Blacks Less Intelligent Than Whites?

I claim there's no particular scientific definition of it as an inherent trait, in the way it is being used by those who think white-skinned people have "more" of it.

Are idiot savants "intelligent" ? Great jazz musicians who score low on IQ tests? Great mathematicians who can't figure out how to work a washing machine or open a childproof medicine vial ?

Is a Polynesian teenager who can navigate hundreds of miles of ocean in an open boat using a lengh of strung shells and the memorized accounts of several hundred ancestors, more or less intelligent than a Pennslyvanian teenager who can solve rate and time problems using calculus ?

Of course intelligence exists. But its nature and expression vary by culture. We have people on this thread claiming that the fact that black people tend to score lower than white people on IQ tests is good evidence that the "black race" is less intelligent than the "white race".

And your habit of attributing to me assertions that you have pulled out of your not-so-parallel universe of expectations for me to have made, is also annoying. Races, as sociologically defined, definitely exist. So does intelligence. Neither one has been scientifically defined in such a way that it can be used to draw genetic conclusions about large groups of people.

There's nothing wrong with discussing black people as we know them, or intelligence as we generally experience it. Much can be said, and learned, and understanding improved. But trying to draw genetic or other scientific conclusions about "race" based on these informal discussions of sociological patterns is goofy.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

But just how do you know that? See? That's the problem! You have "faith" that all people are equal, yet you have no evidence or facts to back up that claim. You're not much different to the racists who claim that blacks are inferior in intelligence ...just statements without fact.

Why not research and test to determine that it's "goofy" instead of just continually saying it? If what you say is true, then there's no reason not to continue testing for inherited traits of intelligence just like any other inherited traits. Hiding out heads in the sand and pretending that we know is pretty foolish and ignorant.

Baron Max

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

They are doing that. What we know so far is that it is goofy. It's just that people like you will never read these publications because they are not written for you. It's easier to read stuff on websites or talk to your neighbour.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Scientists might be doing it, but if this thread is any indication, they'll never be permitted to publish the results!! Look at how people have attacked Watson for his views ...it would be much worse if someone had conclusive proof that blacks are less intelligent than whites. We'd have rioting in the streets and burning buildings all over the nation!

Baron Max

 

the idea is that scientists have shown that these statistical studies are actually a farce with regards to the distribution of alleles of all genes in a black-white population.

So indeed, I can imagine that nobody will be allowed to publish what you are suggesting since usually they at least try to have some kind of standard in what is published in peer-reviewed journals, although of course often shit does get through.

I could tell you what's bogus of course in these IQ studies and your assumptions, but you wouldn't listen anyway.

So i cannot be arsed!

 

Have you any idea of the level of planning, sophistication, problem solving and complexity of ideas required to implement a space program? You obviously don't because no black culture has ever come close to the almost absolute level of control and manipulation of space, matter and time as whites have in order to achieve it.

Trawl the internet and you will find no ends of threads on Black message boards lamenting the Black mans inability to maintain a small business - or any kind of business for that matter. Blacks have even written books about it: http://www.amazon.com/Capitalist-Nigger-Success-Spider-Doctrine/dp/0967846099.
There are many hundreds of such books, mostly blaming the white man for the position of the black in the modern world. To be fair this book does actually blame black people but ultimately it adds up to nothing more than the same question, "why don't/can't we [black people] do something?".

Unbelievably, nobody bothers to consider the psychological reasons why such a vast body of 'eternal victim' literature has evolved amongst Western blacks. Could it be because it actually covers a gaping hole in black peoples intellectual capacity? After keeping black people as slaves for several centuries in which they were considered to be diametric opposites of the white population America freed them and now - hey presto! - we're all the same! And we thought magic didn't exist? Clearly there is more to this than meets the eye and a more balanced approach to understanding racial differences is required.

