A Genetic Code for Genius?

Gautam Naik, Wall Street Journal, February 15, 2013

At a former paper-printing factory in Hong Kong, a 20-year-old wunderkind named Zhao Bowen has embarked on a challenging and potentially controversial quest: uncovering the genetics of intelligence.

Mr. Zhao is a high-school dropout who has been described as China’s Bill Gates. He oversees the cognitive genomics lab at BGI, a private company that is partly funded by the Chinese government.

At the Hong Kong facility, more than 100 powerful gene-sequencing machines are deciphering about 2,200 DNA samples, reading off their 3.2 billion chemical base pairs one letter at a time. These are no ordinary DNA samples. Most come from some of America’s brightest people—extreme outliers in the intelligence sweepstakes.

The majority of the DNA samples come from people with IQs of 160 or higher. By comparison, average IQ in any population is set at 100. The average Nobel laureate registers at around 145. Only one in every 30,000 people is as smart as most of the participants in the Hong Kong project—and finding them was a quest of its own.

“People have chosen to ignore the genetics of intelligence for a long time,” said Mr. Zhao, who hopes to publish his team’s initial findings this summer. “People believe it’s a controversial topic, especially in the West. That’s not the case in China,” where IQ studies are regarded more as a scientific challenge and therefore are easier to fund.

The roots of intelligence are a mystery. Studies show that at least half of the variation in intelligence quotient, or IQ, is inherited. {snip}

The Hong Kong researchers hope to crack the problem by comparing the genomes of super-high-IQ individuals with the genomes of people drawn from the general population. By studying the variation in the two groups, they hope to isolate some of the hereditary factors behind IQ.

Their conclusions could lay the groundwork for a genetic test to predict a person’s inherited cognitive ability. {snip}

{snip}

But critics worry that genetic data related to IQ could easily be misconstrued—or misused. Research into the science of intelligence has been used in the past “to target particular racial groups or individuals and delegitimize them,” said Jeremy Gruber, president of the Council for Responsible Genetics, a watchdog group based in Cambridge, Mass. {snip}

{snip}

The Shenzen government agreed to pay for half the project, and BGI said it would pitch in the other half, says Mr. Zhao.

Most of the samples so far have come from outside of China. The main source is Dr. Plomin of King’s College, who for his own research had collected DNA samples from about 1,600 individuals whose IQs were off the charts. Those samples were obtained through a U.S. project known as the Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth, now in its fourth decade.

{snip}

Attempts to find height-related genes didn’t yield any reliable hits until the number of DNA samples exceeded 10,000. By studying more and more samples, scientists have now identified about 1,000 genetic variations that partly explain why some people are taller than others. Those results are replicable—and they hold true whether a person is from Iceland or Japan.

By comparison, one of the biggest genomic investigations of IQ attempted so far involves only about 5,000 people drawn from the general population. Scientist say that tens of thousands of regular people would have to be studied just to find the first useful IQ gene.

That’s where BGI’s genomic deep dive comes in. The team will compare the genomes of 2,200 high-IQ individuals with the genomes of several thousand people drawn randomly from the general population. Because most of the supersmart participants being studied are the cognitive equivalent of people “who are 6-foot-9-inches tall,” says Dr. Hsu, it should be much easier to identify many key IQ-related factors in their genomes. (Dr. Hsu is now vice president for research and graduate studies at Michigan State University.)

“The genetic basis of intelligence has been ignored for a very long time,” says Mr. Zhao. “Our data will be ready in three months’ time.”

Topics: , ,

Share This

We welcome comments that add information or perspective, and we encourage polite debate. If you log in with a social media account, your comment should appear immediately. If you prefer to remain anonymous, you may comment as a guest, using a name and an e-mail address of convenience. Your comment will be moderated.
  • MikeofAges

    Good thing he doesn’t live here. In the land of the free. He would be considered a pariah merely for not finishing high school. And persecuted for holding politically incorrect views. Amazing, too, that they let a twenty year old actually do something.

    • brengunn

      One of the pluses to living in a bi-polar world, I suppose. There is no absolute hegemony on knowledge.

  • Tim_in_Indiana

    With the way genetic research is progressing, it’s only a matter of time before the genes determining intelligence are found. The only question is, will this knowledge be suppressed by the MSM? After all, we have pretty good evidence of IQ differences between the races already in the form of IQ tests, but these are routinely ignored and rationalized away as “cultural bias,” even though, with Asians doing even better than Whites, this argument makes exactly zero sense.

    • brengunn

      There is only so long governments, media, business etc. can deny science, the truth eventually outs.

      It’s very short sighted to put the kibosh on these types of studies as the sooner we identify these intelligence genes, the sooner we can start to manipulate them to our advantage. That’s got to be a good thing.

      • The__Bobster

        You think so? You’d be amazed at how many kwans think that all races have the same IQ, even though the truth is one Google search away.

        • brengunn

          I don’t think they do think it, I think they’re afraid of the implications of average differences.

        • bigone4u

          At the university where I used to work the PC administrators indoctrinated the faculty into the theory that there are all kinds of intelligences, i.e., musical intelligence, emotional intelligence, etc. and that the faculty must devise tests that measure these other intelligences. So, I suppose that with this rot there are some instructors testing for emotional engineering intelligence. Wanna fly on an airliner designed by someone whose knowledge of engineering is based on his/her emotions?

          • JohnEngelman

            Where is Mary Morrison? I hope she reads this article.

          • Joseph

            The claim that always flummoxes me is where blacks do poorly given conventional test instruments the liberals frequently qualify the results with “These kinds of tests do not measure other aspects of intelligence like -creativity” or some such. I can even go along with the musical aspect to some degree but that is it. They do not even seem to manifest much *creativity* as far as I can tell so if there were such an intelligence test, I still don’t think they’d fare well.

            Now, I look at African or African-American graphics (drawings, paintings) and the highly revered pieces honestly look to me like something done by a gradeschool kid. Everything I’ve ever seen from Africa is two-dimensional. 40,000 yo cave paintings have more life to them. I’ve read a some writings of their authors and it is just not quality work. All of the “great works” are crap like Angelou or Malcolm X or other screeds I don’t recall. But then, I may just not have the “creative intellect” to appreciate African art.

            Can someone seriously point me to the *best* of African or African-American art and literature examples? Maybe I missed ’em.

          • Sherman_McCoy

            It has been documented that apes are apparently gifted in the areas of mimicry and musical rhythm. I believe there was a story on Amren yesterday which reported a study that claimed that chimpanzees have excellent memory.

            It appears that these same traits are often to be found in africans. For example, observing some black pentecostal preachers in the past, I found their sermons to be shallow, banal, and almost exact copies of those made by their white counterparts. Yet, they were delivered in rhythmically interesting way which was almost hypnotic. (You might notice by my example, that religion and blacks is a an area of particular interest to me).

            So, if you are looking for a black (with a low white admixture) Beethoven, or Oppenheimer, or whatever, you might find him, but I suspect it’ll be a tough slog.

          • Barrack Osama

            Observe the greatest and only test that really matters – the countries and living conditions they create.

      • BellaCosa

        Am I the only person here who intensely dislikes the idea of manipulating human genes?

        I think such manipulation completely flies in the face of the concept of identifying with one’s natural genetic endowment. It cheapens the entire enterprise of respecting and revering one’s family, race, history, and civilization if all the identity and genetic heritage that created those things can be rendered moot by flipping a few gene triggers to tweak the traits of members of those groups. It’s absolutely grotesque to me…

        • Stan D Mute

          Yes. Looks like you are alone in failing to aspire to greater innate cognitive ability. Maybe you are in the wrong forum? Huffington Post is chock full of people aghast at the notion of genetically engineering humans to have more intelligence.

          • BellaCosa

            Stan!! How ya doin buddy?

        • Joseph

          It is a very dangerous enterprise. I say this not from some ethical perspective as that is not likely to find a centerpoint here but from a technical perspective.

          The potential adverse consequences, if you reference gene-splicing type genomic modifications, cannot even be foreseen at this point. You could select for some gene or simple network of genes which increases intelligence but causes congestive heart failure at 30 yo. This obviously would not be known for a long time and animal models would very likely not reveal such a defect as any model organism which would display the defect (or not) in an experimental timeframe would not likely be similar enough to humans to be an adequate model. I’ve no doubt that all sorts of unseemly experiments are going on in some clandestine labs under gov’t control but the reason we don’t hear about the marvelous new results is probably because there are none to brag about.

          • BellaCosa

            True. And (as long as we’re playing with hypotheticals) it also remains to be seen how, at a large scale, a population of people with roughly coequal or otherwise advanced intelligence would operate without some kind of interstitial underclass. The interpersonal dynamics of a population consisting only of very intelligent people could be combustible (or at least highly unpredictable).

          • brengunn

            , a population of people with roughly coequal or otherwise advanced
            intelligence would operate without some kind of interstitial underclass

            It’s highly unlikely that everyone will have the same intelligence once the genes have been tweaked. More likely, it will boost people’s natural endowment of intelligence by a standard deviation or two. So different levels of intelligence will remain.

            Joseph is right though. Those genetic switches have all sorts of hidden mechanisms which will be almost impossible to predict, which could lead to catastrophic consequences were it to be rushed to the masses but experimentation is the only antidote. Luckily for science, human life is abundant and in the grand scheme of things, cheap.

          • Daisy

            How do you come to this conclusion?

          • brengunn
        • brengunn

          It is kinda scary but it’s going to be done despite any fears we have, and rightly so. We wouldn’t be human if we shrunk in the face of the unknown.

          It cheapens the entire enterprise of respecting and revering one’s
          family, race, history, and civilization if the identity and genetic
          heritage of the people that created those things can be rendered moot by
          flipping a few gene triggers

          No, quite the opposite. It’s another glory in a long line of glories for the human race. All the knowledge of our forefathers has contributed to getting us to here, where we have the ability to make a better human race. That is the highest honour we can give them.

          • Daisy

            I was taught that the higher the IQ’s of the parents are, the higher the likelihood will be that their children won’t be as smart and vice versa. So heredity is normative and promotes group-cohesion. To start genetically engineering humans does seem scary and unnatural. But I’d suspect that if we could do it as a species and as individuals seeking advantages for our offspring, we would.

          • brengunn

            And it won’t just be brain power that is effected. What with the way fashion works, I can envision a time when a signifcant portion of white males will be six feet tall, have blond hair and blue eyes and look sort of blandly beautiful, ditto for the women. The bland ideal will become the norm and we’ll be no more distinct than Asians. I like the fact Europeans come in various hues of hair, skin and eye colour. It’s interesting and unique to us.

            I’ve heard what your saying about normative heredity, but I don’t know much about it. I’ll have to go do a bit of research on it.

  • WmarkW

    It will find that white and Asians at the skills needed in the modern economy (math, verbal and abstract thinking) and blacks excel at some skills valuable in sub-Saharan Africa until two centuries ago (like recognizing game hiding in a forest).

    This explains why black skills have been undervalued and hence their academic and economic performance has lagged. And why white wealth has to be transferred to blacks, due to creating a culture in which they are not permitted to excel.

  • NorthernWind

    “Research into the science of intelligence has been used in the past “to
    target particular racial groups or individuals and delegitimize them,”
    said Jeremy Gruber, president of the Council for Responsible Genetics, a
    watchdog group based in Cambridge, Mass.”

    Mr. Gruber, Chinese people simply do not care about your idiotic sensitivities. They will continue forward and publish their results without hesitation. When the White man blindfolds himself because he is afraid of the truth, others will rise up and do what needs to be done.

    • The__Bobster

      Jeremy Gruber? I’m not surprised that he doesn’t want his foot soldiers outed as morons.

  • Sam

    “The genetic basis of intelligence has been ignored for a very long time,” says Mr. Zhao. “Our data will be ready in three months’ time.”

    They will be ignored for a long time. The US invests about one trillion dollars per year in denial of genetic basis of intelligence. One trillion dollars means many people have huge fortunes at stake in maintaining the status quo. One trillion dollars is more powerful than a fact.

    The only thing that will change the situation is economic reality. The Soviet system was obviously rotten, but everyone had so much invested in it that they couldn’t unwind the investments until the whole thing tumbled down. The same may happen with our system. The news is telling us that people are buying guns and ammo like crazy right now because people are afraid of a ban. No, that’s not the reason why 556 ammo by the case has been 100% sold out for the past two months.

  • StillModerated

    By comparison, average IQ in any population is set at 100.

    WRONG!! IQs vary by nations. By that logic Africa would be as nice as Italy, or at least Russia.

    Read ’em and weep, realists! http://www.rlynn.co.uk/pages/article_intelligence/t4.asp

    • The__Bobster

      The mean IQ of 100 was based on the average WHITE IQ.

    • IstvanIN

      Black Africa isn’t as nice, or as orderly, or as well run as 1 billion plus, stinkingly poor, India. They can not accomplish what super poor, paranoid, starving North Korea can accomplish (thank goodness). Blacks are not only backward and stupid, they are violent, which proves the old saying, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

    • Sherman_McCoy

      One of several silly comments in this article (along with the misconstrued or misused bit), by a writer who I assume is rather intelligent.

    • Morris Thecat

      WEll, Israel clocks in at 90 and Germany clocks in at 102. The US clocks in at 98–and that is probably after black Americans dragged the average down a bit. China clocks in at 100- but it does not have a sizable minority of Africans driving it’s average down. So what is all this about Asians and Jews being so much smarter than Europeans? I guess this set of data just doesn’t count for some reason.

      • JohnEngelman

        Ashkenazi Jews have the highest IQ of any ethnic group known.
        They average around 112-115, well above the European norm of 100…

        Their numbers among prominent scientists are roughly ten times greater than you’d expect from their share of the population in the United States and Europe. Over the past two generations they have won more than a quarter of all Nobel science prizes, although they make up less than one-six-hundredth of the world’s population. Although they represent less than 3 percent of the U.S. population they son 27 percent of the U.S. Nobel prizes in science…

        American Jews are also over represented in other areas, such as business (where they account for about a fifth of CEOs) and academia (where they make up about 22 percent of Ivy league students).

        – Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending, from “The 10,000 Year Explosion: How Civilization Accelerated Human Evolution,” Chapter 7: “Medieval Evolution: How the Ashkenazi Jews Got Their Smarts,” pages 188, 189, 190.

        http://www.amren.com/ar/2009/05/index.html

        • Morris Thecat

          I am more than one standard deviation above the Ashekenazi john,I suspect most posters on here are as well. Give it a rest already. THIS data says that Israel clocks in at 90- have a nice day john.

          • JohnEngelman

            According to Richard Lynn, who has spoken at American Renaissance conferences, the average IQ in Israel is 94. However, when he calculated that the percentage of Ashkenazi Jews in Israel was 30 percent. Since then the immigration of Ashkenazi Jews from Russia has increased the percentage of the Ashkenazim in Israel, and almost certainly the average IQ of Israel.

            http://www.sq.4mg.com/NationIQ.htm

            What follows is a book review of Richard Lynn’s “The Chosen People: A Study of Jewish Intelligence and Achievement,” that was written especially for American Renaissance.

            ———-

            Professor Lynn begins by pointing out the extraordinary success of Jews in almost every field…

            Prof. Lynn writes: “[Jews] arrived as penniless refugees unable to speak the languages of their new countries; they were the “huddled masses” from the most backward region of Europe. Yet by the middle decades of the 20th century, the children and grandchildren of these immigrants were doing far better than their Gentile hosts on all indices of socioeconomic status and earnings and outperforming them by several orders of magnitude in obtaining elite academic distinction.”…

            Without exception, Jews outperform their non-Jewish neighbors by very large multiples. Whether in education, in professional and managerial positions, in prestigious awards, in income, and in musical and artistic fields, Jews are on average five times more successful than Gentiles…

            Professor Lynn addresses the question of the origins of these Jews’ high intelligence. He dismisses environmental explanations on a number of grounds.
            http://www.amren.com/features/2011/12/the-chosen-people/

          • Morris Thecat

            you are talking to yourself again john.

          • JohnEngelman

            I am quoting someone who has given talks at American Renaissance conferences.

          • Sherman_McCoy

            Don’t forget that their (unspoken or otherwise) social contract (their religion, perhaps) with each other was an advantage, one that whites need to have as well.

          • JohnEngelman

            White Gentiles do not face the dangers Jews have faced throughout their existence.

          • Sherman_McCoy

            Fair comment. Still, Kevin MacDonald’s writings document that one is related to the other.

          • Sherman_McCoy

            Hey Morris, what John says IS true, about the Ashkenazim. And I would never seek to take away from their accomplishments in the arts and sciences.

            BUT, I still have to ask the question: Is the harm that the 75% of liberal Jews and 20% of neo-cons have done to our country and culture excused by the (perhaps) 5% of white and right thinking Jews in our midst? And before you answer, our friend “Jew Among You” would probably have a tough answering answering that question, too.

      • Andy

        There are lots of Middle Eastern and African Jews in Israel. Only European Jews have an average IQ of ~113. They also have 96% white heredity.

  • Barrack Osama

    Leftist political views are nothing more than passing fads. They are deathly afraid of appearing foolish, backwards, and being out-grouped. It’s only going to get tougher for those poor deluded folks. It’s going to take mental gymnastics the likes of which have never been seen before. Perhaps they could open a circus where their best thinkers perform incredible leaps of logic.

    • sbuffalonative

      I never count these people out.

      Once you think you’ve heard the end-all of all harebrained theories, these people manage to top themselves.

      First they’ll denounce the research as racist, self-serving, and politically driven. After that, they’ll come up with some wacky theory. Then they announce ‘even if it’s true, we can’t let this racist research (somehow likely funded by the Pioneer Fund) taint our views on human equality’.

      • bigone4u

        As you suggest the twisted logic of race-blind liberals knows no bounds. Many people can see through it however.

      • Stan D Mute

        They will argue the results show conclusively that Africans must always – ALWAYS – for eternity receive subsidies from whites in the name of “fairness”. This answers the question, “if affirmative action is to correct the sin of slavery, when is that penance paid?” The answer, based on genetic advantages held by whites? “The penance will NEVER be paid.”

        • Joseph

          You are correct. There will NEVER be a turning point for the true-believer liberal.

          If it were determined conclusively to THEIR satisfaction that IQ were completely genetic and thus determinative of life success AND that blacks as a group the world over average lower, the dogma shift would be:

          “More than ever with the new scientific data on race and intelligence, we now know that blacks are disproportionately and adversely affected by differential genetic endowments and thus entitled under universal human rights to compensatory benefits to enable an equivalent quality of life. No one should suffer because of their racial heritage”.

          Working white people would STILL be on the hook to pay for these perpetual wards of the state. They’d just change the justification. Until these liberals personally suffer serious harm at the hand of their pets, they will not repent.

        • sbuffalonative

          Yes, the genetic version of ‘the white man’s burden’ followed to it’s illogical conclusion.

        • Morris Thecat

          let’s subsidize them with lead

    • NM156

      This fad has gone on for decades. It’s not a hula hoop or a pet rock. However, with the amount of energy it has accumulated in the past 50 years, when it crashes, it will crash like a piano shoved off the Sears Tower. How will the left surrender? Will they go out kicking and screaming or sulking out of the room quietly? What’s the endgame?

    • JohnEngelman

      As more is learned about how genetics influences intelligence and crime the constraints of political correctness will become increasingly untenable.

  • bigone4u

    One thing we know instinctively without this study is that blacks and browns were shortchanged when it comes to the DNA that creates high intelligence. When that is verified by science, watch the liberals howl that the science is flawed. An inability to accept the truth must be part of the DNA of liberals. That liberal DNA should be bred out of existence. Acceptance of truth is part of the DNA of race realists, and that DNA should be more widespread. The truth makes for a better life for all.

    • rick

      Perhaps the same scientists looking to isolate the DNA for genius should simultaneously try to unlock the biological underpinnings of homosexuality. That would put left-wing ideologues in a tight spot if both their endevors bear fruit.

      • Nathanwartooth

        Not sure where you are going with this one. The correlation of both twins being homosexual if one is is ~0.6. That is proof enough that it’s genetic.

        Left wing people are generally OK with the notion that you are born gay. They just hate that you can be born smart.

        Right wing people think you can choose to be gay. (Funny you never see them turning gay to prove their point). But they also think that people are not born smart.

        These are just generalizations people. Don’t get mad if you consider yourself left or right and don’t agree with what I wrote.

        • NM156

          Who on the right has ever thought that the intelligent were not born intelligent? Traditional conservatism accepts native-born intelligence as a reflection of the natural order as set forth by the divine.

        • rick

          The correlation of identical twins and IQ is even higher than the 0.6 you quote for homosexuality. Many put the genetic contribution for IQ as high as 0.8. Yet liberals cherry-pick which Traits are innate (being gay) and which one aren’t (intellect). Just like they say IQ tests are “flawed” except when they can be used to get a murderer off of death row because he’s “retatrded.”

        • Morris Thecat

          I think you do not understand the data or the math,

          the CONCORDANCE rate, that means, the rate where BOTH twins are gay is only 6.7%. That means of all the births of twins where one is gay, in only 6.7% of these cases are BOTH gay. That totally REFUTES a genetic cause of homosexuality. If it was genetics then it should be 100% of the time where one twin is gay then both are gay.

          • Nathanwartooth

            This is just really wrong. Read what Rick and I wrote. This own website is where I got the data. Go read the back issues of AmRen.

          • Morris Thecat

            IT is not wrong at all, I am not going to do an archive search. My search for information on the web gave me studies that show that there is NO genetic basis for homosexuality. Even the sentence in YOUR own post —:”The correlation of both twins being homosexual if one is is ~0.6. ” …is the same thing except you say the concordance rate is .6%, not 6%. You just somehow reached the complete opposite conclusion that the evidence gives. If concordance rates are less than 1% then CLEARLY, genetics has NOTHING to do with it. Since the genetics are the same in twins then the concordance rate should be 100% if genetics are the cause of human sexuality. You clearly seem to be totally misunderstanding the issue. Are you gay? Perhaps you have a personal bias in this case. If you are going to tell me that the “party line” here at “Amren” is that homosexuality is genetic in origin then I will tell you the party line is wrong.

          • Nathanwartooth

            Check that data again.

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

            http://www.freeministry.org/h/articles/regenera/twins.htm

            http://abouthomosexuality.com/policy-org-twins.pdf

            Just like most other things it’s a combination of DNA, conditions in the womb and environment. In about 50% of cases where one twin is gay the other one will be. Where twins were not identical there was about a 22% chance.

          • Morris Thecat

            WEll, the data hasn’t changed in 13 minutes,the data of Bearman and Brukner is the same now as it was 13 minutes ago. Wikipedia, not a credible source, nor your others. Even the BEST you can do is 50%, that refutes a genetic origin. Answer the question, are you gay, let us know what your agenda is. Many gay organizations have done flawed studies to bump results higher, even so, 50% is the best they can come up with. STILL, a genetic cause would say it must be 100%. By your own admission, it isn’t.

          • Daisy

            All the studies I’ve seen reflect that homosexuality is determined by intra-uterine dynamics. I’ve seen zero proof that lesbians raise more gay males statistically and I’ve existed in gay communities for most of my adult life. I’ve seen no correlation between gay parents and gay kids. I also think your take on gay men is backwards. A lot of gay men become conflicted with their masculinity and fathers *because they’re gay* not vice versa. I happen to think gay men have bigger issues with women than straight men, although it’s hard to quantify, but it seems clearly sociological to me.

          • Morris Thecat

            “Researchers Peter Bearman and Hannah Bruckner, from Columbia and Yale respectively, studied data from the National Longitudinal Stufy of Adolescent Health, and found even lower concordance rates of only 6.7% for male and 5.3% for female identical twins. In fact, their study neatly refuted several of the biological theories for the origin of homosexuality, finding social experiences in childhood to be far more significant.”

      • Daisy

        Genius is usually some mix of factors, including culture and socialization whether people like it or not, so isolating it’s biological underpinnings is impossible. Homosexuality, to the best that science can determine, occurs in the womb. Factoid: the more sons a woman has the greater the likelihood that the younger ones will be gay; it relates to a woman’s body producing antibodies towards his maleness, according to *one theory* I’ve seen.

        • NM156

          Whatever happens in the womb is also genetic.

          • AnalogMan

            Nonsense. Case in point: foetal alcohol syndrome.

          • NM156

            Fetal alcohol syndrome isn’t a natural process, you idiot.

    • a multiracial individual

      One day the truth will become uncontainable. When that day comes, it is possible that scientists, blacks, hispanics, abos, etc. will finally come together and work toward raising their IQ to the levels of Jews, Asians, and Whites. When everyone will have a median IQ 100, it is possible the diverse society could work.

      • Luca

        IQ is not a silver bullet. There is still morality, culture, ethics, conscience, compassion, and a whole of host of other factors to contend with.

        • a multiracial individual

          High IQ is inversely correlated with every social pathology.

          • Morris Thecat

            In populations as a whole, but not necessarily in individuals. Some serial killers had very high IQ’s. The same can be said for many of the big financial crimes criminals.

          • Morris Thecat

            Crime rates in mobile home parks, which are overwhelmingly white, do not even approach the crime rates in black public housing units. Both areas are low income. For white people IQ level and income level do not affect their morality. For black people, they have no morality whether they have income or don’t have income. They are criminal by nature.

          • a multiracial individual

            A trailor park might have an average IQ of 85, while a ghetto might have an average IQ of 70. Do you have any data that compares the crime rates of Whites and Blacks in identical white collar positions?

          • Morris Thecat

            I hope you don’t eat popcorn with that had after pulling things out of you know where. The facts remain, blacks of all economic stratum and IQs are criminally prone.

        • Guest

          The victims of white collar crime from Wall Street scoff at your analysis.

          • Extropico

            That should have been in reply to the multiracial individual.

          • An anecdote does not falsify a correlation.

            Of course, it is possible that really smart people are just as criminal, and appear less so merely because they are better at not getting caught. But wouldn’t a big part of avoiding getting caught amount to rejecting the bulk of the riskier criminal schemes that come to mind?

          • Joseph

            Most of the successful higher-IQ criminals are the ones who perpetuate the system which we now live under that serves to promote the interests of the few ultra-wealthy (whites/Jews) at public expense via wars and printing money. If you are in a position to craft the system of laws to suit your own interests you can be unethical and unjust without being a “criminal”; you simply exempt your own behavior. The federal gov’t is the chief employer of these malefactors. Race traitors which we bitch about here are those people.

            “The best way to rob a bank is to own one.”

          • Morris Thecat

            “An anecdote does not falsify a correlation.” No. but we are not talking about anecdotes, we are talking about instances. We are talking about instances which disprove the theory that high IQ correlates with high moral standards.

          • AnalogMan

            Please read your comment again. Are you sure that’s what you meant to say? How does an instance differ from an anecdote, and how does it falsify a correlation? Or, for that matter, a “theory of correlation”?

          • JohnEngelman

            Al Capone could have been successful in a legitimate business. For reasons of his own he choose a line of work where the possible rewards were somewhat greater, but the risks were very much greater.

          • Stan D Mute

            The evidence clearly show that Africans disproportionately commit white collar crime just as they do robbery, rape, murder, burglary, etc. Where there is a difference may be in the size of the individual crimes. For example, the mammoth fraud committed by Bernard Madoff probably could not have been duplicated by an African for the simple reason that it is exceedingly unlikely an African would be trusted with that much money. Yet for every Madoff, there are a thousand Africans embezzling a hundred bucks here, ten thousand there. The Madoffs get the headlines because of the sheer scope of their fraud. The Africans go unreported both because the scope of their crimes is not so spectacular and because the media generally refuses to report African crime.

          • Morris Thecat

            Yes, but the point is that high IQ is not necessarily connected with high morals and high ethics. There are many examples where it is not.

          • a multiracial individual

            High IQ probably gave desires to steal as well, they (mostly) abstain because it is not worth the risk.

          • Morris Thecat

            you think like a black man. You show you have no concept of what morality is and no inner morality. You are only motivated by punishment and reward. That is not morality. You need to read the article

            http://whitelocust.wordpress.com/morality-and-abstract-thinking-how-africans-may-differ-from-westerners/

            it applies to you, all you can think of is punishment and reward, that is your concept of morality. I don’t even know if you have the capability to even understand the article since it deals with abstract thought, something with which you are unfamiliar.

