How to prepare for the coming science of genetic racial variations, and a summary of the full case for the genetics of racial differences in intellige

[ApostateAbe]

I am a lay advocate. Do not believe anything I am telling you. For anything you doubt, ask for the evidence. Herrnstein and Murray make claims of high correlations with Spearman's g of subtests of the ASVAB, and they cite the evidence, on pages 75-77.

Once again you send me back to the bible. Do these folks not cite their work? I see a lot of reasons why they chose to ignore certain data sets or argument that the data needs to be fixed by throwing out parts of the data that "skews" it away from their premise. Anyway, the chart was supposed to track IQ across generations and be a predictor. There is no testing of parents in the data provided. I'm not sure where they got their data on parents or if they made broad assumptions such as no high school diploma = less "genetic" intelligence despite many of the parents of this generation not finishing high school (war, jobs,etc.) but it appears the link between parental IQ and wage earning (as opposed to socioeconomic status) is only an assumption pulled out of their arse.

For the correlations of Spearman's g with various subtests of the ASVAB, per Table 9 on page 76, Herrnstein and Murray cited Ree, M. J., and Earles, J.A. 1990. Differential Validity of a Differential Aptitude Test. AFHRL-TR-89-59. Brooks Air Force Base, Tex.: Manpower and Personnel Division. It is verified with Welsh, J. R., Jr.,Watson, T. W., and Ree, M. J. 1990. Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB): Predicting Military Criteria from General and Specific Abilities. AFHRL-TR-90-63. Brooks Air Force Base, Tex.: Air Force Systems Command. And with Jones, G. E. 1988. Investigation of the efficacy of general ability versus specific ability as predictors of occupational success. Master's thesis, St. Mary's University.

Parental IQ is not relevant to the arguments. That claim was made that there is a stronger relationship between a subject's adult income and a subject's IQ than between the subject's adult income and the subject's parents' income.

 

[Playball40]

(3) SCIENCE DOES NOT DECIDE MORAL VALUES. No race is further along the evolutionary path than another race. There is no scientifically "higher" or "lower" race, nor is there a scientifically "superior" or "inferior" race, regardless of natural tendencies among races. Inequality of genotypes does not compel inequality under the law. The principle of equal rights has served western society very well, regardless of inequivalencies of mind and body.

Interestingly the incidence of sociopathy is greater in western societies than eastern ones.

 

[Trodon]

There were a sizeable amount of WWII German scientists who believed in such variations [between the races] but then they were far from clear headed.

After the Second World War fewer people wanted to believe that racial differences mattered, or that they even existed.

This is ironic. The Holocaust was an attempt to exterminate the Jews. The vast majority of the six million Jews killed in the Holocaust were Ashkenazic Jews. The Ashkenazim are the most superior race in existence, with an average IQ estimated at 110 to 115.

Before the Nazi movement people were more willing to draw conclusions from evidence. The evidence clearly indicated that people in some races tended to be more intelligent than people in other races, and more amenable in other ways as well to the demands of modern civilization.

Now liberals go even further, and claim that race does not exist, except when it does exist and when they deem it necessary to give low performance races special preferences in university admissions and hiring quotas.

 

[bilby]

There were a sizeable amount of WWII German scientists who believed in such variations [between the races] but then they were far from clear headed.

After the Second World War fewer people wanted to believe that racial differences mattered, or that they even existed.

This is ironic. The Holocaust was an attempt to exterminate the Jews. The vast majority of the six million Jews killed in the Holocaust were Ashkenazic Jews. The Ashkenazim are the most superior race in existence, with an average IQ estimated at 110 to 115.

Before the Nazi movement people were more willing to draw conclusions from evidence. The evidence clearly indicated that people in some races tended to be more intelligent than people in other races, and more amenable in other ways as well to the demands of modern civilization.

Now liberals go even further, and claim that race does not exist, except when it does exist and when they deem it necessary to give low performance races special preferences in university admissions and hiring quotas.

Survival is the only practical measure of superiority, which makes your assessment a study in incomprehension.

The most superior organisms are bacteria. They always win in the end.

Within species differences are a joke.

And political conclusions based upon them are a very bad joke indeed. Particularly when you conclude that the superior race are the ones who just got wiped out.

Fucking racist dickheads can't even decide amongst themselves who is superhuman and who is subhuman. But oddly enough, they never say 'Hey, I just worked out that my race is the most inferior of all'.

