The modern IQ debate was launched by an essay scholar Arthur Jensen wrote in 1969 called ” How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic Achievement?” where Jensen argued that IQ is mostly determined by genes & that cultural & environmental improvement will do little to improve the test scores of low IQ kids
It was the liberal 1960s & Jensen’s pessimistic views were the last thing America wanted to hear. Despite being a pro-civil rights liberal, a Gandhi fanatic, and a talented musician, Jensen was labeled a racist & became the boogeyman of academia. Protesters attacked his classes so aggressively that he was offered campus bodyguards. Entire generations of academics built careers opposing Jensenism; arguing that there is no such thing as g (general intelligence), that all races are equally smart & that intelligence is not genetic
Throughout decades of persecution, Jensen kept his cool & would calmly and cogently rip his critics to shreds in hundreds of scholarly papers. The man who launched the IQ debate would dominate it until the day he died, leaving the field still scrambling to find a worthy successor.
How could one man have such a huge intellectual impact on American society, launching a debate that would rage for nearly half a century? What would be the IQ of such a significant groundbreaking scholar?
Reporter Dan Seligman asked Jensen that very question. It turned out the best approximation of Jensen’s IQ came from the Terman Concept Mastery test where Jensen scored around the level of the most highly educated gifted people in scholar Lewis Terman’s famous study of the gifted. When reporter Seligman searched through Terman’s data to find out how smart Terman’s most educated gifted subjects were, he discovered a truly astonishing figure: 156; which would make Jensen almost certainly smarter than anyone who has ever posted on this blog, or any other blog you’re likely to read soon.
To understand just how astonishing an IQ of 156 is consider the average American has an IQ of 100, the average college grad has an IQ of 113, and students at the world’s best university (Harvard) average IQ 130. Further, an IQ of 156 would likely make Jensen smarter than any president in American history.
This “possibly helps to explain why Jensen has been such a dominant figure in the IQ debate,” Seligman wrote.
It takes a rare kind of courage to stand firm in the face of ridicule, accusations, danger of career ruin. It’s NOT hard if you are mad, like a marxist in america during the 60:s would also face those those things, but marxism is a religion. It is also NOT hard if you deal with natural science in opposition to maybe quantum mechanics. It IS hard in the intersection of science and society, where have to keep a sharp intellect and at the same time argue on emotional matters.
If you study IQ, you become very familiar with IQ test questions, so if Jensen’s IQ test score came after he became an IQ scholar it becomes a highly bias estimator.
That’s true. Jensen stated that he couldn’t take the WAIS because he was too familiar with it, having given it to others 100 times
But Jensen felt the Terman Concept Mastery test was a valid measure of his IQ, probably because he took it at 43, before he became a major IQ expert & probably because its mostly a vocabulary test so Jensen’s knowledge of IQ tests (assuming he had much at 43) gave him less of a special advantage
jensen had a small iq and a small penis.
IQ = 85
penis size = 4″x1/2″
Your sense of humour indicates very low IQ
And you’re not worthy of shining Jensen’s shoes. He was a hundred times the scholar you are, or could ever be.
or very high.
pepe has so little class she thinks “scholar” a compliment.
it’s an insult pepe. whoever would be a scholar, whoever would claim to be a scholar, whoever would be claimed to be a scholar, is a moron and a joke.
jensen was so dumb he doesn’t even deserve to have his penis esteemed.
that’s right,
jensen was a needle penis.
isn’t it obvious?
just as obvious as…
Jensen’s knowledge of IQ tests (assuming he had much at 43) gave him less (?) of a special advantage…
vocab is the MOST g-loaded.
the MOST heritable.
the MOST reliable.
pp = FUCKTARD.
Jensen who made his life about studying IQ and took the IQ test later in life, did well on the tests. Weak evidence.
Main accomplishment: confirming stereotypes. Weak evidence.
Btw pumpkin, feel free to substantiate your claims about relevance and truth at any time.
You’re the one who made assertions you claimed were true & relevant. The burden is on you to prove they’re both.
“pumpkin”? you mean bumpkin surely.
the NYTs’s piece on social mobility in the US showed the redneck South as least mobile for blacks AND whites. big surpirse.
some other regions showed that 10% of those raised in the bottom 20% will be in the top 20% as adults. doesn’t sound so bad?
actually thise corresponds to an intergenerational income elasticity > .4, still among the highest in the developed world. but that’s just for the bottom 20% of course and the bivariate normal distribution may not apply as well.
the eqn is:
PHI^-1(percentile raised in) x rho + PHI^-1(% of this percentile who make it to whatever percentile as adults) x sqrt(1-rho^2) = PHI^-1(percentile raised in)
where rho = intergenerational income elasticity
Black Brits = 95. Mixed Brits = 99.
True and relevant.
and Canuckistan has a rho of < .2.
good on Canada for that, though it's not all good. there are morons like pp who make it through, or think they have.
That’s interesting that the black-white IQ gap is only 6 points as opposed to 15 points in the U.S…don’t know enough about the test & the sample to draw conclusions.
But it’s only one study. Richard Lynn takes the median of 22 studies & concludes British blacks average IQ 86 (on a scale where the white mean is set at 100)
See page 50 of his book “Race Differences in Intelligence”
Lynn is — as usual — wrong. That is pretty current data. The sample size is huge. It shows a) a gap that has narrowed and b) a gap at plain odds with any strong genetic hypothesis.
True and relevant.
“But it’s only one study. Richard Lynn…”
at that point (CORRECTLY) one stops reading and concludes (CORRECTLY) that the writer is a moron.
i floccinaucinihilipilificate PM and pp!
so there my antidisestablishmentarian fellow commenters!
few syllables yes. but one be a sesquipedalianist and a minimalist simultaneously. no?
no indeed!
grammatical complexity and vocabulary are a sine qua non of minimalist expression.
clarity? ha!
for whom?
that’s the question!
’tis better to be obscure to the obscure and clear to the clear than clear to all or talk jive.
‘“But it’s only one study. Richard Lynn…”’
# of counter-examples needed to disprove a theory: 1.
Let’s listen to what Lynn says about this:
” If a multiracial society is found where these race differences in intelligence are absent, the evolutionary and genetic theory of these differences would be falsified. Those who maintain that there are no genetic differences in intelligence between the races are urged to attempt this task.”
Okay Lynn!
Lynn cited 22 studies. You cited one of unknown representativeness.
Blacks in Britain might be largely descended from highly selected voluntary immigrants
Blacks in America are mostly descended from slaves
and slaves were representative?
that dunk vid is so racially insensitive. 😉 i’m 6’1″ and i’ve never been able to dunk. or…
Swanky considers the debate over when he finds an anomaly.
Lynn is an orange buttfuck.
he claimed the Irish were a “low IQ population”.
so…let’s look at a picture…
it IS over fucktard. just one disconfirmation is enough.
theory #1 is disconfirmed.
theory #2?
And it’s not even an anomaly. Just a smaller black-white gap than found in most countries
But one again confirms orientals > whites > blacks
this fucktarded fucktardedness has gone on long enough.
READ THIS!
AND THE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD STFU!
‘Lynn cited 22 studies. You cited one of unknown representativeness.’
Nice try. This data set is far better than ANYTHING Lynn ever cited. In Lynn’s book (page 34 btw), you can actually see an upward trend in the scores based on cohort.
‘Blacks in Britain might be largely descended from highly selected voluntary immigrants’
Selection has LESSENED over time. Groups such as Somalis who were no doubt NOT highly selected still perform at around only .5 SD difference.
‘Blacks in America are mostly descended from slaves’
Who weren’t highly selected? Or were they just selected for health? But isn’t IQ supposedly correl with health? lol.
‘
‘And it’s not even an anomaly. Just a smaller black-white gap than found in most countries’
If it was a genetic gap, the mixed score wouldn’t be statistically insignificant. So yes, it IS an anomaly. And, according to Lynn, it is an anomaly that destroys the theory.
pumpkin of course knows this is both relevant AND true.
there is a similar question of selection in West African sprinting ability.
is it the descendants of slaves or is it West Africans in general?
iirc Frankie Fredericks and Obikwelu are faster than any white man has ever been. so that theory is crap. but then why are Jamaicans so much faster than others of West African descent? like a lot of things…THEY DIDN’T USED TO BE…SPRINTING IS THE SPORT IN JAMAICA.
so it’s like asking why Russia has had so many great chess players. it’s a stupid question.
No it’s not far better than anything Lynn cited but it might be more recent. What’s the source?
And immigrants are clearly not representative. Indians in India average IQ 81, Indians in America average IQ 112 (though part of that is nutrition )
If selection for black immigrants is anywhere near as extreme in Britain then the numbers make perfect sense
And yes, slaves are probably not 100% representative either
Swank, the mixed score in between blacks & whites just as HBD predicts
‘No it’s not far better than anything Lynn cited but it might be more recent. What’s the source?’
Lynn’s data: roundly criticized, and in his own book he doesn’t make an effort to address the different ages of his British test subjects. So yes, better.
‘And immigrants are clearly not representative. Indians in India average IQ 81, Indians in America average IQ 112 (though part of that is nutrition )’
Blah blah blah. Africa immigrants to the UK are not that highly selected. Look at the mixed race data. However ‘selected’ these immigrants are….the mixed race data is simply INCONSISTENT with any kind of strong genetic hypothesis. It is instead, consistent with what me, jorge, and really, the rest of mainstream science have said: the genetic component exists but it is modest.
‘If selection for black immigrants is anywhere near as extreme in Britain then the numbers make perfect sense’
No they don’t.
‘And yes, slaves are probably not 100% representative either’
They aren’t, but under this ‘selection’ theory, slaves were selected based on features that have strong positive correls with IQ — according to HBDers.
‘
HBD predicts the score to be in between black and white, not somewhere between black and white or insignificant between black and white.
the truth of HBD, so far as there is any, is seen at the extremes.
since 1984 every single one of the finalists in the Olympic 100m has been of bantu descent. Fredericks was Namibian. the rest were mostly West African. it could be this is just various social forces conspiring…it could be smoking doesn’t cause lung cancer…but then again the final of the 1960 100 m had three whites and three blacks, only six for some reason. gold, silver, and bronze went to the whites. so who knows really. many West African sprinters beat their heads against Mennea’s 19.72. only in 1996, 17 years later, did Michael Johnson run 19.66 in the Olympic trials. and Mennea was a total wimp. whatever he was on, if he was on anything, it wasn’t steroids. the same goes for the current “great white hope” Lemaitre. 6’3″ 163 lbs??? seriously. the guy has the BMI of a high jumper not a sprinter. at least that’s what his wiki says. he could gain 40 lbs of muscle and still be within normal range for a sprinter.
HBD predicts the score to be in between black and white, not somewhere between black and white or insignificant between black and white.
You’re dancing on the split of a hair. Blacks scored 95ish & whites scored 101ish. As long as the mixed score somewhere in the 96-100 range it’s close enough given sampling error etc
so the athletic ability and penis size thing is all very much related to this. one may not prescind from it, so to speak. if blacks really are superior athletes and really do have bigger shlongs and really are just as smart…ooops…we don’t want that.
the one white guy in the race won gold…turns out he was ‘roiding…but aren’t we all? wink, wink. nudge. nudge.
‘You’re dancing on the split of a hair. Blacks scored 95ish & whites scored 101ish. As long as the mixed score somewhere in the 96-100 range it’s close enough given sampling error etc’
BUZZ!
Quant: Black African 94.1. White-African 99.7. British/Irish avg: 100.1
Verb: Black African 92. White-African 100.8. British/Irish avg 101.2.
INCONSISTENT.
That’s even assuming your little ‘African immigrants are heavily selected’ argument, which makes no sense. African immigration has become less selective over time. This gap narrowing takes place roughly with the 2000 cohort.
What gap that does exist is likely environmental.
Relevant and true. Not that you or any HBDer will admit it.
Don’t worry I will just add this to the “anomaly” pile.
Swank,
That is interesting that the mixed race people score a bit closer to whites than blacks. There are several explanations:
1) heterosis; outbreeding causes a genetic boost, the opposite of inbreeding depression
2) nutrition; the mixed race kid grows up with the benefit of first world nutrition causing his IQ to be more similar to his first world parent than to the parent reared in Africa
3) People who marry outside their race tend to be more open minded & thus have higher IQ genes to pass to mixed race kids
And of course african immigrants are extremely selected, even if they’re less selected than they once were
There are several possible explanations but Occam is not with you and yours.
True and relevant.
The heterosis explanation is arguabley consistent with Occam’s razor…Occam’s razor does not support an environmental explanation unless you believe hybridized blacks have a mostly white experience
1) must posit a phenom with different effects in different nations. So the arg for Occam is weak.