          • a multiracial individual

            Actually, I am quite repulsed by violence. I treat others with respect because I want to, not because of punishment/reward. To address your ad hominem assault, I will say this. I wish others well because that is my morality. I do not harbor any delusions that abstract moral thinking will ever be prevalent in society. Most people do not think about anything else besides what they will do on the coming weekend. Many people are not capable of this. Frankly, I am bit curious about what possessed you to even think otherwise.

          • Morris Thecat

            you do not get it, you do not have the capability to understand. Your previous posts gave an insight into the way you see the world. Now you are just trying to backtrack.

          • a multiracial individual

            My apologies Morris, I fear our exchanges have become unnecessarily tense. I think there was some breakdown in our communication over the morality issue. I think what might have happened is this:

            1. Person A discusses morality x.

            2. Person B does not like morality x, and prefers the more abstract morality y.

            3. Person B accuses Person A of holding morality x.

            4. Person A insists that he does not hold morality x, at which point Person B accuses person A of backtracking.

          • Morris Thecat

            wow, you have a whole alphabet of rationalizations. Your posts are quite clear, up to the point where I pointed it out, you consistently attributed less criminal behavior amongst higher IQ populations to their supposedly greater ability to anticipate punishment. Once I pointed out how you were thinking you started singing a different tune. Look, there have been no studies that I am aware of that look at criminal behavior and IQ where the races are not limped all together. The black race has lower IQ and higher rates of crime. This does not mean the lower IQ is the cause of the higher crime rates. It could be that they are separate traits.

          • JohnEngelman

            People with high IQs can commit more serious crimes than people with low IQs, but they can also earn fortunes in ways that benefit the society as a whole. Everything that makes this website possible was invented by people pretty far to the right of the bell curve for IQ.

            Muggers and armed robbers are nearly always so stupid that they can do little that is useful.

          • a multiracial individual

            High IQ people usually avoid crime for another reason people do not discuss, it does not pay in the long run. Sparing an Ocean’s Eleven type heist, almost all forms of theft have significant negative expectation. People run risk-to-benefit analyses all the time, criminals simply do this more poorly.

          • Morris Thecat

            True, but risk to benefit analysis does not give accurate results if one has an inflated opinion of oneself. If one can not have accurate criteria to base the risk on then the calculation will be faulty. There are many examples of smart people who thought they could outsmart everyone.

          • a multiracial individual

            Most accountants, lawyers, managers, etc. who are in a position to commit a white collar crime do not for one simple reason, the risk is usually intolerably high. I did not want to suggest that high IQ people never have thoughts of theft. I am sure they do. However, given the downside to being caught, most control their impulses.

          • Luca

            I think many people who have a high IQ stand a better chance of also having a more developed sense of compassion and conscience. There is also a better chance they were raised in an environment that enhanced those virtues as well.

          • Morris Thecat

            Wy are the crime rates in areas of poor whites low? If IQ is correlated with monetary success then these areas should have lower IQ. ( I don’t believe that they necessarily DO have a lower IQ though). The thing is, the black race has high rates of crime and low IQ’s, that does NOT necessarily mean that low IQ is the cause of criminality. It could be that the black race has genes for both low IQ and high criminality. This is probable because low IQ whites are just not prone to criminal behavior the way low IQ blacks are.

          • Luca

            There are many factors that contribute to crime, not just low IQ. The major factors would be: low IQ, high testosterone, culture, fatherless family life, peer pressure, and child abuse. But not necessarily in that order.. Where ever you find blacks, you frequently find these major factors.

            However, a Liberal will say crime is caused by racism, discrimination, corrupt justice system, under-funded schools, lack of opportunity, and under served neighborhoods. Go figure.

          • Morris Thecat

            liberals need to drop the “ism” and add an “e”

          • Morris Thecat

            I would say that there is something else at work – MORALITY. The fact that someone would have to live the rest of ones life with the knowledge they are despicable is enough to keep people honest. Honesty and integrity are valuable to some people. They are NOT the same thing as being respected and honored.If a person is considered by people to have “good character” that doesn’t mean that he really does. Real character and Integrity is determined by what you do when no one is looking.
            I would say the ability to be moral correlates with high IQ in that they both come from an ability for higher forms of thought, such as abstract thinking. Those who lack abstract thinking abilities lack intelligence in general. Abstract thinking is fundamental though for morality as one does not have the ability for projection/compassion, self awareness and, empathy without it. Still, even if one has the ability to empathize, project and think ahead they also have the ability to RATIONALIZE their behavior, at least to themselves. It really comes down to how honest a person is willing to be with themselves.
            Africans lack the ability for abstract thought. They lack the ability for self awareness. They lack morality AND intelligence.

          • Morris Thecat

            The rates of crimes committed by black in those white collar positions is much higher than the whites in those white collar positions. They do not change with income level nor IQ level. That is assuming that they have those positions by merit and not AA.

          • JohnEngelman

            Also they have more to lose.

        • Morris Thecat

          The most important though is family and it’s extension- ETHNICITY!!!!

      • KenelmDigby

        No, it won’t.

      • Morris Thecat

        An individual does not have a “median” IQ. A group of people will have a “median” IQ. It is the average of the group. You all better be careful, those hoping for a Eugenics plan. DId it ever occur to you that some may consider it ‘unfair” that others are born with an advantage, and the “eugenics” program may just be geared towards dumbing the population down, the same way the current educational system is geared. Sure, there are many sitting by their computers with fantasies of power where they decide who can have children and who can not. But once you create that power, it can go in any direction.

        • a multiracial individual

          I meant everyone, as in every group. Eugenics is a risky road to be sure, however, there is no other path out of this wilderness.

          • JohnEngelman

            A good way to start would be to end Aid to Families with Dependent Children, and to begin free abortion on demand.

          • Morris Thecat

            An individual does not have a median IQ. A “Median” means the average of all the IQ’s of the individuals in the group. It is not that hard

          • a multiracial individual

            Perhaps I am not making myself clear. When whites as a group have a median IQ 100, when blacks as a group have a median IQ of 100, and when Hispanics as a group have a median IQ 100 they will get along.

          • Morris Thecat

            you don’t get it, what is clear is that … you don’t get it

          • a multiracial individual

            Reading comprehension is not your strong point. You speculated that since I pointed that some people only behave because of reward and punishment, that is how my morality is. Im not sure why you would make that leap. I do not share that sordid conception of morality. No one (especially me) ever said that an individual has a median IQ. That would make no sense. Only populations have medians.

          • Morris Thecat

            you do not understand the topic of discussion, I understand what you are saying. Your problem is comprehension with anything that has to do with numbers. I guess maff be hard huh?

          • concernedcollegekid

            I WANT you to be right. I really, really, really want you to be right. But I fear that racial divisions can arise independently of IQ differences, just because humans instinctively like to form groups and hate other groups and race is a group, whether or not you bring IQ into the equation.

            I want you to be right because I have a fair number of non-white friends – you seem like someone I would be friends with – and they are all smart. But I’m afraid that “diversity” is still, generally, a weakness even when it all has the same average IQ. For example, whites and Japanese have similar average levels of intelligence, but I bet if you poured millions of whites into Japan, there would be tension, and it would not be due to the Japanese being just a little smarter on average than the whites. It would be simply because there were two ethnic groups there.

            I’ll say it again. I hope you’re right. But a lot of people on this site have fierce loyalties to their race that have nothing to do with IQ. I think they have a right to feel this way, and I don’t think the way they feel would necessarily change if we managed to increase the average IQs of other races. (Which seems like it would be impossible anyway due to “regression to the mean” – a high IQ black couple will usually have less intelligent children than a white couple with the same IQs will.)

          • Morris Thecat

            water seeks it’s own level, if you have a “fair number” of black friends then guess what—YOU FOUND YOUR LEVEL!

          • concernedcollegekid

            I said “non-white” not black… I’ve only ever had one black friend. But I have a fair number Asians and Indians I’m friendly with. They don’t know my innermost secrets or anything, but I see them all the time and none of them have ever done anything to me to make me resent them. Over the course of my life, though, the majority of my best friends have been white.

          • JohnEngelman

            Blacks are more violent than whites because they are closer in number of generations to a paleolithic way of life. A much larger percentage of people died violently during the paleolithic era than since. The best hunters and warriors had the most wives and the largest number of sons who inherited their violent proclivities.

            Hispanics are a hybrid race composed of whites, American Indians, and blacks. That is why they tend to be less criminal than blacks, and more criminal than whites.

  • libertarian 1234

    “But critics worry that genetic data related to IQ could easily be misconstrued—or misused. Research into the science of intelligence has been used in the past “to target particular racial groups or individuals and delegitimize them,” said Jeremy Gruber, president of the Council for Responsible Genetics, a watchdog group based in Cambridge, Mass. ”

    The discoveries of science shouldn’t be hindered with what some person or group’s concern is about the political ramifications of a detailed analysis of research involving an individual’s cognitive skills, his ability to learn and solve problems, anymore than the results of any other scientific endeavor should have a politically correct overseer.

    Social engineers are the flat-earth types of yesteryear, and in a just world there would be laws prosecuting them for distorting the truth for the sake of politics. They will lie, steal, distort, obfuscate, deny, manipulate and falsify data to support their fantasies, because every one of them is beset with serious emotional disorders.

    • JohnEngelman

      Political policies that are based on scientific theories that are not true are likely to lead to social harm. The civil rights legislation was founded on the assumption that there were no significant innate differences between the races, and that apparent differences were due to racial discrimination.

      • Joseph

        “The civil rights legislation was founded on the assumption that there
        were no significant innate differences between the races, and that
        apparent differences were due to racial discrimination.”

        We are way past that. We are so advanced that science is now based on civil rights legislation.

        • Aelfgar

          No Joe, pseudo-science is based on civil rights legislation. This is wonderful news, the Chinese are going to isolate the genes for high IQ and they already practice eugenics, so the outcome should be obvious. Hopefully Western society collapses when China makes us unable to even compete with them economically or militarily. Then we can begin the 2nd war for independence from tyranny.

          • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

            I would have to agree with Joseph only so far as much of the genetic, dna research is providing proof of racial difference and supporting notions like eugenics and so they are being suppressed while political interpretations are prepared before the “shocking” facts to become known generally.

      • Morris Thecat

        hey john , why are the chinese coming HERE to find people with exceptional IQ’s?

        • brengunn

          They didn’t come for people with high IQs. They took data from previous genetic surveys on geniuses done in the United States so they didn’t have to replicate all that research, nothing to do with geniuses being more prevalent in the US. Just for convenience’s sake.

          • Morris Thecat

            rrrriiiiiiiggggghtttt, and they don’t have any data on geniuses in china, hmmm, why IS that?

          • brengunn

            Scientists do this all the time, share info, so they don’t replicate. It’s not what you think it is.

          • Morris Thecat

            rrrriiiiiigggggghhhhhht

        • BonusGift

          You are right, it is a fact the even though the mean Northeast Asian (i.e., not other parts of Asia but specifically Japanese, Koreans and Han Chinese) IQ is now (i.e. pre-industrialization it was likely not) higher than that of Europeans as a group (i.e., not exactly much of a comparable group comparison), the distribution is tighter or less dispersed than that of Europeans, hence they have relatively fewer people with very high IQs. So, yes, it would be easier to use European samples than find Chinese/Han ones (i.e., even though there are more Han Chinese than all the Europeans on the planet). The irony here is that if the Chinese felt the need to carve out a super “genius” group of Han’s they would be working from a very small relative sample indeed (and ignoring the issue that IQ does not exactly equal to what people consider true “genius”).

          • Morris Thecat

            many of histories “Geniuses”, innovators, etc. were rather UNSUCCESSFUL in their time. Those who keep spouting figures about asian’s economic success in the US never want to even get NEAR this territory. Those who memorize, conform, jump through all the hoops, they are the ones who fill academia and the professions yet they are not the ones that come up with the breakthroughs, the innovations. They live the lives of the living dead, their lives are drudgery where they seek to please, please their parents, their peers, their authorities and their rewards are nice “things”. Things that make their way to the second hand stores in ten years or so. Such people are NOT the wellspring of new technologies, innovations, ways of doing things. BUT, living such lives of “filial” duty is characteristic of asian societies.

          • BonusGift

            Yes, simply put, if there is a gene for resume doping I think they are in the right place to find it (i.e., they will need to ditch that U.S sample and use a more local sample).

          • concernedcollegekid

            There is a lot of truth in this, and I say this as someone who really respects the “Asian work ethic”. But generally, the most brilliant and original thinkers I’ve ever known have been white males who were not good students. I think there is a reason whites have invented almost everything. Not because we’re “superior” to Asians but because we are more likely to be disobedient and defy tradition.

          • Morris Thecat

            I respect Asian cultures and peoples too. Perhaps my tone is rather abrasive but john has been an Ashkenazi, Chines IQ snob ever since I have been reading posts on here. The Chinese, Japanese and other Asians did indeed have a great culture, but we eclipsed it a few centuries ago . Everything since then has been imitation and catch up on their part. Let’s be honest about this.Let’s also be honest that race has something to do with this. I think white people are kind of how Mae West once described herself in a movie “when I’m good, I’m very good, but when I’m bad, I’m better”. The Asians can be good, and when they are they are very good, but they can’t be “bad boys”, they can’t break the rules, take different directions, chart new course etc. Look at Asian Art- not much different or variation over thousands of years.

        • potato78
      • Formerly_Known_as_Whiteplight

        That there are significant differences between races has been obvious all along and genetic studies are showing this. The idea that everyone is equal is a editorial goof in our Constitution but more, a Marxist ideal that is based on creating political advantage where there is none with the aim of subverting the existing order with the goal of usurping it.

        That there is racial discrimination is a major topic of the Amren posting boards, but that it is realistic and everyone does it, especially the foes of the white race.

    • Sherman_McCoy

      No, they are worried that will will NOT be misconstrued.

    • SoCal LoCal

      If Mr. Zhao and associates achieve their goal, then that may give us the bulldozer we need to bury the luddites. I know if they succeed I will not be alone in wanting to make their results the basis of social policy. In fact, an industrial sterilization plan for the genetically clueless is one of very few government schemes for social improvement I can conceive of supporting (pun intended).

