LMAO x 1000
Well…
Thanks for those of you who stuck to the point of the thread.
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
LMAO x 1000[/quote]
Don’t bother with silly pictures, you lost the argument the moment you booted up your computer - he lold you.
Thousand. Times.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Don’t bother with silly pictures, you lost the argument the moment you booted up your computer - he lold you.
Thousand. Times.[/quote]
If I had lold him, like, 10000 times first, would I have won?
[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
Well…
Thanks for those of you who stuck to the point of the thread. [/quote]
Sorry! 
I think sending some troops is a good idea, I mean we were in the middle east for a long period of time, and I know more troops going somewhere else is the last thing people want to hear, but the continent of Africa needs outside help. Hopefully when they squash the LRA another group won’t take their place. Plus sending only 100 special force military personnel shows that they believe the job can be done quickly and efficiently. Well, lets hope.
Maybe his genius lies in his preemptive-lol ability ?
Note how skillfully he used a bogus aura of “I side with science”, too.
Lesser men can only hope to learn.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Maybe his genius lies in his preemptive-lol ability ?
Note how skillfully he used a bogus aura of “I side with science”, too.
Lesser men can only hope to learn.[/quote]
Depending on what “race” he actually belongs to, that might have been racist.
Its a case of Schroedingers racism.
BTW, not once have I backpedaled in any of my statements. IT is not my fault you are misconstruing the statements and the information I have presented.
Not once did I say that I knew for a FACT what IQs of past civilizations were. (Otherwise I would’ve said the Myans were about 100, Vikings/Norsemen at 95, etc.) What I did say is that you will have sects of people who will have violent leanings and non-violent leanings no matter what the status of their education was considered as being. History has proven that we can interpret where the status of education was in older civilizations. And that was in response to you claiming that we do not know if this is A culture people with a low IQ create…etc. Also those civilizations WERE successful having less education than others around the world were precieved as to having. (Obviously not as successful) Less education doesn’t necessarily mean “so stupid you can’t survive.”
And I do side with science, which has not, to any degree, provided INDISPUTABLE evidence that has proven, backwards and forwards, without a shout of a doubt, that Africans are intelligently inferior to all other races, genetically. I asked you for proof, you said you don’t have to show me proof, because, well you can’t. Science has no such Indisputable proof. You are simply raising a question for intellectual debate based on a circumstantial, hypothetical and conjectory statement. Which is ok for discussion. WHAT WE DO know is the socioeconomic status of the African continent has held back the education of the continent for more than one reason. IF you raised 10 people in the rainforest and only taught them basic english, you’d expect them to test high on an IQ test??? Ridiculous. Move this to another thread so we don’t derail OP’s thread any further, if you so choose.
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
BTW, not once have I backpedaled in any of my statements. IT is not my fault you are misconstruing the statements and the information I have presented.
Not once did I say that I knew for a FACT what IQs of past civilizations were. (Otherwise I would’ve said the Myans were about 100, Vikings/Norsemen at 95, etc.) What I did say is that you will have sects of people who will have violent leanings and non-violent leanings no matter what the status of their education was considered as being. History has proven that we can interpret where the status of education was in older civilizations. And that was in response to you claiming that we do not know if this is A culture people with a low IQ create…etc. Also those civilizations WERE successful having less education than others around the world were precieved as to having. (Obviously not as successful) Less education doesn’t necessarily mean “so stupid you can’t survive.”
And I do side with science, which has not, to any degree, provided INDISPUTABLE evidence that has proven, backwards and forwards, without a shout of a doubt, that Africans are intelligently inferior to all other races, genetically. I asked you for proof, you said you don’t have to show me proof, because, well you can’t. Science has no such Indisputable proof. You are simply raising a question for intellectual debate based on a circumstantial, hypothetical and conjectory statement. Which is ok for discussion. WHAT WE DO know is the socioeconomic status of the African continent has held back the education of the continent for more than one reason. IF you raised 10 people in the rainforest and only taught them basic english, you’d expect them to test high on an IQ test??? Ridiculous. Move this to another thread so we don’t derail OP’s thread any further, if you so choose.[/quote]
We have already thoroughly derailed it and my answer to the OP is, IZ YOU INSANE !!!??!!.
My answer to you is, thats right, we dont know.
Also, whether they speak English or not is largely irrelevant because the tests used were usually of the kind that did not involve language based questions at all.
When those were used, they still got roughly the same results, with the exception of China, for whatever reason.
Is the data flawed?
Sure.
Might there be cultural, nutritional, whatever else factors at play?
