Race and IQ ARE RELATED.

Sythe posted that video, not me...

 

I found this intriguing, thank you for posting this.

 

You are confusing correlation with causation. There are a shit-ton of factors you are not accounting for. Some of these races traditionally eat different diets, receive different education (so their intelligence will be in areas IQ tests don't look for), etc. This whole topic is pointless.

 

But these races score the same regardless of where they live. Black people in America have the same IQs as black people in Africa, for example.

 

Have you read The Bell Curve? What studies are you using to back up your assertions?

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PLjovgiNZfE
http://www.charlesdarwinresearch.org/Race_Evolution_Behavior.pdf

To name a few

 

What about the Aryan race?

 

Aryan would go under the race of Caucasoid

 

I'm guessing the fact that higher-IQ people may have helped the lower IQ-people was never taken into consideration when writing this?

Hmm.

 

I don't watch Youtube videos, but I read the second link. A few things stand out. Central Native Americans must have come through a lot of cold, crossing the bridge between Alaska and Siberia, to get there. Why are their IQs low? Why do Arctic Natives score less than the white US population?

It is possible to identify racial subsets through DNA analysis with considerable confidence, there's a clear separation between Norwegians and Swedes, for example. What Rushton has done is presuppose the existence of three major races, and box humans into categories like so many breeds of dog. The problem with that is that genetic analyses have shown that the variation within the big 3 races (or using whatever socio-historical concept of race you prefer) is much larger than between them.

I also don't see how environmental factors like malnutrition or lead blood-content can be controlled for.

It's undeniable that race and IQ are related, but Rushton's methods are indirect and don't present a scrap of genetic evidence. It's useless for showing us to what extent genetic factors are responsible. Unidentified environmental factors could be responsible for much of the existing difference; such as the Flynn effect.

Are you sure about that? :huh:

---

Fun reading: http://www.brookings.edu/views/papers/dickens/20060619_IQ.pdf

 

What does IQ actually measure?
In certain contries there are differences, like most people will say tomatoes are red, but what about in countries where they are orange.
IQ is not a measure of intelligence.

 

Some say tomatoes are a fruit and some say they are a vegetable. That doesn't mean that it changes everything about it.

 

This is most likely the largest amount of BS I think I have ever read. Race may have a tiny effect some majority somewhere, but to blame this on the "seasons" is preposterous. Read this out-loud to yourself, and you will see what I mean.

No offense, (maybe a little bit) but I just can't see how any of this can be justified. And, if nothing else, you are going to end up being some discriminating Hitler that views other races as lesser people due to their IQ. You will be saying "oh no, I don't mean that," but that's what it will come to.

The only point you can be trying to make out of this is that geographical situations determine intellect, and that is blind profiling.

 

So basically, people in colder climates will generally be smarter? Can't say I disagree with that. The northern part of the US is clearly smarter than the south.

 

IQ is more of a cultural measure of intelligence

 

Short?

Humans have been here for how many years?

 

Where i live... which is the northern part of australia.. Aboriginals are stupid (No racism intended.). But all they do is take the taxpayers money and buy drugs and alcohol.

 

Nice topic. I believe there probably a few more reasons why negroids and australoids are the dumbest of all then just the correlation of the environment =). I would like to know more about the IQ survey that was taken. What age group and so on.