[Nug]

This will be fun.

Originally Posted by wehrmacht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The IQ differences are already there at age 3 even with parents from the same economic group:

"Currently, the existence of the 15-to-18 point difference (1.1 standard deviations) between Blacks and Whites in the U.S. is not in itself a matter of empirical dispute."

"Further, the Black-White IQ difference shows up before 3 years of age on most standardized test batteries, even after matching on maternal education and other variables. Therefore it is not due to poor education since this has not yet begun to exert an effect. (The East Asian IQ advantage appears by five years of age.)"

"Basic genetic theory predicts that the IQ of offspring will regress towards the mean IQ of the population group from which the parents come. This has been amply documented for a number of physical traits in humans and in other species."

"Regression to the mean is seen, typically, when individuals with high IQ scores mate. Their children tend to show lower scores than their parents. The converse happens for low IQ parents; they have children with somewhat higher IQs. This is because the parents pass on some, but not all, of their exceptional genes to their offspring. It is analogous to rolling a pair of dice and having them come up two 6’s or two 1’s. The odds are that on the next roll, you will get some value that is not quite as high (or as low)."

"Genetic theory predicts the precise magnitude of the regression effect. Culture-only theory makes no systematic or quantitative predictions. Black children with parents of IQ 115 regress to the Black IQ average of 85, while White children with parents of IQ 115 regress to the White IQ average of 100. Regression to a lower average IQ helps to explain the fact that Black children born to high IQ, wealthy, Black parents have test scores 2 to 4 points lower than do White children born to low IQ, poor White parents."

http://www-users.york.ac.uk/~mb55/talks/regmean.htm

First off, it seems like you are incapable of processing information you read. That SAME page you listed (I looked it up) supported what I said about socioeconomic upbringing. Allow me to put it simply for you, since I doubt you'll sit down and actually READ everything you quote from and only pick bits and pieces out to help reaffirm your racist beliefs.

A discrepancy will exist, but it is not because of "race". Intelligence is not like skin color or eye shape. That page you linked even admitted to not accounting for goddamn external factors. How is that scientific?

Also, why even bother with the link to regression to the mean? Trying to put up the facade that you're linking something that's been actually scientifically scrutinized and cross examined?

Originally Posted by wehrmacht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

That book doesn't have a shred of science in it. It starts with the preconceived notion that every black deficiency is caused by white people. It doesn't go into anything concerning genetics or non-elementary evolution. If you want an actual scientific book on why some societies live in mud huts and others invent space shuttles, read "IQ and the Wealth of Nations":

http://www.amazon.com/IQ-Wealth-Nati.../dp/027597510X

1.) Spoken like someone who hasn't even bothered looking at what the book actually says.
2.) I lol'd hard when I saw what book you linked. Hard.

Originally Posted by wehrmacht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Nothing about natural selection predicts equality. It doesn't require the species to diverge from one another before the differences become huge either.

Oh boy, high school biology. You do realize that what you just wrote has nothing to do with anything, right?

Originally Posted by wehrmacht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is too stupid to even respond to. Your claim has already been proven false by the millions of people on earth using steroids that noticed pretty fucking clearly that it caused them to become more aggressive.

It's already become clear to everybody that you don't value scientific research one bit. You DO know what anabolic steroids are and how they're produced, right? And the difference between that and naturally made testosterone? Or the fact that your beloved "correlation not causation" applies to our knowledge of steroid abuse?