d say mid 90s.