October 15, 2009

Can't Miss TV!

UK "science" documentary will prove all races are exactly equal in intelligence by having a cast of young, sexy, multicultural British TV personalities act shocked whenever fuddy-duddy old white guy psychometricians like Lynn and Rushton says there are differences in IQ. According to the infinitely reliable Daily Mail:

Channel 4 to screen controversial documentary that asks whether IQ is linked to race
By Paul Revoir and Niall Firth


Channel 4 is facing a race controversy after deciding to give a platform to scientists who claim that white people are more intelligent than those who are black.

A documentary, fronted by former BBC News correspondent Rageh Omaar, will interview professors who claim brain power is linked to racial grouping.

It will include claims that the most intelligent people in the world are North-East Asians from parts of China, Japan and North and South Korea.

Taboo: TV presenter Rageh Omaar will discuss James Watson's infamous assertion that black people are less intelligent than other races

The Australian Aborigines will be said to have the lowest average IQ.

The broadcaster has decided to air the comments, which will be abhorrent to many of its viewers, as part of a series of programmes about race and science, aimed at busting 'science's last taboo'.

Bosses at the channel claim the season will strongly challenge these opinions and 'explode' the myth that science can support ideas of racial superiority.

But the decision to air the issue at all could prove incendiary and is in danger of throwing the channel into another race row.

The broadcaster was inundated with complaints in 2007 after it aired the alleged racist bullying of Shilpa Shetty on Celebrity Big Brother.

To promote the series, Channel 4 has altered photos of Baroness Thatcher, The Beatles, England's 1966 World Cup winning football team and U.S. President Barack Obama to change their racial appearances.

In Race and Intelligence: Science's Last Taboo, Omaar talks to academics who believe that aspects of the human brain are linked to race.

My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

72 comments:

RWF said...

Channel 4 actually did do a couple of programmes on this subject almost a decade ago, it was called "The Difference", and looked at racial differences in a number of areas including most controversially in intelligence.

Actually I've just found out that the 2nd episode of that series is online here:

http://testtubetelly.channel4.com/programmes/items/21883179

I don't know if it will play outside the UK though.

jody said...

it seems seems like most intelligence test formats are primarily measuring capability in learning and memory. learning and memory affect all brain activity, so that is probably the source of the "g" effect.

intelligence tests as they exist today are pretty good, with satisfactory reliability and validity. but they are still only a rough way to measure any particular person's mental capabilities.

there's a lot a mind can do that current intelligence tests struggle to evaluate.

Jun said...

I read the article yesterday and I'm still trying (well, not really) to comprehend this:

"To promote the series, Channel 4 has altered photos of Baroness Thatcher, The Beatles, England's 1966 World Cup winning football team and U.S. President Barack Obama to change their racial appearances."

Sorry, but I just don't get it. ???

Richard Hoste said...

Notice how blacks get jobs like Diversity Czar in Britain too.

WorkScience said...

If you don't live in the UK will there be a way to see it?

Lover of Wisdom said...

One of our UK friends better get this program on Youtube when it happens!

Anonymous said...

So it's controversial to "claim" that whites score higher than blacks on IQ tests? I thought the controversy was whether the differences have a biological component.

Thomas said...

I have to admit that this actually isn't a bad strategy for the equalitarians. Unless my understanding is really thin, much of the science that could demonstrate definitively that there are genetically-based differences in intelligence by race and ethnicity has yet to be done. That hypothesis fits with Darwinian theory and what we have been continuing to learn of intelligence having a genetic component. There are data sets, like the international IQ tests, that support it as well, but they are older and subject to challenge. The hypothesis also works to adequately explain the phenomenon we observe, but that's not conclusive.

Ergo: a pre-emptive strike, before enough data might be produced that could prove or disprove this hypothesis, is not a bad idea for its opponents. They may be able to "prove" that all the races are equal once again by this method for yet another century after Boas. I can't help but note that this is not long after that comment in Nature you references, Steve, or that much of this battle is, interestingly, being fought in Britain. Nature is published in London, and Dr. Watson's comments two years ago were made there.

K said...

This is bringing the whole Watson debate back again. A quick google search shows this story has been covered in the Telegraph, Independent and the Sun.

Incredibly, some of the reports quote Rushton about brain size & also that North East Asians score best according to Lynn.

Unfortunately, they never mention that the differences are in group averages. Instead they are creating the strawman that group X is more intelligent than group Y.

I wonder if Rushton or Lynn get a right of reply on the programme to the 'experts' they are lining up to 'debunk' their views?

I'm guessing they'll pull out the Lewontin fallacy also.

Still, it's better than completely suppressing the topic?

Thomas said...

By the way, I love the fact that in the very same series that the BBC is promoting, they are going to have a film asking as to whether there are biological advantages to be mixed-race. This is right along with the scheduled Two Minutes Hate against individuals with the temerity to suggest that certain biologically-determined traits are linked to race. Rarely have I ever seen such a blatant and perfect example of doublethink in practice. George Orwell truly had the measure of the future of his island's life of the mind. In the space of two weeks, so it seems likely, Oceania will be at war with both Eurasia and Eastasia.

Steveonaut said...

@The General Audience

So basically this program is a deathmatch between the cast of
"The Puzzle Place" versus the cast of "Last of the Summer Wine". Where the young multi-cultural kids go "racism is wrong", and the old white guys go
"racism is true".

Bibliography:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Last_of_the_Summer_Wine

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puzzle_Place

Notes:

@The General Audience that is anybody besides Truth:

The show "The Puzzle Place" perfectly captures the horrors of coporate funded multi-cultural propaganda for children in the nineties in frighting puppet form. Seriously, I hope to god, your kids or you as a child never watched "The Puzzle Place". The whole show was an after-school special about how "We are all equal, but different" on steroids.

@Sailer

Sailer, if you allowed your kids to watch this show when they were young, you should be shot. I have never forgiven my parents for allowing me to watch "The Puzzle Place". The world court should proscute the creators of this show for crimes against humanity. Seriously, this show is evil. This show is literally a television version of "The Mismeasure of Man" for children with puppets. You must know about its evil, Sailer, if you do not already know about its vile existence. This show has damanged the lives of many children across America, and maybe the world.