In the U.K. there has long been a stereotype of Asian (Indian/Pakistani) immigrants as corner shop owners - and as we know in every stereotype exist seeds of truth. Asians, when they first came to Britain, did indeed buy or let shops which they then worked hard in to build a financial base for their families future. Maintaining a shop that sells everything from perishable goods to frozen foods and household goods as well as dealing with staff and book keeping actually requires a high degree of planning and co-ordination which many of us would take for granted that we are capable of achieving. No such comparative stereotype exists for black people however. Indeed that stereotype is lack of intellectual energy, over-sexed and indolent.

We all know that in the States you promote black people into positions because they are black and not because of any innate ability. I think you call it 'affirmative action'. I prefer the term 'tokenism', which is all it is. Your attempts to discredit the link between IQ and race on this forum are just another example of this tokenism.

Below are some excerpts from Scott Trasks review of Dark Star Safari by Paul Theroux - a highly experienced writer and journalist who spent a large part of his life living and working in Africa.

Stereotyping and unscientific rebuttal (Paul Theroux?) of already described scientific concepts constitutes trolling. Infraction given.

This post also receives the DUH! award of the day

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

S.A.M.

 

Is the DUH! award a scientific award?

(Goody I've never won a science award before!)

 

See? Deep Thought recieving an infraction is exactly the same type of reason why scientists and educators aren't permitted to study racial differences in intelligence or anything else!!

It's taboo to make any comments, to state any findings, to even study such things ....because it might upset someone's tender feelings!!

What else is taboo in the scientific world? What else aren't people allowed to research or study without getting ostracized for it?

Baron Max

 

Its a sign to young readers of the forums that the post has NO scientific content and may be safely ignored.

 

Complaints about moderation removed

Take it to the appropriate forum

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=72820

 

Just a thought,
Brave white expeditionaries and explorers ( and I'm not being facetious, they were) came to places like America and Australia with technology at the forefront of their era( complex navigational techniques etc.) and observed the heathen natives( starting to get a little facetious now). They couldn't believe their eyes, half naked or naked primitive folks with the most rudimentary housing, little or no agriculture, barely more than animals!

Meanwhile, the native indigenous people observed with with wonder the strange folks who arrived in their awe-inspiring, spectacular sailing vessels who seemingly possessed some great science yet continued to dress in completely inappropriate clothing for the climate( I'm using the Australian model here because it is my geography), couldn't catch a fish to save their lives, walked almost blindly into thorn bushes or poisonous vines, couldn't find the most obvious water sources etc., etc.
The Aborigines couldn't believe their eyes, these white folks were just dumb....stupid, ridiculous! How was this possible?
How could they look at food plants and not see them, how could they look at water sources and be dying of thirst? Unthinkable, absolutely unthinkable.

Black boy Spud.

 

If we assume that intelligence (or whatever we shall call it) is defined genetically, this earlier posted statistics is quite interesting:

Asian (in the U.S.) . . . . . . ............ . .. . . 108
East Indian (from India, in the U.S.) . ... 108
U.S. White (Northern European, Urban) 105
U.S. White (Southern European). ... . . . 100
U.S. White (Rural, South) . . . . ....... . . . 95
U.S. Black (North and West). . . .. ....... . . 90
Hispanic-American . . . . . . ......... . . . .. . 90
U.S. Black (Rural, South) . . ......... . . . . . 85
Hispanic, Illegal Immigrant . . ........ . . . . 80
American Indian . .... . . . . ........ . . . . .. . 80

First of course the values alone show the large variations within a group (however defined). But I found one part especially revealing:

Asian (in the U.S.) . . . . . . ............ . .. . . 108
American Indian . .... . . . . ........ . . . . .. . 80

There is an extremely large gap between Asians and American Indians, despite the fact that they are somewhat closely related. Much closer at least, as Whites and Asians. Also this gap is larger than between white and blacks.

 

you are truly confused today. You think that this forum is the scientific world.

If you would start browsing the scientific literature you would find that race is anything but taboo.

