The Victorians Were Smarter than Us, Study Suggests

Nick Collins, Telegraph (London), May 13, 2013

Reaction times–a reliable marker of general intelligence–have declined steadily since the Victorian era from about 183 milliseconds to 250ms in men, and from 187ms to 277ms in women.

The slowing of our reflexes points to a decrease in general intelligence equivalent to 1.23 IQ points per decade since the 1880s or about 14 IQ points overall, researchers said.

Actual IQ scores from different decades cannot be directly compared because people today enjoy better teaching, health and nutrition which would help improve their results, the scientists explained.

But the reaction times signify that the genetic component of general intelligence–which leads to the type of creativity and invention typical of the Victorian era–has been dwindling over the past century.

Dr Michael Woodley, who led the study published in the Intelligence journal this month, identified the trend by comparing reaction times from trials conducted by Victorian scientists against those carried out in recent decades.

Our declining intelligence is most likely down to a “reverse” in the process of natural selection, he explained. The most intelligent people now have fewer children on average than in previous decades, while there are higher survival rates among people with less favourable genes.

“The pressures of modern life, a nine-to-five modern lifestyle, have created all these pressures against very smart people having break-even numbers of children,” he said.

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.
  • thurlow

    You mean D’Brickashaw and Q’Nosha aren’t producing rocket scientists and poets – other than those melodious rap lyrics – I simply can’t believe it. By the way its pronounced Kenosha.

    • The__Bobster

      Didn’t you know that the Zulus are producing melodious cRap lyrics during the era of the Great Gatsby? Or that Ironside was a Bantu?

      http://tv.yahoo.com/news/nbc-resumes-series-pickups-undateable-ordered-163904135.html

      • Manaphy

        Rap = Rapists Attempting Poetry.
        For some strange reason it all makes sense now.

      • Jane Johnson

        May I recommend the movie Jack Reacher? I’m no Tom Cruise fan, but I do enjoy Lee Child novels, one of which is the basis for this film. There is a refreshingly realist plot twist that I believe you will enjoy. Pure escapism, of course, but sometimes it doesn’t hurt to just sit back and be entertained. I think Liam Neeson would’ve been a better choice for the title character, but that’s just me.

      • bigone4u

        Kojak was a Bantu as well, but mercifully I missed the black version of Kojak. I’ll also skip the black version of Ironside, thank you.

      • Sue

        This one made me nauseous. At least I was forewarned.

      • David Ashton

        Great Gatsby, worth reading especially Tom & Daisy on the white future.
        Better than the movie.

    • John

      We’ve all read (or should have read) the studies that show the measured genetic similarity between humans and chimpanzees. The DNA similarities ranged from 95% to 98.5% in various studies I have read.

      Likewise, we have all read (or should have read) the studies that show the measured genetic differences between Caucasoids and Negroids.
      So, here’s what I would like to know, but have not read yet: What are the genetic similarities between (a) Caucasiods and chimpanzees, and (b) Negroids and chimpanzees.
      In other words, how much closer are Blacks to chimpanzees than Whites to chimpanzees? Surely, someone has conducted a study on this important question.
      I simply want to see a study that confirms that which is observable; that Blacks are much more chimp-like than Whites and that the evolutionary divergence between Blacks and chimps is much more recent.
      Incidentally, I do not give a damn about political correctness. These are important questions that must be addressed. While the egalitarians are relentlessly shoving the “racial equality” nonsense down our throats, day after day, I simply want to know if Blacks are much closer relatives to chimpanzees than Whites are. That knowledge, in combination with the vast array of IQ studies, should prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Blacks are not nearly as evolved as Whites.
      Frankly, I am weary of this disturbing charade we all play each day, where we all walk through life pretending that Blacks are the intellectual equals of Whites. It’s like we living in the dark ages, redux (no pun intended).

  • joegoofinoff

    I agree with this only up to a point. Those people lived entirely differently than people today. So intellect has to be measured differently. Todays genius’ are smarter because they’re drawing from a larger pool of intelligence than those of years ago. There can be no real comparison. different ballgame today completely.

    • Bardon Kaldian

      There are no geniuses today. Compared with great creative minds from the Napoleonic era to the WW1, they’re small fry.

      • Martel

        I agree, our educational system has collapsed.

      • Dutchman

        I think Bardon Kaldian is correct. Where are all the self-educated polymaths of the late 20th and 21st centuries? No Sir Francis Galton these days. By now there should be thousands of Galtons if intelligence remained steady or had increased.

        • a multiracial individual

          Society benefits more when people specialize.

        • BonusGift

          Agreed, the proof is in the results. There just seem to be few, if any, geniuses of the caliber that seemed relatively common years ago.

        • purestocles

          For what it’s worth, I am the first to proclaim the great achievements of 19th century European scientists BUT…..they didn’t need billion dollar particle accelerators, multiple array telescopes or any of the diverse resonance detecting gadgets to explore new phenomena. Only institutions can afford the cost of research today (for the most part, of course there are exceptions).

        • Sick of it

          If they are aborted as babies, raped as children by the sodomites, abandoned by one parent or the other, told that achievements mean nothing since we are all equally gifted, and/or kept impoverished by the current system, how could they ever actually do anything? Many highly intelligent people today kill themselves.