@Truth

Truth, this is the television show that you have dreamed about for ages. "The Puzzle Place" could be the primary reason why Obama is in the white house. You should watch it on Youtube, it will make you cry in its multi-cultural glory. It is like "Roots" in puppet form. I'am serious Truth, you would love it, it has lots of bright colors and puppets. You would especially enjoy the antics of the animal puppets. Mean, fat, ugly, white racists like me can not stand this show. Handsome, intelligent, noble blackmen like yourself will think it is the best thing since Kentucky Fried Chicken decided to give free samples of their new grilled chicken to the public. Wow, that was a racist remark on my part, I should have said Kichten Fresh Chicken than Kentucky Fried Chicken. Hearing any allusions to the bad old south must be hurtful to anybody with sensitive ears, even if its just name of a state. Would you agree Truth?

On a serious note:

@Truth

Truth, I find you funny, and that is why I ridcule you. It is not that your blackman, but a blackman posting on a human biodiversity website. The only blackman who would ever be welcomed at this site would Thomas Sowell. Thomas Sowell is a god to people like me and Sailer. Jared Taylor even once said that he would vote for Thomas Sowell if he ran for president. Jared Taylor, I might add, makes Sailer look like Tim Wise in comparson. Thomas Sowell is that powerful, seriously, and he is no token either. Sowell has an appeal to white folks that even Wayne Brady could not match. Unless your Sowell, you will never be liked on this site.

Lastly at Sailer again:

Seriously, Jared Taylor would have voted for Sowell, here is proof:

http://jonathantilove.com/white-nationalists-obama/

kudzu bob said...

While I'm sure that this documentary will turn out to resemble nothing so much as a Two Minute Hate that's accidentally been gene-spliced with a United Colors of Benneton ad inside David Cronnenberg's telepod, it nonetheless represents progress. The topic of HBD might doesn't really exist until it gets talked about on TV.

By the same token, Steve, I exprect in the near future to see your genial countenance broadcast nationwide as American reporters try to look suitably shocked at the notion that human evolution did not stop 50,000 years ago. This will happen as soon as the networks figure out that the topic is ratings gold.

Steveonaut said...

@Sailer

Since you read lot of "Slate". you should read their sister mag "Foreign Policy" since "OBAMA" or refered by some as "THE ONE" reads the magazine. I think it is having an influence on his thinking, but I maybe wrong.

Steveonaut said...

http://archives.cbc.ca/science_technology/natural_science/topics/663-3727/

Here is a video of bad quality of a news broadcast story of the famous Rushton debate with David Suzuki. I hope to find a better video, but it has very good audio, so please enjoy it the best you can.

Anonymous said...

Do read the comments thread at the Daily Mail article linked to by Steve.

Looks like our guys are making their presence felt, in contrast to the inevitable brainless, threadbare liberal catch phrases.

"We all came from Africa..."

"IQ tests are culturally biased..."

"My doctor is African..."

"Watson cheated a woman out of her Nobel..."

We could probably write a macro to generate these, they practically write themselves.

CJ said...

Amazing that it can get on the air at all -- especially in Britistan. I see mostly upside, even if the "presenters" (as they call them over there) fall all over themselves to poop on it. For these ideas all publicity is good publicity. My preferred method of subversive exposition would be the one formerly used in the Soviet bloc, where a journalist would deliver a one-paragraph denunciation of a capitalist writer, quote an entire page of said writer's work, denounce him again for a sentence or two, then quote another long passage, and so on.

Vernunft said...

Did they pick that picture because it would make James Watson look like the Crypt Keeper?

Udolpho.com said...

Is Britain more or less PC than the US? I want to say more. The question hinges on whether it is more or less PC to be so obsessed with the topic that you need to debunk it on national television. Mostly I think American television is just too lowbrow to air such a debate, but perhaps resolutely ignoring the issue is more PC than needing to flog the purveyors of hate facts on stage.

Anonymous said...

GOLDSTEIN!!!

Anonymous said...

The diversity boss said that when Forsyth was growing up, people believed that race was an indicator of intelligence. Speaking generally, King said: 'What's surprising is how those views directly impact us today and how those views persist.'

Yes, because we all know the reason some races do more poorly than others is because we expect them to do more poorly. It's all about prejudice. That's why blacks do so much better in countries and societies where they're left to themselves - Nigeria, Togo, Zimbabwe, Haiti, Detroit, Gary, Indiana, ad infinitum.

Anonymous said...

You can pretty much see how this show will present just from the Channel 4 lead-in.

Interesting how both presenters Omaar and King, chose their parents very carefully.

In their case they will deny that IQ and any perceived advantages might be linked to class and privilege as well.

This is what this kind of distraction and dissemination is really about.

Farmer F.

Anonymous said...

What makes Arthur Jensen an authoritative voice on this subject? And why is Steve Sailer so arrogant as to think that he has the right to determine what constitutes science?

To my knowledge, none of the "TV Personalities" deny that IQ scores vary by race. Nor does the documentary seek to prove that "all races are exactly equal intelligence". Its aim is to debunk a widely held belief in the HBDsphere that genes are the root cause of "IQ gap".

As you said, Arthur Jensen's field of study is Psychology. He's never published a single article in a scientific journal saying that IQ distribution across racial groups is a consequence of genes. He never will.

There's no doubt that intelligence, like every other trait, is hereditary to some extent. Thats why smart parents generally have smart children and dumb parents tend to have dumb children. This phenomenon is entirely independent of race and the genes that code for racial characteristics.

However, this doesn't mean that genes aren't a factor in deflating the mean IQ of some groups, like sub-saharan Africans. All it means is that whatever genes are responsible for it are not linked to ancestry informative genes, which are used in defining "races".

Tamara said...

It's funny Steve, you always black ppl of being "racial"

or racially conscious...

but that's exactly what you are!

60% of your post are about race.

everything is about race with you.

some hypocrisy there steve!

Daran said...

