Racism?

No, it's simply the viewpoint of a very limited intellect. By the way, exactly where is sentral Africa? I'm guessing you weren't all that into book learning.

Not only is it racism ...its stupid uninformed racism. That is the worst kind.

Its tribe people, native tribes. IQ around 70, very controversial study, so. But have you ever seen a white or asian runned in the 100 meter final? Did the Asians(arabs take africans as slaves, and not opposite? yes. Did White people over take africans, and not opposite? You Sir dont think, you dont ask questions,. We have to ask questions. Thats how we develop as a race. What I am trying to say is that there is a thing as genetic diffrences, everybody knows everyone are humans, its like gingers. They have genes that makes their body produce more D-vitamines, like most black people dont have to worry about the sun, because of their skin colour. So is the genetic diffences racism? genetic diffrences are scientificly proved...

You, sir, are an ass!



What scientific study is this? Pls provide the source of this info and name the tribe. Oh, you can't? I thought so.

You didn't come here to ask questions to inform your ignorance. You came here to spread your venomous hatred. I'll bet your panties are in a wad about Confederate flag controversy? Or don't you read unless it's the UK Guardian or some OZzie rag?

Do you have any links to these scholarly papers that give scientific evidence as proof? I'd like to read from the source that you've read that informed your opinion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_hair
Here is one link - gingers
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_skin
Dark skinned people - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_skin
Humans with dark skin pigmentation have skin naturally rich in melanin (especially eumelanin), and have more melanosomes which provide a superior protection against the deleterious effects of ultraviolet radiation. This helps the body to retain its folate reserves and protects against damage to the DNA

Your welcome

Racism is the ultimate form of ignorance. Congrats UPS man, you're #1.

This is a waste of time. Repeating the mantra: Don't feed the trolls.

You beat me to it. I have noticed that very stupid people all take a keen interest in racial differences. There's a huge list of racist idiots on A2K alone.

I can see why you drive a van for a living. It's just as well you didn't have to take a written test for that.

There are more ways to measure intelligence than IQ, since there are other TYPES of intelligence that an IQ test doesn't measure.

And, this is corroborated in the brain. Brain scans, I have read, of London cab drivers have a very complex development in the part of the brain used for spatial reasoning, since London has unique streets that are encyclopedic to remember. That too is a type of intelligence that IQ tests do not measure.

Your analysis of races does not seem to include the fact that a person of average IQ could be superior to a person of under-average IQ for whatever IQ measures. So, your concerns about which race has the smartest members might be short sighted, since we interact with individuals, and I am just concerned whether the person I might be interacting with has average intelligence, or has below average intelligence, since one needs to talk so another person understands us. No use using words of Latin derivation when another person only knows the meaning of words that come from the vulgate.

So, be wary of speaking to the English, since the average Englishman has a command of English often beyond the command of the average American. One is judged, by how one speaks. Forget IQ. If one cannot speak well, one should not embarrass oneself by making references to IQ, in my opinion.

By the way, IQ just measures how precocious one is, since the mathematics that arrives at an IQ score just shows how advanced a young person is from the AVERAGE IQ score (100) of his/her age group. Meaning, for example, an IQ of 140 would just mean for a ten year old that he/she can think like the AVERAGE 14 year old. Now all 14 year olds are not geniuses; however, to think like the average 14 year old, if one is only ten years old, the child seems quite intelligent.

There is only one race - the human race.

Full stop.

No, thats wrong . An IQ test result is compared with broader populations results on a bell curve . It is increasingly difficult to get a higher score as a score gets higher . 50% of people are between 90 and 110 . Depending on which scale is used, genuises are around 1-2 % of the population and can score 160 -170 and above . The highest score ever is believed to be 230 which place them to be one in several billions .

IQ tests are by their nature culture biased . If a black tribe took you on board you would in a very short time convince everyone you were a slobbering moron .

There has never been a successful test that eliminated culture bias, so blacks have repeatedly scored slightly lower than whites on an average, but when comparing poor blacks and poor whites there is no real difference .

Those results of blacks scoring slightly lower than whites have led to much effort to reduce culture bias in testing, but without success . This has been seized by the white supremacists as proof of their superiority, but in reality the one conclusion that can be made is that white supremacists score lower than the black average .