Yes.
Is it likely that that explains away such a huge gap?
Not really, in my opinion.
Be that as it may, it is what it is right now and what it is is a population that is hardly fit to work a fork lift.
That should give us pause when it comes to development aid or military interventions.
If all our actions are influenced by the fact that some people will inevitably cry racism just because we are dealing with a set of somewhat challenged people that just happen to be black we are basically burning money.
Remember this measurement is just an average and doesn’t mean anything except to describe a central tendency for a given geographic area.
Would it mean anything if we took the Average IQ for the entire planet earth?
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]The Londoner wrote:
So essentially, what you’re saying is that African people are inherently stupid?
Are you even minutely aware of how racist your comment is?[/quote]
The average IQ of sub-Saharan Africans is around 70.
That could be due to malnutrition, infectious diseases or, yes, it could be genetic.
This is, as far as we know, fact, and facts are rarely racist.
So, what do we do with nations that have the average IQ of an 11 year old boy. [/quote]
Care to source that? Who the fuck walks around Africa giving people IQ tests and how were they administered?
[quote]Rohnyn wrote:
[quote]Swolegasm wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]Swolegasm wrote:
[quote]Rohnyn wrote:
[quote]The Londoner wrote:
So essentially, what you’re saying is that African people are inherently stupid?
Are you even minutely aware of how racist your comment is?[/quote]
If I had said that Eastern Europe and Latin American had business cultures that were plagued by corruption would you have said that was racist?
You drew your own conclusion from the evidence given, I did not tell you that.
I wasn’t aware ‘facts’ were racist. I thought racism was predicated on advocating the superiority of your group over others.
What I did say was that Africa is inherently fukked up and has been seemingly perpetually…what is the point of investing blood, money and oil into the place? What will be taken in return?[/quote]
You pretty much said how superior you were. By you definition that is racist.
Uhh what will be taken in return? The good of mankind? improving there quality of life, which could be argued was caused by colinisation of Africa and the slave trade in particular by america.
Plus stone age? did you ever hear of timbuktu?
[/quote]
You know whats funny?
If someone points out that at least East Asians have a higher IQ than Europeans that is not racist.
If it is pointed out that Africans, at least those below the Sahara have a significantly lower IQ that is racist.
What is also interesting is that the gap is always explained away in part that this tests are somehow favoring middle class Europeans, without going into why rice farmers in rural China seem to have no problems with that.
Also, the IQ of people in urban areas is higher than that in rural areas, what is that, urbanist?
edited[/quote]
I never argued with the IQ tests just that the tone of that guy, gave me the impression that we were talking about a sub race.[/quote]
I think you have just been mentally conditioned to refuse the cold hard facts of regional/racial reality and reacted that way until you got showed the numbers.
Far enough.[/quote]
I am not convinced of the “cold hard facts”. IQ is supposed to be a reflection of ability not education, but it posits you have education first. The regions in read reflect more the education or lack of, rather than cognitive ability. I garaun-fucking-tee that if you provide the same educational resources that we have and most first world countries have, you will get IQ’s that are on par with the rest of the world.
I want to know, what IQ test was give, how was it given, to whom was it given, in what language it was given, etc.
You cannot put enough controls on such a research because it is impossible. There for the results of such research is impossible.
You have to be able to prove that by genetic nature, you pull 1000 randomly selected kids out of that region, put them in a favorable educational surrounding such as the U.S. and test them against their peers 5 years later and get substantially, statistically significant lower mean than the rest of the world, then it would be somewhere near believable…It won’t, because you take a 1000 kids from that region and give them proper learning environments and those kids will show the same cognitive ability as anybody else.
Like wise if we took you ass as a kid and stuck it in middle Africa where you had to struggle to survive everyday and receive no education, you would come up really low on an IQ test too.
It requires a pretty decent level of education to even take an IQ test. Many people in Africa don’t have that at all.
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]The Londoner wrote:
So essentially, what you’re saying is that African people are inherently stupid?
Are you even minutely aware of how racist your comment is?[/quote]
The average IQ of sub-Saharan Africans is around 70.
That could be due to malnutrition, infectious diseases or, yes, it could be genetic.
This is, as far as we know, fact, and facts are rarely racist.
