Advertisements

Monthly Archives: July 2016

How genetic are school grades?

31 Sunday Jul 2016

Posted by in heritability

≈ 443 Comments

There’s recently been a lot of research on the genetic basis for academic accomplshments (i.e. grades, education level).  One might ask why people are studying school grades when they could be studying IQ.  Well, probably for the same reason that scientists have studied head size when they could have been studying brain size:  The former is more accessible.

Just as it’s easier to put a tape measure around someone’s head than it is to remove their brain from their skull (or now days, shove them under an MRI), it’s easier to ask someone for their GPA or highest degree than it is to give them an IQ test.

As a result, HUGE sample sizes have been emerging linking genes to scholastic success (hat-tip to Steve Hsu):

FT.com: Genetic scoring predicts how children do at school

Professor Robert Plomin, senior author, called the study “a tipping point for predicting individuals’ educational strengths and weaknesses from their DNA”. It is published in the journal Molecular Psychiatry.

An individual’s “polygenic score” is based on the presence or absence of 20,000 common DNA variants across many different genes. Each has a tiny effect on its own but together they explain 10 per cent of the variation in children’s educational attainment at the age of 16.

Taking the square root of 10%, we learn there’s a 0.32 correlation between genetic grades and phenotypic grades (i.e. actual grades).  That’s not a low correlation.  What it suggests is that if you have an embryo that is +5 standard deviations in genetic grades, you can predict with 50% certainty that it will grow up to have grades that are at least +5 SD(0.32) = +1.6 SD (top 5% of an average class), and such an embryo would likely grow to get a graduate degree (top 5% in years of education which I assume would enjoy the same correlation) which is more than even I have! 🙂

Of course as commenter Mugabe/Videla would point out, we don’t know if these are independent genetic effects.  That is, the 0.32 correlation between genetic grades and grades may only hold in specific cultures and thus needs to be tested internationally.

But is even a within culture 0.32 correlation a victory for HBD?  It depends to what extent grades are caused by mental traits (as identified by psychology) as opposed to random factors.  If grades are caused by mental traits then HBD predicts a high correlation between grades and genes because HBD believes mental traits are EXTREMELY genetic by (later) adulthood.

However if grades are caused by random factors (the school or teachers one has, etc), then even a moderate correlation between grades and genes is a win for HBD, because even with all those random factors, a genetic signal is breaking through the random noise.

My sense is that grades are caused in part by two putative mental traits:  IQ (intelligence quotient) and CQ (conscientiousness quotient).

In the general, non-selected U.S. population, IQ correlates about 0.55 which academic success, whether you measure that success by grades in classes where the full range of ability exists, years of education, or prestige of college attended (if any).

Let’s say CQ also correlates 0.55 with academic success, and let’s say there’s a zero correlation between IQ and CQ.  Then we might expect a composite measure of both traits (IQCQ) would explain 61% of the variation in grades

0.55(0.55) + 0.55(0.55) = 0.61

And yet genes only explain 10% of the variation in grades

If we assume that all 10% of the variation in grades that is genetic, is variation in IQCQ, it implies that 16% of IQCQ is genetic, does it not? (10/61 = 16)

That sounds pretty low considering mental traits are often claimed to have heritabilities approaching 80% (of course heritability is not precisely the same thing as phenotypic variation that is genetic, though the term is often used that way).

But maybe the study suffered from range restriction or maybe they only looked at a subset of genes, or maybe I’m making an error in my reasoning or assumptions.

Update July 31, 2016 (evening): On the other hand, finding genes that explain 16% of the variation in mental traits might be considered a HUGE victory for HBD, because we know from Genomewide Complex-Trait Analysis (GCTA), that the amount of  variance explained by specific genes that are found for a particular trait are often AN ORDER OF MAGNITUDE less than the amount of genetic variation in said trait that is shown to exist (at least within countries)

Advertisements

Estimating the IQ of Michelle Obama

31 Sunday Jul 2016

Posted by in politics

≈ 40 Comments

Since Michelle Obama has become First Lady, Oprah has interviewed her perhaps half a dozen times.  Even though Oprah campaigned for the Obamas back in 2007 at a critical time, Oprah NEVER demands that they repay the favour by being interviewed because Oprah seems to consider the Obamas sacred, describing the President as a brilliant black man and the First Lady as a RADIANTLY brilliant black woman.

