The heading in the final table is reversed "Religious groups" should be first and "Ethnic groups" should be second.
The Asian samples are too small and probably non-representative of their population in the US. I wouldn't draw too many conclusions from those numbers.
Indian IQ varies a lot by caste, perhaps 2 standard deviations between Brahmins and Dalits - The caste composition of the Asian Indians Stand alone , Qty = 53, and Asian Indian + White, Qty = 44 ; does not mention anything about the caste of Indians in this sample
What accounts for the jump in IQ of mixed white & asian-indian kids to 111? Is it that there is a greater degree of assortive mating btwn whites & asian-indians than with other mixed pairing types, where only the smartest of the already selectively intelligent immigrants from India are pairing with the smartest whites? If so, what accounts for this process as opposed to other mixed pairing groups (though this part of the question is probably beyond the scope of your knowledge domain and should be best answered by a sociologist)?
Also, how certain are we that India is 80–85? I would think that their avg ceiling is about 90, given my experience with them. How have the studies been done on India? Do u think malnutrition plays a factor? But then again, why would anyone administer IQ tests to persons who are malnourished. What would be the point? Clearly that would not be a representative sample. So maybe the studies done on India are accurate insofar as healthy people were tested, and India does have an 80–85 avg IQ.
Ignorance of certain factors is on display in this study, ruining its conclusions. The statement about prenatal exposure to toxins is wrong, basically the all toxins in the mothers bloodstream the child will get exposed to. SES doesn't control for prenatal alcohol, american blacks have somewhat higher rates of reported alcohol use while pregnant according to one study, however blacks also have higher use of drugs than what they say they use compared to whites and are also more likely to distrust authorities, thus another study reported 7 times higher rate of FAS in blacks than whites. SES also doesn't control for the much higher pollution in urban versus rural areas. India is another example that can be used here, Indians raised in the US/UK/Canada tend to do better than all other groups except EA's on standardized tests, yet India only had an average IQ of 82 from Lynn's study. Why? The studies were from 80's and 70's when India had high rates of poverty. More recent studies have indicated India's IQ isn't much higher, but now India also has bad pollution.
This seems like an open and shut case. Can we make any future predictions for the relationship between denominational affiliation and iq? Have dysgenic trends been more severe among the less religious groups?
Amerindian ancestry having a more negative slope than African ancestry would seem to count as evidence as Michael H. Hart's "Understanding Human History". He thought American Indians had higher IQ scores than African Americans because they were related to "Asian Mongoloids", but this would indicate it is instead because today they are mostly of European ancestry. He used that difference to argue against Jared Diamond on the importance of a continent having a north-south vs east-west axis, since the Americas and Africa all have the former. It does still seem to me that prior to European contact the Americas contained within them more complex civilizations than sub-Saharan Africa did at that time, but perhaps I'm more ignorant of the latter.
Hart's book used to be freely available for download, and I had a blog post linking to it, but the publisher disappeared from the internet so now it's just in the Internet Archive:
Is there any variables accounting for more specific cultural variables? For example, in America, how much do the minority parents or students identify with the "talking white" phenomenon may be a confounding variable. In noting immigrants have higher scores, one interpretation is selective immigration. However, another possibility is suppressor variable of negative cultural attitudes towards academics. I may have missed it if included but it has also been a taboo topic apparently.
The heading in the final table is reversed "Religious groups" should be first and "Ethnic groups" should be second.
The Asian samples are too small and probably non-representative of their population in the US. I wouldn't draw too many conclusions from those numbers.
"Egalitarian researchers need to put up new contrary results or give up."
Perhaps they need to, but I am confident that they will not.
Is there even any uncertainty anymore? Seems like for 20 years the "egalitarian researchers" have just been science denying activists.
Kevin will not be happy about this!
Indian IQ varies a lot by caste, perhaps 2 standard deviations between Brahmins and Dalits - The caste composition of the Asian Indians Stand alone , Qty = 53, and Asian Indian + White, Qty = 44 ; does not mention anything about the caste of Indians in this sample
Wonderful work. Please take my money.
Should there be a table after the sentence: "Here's the scary looking table:"?
Let’s go
Have you seen this clip, Emil? Is he mistaken?
"General Intelligence Biological Regression to the mean does NOT exist - Michael A. Woodley of Menie"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gyvJIkinic&t
Questions.
What accounts for the jump in IQ of mixed white & asian-indian kids to 111? Is it that there is a greater degree of assortive mating btwn whites & asian-indians than with other mixed pairing types, where only the smartest of the already selectively intelligent immigrants from India are pairing with the smartest whites? If so, what accounts for this process as opposed to other mixed pairing groups (though this part of the question is probably beyond the scope of your knowledge domain and should be best answered by a sociologist)?
Also, how certain are we that India is 80–85? I would think that their avg ceiling is about 90, given my experience with them. How have the studies been done on India? Do u think malnutrition plays a factor? But then again, why would anyone administer IQ tests to persons who are malnourished. What would be the point? Clearly that would not be a representative sample. So maybe the studies done on India are accurate insofar as healthy people were tested, and India does have an 80–85 avg IQ.
Ignorance of certain factors is on display in this study, ruining its conclusions. The statement about prenatal exposure to toxins is wrong, basically the all toxins in the mothers bloodstream the child will get exposed to. SES doesn't control for prenatal alcohol, american blacks have somewhat higher rates of reported alcohol use while pregnant according to one study, however blacks also have higher use of drugs than what they say they use compared to whites and are also more likely to distrust authorities, thus another study reported 7 times higher rate of FAS in blacks than whites. SES also doesn't control for the much higher pollution in urban versus rural areas. India is another example that can be used here, Indians raised in the US/UK/Canada tend to do better than all other groups except EA's on standardized tests, yet India only had an average IQ of 82 from Lynn's study. Why? The studies were from 80's and 70's when India had high rates of poverty. More recent studies have indicated India's IQ isn't much higher, but now India also has bad pollution.
This seems like an open and shut case. Can we make any future predictions for the relationship between denominational affiliation and iq? Have dysgenic trends been more severe among the less religious groups?
Brilliant post. Can you recommend any books about statistical/data analysis?
Amerindian ancestry having a more negative slope than African ancestry would seem to count as evidence as Michael H. Hart's "Understanding Human History". He thought American Indians had higher IQ scores than African Americans because they were related to "Asian Mongoloids", but this would indicate it is instead because today they are mostly of European ancestry. He used that difference to argue against Jared Diamond on the importance of a continent having a north-south vs east-west axis, since the Americas and Africa all have the former. It does still seem to me that prior to European contact the Americas contained within them more complex civilizations than sub-Saharan Africa did at that time, but perhaps I'm more ignorant of the latter.
Hart's book used to be freely available for download, and I had a blog post linking to it, but the publisher disappeared from the internet so now it's just in the Internet Archive:
https://web.archive.org/web/20091229023334/http://www.wspublishers.com/uhh.pdf
Is there any variables accounting for more specific cultural variables? For example, in America, how much do the minority parents or students identify with the "talking white" phenomenon may be a confounding variable. In noting immigrants have higher scores, one interpretation is selective immigration. However, another possibility is suppressor variable of negative cultural attitudes towards academics. I may have missed it if included but it has also been a taboo topic apparently.
Chinese higher than Jews? What happened?