It's funny how evolution works: millions of years of survival of the fittest, and then when we reach the current pinnacle (us humans) it suddenly stops. Absolutely no difference in IQ. No sirree, impossible! Perhaps some races are better in dancing or jumping, but IQ differences? Impossible I tell you.

Anonymous said...

Oona King - Head of Diversity for Channel 4.

She has a Black father and a Jewish mother and can speak a couple of languages.

She doesn't need to be in a non-job like Head of Diversity, but with a pedigree like that she was born to hustle.

Anonymous said...

It's funny Steve, you always black ppl of being "racial"

Does he Tamara, Ive never noticed that. And what constitutes being "racial"? Somehow I can't imagine Steve being so sloppy with the English language.

I was about to go through your whole comment, but whats the point really?

Anonymous said...

Until this thread, I've never heard of "the Puzzle Place"... no wonder, since it only ran three seasons, according to wikipedia. And I was entering high school around that time, so it wasn't on my radar.

Anonymous said...

"Is Britain more or less PC than the US?"

The media is less PC but government policy is usually more so.

UK newspapers report on high black crime rates in and regularly run lead articles on the ill effects of immigration. The US media is much more "on message" in promoting white dispossession.

l said...

"My dear Kepler, what would you say of the learned here, who, replete with the pertinacity of the asp, have steadfastly refused to cast a glance through the telescope? What shall we make of this? Shall we laugh, or shall we cry?"

--Letter from Galileo Galilei to Johannes Kepler

Anonymous said...

Channel 4 is a publicly funded commercial channel. It was created 25 years ago to provide an outlet for the 'marginlised'.

They have broadcast some genuinely bold programmes like 'Undercover Mosque' which confirmed everyone's worst fears about mad imams. They have also made not one but two programmes on gang-rape which, just like in the USA and the rest of Europe, is carried mainly by black thugs. 'Undercover Mosque' attracted the attention of the Police, not because of what it revealed about some Mosques in the UK but for being Islamaphobic!!

Oona King, who is a bit of a doll by the way, was ousted in the last General election because the large Muslim population of Tower Hamlets, mainly Bengali, did not like her stance on the invasion of Iraq.

It goes without saying that despite Ms king being part Jewish she has little or nothing to say on Muslim Antisemitism in her old constituency.

She has also called for an 'open honest, debate' on immigration. I say bring it on. Indeed why not have a simultaneous euro-wide Referendum?

http://euroref2009.blogspot.com/

Richard

Lilith said...

@The General Audience.

"Watson cheated a woman out of her Nobel..."

I guess they are talking about Franklin Rosalind. Feminists love to talk about how Rosalind really discovered the structure of DNA. Which unlike most feminist claims, has some legitimacy, but only some "legitmacy". What contridicts this ostensible thief is the fact that Watson himself felt that Rosalind deserved a nobel. He mentioned his position and regret in his book "DNA". It was the fact that she was dead, is why she did not win a nobel.

Only Obama will win a nobel posthumanously, and it will likely be for physics or chemistry, which will be known as obamastry. It will be for his advocacy of the development of new hair care products. Not even for an ostensibe discovery, but just for lobbying for the hair care products industry on capital hill. Most of you will not get this joke, with the exception of possibly Truth.

And it is interesting that Maurice Wilkins is never mentioned as a victim of this ostensible crime. I guess white males can never be victims, even if they harmed by other white males. But also he won a nobel for the discovery, so I wonder what is the deal with feminists. That they were not going to give a nobel to a dead woman?

Bibliography:

http://www.accessexcellence.org/RC/AB/BC/Rosalind_Franklin.php

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/medicine/laureates/1962/wilkins-bio.html

Note for the general audience:

I have decided to change my name from Steveonaut to Lilith. Steveonaut was beginning to annoy me. Having the name of the first feminist has such irony to it, when considering my comments.

KingM said...

Did you watch Grey's Anatomy last night? There was a touching, by-the-numbers scene of a lesbian daughter convincing her conservative Catholic father (over the course of a single episode) to accept her lesbian partner. There was a white burglar brought in by a black cop and two other white guys brought in by three black cops. This is in addition to the cast of hot 25-35 year old doctors of a pleasant racial hue.

Not that this was the most unrealistic thing about last night's preposterous episode, but these things were so blatantly going against stereotypes as to be distracting.

Mr. Anon said...

"Anonymous said...

There's no doubt that intelligence, like every other trait, is hereditary to some extent. Thats why smart parents generally have smart children and dumb parents tend to have dumb children. This phenomenon is entirely independent of race and the genes that code for racial characteristics.

However, this doesn't mean that genes aren't a factor in deflating the mean IQ of some groups, like sub-saharan Africans. All it means is that whatever genes are responsible for it are not linked to ancestry informative genes, which are used in defining "races"."

Blanket assertions, without proof, and said with authority Do you have any? Authority, I mean. Or proof, for that matter.

fellist said...

Interesting that Oona King explicitly hopes for a 'heated debate' -- I guess there's not much point radically increasing diversity if you don't then use it to promote conflict, then fear, then oppression...

Marc B said...

Amazing how anecdotal racial differences in athletic performance barely have a whiff of controversy anymore. The same people finding this documentary outrageous would be the first to lionize Darwin and explain to the plebes that the theory of evolution to be fact yet have no real understanding of his ideas of environmental adaption.

Truth said...

"Notice how blacks get jobs like Diversity Czar in Britain too."

And more importantly, notice how guys like you, in the US, the UK, Denmark and Korea spend their lives in repetitive, insignificant positions making someone you can't stand rich.

Anonymous said...

"whether being mixed-race has biological advantages"
Lets see, any discussion of difference in iq is racist but race mixing has a biological advantage....
How much more blatant can the agenda of our elite be? In both the US and UK, and EU for that matter, the message is clear "race mix' (white people) adapt african kids (white people), become minorities in your own countries because race doesn't matter (white people)
We have an elite who hate us and are trying to destroy us...5 years ago, I would have called that conspiracy theory, but now, not recognizing that fact is blatant ignorance.

Outland said...

"You see race doesn't really exist.."

My god, I'm so glad that I'm not part of the bodysnatched PC sheep out there.

