patrick.net

There’s no room for scientific thoughts or facts in science!
Only approved dogmas will be tolerated!

And they say that the right rejects science. Lol.

It's pretty interesting that the Left says they don't want religion in schools, only science, and yet all they do is demand conformity with their SJW religion, and deride science and scientists who question it.

Left are like wanna be Nazis

Even if research concludes that intelligence varies by race, it really does not matter to individuals. For example, if a study proved that Koreans are higher IQ than Irish, that does not mean all Koreans are smarter than all Irish. There is enough variance such that plenty of Irish will be smarter than plenty of Koreans. Group averages do not mean anything when it comes to any specific individual. Occidental Asians may be the shortest group on Earth, but it was a Mongolian who set the height record for the Guinness Book of Records. We are all individuals and items like race are just attributes.

HeadSet says

Even if research concludes that intelligence varies by race, it really does not matter to individuals. For example, if a study proved that Koreans are higher IQ than Irish, that does not mean all Koreans are smarter than all Irish. There is enough variance such that plenty of Irish will be smarter than plenty of Koreans. Group averages do not mean anything when it comes to any specific individual. Occidental Asians may be the shortest group on Earth, but it was a Mongolian who set the height record for the Guinness Book of Records. We are all individuals and items like race are just attributes.

I don't think that holds true on average. Sure there are enough individuals of any race that defy the average, but the law of big numbers will disadvantage any country or society if average intelligence is low. Of course back then you could make up for it with physical strength and warfare. And it obviously does matter as you can see Asians doing better than pretty much any other race even if they are immigrants into a non Asian country.

And it still doesn't invalidate the measures and the results. You can criticize the IQ test used but you cannot say it doesn't matter or worse threaten sanctions against those who are experts and conduct that research. That's not better than being a nazi. Come up with a different test and have it peer reviewed and accepted but don't go trigglypuff on the messenger.

ThreeBays says

Your narrative in this thread is flawed Patrick.

I don't think so:

Patrick says

“all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours, whereas all the testing says, not really”

ThreeBays says

Not saying your conclusion is wrong, but a measure as shown in your diagram which doesn't account for multiple variables (i.e. a multivariate study) is not very scientific.

Of course there are multiple variables, and one of them is human genetics! But any discussion or scientific research into that particular variable is quite likely to get you fired.

Who cares about IQ? How many of these smarty pants countries can rap?

Dr. Watson is not the only nor the first to have wondered to explain variation in intelligence.

Of course it's a shame that Dr. Watson is being attacked for wondering about something he has observed. But political correctness knows no boundaries.

Someone was noticing that the groups which have more neanderthal DNA seem to be more intelligent.

If I remember correctly, all humans originated from Africa; some migrated out first (Neanderthals) but then other humans also met them after later groups migrated out of Africa.

Those who remained in Africa of course didn't bump into the Neanderthals so genetically are "pure homo sapiens".

I also read that a visible remnant of Neanderthal DNA is red hair; my nephew is a red head and he liked that tidbit.

Pointless Anecdote: recently I was arguing with my female black friend and she got frustrated and said "You think you're smarter than all of us because you're white!"

Pointless Anecdote: recently I was arguing with my female black friend and she got frustrated and said "You think you're smarter than all of us because you're white!"

You missed an opportunity. You should have replied "No, I not smarter because I am white, you are just dumber from being black and female."

All kidding aside, I have met too may highly intelligent black men and black women to believe that any race lacks in brains. I will say though, that my company employs the only dumb Oriental I have ever known.

My wife thought the dismissal of Watson may be justified because he made people feel bad. I was quite surprised that feelings, to her, were more important than science.

From an anonymous reader:

I think maybe you, Patrick, and some of the commenters might be missing the key point here

it isn't about whether Watson is CORRECT about his views or not. I personally question the validity of IQ tests in measuring intelligence, and believe that intelligence is much more than what IQ tests measure. It may be that black people are MORE intelligent than whites in CERTAIN TYPES of musical expression (blues, folk, etc), and better in certain sports, but LESS intelligent in physics or Beethoven-type classical music.

I suggest that's not the issue here.

It's about whether scientists have the RIGHT, in a modern western democratic society, to HOLD some views of whatever content, without being stripped of honors they have rightfully earned in true scientific work. For "politically correct" reasons.

I assert that Watson has this right, and he has been wronged by being divested of his honors on unrelated grounds.

Patrick says

I was quite surprised that feelings, to her, were more important than science

Is she a scientist or have significant science training/degrees? If not, then i don’t know why this is surprising. Women are emotional creatures and place the most importance on relationships. Men place more importance on doing things and understanding our world so that we can tame it and thus provide for women and the children we will make together. This is as nature intended it to be.
My wife actually is highly science trained and she still comes down on the side of emotion quite a bit on these sorts of issues. Maybe 50-50 on those odds for her.

