the within group heritability of IQ is about 90%

the heritability of IQ itself is less interesting than the heritability of g though, which is more heritable and important than IQ (iq is to a great exent just an imperfect proxy measure of g)

the between group heritability is probably about the same as the within group heritability and by default assuming otherwise always seemed insane to me

sub-saharan africans in africa probably have a smaller between group heritability compared to other groups (depending on what those other groups are) vs sub-saharan africans in other places mainly due to biological environmental deficits that are actually operative in sub-saharan africa but are not meaningful in industrialised countries elsewhere

the rushton suzuki debate, an oldie but a goodie, is still relevant today



measuring admixture in individuals is much more sophisticated and easy today compared to 1989 which has enabled some really convincing ways of measuring between group heritability effects; i'd say those study designs are practically dispositive on this question. i'd like to see them repeated with abos here, but no one will ever let you do that

50mins in and Suzuki has still just offered quotes from other Academics and just attacking Rushton as Academic. David so far hasn't even attempted to confront the stats, etc. David coming across as a Racist so far - supporting the 'sweep racism under the carpet' method, rather than bring it out into the open for the brave to face to understand and rise above it.

1hr in and Suzuki's comeback is a bit better.
Rushton is just putting his research out there as right and he is right.
Suzuki though has still tried to just say he is wrong, as his right.

JC Denton wrote on Feb 14^th, 2024 at 1:26pm:


What would it prove, or how would it enable government to close the gap?

You are all still ignoring (or unaware of) the fact that good government can eradicate systemic poverty.

Which is why you are trying to blame poverty on genetics, so you don't have to bother about eradicating poverty.

Deplorable.   

JC Denton wrote on Feb 15^th, 2024 at 12:47pm:


Of course it is; a suitable above poverty job (ie, useful work, matched to the indivdual's abilities) by definition will eradicate systemic poverty.

Quote:


Nonsense, and YOU are not absolved: anyone can perform useful work, regardless of identity. 

Quote:


If you insist on remaining ignorant about money, including "taxpayer money"  so be it.

But stop blaming blacks for the egregious gap your ignorance is responsible for. 

Note: a currency-issuing government doesn't NEED your money, by definition. That's just a convention still hanging over from the middle ages when even kings had to borrow money from the local usurer/banker. 

Quote:


"Sociologist's fallacy"? Actually it's a brain-dead mainstream economists' fallacy. 

We are well past the classical era of scarcity in the face of  unlimited wants.

In the age of AI and IT, there  is no scarcity of essentials, so it's time for practitioners of 'the dismal science' to think again.

[eg the farmers' protests in India: good harvests mean prices fall and farmers can't pay their debts....absolute economic madness.]

Quote:


Ignorance is indeed deplorable.

"everybody should just work in good paying jobs bro that'll eliminate poverty"



what an absolutely amazing and brilliant plan nobody has ever thought of this before

Quote:


even in your peabrained utopia somehow getting everyone into doing "'useful" work (however the f_ck you define that lol) will not actually eliminate the gap (as defined just by income anyway) though cuz there'll still be income differentials stratified by ability levels genius

fmd i know exactly where your dumb beliefs lead to: dei & hiring retards to do jobs they're not capable of doing etc all to satisfy your monomaniac obsession with eliminating group differences

might as well mandate that a certain % of midgets can play in basketball tournaments to eliminate the midget-non midget professional basketball representation gap 

Quote:


the sociologists fallacy is a term for a specific fallacy you commit frequently lol im not explaining it to you myself

thegreatdivide wrote on Feb 16^th, 2024 at 10:51am:


... or to give it it it's full, proper name, political economy.

anyway, the market is not based on greed but on self-interest. NOT the same thing at all.

Frank wrote on Feb 16^th, 2024 at 10:58am:


Ok....self-interest.

But the market driven by self-interested individuals seeking money/profit doesn't place a money value on a well maintained public park.

Only the non-market-based community can do that.