More evidence that the black race is extremely ancient

Given the fact that modern humans evolved in sub-Saharan Africa, and given the fact that even people whose ancestors left Africa some 70,000 years ago (Andaman Islanders) look African, I have long believed that blacks are the oldest human race.  Indeed when word first spread in the late 1980s that all human mitochondrial DNA traced back to Africa, Newsweek portrayed the first modern humans as black.


Thus I was intrigued to learn about a 33,000 year old skeleton from Nazlet Khater, Upper Egypt that “displays Negroid characteristics”.

A landmark study published in the year 2000 concluded:

it is possible that the Nazlet Khater specimen is part of a relict population of this proto-Khoisan Negro stock which extended as far north as Nazlet Khater at least until the late part of the Late Pleistocene.

The black race is extremely ancient.


Norman Bates and the extreme female brain

With Halloween only weeks away, it’s time to start writing scarier articles, though every article is scary when you read some of the folks that populate my comment section 🙂

Speaking of psychos, as a kid not much scared me more than the Psycho movies.  I didn’t even know what they were about but seeing the images in the video stores was enough to keep me up at night.  Not the original Psycho, but the sequels, because after 22 years in the mental hospital, an older, greyer Norman Bates was creepier than ever.


I think my favorite is Psycho III, where some reporter is snooping through Norman’s house, and out of the darkness comes Norman, but dressed up like his mother, saying:  “why don’t you leave my poor son Norman alone?”


What made this scene so powerful is that even though he was dressed and speaking like a little old lady, he had the height and body build of a full-grown man, and that juxtaposition was true horror.  Watch the full scene here:

It’s not a coincidence that a psychotic like Norman Bates chose to dress up like a woman.  Just as Hans Asperger argued that Asperger’s syndrome was an extreme form of the male brain, scientists Crespi and Badcock argue that psychosis is extreme female brain, and one piece of evidence they use is that the psychotic population includes a lot of men who transition into women, while the autistic population includes a lot of women who transition into men.

So if autistic women want to be men, what do autistic men want to be?  Macho men?  Someone should do a study to see if autism is more common among extreme body builders.  Of course that doesn’t fit well with the theory that autism is an extreme form of nerdiness, but perhaps that theory is wrong.

Crespi and Badcock argue that on many different variables, psychotics and autistics are at opposite extremes, with neurotypicals in the middle.  Because this reminded me of J.P. Rushton’s controversial theory that on many different traits, Negroids and Mongoloids are at opposite extremes with Caucasoids in the middle,  I suggested back in 2014 that perhaps Negroids might be more at risk for psychosis and Mongoloids might be more at risk for autism, however Rushton claimed Blacks have the most testosterone and East Asians have the least, which should predict Blacks would be the most autistic,  according to the extreme male brain theory.

Microsoft’s How Old Do I Look app is impressively accurate

I did a google search for photos of different generations posing left to right from oldest to youngest, for the same picture and I was impressed by how perfectly Microsoft’s How Old Do I Look app was able to rank them (yellow age squares were added by app):





Guessing age is one of those intuitive tasks that were once thought to be beyond the capacity of computers, but with the advent of machine learning, artificial intelligence is progressing rapidly.


Historic interview with Ayn Rand

I’ve said before that there is no better way to learn about late 20th century America than watching old syndicated daytime talk shows.  This episode of Donahue from 1979 is especially educational.  Despite her small brain, her Jewish genetics allows her to hold her own against the big brained Donahue as she argues that altruism is evil, corporate monopolies are caused by government, education should NOT be publicly funded and no woman should ever be president.

A brilliant rational lady,  but her objectivism becomes subjectivism when asked about the Middle East, as ethnic genetic interests heat up.

