You should have kept reading. Dr. Nisbett's book does nothing to explain facts I have already mentioned.

 

I have to admit to laughing at your desperation Distant Lover and knew full well it would happen once your favorite source; The Bell Curve was discredited and such an important part of your racist, bigoted identity crumbled right before your eyes.

But now you're going to continue are you? Well what discredits both Slate article and The Bell Curve is . Phillippe Rushton . Let's take a look at his work DL.

http://www.cjsonline.ca/articles/wahlsten.html

 

It wasn't as spontaneous in it's location as you assume, one major factor in the development of civilization was an ability to farm; if you notice all the civilizations that "spontaneously" appeared all appeared in fertile river valleys the Nile, Tigris and Euphrates, Indus river, the yellow river etc. As for your assertion of their whiteness i really need proof of that, as the reason for a persons skin color has a lot to do with their sun exposure and melanin levels.

 

You're pretty fucking ignorant, aren't you? Do you know anything about anthropology? All humanity came from the East African rift valley...'white'? Is this like 'caucasian,' i.e. discredited categories from the infancy of anthropological studies in the last century? Why don't you pitch phrenology to us?

'Whiteness' is the product of an extremely short time period, and surface adaptation to external factors like local weather. Compared to mankind's development over a million or so years, such things are utterly insignificant. Ridiculously insignificant. Fodder for racist dumbshits like you.

 

DNA evidence indicates that about 65,000 years ago one to two hundred people crossed the Sinai Peninsula, and that everyone who is not a Negro is descended from those people. By five thousand years ago, the existing races had evolved, although they have since that time become more diverse.

 

Perhaps I should have said "autonomously" rather than "spontaneously." What I meant is that in various locations and at various times civilization originated without input from other civilizations. For example, if the Sumerian civilization had not developed, the Egyptian civilization would have, and so on. Agriculture came before civilization, but that too developed autonomously.

Once civilization began, it spread and interlocked. The ancient Greeks learned from the Egyptians, and the successors of the Sumerians, who unlike the Sumerians were Semites. From the Greeks, civilization spread to the Romans who spread it throughout Europe, but civilization did not begin autonomously in Europe.

In the New World civilization began slightly less than three thousand years ago, and began in what is now southern Mexico and Peru. Both developments were autonomous. When the Spanish conquered the Aztecs and the Incas, they did not know about each other.

The earliest Egyptian mummies are Caucasian in features and DNA. As more is learned about the human genome, DNA can be used not only in determining a person's race, but also the person's nation, if the nation is old enough. DNA can determine if someone who looks white has some black ancestry, and visa versa. Recently I read of a black person who learned from a DNA test that some of his ancestors came from Ireland. I read of a white person who learned that he might be a direct descendant of Genghis Khan. A ten thousand year old skeleton was discovered in England. DNA testing demonstrated that a direct descendant of that person lived fifty miles away.

 

Intelligence, just like any other characteristic, evolves over a period of hundreds and thousands of years. The superior intelligence of the Ashkenazi Jews is attributed to the fact that after they were dispersed by the Romans following their defeat of the Bar Kokhba Revolt (132-136 AD) they had to live by their wits.

 

Instead of throwing all that stuff at me, you should read it, assimilate it, and explain it.

Those who pretend to refute The Bell Curve cannot explain away three obvious facts: some people are more intelligent than others; intelligence runs in families; some population groups excel intellectually, others do not.

Charles Murray has a simple explanation. Intelligence is primarily determined genetically. Some individuals, families, and population groups have more intelligence genes than others.

Those who attack Murray argue that in a just society, which is presumably a society in which they would have the power, these differences would disappear. They are not disappearing. There is no obvious reason to suppose that they will. No one has designed a system of education that can reliably take a seven year old who gets a low score on an IQ test and significantly raise the IQ score of that child.

 

No DL, you're still just trying to pass off your own racism and prejudice using the white supremacist bought and paid for thoroughly scientifically discredited; The Bell Curve. I told you that the first time you brought it up and provided sources that showed why, just like I've done every time since. Always with better and more credible sources.

These two are excellent.

http://www.jewcy.com/cabal/will_saletans_scandalous_source

http://www.cjsonline.ca/articles/wahlsten.html


They not only expose the fatal scientific and statistical flaws in the work of those who sought to prove a genetic link to racial intelligence, they also expose the corrupting forces behind these studies, and most importantly cites real scientific studies that completely refute and disprove the theory that whites are genetically mentally superior to blacks.

And it really is this simple. The theory of Whites as a race being genetically mentally superior to blacks is utterly disproved by the one consistent finding in every data sets examined. Regardless of which IQ test is used, or who administers it, there is a greater variation in scores between members in any given group than there are between the groups themselves. That means what ever genetic links to intelligence might exist, they are individual not racial.

 

This thread is further proof that my decision to leave this hellhole and to never return was the correct one.

 

.