I never used to feel "White" -- European sure, but I was never race conscious in a Black or Chinese kind of way. The last few years I've come to realize that even though I wasn't interested in race, race sure is surely interested in me. We're constantly judged and grouped as White men, so I guess that means we should act that way.

The PC folks can thank themselves that guys like me act and feel more White every day we hear someone say: "you know, race doesn't really exist.." We know what they mean: white guys should give up their power, money, status and careers and give it to everyone else considered non-White male.

There's masses of people out there who seriously think that their low status, poverty, powerlessness and career prospectlessness are controlled by the ways and dealings of people like me!

Truth said...

"Truth:

The show "The Puzzle Place" perfectly captures the horrors of coporate funded multi-cultural propaganda for children in the nineties in frighting puppet form.

I'd never heard of the show so I researched your link. Some highlights:

"The show followed a multi-ethnic group of kids (puppets) from different parts of the United States who hung out at "the Puzzle Place", which is a teen hangout themed around jigsaw puzzle pieces."

Evil, EVIL stuff! I wonder how why the UK government dosen't arrest these treacherous traitors?

And the white "kids" on the show?

"Ben Olafson
A boy of Norwegian and German descent from a farm near Renner, South Dakota. He is good at difficult puzzles and is a talented dancer. He is performed by Jim Martin.

Kyle O'Connor
An Irish-American boy with a disability from Savannah, Georgia. He loves to play basketball and loves to listen to rock and roll music. Kyle was added sometime after the series was created."

White kids who dance, play basketball and listen to rock and roll; Treason!

"The whole show was an after-school special about how "We are all equal, but different" on steroids."

We are "all equal but different." When you start breathing CO2 or can spread your arms and fly, get back to me.

""The Puzzle Place" could be the primary reason why Obama is in the white house."

A BBC puppet show I've never heard of? Yeah, I can see that.

"It is like "Roots" in puppet form."

Oh, you mean the puppeteers come from behind the set and beat the puppets with whips when they blow a line after 14 hours of work? Now that I'd watch.

"Mean, fat, ugly, white racists like me can not stand this show."

Dude, you're fat?

"Handsome, intelligent, noble blackmen like yourself will think it is the best thing since Kentucky Fried Chicken decided to give free samples of their new grilled chicken to the public."

Now, I think you're going too far, Sport; nothing was that good.


"Hearing any allusions to the bad old south must be hurtful to anybody with sensitive ears, even if its just name of a state. Would you agree Truth?"

You got me, I live in Albuquerque, ask Svigor he's from South Carolina.

"The only blackman who would ever be welcomed at this site would Thomas Sowell."

That's exactly why I post here. You think I want to be a member of a club that would have me as a member?

And Sowell is probably too busy, you know, being famous.

"Thomas Sowell is a god to people like me and Sailer."

A god? You have a rosary of Sowell up in your house Steve?

"Thomas Sowell is that powerful, seriously, and he is no token either. Sowell has an appeal to white folks that even Wayne Brady could not match."

Wow! more popular the Wayne Brady? He is a white man's god, isn't he!

"While I'm sure that this documentary will turn out to resemble nothing so much as a Two Minute Hate that's accidentally been gene-spliced with a United Colors of Benneton ad inside David Cronnenberg's telepod,"

Well that's your problem Sparky, you guys are always "sure" of stuff you haven't watched yet.

"GOLDSTEIN!!!"

You mean we have the same tax attorney?

Anonymous said...

my president, Barak Obama, is a Harvard law graduate and a nobel prize winner.
how can you say that black people are not as smart as white people? That's racist.

Anonymous said...

mm mmm mmm...Barak Hussein Obama...mm mmm mmm...Barak Hussein Obama...mm mmm mmm...Barak Hussein Obama...mm mmm mmm...Barak Hussein Obama...mm mmm mmm...Barak Hussein Obama...mm mmm mmm...Barak Hussein Obama...mm mmm mmm...Barak Hussein Obama...mm mmm mmm...Barak Hussein Obama...mm mmm mmm...Barak Hussein Obama...mm mmm mmm...Barak Hussein Obama...

Chief Seattle said...

The only answer if you have kids is to ban television entirely, and get your kicks from netflix and stuff you control. I heard a few minutes from a cop show at a friends house last night, and they were "bantering" in a painful way about just how racist a fellow cop (the guy with 20 years on the force) was. Does that pass for entertainment these days? Give me back the Dukes of Hazard.

Anonymous said...

"Sorry, but I just don't get it. ???"

It's meant to humiliate whites. It's a form of taunting.

Anonymous said...

I think a lot of you are into HBD so you can feel superior about yourselves. Always talking about how you are smarter than Blacks and Hispanics or whatever disadvantaged minorities out there.

If you were really interested why aren’t you fixated on the equally interesting White vs. Jewish IQ gap, or for that matter White vs. Asian IQ gap? Why is most of the concentration mostly on Black IQ or another disadvantaged group? It is obvious you want to feel good about yourself. If you are interested in intelligence, it would make more sense to concentrate on the more intelligent group instead of the less intelligent, me thinks.

I just guess a lot of your frustrations are spill-overs from other factors, perhaps a result of black crime or sexual frustrations; saw way too many brothers with white chicks and you can get none.

I also have no doubt the vast majority of you are not really that smart. If you were Steve would be earning a good living instead of hustling for peanuts on Vdare fundraisers. Proof that his followers are mostly bums.

Anonymous said...

I also have no doubt the vast majority of you are not really that smart. If you were Steve would be earning a good living instead of hustling for peanuts on Vdare fundraisers. Proof that his followers are mostly bums.
wait.. i thought poverty caused ignorance...you're saying ignorance causes poverty?

David said...

Anonymous said

> There's no doubt that intelligence, like every other trait, is hereditary to some extent. Thats why smart parents generally have smart children and dumb parents tend to have dumb children. This phenomenon is entirely independent of race and the genes that code for racial characteristics. <

That's for clearing that up for us.

> Arthur Jensen's field of study is Psychology. He's never published a single article in a scientific journal saying that IQ distribution across racial groups is a consequence of genes. He never will. <

You, however, publish that it's possibly partly genetic, right here on isteve, as follows.