    • 48224

      I was watching the PBS program FRONTLINE which did a 2 hour special on global warming. They talked to countless experts on how the planet is dying, and people are killing it with human activity. They ONLY talked about solutions in terms of alternative energy like clean coal, wind power and other things. No one ever brought up population control or eugenics.

      I wonder when the world leaders will figure out that we don’t need 6.5 billion people on this earth, most of which have an IQ of around 85-90.

      When will we start a civilized “soft eugenics” program where the smartest people are encouraged to have children and the dumbest people are encouraged to not have children. Because right now, we are doing the opposite and the dumbest people have the most children. And we all need to acknowledge that this needs be done to improve mankind and save the planet.

      If we don’t do this, the alternative is going to be like one of those end of the world shows on the sci-fi channel.

  • The mean IQ of the Chinese would most probably be higher than 100.

    • Intrepid

      According to Rushton, the Chinese have a higher average IQ but a narrower variation… meaning they produce fewer geniuses and fewer idiots. But because they have fewer extremely high IQ people, scientific and technological progress can be made, but more slowly.

      • CaptainCroMag

        IQ is not the only factor. It was already discovered a few years ago that East Asians have a much higher frequency of a gene that is strongly correlated with conformity. Europeans also possess this gene, but with a lower frequency. The European geniuses that developed great innovations in science were usually non-conformists. This is the prime reason why East Asians, despite their slightly higher average IQ, produce less scientific breakthroughs.

        • Intrepid

          I don’t think so. Japan has it’s share of Nobel winners and a high rate of productivity. The reason we don’t see more from Asia is that they’re still mostly developing countries (except for Japan, South Korea and Taiwan) or just haven’t had long enough to fully tool their academic centers and industries (China). The fact that Asians are productive in the U.S. also argues against that theory.

          • Morris Thecat

            barack obsamma is a nobel winner, as was algore, need I say more?

          • Intrepid

            That’s the peace prize. It doesn’t count.

        • Morris Thecat

          you have to be a nonconformist to be an innovator. The two things are opposites.

          • Intrepid

            Even if the Chinese are generally more conformist, their lack of submission to political correctness is greatly in their favor.

            It allows them to do things that are risky, and that don’t full under what we consider to be socially acceptable in North America.

          • Morris Thecat

            They are very submissive to political correctness,to their own brand that is. This is a quasi gubb’mint- free enterprise affair. That means it’s completely gubb’mint and someone in this “private company” is getting paid real good. This is the communist state trying to come up with their “chinese superman”. Of course they don’t care about American political correctness. They have had secret research facilities under the mountains in their far west for ten years now. My guess is that they have not been able to come up with nothing of consequence from their won people and they are trying to get some western DNA so they can get some creative geniuses that are loyal to “the chinese”. This will more than likely not work out as planned, people are not that simple.

          • Intrepid

            There’s a reason for that. During China’s cultural revolution 50 years ago, they killed off most of their own intelligentsia. Now instead of wasting time scouring their population for people, they’re going with proven people from the Americas. I think it’s the circumstances, not a lack of faith in themselves.

      • Carl

        There is no evidence suggesting a smaller SD for IQ among Asians, nor does Rushton ever suggest it. In fact, proxies for IQ like the SAT, GRE, OECD scores, etc. consistently show greater variation in IQ for East Asians.

      • Morris Thecat

        100 is not that high, if the whole population is grouped around that figure, it is nothing to write home about.

      • JohnEngelman

        Where does Professor Rushton say that? This is what he writes in “RACE, EVOLUTION, AND BEHAVIOR,” “The 6-point IQ difference between Orientals and Whites and the 15-point IQ difference between Whites and Blacks means that a higher percentage of Orientals and a lower percentage of Blacks end up in the highest IQ categories. Those percentages have real implications in school and at work.”
        http://archive.org/stream/RaceEvolutionBehaviorabidgedVersion/REB_djvu.txt

        There is no mention in Professor Rushton’s essay of a smaller percentage of Chinese geniuses. One would not get that impression visiting the science departments of America’s greatest universities.

        • Intrepid

          I think it was either Rushton or Richard Lynn. Regardless, everyone should keep in mind that they’re just theories.

    • Extropico

      Possibly. Simply amazing how little they have accomplished or invented until the White man gave them special racial trading rights. Are you bragging or lamenting the ignominy of how little has been invented over there?

      • Morris Thecat

        They also could not launch a satellite into space until clinton gave them that technology.

    • Morris Thecat

      based on what?

  • wattylersrevolt

    How relevent is this to the revolt against race-replacement in America? Answer:0. What monumental idiocy to be using a score on an IQ test as a proxy for genius. Have a look at William Poundstones book about the genius sperm banks. Is this the kind of garbage that will be discussed at the AR conference?…a very big yawn. The late Richard Feynman used to laugh at this nonesense.

    • bigone4u

      Sure it’s relevant. Anything that draws attention to the significance of intelligence and its unequal distribution among races and ethnic groups is relevant.

    • a multiracial individual

      If I recall correctly, his IQ was still in the top 5%.

    • Extropico

      Largely I agree. Most of the geniuses for hundreds of years have been from northwest Europe. Some trolls are using certain samples of IQ tests as a way to encourage the race replacement of Whites. This should be utterly rejected here. Feynman’s school IQ test probably emphasized verbal rules he didn’t care about (He tested at 125). But he scored the highest in the entire nation on certain math testing protocols. Either way, it isn’t a justification to race replace Whites.

      • Carl

        Feynman’s IQ almost certainly was significantly higher than the flawed IQ test he took in high school. Google it and you will find simple, cogent explanations as to why the reported 125 IQ score was not indicative of his actual IQ (had he taken a more reliable and respected one with a much higher ceiling). IQ does not claim to be a perfect measure of intelligence, but we have mountains of data that show the high correlation between IQ and happiness, income, stability, and ingenuity that are the cornerstones of any modern, successful society.

        • Extropico

          I am the one who wrote that he scored the highest in the entire nation on a more accurate testing system regarding mathematics. Go read the post again. You misinterpret what I was driving at. Numerous posters are stating that Jews and East Asians are smarter than White Gentiles and therefore we should be racially replaced. For hundreds of years most of the important inventions have been from Western Europe, regardless of what IQ tests may state from Asia. This is supposed to be a Pro Western Civilization forum. Some of the posters would do well to remember that.

          • Carl

            I replied to the wrong person.

          • Joseph

            More specifically AMERICAN Renaissance. It frequently diverges into Asian Ren. or Ashkenazi Ren. I don’t care if their IQ scores are all 300. That’s interesting perhaps but not what built American culture and ethos.

          • JohnEngelman

            What matters is not race but IQ.

          • a multiracial individual

            John during my undergrad I was able to study with some very bright students from all over the country/world. They were a diverse bunch and they all got along famously. I am aware that diversity is usually difficult, however, it seems that there is an IQ threshold in which it seems to work. A macro-example of this is a place like Seattle, or any White/Asian California suburb.

          • JohnEngelman

            Intelligent people usually find it easier to appreciate other races and cultures. Ethnocentrism and xenophobia are more of a problem for people on the left side of the bell curve for intelligence.

          • concernedcollegekid

            You’re right. Racial diversity can work if it all has comparable levels of intelligence and has something else in common, like a hobby or a job. But basing an entire society on that is difficult. Seattle attracts people of different races that are smart enough to work at companies like Amazon and Microsoft. That seems to work great for Seattle, which I have spent time in, but it’s hard to see how one could base a whole society/country off the same principle. I hope it’s possible but I guess I’m not sure if it is or not.

          • Morris Thecat

            not here, not to me

          • Luca

            You can thank high IQ liberal Jews for Hollywood and media propaganda. You can also thank them the robber baron bankers who run America and much of the world.

            High IQ will not save the day without common sense, values, ethics, morality, courage, risk taking, persistence, hard work, etc.

            There have been some very high IQ criminals and mass murderers so don’t put all your faith in these high IQ’s.

          • Morris Thecat

            yeah, do you mean “gangham style? Or are you talking about William Hung? You are laughable john.

          • convairXF92

            Yes. New American classical music is finally getting away from atonal, cultural-Marxist 20th-century ugliness and is once again depicting emotions like pride and joy. Many of the young people composing this music are of Asian, Jewish, or Middle Eastern extraction. IQ definitely has something to do with this, but in the case of Asians, I think it’s also the emphasis in childhood on keeping a serious, focused demeanor and doing well enough in school to experience victorious feelings for real.

          • Extropico

            Hear, Hear! The discussions are devolving into White Gentiles acquiescing into their racial replacement; but have no fear, at least our test scores are better than black test scores.

          • Morris Thecat

            yes, john needs to be banned. My Iq is likely a standard deviation higher than his, it is more than one standard deviation higher than the average for the Ashekenazi, but until now I haven’t brought it up but that smarmy little IQ snob wannabe is just too much. I want to live in a WHITE country. I love all my white people REGARDLESS of IQ, the way I love family.

          • JohnEngelman

            john needs to be banned.

            – Morris Thecat

            In your desire that I be banned you resemble those people who try to prevent American Renaissance conferences from being held, and who tried to get Professor J. Philippe Rushton fired.

            I neither express, nor do I feel hostility toward white Gentiles. I do have a high regard for Jews and Orientals. That is what you find intolerable about me.

          • Morris Thecat

            john, you have clearly stated that you judge people by IQ and that you do not consider race important, only IQ. THis is not compatible with this site. This is a race realist site, where the truth about the white race and it’s enemies are honestly stated, truths that are banned elsewhere. YOu adulate asians and base this all on a slight, very slight higher showing in IQ studies. Yet that is a distortion of the real picture, which you always refuse to acknowledge. The facts are that the modern, industrial, democratic, technological world was created by the European. NOT the Asian. As for your adulation of the Jews, the same can be said. The industrial revolution in Great Britain and the US was created by White Europeans. The democratic revolution, starting with the Magna Carta and up to the US COnstitution has been a PURELY anglo Saxon creation. The form of government that allowed the industrial revolution and the flowering of science and technology was an Anglo Saxon phenomenon. The progress of science and technology had some Jewish contributions, but was NOT by any means, a jewish phenomenon, it was a white European Christian phenomenon. There CAn be much stated though that the jews have been a destructive element to the country as a whole, perverting it’s media, courts and governement. The most recent books on the subject have been the “The Culture of Critique” series. It can be said that as an added element to the American Nation, jews have been more of a negative in this respect than a positive. For all their high average IQ, they have never really done well, as a people, in all their history. They seem to carry a seed of destruction, self destruction, a form of insane ambivalence towards their own survival and they seem to have spread a form of insanity in this country that is killing it and is definitely anti-white european christian. This ambivalence is clearly visible in the politics of Israel today, where, since the memories of the holocaust have grown dim, they are PERPETUALLY on the verge of self dissolution. From giving back the Sinai, to the OSlo accords, to giving back the Gaza strip, from their reluctance, foot dragging and even heated debate about building the wall that has kept out the suicide bombers. In the last election, Netanyahu just barely held on. I want Israel to survive, but I have given up thinking that it will, not because of it’s enemies, but because of it’s insanity.As far as the Ashekenazi jews in the west, you can argue forever about their high average IQ, yet they are not very numerous. We both understand that that means that since the AVERAGE IQ may be higher, they will have more people who have extremely high IQs per UNIT of population.But we ALSO both understand that their numbers are very small, so in the end this means- not so many exceptional jews overall. The numbers of white europeans that have such IQs is still much much greater than the numbers of jews that do. If all the Jews moved to Israel, the US would STILL have a huge number of exceptional people. Your problem is, the way you alienate people here is, that you think jews OWN exceptionalism . They don’t, they never did. They do seem to OWN the ability alienate those around them, usually by incessant self promotion, as you prove so exceptionally.

        • wattylersrevolt

          You are like the mad calibrators over at Steve Sailer…in an Aspergers fantasy world were you guys believe you have found the theory of everything…yes, of course, IQ tests score scales always being recalibrated. It all just nonesense.
          Someone may find genes highly correlated with IQ score…but IQ test scores are a poor proxy for something that is not well understood and well defined…nothing even in the ball park of a functionalist Turing Computational Model. Its the old joke about IQ tests measuring what ever IQ tests measure.
          Tactically, making the revolt against race-replacement pivot on a… “the eyes-glaze-over-mind-numbing” prolonged psychometric debate that completely shuts out a disscussion of race-replacement and the participation of the predatory asian invaders in the policy of race-replacing Native Born White Americans is insane. I think you mad calibrationists are bat …. crazy.

      • JohnEngelman

        White Gentiles are not threatened by race displacement and genocide.

  • Groovy2

    How long do you think Dr. Hsu will keep his job at Michigan St. after the results come out?

    • bigone4u

      He may or may not keep his job, most likely he will. In my experience in higher ed, he will get crappy teaching assignments, an office with no window, reduced research support, and minimum raises. He will also be ostracized. They don’t have to fire you to punish you.

      • Carl

        Dr. Steve Hsu is not an assistant professor or a low-level associate professor, lol. He was a long-time tenured theoretical physicist at the University of Oregon and now holds a senior position in charge of all research at MSU. That’s not the kind of person/position that gets demoted. Also, BGI is a legitimate genetics lab, whose research is not racially focused and therefore relatively safe from the PC police (although it will be difficult not to notice the the racial differences when the results come out.)

        • bigone4u

          He’s also Asian, which gives him a level of protection a un-PC white professor would not have.

        • Joseph

          “Dr. Steve Hsu is not an assistant professor or a low-level associate professor, lol.”

          Neither was James Watson or Phil Rushton.

          • a multiracial individual

            James Watson acquired nearly as much esteem as a scientist could possibly hope to achieve. That didn’t stop the powers that be from making an example of him.

  • Cannot Tell

    I know that in 2006 James Watson said that he’d be surprised if it took 10 years for the truth about race, IQ, and genes to come out, but I didn’t expect the news to come out this quickly. The only question is whether it will be widely publicized and if so, will there be any policy implications. I once emailed our hero, Jared Taylor, about this issue and he expressed the opinion that the news would be suppressed and that there would be no changes in policy. As a black race realist and child of African immigrants, I just hope the changes in policy don’t involve repatriation.

    • a multiracial individual

      Do not fret my friend. If you thought that white liberals threw energy our way before, the next undertaking will be many orders of magnitude greater. In the end, through the miracle of medical genetics, all races will have a median IQ of 100.