We are talking apples and oranges. My knowledge of IQ testing is based on the tests that WERE given to grade school students, so the child could be tracked to specific classes in the middle and high school grades. So again, an IQ of 140 for a ten years old just means that the ten year old might be functioning intellectually like the AVERAGE 14 year old (140 reflecting the AVERAGE score for 14 years olds). Just precocious; not a genius. And, a score of 160 for a ten year old just means the child is functioning like the AVERAGE 16 years old. Just VERY precocious; not a genius. Naturally, the bellcurve reflects the average score for each age class. And, the fact that a ten year old's high score might reflect a miniscule percentage of the bellcurve is just a non-sequitor.

Perhaps, those that are eventually considered geniuses (its always in hindsight, based on accomplishments) did score a 160 or more as a child being tested (when a high scoring child doesn't achieve we just say one might be an underachiever, or early burnout; regardless the onus is put on the individual, not the veracity of the test). Plus, there are correlations with certain statistical classes to denote creativity or ability to eventually become a professional (doctor, etc.).

As someone of note once said, achievement is mostly perspiration and only a fraction inspiration. The whole educational system is just a sort, as to who can complete a curriculum in the alloted time (semester). Educational theory says that given enough time anyone can become a professional. However, society is based on utilizing the professionals in the functioning years of one's life, so education is a sort, based on who can become a professional with enough time left to benefit society.

But, if we don't agree, I guess we read different material on the subject.

Quote: " You Sir dont think, you dont ask questions,. We have to ask questions. Thats how we develop as a race. "

"like most black people dont have to worry about the sun, because of their skin colour. So is the genetic diffences racism? genetic diffrences are scientificly proved..."

What are you trying to say? I don't understand. YOU Sir obviously didn't excel in the Education of Science. EVERYONE that is a homosapien needs to refrain from getting too much sun. No matter if you're Black, White, Tan, Asian, or Hispanic. Here's a quick tip: The sun emits ultraviolet radiation rays... Therefore it does not matter on your race or skin tone. Stop trying to sound smart when in reality you're making yourself sound ridiculous. Photokeratitis is a painful eye condition caused by exposure of insufficiently protected eyes to the ultraviolet (UV) rays from either natural (e.g. intense sunlight at high altitudes) or artificial (e.g. the electric arc during welding) sources. If it were how you say then white people would be getting photokeratitis and dark skin people wouldn't but that is not the case. There have been many cases of dark skin and light skin people getting photokeratitis.

While physical characteristics are inheritable, I haven't seen any evidence that intelligence (whatever that actually means) is inheritable.

On a side note, an argument can be made that new world blacks constitute a particularly agile and physically efficient sub-population of our species. Consider that during the slave trade, african slaves were selected on departure based on their physical strength and wholesomeness, and that they had to endure the most grueling ordeal while crossing the pound on those slaveships, and in plantations afterward. The ones who survived must have been the most healthy and strong, on the whole. This could go some way to explain why African Americans, Jamaicans etc. tend to dominate many athletic sports.

I'm aware it's a risky argument to make, but I submit it's valid.

I think what you said in addition to the fact that breeding for strength and superior genes (as well as southern plantation owners were privy to this information) give you a valid point.

Yes. It's very sad to say, but it stands to reason that new world slaves were submitted to the same type of artificial selection than draught horse breeds are, for superior physical strength and health.

However, I believe certain breeds of dogs are obviously more trainable to make decisions (aka, intelligent) than other breeds of dogs. Now whether that should be extrapolated to populations within the human genome is just too politically sensitive to offer an opinion, one way or the other. But basing a decision on not having "seen any evidence" is not exactly a scientific comment, in my opinion, not knowing what opportunities you may have had, or not had, to make that statement. Actually, intelligence is accepted, I thought, to be inheritable from one's family most often. Meaning intelligence doesn't come out of thin air. A not so intelligent child might just not have inherited intelligence, similar to many other traits that don't get passed on to the next generation.

And, now there is research to back up the inheritance of traits due to the epigenome having certain genes turned on or off, due to environmental effects. So, it might even be possible to say that if a child comes from a mediocre family of intelligence, but then is put into an enriched learning environment, not only will the child benefit, but his/her children and future generations could benefit.

Since you seem to not be too sure what "intelligence actually means," possibly we can say that whatever advancements in civilization were discovered or invented, the quality of intelligence might have been a driving force. Inventing the wheel was likely due to intelligence, not average thinking. So, realizing how long humans existed before a wheel was invented, or fire was harnassed, we might all be mediocre for today's society, except for a few blessed with a different type of brain. And, if you look in academia, it does not belong to one race/ethnicity/religion.