    • Bill

      Guys. It’s not about the time or place. Intelligence just IS. IQ doesn’t change due to education, time or place. It’s inherent and passed on. It CAN be diluted as so many sorry tramps find out by coal burning. What is going on is that the intelligent folks, if not PC in every utterance, are NOT hired, are NOT recognized for their abilities in the academic community and are marginalized, the K-12 government school system no longer recognizes intelligent people but instead is concerned with indoctrination and politically correctness. Being intelligent is actually frowned upon in the academic community and especially in K-12 – makes the blacks and the mestizos look stupid so can’t be allowed. In fact, at that level, schools hold everybody else back so blacks can “learn” at an equal level.

      It USED to be that inherently intelligent people were actually encouraged and fed every advanced concept and class available to challenge them and aid them in reaching their fullest potential. That no longer happens.

      • whitecross

        This happened to me when I was in school.

      • Eagle_Eyed

        IQ can change, but that is because it is an imperfect (but good) measure of intelligence. Innate intelligence, like anything innate, does not change but can be nurtured and developed to a maximal level in a disciplined and learned individual.

        A dumbed-down, appeal to the lowest-common-denominator education has made us, well dumber. Not innately, but we aren’t reaching our full potential as a whole. (Of course the NAMs don’t help either)

        • Morris LeChat

          IQ changes more in response to nutrition than to education. IT is an organic, biochemical thing. IF one doesn’t improve the physical state of the organism, education wont make a difference. High dose fish oils can raise a persons IQ by several points if taken over a number of years . Niacin can likewise raise IQ and nicotine certainly shortens reaction time. Nicotine is a very potent chemical to increase mental function, and it is chemically very similar to niacin.IT could be that Victorians were much heavier smokers and this is the reason for the difference. Victorians also ate kippers for breakfast every day, they ate much more fish oils than modern Britons do. IN fact, the diet of modern Britons is exceedingly poor, with much sugar and processed foods. The difference in reaction time could be due solely to chemical factors. The natural capacity for intelligence amongst Britons has most likely not changed, but it is being affected by a different diet and a lack of nicotine.

          • Sick of it

            Their natural capacity for intelligence may also have changed due to intermixture with less intelligent bloodlines. I don’t just mean from a racial perspective either.

          • Morris LeChat

            That is just conjecture, but the change in diet and other factors is not conjecture.

          • François

            A sufficient amount of zinc in children’s diets was discovered to be essential for the human brain to develop well. Or else, the synapses or new interconnections, do not connect properly.

      • Morris LeChat

        I left school when I was seventeen. A year later I decided to go back to school and retook entrance tests for a private school to finish high school- to do my senior year in a private school that my parents had been considering before I left home. After a year of living on my own and working, my tests scores improved so much they couldn’t believe it. I scored higher than most of their seniors that ever graduated from that school. The point of this is that I believe there is an intentional effort to take bright kids and frustrate them and slow them down and that this has been going on for decades.

        • Sick of it

          There is one school that I have heard about in my entire state for truly gifted people. Only the rich can afford it.

        • François

          There is that, plus the fact that too many schools allow the smart kids to be violently bullied by some big dumb ones. Psychological well-being, or psychological distress, will have an impact on academic performance.

      • Sick of it

        Intelligent people don’t want to be controlled, which makes them anathema to the current system.

    • Greg Deane

      Drawing on others’ work and using resources isn’t how geniuses work. A genius is able to originate.

  • Bill

    I have a better indicator/comparison of intelligence differences between Victorians and we today. Back then, they colonized the third world and brought Christianity and civilization to the natives, but purely for self interest. They did NOT integrate with them, they did NOT condone fornication with them, they did NOT expect them to all be rocket scientists and mainly employed them according to their intelligence. They always kept in mind these were third world peoples and had they been as smart, as industrious, as right with God they would have had civilization, peaceful enterprise, no idolatry or cannabilism or pagan worship thereby having a comparable civilization of THEIR OWN. To this day, they still don’t. But today we flood our OWN countries with these people, pretend they ARE as smart and God fearing, pretend they have something GOOD to give to US by letting them live with us, etc. WRONG. Purely satanical 180 degree thinking today. Why is this so? Because we have TREASONOUS ELITES OVER US DETERMINED TO IMPORT A SLAVISH, IGNORANT, COMPLIANT MAJORITY to replace us, thereby keeping the tyrants and the Big Government in power forever.

    • sbuffalonative

      I was going to say something pretty much like that.

      They were smart enough to see the differences between us and them and to remain separate and distinct.

      Enough proof for me that they were smarter.

      • BonusGift

        Bingo; and regardless of your reaction times, I think you and Bill are geniuses for your insight. I just wish that enough of our kind could see what is obvious to those of us that can see. We really need our own mass media outlet(s).

    • bigone4u

      It seems like you’re saying that white separatists should be smarter than those who spend lots of time with blacks. It seems like that should be true, other things equal. If so, sending your white children to an integrated school will make them dumber.

    • The Celt

      They think that,but a few rich white elites cant stop millions of non whites killing them,the only thing stopping the elites in the uk being slaughtererd like the money grubbing scum they are is the native british people,they will get what they deserve for what they have done.

