Victor David Hanson predicts America will split and the coasts will fall before we ever have a civil war (link)

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
1,449
1,940
1
It most certainly does.
And IQ by nation is not a good measure. Take Africans as an example, the average IQ scores of recent African immigrants to America would likely be higher than the average African Americans because these recent immigrants are usually well educated and have college degrees.
And the exodus of the educated from their native nations to seek better opportunities in wealthy countries lowers the average IQ scores of their home countries.
Brain drain occurs right here in the US, many of the smart kids who grew up in these poor rural towns go off to college and move away to places that have more economic opportunity.
And look at Native Americans, genetically they are essentially Asians and yet their average IQ score is lower.

Again things like race are based outward physical characteristics and have nothing to do with intelligence and if you think Africans are naturally inferior in intelligence than Europeans and Asians then yes you are likely racist because the science doesn't support your conclusions.

it certainly does not. No statistician alive would agree with you. What was the highest course you ever took in statistics?

IQ by nation is an excellent measure for the nation itself.

There can be no question that LEGAL immigrants will have a higher IQ than the home country,. No question. That's because they need to demonstrate a skill/talent that is stem related (in practice).

The average Indian IQ is about 89, but the average Indian American's IQ is at least 115 (yes, I'm guessing).
 

JeffClear

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2017
8,484
3,412
1
The mechanism you propose is what is generally accepted.

Those groups in harsher climates had to be smart to survive.

It is simple evolutionary pressure that results in what we are.

Some have postulated that it is actually those at the tail end that drive civilizational advancement - Newton, Galileo, etc.

Devil's advocate really isn't useful. We can always say "Since we weren't actually alive during those times and there's no record, then we really can't say".

Sure that's true, but that's not how science is done.

What's done in situations like these are we resort to "Occam's razor" - that which is MORE likely and LESS likely. And we state explicitly that while a give theory is our best theory, it is far from confirmed and might even be overturned.
Haha you couldn't be more wrong. People who live in primitive tribes have to struggle to survive much more than we do.
Human competition is what drives change.
There is little chance that a tribe of primitive humans would be hunted into oblivion by lions tigers and bears. Other humans would certainly would do it though.
And history has shown that if one group of humans lives on good piece of land, other humans are going to want it and will try to take it from them.
 

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
1,449
1,940
1
Haha you couldn't be more wrong. People who live in primitive tribes have to struggle to survive much more than we do.
Human competition is what drives change.
There is little chance that a tribe of primitive humans would be hunted into oblivion by lions tigers and bears. Other humans would certainly would do it though.
And history has shown that if one group of humans lives on good piece of land, other humans are going to want it and will try to take it from them.
I do not think you are right.

I would cite Norway/Scandinavia vs. Africa. Africa was always more populated, and was the cradle of civilization.

I think it is more "weather extremes" related - you have to be a problem solver/builder if you're going to survive the cold. You can't outwrestle the cold, outrun the cold. You have to outthink the cold.

But does it really matter?
 

JeffClear

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2017
8,484
3,412
1
it certainly does not. No statistician alive would agree with you. What was the highest course you ever took in statistics?

IQ by nation is an excellent measure for the nation itself.

There can be no question that LEGAL immigrants will have a higher IQ than the home country,. No question. That's because they need to demonstrate a skill/talent that is stem related (in practice).

The average Indian IQ is about 89, but the average Indian American's IQ is at least 115 (yes, I'm guessing).
Wrong, most scientists agree that there is no proof that there are differences in intelligence based on ethnicity.
As for your statement in legal vs illegal immigrants is absurd.
There are certainly highly educated immigrants from Asia and Africa who are here illegally by overstaying their visas.

Again it has to do with geography and proximity. If the country is far away, even the illegal immigrants will need significant resources to get here.
And again, immigration makes average national IQ test scores unreliable because if a country is poor and has few opportunities, many of the the smart people will leave and move to another country.
You are picking and choosing your data to support your biases.
 

JeffClear

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2017
8,484
3,412
1
I do not think you are right.

I would cite Norway/Scandinavia vs. Africa. Africa was always more populated, and was the cradle of civilization.

I think it is more "weather extremes" related - you have to be a problem solver/builder if you're going to survive the cold. You can't outwrestle the cold, outrun the cold. You have to outthink the cold.

But does it really matter?
Most the "great" civilizations were in the temperate zones, China, Europe, parts of India etc.
These temperate zones have the best farmland. These large agricultural surpluses allow a significant portion of the population to be engaged in non food growing or food gathering activities.
These non food production people would become the scholars, the engineers, the artists, the builders and the professional soldiers etc.
Large agricultural surpluses allow civilizations to have specialists.
 

