If Negros Had Been Left To Their Own Devices...

[Asclepias]

Where did you E1b1b? Thats not correct.

Surprise: Ashkenazi Jews Are Genetically European

You article admits that Ashkenazi Jews are basically when Semitic men met Italian women, there might be some German,Polish, or Russian DNA in Ashkenazi Jews, but it's just minimal.

Where does it say its minimal?

"
The team found that four founders were responsible for 40 percent of Ashkenazi mitochondrial DNA, and that all of these founders originated in Europe. The majority of the remaining people could be traced to other European lineages.

All told, more than 80 percent of the maternal lineages of Ashkenazi Jews could be traced to Europe, with only a few lineages originating in the Near East."

That's only the maternal line.

Your link also admits this.

Surprise: Ashkenazi Jews Are Genetically European

Past research found that 50 percent to 80 percent of DNA from the Ashkenazi Y chromosome, which is used to trace the male lineage, originated in the Near East, Richards said. That supported a story wherein Jews came from Israel and largely eschewed intermarriage when they settled in Europe. [The Holy Land: 7 Amazing Archaeological Fin

Yeah but right under that it says this? I mean like the next paragraph.

"But historical documents tell a slightly different tale. Based on accounts such as those of Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, by the time of the destruction of the Second Temple in A.D. 70, as many as 6 million Jews were living in the Roman Empire, but outside Israel, mainly in Italy and Southern Europe."

So, they're Italians?
Certainly not very White.

There are a lot of very white Italians. However, Sicilians have a lot of African blood and produce some nice looking women.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

..and naturally you just neglected to post any proof of your assertions...right? According to your unproven theory Blacks regressed from this elevated pre-white position of cultural dominance and declined to the point where the languish today...right Spanky? Blacks have the lowest average IQ and the most violent propensity---hardly a winning combo however it does explain why Africa has been in tribal turmoil for its entire history in spite of the wealth of natural resources and minerals...

I already posted my "proof" not that I need to prove anything to you. If youre still riding the IQ thing I already explained its been proven whites lack the intelligence to come up with a test that accurately measures intelligence.

..and naturally you just neglected to post any proof of your assertions...right? According to your unproven theory Blacks regressed from this elevated pre-white position of cultural dominance and declined to the point where the languish today...right Spanky? Blacks have the lowest average IQ and the most violent propensity---hardly a winning combo however it does explain why Africa has been in tribal turmoil for its entire history in spite of the wealth of natural resources and minerals...

I already posted my "proof" not that I need to prove anything to you. If youre still riding the IQ thing I already explained its been proven whites lack the intelligence to come up with a test that accurately measures intelligence.

Seriously you cannot be this dumb...you posted pulp---stories...find someone a bit bright to explain the definition of [ proof ] to you....


THIRTY YEARS OF RESEARCH ON RACE

DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY

J. Philippe Rushton

The University of Western Ontario

Arthur R. Jensen

University of California, Berkeley

The culture-only (0% genetic–100% environmental) and the hereditarian (50%

genetic–50% environmental) models of the causes of mean Black–White differences

in cognitive ability are compared and contrasted across 10 categories of evidence:

the worldwide distribution of test scores, g factor of mental ability, heritability, brain

size and cognitive ability, transracial adoption, racial admixture, regression, related

life-history traits, human origins research, and hypothesized environmental variables.

The new evidence reviewed here points to some genetic component in

Black–White differences in mean IQ. The implication for public policy is that the

discrimination model (i.e., Black–White differences in socially valued outcomes

will be equal barring discrimination) must be tempered by a distributional model

(i.e., Black–White outcomes reflect underlying group characteristics).

Section 1: Background

Throughout the history of psychology, no question has been so persistent or

so resistant to resolution as that of the relative roles of nature and nurture in

causing individual and group differences in cognitive ability (Degler, 1991;

Loehlin, Lindzey, & Spuhler, 1975). The scientific debate goes back to the

mid-19th century (e.g., Galton, 1869; Nott & Glidden, 1854). Starting with the

widespread use of standardized mental tests in World War I, average ethnic and

racial group differences were found. Especially vexing has been the cause(s) of

the 15-point Black–White IQ difference in the United States.

In 1969, the Harvard Educational Review published Arthur Jensen’s lengthy

article, “How Much Can We Boost IQ and School Achievement?” Jensen concluded

that (a) IQ tests measure socially relevant general ability; (b) individual

differences in IQ have a high heritability, at least for the White populations of the

United States and Europe; (c) compensatory educational programs have proved

generally ineffective in raising the IQs or school achievement of individuals or

groups; (d) because social mobility is linked to ability, social class differences in

IQ probably have an appreciable genetic component; and tentatively, but most

controversially, (e) the mean Black–White group difference in IQ probably has

some genetic component.

Jensen’s (1969) article was covered in Time, Newsweek, Life, U.S. News &

World Report, and New York Times Magazine. His conclusions, the theoretical

issues they raised, and the public policy recommendations that many saw as

stemming directly from them were dubbed “Jensenism,” a term which entered the dictionary. Since 1969, Jensen has continued to publish prolifically on all of these

issues, and increasing numbers of psychometricians and behavioral geneticists

have come to agree with one or more of the tenets of Jensenism (Snyderman &

Rothman, 1987, 1988).

The Bell Curve (Herrnstein & Murray, 1994) presented general readers an

update of the evidence for the hereditarian position along with several policy

recommendations and an original analysis of 11,878 youths (including 3,022

Blacks) from the 12-year National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. It found that

most 17-year-olds with high scores on the Armed Forces Qualification Test,

regardless of ethnic background, went on to occupational success by their late 20s

and early 30s, whereas those with low scores were more inclined to welfare

dependency. The study also found that the average IQ for African Americans was

lower than those for Latino, White, Asian, and Jewish Americans (85, 89, 103,

106, and 113, respectively; Herrnstein & Murray, 1994, pp. 273–278).

Currently, the 1.1 standard deviation difference in average IQ between Blacks

and Whites in the United States is not in itself a matter of empirical dispute. A

meta-analytic review by Roth, Bevier, Bobko, Switzer, and Tyler (2001) showed

it also holds for college and university application tests such as the Scholastic

Aptitude Test (SAT; N _ 2.4 million) and the Graduate Record Examination

(GRE; N _ 2.3 million), as well as for tests for job applicants in corporate settings

(N _ 0.5 million) and in the military (N _ 0.4 million). Because test scores are

the best predictor of economic success in Western society (Schmidt & Hunter,

1998), these group differences have important societal outcomes (R. A. Gordon,

1997; Gottfredson, 1997).

The question that still remains is whether the cause of group differences in

average IQ is purely social, economic, and cultural or whether genetic factors are

also involved. Following publication of The Bell Curve, the American Psychological

Association (APA) established an 11-person Task Force (Neisser et al.,

1996) to evaluate the book’s conclusions. Based on their review of twin and other

kinship studies, the Task Force for the most part agreed with Jensen’s (1969)

Harvard Educational Review article and The Bell Curve, that within the White

population the heritability of IQ is “around .75” (p. 85). As to the cause of the

mean Black–White group difference, however, the Task Force concluded: “There

is certainly no support for a genetic interpretation” (p. 97).

