Race and IQ

[Imperializt Russia]

Says one study.

Meta-analysis, more conclusive. Many others do as well. Show me some studies that aren't actually opinion pieces that say it doesn't.

What do the numbers mean in that study.
Please, enlighten us.

[Norepinephrinistania]

Fat=higher estrogen production.
Basic medical fact.

Puberty is occurring earlier in American girls in general. Are girls getting dumber?

No, they're getting blacker, fatter, and there are hormones in our meat. Simple really.

[The Grey Wolf]

But summer is over! What quippy half-assed comment will I now use to provide this topic with the respect it deserves?

Why not just refute it with evidence?

[Norepinephrinistania]

Meta-analysis, more conclusive. Many others do as well. Show me some studies that aren't actually opinion pieces that say it doesn't.

What do the numbers mean in that study.
Please, enlighten us.

It says there is a clear correlation.

[Flyover]

I like how your source only studies girls within the United States, states that earlier onset or puberty is faced by girls of all races, and doesn't reach any damn conclusion at all about genetics nor does it even measure genetics.

This exemplifies everything wrong with what you've posted in this thread so far: failing to read/and or understand your own damn source.

Ask any doctor and they will tell you the same thing.
Common knowledge among the educated and not anti-intellectual SJW brainwashed.

>Thinks opposition is "anti-intellectual"
>has never read a source that doesn't support him out of fear of being proven wrong

[Terminus Alpha]

Oh hi, racist.

Here are some links for you:

http://www.nature.com/news/poverty-shrinks-brains-from-birth-1.17227?WT.mc_id=TWT_NatureNews
https://apa.org/pi/families/resources/newsletter/2012/07/neurocognitive-impacts.aspx
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/268066.php
http://www.urbanchildinstitute.org/articles/research-to-policy/research/children-raised-in-poverty-are-at-greater-risk-for-developing
http://www.princeton.edu/futureofchildren/publications/journals/article/index.xml?journalid=53&articleid=287&sectionid=1889


In case you think that black people are inferior to you because your ancestors evolved harder:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3730125/

And because you think black people are inferior because genes:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1893020/

Now, mr. stormfront, please leave.

(Bonus: Africa had a lot of advanced civilizations, even outside of the totes-not-african-even-though-its-literally-on-the same-continent Egypt.)

So, since you've actually started citing sources, here are mine, again.

Puberty is occurring earlier in American girls in general. Are girls getting dumber?

No, they're getting blacker, fatter, and there are hormones in our meat. Simple really.

Well, at least you're an all around terrible person.

[Imperializt Russia]

What do the numbers mean in that study.
Please, enlighten us.

It says there is a clear correlation.

It says so without explaining what the numbers mean, which makes it a shittily written paper.

What do you believe the numbers mean?

[Norepinephrinistania]

Ask any doctor and they will tell you the same thing.
Common knowledge among the educated and not anti-intellectual SJW brainwashed.

>Thinks opposition is "anti-intellectual"
>has never read a source that doesn't support him out of fear of being proven wrong

Silly ad-hominem.

[Laerod]

I like how your source only studies girls within the United States, states that earlier onset or puberty is faced by girls of all races, and doesn't reach any damn conclusion at all about genetics nor does it even measure genetics.

This exemplifies everything wrong with what you've posted in this thread so far: failing to read/and or understand your own damn source.

Ask any doctor and they will tell you the same thing.
Common knowledge among the educated and not anti-intellectual SJW brainwashed.

Are you calling us uneducated and anti-intellectual SJW brainwashed?

[Vassenor]

So how many sources for it can you find?

"General cognitive ability yielded a heritability estimate of about .80 in two assessments 3 years apart as part of the Swedish Adoption/Twin Study of Aging."

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01067188

When you actually read the source, it says that "about 80% of the total variance among individuals in this sample can be attributed to genetic differences among them", and that general cognition was the most heritable trait. That is not "IQ is 50-80% genetic".

[Flyover]

Puberty is occurring earlier in American girls in general. Are girls getting dumber?

No, they're getting blacker, fatter, and there are hormones in our meat. Simple really.

But I thought being black = less intelligent? So if the girls are getting blacker, would they then -in your fantasy world- be getting dumber?

>Thinks opposition is "anti-intellectual"
>has never read a source that doesn't support him out of fear of being proven wrong

Silly ad-hominem.

But when you accuse people of being "brainwashed" that's legit. Aite. I see how that works.

[Caracasus]

Oh good gods above - is this still going on?

Okay - OP. You support and use phrenology. Phrenology - and let me break this down into easy to understand terms.

Phrenology. Is. Discredited.

Literally no reputable scientist continues to hold a belief that the shape of your skull (with the exeption of a handful of increadably rare genetic disorders) has any input on intelligence.

You are, and continue to, cherry-pick, mis-read and flat out lie about scientific data to provide evidence for your racist theories.

You are a racist.

You don't know how science works, or you deliberately twist it to suit your bizarre bigotry. I honestly don't know what is worse.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 9604001357

Bigger brains correlate positively with higher intelligence.