> However, this doesn't mean that genes aren't a factor in deflating the mean IQ of some groups, like sub-saharan Africans. All it means is that whatever genes are responsible for it are not linked to ancestry informative genes, which are used in defining "races". <

The "hereditary" and the "ancestral" being categorically unrelated, of course. What is your field of expertise?

By the way, that's a good use of scare quotes around "races," comrade. Race does not exist!

Let's sum up the right thinking position! Parents biologically pass on to their children genes that affect their IQ endowment; however, these genes have naught to do with ancestry. For it is an absolute that the genes coding for "race," which is something that does not "exist," do not affect intelligence, and it is disreputable even to suggest they might. And while sub-Saharan Africans receive the same biological-and-hereditary-but-never-ancestral genes that "deflate" their mean intelligence (like a punctured tire - tyre?), still intelligence and "race" cannot have anything to do with each other a priori.

Praise the Lawd!

Anonymous said...

"I think a lot of you are into HBD so you can feel superior about yourselves. Always talking about how you are smarter than Blacks and Hispanics or whatever disadvantaged minorities out there."


As a taxpayer paying over $50,000 a year in taxes, my interest in HBD is to figure out how to get the NAMs off the public tit, aka, my dime.

Please remember everyone that there is an off year election coming up in a couple of weeks. Time to get out and vote against school bonds, municipal bonds, school boards, city councils, etc. These are very important because this is where the taxpayers go head to head with the public employees who will be turning out to vote themselves our money.

Mark said...

However, this doesn't mean that genes aren't a factor in deflating the mean IQ of some groups, like sub-saharan Africans. All it means is that whatever genes are responsible for it are not linked to ancestry informative genes, which are used in defining "races".

WTF? New genes arise through mutation. They propagate via reproduction. A man in Madagascar ca. AD 1000 has a new version of a gene that makes him faster, stronger, smarter, or prettier. Guess who gets the gene? Not some random, unrelated child in Britain, but his descendants, and only his descendants. Assume the gene made its bearer more reproductively fit. Come back 1000 years later. Which island is most likely to have lots of his descendants - Britain or Madagascar? This is not a trick question.

Ancestry informative genes? Is their any other kind?

Mark said...

Regarding Oona King - her uncle, by marriage, is playwrite Tom Stoppard.

She's a former Labour member of parliament. She represented a district so leftist that she was defeated for re-election by George Galloway.

It's funny how liberal politicians move so easily between politics and the media (George Stephanopolous, etc.), unlike conservatives.

Give Oona King credit for saying this, however:

"Multiculturalism hasn't failed; it's a statement of fact. We live together, side by side in this country very well, and far better than most. But to neglect any community is a recipe for disaster. To ensure that disaster doesn't come in the shape of the BNP, then politicians must wake up to the concerns of the white working class. Fast."

OK, the first sentence admittedly is just crap. Replace "multiculturalism" with anything else: "My all-Kit Kat diet hasn't failed; it's a statement of fact." WTF? Right.

However, for her to suggest that British politicians need to wake up to the concerns of the white working class is remarkably honest, even if she probably has no real clue what those concerns are, and if she does she has no desire to promote them. She probably wouldn't favor tightening immigration, or making English children proud of their English heritage, or reminding minority children that the reason their parents or grandparents came to England was because England is so tolerant - that they have no right to harangue about oppression.

And, of course, she treats the English as just another "community," as if they aren't, in fact, the overwhelming majority.

F. Le Mur said...

"...saw way too many brothers with white chicks and you can get none."

Au contraire! In fact I deliberately contracted syphilis in order to spread the disease to my wife and other Party members!

kudzu bob said...

>Well that's your problem Sparky, you guys are always "sure" of stuff you haven't watched yet.<

My problem is that I'm always "sure" that your posts will contain lots of grammatical and punctuation errors even before I've read them. Your problem is that they do.

Nameless White Dude said...

"Ancestry informative genes" is a new kind of pseudo science, I am betting.

If you are a NAM and you recognize that there is something genetic in the low IQ of your NAM group, you would like to somehow separate dumbness and blackness, per se. And that, myfriend, is the social function of this "ancestry informative gene" bushwa.

By creating two kinds of genes NAM's figure they can say "I am black because I have the black skin gene and the thick lips gene, and the good rhythm gene, and the nappy hair gene, but I don't have the gene for 'dumb', OK?"

"Because the 'dumb' gene, while hereditary, is not a 'black' gene, but some different other kind of gene that many white folks have as well."

"Therefore it is discrimination to be prejudiced against me because I am black when you really ought to be prejudiced against those white and black that carry the 'dumb' gene."

All of which means, of course, that they totally miss the point: the statistical nature of discrimination.

To them I say the "dumb" gene may appear in white folks and black folks, and therefore individuals of both races may suffer with it, but black folks have way more individuals with the dumb gene.

The 'dumb' gene may not affect nappitude or dark skin, or sickle cell, or rhythm, but it nonetheless is more common in black folks' DNA than in white folks' DNA.

Bottom line: if we KNEW what the 'dumb' gene was and tested for it, NAM's would STILL say it was discriminatory because percentagewise so many more of them have the 'dumb' gene. Do you have any doubt whatsoever?

And what chaps the @ss of white folks is that instead of recognizing this fact and lowering our expectation of black folks (percentage-wise) we pretend that aptitude and achievement tests are racist, hiring policies are racist, graders are racist, job evaluations are racist, in fact damn near anything developed by white folks is racist because the black/white percentages aren't identical.

And now, with 20 million Mexicans coming here and soon bringing 100 million relatives with them who ALSO have the 'dumb' gene, white folks and our children's education are going to be dead last.

Hell, son, I am white and I am married to a brilliant sister, and we have a 145 IQ [!!] high yalla daughter (good hair) and we both recognize the general statistical mental impairment of black folks.

And as much as my wife hates being judged as dumb based on racial stats, she will not go to a black AA doctor for her medical care. She knows all about MLK/Drew and Grady.

She, like many honest black folks, know that the best way to improve this country is to use honest testing and let the chips fall where they may. No more "disparate impact".