A mostly or substantially environmental explanation is consistent re: any global “race” gaps. Most IQ gaps are environmental anyway, such as Irish IQ such as N/S Korean IQ, N black S white IQ.
3) is unlikely because white women who choose blacks as mates tend to be “lower IQ” in the US so 3) has the same problem as 1).
True and relevant.
And this is just one true/relevant piece of evidence I offered.
HBD does not fit the data.
Swank, interesting chart, showing basically that blacks in britain are above the black american level, especially mixed black.
Britain is where all the doctors of Africa go when they tire of helping their own continent, or ehm.. to study. I can imagine that these doctors often spawn kids with educated european women. Sure, they are not all doctors, if they were the score would be even higher, maybe above the white brit score.
I don’t find it strange or very remarkable.
1) must posit a phenom with different effects in different nations. So the arg for Occam is weak.
Huh?
I think its some combination of heterosis, the fact that the highest IQ Africans are able to mate with whites & the mixed race kids enjoy first world nutrition boosting them above their african parent’s IQ
I also think a lot of mixed race blacks self identify as black when they are 50% white so the ones who identify as mixed are probably 75% white further explaining why they score closer to the white parent
You have provided no environmental explanation for why mixed race would score closer to whites
Hugh, the gap has narrowed too much too recently for your explanation to account for the data.
First of all I don’t have to. Either YOUR explanation is right or it is wrong. It is likely wrong globally.
And what do you mean huh?
Outbreeding hasn’t had the same outsized effects in the US. Whites that mate with blacks in the US don’t have these higher IQ characteristics. And if African immigrants were super selected it’s unlikely that they were that depressed in nutrition.
Occam is not with you here.
The self report dodge is also bunk because afaik the ancestry here is correct: black = 2 black parents, mixed = 1 w and 1 bl parent.
Not only that but these are Africans so they have LESS white admixture than US blacks and biracial a regardless.
True and relevant.
Swank, sample size white brits 145k out of total 175k, black african 2k. Only 30k non-white brits? Am I reading this correctly? Must be a quite old study if it is at all representative. And we are talking “pupils”, how old, sorry I don’t know what CAT is.
It’s not old. It’s from 2009-10. Unsure why it’s unrepresentative according to you.
Oh, as for a contributing explanation….
“Key reasons for the improvement include the introduction of the English Baccalaureate – which has persuaded schools to enter thousands more pupils for core academic subjects since its introduction in 2011. Under it, schools are ranked in league tables on the percentage of pupils getting top grade passes in maths, English, a language, a humanities subject and the sciences.
In addition, schools have been able to earmark “pupil premium” funding, given to them for every disadvantaged pupil they take, to ensure poorer pupils catch up – and are then able to access the more academic subjects.
The success story also holds for the results of national curriculum tests for 11-year-olds in maths, reading and writing – where 73 per cent of black pupils reached the expected benchmark last year – only two percentage points behind the national average compared with a five percentage point difference in 2010.
Schools minister Lord Nash said: “For years black pupils’ results have lagged behind their peers but that gap is being eroded at all levels – The Government’s school reforms are helping thousands more black pupils, including the poorest, to do well at primary school, thrive in their GCSEs and succeed in life.””
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/exclusive-must-do-better-black-pupils-did-with-best-improvement-in-exams-9563395.html
What if….the exact reforms that HBDers have said DON’T WORK….have actually….WORKED?
https://mtc.cdn.vine.co/r/videos/554F4567B9991233541188853760_137930268594749edbf53ec.mp4_KRNtMDK7Ca.D.IpPiQ92OM8A5uKvILHs5FRofkR44oh8ja8F3hsxKzStN47yUoKB.mp4?versionId=mfpaAEnotgs8btY_Cth3jIHcqImDeCtj
Good vid and spot-on.
First of all I don’t have to. Either YOUR explanation is right or it is wrong.
Whether my explanation is right depends on whether there’s a better alternative one, so to claim I’m violating Occam’s razor requires a more parsimonious explanation from you because Occam’s razor is relative .
And what do you mean huh?
Outbreeding hasn’t had the same outsized effects in the US. Whites that mate with blacks in the US don’t have these higher IQ characteristics.
Any benefits of outbreeding likely showed up when white genes first entered the African American population in large numbers. By this point there are likely diminishing returns.
By contrast mixing whites with British Africans who are still virtually pure provides more bang for your buck.
And if African immigrants were super selected it’s unlikely that they were that depressed in nutrition.
That’s not true at all. Suboptimal nutrition tends to affect the entire distribution not just those on the left half of the bell curve. We even see that in Western countries, when nutrition improved over the 20th century, virtually the entire distribution got taller & smarter, not just the short dumb people.
Similarly, even the brightest elite Africans are cognitively stunted. Thus when their genes are planted in Britain, the children have higher IQs than predicted from the African parent’s IQ which was depressed by third world nutrition (not to mention language barriers!)
It all makes perfect sense
We’ve seen a similar story with the high IQ of Indian immigrant kids who score 30 points higher than kids in India because of the potent combination of hyper selected parents & first world nutrition
https://pumpkinperson.com/2014/09/29/the-incredible-intelligence-of-indian-americans/
Swank, I thought it was old since there is over 80% white british. And just over 1% black african. Maybe those are the numbers. England has over half a million kids per year-group. Where do these 175k come from?
‘Whether my explanation is right depends on whether there’s a better alternative one’
Incorrect. Whether the strong genetic position is right depends on whether it agrees with the data. It does not. It is likely wrong globally.
‘Any benefits of outbreeding likely showed up when white genes first entered the African American population in large numbers. By this point there are likely diminishing returns.’
Either IQ increases as a function of admixture or it doesn’t, make up your mind. Further, I don’t know why we should believe outbreeding depression wouldn’t occur instead. Once again, whites who choose blacks as mates tend to be less smart, etc. on average in the U.S.
‘Suboptimal nutrition tends to affect the entire distribution not just those on the left half of the bell curve.’
You’re confusing gains from relieving malnutrition with the FE-type gains that have (allegedly) come from “improved normal” nutrition (of course, those gains are probably less than half of the FE gains anyway). The African immigrants weren’t likely malnourished, so nutrition gains of this magnitude do not show up this fast.
‘We’ve seen a similar story with the high IQ of Indian immigrant kids who score 30 points higher than kids in India because of the potent combination of hyper selected parents & first world nutrition’
African immigrants are NOT that highly selected. The cohort from ~1930’s only had 1.7 more years of schooling, on average, than white natives. IQ correlates .5 with education. Afaik, twice as many African immigrants have college degrees than native Brits, and half as many failed to complete HS. So, to get 1 SD of g — which is pretty much what you need here — you’d need the Africans to have 2 SD more schooling, on average. They don’t.
According to your favorites Lynn and Rushton, college-educated blacks have IQs of ~ 100 (remember the gap is allegedly present at all SES levels). According to Lynn and Rushton, average African IQ is ~ 70. Let’s assume a HS equivalent African = IQ 80. That would give us a mean of .4*100+ .44*80 + .16*70 = 86.2. NOW…if all of the African immigrants were so selected and had high IQs, then they would regress to their population means in the next generation, wouldn’t they? Their kids should have an IQ of ~ 79 with .6 regression.
Even adding 13 points only matches up with ONE data point. The rest exceed your predicted “nutrition” gain and assuming that African college education is higher quality/attracts higher IQs than American education.
Next, look at the IQs above. If what you’re saying is true and all immigrants are super selected, then the other immigrants should have these high IQs relative to their populations — they don’t. They’re mostly in line with what we’d expect.
Last, this chart table A2-2 actually shows that whatever “educational selection” there is from Africa proper to the EU15 is weak, or even slightly negative. The IQ trend should be DOWNWARD, not UPWARD.
notice how the pakis scored.
nisbett deriding lynn-tard:
The instrument Lynn used to apprehend these depressed IQ scores is a supposedly culturally unbiased exam called Raven’s Progressive Matrices. “To use an instrument developed in the West on semi and possibly illiterate people is a fool’s errand,” says Nisbett, a Distinguished University Professor at the University of Michigan who studies cognition and social psychology. “Then they use the results to say that half the people in Africa are mentally retarded. It’s laughable.”
Any corroboration of what Mugabe and Swank say has to start somewhere, and that chart is a start admittedly. I would say the main weakness is it was done on kids. Also, as I understand it, it was done after special measures to boost disadvantaged children. With kids special efforts can pay off, a ten year old can be lifted to twelwe year old level quite easily. Thirdly, the demographic distribution does not seem to reflect young britain. It is as if half the etnic population was excluded. But, taking all that into account it still challenges some earlier theories.
Regarding regression to the mean, it never works quite like the mathematical theory. It is stickier, because it is not the case that a population, like nigerians for instance, carry around the exact same genepool. There is stratification going back many generations, so the regression is not to one single mean but to different means.
GCSE performance highly correl with “g.”
Proportion of black africans and mixed children achieving high GCSE has increased:
‘I would say the main weakness is it was done on kids.’
But the gap has been narrowing as this cohort gets older, which is completely inconsistent with the genetic hypothesis.
‘But, taking all that into account it still challenges some earlier theories.’
I don’t see any reason why this is an “unrepresentative” sample. It is corroborated by a lot of other data, such as the GCSE scores.
‘Regarding regression to the mean, it never works quite like the mathematical theory’
Regardless of how it works in practice, the data simply do not fit any reasonable strong genetic hypothesis. Pumpkin wants to add 13 insta points to IQ based on “nutrition.” Those IQ points only recently showed up, despite the fact that not all of these children are the second generation children of immigrants, despite the fact that “first-world” nutrition has smaller effects in line with FE gains.
Swank, the numbers add up beautifully.
According to Rushton, African university students had IQs of 84 (psych majors) to 103 (engineering majors). So about 95 on average, just like African British who are selected from Africa’s university population
Now an IQ 95 African has a genetic IQ of 108 because African IQs are stunted 13 points by bad environment according to Steve Sailer & Richard Lynn (they’re also 1 SD shorter than blacks reared in the developed world). When an African genetic IQ of 108 mates with a white IQ of 101 they have an average genetic IQ of 105 & their babies will be 60% as far above their respective racial averages as their parents are (since mid parent IQ correlates 0.6 with offspring IQ per steve hsu)
Since British whites have an IQ of 101 & Lynn estimates africans have a genetic IQ of 80, the genetic average for precise mulattoes is about 91. A midparent IQ of 105 will thus have mulatto kids who are 0.6(105-90)+91= 99
Fits the data you cite beautifully & explains why mulatto Brits score almost identical to whites per your source
‘Swank, the numbers add up beautifully.’
Lie.
‘Now an IQ 95 African has a genetic IQ of 108 because African IQs’
Wrong. You have no evidence that they are malnourished to that extent.
‘When an African genetic IQ of 108 mates with a white IQ of 101 they have an average genetic IQ of 105’
Wrong. You have no evidence that the trend in the US for white-black mating doesn’t hold in the UK.
‘Fits the data you cite beautifully & explains why mulatto Brits score almost identical to whites per your source’
Yes, when you make things up with an ad hoc ‘just-so,’ I guess it would ‘fit the data’ beautifully. The 13 point first generation nutrition add is bogus.
I notice that even your ‘just so’ story failed to account for the NARROWING gap among PURE Africans.
‘Since British whites have an IQ of 101 & Lynn estimates africans have a genetic IQ of 80,’
‘Now an IQ 95 African has a genetic IQ of 108 because African IQs are stunted 13 ‘
If the genotypic IQ is 80, then it makes no sense for a college graduate’s genotypic IQ to be 108. Sorry Charlie. 95 is probably “correct,” because it is 1SD above the (alleged) genotypic IQ, which fits the pattern elsewhere. Remember, the gap is supposed to hold for ALL levels of SES. So an AA college grad would have an IQ of 100, and because of white admixture, the AA geno-IQ is about 5 points higher than African genotypic IQ, which leaves African college grad genotypic IQ at 95. Hoisted by HBD’s petard.
.4*95 + .44*85 (African HS — 5 points above norm like in America) + .16*80 = 88.2. Regression = 85 genotypic IQ != data.
I almost forgot…
http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/article/media_slots/photos/000/923/959/KawhiDUnk2_original.gif?1371605259
True and relevant.
‘A midparent IQ of 105’
Oh yeah, this is ALSO wrong. Are ONLY the high educated Africans mating with whites? They all are.
Let us break it down and just assume NO assortative mating and that all black african populations are getting with 101 white IQs:
Assuming 80 African non-HS, 90 HS African, 108 College African. Lazy used avg 100 IQ for white save for the first data point (105).