      • Stan D Mute

        I doubt that. That’s like saying with the next development in chip design, all computers will have the same processing power. What is more likely is that genetic engineering will lift all races while more or less keeping their relative IQ’s constant. Africans may have an IQ of 175 and whites may have an IQ of 200 while Chinese reach 205 and Jews 210. The only likely way to level the field would be implanting the Jew genetic code into the rest of us.

        • a multiracial individual

          [ The only likely way to level the field would be implanting the Jew genetic code into the rest of us.]

          Ha, prepare to be inundated with some of our friendly “Jewish Conspiracy Folk.”
          To your point, you may be right. Of course there is another way to improve the stock of some races. Eugenics (soft or hard). If only the top 10% of Africans reproduced it would not take very long for significant gaps to be closed.

          • brengunn

            There will probably be uproar about gene manipulation, never mind denying 90% of a population the right to recreate. That’s cause for the worst kind of rebellions and war.

            I favour a worldwide vasectomy program where every male, no matter how dull, gets to reproduce once. They then have compulsory vasectomies. National data banks of semen will collect samples of every mans semen before he is cut. From this bank, a certain percentage (it’s debatable how large or small) of samples from successful, smart men will be used in artificial insemination for women wanting second and third children. Within a couple of generations the standard human iq would be raised a deviation or so.

            Seems like a great idea to me.

          • Daisy

            There was a program about genius sperm donors and how some have scads of biological kids I saw some years ago. I think as we type there is legislation being developed to try to limit the number of children women can have with any one sperm donor, although most sperm banks only list profession and degrees, which reveals little about IQ. The problem with your sci-fi superior race is that a) new generations would start looking ugly and b) neither men nor women would allow it. Men won’t stand for being snipped and women won’t share their dudes’ smart sperm. Not happening.

          • brengunn

            The problem with your sci-fi superior race is that a) new generations would start looking ugly

            Why?

            and b) neither men nor women would allow it. Men won’t stand for being
            snipped and women won’t share their dudes’ smart sperm. Not happening.

            You say that like they’ll be given a choice. Sooner or later, central governments will have to enforce population quotas and control reproductive rights, not so much in the West, but in the quickly growing nations in the third world. The only alternative to that is a major resource war, which will not only kill people, it may destroy the planet.

            I think my system is fair. It doesn’t deny anyone the right to reproduce while also improving the stock with all secondary and tertiary children being born to donors of above average intelligence.

            It may be cruel by today’s standards but we face major problems without tighter population controls. I believe it’s justified.

          • Daisy

            Men would go to war before allowing themselves to be vasectomied.

            If you took all the smart males you miss out on a) some of the better looking ones and b) the genetic variation which is the engine of evolution. The variation alone causes improvements, not to mention that human beings pick their mates for *reasons.* You might know about pheromones and that people choose mates who offer the right combination to confer the most advantages on the offspring. We engineer through our noses the best combination for giving our kids immunities from diseases like cancer, for eg, which is one reason inbred populations often have higher rates of it. Ask any non-smoking woman ‘in love’ with her man and she’ll tell you she loves the way he smells naturally, without cologne, and that his scent is a key factor in her sexual arousal. A study I saw once found that among 100 married women whose husbands wore the same size white T-shirts for a day around 90-95% could easily identify her husband’s.

            We also have eyes and a strong tendency to pick mates who complement what we like or don’t like in ourselves, whether consciously or subconsciously, and that allows for the greatest likelihood of the best looking kids. My mother claims she designed my face and got what she wanted based on hers combined with my dad’s, although I look more like him. I could never mate with certain men based on body type and most of it is what I want that I don’t have or have that I don’t need more of – what improves my offerings. These are all reasons why inbred populations look less attractive than normal ones

          • brengunn

            There could be several criteria for selected males, with looks among them. There could be millions of men involved, therefore avoiding inbreeding. If we took away 10% of the ‘worst’ male breeding stock it could have a huge impact. Remember this is one of the reasons for high Jewish intelligence, they jettisoned some of their weaker males who then joined the Gentile community.

            For a sizable portion of history, marriage and reproduction has not been about love or attraction, so I don’t think any pheromones or compatibility of looks will matter too much.

            I’m sure the children of these unions will be able to pick back up where we left off and resume breeding for love and attraction.

          • Daisy

            Marriage and reproduction weren’t necessarily so tied together even as it was often made to appear so. The jews do have immunity problems along with high rates of genetic defective genes – all associated with inbreeding. I’ll punt on the looks issue, but, I’ll repeat that the notion that the jews bred for intelligence is bunk. At the level of IQ’s they allegedly maintain that is higher, culture and class are the explanations. IQ’s are *very* fluid at that range.

            People have always bred for looks and pheromones; even in medieval patriarchal Italy women had *some* say in their choice of husbands. Cuckoldry is under-rated on here, and we know men were rarely faithful in these arranged marriages.

          • Daisy

            And, also during the Middle Ages, while marriage was largely socioeconomically determined among the upper class, most of the peasants, who made up the vast majority of the populace, were not so constrained. Even among the few rich, marriage was economic while sex was utilitarian and the males had it freely with the lower class females. The upper class created ‘courtly love’ to allow for platonic romance between their equals or peers among the noble class. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Courtly_love

            But most of the sex was fueled by lust. Dig it.

          • brengunn

            At the level of IQ’s they allegedly maintain that is higher, culture and
            class are the explanations. IQ’s are *very* fluid at that range.

            I don’t think they did breed for brains. I think they bred for the same reasons that we bred. But if they did expel a certain percentage of their group for being too dull for Talmudic Scholarship, this would have very beneficial effects on their average IQ.

            Cuckoldry is under-rated on here, and we know men were rarely faithful in these arranged marriages.

            I don’t discount it, I just imagine the children born from it are fewer than children born from marriage. We’d have to do some genetic studies on Pakistani/Indian society to determine what frequency of cuckoldry occurs where arranged marriages are endemic.

            Interestingly enough, we know from genetic studies that cuckoldry happens in primates, where females will often bare the children of young beta males while pretending they are the offspring of the Alpha. Well, I don’t quite know if they pretend but you know what I mean.

          • Daisy

            Carl Sagan posited that a female primate has the capacity for multiple orgasms to ingratiate herself to potentially vindictive males, and that the specific purpose was to protect her offspring from their wrath. I just think it was the female version of genetic variation being the engine of evolution, and nothing more. Anthropology became semi-dominated by women for a time because they were considered less projecting of human classist sexism onto other primates.

          • brengunn

            I just think it was the female version of genetic variation being the engine of evolution, and nothing more.

            I don’t quite follow, could you explain that to me?

            Anthropology became semi-dominated by women for a time because they
            were considered less projecting of human classist sexism onto other
            primates.

            I always thought it was because girls loved animals! You know, the way lots of zoo keepers and vets are female.

          • Daisy

            Look up Leakey’s Angels or read up on what an attitude Leakey had towards his female proteges. I think he even suggested one get a clitorodectomy so she wouldn’t have a drive towards sex and thus would focus on her work in the field. Mostly he noted they were more objective observers particularly regarding the study of how female primates exercise power. I think he might have thought they were less threatening to their subjects too.

            I was just asserting that females share the same drive – which engines evolution – to achieve genetic variation. By mating with multiple males – at a time – she ensures the greatest chance for the most variation, same with males desiring multiple sexual partners. Sagan’s interpretation is just too attenuated and downright sexist. If the female achieves multiple orgasms she can potentially mate with more partners, depending on who gets in at the right time. Sagan also noted that the smaller the size differential between males and females, the more monogamous the primate species was

            I asked you on another thread that I can’t locate whether Ireland was as bad as you’d described, which sounded like totally repressive of questioning anti-white dogma. Is it really that bad?

          • brengunn

            I think he even suggested one get a clitorodectomy so she wouldn’t
            have a drive towards sex and thus would focus on her work in the field.

            What an appalling idea. We really are a strange species, aren’t we.

            By mating with multiple males – at a time – she ensures the greatest
            chance for the most variation, same with males desiring multiple sexual
            partners.

            Wrong. That is not the female imperative. It makes no sense for females to have genetic variation as a goal. It makes a whole lot of sense for them to choose the best mate available to ensure the health of the offspring. What possible good come of mating with a genetically inferior mate.

            same with males desiring multiple sexual partners.

            Nothing like the same. Males can scatter there seed far and wide, and often care little for the kind of ground it grows in. This statement does not apply to women, in fact, it’s completely opposite.

            Sagan also noted that the smaller the size differential between males and females, the more monogamous the primate species was

            That is very interesting. Was there any correlation between monogamy and increased female power within the group, do you know?

            I asked you on another thread that I can’t locate whether Ireland was as
            bad as you’d described, which sounded like totally repressive of
            questioning anti-white dogma. Is it really that bad?

            I gave a lengthy response but it seems to have disappeared. The gist of it was: No, Ireland isn’t so bad but I live in England and move in liberal circles so feel pc culture to be more oppressive than I might otherwise.

          • Daisy

            “Wrong. That is not the female imperative. It makes no sense for females to have genetic variation as a goal. It makes a whole lot of sense for them to choose the best mate available to ensure the health of the offspring. What possible good come of mating with a genetically inferior mate.”

            What good comes out of a male mating with a genetically inferior mate? So some males are fitter than others but not so for females? If the males scatter their seed but don’t care for the ground growing it, then what’s the point of scattering it at all by your logic? You ignore the fact that the primates – apes, chimps, bonobos, etc. – Sagan wrote about in my fav source on him lived in *classless societies*, not in agrarian ones. There really wasn’t this need to rely on ‘a man.’ It served no purpose and even it it had your logic doesn’t hold. It would make no sense for males to spread seed carelessly in ground (females) whose children only survive with the help of a male. That is illogical! When I call genetic variation the engine of evolution I mean on a biological scale and you’re trying to make it sociological. Same goes for men and women. I guess I’m hitting on what some of your issues with feminism are…he he…What you’re missing is that variation is a goal serviced by various mates, and it likely promoted group cohesion sociologically too while furthering evolution biologically for females to have multiple partners . Why do *you* think females evolved the capacity for multiple orgasm? Sagan observed that it was not uncommon for females to have sex with multiple males at a time hence his theory as to why they could do this. I don’t agree with him.

            I think there was some correlation between monogamy and female power or at least some reduction of abusive of females..I think, but I’m not sure nor believe it to have been pronounced if so.

          • brengunn

            What good comes out of a male mating with a genetically inferior mate?

            If the male is not involved in child rearing it doesn’t matter to the male what state the females health is, his genes have been passed on. He moves to the next female and competes for her. This is evident in some of our less modern cousin’s behaviour.

            You are trying to give males and females identical reasons for mating while ignoring the completely different outcomes for that behaviour. Pre contraception, women had to live with their mating choices, men didn’t, they got to walk away and still do. Afterall, dead beat mom’s are relatively uncommon.

            In that sense, you are guilty of what you accuse me of! You are foisting modern feminist ideals onto primate societies.

            *classless societies*

            Not true. In all primate societies there are hierarchies. However, because primates live in small groups there is no fragmentation between the top, bottom and middle like we see in human society.

            it likely promoted group cohesion

            Tell that to the free love communes of the 60/70’s were sexual jealousies were rife and were a factor in the break up of the groups.

            Why do *you* think females evolved the capacity for multiple orgasm?

            I don’t know, I’ve never really gave it much thought, never had much reason to (sniff, sniff)! Em, if I had to take a guess I would say it’s something about bonding. I have been frequently told by women that sex is better with a man they love but I’ve never heard this said by a man, and in my own experience it’s certainly not true. But I don’t think that is quite adequate. I can’t really say.

          • Daisy

            moderator above I typed a long response and it appears it got frozen in translation. Is that you reading/suspending it or is it a tech problem? This has happened a few times on here.

          • brengunn

            It’s disappeared into the ether, never to be seen again.

          • That definitely sounds like a Disqus issue.

          • Daisy

            testing italics

          • brengunn

            remove spaces between these symbols and put text here

          • Daisy

            I cannot get my posts to remain in italics onto disqus. Very frustrating.

            “If the male is not involved in child rearing it doesn’t matter to the male what state the females health is, his genes have been passed on. He moves to the next female and competes for her. This is evident in some of our less modern cousin’s behaviour.

            You are trying to give males and females identical reasons for mating while ignoring the completely different outcomes for that behaviour. Pre contraception, women had to live with their mating choices, men didn’t, they got to walk away and still do. Afterall, dead beat mom’s are relatively uncommon.”

            Genetic fitness is different from health of the carrier of the genes. But that doesn’t matter for my take, because I *think* all males want to put their genes into as many females as possible, or at least I’m sure the Alpha does, and that he will defend all females from any male whenever he can. He simply feels he has a right to prevent (or try) other males from impregnating any of his group’s females. I could be interpreting that point rather than reporting; I just remember reading that the alpha will defend all females no matter how old, young, etc. as a rule from males. I *assumed* that also encompassed trying to prevent not just abuse per se, but also consensual matings between underling males and females.

            You ignore the outcome of a male impregnating a female with his genes and then leaving her; what’s the point when according to your model she can’t raise her kids alone to begin with? Fail logic. It makes no sense that he would even bother given that all these seeds he’s spreading have so little chance of growing. Your premise is inherently faulty anyway

            “*classless societies*”
            Not true. In all primate societies there are hierarchies. However, because primates live in small groups there is no fragmentation between the top, bottom and middle like we see in human society.”

            Not all hierarchy is based on class. A small group of gatherers and I’d think occasional hunters does not require classes to express disparities of power; differences are just between individuals and inter-relational. So in these groups it confers little if any benefit on the female to bear and raise the stronger males’ kids except for genetically, as she doesn’t need him to provide or protect. She’s not tied to any specific male but just to her tribe. Females share the same will to power over males and want to hoard their genes for herself just like the males or alpha and higher males do. She like them, also acts out what is best for that engine of evolution, variation. It’s the same for her as it is for him. I’ll tell you why she has the capacity for multiple orgasms: so she can have sex with multiple males, which she does at the same time not infrequently. I always wondered if this happened out from under the watchful eye of the alpha. This allows for the greatest rate of variation and for the female to feel she gets to have all the males.

