Another writer at unz.com and some guy in the comments did a good job of refuting this. The article involves a lot of sampling problems and selection bias, but I'll move on to some other issues not mentioned in these refutations:
My two big gripes with this pertain to two things, the validity and g-loading of GCSE's and the free-school meals chart.
GCSE's are not highly g-loaded or that relevant, we know this for two reason:
>girls are doing better than boys, this almost never happens on g-loaded tests
>controlling for iq gets rid of most of the disparities in crime between blacks and whites. Yet, blacks in the U.K. are about as if not MORE criminal than blacks in the U.S.
Now the on to the free meals argument. Trying to use this to say that "poor blacks are outdoing poor whites" is false. Free school meals are not an objective measure of poverty or disadvantage, here is the definition:
>Free school meals Where a pupil's family have claimed eligibility for free school meals in the School Census they are defined as eligible for Free school meal (FSM). FSM data for pupils who attend further education colleges with 14 to 16 provision is available for 2016 and are therefore included in data presented here. The inclusion of these pupils adds around 900 pupils at the end of year 11 or around 0.2% of all pupils in state-funded schools. In 2016, 13.4% of pupils at the end of key stage 4 were eligible for free school meals, compared to 13.8% in 2015.
It's entirely self-selected. All that this really tells us is that blacks who aren't in trouble or disadvantaged claim free-school meals. Whites on the other hand, wait until they are in deep shit to claim FSM. It's also worth mentioning that blacks in the U.K. are more likely to enter the eBacc (English Baccalaureate), but less likely to pass:
Now that that's over, on to the next argument that matters.
>Muh flynn effect
In the United States, blacks haven't gained that much. Back in 1917, a test was given to white and black enlisted and officers during WWI. The scores were 100 and 83 respectively.
>page 317 of "Testing of Negro Intelligence", I'll provide a libgen link in a second
Besides that, the flynn effect has a negative correlation with gains in "general intelligence". The way whites and blacks differ in cognitive ability that we care about has nothing to do with the flynn effect.
Now on to the adoption studies, they are all deeply flawed:
>Eyferth 1961
>The final and earliest study in this literature is Eyferth (1961). Eyferth collected the IQ scores of 181 children (mean age = 10) who were either biracial (black/white) or White. All the children were the result of American military mating with German women during the occupation of Germany following the second world war.
>Eyferth found that White children had a mean IQ score of 97.2 compared to 96.5 for mixed children, a gap of only 0.7 IQ points.
>The first step in interpreting this study is to understand what we would expect to be true if the hereditarian hypothesis is correct. Because we are dealing with mixed race children, the expected Black-White IQ gap can immediately be cut in half to 7.5 points, giving Blacks a predicted IQ of 92.5. Next, we should account for the fact that the military rejected the bottom 30% of Black applicants compared to only 3% for Whites. This is therefore an elite sample of Blacks. This would lead us to predict a Black-White IQ gap several points lesser, perhaps 5 or 4 points, and a mean Black IQ of something more like 94.5 or 95.5. Then, we have to take into account the fact that the White mothers in question were of low socio-economic status. The Black-White IQ gap is generally much smaller among low SES families, and this alone could lead us to predict a gap several points smaller, maybe 2.5 or 3.5 points, giving us a predicted biracial IQ of something like 96.5 or 97.5. This, we might note, is exactly what the biracial IQ score was.
Nathan Martin
>The problem, then, comes from the Whites, and in particular the White women. Standardization data for the IQ test administered in this study showed that it exhibited no significant difference between samples of men and women. Among the biracial children, this holds true. However, there is an 8 point gap between White males and White females. Because of the previously referenced standardization data, we can therefore conclude that this sample of Whites is unrepresentative and, due to random sampling error, has unusually dumb White females. Among males, the IQ gap between biracial and White children was 4 points. As we’ve seen, this is fully consistent with the hereditarian hypothesis.
