Do the MAOA and CDH13 ‘human warrior genes’ make violent criminals—and what should society do?

The warrior gene is back. And he’s brought along a buddy. This new research on a gene long associated with aggressive behavior raises an old question: What can–or should–be done about genetic predispositions that lead to grim social consequences in only some of the people with the predisposing genes?

The usual response, picking holes in individual research projects, denying that genes are ever involved in bad behavior, is just not good enough. We need to get serious about figuring out how to interfere with noxious genetic susceptibilities in ways that are fair and decent for everybody.

The so-called warrior gene comprises particular variations in the X chromosome gene that produces monoamine oxidase A (MAOA), an enzyme that affects the neurotransmitters dopamine, norepinephrine, and serotonin. The variants, known collectively as MAOA-L, produce human MAOA “knockouts” with a low level of the enzyme.

MAOA was the first candidate gene to be linked to antisocial behavior, identified in 1993 in a large Dutch family that was notorious for violence. It has been a media favorite ever since, acquiring the nickname “warrior gene” in 2004 as a result of an article in Science, of all places. This I learned from John Horgan’s fine rant about the exploitation of MAOA genetics at Scientific American, which describes weaknesses in the research.

The most recent appearance of MAOA-L is a paper Molecular Psychiatry published a week ago from a host of researchers based mostly in Finland. It showed that Finnish criminals convicted of several violent crimes frequently possessed either MAOA-L or a mutant version of another gene, CDH13, while the nonviolent controls did not. Find details in John Gever’s piece at MedPage Today.

CDH13 is involved in signaling between cells. Previous research has linked it with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism, schizophrenia, substance abuse or bipolar disorder. So far as I know, this is the first time it has been associated with violent criminality. I will ignore it for the rest of this piece because I want to focus on MAOA and its long history of being connected with aggressive behavior.

Genes vs the environmental factors in violent behavior

Although it’s clear that the Finnish researchers believe their findings unequivocally, they also appear to understand the unhappy history of attempts to find genetic explanations for crime and violence. They also know perfectly well that, even if their findings turn out to be true, other factors besides low MAOA go into the making of violent criminals.

Past research has found relationships between specific environmental factors and genes linked to aggressive violence, including MAOA. A particularly strong connection has been noted among abuse in childhood, MAOA-L gene variants, and violent behavior in adulthood. A recent review declared that several studies have shown that MAOA-L men previously exposed to early life abuse engaged in significantly higher levels of violent behavior than men with high levels of MAOA. The authors assert that this is one of the best-supported “observations in the entire literature of psychiatric genetics.”

Well-supported it may be, and child abuse is certainly a plausible connection. But the Finns found no such link in their studies. They say, “maltreatment did not modify the risk in any way.” They have, however, identified another factor they think is crucial: intoxication, either with alcohol or amphetamines.

Intoxication, they say, is a feature of most of the violent crimes in Finland. They propose that intoxicants interact with MAOA-L to affect brain neurotransmitters and produce impulsive aggression. Their suggestion: when violent criminals are released from prison they should be subject to mandatory treatment with drugs like disulfram or naltrexone that interfere with the effects of intoxicants.

Child abuse and intoxicants by no means exhaust the list of possible  influences on genes and behavior. There are doubtless many others. I ran across a paper proposing a complex relationship with the “male” hormone testosterone and antisocial (and prosocial) behavior. High levels of testosterone in fetal life and childhood, the theory goes, combine with negative or positive early life events to produce either “chronic antisocial lifestyles” or men predisposed to “socially adaptive traits such as a strong achievement motivation, leadership, fair bargaining behaviors, and social assertiveness.” That sounds plausible too. Maybe the Finns should be investigating whether their MAOA-L violent criminals have high levels of testosterone too.

Dealing with the revelations of behavioral genetics

The John Horgan piece I referred to above is a rant–a productive and rational rant that will give you a brief history of what’s been misleading and outright wrong about past attempts to link genes with violence and crime. But I’m coming around to the view that ranting is no longer a satisfactory way of dealing with the discombobulating implications of behavioral genetics. We have to start figuring out how to handle them.