“I have a rule,” she once explained on her cable network OWN. “I never use my friendship with the Obamas for ANYTHING!”

Period.

Oprah has a reverential worshipful attitude towards blacks she considers brilliant, eloquent, and historic.  When she bought the movie rights to Nobel prize winning Toni Morrison’s book Beloved, she told her agent to give Morrison however much money she wanted.

NO NEGOTIATIONS.

“That’s not how it works,” explained the agent.

“That’s how this will work,” explained Oprah.

Oprah’s razor sharp business instincts fly out the window when she is dealing with historic blacks who she worships like Gods.  So she wouldn’t dream of disrespecting Morrison by negotiating the value of her divine work of literary art, and she wouldn’t dream of disrespecting the First Lady by demanding favours be returned.

Indeed so great is the reverence Oprah has for the First Lady that she is one of only three people in history who Oprah has allowed to share the cover with her on O magazine:

So what is the First Lady’s IQ?

Average IQ of super tall blacks who are best friends or spouses of brilliant blacks: 120

Although First Lady Michelle Obama is black, and these tend to score low on IQ tests, Michelle shows two major signs of intelligence.  She has a brilliant husband, and she’s super tall.  Both the IQ of one’s spouse and one’s own height are positively correlated with IQ.

Michelle Obama has so much in common with morning host Gayle King Bumpus.  Both are famous for their close relationship with a brilliant historic black.  Michelle is the wife of America’s first black president, and Gayle is best friends with North America’s first multi-billionaire black (Oprah).

In addition, both Michelle and Gayle are extremely tall black women.

Gayle is a 5’10” female black boomer with a 140 IQ best friend, and statistics show such people tend to have IQs around 120.  Similarly, Michelle is a 5’11” female black boomer with a 135+ IQ husband, so statistics would predict that she too likely has an IQ around 120.

michelle.PNG

Separated at birth?  Gayle & Michelle are both super tall sidekicks of historic brilliant blacks

A minimum IQ of 114

Individuals don’t always fit the demographic expectation so it’s useful to look at some other evidence.  Michelle Obama claims to have skipped the second grade.  Skipping a grade is a rare and huge achievement that not many people can claim. It suggests that age seven, Michelle was intellectually functioning like at least an eight year old, and thus was mentally developing at 114% the normal rate, implying a ratio IQ of 114 (ratio IQs are valid within the range of IQ 70 to 130, but tend to give silly results beyond those limits).

It should be noted that IQ 114 is a very conservative estimate for Michelle because grade skipping is very rare even for people with IQs above 114, so 114 should be considered the MINIMUM IQ Michelle could have.

A maximum IQ of 122

What is the MAXIMUM IQ Michelle could have?  Here too we have some evidence, thanks to Michelle’s great honesty.  She is famously quoted as saying:

If my future were determined just by my performance on a standardized test, I wouldn’t be here. I guarantee you that.

According to CBS News, when Michelle was growing up, she was never a great standardized test-taker, but because of Straight-A grades and a strong essay  she ended up attending Princeton University.  It is so great that Michelle admitted this, because she gives hopes to so many millions of blacks who also don’t score high on standardized tests, that they too can some day shine as brightly as the First Lady.

More evidence for Michelle Obama’s IQ comes from her Princeton thesis which was made public and has been generally panned. Most cruel was Christopher Hitchens who said:

To describe [the thesis] as hard to read would be a mistake; the thesis cannot be ‘read’ at all, in the strict sense of the verb.  This is because it wasn’t written in any known language.

So based on her self-proclaimed unimpressive test scores and based on the bad reviews of her Princeton thesis, it seems safe to say Michelle’s IQ is lower than the average Ivy League student.  Since the average Ivy League undergrad has an IQ of around 122 (when measured on tests NOT used to select them), then 122 seems like the maximum IQ Michelle could have.

Split the difference: IQ of about 120

With a maximum IQ of 122 and a minimum IQ of 114, an IQ just under 120 sounds like a reasonable guess for Michelle Obama.

Although IQ 120 is a bit below the Ivy League average, it is still higher than 99% of black America and higher than 90% of white America.  An IQ of 120, especially when combined with charisma and outstanding character, more than explains why Michelle is so admired by so many.