Jensen’s India

On pages 54-55 of Daniel Seligman’s book A Question of Intelligence, he reveals Arthur Jensen’s little known interest in India:

In his early years, Jensen was being pulled in still another direction.  While in high school, he developed an enthusiasm for Gandhi and, incredibly found time to produce a book-length manuscript about the Mahatma.  Under Gandhi’s influence,  he also became a vegetarian.  That did not last too long, but Jensen retains an interest in Indian culture and customs–and food.  When he bought a lakeside vacation home several years ago, he put in a second kitchen so he could prepare Indian dishes without getting in his wife’s way.

I asked Jensen what it was about Gandhi that had attracted him.  Was it, for example, the pacifist message?  “No” Jensen said,  “I can’t say I was ever really a pacific.”  (He expected to serve during World War II but ended up with a medical exemption).   Given his determined advocacy of unpopular ideas during much of his life,  the reason he gives for gravitating to Gandhi seems significant.  The main reason:  “Gandhi’s willingness to go wherever his convictions took him.”

From page 76:

…Arthur Jensen once told me a gripping story about a child in India who was denied a formal education because, as a low-caste “untouchable,” he was not allowed to attend the only school in his region.  The child nevertheless managed to learn a lot by spending hours peering through the schoolroom windows,  ultimately,  figuring out what the teacher was explaining at the blackboard.  He learned to read this way,  which enabled him to pursue an education on his own and qualify for the University of Bombay.  Eventually, he became a distinguished Indian lawyer.  It is hard to believe that he would ever have made these heroic efforts to transform his environment without some genetic head start.

Seligman should have asked Jensen what he thought the heritability of IQ in India was during this period.  In the U.S., the WAIS full-scale IQ correlation of identical twins reared apart is about 0.7 by adulthood, suggesting a genotype-phenotype correlation among adopted Americans is an incredible 0.84 (the square root of 0.7)

But these correlations may be spuriously high, because in America, it may not be genes directly raising your scores.  It could be genes causing you to create an environment that raises your scores, so regardless of whether you were raised in a high or low social class, certain genotypes still end up attending university and joining a stimulating occupations that may prepare them for IQ tests.

But in 1930s India, when the caste system so restricted socio-economic mobility that untouchables were prohibited from even entering school, it would have been fascinating to see an IQ study of identical twins reared apart, because you’d have one person confined to a life of unclean labour, and his identical twin raised in an upper caste becoming a doctor.  Only in the most extreme cases, like the anecdote Jensen cited, would an untouchable have become a professional.  Thus, such a study would have given us a more meaningful measure of heritability.

Bushmen & the IQ needed to invent agriculture


There’s been an incredible amount of IQ testing done in South Africa, with entire schools with thousands of kids being administered the Raven Progressive Matrices.  The broad finding is that on a scale where white Americans average IQ 100 and SD = 15, whites South Africans average IQ 96, Indians average IQ 86, Coloureds average IQ 83, and blacks average IQ 69.  The black mean probably sinks to the mid 60s by adulthood because paper-pencil tests (even those like the Raven) are sensitive to schooling and the racial education gap widens at older ages.

It’s clear that the black South Africans are being held back by horrific environments, since the black descendant of slaves reared in First World countries average a far more impressive IQ 85 (white admixture might have boosted their IQs slightly, but slave class ancestry lowered them, so it cancels out).

To a lesser degree, the Coloureds, Indians, and even Whites also have their IQs suppressed by South Africa’s lack of progress.  We know for example that whites (by definition) average 100 in the First World, and early Indian immigrants to the UK (who were much less selected in those days) averaged IQ 93 by the second generation.

Since both Coloureds and Indians served as a buffer group to shield the white South African elite from the black masses, we can assume they enjoyed similar and roughly equal environments.  So if Indians score 3 points higher than Coloureds in South Africa and if Indians have a genetic IQ of 93, then (assuming the Phenotype = Genotype + Environment model), Coloureds have a genetic IQ of 90.