It’s not an adequate response to pick nits with particular papers and so by implication condemn all of behavioral genetics as a hopelessly flawed endeavor. MAOA-L is a prime example, maybe the best one–and a good place to start. The studies on low MAOA activity have piled up. Despite their individual flaws, it’s pretty clear that something really does seem to be going on with that gene variant that is (or can be) in some way related to bad behavior.

I have read that MAOA-L is pretty common–one paper says 40 percent of the population possesses it. It gave no reference, and I haven’t been able to nail that number down for sure, but let’s assume it’s true. Let’s assume that many of us are walking around with low MAOA and that we are not aggressive, don’t commit violent crimes, and are really nice people. You may be one of them. I may be one of them.

Does the fact that most people with low MAOA are not violent criminals mean there should be no attempts to identify and prevent whatever bad behavior is encouraged by MAOA-L? The researchers argue that their findings should not lead to screening for these gene variants, and I agree. But what about their proposal to prevent violent criminals from using alcohol and other intoxicants when they get out?

Applying it across the board would mean that former violent prisoners without MAOA-L would also be denied intoxication. My feeling about that is, so what? We know that alcohol and some other drugs precipitate irresponsibility and nastiness in lots of people. We already have laws that punish bad behavior associated with those drugs. The laws and social pressure even help prevent chemically induced bad behavior.

What’s wrong with applying that logic to criminals with a history of violent–often murderous–behavior? It takes the focus off genes and shifts it to well-known environmental triggers for bad behavior. These are much easier to control than genes–and would probably have more widespread social benefits.

Tabitha M. Powledge is a long-time science journalist. She also writes On Science Blogs for the PLOS Blogs Network. Follow her @tamfecit.

Additional reading:

233 thoughts on “Do the MAOA and CDH13 ‘human warrior genes’ make violent criminals—and what should society do?”

  1. I’m not sure what’s being suggested beyond the fact that human behavior is much more complex than a singular gene. The proposed social “solutions” will undoubtedly work just as well as keeping guns out of the hands of convicts.

    After all, if the point is that we need more laws to protect us from “violent–often murderous–behavior”, then doesn’t it make more sense to leave these people in prison, rather than to create a convoluted legal system whose sole purpose is to put them back in anyway?

    Isn’t the first question we should be asking is why are violent/murderous criminals being released? We already house far too many drug addicts in our prisons, leading to overcrowding, do we really need another drug-related law to do even more of it?

  2. I don’t know who John Rennie is, but the John Horgan rant to which you linked was not “fine,” “productive,” or “rational.” Like many others, he dismissed the research based on a copy-and-paste error that slanders Chinese people.

    The variants, known collectively as MAOA-L, produce human MAOA “knockouts” with a low level of the enzyme.

    No, you are mistaken. Knockout refers to a missense codon that turns the gene completely off. In the case of MAOA, this is called Brunner syndrome. MAOA-L lumps rare alleles with the two common forms, despite the fact that studies have found MAOA-2R to be far worse than MAOA-3R. This means that studies that only look at MAOA-L in populations with relatively high prevalence of MAOA-2R, like African Americans, underestimate the effects of MAOA. In fact, there are many promoters of MAOA and other interacting genes, hormones, and drugs for which studies have not controlled.

    A particularly strong connection has been noted among abuse in
    childhood, MAOA-L gene variants, and violent behavior in adulthood.

    It’s easier to talk about child abuse than child IQ, but the influence of the latter was stronger in Fergusson et al.

    Maybe the Finns should be investigating whether their MAOA-L
    violent criminals have high levels of testosterone too.

    Yes, in fact, testosterone and other hormones also interact with MAOA-3R. I wonder why scientists would rather study only the gene-“environment” interaction with child abuse.

    I have read that MAOA-L is pretty common–one paper says 40% of the population possesses it. It gave no reference, and I haven’t been able to nail that number down for sure, but let’s assume it’s true.

    Let’s not. I can help you nail the number down, since I have been tabulating the allele frequencies. Unfortunately, that might require that you address the prickly issue of race, since the much greater frequencies of both MAOA-3R and MAOA-2R are found in African Americans. (HapMap also shows that the CDH13 allele identified in that study is most common in Mexicans.) Since Africans and Asians outnumber whites, MAOA-3R is the most common version in the world.