Sadly, like most black folks in her situation she sure as h*ll isn't going to b*tch about it since AA is going to put our little sweetness into a full boat Ivy League scholarship.

[Do you have any freaking clue just how rare a Negro with a 145 IQ is? She is not "Talented Tenth", she is "Talented Ten-Thousandth"!]

Truth said...

"Most of you will not get this joke, with the exception of possibly Truth.

They will get it, but I don't think they'll think it's funny.

"mm mmm mmm...Barak Hussein Obama...mm"

Excellent! Now that you can type that, let's try:

The sly brown fox jumped over the lazy dog.

ricpic said...

The acknowledgment that there are clear differences in intelligence between the races is not "abhorrent" to viewers, it's bloody obvious.

ricpic said...

The acknowledgment that there are clear differences in intelligence between the races is not "abhorrent" to viewers, it's bloody obvious.

Svigor said...

scientists who claim that white people are more intelligent than those who are black.

One way to combat this is to always answer as if the question was "are east Asians smarter than whites?" Make a farce of their obsession with blacks. And by that I mean:

Turd: so, you're saying whites are smarter than blacks?

Man: I'm saying that east Asians have a higher mean IQ than whites.

Turd: but, what about blacks?

Man: what about them?

Turd: Are you saying blacks are generally less intelligent than whites?

Man: Again, I'm saying that whites are generally less intelligent than east Asians.

Turd: But are whites smarter than blacks?

Man: We've been over this, I've already told you east Asians have a higher mean IQ than whites.


After a bit of this, pull out the chart with the E. Asians>Euros>Africans graphic, and keep moving it around so the camera-turd can't zoom in past the "E. Asians" part.

Et cetera.

Make the turds work for the hostile edits.

Truth said...

"My problem is that I'm always "sure" that your posts will contain lots of grammatical and punctuation errors even before I've read them."

If that's you problem Bobby, you have led a charmed life.

Svigor said...

So it's controversial to "claim" that whites score higher than blacks on IQ tests?

In the toilet (media), it is.

Unless your Sowell, you will never be liked on this site.

I dunno, I'd vote for Ward Connerly for Pres.

However, this doesn't mean that genes aren't a factor in deflating the mean IQ of some groups, like sub-saharan Africans. All it means is that whatever genes are responsible for it are not linked to ancestry informative genes, which are used in defining "races".

Name an "ancestry informative gene" please.

My guess is you're talking out of both sides of your mouth but I've been wrong before.

The media is less PC but government policy is usually more so.

UK newspapers report on high black crime rates in and regularly run lead articles on the ill effects of immigration. The US media is much more "on message" in promoting white dispossession.


Thanks, I was trying to answer the question myself and your answer makes sense. On one hand Britain seems sooooo friggin' PC, and on the other, the media seems so much more bare-knuckled than ours.

I think a lot of you are into HBD so you can feel superior about yourselves. Always talking about how you are smarter than Blacks and Hispanics or whatever disadvantaged minorities out there.

You asked and answered your own question; you assert that minorities are "disadvantaged", which is code for "held down by whitey." And you want to know why we bring up IQ? D-U-H!

You guys need to crawl out from under your rocks and practice fighting southpaws more often, you'd sound less insipid.

If you were really interested why aren’t you fixated on the equally interesting White vs. Jewish IQ gap, or for that matter White vs. Asian IQ gap?

Lol! Yeah that's me (scroll up).

Why is most of the concentration mostly on Black IQ or another disadvantaged group?

Because that's who YOU LOT are obsessed with, that's who YOU LOT accuse us of oppressing.

D-U-H!

perhaps a result of black crime or sexual frustrations; saw way too many brothers with white chicks and you can get none.

Lol, zing! You got us there. Similarly, if I'm a thief, and I say stealing is wrong, I can't be trusted. Stealing is therefore right!

I also have no doubt the vast majority of you are not really that smart. If you were Steve would be earning a good living instead of hustling for peanuts on Vdare fundraisers. Proof that his followers are mostly bums.

Okay, this has just got to be farce. Are you an HBD-er posing as an over-the-top nitwit leftist?

K said...

"Do you have any? Authority, I mean. Or proof, for that matter."

The latest genetic research shows that human groups are evolutionarily diverging from each other and in many ways. At least 7% of the genome had undergone significant change over the past 10,000 years. A fair fraction of this appears to relate to neurological function in some way.

http://unews.utah.edu/p/?r=120607-1

A June 2007 article from Plos Genetics, Localizing Recent Adaptive Evolution in the Human Genome, provides examples of localized evolution of cognitive function.

A Map of Recent Positive Selection in the Human Genome, finds plenty of signs up local cognitive evolution.

http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/005501.html

M Stein said...

To the person who asked whether Arthur Jensen ever addressed genetic arguments, see Chapter 12 of the 'g factor'. Excerpt below:

"The behavioral capacities or traits that demonstrate genetic variation can also be viewed from an evolutionary perspective. Given the variation in allele frequencies between populations for virtually every known polymorphic gene, it is exceedingly improbable that populations do not differ in the alleles that affect the structural and functional basis of heritable behavioral traits. The empirical generalization that every polygenic physical characteristic that shows differences between individuals also shows mean differences between populations applies to behavioral as well as physical characteristics. Given the relative genetic distances between the major racial populations, one might expect some behavioral differences between Asians and Europeans to be of lesser magnitude than those between these groups and sub-Saharan Africans.

The behavioral, psychological, or mental characteristics that show the highest g loadings are the most heritable and have the most biological correlates (see Chapter 6) and are therefore the most likely to show genetic population differences. Because of the relative genetic distances, they are also the most likely to show such differences between Africans (including predominantly African descendants) and Caucasians or Asians.

Of the approximately 100,000 human polymorphic genes, about 50,000 are functional in the brain and about 30,000 are unique to brain functions. The brain is by far the structurally and functionally most complex organ in the human body and the greater part of this complexity resides in the neural structures of the cerebral hemispheres, which, in humans, are much larger relative to total brain size than in any other species. A general principle of neural organization states that, within a given species, the size and complexity of a structure reflect the behavioral importance of that structure. The reason, again, is that structure and function have evolved conjointly as an integrated adaptive mechanism. But as there are only some 50,000 genes involved in the brain's development and there are at least 200 billion neurons and trillions of synaptic connections in the brain, it is clear that any single gene must influence some huge number of neurons-not just any neurons selected at random, but complex systems of neurons organized to serve special functions related to behavioral capacities.