Genetic IQ of Bushmen

Genetic research tells us that the ancestry of the Coloureds is 25% bushmen, 25% regular black, 25% white, and 25% Indian.  Since the genetic IQs of the last three groups can be estimated to be 85, 100, and 93 respectively, simple math tells us the bushmen must have a genetic IQ of 82 for a genetic average of all four groups to equal IQ 90.

The IQ of Bushmen is important because they are sometimes thought to reflect the earliest stage of our species, having split off from other blacks about 250,000 years ago.

My guess is that the first modern humans who evolved in Africa around 300,000  years ago had an average genetic and phenotypic IQ around 80 (as measured by truly culture reduced tests, not pseudo-culture reduced tests like the Raven).

Out of Africa

Then by 70,000 years or so, average IQ (for non-proto Bushmen) increased to 85 and modern humans were able to leave Africa and migrate to locations as difficult to reach as Australia, which at the time was equivalent to going to the moon.  They were also for the first time smart enough to develop agriculture, as proven by the fact that it was independently developed in Papua New Guinea.

IQ 85 seems to be the cut-off needed to independently create agriculture which explain why Papuan New Guineans were able to invent it, and all black Africans with the exception of Bushmen were able to at least acquire it.

But while IQ 85 is high enough to invent agriculture, it was not high enough to create civilization.  That would take a mean IQ of 93 and such high average IQs would only appear for those humans who took the Northern route out of Africa and thus had their wits sharpened by the last Wurm glaciation.

One question is why didn’t Neanderthals develop agriculture if the ice age so selected for IQ?  The answer is Neanderthals were physically adapted to the cold, having mutated into existence in Eurasia.  By contrast modern humans are an African primate that evolved in Africa where we lived exclusively for most of our history. The ice age thus required enormous behavioral adaptability since unlike Neanderthals, our tall slim black bodies were so maladapted for cold.

IQ, nuclear weapons & civilization

Lion of the Blogosphere writes:

The genetically high IQ of Koreans means that North Korea can produce nuclear weapons (which is only a 1950s technology), while countries in Africa are never going to do that. It’s the HBD, stupid.

What a fascinating thing to say!

In my opinion, it’s virtually impossible for a country with a mean genetic IQ below 93 to make nuclear weapons.  Below an average genetic IQ of 93 (white norms),  there are  simply not enough geniuses to figure it out, and what few there are wont have enough smart teachers to guide them.

My guess is all human races can make nuclear weapons except for those who pre-Carleton Coon anthropologists crudely defined as “negroid” (including bushmen, pygmies, and the unrelated australoids).

I think a people’s ancestors needed at least some exposure to the incredible cognitive demands of the last ice age to have the power to either end civilization (nuclear weapons) or create it.

Indeed it was only after humanity had their wits sharpened by the Wurm glaciation that civilization may have been possible because before that ice age, no human race had a mean (genetic) IQ of 93+.

According to

In ancient history, six distinct “cradles” of civilisation are usually identified. These are the regions which appear to have developed civilisation independently or semi-independently.

The six cradles of civilisation were: Egypt, Mesopotamia, the Indus Valley, China, Mexico and Peru.

One curiosity is that, with the exception of China, which emerged a little later, each of these societies emerged around 3000 BCE – as if history’s light was suddenly switched on.

As Michael Hart implied for agriculture, I suspect civilization was likely in climates that were in or near the Goldilocks zone:  warm enough to work with, but cold enough to have selected for 93+ IQ.

What Samoans can teach us about Ashkenazi IQ and brain size


The unspectacular brain size of Ashkenazim has long bothered me because if brain size plays a substantially causal role in IQ, then whatever selected for high Jewish IQ should have also selected for bigger brains by proxy, so the absence of larger brains makes the high Jewish IQ seem more cultural than biological.

Fortunately Dr. Henry Harpending, Greg Cochran, and Jason Hardy came to the rescue by linking the high Ashkenazi IQ to four other biological traits:  Tay-Sachs, Niemann-Pick, Gaucher, and mucolipidosis type IV.