    • saxonsun

      And they always reached for the stars instead of looking down–“A man’s reach must exceed his grasp, or what’s a heaven for?” That’s Robert Browning, a great Victorian poet.

    • John

      I complete agree with every word, Bill. I would only add, as the next conclusion, that the very tiny portion of the population who controls the world now, is advancing their own genome by remaining separate from us. What I mean is that while millions and millions of White “peons” are worshipping a Black president, worshipping White women who have Black babies, and hating themselves out of existence, the Whites who own the banks and control the world are capitalizing, remaining separate, and surviving. That is the final litmus test of evolution… survival. The bank owners are doing that, while the vast majority of White succumb to the “bread and circuses” routine. Very sad and tragic.

      Note: I intentionally avoided mentioning the specific ethnicities/religion of the bank owners, so as not to risk another deleted post, but we all know who owns the banks, and we all know how many countries they have been kicked out of during recorded history.

      • Sick of it

        A look at real history shows that they were not truly removed and came to dominate everything from the financial markets to the governments and the churches in many, many countries.

  • The__Bobster

    The slowing of our reflexes points to a decrease in general intelligence equivalent to 1.23 IQ points per decade since the 1880s or about 14 IQ points overall, researchers said.
    ________

    Errr, what happened to the Flynn effect?

    • Robert Binion

      Didn’t some early baseball players refuse to watch movies because they thought it slowed their reflexes?

  • The__Bobster

    Reaction times–a reliable marker of general intelligence–have declined steadily since the Victorian era from about 183 milliseconds to 250ms in men, and from 187ms to 277ms in women.
    _________

    Well, after I invent a time machine, I’ll make sure to avoid quick draw contests in the old West.

    • Jane Johnson

      Better skip drag racing, too.

  • The__Bobster

    The most intelligent people now have fewer children on average than in previous decades, while there are higher survival rates among people with less favourable genes.
    _____

    Dysgenics at work. And we’re subsidizing it.

    • StillModerated

      That was the premise of the film Idiocracy.

      • François

        Come to think of it… I think I’d prefer the kind of society depiected in another movie, Gattaca, after all.

    • John

      Dysgenics at work. And we’re subsidizing it.
      I strongly agree, my friend, but I would only add that we are literally forced at gunpoint to subsidize it. I want no part of subsidizing, and I doubt that anyone who thinks as we do wants any part of it; however, we all know that if we refuse to pay their extortion — and that’s what taxes are; extortion — the central bank’s owners will dispatch armed agents from their terrorism arm (e.g., IRS) over to our homes to terrorize and brutalize us and our families. We stand to be robbed, imprisoned, and even killed if we resist, peacefully or otherwise. It’s a very bad situation with no obvious solutions beyond moving to a remote desert island, far from civilization.

  • Hal K

    What about the Flynn effect, which says that IQs have been increasing since WWII? What is this “reaction time” anyway? The original article doesn’t explain what this means.

    It could be that human brains are tuned for modern tasks and that these “reaction times” were something that the Victorians could excel at relative to us.

    Life must be more complicated today than it was for the Victorians, even though they had to put up with more drudge work in their daily lives.

    • bigone4u

      Our reaction times were tested in driver’s ed class. A light flashed on and the amount of time elaspsed between the light coming on and the time my foot hit the brake pedal was measured. My driver’s ed teacher reported to me that my reaction time was outstanding. Not by coincidence I suppose, my IQ test scores were also outstanding.

    • François

      But Victorians had to do many things that we use machines for, in 2013. Just think of the fact that in the 1800, kids would learn math using two things, mainly: pencils ans sheets of paper (and sometimes slide rules for more adavanced math).

      Today, it is very easy to just use a pocket calculator or a personnal computer, in comparison!

      There is also the fact that kids don’t read as much as they used to.

      I think some of our abilities are slowly becoming dull.

  • T_Losan

    Russian scientists are able to selectively breed wild foxes to be almost indistinguishable in behavior from domesticated dogs in just six generations. Physical changes are also visible through further breeding. This means that genetic changes can be induced much faster than through natural selection. We are in effect selectively breeding generation after generation of criminal malcontents in large part thanks to our social welfare systems.

    • anonymous

      Nice! Someone else who found that article interesting. Also interesting was how the scientists had to work in relative secrecy so they wouldn’t be liquidated by Lysenko. I often refer people to that article in order to illustrate the potential for eugenics to improve humanity

    • François

      … while smarter, more talented people often work in demanding jobs or careers, after years spent studying; so they won’t have as many children, on average, as the parents of the new generations of criminal malcontents.

      One of the ills of modern Western society, I suppose.

  • NorthernWind

    Did they account for the fact that 10% of the population is now non-White or did they only look at indigenous Britons in the contemporary study?

    • François

      Only 10%? That’s good news to me. I honestly thought it was much more than that.

  • smells_just_like

    The Victorians had too much White privilege, which was a Hate Crime against Equality and Democracy, so using Diversity genes to eradicate their Racism through mongrelization is a good thing.

  • Bardon Kaldian

    For the real perspective, just read a short bio of Richard Francis Burton. Do you actually think that a person of such accomplishments-and, don’t forget, he was not one of great culture -shapers like Darwin or Marx, just a very prominent man of the age- does exist now: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Francis_Burton ?

