November 22, 2009

NYT: "Hispanic Immigrants’ Children Fall Behind Peers Early, Study Finds"

The media build-up for the oncoming Stolen Generations Apology Act of 2050 continues. From the New York Times:
The children of Hispanic immigrants tend to be born healthy and start life on an intellectual par with other American children, but by the age of 2 they begin to lag in linguistic and cognitive skills, a new study by researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, shows.

The study highlights a paradox that has bedeviled educators and Hispanic families for some time. By and large, mothers from Latin American countries take care of their health during their pregnancies and give birth to robust children, but those children fall behind their peers in mental development by the time they reach grade school, and the gap tends to widen as they get older.

The new Berkeley study suggests the shortfall may start even before the children enter preschool, supporting calls in Washington to crack down on illegal immigration by the unskilled, uneducated, and unintelligent.

Oh, wait, sorry, that was in the Non-Bizarro Universe.

Here in the Bizarro Universe:

The new Berkeley study suggests the shortfall may start even before the children enter preschool, supporting calls in Washington to spend more on programs that coach parents to stimulate their children with books, drills and games earlier in their lives.

“Our results show a very significant gap even at age 3,” said Bruce Fuller, one of the study’s authors and a professor of education at Berkeley. “If we don’t attack this disparity early on, these kids are headed quickly for a pretty dismal future in elementary school.”

Professor Fuller said blacks and poor whites also lagged behind the curve, suggesting that poverty remained a factor in predicting how well a young mind develops. But the drop-off in the cognitive scores of Hispanic toddlers, especially those from Mexican backgrounds, was steeper than for other groups and could not be explained by economic status alone, he said.

One possible explanation is that a high percentage of Mexican and Latin American immigrant mothers have less formal schooling than the average American mother, white or black, the study’s authors said. These mothers also tend to have more children than middle-class American families, which means the toddlers get less one-on-one attention from their parents.

“The reading activities, educational games and performing the ABCs for Grandma — so often witnessed in middle-class homes — are less consistently seen in poor Latino households,” Professor Fuller said.

The study is based on data collected on 8,114 infants born in 2001 and tracked through the first two years of life by the National Center for Education Statistics. The findings will be published this week in Maternal and Child Health Journal, and a companion report will appear this fall in the medical journal Pediatrics.

The analysis showed that at 9 to 15 months, Hispanic and white children performed equally on tests of basic cognitive skills, like understanding their mother’s speech and using words and gestures. But from 24 to 36 months, the Hispanic children fell about six months behind their white peers on measures like word comprehension, more complex speech and working with their mothers on simple tasks.

The study comes as the Obama administration has been pushing for more money to help prepare infants and toddlers for school. In September, the House passed an initiative that would channel $8 billion over eight years to states with plans to improve programs serving young children.

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

73 comments:

RKU said...

“Our results show a very significant gap even at age 3,” said Bruce Fuller, one of the study’s authors and a professor of education at Berkeley. “If we don’t attack this disparity early on, these kids are headed quickly for a pretty dismal future in elementary school.”

Ha, ha! I'd bet good money that a very similar "mysterious developmental affliction" seems to hit white children relative to Asian ones at a comparably young age.

The whole situation is very, very mysterious, and clearly requires massive state spending on better pre-schools lest whole future generations of white children become even more intellectually disadvantaged.

One pretty silly aspect of ardent IQists is that the quickest and easiest way for America to raise its national IQ is just a import a hundred million or more Chinese, as Old Deng once offered to Carter after the latter's badgering for "a free emigration policy."

Udolpho.com said...

SWPL thinking that is absolutely beyond parody. I just shook my head reading it.

While we're at it, let's whip out the ol' pocketbook and see if we can turn Downs Syndrome children into neurosurgeons. I particularly liked the part about blaming "large families"--as if that makes a lick of sense.

Cat Patrol said...

Poverty causes low intelligence?

or

Low intelligence causes poverty!

OneSTDV said...

"“The reading activities, educational games and performing the ABCs for Grandma — so often witnessed in middle-class homes — are less consistently seen in poor Latino households,” Professor Fuller said."

OK, so if it's "middle class" norms, then explain this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1995-SAT-Income2.png

Jonathan said...

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."

-- John Adams, 1770

Anonymous said...

So why do the descendants of Indians who crossed the Bering Straight from northern Asia and western European Spaniards lag both Europeans and Asians? Is it a class thing in that only poor Mexicans immigrate to the US? How do Mexicans in Mexico do in IQ rankings?

Mo said...

Buy gold.

Holtz said...

Did they check brain size?

"The largest autopsy study, as yet unpublished, is by anthropologist Ralph Holloway at Columbia University Medical School (personal communications, March 16, 2002, August 26, 2004). He found that in both men and women aged 18–65 years, 615 Blacks, 153 Hispanics, and 1,391 Whites averaged brain weights of 1,222, 1,253, and 1,285 g, respectively. The population groups were all of similar body size. There were also a large number (N = 5,731) of brain weights from 15- to 50-year-old Chinese from Hong Kong and Singapore that averaged 1,290 g."