            It also promotes the group cohesion in that the lesser males (who I believe engage in this practice as opposed to the alpha) do not give in to anger and frustration which would deteriorate the cooperation and social fabric they need as a group to survive. I doubt it has much to do with bonding emotionally. Maybe it puts in them some sense that a female’s child could be theirs but I don’t know if they’re that smart. So jealousies may exist but tend to come out of pair-bondings more often than ‘free love’ and you’re once again humanizing our primate cousins.

            Finally you observe that men are not tied emotionally to sex while women tend to be. That is not what I’ve observed at all in the US in my generation and younger. I notice there’s not that much difference. I’ve known plenty of women who enjoyed casual sex and plenty of men who experience sex as more fulfilling in a relationship. In the primitive parts and drives of our brains we are basically the same. I think it’s odd that you don’t experience any difference between relationship sex and casual, but I’m assuming you are fairly young; everyone is entitled to their own experience, opinions and observations but not to their own facts and logic.

          • brengunn

            I cannot get my posts to remain in italics onto disqus. Very frustrating.

            Try those brackets I posted earlier.

            what’s the point when according to your model she can’t raise her kids alone to begin with?

            I never said that. We discussed cuckoldry earlier, surely that’s a form of a male spreading his seed.

            Not all hierarchy is based on class. A small group of gatherers and I’d
            think occasional hunters does not require classes to express
            disparities of power

            Again, hunter gatherer societies, like primate groups, are so small they really only contain extended families. Therefore, I would imagine that differences in strength, intelligence, looks, agility, etc. are much smaller than in more varied societies, like our own. Also the power differential between men and women would not be as great as agrarian societies but men were still in charge. It certainly wasn’t a feminist paradise. Many tribes had a tradition of killing the wife if her husband died, like her life didn’t mean anything without her husband. It was often her sons who done the killing.

            She like them, also acts out what is best for that engine of evolution, variation.

            Daisy, have you ever heard of Whip Tail lizards? There is a species of this lizard that lives in Death Valley. It looks like a normal lizard and acts like a normal lizard, except… they’re all female. There are no males! The climate of Death Valley is so steady and unchanging that males have been done away with. There is no need for variation, no need to evolve, males are surplus to requirements. The only reason males exist is to mix female genes within a population. Females don’t do this.

            you’re once again humanizing our primate cousins.

            Aren’t we both doing that. To be honest, I’m finding it hard to stick to either human or primate examples. A cluttered mind, perhaps.

            I think it’s odd that you don’t experience any difference between relationship sex and casual

            One may be in a relationship without being in love, that’s more what I meant rather than just casual sex. In my experience, I have never found love to increase pleasure during sex, maybe I haven’t loved properly, I don’t know.

          • Daisy

            Cuckoldry is a form of the female finding different seed as well. The male let’s say in the middle ages and even beyond was allowed to mate outside the marriage; women were just more secretive about it.

            I was referring to gathering and hunting as the primate, as in chimps, etc., form of sustenance. I can separate the primates from the humans, but this seems difficult for you. Who says the males exerted power over the females in them? From what I could discern this wasn’t so true, and again relates to why Leakey wanted female anthropologists in the field as they recognized the more subtle but still effective modes of exercising power among females. There was generally an alpha male but did he really have total power over what other males the females mated with? Even Sagan says no. He exerted more power over males in general but female biology and I guess wile subverted his drive to control everything. Maybe that’s why she’s muti-orgasmic; do ’em a bunch at a time so you don’t get caught! There was just a landless tribe/group of chimps, etc.

            Yah, you’re big issue is separating primates from humans. We are 98% the same DNA as they are and we share their basic emotional capacities; they however cannot recognize the abstract or symbolic and therein lies all the difference. But we are in our hearts and drives the same, our primitive brains are very similar. You are so put off by this you reference lizards to try to prove your need to dominate as a male human, but that is *you*!

            Hunting and gathering ‘primitive’ human societies were not all male-dominant at all; I studied this in cultural anthropology and there was a range of different types with respect to the status of women. Even in class-based societies it is a distortion to say women are dominated by men; the rich females exert almost total political power over lower class males.

            Well I trust you will not believe me about any of this. Oh well. What’s odd is I’ve noticed men from my ethnic group to be the most egalitarian and non-sexist of all males (in general not as individuals) and that includes irish, waspy types, northwestern europeans in general. Sometimes it seems particularly some of the irish; it could be the ancient tribal celts’ more gender equal attitudes, or the poverty the irish lived through since in my view it’s classism which creates gender disparities, not innate male or female biology (for the most part). Could be the frontierish experience of my people(s) in America also impacted them and brought them closer to their tribal roots, which the Roman Catholic church in many ways violated and imposed upon.

            But how you defy logic and the concrete facts of both primate and human reality to convince yourself the only reason males exist is to mix female genes within a population is beyond me, if you meant to analogize lizards to we humans. Maybe this is why you don’t have better sex with your girlfriends. Maybe you’re a cold-blooded snake.

            Okay, would I be an irish human female if I didn’t crack on you? 🙂 Maybe this thread explains why I never sought to live in Ireland and instead contemplated emigrating to Sweden, likely the least sexist culture on earth.

          • brengunn

            I can separate the primates from the humans, but this seems difficult for you.

            Why beat around the bush, we’re only using primates as proxies for humans, anyway.

            You are so put off by this you reference lizards to try to prove your need to dominate as a male human, but that is *you*!

            This was not about dominance at all. I was trying to point out that females aren’t concerned about genetic diversity in their mating habits, as you suggested. It’s a widely held belief amongst biologists that males diversify female genes, that is their purpose.

            the rich females exert almost total political power over lower class males.

            Only by virtue of their class, not by virtue of their sex. And, in a sense it’s not true at all, women don’t really exert political power over anyone.

            What’s odd is I’ve noticed men from my ethnic group to be the most
            egalitarian and non-sexist of all males (in general not as individuals)
            and that includes irish, waspy types, northwestern europeans in general.

            Are you saying I’m a sexist or an egalitarian? I would plant my flag in the egalitarian camp(you may disagree). Though I do believe there are innate differences between the sexes which mean men will naturally dominate, there are women who were born to lead, too. Everyone, should get a fair crack of the whip, if they’re up to it, regardless of sex.

            But how you defy logic and the concrete facts of both primate and human
            reality to convince yourself the only reason males exist is to mix
            female genes within a population is beyond me, if you meant to analogize
            lizards to we humans.

            Not just lizards, humans and apes. Every species of animal, the males of all species primary purpose is the diversification of female genes. This goes right back to the first ‘animal’ that used this strategy to multiply, probably a single celled organism. Of course there are now other reasons for males, like: putting the bins out, mowing lawns and doing DIY around the house, but they came much later!

            Maybe you’re a cold-blooded snake.

            Easy now, tiger!

            Maybe this thread explains why I never sought to live in Ireland and
            instead contemplated emigrating to Sweden, likely the least sexist
            culture on earth.

            I’m sure it’s no utopia there. Anyway, what’s wrong with the good ol’ US of A?

          • Daisy

            brengunn, how do you expect me to take your arguments seriously when you say things like, “women don’t really exert political power over anyone?” You are just obstinately obtuse, plain and simple, and functionally blind to boot. Then you go on to say you are egalitarian but men will naturally dominate. That has me giggling, both in how self-contradictory it is, not to mention again plainly inaccurate (the latter, or actually both).

            I don’t think I’ll be posting on here much more. It’s been quite a trip and a temporary semi-addiction. While I’ve learned a lot and experienced an epiphany about pivotal elements of my own life’s journey, I just cant fit into the gender realist mode of it, nor for that matter the seemingly classist one, and while being white is a war I’ve fought and continue to more bitterly than most on here, being female is indivisible from that experience. I am no less woman than I am white.

            Peace, my irish brother

            ceann amhain chroi amhain daoine
            ‘one heart, one people’

          • brengunn

            Then you go on to say you are egalitarian but men will naturally dominate.

            I believe in equality of opportunity, not necessarily equality of outcome.

            I wish you well in your journey, you’ll be ploughing a lonely furrow out there in the world as a feminist and a realist. Good luck to you.

          • Daisy

            I was never a race realist, just realistic about the institution of ‘race.’ It’s not the same thing. Nor do I consider myself a feminist, as feminism was mostly just a movement of upper middle class women merely trying to maintain their upper class privelege but in a more inter-personally balanced lifestyle. Some were authentic progressives but were just hijacked and dominated by the majority of essentially classist, and in their own way, sexist cohorts.

            Your own race realism will never really jibe with the liberal values you espouse, IMO. The two postures and goals are simply at odds and cannot be reconciled philosophically or pragmatically although I don’t know how much you perceive this to be a problem. So good luck to you too in that alone-ness. I’m less lonely than simply oppressed, invaded and inveighed upon economically and socio-politically, and physical violence towards white women has been the most pivotal agent in the mechanics of it all, while not the only one. How you justify the epidemic and institution of rape and sexual assault harassment is another mystery; to say men inherently dominate is to do that as rape is then just the natural price for male superiority. I just don’t get it. Race realists think there is an essence of things, but since the pragmatic concrete reality of the acts of the anti-white left is so dire perhaps I’ll find more allies in the mainstream white people who realize their kids’ futures are imperiled and who don’t justify woman-hate.

            Don’t mean to accuse you of that on a personal basis, but that is the inevitable conclusion of your philosophy. Take care.

          • brengunn

            Your own race realism will never really jibe with the liberal values you
            espouse, IMO. The two postures and goals are simply at odds and cannot
            be reconciled philosophically or pragmatically although I don’t know
            how much you perceive this to be a problem.

            First of all, my race realism extends no further than accepting that differing outcomes in life for separate races is at least partly genetic. Intolerance, even in the face of higher crime rates, joblessness, social dysfunction etc., is not something I ascribe to. I do not believe my beliefs are incompatible with each other, some of my beliefs are incompatible with the liberal body politic, which is completely different.

            I cannot accept a society where certain views, however innocuous, are grounds for imprisonment, dismissal and loss of reputation. What is more liberal than that?

            How you justify the epidemic and institution of rape and sexual
            assault harassment is another mystery; to say men inherently dominate is
            to do that as rape is then just the natural price for male superiority.

            With all due respect, Daisy, you’ve gone too far. That was neither implicit nor explicit in the statements I’ve made. I honestly don’t know how to even reply to that.

            Don’t mean to accuse you of that on a personal basis, but that is the inevitable conclusion of your philosophy.

            Rape is inevitable. I don’t condone it.

            BTW, you’re right, I take back that statement about women not exerting political power, that was silly.

            Again, good luck in the mainstream.

          • Daisy

            I’m sorry, I did not mean to offend.

          • brengunn

            Bonobo societies are interesting. They have a completely different power dynamic than chimps, gorillas or humans, having more female centric groups. They also have much more casual sex which seems to me, counter-intuitive.

          • Daisy

            I don’t recall specifics but that some primates were more prone towards ‘casual sex’ with it being pretty much the norm; I think these groups were also tending towards if not largely bisexual as well, and that one theory for that since it obviously doesn’t further ‘evolution’ was that it promotes group cohesion in some way. Maybe as a non-lethal or destructive alternative to fighting perhaps. More often ‘bisexuality’ or more accurately homosexual experimentation was just that – experimentation and learning as opposed to a lifelong practice. I don’t remember studying much about homosexuality at all, and doubt that it would have interested Sagan much given the very low incidence of it and lack of impact on evolution.

          • brengunn

            culture and class are the explanations

            Are you not an Hereditarian?

          • Daisy

            I believe in the middle part of the bell curve for ‘IQ,’ there is a fair amount of wiggle room and that it’s simply more malleable – at that level – than it would be if you looked at the above 125, 135, 140 ranges, with the room to wiggle decreasing as IQ increases. So culture and class at, say 110 or 112 easily explains seemingly innate disparities. That does not negate the genetics of it though, and hey, your theory about designing a smarter race also fails to account for ‘patterns’ of heredity. I’ve noted having studied the families of high IQ people that it’s heritability is geometric much more than linear.

          • brengunn

            That wouldn’t really affect my new race. As most men will get to reproduce twice or three times. Only the dullest will be denied the right to father more than one child.

            I’m working class myself so I’m not going to reserve reproduction rights for the aristocracy or intelligentsia. There are some genes that need to be removed from circulation, though.

      • Joseph

        They’ve made hardly any progress with a genetic treatment, let alone cure for cystic fibrosis and they’ve been beating on that very well understood problem for decades. I wouldn’t hold my breath for a worldwide cure for dullness.

        • a multiracial individual

          There is another way to lift some races, eugenics.

    • Andy

      I suspect the result will simply be that intelligence is even more devalued than it is now. Possibly we will rid ourselves of affirmative action. Possibly we will get more of it. I very much doubt the result will involve deporting black Americans, let alone high-intelligence black Americans.

    • brengunn

      You know, I think blacks would be the major beneficiaries of any advance in genetically modified intelligence. Blacks do score less on IQ tests but in my opinion they have something which isn’t measured on the test. Call it creativity or non-conformity, whatever you like. Were the black average IQ to rise to where a sufficient number had above 140, they might be able to do some great intellectual work comparable to whites.

      • concernedcollegekid

        I really agree with this. Blacks, I think, have even more of the good qualities that whites have over Asians (non-conformity, spontaneity, warmth, soulfulness) but without whites’ high IQs, and I think these qualities in combination with low IQ cause blacks’ social dysfunction. I agree with you that there is something really special about high IQ blacks (one of my best friends is a very smart black guy and I think the fact that he has, basically, white-level intelligence combined with black social aptitude is what makes him such fantastic company) and that if there were a way to make more of them that would be good.

        • brengunn

          It would be great to see how their different brains worked at a high level. Unfortunately, if they got too good, we’d have to hate them for that, too!!

  • Dave4088

    There was an article some years ago that China was making rapid progress in genetic research and would likely create a eugenics program and quickly surpass the equalitarian West as a world leader. This is very likely because the Chinese mentality is not restrained by doctrines of racial equality, Christian dogma and the universalism and sentimentality that is peculiar to the Indo-European.

