PLAYER57832 wrote:Napoleon Ier wrote:
So how do you explain the fact that negroes have an IQ (which are 80% genetically determined) 14 points lower on average than Caucasians (genuine question, I'm not racist, but when friends say that to me, I genuinely can't answer)?
3 reasons:
1. Blacks have historically not been afforded the same educational opportunities as whites and therefore historically scored lower on IQ tests as adults.
2. IQ tests are notorious for racial/cultural bias. A classic example was the old "what goes with a cup?". Years ago, white kids would typically say "saucer". Black kids would often say "spoon". Why? Because, at that time, blacks tended to come from poorer families that tended to not use cups and saucers. Truthfully, I am not sure how my son would answer. I use mugs now. Tests have changed, but economics is still a huge predictor of results. Poor whites generally score lower than rich whites because poorer whites also don't have the same opportunities.
3. Within the US, now, this is just plain wrong. When you factor in socio-economic factors (region of the country, parental education, etc.), you find that blacks score the same or higher than whites. If it is not true within the UK, I would suggest that it is probably because a high number of UK blacks are immigrants. Immigrants score lower because of language and cultural differences.
DISCLAIMER: Napoleon Ier does not claim to hold the views expressed in this article and is merely attempting to present a serious matter for intellectual debate.
"Race differences show up by 3 years of age, even after matching on maternal education and other variables," said Rushton. "Therefore they cannot be due to poor education since this has not yet begun to exert an effect. That's why Jensen and I looked at the genetic hypothesis in detail. We examined 10 categories of evidence."
1.
The Worldwide Pattern of IQ Scores. East Asians average higher on IQ tests than Whites, both in the U. S. and in Asia, even though IQ tests were developed for use in the Euro-American culture. Around the world, the average IQ for East Asians centers around 106; for Whites, about 100; and for Blacks about 85 in the U.S. and 70 in sub-Saharan Africa.
2.
Race Differences are Most Pronounced on Tests that Best Measure the General Intelligence Factor (g). Black-White differences, for example, are larger on the Backward Digit Span test than on the less g loaded Forward Digit Span test.
3.
The Gene-Environment Architecture of IQ is the Same in all Races, and Race Differences are Most Pronounced on More Heritable Abilities. Studies of Black, White, and East Asian twins, for example, show the heritability of IQ is 50% or higher in all races.
4.
Brain Size Differences. Studies using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) find a correlation of brain size with IQ of about 0.40. Larger brains contain more neurons and synapses and process information faster. Race differences in brain size are present at birth. By adulthood, East Asians average 1 cubic inch more cranial capacity than Whites who average 5 cubic inches more than Blacks.
5.
Trans-Racial Adoption Studies. Race differences in IQ remain following adoption by White middle class parents. East Asians grow to average higher IQs than Whites while Blacks score lower. The Minnesota Trans-Racial Adoption Study followed children to age 17 and found race differences were even greater than at age 7: White children, 106; Mixed-Race children, 99; and Black children, 89.
6.
Racial Admixture Studies. Black children with lighter skin, for example, average higher IQ scores. In South Africa, the IQ of the mixed-race "Colored" population averages 85, intermediate to the African 70 and White 100.
7.
IQ Scores of Blacks and Whites Regress toward the Averages of Their Race. Parents pass on only some exceptional genes to offspring so parents with very high IQs tend to have more average children. Black and White children with parents of IQ 115 move to different averages--Blacks toward 85 and Whites to 100.
8.
Race Differences in Other "Life-History" Traits. East Asians and Blacks consistently fall at two ends of a continuum with Whites intermediate on 60 measures of maturation, personality, reproduction, and social organization. For example, Black children sit, crawl, walk, and put on their clothes earlier than Whites or East Asians.
9.
Race Differences and the Out-of-Africa theory of Human Origins. East Asian-White-Black differences fit the theory that modern humans arose in Africa about 100,000 years ago and expanded northward. During prolonged winters there was evolutionary selection for higher IQ created by problems of raising children, gathering and storing food, gaining shelter, and making clothes.
10.
Do Culture-Only Theories Explain the Data? Culture-only theories do not explain the highly consistent pattern of race differences in IQ, especially the East Asian data. No interventions such as ending segregation, introducing school busing, or "Head Start" programs have reduced the gaps as culture-only theory would predict.
In their article, Rushton and Jensen also address some of the policy issues that stem from their conclusions. Their main recommendation is that people be treated as individuals, not as members of groups. They emphasized that their paper pertains only to average differences. They also called for the need to accurately inform the public about the true nature of individual and group differences, genetics and evolutionary biology.
Rushton and Jensen are well-known for research on racial differences in intelligence. Jensen hypothesized a genetic basis for Black-White IQ differences in his 1969 Harvard Educational Review article. His later books Bias in Mental Tests (1980) and The g Factor (1998), as well as Rushton's (1995) Race, Evolution, and Behavior, show that tests are not biased against English speaking minorities and that Black-White-East Asian differences in brain size and IQ belong in an evolutionary framework.
www.charlesdarwinresearch.orgAgain, I don't agree with it, but there is evidence out there, and I want to see what you guys make of it. What you're all saying looks to me like a load of shoddily put-together excuses which you proclaim as gospel truth despite not knowing whether or not any serious anthropological research backs your views.
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 9:53 pm
