IQ and the Wealth of Nations

Tell me BiSexMansBud, would IQ and the Wealth of Nations also be Illegal in England? It attributes the poverty of Africa to the fact that the average IQ among African Negroes is 70. In the United States that is considered to be dull normal.

----------

IQ and the Wealth of Nations is a controversial 2002 book by Dr. Richard Lynn, Professor Emeritus of Psychology at the University of Ulster, Northern Ireland, and Dr. Tatu Vanhanen, Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland.[1] The book argues that differences in national income (in the form of per capita gross domestic product) correlate with differences in the average national intelligence quotient (IQ)...

Along with the rest of Lynn's work, IQ and the Wealth of Nations has had a large impact on the understanding of human differences, and has served as the basis for many subsequent studies about international comparisons.[15] Studies by Weede and Kämpf[16] and R. E. Dickerson[17] have re-examined Lynn's data and concluded that IQ is an important contributor to national wealth. Whetzel and McDaniel also agree that the book's conclusions about the relationship between IQ, democracy and economic freedom are robust.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_and_the_Wealth_of_Nations

 

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-bellcurvescience.htm

 

The 10,000 Year Explosion

BiSexMansBud,

The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution, by professors Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending attributes the high crime and low intelligence that characterize blacks everywhere and always have to the fact that the Negro race is closer in number of generations to the savagery of the stone age. Is that book also illegal in England?

http://the10000yearexplosion.com/

 

http://repec.wesleyan.edu/pdf/jjacobsen/2006026_jacobsen.pdf

 

You can dress anything up as you see fit, I doubt we have banned that book here though it would be viewed very differently, probably in a state of bewildered horror. I strongly suspect that the authors would not be well recieved here in the UK and would have to be careful what they said should they gain entry here..we would not tolerate racial hatred or the incitement to racial hatred which in the wrong hands could cause national outrage.

I cannot debate with all the academia you throw at me I am not an academic or inclined to read that kind of literature. So maybe I am seeing this from a more human prospective.

You know you can bombard people with endless writing as you frequently do, but that doens't make you or your opinions correct. You can dismiss people with less education than you such as myself, but again that doesn't make you right what it does is exhibt you as is a racist and a very dangerous influence on any young person who should fall under your opinion.

Have you ever considered how dangerous you are..We deport and refuse entry to the UK for extremists such as yourself and the authors of such books for the common good. We are not perfect in England far from it but we will die trying and will defend any who fall foul of hatred.

Maybe I have got you all wrong..I don't think so not from what I have read here. Your opinions on other races intelligence backed up by this particular book are astounding, offensive and downright nasty.

This has been a thoroughly unpleasant experience..I may start a crusade here to get this damn book removed if its here.. We're a queer lot in England you have no idea how much we detest this sort of thing..Yes we have our haters as well but they have no real muscle thank god..they try but get swiftly kicked into touch..

 

As more blacks move to England the English will become more aware that what I and the authors of these books are saying is true. I think there is already a growing resistance to black immigration in England.

There should never be any taboos against telling the truth.

 

http://repec.wesleyan.edu/pdf/jjacobsen/2006026_jacobsen.pdf

 

Utter nonsense. We welcome anyone who can contribute to the country be that academics or blue coller workers as you call them. If there is any resistance it would be to more eastern european migrants who stay a short time and contribute very little..

 

Code:

At least some of your prejudice against blacks appears to stem from your misconception that pre-colonial sub-Saharan Africans were savages.

This is ignorance, plain and simple.

Indigenous sub-Saharan Africans have been practicing cultivated farming for tens of thousands of years, and quite possibly for longer than any other race on earth.

For the most part, they cultivated root vegetables, such as yams, which were nutrient-rich, kept well, and were well suited to the locale.

Sub-Saharan Africans also achieved a Bronze age technology- not Stone age- and acquired a mastery level aptitude at that level.

The one thing they did not have was a symbolic language (that is, not if one omits the ancient Egyptians, although most contemporary anthropologists count Egyptians as Nubian Africans, most definitely of the so-called "negroid" race).

As I said approximately 50 posts ago, people tend to educate themselves to the degree necessary.

Life in pre-colonial Sub-Saharan Africa was idyllic, almost to the point of being reminiscent of Eden. Food literally grew on trees. The peoples of pre-colonial Africa had paradise on earth, for which they can perhaps be forgiven if they did not spoil it by learning how to punch time clocks.

For one to conclude from their lifestyle that they were unintelligent savages is nothing but coarse ignorance.

Read Things Fall Apart and No Longer At Ease, by Chinua Achebe. Not the Cliffs Notes versions. Don't look them up on Wikipedia. Buy the books and read them. Then come back and dare to spout this racist crap.

 

Read it yourself and tell me about it in your own words.

 

It seems likely that the expansion of the Bantu-speaking people from their core region in Cameroon began around 1000 BC. Although early models posited that the early speakers were both iron using and agricultural, archaeology has shown that they did not use iron until as late as 400 BC, though they were agricultural.[21
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bantu_expansion

-----

American Negroes are descended from the Bantu. These did not go through a copper age and bronze age like the Caucasians in the Near East, but learned iron technology from the Nubians about 400 BC, although they practiced agriculture earlier. The use of iron weapons enabled them to expand at the expense of more primitive stone age peoples. On occasion the Bantu built large towns with stone and brick buildings, but they never developed indigenous civilizations the way the American Indians did, with their own system of mathematics and writing.

The agriculture they developed was one women could practice with little assistance from men. Among Caucasians in Northern Africa, the Near East, and Europe plows were necessary. These required the strength of men. Consequently women needed men to raise their children, so marital bonds were stronger.

