Some IQ Conundrums

On the post IQ Is a Meaningful Construct, two commenters make some interesting comments. First cursed and then tulio comment, then my comments follow:

cursed: I have no problems believing that Blacks are stupid, but one thing that puzzles me is how a guy like Mohamed Ali (before he got punch drunk) summoned forth dazzlingly quick witted rhetoric, yet on his armed forces enlistment test he registered an 80 IQ.

White guys with an 80 IQ can in no way shape or form talk like Ali could. I’m not trying to let blacks off the hook for performing poorly on standardized test, but I think those guys brains work a little differently.

tulio: What cursed said is why I think we aren’t even close to conclusions about race and intelligence. I can think of many instances where a Black person who scored low on an IQ test didn’t necessarily come across as unintelligent. Also tests show IQ’s of 70 for Black Africa and I’ve even seen some groups with scores in the 60s, I think the Australian Aborigines score 62.
Now think about it, someone with an IQ in the 60s would be functionally retarded. They wouldn’t even be capable of normal activities like driving a car.
Yet the average African or Aborigine can operate a vehicle just fine and they are perfectly functional. So I do think there are some questions to be asked of how useful these tests are in gauging one’s intelligence, or at least the intelligence of groups that grossly-underperform on them.
I’m sorry, I have a seriously hard time believing that the average African or Aborigine is functionally retarded. Also, IQ is only one component of intelligence. And I think its importance in society and good desirable behavior is very overrated.
A person with a high IQ will probably be good at things like math, winning chess matches and solving computer programming bugs.
However, IQ doesn’t measure more esoteric but possibly more crucial survival skills such as “common sense” or just general “life wisdom”. I’m willing to bet that the people who run the flat earth society are intelligent and probably would do well on an IQ test, yet they have no common sense if they believe in such nonsense.
Look at Bobby Fischer, the late chess champion, guy’s IQ was probably off the charts, yet if you read any of his social commentary after 9/11 the dude was a complete moron.
The Mohammed Ali bit is interesting. It reminds of some of the freestyle rappers that I’ve heard. If you’re not familiar with that, “freestyle rap” is when a rapper has no pre-written lyrics but is making up rhyming verses on the fly that not only rhyme and make sense but can also be quite witty.
I’ve tried it myself once just to see if I could do it, and found it extremely difficult. It takes intelligence.
But who knows, if you gave these same guys an IQ test, they may not do too well. Maybe there is something to the multiple intelligences theory. Maybe we don’t know enough about the nature of intelligence to draw any conclusions of this time.
On the original post, Robert Lindsay wrote: The lower the IQ, the more likely the person is to do stupid things – go to jail or prison, commit crimes or lots of crimes, have kids out of wedlock or as a teenager, parent multiple children by multiple partners, be a lousy parent to your child if you’re female or refuse to support the kid if you’re male, go on welfare, engage in domestic violence, have poor to low morals, join a street gang, shoot someone or get shot, refuse to plan for the future, drink or take drugs, die young, never go to the doctor, engage in extremely risky behaviors, fall victim to injurious or life-threatening accidents, refuse to engage in healthy behaviors such as eating properly and exercising, etc.
I’m not convinced at all that low IQ leads to pathological behavior. I think this is a values issue, not an intelligence/genetic one. For example, yes people in jail will probably have lower IQ’s, but I think a more accurate way of reading this is that people with low IQ’s are simply more likely to get caught because they commit more petty crimes.
The leaders of crime rings are quite intelligent, they are the least likely to end up in prison. They are smart enough to cover their tracks, use lower IQ pawns to do their dirty work, work the system to their advantage and evade capture. I really don’t like assigning low-intelligence rationales to behaviors that could better be explained by low VALUES.

The commenters raise some interesting questions for which there are no good answers. It doesn’t really make sense.
The Black Africans with IQ’s of 70 or 65 or so are not retarded in the same way that a White person with an IQ that low would be. So in a way, those scores don’t make sense.
I have a Yahoo group where we fight scammers in Nigeria.
These guys probably have IQ’s of ~67 . Yet we had some White victims who were low IQ (I figure maybe ~72 IQ) and these Nigerians just danced circles around them for months on end and cleaned them out for $10,000’s. They were so much smarter than these women it was not even funny.
Your average African or Aborigine is not functionally retarded in the same way that a White with a below 70 IQ is. However, we spent a lot of time dealing with these African scammers, talking to them, etc. In some ways, these guys were dumb as rocks.
They can’t spell or construct a meaningful sentence, and their intellectual processes are just stupid in a lot of ways. Nevertheless, they were able to survive, and they were brilliant at reading people psychologically and manipulating them. They had a genius “Con Artist IQ.” They also often had excellent social skills. They are able to work and function in their societies, they have friends, they date, marry, and raise kids, all the things that below 70 IQ Whites often cannot do.
I have not dealt much with Aborigines, but I suspect that a similar thing is going on. I have seen some of them commenting on Youtube videos, and their writing reminded me of the Africans. They can’t spell to save their lives, can’t construct a sentence, and their writing comes across as stupid. Yet they can function in that they are sociable, can make friends, date, marry, raise families, etc. and even work at jobs concordant with their culture.
The White nationalists and scientific racist types have some argument that tries to explain this, but it never made sense to me. They argue that a 65 IQ in a Black is not the same as a 65 IQ in a White. Well, ok, but if not, why not? Nevertheless, they still argue that the 65 IQ Black is still retarded.
I suppose the point is that in our modern society, IQ tests do indeed measure all sorts of important things, such as ability to succeed in the workplace of a modern society. Societies with low IQ’s don’t do very well. Those with high IQ’s do better. IQ tests also predict very well how one does in school, and even how one does on the job.
They also predict all sorts of other things. The list of pathological behaviors that tulio is saying have no basis in IQ in fact do have such a basis.
The lower the IQ, the more likely people are to do what I call above stupid things. The higher the IQ, the less likely they are to do those stupid things. The notion that high-IQ types lack common sense is also not true. It’s hard to imagine a more commonsensical behavior than keeping healthy or living a long time. The higher the IQ, the longer you live and the healthier you are.
There just flat out are not a whole lot of ways in which high IQ people act stupid. It’s said that some of them have poor social skills, but I think that this is often due to neurosis, shyness, introversion, etc. They come across as strange because their heads are in the clouds all the time.
I don’t think that neurotics, shy people, introverts, etc. are social retards or lack social skills. A neurotic is ill, and in many cases, I think they can’t help it. Introverts and shy people are not social idiots; they’re just introverts.
If you subtract that stuff, I’ve found that most high IQ people have pretty good social skills. They are often very careful about what they say, they monitor conversational attributes, verbal and nonverbal, very well, and are constantly adjusting their verbal and nonverbal behaviors based on those cues.
Some of them are “deliberately eccentric” in that they just don’t give a damn about social rules that much and seem to delight in breaking them on purpose just to thumb their noses at society. The notion of the high-IQ social retard is dubious.
Much has been made of “emotional intelligence,” and some books have even been written on it. People love this stuff because everyone hates IQ, mostly because they don’t have a very high one, and they are jealous. EQ was a way to get back at all those uppity brainiac nerds. The problem is that EQ is highly correlated with IQ, so the argument starts going round in circles.
So you can go on all you want about how IQ doesn’t matter, but bottom line is that low-IQ folks in modern societies tend to not do so well. That’s just all there is to it. So right there, that implies that the tests are indeed measuring something meaningful, or at least something meaningful in our modern societies.

Please follow and like us:
Tweet 20

105 thoughts on “Some IQ Conundrums”

  1. Have you seen this…
    “In two earlier VDARE.COM articles (click here and here), I discussed the low average African IQ of 70 reported by Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen in their path-breaking book IQ and the Wealth of Nations.
    As their IQ map of the world illustrates, the average IQ for all countries is 90 (The Wealth of Nations is mapped by their IQ, By Glen Owen, November 10, 2003). Less than one in five countries has national IQs equal or near the British norm of 100. Almost half the countries have national IQs of 90 or less.
    If IQ and the Wealth of Nations is correct that an average IQ of 90 forms the threshold for a technological economy, this poses a serious problem.
    But can that African 70 average IQ be real? It is indeed extremely low, the lowest found in any comparable area. This has caused many to dismiss the finding.
    I know that the figure is not a fluke, however, because for the last six years I have collected African IQ data on hundreds of students at the prestigious University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg, South Africa. The average IQ for these African students turns out to be 84. Assuming they score 15 points above the general average, as university students of any group typically do, then an average African IQ of 70 is implied—exactly what the direct measurements show.
    An IQ of 70 suggests mental retardation—at least it would in the White populations of Europe, North America, Australia and New Zealand. There it would frequently be associated with dysfunctional social behavior and visible deficiencies.
    This is because, as Arthur Jensen pointed out in his 1998 book, The g Factor, retardation in Whites is often the result of a single gene or chromosomal anomaly, which also causes physical abnormalities and mechanical deficiencies effecting motor or speech skills. But, clearly, these abnormalities and deficiencies are not seen in the bulk of the black population of Sub-Saharan Africa.
    What’s going on?
    One way to think about an African IQ of 70 is in terms of “mental age”—that is, a person’s mental age in relation to his chronological age. Nowadays, standard scores based on the normal distribution (or “bell curve”) have replaced the concept of mental age. But it still provides a way to understand differences.
    An average IQ of 100 is set to a mental age of 16. Adult Whites, then, have an average mental age of 16, with a normal range (plus or minus one standard deviation) of from less than 14 years to over 18 years.
    African Americans average about 25% European ancestry and have an IQ of 85, which is equivalent to a mental age of nearly 14, with a range of from 11 to 16 years.
    An IQ of 70 in adults, then, is equivalent to a mental age of about 11 years. This would make the normal range of mental ages found in Africa to be from less than 9 years to almost 14 years.
    Eleven-year-olds, of course, are not retarded. They can drive cars, build houses, and work in factories if supervised properly. Eleven-year-olds can even wage war—and do so in many parts of the world…
    It may be surprising to learn that Blacks also have higher self-esteem than Whites and East Asians. This is true even when Blacks are poorer and less educated. In one large study of 11- to 16-year-olds, Blacks rated themselves as more attractive than did Whites. Blacks also rated themselves higher in reading, science and social studies (but not in mathematics).
    The Blacks said this even though they knew they had lower actual academic achievement scores than White children.
    In contrast, East Asian students, even though they score higher in academic achievement than Whites, often score lower in self-esteem.
    What I am suggesting then, is that Blacks have a self-assured “bright” talkative, personality, which leads many people to over-estimate their abstract reasoning ability. East Asians provide a “compare and contrast” case study with people under-estimating their IQ because of their quietness and otherwise “subdued” personality profile. East Asians who average higher than Whites on IQ tests (107 versus 100) have often been described to me as seeming “dull and uncreative” compared to Whites, achieving what they do only through unimaginative rote learning, imitation, and memorization.
    The relative restraint of East Asians contrasted with the noisiness of Africans is apparent to anyone visiting their home continents. When the New York Yankees played the first game of the 2004 baseball season before a packed stadium in Tokyo, Japan, the announcers noted how very much quieter the crowd was than those at games in the U.S. But it was a more tranquil disposition, not a lack of interest in the game, which hushed the stands.
    Because of the time difference, people all over Japan regularly get up at two in the morning to view games broadcast from the U.S. featuring American teams which include Japanese-born stars.
    Like any other group, Whites look upon themselves as the norm. Whites tend not to speak up if they don’t know the answer to a question. Nor do they like to intrude on the privacy of others. They erroneously assume that, because Africans are talkative, they must know what they are talking about.”

    1. Rushton and Jensen don’t make sense. You’re just repeating their senseless statements.
      Yes, I’ve read that article and all such articles, and still none of it makes any sense.
      Whites with <70 IQ's can't function. They can't drive cars, work, marry, have kids, date, or do much of anything. They can't even live on their own. And none of that is because they talk funny or walk funny. It's because they are too stupid to do any of these things properly.
      Africans and Aborigines with <70 IQ's can do all of these things and more. Plus they have superb social skills. They can do all the above, quite well, and on their own, just fine.
      In this way, they differ dramatically from Whites with <70 IQ's.
      It doesn't make sense that the 67 IQ Nigerian scammers are able to run circles around Americans with IQ's of 65-73. The Nigerians were vastly more intelligent than the 65-73 IQ Americans in some very important ways. In particular, the Africans had excellent social intelligence and social skills. They were geniuses at "con artist IQ".
      I realize that these Africans and Aborigines are not geniuses, but our tests do not seem to be measuring their intelligence properly.

    2. Robert,
      In America 16% of blacks are retarded. Do you think that the tests don’t accurately measure their intelligence?
      Whites with IQs of 70 have something else wrong with them. They can’t drive or work because they are diseased. In addition to giving them a low IQ their genetic package makes them uncoordinated or foam at the mouth or whatever. A black with an IQ of 70 is usually otherwise normal.
      I’m repeating the argument that makes sense. Rushton says that an IQ of 70 is equivalent to a European 11 year old. 11 year olds can drive cars, work, and mate if physically mature enough. So can adults with equivalent IQs if nothing else is wrong with them. What about that do you doubt?