Among the factors contributing to the longstanding lack of resolution of this

important and controversial issue are the difficulty of the subject matter, the

political issues associated with it and the emotions they arouse, and the different

meta-theoretical perspectives of the experimental and correlational methodologies.

Cronbach (1957) referred to these conflicting approaches as the two “halves”

of psychology because researchers are predisposed to draw different conclusions

depending on whether they adopt a “manipulations-lead-to-change” or a “correlations-

find-stability” paradigm.

Here we review in detail the research that has accumulated since Jensen’s

(1969) article and compare our findings with earlier reviews and evaluations such

as those by Loehlin et al. (1975), P. E. Vernon (1979), Herrnstein and Murray

(1994), the APA Task Force (Neisser et al., 1996), and Nisbett (1998). Facts in

themselves typically do not answer scientific questions. For a question so complex

as the cause of the average Black–White group difference in IQ, no one fact, one study, nor indeed any single line of evidence, can hope to be determinative.

Rather, resolving the issue requires examining several independent lines of

evidence to determine if, when taken together, they confirm or refute rival

hypotheses and research programs.

The philosophy of science methodology used here is guided by the view that,

just as in individual studies the principal of aggregation holds that a set of

measurements provides a more reliable indicator than any single measure taken

from the set (Rushton, Brainerd, & Pressley, 1983), so in reviewing multiple lines

of evidence, making strong inferences from a number of contending hypotheses

is more efficacious than considering only one hypothesis at a time (Platt, 1964).

Although strong inference is the method of science, it has, more often than not,

been eschewed in this controversial debate.

The final section of this article addresses the question of what these conclusions

imply for policy, specifically for the issues of educational and psychological

testing, health, race relations, and conflicting worldviews about the essence of

human nature. It suggests that the distributional model that takes genetic factors

into account must temper the discrimination model that explains Black–White

differences in socially valued outcomes.

Section 2: The Two Conflicting Research Programs

Here, we review the research on Black–White difference in average IQ

published since Jensen’s (1969) now 36-year-old article. We then apply the

philosophy of science methodologies of Platt (1964), Lakatos (1970, 1978), and

Urbach (1974a, 1974b) to determine if the preponderance of this new evidence

strengthens or weakens Jensen’s (1969) tentative assertion that it is more likely

than not that some part of

This guy is a white. He has no credibility. You actually lowered your credibility by posting him as your source.This is your proof?

.

Not the imbecile's comment: he dismisses this man's 'credibility' because he is White...if there is a more solid definition of moron I am unaware of it....WOW

Yeah whites lie a lot. Besides...he some kind of sexual weirdo and racist. Why you think he is credible is something that is typical of you lice attracting white boys.

This guy is a fucking moron and little dick wimp like you.

"Although his training is unrelated to biology or genetics, Rushton has not hesitated to spread his controversial opinions far and wide, especially through his major published work, Race, Evolution and Behavior. His findings: black people have larger genitals, breasts and buttocks — characteristics that Rushton alleges have an inverse relationship to brain size and, thus, intelligence. Although the University of Western Ontario has always been careful to defend Rushton’s academic freedom, officials did reprimand him twice for carrying out research on human subjects in 1988 without required prior approval. In the first incident, Rushton surveyed first-year psychology students, asking questions about penis length, distance of ejaculation, and number of sex partners. In the second, he surveyed customers at a Toronto shopping mall, paying 50 white people, 50 black people and 50 Asians five dollars apiece to answer questions about their sexual habits."

Rushton did a lot of good work, but not all good work.

I have larger genitals, and a huge head (Presumably a huge brain), so no I don't agree with Rushton on that one, even if I do on most other things.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

You article admits that Ashkenazi Jews are basically when Semitic men met Italian women, there might be some German,Polish, or Russian DNA in Ashkenazi Jews, but it's just minimal.

Where does it say its minimal?

"
The team found that four founders were responsible for 40 percent of Ashkenazi mitochondrial DNA, and that all of these founders originated in Europe. The majority of the remaining people could be traced to other European lineages.

All told, more than 80 percent of the maternal lineages of Ashkenazi Jews could be traced to Europe, with only a few lineages originating in the Near East."

That's only the maternal line.

Your link also admits this.

Surprise: Ashkenazi Jews Are Genetically European

Past research found that 50 percent to 80 percent of DNA from the Ashkenazi Y chromosome, which is used to trace the male lineage, originated in the Near East, Richards said. That supported a story wherein Jews came from Israel and largely eschewed intermarriage when they settled in Europe. [The Holy Land: 7 Amazing Archaeological Fin

Yeah but right under that it says this? I mean like the next paragraph.

"But historical documents tell a slightly different tale. Based on accounts such as those of Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, by the time of the destruction of the Second Temple in A.D. 70, as many as 6 million Jews were living in the Roman Empire, but outside Israel, mainly in Italy and Southern Europe."

So, they're Italians?
Certainly not very White.

There are a lot of very white Italians. However, Sicilians have a lot of African blood and produce some nice looking women.

How about this group of Northern Italians, are they very White?

 

[Asclepias]

I already posted my "proof" not that I need to prove anything to you. If youre still riding the IQ thing I already explained its been proven whites lack the intelligence to come up with a test that accurately measures intelligence.

I already posted my "proof" not that I need to prove anything to you. If youre still riding the IQ thing I already explained its been proven whites lack the intelligence to come up with a test that accurately measures intelligence.

Seriously you cannot be this dumb...you posted pulp---stories...find someone a bit bright to explain the definition of [ proof ] to you....


THIRTY YEARS OF RESEARCH ON RACE

DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY

J. Philippe Rushton

The University of Western Ontario

Arthur R. Jensen

University of California, Berkeley

The culture-only (0% genetic–100% environmental) and the hereditarian (50%

genetic–50% environmental) models of the causes of mean Black–White differences

in cognitive ability are compared and contrasted across 10 categories of evidence:

the worldwide distribution of test scores, g factor of mental ability, heritability, brain

size and cognitive ability, transracial adoption, racial admixture, regression, related

life-history traits, human origins research, and hypothesized environmental variables.

The new evidence reviewed here points to some genetic component in

Black–White differences in mean IQ. The implication for public policy is that the

discrimination model (i.e., Black–White differences in socially valued outcomes

will be equal barring discrimination) must be tempered by a distributional model

(i.e., Black–White outcomes reflect underlying group characteristics).

Section 1: Background

Throughout the history of psychology, no question has been so persistent or

so resistant to resolution as that of the relative roles of nature and nurture in

causing individual and group differences in cognitive ability (Degler, 1991;

Loehlin, Lindzey, & Spuhler, 1975). The scientific debate goes back to the

mid-19th century (e.g., Galton, 1869; Nott & Glidden, 1854). Starting with the

widespread use of standardized mental tests in World War I, average ethnic and

racial group differences were found. Especially vexing has been the cause(s) of

the 15-point Black–White IQ difference in the United States.