Ankney, C. D. (2009). Whole-brain size and general mental ability: A review. International Journal of Neuroscience, 119, 691-731

http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/2009%20IJN.pdf

Anonymous said...

"So why do the descendants of Indians who crossed the Bering Straight from northern Asia and western European Spaniards lag both Europeans and Asians? Is it a class thing in that only poor Mexicans immigrate to the US? How do Mexicans in Mexico do in IQ rankings?"

According to Lynn and Vanhanen, Mexico's mean IQ is 87 and Spain's is 99. Hispanics in the US score in the upper 80s.

Amerindians split off from other Mongoloids at least 15,000 years ago. That's a long time. It would be shocking for two populations not to diverge from each other in some ways after almost a thousand generations of separate development.

Michael said...

Stop toying with me Sailer!

That quote from the Non-Bizarro Universe makes me want to live there so much it hurts.

If only such a place existed, and that we could know there were people out there with the privilege of living there.

"One possible explanation is that a high percentage of Mexican and Latin American immigrant mothers have less formal schooling than the average American mother, white or black, the study’s authors said. These mothers also tend to have more children than middle-class American families, which means the toddlers get less one-on-one attention from their parents."

Um, there's NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that coming from a family with lots of children and less one on one interaction with the parent(s) causes reduced IQ or academic achievement.

When you get down to it, why do we bother having statistics and scientific research when even the Professors we entrust with duty of educating our young sternly refuse to pay the slightest heed to the research relevant to what they‘re talking about?

We should just chuck science and go back to using Human Sacrifice to appease the Corn God.

At least that would be a lot less harmful in the long term than the kind of outrageous schemes and swindles the Professor quoted in the article has in mind for us.

3,000 Americans were already sacrificed to the Diversity God in a mass ceremony on 9/11.

Just who are we to shudder at the human sacrifice once practiced by the savage Aztec?

Anonymous said...

As has been mentioned on this blog before, hispanic is not a good description. The article appears to imply Mexican which, for the most part in the US, means mestizo.

I would imagine European Cubans in Miami don't have this problem.

Anonymous said...

Yes and with a little early piano tutoring we can all have four year olds who can do this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZwpjSNT620

Turning into six year holds who can do this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBth9_FPopI

Otto Von Bismarck said...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:1995-SAT-Income2.png

I knew that poor whites are the smartest of all the poor people. Trailer trash can really surprise with their brillance. I have met working class whites in low paying jobs without geds or diplomas who could understand amazingly complex concepts. I never meet a poor nam or asian who has impressed with their intelligence.

Melykin said...

Anonymous said:
"So why do the descendants of Indians who crossed the Bering Straight from northern Asia and western European Spaniards lag both Europeans and Asians? "
-------------------
A lot of evolution can happen in 12,000 years, especially since agriculture was developed in that time. For example, a lot of Asians seem to be protected from alcoholism by the so-called "Asian flush". North American aboriginals seem to be particularly vulnerable to alcoholism.

Otto Von Bismarck said...

So why do the descendants of Indians who crossed the Bering Straight from northern Asia and western European Spaniards lag both Europeans and Asians? Is it a class thing in that only poor Mexicans immigrate to the US? How do Mexicans in Mexico do in IQ rankings?

I think its dysgenic breeding. When the native peoples of mexico were wiped out, resources became very plentiful to the point that competition was not very demanding on the intellects of the mixed decedents of the spainards and indians. Intelligence is not much use when there plentiful resources to go around without the need of complex strategies to obtain them. This is a simple thesis with many holes, but I feel it is a start in asking your question, Anonymous.

Otto Von Bismarck said...

Sorry, its descendants. I write my comments fast, without editing them throughly.

John Seiler said...

In the words of the greatest Republican president of this millennium, George W. Bush, "Is our children learning?"

Dirt Pipe Milkshakes said...

Mo' money, mo' problems.

AC said...

Wait till you see what Lee Kwan Yew, no fool, says about Hispanic immigration:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXHPmIcy-kI

Starts at 3:15

Michael said...

BTW, why is Fulford getting credit for the post on VDare.com?

Anonymous said...

Udolpho said:


SWPL thinking that is absolutely beyond parody. I just shook my head reading it.

While we're at it, let's whip out the ol' pocketbook and see if we can turn Downs Syndrome children into neurosurgeons. I particularly liked the part about blaming "large families"--as if that makes a lick of sense.


I'm holding out for rocket scientists.

Anonymous said...

Could there be anything to do with the amount of lead that is in Mexican candy that these children consume?

MQ said...

So why do the descendants of Indians who crossed the Bering Straight from northern Asia and western European Spaniards lag both Europeans and Asians?

Because IQ is probably more cultural than it is genetic...but cultures are at least as hard to change as genes.

Lawful Neutral said...

Come on, Anon. The Amerindians were separated from Asia for between 10 and 20 thousand years; does it really tax the imagination to think there might be differences between the populations? Heck, you can see some differences just by looking.

headache said...