It's just that the kind of racist propaganda commonly seen on forum is taboo on certain forums who do not which to be stigmatized by this form of propaganda.

Two very different things Baron Max.

No need to confuse them with each other.

 

Excellent point of course.

What you will also see in the statistical studies on IQ differences between races is that there are categories: white, black, hispanic.

None of these are genetically established in any way. They are determined by checking the appropriate box by either the researcher or the person in question.

Alleles (different forms of the same gene) don't confine themselves like that.

I could put Baron Max and Bishop Tutu next to each other, take some genetic material and check if they have alleles in common. And DEAR GOD, BARON MAX HAS SEVERAL ALLELES IN COMMON WITH BISHOP TUTU!!!!

Now I put Baron max next to George W Bush and compare those exact same genes. AND OH DEAR GOD; THEY ARE DIFFERENT!

Still Baron Max is white ( I presume) and bishop tutu is black. Still these specific alleles are shared between them and not with GW Bush?! How can that be?

Easy. Genes travel all over the place. They don't care about your ancestry as a direct lineage. they go lateral all the time. mixing and swapping around.

And Baron max as an individual ends up with a collection of 20,000+ alleles and remarkably many of them he shares with Bishop Tutu but not GW Bush. And vice versa.
There are even alleles which show he is closer to chimps than to other humans. His bloodgroup for instance. His bloodgroup alleles are more similar to that of a chimp with the same bloodgroup as to another human with a different blood group.

Baron Max's ancestry is a complete mess.

Still, they let him tick a box that he is white, measure his IQ and than come to the wild conclusion that he is less intelligent than the chef in the chinese restaurant.

It is utter bullshit this kind of research.

Black and white are not categories. They are a gradient. Colin Powell is black, but probably has more alleles in common with the average Fin than some person from Africa. Still he is labeled as black.

Genes do not stick together like that in a population. The genes for intelligence are not glued to the gene for dark skin. Genes move freely through a population. Bishop Tutu could very well share the same intelligence alleles with Baron Max.

Absolutely no conclusion can be derived for the genetic determination of intelligence for these statistical studies. They are based on false assumptions. That the categories black, white, hispanic etc are meaningful on a genetic level concerning intelligence.

And that brings us back to the story of this television program where they were looking for the ancestors of this person in the UK ('black roots'). They checked one gene. Found a likely place in the Caribbean where he was hailed as the lost son.

The irony of the whole situation was that if they had looked at the next gene on the chromosome they very well could have ended up looking in Bristol or York.

When you see a study always ask yourself the question; what does this mean?

the category black; what is it? A genetic uniform collection distinct from the 'white' category? No.

What is IQ?: a measurement of the estimation of how well someone will do in the western educational system.

What is the difference between Bishop Tutu and Baron Max? We do not know. It can be less than the difference between Baron Max and his neighbour, and it could be more.

This post wins the RAD! award ~ S.A.M.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Finally.

Thanks spuriousmonkey.

 

Oh and I suppose if some study 'concluded' that black people were more intelligent than white people all the white people would just shut the fuck up and accept it? Or would they complain about how they feelings was hurt?

One race - human race. Brain, blood, bone, guts. All the same under the skin, except for the differences which keep on dividing us. When we fall we all fall together my brothers and sisters.

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

uke:


Why can't I be S.A.M.MIES bestest friend?

 

Yes, for those "statisitical studies", I agree. But statistics is not what we're looking for/at in this thread. We're discussing genetics linked to intelligence. That has nothing whatsoever to do with statistics, and why you'd even bring it up is apparently only to derail the discussion.

Are you saying that scientists can't look at the DNA of a person and tell whether that person is black? I don't believe that.

Baron Max

 

Oh, that's interesting.

please enlighten us on the genetic mechanisms of intelligence.

I'm sure the entire scientific field is hanging from your lips to hear this since nobody knows.

 

Can they look at the DNA and tell if the person is good looking, polite or intelligent?