I wonder why not?

 

[AthenaAwakened]

There were a sizeable amount of WWII German scientists who believed in such variations [between the races] but then they were far from clear headed.

After the Second World War fewer people wanted to believe that racial differences mattered, or that they even existed.

This is ironic. The Holocaust was an attempt to exterminate the Jews. The vast majority of the six million Jews killed in the Holocaust were Ashkenazic Jews. The Ashkenazim are the most superior race in existence, with an average IQ estimated at 110 to 115.

Before the Nazi movement people were more willing to draw conclusions from evidence. The evidence clearly indicated that people in some races tended to be more intelligent than people in other races, and more amenable in other ways as well to the demands of modern civilization.

Now liberals go even further, and claim that race does not exist, except when it does exist and when they deem it necessary to give low performance races special preferences in university admissions and hiring quotas.

Do you believe the laws and customs of society should reflect a white supremacist ideology?

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Once again you send me back to the bible. Do these folks not cite their work? I see a lot of reasons why they chose to ignore certain data sets or argument that the data needs to be fixed by throwing out parts of the data that "skews" it away from their premise. Anyway, the chart was supposed to track IQ across generations and be a predictor. There is no testing of parents in the data provided. I'm not sure where they got their data on parents or if they made broad assumptions such as no high school diploma = less "genetic" intelligence despite many of the parents of this generation not finishing high school (war, jobs,etc.) but it appears the link between parental IQ and wage earning (as opposed to socioeconomic status) is only an assumption pulled out of their arse.

For the correlations of Spearman's g with various subtests of the ASVAB, per Table 9 on page 76, Herrnstein and Murray cited Ree, M. J., and Earles, J.A. 1990. Differential Validity of a Differential Aptitude Test. AFHRL-TR-89-59. Brooks Air Force Base, Tex.: Manpower and Personnel Division. It is verified with Welsh, J. R., Jr.,Watson, T. W., and Ree, M. J. 1990. Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB): Predicting Military Criteria from General and Specific Abilities. AFHRL-TR-90-63. Brooks Air Force Base, Tex.: Air Force Systems Command. And with Jones, G. E. 1988. Investigation of the efficacy of general ability versus specific ability as predictors of occupational success. Master's thesis, St. Mary's University.

Parental IQ is not relevant to the arguments. That claim was made that there is a stronger relationship between a subject's adult income and a subject's IQ than between the subject's adult income and the subject's parents' income.

Wait, I thought this thread was about GENETIC RACIAL VARIATIONS. Now it is not? How can we prepare for the coming science if there is no evidence to present? This indicates that this is not a discussion about science, but a discussion about what someone believes to be true despite the lack of evidence. A.K.A. Pseudoscientific belief.

- - - Updated - - -

There were a sizeable amount of WWII German scientists who believed in such variations [between the races] but then they were far from clear headed.

After the Second World War fewer people wanted to believe that racial differences mattered, or that they even existed.

This is ironic. The Holocaust was an attempt to exterminate the Jews. The vast majority of the six million Jews killed in the Holocaust were Ashkenazic Jews. The Ashkenazim are the most superior race in existence, with an average IQ estimated at 110 to 115.

Before the Nazi movement people were more willing to draw conclusions from evidence. The evidence clearly indicated that people in some races tended to be more intelligent than people in other races, and more amenable in other ways as well to the demands of modern civilization.

Now liberals go even further, and claim that race does not exist, except when it does exist and when they deem it necessary to give low performance races special preferences in university admissions and hiring quotas.

I smell the Elders of Zion here.

 

[ApostateAbe]

For the correlations of Spearman's g with various subtests of the ASVAB, per Table 9 on page 76, Herrnstein and Murray cited Ree, M. J., and Earles, J.A. 1990. Differential Validity of a Differential Aptitude Test. AFHRL-TR-89-59. Brooks Air Force Base, Tex.: Manpower and Personnel Division. It is verified with Welsh, J. R., Jr.,Watson, T. W., and Ree, M. J. 1990. Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB): Predicting Military Criteria from General and Specific Abilities. AFHRL-TR-90-63. Brooks Air Force Base, Tex.: Air Force Systems Command. And with Jones, G. E. 1988. Investigation of the efficacy of general ability versus specific ability as predictors of occupational success. Master's thesis, St. Mary's University.