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
1,449
1,940
1
Wrong, most scientists agree that there is no proof that there are differences in intelligence based on ethnicity.
As for your statement in legal vs illegal immigrants is absurd.
There are certainly highly educated immigrants from Asia and Africa who are here illegally by overstaying their visas.

Again it has to do with geography and proximity. If the country is far away, even the illegal immigrants will need significant resources to get here.
And again, immigration makes average national IQ test scores unreliable because if a country is poor and has few opportunities, many of the the smart people will leave and move to another country.
You are picking and choosing your data to support your biases.

Right now, we have about 1,000,000 Indian Americans who came to this country. 4,000,000 people of Indian American heritage.

So, while the average IQ of your American Asian Indian is about 115, it had negligible effect on India's average IQ.

Here is the math. 1,300,000,000 * 85 + 115*4,000,000 / (1,300,000,000 + 4,000,000) = 85.09.

So, legal immigrants cost India an average of 0.09 IQ points.

Why do you keep arguing?
 

KnightWhoSaysNit

Well-Known Member
Jul 19, 2010
6,801
5,436
1
That's your fault.

Maybe you are correct. Perhaps I am dense.

The problem here is that I was a modeling specialist for most of my career. Wrote my own algorithms and software, from scratch, down to the matrix inversions, to mine unstructured data. There is that, and the fact that the subject tends to interest me.

Is there a way for each of you to succinctly state the claim that you believe is false within the other's claim?

I am stuck.
 

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
1,449
1,940
1
Maybe you are correct. Perhaps I am dense.

The problem here is that I was a modeling specialist for most of my career. Wrote my own algorithms and software, from scratch, down to the matrix inversions, to mine unstructured data. There is that, and the fact that the subject tends to interest me.

Is there a way for each of you to succinctly state the claim that you believe is false within the other's claim?

I am stuck.
Why don't you just state your opinion on the question of average IQ by race and your own view of how much of that AVERAGE (not individual) is genetic?
 

KnightWhoSaysNit

Well-Known Member
Jul 19, 2010
6,801
5,436
1
Why don't you just state your opinion on the question of average IQ by race and your own view of how much of that AVERAGE (not individual) is genetic?

OK. This is unsubstantiated opinion ...

There are differences in average IQ by race, just as one race might differ from another in average height, but it isn't race that is the driving factor. It is genetics within that race.

Over time environmental factors impact the gene pool, which then impacts the IQ of the race, including other physical attributes.

There are secondary environmental factors. I mentioned two big ones (my opinion): Nutrition and child stimulation, which can also vary, on average, by race -- outside of the genetics. This is another thing that isn't easy to quantify, but we believe it to be true based on studies conducted independent of race. In segregated societies socioeconomic conditions can drive this to great significance, making it appear that race, or genetics, are more of a factor than whatever is truly real.

Over time is an operative qualifier. Environmental impacts drive the evolutionary process that begin the process of divergence, which then, I suppose, could feed itself.

But then with time the samples also become corrupted through biased migration, commingling, etc. If we ask "how much" then it becomes an impossible question to answer, in part because time does not appear to be part of the question.

The fallback is to become subjective, like using "mostly." In the end we wind up with opinions, and not much more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PSUEngineer89

KnightWhoSaysNit

Well-Known Member
Jul 19, 2010
6,801
5,436
1
Let me add one additional thought that might help you understand my perspective.

If we were able to measure IQ by race across the entire globe, and keep the data to within one generation, I think we would find that what I would call secondary environmental conditions do not sufficiently account for the average differences.

And this would as well apply to any other physical characteristic.

So I would say that the races are inherently different as a result of genetics.

What we should never do is let such differences impact public policy. Merit is the correct driver. We would never expect an NBA basketball team to make itself look racially inclusive. We should not expect other types of participation, such as college entry, or even the President's Cabinet, to be any different.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PSUEngineer89

JeffClear

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2017
8,484
3,412
1
Right now, we have about 1,000,000 Indian Americans who came to this country. 4,000,000 people of Indian American heritage.

So, while the average IQ of your American Asian Indian is about 115, it had negligible effect on India's average IQ.

Here is the math. 1,300,000,000 * 85 + 115*4,000,000 / (1,300,000,000 + 4,000,000) = 85.09.

So, legal immigrants cost India an average of 0.09 IQ points.

Why do you keep arguing?
America isn't the only country Indians go to, in total there are about 18 million Indians who have left India.
And that doesn't include their children that are born overseas.
 

