If race does not exist... - Page 7 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

For discussion of moral and ethical issues.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14801807
Wrong. They don't support the idea of race. They say people are merely adapted to specific geographic areas and that they aren't actually separate races. The genetic variation isn't great enough for it. You're making shit up to support a stupid argument. :knife:
#14801826
Nobel laureate​s have gone on to say lots of crazy stuff, these are experts in their narrow fields not mega genius polymaths who are authoritative in all subjects.

Defend your beliefs with your own arguments, don't simply cite the fact that other people out there in the world agree with you.
#14801830
A few scientists believe (incorrectly) that race is an objective and genetic category for humans.

Most scientists are aware of the findings of the Human Genome Project, and thus are also aware that there is no genetic evidence to support the claim that the races are distinct with inheritable racial traits other than the obvious ones.
#14801833
It does not matter whether someone embraces the notion of biological race or not. Race exists and it is a huge issue. You can maintain that the elephant in the room is an elephant or you can assert he is a mastodon. The fact remains that there is a massive motherfucker in the room and we had best learn how to deal with it.
#14801835
Suntzu wrote:You might want to do a little research on Shockley.


You might want to try making your own arguments instead of saying Shockley over and over, he wont be summoned into the thread to make your arguments for you.
#14801844
No, Shockley is dead. He was something of a renaissance man, and accomplished rock climber and magician. I think he was still working on top secret ultra low frequency communications when he died.
#14801848
Godstud wrote:I posted a source refuting your idiotic and out-dated view on race. That you ignore it only reflects on how racist you actually are.

You don't like when science refutes your lame arguments. You ignore them when they do.


It completely the other way around. You ignore the research of Dr. James Watson, who offered mountains upon mountains of research and evidence showing that blacks are intellectually inferior to whites. It is a scientific fact. Now, you can't refute facts. Race exists. Deal with it.
#14801864
Agent Steel wrote:It completely the other way around. You ignore the research of Dr. James Watson, who offered mountains upon mountains of research and evidence showing that blacks are intellectually inferior to whites. It is a scientific fact. Now, you can't refute facts. Race exists. Deal with it.


Actually, Dr. Watson only made one claim about blacks being stupider, and the only evidence he ever offered was to say that anyone who had ever hired blacks would agree with him.

There are no mountains of evidence.
#14801899
"Black–White IQ differences are found worldwide

National IQs have been reported for 192 countries around the world [30,32]. The results show that the average IQ for East Asians centers around 106; for Whites, about 100; for US Blacks about 85, and for sub-Saharan African Blacks about 70 (Fig. 1). The same rank-order of race differences is found for ‘‘culture-fair’’ tests and reaction-time measures. Reaction-time tasks are so easy that all children can do them in less than one second [25,26]. More intelligent children, measured by conventional IQ tests, perform faster on these tasks. East Asians average faster reaction times than Whites who, in turn, have faster reaction times than Blacks.

Mean IQs differ much less within major population groups (that is, races) than between them. Whites have IQs close to 100 whether they live in Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, or South Africa, whereas Blacks in sub-Saharan Africa have IQs closer to 70 regardless of whether they live in East, West, Central, or Southern Africa – or whether the data were collected in the 1920s or the 2000s. This worldwide pattern contradicts the hypothesis that the low IQ of American Blacks is due to the legacy of slavery, segregation, and ‘‘White racism.’’ Many of the African countries showing a mean IQ of 70, such as Nigeria and Ghana, have been independent for half a century, and the Caribbean island of Haiti for two centuries. However, there has been no documented improvement in cultural achievement or in IQ scores.

Currently, the existence of the 15- to 18-point IQ difference (1.1 standard deviations) between Blacks and Whites in the US is not in itself a matter of empirical dispute. Only its explanation is under discussion. For example, Herrnstein and Murray [18] analyzed data from the 12-year National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. They found that most 17- year-olds with high scores on the Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT), regardless of ethnic background, went on to occupational success by their late 20s and early 30s. Those with low scores were more inclined to welfare dependence. The study also found that the average IQ for African Americans was lower than those for Latino, White East Asian, and Jewish Americans (85, 89, 103, 106, and 113, respectively). Similarly, a meta-analytic review by Roth et al. [39] confirmed the 1.1 standard deviation Black–White IQ difference for a total sample of 6,246,729 corporate, military, and higher education testees.

Nor can there be doubt that the average African IQ of 70 is reliable and not due to a ‘‘fluke,’’ or to sampling error, or to the prejudice of investigators. Lynn [30] reviewed over two dozen studies from West, Central, East, and Southern Africa and consistently found an average IQ of 70. For example, in Kenya, Robert Sternberg et al. [61] administered the Colored Progressive Matrices to 85 12- to 15- year-olds who scored an IQ equivalent of 70. In Tanzania, Sternberg et al. [60] gave the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test to 358 11- to 13-year-old; they received a score equivalent to the 5th percentile on American norms (that is, IQ = 75). After training on how to solve problems such as those on the test, the children’s scores improved, but only to about the 9th percentile on American norms (IQ < 80).

It is also generally agreed that because test scores provide the best predictors of educational and economic success, average group differences have important societal outcomes. Further, the Black–White IQ difference shows up before 3 years of age on most standardized test batteries, even after matching on maternal education and other variables. Therefore the race differences are not due to poorer educational opportunities since this has not yet begun to exert an effect. (The East Asian IQ advantage appears by five years of age.)