    The studies on low MAOA activity have piled up.

    Despite your errors, I like this line. I just wish the word “meta-analysis” had appeared somewhere.

    • Can African Americans and Mexicans as well as Chinese and Finns be distinguished by genetic analysis? If not, those grouping would have little meaning in determining the value of specific codons. Is there an identifiable genetic combination that predicts violent behavior in all places at all times ?

      • Your comment contains a non sequitur. However, scientists did publish a study based on this logic. Widom and Brzustowicz grouped their sample into white and “non-white” categories. The white sample was 24% female. The non-white sample was 43% female. They did not control for gender. Since MAOA is on the X-chromosome and is subject to both hemizygosity in men and greater methylation in women, it has much less effect on women. So, the scientists might have intentionally engineered their conclusion that MAOA only affects whites. The studies Haberstick et al and Foshee et al compared white males to black males and found stronger effects of MAOA on violent crime in the black-male samples. Perhaps this is partly because black people are more likely to have versions of dopamine genes like ANKK1, DAT1, and DRD4 that have been linked to antisocial behavior.

        A study that compared self-identified race to genetically determined groups found almost perfect alignment, but anthropologists and population geneticists still try to deconstruct race, and they deny that any genes are “strong candidates for playing a role in behaviour.” Geneticists are not the leading authority on behavioral genetics. Psychiatrists have done more of this research.

          • Dennis for a good discussion of that, you might find two of my books of interest: Taboo, on race and sports, and Abraham’s Children, on race and religious identity. The answer to your question is nuanced.

          • Dennis glad Jon brought his books up as both of Jon’s book are pretty much discredited by anyone who studies race. A BA in Philosophy doesn’t get one a degree in genetics. Read how Kevin Macdonald says Jon misquotes him in Abraham’s Children and says flay out Jon doesn’t get it. Jon looks good on paper but dig deeper and it gets ugly. Dude thinks there is a black sports gene…he got laughed out of the race space (see hir article) and now shills for the foundations and trust behind GLP. Guess he has to pay that child support and alimony some how. What gene causes spouse abuse I wonder?

            http://www.kevinmacdonald.net/blog-Entine.htm

            http://www.hirhome.com/rr/rrcontents.htm

          • Kevin MacDonald believes in genetic influence on collective ethnic behavior so far as “the Jews” are concerned.

          • From your reference, I quote;”Subjects identified themselves as belonging to one of four major racial/ethnic groups (white, African American, East Asian, and Hispanic)” . One expects common artifacts among groups and I expect predictions can be made for groupings. But can a researcher identify an individual’s racial or ethnic group when only the genetic analysis is available in an otherwise blind study?
            ?

          • The answer to your question is yes. Geneticists can definitively determine your race by genetics alone (with 99.99% accuracy).

          • I would really appreciate a citation for the research publications that support the statement you make. The great majority of studies I see on genetics and race have difficulty even defining race.

            For social, economic, and historical reasons, we’ve designated arbitrary constellations of phenotypic traits to indicate races. There is no compelling biological reason why those traits and not others should take priority in defining race. And the obvious traits we use to indicate “race” are influenced by a fairly small number of genes, so it’s difficult to assign any larger meaning to the artificial categories we create.

            It’s possible to use genetic markers to make inferences about the geographic origins of an individual’s ancestors. But often these markers are from non-coding regions of the DNA, including single nucleotide polymorphisms and repeat sequences that probably have little or no phenotypic effects. So, again, it’s difficult to assign any social or behavioral significance to that level of genetic variation.

            Still, I’m interested in learning more about the issue and would appreciate links to further scientific information. Thanks.

          • 1) I made one claim here. Cluster analysis allows geneticists to determine an individual’s race with an extremely high level of accuracy. That’s easily researchable.
            2) It certainly is difficult to assign social or behavioral significance to these differences, absent direct data on behavior differences and the genetic differences that underlie them. We can however still engage in educated speculation.
            3) Lastly, there are however some examples of underlying allele frequency differences that almost certainly account for some of the predisposition to violence seen in certain groups (relative to other groups). That is to say there is direct evidence of underlying genetic differences that probably manifest themselves in behavioral disparities between racial/ethnic groups. The MOAO (Monoamine Oxidase A) gene springs to mind…

          • Thanks for your response. Nevertheless, educated speculation is still speculation, and we need to be careful. The fact that males, almost universally across cultures, are far more likely than females to be violent suggests a genetic influence, but it does not mean that we know anything about any individual male’s propensity toward violence.

