Can we have some discussion of Scientific Racism (also called Race Realism, Jensenism, or Hereditarianism). This is the view that races show innate differences in mental and physical traits (other than merely superficial things like skin color, facial features or hair texture). There is a growing presence of bloggers that espouse this viewpoint which they refer to as the Human Bio-Diversity movement (these HBD blogs include Steve Sailer, Gene Expression, One Standard Deviation, Half Sigma, etc.).

Nearly everybody agrees that racial/ethnic groups differ in average IQs (approximate levels: African Americans 85, Hispanics 89, European Americans 100, East Asians 108, Jews 115). These groups also differ in performance on standardized tests and academic attainment, this is often referred to as the racial "academic achievement gap". The Hereditarians see the achievement gap as a direct result of these racial differences in IQ-type intelligence.

If it is true that races have innate differences in IQ, then is still racist to believe in the truth?

yes it is facist but like most things facist, its probably correct.

Truth does not matter. Progressive dogma was never fact based, but feelings based. Left-wingers would even go so far as demonize all those who dare search for the truth, because reality always contradicts progressive dogma.

To protect the jungle’s feelings, the politically correct term is now rain forest. Extrapolate politically correct thinking to the human species, and your question becomes too extreme to even consider. Progressives would harm you (destroy humanity) to prevent the world from understanding reality.

How about the theories and the supposed tests that Nazis espoused that "proved" their theories on Jewish people? I suppose azzholes can make any prejudice sound fact based if they want to. The problem is the dummies who believe it. Who in their right mind would believe that the average African American IQ is 85 and Hispanics average a bit higher - only a racist and an a**hole. That's who.

Cusano18:

To protect the jungle’s feelings, the politically correct term is now rain forest.

That's not being politically correct; it's being precise. A rainforest is a particular type of forest. I've never heard someone say not to use the word "jungle" because it's not politically correct.