Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Ok, then let's talk about the claims of race realist.
For one let's talk about IQ. The first question is the most basic one. What percentage of the US population actually get IQ test? I have never received a formal IQ test, neither has my mother, my grandmother, my cousin, my father, etc. Basically no one in my family ever took an IQ test. In addition to that no one in my girlfriend's family has either. So I can say that 100% of the population does not receive an IQ test, so this must mean only a percentage of the population receive one. So how many people actually take IQ test? How are they selected? What school districts are most common for them? Do private school participate in IQ test studies?
And lastly, where is the actual raw data that these people are using? I can't find the actual raw data anywhere. I'm imaging the dataset in somewhere, but I can't find it. The only thing that can be found are studies. Actually there are a few very small datasets floating around, many of them have nothing to do with race, and the sample sizes are insanely small.
So... it's a conspiracy! The entire field of psychometrics is bogus. All the people doing IQ studies which show racial differences are either evil racists or just bad scientists. And the respected journals publishing their work must be in on this too. Nice work exposing all this.
Quote:
And even if we did somehow get the data, the percentage of IQ test takers are important.
Strange isn't it, that these professional scientists don't understand statistics as well as you do. How can they have arrived at any valid conclusions about IQ without testing you and your girlfriend's families?
Quote:
The common text for IQ and race is Bell Curve, with very little followup since then. This was a study taken in the 80s and early 90s? Back when we didn't really have the computational power we have now, and there was no such thing as data science. Perhaps we need to revisit this with larger sample sizes, better programming techniques, and methodology.
Maybe they could hire you as a consultant to teach them how to do proper 21st century scientific inquiry into race and IQ... but wait, wouldn't that be racist? The whole field of study is illegitimate, right?
The Alt-Right is just a reactionary movement. Every single one of their racial policies was the law of the land in the US prior to the Civil Rights movement. Their views would also be considered mainstream prior to 1965 which was exemplified by writers such as Madison Grant, Carleton Coon, and Lothrop Stoddard. These writers are also popular today in Alt-Right circles. A lot of Alt-Right supporters would probably agree with the views of politicians like Theodore Bilbo or Ben Tillman. Was life really better before 1965? I don't think so and it also wasn't really easy for most White Americans which is why it is so puzzling they want to return that state.
The difference is that they now THINK they are sort of intellectual about it. Which is a lot funnier than the sit-com I am watching on t.v.
For Whites with below average IQs and low levels of education life was better before 1965. They enjoyed an inflated salary and social status by not having to compete against minorities, even smart ones, and other 1st World countries were still rebuilding from WW2. A guy with an IQ of 90 making $50 as a non manager at a factory makes no sense and was never sustainable. Today we are returning to the historical norm where income is mostly based on IQ and education level.
Very true. It isn't that they don't want to compete. Many of them can't compete, and so they want to blame someone else instead of themselves.
The Alt-Right has always existed... but I guess this term is more "appropriate" then calling them what they really are, fascists.
That is rich, when Fascist are Socialist. The alt-Right as you are calling them these days, are anything but socialist.
What is Fascist about the Constitution?
The Alt-Right has always existed... but I guess this term is more "appropriate" then calling them what they really are, fascists.
They are reactionaries not really fascists. They are very naive though since they think they can actually govern a country. Considering all the enemies they made, they will barely even be able to manage the White House janitorial staff let alone the government.
So... it's a conspiracy! The entire field of psychometrics is bogus. All the people doing IQ studies which show racial differences are either evil racists or just bad scientists. And the respected journals publishing their work must be in on this too. Nice work exposing all this.
Well, I think if we're going to give the work of Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen credence, then we need to accept their methods and conclusions in their entirety.
Quote:
Lynn seems to have accepted this conclusion. The current issue of the academic journal Personality and Individual Differences is organized as a tribute to Lynn and contains a lengthy interview in which he describes the turning points of his career, beginning with his appointment as a research professor in Dublin. His official responsibility was to investigate the social and economic problems of Ireland, and he soon concluded that the nation’s backwardness was largely due to the low IQ of its people, with the only obvious solution being a strong eugenics program, presumably including sterilization of a substantial fraction of the population.
Lynn's research showed that the average IQ in Ireland was 87, which was a full standard deviation away from Irish-Americans in the 1970s. Lynn argued that Irish IQ was fixed and hereditable, but as Unz points out, that hypothesis can't be true because IQ scores rose over time. The same was true in Germany where a 17 point gap existed between East and West German children during the Cold War.
Well, I think if we're going to give the work of Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen credence, then we need to accept their methods and conclusions in their entirety.
Lynn's research showed that the average IQ in Ireland was 87, which was a full standard deviation away from Irish-Americans in the 1970s. Lynn argued that Irish IQ was fixed and hereditable, but as Unz points out, that hypothesis can't be true because IQ scores rose over time. The same was true in Germany where a 17 point gap existed between East and West German children during the Cold War.
But who are we to argue with Lynn?
Lynn may have been overly sold on the genetic aspect of intelligence early in his career. But few if any researchers today believe IQ can be ascribed entirely to genes. The usual estimates are around 50/50 for nature vs. nurture. The Flynn effect, which saw substantial increases in average IQs as nations modernized during the 20th century, is well recognized.
Lynn may have been overly sold on the genetic aspect of intelligence early in his career. But few if any researchers today believe IQ can be ascribed entirely to genes. The usual estimates are around 50/50 for nature vs. nurture. The Flynn effect, which saw substantial increases in average IQs as nations modernized during the 20th century, is well recognized.
The eradication of a 17 point IQ gap goes way beyond the Flynn effect. I've never read anything that apportions the determinants of IQ on a percentage basis. Most people in the HBD world seem to be pretty hard hereditarians, which is why so many people lost it when Britain's GSCE and CAT results came out showing poor African and Caribbean students outperforming poor White British students.
I suppose my larger point is that you just can't accept the data you like and reject the data you don't like. There's also a tendency to treat certain authority as gospel (Lynn, Murray, Rushton, etc.) so long as they are saying things you (not "you" specifically) like and rejecting it when they are not.
Very true. It isn't that they don't want to compete. Many of them can't compete, and so they want to blame someone else instead of themselves.
Compete? The blue collar workers are all in the same boat, race aside. No they cant compete with illegals making pennies. The loss of these jobs is devastating to the black community, look at Flint. A black man could support a family on his factory job, just as well a white man, and this was post 1960s. No need to separate the races on this one, its about Americans.
To be real, many of those people may have been working at their capability level, not just coasting doing unskilled work for fun. Factory work isn't the most pleasant, and employees were compensated to a living wage level. What is supposed to happen when you take any chance at that away from people, particularly young men who really don't have the ability to earn a STEM degree or learn a technical trade. They lash out, or give up, either choice involves crime and devastation.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