The new Berkeley study suggests the shortfall may start even before the children enter preschool, supporting calls in Washington to spend more on programs...

staffed by teachers trained in Berkeley. Hmmmm. Every time some SWPL outcome does not pan out, there are calls for more money down the rathole. Apart from the usual liberal shtick of demanding taxpayer cash to fix insoluble social problems created by their irresponsible ideologies, I wonder if the deeper reason is not that people my just think they should dump all these programs and a lot of teachers and social workers (liberal central) may be out of work.

Steve Sailer said...

"Could there be anything to do with the amount of lead that is in Mexican candy that these children consume?"

Lead could be a big deal.

I spent a day looking at lead statistics once and couldn't either validate or dismiss the idea that lead in the environment played a big role in the rise and fall of crime rates.

Jimmy Crackedcorn said...

Amerindians split off from other Mongoloids at least 15,000 years ago.

Harpending & Cochran observed that the Big Event driving modern human evolution was the invention of agriculture, followed by civilization. Heck, they made it the title of their book - The 10,000 Year Explosion. Amerindians broke off from their Asian cousins well before the invention of agriculture, 500-800 generations ago.

The new Berkeley study suggests the shortfall may start even before the children enter preschool, supporting calls in Washington to spend more on programs...

If there's any upside to the great recession - and you have to admit there are a few, like reduced immigration - budget pressures on universities are among them. One hopes the UC system, under severe budget constraints, opts to slash the department employing these professors.

Because IQ is probably more cultural than it is genetic...but cultures are at least as hard to change as genes

Ya, say what? Witness the radical changes in American culture in just the last 2 generations.

Cultures are quite easy to change - take child from Parents C & D (or more likely just Parent D), and give to Parents A & B.

Anonymous said...

The 87 used for Lynn as mean iq for Mexico came from a test administered by Nancy Modiano to a group of mostly maya (tzotzil)and some mestizo children in the Chiapas Highlands. I think that this test is closer to reality, not only it's newer, it also has a bigger sample rate (920)and it makes distinctions between whites, mestizos and amerindians in mexico.

http://bit.ly/8RotgX

Anonymous said...

Lawful Neutral said...
"Come on, Anon. The Amerindians were separated from Asia for between 10 and 20 thousand years; does it really tax the imagination to think there might be differences between the populations? Heck, you can see some differences just by looking."

Well, the Aztecs, Mayas, and Incas all seemed to have pretty advanced societies. They must have had something on the ball.

Mark Time said...

It is the bilingualism. My daughter has lived overseas her whole life and has heard Hindu, French and English, and she is not a good English speaker. I expect she will make the ground up later, but Hispanic kids may have cultural reasons why they do not.

rob said...

Heck, you can see some differences just by looking.

Looking is racist.

David said...

Jonathan said

> "Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." -- John Adams, 1770 <

Cynic! Hater! UnAmerican! I'm an idealist and satisfied with my beautiful mind. Sing along with me:

"To Dweeeeam...the impossible dweeeeeeeeeeam..."

Svigor said...

Who can deny the power of nurture? The descendants of European Christendom have been carefully nurtured right into mass stupidity.

David said...

When the white-adopted Hispanic kids grow up, will they turn their own charges over to white grandma and grandpa to rear? After all, not doing so may be risking a continuation of the persistent legacy of infection by the apparent "Hispanic-parent brain germ." If our ersatz elites are not postulating any such germ, then are they implying that it's having a swimming pool that's supposed to turn an at-risk child into a responsible adult?

And why isn't this money going to American children? Well, we all know the answer to that. Consider the source: Berkeley, New York, DC.

Anonymous said...

I have met working class whites in low paying jobs without geds or diplomas who could understand amazingly complex concepts.

Yeah, I have met Scots-Irish redneck types with an intuitive grasp of mechanical and electrical engineering which is just staggering.

dearieme said...

"Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence."

I see that American politicians have always been verbose.

Anonymous said...

About him having an IQ of 96 - what is the formula for converting Wonderlic score to IQ? I heard it was the score x 2 + 60, which would give him an IQ of 98.

I took a Wonderlic exam last summer for a job interview. I scored a 33. They told me that the average for an accountant was a 25. Anyway, I'd guess my IQ would be about 125, which seems about right

Couch Scientist said...

Everyone is missing the real problem here. The test are culturally biased, and begin being biased around age 3. This is because age 3 is when white people stop thinking Mexican children are cute and begin to discriminate against them. It all flows from a white dillusion that race is other than a social construct.

Anonymous said...

Among other things, just more evidence that we need to do away with the label "Hispanic" due to its imprecision. In most discussions of public policy, "Hispanic" is just "mestizo" or "mulatto" by proxy. Even though the words "mestizo" and "mulatto" are more precise and carry more meaning, they are considered "offensive"(especially the latter); PC would have us bury them. This serves the interests of those who politicize the term "Hispanic" quite nicely.