    • Martel

      I had a debate a while back where I challenged my opponent to prove we still had thinkers like ” back in the day”.Obviously I did not get a satisfactory answer and hence i do not worry as much about competition with Asians, Europeans are not operating at optimal levels, far from it.

      • François

        “… hence i do not worry as much about competition with Asians, Europeans are not operating at optimal levels, far from it.”

        But perhaps that is exactly what the problem is: we are being dumbed down! While the Chinese, Japanese and South Koreans (to name a few Asian nations), are not.

        • Martel

          That is the problem, if we were as disciplined as in the days of our greatest minds, we would outcompete the asian, but our education system has become worthless.

          • François

            Time for new reforms!

  • IKantunderstand

    OK. Completely not getting this. I thought I.Q. wasn’t genetic? You know, had nothing to do with race or inherited genes? Gosh, I can’t keep this stuff straight . I forget, is red wine good for me? Coffee? Eggs? How about this? Whites are smart, Blacks and Mexicans are stupid, the Chinese are supposed to be smart, but you can’t prove it by my personal observation, because anybody who believes in magic potions derived from almost extinct animals(REALLY! YOU THINK AN ANIMAL ON THE VERGE OF EXTINCTION IS THE KIND OF ANIMAL WHOSE “MAGIC POWERS” YOU WANT?REALLY!) and who consider dogs and cats fair game for culinary purposes(is there some connection with this “cultural” predisposition to cast Asians as vets in commercials to reassure the Whites or to to keep convincing our heathen Asian population that in the West, we DON’T EAT OUR PETS). Hey, let me tell you something, you just keep on heaping this diversity crap on until you think we are smothered, but, I got news for you, we are White people, and we intend to stay that way. We will arise from this immigrant effluvium, because we don’t look good in brown.

    • Talltrees

      You are onto something. Whites look better in bright colors and pastels, not brown or tan.

  • Reaction times–a reliable marker of general intelligence–have declined steadily since the Victorian era from about 183 milliseconds to 250ms in men, and from 187ms to 277ms in women.
    .
    I wasn’t aware that there were stopwatches accurate to the millisecond in the Victorian era?
    .
    The slowing of our reflexes points to a decrease in general intelligence equivalent to 1.23 IQ points per decade since the 1880s or about 14 IQ points overall, researchers said.
    .
    Miscegenation?
    .
    Actual IQ scores from different decades cannot be directly compared because people today enjoy better teaching, health and nutrition which would help improve their results, the scientists explained.
    .
    We can’t compare IQ’s, but we can compare reaction times to a time when they didn’t have stopwatches accurate to give results in the time frame used?

    • Glen

      “I wasn’t aware that there were stopwatches accurate to the millisecond in the Victorian era?”

      Apparently 19th century scientists could, with difficulty, measure time increments as small as one hundredth of a second. Eadweard Muybridge Photographer Eadweard Muybridge measured increments as small as one millisecond in the mid-1870s. Read about this fellow, his zoopraxiscope, and measuring a horse’s gait here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eadweard_Muybridge

    • BonusGift

      They were a bit smarter than you seem to give them credit (i.e., based on the placing of your question marks, and questions). And, yes, reaction times are reaction times are reaction times.

      • François

        But reaction times to what? Can that be a very good indication of intelligence? Because some animals actually might much sharper reflexes tha we do. But it’s us, and not them, who built the International Space Station, for example.

        Are we talking about how fast someone can solve problems, answer questions, for instance, or just pure reflexes?

        • BonusGift

          Yes, it seems to be reaction time: here is the article/meta study (or, at least, a very closely related one): http://iqpersonalitygenius.blogspot.co.uk/
          And I don’t know but it seems plausible that some animals have sharper reflexes than humans. Also, IQ tests are really rough guides at judging something that is correlated with something that can be defined as ‘intelligence’ (which isn’t exactly what the average person thinks of as “intelligence”), for example it is poor at measuring the extreme right part of the distribution (which, BTW, is the most important part for western civilization’s purposes), etc. etcetera. The larger issue is whether reflex times for humans (not domestic cats or a certain type of ant, etc.) is correlated with that which is correlated with ‘g’ (or what people who measure IQ would call ‘intelligence’; i.e., no matter if it is a relatively rough measure of it or not)? The answer is that it is and is seemingly free of the many criticisms heaped by the PC police on most IQ measures (i.e., since it doesn’t depend on language and is hard to increase one’s score with practice, etc.).
          Regarding “problem solving” that depends on what type of problem we are talking about? Also, if you asked me, the most important type of problem solving for society’s progress are, by definition, non-standard ones. That is, problems that are not replicable, by definition, by standardized tests. I teach and make up lots of tests (and have worked with many very ‘bright’ people in the real world) and can tell you that in the real world it generally isn’t the ability to answer easy to replicate problems that is key to success there (even though there is some positive correlation between being able to do well on standardized tests and success; in fact much of that can be subsumed within merely being conscientious and doing the work and studying, etc. and not being exceptional at solving real world problems). In short, I know where you are going with this but human reaction time seems to me to be roughly just about as good as any measure of IQ (which, again, is just a rough measure of a sample population’s distribution of ‘g’); and it is not perfect, as there aren’t any perfect measures on intelligence (expect maybe non-standard problem solving, which, BTW, can be inferred from real world outcomes like, e.g., who actually produces novel and useful solutions to real world problems – hint it’s not who some on this sight think do but actually people who look alot like you and me). Anyway, long story short, the nice thing about this measure is that some humans have been measuring reaction times for a relatively long period of time so that we can longitudinally infer statistically significant changes in a rough measure of ‘g’ (which, BTW, appears to be the case). In short, our Victorian ancestors probably not only could out draw us in a gun fight (i.e., on average), but probably had a roughly better innate ability in solving problems.