Did I mention brain volume? No.

You are using phrenology - the idea that the shape of the skull determines characteristics including intelligence. This has been widely discredited. The study states brain volume is not actually that great an indicator of intelligence - and a crude approximation of brain size (for example the kind of approximation you'd get from measuring someone's poxy skull) is all but useless.

Again. You are a racist. You are cherry picking scientific evidence without any understanding of what it means to support your own, racist views.

[Laerod]

But summer is over! What quippy half-assed comment will I now use to provide this topic with the respect it deserves?

Why not just refute it with evidence?

Because wasted effort. OP isn't arguing in good faith as evidenced by selective reading of evidence.

[Norepinephrinistania]

Ask any doctor and they will tell you the same thing.
Common knowledge among the educated and not anti-intellectual SJW brainwashed.

Are you calling us uneducated and anti-intellectual SJW brainwashed?

On this issue at least, absolutely. Most SJW's are very anti intellectual. They think being fat is healthy, enough said.

[Flyover]

Are you calling us uneducated and anti-intellectual SJW brainwashed?

On this issue at least, absolutely. Most SJW's are very anti intellectual. They think being fat is healthy, enough said.

Silly ad-hominem.

[Laerod]

Are you calling us uneducated and anti-intellectual SJW brainwashed?

On this issue at least, absolutely. ...

That's not nice! D=

[Bogdanov Vishniac]

So brain size really doesn't have much to do with intelligence?

It is one factor out of several biological factors.

A page ago you were arguing that the size of the skull is a primary determinant of intelligence. Now you've switched positions; now you're arguing that neotenous characters like delayed puberty are a sign of intelligence. Smaller skull size is also a trait of neoteny. You can't hold both positions - physiology dictates that neoteny and robust characters like large skull size are mutually exclusive. So which one are you going to stick to?

[Mavorpen]

Ask any doctor and they will tell you the same thing.

No they won't.

Common knowledge among the educated and not anti-intellectual SJW brainwashed.

The irony in someone who refuses to address the vast majority of the posts proving him wrong, presented fabricated data and admitted to not reading his own sources, repeatedly expresses a failure to effectively read other people's posts, etc. claiming to be educated and not anti-intellectual.

[Vassenor]

OK, let me ask you a specific question, OP.

What qualifications do you hold that make you an authority on this subject?

[Yumyumsuppertime]

>Thinks opposition is "anti-intellectual"
>has never read a source that doesn't support him out of fear of being proven wrong

Silly ad-hominem.

Yes. Must be a brainwashed SJW anti-intellectual, as they're so prone to using ad hominems.

[Norepinephrinistania]

It is one factor out of several biological factors.

A page ago you were arguing that the size of the skull is a primary determinant of intelligence. Now you've switched positions; now you're arguing that neotenous characters like delayed puberty are a sign of intelligence. Smaller skull size is also a trait of neoteny. You can't hold both positions - so which one are you going to stick to?

Neoteny is absolutely correlated with intelligence in both humans and animals.
Humans are much more neotenic than other apes.
Asians are the most neotenic and the smartest, followed by whites and blacks on both fronts.

[The Solar Cooperative Union]

I dont fit in with the popular crowd at middle school-> Black people in popular crowd? I know, I'll get back at them by using turn of the century pseudo-scientific bullshit to validate my bitterness at the world!

[Norepinephrinistania]

Ask any doctor and they will tell you the same thing.

No they won't.

Common knowledge among the educated and not anti-intellectual SJW brainwashed.

The irony in someone who refuses to address the vast majority of the posts proving him wrong, presented fabricated data and admitted to not reading his own sources, repeatedly expresses a failure to effectively read other people's posts, etc. claiming to be educated and not anti-intellectual.

This is why I think you're an anti-intellecual. (Many communists were)
This is commonly accepted medical fact and you could see so just via a google search.

[Bogdanov Vishniac]

A page ago you were arguing that the size of the skull is a primary determinant of intelligence. Now you've switched positions; now you're arguing that neotenous characters like delayed puberty are a sign of intelligence. Smaller skull size is also a trait of neoteny. You can't hold both positions - so which one are you going to stick to?

Neoteny is absolutely correlated with intelligence in both humans and animals.
Humans are much more neotenic than other apes.
Asians are the most neotenic and the smartest, followed by whites and blacks on both fronts.

So again, skull size is not a predictor of intelligence?

[Yumyumsuppertime]

No they won't.

The irony in someone who refuses to address the vast majority of the posts proving him wrong, presented fabricated data and admitted to not reading his own sources, repeatedly expresses a failure to effectively read other people's posts, etc. claiming to be educated and not anti-intellectual.

This is why I think you're an anti-intellecual. (Many communists were)
This is commonly accepted medical fact and you could see so just via a google search.

No.

YOU made the claim.

YOU cite the sources.

It is not the responsibility of the people here to do your research for you. I understand the confusion, though, as you seem to have little clue as to what research actually entails.