          • There may not be a specific gene for race. But races are created by genetic diversity through adaptations to different environments and situations. We’re all human. Our different appearances come with natural tolerance to certain environments. While some people will be more comfortable in the frigid cold environments of the north. Other people will be more comfortable in the heat.

          • What’s making the most important differences between humans beings is the behavior… And not the very minor differences like the skin or the eyes.
            … And the characteristics of the skin or the eyes are not on the same chromosome than those of the violence or the ability to empathy.
            The links between race and behavior is a way to use stats to manipulate real science.

          • “What’s making the most important differences between humans beings is the behavior…”

            Not only do Blacks have small, light and primitive brains, but they are also innately violent-

            Blacks have mean testosterone levels 19% higher than in whites. This is why 1-in-4 Black men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer but only 1-in-8 White men and 1-in-13 Asian men will. Testosterone is associated with impulsive, aggressive and violent behavior.

            The Black homicide rate is 17 per 100,000, a rate over 9x that of the White rate, and comparable to some of those most murderous countries in the world.

            If the homicide rate for the country as a whole were the White-only rate, the homicide rate would drop 84%, making the U.S. rate comparable to European countries.

            Black males age 18-35 are only 4% of the U.S. population, yet commit 50% of homicides. Black males (all ages) are only 6% of the U.S. population, yet commit 46% of all violent crimes, and 50% of the gun homicides. If Blacks were removed from the equation, the U.S. gun homicide rate would be equal to Great Britain’s, who have some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the world.

            Therefore, the U.S. has a Black problem, not a gun or violent crime problem.

            In 2013, according to FBI statistics, Blacks committed an average of 486,945 violent crimes against Whites, whereas Whites committed only 99,403 violent crimes against Blacks. This means Blacks were the attackers in 84.5 percent of the violent crimes involving Blacks and Whites. By age 23, half of Blacks males have been arrested.

            Blacks have a very high percentage carrying the dysfunctional form of the MAOA gene which does not produce a protein needed to break down old serotonin in their brains. This causes them to be agitated, aggressive and impulsive. The popular term for this is the “warrior gene” which could be considered propaganda to put a positive spin on those who possess this dysfunctional gene which is highly-correlated to criminality.

            Comprehensive Psychiatry published a large study on the rates at which black and white Americans carry shortened, or dysfunctional, MAOA genes.

            The gene can come in the form of 2, 3, 3.5, 4, or 5 allele. A 3-repeat allele is considered dysfunctional and is what is referred to as the “warrior gene”. A 2-repeat allele is considered very dysfunctional. People with a 2-repeat allele MAOA gene have a permanent chemical imbalance in their brain making the person more likely to be agitated, aggressive, and impulsive.

            According to the study published in Comprehensive Psychiatry, 34.6% of Whites and 53.4% of Blacks have 2-repeat allele or less. However, only .5% of whites have the 2-repeat (2R) allele version compared to 4.7% of blacks.

            That means Blacks are 9.4 times more likely to have the extremely dysfunctional version of the gene than Whites. Considering that Black Americans are 9 times more likely to commit murder, this is very significant.

            Other studies have shown even higher rates of occurrence of the 2-repeat (2R) allele version of the gene in Blacks.

            It was discovered that Black males carrying 2R were more likely to be involved in extreme violence (shooting and stabbing) than Black men with other MAOA variants. The relationship between the rare MAOA version and antisocial behaviors has raised eyebrows because, quite simply, this gene is not distributed equally across ethnic groups. In the Add Health database, 5.5% of African American men, 0.9% of Caucasian men, and 0.00067% of Asian men have 2R.