    3. Whites with IQs of 70 have something else wrong with them. They can’t drive or work because they are diseased.
      Forget it. I’ve known a few of these folks who were quite normal. They can’t drive or work or do any of those other things because they are too dumb.
      In America 16% of blacks are retarded. Do you think that the tests don’t accurately measure their intelligence?
      Yeah, the tests do not measure it accurately. Are they all on SSI? No way. Most every White below 70 is on SSI. Not because he’s diseased, because he’s too stupid to work. I bet a lot of those 16% are working or functional in one way or another, married, kids, driving cars, paying bills, renting property.
      I’m repeating the argument that makes sense.
      It doesn’t make sense. It’s never made sense.
      Rushton says that an IQ of 70 is equivalent to a European 11 year old. 11 year olds can drive cars, work, and mate if physically mature enough.
      Maybe so, but when a White has an IQ <70, we don't let them do any of these things, really. They don't even live on their own. Why? Too stupid to do any of those things, says society. I've spent a lot of time around the local retarded folks, so I know them well.
      So can adults with equivalent IQs if nothing else is wrong with them.
      But we don’t let them.
      What about that do you doubt?
      My position: There is a “Black intelligence” is qualitatively different from “White intelligence.” This is a race realist position, since the races are quite different. The IQ tests do not accurately measure Black intelligence and compare it to White intelligence, which is a false measurement. In particular, a <70 IQ Black is just not the same critter as a <70 IQ White.
      How else could those 67 IQ Nigerians run circles around 65-73 IQ Whites and Hispanics? They ran circles around them because in some ways, they were dramatically more intelligent. In other ways, they were just as dumb. But their superior social and practical intelligence enabled them to keep these Americans with even higher IQ's running around like chickens with their heads cut off.

      1. …not to mention the outstanding capacity of 11-year-olds to annoy and infuriate, and their off-the-charts BQ (Brattishness Quotient)

    4. “My position: There is a “Black intelligence” is qualitatively different from “White intelligence.” This is a race realist position, since the races are quite different. The IQ tests do not accurately measure Black intelligence and compare it to White intelligence, which is a false measurement. In particular, a <70 IQ Black is just not the same critter as a <70 IQ White."
      We agree. But calling whatever extra blacks have that's not measured in IQ tests "intelligence" isn't legitimate. The word has a very specific definition in the scientific literature.

    5. I don’t agree with the literature then. This is a case where the tests are not accurately measuring something. Once you start getting <70 in a lot of groups like Aborigines, Pygmies, Bushmen, Papuans and Africans, I don't think the tests are accurately measuring their intelligence. None of these groups is retarded in the same sense of being dumb as a rock as an American with <70 IQ is. At that level, those tests are not that good anymore.

    6. Richard:This is some information that logically eradicates, your low African I.Q theory and explains the unethical, prejudiced, European I.Q. tests which are most certaintly culturally biased.
      African Blacks significantly Exceed Whites in Educational Attainment and Occupational Status:
      African-born blacks comprise about 16 percent of the U.S. foreign-born black population (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000), and are “considerably” more educated than other immigrants. The vast majority of these immigrants come from minority white countries in East and West Africa (e.g. Kenya and Nigeria). While less than 2 percent originate from North or South Africa (CIA World Factbook, 2004; Yearbook of immigration Statistics, 2003). In an analysis of Census Bureau data by the Journal of Blacks in higher education, African immigrants to the United States were found more likely to be college educated than any other immigrant group, which included those from Europe, North America and Asia (see also Nisbett, 2002; U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000). African immigrants have also been shown to be more highly educated than any native-born ethnic group including white and Asian Americans (Logan & Deane, 2003; Williams, 2005; The Economist, 1996; Arthur, 2000; Selassie, 1998; Nisbett, 2002).
      Most data suggests that between 43.8 and 49.3 percent of “all” African immigrants in the United States hold a college diploma (Nisbett, 2002; Charles, 2007; U.S. Census, 2000). This is slightly more than the percentage of Asian immigrants to the U.S., substantially greater than the percentage of European immigrants, nearly “double” that of native-born white Americans, and more than “8 times” that of some Hispanic groups (Williams, 2005; Nisbett, 2002; The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 1999-2000; U.S. Census, 2000). Black immigrants from Africa have also been shown to have rates of college graduation that are “more” than double that of the U.S. born population, in general (Williams, 2005). For example, in 1997, 19.4 percent of all adult African immigrants in the United States held a “graduate degree”, compared to 8.1 percent of adult whites (a difference of “more than” double)(The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 1999-2000). This shows that America has an equally large achievement gap between white Americans and African born immigrants.
      In the UK, 1988, the Commission for Racial Equality conducted an investigation on the admissions practices of St. George’s, and other medical colleges, who set aside a certain number of places for minority students. This informal quota system reflected the percentage of minorities in the general population. However, minority students with Chinese, Indian, or black African heritage had higher academic qualifications for university admission than did whites. In fact, blacks with African origins over the age of 30 had the highest educational qualifications of any ethnic group in the British Isles. Thus, the evidence pointed to the fact that minority quotas for university admissions were actually working against students from these ethnic groups who were on average more qualified for higher education than their white peers (Cross, 1994; Also see, Dustmann and Theodoropoulos, 2006). Dustmann and Theodoropoulos (2006) provided the first thorough investigation of educational attainment and economic behavior of ethnic minority immigrants and their children in Britain. This study investigated how British born minorities performed in terms of education, employment and wages when compared to their parent’s generation, as well as to comparable groups of white natives, using 27 years of “LFS data” (Labour Force Survey). For both generations Black Africans topped the list in both years of schooling/educational qualifications and wages/employment, followed by Indian and Chinese immigrants. In terms of educational attainment levels, their results showed a strong educational background for Britain’s ethnic minority immigrant population, in general, with second generation ethnic minorities on average doing better than their parents, and “substantially better” than their white peers for most socio-economic indicators.
      Again, when comparing immigrants in the United States one quickly finds that the racialist models adopted by many Psychologists do not always predict outcomes in the way one might expect. For example, it has been shown that black immigrants born from Zimbabwe (96.7 percent), Botswana (95.5 percent) have high school graduation rates that far exceed all white immigrant and native born groups. While the average Nigerian immigrant (58.6 percent) living in the United States is “eight times” more likely to have obtained a bachelors degree than the average Portuguese born (7.3 percent) (Dixon D, 2006; Dixon D, 2005)! The African born in the United States are concentrated in management or professional and sales or office-related occupations. Of the employed population age 16 and older in the civilian labor force, the African born are much more likely than the foreign born in general to work in management and professional occupations as well as sales and office occupations (i.e. clerical/administrative). Additionally, the African born are less likely to work in service, production, transportation, material moving, construction, and maintenance occupations than the foreign born in general (Dixon D, 2006). In the UK a study by Li and Heath, from Birmingham University and Oxford University (respectively), found that Africans are more likely to be in professional and managerial jobs than white British men, with a large proportion, about 40%, holding these positions (Li and Heath, 2006; Cassidy, 2006). The information presented above suggests that African born blacks residing in western countries as a group possess IQs that are between 5 points and a full standard deviation (15 IQ points) above that of whites living in these countries (see, Gottfredson, 1998; Ostrowsky, 1999; Richardson, 2002; Cross, 1994; Williams, 2005; Nisbett, 2002). So that the median IQ for African blacks residing in the west should be about 110, if one accepts the research suggesting direct casual relationships between academic attainment and IQ (Gottfredson, 1998; Ostrowsky, 1999)! This is especially true for those living in the United States and in the UK.
      A Closer Look at Culturally Bias Testing:
      Barnes (1972) noted that the Stanford-Binet, and the Wisc IQ tests are examples of “Culture specific tests,” and that the culture in this instance is what is referred to as “white middle class” culture. Lyman (1970) designed a cross cultural test called the “American Cross Culture Ethnic Nomenclature Test”, or “ACCENT.” The instrument contained 20 black biased and 20 white biased items. In one experiment this test was administered to 110 undergraduates (91 whites and 19 blacks). It was found that the black participants out performed the white participants, with blacks obtaining a mean of 15.3 on the black items and 11.1 on the white items, while white subjects obtained a mean of 12.7 on the white items and 8.3 on the black items. The results indicate that when blacks and whites are tested cross-culturally that blacks may outperform whites.
      Williams and Rivers (1972b) showed that test instructions in Standard English penalized the black child; and that if the language of the test is put in familiar labels, without training or coaching, the black child’s performances on the tests increase significantly. It has been pointed out that ideally a child’s language development should be evaluated in terms of his progress toward the norms for his own particular speech community (Cadzen, 1966). However, this kind of evaluation is rarely, if ever, done with respect to African American students. Studies using sentence repetition tasks have found that at both third and fifth grades, white subjects repeated Standard English sentences significantly more accurately than black subjects, while black subjects repeated nonstandard English sentences significantly more accurately than white subjects (Marwit et al, 1977). Students in American schools are only taught and tested in Standard English, which puts African Americans at a decided disadvantage. In fact, this issue was at the center debates concerning the use of Ebonics in the American school system, during the 1990s.
      It is argued that traditional psychological assessment is based on skills that are considered important within white, western, middle-class culture, but which may not be salient or valued within African-American culture (Helms, 1992; Helms, 1997; Hilliard, 1995). When test stimuli are more culturally pertinent to the experiences of African Americans, performance improves (Hayles, 1991; Williams and Rivers, 1972b). Research shows that “Black Culture” tends to depict problem solving as an integrative hemispheric endeavor rather than a linear, analytical process (Bell, 1994), and that in this culture “psychological closeness” is necessary for one’s involvement in the phenomena which he seeks to understand. It has also been shown that culturally diverse learners are often excluded in educational programs in the U.S. through misidentification, misassessment, miscategorization, misplacement, and misinstruction-misintervention (Obiakor and Utley, 2004). Kwate (2001) provides evidence that IQ tests are antagonistic and incompatible with an African centered conception of intelligence and mental health.
      Studies using empirical methods find that cultural differences in the provision of information account for racial differences in IQ scores. For example, Fagan and Holland (2007) asked African-Americans and white Americans to solve problems typical of those administered on standard IQ tests. Half of the problems were solvable on the basis of information generally available to either race, or on the basis of information newly learned; while other problems were only solvable on the basis of specific previous knowledge. In this study specific knowledge varied with race and was shown to be subject to test bias (Fagan and Holland, 2007).
      The General European I.Q. Test design:
      IQ tests are not constructed on the basis of any scientific model of intelligence; they are simply created (by statistical manipulation of item content) to identify individuals who have already been deemed to be ‘intelligent’ by other, more subjective, criteria (Richarson, 2002; Richardson, 2000). These criteria involve what is called, “norm-referencing.” In norm-referenced tests, items which do not discriminate between preselected groups are simply rejected or thrown out (Williams, 1972). So that test factors are no more than a product of the arbitrary way that ability items are devised or selected for inclusion in psychometric tests. Norm referenced measures are by far the most common method used, trying out and discarding items based on item correlations is a major part of the standardized test construction enterprise. In this respect, not only can one expect to find examples of “cultural bias” built into IQ tests, but also, “observer bias.” Psychometric tests are intended to sample performance in some aspect of the test taker’s environment. However, popular IQ tests are hardly able to do this outside of the “white middle class,” to whom the tests are normed. They are also particularly harsh against those who are unfamiliar with “white middle class’” cultural tools and values, or are simply unable to receive an education that is comparable with this group (Richardson, 2000, 2002; Helms 1992, 1997; Barnes, 1972). For this and other reasons the use of IQ tests can be unfair when comparing people outside of certain social groups.
      Psychometric theory states that differences in raw test scores (eg, IQ-scores) of different groups cannot be used to infer group differences in theoretical attributes (e.g. intelligence) unless those test scores accord with a particular set of restrictions, as the same attribute must relate to the same set of observations in the same way in each group (Borsboom, 2006; Mellenbergh, 1989). Wechsler (1944) “himself” warned that his Wechsler Bellevue test norms were to be used exclusively for the white population, stating: “Our norms cannot be used for the colored population of the United states. Though we have tested a large number of colored persons, our standardization is based upon white subjects only (pg. 107).” Virtually all IQ tests in common use today were designed for and normed using one cultural/social group as a reference. For this reason these tests can be insensitive to the cultural perceptions, values or dialectal differences of those from communities outside of this “norm referenced” group (see also, Richarson, 2002; Greenfield, 1997; Sternberg, 2004; Valsiner, 2000; Kwate, 2001; Helms, 1992; Helms, 1997). Williams (1972) administered an intelligence test which was normed on the African American population to group of white Americans to illustrate the effects of cultural bias, and norm referencing. This study found black Americans to demonstrate a “clear superiority” of white Americans (p. 11).

    7. Jason, clearly we are taking the best and the brightest from Africa, and that is why the immigrants do so well.
      I don’t agree that the tests are biased. Anyway, there are reaction time tests that have about a .4 correlation with IQ tests. Africans also score very low on reaction time tests.
      The African IQ is 67 or so. However, the US Black IQ is 87. That’s 20 points difference. White genes could only account for 4 points of that. Where’s the other 16 points? Environment. So I figure that Africans could gain at least 16 pts on that 67 IQ due to environmental betterment. That would give them IQ’s of 83, adequate for performance in the modern world. At 67 IQ, they are just lost at sea, and current state Africa is the logical result.
      Further, there is some evidence that the Flynn Effect is going like gangbusters in Africa for a while now.
      There are also problems with the African IQ scores. I understand that at 67 IQ, there would be almost none at IQ over 130. Like 1 in 8 billion. Yet there are clearly many Africans with IQ’s over 130, so this part makes no sense at all.
      The Raven’s test in particular in culture-fair. There isn’t even any language on it. It’s all just little puzzles and whatnot.

      1. An IQ of 130 is only 4.2 SD above the African mean of 67, so about one in 70,000 black Africans would score this high.