Because this "Hispanic" behemoth is supposed to cover everyone in the Spanish-speaking countries of Latin America, some Americans are surprised to learn that there are Mexican natives in the more remote mountain areas of southern Mexico who can barely speak Spanish(millions of more native Mexicans only learned Spanish one or two or even 3 generations ago). They speak their own native language; many Americans would think these people are "Hispanic" by looking at them, but that would be completely wrong. More ridiculous still to think that they magically become "Hispanic" just by learning Spanish and that they share the same interests with all the other "Hispanics", regardless of race, country of origin, class, religion, etc...

Those of us who oppose Hispanic immigration need to better exploit the differences in the "Hispanic" camp, especially when it comes to separating white "Hispanics" from the non-white and mixed "Hispanics".

Luckily, many people in Latin America are already doing much of this work for us. I've recently read some very moving essays by some Latin American natives, who, although they speak Spanish hate being thought of as "Hispanic". To them "Hispanic" represents the death of their native culture, the death of their native language; "Hispanic" represents how they shall forever be known by their ruthless European exploiters from Spain who so successfully conquered, brutalized, raped and destroyed their people. Countless unique languages and cultures have been destroyed by the Spanish invaders, and in its place there is nothing but "Hispanic" or "Latino" culture.

These people may or may not our natural allies, but this is a division we must exploit to weaken the blow of the "Hispanization" of the U.S.

RKU said...

So why do the descendants of Indians who crossed the Bering Straight from northern Asia and western European Spaniards lag both Europeans and Asians? Is it a class thing in that only poor Mexicans immigrate to the US? How do Mexicans in Mexico do in IQ rankings?"

According to Lynn and Vanhanen, Mexico's mean IQ is 87 and Spain's is 99. Hispanics in the US score in the upper 80s.

Amerindians split off from other Mongoloids at least 15,000 years ago. That's a long time. It would be shocking for two populations not to diverge from each other in some ways after almost a thousand generations of separate development.


Well, if any of the silly IQists commenting here actually bother to look in Lynn's IQ & Wealth of Nations book, they'll discover that a huge test of Ireland's student population in the 1970s determined the national IQ to be 87.

So presumably the sub-normal Irish Race must have also been separated from that of regular Europeans for about 15,000 years or whatever...

David said...

> These people may or may not our natural allies, but this is a division we must exploit to weaken the blow of the "Hispanization" of the U.S. <

Worldwide, countless people of all groups yearn for their own ethno-state. Old-fashioned ethno-states, much derided by Communists as "nationalism," are the natural and salutary human arrangement. (They seem to produce children at replacement level more reliably than do deracinated modern states.) But nowadays only one group is permitted to have an ethno-state (or at least a GHQ). The rest of us? We must be melted in a pot, the better to serve "democracy" and international interests. It's called globaloney and it stinks.

RKU said...

Worldwide, countless people of all groups yearn for their own ethno-state. Old-fashioned ethno-states, much derided by Communists as "nationalism," are the natural and salutary human arrangement. (They seem to produce children at replacement level more reliably than do deracinated modern states.)

Actually, is this correct?

I'd think that Japan is one of the purest ethnostates in today's world, yet has very low birthrates. China is something like 95% Han (maybe 98% excluding various outlying provinces) but also has very low birthrates. And lots of relatively "pure" other countries also have low birthrates, while extremely mixed African countries have enormously high ones.

One can certainly make some reasonable arguments in favor of ethnostates, but I don't think high birthrates are among them.

Anonymous said...

One simple solution to this quandry would be: "Stop importing people who don't do well on your tests"!
To me it's just so simple. To a liberal, this thought never occurs to them.

Anonymous said...

[So why do the descendants of Indians who crossed the Bering Straight from northern Asia and western European Spaniards lag both Europeans and Asians?]

Read the 10,000 Year Explosion by Cochran and Harpending. Then you'll understand.

[Is it a class thing in that only poor Mexicans immigrate to the US?]

This is probably one reason. Roth and Bobko's meta-analysis points to an average IQ of about 89 for US Hispanics. (data is drawn from millions of subjects tested) However, a Princeton study on the children of legal immigrants, which Steve discussed a while ago, found reverse digit span IQ equivalents of about 82 for the children of Mexican immigrants.

[How do Mexicans in Mexico do in IQ rankings?]

Richard Lynn's work cites a number of studies. The average IQ of Mexicans in Mexico appears to be around 87. A study done by Lynn himself in collaboration with Mexican psychologists found that amount of white ancestry was correlated with IQ in Mexico - the average IQ of Mexican fullblooded whites (about 9% of the population) on the Raven's Progressive Matrices was 98. Fullblooded indians averaged about 83 IIRC.

David said...

RKU, I overstated, was referring however to what seemed to work for white populations in the past.

Someone here recently said Korea is in a bad way, though I also read N. Korea has a higher birth rate than S. Korea. Which African countries are you referring to as both "mixed" and fecund? Does the optimism inherent in solidarity help birth rates significantly? Solidarity would be promoted I think by 1. physical solidarity (ethnic/racial homogeneity) and 2. cultural optimism necessarily based on it ("our people are good, we're going places"). Both necessary but neither sufficient. So we see some countries that have one but not the other. Just a theory as always.