Among birds and mammals, when males are needed to raise the young, monogamy is the rule. When males are not necessary to raise the young, they fight for possession of females. The winners mate. The losers do not. The males as a consequence evolve to become more violent.

Consider the practice of cock fighting. You might think male eagles would put up better fights than male chickens. However, eagles are monogamous, so the males do not fight.

 

A good theory cannot exist without a bit of good philosophy, and just a bit of even bad philosophy makes it rather clear that your argument defeats itself. A strict comparison of white progression, white culture, white influence and white civilization, versus, let us say, Oriental, is all that is needed to debunk what I will kindly call a disaster.

If Orientals were indeed the brightest of the species(as is proposed) they would not find themselves in such a poor state when placed against the merely middle of the road whites. So a thinking man is left with two possible explanations.

First: Intelligence has no real influence over a race's ability to contemplate and control its surroundings. Intelligence does not guarantee quicker progression, more widespread civility, heftier worldwide influence, or greater innovation.

Result: If this is the case. Then one must ask, of what use is intelligence? And if intelligence is truly of such little use, then of what use is theory which proposes to identify the intelligence of races? Such a theory would be wasted, as intelligence has just been proven to be meaningless and obsolete when considering a races well being. In fact, if intelligence has no bearing over any of these most important things, does the word hold any meaning at all outside of individual instances? And if any individual of any race can be an exception to the rule, and intelligence can only make a difference on an individual bases, is not then the measure of a "races" intelligence a useless abstraction. If so, is not the theory which does so also...a useless abstraction?

Second: Intelligence has a hefty influence over progression, civility, influence and innovation. As would be expected. So the most intelligent race should naturally outpace all others in this regard.

Result: Your theory has clearly mismeasured intelligence among the races, is flawed, and should be ignored.

 

I have explained the superior average intelligence of the Orientals by discussing the importance of the imperial exam system in China, and the fact that once civilization began in China about 4000 years ago and spread to Korea, Japan, and Vietnam the area never experienced a dark age, like Europe did with the fall of the Roman Empire. Europe experienced an earlier dark age with the fall of the Mycenaean civilization in Greece about three thousand years ago.

That is my explanation. I have admitted that The 10,000 Year Explosion does not adequately explain why Orientals have higher average IQs and lower crime rates than whites.

 

Does The Bell Curve explain why America has a BLACK president?????

 

That is a poor answer and perhaps no answer at all. Your diddling on about the "Dark ages" is so off the point that I'm failing to find where it even landed, or where you intended it to. Such a statement has nothing to do with the matter at hand and the "Dark ages" are not exclusive to any society in their meaning, and the idea of an even existing "Dark age" has been more than debunked among modern scholars. But lest I follow you off the point, I will get back to it.

Leaving off your love of ancient history, I would like you to explain why "White" civilization has outpaced Oriental civilization to such a large extent in recent history, and continues to at present. Does it not seem odd to you that the "smartest" of the races would be little more than tools put to work constructing the desired civilization and mechanical innovations of a so called second tier race? Your entire theory, or rather, the theory you love, falls apart entirely upon the point.

Again, either the theory is mistaken, or racial IQ means exactly nothing in real terms. Either way, Humpty Dumpty remains quite broken.

 

During the middle ages explorers from another planet would have certainly found the Chinese to be technologically superior to the Europeans. When Marco Polo wrote an account of his travels in China during the early fourteenth century many in Europe doubted that such an advanced civilization could exist.

It was not until the Renaissance that European science and technology achieved an obvious superiority to those of other civilizations.

The imperial exam system had a paradoxical effect on China. By making it possible for brilliant young men from humble origins to achieve wealth power and prestige, as well as several wives and many children they could provide well for so they were more likely to survive and reproduce, it increased the average intelligence of the Chinese. However, the exams were based on the classics of Confucianism, rather than science. This caused the Chinese to look backward, and discouraged advancements in technology.

When the Chinese were threatened by European military aggression in the nineteenth century they were at a disadvantage for two reasons. First, the Manchu Dynasty had entered into the organic decadence that was typical of Chinese dynasties after a few centuries. Second, the Manchu's had come from Manchuria. Most Chinese did not consider them to be authentic Chinese, and resented them as foreign conquers. Consequently the Manchu emperors were unable to enlist Chinese nationalism the way more native emperors would have been able to.

Nevertheless, the Japanese can manufacture nearly anything better than we Americans can, and the Chinese can manufacture it cheaper.

In 2010 the gross domestic product of China grew by 10.8 percent. That was higher than for any Caucasian country. Two countries that had higher growth rates were Taiwan, and Singapore. Both have Chinese populations. Vietnam, Hong Kong, and South Korea also have higher rates of economic growth than the United States and European countries.

In American universities Orientals have a prominence in science and mathematics departments that far exceeds their percentage in the U.S. population.

From 1990 to the present whites in the United States have scored higher averages than Asians on the reading part of the SAT. However, the advantage of the whites is declining as the percentage of Asians who speak English as a second language is declining. Asians have always scored better in mathematics. They are increasing their advantage over whites.

http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=171

 

On page 237 of The Bell Curve there is a prediction that in 2008 the United States will elect a black president with a Harvard degree. The authors did not say if he would be reelected however.

 

Excellent response and I agree you've just shot a huge hole in DL's racist bullshit.

 

I did read them, you pathetic ass. And I told you about them, in my own words, in the post to which you responded.

The books are an account of pre-colonial Nigerian culture, derived from thousands of years of spoken tradition.

 

Unlike dear DL who, by has own admission, has never read the Bell Curve.