    8. I think the African performance in America proves one thing, that racism in America is not chief force behind black social problems at this point, otherwise the Africans that come here would end up in bad shape as well. That isn’t to say of course that there’s no racism, there clearly is, but it doesn’t seem to be capable of holding back intelligent and driven black people from succeeding. Or put it this way, I’ve rarely if ever met an intelligent, driven black person that wasn’t at least middle class.
      Also, I think what all this IQ stuff boils down to is problem solving skills. I don’t even like trying to quantify people’s intelligence because I think of people I know who I can have an decent conversation with and who may have as much common sense as the next person but I know for sure would bomb an IQ test. Yet this people have enough general smarts to get by in life, stay out of trouble and at least perform some sort of job well enough to make a living and raise kids.
      Where intelligence makes a difference in standard of living is the type of intelligence that gives *problem solving skills*. The difference between successful countries and failing countries is one has a lot of people who can solve problems efficiently and one does not. Same with successful corporations, or successful militaries. African countries have a shortage of people with problem-solving skills. Their governments simply cannot resolve problems and that’s what governments are there to do. Africa desperately needs people that can solve problems. Plain and simple, no other way around it. Under colonialism, Africa had a lot of problem solvers, but also a lot of racism from those same people. Now it has neither the problem solvers nor the racism. What a shitty option to have to choose from. No wonder so many educated Africans just flee to the developed world and never look back. You’d all probably do the same. It’s hard to have hope for that continent when the best and brightest are leaving in large numbers.

    9. tulio, are you familiar with the debate about the Flynn Effect? Whereby the Blacks of today score the same on IQ tests as the Whites of 1959? So how come the 1959 Whites created a great society and the 2009 Blacks create, well, Detroit? I’m sorry but I just don’t get it. I don’t understand Black problems and shortcomings. I’ve analzyed them to death on this blog and they still don’t make any sense to me.
      One thing that I have concluded though, is that 2009 Blacks are certainly not idiots! If they score the same on IQ tests as 1959 Whites then they should be capable of making a 1959 America type society. The fact that they do not is due to many things I guess, but lack of brains doesn’t seem to be one of them.
      A lot of people argue about that 1959 Whites – 2009 Blacks analogy and they argue that the huge Flynn rise has not been a rise in “real intelligence” at all. These people are very frustrating to talk to. IQ tests are real when Whites best Blacks, but they’re not real when Blacks show huge gains. Whatever! Their argument is all based on some complex factor called “g” which is too involved to go into in this comments box, but you can look it up if you want.
      They argue that “g” is the real, pure, raw intelligence, and all the rest of just meaningless noise, IOW, it’s not a real intelligence rise at all. There’s actually some disturbing evidence that they may be right in a sense, but they’re also wrong.
      One of the things that has been going like gangbusters due to the Flynn Effect is “the ability to solve a brand-new problem never seen before without being able to use previous methods.” I will let you think about what that means. Flynn calls it “on the spot problem solving skills.” It’s also something that Blacks seem to be pretty good it.
      I hate to use the word “nigger-rigging,” but even the Whites I know use that word. It means using whatever materials are at hand to come up with some half-assed solution to a problem that at least fixes the matter for the moment anyway, until a better solution comes along. You can also call it “jerry-rigging.” It’s a very important survival skill.
      I know people who hired Black auto mechanics and they said that they were very good at this “jerry-rigging” and finding unique problems to car problems. I would even call it a factor of Black intelligence. Whatever else we say about Blacks, they are survivors. Even the low IQ Blacks in Africa know how to survive, while Whites with the same IQ’s need institutional support.
      What I’m getting at is that Blacks do have some interesting and somewhat unique problem-solving skills that are a component of what I call Black intelligence. It’s also sort of a problem. I understand that in Africa there is a lot of “jerry-rigging” going on. It fixes something temporarily, but then the sewer main breaks in 4 months.
      Anyway, it’s impressive that Westerners, Blacks included, have showed such major gains in this weird category of “on the spot problem solving skills of unique problems.” It frustrates me to no one that these idiots say that is “not intelligence.” Whatever the Hell it is, it would seem to be very useful in modern life, and in particular in modern job performance.

    10. I am familiar with the Flynn debate and I certainly don’t have any answers there either. I mean if we go back a hundred years according the Flynn effect, everyone should be retarded. How was the Roman Empire created? If we subtract 3pts for every decade, Aristotle should’ve been crawling around on all fours like a dog. So I don’t know. The Flynn effect is real and has been proven, but we don’t quite understand it and all its implications.
      As for Detroit, it could be complex. Detroit is suffering from the collapse of auto industry and it’s right in the heart of the decaying rust belt. It’s just not a good place to be for anyone, period.
      Also, Atlanta is at least as black as Detroit and it hardly seems like a hellhole. I used to live there. It seemed like just a normal American city, but with a lot more black people than most places.

    11. The main thing we can both agree on is that whatever is holding Blacks back, it’s not stupidity. I suspect it may have something to do more with “Black personality,” which may have genetic components. They just don’t seem to be all that future-oriented and self-sacrificing, and unfortunately, modern society seems to call for that.

  2. Here’s more on blacks’ “winning personality” with an anecdote about Muhammad Ali in particular.
    “It is this ‘winning personality’ among Blacks, I believe, that makes it hard for so many to accept the validity of their failing tests of abstract reasoning ability.
    A typical academic story comes from professors who, on first exposure to African students, express their delight in the high levels of classroom performance. The students are described as engaged, offering lively opinions, and giving a clear impression of brightness. Only when the students took objectively measured essay or multiple-choice examinations did it become painfully obvious to even the most well-wishing faculty members that their grasp of abstract material failed to live up to their classroom rhetoric.
    Millions around the world delighted in the badinage between Muhammad Ali, perhaps the greatest boxer of all time, who failed the IQ test for his military induction physical, and TV sports announcer Howard Cosell.
    ‘I’m gonna whoop him Howard. You just watch!’ Cosell responded, ‘You’re feeling very truculent today, Muhammad.’ Without batting an eye (or opening a dictionary) Ali uttered one of his trademark retorts, ‘Truculent? If that’s good, I’m it!’
    Asked on the CBS news program Face the Nation, ‘Muhammad, you say you’d never throw a fight, but what about that IQ test?’ Ali shot back, ‘I told you I was the greatest, not the smartest!'”
    I think having a lower IQ and more confidence is sort of like being drunk. I make better conversation under the influence because being more relaxed more than makes up for the intelligence drop. So think of blacks as whites who are buzzed all the time.

    1. I believe that your white Nationalist brand of racism has severly affected your reasoning in the I.Q. race issue. Ali’s not knowing a particular word, is no way indicative of a lack of intelligence. That shows faulty reasoning on your part. Ali’s ability to respond rapidly,sensibly and articulately to trained newscasters who had been to college for public speaking seems to display high level intelligence. As for the I.Q. tests given to Africans there are many questions on them that do not translate to mean anything sensible to the Africans. The tests are not accurately measuring Africans intelligence and that is the “Logical” conclusion to come to. Your other theories are simply ridiculus and preposterous grasping of straws to explain the gap between 67 I.Q. Africans and 67 I.Q. whites. Whites are actually inferior to blacks genetically(Science has proved this) so there is no way that our recessive gened derivities could be naturally smarter than us blacks the founders of civilazation. You are simply an insane bigot.

      1. You comment with regard to IQ non-applicable to Africans as the tests bear no relevance to an African, please explain yourself just how then if the Black populations have a history older than white why if they have equal IQ to white populations then one must say they have had the same throughout history, taking your point of view a black man should have been on the moon 38000 years ago, what is your explanation for this failure to do so.

      2. Humans are genetically inferior to monkeys, dogs, Gorillas and all manner of predatory animal and some which aren’t that being fact are we saying these animals also have an IQ comparable or higher than our own?? Sort of shoots holes in physical traits over that of intelligence. No specific relationship I am thinking except that of a person with less genetic stature requires more intelligence to compete against one that has an impressive genetic stature, clearly, brains will always end up ruling brawn.

    2. A lot of folk tend to have the idea that dominant genes are good for fitness, while recessive genes are negative fitness. This is true to some extent, but many folk don’t really understand why.
      Negative genes tend to be recessive because, if they were dominant, they would affect their hosts in a way that decreased their fitness. Thus dominant fitness reducing genes tend to become extinct, while recessive fitness reducing genes tend to survive.
      Likewise, fitness boosting genes tend to be dominant because if they are dominant they spread faster and better.
      It’s not because mutations which tend to dominant when in conflict tend to be fitness boosting while mutations which tend to recessive when in conflict tend to be fitness reducing. It’s not a property of the mutation, but a property of selection.
      The alleles which cause skin lightening in Europeans, btw, tend to be mildly dominant in terms of the phenotype of mixed offspring (i.e. in terms of melanin, mixed kids are closer to Europeans than Africans). When you think about this, this makes sense, since the skin lightening alleles were selected from a background where African (or less African derived) skin colour alleles were the norm, because they had a fitness advantage. We think of the darkening alleles as dominant because we are thinking in terms of traits and basically have binned the traits into “darker than white” and “white”. Razib Khan has a good post about this at GNXP.

    3. As to other traits and recessive vs dominance, I am not aware that anyone has ever made a formal study. I believe they will be subject to the same “binning” problems as skin color, with Blacks binning things so that their superior, “stronger” traits that are proof of their healthy vitality are dominant and Whites binning things so that their “superior” but more “fragile” traits (the “flower” of their “gentility”) which need to be protected are recessive.

    4. The alleles which cause skin lightening in Europeans, btw, tend to be mildly dominant in terms of the phenotype of mixed offspring (i.e. in terms of melanin, mixed kids are closer to Europeans than Africans). When you think about this, this makes sense, since the skin lightening alleles were selected from a background where African (or less African derived) skin colour alleles were the norm, because they had a fitness advantage. We think of the darkening alleles as dominant because we are thinking in terms of traits and basically have binned the traits into “darker than white” and “white”. Razib Khan has a good post about this at GNXP.

      This is a good point and one that has crossed my mind before.

  3. I’ve no doubt that IQ tests measure something, but the criteria for what constitutes intelligence derives largely from the culture of 18th and 19th century Europeans.
    Let’s imagine for instance an IQ test that tests the mental abilities that Aboriginal culture regards as important (sense of direction, animal tracking indicators, making sense of complicated kinship groups etc). Aboriginals would trounce whites every time.

    1. I’ve always hated that type of answer, but I think you guys are onto something. In particular, I doubt if 62 IQ Aboriginals are “retarded” in the same way a 62 IQ White is, though I’ve never met one. These tests seem to have a hard time measuring these really primitive type peoples. It doesn’t make sense to call them all “retarded,” though in some ways, they are very slow, such as what we value in a modern industrial society.
      A 62 IQ Aboriginal can live on their own just fine, marry, raise kids, get things done, survive. A 62 IQ US White can’t function and is frankly taken care of by caretakers because they can’t make it on their own.

    2. RL:”A 62 IQ Aboriginal can live on their own just fine, marry, raise kids, get things done, survive. A 62 IQ US White can’t function and is frankly taken care of by caretakers because they can’t make it on their own.”
      You are failing to take in to account the differences between the typical ‘White environment’ and ‘Aborigine environment,’ i.e. think about how incredibly different the very industrialized/urbanized White nations are compared to the almost entirely rural Australian Outback.
      Very low-IQ Whites would likely function just fine if they were born, raised, and lived all their lives in a very rural/agrarian society like the Aborigines live(d) in. In cultures like that they spend most of their time engaging in various leisurely activities believe it or not…slow easy livin’…rural folk rest a lot to conserve vital energy of body and mind, but also because leisure activities are just plain pleasurable.
      Down here in Dixie we have plenty of lowish-IQ Whites who functioned very, very well back in the early rural/agrarian centuries of White settlement in North America, but many of them are not doing all that well in the increasingly industrialized/urbanized South. Life was shorter and more brutal and harsher in the rural past, but quite a bit simpler at the same time: more routine and easier/repetitive tasks, deep rural/agrarian cycles ingrained in people over many centuries of folkish traditions passed down from generation to generation; not much ‘thinking,’ just doing what you’ve been taught to in order to survive. One doesn’t need very much “book learnin'” to milk to the cows on time everyday, tend to the fields a bit, haul some water, weed the garden(s), sharpen tools, herd some livestock, etc.
      But all that’s been thrown out the window nowadays in the mind-bogglingly complex urban/technological/industrial societies that we’ve built in modern times — there is much more complexity in modern ‘advanced’ urbanized-industrialized nations, and thus it seems obvious that many low-IQ Whites just sort-of ‘shut down’ or go semi ‘comatose’ because he/she can’t handle the increasing stress, complexity, and ever-quickening activity necessary in so many modern techno-urban-industrial lifestyles — but a low-IQ Aborigine of course lives in a much simpler and slower rural environment and thus functions better because he/she has to deal with a whole lot less complexity on a daily basis.
      A reading recommendation Mr Lindsay, let me know what you think of it sometime — it’s not too long; it’s the “Introduction: A Statement of Principles” to the 1930 book I’LL TAKE MY STAND by Twelve Southerners;the following are some brief excerpts:

      “Even the apologists of industrialism have been obliged to admit that some economic evils follow in the wake of the machines. These are such as overproduction, unemployment, and a growing inequality in the distribution of wealth. But the remedies proposed by the apologists are always homeopathic. They expect the evils to disappear when we have bigger and better machines, and more of them. Their remedial programs, therefore, look forward to more industrialism.

      Turning to consumption, as the grand end which justifies the evil of modern labor, we find that we have been deceived. We have more time in which to consume, and many more products to be consumed. But the tempo of our labors communicates itself to our satisfactions, and these also become brutal and hurried. The constitution of the natural man probably does not permit him to shorten his labor-time and enlarge his consuming-time indefinitely. He has to pay the penalty in satiety and aimlessness. The modern man has lost his sense of vocation.

      The tempo of the industrial life is fast, but that is not the worst of it; it is accelerating. The ideal is not merely some set form of industrialism, with so many stable industries, but industrial progress, or an incessant extension of industrialization. It never proposes a specific goal; it initiates the infinite series. We have not merely capitalized certain industries; we have capitalized the laboratories and inventors, and undertaken to employ all the labor-saving devices that come out of them. But a fresh labor-saving device introduced into an industry does not emancipate the laborers in that industry so much as it evicts them.

