/sci/ - Science & Math

>>11823492
>>11825048
it's also why koreans and "burakumin" (japanese from the area of osaka) show a performance gap similar to the black/white gap in america, despite being very similar genetically.

so to answer the question, racism is not the cause, but rather it's an effect seen in brainlets with limited working memories.

>>11782117
>>11782122
One could just as easily argue that the wildcard in play here is "racial differences" which allows you to dismiss all "environmental" arguments regardless of evidence.

The reason "systemic racism" seems like it can't be dismissed is that it's not a bad argument. It existed not long ago (and that's not even disputable), it's reasonable to conclude it still exists, and it has greater explanatory power (direct chains of causality, as opposed to weak statistical correlations).

It's easy to just say the other side is a group of drooling fanatics who won't listen to reason because it makes them feel bad. This is called "appeal to motive" and is a fallacy. To be sure, it's far easier than admitting that you can't refute their argument.

>>11103453
The transracial adoption study authors themselves conceded their results could be construed as proof of environmental effects.
Consider, for example, the achievement gap between the Japanese and Koreans raised in Japan similar to the American black/white gap, even though the genetic gap between them is not as great.

>>10885658
>The studies are out there though, and being able to get info from them instead of repeating the same study yourself is the whole point of scientific journals.
Maybe you've never read one? The way they work is you do something called "citing" the papers. This means when you make an argument, and you want to reference info from another study, you provide a link (called a "citation") to that study.
That way, other people can read the other study and learn from it too, and also understand your own argument better.
Otherwise, you could just make any argument you want and back it up with studies that may not support your claim, or that don't even exist.

Come to think of it William Shockley devoted his geriatric years to pro-eugenics race science. He never published anything either. And that was back when there wasn't any real backlash for his claims. How come these guys can never seem to scrape together conclusive proof so we can put the matter to rest?

>>10885659
Oddly enough, we see achievement gaps even between groups even though no one argues for racial differences. Koreans in Japanese schools, Irish in English schools, the different castes of India, and so forth. Perhaps the difference is, just like in those other nations, due to pervasive systems of socioeconomic oppression.

>>10871701
>in the real world poor whites are still outscoring poor blacks
In the real world, from the mid-60's to the end of the 80's, poor blacks were sequestered by redlining into shitty neighborhoods with shitty schools.
When blacks are pitted against other races in classroom environments, they are presumed mentally inferior and thus lose out overwhelmingly on subjective evaluation by teachers, guidance counselors, or college interviewers, affecting their placement in college prep programs and tracks, and which schools they apply to.
These effects are real. Consider that we see similar effects in other nations, like with Koreans in Japan, with Irish in Britain, or with the varying castes in India. Even though race scientists don't argue for huge racial IQ gaps in those cases. Consider there were states where boomers went as far as closing down their school systems rather than integrating them, and those boomers' children eventually became the next teachers.

>because these poor little retards had a hard life so obviously it means their lower scores are actually secretly equal to the higher scores of others!
Keep in mind the ultimate goal of these tests is not to rank students, but to identify (as in True or False) who has the intelligence and work ethic to succeed in school.
It's certainly not a perfect solution but the alternative is to continue enforcing a caste system. I suppose that's justified if you presuppose the poor are retards or whatever though.

>>10856563
We've already debunked it, check the archives I guess

>>10727370
i think it's obviously influenced by genetic factors, just like every other factor. the question is, just how much does it vary from one "race" to another?
as an analogy, different "races" have different skin traits. for example europeans have lighter skin, improving production of vitamin D in climates with less sun, while africans have dark skin to resist consistent bombardment by uv rays.
in spite of all that, the overwhelming majority of skin traits (the structure of the molecules, the organization of the cells, the healing processes, etc.) are basically the same between all people.

bad actors with political agendas exaggerate the influence of genetics on racial differences and ignore environmental factors entirely, all to justify treating others like animals without considering individual merit. this is unethical. the restriction of civil rights and opportunity should require an extremely high standard of proof (analogous to the way we require extremely high standards of proof to imprison someone for life or sentence them to death).

>>10445119
>no less bizarre than the idea that they would have different reflexes or memory
seems pretty bizarre to me.
if there even is a population difference, it is very small.
the douwa problem in japan is an example of population-level achievement & """IQ""" differences despite the two groups being genetically identical.