A friend indeed

As the Queen of All Media, Oprah understood better than anyone that powerful people are constantly burdened by those who want to use them for something, so as mentioned above, she very shrewdly decided to never use the Obamas for ANYTHING.  Over the years, the Obamas may have realized that Oprah, who campaigned for them long before anyone thought they had a chance of reaching the white house, was one of their very few true fiends.  This may help explain why Oprah was recently invited to the white house to have a special conversation with Michelle.

The moral of the story is that if you want a good friend, be a good friend.  And don’t force yourself on people.  Just show that you are welcoming, and wait for them to invite you:

 

 

 

 

 

Estimating the IQ of Cynthia McKinney

30 Saturday Jul 2016

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 30 Comments

One of my biggest critics, commenter Santoculto recently described former U.S. congresswoman and presidential candidate Cynthia McKinney as “some real brave black women that peepee despise”.

I was curious to see why Santoculto would think I would despise McKinney so I decided to read the link Santoculto posted, and now I know why.

WOW!  This woman is radical in her views.  According to a recent article by forward.com, McKinney is implying that an Israeli plot is behind Europe’s recent terror attacks.  They write:

Former Georgia Rep. Cynthia McKinney tweeted Saturday night: “Same Israeli photographer captures Nice and Munich tragedies. How likely is that? Remember the Dancing Israelis?…”

The Dancing Israelis refers to a group of Israeli men who were caught celebrating and filming the 2001 September 11th attacks as it happened.  This gave rise to the conspiracy theory that Israel may have known about the September 11th attacks in advance since the attack was crucial to getting America to Invade Israel’s Muslim enemies like Iraq.

According to blogger Robert Lindsay, 11 months before 9/11, men were overheard speaking in Hebrew about planes hitting buildings, and one allegedly said “The Arabs are so stupid. They don’t even imagine that we are using them.”

While it’s true that Ashkenazi Jews have perhaps the highest genetic IQ of any ethnic group (mean IQ 110 when reared in the U.S.) and thus can trick other ethnic groups, it’s hard to believe Arabs (average IQ 84 in their home countries) would be dumb enough to be patsies in such a massive conspiracy, and that Americans (average IQ 97) would fall for it.

But Cynthia McKinny apparently believes something like that happened, and is now happening again with the recent terror attacks in Europe.

So what is her IQ?

According to research by scholar Jonathan Wai, about 41% of elite U.S. politicians have IQs in the top 1% of America (IQ 133+) suggesting the average elite U.S. politician has an IQ of 130. But McKinney is more left-wing than easily 98% of elite politicians, making her +2 standard deviation more left-wing than other presidential candidates.

If there were a perfect correlation between left-wing views and IQ, we’d expect her IQ to be 30 points above the average elite politician, but since the correlation is only about 0.3, we’d expect her to be only 0.3(30) IQ points smarter than the typical IQ 130 elite politician:

0.3(30) + 130 = 139

However because the typical super left-wing U.S. politician is white, and McKinney is black, and in the U.S., blacks tend to score about 15 IQ points lower than whites, even whites of similar accomplishment, I would guess that McKinney is 15 IQ points less intelligent than the average super-left-wing elite politician:

McKinney’s IQ = 139 – 15 = 124

But even an IQ of 124 is very high when you consider the average black American has an IQ of 85, the average white American has an IQ of 100, and even the average Jewish American has an IQ of 110. An IQ of 124 is about what a white PhD or a white Ivy League undergrad would score on an official IQ test.  It is higher than roughly 95% of white America.

According to talk show host Alex Jones, who claims his own IQ is an incredible 140, McKinney is as smart as they come, so he would likely estimate her IQ to be a lot higher than I have.

But regardless of how smart she may be, her views are considered nutty by the mainstream media and the ultra-influential pro-Israel lobby was instrumental in driving her out of congress.  She is only taken seriously by alternative media like Alex Jones, and I suspect her latest comments are much too taboo for even him.

Estimating the IQ of Gayle King Bumpus

27 Wednesday Jul 2016

Posted by in Oprah

≈ 62 Comments

American Museum of the Moving Image Salute to John Travolta - Show and Backstage

For the last 40 years, Oprah and Gayle King Bumpus have had the kind deep intimate friendship that most women can only dream of, sharing secrets, bonding, laughing, and talking on the phone every single day.

The friendship began in 1976 when Oprah was just 22 and was hired to co-anchor the evening news in Baltimore, with a grumpy older white man who did not want to co-host the news with young Oprah.  One day Gayle, who was a 21 year old production assistant, walked up Oprah to say how proud she was to be on such a historic team (at the time, a black women co-anchoring the evening news was considered historic).

One evening there was a snow storm and Gayle was afraid to drive all the way home.

“Stay at my place,” suggested Oprah.

“But I have no underwear,” said Gayle.

“I’ll give you underwear,” said Oprah.

That snowy night in 1976, the two women stayed up all night talking and bonding, and 40 years later, they are still talking and bonding every night.  Although those  early Baltimore years were some of the worst in Oprah’s life, professionally and romantically, Gayle was the constant shining light.

ca4c389f88c058875d9871bc62649ee9

It was Oprah and Gayle against the World. Two young black girls trying to make it in the white male dominated world of TV news, where many simply did not want them.

The two would spend the 1970s hitting the Baltimore bars, looking for sexy black men.  They would stay out all night getting drunk.  Well, Oprah would get drunk.  Teetotaler Gayle would sip on cocoa or order a glass of milk, much to Oprah’s chagrin.

Now in their 60s, the two women must look back with nostalgia to those long nights in bars and night clubs, in their carefree 20s, in the heart of the 1970s.  To quote the song 1973 by James Blunt:

And though time goes by I will always be, in a club with you, in 1973

While Gayle King knew her best friend was “scary smart”, little did she know that her friend’s head circumference measured a superhuman 25.25″ around, and that such a huge brain size would give Oprah the intelligence to rocket out of Baltimore, and become, at her peak, both the World’s richest black and the World’s most influential woman, and that as the loyal best friend, Gayle would come along for the ride, seated in first class.

And what a ride it’s been.

So what is Gayle’s IQ?

Expected IQ of Oprah’s black best friend: 110

If we begin with the fact that on a scale where the average white American has an IQ of 100 (Standard Deviation = 15), the average African American has an IQ of 85 (SD possibly 15, though reports vary).  The average African American thus has a best friend who also has an IQ  of 85.  However Gayle is best friends with Oprah, who I believe has an incredible IQ of 140 (3.66 SD higher than the average best friend of a black American).

It is known that the IQs of spouses correlate at about 0.45.  If we assume the IQs of best friends also correlate at 0.45, then simple regression would predict Gayle’s IQ to be about 45% as far above the black mean as Oprah’s:

0.45(3.66 SD) = 1.65 SD

Being 1.65 SD above the African American mean implies an IQ of 1.65(15) + 85 = 110

Expected IQ of a 5’10” black female boomer: 98

Having a brilliant best friend is not the only sign of intelligence Gayle displays.  Gayle is also 5’10” tall.  The average African American woman over 60 is about 5’3″ (SD = 1.98 inches).  Thus Gayle is an astonishing +3.53 SD in height!  Given the within sex, within race correlation between IQ and height is about 0.24, simple regression would predict an IQ of 0.24(+3.54 SD) =  0.85 above the black mean, which is 98.

Expected IQ of 5’10” black female boomer who is best friends with Oprah: About 120

So based on the IQ of her best friend, we’d expect Gayle to have an IQ of 110, and based on her height, wed expect Gayle to have an IQ of 98.  What happens when both of these predictors are considered together?

Obviously having two signs of intelligence (brilliant best friend AND super tall height) would predict a higher IQ than having just one of these.

It’s tempting to simply add the prediction based on best friend’s IQ to the prediction based on height:

0.45(best friend IQ) + 0.24(height)

However the problem with doing that is that the two predictions are not entirely independent so simply adding them redundantly counts their shared predictive power twice.

According to the brilliant Promethean who introduced me to multiple regression, in order to make predictions from multiple variables, we must first know the correlation between the variables themselves.  If we assume that the IQ of one’s best friend and one’s height only correlate because they both correlate with one’s own IQ, then taking each variable’s correlation with one’s own IQ (0.45 and 0.24 respectively) and multiplying them (0.45 * 0.24 = 0.11), gives the correlation between the variables themselves.

Assuming these two predictors (best friend’s IQ and personal height) correlate 0.11, instead of the predictors having values of 0.45 and 0.24, they are reduced to 0.43 and 0.19, because these slightly lower values reflect their predictive power independent of one another.  Thus Gayle’s expected IQ:

IQ = 0.43(best friend’s IQ) + 0.19(height)

IQ = 0.43(3.66 SD) + 0.19(3.54 SD)

IQ = 1.57 SD  + 0.67 SD

IQ = 2.24 SD

Thus I estimate Gayles’s IQ to be an impressive 2.24 SD above the black mean, or roughly IQ 120.  In other words, I think Gayle is smarter than 99% of black America, and smarter than 90% of white America.