.44*105 + .4*95 + .16 * 90 = 98.6 ~ mean B/W parent IQ.
Regress to your stated mean of 91 (likely wrong) ~ 95.
INCONSISTENT even WITH your assumptions.
Yes, when you make things up with an ad hoc ‘just-so,’ I guess it would ‘fit the data’ beautifully. The 13 point first generation nutrition add is bogus.
Nothing ad hoc about it. On the contrary I’ve cited it before (in the context of Indian IQ) and it is explained in Richard Lynn’s 2006 book. Lynn argued that the African American IQ of 85 is 100% genetic, and claimed that African Americans are 25% white (probably an overestimate) and that whites have an IQ 100.
Simply algebra would suggest that without that 25% white IQ 100 admixture, the African American IQ falls to 80, and indeed Lynn found that the most dark skinned American blacks averaged 80 instead of the usual 85. He thus took 80 to be the genetic IQ of “pure negroids”. SInce Lynn found the average IQ in sub-Saharan Africa to be 67, he concluded that their IQs were depressed by 13 points. Thus, you add 13 points to the IQs of blacks reared in Africa to get their genetic IQ (i.e. the IQ they would have had if born in the developed world)
The reason African university students, particular those who study STEM have IQs so much higher than the African average is that they are a super elite. STEM university is to sub-Saharan Africa as Ivy League university is to America
Oh yeah, this is ALSO wrong. Are ONLY the high educated Africans mating with whites? They all are.
I’m going by the average. The average British African is highly educated.
‘The reason African university students, particular those who study STEM have IQs so much higher than the African average is that they are a super elite.’
Once again, malnourishment in Africa only affects 33% of the populous. Higher SES individuals are not malnourished. So, any “first world” nutrition gains will mirror FE gains, in the context of ‘super selected’ immigrants.
They don’t have genotypic IQs of 108 versus 80 genotypic IQs. You have nothing demonstrating that they do, and nowhere else in the world do we see that kind of gap. They are already “super elite” at 95 versus the phenotypic 70.
In fact, some studies have found African university students having an average IQ of as low as 84.
It’s worth noting that West Africans are several inches shorter than African Americans. If malnutrition had the same effect on their IQs as it has on their heights, we would indeed expect their IQs to be depressed by 13 points or more.
‘I’m going by the average. The average British African is highly educated.’
60% are HS graduates or less. It’s 40% college, 44% HS-eq, 16% less-than HS.
‘If malnutrition had the same effect on their IQs as it has on their heights, we would indeed expect their IQs to be depressed by 13 points or more.’
We would not “indeed” expect their IQs to be that depressed if they came from the TOP END of the SES distribution.
The huge “malnourishment” gains you are talking about probably do NOT exist here. Instead, we can expect some FE “nutrition” gains, which occur gradually. If it’s 3 points ever 10 years and half or less goes to nutrition, then we’d expect 1.5 points more or less.
Swank I already provided evidence that sub-optimal nutrition affects the whole bell curve uniformly, not just the left half of the curve and you violate Occam’s razor by suggesting two different effects are operating in the same population. Indeed in the West, height gains over the 20th century have been just as large among the tall as the short, and the Flynn effect has been mostly uniform on the Raven as Flynn himself will tell you. Further, if only the left half of the curve was affected, the distribution would be incredibly skewed and the variance would be huge. Neither seems true.
‘Swank I already provided evidence that sub-optimal nutrition affects the whole bell curve uniformly’
Your evidence came from FE-associated nutrition gains, not raw malnutrition. And those do affect the entire bell curve, but the gains are smaller. Like I have said the entire time: you are trying to conflate two separate phenomenons.
And even with the ‘nutrition’ boost, to suppose that African college IQ is “really” 108 is also ridiculous. If genotypic IQ is 80, then 95 college grad IQ sounds about right. 95 genotypic IQ follows from the ‘gap’ and the AA admixture advantage.
‘violate Occam’s razor by suggesting two different effects are operating in the same population.’
No I don’t. Your explanation doesn’t fit the data and observations. Mine does. Malnourishment causes a dramatic increase in IQ once corrected. FE gains from “nutrition” have been gradual and spaced out over long intervals. The left/rght bell curve effect has been observed in the latter, not the former…because the right side of the bell curve simply is NOT malnourished.
Swank, regardless of how much of the Flynn effect you think is explained by nutrition, the nutrition component likely affects virtually the entire distribution roughly equally as evidenced by the fact that nutrition affects virtually the entire height distribution equally.
Further, when I visit third world countries I find that even the elites are shorter than elites of the same race in North America. Further, not all African university students are from the elite; many were born in average families.
60% are HS graduates or less. It’s 40% college, 44% HS-eq, 16% less-than HS.
If 40% are college grads, the average British African would have some university education
And it is extremely ad hoc anyway. Afaik second generation immigrants tend to do WORSE than their immigrant parents (r to m). why do these kids get some super duper nutrition boost that seems to happen NOWHERE else?
FE gains from “nutrition” have been gradual and spaced out over long intervals.
Yes but when you jump from third world to first world, it’s equivalent to jumping from the 19th century to the 21st century, and so the nutrition difference between father an son is equivalent to the difference between a white British great great grandfather and his white British great great grandson.
‘the nutrition component likely affects virtually the entire distribution’
Never said it didn’t. However, there’s no way around the fact that your 13 point boost in one generation is ridiculous.
And -some- college is not “highly” educated. Especially when you consider the education differential between Western institutions and Global South institutions.
But even adding your nutrition boost in to give a genotypic IQ requires yet ANOTHER ridiculous assertion….that African college grads have IQs nearly 30 points above average.
And even AFTER that, we also must assume that only the most educated Africans mated with whites.
THEN we must assume that the whites they mated with were average IQ, even though mating trends in the US demonstrate otherwise.
It’s ad hoc and it’s likely false.
It’s only that dramatic of a jump at the LOW END of the distribution, pumpkin.
why do these kids get some super duper nutrition boost that seems to happen NOWHERE else?
It happens with second generation Indian Americans too. It happens to any family that jumps from the third world to the first world in one generation
Never said it didn’t. However, there’s no way around the fact that your 13 point boost in one generation is ridiculous.
It’s nutrition, not genetics. Environment can create nearly a one SD change in phenotype in one generation. For example, research has found that regardless of ethnicity, children of immigrants are 2 inches taller than their parents.
https://books.google.ca/books?id=mQovr42wLOwC&pg=PA28&lpg=PA28&dq=children+of+immigrants+inches+taller+than+their+parents&source=bl&ots=GmqRhrOJe3&sig=Bt1iYBHgZwuYaMyg-7PLBn9jP0g&hl=en&sa=X&ei=iTSiVM20B8uqyATXu4KoAw&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=children%20of%20immigrants%20inches%20taller%20than%20their%20parents&f=false
Changes would be especially acute when moving from the third world to the first world
But even adding your nutrition boost in to give a genotypic IQ requires yet ANOTHER ridiculous assertion….that African college grads have IQs nearly 30 points above average.
In America Ivy League grads are 30 points above average. Having a college degree in some sub-Saharan countries might be analogous to having an Ivy League degree in America in terms of how selective it was. This would be especially true for older Africans. For example, in 1950, only 0.5% of South African (blacks) qualified for university:
https://books.google.ca/books?id=S6UYpCoGUkgC&pg=PA12&lpg=PA12&dq=percent+South+Africans+university+desmond+tutu&source=bl&ots=YqO98XjW82&sig=mofMO4DVUtO4S5r37FQXO5S9oPo&hl=en&sa=X&ei=uS-iVJGfEYj6yASiooGgAw&ved=0CEIQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=percent%20South%20Africans%20university%20desmond%20tutu&f=false
The percent who actually graduated were even smaller still. Depending on the country and the generation and the subject majored in, university grads could easily be a super elite.
And even AFTER that, we also must assume that only the most educated Africans mated with whites.
The Africans who migrate to Britain are the most educated Africans on average, nearly half having university degrees.
THEN we must assume that the whites they mated with were average IQ, even though mating trends in the US demonstrate otherwise.
There’s a big difference between some white prole who gets knocked up by some black guy in the ghetto, and the more sophisticated white women like Obama’s mother who seek out exotic foreigners.
It’s only that dramatic of a jump at the LOW END of the distribution, pumpkin.
It’s much simpler to just assume the jump is uniformly dramatic across virtually the full distribution.
False.
High achieving immigrant parents have children who do worse than them on average in IQ/achievement terms.
Your chart does not partition out high SES immigrants — as expected.
You have no evidence regarding African Universities, and the fact that some studies have found African college IQs of 84 casts great doubt on your claim.
And yes there is a difference between “ghetto” mating and sophisticated white mating…so? In the US, whenever a white mates with a black they are LESS intelligent on average. So now we must assume this trend fails to hold based on nothing.
The 13 point add is groundless. The college difference is groundless.
And even assuming the entire black African population mated with whites who had IQ 101 still leads us to mixed results inconsistent with your theory.
You have nothing.
True and relevant.
And that assumption may be simpler but it does not account for the facts. The entire foreign population is not malnourished.
The jump you’re talking about would only make sense for the bottom distribution because more affluent individuals have captured many of the first world’s benefits.
Britain is funny in the way that the white working class does poorly, outshone by indians, chinese, and one day maybe black africans. Whether from africa, india or china the immigrants are clearly the cream of their native countries. Indians and Chinese form a sort of upper class in britain, capable of reproducing itself without crashing already the second generation. One day we may see the same for a black population, but afaik that has not materialized even in America. And in america you have millions of priviledged blacks, who were born into priviledge.
I don’t believe that the malnutrion is that bad for priviledged africans, I understand the argument about height, but notice that weight also increases, and… basically brains and height don;t really work the same way.
Swank, the share of ethnic pupils in that study seems too low, britain has more ethnic kids than that. Compare america where there is hardly any white majority among new borns. Britain may not be as blessed with diveristy yet, but the pupil body of the study neverheless looks either old or conveniently selected.
Hugh the CAT g test isn’t the only data point in play. Look at the GCSE (correl with g .92!) scores. Look at the age 16 administered K4’s that show virtually no gap.
Lynn and HBD have been refuted. The strong genetic hypothesis is wrong.
High achieving immigrant parents have children who do worse than them on average in IQ/achievement terms.
Actually you’re 100% wrong:
http://www.academia.edu/4065142/Flynn_Effect_in_North_Africans_Turks_Migrated_To_West_Europe
You have no evidence regarding African Universities, and the fact that some studies have found African college IQs of 84 casts great doubt on your claim.
Rushton found black African engineering students had an average IQ of 103 (36 points above the African mean of 67).
And these are just students, many of whom presumably did not graduate. The average IQ of black African engineering graduates would be higher still.
And yes there is a difference between “ghetto” mating and sophisticated white mating…so? In the US, whenever a white mates with a black they are LESS intelligent on average.
So you say.
Meanwhile CNN reports Hispanic or African-Americans who married whites tended to have higher educational attainment compared to marriages within their own race or ethnic group.
http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/16/us/interracial-marriage/
So even if dumber whites mate with blacks, smarter blacks mate with whites, so your argument continues to crumble.
The 13 point add is groundless. The college difference is groundless.
You’re entitled to your opinion, but all the evidence is against you. You also undermine your own HBD denial by denying that African university IQ is depressed by environment, even if you doubt the cause is malnutrition.
Further, your dismissal of heterosis was also groundless. In his book, The g Factor, Jensen reported “A heterotic effect equivalent to about +4 IQ points was reported for European-Asian interracial offspring in Hawaii.”
No you are wrong — again. The IQ of the high SES parents is no doubt higher than what the children score. That data set does not partition them out. And it’s an article by a blogger — what have I told you about treating blogposts as authority, pumpkin? Amateur hour.
And the trend is for the WHITES not the blacks, pumpkin. So their educational attainment is irrelevant. Search the https://www.nlsinfo.org/investigator/pages/login.jsp for yourself: fatter and dumber on average.
And ok? Rushton finding ONE college major had that IQ tells us nothing of overall average African college IQ. 95 is in line with the distribution we see everywhere else — yours isn’t.
And it helps rather than hurts my argument because it shows that white IQ DROPS with respect to each cohort, which would lead to mixed results even MORE inconsistent with your theory.
Moreover my HBD denial is consistent with my position and common sense: 33% of Africa is malnourished. Individuals at the top of SES are not likely malnourished.
My dismissal of outbreeding benefits is supported by black white mating trends.
It’s not an opinion at this point. You don’t have anything.
So sure if you want to call making shit up and citing blog posts “evidence” then the “evidence” is against me. Meanwhile data gathered by your own authorities and real IQ and test data overwhelmingly supports me.
True and relevant.