In 1969, the Harvard Educational Review published Arthur Jensen’s lengthy

article, “How Much Can We Boost IQ and School Achievement?” Jensen concluded

that (a) IQ tests measure socially relevant general ability; (b) individual

differences in IQ have a high heritability, at least for the White populations of the

United States and Europe; (c) compensatory educational programs have proved

generally ineffective in raising the IQs or school achievement of individuals or

groups; (d) because social mobility is linked to ability, social class differences in

IQ probably have an appreciable genetic component; and tentatively, but most

controversially, (e) the mean Black–White group difference in IQ probably has

some genetic component.

Jensen’s (1969) article was covered in Time, Newsweek, Life, U.S. News &

World Report, and New York Times Magazine. His conclusions, the theoretical

issues they raised, and the public policy recommendations that many saw as

stemming directly from them were dubbed “Jensenism,” a term which entered the dictionary. Since 1969, Jensen has continued to publish prolifically on all of these

issues, and increasing numbers of psychometricians and behavioral geneticists

have come to agree with one or more of the tenets of Jensenism (Snyderman &

Rothman, 1987, 1988).

The Bell Curve (Herrnstein & Murray, 1994) presented general readers an

update of the evidence for the hereditarian position along with several policy

recommendations and an original analysis of 11,878 youths (including 3,022

Blacks) from the 12-year National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. It found that

most 17-year-olds with high scores on the Armed Forces Qualification Test,

regardless of ethnic background, went on to occupational success by their late 20s

and early 30s, whereas those with low scores were more inclined to welfare

dependency. The study also found that the average IQ for African Americans was

lower than those for Latino, White, Asian, and Jewish Americans (85, 89, 103,

106, and 113, respectively; Herrnstein & Murray, 1994, pp. 273–278).

Currently, the 1.1 standard deviation difference in average IQ between Blacks

and Whites in the United States is not in itself a matter of empirical dispute. A

meta-analytic review by Roth, Bevier, Bobko, Switzer, and Tyler (2001) showed

it also holds for college and university application tests such as the Scholastic

Aptitude Test (SAT; N _ 2.4 million) and the Graduate Record Examination

(GRE; N _ 2.3 million), as well as for tests for job applicants in corporate settings

(N _ 0.5 million) and in the military (N _ 0.4 million). Because test scores are

the best predictor of economic success in Western society (Schmidt & Hunter,

1998), these group differences have important societal outcomes (R. A. Gordon,

1997; Gottfredson, 1997).

The question that still remains is whether the cause of group differences in

average IQ is purely social, economic, and cultural or whether genetic factors are

also involved. Following publication of The Bell Curve, the American Psychological

Association (APA) established an 11-person Task Force (Neisser et al.,

1996) to evaluate the book’s conclusions. Based on their review of twin and other

kinship studies, the Task Force for the most part agreed with Jensen’s (1969)

Harvard Educational Review article and The Bell Curve, that within the White

population the heritability of IQ is “around .75” (p. 85). As to the cause of the

mean Black–White group difference, however, the Task Force concluded: “There

is certainly no support for a genetic interpretation” (p. 97).

Among the factors contributing to the longstanding lack of resolution of this

important and controversial issue are the difficulty of the subject matter, the

political issues associated with it and the emotions they arouse, and the different

meta-theoretical perspectives of the experimental and correlational methodologies.

Cronbach (1957) referred to these conflicting approaches as the two “halves”

of psychology because researchers are predisposed to draw different conclusions

depending on whether they adopt a “manipulations-lead-to-change” or a “correlations-

find-stability” paradigm.

Here we review in detail the research that has accumulated since Jensen’s

(1969) article and compare our findings with earlier reviews and evaluations such

as those by Loehlin et al. (1975), P. E. Vernon (1979), Herrnstein and Murray

(1994), the APA Task Force (Neisser et al., 1996), and Nisbett (1998). Facts in

themselves typically do not answer scientific questions. For a question so complex

as the cause of the average Black–White group difference in IQ, no one fact, one study, nor indeed any single line of evidence, can hope to be determinative.

Rather, resolving the issue requires examining several independent lines of

evidence to determine if, when taken together, they confirm or refute rival

hypotheses and research programs.

The philosophy of science methodology used here is guided by the view that,

just as in individual studies the principal of aggregation holds that a set of

measurements provides a more reliable indicator than any single measure taken

from the set (Rushton, Brainerd, & Pressley, 1983), so in reviewing multiple lines

of evidence, making strong inferences from a number of contending hypotheses

is more efficacious than considering only one hypothesis at a time (Platt, 1964).

Although strong inference is the method of science, it has, more often than not,

been eschewed in this controversial debate.

The final section of this article addresses the question of what these conclusions

imply for policy, specifically for the issues of educational and psychological

testing, health, race relations, and conflicting worldviews about the essence of

human nature. It suggests that the distributional model that takes genetic factors

into account must temper the discrimination model that explains Black–White

differences in socially valued outcomes.

Section 2: The Two Conflicting Research Programs

Here, we review the research on Black–White difference in average IQ

published since Jensen’s (1969) now 36-year-old article. We then apply the

philosophy of science methodologies of Platt (1964), Lakatos (1970, 1978), and

Urbach (1974a, 1974b) to determine if the preponderance of this new evidence

strengthens or weakens Jensen’s (1969) tentative assertion that it is more likely

than not that some part of

This guy is a white. He has no credibility. You actually lowered your credibility by posting him as your source.This is your proof?

.

Not the imbecile's comment: he dismisses this man's 'credibility' because he is White...if there is a more solid definition of moron I am unaware of it....WOW

Yeah whites lie a lot. Besides...he some kind of sexual weirdo and racist. Why you think he is credible is something that is typical of you lice attracting white boys.

This guy is a fucking moron and little dick wimp like you.

"Although his training is unrelated to biology or genetics, Rushton has not hesitated to spread his controversial opinions far and wide, especially through his major published work, Race, Evolution and Behavior. His findings: black people have larger genitals, breasts and buttocks — characteristics that Rushton alleges have an inverse relationship to brain size and, thus, intelligence. Although the University of Western Ontario has always been careful to defend Rushton’s academic freedom, officials did reprimand him twice for carrying out research on human subjects in 1988 without required prior approval. In the first incident, Rushton surveyed first-year psychology students, asking questions about penis length, distance of ejaculation, and number of sex partners. In the second, he surveyed customers at a Toronto shopping mall, paying 50 white people, 50 black people and 50 Asians five dollars apiece to answer questions about their sexual habits."

Rushton did a lot of good work, but not all good work.

I have larger genitals, and a huge head (Presumably a huge brain), so no I don't agree with Rushton on that one, even if I do on most other things.

Never heard of the clown. Sounds like a fucking nut case. He kind of proves my point whites are not too smart.