So, what do we do with nations that have the average IQ of an 11 year old boy. [/quote]
Care to source that? Who the fuck walks around Africa giving people IQ tests and how were they administered?[/quote]
You have a link on page 1
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
In all honesty, BTW, you can ask “What if it is genetic?” all you want, and others can too. Unfortunetly you will arrive at the same answer. IT’s not. That would mean that many of the successful Africans from around the world who have achieved compentency and general success would have been held back by subpar genetics and there are too many AFricans/Blacks who do test high IQ wise and are competent. These people were decendents of African natives and have succeeded. Your DNA has nothing to do with region, racially, and these people are too far in number to be considered potential outliers on a statistical scale. This just further proves that we are products of our environment to a degree.
And for the record, I never said we had DNA/genetics all figured out, but when it comes to this it is pretty obvious. You can take any race from any region, and barring any mental issues you can educate them to above a 70 mentally handicaped IQ level. [/quote]
Excuse me, that is not an argument.
So, some people did well.
Awesome?
So?
That says nothing about average intelligence in sub Saharan Africa, that only shows that intelligence is distributed along a bell curve there too.
That is along the lines of Chinese are not smaller than Americans because one Chinese plays in the NBA.
Also, what study?
Education in Africa? That is a good documentation that education sucks in Africa, but that say little about raw intelligence.
[/quote]
You cannot determine shit about raw intelligence with out education. Second, if I dropped your well educated ass in the African plains, you would die. Where as your ‘dumb’ counter parts will step around your carcass to get to the next source of survival. Whether that’s before or after the buzzards eat your dead ass, I don’t know.
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
In all honesty, BTW, you can ask “What if it is genetic?” all you want, and others can too. Unfortunetly you will arrive at the same answer. IT’s not. That would mean that many of the successful Africans from around the world who have achieved compentency and general success would have been held back by subpar genetics and there are too many AFricans/Blacks who do test high IQ wise and are competent. These people were decendents of African natives and have succeeded. Your DNA has nothing to do with region, racially, and these people are too far in number to be considered potential outliers on a statistical scale. This just further proves that we are products of our environment to a degree.
And for the record, I never said we had DNA/genetics all figured out, but when it comes to this it is pretty obvious. You can take any race from any region, and barring any mental issues you can educate them to above a 70 mentally handicaped IQ level. [/quote]
Excuse me, that is not an argument.
So, some people did well.
Awesome?
So?
That says nothing about average intelligence in sub Saharan Africa, that only shows that intelligence is distributed along a bell curve there too.
That is along the lines of Chinese are not smaller than Americans because one Chinese plays in the NBA.
Also, what study?
Education in Africa? That is a good documentation that education sucks in Africa, but that say little about raw intelligence.
[/quote]
You cannot determine shit about raw intelligence with out education. Second, if I dropped your well educated ass in the African plains, you would die. Where as your ‘dumb’ counter parts will step around your carcass to get to the next source of survival. Whether that’s before or after the buzzards eat your dead ass, I don’t know.[/quote]
My ability to survive in Africa is hardly relevant and the claim that you cannot test someones IQ without education is unsubstantiated.
We test 3 year olds all the time and their IQ remains relatively stable over time.
I probably should ask you guys to STFU and/or make your own thread. But whatever, this one is pretty well killed anyway.
I don’t get why the obvious is so controversial.
People in SubSaharan Africa have a mean score in the retard range in their IQ.
You deny the veracity of the IQ tests, yet don’t take into account that rural Chinese farmers do fine on them, or that Tageki rock dat.
Okay fine, deny the IQ test.
But then you don’t see the correlation with the fact that Africa is basically the asshole of the Earth socially. They have cannibalism, baby rape, child armies, insane murderous religious zealots, pooping their own drinking water and massive plague caused by an easily previntible disease.
Okay you disregard that. You say COLONIALISM or SLAVERY.
But slavery was an indigenous African practice, and Africans traded human beings because they had no worthy industry and wanted whiskey/blankets whatever.
Then with Colonialism, you say Europe somehow damaged Africa to a point where her entire moral structure was broken. The inverse is true, Colonialism provided a life better for nearly all African people and countries than the post-colonial shithole we have today.
Unemployment, crime, and social disorder were minimal compared to now.
The assertion doesnt make sense also because, the injustices commited during Colonialism were not without parallels in other continents yet the results of these in other continents did not cause; cannibalism, baby rape, child armies, insane murderous religious zealots, pooping their own drinking water and massive plague caused by an easily previntible disease.
Thus these activities appear to be unique to Africa and her people.
You then say, we must help these people. How do we help them? You basially advocated colonialism all over again while at the same time indict it.
Once you acknowledge the disparity, you say “it is due to malnutrition” or “lack of education.” Yet similarly uneducated and seemingly malnourished people do not have the same difficultities with the test in Asia.