According to Lynn himself it’s over — and this is just ONE piece of the true and relevant evidence you tried to (and still are trying to) hand wave away.
“According to Lynn himself it’s over ”
No, it takes more than promising school results for teenagers, partly after heavy intervention in one coutry obsessed with leveling at any cost. In the other corner is a world of evidence, many countries, many systems, over generations.
” If a multiracial society is found where these race differences in intelligence are absent, the evolutionary and genetic theory of these differences would be falsified. Those who maintain that there are no genetic differences in intelligence between the races are urged to attempt this task.”
I don;t think Jensen meant just do one drive of school results boosting and the task is done.
No you are wrong — again. The IQ of the high SES parents is no doubt higher than what the children score. That data set does not partition them out.
But you used your psychic powers to partition it out? Gotcha.
And it’s an article by a blogger — what have I told you about treating blogposts as authority, pumpkin? Amateur hour.
A blogger who cited sources, something you’ve failed to do here.
And the trend is for the WHITES not the blacks, pumpkin. So their educational attainment is irrelevant
Wrong. Your point was that the IQs of mulattoes would be dragged down because dumb white women mate with black men. I countered by showing that mulatto IQ would be lifted by educated blacks mating with whites. In other words, the two effects counterbalance, so your entire argument crumbles.
And ok? Rushton finding ONE college major had that IQ tells us nothing of overall average African college IQ. 95 is in line with the distribution we see everywhere else — yours isn’t.
I agreed with 95; my point is that black African university students score 13 points below their genetic potential, just like the rest of sub-Saharan Africa
Moreover my HBD denial is consistent with my position and common sense: 33% of Africa is malnourished. Individuals at the top of SES are not likely malnourished.
Speculation based on nothing. We know from white Victorians that malnutrition transcended social class. Even elite Victorians were shorter than elites today. Further, not all high IQ Africans are high social class. Further, even if you doubt African university students are malnourished, there could be other environmental factors keeping their IQs well below their genetic potential, or do you agree that African university students have a genetic IQ of 95? Looks like you’re far more of an HBDer than I am. Do you even know what side of the debate you’re on? LOL!
My dismissal of outbreeding benefits is supported by black white mating trends.
Other research has supported it and it’s justified on theoretical grounds.
If a multiracial society is found where these race differences in intelligence are absent, the evolutionary and genetic theory of these differences would be falsified. Those who maintain that there are no genetic differences in intelligence between the races are urged to attempt this task.
Further Swank’s data did not even find the absence of racial differences. The same oriental > white > mulatto > black differences were found. Now granted they were much smaller, because the average British African is selected to be more educated than 99.5% of black Africa, and yet despite this extreme selection bias, the racial pattern still reemerged. Contrary to Swank’s spin, this is a huge victory for HBD.
Lynn said if a society is found, then the theory is falsified. The CAT, GSCE, and K4 results point in that direction.
‘Further Swank’s data did not even find the absence of racial differences’
Shh, pumpkin.
‘But you used your psychic powers to partition it out? Gotcha.’
Common sense would appear as “psychic powers” to the uninitiated. A 13 point nutrition jump in one generation among members of an SES class who aren’t malnourished? Highly improbable. Children of overachievers regress to the mean. The Indian immigrants in that sample are also “super” selected…yet they have IQs in the mid-90’s. Your 13 point bump borders on nonsense. And it needs to be that high to make a dent in the facts.
‘A blogger who cited sources, something you’ve failed to do here.’
None that are germane to my point. Your 13 point increase is your contention — you prove it. You have failed mightily.
‘. In other words, the two effects counterbalance, so your entire argument crumbles.’
No pumpkin, it doesn’t. I already calculated intermating among the three groups and ASSUMED a white IQ of 101 for each. Even with that calculation, the mixed IQ is inconsistent. So, if I went back and LOWERED the white IQ to correspond, it would be even worse for you, not better. Next.
‘my point is that black African university students score 13 points below their genetic potential, just like the rest of sub-Saharan Africa’
And it’s a baseless point. Individuals in the top part of the SES distribution in a population that is 33% malnourished are not likely to be malnourished. They have likely reached their genotypic IQ or are very close to it.
‘Speculation based on nothing’
Common sense, or, “psychic powers” to the layman. Whatever the extent of malnourishment, it is not likely on the order of 1 SD. So whatever gains may come will be the gradual sort we observe with FE.
‘Looks like you’re far more of an HBDer than I am. Do you even know what side of the debate you’re on? LOL! ‘
I’m just hanging you with your own rope.
‘Other research has supported it and it’s justified on theoretical grounds.’
Supported in the sense that it CAN happen, but in the sense that it’s likely to occur in THIS CONTEXT? No pumpkin.
‘Contrary to Swank’s spin, this is a huge victory for HBD.’
Lol. Yes. The extreme NARROWING of the gap that has CLOSED WITH AGE, which is contra all of HBD, is a victory for HBD.
97-100 for Indians, to clarify. Not in line with these immigrants doing better than their overachieving parents.
Just to let you know how silly this is —>
.4*108 +.44*90+.16*80 = 95.6. Genotypic IQ 80. Regression would still leave us at 89.
The theory is WRONG.
True and relevant.
Lynn said if a society is found, then the theory is falsified.
He also said if a SOCIETY is found, then the theory is falsified.
I’m not surprised that HBDers are sticking to it. But according to Lynn, it’s over.
P. 10 Age 16 KS4 gap = .1 SD, = within error = virtually ZERO.
The strong genetic hypothesis is over.
Throw all society’s resources on it and you almost get there. I would have been more impressive if all ethnic groups had advanced. Then you could have said, look finally a non racist society and equality of grades has followed. Now it looks more like all the money went to schools with heavy black concentration and the others were left out. What happens when the money runs out, or other groups wan’t a share in the name of color blindness.
Lynn doesn’t say all races have to be “equal.” He specifically refers to the “race differences” that HBD predicts. Here and now, they fail to hold in the UK. The strong genetic position, by HBD’s own terms, is wrong.
That’s not to say a modest genetic position is out of the question, and that is, after all, what mainstream science suggests.
I thought Jensen reported his IQ in his discussions with Frank Miele as being 140 to 145, although if I remember correctly Jensen wasn’t that interested in the topic of his own IQ.
more laughably abject ignorance from PM.
whoever says my IQ is this or that or between this and that has no idea at all what IQ tests are or what they mean. if jensen weren’t a morn like PM he would never have said, “my Iq is this or that.” he would have said, “my percentile score on this or that test or tests was this or that.”
what was Jensen-tard’s SAT or GRE? or was he too old to have taken either?
Oh dear God, shut up
Jorgeous,
Jensen didn’t say his IQ score was between this or that, fuckface. I just can’t remember where his score fell. Was it 140? 141? 142? 143? 144? 145? I can’t remember. It was, however, somewhere in that vicinity.
But I’ve given everyone the source. If they’re really that curious to nail down the exact figure, they can consult it.
The only reason I report it is because it’s quite a bit different from what Pumpkin says Seligman found (156), and also because Jensen plainly didn’t care about it. His attitude toward his own IQ score was one of indifference.
I’d say being skeptical and/or blasé about one’s own IQ is the best place to be. IQ by itself is only the suggestion that one might have the capability to do something of worth. Having the drive to actually accomplish something is not assured by any means. I’ve met many intellectuals who spew great varieties of large words while they consider complex ideas but have few if any deeds of their own to speak of. They’re like Jets with large powerful engines but no wings.
Sisyphean,
I completely agree. Jensen’s indifference to his own IQ is probably a wise individual policy. In all likelihood, he’d met many men with higher IQs who accomplished less than he had and some men with lower IQs who accomplished more.
Jensen apparently had an IQ higher than Feynman 🙂
His response was apt and succinct. You’re a tediously dull little boy.
then i mis-underestimated you.
mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.
but i’ve heard so many moron say, “my IQ is this or that.”
in fact, the correlation of self-described IQ tests and their betters college/school entrance exams is quite imperfect. the range might be 15 points or more, especially if given far apart in time.
in general the RPM is the world’s shittiest IQ test. even among Bouchard’s twins it had an h^2 of < .6.
the best measure is the mean of all such tests one has ever taken, with some adjustment if the trend is lower or higher.
i know you like boys but let’s see…
“tedious dull little boy”
SEVEN syllables.
are the proles really incapable of learning Swank?
pp is. the jury’s yet to render for PM, but the questions they’ve asked the judge…it looks bad.
btw, PM will be interested to know that i have a sesquipedalian penis. that’s right! 18″! in gym class the guys used to call me “Tapir”.
i know how gay men esteem themselves according to the size of their members.
The only thing your penis has in common with a Tapir’s, Jorgeous, is that you both have a zero percent chance of using your sexual organs on an actual woman.
But, hey, maybe you could try it out on a female tapir. You may find that species is more susceptible to your charms.
so your sister isn’t a woman?
that’s what i’m talkin’ about. oh yeah…
Jorgeous,
It’s certainly more believable that you have all the physical charms of that Tapir than that you scored a 2400 on your GREs.
I have that book; read much of it, but don’t recall Jensen’s IQ being mentioned.
His IQ could be 140-145; he never gave Seligman an exact number, only saying that he scored equivalent to those members of Terman’s gifted group who went on to earn PhDs
It was Seligman who then concluded that that subgroup had an IQ of 156, but the details of how that figure were arrived at are vague
did you fap to it?
”vocab is the MOST g-loaded.
the MOST H-E-R-I-T-A-B-L-E!!!!
the MOST reliable.”
”Terman syndrome”, you have this disease, Pumpkin… Incredible!!!!
You also are dishonest when you say (agree with me) to me that intelligence can’t be summarized only with ”iq”.
I don’t understand the proposal this post.
No doubt that Jensen is smart, no doubt that Jensen is very above ”average intelligence” but its intelligence can’t be summarized ONLY or SPECIALLY with three digit numbers, please!!! You don’t see this absurd??
You could say about Jensen REAL achievements, its ideas, theories, advances in psychology, but you continue using ”IQ” (as) above the REAL manifestations of the intelligence. ”Look at -Jensen-iq-, they are MORE smart than us”. Please, man!! Even if was COMPLETELY true to quantitative point of view, ISN’T so simple as you are thinking.
i already said to you and to others here that Terman study failed miserably because their first proposal, its theory, was found ”geniuses” before they appear. But the self-called ”prodigious genius” Terman simply don’t examined the extremely important component CREATIVITY, where iq is completely blind to measure. I already said to you and for all here that Terman use emotional reasons to do this job, the most important job of their career. He despised two boys who score below its magical line ‘of giftedness” and LOL, they won your ”precious” Nobel.
Smart people can to do dumb things. OR not-so-smart like that.
I agree about completely insane and unfair persecution by retards against Jensen, completely agree with you. BUT, you guys need learn to build perfect theories, perfect premisses because some things seems obvious like ”notorious limits of IQ”, diversity of kinds of smart, etc…
You guys need to learn to see in ”darkness”, to see real big picture.
People attack HBD achievements because is relatively easy to do. Many blind spot like…
Mixed-race people TEND to score slightly lower than british whites. How explain these anomaly??
British whites with higher intelligence can be slightly prone to marry with non-white people. And… no Swanky, you still not won this debate (i doubt that someday you will win it)
Firstly, really ”iq tests” can substitute real perception??? Obviously there smart mixed-race, PLEASE!! But, on average, at least here in Brazil, majority of REALLY mixed-race, people with at least three races, the intelligence is not above than whites.
OBVIOUSLY that with ” intensive selection” any people can improve their collective (and individual) intelligence. ‘Slightly more’ marriage between ”super smart” ones and non-white people (selected) can be improve the average iq of mixed-race british (-and not angliiisch-) people.
I believe the US is on the path of becoming another multicultural cesspool like Brazil with a lot of low IQ idiots. I’m beginning to see a growing number of White men dating/marrying down, including with unattractive black women. The same goes for White women, which has already become a trend for quite sometime, and it’s worse for them because they only date/marry black men and no one else when it comes to non-Whites. Blame our media for self annihilation.
Further, Spain was a smarter nation than England and even Portugal, who imported their multiculturalism from their colonies into their homelands. The Spanish just took all the gold and ship them back to Spain, and left the New World with their dysgenic populations, unlike England, where their black slaves and former subjects began to settle there and mix with the English. The same goes for Portugal, but on a lesser extent.
Also the Spaniards were the 1st ones to link early HBD theory and gold. Dumb savages in hot weather populate areas where there is gold. Let’s have the dumbbells do our gold hoarding for us: this was the motto for Christopher Columbus and his New World endeavors.
http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/tropics-empire
Not bad for such a prediction in the 15th Century.