The New York Times reported:

Ashkenazic diseases like Tay-Sachs, they say, are a side effect of genes that promote intelligence.

The explanation that the Ashkenazic disease genes must have some hidden value has long been accepted by other researchers, but no one could find a convincing infectious disease or other threat to which the Ashkenazic genetic ailments might confer protection.

Why Jewish high IQ is linked to disease while East Asian high IQ is linked to brain size is something of a mystery, but may relate to the fact that Jewish IQ had to evolve with lightning speed and evolved in a much smaller population, or it may relate to verbal IQ vs spatial  IQ.  Who knows?  So much research needs to be done and so few scientists are doing it.

I have long argued that height is to weight as brain size is to IQ.  The taller you are, the more room there is a for a heavy body, just as the bigger brained you are, the more room there is for a high IQ mind, but in both cases, other factors determine how much of that room is used.

So in order for me to feel better about Jews having big IQs despite having slightly small brains, I needed to find a race that had big weights, despite having small heights.

Enter Samoans.

In a study where white males averaged 177 cm (SD = 6.4), Samoan men averaged 173 cm.  Translating this to an IQ (Intelligence Quotient) type scale where the mean and SD in the white population are defined as 100 and 15 respectively, Samoans had a HQ (Height Quotient) of 91.

And yet, when it comes to weight, white males averaged only 80.3 kg (SD = 11.9) while Samoan men averaged 94.7 kg.  Once again, setting the white mean and SD at 100 and 15 respectively, Samoans enjoyed a WQ (Weight Quotient) of 118!


So just as Ashkenazi Jews may have brains slightly smaller than the white mean set at 100, (Brain-size quotient = 94) despite having an average IQ that is higher (110), Samoans have heights well below the white mean, despite having weights that are way above.

Because just as Jews makeup for their brain size with Tay-Sachs, Niemann-Pick, Gaucher, and mucolipidosis type IV, Somans make up for their height with big muscles, big fat, and big bones.

Processing Speed: A view from the top by Gypsy

[Note from Pumpkin Person, aug 26, 2017:  The following is a guest article and does not necessarily reflect the views of Pumpkin Person.  Out of respect for the author, please try to keep all comments on topic.  I understand conversations naturally evolve, but at least try to start on-topic]

I have discovered a reasonably rare source revealing the arithmetic abilities of a man whose intellect arguably constitutes the greatest of the 20th century, a man whose genius oversaw the creation of the computer architecture that forms the basis of all modern computers, a man whose great vision extended to the creation of game theory, quantum formalization, the Von Neumann self-replicating space probe and beyond. It’s not an exaggeration to say he laid the groundwork for the present and the future of mankind.

Subsequent to his achievements yarns inevitably follow about the mind behind the achievements, about his capabilities. Stories abound of arithmetic abilities that border on the supernatural, therefore I act in the capacity of Ghostbuster in the course of this article. Inspired in part by PP’s transmission of a theory by a Promethean, and in part by my own speculations on the matter I present the true arithmetical capabilities of a man at the very heighth of intellectual power and the implications for that on processing power, speed and consequently broader intelligence.

The revealing anecdote itself is at the very bottom of this fascinating account of the Princeton mathematical community by Nobel Laureate Eugene Wigner.

His capabilities act as a yardstick for processing power for all those that stand between the average and himself, a measuring stick for what it means to have mental powers; I hope my contribution will allow for PP to develop his vision of processing power and intelligence and from there perhaps extract a method for a more precise estimation of intelligence from this highly g-loaded ability.

In the words of Norman Mcrae in his superlative biography of John Von Neumann: “The story conflicts with the notion that Johnny was a mental calculator without peer. The uninformed view has always held that mathematicians are the very devils at multiplying and dividing. Some are, some are not, and there are always idiot savants here and there who are better at it than even the very best mathematicians.”