    • Sherman_McCoy

      This is why, with every perusal of the documentation of the depredations of the blacks I read in Amren and elsewhere, it becomes harder and harder for me to hold onto the Christian faith in which I was raised. The precarious promontory upon which I presently perch is an evolving belief that some purportedly human species are too close to being brutes to share in the hopes of salvation and redemption. If I am pushed too much further, I’ll have no belief system left.

      • Robert Binion

        Your predicament is shared by every Christian here, though few perceive it as clearly.

        • Morris Thecat

          not me, I reserve my charity and empathy for humans

          • Sherman_McCoy

            And Morris, you are pretty much where I am.

        • Sherman_McCoy

          Robert, I’ve been moderated more than once for simply asking for aChristianity-compatible answer to the question, “Whence the blacks?” As a right-wing (in a lot of areas) conservative Christian, nothing shakes my faith in intelligent design more than the presence of creatures that appear to be way behind in their development. And please understand, I’ve many of my beliefs off-and-on-since childhood, have studied philosophy and Christian apologetics to the limits of my intellect. It appears that it takes someone with a higher IQ than mine (135), to find an answer that let squares my need for Christianity to be true, and what I see about me.

          Some folks have offered helpful theories such as the stories about Noah’s son Ham, (doesn’t work for me), that some fallen men had sexual relations with beasts back when our newly created DNA was in flux(also hard to swallow), or that blacks are more accurately the result of devolution on their own isolated continent.

          When you get right down to it, though, Occam’s razor just might be the answer here. Question is: what IS the simplest answer?

          • Well, if you want an answer that is both “orthodox” and “unorthodox”- yes, Blacks are human. They have spirit, human spirit (body, soul, spirit in St.Paul). But- and here heterodoxy comes- it seems that they, as a group, possess psycho-spiritual structure that almost invariably tends to darken or quash their spirit. If we take white people as the norm, we can find numerous white individuals that are below white people’s norm- mentally, spiritually, emotionally. You can take this segment of whites to be something like blacks’ norm. Of course, there are exceptions to the rule. But, as a group, they’re something similar to underdeveloped whites with permanent psycho-pathologies.

      • Morris Thecat

        Blacks lack the ability for abstract thinking. They are not completely human in this respect. I have witnessed too many black people shoplifting and perpetrating other crimes, and lying through their teeth about it when caught. I am convinced that they do not have the same minds we have. They indeed are more animal than human. They live by aggression, they think aggression can make something they say true. They are not worthy of christian charity. They are indeed beasts that only understand force.

      • Dave4088

        Christianity has not united the races and the version practiced by blacks is much different than that practiced by deracinated white people. If organized religion was unifying then someone needs to explain why Sunday worship is largely a race based, segregated affair. And where are the Christian leaders when blacks savagely attack or kill white people?

        It’s high time white Christians start asking some difficult, but necessary questions regarding their faith and its inability to serve our racial interests.

        • Morris Thecat

          Blacks don’t understand Christ or Christianity at all, I have had the great misfortune to be present at black church meetings. Absolutely disgusting is all I can say.

          • Sherman_McCoy

            Yes, there seems to be little going on except for emotional outbursts by the “communicants” along with constant caterwauling by the “choir” and endless repetitions of the same simple platitudes by the “pastor.” It’s all calculated to work the crowd into a state of frenzy and some kind of ecstasy. I found the church scene in “Blues Brothers” with James Brown as the preacher to be closer to fact, than fiction. Trampolines, anyone?

    • NM156
  • BellaCosa

    It’s one thing to identify the major genes responsible for the heritable portion of IQ, but insofar as this information is likely to be used to genetically modify people (or unborn babies) in order to breed artificially intelligent persons (that is, people who would not otherwise end up being intelligent), I don’t really like the direction that genetic research is headed.

    Perhaps it’s an inevitability that I should just come to terms with, but a world that James Watson has described as being wonderful (i.e. one where everybody is genetically modified to be attractive and intelligent) is very nearly the polar opposite of my idea of a perfect world. I prefer the variety and I prefer the natural order to govern reproductive and recreative processes in human life…

    • Stan D Mute

      Go live with the Amish.

  • Mike

    Of course Gruber would not say what he did if he did not already know 1) that IQ was largely inherited, and 2) blacks have a median score one standard deviation below that of whites. Both these points have been known for a long time – ever since Terman began the systematic study of IQ in this country – and are a perfectly sufficient explanation for the persistently low socioeconomic status of blacks and the high incidence of social pathology that exists among them.

    Gruber and other egalitarians occupy exactly the same position with respect to science as the Inquisition did in Galileo’s time. Facts cannot be allowed to interfere with faith – even if the cognitive elite in the academic/media/government complex are privately aware of the facts, they cannot tolerate the public’s catching on.

    • Stan D Mute

      Africans are not one standard deviation below whites. Mulattoes, quadroons, and octoroons are in that range. Africans are two standard deviations below whites.

      • Sherman_McCoy

        At least.

  • MikeS

    Maybe they’ll get lucky and accidently stumble across the gene(s) responsible for honesty, integrity, innovation, creativity, compassion, empathy, sympathy, etc., but I won’t hold my breath since we as Whites posess the vast majority of the world’s supply.

    • Intrepid

      Strongly disagree. China wouldn’t have survived for as long as it has if its people didn’t have those qualities.

      • MikeS

        You forgot to add your third sentence. “Live from New York – it’s Saturday Night!”

        • Intrepid

          What I’ve said is accurate. Your claim is just as an exaggeration, and a false one.

          • Morris Thecat

            not accurate at all when it comes to creativity and innovation. Where is the asian Isaac Newton, the Asian Thomas Edison, the asian Niels Bohr, The asian Mozarts, Bethovens, Puccinis. They stumbled on things such as using gas to light the streets of a city, but they never took it beyond simple bamboo piping right from the source. They never gasified coal. They stumbled upon gunpowder but they never took it beyond a primitive firecracker or large firecracker style rocket. They never put it in a metal casing topped with a lead projectile. They never used it even more primitively in a small hand held type of cannon.The asians show a strong tendency towards conformity, and that is the OPPOSITE of innovation.Chinese history was cyclical, little changed as far as technology for thousands of years. New discoveries were used for a time and either taken no further or abandoned and forgotten.They went nowhere for two thousand years. Dynasty rises, dynastic decline sets in, dynasty restored for a time, dynasty falls and multiple states spring up. Wars between the states, then one state victorious over all and new dynasty rises. Wash rinse repeat. The architecture changed little over those thousands of years. The technology changed little as well. They were basically a medieval society when the west discovered them. The WEST discovered THEM because they never explored, probed, prodded, expanded. China was a country with thousands of miles of coastline but sent out only two or three exploratory expeditions in it’s whole history, and nothing was ever followed up on or became of those expeditions. Genetically, asians show a strong inability towards innovation beyond the very rudimentary and also a strong inclination towards conformity.

          • Morris Thecat

            on negative but no rebuttal, poor john, he’s frantically flipping through his notecards right now.

          • JohnEngelman

            I have responded to that several times. From the fall of the Western Roman Empire to the Italian Renaissance Chinese civilization was ahead of what existed in Europe. Now the United States is declining while China is ascending. One out of five people in the world is Chinese. With plenty of high IQ genes and lots of low crime genes nothing can hold them back.

          • Intrepid

            China was advanced relative to others when their society reached its zenith in the Middle Ages. Their creativity and organization at the time was unquestioned. The biggest mistake they made was closing their society off to outsiders (when they should have paralleled our development like Japan did). I think the world would be a different place if that happened.

            Even now, statistically speaking, they remain a source of untapped human potential, and this discussion about BGI is an example that supports it.

          • Morris Thecat

            It was no more advanced than Rome had been. It had been contemporary with Rome and there is evidence that technologies had travelled during this time. Rome declined. The West went backward, Chin did not advance, it just stood still. It stayed standing still for a thousand plus years until the Europeans came.

          • MikeS

            Well said sir!

      • Morris Thecat

        China most definitely would have survived. It is quite isolated from the rest of the world. The himalayas and Tibet on one side. The Gobi and Taklimakan deserts on another side. Mongolia and Siberia up north and the ocean to the east. In it’s long history, only the Mongols and Jurchen/Manchurian peoples to the north ever posed any kind of a threat. The northern lands just could not support large enough peoples to be a real threat under normal circumstances. Genghis Kahn was an extraordinary circumstance that happened only once. The Manchurians managed to take advantage of the degeneration of the Ming state. I am not saying I agree with the characterization of Mike S as far as honesty and integrity are concerned, in fact I don’t believe they are any different in those two respects. You must remember though that China was always a monarchy, honesty and integrity are not big issues in such a government.

      • Luca

        China’s survival can also be traced to high fertility rates that are quite common in farming cultures and acceptance of concubines which tends to also further population and hence survival.

  • John D

    People by their evolved nature are a lot more interested in seeing how they’ve been fooled
    than in merely discovering new facts. From the basis of scientific facts, we’ve known enough
    for a long time to know the likelihood that (simplistically stated) “nature” is a lot more important than “nurture” in determining how many and how big the cards are folks have in hand at Life’s great card table. It’s easier to sense the importance of the genetic dice throw if you have , say, eight sibs (from a sexualy faithful mother) than if you have,say, only one (by a mother that’s nowadays “liberated”). That’s the difference between , say, 1913
    and 2013. Also, if you are living on the farm or have moved into the nearby town, chances
    are you have a lot of social contact with blood relatives in a world of several sibs (1913).
    Nowadays, you may mainly “know” your few kin by space spanning technology that is not
    nearly so gene revealing. If you are on, or near, the farm, it’s pretty hard to convince folks
    watching the rather quick breeding and growth of animals like, say, dogs, or calves….that
    genes don’t matter. That’s 1913. To know in 2013 what’s really going on, you
    have to sense the bubble world/ delu-sphere/ that envelops you and then to be reasonably
    skeptical rather than passively gullible. Humans imbibe very deeply implications rather than
    just explicit indications. Wet and wild lust serves to imply that folks are for reproductive
    quality, equally good–it’s just the “turn on” quality that matters. Evil lie! The old fashioned
    constraints and penalties and the social and eugenic filtration of courtship–served us very well. The “plain Jane” girl who is centered on a network of kinship IQ’s
    reaching from, say, 115 to 135 is reprodutcitvely preferable to the T&A dream gal who
    centers on, say, 101, reaching from 90 to 117. Genetically, you DO marry the whole
    d*** family and not only that, their immediate ancestors. Get acquainted before getting
    serious. When you walk through the larger facts of life, the science falls into place–perhaps after you’ve already got the bigger picture.

  • A. Windaus

    If this is so then they could scan for it within their own population and put these gifted individuals into advanced education classes. These gifted individual’s discoveries will be priceless in the future, especially while the first world regresses back to the stone age.

  • JohnEngelman

    The Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) is not an IQ test, but it correlates with IQ. During the school year of 1986 – 87 Asians on the average out scored other races in mathematics. They outscored every race but whites in reading on the average. That is understandable, because for many English was a second language.

    Since 1986 – 87 Asians have reduced the gap in reading averages with whites, while increasing the gap in mathematics.

    Hispanics, most of whom probably speak English as a second language average lower scores than whites and Asians. They average better than blacks, even on reading.

    http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=171

    • robinbishop34

      I thought it was the ACT that was more or less an IQ test?

    • cadmium

      while i don’t deny asians may have slightly higher intelligence, i think asian scores in western countries are a little misleading because the asian populations in western countries would represent a slightly higher calibre of asian. even many initial immigrants would have been at least bright to get by. certainly in recent times it’s been the intelligent, qualified asians settling. i think a subtle bottlenecking would be going on. intelligence reverts to the mean to an extent but if you start with even soft elites you end up with a better average.

      • JohnEngelman

        According to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development – Programme for International Student Assessment Study students in South Korea and Japan outperform all white countries in mathematical and scientific literacy. They outperform most white countries including the United States in reading literacy.

        http://siteselection.com/ssinsider/snapshot/sf011210.htm

  • JohnEngelman

    If Zhao Bowen knows English he should be invited to speak at an American Renaissance conference. Even if he does not know English he should be invited to present a paper than can be translated. His findings will not end the shouting over race realism, but it will end the debate.

    • Morris Thecat

      what do asian sphincters taste like john?

      • JohnEngelman

        Moderator: Morris Thecat’s is a vulgar comment which ought to be removed.

        • Morris Thecat

          moderator, Engleman is a an asian fetishist that keeps posting the same thing over and over that amounts to nothing more than white people are inferior to asians and “ashekenazi” jews. His purpose here is destructive, he seeks to cast doubt and demoralize.

          • JohnEngelman

            If my comments are inappropriate for American Renaissance why do I have such an easy time substantiating my factual assertions by quoting articles I have found here?

            My purpose here is a positive one. I seek to cast doubt on beliefs that are based on misconceptions, and which foster racial animosities.

          • Morris Thecat

            don’t you ever get sick of yourself?

          • Daisy

            I suspect that JohnE suffers from some form of autism which if true might explain some things. I would actually find him much more sympathetic if so.

          • Morris Thecat

            yes, I can see signs of assbuggers syndrome, the kung pow varient

          • JohnEngelman

            Daisy & Morris Thecat,

            It says bad things about both of you that you search for pathological reasons for my love for China and the Chinese people. If I came here and expressed hostility for whites and Western civilization I could understand your hostility for me, but I do not do that.

            Nor do I feel hostility for the West. You do not read comments by me blaming the problems of the world on European colonialism, American imperialism, and white racism. That is not the way I think.

