The Bell Curve

aquapub · Jun 25, 2006

A controversial author revived the Bell Curve argument (written by a black man) by writing this:

"Liberals were afraid of a book that told the truth about IQ ("The Bell Curve") because they are godless secularists who do not believe humans are in God's image. Christians have no fear of hearing facts about genetic differences in IQ because we don't think humans are special because they are smart. There may be some advantages to being intelligent, but a lot of liberals appear to have high IQs, so, really, what's the point? After Hitler carried the secularists' philosophy to its grisly conclusion, liberals are terrified of making any comment that seems to acknowledge that there are any differences among groups of people — especially racial groups. It's difficult to have a simple conversation — much less engage in free-ranging, open scientific inquiry — when liberals are constantly rushing in with their rule book about what can and cannot be said."

I read up on the methodology used in the research and I want to know what people here think....

The most compelling results were ones that demonstrated differences in IQ, reaction time, and brain size by the age of three across different classes, family structures, cultures, etc.

There were also parts that tracked twins separated into adoptive families with widely differing incomes, customs, family structure, etc. The results largely break down consistently along racial lines.

So is the egregious academic performance of blacks purely subcultural here? Do Asians beat the crap out of whites strictly because of their cultural differences?

Kelzie · Jun 25, 2006

Moderator's Warning:

I think you need a source

ptsdkid · Jun 25, 2006

Kelzie said:
Moderator's Warning:

I think you need a source

***What source are you looking for? For the black author of the 'Bell Curve', or the controversial author as stated?

Hey Aqua, I just read that chapter where you quoted Ann Coulter. The book 'Godless' certainly puts liberalism into perspective.

Kelzie · Jun 25, 2006

ptsdkid said:
***What source are you looking for? For the black author of the 'Bell Curve', or the controversial author as stated?

Hey Aqua, I just read that chapter where you quoted Ann Coulter. The book 'Godless' certainly puts liberalism into perspective.

Well the source for the quote would have been what I was looking for. I should have guessed it though.

talloulou · Jun 25, 2006

aquapub said:
A controversial author revived the Bell Curve argument (written by a black man) by writing this:

"Liberals were afraid of a book that told the truth about IQ ("The Bell Curve") because they are godless secularists who do not believe humans are in God's image. Christians have no fear of hearing facts about genetic differences in IQ because we don't think humans are special because they are smart. There may be some advantages to being intelligent, but a lot of liberals appear to have high IQs, so, really, what's the point? After Hitler carried the secularists' philosophy to its grisly conclusion, liberals are terrified of making any comment that seems to acknowledge that there are any differences among groups of people — especially racial groups. It's difficult to have a simple conversation — much less engage in free-ranging, open scientific inquiry — when liberals are constantly rushing in with their rule book about what can and cannot be said."

I read up on the methodology used in the research and I want to know what people here think....

The most compelling results were ones that demonstrated differences in IQ, reaction time, and brain size by the age of three across different classes, family structures, cultures, etc.

There were also parts that tracked twins separated into adoptive families with widely differing incomes, customs, family structure, etc. The results largely break down consistently along racial lines.

So is the egregious academic performance of blacks purely subcultural here? Do Asians beat the crap out of whites strictly because of their cultural differences?

Besides quoting Ann Coulter have you actually read the Bell Curve? Don't they actually state in the book that they can not tell whether it is genes or environment that make the biggest diffence in IQ? That despite all their different studies the only thing that is clear is that both genes and environment play a role and no opinion can be reached as to which plays a larger role????

talloulou · Jun 25, 2006

"If the reader is now convinced that either the genetic or environmental explanation has won out to the exclusion of the other, we have not done a sufficiently good job of presenting one side or the other. It seems highly likely to us that both genes and the environment have something to do with racial differences. What might the mix be? We are resolutely agnostic on that issue; as far as we can determine, the evidence does not yet justify an estimate."

http://www.vdare.com/sailer/bell_curve_10yr.htm

So I guess I'm not sure where you are going with your question in regards to the Bell Curve. I will say I believe Asians generally do better in school because of "parenting style" and thus I have done my best to adopt the asian parenting style and ensure my kids take their studying very very seriously.

I also believe if both parents are what I call "book smart" there is a higher chance their kids will be "book smart" regardless of race and the same applies to all the other ways in which you can be smart so choose your breeding partner wisely!

talloulou · Jun 25, 2006

aquapub said:
The results largely break down consistently along racial lines.

Source? Certainly not the BellCurve book?

aquapub · Jul 4, 2006

Points of interest from the one chapter of the Bell Curve that generated so many viscious attacks, intellectually dishonest dissmissals, and smearing from liberals:

1) 40-80% of intelligence is genetic.

2) The IQ of blacks are around 15 points lower than whites in general.

3) Asians rank highest.

4) The research was conducted on infants (reaction time, cognitive abilities, etc.) and they followed the subjects into their adult life and recorded facts about income, divorce, out-of-wedlock kids, crime...everything.

Even at the age of 3, the differences in IQ distinctly broke right down racial lines with Asians at the top, and blacks at the bottom.

The American Psychological Association formed a task force-due to all the ugliness that ensued on campuses and from a very hysterical media-to study their research and find flaws.

Among many other findings that SUPPORTED the conclusions that IQ is at least partially genetic, are these:

"Individual differences in intelligence are substantially influenced by genetics.
There is little evidence to show that childhood diet influences intelligence except in cases of severe malnutrition."

"The differential between the mean intelligence test scores of Blacks and Whites...does not result from any obvious biases in test construction and administration, nor does it simply reflect differences in socio-economic status."

"IQ scores have high predictive validity for individual differences in school achievement."