            The association between 2R and committing a shooting or stabbing crime was statistically significant. The MAOA-2R has become a symbol of a new era in behavioral genetics research — an era that has reintroduced race into the nature versus nurture debate over the source of ethnic behavioral differences

            Notes: There are other genes associated with violent and/or impulsive behavior. The MAOA gene is only one of them. However, the effects of a shortened MAOA gene are well documented. The chemical imbalance its creates can be observed in a laboratory.

            Blacks possess 10x more of the dysfunctional MAOA (or “warrior gene”) that is associated with violent and/or impulsive behavior.

            ~~~~~~~~~~~

            Abstract:

            A line of research has revealed that a polymorphism in the promoter region of the MAOA gene is related to antisocial phenotypes. Most of these studies examine the effects of low MAOA activity alleles (2-repeat and 3-repeat alleles) against the effects of high MAOA activity alleles (3.5-repeat, 4-repeat, and sometimes 5-repeat alleles), with research indicating that the low MAOA activity alleles confer an increased risk to antisocial phenotypes. The current study examined whether the 2-repeat allele, which has been shown to be functionally different from the 3-repeat allele, was associated with a range of antisocial phenotypes in a sample of males drawn from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Analyses revealed that African-American males who carried the 2-repeat allele were, in comparison with other African-American male genotypes, significantly more likely to be arrested and incarcerated. Additional analyses revealed that African-American male carriers of the 2-repeat allele scored significantly higher on an antisocial phenotype index and on measures assessing involvement in violent behaviors over the life course. There was not any association between the 2-repeat allele and a continuously measured psychopathic personality traits scale. The effects of the 2-repeat allele could not be examined in Caucasian males because only 0.1% carried it.

            Authors: Kevin M. Beavera, John Paul Wright, Brian B. Boutwell, J.C. Barnesd, Matt DeLisie, Michael G. Vaughnf

            ~~~

            Monoamine oxidase A genotype is associated with gang membership and weapon use.

            Beaver KM1, DeLisi M, Vaughn MG, Barnes JC.

            ABSTRACT:

            A functional polymorphism in the promoter region of the monoamine oxidase A (MAOA) gene has been found to be associated with a broad range of antisocial phenotypes, including physical violence. At the same time, it is well known that gang members represent some of the most serious violent offenders. Even so, no research has ever examined the association between MAOA and gang membership.

            RESULTS:

            The low MAOA activity alleles conferred an increased risk of joining a gang and using a weapon in a fight for males but not for females. Moreover, among male gang members, those who used weapons in a fight were more likely to have a low MAOA activity allele when compared with male gang members who do not use weapons in a fight.

            CONCLUSIONS:

            Male carriers of low MAOA activity alleles are at risk for becoming a gang member and, once a gang member, are at risk for using weapons in a fight.

            Copyright 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

            PMID: 20152292

            ~~~

            Serum testosterone levels in healthy young black and white men.

            Blacks in the United States have the highest prostate cancer rate in the world and nearly twice that of whites in the United States. The 2:1 black-to-white ratio in prostate cancer rates is already apparent at age 45 years, the age at which the earliest prostate cancer cases occur. This finding suggests that the factor(s) responsible for the difference in rates occurs, or first occurs, early in life. Testosterone has been hypothesized to play a role in the etiology of prostate cancer, because testosterone and its metabolite, dihydrotestosterone, are the principal trophic hormones that regulate growth and function of epithelial prostate tissue. Mean testosterone levels in blacks were 19% higher than in whites, and free testosterone levels were 21% higher. Both these differences were statistically significant. A 15% difference in circulating testosterone levels could readily explain a twofold difference in prostate cancer risk.

            J Natl Cancer Inst. 1986 Jan;76(1):45-8.

            PMID: 3455741

            ~~~~~~~~

            The 2-repeat allele of the MAOA gene confers an increased risk for shooting and stabbing behaviors.

            Beaver KM1, Barnes JC, Boutwell BB.

            Abstract

            There has been a great deal of research examining the link between a polymorphism in the promoter region of the MAOA gene and antisocial phenotypes. The results of these studies have consistently revealed that low activity MAOA alleles are related to antisocial behaviors for males who were maltreated as children. Recently, though, some evidence has emerged indicating that a rare allele of the MAOA gene-that is, the 2-repeat allele-may have effects on violence that are independent of the environment. The current study builds on this research and examines the association between the 2-repeat allele and shooting and stabbing behaviors in a sample of males drawn from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Analyses revealed that African-American males who carry the 2-repeat allele are significantly more likely than all other genotypes to engage in shooting and stabbing behaviors and to report having multiple shooting and stabbing victims. The limitations of the study are discussed and suggestions for future research are offered.