It is extremely improbable that the evolution of racial differences since the advent of Homo sapiens excluded allelic changes only in those 50,000 genes that are involved with the brain...

http://www.prometheism.net/articles/chap12.html

Anonymous said...

Mr. Anon writes...

"Blanket assertions, without proof, and said with authority Do you have any? Authority, I mean. Or proof, for that matter."

What specifically do you want me to "prove"? You didn't mention which part of my post you take issue with.

David said...

"The "hereditary" and the "ancestral" being categorically unrelated, of course."

Well, the two are not categorically unrelated in all cases. Approximately 15 perecent of
an individual's complete genome can be used to group him/her according to their geographic origin. But as far as I can tell, none of these ancestry informative markers are linked to IQ.


"What is your field of expertise?"

I have no field of expertise, but I refrain from touting my personal beliefs as "science". HBD is a belief system, shared by a community of people who apparently have little understanding of the scientific method.

Realistically, no one needs a Phd in any particular subject to "do" science, but one certainly needs to follow a process of gathering information, replicating results and drawing conclusions based on those results. Facts are all that matters, speculation means nothing.

It's the difference between making inferces from observations alone ("blacks on average have lower IQ scores than whites, therefore their lower IQ is a result of them being black")and making inferences based on fact ("the genes that make black people black don't code for intelligence, therefore the mean black IQ score can't be a result of them being black").

The latter statement still leaves open the possibility that IQ is heritable to some extent. Heritability applies to members of the same group.

Source:
http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/pageDocuments/XT0UW7SVHY.pdf.


"et's sum up the right thinking position! Parents biologically pass on to their children genes that affect their IQ endowment; however, these genes have naught to do with ancestry."

That's what all the data seems to suggest.

And for what it's worth, I spent my undergraduate years studying Biology and Maf.

I have no formal education in Genetics. But in between indoctrinating me with their politically correct lies and spewing anti-white hate, my professors taught me a thing or two about thinking objectively.

You might wanna try it for yourself some day.

headache said...

who claim that white people are more intelligent than those who are black.


gee, who woulda thunk!

Concerned Netizen said...

I look at this as glass half-full. People will be exposed to race realism. Even if the exposure is unfavorable, they'll hear the other side.

And most people realize that race realism is....realism.

headache said...

What exposes all this stuff is that it is inconceivable that any white person would be paid by an Asian, Arabic, or African government to ridicule and humiliate their own people. This only happens in the West.

Anonymous said...

"Excellent! Now that you can type that, let's try:

The sly brown fox jumped over the lazy dog."

Where are the "q", the "i" and the "k", Troof?

What an absolute moron.

Truth said...

Hey, I don't want to overload you Sport, that typing stuff is tough!

Svigor said...

Anon, name an "ancestry informative gene" please.

Anonymous said...

Mark said...

"Ancestry informative genes? Is their any other kind?"

Ummm, yes, of course there are other kinds.

"An ancestry-informative marker (AIM) is a gene, generally of humans, which has several polymorphisms that exhibit substantially different frequencies between groups of descendants derived from mutually inbred ancestral groups (often referred to as races by some sources). For example, the Duffy Null allele (FY*0) has a frequency of almost 100% of Sub-Saharan Africans, but occurs very infrequently in other races. A person having this gene is thus very likely to have some Sub-Saharan African ancestors. By using a number of AIMs one can estimate the ancestral (racial) proportion of an individual, as well as confidence intervals of the estimates. By using a suite of these markers more or less evenly spaced across the genome, they can be used in a cost-effective way to discover novel genes underlying complex diseases in a technique called admixture mapping or "mapping by admixture linkage disequilibrium". A collection of AIMs that distinguish African and European populations contains 3011 highly differentiated SNP's. [1]. While this may seem like a large number to someone not familair with genomics or genetics, it is important to note there are an estimated 35,000,000 SNP sites with greater than 1% allelic frequency in the Human Genome."

http://en.allexperts.com/e/a/an/ancestry-informative_marker.htm

Nameless white dude said...

“is a new kind of pseudo science, I am betting.”

Everyone knows what an AIM is. Your comment illustrates my point about arrogance in the HBD community. If you don’t know what something is, just look it up for yourself or ask someone to explain it to you. The fact that you don’t understand it doesn’t make it pseudo science.

“If you are a NAM and you recognize that there is something genetic in the low IQ of your NAM group, you would like to somehow separate dumbness and blackness, per se. And that, myfriend, is the social function of this "ancestry informative gene" bushwa.”

I don’t need to separate the two, you’ve already done that for me with your earlier comment.

“By creating two kinds of genes NAM's figure they can say "I am black because I have the black skin gene and the thick lips gene, and the good rhythm gene, and the nappy hair gene, but I don't have the gene for 'dumb', OK?"”

Yep, I’m not sure about the good rhythm gene though. And how does one go about 'creating' a gene?

“The 'dumb' gene may not affect nappitude or dark skin, or sickle cell, or rhythm, but it nonetheless is more common in black folks' DNA than in white folks' DNA.”

When I said that it’s possible that genes might be responsible for low IQ scores in sub-Saharan Africa, I wasn’t suggesting that genes ALONE are responsible for it. Virtually all genes interact with environment. So a variety of factors come in to play, such as nutrition and parental skills.

However, even if the unidentified 'cognitive genes' are distributed unevenly between populations (your claim, for which you didn’t cite a source) it would still have nothing to do with race. Nothing to do with “teeh black jeans!”

I won’t bother addressing the rest of your post since my opinion on AA and immigration have nothing to do with the topic at hand. LOL, and I highly doubt that your wife is a “sister”.

Svigor said…

“Name an ancestry informative gene please”

See the link above, or do a simple google search. There’s a wealth of information out there.

