>and genetically correlated to the point where one can use one as a proxy for the other.
even if underlying genetics is same, phenotypically they are different. We already knew even before any genomic studies that rich parents could buy education for their dull children, but not IQ. EA is IQ passed thru non-genetic filters "add noise" and "average by sliding window".
"If siblings are dissimilar, say, one is tall and one is short (relative to age and sex norms), the product will become negative (2 * -2 = -4)."
But what if one is super tall and one is average? (4 * 0 = 0)? And yet the actual difference between siblings is just as large as in your example. I don't get this method.
>and genetically correlated to the point where one can use one as a proxy for the other.
even if underlying genetics is same, phenotypically they are different. We already knew even before any genomic studies that rich parents could buy education for their dull children, but not IQ. EA is IQ passed thru non-genetic filters "add noise" and "average by sliding window".
>(Why did they forget to remove one half-sibling on the left side?)
hehe
"If siblings are dissimilar, say, one is tall and one is short (relative to age and sex norms), the product will become negative (2 * -2 = -4)."
But what if one is super tall and one is average? (4 * 0 = 0)? And yet the actual difference between siblings is just as large as in your example. I don't get this method.
Yes, it's definitely unusual but apparently works in their simulations.