 

[Asclepias]

Where does it say its minimal?

"
The team found that four founders were responsible for 40 percent of Ashkenazi mitochondrial DNA, and that all of these founders originated in Europe. The majority of the remaining people could be traced to other European lineages.

All told, more than 80 percent of the maternal lineages of Ashkenazi Jews could be traced to Europe, with only a few lineages originating in the Near East."

That's only the maternal line.

Your link also admits this.

Surprise: Ashkenazi Jews Are Genetically European

Past research found that 50 percent to 80 percent of DNA from the Ashkenazi Y chromosome, which is used to trace the male lineage, originated in the Near East, Richards said. That supported a story wherein Jews came from Israel and largely eschewed intermarriage when they settled in Europe. [The Holy Land: 7 Amazing Archaeological Fin

Yeah but right under that it says this? I mean like the next paragraph.

"But historical documents tell a slightly different tale. Based on accounts such as those of Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, by the time of the destruction of the Second Temple in A.D. 70, as many as 6 million Jews were living in the Roman Empire, but outside Israel, mainly in Italy and Southern Europe."

So, they're Italians?
Certainly not very White.

There are a lot of very white Italians. However, Sicilians have a lot of African blood and produce some nice looking women.

How about this group of Northern Italians, are they very White?

They are not moving but from the still they look white to me. I've dated a lot of Italian chicks. (the darker ones).

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Seriously you cannot be this dumb...you posted pulp---stories...find someone a bit bright to explain the definition of [ proof ] to you....


THIRTY YEARS OF RESEARCH ON RACE

DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY

J. Philippe Rushton

The University of Western Ontario

Arthur R. Jensen

University of California, Berkeley

The culture-only (0% genetic–100% environmental) and the hereditarian (50%

genetic–50% environmental) models of the causes of mean Black–White differences

in cognitive ability are compared and contrasted across 10 categories of evidence:

the worldwide distribution of test scores, g factor of mental ability, heritability, brain

size and cognitive ability, transracial adoption, racial admixture, regression, related

life-history traits, human origins research, and hypothesized environmental variables.

The new evidence reviewed here points to some genetic component in

Black–White differences in mean IQ. The implication for public policy is that the

discrimination model (i.e., Black–White differences in socially valued outcomes

will be equal barring discrimination) must be tempered by a distributional model

(i.e., Black–White outcomes reflect underlying group characteristics).

Section 1: Background

Throughout the history of psychology, no question has been so persistent or

so resistant to resolution as that of the relative roles of nature and nurture in

causing individual and group differences in cognitive ability (Degler, 1991;

Loehlin, Lindzey, & Spuhler, 1975). The scientific debate goes back to the

mid-19th century (e.g., Galton, 1869; Nott & Glidden, 1854). Starting with the

widespread use of standardized mental tests in World War I, average ethnic and

racial group differences were found. Especially vexing has been the cause(s) of

the 15-point Black–White IQ difference in the United States.

In 1969, the Harvard Educational Review published Arthur Jensen’s lengthy

article, “How Much Can We Boost IQ and School Achievement?” Jensen concluded

that (a) IQ tests measure socially relevant general ability; (b) individual

differences in IQ have a high heritability, at least for the White populations of the

United States and Europe; (c) compensatory educational programs have proved

generally ineffective in raising the IQs or school achievement of individuals or

groups; (d) because social mobility is linked to ability, social class differences in

IQ probably have an appreciable genetic component; and tentatively, but most

controversially, (e) the mean Black–White group difference in IQ probably has

some genetic component.

Jensen’s (1969) article was covered in Time, Newsweek, Life, U.S. News &

World Report, and New York Times Magazine. His conclusions, the theoretical

issues they raised, and the public policy recommendations that many saw as

stemming directly from them were dubbed “Jensenism,” a term which entered the dictionary. Since 1969, Jensen has continued to publish prolifically on all of these

issues, and increasing numbers of psychometricians and behavioral geneticists

have come to agree with one or more of the tenets of Jensenism (Snyderman &

Rothman, 1987, 1988).

The Bell Curve (Herrnstein & Murray, 1994) presented general readers an

update of the evidence for the hereditarian position along with several policy

recommendations and an original analysis of 11,878 youths (including 3,022

Blacks) from the 12-year National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. It found that

most 17-year-olds with high scores on the Armed Forces Qualification Test,

regardless of ethnic background, went on to occupational success by their late 20s

and early 30s, whereas those with low scores were more inclined to welfare

dependency. The study also found that the average IQ for African Americans was

lower than those for Latino, White, Asian, and Jewish Americans (85, 89, 103,

106, and 113, respectively; Herrnstein & Murray, 1994, pp. 273–278).

Currently, the 1.1 standard deviation difference in average IQ between Blacks

and Whites in the United States is not in itself a matter of empirical dispute. A

meta-analytic review by Roth, Bevier, Bobko, Switzer, and Tyler (2001) showed

it also holds for college and university application tests such as the Scholastic

Aptitude Test (SAT; N _ 2.4 million) and the Graduate Record Examination

(GRE; N _ 2.3 million), as well as for tests for job applicants in corporate settings

(N _ 0.5 million) and in the military (N _ 0.4 million). Because test scores are

the best predictor of economic success in Western society (Schmidt & Hunter,

1998), these group differences have important societal outcomes (R. A. Gordon,

1997; Gottfredson, 1997).

The question that still remains is whether the cause of group differences in

average IQ is purely social, economic, and cultural or whether genetic factors are

also involved. Following publication of The Bell Curve, the American Psychological

Association (APA) established an 11-person Task Force (Neisser et al.,

1996) to evaluate the book’s conclusions. Based on their review of twin and other

kinship studies, the Task Force for the most part agreed with Jensen’s (1969)

Harvard Educational Review article and The Bell Curve, that within the White

population the heritability of IQ is “around .75” (p. 85). As to the cause of the

mean Black–White group difference, however, the Task Force concluded: “There

is certainly no support for a genetic interpretation” (p. 97).

Among the factors contributing to the longstanding lack of resolution of this

important and controversial issue are the difficulty of the subject matter, the

political issues associated with it and the emotions they arouse, and the different

meta-theoretical perspectives of the experimental and correlational methodologies.

Cronbach (1957) referred to these conflicting approaches as the two “halves”

of psychology because researchers are predisposed to draw different conclusions

depending on whether they adopt a “manipulations-lead-to-change” or a “correlations-

find-stability” paradigm.

Here we review in detail the research that has accumulated since Jensen’s

(1969) article and compare our findings with earlier reviews and evaluations such

as those by Loehlin et al. (1975), P. E. Vernon (1979), Herrnstein and Murray

(1994), the APA Task Force (Neisser et al., 1996), and Nisbett (1998). Facts in

themselves typically do not answer scientific questions. For a question so complex

as the cause of the average Black–White group difference in IQ, no one fact, one study, nor indeed any single line of evidence, can hope to be determinative.