          • François

            Thank you very much. That was interesting, and informative.

            But I have to say, I think way too many people on Amren, would seem to be obsessed with that IQ thing.

            I mean, even if Whites were the race or ethnic group or whatever, to get the lowest scores ont such tests, Western countries would still be OUR countries. And we still woud have every right to preserve our culture and way of life, right?

            I think this should be what our fight should be about . But too often, people on Amren will focus on things such as the exact nature of what we call race; or the finer points of the psychological theory behind IQ tests, etc.

            I believe we should focus on what is essential.

            I mean, look at the Hispanics: it looks like they might take over some states in the US, and they don’t seem bothered in the least, that their IQ average is relatively low. They protect their interests, go after what they want, and that’s it!

            More action (and actual change), and a little less analysis, is what we need, my brothers and sisters.

          • BonusGift

            I think we generally agree; yet the site administator keeps focusing on the IQ sideshow without a focusing on the issue at hand. Although, the whole we are all equal thing is part of the problem (i.e., it is a central tenant in the ones who want us genocided and/or subserviant to their wishes).

          • François

            You’re right, that whole Franz Boas b.s. is part of the problem, because it is a form of propaganda that has beeen spread very, very widely.

            Thanks for your input.

    • Dave

      You don’t need a stopwatch to measure reaction time. When I was a kid they tested me by dropping a ruler and seeing how far it fell before I caught it. Galileo wrote in a 1638 book that distance fallen is proportional to time squared, so the Victorians knew this.

  • 48224

    I have a job where I have to go into some pretty bad, mostly black neighborhoods. I always wonder at the number of black kids out playing, usually in the street. Then I go to a white neighborhood and the kids are far and few between.

    It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out what is going on. Forget about nuclear war, section 8 housing, food stamps and bridge cards will end this world.

    Hopefully enough intelligent people will be left to rebuild.

    • IstvanIN

      If we had cataclysm the surviving smart white people, rather than focusing solely on the survival of their own, would also go out of their way to help the black and the mestizo, starting the whole problem all over again.

      • Sick of it

        Not necessarily. Realistically, I figure the surviving whites would compete with each other AND everyone else. We live in a mercenary world.

  • whiteuncleruckus

    Highly intelligent people have created plentiful food supply. This has allowed people, who would have been killed off by nature, to survive. They also have made laws that protect people with inferior dna from accidental or intentional death.

    • IstvanIN

      Hardworking, diligent people have also made it possible for the lazy, low IQ to survive.

  • Dr. X

    I’m not sure if reaction times are necessarily a valid indictor of IQ — they might be or not, the article just doesn’t give sufficient information. Anecdotally, though, I’d say it is true that people are getting dumber. There are several factors at play. 1) Miscegenation and “diversity” is certainly one of them, no doubt. These things were unheard of in Victorian times. (Sure, some slaveowners went down to the slave shack for a good time but this was done “on the sly” and considered a horrible deed by polite society.) 2) Cognitive elites do not tend to marry non-cognitive elites; and cognitive elites have low birthrates. For instance, the probability that a Jewish neurosurgeon at NYU with an IQ of 130 will marry a crack-addicted black prostitute with an IQ of 80 and produce offspring is virtually zero. He will likely marry a Jewish girl with a 120 IQ and a graduate degree and produce one or two kids who go to Harvard like the father and mother did. But the probability that the protitute will produce four or five offspring with men who have semi-retarded IQs and raise those kids as a single mom in the projects is very high, and her offspring will outnumber those of the neurosurgeon. 3) As we have increasingly transformed our environment into a postmodern and postindustrial bubble, there is less need for study and more demand for entertainment. If “necessity is the mother of invention,” people in the postmodern West don’t “need” very much and thus have less incentive to be intelligent. Westerners can literally afford to be stupid because so much of the way was paved for them by brilliant Victorians. I fear that we may be approching a point where our population will become so stupid that it cannot maintain the technologically-advanced civilization that we live in. Importing Africans and Mexicans surely will make the problem wose, not better.

    • Dr. X

      Sorry for the typos, guys. For some reason entering text into this format can be very slow and if you try to type fast not all of it will show up.

    • kingfish

      I agree with all you have said exept 1 scenario was left out. Yes,, there is a 0 chance the jewish surgeon will marry a black hooker, agreed…. But there is a far higher chance that the jewish 120IQ girl will shack up or marry a gang banger type and have babies with him, babies that will not overcome the bangers genes. Its almost always the girls that are in misgenation with blacks. Now, having said that, there is a fair chance the jewish surgeon will marry a smart white or asian or even latina girl, but the kids will still come out smart. kf

      • Bossman

        Jews, Arabs and Hispanics appear to be very good at assimilating other races when they choose to mate with them.