>Eyferth’s study demonstrably suffered from sampling error and contained an elite sample of Blacks. After taking these flaws into account, Eyferth’s findings are totally consistent with both hereditarianism and environmentalism.
Now moving on to the Tizard study:
>On its face, this data seems to offer clear evidence in favor of egalitarianism. However, a previous analysis of these studies pointed out that environmentalists would need to suppose an environmental advantage of .60SD and .37SD in favor of Blacks in order to account for them outscoring Whites in this dataset. Given the low value of the heritability of IQ at this age, hereditarians would only need to suppose an environmental advantage of .77SD and .46SD for their model to predict the observed results. The difference between these two suppositions, .17SD and .13SD, is a very small difference considering the small sample sizes present in Tizard’s studies and could easily occur by chance.
It also has a small sample size and fails to control for the Wilson Effect (increase of heretability of iq with age).
DNA's cofounder says race based iq exists. He has been blacklisted from all scientific communities since he said that, but so was Galileo when he said earth is not the center of the universe.
Charles Richardson
That and the fact that they used a study with a sample size of 23.
Adam Nguyen
what's the flynn effect?
Xavier Murphy
IQ gains over time. While the raw iq scores might be increasing, there has been a decline in the general intelligence factor. Using a reaction time as a proxy for g, there is evidence that g has been declining since the victorian era.
weighted mean = reaction time in milliseconds how long it took to respond to stimuli
Jace Jones
why is not a serious argument?
Jace Wood
bump
Christopher Williams
If you want to argue against alt right race realism you just mention that Murray stated that IQ test results are 40-80 percent due to hereditability. Since alt righters never address where the missing complement comes from, critics have plenty of room to make their case - but they almost never do this.
Camden Myers
?
Easton Morgan
Good thread, bump
also lol @ their smuggie being a wall of text
Matthew Diaz
fuckin kikes
David Cox
It's because most people aren't even arguing that genetics determines IQ entirely, but many people that argue against race realists think it's entirely environmental- discrimination and oppression. They don't even want to look at that figure.
Parker Brown
Have a bump while i read.
Charles Phillips
Reminder that you shouldn't feel bad for Kraut.
Jayden Butler
bump
Landon Jenkins
You tried to get Rage fired from her job, I won't be feeling any sympathy for Kraut my Croatian friend. Nice digits btw
Christian Collins
Leftist hate the truth. Especially when it involves statistics about black crime.
>irish were hated and treated as basically slaves >doing well now
>asians were hated and used as *not*slaves >doing extremely well
>blacks used as slaves >still can't get their shit together
>asains in asia doing well >ireland doing well
>Africa is the same as it was 8000 years ago
hmmm
Luke Myers
Thanks, m8.
This thread is more active by the way I think we should use this one past the bump limit of the that one.
Joshua Mitchell
LEFTIST LOGIC 101
>racists have low IQs >IQ is racist and scientifically provable difference between groups are fake
>there's 0 evidence IQ is genetic, but jews have higher IQ than you goyim.
>asians are so smart! ^_^ >accidentally opening the pandora's box of race-based intelligence gradients Woops!
>africans are the BEST athletes! ^_^ >continuing the trend Woops!
>0 evidence >European IQs begin plummeting after refugee crisis Top. Fucking. Kek
>Point out blacks do most of the shootings in America >I get called a racist for posting government sources
>Fuck white cis males!! >There's no such thing as race and gender it isn't real. Hmmmmmm....
>Lives in a white gated community >Whites in South Africa and Mississippi are racist because they're ignorant
>Leftists are more intelligent >Measures of intelligence are meaningless Please pick one bullshit idea at a time, not two which contradict each other
>height is associated with race >skin color is associated with race >eye color too >weight >"muh dick" >hair color >predisposition to diseases >bone structure >ability to digest certain foods >but not muh magical IQ because i-its environmental isnt it strange that the only factor that could hurt your feelings has NOTHING to do with race or genetics wow really makes you think.