The English limeys were just imbeciles who founded North America, where there was NO GOLD, and created a cesspit monster known as the USA today.
This is sad because is based on IGNORANCE, complete lacy of REAL wisdom and injustice against white individuals. ”White guilty” is a psychosis masse, when individuals takes the responsibility to crimes that they did not commit.
Psychopaths have some important components related to wisdom, but they lack in others VERY IMPORTANT traits.
What you said is wrong, specially for Portugal, because many slaves, subsaharian slaves, was taken to Portugal during colonialism era. Portuguese people are very outbreeding, is interesting and confuse. Sometimes (XVIII, Lisbon, capital of Portugal, have 10% of negroes in its demography).
Yes, Portugal and Spain are on the same Iberian land, but Portuguese, unlike the Spanish is much less racist towards blacks and their colonial subjects, and they breed with them in large numbers. But I think the English nations are worse, their immigration is completely out of control. Too many different cultures and ideologies in the UK and also in the USA.
Spain has almost no love for Latin America, unless, that person from there is European or very White (meaning minimal black or Indio ancestry).
”You have provided no environmental explanation for why mixed race would score closer to whites”
Indeed. Bingo!!! Congratulations!!!
I don’t have to you dildos. Either YOUR hypothesis predicts the data or it does not. It does not.
Your dishonesty in infinite and beyond…
Checkmate.
Incidentally, the “mostly” environmental hypothesis DOES predict that mixed children will score closer to the white mean because of less racism/better environment/etc.
Afaik the UK is more accepting of blacks than the US.
of course you would label data that disagrees with your pet theory as “dishonest.” Checkmate means something other than what you apparently think it means.
lack and not lacy monsieur!!! 😉
”Yes, Portugal and Spain are on the same Iberian land, but Portuguese, unlike the Spanish is much less racist towards blacks and their colonial subjects, and they breed with them in large numbers. But I think the English nations are worse, their immigration is completely out of control. Too many different cultures and ideologies in the UK and also in the USA.
Spain has almost no love for Latin America, unless, that person from there is European or very White (meaning minimal black or Indio ancestry).”
Because Spain is powerfull than most of their old colonies, only Argentina and Mexico can threaten its hegemony while Portugal is ”less relevant” than Brazil in important ”attributes” as demography, territory and economy.
All empires die with same disease, megalomania. Egipt, Rome, Persia, etc…
Megalomania with ”mental irritation”.
I think Spain has a healthier mind when it comes to immigration. They deported most of their Latin American workers once their economy was in recession, and they said to them in a honest face, we have no work for you and your visa is temporary, so go home and we will pay you to leave.
And perhaps you’re correct. Spain has gotten the best out of her colonies and managed not to be overpowered by them. The main purpose of colonizing is to get resources. Spain gotten hers and then left. Then English was foolish to think North America had gold. There is no gold in the North and the Spanish took everything from the South because they came first. They stayed and created a useless nation called the United States.
Gold of iberian exploration colonies in South America was used by finance british industrial revolution.
Is not justifiable for me, sorry.
”of course you would label data that disagrees with your pet theory as “dishonest.” Checkmate means something other than what you apparently think it means.”
Oo lord of war!!!!! This RETARD should be EXTERMINATED, ANY serious eugenic programs, this pathetic beings will be eliminated.
No, dementia, you are VERY dishonest because TO EXPLAIN about white-black iq, where ”WHITE IQ” is higher than ”BLACK iq” you use ”environmental deterministic, culturel nonsense ”theories” ”, but when is TO EXXXPLAIN about ‘ anomalies” you conveniently DO NOT uses ANY environmental or culturél deterministic nonsense.. Then
iq is VERY reliable to you
and
”intelligence” (different than your bullshit, endless intelligences theories) is genetics. In other summarized words, ”When -the- white iq is, on average, higher than black iq” ENVIRONMENT AND CULTURE is 100% responsible to this situation, therefore, when ””””’mixed white-black””’ gap have little difference OR ”white and black intelligences is the same”, ”intelligence” is relevant and biologically predisposed.
The answer of Pumpkin is a beautiful checkmate to a RETARD female like you.
You are a bitch. You want BIG and BLACK PENIS.
Logic is a thing that is not important for you and its narrative here. Again, you answer is based only in very short term. You (pseudo, seems but is not) win battle but not war.
” you would label data that disagrees with your pet theory”
What a imense pokkker face.
‘TO EXXXPLAIN about ‘ anomalies” you conveniently DO NOT uses ANY environmental or culturél deterministic nonsense.. Then’
Get it through your head: I have never said that IQ/intelligence/smarts is 100% culture/environment-determined.
And I offered several possible explanations: less racism in the UK, more focused/better education, etc.
‘”intelligence” (different than your bullshit, endless intelligences theories) is genetics’
First, there isn’t even an agreed-upon definition of intelligence, and second, I don’t care what you think intelligence is.
Naturally, because you either a) don’t quite understand how devastating this data is for the strong genetic position or b) understand but are understandably upset, you resort to namecalling.
Mainstream science and experts are likely right. You and yours are likely wrong. The experts win again.
I notice that some of Jorge’s comments disappeared.
pp is ineducable. her IQ is just too low.
look at those Bangladeshis!
from now on i’m just going to post porn on her blog.
By HBDers own terms the jig is up.
it’s already happened. the “freestyle” chess champ is a black Brit, anson williams.
It’s no great surprise to me that a blackman can win chess tournaments. It would be more surprising if it never happened.
Williams isn’t a chess player.
he’s an electrical engineer.
here’s a picture of him with Anand.
SwankyWANTBLACKCOCKINYOURPALEASS”,
magic?? 😉
“It’s no great surprise to me that a blackman can win chess tournaments. It would be more surprising if it never happened.“
Like my iliteral brother said ”Ooooh, look, blacks can talk”.
Its a great surprise to REAL RAYCIIIIST called marxistoid leftoid dishonest and stupid here and in any place.
I’m not smarter than Swankbitchlovebigblackcock or Nutella, but i’m wiser, that’s the fundamental difference. Intelligence without wisdom is useless and dangerous.
“Intelligence without wisdom is useless and dangerous.”
I fully agree.
”Get it through your head: I have never said that IQ/intelligence/smarts is 100% culture/environment-determined. And I offered several possible explanations: less racism in the UK, more focused/better education, etc. ”
LIAR BITCH, you want big black cock in your pale and ugly ass, stop PSYCHO ILOGICAL PROJECTION!!! Stop to watch interracial porn movies and perform your more secret dreams of concubine.
”BETTER EDUCATION” is my hairy ass. Poor chinese children in extremely social depressed environment learn better than schools with computers, books, all possible ”environment stimuli” and a lot of black kids, RETARD. I never need any draconian chocolate factory stimuli to like to learn, invent histories or theories, MINIMUM stimuli already help to flourish my predispositions. A matchbox already can be usefull to creativity and not any its ‘pilantra’ excuses. Teachers in general are completely STUPID, my mother, my brother, lot of my friend who begin in ”’education career”, 95% them are stupid.
LESS RAI-CISMA IN UK???
A country that is completely submerged by ”immigrants”. You are completely desilusional, a danger person, you can’t live with real DECENT people, black, homossexual, albino…., any DECENT people can live with you.
”I don’t care what you think intelligence is.”
Did I offer to you my concept ??? ANTA. I use ad hominen because you deserve completely.
I don’t care your pseudo-slutz stupid ”opinions”, you are not able to produce any decent argumentation.
”Naturally, because you either a) don’t quite understand how devastating this data is for the strong genetic position or b) understand but are understandably upset, you resort to namecalling.
Mainstream science and experts are likely right. You and yours are likely wrong. The experts win again.”
”Mainstream science”???? huahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahuahua
This BULLSHIT is understandable inclusive to you. Great majority of BURROCRATZ ”experts” today are stupid like you sneak.
Weak ”’argumentations”’ hihihihihihihihihi,
weak ”opinions”,
weak explanations or confrontations,
enormous contradictions (as big black penis you want in your ugly pale ass, bunda murcha -), all the time….
Now I will despise you summarily.
‘LIAR BITCH, you want big black cock in your pale and ugly ass, stop PSYCHO ILOGICAL PROJECTION!!! Stop to watch interracial porn movies and perform your more secret dreams of concubine. ‘
A more honest example of HBD “argumentation,” one will never find.
‘ I never need any draconian chocolate factory stimuli to like to learn’
So. What.
‘I don’t care your pseudo-slutz stupid ”opinions”, you are not able to produce any decent argumentation.’
You are free to actually make a point that’s even tangential to my arguments at any time.
‘This BULLSHIT is understandable inclusive to you. Great majority of BURROCRATZ ”experts” today are stupid like you sneak’
Unsurprising that you disdain real scientists.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
I agree. You and your ‘arguments’ have been put to bed.
brazil is the country of the future and it always will be.
Brasil é o país do futuro e sempre será .
I haven’t followed every post in the Swanky/Pumpkin exchange, and so perhaps this has already been covered, but now that Swanky believes that Britain has solved “The Gap” through its well-intentioned policies, perhaps he can explain this and this and this.
A large part of the problem with a shore-bound American like Swanky making interpretations about data from lands he knows nothing about is that he can easily misinterpret it. He doesn’t know how it’s collected, how it’s interpreted, how it’s defined.
White students get better degrees than minority peers with same entry grades
All of the “how it’s collected,” “how it’s interpreted,” and “how it’s defined,” info is actually in the sources I cited to re: GCSE scores, KS scores, and CAT scores. So shh, spunky.
The article you cite supports me and the environmental explanation. If anything it shows that racism of one type or another is real or that strong cultural factors are at play in achievement. Cumulative GPA measures are weakly correlated with g, anyway.
The strong genetic hypothesis is wrong globally.
Citing sources is not the same thing as understanding the assumptions underlying your data. How does immigration impact the data? How are racial classifications assigned? How much coverage does the data have for British schools and British minorities? Who collects and controls the data? etc.
All of these things are important. You don’t get to skip them because you like the political implications of what little you do understand.
And how likely is it that a society as large as the United Kingdom, which has – in your mind, at least – closed “The Gap” in its primary and secondary educational systems, suddenly would find a Grand Canyon chasm of a gap in its university system?
Who mans the U.K. educational system, Swanky Pete? Who are the elite that fund and control the universities? They’re the same people: the various governments of Britain.
So you would have us believe on the one hand that the British elite have eliminated the gap in the one major area of education – something no one else has ever done – and yet on the other hand still maintain a university system that makes American universities look inclusive.
Not bloody likely. I think you need to reassess your priors.
‘How does immigration impact the data?’
Covered.
‘How are racial classifications assigned? ‘
Covered.
‘ How much coverage does the data have for British schools and British minorities?’
Covered.
‘Who collects and controls the data? etc.’
Covered.
Like I said…shh, spunky. The data is representative, the data set is large and multi-faceted, the racial classifications are correct, and the selection effect of immigration — even in the best case — can’t account for the data. You are free to read the material and come up with your own questions, though.
‘And how likely is it that a society as large as the United Kingdom, which has – in your mind, at least – closed “The Gap” in its primary and secondary educational systems, suddenly would find a Grand Canyon chasm of a gap in its university system?’
There’s nothing “sudden” about differential ethnic group University attainment. And the ‘gaps’ you are talking about are within older cohorts. Younger cohorts do better. Further, Asians and Chinese also have lower University outcomes than whites. So the cultural explanation is strong. The data is what it is, spunky.
‘Not bloody likely. I think you need to reassess your priors.’
That’s a nice conspiracy ‘just-so,’ but unfortunately, here is the hard part: back up your claim.
Blacks are losers and parasites all around. They cannot be self sufficient, similar to the predicament of women, except blacks display very negative traits of aggression, poor future time orientation and lower IQs.
Throughout the world, blacks cannot complete with the more entrepreneurial and innovative races like Whites, the industrious Asians, and the hardworking native races of the New World. The Muslims in the Middle East who are nothing but troublemakers with their religion, and are capable of civilization, had they not adopted their extremist views, were the first ones to say blacks are no good.
‘Throughout the world, blacks cannot complete with the more entrepreneurial and innovative races like Whites’
Your post reeks of anger JS. I can’t tell if you are american, but if you are, acknowledge that blacks did not come voluntarily to america. Other groups are coming to take advantage of you, be angry at them if anything.
I’m speaking of the truth. Blacks have no place in modern society. Readers here like to cite black outliers who are otherwise overrepresented in the White demographic. I see blacks as a cart of bad apples with a few good ones here and there, basically a poor investment.