@M Stein, I didn't ask if Arthur Jensen ever addressed genetic arguments, I asked if he ever published an article in a scientific journal, stating that IQ distribution across racial groups is a consequence of genes.

Anonymous said...

There's no doubt that height, like every other trait, is hereditary to some extent. Thats why tall parents generally have tall children and short parents tend to have short children. This phenomenon is entirely independent of sex and the genes that code for sex characteristics.

However, this doesn't mean that genes aren't a factor in deflating the mean heights of some groups, like women. All it means is that whatever genes are responsible for it are not linked to genes which are used in defining "sexes".

---

It's the difference between making inferences from observations alone ("women on average have lower heights than men, therefore their lower height is a result of them being women")and making inferences based on fact ("the genes that make females female don't code for height, therefore the mean female height can't be a result of them being female").

---

When I said that it’s possible that genes might be responsible for low heights in women, I wasn’t suggesting that genes ALONE are responsible for it. Virtually all genes interact with environment. So a variety of factors come in to play, such as nutrition and parental skills.

However, even if the unidentified 'height genes' are distributed unevenly between sexes (your claim, for which you didn’t cite a source) it would still have nothing to do with sex. Nothing to do with “teeh women jeans!”

K said...

"However, even if the unidentified 'cognitive genes' are distributed unevenly between populations (your claim, for which you didn’t cite a source)"

That seems to be the case with the handful of candidate genes identified.

"As you can see, there's some clustering along traditional racial lines, most visible when comparing frequency rates among the three East Asian populations with the four black African populations. Regardless of whether these SNPs are ultimately found to be associated with intelligence (and even if they are, they are almost certainly going to be of very small effect), the fact that they are known to be expressed in the brain and that prevelance rates for all of them - with the possible exception of rs363039 - cluster to one degree or another along traditional racial lines illustrates that the forces of genetic drift and selection did not stop at the neck."

http://congenialtimes.blogspot.com/2009/02/evolution-didnt-stop-at-neck.html

M said...

Steve,

Readers are invited to enter their definition of race on the website. They also provide some information about race, & commit the Lewontin Fallacy! They state that 93% variation is between individuals and 7% between groups. I've commented there pointing out this overlooks the correlations.

Here are some reader's entries:

"Races are taxonomic groups that are subdivisons of a species. Evolutionary psychology explains why some races are more advanced than others.
F. R White
REPORT

Race is just another catagorisation our mind uses to deal with the unknown. We keep "safe" based on generalisations we learn or are taught.
C. Hamilton
REPORT

Race defines humans personally and is something we should be proud of, yet it has been mostly used to segregate and opress.
tom
REPORT

I think that the term racialism is a recognition of differences in people - we all belong to one race the human race-Race is power abuse
john davies
REPORT

Race is a myth about human difference linked to the idea that there are things called 'races' and that some are superiror to others.
Gurnam Singh
REPORT

a group that has been subject to strong enough selective pressures for long enough, with low enough gene flow, to end up demonstrably differ
Brian Richards
REPORT

Race is a general grouping of humans based on ancestral heritage
mike
REPORT

A biological population which forms a portion of the entire range of a species and is biologically distinguishable from other such portions.
Liam
REPORT

A pseudo-scientific term employed from the 19th century to help justify different treatment such as slavery. Ethnicity is much better.
jon scaife
REPORT

arbitrary
arutha
REPORT

Two ends of a spectrum, without the graidents inbetween with which to guage their similarities.
Charlie
REPORT

extended family
Billy Bloggs
REPORT

The issue is not what it means but how it is used.
Alexandra
REPORT

'Race' is a social construct. It is an idea born out of racism. Its meaning was forged by and lives on through white supremacist ideology
Rick
REPORT

My gut reaction was about colour but as soon as I thought it I realised that it didn't seem to be the right definition. A tough question!
eleanor
REPORT

A term generated by those who once thought they were most powerful (white) in an attempt to demean those who were dominated (black)
Abby
REPORT

Race - a disgusting, socially contructed term to compartmentalise human beings into categories for there mere purpose of management.
AB"

http://raceandscience.channel4.com/defining-race.htm

Matt said...

Saw this programme the other night and wasn’t surprised.
It was inevitable that C4 would not conclude that IQ had a racial basis. Rageh’s attitude towards the hereditarians was just truculent and didn’t go into any detail on the science behind it, which is overwhelming.
He didn’t ask questions as to why East Asians (Chinese / Japanese etc) have far more adaptive cultures than blacks do; it has to start somewhere – it’s obvious that such a culture is the product of an intelligent race, rather than the other way round – that could hardly happen by accident. He didn’t examine the obvious point that even once you have an adaptive culture that could (emphasis could) explain some of the IQ gap, that that culture would select for intelligence, therefore turning the genetic focus into a reality.
He didn’t point out that middle-class blacks who do well and go to university study the softer subjects, like media studies, cultural studies, and so on, and make up a miniscule percentage of scientists.
He didn’t mention the studies that show that adopted black kids who have a large amount of white ancestry but which is unknown to them and their adopting families, have IQs between the black and white norms, where discrimination could not have been a factor. He didn’t point out that many persecuted races have done very well; look at the Jews or Chinese – both, especially the former in Europe, have had more than their fair share of persecution – adversity does not explain the black-white difference.
He went through the assinine “more difference within than between the races” statement that omits the fact that the two are irrelevant to each other; that the difference within is more than between does not mean there’s no difference between. Also did the ‘race does not exist’ angle despite mountains of research / common sense to the contrary, yet concluded that prejudice of a racial nature was to blame for IQ disparities…. eh?!
But most revealingly, he didn’t point out something that I’ve always thought was suspect; if adverse conditions were to affect black – and white – IQs in comparison to East Asian ones (quite how, I don’t know), then you wouldn’t expect the normal bell curve distribution to be present; you’d expect a skewed graph; little effect on the left side where lower IQ is unlikely to get any lower, but with a sudden plummet at about 85 where the average on his graph was grouped. Yet the distribution either side of 85 is the same pattern as for whites and East Asians, if not the same average score; that’s a NORMAL distribution!!!