>Jews are poor innocent victims and whites have all the power and privilege! >Jews are superior and deserve it! Pick one and only one.
Sebastian Davis
Thank you, I highly recommend you do use this thread. This way my post gets more exposure and less people are swayed by leftypol's egalitarian pseudoscientific sophistry
Luke Perry
>Race is an artificial concept. There is no such thing as race. >Check your white privilege. >Would you consider a sub saharan African albino a white person with "white privilege" >Evolution only exists below the neck. >Evolution is real. >Evolution doesn't exclude the brain.
Be a leftist >Say that race doesn't exist >Have no problem determining the race of someone when dolling out affirmative action >Have no problem determining the race of someone when absolving responsibility from non-whites >Applaud mandatory diversity Imagine being this much of a disingenuous, manipulative, weasel. These people have no problem lying to your face. The idea that differing sub-groups of human evolved for tens of thousands of years in vastly different environments and developed zero biological differences aside from physical appearance is patently absurd to anyone who understands how evolution works.
Leftist: >Blacks are too stupid to get ID cards >Blacks are too stupid to learn Grammer So what are (((Liberals))) implying anyway
Socialism in a nutshell: >Race is a social construct >Value and socio-economic class are real and objective Reality is a lie, utopian idealism is the truth, and somehow it's a strictly materialist ideology. It's some fucking inconsistent garbage that only plebes with a sub-120 IQ ever fall for.
White leftists telling white people to "go back to Europe" while at the same time holding belief that Europe doesn't belong to white people. Leftism truly is a mental disorder.
>Multiple cultures owned slaves for thousands of years. >Liberals: White people need to apologize
Michael Reyes
You can always repost those, familia.
Leo Wood
I'll screenshot in a bit
Caleb Hughes
quick timeline: >white nations around the Renaissance: "wow we are sure developing culturally but we still maintain our homelands" >cue the Enlightenment Era: "*tips fedora* well sir we have a major problem, our culture lacks in the values of individualism™, rationalism™ , and scientific skepticism™. It is clear you should abandon you natural inclinations to maintain your own nation's cultural and biological sovereignty in favor of our enlightenment materialist ideology." >"also pay no attention to what shlomo is doing over there" >hundred years later: "the monarchy must fall, the traditional institutions we have are getting in the way of revolution and democracy, and this guy (((Marx))) has some really profound ideas!" >modern day: "white people don't exist and white culture doesn't exist, but all white people must be eradicated, and their nations must take on all denizens of the world. Also Israel must remain a Jewish nation while white nations should learn to be multicultural."
Marxism and Progressive SJW-ism is cancer, but the root of the cancer comes from the type of moderate leftist "centrists" who expose Enlightenment era philosophy that caused the first fracturing of white solidarity. They will tell you identity politics is a new thing, but it wasn't, people ages ago understood the racial divides. Only when the Enlightenment era came about did whites fall for this individualist autism that lulled them into a false sense of security that allowed non-whites to start flooding their nations. Now the identity politics shows its face again, but this time its minorities trying to dismantle power in white nations, while their own home nations remain homogenous. Don't fall for the "Rational Centrist" rhetoric, they are the worst culprit to what is going wrong in white nations.
Grayson Allen
...
Easton Morris
Imagine any confrontation, any sport or competition where groups are involved. One side works together and helps one another. The other one works solely for themselves and will temporarily cooperate with anyone including the opposing team against their own people for short term benefit to themselves. Which side is going to win is pretty much decided from the get go.
Liberals have a mental disease and we've allowed the celebration of mental illness to go on long enough.
Benjamin Stewart
There's something pathologically wrong with these people's heads were everything beautiful is perverse and vile and vice-versa. Why do you think they have such a strong infatuation with black tranny disabled muslims? I realize that leftypol is "anti-idpol", I'm referring to liberals and reddit type leftists
