I've already answered you, SAM. Various studies purporting to show lower IQs for black people have been roundly criticised on various grounds.

Since the science is far from settled, it is certainly not "scientifically correct" to say that black people are dumber than white people.

Clear enough for you?

seems so , unfortunately

but does it tell the WHOLE story of WHY no

Do these tests have the ability to distinguish innate "dumbness" and less educated? Because, western society has done a great job of leaving Blacks behind the curve in education.

~String

The original aim of the OP is to demonstrate that any kind of statistics can be accepted as "evidence" for any kind of judgement or belief. Just as given this particular "black/white IQ" graphics example, one can deduce, conclude, or "think" philosophically, rationally or scientifically whatever one like to entertain any idea.

The OP aims to show these lot ( a fantasized creatures of atheist philosophical, rational science group who ultimately work for satan but pose as if they were human thinkers) can manipulate anything however they like, just as hinted in OP.

The OP intentionally shortcuts below concepts and topics in order to support deity :

1. Black and White definitions;
2. Data, representation of Data;
3. Scientific;
4. Philosophical;
5. Rational;
6. Representation of IQ;
7. The difference between logical and scientific "evidence".
8. Scientific evidence.
9. And everything else you can imagine... Yes, you can imagine...

For the fifth or sixth time: No.

That is No.

No.

The answer to your question is: No.

As several people have pointed out, some with reasons and some simply in courtesy, since you seem so sincere, the answer to your question is: No.

The answer: No.

No.

Got it?

But I am not addressing the interpretations of other scientists.

I am addressing the evidence of this graph. Yo can present rebuttal from any other less biased scientific paper to show why this graph is "wrong".



Science does not address WHY? It only addresses HOW?

The assumptions and interpretations are how we choose to see the data obtained.

e.g. similar graphs related to other population measures.




How would you interpret these graphs?

You were smart, you provided an odd number of "no's" so they don't balance out into an affirmative statement.

~String

The real question is whether there is a correlation between melanin and intelligence you ppl you :P

You're not addressing anything. This thread is pointless, like most of your threads lately.

Feel free to tell me how you interpret the other graphs I presented/

What do you base that statement on?

The graphs that you have posted? I will get to those later in this post. But please, tell me, how black does someone have to be to be dumb?

Would you say that using proper punctuation and being able to spell is a measure of intelligence? If so, you fail the intelligence test. Moving right along..

Yes. Because Africans living in Africa have the same educational facilities available to even the paltry facilities available to African Americans.

Of course, if you are going to measure the IQ of a goat herder in Africa, as an example, his or her tests could then be compared to an African American or white or Asian individual who lives and is educated in the US. That is a fair comparison.

Indeed. Look how far you have come and how articulated you are after having lived in a "civilised country". For example:

You are truly the bastion of your edumacation system.

Of course. Now tell me, has science taken into account the simple fact that blacks are far worse off than whites, be it in health, economically and with the standard of education they receive?

Ah, so now we move onto race and not one's colour? But hang on, wasn't you who said the following?

"Are black dumb? yes."

Don't ask me why, but that statement reminds me of Bush's "You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test" comment.

But getting back on track. So which race is dumber than the other?

What about those of mixed race? Are they slightly higher than average because they have that white blood gold running through their veins, thereby instantly making them smarter?

Who?

Blacks? Or particular races? After all, you are basing your assumption on mere colour but then said that should not apply because we need to look at their race instead. Which at this point makes you appear to be decidedly racist. But regardless of your own shortcomings, why do they have a shorter lifespan? Have you ever looked into that? What about their healthcare and the healthcare they have access to? Looked into that? And their education? Are the standards the same across the board?

SAM:

Your graph marked BMI is related, I assume, to body mass index. It must be flawed, because the percentages don't add up to 100%. For example, if we look at the non-hispanic whites, we have 9+12+21 = 42% of the population covered. I suppose we're supposed to believe that the other 48% of non-hispanic white people don't have a body mass index at all.

The graph of "ages" appears to suffer the same flaw. For example, looking at black men, apparently 80% are aged 60+, about 50% are 40-59 and 20% are 20-39. This leaves out those younger than 20, but there's a worse problem: even without that group the percentages already add up to 150%.

So, my conclusion from your graphs is that all of them are nonsense.

Thank you

You can find the details here

http://www.health.state.ny.us/preven...b_diseases.htm

http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/about/factbook-05/chapter4.htm

SAM:

Looking at your links, I see that you withheld important information about the graphs - in particular, the titles. Those titles show that they are not graphs of the entire population, but of subsegments of populations.

I can only assume your point here is to troll.

Therefore: thread closed.