          • Morris Thecat

            john, you have clearly stated that you judge people by IQ and that you do not consider race important, only IQ. THis is not compatible with this site. This is a race realist site, where the truth about the white race and it’s enemies are honestly stated, truths that are banned elsewhere. YOu adulate asians and base this all on a slight, very slight higher showing in IQ studies. Yet that is a distortion of the real picture, which you always refuse to acknowledge. The facts are that the modern, industrial, democratic, technological world was created by the European. NOT the Asian. As for your adulation of the Jews, the same can be said. The industrial revolution in Great Britain and the US was created by White Europeans. The democratic revolution, starting with the Magna Carta and up to the US COnstitution has been a PURELY anglo Saxon creation. The form of government that allowed the industrial revolution and the flowering of science and technology was an Anglo Saxon phenomenon. The progress of science and technology had some Jewish contributions, but was NOT by any means, a jewish phenomenon, it was a white European Christian phenomenon. There CAn be much stated though that the jews have been a destructive element to the country as a whole, perverting it’s media, courts and governement. The most recent books on the subject have been the “The Culture of Critique” series. It can be said that as an added element to the American Nation, jews have been more of a negative in this respect than a positive. For all their high average IQ, they have never really done well, as a people, in all their history. They seem to carry a seed of destruction, self destruction, a form of insane ambivalence and they seem to have spread a form of insanity in this country that is killing it and is definitely anti-white european christian

          • JohnEngelman

            From the fall of the Western Roman Empire to the Italian Renaissance Chinese civilization clearly eclipsed what existed in the West. Now China is rising, while the United States is declining.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94T-NC3uv3o

          • Morris Thecat

            you didn’t answer any of my questions john. What did the chinese contribute to the modern world? YOu have to struggle to come up with some obscure person somewhere and that person will be buried under mountains of Europeans. If one changed every word that is “chinese” and “asian” in your posts to “Deutche Volk” you’d have almost an exact transcript of nazi propaganda “Der X Volk sind die UBER volk fun der ganzen Welt!” ‘Unser tag KOMMT!” .Have a nice day john. BTW, did you ever decide on a thesis topic yet?

          • JohnEngelman

            You are talking about previous achievements. This is what is happening now:

            ———

            Centuries after it led the world in technological prowess — think gunpowder, irrigation and the printed word — China has barged back into the ranks of the great powers in science. With the brashness of a teenager, in some cases literally, China’s scientists and inventors are driving a resurgence in potentially world-changing research…

            “They have grown so fast and so suddenly that people are still skeptical,” said Rasmus Nielsen, a geneticist at the University of California at Berkeley who collaborates with Chinese counterparts. “But we should get used to it. There is competition from China now, and it’s really quite drastic how things have changed.”
            http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/27/AR2010062703639.html

            As China catches up with the United States, within the United States Chinese Americans surpass white Gentiles. They tend to do better in school, and they usually make more money. This is because they are usually more intelligent.

      • He has made it abundantly clear that he is pro-Asian, not pro-White. Which makes me wonder why, since he believes in the superiority of Asians, isn’t he projecting his fetish in a more appropriate environment, like an Asian community or online watering hole where other people share his affliction?

  • Joseph

    Intelligence is a “social construct”.

  • JohnEngelman

    By John PomfretWashington Post Staff Writer
    Monday, June 28, 2010

    SHENZHEN, CHINA — Last year, Zhao Bowen was part of a team that cracked the genetic code of the cucumber. These days, he’s probing the genetic basis for human IQ.

    Zhao is 17…

    In 2007, Chinese geneticists discovered vast differences in the genetic makeup of Africans, Asians and Caucasians…

    Zhao came to BGI on a summer internship last year to work on cucumbers. Now a full-time employee while continuing his studies, Zhao is turning his attention to a topic Western researchers have shied away from because of ethical worries: Zhao plans to study the genes of 1,000 of his best-performing classmates at a top high school in Beijing and compare them, he said, “with 1,000 normal kids.”
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/27/AR2010062703639.html?sid=ST2010062800373

  • So glad this is being done in China, as this type of research would never see the light of day here.

  • Sherman_McCoy

    Hey doc? If you ever diagnose that I have cancer or heart disease, or some other life-threatening condition, PLEASE DON’T TELL ME ABOUT IT! It would make me feel bad.

  • Room101

    Are the Chinks afraid to tell the Truth to the Pussy West?

    That certain races are inferior to others?
    The Chinks can plow everybody and exterminate them at will.
    All the “liberals” will be thanking the executioners as they dig their own graves.
    Oh if only a Liberal could be executed by a “diverse” not-White person!

  • KenelmDigby

    That China will surpass the west, is more or less inevitable.
    That China will overhaul massively the west, sometime this century is also highly probable.
    If the Chinese continue doing the right thing, (and this program is very definitely the correct thing to do), then the astonishing success of China – and how it is leaving the west mired in the dust will continue, and continue to astonishing and exponentially inflated heights.
    The game is deadly serious – and China are the only real players, using scientifically proven theories cocerning the heredibility of IQ, and the absolutely vital influence persons of high IQ have in scientific, economic and industrial progress. Basically infalted IQ is *the* ‘magic’ ingredient.
    And meanwhile the USA imports mixtec floor-wipers by the million and favors pouring limited financial resources into proven failures like ‘Headstart’.

  • Andy

    *We* could be doing this research if it weren’t for our ridiculous taboos on it. I’m glad Zhao Bowen is anyway.

  • Bob

    There is more to genius than a high IQ. The ability to concentrate, to imagine, and to play. Even Einstein said, “Imagination is more important than knowledge.” Asians lack that “zigzag lightning in the brain,”which is why there no Asian Aristotles, Newtons, Eulers….and that’s why no Asian country will ever overcome the United States, contrary to the hysterical paranoids.

    • Morris Thecat

      No asian Mozarts, Bethovens, Michelangelos, etc. Asian art stayed basically the same for thousands of years whereas western art went through period after period of change and innovation.

    • Morris Thecat

      Mankind can now fly because white men had flights of fancy. The chinese had kites- for thousands of years, yet they remained on the ground because their minds could not take off.

    • Sherman_McCoy

      No, America will not be conquered from without, but from within, and the replacement of those great white minds with mediocre ones from the third world.

  • Pelagian

    “expects to have found genes for intelligence in three months” < and the West has been beaten to this study because it is handicapped by its own PC-ness.

  • Morris Thecat

    Anyone remember that old movie “the Isle of Dr. Morreau” This is “The Isle of Dr. Ming Lo”

  • newscomments70

    If we are more intelligent than those who wish to destroy us, then we must use our collective intelligence to stop them.

    • Morris Thecat

      No such thing as collective intelligence.

      • newscomments70

        I think you’re right….I will change that to collective effort and strength. We have to do something though.

        • Morris Thecat

          Thank you for changing that . The problem with “collective intelligence” and “collective efforts” is that they are always dumbed down to the slowest in the group. There is such a thing, in this regards, as collective stupidity, but it is only when an authority is controlling things. Let people do things at their own pace towards a common goal, that has always been the secret to America’s success.

  • Epiminondas

    “Council for Responsible Genetics, a watchdog group based in Cambridge, Mass.” The usual suspects who don’t want any IQ studies publicized. Not really a surprise where it’s located, either.

  • Most people here are atheists, Christians, agnostics or something similar. But, to bring some fresh perspective- not an answer, just a hypothesis to play with- let’s take into consideration esoteric doctrines we can find in both East & West (Rosicrucianism, Hermetism, Vajrayana Buddhism, various forms of Hunduism, Jooish Kabbalah, Islamic Sufism, ..). Even that wacky 19th century child, theosophy. Of course, you’ll have to accept reincarnation- at least as a working hypothesis.

    According to them:

    a) essential human self does not die with the death of the body. It’s called differently in various traditions (shes-pa in Tibetan Buddhism, anthropos in Hermetism, spirit or pneuma in Christian Gnosticism, ruh or spirit in Islamic Sufism, divine spark …). It takes ca. 1000 incarnations to complete cycle towards higher, more abundant dimensions or worlds.
    Those who are “geniuses”- genius is Latin word for daimon or spirit- are almost superhuman in their abilities- one should just read lives of Alexander, Mozart, Michelangelo or Euler to see this. In this view, IQ is important, but not sufficient condition for such an unbelievable excellence. When we read the exploits of 22 years old Alexander the Great- we are left in amazement: how on earth can a human being posses such abilities (a book to read: Paul Johnson: Heroes).

    b) racially, old theosophists (including American Rosicrucian Max Heindel) thought that “old souls” (those entities with numerous experiences stored & developed from many former lives ) incarnate into “advanced races”. “Young souls”, without previous experience, end up in Africa & similar places- areas for human children to begin their odyssey.

    I’ve posted this more as a diversion. Just- Heinrich Himmler wouldn’t thought so. He followed theosophy & “Bhagavad Gita” as a warrior’s ethics manual. I admit- he isn’t much of an example.

    • Morris Thecat

      That all could be, then again, it could not be at all. When the body dies, all that the person learned in this life dies with it.

      • Maybe. And maybe not. One just doesn’t know.

        • Morris Thecat

          yes, but we will all find out in time

          • Sure. Just- people tend to live their lives according to what they believe to be *the* truth about cosmos & life. Roughly, a life for a Platonist & for an Aristotelian simply isn’t the same, from ethics to politics.

  • Morris Thecat

    sir, you offer nothing but rhetoric. I offered you data – a study that found only a 6.7% concordance, but you seem to reject this set of data because it doesn’t support your belief. The biological origin of homosexuality has been disproven. It is not “natural”. I did not say it was a “choice ” either. I do not believe it is a choice. I believe it is brought about by social factors, by problems separating from the mother and identifying with the father and from this, developing a masculine gender identity. There is much evidence for this. Evidence such as the rise in the incidence of homosexuality in Germany after the War, when many infants had lost their fathers . The fact that lesbians raising male sons have a much higher incidence of those sons becoming gay whereas there is no greater incidence of this amongst a male gay couple raising sons. There is a crucial period of development where the absence of a father, either through work, neglect, death, avoidance of a difficult wife, as well as a cold distant father who is there but emotionally absent, there is this period of development where the child needs to bond with the father. When that doesn’t happen, he never develops a masculine gender identity, maleness becomes something that is “other” and the child develops a hunger for this, a thirst and it becomes eroticized during puberty. This crucial development period is early on, at about the age 1 and a half or two and a half, I’m not sure. It is before the time that you can remember. It was never a choice. Your homosexual desires are nothing more than a strategy of trying to repair yourself, to gain masculinity that you don’t feel you have. Gay men know they are men, their “core” identity is intact, but they don’t “feeL’ masculine, they are not confidently masculine. They desire men for the sake of becoming more masculine. They don’t really want men, they want to be men.

    • Nathanwartooth

      So I did some research on the question of if children raised by homosexual parents are more likely to be homosexual themselves.

      From the reading that I did, it seemed like most scientists don’t even want to ask the question, let alone find the answer. If they found out that the children were more likely to be homosexual they would be called bigots. It’s just more politically correct crap going on. But from what I could infer, there is in fact a higher chance to call yourself a homosexual when you have at least one homosexual parent.

      But this actually coincides with something that I have dealt with in my own life. People in the Gay community don’t like Bisexuals. I lie to women about being Bisexual for the same reason, because the straight community doesn’t like them either. Bisexual women can get a pass when dating a guy but that is about the only situation. Bisexual women will say they are gay when dating a woman, same with men.

      I have been told numerous times from gays that I am not Bi I am gay. Bisexuals to them are people who are lying to themselves or some other such nonsense.

      So here is the case I am making and it actually fits in to what my world view tells me.

      Since homosexual parents are very open and probably constantly asking their kids if they are gay, people like me who are a 2 on the Kinsey scale and only slightly homosexual will say they are gay instead of straight. If they were raised by a traditional couple they would probably say they were straight.

      I think it has a lot more to do with homosexual parents pushing their kids to be gay when they are only slightly gay.

      In my world view homosexuality is caused by multiple factors including genetics. In your world view homosexuality is caused by multiple factors, just not genetics. We really aren’t that far off and I don’t think it really matters.

      I do just want to say one last thing. How do you explain the “gay voice” if there is no genetic component? People over XBox live call me gay just hearing two sentences out of my mouth because I have a distinct “gay” voice. I actually try to deepen it when I can because I hate it. I don’t want it but it was the voice I was born with so I’m kind of stuck here.

      Oh and I’m not going to say this just to try to prove you wrong, because you actually made me think about it. I would have to honestly say that when things are going badly and I am depressed, etc. I tend to be more straight. When things are going good for me I am much more inclined to actually go more towards homosexuality.

      • Morris Thecat

        I think you are still trying to rationalize things. You offer much conjecture, that is all. The facts are that male children raised by lesbians turn out to be gay at a rate that is significantly higher than male children in general while male children raised by a male couple do not. Populations that lose a generation of males in war have a higher incidence of male homosexuality in the generation that the lost men fathered. The fact remains that the Bearman and Bruckner study does not replicate the findings of other studies. One study does not prove anything if the results are not replicable. Even the authors of the study you cited state quite clearly that their study showed that a 50% concordance disproves a genetic cause of homosexuality. There may be a predisposition. Anyone who has seen children grow has seen that temperament is definitely inborn. Some children react to change much more calmly than others. Some children are more prone to anger and frustration, some children are harder to anger or frustrate. Some children are decidedly gregarious and outgoing, others are more quiet and introverted. These traits are inborn and it could be a certain personality that reacts to certain developmental stumbling blocks in certain ways. But that does NOT mean the homosexual behavior or orientation is genetic. It is not. Nor is it normal or healthy. It is a failure to develop completely as a male that the person tries to repair in an ineffective and injurious way for the rest of his life .

        • Daisy

          I have known many gay male couples who have lived long monogamous and romantically fulfilled lives. There’s promiscuity in the younger years at greater rates perhaps, but that may be sociological and doesn’t negate all the lasting attachments I’ve seen many gay men form.

      • Daisy

        I suspect bisexuality is more a reaction to society’s gender roles and gender dysphoria than it is a biological issue, but that is based mostly on observing bisexual women. I haven’t known many bi men but suspect they’re also conditioned more than born, which is not to say it is a choice in either sex.

        • Nathanwartooth

          The Kinsey scale of sexuality makes the most sense to me because almost everything is along a continuum. For a lot of traits like intelligence you can have an IQ from 50 to 160+, I don’t see why it has to be different for sexuality.

          You say you haven’t met many bisexual men and I haven’t either. My theory for this is because bisexual women are much more socially acceptable than bisexual men. A woman doesn’t want to date a bisexual man but a man might have no problems dating a bisexual woman.

          I do think that this is an interesting topic. It’s too bad that it’s plagued with politically correct goons and “conservatives” like Morris who think that either homosexuality is a choice or it springs from being damaged somehow in life.

  • Transpower

    In 1982 I took the Mega-IQ test and scored at the level of 160. The problem with this test and others is the sample size is small and so it’s difficult to obtain the correct ratios. A high IQ is, of course, a pre-requisite for genius, but it’s absolutely essential to be highly motivated to accomplish anything worthwhile.