To Rodney.

Intelligence testing of human beings has been around for 100 years, and it began the science of Psychology. Intelligence testing is taken very seriously for recruitment by many organisations, including the US Armed Forces. It is also used in the US for university entrance qualification, (SAT scores) because of the propensity of the politically correct US education system to produce students who may have racially integrated, pro LGBTXFWQUAL, and politically left wing orientated, it's just that they can't actually read, write, spell, or do bloody sums.

100 years of intensive intelligence testing by thousands of qualified cognitive metricians in the USA, has revealed interesting things about racial IQ. Put simply, the most common IQ among US Asians is 106, whites 103, Hispanics 97, and African blacks 85. If it is true that 100 years of testing is wrong, and that all races are equal in intelligence, then a Nobel Prize awaits any cognitive metrician who can simply design a test to prove it. But although there are many lefties who claim that these IQ tests are wrong, they know that there is no way that they can fiddle the historical IQ figures like the East Anglia Climate Research guys did with the climate change figures. They got caught anyway.

It is perfectly routine for animal breeders to refer to different breeds (actually, sub-species) of dogs, cats, horses and birds as being particularly intelligent breeds. If genetically heritable intelligence can be naturally or artificially bred into animals, it can be done with humans. Human intelligence is heritable. You have already admitted that.

If you really think that all races are equal in intelligence, my advice to you is to strike up a conversation with a group of Pacific Islanders. That should give you a reality check. Like aborigines, Pacific Islanders are very disproportionately represented in serious criminal behaviour. From memory, they make up almost 70% of the incarcerated juvenile delinquents from the Campbelltown area of Sydney.

Race and crime are linked, Rodney. I wish it were not so. But "may the truth be told, though the heavens may fall."

Hi Aj.

I know that you are too frightened to submit a reasoned argument yourself. But you are not going to con me into doing that job for you.

Genetics and crime are linked, and the link is very strong. 95% of the people in jail are males. There is a very convincing argument supporting that premise, right there. If you can dream up any argument involving environmental factors which explains the very wide disparity between male and female offending, then let's hear it.

And please don't try that "it's not genetics, it's hormones" crap, unless you can explain to us how genetics does not control hormone production. On second thought, please do just that. Our readers will wonder if you are really that stupid, or just trying to be funny.

Oh but I already have, LEGO.

<<I know that you are too frightened to submit a reasoned argument yourself.>>

“The problem for you here is two-fold. Firstly, you haven’t controlled for environmental factors, so you can’t know to what degree genetics plays a role (if any at all) on a macro level. Secondly, your scientifically debunked 19th century racial theories don’t address the problem of which came first: low intelligence or disadvantage.” (http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=18533#330972)

You're delusional.

<<But you are not going to con me into doing that job for you.>>

How on earth do you come to the conclusion that that’s what I've been trying to do? I can't even imagine what doing that would look like.

<<Genetics and crime are linked, and the link is very strong.>>

Agreed, although how strong is still debated.

<<95% of the people in jail are males. There is a very convincing argument supporting that premise, right there.>>

Sex is not the same as race. Gender is a far more reliable predictor of behavioural traits.

<<If you can dream up any argument involving environmental factors which explains the very wide disparity between male and female offending, then let's hear it.>>

Thanks for pointing out another way that another way biological sex is different. Males and females respond differently to the same environments, while different races don't. Your analogy is invalid.

<<And please don't try that "it's not genetics, it's hormones" crap, unless you can explain to us how genetics does not control hormone production.>>

I've put it in simpler terms for you above. You're welcome.

Rodney raises an interesting point that your racial theories don't account for. There's been talk recently about how intelligence and common sense don't seem to be linked at all.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/11232300/Why-do-geniuses-lack-common-sense.html

There's yet another hurdle for your debunked 19th century worldview.

.

Dear LEGO,

.

You wrote :

« Intelligence testing of human beings has been around for 100 years, and it began the science of Psychology »

That is incorrect, LEGO. A Venetian of Croatian extraction by the name of Marko Maruli&#263; (1450-1524) was the first to define and use the notion of psychology as we know it today. He published “Psichiologia de ratione animae humanae” containing the earliest known literary reference to psychology (in Latin).

It was more than 400 years later, in 1912, that the German psychologist, William Stern, invented “intelligenzquotient” as a scoring method of intelligence.

You also wrote :

« If it is true that 100 years of testing is wrong, and that all races are equal in intelligence, then a Nobel Prize awaits any cognitive metrician who can simply design a test to prove it »

You are putting the cart before the horse, there, LEGO, geneticists have never found any evidence that so-called “race” determines intelligence or has any influence on it whatsoever. Some geneticists, however, do not rule out the idea that future research may, perhaps, reveal some connection between the two. That has not yet materialised:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence#Genetics_of_race_and_intelligence

In the meantime, the current state of the art of genetics is that there is no connection between so-called “race” and intelligence. Nevertheless, as you rightly point out, IQ tests reveal that there is an “intelligence gap” between some so-called “races”.

As there is no evidence of biological difference of intelligence among different so-called “races” it is considered that the apparent “intelligence gap” is due, not to a difference in intelligence, per se, but to cultural, environmental or “external” factors which restrict its exercise.

These cultural, environmental or “external” factors act like a mechanical speed limiter on a motor vehicle that prevents it from exceeding a pre-determined speed limit. They do not reduce the intellectual capacity of the individual, they simply prevent him from exercising his full intellectual capacity.

The problem, LEGO, is not how to prove that the IQ tests are wrong. The problem is how to remove the “speed limiter”.

.

.

Oops, it seems the OLO forum does not recognize certain foreign letters !

The Venitian of Croation extraction’s name was Marko Marulic :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marko_Maruli%C4%87

.

Dear Rodney

The first investigation of psychological thought processes was probably begun with the Greek philosophers. But modern Psychology grew out of the scientific investigation of IQ.

Your claim that scientists can not find a link between race and crime, I would counter by saying that in western societies today, it is dangerous and illegal to do so. When the Director of the US National Institute for Mental Health, Dr Frederick Goodwin, publically declared a link between race and crime, he was sacked. The black vote is more important than science. When Nobel Laureate Francis Crick, co discoverer of the double helix, and head of the prestigious Human Genome Project, said that Africans had low intelligence, he was sacked. When the Human Genome Project team tried to begin a project called "Genetic factors in Crime", the US NAACP lobbied the US Congress to withhold funds and shut it down.

100 years of intelligence testing has conclusively proven that incarcerated prisoners generally have below average intelligence. Even AJ concedes that. Black prisoners are very disproportionately represented in incarceration rates. 1+1 equals 2.

The concept of race as a generalized human classification exists as a self evident fact.

You don't need a PhD in genetics to figure out that some ethnicities are generally not too bright. All you have to do is to socialise with them. Low intelligence and crime is linked. Intelligence is heritable. Genetics and crime are linked. And if genetics, low intelligence, and crime are linked, and some ethnicities are very disproportionately represented in criminal behaviour, then race and crime must be linked. It all fits, doesn't it Rodney?

Your claim that intellectual capacity can be limited has merit. The reason why Asians are generally smarter than every other race has probably got something to do with the fact that continuous Asian civilisations have been around for thousands of years. Given time, all races have the capacity to evolve and increase their intelligence levels through constantly being forced to exercise their higher learning skills. But at this point in time, racial IQ bell curves are different.