Nobel Prize Scientist Loses Titles after Race and IQ claims

[Don Pichardo]

Dogs have distinct breeds.

Biologically humans are only one race.

You can have a "black" person with more intelligence genes than an East Asian, but you ain't going to get Jack Russel with more intelligence than as German Shepard.

This is true. Dog breeds have different brain sizes as well, which Happens to be the factor with the highest correlation to intelligent. All humans brains weight about three pounds.

[D4thincarnation]

Said he is either in the top 0.3 or top 0.03.

That is about 140.

You have some guys with IQ's much higher who work in minimum wage jobs and have little success in life.

[D4thincarnation]

He doesn’t have the proof.

What do you mean physical differences between races? Sure there are differences between white and black obviously. Skin color. But there are also differences within races. Short vs tall, brown vs. blue eyes, blond vs red hair. Straight vs. curly hair.

From a genetic level these differences are insignificant. Hell the difference between a human and a chimpanzee is a 2% difference in generic material. We are 98% the same as a chimp.

Thus skin color or any other single physical difference is minimal. So minimal in fact that within the realm of science race doesn’t exist. There isnt a scientific name for a black man or a white man, they are both **** sapiens.

The measurement of intellect is even more trivial

They have identified numerous genes that are responsible for intelligence.

The prevalence of these genes are not equally spread across the phenotypes

[siablo14]

That is about 140.

You have some guys with IQ's much higher who work in minimum wage jobs and have little success in life.

Gotcha.........

[GGG Gloveking]

This is true. Dog breeds have different brain sizes as well, which Happens to be the factor with the highest correlation to intelligent. All humans brains weight about three pounds.

So why aren't all people smart?

[Don Pichardo]

So why aren't all people smart?

I think all people are smart compared to any dog or chimp.

[Don Pichardo]

They have identified numerous genes that are responsible for intelligence.

The prevalence of these genes are not equally spread across the phenotypes

They are also not exclusively found within any group of people.

[D4thincarnation]

They are also not exclusively found within any group of people.

Nobody said they were.

More prevalent.

[GGG Gloveking]

I think all people are smart compared to any dog or chimp.

Are you intentionally avoiding the point I'm trying to make, or demonstrating it?

[////]

There is no alternate thesis to racial IQ differences. The closest would be activist organizations who merely refuse to use the word "race" due to its negative historical associations, but substitute it with a different word that means the exact same thing.

No matter how you divide any species, there will be trait gaps between the groups. Hereditary groups that diverged from tens of thousands of years of both sympatric & allopatric speciation are going to result in particularly strong trait differences. AKA race.

Like the above poster said, while there is no real alternate thesis or sane argument against it, it's just "not nice" and not profitable for institutions, and ultimately science is full of even more schmoozing for promotions and funding than retail or banking.

The question is why isn't it nice? If people truly believe in individualism then why do they find out that they belong to a group with certain strengths/weaknesses and assume that's true of them as an individual?

We are talking about averages that have profound frightening implications regarding the future of mankind if dysgenic breeding & migration patterns continue/global IQ continues to decline, but these averages don't really mean anything about individual members of any group.

Anyone intelligent enough to understand the data is also going to be intelligent enough to not judge your individual intelligence based on your physical appearance or group membership. They will understand the gradeschool concepts of mean/media/mode. It's a moot point in that sense.

Prison/street "racists" are actually at one extreme end of the spectrum (hurting people based on the stereotypes attached to their group) and controversial heredity scholars like Richard Lynn are at another extreme end (neutral observation, including the trait areas in which his own race is lacking or scores low).

Average Joe "anti-racists" are somewhere in the middle — secretly harboring much of the same primal fear & hatred of the "street racists" but dealing with it via repression, so they explode into an angry mob when racial differences are so much as mentioned by harmless old men in bifocals.