        • François

          That’s because those cultures are not, so to speak, totally “emasculated” by political correctness.

      • a multiracial individual

        I thought women cannot stand to be with men with a lower IQ than them?

        • Sick of it

          Actually, these days, it seems to be the complete opposite. Would be nice.

        • François

          What about Marylin Savant?

          • a multiracial individual

            Yeah, women like her are going to have a hard time find a mate with comparable IQ

      • François

        Some of those gang banger types end up having lots of money, selling we know what… Just like Black professional “afwetes” will end up rich. And there are definitely White women out there, who are Nicole B. Simpson types.

    • François

      “If “necessity is the mother of invention,” people in the postmodern West
      don’t “need” very much and thus have less incentive to be intelligent”

      Thank you. I think you pretty much “nailed” it.

  • StillModerated

    The Victorians did not have television to “apathize” them. Just one theory.

    • Martel

      The victorians didn’t have marxist teachers unions, nor did they have teachers who believed in the widely accepted taxonomy of benjamin bloom as in the importance of “changing the students values and challenginf his fixed beliefs”, actual teaching was considered more important then indoctrination.

    • Bossman

      Also the educated people of the Nineteenth century all studied Greek and Latin. They also read a lot of books and they generally paid close attention to the spoken language.

      • Funruffian

        Don’t forget that during the 19th century England the educational theory being used was what we refer to today as the “Lancaster method”. This traditional form of teaching is where you have one authority figure while all the students are subordinates. This method, although autocratic, ensured order and discipline in the classroom setting. Strict teaching methods worked and were very useful in determining a pupil’s aptitude. It existed in the USA up until the 1960’s and slowly degenerated into the Marxist BS we have today.

    • François

      Television certainly played a major part, in all this. Plus, it is a powerful propaganda machine.

      Internet sites, who are the grandsons of television, one could say, are often full of bull too.

  • Anthony

    This does not surprise me at all, did you ever see the old black and white photos of people from the early 1900s in the US and Canada. What stands out to me the most is the people are generally better looking and healthier then their peers today. They were rarely very skinny, flabby, or obese and seemed more fit. They also seemed to have stronger sharper facial features which could be seen even in black and white photos. I am also not including blacks, asians for hispancis. I am strictly comparing the whites population of today to that of 100 years ago. Since physical quality has declined I don’t find it unfathomable that intellectual quality may have also taken a hit.

    I understand peoples ideas about things which may have caused low quality black and brown populations to expand but any ideas of what may have hurt the quality of the white populate seemingly world wide as that is what counts most.

    • Bossman

      The American white people in those old black and white photos all look like Abe Lincoln; that is they all had gaunt and sunken faces. The women were short and plump. The photos from the 1900s were usually of European immigrants.

      • [email protected]

        Why then why were the european immigrants of better features then the natives? I highly doubt your assumption.

  • Exoplanet Finder

    They were smarter, as a group, than us. No surprise. A good example to illustrate is that they had no cognitive dissonance in being Enlightened and at the same time race-conscious. We allow ourselves to be tricked into thinking the remakers of our civilization were one-world universalists, which they were not. None of them, as Amren issues of the past have argued, believed in literal, biological race equality. The most recent contribution to this argument is a K.O. to our betters who are trying to swindle our nations away with the killing touch of justifying it by saying “these are our values”. No, they are not. It is time to take the Enlightenment back from the lying academy! Check this out: http://www.counter-currents.com/2013/05/the-enlightenment-from-a-new-right-perspective/

  • To state the obvious, academic standards were far more demanding in earlier times than they are today. The following is a purported test given to Grade 8 students before graduating, and also bearing in mind these children would be about 13 yrs. old.

    The year is 1895.

    http://skyways.lib.ks.us/genweb//ottawa/exam.html

    • Jane Johnson

      That is amazing, I’m 55 and still have trouble with metrics (not to mention wagons and bushels). The section on teachers would give the NEA nightmares. Thanks for the link.

  • JohnEngelman

    I doubt that during the Victorian era there were nation wide tests of reaction time, so I doubt this study is valid.

    • Morris LeChat

      face it john, you are wrong, you have said repeatedly that smarter people are outbreeding the less smart, and this author makes a good case for the exact opposite. I guess your reaction time is not that good.it make take you a couple more years till you get it.

      • JohnEngelman

        What I have said is that dysgenics is a temporary phenomenon that is coming to an end. Dysgenics requires the willingness of people with high IQs to subsidize the reproduction of people with low IQs with programs like Aid to Families with Dependent Children. That is coming to an end.

        It is not important to have large numbers of children. It is important to have children with high IQs that one can afford to send to elite colleges and universities. People who can do that will have living descendants on this planet ten thousand years from now. The others will not.

        • Morris LeChat

          YOu have said in the past that people with higher IQs outbreed those with lower IQs, Now you are trying to change this. I see no evidence that dysgenics is coming to an end. Universities do not improve IQ. It is purely genetic. Universities are irrelevant. You exist in that world so you can not face this, you have an emotional resistance to facing this reality. The university educated people you speak of have LESS children, They are dying out. They are a total analogue to the Parsees of India, who are more intelligent, pursue higher education, put off children till later and therefore have fewer. The Parsees are becoming extinct. University educations lead to non production.