"IQ scores have predictive validity for adult occupational status, even when variables such as education and family background have been statistically controlled."

APA 1996 Intelligence Task Force Report

http://www.indiana.edu/~intell/apa96.shtml

nkgupta80 · Jul 4, 2006

aquapub said:
Points of interest from the one chapter of the Bell Curve that generated so many viscious attacks, intellectually dishonest dissmissals, and smearing from liberals:

1) 40-80% of intelligence is genetic.

2) The IQ of blacks are around 15 points lower than whites in general.

3) Asians rank highest.

4) The research was conducted on infants (reaction time, cognitive abilities, etc.) and they followed the subjects into their adult life and recorded facts about income, divorce, out-of-wedlock kids, crime...everything.

Even at the age of 3, the differences in IQ distinctly broke right down racial lines with Asians at the top, and blacks at the bottom.

The American Psychological Association formed a task force-due to all the ugliness that ensued on campuses and from a very hysterical media-to study their research and find flaws.

Among many other findings that SUPPORTED the conclusions that IQ is at least partially genetic, are these:

"Individual differences in intelligence are substantially influenced by genetics.
There is little evidence to show that childhood diet influences intelligence except in cases of severe malnutrition."

"The differential between the mean intelligence test scores of Blacks and Whites...does not result from any obvious biases in test construction and administration, nor does it simply reflect differences in socio-economic status."

"IQ scores have high predictive validity for individual differences in school achievement."

"IQ scores have predictive validity for adult occupational status, even when variables such as education and family background have been statistically controlled."

APA 1996 Intelligence Task Force Report

http://www.indiana.edu/~intell/apa96.shtml

so what do you conclude from thsi data?

ptsdkid · Jul 4, 2006

nkgupta80 said:
so what do you conclude from thsi data?

***I'll tell you what I conclude: That genetics plays a huge role in determining the I.Q's of different races. That these genetic facts must never be misconstrued into thinking that the fact messenger is a racist. That Asians have the highest I.Q's, followed by Whites, with Blacks bringing up the rear.

aquapub · Jul 5, 2006

ptsdkid said:
***I'll tell you what I conclude: That genetics plays a huge role in determining the I.Q's of different races. That these genetic facts must never be misconstrued into thinking that the fact messenger is a racist. That Asians have the highest I.Q's, followed by Whites, with Blacks bringing up the rear.

Generally speaking, yes. It does seem like compelling evidence. But this in no way limits blacks to underperform.

I still think that the majority of what keeps blacks in a perpetual state of dysfunction is their own subculture. With self-serving "civil rights" leaders like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson guiding them down the path of paranoid bigotry and professional victimhood, and the black community always making excuses for their decisions, they have one hell of an uphill battle. As usual, liberals are the worst thing for the people they claim to be helping.

nkgupta80 · Jul 5, 2006

ptsdkid said:
***I'll tell you what I conclude: That genetics plays a huge role in determining the I.Q's of different races. That these genetic facts must never be misconstrued into thinking that the fact messenger is a racist. That Asians have the highest I.Q's, followed by Whites, with Blacks bringing up the rear.

genetics probably does play a role, But... I'll bet that if they tested Asian populations back in their original countries, they would find that the IQs vary similarly compared to the white population in America. In the same way, if htey solely tested black immigrants in the US, I bet they'd find that there is a higher IQ among these people, than the average white population.

point is, Asians who came to america were the most educated -- they had the brains to get here. Thus if genetics played a role in their intelligence, then their offspring would have that high IQ as well. HOwever asians back in China or India will be as dumb or smart as any American here. (there is no cultural selection process thats breeding smart asians there). This is also where you see the difference between the black kid who's parents moved in from Ghana and the black kid from joe schmoe town in America. The kid from Ghana will probably be very smart as compared to the African American kid due to this cultural selection process.

So...I can't say that the genetics for intelligence are pre-determined or influenced by race.

talloulou · Jul 5, 2006

ptsdkid said:
***I'll tell you what I conclude: That genetics plays a huge role in determining the I.Q's of different races. That these genetic facts must never be misconstrued into thinking that the fact messenger is a racist. That Asians have the highest I.Q's, followed by Whites, with Blacks bringing up the rear.

That's funny cause the authors who gathered the studies and wrote the bell curve were still unsure which played the higher factor in determiniting IQ or intelligence......genetics or environment. Clearly both play a large part but whether one out weighs the other was not determined in the Bell Curve as you can see from the paragraph I quoted.

Iriemon · Jul 5, 2006

ptsdkid said:
***I'll tell you what I conclude: That genetics plays a huge role in determining the I.Q's of different races. That these genetic facts must never be misconstrued into thinking that the fact messenger is a racist. That Asians have the highest I.Q's, followed by Whites, with Blacks bringing up the rear.

And therefore...?

Either Blacks as a race have IQ as measured by the author that is a std dev lower because 1) genetics or 2) social factors. So what? a) this only shows the measure of the population (assuming statistical sampling methods were accurate) not an individual. Regardless of group dynamics, obviously many blacks are smarter than many whites. There is no logical basis for treating blacks different as individuals because of this finding; each person should be treated on an individual basis regardless of how whatever group they are classified in as a whole is determined. And b) given this conclusion, it argues for some form of affirmative action in my opinion, regardless of the cause, unless you think a permanent sub-culture of economically disadvantaged black folk is a good thing for the country.

The Bell Curve

aquapub

Kelzie

The Almighty

ptsdkid

Kelzie

The Almighty

talloulou

talloulou

talloulou

aquapub

nkgupta80

ptsdkid

aquapub

nkgupta80

talloulou

Iriemon

The Bell Curve

The Almighty

The Almighty

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency