Steve Hsu has a blog post up about new research showing intelligence is genetic:
General cognitive function is a prominent human trait associated with many important life outcomes including longevity. The substantial heritability of general cognitive function is known to be polygenic, but it has had little explication in terms of the contributing genetic variants. Here, we combined cognitive and genetic data from the CHARGE and COGENT consortia, and UK Biobank (total N=280,360). We found 9,714 genome-wide significant SNPs in 99 independent loci. Most showed clear evidence of functional importance. Among many novel genes associated with general cognitive function were SGCZ, ATXN1, MAPT, AUTS2, and P2RY6. Within the novel genetic loci were variants associated with neurodegenerative disorders, neurodevelopmental disorders, physical and psychiatric illnesses, brain structure, and BMI. Gene-based analyses found 536 genes significantly associated with general cognitive function; many were highly expressed in the brain, and associated with neurogenesis and dendrite gene sets. Genetic association results predicted up to 4% of general cognitive function variance in independent samples. There was significant genetic overlap between general cognitive function and information processing speed, as well as many health variables including longevity.
Of course predicting 4% of the variance is not all that exciting, giving that we already have biological variables (brain size) that can predict roughly 20% of the variance. But when you consider how hard these SNPs are to find with any reliability (each one explains such a tiny percentage of the variance that you need insanely large samples to take extremely g loaded tests as adults to find them) it’s a reasonable number. Scientists have made far more progress finding genes for IQ than they’ve made finding life on other planets, even though theoretically both exist in droves. And few doubt height is extremely genetic, even though the vast majority of assumed height genes have not been found.
More interesting to me is that the genes they did find were directly related to intelligence (i.e. associated with neurological impairments) because this suggests the genes are not just correlated with intelligence, but cause it too. One of my concerns was that the heritability of IQ could just be a by-product of test motivation being genetic, or some other indirect effect, so the fact that it’s directly related to neurological functioning is encouraging.
Of course the usual reaction norms disclaimer about these genes likely only being found in local populations always applies.
Pumpkin Person 
Explain what ‘reaction norms’ are.
I elaborated on reaction norms in this article
https://pumpkinperson.com/2017/07/05/reaction-norms-vs-independent-genetic-effects/
Yes, its interesting.
almost all the data is from the US and the UK. and it hasn’t been replicated.
it means if it were possible to predict IQ (or any phenotype) directly from the genotype, but only within one country, then it’s not clear that the genetic architecture of IQ has been discovered except for that one country at a specific point in history. the prediction function genotype –> phenotype would have to be applied to nigerian genomes too, for example. it might not work very well.
The high academic achievement of Indian Americans is evidence against reaction norms, because these are the children of the brightest Indians, and whatever genes made their parents smart in India is making the kids smart in America, though Tiger parenting is a confound.
Obama is also evidence against reaction norms. His dad was a genius in Kenya, and his two sons are brilliant, as Lion noted, and this despite not being raised by him, and all three of them in 3 different countries.
so now peepee is indian?
oprah-wallah?
Deepak Chopra joked that if Oprah married him she could be Oprah Chopra.
A lot of Indians are HUGE Oprah fans. I noticed tons of Indians when I went to see Oprah when she came to the Toronto convention centre.
Yet at the same time, Oprah experienced vicious racism in the Indian press during her trip to India because blacks are considered the lowest of the lowest of the lowest in India. She was smart enough to ignore it.
[redacted by pp, aug 23, 2017]
it would have to be that genes/SNPs discovered among whites in the US and the UK also predicted IQ in india, in indian americans, in kenya, and in kenyan americans.
but do indians and kenyans have these genes?
they do!
race is like a costume or a mask. it’s not pc bs. almost all of human genetic variation is within racial groups.
My point is that the kids of high IQ parents in India/Kenya are high IQ in other countries. If IQ genes were country dependent, this shouldn’t happen.
lion’s commenter yakov claimed that ne asian americans are taller than asians in asia. peepee says this isn’t true. it matters, because if it’s true the nutrition theory of the flynn effect is once again falsified, as ne asian americans do not score higher on IQ tests than ne asians in ne asia.
Well nutrition’s almost certainly not the only explanation for the Flynn effect, but it must be part of the story, because over the 20th century head size, and presumably brain size, increased dramatically, and sex adjusted brain size correlates about 0.45 with IQ, and the correlation is likely causal.
[redacted by pp, aug 23, 2017]
it could be heads were smaller because people were shorter and the brain size IQ correlation was the same AND IQs were also the same.
if ne asians in the US are taller, then they also have bigger brains.
yet they are not smarter, apparently.
it could be heads were smaller because people were shorter
The head size increase is far greater than predicted by the height increase given the small correlation between height and head size
if ne asians in the US are taller, then they also have bigger brains.
Not necessarily. There was one study where they found that being adopted into a middle class home raised the height of kids, but not their head size or IQ. Brain growth largely occurs prenatally and I suspect that’s where the biological component of the Flynn effect occurred.
And even in America, Asians are about 7.5 cm shorter than whites, though I don’t know if they’re shorter than in their home countries
Reading this ‘culture of critique’ people mention in the alt right. It seems like a more comprehensive retread. I didn’t know Einstein was that tribal or proud of his jewishness to the point he was an apologist for bolshevism.
Or that the jews had near close domination of media by the 30s.
It just goes to show something I keep saying – people that have very strong cognitive abilities are not going to be less tribal. In fact, they are probably going to be more tribal. The only people with high IQs that aren’t tribal are gentiles and thats because its been conditioned.
Tribalism is the sine que non of evolution. Probably more than individual mate sorting (a very recent western thing) if you bother to read a history book.
And east asians I suppose. Most Asian PhD students I’ve met would probably be more likely to let you have 10 minutes with their wife than take up a rifle and stand at the border.
http://takimag.com/article/war_of_the_classes_steve_sailer/print#axzz4qM8yXeGe
Well Steve makes roberts point that economics matters more.I always say genetics matters more. This madness doesnt happen in East Asia.
Nationalism is really a proxy for genetic/family kinship.
Thats why jews always try to make nations they infest an abstract ‘idea’ which is a complete contradiction to the notion of a nation (unsurprisingly, except israel). If it was up to the jews Europe would mean the EU and a set of beliefs in liberalism, free trade rah rah rah …barf into doggy bag.
Abstraction is a ridiculous exercise in any endeavour when an understanding of the underlying phenomenon is already grasped. The reason abstractions, symbols and fables are used is because they are mainly used by people brainwashing lower IQ people by putting packaging on something heinous or fraudulent.
This is why people talk about the ‘free market’ instead of saying ‘people should get to do whatever they want to make money’.One of these ways of framing it is going to convince someone than speaking the ‘earthy’ definition of it.
another recent sailer piece claims asians score lower on the LSAT than whites but not by much. just like they score higher on the GMAT but not by much.
this is interesting because asian americans should be smarter than asians in asia, yet according to lynn’s figures for hk, s korea, they aren’t. or rather ne asians aren’t. asian americans tend to be richer than average and they live longer than asians in asia. the rich don’t always live longer than the poor in the US. the difference varies a lot by location. in sf the poor live as long as the rich iirc. the US really is a sack of potatoes, “suburbs in search of a city”, the opposite of a melting pot even for its whites.
and e pluribus unum originally referred to the states not to peoples. the melting pot rot is also 20th c.
until the late 19th c the US was a nation-state. mostly anglo-saxon. ben franklin was against allowing germans and swedes in. it was like australia used to be plus black slaves.
sailer is close to the point i’ve made multiple times. there should be affirmative action based on class AND on how american one’s ancestry is. this is inheritance. citizenship is property. if you’re a hillbilly whose ancestors fought in the revolutionary war you should have some preference (extra points) in admissions, hiring, promotion, etc. citizenship should be treated like property.
To paraphrase Sailer, this is a race war, disguised as a racism war.
but not a race war between white people and brown or black people.
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/detroit_2017
Another magic negro worship movie goyim.
Makes me sick looking at the trailer on tv.
Shame Goyim! Feel the shame! Repent for RACISM!
Okay, calm down
My favourite magic negro worship sermon was 10000 years a slave.
Massa, i just want a cup of yo wata. Please so thirsty. I know the constitution. It says we are all equal under god and america is an idea in de science fiction!
the native americans practiced slavery. the black africans sold their slaves to whites. there wasn’t any rounding up of blacks by whites. whites were slaves in ancient greece and rome.
according to richard thpenther whites as slave masters differed from other peoples as slave masters only in that whites were better at being slave masters. thpenther neglects the racial difference naturally. colonial powers never brought slaves to their home countries. why? yet modern american slavers bring them to the US. at first the native americans were enslaved, but they died. only then did spanish, pork-and-cheese, french, and british turn to black africans slaves. the british also used white indentured servants, temporary slaves.
as chomsky has noted one argument for slavery by one confederate was actually a good argument. namely that owning one’s workers encouraged one to take care of them. while northerners merely rented/leased their workers. here chomsky shows he knows marx even though he has derogated marx at other times.
Part of the reason I became an HBDer was as a child my impression was blacks were just captured by more advanced races like animals, and that blacks were the only slaves in history. As I got older I learned the reality was more nuanced.
Or was it?
I am a high psychology teacher and I am looking for some more basic research (a primer for high school students) that my students could use to better understand IQ, its assessment, and the issue of heritability. Do you have any recommendations?
The book A Question of Intelligence: The IQ Debate in America by the late Daniel Seligman is a really clearly written thorough introduction to the topic, though a few chapters deal with racial differences in IQ which may be offensive to many of your students, so rather than assigning the whole book, you could just photocopy relevant chapters.