      It is an inevitable consequence of industrial progress that production greatly outruns the rate of natural consumption. To overcome the disparity, the producers, disguised as the pure idealists of progress, must coerce and wheedle the public into being loyal and steady consumers, in order to keep the machines running. So the rise of modern advertising-along with its twin, personal salesmanship-is the most significant development of our industrialism. Advertising means to persuade the consumers to want exactly what the applied sciences are able to furnish them. It consults the happiness of the consumer no more than it consulted the happiness of the laborer. It is the great effort of a false economy of life to approve itself. But its task grows more difficult even day.

      Opposed to the industrial society is the agrarian, which does not stand in particular need of definition. An agrarian society is hardly one that has no use at all for industries, for professional vocations, for scholars and artists, and for the life of cities. Technically, perhaps, an agrarian society is one in which agriculture is the leading vocation, whether for wealth, for pleasure, or for prestige-a form of labor that is pursued with intelligence and leisure, and that becomes the model to which the other forms approach as well as they may. But an agrarian regime will be secured readily enough where the superfluous industries are not allowed to rise against it. The theory of agrarianism is that the culture of the soil is the best and most sensitive of vocations, and that therefore it should have the economic preference and enlist the maximum number of workers.

  4. Didn’t one of the African IQ authors (Lynn, Vanhanen, Rushton or Gedadaih Bruan) determine that 70 is due to the fact that Africa is a non-intellectually stimulating environment and that if they had grown up in an advanced environment their IQ would be 80. I think they called that the “genomic” IQ. This would make more sense that if the average African-American is 25% white, their 85 score = .25×100 + .75 x 80.
    An 80 IQ person is usually capable of living a normal life and doing work with high routine.

  5. As I said in the other thread (before I realized this one existed), I can generally agree that blacks and whites have different intelligence profiles. I think the comparison of black adults to white children is actually pretty good, because if you think about it, a classroom full of 11 year olds isn’t really much different than a classroom full of high schoolers, and if a bunch of children got stranded on an island somewhere they could probably get along pretty well if they happened to know how to fish, build campfires, etc. But an island full of Down Syndrome adults wouldnt last long.

  6. One view is that black adults are sort of like white children (an old view). Another is that black people are sort of like drunken white people.
    I don’t know if this is the view you really want of black people. Children and the inebriated require caretakers and supervision.

  7. Violation of comments policy, Jason Karamo, my Black friend or otherwise known as Do it again Jason and I ban you ok.
    May I suggest that when you write articles about IQ, you try to sound a little bit intelligent yourself. You misspell words, do not use proper punctuation, and you often use poor sentence construction. Furthermore, some of your sentences don’t even seem to make sense, which suggests that you have problems with logic.

  8. Whites built Europe, blacks built black Africa.
    Yes, Whites really do have a higher average intelligence than blacks. The difference is reflected in their societies and in their I.Q. test scores.
    A White with an I.Q. of 70 has something wrong with him; a black with an I.Q. of 70 is normal, for a black.
    The level of accomplishment of Whites in technology, science, art and literature is so far above what blacks have accomplished that one has to be in complete denial to think that blacks are as intelligent as Whites.
    In order for blacks to claim the same level of accomplishments as Whites, they have to steal history from the Whites. The blacks claim the ancient Egyptians were black, the ancient Chinese were black, the Sumerians were black. The blacks have to do this because their own history wants any type of significant accomplishment.
    Then the blacks claim that everything the White man has, he stole from the blacks. (So called ‘White Privilege”)
    White ruled Rhodesia exported food; black run Zimbabwe is starving. The average IQ in Zimbabwe is about 74. Maybe they can drive cars, but they can’t run an advanced society.

    1. Oh brother…
      Yeah, blacks are running around claiming the ancient Chinese were black. You WNs loons need to get lives. Seriously.
      Hey Sunny, one question. What technology, art, science or literature have YOU contributed to the world? If the answer is zilch, how exactly are you more accomplished than any black person? You see 99.9% of the planet will contribute nothing of any signifance the world other than to go to work, eat, have a few kids and die. I suspect you are amongst them. So I don’t consider you anything special based on the fact that you are white.

    2. tulio, the Afrocentrist dickwads claim precisely that. The ancient Southern Chinese appear to have had somewhat of a Negrito appearance, and the Afrocentrist buttheads use this to mean that they were BLACK!
      I don’t think that going back and looking at history is all that useful, though it can maybe give us some ideas. The Blacks of ancient days did not in general have access to the more advanced stuff from the rest of the world, so they achieved a low level of development.
      However, now that the entire cornucopia of all of modern society’s worldwide progress, inventions and knowledge is available to Blacks in whatever land they live in, all of this mental, cultural and inventive wealth is available to these Blacks for their own use. Further, they can adapt it to their own needs and use these objects and ideas to cultivate their own scholars and inventors.
      And if Blacks are anything, they are *adaptive*. Black people are very adaptive. I need to do a post on that some time.

  9. Wallace Fard revealed that the Black Man is the Original Black Asiatic Man. White devils say he came from Pakistan or new Zealand, but we know he originally appeared in Mecca in Africa. The Black Man is God because Melanin gives us special powers and secret knowledge of the Supreme Mathematics that the white man cannot comprehend.

    1. These 5% Nation guys are pretty out there. Even more extreme than the Nation of Islam. But let’s not forget, more whites believe Elvis is still alive than Blacks believe the ancient Chinese were black.

  10. To Jason:
    Whites are actually inferior to blacks genetically(Science has proved this)
    How so..? Do you have any links to articles on this matter…?

  11. African Americans and Africans are obviously not, as a group, intelligent at all, but part of the problem for race and IQ for me is:
    – African-Americans are admixed from European and African sources.
    – They have wide variation within population in terms of the admix (see – for one among many).
    – Yet, they have very narrow variation in IQ (relative to Europeans and Chinese).
    – Also, IQ displays strong heritibility and modern mixed race groups in the USA (e.g. half Chinese, half White) medians tend to be intermediate between the parental groups medians. There is additionally no evidence of a special lower heritibility when we extend the analysis to include African Americans transplanted into environments for which European Americans and Chinese show high IQ.
    How are these things to be reconciled?

  12. Uncle Milton: Here are a few excerpts from the above mentioned sites.
    White Americans are both genetically weaker and less diverse than their black compatriots, a Cornell University-led study finds.
    Researchers analyzed the genetic makeup of 20 Americans of European ancestry and 15 African-Americans.
    The Europeans showed much less variation among 10,000 tested genes than did the Africans, which was expected, but also that Europeans had many more possibly harmful mutations than did African, which was not.
    “Since we tend to think of European populations as quite large, we did not expect to see a significant difference in the distribution of neutral and deleterious variation between the two populations,” said senior co-author Carlos Bustamante, an assistant professor of biological statistics and computational biology at CornellIt’s been known for years that all non-Africans are descended from a small group, perhaps only a few dozen individuals, who left the continent between 50,000 and 100,000 years ago.
    But the Cornell study, published in the journal Nature Thursday, indicates that Europeans went through a second “population bottleneck,” probably about 30,000 years ago, when the ancestral population was again reduced to relatively few in number.
    The doubly diluted genetic diversity has allowed “bad” mutations to build up in the European population, something that the more genetically varied African population has had more success in weeding out.”What we may be seeing is a ‘population genetic echo’ of the founding of Europe,” said Bustamante.
    The Cornell team hopes to study other population groups in search of similar results.
    For example, Native Americans show even less genetic diversity than Europeans, having descended from a few thousand people who entered North America about 10,000 years ago.
    That fact was reinforced by a larger-scale study, also published in Nature, led by scientists from the Universities of Michigan and Virginia who analyzed genetic samples of 485 individuals scattered around the globe whose DNA is recorded in a French databank.
    As would be expected with the “out of Africa” theory, the researchers found Africans had the greatest amount of genetic diversity, followed in turn by Middle Easterners, then Europeans and South Asians at about equal levels, then East Asians.
    Proportionally more deleterious genetic variation in European than in African populations
    Kirk E. Lohmueller1,2, Amit R. Indap2, Steffen Schmidt3, Adam R. Boyko1,2, Ryan D. Hernandez2, Melissa J. Hubisz4, John J. Sninsky5, Thomas J. White5, Shamil R. Sunyaev6, Rasmus Nielsen7, Andrew G. Clark1 & Carlos D. Bustamante2
    Quantifying the number of deleterious mutations per diploid human genome is of crucial concern to both evolutionary and medical geneticists1, 2, 3. Here we combine genome-wide polymorphism data from PCR-based exon resequencing, comparative genomic data across mammalian species, and protein structure predictions to estimate the number of functionally consequential single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) carried by each of 15 African American (AA) and 20 European American (EA) individuals. We find that AAs show significantly higher levels of nucleotide heterozygosity than do EAs for all categories of functional SNPs considered, including synonymous, non-synonymous, predicted ‘benign’, predicted ‘possibly damaging’ and predicted ‘probably damaging’ SNPs. This result is wholly consistent with previous work showing higher overall levels of nucleotide variation in African populations than in Europeans4. EA individuals, in contrast, have significantly more genotypes homozygous for the derived allele at synonymous and non-synonymous SNPs and for the damaging allele at ‘probably damaging’ SNPs than AAs do. For SNPs segregating only in one population or the other, the proportion of non-synonymous SNPs is significantly higher in the EA sample (55.4%) than in the AA sample (47.0%; P < 2.3 10-37). We observe a similar proportional excess of SNPs that are inferred to be 'probably damaging' (15.9% in EA; 12.1% in AA; P < 3.3 10-11). Using extensive simulations, we show that this excess proportion of segregating damaging alleles in Europeans is probably a consequence of a bottleneck that Europeans experienced at about the time of the migration out of Africa.

  13. I am not a racist Uncle Milton. I do have some justifiable prejudices against racist,ignorant and hateful people. I mentioned the information in the above post in response to several WN ‘s and WS’s who are either blatantly or subtly racist. I understand of course, that race really is just a social construct and there is less than 0.1% genetic difference between human to human. A miniscule 8% of this difference seperates the races.The powers that be (Illuminati,Thousand points of light society Skull and Bones) and other such darling groups are not really genuinely racists in their heart of hearts. They push that racism across the idiot box and through the goverment controlled media, sitcoms and movies to manipulate racist idiots who either don’t know better or worse insecure white intellectuals that know better but lie to themselves wanting to feel better about themselves due to personal inferiority complexes some of them because of penis issues and having lost white women to black men or some other similarily trivial incident. They hate us all equally. If I was willing to use my intellect, abilities and talents to further their needs and you were not, your white skin wouldn’t save you from their anger. They are simply and unashamedly interested in the age old religion of power and controlling all human beings regardless of their color. If they can keep us arguing among ourselves about stupid things like I.Q. points and whether or not blacks like hotsauce and whites like mayonaise, we will continue to kill each other and attack each other and they will continue to divide and conquer. Obama in my opinion is a”puppident” who is being used to allay false H.O.P. E. to AA’s and other blacks while the goverment continues to screw us all. The whole race thing had to be used to divide people and divert them from truly thinking about what really matters; true unity and American freedom. I mentioned a few of these secret society groups because black people are in a lot of them and the oaths that they have to other group members exceed the petty racism of black and white. In the end, if I fail in my marriage and as a father and If I am unable to love my fellow man(so what if he is white) and contribute anything positive to my enviorment what good is my high I.Q.? It is only good for boosting my pride and ego and using my brain to manipulate others that I deem as less worthy than myself. In essence then, I fail the test of life and become a blooming fool.

  14. You make some very interesting points Robert. You still hold on to the views that the tests are not biased, as well as the belief that 4 points on the Africans Americans I.Q. tests can be accounted for because of “White genes.” I just presented research above clearly detailing, that a lot of the current I.Q. standard tests are clearly culturally biased and rely on testing information responses that do not translate into anything meaningful or equivalent to the Africans taking these tests. As for the “European gene” having anything whatsoever to do with intelligence I see neither the science or logic supporting the science for your belief.
    An excerpt from the above mentioned research,Robert;
    Wechsler (1944) “himself” warned that his Wechsler Bellevue test norms were to be used exclusively for the white population, stating: “Our norms cannot be used for the colored population of the United states.
    Virtually all IQ tests in common use today were designed for and normed using one cultural/social group as a reference. For this reason these tests can be insensitive to the cultural perceptions, values or dialectal differences of those from communities outside of this “norm referenced” group (see also, Richarson, 2002; Greenfield, 1997; Sternberg, 2004; Valsiner, 2000; Kwate, 2001; Helms, 1992; Helms, 1997). Williams (1972) administered an intelligence test which was normed on the African American population to group of white Americans to illustrate the effects of cultural bias, and norm referencing. This study found black Americans to demonstrate a “clear superiority” of white Americans (p. 11). The above mentioned research seems to point directly toward there being a distinct cultural bias in I.Q. tests Robert.
    Reaction time with reference to race:
    Bache, R. Meade
    Psychological Review. Vol 2(5), Sep 1895, 475-486
    The experiment reported has been conducted using a magneto-electric physiological apparatus. Results reveal a relative slowness of White Ss, as compared with the Indians and Blacks
    (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2009 APA, all rights reserved) This article also seems to contradict your ideas of faster white reaction time to blacks.