RKU said...

Which African countries are you referring to as both "mixed" and fecund? Does the optimism inherent in solidarity help birth rates significantly?

Actually, nearly all the Sub-Saharan African countries are extremely mixed in race/ethnicity/language, much more so than e.g. most of today's European or East Asian countries.

In fact, thinking a bit about it, you could almost make the reverse argument. I think that Rwanda and Burundi used to have a couple of the world's highest fertility rates, with the rival Hutus and the Tutsis trying to out-reproduce each other between bouts of out anti-reproducing each other during their periodic massacres, both obviously for exactly the same reason.

I'd guess that the two biggest factors corresponding to low birth-rate everywhere in the world are affluence and lack of religion, with East Asian and to a lesser extent European background being up there as well.

Once we extract these factors, I wouldn't be surprised if the residual variation actually correlated very weakly or even inversely with ethnic diversity.

O'Brien said...

The problem is that New Left ideology, like all ideologies, is largely impervious to facts, especially those directly contradicting the ideology. To try to convince a New Left ideologue that IQ is real, most variation in IQ is probably genetic, and that in all probability there are differences between ethnic groups through detailed statistical argument is probably an exercise in futility, especially since most New Left types aren't good with numbers.

I think a more fruitful approach with New Left ideologues may be to point out the similarities between New Left dogma and other dogmas, without going over the top (e.g., comparing New Left ideology to Stalinism, Nazism, al-Queda-ism, or even Creationism without qualification).

People believe in ideologies primarily because it gives them a sense of purpose, belonging, and security ("having all the answers"). New Left ideologues may be more likely to soften up if they are given an understanding of the psychology and sociology of ideology, which they are more likely to understand than population genetics and related material.

David Davenport said...

they'll discover that a huge test of Ireland's student population in the 1970s determined the national IQ to be 87.

...


Maybe the bearers of smarter Hibernian genes had all emigrated by then. The left-behinds all grew up to be middle-aged U2 fans.

;0)

Regarding Mayans, Aztecs. etc.:

If they were so clever, why didn't they have wheels, stirrups, iron or steel, firearms, compasses, astrolobes, or sailing ships?

Why couldn't your lovely MesoAmericans sail to Spain and enslave the paler faces, instead of the other way around?

David said...

> I wouldn't be surprised if the residual variation actually correlated very weakly or even inversely with ethnic diversity. <

Why?

Anonymous said...

Well, if any of the silly IQists commenting here actually bother to look in Lynn's IQ & Wealth of Nations book, they'll discover that a huge test of Ireland's student population in the 1970s determined the national IQ to be 87.

So presumably the sub-normal Irish Race must have also been separated from that of regular Europeans for about 15,000 years or whatever...


As noted by Lynn in Race Differences in Intelligence, there was much outmigration of talented people from Ireland for several decades. However, since Irish living standards have now caught up and perhaps surpassed Britain's, Irish expats have been returning. There have since been other IQ tests in Ireland showing an average IQ in the 90s.

Anonymous said...

"Well, the Aztecs, Mayas, and Incas all seemed to have pretty advanced societies. They must have had something on the ball."

Their level of technology and culture at the time of European contact was at best equal to that of ancient Sumer ca. 5,000 BC.

Anonymous said...

RKU - Well, if any of the silly IQists commenting here actually bother to look in Lynn's IQ & Wealth of Nations book, they'll discover that a huge test of Ireland's student population in the 1970s determined the national IQ to be 87.

Being English and therefore coming into contact with Irish people regularly socially & at work, new immigrants, 1st gen, 2nd Gen etc I have to assume this test was flawed. Or the concept of IQ is flawed. Or there were unaccounted cultural factors. But frankly the idea that the Irish only hit an average of 87 just doesnt seem credible. And Im not talking about 'bright' personalities.

fred said...

@ Michael: re:"When you get down to it, why do we bother having statistics and scientific research..."

Obviously, you do not understand science. The purpose of science is to provide politicians with data that justifies their programs.

Once you accept that truth the world will become much clearer to you.

Truth said...

"I have met working class whites in low paying jobs without geds or diplomas who could understand amazingly complex concepts.

Yeah, I have met Scots-Irish redneck types with an intuitive grasp of mechanical and electrical engineering which is just staggering."

Guys, you know, I really hate to admit you are right, but I will when I have to. When I was 17 I had the following experience:

I had a job as an early morning unloader for K-Mart. Me and this white kid worked together every day, he was a little lazy, but he was 19 and a good kid; G.E.D, poor Kentucky upbringing the whole nine.

Anyway; we used to sneak off and hit the spliff together at lunch, so one day he invites home to his trailer. There was this huge shiny peice of equipment in the corner and I couldn't figure out what it was so I asked him; he was totally evasive.