Parental IQ is not relevant to the arguments. That claim was made that there is a stronger relationship between a subject's adult income and a subject's IQ than between the subject's adult income and the subject's parents' income.

Wait, I thought this thread was about GENETIC RACIAL VARIATIONS. Now it is not? How can we prepare for the coming science if there is no evidence to present? This indicates that this is not a discussion about science, but a discussion about what someone believes to be true despite the lack of evidence. A.K.A. Pseudoscientific belief.

Yes, the OP was about that, I cited evidence, and it is a broadly established fact in psychology that within-group intelligence score variations are mostly related to genetic variations. But you seemed to think that the NSLY79 data needed to contain parental IQ for Herrnstein and Murray to claim that there is a stronger relationship between a subject's adult income and a subject's IQ than between the subject's adult income and the subject's parents' income. Not so. If you disagree with a science and you scrounge for reasons to not like it, that doesn't make it a pseudoscience.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Wait, I thought this thread was about GENETIC RACIAL VARIATIONS. Now it is not? How can we prepare for the coming science if there is no evidence to present? This indicates that this is not a discussion about science, but a discussion about what someone believes to be true despite the lack of evidence. A.K.A. Pseudoscientific belief.

Yes, the OP was about that, I cited evidence, and it is a broadly established fact in psychology that within-group intelligence score variations are mostly related to genetic variations. But you seemed to think that the NSLY79 data needed to contain parental IQ for Herrnstein and Murray to claim that there is a stronger relationship between a subject's adult income and a subject's IQ than between the subject's adult income and the subject's parents' income. Not so. If you disagree with a science and you scrounge for reasons to not like it, that doesn't make it a pseudoscience.

You introduced it as showing a relationship of parent-child IQ.

 

[ApostateAbe]

Yes, the OP was about that, I cited evidence, and it is a broadly established fact in psychology that within-group intelligence score variations are mostly related to genetic variations. But you seemed to think that the NSLY79 data needed to contain parental IQ for Herrnstein and Murray to claim that there is a stronger relationship between a subject's adult income and a subject's IQ than between the subject's adult income and the subject's parents' income. Not so. If you disagree with a science and you scrounge for reasons to not like it, that doesn't make it a pseudoscience.

You introduced it as showing a relationship of parent-child IQ.

Yeah, and I cited the study: Devlin, Daniels and Roeder, 1997. If you need further information, just ask. This figure took the data from that study. It is Table 2.1, Page 24 of Richard Nisbett's "Intelligence and How to Get It: Why Schools and Cultures Count"

 

[ApostateAbe]

"Midparent" in this figure is the average IQ of both biological parents.

 

[ApostateAbe]

I smell the Elders of Zion here.

No, you farted.

 

[Jokodo]

<snip>Now, I will explain how I know with high certainty the objective reality that the genes for racial differences in intelligence exist, waiting to be discovered.<snip>

Someone's probably said that before, but here we go...
I, like anyone who knows the first thing about genes and "races", know with absolute certainty that genes for racial differences in intelligence do not exist. Because it's a category error: Genes are an individual-level phenomenon while racial differences are a population-level phenomenon. Talking about "genes for racial differences" makes exactly as much sense as talking about electrically conductive electrons or atoms with high rigidity, i.e. none whatsoever.

If you want to convince the rest of us that your prejudices are based on your superior understanding of the science of genetics, you're shooting yourself in the foot right there.

 

[ApostateAbe]

<snip>Now, I will explain how I know with high certainty the objective reality that the genes for racial differences in intelligence exist, waiting to be discovered.<snip>

Someone's probably said that before, but here we go...
I, like anyone who knows the first thing about genes and "races", know with absolute certainty that genes for racial differences in intelligence do not exist. Because it's a category error: Genes are an individual-level phenomenon while racial differences are a population-level phenomenon. Talking about "genes for racial differences" makes exactly as much sense as talking about electrically conductive electrons or atoms with high rigidity, i.e. none whatsoever.

If you want to convince the rest of us that your prejudices are based on your superior understanding of the science of genetics, you're shooting yourself in the foot right there.

I don't disagree with you too much. Theoretically, there are alleles that account for variations in intelligence among individuals, and, as races are collections of individuals, the set of genetic variations among individuals accounts for differences in average intelligence among races. I expressed it the way I did because it is commonly denied that genetic heritability is responsible for differences in average intelligence among races, even if it is recognized that genetic heritability largely accounts for differences among individuals. I think everyone understands what I really mean, as I wrote: "I predict that it will be a decade before all the genes for intelligence are identified and found to vary significantly by race," which is more than clear, I hope.