Rather, resolving the issue requires examining several independent lines of

evidence to determine if, when taken together, they confirm or refute rival

hypotheses and research programs.

The philosophy of science methodology used here is guided by the view that,

just as in individual studies the principal of aggregation holds that a set of

measurements provides a more reliable indicator than any single measure taken

from the set (Rushton, Brainerd, & Pressley, 1983), so in reviewing multiple lines

of evidence, making strong inferences from a number of contending hypotheses

is more efficacious than considering only one hypothesis at a time (Platt, 1964).

Although strong inference is the method of science, it has, more often than not,

been eschewed in this controversial debate.

The final section of this article addresses the question of what these conclusions

imply for policy, specifically for the issues of educational and psychological

testing, health, race relations, and conflicting worldviews about the essence of

human nature. It suggests that the distributional model that takes genetic factors

into account must temper the discrimination model that explains Black–White

differences in socially valued outcomes.

Section 2: The Two Conflicting Research Programs

Here, we review the research on Black–White difference in average IQ

published since Jensen’s (1969) now 36-year-old article. We then apply the

philosophy of science methodologies of Platt (1964), Lakatos (1970, 1978), and

Urbach (1974a, 1974b) to determine if the preponderance of this new evidence

strengthens or weakens Jensen’s (1969) tentative assertion that it is more likely

than not that some part of

This guy is a white. He has no credibility. You actually lowered your credibility by posting him as your source.This is your proof?

.

Not the imbecile's comment: he dismisses this man's 'credibility' because he is White...if there is a more solid definition of moron I am unaware of it....WOW

Yeah whites lie a lot. Besides...he some kind of sexual weirdo and racist. Why you think he is credible is something that is typical of you lice attracting white boys.

This guy is a fucking moron and little dick wimp like you.

"Although his training is unrelated to biology or genetics, Rushton has not hesitated to spread his controversial opinions far and wide, especially through his major published work, Race, Evolution and Behavior. His findings: black people have larger genitals, breasts and buttocks — characteristics that Rushton alleges have an inverse relationship to brain size and, thus, intelligence. Although the University of Western Ontario has always been careful to defend Rushton’s academic freedom, officials did reprimand him twice for carrying out research on human subjects in 1988 without required prior approval. In the first incident, Rushton surveyed first-year psychology students, asking questions about penis length, distance of ejaculation, and number of sex partners. In the second, he surveyed customers at a Toronto shopping mall, paying 50 white people, 50 black people and 50 Asians five dollars apiece to answer questions about their sexual habits."

Rushton did a lot of good work, but not all good work.

I have larger genitals, and a huge head (Presumably a huge brain), so no I don't agree with Rushton on that one, even if I do on most other things.

Never heard of the clown. Sounds like a fucking nut case. He kind of proves my point whites are not too smart.

Well, he made a lot of good points on hardwired racial characteristics.

 

[BlackSand]

Not the imbecile's comment: he dismisses this man's 'credibility' because he is White...if there is a more solid definition of moron I am unaware of it....WOW

You don't have to dismiss Pencildick Rushton's credibility because he is white.
The dude is a fricken Canadian ... And how the hell can you trust someone who puts maple syrup on grits ... That's just barbaric.

.

 

[Asclepias]

This guy is a white. He has no credibility. You actually lowered your credibility by posting him as your source.This is your proof?

.

Not the imbecile's comment: he dismisses this man's 'credibility' because he is White...if there is a more solid definition of moron I am unaware of it....WOW

Yeah whites lie a lot. Besides...he some kind of sexual weirdo and racist. Why you think he is credible is something that is typical of you lice attracting white boys.

This guy is a fucking moron and little dick wimp like you.

"Although his training is unrelated to biology or genetics, Rushton has not hesitated to spread his controversial opinions far and wide, especially through his major published work, Race, Evolution and Behavior. His findings: black people have larger genitals, breasts and buttocks — characteristics that Rushton alleges have an inverse relationship to brain size and, thus, intelligence. Although the University of Western Ontario has always been careful to defend Rushton’s academic freedom, officials did reprimand him twice for carrying out research on human subjects in 1988 without required prior approval. In the first incident, Rushton surveyed first-year psychology students, asking questions about penis length, distance of ejaculation, and number of sex partners. In the second, he surveyed customers at a Toronto shopping mall, paying 50 white people, 50 black people and 50 Asians five dollars apiece to answer questions about their sexual habits."

Rushton did a lot of good work, but not all good work.

I have larger genitals, and a huge head (Presumably a huge brain), so no I don't agree with Rushton on that one, even if I do on most other things.

Never heard of the clown. Sounds like a fucking nut case. He kind of proves my point whites are not too smart.

Well, he made a lot of good points on hardwired racial characteristics.

If you say so. Thats kind of like digging through a dumpster to find something edible to eat instead of just going to the store and buying something.

 

[Ventura77]

Not the imbecile's comment: he dismisses this man's 'credibility' because he is White...if there is a more solid definition of moron I am unaware of it....WOW

You don't have to dismiss Pencildick Rushton's credibility because he is white.
The dude is a fricken Canadian ... And how the hell can you trust someone who puts maple syrup on grits ... That's just barbaric.

.

Holy shit the idiocy posted here is numbing...like it or not the stats don't lie: Blacks have the lowest IQ and East Asians have the highest IQ...a cursory review of contrasting patterns of assimilation and success rates essentially makes the case...

 

[Ventura77]

Seriously you cannot be this dumb...you posted pulp---stories...find someone a bit bright to explain the definition of [ proof ] to you....


THIRTY YEARS OF RESEARCH ON RACE

DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY

J. Philippe Rushton

The University of Western Ontario

Arthur R. Jensen

University of California, Berkeley

The culture-only (0% genetic–100% environmental) and the hereditarian (50%

genetic–50% environmental) models of the causes of mean Black–White differences

in cognitive ability are compared and contrasted across 10 categories of evidence:

the worldwide distribution of test scores, g factor of mental ability, heritability, brain

size and cognitive ability, transracial adoption, racial admixture, regression, related

life-history traits, human origins research, and hypothesized environmental variables.

The new evidence reviewed here points to some genetic component in

Black–White differences in mean IQ. The implication for public policy is that the

discrimination model (i.e., Black–White differences in socially valued outcomes

will be equal barring discrimination) must be tempered by a distributional model

(i.e., Black–White outcomes reflect underlying group characteristics).

Section 1: Background

Throughout the history of psychology, no question has been so persistent or

so resistant to resolution as that of the relative roles of nature and nurture in

causing individual and group differences in cognitive ability (Degler, 1991;

Loehlin, Lindzey, & Spuhler, 1975). The scientific debate goes back to the

mid-19th century (e.g., Galton, 1869; Nott & Glidden, 1854). Starting with the

widespread use of standardized mental tests in World War I, average ethnic and

racial group differences were found. Especially vexing has been the cause(s) of

the 15-point Black–White IQ difference in the United States.