You scoff at the idea that it could be genetic to people of bantu or congoloid origins. That their mean IQ is simply due to a differing gene pool. This does not mean all these people are less intelligent than the Asian or European average it means, they are far more likely to be - there’s less IQ to go around. You scoff at this and call it racism, despite the fact that this has IQ test was scientifically concluded. Depite the fact that you were not offended when it is said the European ‘racial’ mean iq is lesser than the Asian one.
You claim that being put into first world environments refutes this claim, that Africans can have mean IQs at the level of Europeans if they are jsut given enough Cheetohs and Democratic party propganda. Yet the metrics disprove this hardily.
Blacks in America and in Europe all score well below their European dsecended counterparts and even further below their Asian ones. You say this is due to ‘OPPRESSION.’ Yet if oppression were the cause, then there must be a control of ab expansive, developed and intellectually powerful black civilization at large, most especially in modern times. There is not one, in fact the fact the opposite is true. Any region that Africans take over from whites summarily collapses; South Africa, Detroit, Zimbabwe (Rhodesia), and Jo’Burg are just a few examples.
You claim that it is cultural, a culture of poverty. Yet blacks raised by white families still score lower on IQ test on average, and mullattos also have a higher but still slightly lower IQ. You also don’t realize the poverty is a cycle due to low quality of the inputs involved, intellect being one of them.
You claim angrily, ALL THIS must be FALSE AND RACIST, because it doesn’t bid your Politically Correct upbringing or labor party propaganda…Despite the mountain of evidence to confirm the basic fact that Asians are (mathematically) smarter, whites are in the middle, and blacks are quite dumber as a whole.
For some reason you can’t accept something what is basically evident from any crosscultural/interracial transaction.
That just as blacks might be on average physically taller; they are also on average mentally shorter.
ZOMG RACISM. STFU.
The facts speak for themselves, welcome to the real world.
How do you fix a society of people with down syndrome? You kill the bully with down syndrome? What does that solve?
The one anecdoate I will agree with but also refute.
THe assertion that African immigrants in the USA are extremely successful in the USA as a counterpoint.
This is true, by some estimates, African immigrants might be the most per capita successful group.
However, this is not reflective on the group as a whole but due to circumstance. Most African countries have per capita incomes that are lesser than half the price of a plane ticket.
The odds are stacked against anyone trying to leave the continent to go to the USA. The fact is that, only the wiliest, most intelligent, basically geniuses are able to escape.
This is confirmed by two other pieces of evidence.
Africans immigrants to Europe are far less successful than their American counterparts. This is due to the fact it is far more easy to get there.
Immigrant groups have inflated skillsets and prowess in America often, due to the fact that only the creme of the crop can get here. The Chinese people are a prime example, we have the super stars of China arriving in our country, so it paints a picture of their academic prowess. Yet if you went to China you’d a far more ‘average’ distribution. Perhaps a better overall work ethic tho.
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
In all honesty, BTW, you can ask “What if it is genetic?” all you want, and others can too. Unfortunetly you will arrive at the same answer. IT’s not. That would mean that many of the successful Africans from around the world who have achieved compentency and general success would have been held back by subpar genetics and there are too many AFricans/Blacks who do test high IQ wise and are competent. These people were decendents of African natives and have succeeded. Your DNA has nothing to do with region, racially, and these people are too far in number to be considered potential outliers on a statistical scale. This just further proves that we are products of our environment to a degree.
And for the record, I never said we had DNA/genetics all figured out, but when it comes to this it is pretty obvious. You can take any race from any region, and barring any mental issues you can educate them to above a 70 mentally handicaped IQ level. [/quote]
Excuse me, that is not an argument.
So, some people did well.
Awesome?
So?
That says nothing about average intelligence in sub Saharan Africa, that only shows that intelligence is distributed along a bell curve there too.
That is along the lines of Chinese are not smaller than Americans because one Chinese plays in the NBA.
Also, what study?
Education in Africa? That is a good documentation that education sucks in Africa, but that say little about raw intelligence.
[/quote]
You cannot determine shit about raw intelligence with out education. Second, if I dropped your well educated ass in the African plains, you would die. Where as your ‘dumb’ counter parts will step around your carcass to get to the next source of survival. Whether that’s before or after the buzzards eat your dead ass, I don’t know.[/quote]
My ability to survive in Africa is hardly relevant and the claim that you cannot test someones IQ without education is unsubstantiated.
