White nations score between 98-102 on IQ, East-Asians (not all Asians) score between 102-105. Let's say 100 for whites and 105 for East-Asians. With this 5 point lead, they should have produced and accomplished a lot more just on that. Now you could say the geographical position, as Eastern-Asia was a good place for civilization early on,but with more advanced ways of extracting minerals, the European continent had an advantage (if we say that the East-Asian region are poor on minerals).
Which is also the explanation to why more northern regions used longer time to become Civilized and in the end ended up dominating the rest - we had to use more energy on survival, when our technology caught up, we could exploit the rich lands.
But to reach the point where we could exploit our rich lands, a lot of people died, the less adaptive, creative and dumb ones died. My guess is that East-Asians gained it's intelligence by that the rich had many children (significant numbers), while the poor less. As it have had a much more centralized structure for a much longer time than white nations. To become rich and climb in a centralized world, IQ gives you a big advantage.
White nations where not as centralized, so rich people did not have a lot more children than the rest. Smaller tribes had to evolve to tackle the climate, and find creative ways to survive.
If you take in modern times, Asian comedy? Asian literature (there are some Japanese authors that are superb, but exceptions)? Asian revolutionary inventions? There are many factors in this, such as geography, but Asians are very unrepresented considering their IQ. So much that I think that it has to do with other parts of their intelligence, such as creativity.
>Scandi men are disgustingly effeminate, and women are largely known for preferring darker pigmented Med-looking men over everyone else, not you sickly pale looking fags.
It's a Sup Forums meme. Are you a cuckold, or non-white?