  15. Tulio: I believe your synopsis of Africa is guilty of viewing the end result, instead of the results that led to the end. Africa is in the state that it is now due to it being colonized,robbed blind of its natural resources and still;currently controlled by foreign sources.
    These “foreign sources” have only their own invading and materialistic interests in mind and have consistently worked in synchronated logical conjuction with other theiving, opportunist to rape and frustrate the intellectual growth of Africa’s young minds.
    They viciously aim for the jugglar of Africa’s natural resources and strive to strangle the cultural and developmental growth of Africa, with the relentless and shameless help of the United States and Europe.
    I don’t believe that Africans lack problem solving skills. I believe that they lack organizational skills as a whole and the type of economic and social help received from other goverments, that Isreal the Jews and Japan were given.
    Oh I forgot, the Germans even had outside help after WWII, because Ecologists mentioned that Germany would have required 150 years to recover if they did not receive outside help.
    In Africa you have a group of people who have been abused by every psychological standard, according to the textbook guidelines of the APA.
    In addition, these people have no help politically,financialy or otherwise to stop their continual economic and psychological rape, assault and miseducation.
    This obviously results in the negative social state in Africa.
    If you have an assault that manifests psychologically,economically and socially, then you would have a group of people living in the state of black people around the world today.
    What is incredible and a time-honored testimony to the brilliance and resilience of black Africans and their ancestors, is that they and we continue to acheive so much in the face of a pathological sytem of worldwide hatred and racism.
    This dishonarable racist system, consistently assaults us on every front possible to experience as human beings.
    Even Tiger Woods, who claimed bi-racialness as a psychological ploy for acceptance into the white world and is as conservative as they come, is being crucified in the media brutally for marital indiscretions.
    Ex-President Clinton enjoyed these same marital indiscretions (not to mention our darling J.F.K)without 1/2 of the flack that Tiger is receiving.
    I mention this to describe the type of institutionalized racism that is at work at all times against blacks and the scientific,medical and academic fields are rife with it.
    If Tiger Woods(an honorary white) could be treated this way over flings with bimbos(only because they were white) Then common sense tells me that same monster of racism will and has reached out its ugly claws and scratched Africans in regards to I.Q.testing, educational and economic help and everything else that can positively affect Africa.

    1. I would hardly say that Bill Clinton was let off the hook easy for his infidelity. He went through hell over it. Don’t you remember that he was impeached? Don’t you remember Ken Starr? And the infamous “stained blue dress” that was the butt of late-night talk show jokes forever?
      As for Africa, yes, it’s been an exploited and brutalized part of the world, but most countries that were former colonies have rebounded to at least some success. Africa is the only part of the world that seems to be going backwards. Asia is moving forward, Latin America is moving forward, the middle east is stagnant and Africa is in reverse gear. I’m not one who likes to make issues black and white and I realize that the Africa situation is multi-faceted. It has the most corrupt governments on earth, the most incompetent governments on earth, the more successful African countries in the southern portion have between 1/5 to 1/3 of the population walking around with HIV, the best and brightest flee and don’t look back. They can’t build any infrastructure without outside help, but foreign investment is hard to come by unless you have stability first. You have inconsistent weather patterns which makes droughts and famines periods. Africa has more landlocked nations than any continent on earth making trade more difficult. You have vast deserts and jungles which don’t help in making the countries anymore accessible to the outside world, esp without good infrastructure. It sounds like an almost intractable situation. I know it’s possible to have affluence in Africa, there was affluence when whites were running things(at least for the whites anyway), so there’s plenty of resources there to make things better, it’s just the ability to organize, solve complex problems and the skills needed to run a modern society that are severely lacking in Africa, you can sum these things us with “human capital”. Africa just has little of it. I hope things change there one day and we start seeing successful African nations rising. Botswana seems to be on the right path, maybe it will be the first.

  16. Bill Clinton had no choice but to be impeached. However, I was refering to the amount of coverage that Tiger Woods a non-political person(simply a golfer) has consistently gotten.
    Clinton did not receive the amount of negative coverage in the media that Tiger Woods has about the infidelity issue. Clinton should have gotten worse coverage because he was in a position of leadership,the highest position one can go in our country on the front lines of course)
    Yes, I do remember Ken Star and the infamous blue dress that was the butt of late night talk show jokes. I still remember that Clinton, was definitley respected underneath all the snide remarks,he was talked about of course there was no way around that, but right now he is respected. I saw the coverage of Tiger Woods last almost twenty four hours in one single day.
    That racist shrew of a witch Nancy Grace repeated that tape message for hours on end. That level of negative,hateful condeming media coverage never occured with Clinton.
    There is a distinct patented level of viciousness that the media is unveiling against Tiger, who never claimed to be a moral person and is not a political person,preacher or civil rights leader. Tiger Woods should not be held to higher standards of accountability than the President. That is absolutley insane to suggest.
    It’s not even so much the media coverage Tulio, it’s the way the coverage is being handled over Tiger Woods.
    I do believe Tulio, that you are intelligent enough to know the truth, about this racist and Goverment controlled media, your just going through semantic excersises for now,and that’s perfectly fine with me.
    God knows,what type of coverage Obama would receive had he done the same thing as Clinton. There would be no end to the type of hate filled attacks he would receive(he receives 4,000 death threats a day as it is.
    If you can debate that Obama would not get much worse coverage than Clinton got,then I honestly couldn’t even continue to debate with you about anything else from that point.
    It would be proof beyond the shadow of a doubt that you want to believe in differnt forms of white supremacist fantasy, instead of reality and that type of person is dangerous as well as deluded.
    They are dangerous, because not only is dogma filled white power fantasy mesmerizing to the owners of such self imposed ignorance, they posses the blind, sensless belief that is contagious to a lot of young,stupid aimless white boys.
    Boys who are buying into the facist dream of white supremecy,white nationalism and other more subtle forms of psychological warfare against black people.
    I really am just curious though,in your thinking does Tiger Woods seem to be getting justifiable coverage for cheating? It is not even remotley debatable if Tiger Woods media coverage is much more harsher antagonistic and racist than what Bill Clinton received.
    That is laughable to any true open minded thinker. There was always that overall feeling of the news media saying “Old Bill got caught with his hand in the cookie jar” It was not an atmosphere of hate with Clinton’s coverage.
    All you have to do is go back and watch how many times in one day that Nancy Grace,played his taped message and the amount of times that regular news covered this on all channels.
    I am simply being redundant though.This part of our dialogue,I won’t even waste time going over again,it is completley sensless to talk about.
    Talking about Africa again,Tulio old pal, I believe your point of view is that Africa is the only or one of the only countries that have not rebounded from the continual sysytematic rape,robbery and Arpatheid sysytem implemented by Europeans.
    I wonder if you have access to different history books than the rest of us or something. However, India is in horrible condition, Asia received help to acheive some former status(not all of course).
    Latin America is still third world status and there is no need for me to go into the status of the Native Americans.
    Every country that has been colonized by Europeans has been affected adversley, and most of their indigenous populations have been ruthlessly tortured and slaughtered.
    All this to say that Europe and the U.S are responsible for everything negative in Africa today.
    H.I.V. is not a natural virus Tulio, it is a man made virus that was placed in Africa by white scientists and there is even a file called the Strecker memorandum that you should read.
    This document will enlighten you,hopefully about the H.I.V. situation. There are people who argue now about it now, the same way in the past Europeans argued about it being a lie that small pox infected blankets weren’t spread around purposely to the Native Americans.
    Thank God for access to education nowadays.
    It’s sad that people can be intelligent enough to read about history and still choose to be blind about the most horrific war crimes known to man that occured in Africa.
    There are corrupt goverments are in Africa because they have European support and have been placed there by Europeans and you already know this Tulio,
    Your words:”They can’t build any infrastructure without outside help, but foreign investment is hard to come by unless you have stability first.”
    Now that is a European mindset for you,they created the situation of instability in Africa in the first place.
    This was done in part by creating an unstable socio-economic infrastructure and causing civil wars within the country and then they have the ungodly gall, to turn around and say that we won’t help you because you have no stability.
    Read about The King of Belgium Leopold II and what he did the people of the Congo and ask yourself what kind of stability could Africa have.
    That is a example of good old fashion European hospitality at its best in Africa.
    All of Africas diamonds which are it’s most valuable resources,it’s oil and other minerals are controlled by outside sources.
    How in the name of anything true and right are they going to have stability? You have got to be kidding.
    Name one other country who was robbed and exploited the way Africa was and is economically back on the top without anyform of outside help.
    You cannot because you and I both know there is not one country that you can name.
    I already talked about the countries that received help and were able to bounce back,but you already know this.
    The middle east is stagnant because America is controlling their oil and resources.
    Any of the middle eastern countries who have had the balls to tell this terrorist raping country to get lost, end up having to worry about being caught up in U.S. controlled civil wars.
    Just like this farce of a war that is going on now.
    I suppose though, that the deeper issue is how someone properly educated with any kind of a conscience, could believe that Africa is mainly responsible for her own current state poverty.
    In my research, and in my personal opinons I believe that the western world has made a very complex system of psychologically guilt assuaging, it’s European citizens.
    One of the ways they do this by brushing over the effects of the Black holocaust and Slavery and making it appear as if blacks were used to slavery or didn’t mind it slavery.
    When in fact the type of slavery that Africans experienced prior to the Europeans arrival, was in no way comparable, to the brutal and dehumanizing slavery that the Europeans perpetuated on them.
    It is completley illogical, to expect Africa to be healthy as a nation after what she has suffered and what she still is suffering .
    However, I understand this to be a psychological knee jerk reaction to all the white washed lies that have brainwashed you throughout your entire lifetime Tulio.
    Lies that have traveled through the idiot box,movies,newspapers and subtle as well as blatant racist attitudes toward blacks that you have picked up on.
    These attitudes have come from white authority figures and your peers from as early as elementary school and lasted you through college and beyond.
    It is because of this pervasive, systematic, pathological system of institutionalized racism that cuts even its own whites and even causes weaker blacks to hate themselves and other blacks that I can forgive you and others for this sick thinking.
    I don’t believe that you are bad at all I believe that college doesn’t really teach people to think critically about issues.
    College teaches people how to memorize facts and use those facts in particular contexes.
    The other factor is that some people are simply unable to see past beliefs (lies they believe in) vs truth based upon facts.
    Without the ability to think clearly and critically and look within and study one’s own heart and mind ,a person is blind and lost because they are unable to see past the illusions and fallacies that seperate them from other great minds and spirits.
    This same racist institution lies to you to make you feel a part of something that portays itself as great and honarable,that lies even down to the ridiculous portrayals of Egyptians as white(The ten commandments with Charleston Heston)
    This is the same system that would use a black man to tell him he should hate whites and even put him in the presidency(Obama) if he serves their needs more than yours.
    If that doesn’t make you peer out of your Plato’s cave and see that racism is just a devisive method to seperate people from uniting than I am definitley wasting my intellect on a hopeless cause.
    Africa has received abject suffering for centuries, at the hands of European monsters that should be tried for war crimes and promptly executed.
    As for the affluence in Africa being even mentioned by you that is laughable,because the only affluence in Africa was and is for whites or blacks who want to be their puppets.
    I am not mentioning the so called dictators or guerrilla warriors because they are only parroting learnied behavior from the history of the European in Africa.
    The whole Liberia and Sierra Leone buisness touches on this.
    All this being said Tulio, I am just thankful that I was taught to effectively look beyond my own personal prejudices and see stark reality.
    I will continue to teach my son the art of real unbiased thinking and how to love his neighbors and contribute positively to his community.
    Being a part of this world and environment and having a paradigm of unity and mutual communal elevation is my philosophy.
    The more evolved a person is the more they see themselves as part of a whole organism instead of seperate closed off individuals, peering out at the world from a rigid self -glorifying point of view.
    A person or system that can look at the state of Africa and understand it’s history truly in the proper context, and feel no sympathy whatsoever, is a sad,sick sociopath.
    One of the definitions of a sociopath psychopaths) is they have no guilt, remorse or empathy.
    The past and daily attacks on Africa and black people worldwide and the lack of empathy regarding them, fit the textbook descriptions of sociopaths to a tee.
    Profile of the Sociopath:
    This website summarizes some of the common features of descriptions of the behavior of sociopaths.
    Glibness and Superficial Charm
    Manipulative and Conning
    They never recognize the rights of others and see their self-serving behaviors as permissible. They appear to be charming, yet are covertly hostile and domineering, seeing their victim as merely an instrument to be used. They may dominate and humiliate their victims.
    Grandiose Sense of Self
    Feels entitled to certain things as “their right.”
    Pathological Lying
    Has no problem lying coolly and easily and it is almost impossible for them to be truthful on a consistent basis. Can create, and get caught up in, a complex belief about their own powers and abilities. Extremely convincing and even able to pass lie detector tests.
    Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt
    A deep seated rage, which is split off and repressed, is at their core. Does not see others around them as people, but only as targets and opportunities. Instead of friends, they have victims and accomplices who end up as victims. The end always justifies the means and they let nothing stand in their way.
    Shallow Emotions
    When they show what seems to be warmth, joy, love and compassion it is more feigned than experienced and serves an ulterior motive. Outraged by insignificant matters, yet remaining unmoved and cold by what would upset a normal person. Since they are not genuine, neither are their promises.
    Incapacity for Love
    Need for Stimulation
    Living on the edge. Verbal outbursts and physical punishments are normal. Promiscuity and gambling are common.
    Callousness/Lack of Empathy
    Unable to empathize with the pain of their victims, having only contempt for others’ feelings of distress and readily taking advantage of them.
    Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature
    Rage and abuse, alternating with small expressions of love and approval produce an addictive cycle for abuser and abused, as well as creating hopelessness in the victim. Believe they are all-powerful, all-knowing, entitled to every wish, no sense of personal boundaries, no concern for their impact on others.
    Early Behavior Problems/Juvenile Delinquency
    Usually has a history of behavioral and academic difficulties, yet “gets by” by conning others. Problems in making and keeping friends; aberrant behaviors such as cruelty to people or animals, stealing, etc.
    Not concerned about wrecking others’ lives and dreams. Oblivious or indifferent to the devastation they cause. Does not accept blame themselves, but blames others, even for acts they obviously committed.
    Promiscuous Sexual Behavior/Infidelity
    Promiscuity, child sexual abuse, rape and sexual acting out of all sorts.
    Lack of Realistic Life Plan/Parasitic Lifestyle
    Tends to move around a lot or makes all encompassing promises for the future, poor work ethic but exploits others effectively.
    Criminal or Entrepreneurial Versatility
    Changes their image as needed to avoid prosecution. Changes life story readily.
    Look at what happened to Africa and their descendents and you will see that the characteristics of Europeans and their descendents to this day “match the profile of sociopaths.
    Whites today are being taught to have no emapathy toward “colored” peoples non blacks.
    Very sad.