We test 3 year olds all the time and their IQ remains relatively stable over time.[/quote]
You don’t know much about them, so I will give you a brief run down, IQ tests are done age dependent. So you cannot give a 3 year old a 12 year old’s test. So if you you are test 20 year olds, of nomadic tribes in lower Saharan plains, you have to give them one that presumes an ability to read and write. Otherwise the test is not comparable to the 1rst world counter parts. Further, you have a language issue. While there are some regions who can speak French, maybe some Portuguese and Spanish, and perhaps a bit of English, may speak native dialects of native languages. Where the tests converted to those native languages? Where the tests administered orally or written? Was the time constraints observed on the tests? There are many, many considerations to take in to account for this to have any validity what so ever.
My main question is how were these numbers arrived at? What controls were used to ensure validity?
IQ is a measure that can only be determined in a person with average or better education. If you are not taught cognitive skills, if you do not have the ability to perform the test, then there is no way to determine an IQ.
If we administered the 3 year old test, adapted to their environment and culture, then I bet you can better measure.
To say that entire regions with millions of people in them, have a mean IQ just an ass hair above retardation is quite a bold statement and requires substantial proof… Not 'cause I said so.
These people lack resources and education, not total lack of ability.
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]pat wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
[quote]FrozenNinja wrote:
In all honesty, BTW, you can ask “What if it is genetic?” all you want, and others can too. Unfortunetly you will arrive at the same answer. IT’s not. That would mean that many of the successful Africans from around the world who have achieved compentency and general success would have been held back by subpar genetics and there are too many AFricans/Blacks who do test high IQ wise and are competent. These people were decendents of African natives and have succeeded. Your DNA has nothing to do with region, racially, and these people are too far in number to be considered potential outliers on a statistical scale. This just further proves that we are products of our environment to a degree.
And for the record, I never said we had DNA/genetics all figured out, but when it comes to this it is pretty obvious. You can take any race from any region, and barring any mental issues you can educate them to above a 70 mentally handicaped IQ level. [/quote]
Excuse me, that is not an argument.
So, some people did well.
Awesome?
So?
That says nothing about average intelligence in sub Saharan Africa, that only shows that intelligence is distributed along a bell curve there too.
That is along the lines of Chinese are not smaller than Americans because one Chinese plays in the NBA.
Also, what study?
Education in Africa? That is a good documentation that education sucks in Africa, but that say little about raw intelligence.
[/quote]
You cannot determine shit about raw intelligence with out education. Second, if I dropped your well educated ass in the African plains, you would die. Where as your ‘dumb’ counter parts will step around your carcass to get to the next source of survival. Whether that’s before or after the buzzards eat your dead ass, I don’t know.[/quote]
My ability to survive in Africa is hardly relevant and the claim that you cannot test someones IQ without education is unsubstantiated.
We test 3 year olds all the time and their IQ remains relatively stable over time.[/quote]
You don’t know much about them, so I will give you a brief run down, IQ tests are done age dependent. So you cannot give a 3 year old a 12 year old’s test. So if you you are test 20 year olds, of nomadic tribes in lower Saharan plains, you have to give them one that presumes an ability to read and write. Otherwise the test is not comparable to the 1rst world counter parts. Further, you have a language issue. While there are some regions who can speak French, maybe some Portuguese and Spanish, and perhaps a bit of English, may speak native dialects of native languages. Where the tests converted to those native languages? Where the tests administered orally or written? Was the time constraints observed on the tests? There are many, many considerations to take in to account for this to have any validity what so ever.
My main question is how were these numbers arrived at? What controls were used to ensure validity?
IQ is a measure that can only be determined in a person with average or better education. If you are not taught cognitive skills, if you do not have the ability to perform the test, then there is no way to determine an IQ.
If we administered the 3 year old test, adapted to their environment and culture, then I bet you can better measure.
To say that entire regions with millions of people in them, have a mean IQ just an ass hair above retardation is quite a bold statement and requires substantial proof… Not 'cause I said so.
These people lack resources and education, not total lack of ability.[/quote]
There are tests for people who are unable to read and write.
In fact there are numerous tests that tests for spatial intelligence (if that is a word in English) pattern recognition and so further and so on.
All that it requires is the ability to hold a pen and learn how to use it.
If you cannot do that, I guess testing your intelligence is kind of moot anyway.
Do I recognize that they worked with the tests they had and that there are of course many methodological flaws in how these over 150 tests were administered?
Sure, but this is the data we have, what else is there to go on?
In fact, the whole OMGDZ racism and “it simply cannot be” attitude is the very reason why we wont get more reliable data and that is very, very bad, because assuming that we want to do something about the abysmal conditions in Africa we need a clear picture of what is actually going on.