In 1969, the Harvard Educational Review published Arthur Jensen’s lengthy

article, “How Much Can We Boost IQ and School Achievement?” Jensen concluded

that (a) IQ tests measure socially relevant general ability; (b) individual

differences in IQ have a high heritability, at least for the White populations of the

United States and Europe; (c) compensatory educational programs have proved

generally ineffective in raising the IQs or school achievement of individuals or

groups; (d) because social mobility is linked to ability, social class differences in

IQ probably have an appreciable genetic component; and tentatively, but most

controversially, (e) the mean Black–White group difference in IQ probably has

some genetic component.

Jensen’s (1969) article was covered in Time, Newsweek, Life, U.S. News &

World Report, and New York Times Magazine. His conclusions, the theoretical

issues they raised, and the public policy recommendations that many saw as

stemming directly from them were dubbed “Jensenism,” a term which entered the dictionary. Since 1969, Jensen has continued to publish prolifically on all of these

issues, and increasing numbers of psychometricians and behavioral geneticists

have come to agree with one or more of the tenets of Jensenism (Snyderman &

Rothman, 1987, 1988).

The Bell Curve (Herrnstein & Murray, 1994) presented general readers an

update of the evidence for the hereditarian position along with several policy

recommendations and an original analysis of 11,878 youths (including 3,022

Blacks) from the 12-year National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. It found that

most 17-year-olds with high scores on the Armed Forces Qualification Test,

regardless of ethnic background, went on to occupational success by their late 20s

and early 30s, whereas those with low scores were more inclined to welfare

dependency. The study also found that the average IQ for African Americans was

lower than those for Latino, White, Asian, and Jewish Americans (85, 89, 103,

106, and 113, respectively; Herrnstein & Murray, 1994, pp. 273–278).

Currently, the 1.1 standard deviation difference in average IQ between Blacks

and Whites in the United States is not in itself a matter of empirical dispute. A

meta-analytic review by Roth, Bevier, Bobko, Switzer, and Tyler (2001) showed

it also holds for college and university application tests such as the Scholastic

Aptitude Test (SAT; N _ 2.4 million) and the Graduate Record Examination

(GRE; N _ 2.3 million), as well as for tests for job applicants in corporate settings

(N _ 0.5 million) and in the military (N _ 0.4 million). Because test scores are

the best predictor of economic success in Western society (Schmidt & Hunter,

1998), these group differences have important societal outcomes (R. A. Gordon,

1997; Gottfredson, 1997).

The question that still remains is whether the cause of group differences in

average IQ is purely social, economic, and cultural or whether genetic factors are

also involved. Following publication of The Bell Curve, the American Psychological

Association (APA) established an 11-person Task Force (Neisser et al.,

1996) to evaluate the book’s conclusions. Based on their review of twin and other

kinship studies, the Task Force for the most part agreed with Jensen’s (1969)

Harvard Educational Review article and The Bell Curve, that within the White

population the heritability of IQ is “around .75” (p. 85). As to the cause of the

mean Black–White group difference, however, the Task Force concluded: “There

is certainly no support for a genetic interpretation” (p. 97).

Among the factors contributing to the longstanding lack of resolution of this

important and controversial issue are the difficulty of the subject matter, the

political issues associated with it and the emotions they arouse, and the different

meta-theoretical perspectives of the experimental and correlational methodologies.

Cronbach (1957) referred to these conflicting approaches as the two “halves”

of psychology because researchers are predisposed to draw different conclusions

depending on whether they adopt a “manipulations-lead-to-change” or a “correlations-

find-stability” paradigm.

Here we review in detail the research that has accumulated since Jensen’s

(1969) article and compare our findings with earlier reviews and evaluations such

as those by Loehlin et al. (1975), P. E. Vernon (1979), Herrnstein and Murray

(1994), the APA Task Force (Neisser et al., 1996), and Nisbett (1998). Facts in

themselves typically do not answer scientific questions. For a question so complex

as the cause of the average Black–White group difference in IQ, no one fact, one study, nor indeed any single line of evidence, can hope to be determinative.

Rather, resolving the issue requires examining several independent lines of

evidence to determine if, when taken together, they confirm or refute rival

hypotheses and research programs.

The philosophy of science methodology used here is guided by the view that,

just as in individual studies the principal of aggregation holds that a set of

measurements provides a more reliable indicator than any single measure taken

from the set (Rushton, Brainerd, & Pressley, 1983), so in reviewing multiple lines

of evidence, making strong inferences from a number of contending hypotheses

is more efficacious than considering only one hypothesis at a time (Platt, 1964).

Although strong inference is the method of science, it has, more often than not,

been eschewed in this controversial debate.

The final section of this article addresses the question of what these conclusions

imply for policy, specifically for the issues of educational and psychological

testing, health, race relations, and conflicting worldviews about the essence of

human nature. It suggests that the distributional model that takes genetic factors

into account must temper the discrimination model that explains Black–White

differences in socially valued outcomes.

Section 2: The Two Conflicting Research Programs

Here, we review the research on Black–White difference in average IQ

published since Jensen’s (1969) now 36-year-old article. We then apply the

philosophy of science methodologies of Platt (1964), Lakatos (1970, 1978), and

Urbach (1974a, 1974b) to determine if the preponderance of this new evidence

strengthens or weakens Jensen’s (1969) tentative assertion that it is more likely

than not that some part of

This guy is a white. He has no credibility. You actually lowered your credibility by posting him as your source.This is your proof?

.

Not the imbecile's comment: he dismisses this man's 'credibility' because he is White...if there is a more solid definition of moron I am unaware of it....WOW

Yeah whites lie a lot. Besides...he some kind of sexual weirdo and racist. Why you think he is credible is something that is typical of you lice attracting white boys.

This guy is a fucking moron and little dick wimp like you.

"Although his training is unrelated to biology or genetics, Rushton has not hesitated to spread his controversial opinions far and wide, especially through his major published work, Race, Evolution and Behavior. His findings: black people have larger genitals, breasts and buttocks — characteristics that Rushton alleges have an inverse relationship to brain size and, thus, intelligence. Although the University of Western Ontario has always been careful to defend Rushton’s academic freedom, officials did reprimand him twice for carrying out research on human subjects in 1988 without required prior approval. In the first incident, Rushton surveyed first-year psychology students, asking questions about penis length, distance of ejaculation, and number of sex partners. In the second, he surveyed customers at a Toronto shopping mall, paying 50 white people, 50 black people and 50 Asians five dollars apiece to answer questions about their sexual habits."

Rushton did a lot of good work, but not all good work.

I have larger genitals, and a huge head (Presumably a huge brain), so no I don't agree with Rushton on that one, even if I do on most other things.

Never heard of the clown. Sounds like a fucking nut case. He kind of proves my point whites are not too smart.

...and yet Whites on average are a full 15 IQ points more intelligent than Blacks...you just cannot accept the fact that you strain to defend an inferior race of barbaric idiots...