    1. I’m not going to go through your very long post point by point and debate it as I just don’t have the time. I’ve pretty much already stated my opinion and don’t really have anything new to add to those topics. On your last point, I’d like to comment:

      Whites today are being taught to have no emapathy toward “colored” peoples non blacks.

      Empathy from whites is not going to solve any problems for blacks in America or in Africa. In fact, I think blacks care way too much what white people think of them. Blacks will only move forward by learning self-reliance and how to organize and build stable, non-corrupt governments, strong families, and through investment in human capital via education geared toward surviving and creating in the modern world. That is the path out for the black race, not looking for empathy or “I feel your pain” gestures from whites. Who cares what whites think, really. It’s irrelevant to black progress.

    2. From your perspective, Jason, the more evolved a person is the more he sees himself as part of a whole, rather than as a closed-off individual. Although I understand what you’re saying, I think a lot depends on what his priorities are.
      Sometimes in order to have some semblance of freedom in your life, you have to set aside group loyalties. Groups are very possessive of their members, and generally don’t reward independent thinking.

  17. “Empathy from whites is not going to solve any problems for blacks in America or in Africa.”
    I disagree. I believe that empathy from whites as a whole would help black people in Africa and America.
    The reason being is that it could start a movement of help and unity that could permeate, even down to the most callous, uncaring, sociopaths that currently enjoy the present status of black peoples misfortune today.
    It is grossly illogical, to assume that white people as a whole could not care about blacks and black people would just immediatley crawl out of the socio/economic hole that they were thrown in. That’s ridiculous!!!
    Your words:”Blacks will only move forward by learning self-reliance and how to organize and build stable, non-corrupt governments, strong families”
    Have you forgotten that every black town that was started in The U.S. and flourished was infiltrated by conniving, sociopathic, whites and destroyed?
    Or the fact that one of the tenets in Willie Lynches plan was to purposely destroy black families in a cruel and systematic fashion?
    Name one that wasn’t.
    Haiti was infiltrated by the U.S. and their entire economy ruined, not to mention the AIDS virus put in their hepatitis B vaccinations.
    Another example of the type of fear and racism that occurs in the cowardly hearts of WN’S, when a black man like Tousaint L’ouverture defeats Europes best; Napolean.
    Every attempt to do exactly what you suggested has proved, that the desire of Europeans is antithetical to blacks Familial self -determination.
    I dare you to prove me wrong.
    There is not really a large neutral status in regards to this issue. It’s either you are evolving toward a place of mutual unity,empathy and cooperation or remaining stagnant with “I don’t really care about them, they just need to pull themselves up by their boot straps theory.”
    Or mentally and morally regressing with old 18th and 19th century views of white superiority.
    How are black people going to come out on top without any white empathy?
    You still were unable to name one country that flopped and came back without “white empathy” and you still can’t.
    Your words:”In fact, I think blacks care way too much what white people think of them.”
    How in the world could black people not care what white people think of them? When white people have put black people in the horrible situation that they are in now and had them walking around on eggshells for the last three centuries.
    They had no choice but to care what whites thought or they would have beaten, murdered, raped or put in positions where they simply could not survive.
    Caring what white people think has been and still is a survival mecahnism for black people.
    People just don’t drop survival mechanisms after hundreds of years.
    As for black people sitting around waiting for the “I feel your pain” Sentiment that is not the case.
    I was just addressing the patently unreasonable attitude that your remarks have shown that you posses toward black people.
    I don’t really care that you don’t care.
    I just use you and others of your ilk to further strengthen and educate myself,my son and other blacks.
    Honarable Blacks, who need to see people like yourself for what they truly are; a miniscule part of a racist institution that eats it white own and attacks the very spirit of freedom and dignity within black people .
    The type of people that will sociopathically deny responsibility for blacks plight today and forever more.
    They will deny their responsibility right up to the day of their genetic extinction, which is occuring on a daily basis,even as we speak.
    The type of people that I can thank God for being so far removed from in intellect,character,strength and moral fiber.
    I thank God, for being me able to have empathy with others and evolve as a humanbeing, being a positive part of my environment.
    This is my last post to you,because it is utterly sensless trying to get a brainwashed sociopath to connect with a larger movement other than himself.
    I have expressed my views and my moral character is diametrically opposed to yours.
    Unless there is a”miracle”and you awaken from the self imposed slumber of self righteous racism,there is no need for me to reiterate my views with you.
    Good luck and have a nice life Tulio.

    1. Could I draw attention to a rarely mentioned black African achievement? I’m referring to the bronze age kingdom of Benin that we British, to our eternal shame, destroyed over a hundred years ago. Here was an indigenous urban society, highly sophisticated, that had already produced some of the most beautiful artefacts in the history of art. But Benin had the misfortune to attract the attention of one of the most rapacious empires in history. What did the British do? We demanded access to the religious capital. It was denied. We threatened, we were met with defiance. So we burnt the capital, looted the artefacts and declared ourselves bringers of culture to the benighted blacks. We even had the gall to claim the Benin sculptors must have learnt their craft from the Portuguese! The breath-taking Benin bronzes still languish in exile in the British museum. The day we refused even to return Nigeria’s looted heritage on loan for a national exhibition, on the grounds we probably wouldn’t get the items back, that day I felt truly ashamed of being British. I’m as patriotic as the next man, but I had hoped we’d put the bad old days of cultural and racial arrogance behind us.

  18. Since making my earlier comment I have been re-reading Jason’s analysis of African history, and I can’t argue with a word of it.
    Jason’s knowledge of the black man’s heritage is far more wide-ranging than mine, but I wonder if he knows anything about Mentuhotep I? (I would hate to patronise you, Jason, but in my country at least (Britain) there’s a conspiracy of silence about this one-time leader of the civilised world, and I think it possible that you haven’t heard of him. Please forgive me if I’m wrong.)
    Four thousand years Egypt was on its knees after nearly fifty years of civil war. Then a military leader from the South reunited the country, restored the old institutions, and set Egypt on course for one and a half millenia of social and cultural splendour. His name? Mentuhotep. So why has nobody heard of his achievements? Everybody’s heard of Ramesses – fatuously portrayed as white in The Ten Commandments, as Jason so rightly remarks. But Mentuhotep, he might as well never have existed.
    The problem was, the discovery of his portrait statue faced the racist academic community of the day with quite a dilemma. They came up with a number of intriguing explanations for the fact that it was painted black. But they couldn’t explain the face. It just didn’t look Egyptian. One art historian was even reduced to the feeble comment that the statue’s pronounced brow ridges, broad nose and full lips were ‘stylistic exaggerations, the significance of which escapes us.’ Racists that they were, they just couldn’t accept the fact that the guy was black. At a time when their own forebears were organised into tribes, the world’s first nation state was being run by a black man, and run damn well into the bargain.
    Now I know that Ancient Egypt was a Hamitic, not a Negroid creation. White professors over here never tire of telling their black students that. But it’s difficult to overestimate the role played by blacks at key points in Egyptian history. The tombstone of a soldier called Qedes describes the military trainees of his district (the Theban Nome that Mentuhotep came from) as ‘Egyptians and Nubians’ in other words ‘Hamites and Negroes’. The Medjay – the Ancient Egyptian police – were recruited exclusively from Nubia. Towards the end there was even an entire black dynasty, the 25th, under three redoubtable rulers – Shabako, Shebitku and Taharqa (their very names are totally un-Egyptian). Taharqa won fame in his day for facing up to the Assyrians at the height of their power. They defeated him, inevitably, but he slowed them down, and – who knows? – possibly saved Israel from annihilation.
    So there you have it – four black men who changed the course of world history, and are consequently ignored by the school text books, in my country at least. If their deeds are in fact celebrated in American schools then I can only apologise for my stupid mistake!

    1. First off Micheal, I would like to commend you on your open minded honesty and thank you sincerly for having respect for the black culture.
      Whenever, I met a white man and in particular a British gentleman who has the capacity for empathy for non-caucasions, I feel nothing but extra warmth,appreciation and love for him.
      The reason being Micheal, is that obviously you and I enjoy a larger spark of the type of hope, decency and honor which resides in the hearts of true, genuine, human beings.
      The type of humans that hate tyranny in all of it’s myriad of ugly forms, the type of racist despotism that loves to rear it’s obscene Lernaean hydra against decent non racist men.
      It is evident to any sane person that you have to be a cut above the rest of your group to support anything that is not leaning toward WN.
      Micheal, I have heard of Mentuhotep I.
      I believe he was the prince of Thebes,who defeated Herakleopolitans and was the 4th king of the 11th dynasty.
      Mentuhotep I ruled;2060-2010 BCE
      Nebhetepepre(pleased is the Lod Re) was his throne name. He was the first chief of “upper Egypt” and later being the “cheeky chap” that he was, declared himself King over all Egypt.
      Nebhetepepre Mentuhotep I lasting monument is a fantastic Mortuary complex built into the cliffs on the west bank of the nile.
      Deir El- Bahari was the name of this lasting acheivement of black greatness.
      Your words; ‘ Now I know that Ancient Egypt was a Hamitic, Not Negroid Creation”
      That sounds to be a 19th century philosophy that was called the “Hamitic Hypothesis”
      This was none other than an attempt to “white wash” the glory of Egypt once archaeologist began to uncover the fantastic wonders of Egypt.
      Prior to the archaeological discoveries that proved the Egyptians were using advanced mathematics to build pyramids, at the same time that Europeans lived in caves, the “Hamitic Hypothesis” had a distinct ant-black flavor.
      Europeans used to have a “Hamitic Hypothesis” that put Hamites as the descendents of Ham, the cursed father of blacks and one of Noah’s sons, who’s cardinal sin was to witness his fathers nakedness.
      It was only when Europes best anthropologists and archaeologists saw first hand the glories of Egypt around the time of Napolean, did the “Hamitic Hypothesis” began to subtly have a “pro white” texture vs. the previous anti black sentiment.
      The “Hamitic Hypothesis” went from describing black people as being the inferior cursed descendents of Ham doomed to slavery, to being some superior white or near white race, in order to rationalize the presence of civilazation in Egypt.
      The “Hamitic Hypothesis” somersaulted through so many silly turns during this period, at one time it was even used to describe Germans who civilized all inferior parts of the world in the past.
      Very funny stuff right? “pure poppycock”
      As anthropology and archaeology advanced it became ludricous even to German nationalist, that the Egyptians could have been a pure white race,so they settled for a brownskin race that was not negroid and somehow a Hamitic-Semetic race emerged, who were kind of brownskin but were also somehow Semetic.
      Never mind the fact Micheal, that there is no race which can be called Semetic, as this word refers in the strictest sense to a group of language types and not race or ethnicity.
      My final analysis, is that the word Hamite began in allegory,continued in racism and should end in nothingness. The only way to treat illogical nonsensical theories.
      The Hamitic concept has been tainted with so many historical inaccuracies,political schemes and racist pseudo scholarship, that indeed it is not a word that applies to anything at all except a hallmark of Eurocentricity.
      This phrase has been slung about so much, that I don’t necessarily think that those who use it are racist,just really ignorant about it’s history.
      I am quite sure, that one day people will be able to pull their heads out of the sand, like the proverbial ostrich and begin using words that are anthropologically correct, to describe ancient African(negroid)peoples.
      When this is properly done, a crystal clear picture will emerge for those who are intellectually and conceptually ambiguous, or holding firmly on to European misconceptions about the Origin of mankind and Egypt.

  19. Just to add the comment of an evolutionay anthropologist who specialises in the development of the human brain (private correspondence)…
    “To believe G was the was the same across races you would have to assume that the evolution of the human brain ceased 130,000 years ago when African and non-African populations separated.”
    And yes, the date IS 130,000 years. not more recent. You have modern humans in Israel 120k ago.
    We know that at least one brain affecting mutation common in Eurasians but rare in Africans dates to about 35k ago (MCPH1), so it’s provable that the evoultion of the brain has been happening after the populations split up. Other IQ affecting traits are common in one group but rare in other (Torsion dystonia, myopia etc).
    And if you ask an evolutionary anthropologist they’ll be quite happy to point out how hominids have been getting smarter as their brain size increased, and it’s well understood that relative brain mass varies between races. And modern MRI/IQ studies have show a very good correlation with brain size to IQ.
    Evolutionary theory and IQ/brain size gives zero support to the ‘all differences environmental’ school. If you could have the same kind of intelligence with a smaller brain, any genes that could cause this would be rapidly selected into a population, as it would decrease infant and maternal deaths at birth quite significantly.

    1. Mathilda……….what a load of rubbish..ever heard of genetic potential?environment and genetics works hand in hand. Evolutionary theory is crack…since whites used to be retarded back than. I would say blacks have not reached their true genetic potential yet.

  20. It is “Untrue” that an IQ below 70 cannot operate a car, marry or work”.. Special ED. USA graduates do all these things “with guidance and training”, just the same as IQ above 70. The Minn. Multiphasic Personality Test results prove that Negro Americans “have advanced social skills as compared to their White and Asian counterparts”. Mohammed Ali is a Classic Example, to prove my point. . . The Big Lie in American Culture is “In America, you can be and do whatever your heart desires”!!! Instead of guiding 9th graders into training programs based on their aptitude tests (like Switzerland) , we leave them rudderless and stumbling towards their future in darkness. Oh, let’s not forget the college blood suckers that want everyone to attend college so they won’t be laid off; maybe the US employee’s suffer from an addiction to taxpayer money, HA!