            PMID: 24326626

            ~~~~~~~~

            Barnes, B. Genes, agents and the institution of responsible action. New Genetics and Society 21(3), 291-302 (2003).

            Beaver, K. M. et al. Monoamine oxidase A genotype is associated with gang membership and weapon use. Compr. Psychiatry 51(2), 130-134 (2009).

            Brunner, H. G. et al. Abnormal behavior associated with a point mutation in the structural gene for monoamine oxidase A. Science 262, 578-580. (1993).

            Buchen, L. In their nature. Nature 467, 146-148 (2010).

            Caspi, A. et al. Role of genotype in the cycle of violence in maltreated children. Science 297(5582), 851-854 (2002a).

            Caspi, A. et al. Supplementary material. Description of methods and measurements used in the Dunedin multidisciplinary health and development study. Science 297 (2002b).

            Denno, D. W. “Behavioral Genetics Evidence in Criminal Cases: 1994–2007” in Farahany N. A. (ed) The impact of behavioral sciences on criminal law (Oxford University Press, chapter 10, 2009).

            Lea, R. & Chambers, G. Monamine oxidase, addiction and the ‘warrior’ gene hypothesis. New Zealand Medical Journal 120, 1250 (2007).

            Levitt, M. Genes, environment and responsibility for violent behaviour: “Whatever genes one has it is preferable that you are prevented from going around stabbing people”. New Genetics and Society 32(1), 4-17 (2013).

            Shih, J. C et al. Monoamine oxidase: from genes to behaviour. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 22,197-217 (1999).

            ~~~~~~~~

            MAOA is an enzyme that degrades neurotransmitters such as serotonin and dopamine in the brain — is coded for by the MAOA gene. Neurotransmitters play a pivotal role in mood, arousal, and emotions, even affecting impulse control. Since the 1990s scientists have identified several versions of the MAOA, which are usually categorized as low-activity or high-activity variants. MAOA genes are classified based on how many times a short sequence — a functional strip of DNA — repeats itself within a variable region of the gene. The most common variant, MAOA-4R, has four repeats and is associated with high-activity breakdown of neurotransmitters. Alternate forms of the MAOA, including the 2-repeat (2R) and 3-repeat (3R) versions, contain fewer repeat sequences.

            The 2R and 3R variants are often lumped together in studies of the low-activity MAOA gene. (Although the 5R version has a large number of repeats, it too is less active than the 4R version.) The two classes of MAOA versions correlate with different behavioral tendencies. Low-activity variants are thought to lead to reduced levels of MAOA in the brain, possibly shifting mood by changing serotonin levels.

            But it was 2R — the “extreme warrior gene” — that captivated researchers searching for a genetic basis of criminal predispositions. Guo’s team analyzed data on male youth from Add Health — a national sample of adolescents in grades 7-12. Their findings showed that the rare variant, 2R, was correlated with higher levels of self-reported serious and violent delinquency.

            More recently, Beaver’s team has focused only on the 2R variant rather than the low-expression variants combined. He and his colleagues have discovered that African American males carrying 2R were more likely to be involved in extreme violence — shooting and stabbing — than African American men with other MAOA variants. The relationship between the rare MAOA version and antisocial behaviors has raised eyebrows because, quite simply, this gene is not distributed equally across ethnic groups. In the Add Health database, 5.5% of African American men, 0.9% of Caucasian men, and 0.00067% of Asian men have 2R. Since the rare MAOA variant is virtually non-existent in whites, all of the males in Beaver’s study were black Americans.

            Beaver’s sample of 133 African American men from the Add Health database included 6% that carried 2R. Overall, 5.6% of the men in the sample reported shooting or stabbing someone at some point in their lifetime. The association between 2R and committing a shooting or stabbing crime was statistically significant. Based on Beaver’s evidence, 2R appears to increase the risk of shooting or stabbing a victim during adolescence or adulthood. For some commentators in the public arena, MAOA-2R has become a symbol of a new era in behavioral genetics research — an era that has reintroduced race into the nature versus nurture debate over the source of ethnic behavioral differences.