However this is a very crude estimate with a large standard error.  At best we can say with 95% confidence that Gayle’s IQ is anywhere from 95 to 145, with 120 being roughly the best guess.

Gayle & Charlie Rose

You can go pretty far in America with an IQ of 120, especially when your best friend is the most influential woman on the planet.  Several years ago Gayle was hired to host CBS This Morning with Charlie Rosie.  Oprah told Gayle it was a once in a lifetime opportunity so Gayle took the job, and Gayle recently landed a coveted interview with the Obamas.

Gayle would sometimes joke about having a romance with Charlie Rose, and Rose would play along with the joke.  Because Gayle is so tall, the #1 trait she looks for in a man is height, so the 6’3″ Rose might appeal to Gayle.  She would also appreciate the fact that Rose seems highly intelligent, curious, interested in current events, and extremely successful and famous.

So why then has there been so romance between these two seemingly single morning co-stars? Does the erudite Chalie Rose think the gossipy Gayle is just not good enough for him, or is it Gayle who is not interested in Rose?

 

 

 

Bernie steals the show

26 Tuesday Jul 2016

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 115 Comments

My hero Bernie Sanders, who towers as the most admired Jewish man in the entire World, emerged as the star of the Democratic convention this evening.  When he came out to speak, the crowd went wild, cheering so long and so loud, that it looked like he’d never be able to speak.

As the camera panned the crowd, so many people were crying at the mere sight of Bernie.  Crying about what could have been.  Grieving for a President who should have been.  Looking out at all his screaming fans, Sanders himself almost lost composure and started crying himself.

The contrast between the enthusiasm for Sanders and the tepid response to the Elizabeth Warren speech he followed was stark.  Warren was even heckled by protesters who shouted “we trusted you”.

Many on the progressive left had hoped Elizabeth Warren would have dived in and challenged Hillary for the Democratic nomination.  When she was too scared to do so, they had hoped she would at least endorse Bernie Sanders, who was a much better fit with her progressive values than Hillary is.  But sadly, either because of jealousy or political opportunism, she refused to back anyone, and her silence cost Bernie the nomination.

Once Hillary secured the nomination, Warren then endorsed Hillary and emerged as an extreme attack dog against Donald Trump, shaming him for acquiring his wealth through inheritance and cheating others.

I actually find Warren, who shakes and trembles as she delivers her scathing anti-Trump tirades to be quite unintentionally comical, and ask, where is Saturday Night Live to impersonate this clown?  But alas, they’re in the tank for Hillary, so no mocking her supporters.

But it’s easy for Warren, as a Democrat, to attack Trump.  The real courage would have been in supporting Bernie over Hillary.  Where was she when we needed her?

 

How many races are there?

23 Saturday Jul 2016

Posted by in ethnicity

≈ 119 Comments

In his 1998 book The g Factor, scholar Arthur Jensen used an extremely objective method to classify humans in different races: Varimax rotation of principal components applied to the genes of 42 populations studied by scholars Nei & Roychoudhury (1993).  What I love about this is Jensen used the eigenvalues > 1 rule for determining the number of components to be retained for rotation.

So based on “genetic similarity”, there are roughly six major races, though in the chart below (which I adapted from Jensen) I prefer to label all six using just three major anthropological types: Negroid, Caucasoid, and Mongoloid.  Different ethnic groups have strong or weak loadings on the different components (races) and some load on multiple components, which as Jensen noted, reflect, central tendencies, not discrete categories.

varimax rotation components 1 2 3 4 5 6
population asian mongoloid caucasoid hybridized mongoloid african negroid american mongoloid non-african negroid
pygmy 651
nigerian 734
bantu 747
san (bushman) 465
lapp 500
finn 988
german 978
english 948
italian 989
iranian 635
northern indian 704
japanese 936 214
korean 959 229
tibetan 855
mongolian 842 357
southern chinese 331 771
thai 814
filipino 782
indonesian 749
polynesian 526 284
micronesian 521 328
australian (aborigines) 706
papuan (new guineans) 742
north amerindian 804
south amerindian 563
eskimo 726

I find it interesting that Italians are the most Caucasoid of all Caucasoid ethnicities (clocking in at 989). Italians look like a hybrid of what I believe are the three Caucasoid sub-races: whites, dark caucasoids, and Ashkenazim; thus it makes sense that Italians are the essence of the Caucasoid race.