  21. Lindsay
    Tulio is right. You may be a genius, but you lack basic common sense. You don’t talk about the black IQ in a public forum if you value your safety…

  22. You know Mohammed Ali made no secret that he didn’t want to join the military. Given this information it is likely that he didn’t try very hard on the military’s IQ test. This may be why he scored so low on it.

  23. It it really annoying to see people talk about issues they themselves have no knowledge on where their predisposition on the matter shines through anyways.
    I hope this “Robert Lindsay” guy is reading because I wanted to ask him what is his background/education is on this matter. As if you ask any sociologist or biologist they will tell you that IQ is mostly determined by social factors and that intelligence is mostly subjective rather than objective.
    It is true that societies with low IQ have more problems than societies with high IQ. If you are using this fact to prove African countries are less intelligent biological you will fail. This argument is logically unsound because you are using a symptom(low IQ) as the cause for the problems (problems in low IQ society). Where the symptom (low IQ) is actually caused by lack of education(which is the cause) which also causes problems in the society.
    So obviously if a society has a lack of means for education,they are going to test as having low IQs as well as having more problems than societies with advanced education.
    **** > If you are claiming that certain races are more cognitively advanced than other races then you are claiming that there is a biological reason by default.
    However the brain of a black person is biologically the same as the brain of a white person,this is why biologists and scientists laugh at people who try to sound scientific and in the same breath claim that blacks are less intelligent than whites simply based upon biology.
    There is indeed a correlation between brain size and intelligence,however this difference is extremely small and negligible where education and social factors make it irrelevant.
    Women on average will have smaller brains than men (Peters, 1991). However, this does not indicate that the level of male intelligence is higher than female intelligence; Neanderthals had on average larger brains than do anatomically modern humans (Tattersall, 1995; Gould, 1981)
    Tobias (1970) – Blacks have larger brains.
    There is likely no difference biological mechanisms in the brains between blacks and whites,to suggest so is pseudo science.

  24. I have a few typos in there but none the less I hope you got the point.
    You sound extremely pseudo-scientific and someone who should be ignored.

  25. A few points:
    1) how do you know the Nigerian con artists would score lower than the whites they tricked? Just because the average Nigerian has an IQ of 67 doesn’t mean these con artists do. They are presumably part of the educated elite with Internet access and probably have IQ’s around 86 (the average for university Africans )
    2) the nigerian con artists probably had thousands of hours of practice perfecting their con so it’s hardly surprising that they can beat smarter inexperienced people at the game they’ve been practicing their whole lives.
    3) IQ is a measure of overall intelligence, but each race has their own strengths and weaknesses. Blacks probably have a higher social IQ than whites and especially East Asians of equivalent g because blacks evolved to have numerous sexual partners, while whites and East Asians needed technological IQ to adapt to challenging environments so there was an evolutionary tradeoff between people smarts vs technology smarts. That’s why high tech types are known for their socially awkward nerdiness.

  26. I find this debate quite fascinating, After reading through all the posts, I am pretty much convinced low, isolated populations during the ice age in Europe and Asia lead to the differences in race as we see now. Adaptation to long cold winters lead to populations scoring high on adaptability and problem solving intelligence (they had to adapt and innovate, or die). I suspect high amount of out-of -Africa migrants with winning personalities, but poor adaptability and “forward thinking” ability eventually lead to populations with lower numbers of them, especially in Europe and Northern Asia at the time. Survival of the fittest worked in Ice-age Europe, not survival of the best singers dancers and comedians.
    I agree with Robert that IQ tests are good at measuring the type of intelligence that measures the ability to reason, do math and “plan ahead”. They don’t at all measure wit, personality, drive and the ability to be charming.
    As for the “black supremacist” on the blog, I have to disagree with a lot of what he prints. The evidence pretty much overwhelmingly points to there not being enough of populations of intelligent, forward thinking blacks in almost all representative sub-Saharan population groups to form stable, non-corrupt, prosperous countries/societies. Those that seem to possess these qualities usually seem to form the small ruling (read ruthless) elite or they western countries.
    I witness far too much politically correct excuse-making and blame for the failings of Sub-Saharan Africa. i believe Africans, though no fault of their own, were victims of different evolutionary environments that lead to our differences.

  27. Where are the Great Black civilisations and inventions through all manner of engineering, sorry it just doesn’t exist, they have been here longer than us supposedly, some call them the cradle of civilisation, when in reality that cradle was broken many thousands of years ago and no longer exists? If picking up a stick says your civilised then a dog running around in the park with a stick is at the same level.

      1. To Phil78
        (way off topic but)
        Just wondering you ever get/saw my second to last comment(in the comments section under the post linked below)—the one that begins “Another significant issue with Cabrera’s theory:”—(and last comment) to you. I had been answering some of your questions, but did not remember those additional points I added last (in the aforementioned posts) until fairly late (they should have occurred to me earlier—though the commenter Lank had vaguely alluded to some similar points/a somewhat similar idea in one of his posts at the forumbiodiversity thread on the topic I had linked at Razib’s blog—which I quote)

        1. Oh I did, I forgot to respond at the time because I was doung other research.
          BTW, do you have more research on the pottery in Mali? I’ve read the study linking it with SSA LSA sites like Shum Laka, but I’ve read earlier comments on it being describe as “Kiffian”, which was described as Caspian but I’m aware that was a latter culture and less likely.

        2. I remember reading that the the stone tools had Shum Laka affinities as well—i.e the style of its microliths were related to those at Shum Laka (from 30,000 bc-10,000 bc) along with Shum Laka affinities in the other tool types used (if you’re referring to the early, ca. 9,500-10,000 bc, pottery from Ounjougou in the Bandiagara region of South Central Mali—the oldest known in Africa—, so they likely has some southern origins). I don’t recall anything about it being Kiffian (which as you say is a later culture and wouldn’t really make sense).
          I find the Shum Laka culture (and the Ounjougou culture and its region/the Western savannah and period) interesting, and intend to look more into it. It seems we don’t know too much about the that part of the paleolithic or mesolithic in that area of West Africa (partly because a lot doesn’t preserve in the wetter forest climate, partly because of a relative lack of investigation)—the Paleolithic Western savannah seems bit under studied also.
          On the issue of the Kiffians though and their own affinities/origins: they were described as having cranially Iberomaurusian affinities (not Capsian I believe) or “mechtoid” (a type descended from Eurasian backmigrants to North Africa supposedly similar to early European/Eurasian cromagnons) , but mechtoid is itself sometimes a vaguely defined term and partly designated by certain tendencies of robusticity (which is a trait that can occur in various racially disparate groups). Thus it was thought that mechtoids were a proto-caucasian type.
          However the people at a site in region in mesolithic Nubia (I think Jebel Sahaba) were originally classed as mechtoid but dna (and I believe dental analysis) showed them to be negroid and without Eurasian origins (dental analysis and some limited mtrna studies suggested that the mechtoids of Taforalt and Afalou in Northern Morocco were caucasoid or mostly so, and that those of Mechta el Arbi—I believe— also in Morocco were somewhat mixed but also closer to the Eurasian range.
          It has been suggested that the “mechtoid affinities of the Kiffians indicates that they were of Eurasian origin (or significantly so). However, the above (and other genetic and archaeological evidence) suggests that though the mechtoid type (in many cases) was to some extent a real thing that existed (a proto-caucasoid type descended from Eurasian back-migrants to North Africa) in parts of North Africa, it seems that perhaps that other types with only more of a superficial resemblance to it (including certain tendencies toward certain types of robusticity) and not necessarily related to it (or not substantially so)—like the case of of the Jebel Sahaba people—were mistakenly lumped into the (sometimes over-broad) mechtoid category.
          Also, and interesting study has come out on the dna of the Taforalt people, showing them to have been 1/3 subsaharan (which is to say, deriving one third of their ancestry from native Africans not descended from OOA migrants/Eurasians—some evidence suggests the population was a basal branch native to or well established in the Sahara the has affinities to both West Africans and, to some extent, to the Hadza; indicating that it had branched off fairly early from or close to a common ancestor of those groups—perhaps ancestry from the still mysterious Aterians was a significant or major element of that group).
          The other 2/3 of the Taforalt people’s ancestry came from Eurasian back-migrants (deriving from the Middle East—I believe it had been debated whether the back migrants had come via the Middle East or Iberia, but this study shows it was the former; the Eurasian group back-migrant was apparently much closer to contemporary Levantine than Iberian peoples—no contribution from Western Europe/Europe was detected).

          “Pleistocene North African genomes link Near Eastern and sub-Saharan African human populations”
          (the study abstract)

          Interestingly, it suggests that in the taforalt Iberomaurusians had such a significant level of SSA/non-Eurasian ancestry (albeit a minority percent), than other groups such as those of Mechta el Arbi might have had more, and that more southern groups like the Kiffians previously classed as having mechtoid affinities (others from that region, if any) would likely have been (like the people of Jebel Sahaba) of entirely (or perhaps nearly so or predominantly) subsaharan (or/i.e. non-Eurasian, but from a group native to the Sahara) origin.
          Later waves of Eurasian migrants (including some ancestry brought by the Capsians from N.E Africa (whom I believe were generally predominantly Eurasian, though they likely carried a small amount of SSA ancestry as well)and to a lesser extent, later waves of migration, lowered the SSA/non Eurasian component in Northern Maghrebians/Morroccans to the lower level at which it is now.

        3. Cont.:
          I believe the study found that modern Moroccans derive about 1/3 (or maybe 1/3-1/2) pf their ancestry from local Iberomaurusians like the Taforalt people, with the rest presumably coming from the later Capsians, and some from later waves (the Capsians likely descended—at least partly—from Afro-Asiatic peoples from the East and may have brought the linguistic ancestor of proto-Berber to the Maghreb in the mesolithic).
          The Moroccan (and other North Maghrebian) Iberomaurusians would have spoken a now extinct language, whose origins are as of yet mysterious (perhaps from an unknown family of paleolithic Levantine origin—the source of 2/3 of their ancestry, or a linguistic mix of that language family and the language family of the previously unknown “SSA”/native African group native to Africa which whom they were mixed and derived 1/3 or so of their ancestry).
          (as mentioned) The non-Eurasian/native African component could have come (or partly-mostly come) from the Aterians. the degree to which Iberomaurusian culture had continued or derived from the older native Aterian cultured had been unknown and debated—though it had been known that the Iberomaurusian was partly-perhaps largely Eurasian in origin for a while (v.s. something closer to a replacement scenario).
          So it appears (from the dna, and, according to some, from indications in cultural archaeology), that there was likely some at least modest-moderate continuity and in Morocco from the Aterian (through mixture between natives—perhaps Aterian descended—and Eurasians, thus forming the Maghrebian Iberomaurusians, at least from the Taforalt evidence).
          Thus the subsaharan/nonEurasian-derived ancestry of most modern Moroccans would be about 1/3-1/2 of the 1/3 (ca. 33%) present in the Moroccan Iberomaurusians: i.e about 6%-15% or so in modern Moroccans—though also of course varying by region—which sounds about right. Though the Capsians—in some areas at least—likely brought a certain minority fraction of SSA.
          “but I’ve read earlier comments on it being describe as “Kiffian”, which was described as Caspian”
          Also, the Capsians were never south of the Magheb/general Northern Sahara. (The Kenyan industry, now sometimes known as the Eburran was once erroneously connected to the Capsian— and was then incorrectly called “Kenya Capsian”—but seems to have been unrelated to the Capsian, and also to have included a range of Kenyan native traditions, some of which may have also in fact been distinct from each other)

          (And early Western/Maghrebian Capsians, of course did have some traits in common with the preceding Iberomaurusians due to mixing with them—they of course became a hybrid group with significant Iberomaurusian ancestry)

        4. Edit:
          “…with the rest (of the post-Iberomaurusian admixture) presumably coming largely from the later Capsians (the Capsians likely had some small amount of SSA too, though much of it could have been more a distant remnant especially in some of their paternal lineages than anything else—they likely were descendants or relatives of the Levantine Natufians, thus perhaps with distant ultimate East African roots maybe from the proto-AfroAsiatic part of their ancestry, along of course with much to a preponderance of indigenous ancestry from the Levant and Near East),…”

        5. Should have been written:
          “…they likely were descendants or relatives of the Levantine Natufians, who perhaps had distant ultimate East African roots maybe from the proto-AfroAsiatic part of their ancestry, along with…”

        6. Edit:
          “…the stone tools had Shum Laka affinities as well—i.e the style of its microliths were related to those at Shum Laka (from 30,000 bc-10,000 bc) …. I don’t recall anything about it being Kiffian (which as you say is a later culture and wouldn’t really make sense)—nor were they related to the Capsian (which was not in that region and also at a later period), or to the Iberomaurusian (was also much further north at the time).”

        7. “…, pottery from Ounjougou in the Bandiagara region of South Central Mali—the oldest known in Africa, along with some roughly contemporary pottery from the mesolithic South Central Sudan from a period predating Eurasian contact/migration; and both predating the later development of pottery in the Near East and North Africa.”