            Beaver’s studies have shown that the 2R variant has a robust association with violent behaviors, arrest, and incarceration. His research is applauded by supporters of behavioral genetics, but it has also drawn criticism. It focuses on an antisocial-linked gene that reportedly occurs more frequently in African American men than in males of other ethnic groups. This has led some popular writers to speculate that MAOA-2R might account for — or at least play a significant role in — the relatively higher rates of violent crime in African Americans.

          • Jury is out on the premise. https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article/92/7/2519/2598282/Serum-Estrogen-But-Not-Testosterone-Levels-Differ

            Jury will stay out on the conclusions. We know the biological nature of this homicide rate finding is subject to review and rejection since West African travelers have reported being able to travel from one end of the continent to the other without escort for centuries. Those reports going all the way back to the 1300’s suggest a broader lens is required…broader than looking at how Blacks survive in white-created exploitation zones.

          • Blacks have small brains

            Would you expect a population of small-brain people to have a higher, lower or equal IQ as compared to a population of large-brain people?

            Compared to Blacks, Whites’ brains:

                 •   are 7% larger (1438cc versus 1343cc)
                 •   are 100 grams heavier
                 •   have deeper fissuration in the frontal and occipital regions
                 •   have more complex convolutions and larger frontal lobes
                 •   have more pyramidal neurons
                 •   have 16% thicker supra-grandular layer
                 •   react faster on mental chronometry tests
                 •   have 600 million more neurons (each carries about 600 billion synapses, which each carry one bit of cortical information)

            Genes contribute to about 90% of the individual variation of brain size.

            Blacks are the only racial group with no DNA from the large-brained Neanderthals, and also the only race without the derived form of MCPH1 microcephalin called haplogroup D which produces increased brain volume.

            The correlation between brain size and IQ across 25 primate species is 0.77 (where 1.0 indicates that monozygotic twins have no variance in IQ and 0 indicates that their IQs are completely uncorrelated).

            Larger brains contain more neurons and synapses and process information faster. By adulthood, East Asians average 1 cubic inch more cranial capacity than Whites who average 5 cubic inches more than Blacks.

            The average White brain is 1438cc while the average Black brain is 1343cc, or 93% of the average White brain. The heritability of brain size is extremely strong at 0.90 and not one study to date has shown larger brain size for Blacks. The White and Asians brain also has a higher degree of fissuring (higher complexity) in the cerebral cortex of their brains, where abstract and conceptual thought is performed.

            There are also racial differences in brain shape, fissuration, number of pyramidal neurons and supra-grandular layer thickness. The depth of fissuration is related to superior intelligence and the brains of Whites have deeper fissures in the frontal and occipital regions. The supra-grandular layer of Blacks’ brains is 16% smaller than it is for Whites’ brains.

            Based on studies of brain weight at autopsy, endocranial volume of empty skulls, head size measurements by the U.S. military and NASA, and two dozen MRI volumetric studies Blacks’ brain size is 7% smaller than Whites’, and 8% smaller than Asians’. There is a correlation of brain size with IQ of about 0.40 and that these racial differences in brain size are present at birth. Genes contribute to about 90% of the individual variation of brain size.

            In addition to brain size are differences in brain shape, fissuration, number of pyramidal neurons and supra-grandular layer thickness. The depth of fissuration is related to superior intelligence and the brains of Whites have deeper fissures in the frontal and occipital regions. The supra-grandular layer of Blacks’ brains is 16% smaller than it is for Whites’ brains.

            The average human brain contains 86 billion neurons. Whites, on average, have 600 million more neurons than Blacks. Each neuron carries about 600 billion synapses, each of which carries, as a minimum, one bit of cortical information.

            Blacks are the only racial group with no DNA from the large-brained Neanderthals, and also the only race without the derived form of MCPH1 microcephalin called haplogroup D which produces increased brain volume.