It should be noted that genetic distance is measured using relatively neutral genes, which by definition are relatively insensitive to natural selection. It’s probably for this reason that sub-Saharan and Australoids get divided into different races, despite both being Negroid in appearance and IQ; because neutral genes primarily reflect the genetic clock (time since populations split) and not how truly similar folks are. So if you define race by how recently people shared a common ancestor, then this analysis should please you, but if you define race by how much people preserve the traits of a common ancestor, then an analysis using non-neutral genes is badly needed.

We need to talk about Kevin (2011)

17 Sunday Jul 2016

Posted by in horror

≈ 163 Comments

Pumpkin Person rating: 9/10

So I was in the very small town of Casselman, Ontario, just East of Ottawa, the other day.  Commenter JS might like this town, as the people there all seem to prefer to speak in French, though they know how to speak English for business purposes.

I stopped at a gas station and I noticed the film We need to talk about Kevin on sale for only $5.  I first heard of the film when actress Tilda Swinton promoted it on Charlie Rose.  Since Rose’s show focuses on intellectual topics, I figured the film might have some depth.  Always looking for quality horror and dark dramas to add to my collection, I snatched it up.

The film is about the typical high IQ highly educated liberal career woman named Eva (played by Swinton), who like so many smart women, is not very maternal, going through the struggle of having a baby.

Except in this case the adjustment to motherhood is way harder because the baby is born pure evil.  From birth it seems like the baby’s only purpose is to make his mother’s life hell on Earth.  For the first few months of life, he does nothing but scream all day long.  Then he refuses to talk, causing Eva to have him checked for autism.  The East Asian doctor concludes he’s perfectly normal.

Eva soon discovers the child is feigning developmental delays as a way of torturing his mother.  He pretends he doesn’t know any numbers, but secretly seems to have a genius IQ and can count to the stratosphere.  He pretends he can’t use a toilet, just to force Eva to change his diaper, well past the toddler years.  He sprays paint all over a bedroom she spent days decorating.

Yet around his father, and everyone else, he acts like a perfect little angel, thus demonizing Eva as a bad mother who doesn’t love her own son.

Once he becomes a teenager, is evil only hardens, but not even Eva can imagine the utter horror he will release on the town where he lives.

The film really deserved an Oscar, either for the excellent performance of Swinton, as the woman who hates being a mother, or the performances of Ezra Miller, as the teenaged Kevin, or Rock Duer or Jasper Newell who plays Kevin as a child. Newell was an incredibly precocious actor, and I appreciate how much he looks like Duer, who plays him as a toddler, and Miller, who plays him as an adolescent, and how much all three boys look like Swinton who plays the mother.  Clearly a lot of care went into the casting and makes the film that much more believable.

Interestingly Miller is half Ashkenazi, half white, but he looks half East Asian, half white.  Newell and Duer look similar, though I don’t know what their true background is.  Such a high IQ ethnic look makes the character’s genius more believable, as you see a lot of these Eurasian looking kids in classes for the gifted.

Kevin’s high IQ is also revealed through his constant sarcasm (seems common in high IQ boys) and clever dialogue.  In a scene where his mother discovers his collection of computer viruses, and asks what’s the point, he smartly replies, as some of you do:

“There is no point.  That’s the point”

In a scene where Kevin overhears that his mother doesn’t want custody of him when she divorces his father, the father tries to placate Kevin by saying the discussion was heard out of context.

“How could I not know the context,” Kevin replies. “I AM the context.”

I recommend this film for sophisticated realistic horror fans, who like real character development, and artsy non-linear story telling.

 

World’s smartest ethnic group (sorry Jews, not you)

16 Saturday Jul 2016

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 329 Comments

With their towering average IQ of 110 (white norms) and their incredible overrepresentation among billionaires and media, I had always assumed American Jews were the smartest ethnic group on Earth.  But I recently discovered that the Singapore Chinese have them beat, with a breathtaking average IQ of 114.