Because the same differences are found on relatively culture-free tests, and because the tests show similar patterns of internal item consistency and predictive validity for all groups, many psychometricians have concluded that the tests are valid measures of racial differences. In Africa too IQ scores are demonstrably valid. For example, Kendall et al. [28] showed that test scores predicted school grades and job performance equally well for Africans as for non-Africans (i.e., 0.20 to 0.50). Similarly Sternberg et al.’s [61] study of Kenyan 12- to 15-year-old found that IQ scores predicted school grades with a mean r = 0.40. In Rushton et al.’s [53,54] studies of African and non-African university students, scores on one IQ test correlated with scores on another IQ test 3 months earlier (0.60 for Africans; 0.70 for non-Africans) and with end-of-year-exam marks measured 3 months later (0.34 for Africans; 0.28 for non-Africans). The only demonstrated reliable example of bias is the rather obvious one of vocabulary for groups whose first language is not English. Even here, however, language accounts for only about 7 IQ points (out of the 30-point difference)."


Enjoy!
#14801900
I think it's primarily about environmental factors which contribute to low black IQs in Africa and the average IQ for black Britons is 95. Blacks from Africa are expected to be 30 IQ points below whites but this is not clearly the case in the UK. Watson may be too old to come into contact with blacks in British society as he grew up in the era before the arrival of black migrants. The chart below shows that Eastern European migrants are just as smart as Somalis in GCSEs.

Image

AFRICAN ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT IN THE U.K.

The most definitive proof of Africans’ grossly underestimated genotypic IQ (80 according to Lynn, or 70 according to Jensen and Rushton, et al) has come in recent years from the performance of African school children in the UK. These results sparked instant reactions in the IQ debate world as soon as they started being reported by the news media, with some strong hereditarians suddenly becoming some kind of neo-environmentalists just to explain why white school children were not showing the kind of academic superiority over blacks that they have become accustomed to in the United States (wrong tests, declining white culture, an alleged war on whites, etc – the same kinds of reasons they always dismissed from liberal environmentalists explaining black underachievement in the US).

The first report that caused some consternation in the IQ blogosphere indicated that black African pupils were apparently catching up with British white pupils on their GCSE tests and that in fact, they had already overtaken them at the lower end: the poor black kids were now performing better than poor white kids (The Guardian, 2010). Hereditarian psychometricians and scholars from Jensen to Gottfredson, Lynn, Rushton, et al had after all declared that IQ predicted test scores on all kinds of tests since a common factor of intelligence, g, was highly robust.

Many bloggers and commentators came up with countless explanations for the unexpected trend among blacks from Africa who were expected to be around two standard deviations (30 IQ points) below whites in average IQ scores, but were only half a standard deviation below. Almost all the guesses on what could be causing this unexpected trend assumed that the upward trend would not continue in future to the point of actually equaling white scores, an event that could cause a crisis in the hereditarian camp.

In fact, what most scholars and bloggers in the IQ world seemed to not know is that by the time these pieces of news were coming out in the media, there were already African nationalities that had overtaken the white average by a significant margin. The reason it seemed that the black Africans were only trying to catch up now was the usual academic tendency of lumping Africans together into one big racial group when other groups were being identified by nationality (e.g. Chinese, Indian, Pakistani, etc rather than “Asian” or “South-East Asian” etc). Grouping Africans into the monolithic “Black African” ethnicity concealed the different experiences of African immigrants from different nations, some of whom had emigrated as refugees from war-torn countries, while others lad left countries that did not speak much English and were thus disadvantaged in the tests. A negative correlation with English as Another Language was evident on both the CAT scores and the GCSE scores.

http://www.unz.com/article/the-iq-gap-i ... ite-issue/
#14801902
Agent Steel wrote:But the fact still remains that blacks consistently score much lower on IQ tests than whites. I don't care whether you like it or not. Reality doesn't care about your feelings.


They do? Please provide evidence. Thanks!

---------------

@Suntzu

Please provide a link. Thanks!
#14801910
@Suntzu

HonestThinking is run by Jens Anfindsen, a big name in Islamophobic circles.

Now, the first footnote we have there says [30, 32]. To what do those numbers refer?
#14801912
Suntzu has just provided a detailed report on which way the evidence points. You accuse me of ignoring the science yet you are doing the same thing. Now you're fabricating reasons to try to explain away the differences in IQ, which is irresponsible and unscientific.

Race deniers operate with the presupposition that any discrepancy in performance between the races must be due to cultural and environmental factors, because they don't want to accept the evidence that's right before their eyes.

If you want to deny race, you might as well just do away with the entire field of genetics. Who needs it after all? It all comes down to environment right?
#14801915
@Pants-of-dog wrote:@SuntzuNow, the first footnote we have there says [30, 32]. To what do those numbers refer?

That blogpost is citing Rushton and Jenson (2009) (Ruston's Wiki; Jenson's Wiki). From their paper, source 30 and 32 refers to two books written by Richard Lynn (2006 [2015]; (2006)) a controversial, Cambridge-trained psychologist.

It's been noted before that Lynn's work is a heap of shit (Wicherts et al. 2010a; 2010b; 2010c) based on strategic misinclusion of relevant studies within his meta-analysis, with shoddy inclusion criterion, if not outright falsification at points. I'm not sure why it is being referred to as evidence for this hypothesis.

Hope that was of some help, PoD.

:)
  • 1
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 11

No, Rancid, I think a lot of the people who voted[…]

Israel-Palestinian War 2023

This is the issue. It is not changing. https://y[…]

@annatar1914 do not despair. Again, el amor pu[…]

I think we really have to ask ourselves what t[…]