          • JohnEngelman

            The theory of r-K life histories explains the worldwide three-way pattern in race differences. The r-strategy means being very sexually active and having many offspring. The K-strategy means having fewer offspring, but with both mother and father giving them more care. Humans are the most K strategists of all species. Among humans, Orientals follow the most K-strategy, Blacks the most r-strategy, and Whites fall in between.

            – Professor J. Philippe Rushton, from “RACE, EVOLUTION, AND BEHAVIOR”
            http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/race_evolution_behavior.pdf

            ———

            You do not seem to understand the difference between an r-strategy and a K-strategy. In the long term a K-strategy is more successful. Affluent and intelligent parents tend to follow a K-strategy. I suggest you read all of Professor Rushton’s essay. He spoke at six American Renaissance conferences.

          • concernedcollegekid

            “In the long term a K-strategy is more successful”
            Yeah, more successful when k-strategy people have their own countries. But when k-strategy people share countries with r-strategy people and subsidize them to reproduce, I don’t see how that bodes well for the future. How on earth would it? What are we going to do as the ratio of r-style to k-style breeders in (formerly) white countries increases? How will we maintain the first world infrastructure that allows k-style breeders to thrive?

          • JohnEngelman

            My point has been that K-strategy people are becoming less willing to subsidize r-strategy people with programs like Aid to Families with Dependent Children.

            Computer technology increases the relationship between intelligence and income. It is becoming increasingly difficult for people of below average or even average intelligence to earn decent incomes.

          • Sick of it

            With the lack of employment these days, it is becoming increasingly difficult for anyone who is not a liberal activist with political connections to earn such an income or even to work at all.

          • JohnEngelman

            I feel your pain. Nevertheless, the stock market is higher than ever before. Stock holders and business executives are not Democratic constituencies.

          • Sick of it

            I’ve been picking major success stories in the stock market since I was 10, but even now, after a meager investment in a stock that has gone up over 800%, I do not have the capital to obtain any real returns. So much is wasted on living expense. As they say, it takes money to make money.

          • JohnEngelman

            Increasingly economic growth goes to capital rather than to labor, and to those with the biggest salaries rather than to middle class and working class Americans.

            Unfortunately, the Republicans have done a fairly good job of convincing whites who are losing ground economically that if the Democrats got out of the way they would become rich, or at the very least affluent.

            When I tell lower income white Republicans that a white plutocracy with the help of the GOP is getting richer at their expense they either do not understand what I am talking about or they get angry at me.

            One sees it right here on this website when I am accused of hating whites.

          • Sick of it

            I agree with your assessment, because it’s true. The people benefiting the most are the ones who have pushed for free trade agreements, outsourcing (apparently a lot of accounting work has been outsourced to Asia), cheap immigrant labor, importing cheaply made goods, and other policies that have hurt the American working man.

          • JohnEngelman

            The rich also benefit from Republican efforts to flatten the tax system. Democrats like to point out that Ronald Reagan signed a number of tax increases, but the top tax rate declined from 70 percent to 28 percent when he was president.

            http://www.ctj.org/pdf/regcg.pdf

          • Sick of it

            True, but I believe, as did the Founders, that taxes should be equally paid and very, very low. Government should be much smaller in this country as well.

          • JohnEngelman

            What you want would require deep cuts in military and domestic spending that most Republicans and the vast majority of Democrats and independents would oppose.

            According to a Pew Research Study released February 22, 2013 the only item in the federal budget for which there is majority support for reducing is foreign aid. That is less than two percent of the budget.

            http://www.people-press.org/2013/02/22/as-sequester-deadline-looms-little-support-for-cutting-most-programs/

          • Morris LeChat

            all bubbles burst. This stock market is due to a fed that is printing money like never before. When this bubble bursts the catastrophe will be unlike anything ever seen before.

          • François

            There are actually a lot of liberal people in business.

          • JohnEngelman

            There are more libertarians in business than liberals. They are as they like to say, “socially liberal, fiscally conservative.” They favor gay marriage, legal abortion, no restrictions on immigration, lower taxes, and less government.

          • Morris LeChat

            “less willing” but more cowardly so they are more likely to keep doing it. Also, when less in number through to less reproduction, they are more likely to do what ever the untermenschen demand of them

          • David Ashton

            Read Lynn on dysgenics.

          • JohnEngelman

            You read him. What did he say?

        • François

          «That is coming to an end.»

          What would make you certain of that?

          «It is not important to have large numbers of children. It is important
          to have children with high IQs that one can afford to send to elite
          colleges and universities. »

          If we become small minorities in our Western democracies, we will have very little influence left, and the Others will shape our countries to fit their values, priorities, etc.

          Demographics do matter.

  • NYB

    Instead of allowing white births to spring back (because nature abhors a vacuum) the financial elites are trying to fill the void of growth with immigrants of lower quality.
    If there was no immigration, our white population would level out, and then pick up as opportunities and employment abound. This would be the natural cycle.
    Trying to cheat nature is immoral and self-defeating. The unelected rulers are immoral and their immigration ideas unnatural.