This may help explain why Singapore has been called the World’s greatest city with spectacular architecture.

singapore1

Despite the incredible financial and media achievements of American Jews, it makes sense that the Singapore Chinese would be even smarter, because as accomplished as Jews are, at the end of the day, they’re still Caucasoids, and this puts a genetic ceiling on how smart they can be.   Despite milenia of selection for higher intelligence in the Ashkenazi community, they eventually just hit a genetic wall, much like thoroughbread horse breading reached a genetic wall in the 1970s, where no horse could exceed Secretariat’s speed (as commenter Mugabe noted).

There’s only so fast a horse can be, and there’s only so smart a Caucasoid can be (on average) before genetic diseases and side-effects loom large.

To get beyond these limits, you need a reshuffling of the genetic deck.  A massive mutation like change, transforming a horse into a cheetah, transforming a Caucasoid into a Mongoloid.

According to scholar J.P. Rushton, the Mongoloids branched off the Caucasoids tens of thousands of years ago in a new and improved form.

“One theoretical possibility,” said Rushton, “is that evolution is progressive, and some populations are more advanced than others.”

Things get better over time.  Mongoloids are humanity’s final draft.  The newest, latest model, in a long line of revisions.  The ultimate triumph of trial and error.  To paraphrase Martin Luther King, the arch of evolution is long, but bends towards perfection.

Overall the Mongoloid ethnic groups range from IQ 86 (Native Americans) to IQ 114 (Singapore Chinese) suggesting a global mean IQ of around 100.

Meanwhile the Caucasoid ethnic groups range from IQ 68 (gypsies) to IQ 110 (American Jews), suggesting a global mean IQ of around 89.

The first and oldest human race are the Negroids, and their IQs reflect their archaic origin.  Their ethnic groups range from about IQ 51 (Bushmen and pygmies) to about IQ 93 (Black British), suggesting a global mean of around IQ 72.

The enormous IQ range, even within macro-racial groups, suggests both genetic and environmental causes.

 

A sad story

12 Tuesday Jul 2016

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 343 Comments

Do you remember your first crush?  Mine was a teenaged girl who lived down the street (we’ll call her Sarah-not her real name).  I was only four-years-old, and she was a teenager who would sometimes babysit me.  She was the stereotypical 80s girl.  I was always picking dandelions to give her and tagging along when she would hang out with her teenaged friends.  Those were innocent times in the idyllic suburbs, long before the internet and the war on terror.

There was a group that was wildly popular with many of the teenagers in the 1980s.  Their name was Twisted Sister.

It seemed everyone just loved them.  Well everyone except Sarah, who was too preppy and innocent for that heavy metal music.

One day Sarah went to a night club, and the night club had a surprise.  They had landed as their guests for the evening, the one, the only Twisted Sister!

hqdefault

The crowd went wild.  People were singing along, screaming, getting out of their seat and dancing.  It was total pandemonium.

Except for Sarah.  She just sat there at a table by herself in the back of the room, looking completely unenthused.

When the music stopped, and the show ended, everyone began leaving the night club, incredibly stoked by the exhilarating show.

Except for Sarah.  She just sat there at her table with her cigarette (you could smoke in night clubs in those days) completely unimpressed by the show that everyone else had loved so much.

Once everyone left the night club, Sarah just sat there…

In the dark…

Now this is where the story gets really scary.

Apparently Twisted Sister could see her.  They could see her the whole time, while they were up there singing.  They could see that everyone in the room was rocking out to their music except for her.

And even more frightening, they were still there…

Waiting…

What happened next would be Sarah’s deep dark secret.

A shame she would live with for decades.

According to Sarah (and I was told this second hand from someone I trust), after everyone left and Sarah was virtually alone in the nightclub, Twisted Sister came barging out of the backroom and confronted her.

Paul Natkin Archive

“You gotta FUCKING problem?  You think you’re too good for our music?”, they said, or said something to that effect.

“It’s just not my kind of music,” she explained.

And then, the lead singer of the group, allegedly spit on her.

 

 

 

The most terrifying interview I have ever heard

09 Saturday Jul 2016

Posted by in Uncategorized

≈ 103 Comments

december8202013

Image found here

It’s so ironic that from the quiet suburbs of Chicago, a sweet lady named Deanna Spingola hosts a talk show discussing the most terrifying conspiracy theories imaginable.  I’ve always been skeptical of conspiracy theories, but my God, this is a scary one.

It’s interesting that some of her guests have begun calling themselves conspiracy realists, since the term conspiracy theorist was used to discredit them.  They argue that there is nothing nutty about believing in conspiracies, noting that people are found guilty of “conspiracy” in court rooms all the time.