There are few decent blacks, they should be valued because they are not guilty about the animal savage behavior or ”their” low intelligence and empathy ”brothers”. The average black is very problematic specially in novel (anthropomorphic) behavior. Is like if they was elephants in the middle of Mannhatan. Guilty of psychopathy, selfish behaviour won in tropical environment. Surprising (not-so…) there are pacific subsaharian tribes that like us are in serious danger because they are surrounded by its subhuman beasts, called psychopath (specially the male) negroid african subspecies.
I once worked with a few African immigrants, many of them middle class and had white collar professions in the government sector. They seem to have lower intelligence, lower empathy and acted like they were still in their African tribal environment with their aggression and seething resentment when things don’t go their way. The African American seems more domesticated, but still display the same aggressiveness when provoked.
Well, as i said before. MOST them are like we know very well, but yet there exceptions. I know some black people who are very good, most of them are woman.
Test
Pumpkin,
I’m unable to post my response to Swanky. I’ve removed the links and it still doesn’t post. Any ideas?
Never mind.
Swanky,
Yes, you covered it the same way you cover everything international – from including Libya in a discussion about SSA to holding up Barbados and the Seychelles as exemplars of SSA development.
But you didn’t cover the topics in any substantive detail because you’re not capable of doing so. You don’t have detailed knowledge of the British educational system or of British demography, and you need to understand both to handle this subject well.
For example, the 2011 census shows that blacks make up slightly over three percent of the UK’s population. But the CAT study shows that only 2.65 percent of the test takers were blacks of any sort, despite the fact that the black birth rate in the UK has been higher than the white average for the last two decades, and so their population should skew younger. We should see a higher percentage of black students than than percentage in the census, but we don’t.
So what happened to those missing black students, Swanky? Did they all tire of school and fly back to find jobs in Africa or the Caribbean? Are they on the street unaccounted for? Until you find them, Swanky, your explanation doesn’t hold water.
The students getting into British universities today are either those “younger cohorts” covered in the CAT who started their secondary schooling in 2009/10 or the class from the year before. Yet they still aren’t getting into college at the rate your explanation would suggest they should. Where’s that black fraction of cognitive elites?
You have no reasonable explanation for that gap except to suddenly throw racism back into the mix.
The CAT data for South Asians shows that perhaps they earned those outcomes.
As for the Chinese, they do just fine in Britain’s universities.
CORRECTION:
“We should see a higher percentage of black students than the percentage of the blacks listed in the UK census, but we don’t.” Quite the opposite. There are fewer black students taking the CAT in 2010 than their numbers in the census and relative black birth rates suggest should exist. A lot fewer.
‘ Until you find them, Swanky, your explanation doesn’t hold water.’
Oh are they not in the GCSE results? Are they not in the KS4 data sets? Your “rejoinder” is piss-poor — quibbling over 2.65 percent v. a proposed 3.x percent in the CAT study.
‘You have no reasonable explanation for that gap except to suddenly throw racism back into the mix.’
Racism and culture are reasonable explanations.
‘As for the Chinese, they do just fine in Britain’s universities.’
Lie. They achieve less than whites as a matter of fact. Of course, racism and culture would explain this.
It’s not small ! Your arithmetic illiteracy is confusing the comparison of two small percentages with a trivial difference.
If blacks are 3 percent of the UK’s population, they probably ought to be at least 3.5 percent of the student population given their higher birth rates. Perhaps even higher. It would take more detailed demographic work than I’m willing to do to figure it out, but it’s perhaps even much higher.
But blacks are only 2.65 percent of CAT test takers. That’s a huge difference. Perhaps as many as a quarter or more of the UK’s black students are not accounted for.
Swanky writes:
You’re wrong.
From Wikipedia’s write-up on the British Chinese:
Keep talking about what you don’t know, Swanky.
A) it is small, B) the data I have presented are nationally representative samples, and C) the GCSE and K4 scores stand regardless. You are grasping at straws.
‘If blacks are 3 percent of the UK’s population, they probably ought to be at least 3.5 percent of the student population given their higher birth rates. Perhaps even higher.’
No they shouldn’t. The 2011 census includes this cohort. As of 2001, around the time this new cohort emerged, the figure was something like 2 percent. The kids didn’t start school until what, 2004-5-ish? So, these numbers square anyway.
I’m not wrong, spunky. You’re the one who doesn’t know what you’re talking about.
Chinese do not achieve on the same level as whites despite their GCSE and CAT performance.
Once again — cultural explanations are strong.
Another genetic hypothesis prediction busted: greater representation among the mentally retarded and disabled.
Lynn says: “Mental retardation is also partly the tail end of the normal distribution of intelligence and the incidence of this would be expected to be greater among the ethnic minorities because these have lower mean IQ and hence a greater proportion at the low end of the distribution.”
In the UK: “The general US finding that Black American students are up to two-and-a-half times
more likely than White students to be identified among those with Mental Retardation (Donovan
& Cross, 2002; Oswald et al, 1999, Skiba et al, 2004) was not replicated for Black Caribbean or
Black African students in the present study. Neither group was over-represented for Moderate
Learning Difficulties at the level selected for this study to indicate educational significance
(1.5:1), nor were Mixed White and Black Caribbean, Mixed White and Black African or Black
Other groups. Indeed, the adjusted odds ratios showed under-representation for both Black
African and Black Other groups; Mixed White and Black Caribbean students were just above
this cut-off for under-representation”
The dream dies hard for Swanky.
A) It’s not small. It’s huge.
B) The data is obviously not nationally representative if there are fewer black students among the test takers than blacks are found among the UK population as a whole. You’re missing something critically important.
C) If the black students taking the test are not representative of the full spectrum of the black population for that age cohort, then their results are worthless for talking about the black population as a whole. You’re basing your entire argument on 4,500 black test-takers when at least another 1,000 to 1,500 blacks in that age cohort – and perhaps many more – are still out there somewhere.
And I’m betting the ones who didn’t take the test are not likely to be the best students.
Of course the 2011 census includes the younger age cohort. That’s why it should skew younger. They’re a younger, more dynamic population with more growth.
They don’t square at all. Immigrants bring kids with them. So as the black immigrant population grows, so does the percentage of black school kids.
This is exactly what’s happened with Hispanics in America. They made up 16.3 percent of the general population in 2010, but 23.1 percent of the U.S. population under 17 years of age.
That’s a huge difference. If it was consistent with black demographics in the UK, then 3.9 percent of the students taking that CAT should be black rather than the 2.65 percent you found. Rather than 4,650 black test takers, we should see more than 6,800 blacks taking the test. What happened to them?
If you want to prove me wrong, find the age breakdown for the UK census which shows that the 3 percent of the UK population which is black skews older than – or even the same as – the rest of the population. You won’t find it.
from the paper cited above:
. In particular, Connor et al. pointed out that only a third of Black students
had gained first-class or upper second-class honours, compared with about 45% of Indian and
Chinese students and about 60% of White students.
8.5 % of chinee students obtained first class degrees vs 12.9% of white students. this was not explained by fewer school leaving exams or lower grades on these exams. apples to apples and the chinee lose?
the opposite the case in ‘mer’ca-stan? why? because degree class is determined by cumulative exams in the UK, but by short term grades in the US and canuckistan. hence pushy striving fucktards do better in the ‘mer’ca-stan and canuckistan than in the UK.
Swanky writes:
Yeah, sure. Stomp your feet and cover your ears.
I provided you with a summary of sources that shows you’re wrong. You in turn provided me with one ten-year-old source which deals only perfunctorily with the Chinese.
A) It’s not small. It’s huge.
that’s what PM tells her.
‘That’s a huge difference. If it was consistent with black demographics in the UK, then 3.9 percent of the students taking that CAT should be black rather than the 2.65 percent you found. ‘
No they shouldn’t. ALL young children are not in school. If it’s 2 percent in 2001, and the cohort tested was brought into school ~2004-5, then it does square.
‘And I’m betting the ones who didn’t take the test are not likely to be the best students.’
Based on nothing, per usual. The white percentage doesn’t even match up, FYI. I guess the entire data set must per se be unrepresentative. Nonsense.
‘You’re basing your entire argument on 4,500 black test-takers when at least another 1,000 to 1,500 blacks in that age cohort – and perhaps many more – are still out there somewhere.’
Actually, no I’m not. Once again I direct you to TWO SEPARATE data sets — GCSE scores and KS4 scores. Now I direct you to the incidence of ‘mental retardation’ as the latest entry.
‘I provided you with a summary of sources that shows you’re wrong.’
The sources are consistent you dildo. Your source says that Chinese get a lot of degrees and that the Chinese are the most accomplished minority group. My source shows that the level of degrees granted — level of achievement for — to Chinese is LOWER than whites.
Much like pumpkin, you have nothing.
‘If you want to prove me wrong, ‘
Wrong in your stupid conspiracy theory that itself is based on the percentage pop not matching up which itself does not mean the sample is unrepresentative per se? Your claim is WEAK.
It has nothing to do with “matching up,” you idiot. They’re significantly lower, and that makes absolutely no sense.
The only reason you don’t understand that is because you don’t understand demography, and so it’s perfectly plausible to you that, since the number 2.65 looks close to the number 3.01, black students of that cohort are fully represented by the test when it’s obvious they’re not.
And a “conspiracy theory”? No, most of you guys aren’t smart enough to conspire along these lines, Swanky. But for some reason a significant slice of blacks of student age in the UK are being left out of the test results. Either they’re falling out of the system because no one is monitoring them or they disproportionately belong to a marginal group of students who aren’t tested for some reason. Some explanation, however, is needed.
Luther described James as an “epistle of straw”.
in this epistolary exchange between Swank and PM, the straw man is obvious.
i found this vid of PM:
You’re still avoiding the elementary fact, Swanky. The black student population at all levels *should* be much higher than their numbers in the population as a whole. Yet, it’s significantly lower.
And, yes, that elementary fact was as true in 2001 as it is today. The student population of a young, growing, and dynamic population is *always* higher than its overall percentage in the population. Hispanics under the age of seventeen, for example, were a higher percentage of their age group in 2000 (17.1%) than Hispanics as a whole were ten years later in the 2010 census (16.3%).
If black CAT test takers were, say, 3.1 percent of all the test takers, I would still argue that’s too low. But at least you would have a better argument. But the fact that black students make up only 2.65 percent of the CAT test takers destroys any claim you have for the validity of this test representing that black cohort as a whole in British society.
I haven’t looked at them, but they shouldn’t match up. The percentage of white students should be lower than their overall percentage in the UK population. British whites have long had lower birth rates than most if not all British minorities, and so they are older as a population. Fewer students, fewer test takers.
If white test takers are higher than their percentage of the overall population, then the CAT test is obviously not as representative as you claimed.
You’ve presented no demographic information which shows black students are well represented among the age cohorts for the tests you’ve shown. None.
Unlike you, I’m not going to pretend I know why this is. But I can imagine several different plausible possibilities.
as usual the racist relies on his theory and not on facts. the TFR of black British African and Afro-Caribbean isn’t much higher than that of white British. the Pakis and Bangladeshis are the baby factories. could it be Islam and thus culture?
http://iussp2009.princeton.edu/papers/93139
Barbados has the second lowest TFR in the New World. only Cuba’s is lower.
now what is it for Latino Americans? they’re like the Pakis and East Pakis.
and Mexico’s TFR is much less than that of Mexican Americans. OMG, time and place matters!
As usual, Tapir Dick says I’m wrong and then backs me up.
Black birth rates have been higher in Britain than white birth rates for at least two decades. Combine that with immigration and it explains why the British black population has nearly doubled in the last ten years.
If Barbados was the sole provider of population growth for Britain’s black population, then maybe Tapir Dick would have a point. Since it’s not, he doesn’t.
TFR data here http://iussp2009.princeton.edu/papers/93139
Whites average 1.8 Blacks average ~ 2.1.
2001 cohort starts with 20 blacks 1000 whites. 20 * 2.1 / 1000 * 1.8 = 42/1800 = 2.3 percent + x immigration —> 2.65 percent reasonable number.
it’s higher dummkopf.
but it’s not much higher.
it would have to be MUCH higher to “back you up”.
Almost forgot…
and it’s so much lower than the SSA’s. culture influencing behavioral traits again.
the highest TFR in the Us is for Hasidic Jews. and they’re also among the poorest. if a high dependency ratio can ruin Ashkenazim how much more can it ruin SSAs…right?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_fertility_rate#mediaviewer/File:Countriesbyfertilityrate.svg
Perhaps your oversized animal penis got in your eye, Jorgeous, but I haven’t argued for any particular numbers other than that the percentage of black students must be higher than the percentage of blacks in the UK’s overall population.
Besides, you still have immigration to figure in, Tapir Dick, and your factoid about Barbados’ TFR ain’t going to cut it.
