Race and IQ

Redpill me on the Race and IQ

In psychology, we learned that some tests can be completely biased and affect the person's performance on a test.
For example, if a woman was taking her intermediate test and the instructor said something like "not a lot of women pass this test, so don't feel so bad if you fail", that will affect her performance.
Telling African Americans that they score around an 80 on an IQ test when the average for whites is 100, will affect their performance.

This is the real redpile here.

Exactly this.

In reality they probably score closer to their African counterparts.

Seeing as the African IQ is about 70, the competition is probably boosting their score by 15 points.

Psychology!

TL;DR version: Genetics influences intellectual capacity, and mainstream biology already understands this. We just pretend it's different for humans because muh ekwalatey and muh feelings.

Scientific racism was NEVER debunked.

This looks like a shoop, I can tell from the pixels.

I have other statistics and various other things that proove it to be correct. Before you accuse me of something you may want to do *some* reading.

Nigga, that is an old black vs white IQ distribution image with Brexit and remain voter shooped over the original text.

No its not and this graph proves that my claim is legit. Deal with the facts bigot.

Charles Murray proved it, while doing his best not to lmao

most niggerrs be dumb and sheeeit

>the competition is probably boosting their score by 15 points.
or they have some White admixture(they do)

English shitposting.

The brexit curve is higher we are smarter!!!!!

IQ is about 70-90% genetic.

>Still believing in the IQ meme

...

the real reason IQ results like this aren't taken seriously isnt because "hurr durr blue pilled liberal cant accept white master race" like Sup Forums claims. Its because its widely know that IQ test by design have flaws (Flynns Effect for example).

Most IQ test are either written or orally administered. Meaning you're not just testing someones raw intelligence but also their ability to take test which means that reading/language comprehension, writing ability and test taking strategy come into play. These are all skills that come from education and not inherent intelligence. Its no question that blacks receive poorer education than whites, they would do worse than whites on any written test, no matter what you were testing them for. It's like if you were to do a speed a test with a horse and dolphin but you put both animals on land.The medium used to administer the test affects the results

A true intelligence test would be administered to recipients of equal education using vernacular comfortable to the test takers and it would also test multiple areas of intelligence using multiple methods like testing spatial awareness using 3D puzzles and mazes and face pattern test to measure social intelligence. Just because you cant do long division because no one ever showed you doesnt mean you're less intelligent, just uneducated.

Nigger have you ever seen an IQ test? They're basically the shit you want minus the (((other kinds of intelligence)))

Researchers actively try their damnedest to remove bias from these tests and Ave been doing so since their invention.

That is exactly why IQ tests are designed the opposite of what you describe them as.

IQ is a measure of your ability to learn, not how smart you are.

>, if a woman was taking her intermediate test and the instructor said something like "not a lot of women pass this test, so don't feel so bad if you fail", that will affect her performance.

Total fucking bullshit.

Not only does mainstream biology understand it, but normal people do too. People are pretty good at guessing their own IQ, and estimating the IQ of those around them, and they behave accordingly. People who deny the existence of IQ, still walk and talk as if they knew the IQ of those around them, which they do.

> design have flaws (Flynns Effect for example).

How is the Flynn Effect a flaw? Its an effect.

Anyway, suppose the IQ test was flawed, why does that mean it shouldnt be taken seriously? BMI is a good test, even tho is doesnt measure everything, and has some pretty well known exceptions. Why would you be like "BMI doesnt measure everything, therefore it measures nothing"?

>Meaning you're not just testing someones raw intelligence but also their ability to take test which means that reading/language comprehension

Intelligence is test taking ability, and it is reading comprehension, and test taking ability and reading comprehension are greatly associated with a great number of socially relevant variables, like how many kids you have, how much crime you commit, and your life expectancy. Its not "just" test taking ability.

> These are all skills that come from education

They dont. They are skills that are greatly heritable. When you control for IQ and education, the effect of education is basically zero.

> using vernacular comfortable to the test takers

The cool thing is you can do a scientific study on where vernacular matters in IQ tests. Results : It doesnt. Smart blacks from poor backgrounds have the same vernacular as smart whites from rich backgrounds. If you are smart you get the vernacular, if you arent you dont. Background and culture have no effect on vernacular.