 

I have read this article several times. I wonder how thoroughly you have. Daniel Koffler spends a lot of time talking about brain size which is not directly relevant to his topic, although there seems to be a correlation between brain size and IQ when sex is held constant.

He quotes Stephen Jay Gould as saying in his New Yorker review, [The Bell Curve] "contains no new arguments and presents no compelling data." Well the assumption that the Negro race is mentally inferior to the white race has existed as long as the races have interacted. As far as "compelling data," is concerned, we will have to rely on Gold's judgment for what is "compelling data." I think the persistence of the 15 IQ gap is compelling data, as well as the fact that four decades after the civil rights legislation was signed, there is still a considerable gap in academic and professional performance.

When reading comments to Koffler's article I found this: "The Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study. It is the only adoption study that tested the black IQ of adoptees in childhood and adulthood, and this incredible intervention didn't do anything. The 130 adoptees also markedly differed in IQ as a function of how much black ancestry they had."

And this: "Low black intelligence relative to whites has been consistently found in hundreds of studies conducted over the course of a century and all over the world, including the US, the Caribbean, Europe, Israel, and Africa. As I say in my article, The Reality of Racial Differences, at The Inverted World (link below): 'Despite all the efforts made in the US to achieve parity among the [blacks and whites], the IQ gap has not gone away. In 1917, the first large scale IQ tests in America found about a 17-point difference between the scores of the races; the most recent studies show the difference is about the same11. The equalization of spending on black and white education, government educational programs for the poor, diversity training, and all the rest of it simply have had no discernible effect on the racial IQ gap'."

I have already pointed out that although the Washington, DC public school system is one of the most expensive in the United States, it gets among the lowest test scores. Students in the DC public school are almost entirely black.

 

J.P. Rushton, Race, Evolution and Behavior. New Brunswick, NJ.: Transaction Publisher

Review by Douglas Wahlsten, University of Alberta

Rushton proposes that modern humans first arose in Africa where conditions of life were supposedly quite congenial and exerted little pressure to evolve further; whereas those people who migrated to harsh northern climates were subjected to Darwinian natural selection favouring higher intelligence... Many gross inconsistencies in the arguments have also been noted, such as the subordinate social circumstances of the aborigina l peoples in the northern regions of Canada despite their hundreds of generations of living in the harshest of all climates, which should have endowed them with the highest IQ scores...

Rushton proceeds with genetic arguments on the basis of data that are obviously confounded with the environment. He claims that Africans have very low average IQ scores, even lower than American blacks. His evidence includes IQ test scores of black children in the Republic of South Africa prior to 1990 who were attending "typical primary schools'' there, schools widely known to be substantially inferior to those of the ruling white minority.

http://www.cjsonline.ca/articles/wahlsten.html

------

I have not read Rushton's book, so I do not know how much he attributes the higher average IQ scores of whites and Orientals to a colder climate. The current theory among anthropologists is that humans left Africa in two migrations, both across the Sinai Peninsula. The first migration happened about one million years ago. The descendants of this migration evolved into the Neanderthals in Europe and the near east. These endured extremely harsh conditions during the last one or two ice ages. Although their brains were somewhat larger than those of modern humans, remains of their encampments indicate lower intelligence. For example, they do not seem to have practiced trade, and they do not seem to have been able to plan for the future. In addition, their stone tool kit was more limited, and they did not use spear throwers.

While Neanderthals evolved outside of Africa, modern humans evolved in Africa. DNA evidence indicates that one to two hundred of them crossed the Sinai Peninsula about 65,000 years ago. These competed with the more primitive human beings. Eventually they out hunted and out fought them, and the more primitive human beings became extinct.

In other words, if Rushton attributes the higher average IQ's of whites and Orientals to living in a colder climate, his explanation is unconvincing. Nevertheless, the higher averages remain. I attribute the higher averages to differing population pressures. Whites and Orientals developed agriculture before African blacks, and they also developed urban centers earlier.

As far as the low quality of schools in Africa for blacks, I have already pointed out that there is very little relationship in the United States between the amount of money spent on public schools, and the test scores students in those schools achieve.

 

Charles Murray has always pointed out that differences within each population group are far greater than differences between them. So did Richard Herrnstein.

 

hell muslims have been starting shit all over, they did not come to attention till 9/11.
so kill them all and no more problems,,give them guns and let the shites fight it out with the other muslem groups,, as they sat the only good one is a dead one,,,,,,,,,,:laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing:

 

You failed. :laughing::laughing:

Its As they say.

 

hey your the one going to usf. it means Unknowing Stupid Fucks,,,,,,:laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing:

 

virginmale762, too bad you left so early in this thread, but I agree 100 percent with all you say, and I am American and Jewish to boot.

 

Americans are too involved with themselves. They are used to food on the table.

 

Hello Virgin Male,

Just read your thoughts and have come to one significant conclusion:
YOU ARE ONE BIG ARSE HOLE