Could explain much of why blacks lag behind whites and Asians in education, earnings and wealth. Yet another argument to do away with affirmative action and diversity programs.

If the Spaniards didn't come along and fuck the Indians in Central and South America, who knows how the pure blood Indians would have scored.

ThreeBays says

Yet James Watson himself stated “I cannot understand how I could have said what I am quoted as having said. There is no scientific basis for such a belief.”

lol this is pure angst of never being able to make a dime again in ones senior years speaking, not honesty.

ThreeBays says

Regardless, it's not the science that's objectionable, it's the conclusions. What's the implication of stating "all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours"? Should we be changing our social policies to degrade blacks? I reckon we should "nurture" our citizens, including and perhaps more so those that have the most to gain from an improved social environment.

Nobody is degrading anybody by stating scientific outcomes. In fact it's better to know more than less about IQ distributions for all races and genders.

Patrick says

My wife thought the dismissal of Watson may be justified because he made people feel bad. I was quite surprised that feelings, to her, were more important than science.

Women are masters at the feelz and manipulating them so for them it is in their best interest if the whole world is reprogrammed to function based on feelz. That is until bridges crumble, companies fail and power stations explode cause they were constructed and governed with feelz ;)

If Watson would have said "WHITE MALES STUPID AND TOXIC, SHOULD NEVER BE HIRED" then he would not have been hounded. instead, he would be advising Democratic congressional candidates and would be talking on CNNPC all day.
The worst thing is that you can slander some segments of population all day long, while saying anything bad about others is grounds for persecution. One can also remember what happened to Larry Summers as Harvard president after asking a simple question.

willywonka says

Indians in Central and South America, who knows how the pure blood Indians would have scored.

They are genetically quite close to SE Asians, so might be scoring very high.

mell says

And it still doesn't invalidate the measures and the results. You can criticize the IQ test used but you cannot say it doesn't matter or worse threaten sanctions against those who are experts and conduct that research. That's not better than being a nazi. Come up with a different test and have it peer reviewed and accepted but don't go trigglypuff on the messenger.

Yes, and IQ Test results hardly vary. Whether you weight more with verbiage, symmetry and asymmetry, synonym/antonym, identifying similar groups of numbers, etc. the tests give pretty much the same results within the MoE.

d6rB says

willywonka says

Indians in Central and South America, who knows how the pure blood Indians would have scored.

They are genetically quite close to SE Asians, so might be scoring very high.

Arent american Indians also genetically similar? Why are american Indians low in IQ whereas SE asians are high?

I think culture is a HUGE part of IQ.

CBOEtrader says

Arent american Indians also genetically similar? Why are american Indians low in IQ whereas SE asians are high?

I think culture is a HUGE part of IQ.

That is the point. Most of variations in IQ can be explained with cultural influences and how affluent family is. There was a study, deeply unpopular these days, that if you put a black child in a white family, his IQ will be 10-12 pts higher than that of a black child who grew up in a black family in US. Conversely, a white child who grew up in a black family will score 10 pts lower than a white child who grew up in a white family. To me, it says that IQ is more cultural than genetic which is not surprising given how little genetic variation exists among humans. When Africa modernizes, IQ's will go up substantially.
Perhaps TOXIC WHITE CULTURE and toxic Asian culture are the ways to go if we want successful citizenry.

d6rB says

They are genetically quite close to SE Asians, so might be scoring very high.

Illogical. If that were the case, there would be no racial differences at all as everyone is from Africa. But compare Argentina, mostly white, and 1.4% Indian, to Mexico, 12% Indian, to Guatemala, 40% Indian, and the IQ matches, i.e, Argentina: 93, Mexico: 88, Guatemala: 79. The more Indian the population, the less the IQ.

Big Bill Broonzy had it right:

www.youtube.com/embed/k0c1c0ZsTLA

willywonka says

Illogical. If that were the case, there would be no racial differences at all as everyone is from Africa. But compare Argentina, mostly white, and 1.4% Indian, to Mexico, 12% Indian, to Guatemala, 40% Indian, and the IQ matches, i.e, Argentina: 93, Mexico: 88, Guatemala: 79. The more Indian the population, the less the IQ.