A couple of more times I came to his trailer and was transfixed by this machine, I wanted him to show me what it was, so he agrees.

"Alright 'Truth' but, like, dude, like first you have to put on this lead suit." So I help him pull this heavy lead suit, it looked like 15th century armor. So he powers up this machine...every light in the neighborhood goes off and then comes back one 100% brighter.

I was like "Ryan, what the hell is that machine?"

He says "Oh, dude, it's just like my atom smasher and stuff." I said, atom smasher?!?!, don't you have to be really smart to make one of them?

He says "Dude, man, like you would never, like believe it, some like, Russian dude gave me the plans, and it like took a whole week after work to like make it out of parts from the junkyard."

I said WHAAAAAAAAAA?!?!

He looks at the shocked look on my face and says "dude, don't like get all weirded out on me like one of those, like CIA guys that's always coming here and stuff, that would be Buzzkill; I'm just trying to like help the neighborhood get off foreign oil and stuff."

So I regained my composure, my head all aswhirl with Johnny Walker Black and Mexican Brown; I said, "hey can I bring my mom over to see it tomorrow?

He says, "dude, man tomorrow's like Tuesday and stuff, I'm like at the hospital doing optical nerve surgery, and like teaching classes to surgeons and stuff."

I was dumbfounded, After about 20 minutes I finally got the werewithall to ask him "Ryan, do you have any other hobbies I don't know of?"

He said, "dude, I own like, every Queensryche album and stuff!

!!!!!!!!!!!PARTY ON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

I have been in denial about the superior IQ of white folks since that day I can only imagine what he would have been capable of if he wasn't addicted to crank.

Topiary Utopia said...

"If they were so clever, why didn't they have wheels, stirrups, iron or steel, firearms, compasses, astrolobes, or sailing ships?"

It's a bit difficult to invent the stirrup when you don't have horses or any other ridable animals (that may have precluded the invention and widespread use of the wheel, too).

The compass was a Chinese invention, not an European one.

Horsemeat said...

It's a bit difficult to invent the stirrup when you don't have horses or any other ridable animals (that may have precluded the invention and widespread use of the wheel, too).
There were horses actually before colonisation, but the ancestors of modern Amerindians ate them all up.

David Davenport said...

Old World early humans domesticated horses. MesoAmericans did not, although there were horses or proto-horses in the New World:


... Man’s relationship with the horse began some 50,000 years ago, when Cro-Magnon man considered the horse a valuable source of food. Eventually, as early Cro-Magnon farmers were forced to become nomadic, it is likely that they used horses as pack animals to move their camps, food and belongings.

Around 5,000 years ago farmers kept horses for meat and milk, and may have begun the process of taming horses for riding; unearthed horse teeth from this period show distinct signs of wear from a bit, the metal mouthpiece on a bridle used to control the horse. Today we are still making connections with the wild horses that roam the free ranges of this country.

Although North America was once home to boundless herds of wild horses, a combination of man, a changing environment and disease forced them to emigrate from this continent. They migrated throughout the world. It wasn't until the early 1500's that North American soil would once again cushion the pounding hooves of herds of wild horses.


...

http://www.letemrun.com/Wild-Horse-Information-Mustangs-and-Man.htm

David said...

A trailer park doesn't have a sufficient foundation for an atom-smasher. Trust me on this, dude.

David Davenport said...

Where was the compass first used?

The origin of the compass is shrouded in mystery. Certainly the Greeks knew about the attractive properties of magnetism in ancient times. Similarly, the Chinese were probably aware that an iron bar stroked with a lodestone acquired a directional north-south property as long as 2000 years ago. However, the precise date at which this knowledge was used to create the first magnetic compass is unknown. By the 10th century, the idea had been brought to Europe, probably from China, by Arab traders. Magnetic compasses of a very simple kind were certainly in use in the Mediterranean as early as the 12th century. However, early compasses were not very reliable. Although the magnetic compass was in general use in the Middle Ages, little was known about precisely how it worked.


http://www.solarnavigator.net/compass.htm

Anonymous said...

"If they were so clever, why didn't they have wheels, stirrups, iron or steel, firearms, compasses, astrolobes, or sailing ships?"

It's a bit difficult to invent the stirrup when you don't have horses or any other ridable animals (that may have precluded the invention and widespread use of the wheel, too). "

"The compass was a Chinese invention, not an European one."

What's your point?
This is a discussion more about IQ than which race invented what. Nobody has ever claimed the Chinese are low IQ. In any case, a major measure of intelligence is the ability to take what others have done and improve on it, or even just maintain and use efficiently. That's why I never diss the Japanese for being "imitators." Good imitators keep civilization going. A mark of the Japanese intelligence was the immediacy and efficiency with which they grasped and improved upon the technology brought from other places, and this goes back to the 1500s in the case of contact with Europeans.

As for the other inventions, of course necessity is the mother of invention, but even if you don't have horses there are uses for the wheel and invention of that usefull tool seems a pretty good measure for the ability to conceptualize and manifest. The Inca and Maya didn't have the wheel; however they had other highly advanced achievements.
I believe one invention noted by Baker in his study of civilizations, was the invention of a simple hinge. It's hard to get complicated with construction if you don't have the ability to conceptualize the components.