  • Truth

    I guess this means that Floyd Mayweather Jr. is the smartest man on the planet?

  • 34werwer

    I’m sorry, but there’s no way british whites were 15 points higher in terms of IQ just over 100 years ago.

    • Morris LeChat

      Oh yeah, you ever heard of a fictional character named Vicky Pollard? It is fiction, but what makes it funny is that it has a basis in truth.

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

      • François

        Ouch! That was a bit hard to watch, really.

  • Morris LeChat

    The Amish double their number every twenty years. The Mormons also are reproducing at a much greater rate than the general population. The reason is their more tradition roles for women. IT is not the hectic 9 to 5 life of modern Americans, it is feminism, pure and simple. If women were at home, and not on birth control, white Americans would be double the number they are today.

    • concernedcollegekid

      Statistically you seem to be right. I’ve become convinced that equal rights for women seems like a good idea in the short term, perhaps, but does not bode well if you want your society and culture to last hundreds or thousands of years without dwindling and disappearing. For example, Islam will not cease to exist unless you kill every Muslim in the world because if you leave Muslims alone they will breed and spread. The same cannot be said of gender-egalitarian, modern white cultures. If you leave them alone and don’t kill them they do not breed prolifically and spread. Their numbers dwindle and they import immigrants who will not be able to maintain their existing white cultures.

      This is not really an “is-ought” comment about what rights I think my gender should or shouldn’t have; it’s just an observation.

      • Dude

        Women being stay-at-home-moms doesn’t mean they don’t have “equal rights.” Not if it’s their choice.

        And Muslims can’t spread if surrounding nations don’t let them in (and their numbers won’t grow past carrying capacity, even if they try).

        • Morris LeChat

          The natural desires of women are to be mothers. WE see this when they are very young, this is the role they enjoy playing. It has been an uphill battle against nature for feminists to bring about their changes. The present state requires CONSTANT reinforcement against nature. People have the WRONG impression that changes that took so long to bring about will take just as long to reverse. Nothing could be further from the truth. A strong right wing government could come to power and mandate white women be excluded from most professions, and tax unmarried people older than 25 and tax childless couples older than 26. The societal change would be very quick because this is what most people want. Most people would accept this. Those who rebelled would be few. With an adequate PR campaign to back these changes, in just a few years the mindsets of most people would be so different that it would be unthinkable to express any nostalgia for the society we now have. Changes that go against nature take a long time to bring about and require constant reinforcement. Changes in line with nature can happen with lightning speed, as if one just stopped rowing against the current and started rowing with it.

          • concernedcollegekid

            I think the shift in the direction you want would be huge if all we did was heavily tax relatively high-earning childless people and couples over a certain age (like 26). Frankly, I don’t think we would even have to formally exclude women from any jobs.

            Interesting “humane eugenics” idea. I’ll remember that one.

          • Morris LeChat

            It is an old one, the Romans did this. Chances are that it can not be done in a democracy. White people need to face the fact that it is our democracy that has injured us and it will be our democracy that kills us. Once white women were given the vote our days were numbered. The societal transformation started almost immediately. Each generation took things as far as they thought proper, but each succeeding generation was willing to push things even farther. WE went from women “bobbing” their hair and wearing make-up, but still marriage and family oriented, to finally a country where “pole dancing” is considered a “career”. Where single motherhood is not stigmatized, and where most people who attend college do so with no intent at all of ever getting married. They suffer under the wrong belief that personal fulfillment comes from being a wage slave where one’s work connections are all that matters.

  • robinbishop34

    Anyone remember the episode of WKRP in Cincinnati when the more intoxicated Johnny Fever became, the better he performed on a drunk driving reaction time test?

    • Morris LeChat

      that was a tehhhhlehhhhhvihhhhhsion show, it wasn’t reeeeeeeeaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhlllllll.

  • Alphone Latrousse

    So this kind of thinking implies that Muhammed Ali was a genius, and Stephen Hawking must be bereft of brains…. Uhmmm… ya think so?
    And who exactly measured reliably “reaction times” in men and women to the 1000ths of a second in 1880? Before such relaible timers existed?

  • Auntie Analogue

    The heading of this item should be “The Victorians Were Smarter Than We (Are),” not “The Victorians Were Smarter Than Us (Are).” An error which gives evidence to the validity of the declaration in the heading.

  • Funruffian

    While I wouldn’t doubt the Victorians during the Crinoline where smarter than the average Brit today, this article explains it through reaction times?? This is too vague. Are they talking about verbal and mental reactions or physical reflexes??
    The reasons for explanining their superior intelligence is poorly explained in this silly article.

    • Martel

      How else would you go about attempting to compare Victorians with modern Brits?

  • Dude

    How smart were first century Northern Europeans? And when are they going to start using reaction-time tests for hiring?

    • Sick of it

      About the same time they start hiring people for their honesty and integrity.

  • Michael

    Our society is much older than the Victorian equivalent. I cant see any indication in the article that these ‘scientists’ have controlled for that. As for their conclusion, they’re just begging the question.

  • Leelywhite

    Isn’t this the basic premse of the movie Idiocracy? There is another factor though: WW1, which wiped out a whole generation of educated young men.