That is the point -- culture and wealth determines IQ to a very large extent. American Indians diverged form East Asians AFTER admixture of Denisovans and Neanderthals and they have paternal and maternal haplogroups that are rather common in E. Asia.

willywonka says

"They are genetically quite close to SE Asians, so might be scoring very high." Ok, that was wrong.

that was poorly worded sarcasm on my part

d6rB says

that was poorly worded sarcasm on my part

No worries. SE Asia encompasses a broad range.

d6rB says

Perhaps TOXIC WHITE CULTURE and toxic Asian culture are the ways to go if we want successful citizenry.

You, sir, are a monster.

Ocasio Cortez says using genes to determine intelligence is ridiculous, because you just can't tell how smart a person is by the kind of Levi's they wear.

CBOEtrader says

You, sir, are a monster.

THANK YOU! I suspect my toxic white masculinity shows!

Quigley says

Patrick says

I was quite surprised that feelings, to her, were more important than science

Is she a scientist or have significant science training/degrees? If not, then i don’t know why this is surprising. Women are emotional creatures and place the most importance on relationships. Men place more importance on doing things and understanding our world so that we can tame it and thus provide for women and the children we will make together. This is as nature intended it to be.
My wife actually is highly science trained and she still comes down on the side of emotion quite a bit on these sorts of issues. Maybe 50-50 on those odds for her.

Yes, she has a master's degree in physics, having dropped out of the PhD program at Michigan.

I suggested that women put more importance on feelings in deciding what truths to speak than men do, and she agreed with that. She thought that even if it were true that the races vary on average in temperament and intellectual abilities, people from lower-achieving groups would be unnecessarily discouraged by the revelation of scientific proof of it.

And so it seemed fair to her to fire someone who publicly spoke those truths. I was pretty surprised, since I would say that everyone had the right to speak scientific truths in public without being fired or harassed in other ways.

Another point my wife brought up: how would I feel if it came out that the Irish were not as smart as the English. I said that testing does seem to show the Irish are a couple of IQ points lower than the English on average, and that even though I don't like it, I would not fire anyone for pointing it out.

Both culture and genetics plays a role, probably the former more so than the latter.

There are subgroups in Africa that average very high IQs, the Ibo of Kenya I think?

Interestingly, Herders have the highest IQs and primitive agriculturalists the lowest. In the 19th Century, the first long term studies determined that peasants have great trouble with abstract/hypothetical thinking, probably since they don't encounter it. A herder is always counting, comparing grazing sites, has to evaluate a wide range of threats, train animals, etc. A peasant just hopes for rain.

Yes, I like to point out the Ibo (also spelled Igbo sometimes) of Nigeria. They are the intellectual stars of Africa and have little problem competing with Asians in England or America. So the averages gloss over subgroups.

Indians who move to America are consistently among the highest in IQ rankings, though India overall is rather low. Could be that we are getting a genetic subgroup, or that we are getting the better-nourished upper classes. Probably some of both.

I'm not saying that race is the only factor in intelligence, just that it's extremely unlikely that human genetic variation by race affects height, skin color, milk tolerance, etc etc but utterly stops at intelligence, where all races are absolutely identical.

Patrick says

My wife thought the dismissal of Watson may be justified because he made people feel bad. I was quite surprised that feelings, to her, were more important than science.

Maybe more important than feelings are the fact that any public discourse is political by nature, and politics have practical consequences.
So here you leave people 1 or 2 direct implications away from white nationalism, race based tribalism, etc...
It doesn't lead to holding hands and singing Kumbaya.

Heraclitusstudent says

Patrick says

My wife thought the dismissal of Watson may be justified because he made people feel bad. I was quite surprised that feelings, to her, were more important than science.

Maybe more important than feelings are the fact that any public discourse is political by nature, and politics have practical consequences.
So here you leave people 1 or 2 direct implications away from white nationalism, race based tribalism, etc...
It doesn't lead to holding hands and singing Kumbaya.

I think that left is very crazy about policing speech, and that's what tyrannical governments have always done. They choose lies over truth, and ban truth. It'll very likely lead to tyranny of some sort, right now it's identity politics for sure.

Fortwaynemobile says

I think that left is very crazy about policing speech

You mean censorship.
Free speech doesn't imply that no public shaming will take place based on what people say.

Heraclitusstudent says

Free speech doesn't imply that no public shaming

Correct. Public shaming often takes the form of oppression such as firing someone from a job or removing their honors for speaking the truth.

The left isnt against free speech just pro oppression. eyeroll

No, personally I think the respect of truth should come first. Shaming should apply to people like Alex Jones.

Heraclitusstudent says

Shaming should apply to people like Alex Jones.

workplaces should not fire people for politics of any kind. Deplatforming and/or kicking someone or a company off of email services, payment services, etc... these are the tools of tyranny that the left is cheering on.

Read history please before it's too late