Anonymous said...

87 seems absurdly low average for the Irish (I read that it was 93 in the early 90s) but the rural background is partly to blame, as it is on all Continents and among all races. All nationalities with a heavily rural population will show a lower IQ than when that nation industrializes (or whatever they do nowadays to modernize.) Greater access to education and to more complex, challenging "city living", just seems to quicken the intellect.

Svigor said...

The problem is that New Left ideology, like all ideologies, is largely impervious to facts,

I at least agree with the Nu Left part. Today's featured article at Trickypedia:

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

Here the term "races" is used as an alternative for "varieties" and does not carry the modern connotation of human races—the first use in the book refers to "the several races, for instance, of the cabbage" and proceeds to a discussion of "the hereditary varieties or races of our domestic animals and plants".[43]

The citation provides no support for the argument, only for the quote. Have fun figuring out how the leftist ideologues at Trickypedia got "Darwin didn't mean race to apply to man" from a quote where Darwin did mean race to apply to cabbage.

Curvaceous Carbon-based Life Form said...

"It's a bit difficult to invent the stirrup when you don't have horses or any other ridable animals (that may have precluded the invention and widespread use of the wheel, too)."

Ptui. NOT having large animals to use for pack animals, that is, having only human power to rely on, it seems to me, would have INCREASED the necessity of a wheel, in order to leverage the human power. (Or in the case of the Plains Indians, the poor dogs, who had to drag travois.)
Necessity being the mother of invention, groups without large animals for carrying ought to have invented the wheel first, if the all-human-groups-have-equivalent-IQ hypothesis were true.

Svigor said...

There were horses actually before colonisation, but the ancestors of modern Amerindians ate them all up.

That's impossible, and I can prove it:

1) The white man is bad, bad, bad for nearly exterminating the buffalo.

2) The red man would therefore be bad, bad, bad for exterminating the horse.

3) Calling the red man bad, bad, bad would be racist.

4) Racism is always wrong.

You have to think things through before you post, sir.

Truth said...

"A trailer park doesn't have a sufficient foundation for an atom-smasher. Trust me on this, dude."

That's precisely what I said; then he told me about his anti-gravity device...

Otto Von Bismarck said...

Truth, funny story, I get your point. However, I should add that superior intellect does not mean sanity or lack of ignorance. In my experience Truth, if black people are less smart than white people, they are definitely more logical also. Which for some is a paradox, but not for me.

Here is my own story:

I meet this middle age white guy from Georgia. He was an IT professional, inspite of the fact that he never had a college degree. This dude was also married to a jewish woman who was a lawyer, so this guy had to be smart.

He was the most ignorant man that I have ever meet. For one, he thought dolphins were smarter than human beings. Next, he believed that the universe was two dimensional, because we could not see in three dimensions, not the hologram theory. He thought a red light district, was a place that police could not beat up gays. The dude was an ignorant piece of white trash, and annoying at the same time.

He would threaten people with physical violence. He consider himself a history expert because of stuff he read randomly on the internet and watched on television. He never read books, and consider them useless.

He was white trash personfied. However, the dude had good understanding of computers and other devices that was amazingly compotent. Arrogant piece of white trash yes, stupid no.

I hope you were not offended, Truth. You are more entertaining than most of the people here at this blog. If I start my own blog, I invite you to comment on it.

Yours truly, the infamous Otto Von Bismarck.

Truth said...

What do you mean funny story Otto? It is a true story.













Bawhawhawhawhaw!

Sometimes; I'll tell you, I crack myself up.

Anyway, I was not offended at all, and I appreciate the kind words the other day, I am going to make more posts, it's just, you know, time and motivation.

I think that a lot of people here misunderstand me; I feel that there is distinct difference in the way black people, white people and Asians, process information. Much of that difference is nature...much of it however, is not, and there is a third factor in addition to nature and nurture as well.

BTW; that guy in your story seems like he had the potential to be a load of fun, he'd probably be the one to go to a honky-tonk bar and get drunk with.

Anonymous said...

"If they were so clever, why didn't they have wheels, stirrups, iron or steel, firearms, compasses, astrolobes, or sailing ships?

Why couldn't your lovely MesoAmericans sail to Spain and enslave the paler faces, instead of the other way around?"

And why didn't the high IQ Hindu Brahmins invent lathe machines and kick start the industrial revolution? The Indians were discussing high philosophy and mathematics but were quite primitive compared to the visiting Europeans in practical things. Why did they not conquer Europe and Arabia before Europe and Arabia conquered India?
For example
Check what the Persian scholar scholar Al-Beruni wrote about Indians

“Having observed the names of the orders of the numbers in various languages he had come in contact with, Alberuni found that no nation goes beyond the thousand including the Arabs. Those who beyond the thousand in their numeral system are the Hindus who extend the names of the orders of numbers until the 18th order. (Sachau:174)”
“There was no consensus about the resting or movement of the earth. Aryabahata thought that the earth is moving and the heaven resting. Many astronomers contested this saying were it so, stones and trees would fall from earth. But Brahamgupta did not agree with them saying that that would not happen apparently because he thought all heavy things are attracted towards the center of the earth. (Sachau:276-7)”

Yet the same India which was definitely much more advanced than Europe and China/Japan/Korea in mathematics and physics at the time was piss poor in simple practical appliances common in an European, Japanese or a Mongol house of that time.