 

[Ventura77]

Race differences in average IQ are largely genetic

· Download PDF Copy

April 26, 2005

A 60-page review of the scientific evidence, some based on state-of-the-art magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of brain size, has concluded that race differences in average IQ are largely genetic.

The lead article in the June 2005 issue of Psychology, Public Policy and Law, a journal of the American Psychological Association, examined 10 categories of research evidence from around the world to contrast "a hereditarian model (50% genetic-50% cultural) and a culture-only model (0% genetic-100% cultural)."

The paper, "Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability," by J. Philippe Rushton of the University of Western Ontario and Arthur R. Jensen of the University of California at Berkeley, appeared with a positive commentary by Linda Gottfredson of the University of Delaware, three critical ones (by Robert Sternberg of Yale University, Richard Nisbett of the University of Michigan, and Lisa Suzuki & Joshua Aronson of New York University), and the authors' reply.

"Neither the existence nor the size of race differences in IQ are a matter of dispute, only their cause," write the authors. The Black-White difference has been found consistently from the time of the massive World War I Army testing of 90 years ago to a massive study of over 6 million corporate, military, and higher-education test-takers in 2001.

"Race differences show up by 3 years of age, even after matching on maternal education and other variables," said Rushton. "Therefore they cannot be due to poor education since this has not yet begun to exert an effect. That's why Jensen and I looked at the genetic hypothesis in detail. We examined 10 categories of evidence."

1. The Worldwide Pattern of IQ Scores. East Asians average higher on IQ tests than Whites, both in the U. S. and in Asia, even though IQ tests were developed for use in the Euro-American culture. Around the world, the average IQ for East Asians centers around 106; for Whites, about 100; and for Blacks about 85 in the U.S. and 70 in sub-Saharan Africa.

2. Race Differences are Most Pronounced on Tests that Best Measure the General Intelligence Factor (g). Black-White differences, for example, are larger on the Backward Digit Span test than on the less g loaded Forward Digit Span test.

3. The Gene-Environment Architecture of IQ is the Same in all Races, and Race Differences are Most Pronounced on More Heritable Abilities. Studies of Black, White, and East Asian twins, for example, show the heritability of IQ is 50% or higher in all races.

4. Brain Size Differences. Studies using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) find a correlation of brain size with IQ of about 0.40. Larger brains contain more neurons and synapses and process information faster. Race differences in brain size are present at birth. By adulthood, East Asians average 1 cubic inch more cranial capacity than Whites who average 5 cubic inches more than Blacks.

5. Trans-Racial Adoption Studies. Race differences in IQ remain following adoption by White middle class parents. East Asians grow to average higher IQs than Whites while Blacks score lower. The Minnesota Trans-Racial Adoption Study followed children to age 17 and found race differences were even greater than at age 7: White children, 106; Mixed-Race children, 99; and Black children, 89.

6. Racial Admixture Studies. Black children with lighter skin, for example, average higher IQ scores. In South Africa, the IQ of the mixed-race "Colored" population averages 85, intermediate to the African 70 and White 100.

7. IQ Scores of Blacks and Whites Regress toward the Averages of Their Race. Parents pass on only some exceptional genes to offspring so parents with very high IQs tend to have more average children. Black and White children with parents of IQ 115 move to different averages--Blacks toward 85 and Whites to 100.

8. Race Differences in Other "Life-History" Traits. East Asians and Blacks consistently fall at two ends of a continuum with Whites intermediate on 60 measures of maturation, personality, reproduction, and social organization. For example, Black children sit, crawl, walk, and put on their clothes earlier than Whites or East Asians.

9. Race Differences and the Out-of-Africa theory of Human Origins. East Asian-White-Black differences fit the theory that modern humans arose in Africa about 100,000 years ago and expanded northward. During prolonged winters there was evolutionary selection for higher IQ created by problems of raising children, gathering and storing food, gaining shelter, and making clothes.

10. Do Culture-Only Theories Explain the Data? Culture-only theories do not explain the highly consistent pattern of race differences in IQ, especially the East Asian data. No interventions such as ending segregation, introducing school busing, or "Head Start" programs have reduced the gaps as culture-only theory would predict.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Not the imbecile's comment: he dismisses this man's 'credibility' because he is White...if there is a more solid definition of moron I am unaware of it....WOW

Yeah whites lie a lot. Besides...he some kind of sexual weirdo and racist. Why you think he is credible is something that is typical of you lice attracting white boys.

This guy is a fucking moron and little dick wimp like you.

"Although his training is unrelated to biology or genetics, Rushton has not hesitated to spread his controversial opinions far and wide, especially through his major published work, Race, Evolution and Behavior. His findings: black people have larger genitals, breasts and buttocks — characteristics that Rushton alleges have an inverse relationship to brain size and, thus, intelligence. Although the University of Western Ontario has always been careful to defend Rushton’s academic freedom, officials did reprimand him twice for carrying out research on human subjects in 1988 without required prior approval. In the first incident, Rushton surveyed first-year psychology students, asking questions about penis length, distance of ejaculation, and number of sex partners. In the second, he surveyed customers at a Toronto shopping mall, paying 50 white people, 50 black people and 50 Asians five dollars apiece to answer questions about their sexual habits."

Rushton did a lot of good work, but not all good work.

I have larger genitals, and a huge head (Presumably a huge brain), so no I don't agree with Rushton on that one, even if I do on most other things.

Never heard of the clown. Sounds like a fucking nut case. He kind of proves my point whites are not too smart.

Well, he made a lot of good points on hardwired racial characteristics.

If you say so. Thats kind of like digging through a dumpster to find something edible to eat instead of just going to the store and buying something.

Rushton sourced a couple dozen variables which put Asians on one spectrum, Whites intermediate, and Blacks on the opposite spectrum.

That's important, because it supports strong genetic ties of race.

 

[BlackSand]

Holy shit the idiocy posted here is numbing...like it or not the stats don't lie: Blacks have the lowest IQ and East Asians have the highest IQ...a cursory review of contrasting patterns of assimilation and success rates essentially makes the case...

Talk about mind numbing idiocy ... Who the fuck thinks Canadian bacon should be called bacon at all ...
Fricken Brits and Canadians ... That's who ... Hate to tell them that leaving a little pork belly on a slice of pork loin ain't damn bacon... LIARS!

.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

That's only the maternal line.

Your link also admits this.

Surprise: Ashkenazi Jews Are Genetically European

Past research found that 50 percent to 80 percent of DNA from the Ashkenazi Y chromosome, which is used to trace the male lineage, originated in the Near East, Richards said. That supported a story wherein Jews came from Israel and largely eschewed intermarriage when they settled in Europe. [The Holy Land: 7 Amazing Archaeological Fin

Yeah but right under that it says this? I mean like the next paragraph.

"But historical documents tell a slightly different tale. Based on accounts such as those of Jewish historian Flavius Josephus, by the time of the destruction of the Second Temple in A.D. 70, as many as 6 million Jews were living in the Roman Empire, but outside Israel, mainly in Italy and Southern Europe."