        8. A pasage from the study I believe you mention connection the Malian pottery to earlier LSA sites in the south.
          “In contrast, the earliest ceramics in the sub-Saharan area appear in the sixth millenniumBC in Cameroon at Shum Laka or in Nigeria at Konduga, then at the turn of the fifth andfourth millennia in Mali at Kourounkorokale and in Ghana at Bosumpra (Lavachery 2001;Wotzka 2001; MacDonald 1997; Shaw 1985). The decorations include impressions withsimple rocker combs or cord wrapped stick roulettes, and sometimes with incised geometricmotifs. The ceramics of Ounjougou, also decorated with flexible counter-wrapped cord rouletteand toothed comb, and dating back to at least the eighth millennium BC, are thus the oldest in the sub-Saharan world, and are contemporaneous with the Saharan dates. However, no ceramic indicator is currently known between the regions of emergence in the Sahara and our site complex. The first ceramics of the Malian Sahara, although presenting certain decorations described above, only appear at the end of the seventh millennium for the facies at Oumm el Assel and Hassi-el-Abiod, or even at the end of the sixth or fifth millennia BCfor other cultural assemblages (Raimbault 1990, 1996). In the Central Sahara, millstones and grinders are known from the beginning of the ninth millennium BC in Niger at Temet,with stone receptacles, and during the ninth and eighth millennia BC at several sites in Niger and Libya, with the use of ceramics (Roset 1996; Barich 1974). In contrast, in the southern Sahara, this type of material seems to appear only at the turn of the fifth and fourth millennia BC in Mali at Kourounkorokale, and from the second millennium BC at numerous sites in Mali, Burkina Faso, Nigeria and Ghana (MacDonald 1997; Anquandah 1993). Once again,grinding implements at Ounjougou, appearing in the eighth millennium BC, are the oldest in the Subsaharan world. By their dimensions and intentional and careful shaping, the millstone and the grinder at Ounjougou are clearly distinguished from Pleistocene material,but have strong resemblances with the millstones for grasses and the associated grindersknown in West Africa (Schär 2002).
          The Saharan lithic industries are distinguished by clearly laminar reduction, with thepreferential use of raw materials such as flint, schist, rhyolite or jasper, but quartz only rarely(Aumassip 1986; Di Lernia & Cremaschi 1996; Gaussen & Gaussen 1988; Raimbault 1990).The typological range is often dominated by retouched blades and/or Ounan points,particularly in the different facies in northwest Mali and at several Nigerian sites, even ifbacked points, geometric microliths and bifacial armatures are present. These last are particularly diverse here and the characteristic types are not found further south. In the sub-Saharan zone, by contrast, following the Pleistocene-Holocene transition, the industries areoften hardly laminar and quartz was used as the main raw material. The characteristictypological range consists of geometric microliths, awls, backed points, and rare flakes orpoints with bifacial retouch, sometimes associated with a macrolithic component. This “WestAfrican microlithic technocomplex” (MacDonald 1997) includes sites such as Iwo Eleru andRop in Nigeria, Bingerville on the Ivory Coast and Shum Laka in Cameroun (Shaw &Daniels 1984; Rosenfeld 1972; Chenorkian 1983; Lavachery 2001).The lithic industries of phases 1 and 2 at Ounjougou clearly belong to this southern complex,although the bifacial fusiform points find comparison only at the contemporaneous site ofTemet in Niger (Roset 1996). In the Central Sahara, only the Early Acacus facies, present inLibya between the tenth and the beginning of the eighth millennium BC, shows a substantialuse of quartz, similar to the Ounjougou industry, with the same tendency toward“hypermicrolithization”, the backed pieces being more frequent and bifacial armatures absent(Garcea 1997; Di Lernia 1999).”
          Overall, the intial 9th millienial ceramics could be a converged phenomenon with the aridification occuring likewise with the north. Evidence of potter in the cnetral sahara was lacking between these cites at the time and the technology didn’t suggest diffusion until the 3rd and 4th phase of the Ounjougou industry, after the 7th and 5th millienia.

        9. “Overall, the intial 9th millienial ceramics could be a converged phenomenon with the aridification occuring likewise with the north. Evidence of potter in the cnetral sahara was lacking between these cites at the time and the technology didn’t suggest diffusion until the 3rd and 4th phase of the Ounjougou industry, after the 7th and 5th millienia.”
          I see, I suppose it seems then that the a likely implication might be that pottery was created independently in both the Ounjougou region of Mali (i.e. Central Mali) and the Central Sahara (around Niger, Southernmost Algeria and southernmost Libya) around the same time, as seemingly suggested in the quotes you cited from Huysecom’s study—I believe it’s Huysecom—(but not invented in the Northern Sahara or Maghreb, the portion of the South Sahara including Northern Mali that lay between the Ounjougou region and the Central Sahara, or in the region south of Mali, in all of which regions it did not appear until later) with some contact/diffusion occurring later between the Ounjougou and Central/South Saharan cultural traditions only in a later phase of the Ounjougou culture after the the Ounjougou culture’s creation/invention of ceramics.
          As the Huysecom study you cited says (I believe the ” contemporaneous saharan dates” they refer to are the Central Saharan, as there was no pottery contemporaneously in the more Northern Maghrebian zone of the Capsian culture):
          “The ceramics of Ounjougou, also decorated with flexible counter-wrapped cord rouletteand toothed comb, and dating back to at least the eighth millennium BC, are thus the oldest in the sub-Saharan world, and are contemporaneous with the Saharan dates. However, no ceramic indicator is currently known between the regions of emergence in the Sahara and our site complex.”
          ” In the Central Sahara, millstones and grinders are known from the beginning of the ninth millennium BC in Niger at Temet,with stone receptacles, and during the ninth and eighth millennia BC at several sites in Niger and Libya, with the use of ceramics”
          Pottery was also as far as we know not yet used in the region in between the C. Sahara and Central Mali (i.e. the Western South Sahara in the North of Mali, that lies north of Ounjougou):
          ” In contrast, in the southern Sahara, this type of material seems to appear only at the turn of the fifth and fourth millennia BC in Mali at Kourounkorokale”
          There are also very early (slightly earlier than Niger/Libya I believe) pottery dates from the Central Sudan at Saggai. Perhaps the central Saharan traditions (to the North East of Ounjougou but no earlier) were derived from that of Central Sudan, and that those together (Saggai and Central Saharan) represent one tradition/invention, which along with the tradition represented at the Ounjougou site comprise two separate inventions of pottery in Africa (one on the Sudan and one in Mali?), perhaps more than one case of convergence/invention (as you suggested) within Africa (in Niger, Sudan, and Mali?) related to similar climatic conditions around that time in different locations within of the Central Sahara-North Savanah region).
          (So initially there was pottery in Ounjougou/the north savannah/south sahel and in the Central Sahara/btwn north and south and btwn east and west, and the Central Sudan/Saggai around modern Nubia but none in between in the western south Sahara, or in the north sahara)
          I had remembered the early dates from Central Mali and central Sudan, but those from Niger must have slipped my mind (though they may possibly be slightly later that those of the two former regions)
          (especially see fig 3; parts a and b, page 587, for visuals of the the geographic spread/progression of pottery in Africa and Eurasia, at the study linked below—which hypothesizes tentatively that African pottery making may influenced the later emergence of Middle Eastern pottery)
          “Modelling the diffusion of pottery technologies across Afro-Eurasia: Emerging insights and future research”

          (summing up/citing the above study linked above:) (The African tradition is described as “North African”, but really is North African only in the broader sense—of being from the northern third or quadrant of the continent—as it belongs to/originates from within the broad Central Sahara-North Savannah encompassing Mali, Niger/S Algeria and North-Cental Sudan, rather than the more northern Maghreb)

          “Where did pottery first appear in the Old World? Statistical modelling of radiocarbon dates suggests that ceramic vessel technology had independent origins in two different hunter-gatherer societies. Regression models were used to estimate average rates of spread and geographic dispersal of the new technology. The models confirm independent origins in East Asia (c. 16000 cal BP) and North Africa (c. 12000 cal BP). The North African tradition may have later influenced the emergence of Near Eastern pottery, which then flowed west into Mediterranean Europe as part of a Western Neolithic, closely associated with the uptake of farming.”
          “”Early Holocene pottery sites are found within a 4000km-long band encompassing the southern Sahara and northern Sahel, with early dates clustering in the Middle Nile valley and the Western Desert of Egypt, in the vicinity of the mountainous regions of southern Algeria and northern Niger, and at Ounjougou, Mali (Close 1995; Nelson et al. 2002; Jesse 2003; Huysecom et al. 2009)…..
          A number of locations inNorth Africa have sites with pottery dated to the earlyHolocene. Ounjougou, in Mali, has some of the very earliest dates but lies quite distant from the Near East (Huysecom et al. 2009). Pottery that is potentially as early as the Ounjougou material has been found at sites that are geographically closer to the Near East. Bir Kiseiba, in theWestern Desert of Egypt, has the earliest dates coming from site E-79-8, although with large margins of error, and in the central Nile Valley of Sudan, the Saggai site has produced the region’s earliest date for pottery (Close 1995)… We have taken… Saggai in Sudan (e.g. Caneva 1983) as the origin point in Africa. The exact location of the source point in the broader region of origination is unlikely to significantly affect the modelled results..”

        10. “…with some contact/diffusion occurring later between the Ounjougou and Central/South Saharan cultural traditions only in a later phase of the Ounjougou culture after the the Ounjougou culture’s creation/invention of ceramics.”
          Central Saharan cultures at the time (such as the Kiffian, Ounanian and those of the mesolithic-early neolithic in Niger, South Libya and South Algeria) would have likely been of subsaharan origin—or generally and/or primarily so. And if they were related to the Iberomaurusians (of Taforalt or Mechta el Arbi) it seems that it would likely have been in the sense of their being largely composed of the same SSA population that had contributed about 1/3 of the ancestry of Iberomaurusians.
          This is consistent with much of the rock art from sites like Tassili N’Ajjer in Southern Algeria from the (particularly that from the mesolithic-early neolithic i.e that of the roundhead and early cattle pastoral or bovidien stylistic periods, often depicting dark and subsaharan/negroid people (e.g. at art sites like that of Jabarren, sometimes herding cattle) and have been sometimes said to depict cultural affinities to groups further south in the sahel, prior to the arrival of Capsian-descended proto-Berbers (also pastoral) to the area from the North Sahara in the later neolithic who made their own rock art in somewhat different styles (and likely intermixed and overlapped with the previous inhabitants).
          “Later waves of Eurasian migrants (including some ancestry brought by the Capsians from N.E Africa (whom I believe were generally predominantly Eurasian, though they likely carried a small amount of SSA ancestry as well)and to a lesser extent, later waves of migration, lowered the SSA/non Eurasian component in Northern Maghrebians/Morroccans to the lower level at which it is now.
          The South and Central Sahara would also have also received other SSA contributions from the migrations from the nearby SSA south that occurred during the early neolithic period/Geren Sahara likely of early Nilo-Saharan and possibly certain Niger Congo peoples (around the time the Capsians were migrating to the North and Sahara)”—there is still, I believe, a small old “green sahara-era” SSA component in some Southern Maghrebians and other North Africans that predates the later SSA contributions of the trans-saharan slave trade.

      2. Jm8, mind going to one of my articles (the Fenton one) and comment on these studies?
        That is, any speculation on what they mention on the history of archaic ancestry in Africans?
        From the Pygmy one, it seems that genetic introgression occurred multiple times the intermediate form of erectus and sapiens at low levels.
        And of course, where you stand with dienekes on the implications of modern diversity and human origins?

  28. Africa is mineral and resource-rich, it has fertile land and yet all the while the populations of Africa only farmed at best to subsistence level or less, they never looked to beyond the day, they never mined, fashioned jewels yet their lands arguably have produced some of the richest jewels ever to be found. Never built housing or structures beyond that of sticks and cow dung with dirt floors, they maintained a level of transport by foot only pretty sure none ever used a wheel, and the highest level of weaponry were sheilds from sticks and cow hides and spears from sticks.
    Their climate was better, they had the resources but it is clear they never had the inventive intelligence to go beyond.
    They had drums a hollow log but where were the complex instruments of the Europeans something the entire African continent was devoid of and still would be if not for the European.
    If I am wrong please advise where all the blueprints for these inventions lay hidden in Africa, just because you say someone is smart doesn’t cut it there needs to be evidence of that intelligence and in Africa there is as in South America, Australia and the Pacific a complete lack of intelligent invention or accomplishment.

  29. White man lit a fire took a burnt stick learnt to write with it and well the rest is plain to see we now live in skyscrapers, drive cars, sail the globe, fly in planes and all the while the Black races are still reinventing the stick and the philosophers pat them on the head and say wow what a clever little mankey you are.

  30. While we are talking about the intelligence of Aboriginals and Africans. An intersting thing ithought about is that most intra group genetic variance is within Africa, while the largest IQ differences are prescent within non-africans that are seemingly very genetically homogenous compared to the variance existant within Africa. How so? how can Nigerians and Kenyans be so different (in traits that arent looks, while looks could be an larger part of genetic variance within non-africans, making the genomic difference in gene frequency related to brain structure smaller within non-africans smaller than the variance africans have) in genome while aboriginals and other non-africans are so different phenotypically when prety similar genotypically?
    Becuase of genes relating to brain structure arent causing iq differences? Well brain structure is Polygenic so it HAS TOO or else it would be extremely easy to find genes with large impacts on IQ scores, it not being polygenic or having the potentiall of having few genes change phenotypes by a lot..

    1. What do you mean? The Aboriginals are furthest from Blacks as any other race. How can you say they are close genetically? There are some very smart Africans. There are a number of Africans at US universities with IQ’s over 160. Not surprising if they have that much genetic variance in them.

      1. Its all Contingent on Africans having more genetic variance (that probably have less to do with physical traits as they all look the same) but less phenotypic variance than non-africans. But with the existance of bantus, pygmies and khosians maybe what i said is irrelevant, or not.

      2. When i said “less IQ variance” amongst non-africans i meant that groups have more varied avarage iq’s than groups within Africa. Yes, Africans are the most different from aboriginals.
        but out of the total variance in humanity most lies within Africa, meaning that less is outside of Africa and that its wierd that differences in genes outside of Africa cause such much IQ variance. How the heck could aboriginals be so much more similar to Europeans in Brain genes (presumably) compared to how similar Europeans and Africans are, yet more different phenotypically?
        All of this is not rock hard empiricism, bit with the right evidence could provide an inconsistency in Jensens model.

      3. (adding on the last posts semtence) More different phenotypically when IQ is an polygenic traits, meaning that an such large differences would have to have non-rare variants cause large differences in IQ, which is against what most GWAS intelligence researchers likes to cite is the case.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)