>>10403952
the same gap you see from koreans in japan
is that gap genetic also?

>>10277350
>Assuming they are all equal without evidence is just as bad as saying they aren’t without evidence.
Wrong, because the latter position is used to justify restriction of civil rights and opportunity. Therefore, the standard of proof must be higher. It's similar to the reason that in criminal courts we assume innocence rather than assume guilt.

>>10279077
>>10283280
You guys are doing a good job white knighting for him but as far as I know, he never actually made a complete argument himself; just some hand-wavy references to "testing". He was invited to defend his claims with specific studies. Did he ever respond?

>>10066320
>durrr LOL it's still 80, that's less than 100, Checkmate!!1 xD
Yes, Cletus. Let me connect the dots for you. Average IQ is naturally lower in underdeveloped, famine- and war-torn nations where genetic potential cannot be reached.
Environment can't make an idiot smarter, but it can obviously turn a genius into an idiot.

Examples:
Moleti Mariacarla, Trimarchi Francesco, et. al. Thyroid. February 2016, 26(2): 296-305. https://doi.org/10.1089/thy.2015.0336
>Overall, the prevalence of borderline or defective cognitive function was more than threefold higher in the children of mothers not using iodized salt than of those mothers using it (76.9% vs. 23.1%, odds ratio 7.667 [CI 2.365–24.856], χ2=12.65; p=0.0001).
Yousafzai, Aisha K et al. Effects of responsive stimulation and nutrition interventions on children's development and growth at age 4 years in a disadvantaged population in Pakistan: a longitudinal follow-up of a cluster-randomised factorial effectiveness trial. The Lancet Global Health , Volume 4 , Issue 8 , e548 - e558 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(16)30100-0
>1302 mother–child dyads were re-enrolled between Jan 1, 2013, and March 31, 2013, all of whom were followed up at 4 years of age. Children who received responsive stimulation (with or without enhanced nutrition) had significantly higher cognition, language, and motor skills at 4 years of age than children who did not receive responsive stimulation.

So, the important question is, if you took those blacks and raised generations of them in London, what would you measure?
This is one question "The Bell Curve" tried to answer. From Lynn's base figure of 70 they extrapolated a mean IQ of 85 for Black Americans.

What if we start with more accurate base IQ of 80 and applied the same corrections? Black IQ might have come up to 95 or higher... which would contradict the agenda of Pioneer Fund who paid for these race "science" studies. Hence the reliance on gamed "statistics".

>>10019507
jp > kr

>>9825614
>But even if average sub-saharan IQ is 80, that's still less than 100, Checkmate!
Of course. The average IQ (as in the measured value correlated with "intelligence") is naturally lower in underdeveloped, famine- and war-torn nations where genetic potential cannot be reached. The important question is if you took those blacks and raised generations of them in London, what would their IQ measure?

This is what "The Bell Curve" tried to answer. From Lynn's base figure of 70 they calculated a mean IQ of 85 for Blacks. Now suppose you used the more accurate correct base figure of 80 and applied the same corrections? The Black IQ might have come up to 95 or higher, which would have contradicted the agenda of the Pioneer Fund and The Bell Curve. Hence the importance of citing flawed studies.

As a side note it's interesting that the useful idiots of /pol/ can't imagine academic dishonesty when it comes to racial IQ studies, but accept it quite easily in regards to other issues such as climate change.
They believe what they want whenever it suits them, and care nothing for facts and logic. Keep parroting fake facts, faggot.

>>9771132

>>9769422
Descendents of Burakumin and Koreans in Japan perform notably worse on standardized tests and in academic achievement than those of the Japanese ethnic majority, in Japan, by about the same margin as the US black-white achievement gap.
They are all essentially the same "east Asian" race -- how could it be that such a large achievement gap exists, given that achievement gaps are genetic in origin?

The genetic differences between the majority Japanese, the sub-ethnicity of Japanese called the Burakumin, and Koreans, are much less pronounced than those between blacks and whites in America.

Yet they show a similar achievement and IQ test gap, as well as similar rates of higher crime, higher childbirth out of wedlock / single-parent homes, etc.

https://unsafeharbour.wordpress.com/2012/01/13/burakumin-and-koreans-in-japan/