For example check out what Babur the Mughal (Mongol) conqueror and Emperor of India writes about this newly conquered land, India in his book the Baburnama.

“Hindustan is a country that has few pleasures to recommend it. The people are not handsome. They have no idea of the charms of friendly society, of frankly mixing together, or of familiar intercourse. They have no genius, no comprehension of mind, no politeness of manner, no kindness of fellow-feeling, no ingenuity or mechanical invention in planning or executing their handicraft works, no skill or knowledge in design or architecture; they have no horses, no good flesh, no grapes or musk melons, no good fruits, no ice or cold water, no good food or bread in their bazaars, no baths or colleges, no candles no torches, not a candlestick

In place of candle and torch they have a great dirty gang they call lamp-men (diwati\ who in the left hand hold a smallish wooden tripod to one corner of which a thing like the top of a candlestick is fixed, having a wick in it about as thick as the thumb. In the right hand they hold a gourd, through a narrow slit made in which, oil is let trickle in a thin thread when the wick needs it. Great people keep a hundred or two of these lamp-men. This is the Hindustan substitute for lamps and
candlesticks ! If their rulers and begs have work at night needing candles, these dirty lamp-men bring these lamps, go close up and Foi. 291. there stand.Except their large rivers and their standing-waters which flow in ravines or hollows (there are no waters). There are no
running-waters in their gardens or residences ^imaratldr).* These residences have no charm, no air had no regularity or symmetry. Peasants and people of low standing go about naked.”

So a people who dabbled in high mathematics and gravity when most Europeans were convinced that the Earth was flat could not even invent a candle! Why was iron working and gunpowder never independently developed in India? I guess not all civilizations develop in all sectors of society at the same pace. I guess you can say the same about the Aztecs, Mayans and other native american civilizations etc...

watcher said...

"So a people who dabbled in high mathematics and gravity when most Europeans were convinced that the Earth was flat could not even invent a candle!"

Glad you say "most." That the earth was spherical was a common theory in Europe, just as there are different ideas today about phenomena.
What amazes me about Europeans is the extraordinary rapidity with which they took off. Clocks and watches all of the sudden in the 1200s were some of the earliest manifestations, and certainly contact with other parts of the world inspired them. But why didn't other cultures invent these things? They were on the track. Religion inspires in the beginning but when it decays it is a hindrance to material progress. While I don't like to blame the Church entirely (many Churchmen were of a scientific bent), it's a fact that the Reformation, around 1550, coincided with scientific advancement. I'm not sure when Europe couldn't invent candles, but by the 1500s they invented automatons, mechanical "toys", and electrically. I saw two automatons (male and female) made in the 1700s playing a harpsichords in a museum in Switzerland. I bring up the automatons because they were a surprise and so startling. By the 19th century, Edison and Tesla had the means to light up the planet. It's weird how so suddenly they took off and took technology to such heights.
No one denies "Arabic numerals"; the Indian zero, Persian algebra (yes); but they lapsed, they didn't take it anywhere--I don't know what happened but perhaps education was just not as democratically spread out as in those European countries that advanced rapidly. Islam and Hinduism became more and more fatalisitic. Perhaps every culture lapses eventually, but the explosion of technology for 500 years out of Europe after 1500, dwarfs anything in recorded history, in the sense of material transformation of a technical, scientific nature.
This does not take anything away from other cultures--you could never develop aeronautics with arabic numerals and the hindu zero, and Chinese gun powder. But if, after 1500, they had never come into contact with any Europeans or Americans, what would they be doing today?

Truth said...

"Glad you say "most." That the earth was spherical was a common theory in Europe."

Yes, and statutory rape being beneficial to both parties is a common theory in the U.S. today, yet neither "theory" is/was excepted by the people who control the guillotines, who are generally the important arbiters.

Anonymous said...

The compass was a Chinese invention, not an European one.

Did the Chinese invent it first and it migrated to Europe later. Or did the Europeans came up with it separately. Thats what seems to have happened with printing and gunpowder. The Chinese were first but if China had never existed then Europe will still have made those advances.

Anonymous said...

That any people in even comparatively ancient times believed the earth to be flat is a myth that has been debunked, Ive heard.

silly girl said...

Truth said...

So a people who dabbled in high mathematics and gravity when most Europeans were convinced that the Earth was flat ...

_____________________


Come on, let go of the myth of anyone thinking the world was flat. They did not. Erostosthanes measured the circumference of the Earth 200 BC.