If the "science" in this area resembles the presentation in any of these articles, all the participants are playing the same game, pseudo-science. This nonsense makes "intelligent design" look like atomic physics. Each side just adjusts its standards to avoid being falsified. The question for each side should be, what experiment would you accept as dispositively falsifying your claim? If the answer requires completely reordering society first, you will know that this is really about politics, not science.

yeah. what he said.

Got 200 Million dollars I'll raise 100 black and 100 white poor orphans form babes up in the Rocky mountains in a monastic setting, providing for the best education/environment. At the age of 18 I'll test their IQ and we'll begin to understand from a psychology point of view only if black and white mean IQ's are a standard deviation or more different because of genes.

Spiker, there would still be a flaw in your experiment: the conditions of the mothers of those orphan babies (were they well-fed, happy, relaxed while pregnant, or undernourished and stressed, etc); did they have a full-term, uncomplicated delivery, or were there problems? In the times of large rural families and inadequate medical care, many families had one or more feeble-minded children, because of complications during delivery which prevented enough oxygen from reaching the baby's brain. Feeble-minded women born under such conditions do not necessarily produce subnormal children themselves, if they have a normal pregnancy and delivery.

Do you think a study couldn't screen for those variables?

I'm sure that the term "poor" used in the description would also greatly help ensure a fair starting point.

Too easy.

Critics would just claim that those rasing the children had subconsciously conditioned the children differently based upon skin color.

That the post assumed that black and white were the relevant groups to study speaks volumes about deeply ingrained prejudices.

To easy my butt. There are plenty of people who are not racist and that could be trained to raise these children. You could also have an extensive live recording system that would give staff a sense of being watched. Plus you'd hire staff with high IQ's. :-)

As far as your second sentiment goes about assuming relevant groups indicates it is because these two groups are the ones that are pertinent given the race realists arguments on the subject.

BTW, if you pay attention to the discussion I'm not a race realist. In fact I come across as anti "race realist"

Spiker writes: "BTW, if you pay attention to the discussion I'm not a race realist. In fact I come across as anti "race realist."

This is true.

However, dear Spiker, you made the mistake of actually proposing an experiment that would probably give very useful results. The mere fact of thinking in scientific terms about the question of race and IQ makes you suspect in the eyes of those who prefer to remain in ignorance.

Isn't it depressing how little it takes to be considered a "racist" these days? If you're not careful it could happen to you, too.

Jared Taylor

Jared. Just the guy I was looking for:

Could youp please name and link (to the original source/researchers:*.edu site) the top 10 studies that show White-Black IQ differences on the order of a standard deviation or more. Preferably the ones that most control for environment directly and preferably done after 1985.

Are men more intelligent as measured by IQ than women by 5-6 IQ points?

BTW Jared, short term, this hypothetical experiment example undermines most the of the "research" you cite. There is an ethical test that can be done that would control for the vast majority of environmental factors. Since your cited research so poorly isolates environment they become rather stale, don't you think?

I think I should have been clearer.

My suggested experiment shows how un-scientific your cited research is.

The best place to look for research is not on the Internet.

The g Factor, by Arthur Jensen is excellent. (He also concludes that there are no differences in IQ between men and women.)

Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen's IQ and Global Inequality includes references to a very large number of tests. Lynn concludes that men have a slight advantage in IQ, but does not cover that question in this book.

Jared Taylor

Well I'm expecting to find contemporary data (last 20 years) that is strictly black-white, American and "mountains" of it (i.e. data). I don't want to be fed digested information (Jensen). I want raw studies with methodology included.

Real meat.