 

[ksen]

So Appalachians would be a different race than Southern Californians?

I think so. Races are divisible all the way down to the individual, much like colors on a color spectrum are divisible all the way down to the minutest wavelength difference.

Races are divisible all the way down to the individual you say?

Then that means every individual is his/her own race. And if that's the case then all this talk about "racial differences" is meaningless.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

I think so. Races are divisible all the way down to the individual, much like colors on a color spectrum are divisible all the way down to the minutest wavelength difference.

Races are divisible all the way down to the individual you say?

Then that means every individual is his/her own race. And if that's the case then all this talk about "racial differences" is meaningless.

 

[ApostateAbe]

I think so. Races are divisible all the way down to the individual, much like colors on a color spectrum are divisible all the way down to the minutest wavelength difference.

Races are divisible all the way down to the individual you say?

Then that means every individual is his/her own race. And if that's the case then all this talk about "racial differences" is meaningless.

And by the same logic colors are meaningless, too. So are height and weight measures. If the doctor thinks you are too fat and tries to get your weight, tell him that the measures of weight are infinitely divisible, so any talk of weight differences are meaningless.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Races are divisible all the way down to the individual you say?

Then that means every individual is his/her own race. And if that's the case then all this talk about "racial differences" is meaningless.

And by the same logic colors are meaningless, too. So are height and weight measures. If the doctor thinks you are too fat and tries to get your weight, tell him that the measures of weight are infinitely divisible, so any talk of weight differences are meaningless.

Abe,

you are the one who made the statement in question in the first place. You are now essentially agreeing with a post I think you are trying to rebut.

 

[Jokodo]

Someone's probably said that before, but here we go...
I, like anyone who knows the first thing about genes and "races", know with absolute certainty that genes for racial differences in intelligence do not exist. Because it's a category error: Genes are an individual-level phenomenon while racial differences are a population-level phenomenon. Talking about "genes for racial differences" makes exactly as much sense as talking about electrically conductive electrons or atoms with high rigidity, i.e. none whatsoever.

If you want to convince the rest of us that your prejudices are based on your superior understanding of the science of genetics, you're shooting yourself in the foot right there.

I don't disagree with you too much. Theoretically, there are alleles that account for variations in intelligence among individuals, and, as races are collections of individuals, the set of genetic variations among individuals accounts for differences in average intelligence among races. I expressed it the way I did because it is commonly denied that genetic heritability is responsible for differences in average intelligence among races, even if it is recognized that genetic heritability largely accounts for differences among individuals. I think everyone understands what I really mean, as I wrote: "I predict that it will be a decade before all the genes for intelligence are identified and found to vary significantly by race," which is more than clear, I hope.

Expressing it the way you did rather leaves the impression that you don't really understand that populations don't have genes. Not an impression you want to leave if your intention is to convince others that you're basing your conclusions on sound science which you understand well enough to warrant conclusions.

 

[ApostateAbe]

I don't disagree with you too much. Theoretically, there are alleles that account for variations in intelligence among individuals, and, as races are collections of individuals, the set of genetic variations among individuals accounts for differences in average intelligence among races. I expressed it the way I did because it is commonly denied that genetic heritability is responsible for differences in average intelligence among races, even if it is recognized that genetic heritability largely accounts for differences among individuals. I think everyone understands what I really mean, as I wrote: "I predict that it will be a decade before all the genes for intelligence are identified and found to vary significantly by race," which is more than clear, I hope.

Expressing it the way you did rather leaves the impression that you don't really understand that populations don't have genes. Not an impression you want to leave if your intention is to convince others that you're basing your conclusions on sound science which you understand well enough to warrant conclusions.

Yes, good point. If there are future publications, I will change it appropriately, thank you.

 

[ApostateAbe]

And by the same logic colors are meaningless, too. So are height and weight measures. If the doctor thinks you are too fat and tries to get your weight, tell him that the measures of weight are infinitely divisible, so any talk of weight differences are meaningless.

Abe,

you are the one who made the statement in question in the first place. You are now essentially agreeing with a post I think you are trying to rebut.

Ok, let me be clear. Races are spectral. It does not follow that races are meaningless, as that reasoning would be a variation of the "continuum fallacy."