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
1,449
1,940
1
America isn't the only country Indians go to, in total there are about 18 million Indians who have left India.
And that doesn't include their children that are born overseas.
Why don't you do the math on 18 million Indians.

See how it works out. Probably comes out to 0.40 IQ points. Not standard deviations. Points.

But you show me your math.
 

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
1,449
1,940
1
Let me add one additional thought that might help you understand my perspective.

If we were able to measure IQ by race across the entire globe, and keep the data to within one generation, I think we would find that what I would call secondary environmental conditions do not sufficiently account for the average differences.

And this would as well apply to any other physical characteristic.

So I would say that the races are inherently different as a result of genetics.

What we should never do is let such differences impact public policy. Merit is the correct driver. We would never expect an NBA basketball team to make itself look racially inclusive. We should not expect other types of participation, such as college entry, or even the President's Cabinet, to be any different.
Perfectly stated.
 

JeffClear

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2017
8,484
3,412
1
Right now, we have about 1,000,000 Indian Americans who came to this country. 4,000,000 people of Indian American heritage.

So, while the average IQ of your American Asian Indian is about 115, it had negligible effect on India's average IQ.

Here is the math. 1,300,000,000 * 85 + 115*4,000,000 / (1,300,000,000 + 4,000,000) = 85.09.

So, legal immigrants cost India an average of 0.09 IQ points.

Why do you keep arguing?
“Brain drain is particularly acute in sub-Saharan Africa,” says the World Economic Outlook(link is external) (October 2016), a report published by the International Monetary Fund (IMF(link is external)). “The migration of young and educated workers takes a large toll on a region whose human capital is already scarce. The concentration of migrants among those who are educated is higher than in other developing economies. The migration of highly-skilled workers entails a high social cost, as is evidenced by the departure of doctors and nurses from Malawi and Zimbabwe, which may mean welfare losses beyond those that are purely economic.”
 

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
1,449
1,940
1
“Brain drain is particularly acute in sub-Saharan Africa,” says the World Economic Outlook(link is external) (October 2016), a report published by the International Monetary Fund (IMF(link is external)). “The migration of young and educated workers takes a large toll on a region whose human capital is already scarce. The concentration of migrants among those who are educated is higher than in other developing economies. The migration of highly-skilled workers entails a high social cost, as is evidenced by the departure of doctors and nurses from Malawi and Zimbabwe, which may mean welfare losses beyond those that are purely economic.”
I ran the statistics on the numbers in the article.

The authors are wrong, they're obviously mathematically challenged.

You can run your own figures if you don't believe me.
 

JeffClear

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2017
8,484
3,412
1
Why don't you do the math on 18 million Indians.

See how it works out. Probably comes out to 0.40 IQ points. Not standard deviations. Points.

But you show me your math.
No need, unless you are arguing Indians are less intelligent.
India is a very big country and is middle of the road economically.
It's the poor countries, especially those in Africa, who are experiencing the most "brain drain"
And who would blame them. If I lived in many of these countries in Africa I would want to leave too.
 

PSUEngineer89

Well-Known Member
Aug 14, 2021
1,449
1,940
1
No need, unless you are arguing Indians are less intelligent.
India is a very big country and is middle of the road economically.
It's the poor countries, especially those in Africa, who are experiencing the most "brain drain"
And who would blame them. If I lived in many of these countries in Africa I would want to leave too.
It is without dispute that people from the sub-continent of India are not as smart as Japanese people, or South Koreans for that matter.

Without dispute.
 

LMTLION

Well-Known Member
Mar 20, 2008
2,097
2,199
1
I do believe that difficulties (climate, competition, etc) forced some populations in Europe and Asia to evolve sharper intellect just to survive. That fostered the creation of environments, such as those found in the renaissance and in more recent centuries, that allowed the expression of intellectual thought through science and the arts, creating a self-perpetuating cycle of advancement in modern civilization. Heck, this country as a melting pot is the culmination of many centuries of advancement in European countries and now Asian countries as well. What I fear is that recent successes and luxuries are making civilized populations lazy, leading to eventual decline of general intelligence in future generations . We are at a point that you do not have to work or advance yourself in the United States to be able to eat. Even many of the poorest among us in the US have luxuries that the middle class in much of the rest of the world would only dream of attaining. Absent some other motivation to succeed or advance, most people of any nationality will choose the lazy route. I fully support a real safety net and I think that every civilization should provide a safety net, but we do need to figure out how to motivate people to express their intellect in a society that’s likely leading to universal basic income and such. Too many people are focused on nonsense nowadays rather than bettering themselves.