Tapir Dick writes:
The dependency ratio runs both ways. You can have too many old people as well as too many young people.
But the history of the US shows that a high TFR wasn’t an impediment to modern economic growth.
You’d think Tapir Dick, who says he supports eugenics, would try to maintain some consistency by showing he understands that it matters more who in a society has the babies as it does how many babies a society has.
yes of course, i remember reading an article a while back predicting Japan would run a trade deficit as a result of its aging population. at the time i thought, “pshaw!” but now Japan does in fact have a trade deficit.
the point, Dingleberryhumperdinck is that SSA’s ridiculously high TFR is:
1. not a consequence of black people breeding like rabbits necessarily.
2. is DESTROYING any possibility for economic growth in SSA.
notice E Timor and Afghanistan are also baby factories. don’t buy them.
Tapir Dick,
Yeah, stupid people do stupid stuff, like have babies when they shouldn’t.
But you guys like to have it both ways. Today you argue that Africa’s high TFR is destroying its economic growth, and tomorrow you’ll be arguing that Africa is breaking through to modernity.
They can’t both be true. Not even in your twisted mind.
Jorge I already knew this would happen: HBDers don’t care if HBD is true.
my God you’re thick.
when i said blacks don’t breed like rabbits necessarily i was referring to the low TFR of Barbados and the marginally higher than white TFR of British blacks.
get it?
unlike you i wasn’t just making shit up,
‘And, yes, that elementary fact was as true in 2001 as it is today.’
You don’t get it. They were 2 percent overall in 2001, the cohort tested represents the cohort that entered school a little after. It shows the increase you’re talking about, to 2.65 percent. The pupils would not reflect ALL youth at the time of testing, only “all” youth at whatever point the kids entered school. It tracks.
‘You’ve presented no demographic information which shows black students are well represented among the age cohorts for the tests you’ve shown. None.’
You are the one mounting these attempted critiques. It’s not even enough to say that the population demographics don’t match perfectly. Let’s just take it out of 1000. 26.5/1000 score 94 on average. You are saying it needs to be 39. So we’re about 12.5 off. 26.5/39 ~ 68%. So what score would this other group have to average to bring down the entire number to Lynn levels? .68*94 + .32*70 = 86.
So, the other group would have to score 24 points lower on average and would have been forcibly “kept out.”
IT DID NOT HAPPEN, spunky.
REPOSTED:
You’re saying that 2.65 percent of test takers who are black are only those black students who have been in British schools for at least ten years. All other black students are either not given the test or don’t have their test results reported in the published summary.
Prove it.
I don’t need to bring it down to Lynn levels. I just need to show that the IQ levels are artificially high, and hence your excitement about them artificially enhanced.
The SDs shown for the black students don’t suggest a huge lop off of the demographic bottom for low-IQ blacks, but the number of test takers is suspiciously low and not impressive evidence in support of any thesis.
‘I don’t need to bring it down to Lynn levels. I just need to show that the IQ levels are artificially high, and hence your excitement about them artificially enhanced.’
No, spunky. First of all, you have no evidence that this hypothetical “other” group would score differently. Nor do you have any evidence that their lower scores would depress the scores in a way that would do any harm to the contention.
AND THEN….you need to account for the NARROWING gap. You need to account for the mixed results being inconsistent with the genetic prediction. You need to account for the GCSE scores mirroring these CAT gains. You need to account for there being no gap at age 16 KS4 tests. You need to account for the lack of overrepresentation among the mentally retarded.
‘You’re saying that 2.65 percent of test takers who are black are only those black students who have been in British schools for at least ten years.’
The source I cited states that the large scale study was of children entering secondary school, which in the UK starts at around age 10-11.
I just need to show the test is not comprehensive for the population in question, which I’ve shown.
Of course a reasonable person would know it’s not likely that students who score as well on tests as those students who took it are prevented, for some reason, from taking those exams, but since when have you ever been reasonable?
Once you’ve established that the testing populations aren’t fully representative, the rest is easy.
Britain has a small population of blacks who are modestly selected for intelligence, and whose worst subgroups don’t show up in the test results for some reason or another.
They still test noticeably lower than whites. They still have more behavioral problems than whites. They still can’t handle university-level work. They still don’t perform nearly as well as Britain’s model minorities. They still only look good compared to the gypsies and the Pakis.
Overall, nothing to get too excited about.
advocatus diaboli regarding the mentally retarded:
different standards in different countries.
but…whatevs
Binet intended to identify the retarded with his test, the first IQ test. the extension to normals may have been an unfortunate innovation.
that is, the mentally retarded aren’t just the far left of the bell curve, which itself is not reality but a bed of Procrustes for the mathematically illiterate like Rushton, Lynn, and Jensen.
the pathologizing of difference is a theme in Angloshphere psychology and psychiatry. but abnormality and pathology are two VERY different things. is this guy “sick”? i expect he gives PM a hard on.
You’re very vague, Swanky. That doesn’t answer my question directly, and in fact you undermine your earlier post where you cited the demographic info on blacks from ten years before the 2010 CAT was taken. So unless they were taking the test at the age of 20 or 21, what the hell are you talking about?
Once you’ve established that the testing populations aren’t fully representative, the rest is easy.
another example of PM’s mathematical illiteracy.
if one samples a distribution in a biased way, will the sample distribution be biased? maybe. maybe not. maybe biased but only a very little.
‘I just need to show the test is not comprehensive for the population in question, which I’ve shown.’
No, you haven’t, Not by a longshot. It’s not enough to even say that the percentage is off to show that the sample isn’t representative.
‘Once you’ve established that the testing populations aren’t fully representative, the rest is easy.’
Yes, once you do things that you haven’t done I’m sure ‘the rest’ is easy.
‘They still test noticeably lower than whites.’
.1 SD gap KSD4 age 16 scores — which is pretty much NO gap. GCSE scores rising fast to near complete closure. Mixed scores inconsistent with the genetic prediction. Mental retardation inconsistent.
there’s no vagueness or undermining at all…
PM is a mathematical illiterate.
a mountain of words, a thousand words, one equation, one picture…or one vid.
so let’s assume that the black distribution is truncated from below and more so than the white distribution.
where’s the truncation point? at what percentile?
whatever it might be…
it would make NO difference to Swank’s conclusions.
Tapir Dick,
I already explained this part. You need to keep up.
‘you cited the demographic info on blacks from ten years before the 2010 CAT was taken’
I know I did, because that’s the relevant data. The cohort reflected in the pupil data would be from that time period roughly. 2 percent with those birthrates and immigration would yield ~ 2.65 percent at that time period.
You can’t use 2011 census data to argue for a school population born almost a decade earlier. I’m not surprised that you’re confused.
If you’re arguing for birthrates compared to demographics, then we need to know what population the demographic comes from. The pupils were added roughly around 2000~ish. Back then the share was 2 percent. All blacks who were < 10 are not included here.
That’s a bold claim, Tapir Dick. Care to back up how a truncated quarter (at least) of your testing population doesn’t matter in the slightest to Swank’s conclusions, no matter how it is truncated?
Let’s say that troubled youths of all races either drop out of school or are sent to a division to handle behavioral problems which is excused from the testing protocols other schools must follow. So the one quarter comes from the left side of the bell curve.
you already explained it?
did you bake your conclusions in the easy bake oven.
https://screen.yahoo.com/chess-girls-000000603.html
You are the one mounting these attempted critiques. It’s not even enough to say that the population demographics don’t match perfectly. Let’s just take it out of 1000. 26.5/1000 score 94 on average. You are saying it needs to be 39. So we’re about 12.5 off. 26.5/39 ~ 68%. So what score would this other group have to average to bring down the entire number to Lynn levels? .68*94 + .32*70 = 86.
Actually the learned Pincher Martin has launched a devastating attack on your numbers (which were never formidable to begin with) . This is kind of a mirror image of what happens on the SAT every year. Only a third of all American 17 year olds write the SAT and they have an IQ 8 points above the American mean, while the 2/3rds who skip the test have an IQ 4 points below the American mean. This happens because taking tests is a proxy for upward academic mobility which is highly correlated with IQ.
So in this case it would be the other way around. The two thirds who write the test would be 4 points above the African British mean and the third who skip it would be 8 points below. Since those who took it had an average IQ of 94 (actually 92 using Lynn’s white norms; see my latest post), deducting 4 points would bring the average IQ to 88. Very similar to the 86 Lynn claimed for blacks in Britain.
devastating to the mathematically illiterate only.
the problem with HBDers is they’re DUMB.
whoever thinks PM learned is a moron.
Lol no he hasn’t pumpkin. I already responded to his critique — which is misplaced — and showed why even if it was true it would still fail to prove the point.
Spunky doesn’t understand numbers, which we all came to understand with his inept handling of Obama’s 1l grades.
The numbers are strong. Your piddly critiques are nonsense.
it’s easy my mathematically illiterate chinee baby bpenis person.
1. there is a change in the scores over time dummkompf.
2. dumb black kids in the US are even less likely to sit the SAT or ACT but the black average is lower all the same.
3. the greatest diff it can make is if the excluded 1/4 you claim is identical to the bottom 1/4 in ability. and you’d have to adjust the white scores too for whatever dumb fraction doesn’t sit.
the mean of a truncated normal dist truncated from below at the bottom quartile is, in IQ terms, with a mean of 100, 104.8.
or rather 4.76.
so considering
1. the black dist likely had a smaller SD than the white dist
AND
2. the white distribution would also have to be truncated, though perhaps by less than your claimed 1/4.
you’ve got significantly less than 4.76 points to work with.
Tapir Dick,
It’s only a “mountain of words” to a guy who writes like his favorite author is a lecherous Dr. Seuss.
And for a guy who claims he never goes to the movies, you sure do link to a lot of cinematic videos.
lecherous.
use words you know the sense of PM.
and indeed. my illiterate and chopped style is the best. why? because i say so.
fluidity is the opposite of lapidary. fluidity is a bad sign in prose and bowel movements.
what have i left undone.
some serious lapidary style.
Constipation is also a bad sign in prose and bowel movements, Tapir Dick, unless you’re just the kind of guy who likes to waste time squeezing both of them out.
Now, the Star-Belly Sneetches
Had bellies with stars.
The Plain-Belly Sneetches
Had none upon thars…
…
Then, quickly Sylvester McMonkey McBean
Put together a very peculiar machine.
And he said, “You want stars like a Star-Belly Sneetch… ?
My friends, you can have them for three dollars each!”…
…
“Belly stars are no longer in style,” said McBean.
“What you need is a trip through my Star-Off Machine.
This wondrous contraption will take off your stars
So you won’t look like Sneetches who have them on thars.”…
…
And he laughed as he drove
In his car up the beach,
“They never will learn.
No. You can’t teach a Sneetch!”
In case pumpkin missed it : the correct demo is the 2001 demo not the 2011 demo.
It’s over. There was never anythjng close to a devastating attack, unless you call bungling concepts in a vain effort to conceal the truth devastating. The truth: by Lynn’s terms it’s over.
There was never anything requiring an attack. All you’ve proved is that even the most highly selected Africans are less intelligent than average whites, thus confirming everything Lynn ever said. If you honestly think you’ve undermined HBD in any way, you’re delusional.
Narrowing gap, a stat insignificant gap at 16, mixed scores out of line with any g prediction, low incidence of mental retardation.
Even with all of your IMPROBABLE assumptions, these trends are unexplained as I showed above.
True and relevant.
that makes two of us. swank and i are both delusional.
but it depends on what one means by HBD.
1. Swank’s evidence does disprove hereditism…for the the thousanth time.
2. but it may not disprove HBD in the sense of Flushton’s “scientific” racism.
hbd means the following, if it means anything at all…
there is no norm crossing for IQ and other important psychological traits for populations which are representative of the races of man…however membership in one race or another may be determined.
1. it’s quite clear that the norms of poor British blacks and council estate whites intersect.
but it may be that neither is representative of blacks or whites genetically that is.
2. it is also clear after 1994 that the norms of poor white South Africans and poor blacks intersect.
again there is a question of representativeness.
but supposing humans were experimental animals and one could show intersecting norms the HBDers could redefine HBD as…some intersections but few…the integral of the difference in the norms between whites and blacks is positive…etc.
of course of the one place there was intersection was near the maximum P value for both then the critic could claim that whites are eurytypic and blacks stenotypic, and a near ideal world for everyone the differences really do disappear.
Swank, do you honestly think that Lynn would consider it to be over? What you have is at best a few glipses of light in an otherwise dark night of failed attempts and hopes. The PISA study got talked about a lot earlier this year, and I don’t remember any cries of joy about black advancement in Britain, or anywhere else. As I remember it mostly showed that second generation immigrant gained nothing on their parent in most countries, I’n not sure about britian, I think the anglo coutries were a little better. White working class kids is also a headache for britian. I think england may be the european country with the greatest divide between different indigenous groups, with the working class as a heavy drag, and an upper class cognitive elite.