So, they're Italians?
Certainly not very White.

There are a lot of very white Italians. However, Sicilians have a lot of African blood and produce some nice looking women.

How about this group of Northern Italians, are they very White?

They are not moving but from the still they look white to me. I've dated a lot of Italian chicks. (the darker ones).

Eifel 65 from Northern Italy.

 

[Ventura77]

Holy shit the idiocy posted here is numbing...like it or not the stats don't lie: Blacks have the lowest IQ and East Asians have the highest IQ...a cursory review of contrasting patterns of assimilation and success rates essentially makes the case...

Talk about mind numbing idiocy ... Who the fuck thinks Canadian bacon should be called bacon at all ...
Fricken Brits and Canadians ... That's who ... Hate to tell them that leaving a little pork belly on a slice of pork loin ain't damn bacon... LIARS!

.

Why would someone as inherently mindless and childlike as you post on a debate forum?

 

[Ventura77]

Yeah whites lie a lot. Besides...he some kind of sexual weirdo and racist. Why you think he is credible is something that is typical of you lice attracting white boys.

This guy is a fucking moron and little dick wimp like you.

"Although his training is unrelated to biology or genetics, Rushton has not hesitated to spread his controversial opinions far and wide, especially through his major published work, Race, Evolution and Behavior. His findings: black people have larger genitals, breasts and buttocks — characteristics that Rushton alleges have an inverse relationship to brain size and, thus, intelligence. Although the University of Western Ontario has always been careful to defend Rushton’s academic freedom, officials did reprimand him twice for carrying out research on human subjects in 1988 without required prior approval. In the first incident, Rushton surveyed first-year psychology students, asking questions about penis length, distance of ejaculation, and number of sex partners. In the second, he surveyed customers at a Toronto shopping mall, paying 50 white people, 50 black people and 50 Asians five dollars apiece to answer questions about their sexual habits."

Rushton did a lot of good work, but not all good work.

I have larger genitals, and a huge head (Presumably a huge brain), so no I don't agree with Rushton on that one, even if I do on most other things.

Never heard of the clown. Sounds like a fucking nut case. He kind of proves my point whites are not too smart.

Well, he made a lot of good points on hardwired racial characteristics.

If you say so. Thats kind of like digging through a dumpster to find something edible to eat instead of just going to the store and buying something.

Rushton sourced a couple dozen variables which put Asians on one spectrum, Whites intermediate, and Blacks on the opposite spectrum.

That's important, because it supports strong genetic ties of race.

The truly hilarious part is that Blacks continue to claim that it is some grandiose White conspiracy that is holding them all back...and yet a brief review of overall patterns of Black cultural stasis and deterioration around the globe would correlate with the IQ scale...both in the U.S. during the Civil Rights period, and in South Africa Black leaders promised a cultural transcendence would accompany liberation...in both cases--America and South Africa---the Black population remained mired in poverty and internecine savagery and crime...South Africa is instructive to the extent that Johanesberg and Pretoria exemplified the regression, with Pretoria taking the title of 'child rape capital of the world'

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

Rushton did a lot of good work, but not all good work.

I have larger genitals, and a huge head (Presumably a huge brain), so no I don't agree with Rushton on that one, even if I do on most other things.

Never heard of the clown. Sounds like a fucking nut case. He kind of proves my point whites are not too smart.

Well, he made a lot of good points on hardwired racial characteristics.

If you say so. Thats kind of like digging through a dumpster to find something edible to eat instead of just going to the store and buying something.

Rushton sourced a couple dozen variables which put Asians on one spectrum, Whites intermediate, and Blacks on the opposite spectrum.

That's important, because it supports strong genetic ties of race.

The truly hilarious part is that Blacks continue to claim that it is some grandiose White conspiracy that is holding them all back...and yet a brief review of overall patterns of Black cultural stasis and deterioration around the globe would correlate with the IQ scale...both in the U.S. during the Civil Rights period, and in South Africa Black leaders promised a cultural transcendence would accompany liberation...in both cases--America and South Africa---the Black population remained mired in poverty and internecine savagery and crime...South Africa is instructive to the extent that Johanesberg and Pretoria exemplified the regression, with Pretoria taking the title of 'child rape capital of the world'

Indeed, as I've long touted Estonia colonized for close to 1,000 years is now #1 in Europe in educational PISA scores, and a producer of Skype, and Kazaa, while Ethiopia which wasn't colonized, is far behind even the average of Africa.

Something just doesn't add up here.

 

[BlackSand]

Why would someone as inherently mindless and childlike as you post on a debate forum?

Because I really don't have a problem matching your truly inherited mindless and childlike behavior ... You get what you ask for ...
Say something intelligent and maybe we can have a more productive conversation.
Until then the best way to debate you is just mock your ass until you say the next stupid thing that crosses your mind.

Screw it ... I am even better than you at that ... I at least try to have some fun at it while all you have to show is your panties in a wad.

.

 

[Ventura77]

Why would someone as inherently mindless and childlike as you post on a debate forum?

Because I really don't have a problem matching your truly inherited mindless and childlike behavior ... You get what you ask for ...
Say something intelligent and maybe we can have a more productive conversation.
Until then the best way to debate you is just mock your ass until you say the next stupid thing that crosses your mind.

Screw it ... I am even better than you at that ... I at least try to have some fun at it while all you have to show is your panties in a wad.

.

You try so desperately to convince yourself that you annoy or agitate me when for the most part I simply laugh at you...you are out of your element here: you casually accuse posters who are smarter and considerably more knowledgeable of being 'stupid' or 'racist'...but you offer nothing in the way of proof---that is what makes you a sullen idiot...

 

[Ventura77]

Never heard of the clown. Sounds like a fucking nut case. He kind of proves my point whites are not too smart.

Well, he made a lot of good points on hardwired racial characteristics.

If you say so. Thats kind of like digging through a dumpster to find something edible to eat instead of just going to the store and buying something.

Rushton sourced a couple dozen variables which put Asians on one spectrum, Whites intermediate, and Blacks on the opposite spectrum.

That's important, because it supports strong genetic ties of race.

The truly hilarious part is that Blacks continue to claim that it is some grandiose White conspiracy that is holding them all back...and yet a brief review of overall patterns of Black cultural stasis and deterioration around the globe would correlate with the IQ scale...both in the U.S. during the Civil Rights period, and in South Africa Black leaders promised a cultural transcendence would accompany liberation...in both cases--America and South Africa---the Black population remained mired in poverty and internecine savagery and crime...South Africa is instructive to the extent that Johanesberg and Pretoria exemplified the regression, with Pretoria taking the title of 'child rape capital of the world'

Indeed, as I've long touted Estonia colonized for close to 1,000 years is now #1 in Europe in educational PISA scores, and a producer of Skype, and Kazaa, while Ethiopia which wasn't colonized, is far behind even the average of Africa.

Something just doesn't add up here.

...actually everything adds up in this respect...the contrast correlates with prevalent IQ scores