If things are changing for blacks in britain, don’t you think that would be spearheaded by a black elite? What do you think is gonna happen in the coming ten years, Swank? When you say it’s over you sound like a polician running out of money, good the job is done, a complete success, luckily since we no more resources to throw at it.
just more blah blah blah.
define your terms. arguments with vague terms can NEVER be resolved.
no intersecting norms for the races of man however membership in a race is defined. where the phenotype is the expectation/mean of a representative population.
…this is the contention.
because humans can’t be treated like rats, it is difficult or impossible to find conditions where
1. environment is the same.
2. the populations are representative.
let alone find thousands of such cases and thus be able to claim with some confidence that there is no norm intersection or at least intersection is rare.
yeah that’s it Hamlet,
the reason why the UK has the most rigid class structure and the greatest inequality in Europe is genetic.
fucking grow up and leave DK. you have no fucking idea how different DK is from the rest of Europe.
Science says one counter example disproves a theory.
“no intersecting norms for the races of man however membership in a race is defined. where the phenotype is the expectation/mean of a representative population.”
Ok, a way of saying for instance that nowhere and never should a typical african come close to a typical european, or else the theory is disproved.
Is that was has at last happened in britain? Do you suggest to drop or extend affirmative action after learning this?
hugh. i’ve never been a fan of affirmative action. foreign aid. or open borders. and that’s not because i’m a cruel mofo.
from each according to his ability (whatever the reason is for his ability being what it is). to each according to his need (whatever the reason is for his need being what it is).
the deep problem isn’t that Harvard has too few blacks or too many Chinese or whatever.
the ultimate problem is that there is any institution such as Harvard.
The reason I asked about AA is I suspect neither you or Swank hostestly believe that kids’ grades in england really mean that much. I guess asking about AA is not Sherlock level of inquiry, but… I think you are gentlemen, who have sympathy for blacks, as americans. But you don’t think that the three british test results, or even a black computer-aided chess champ, disproves what Lynn and Murray etc. have claimed. You must understand how meagre your evidence is. I’m happy to learn about actual evidence, and if you pile up lots of results continuing for years and extending to university level, then sure.
It’s the exact evidence that HBDers use to show a gap — better, in most cases. It’s actual as actual gets. If ‘grades’ don’t mean anything, then why does the GCSE have such a high correl with ‘g,’ Hugh? Did they inflate ‘g’ somehow?
i can’t speak for Swank, but i’m no gent…gents don’t comment on blogs…especially compulsively like me. they have better things to do like play whist or shoot grouse.
it is true that there is some kind of inbuilt incredulity among whites/Europeans, especially the colonials, that black africans are their equals or near it. this incredulity extends to Abos and Amerindians…colonized peoples. the indigenes of the former Raj, however, have so distinguished themselves and had such a distinguished ancient civilization that they are exempt from this prejudice of colonizers.
but Meng Hu, a chinese, is an example of one who was quite agnostic about the issue. and now, of course, the chinese are getting rich in the dark continent which europeans regard, wrongly, as a lost cause.
how did the Romans regard their colonies’ indigenes? then 2000 years after the conquest of Britain it was said of Churchill he believed the Wogs begin at Calais. but afaik Flushto style biological racism is a 19th c invention of Germanic language speaking peoples.
what i really think is that the real differences in the means of whatever populations in all psychological traits, so far as there are really any such things as psychological traits, are small, much smaller than 1 within population SD, and that the real differences are only observable at the very far right end of the curve.
pp and i agree that perfect equality on all psychological traits, so far as there are such things, is…probably impossible. certainly equal norms of reaction is impossible. and that goes for population means and for individuals irrespective of the group to which they belong.
but as species go, humans are quite homogeneous. they lack diversity.
has nothing to do with being a gent. if I was that concerned about the issue, I wouldn’t be spitballing on a blog about it. However, it’s entertaining because the entire HBD-osphere demonstrates that commonsense is uncommon.
Hi correl with ‘g’ ? How is that ‘g’ defined and measured then? Are you saying cetain groups of kids score high on GCSE and then deviate in every other way from the ‘g’ suggested by their GCSE scores?
They don’t ‘deviate’ in every other way. The GCSE is highly correlated with ‘g,’ and CAT scores. Thus, it’s as good as any data used by HBDers to assess ability differences between populations. The fact that you all are trying to diminish this kind of data’s importance proves my real thesis about HBDers:
HBDers don’t care if HBD is true.
If they score high on GCSE, and otherwise display only consistency with that, then the articles linked to by PM about Oxford should be a thing of the past very shortly? And earning power, that will also be aligned with GCSE soon?
No. The Chinese have outstanding GCSE achievement and scores and despite that fact still achieve at lower levels than whites at University. So there are other factors that affect achievement.
Of course, the prediction would be that younger cohorts would do better. And in that source I cited, that seemed to be a conclusion.
GSCE and A-levels aren’t the same thing iirc.
…and despite that fact still achieve at lower levels than whites at University
Don’t you think that undermines the relevance of GCSE? Good measure up to a point, and g-loaded provided you define g as that test and other similar tests.
right. GCSEs aren’t A-levels. though they do sometimes serve as university entrance requirements.
4 A-levels gets you into Oxbridge usually. all of the American bullshit with grades, recommendations, extracurriculars, legacies, etc. simply doesn’t exist.
Oxbridge is dominated by the 7% who attend “public schools”. half of Britain’s medal winners in the last summer games were from that 7%.
learn this by heart Hamlet: Britain is shit.
the UK would have a less rigid class system if the the 11+ exams and grammar schools were reintroduced. the reason for public school dominance is that comprehensives are shit, not that their students are.
Britain is what it is, aaah if only William had been repulsed. But that’s history. According to you and Swank britain is also the place of a miracle, the refutation of Lynn and all the signatories of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainstream_Science_on_Intelligence
huh? “is what it is”? that’s not a Danish expression. i’m thinking you’re not Danish. or maybe you’re a relative of Stig Tofting?
maybe there’s a translation of that paper into Viking talk.
or maybe you haven’t read it.
What do you know about danish expressions Mugabe?
it means that when some linear combination of GCSE or GCE scores and other tests are compared that this linear combo of British school leaving exams is one of the best predictors of the other scores, perhaps the best.
The main point here is that all of this comes from within your own paradigm, playing by HBD rules. It is total destruction. And it’s only round one. But what a round one…
http://i1.wp.com/www.brobible.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Tyson-knockout-10.gif?resize=600%2C338
Further, Asians and Chinese also have lower University outcomes than whites. So the cultural explanation is strong. The data is what it is, spunky.
Yes, Asians have lower outcomes than Whites, and it’s not because of racism or the lack of job opportunities. Whites are just more enterprising than Asians. Some Chinatowns in the Americas have been infiltrated by White gentrifiers, and they have done a pretty good job at it. The children of Chinese immigrants are docile and make boring elites. No wonder the Ivy League doesn’t care for them. They serve no purpose in the grander scheme of things. Asians have no business in White societies. They perform their best in their own continent of East Asia, where uniform hierarchy and conformity suits their inherent nature.
Just curious: What as Jensen’s actual Concept Mastery Test score; is it known?
As far as I know, all that’s been reported is that he claims to have scored the same on the CMT as those members of Terman’s Gifted group who went on to earn a PhD. Daniel Seligman equated this to a Stanford Binet equivalent of IQ 156, however it’s very unclear how to interpret this. Was Jensen’s score on the CMT equivalent to PhD adult gifted kids who scored 156 on the Binet as children, or was it equivalent to an adult IQ of 156 on the CMT itself? And if so, was it ratio IQ or deviation IQ? Lots of ambiguity and room for interpretation.
Thanks for the quick reply. I am curious because the Concept Mastery Test, form T (CMT-T) is all I have to go on, as well, and Jensen’s and my scores on it would have been interesting and fun to compare.
I am curious as to how Seligman derived his equivalency. I have a PDF copy of the CMT-T manual, and it does not give such equivalencies. The closest it comes to doing so is via a table stating the mean CMT-T score for a certain range of Stanford-Binet ratio I.Q.s. For instance, the highest I.Q. range, those at or above 170, had a rounded mean CMT-T score of 156 (ceiling = 190).
The table is reproduced in Grady Towers’ famous “Outsiders” article, linked here:
http://www.worlddreambank.org/O/OUTSIDRS.HTM (about halfway down the page).
The manual gives the mean CMT-T score earned by Ph.D.s as 159, but does not correlate that score with an I.Q. score. Per the table referred to above, however, a 159 would put the Ph.D.s into the above 170 (ratio) I.Q. category.
Other than that, the only other work I’ve seen that correlates CMT scores to I.Q. is this rather extensive discussion:
http://hiqnews.megafoundation.org/2002-9-5_More_on_IQ.htm.
Given the higher ceiling of the older Stanford-Binet I.Q. test, I am guessing that the estimated I.Q. for Jensen would be a ratio I.Q., but of course I have no real idea, either. It could, however, be a deviation I.Q., since, per the equivalency table in the Web page linked immediately above, a 160 CMT-T score correlates with a 155 (deviation) I.Q.
Anyway, take a look at all the pages linked above, if you’re interested. I’d be curious to know what you think.
I am curious as to how Seligman derived his equivalency.
Here’s the full quote from page 63 of his book A Question of Intelligence:
I once asked Jensen if he knew his own IQ. It turned out that he had never taken any of the standard tests, like the WAIS. The question of testing him first arose during the year of his Maryland internship, but by then he could not take the WAIS because he was too familiar with it (having administered it to others perhaps a hundred times). Of the various mental tests he has taken over the years, the Terman Concept Mastery Test (CMT) __ a high-level measure of verbal skills__probably provides the best approximation of an IQ test. Jensen took it when he was forty-three. He declined to tell me the score__and seemed distinctly unhappy at my interest in the subject__but did finally mention that his CMT score was about at the average of those members of Terman’s Gifted Group who had gone on to earn Ph.D.s.
Poking my nose into volume 5 of Terman’s Genetic Studies of Genius, I learn that this subgroup of the gifted had Stanford-Binet IQ equivalents of 156, well into the 99.9 percentile. Which possibly helps to explain why Jensen has been such a dominant figure in the IQ debate.
P.S. Also according to the CMT-T manual, a score of 159 is at the 70th percentile among the Terman gifted group. For reference, a score of 177 is at the 95th percentile of the group, and the group itself had childhood Stanford-Binet ratio I.Q. scores at the 99th percentile of the general population.
Argh–one last comment/correction: a CMT-T score of 159 is at the 75th percentile of the Terman gifted group as a whole, not the 70th.
Is this blog trying to make us believe that Jensen was more intelligent than Carson ?
OK, thanks. The I.Q.s reported in volume 5 of Terman’s Genetic Studies of Genius would almost certainly have been ratio I.Q. scores, and the physicists would likely have been tested as children. According to John Scoville’s log normal distribution equivalency tables*, the Ph.D.s’ average ratio I.Q. of 156 would equate to a deviation I.Q. of 147.4.
On the other hand, as I mentioned earlier, assuming Jensen scored at or around the mean on the CMT-T for Ph.Ds as reported in the CMT-T manual, then that score would equate to a deviation I.Q. of around 154 -155 (per the equivalencies calculated at the Mega Foundation “More on I.Q.” page that I linked to in my second post).
* http://hiqnews.megafoundation.org/John_Scoville_Paper.htm
OK, thanks. The I.Q.s reported in volume 5 of Terman’s Genetic Studies of Genius would almost certainly have been ratio I.Q. scores,
Unless they were referring to their scores on the CMT itself, since that is an adult test and they were tested as adults, so it’d be kind of awkward to express adult performance on an IQ test as a ratio IQ of 156
would likely have been tested as children. According to John Scoville’s log normal distribution equivalency tables*, the Ph.D.s’ average ratio I.Q. of 156 would equate to a deviation I.Q. of 147.4.
And Scoville used an SD of 16, so converting to the now more commonly used sigma 15 deviation scale, it equates to an IQ of 144.
And people who averaged an equivalent of 144 as children on the Binet would likely regress to the mean as adult on the CMT, because of the imperfect stability of IQ across the life span and the imperfect correlation between the two tests, though this is somewhat negated by their PhD status (an independent indicator of high IQ). So if 144 was the childhood IQ equivalent, then the adult IQ equivalent on the CMT might be in the 130s.
*I meant Ph.Ds, not physicists. Sorry about all the corrections. I’ll blame a tiring day at work for all this sloppiness.