            Even before birth, population group differences in average brain size are found from the ninth week of intrauterine life with White fetuses averaging larger brain cases and smaller faces Black fetuses, with the differences becoming more prominent over the course of fetal development.

            Weighing brains at autopsy, Whites averaged heavier brains than Blacks and had more complex convolutions and larger frontal lobes. Subsequent studies have found an average Black–White difference of about 100 g. Studies have found that the more White admixture (judged independently from skin color), the greater the average brain weight in Blacks. In a study of 1,261 American adults, Ho et al. (1980) found that 811 White Americans averaged 1,323 g and 450 Black Americans averaged 1,223 g. Since the Blacks and Whites were similar in body size, differences in body size cannot explain away the differences in brain weight.

            The same three-way pattern of race differences has been found using the simplest culture-free cognitive measures such as reaction time tasks, which 9- to 12-year-old children perform in less than 1 s. Lynn (2006) found that East Asian children from Hong Kong and Japan were faster than European children from Britain and Ireland, who in turn were faster than African children from South Africa. Using similar tasks, this pattern of racial differences was also found in California (Jensen, 1998; Rushton & Jensen, 2005). Within each group, the children with higher IQ scores perform faster those with lower scores.

            Race differences start in the womb. Blacks are born earlier and grow quicker than Whites and Asians. The three-way race pattern occurs in milestones such as sexual maturity, family stability, crime rates, and population growth.

            Black babies mature more quickly than White babies, while Asian babies mature more slowly. Black babies in a sitting position are more able to keep their heads up and backs straight from the start. White babies often need six to eight weeks to do these things. It is unlikely that social factors could produce these differences. A basic law of biology shows that longer infancy is related to greater brain growth.

            Black babies spend the least time in the womb. In America, 51% of Black children have been born by week 39 of pregnancy compared with 33% of White children. In Europe, Black babies of even professional mothers are born earlier than White babies.

            Black children sit, crawl, walk, and put on their own clothes earlier than Whites or Asians. The findings are measured by such tests as Bayley’s Scales of Mental and Motor Development and the Cambridge Neonatal Scales.

            Asian children, on the other hand, mature more slowly than do White children. Asian children often do not walk until 13 months. Walking starts at 12 months for white children and 11 months for Black children.

            ~~~~~~~~~~

            Meta-analysis of associations between human brain volume and intelligence differences

            AUTHORS: Pietschnig, Penke, Wicherts, Zeiler, Voracek

            ABSTRACT: “By means of a systematic review of published studies and unpublished results obtained by personal communications with researchers, we identified 88 studies examining effect sizes of 148 healthy and clinical mixed-sex samples. Our results showed significant positive associations of brain volume and IQ.”

            2015, October

            PMID: 26449760

            ~~~~~~~~

            Brain mass differences between racial groups in the US

            Jensen (1998) summarizes the brain mass findings from the Case-Western Reserve (1980) study (N= 811 W, 450 B). An age matched and height adjusted B-W differences of ~100g (~.78SD) was found, which is commensurate with the findings of Bean (1906), Mall (1909), Pearl (1934), and Vint (1934) as described in Rushton and Ankney (2009). Holloway (2002) found a B-W difference of 63 grams (N = 1,391 W; 615 Black). Similar findings have been found based in imaging studies (see 5). In their study, Isamah, et al. (2010) found that African Americans have 1 SD less total cerebrum volume than European Americans.

            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

            Contrary to most purely environmental theories, racial differences in brain size show up early in life. Data from the U.S. National Collaborative Perinatal Project on 19,000 Black children and 17,000 White children showed that Black children had a smaller head perimeter at birth and, although Black children were born shorter in stature and lighter in weight than White children, by age 7 ‘catch-up growth’ led Black children to be larger in body size than White children. However, Blacks remained smaller in head perimeter (Broman et al., 1987). Further, head perimeter at birth, 1 year, 4 years, and 7 years correlated with IQ scores at age 7 in both Black and White children (r = 0.13 to 0.24).

            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

            Brain Size Differences. Studies using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) find a correlation of brain size with IQ of about 0.40. Larger brains contain more neurons and synapses and process information faster. Race differences in brain size are present at birth. By adulthood, East Asians average 1 cubic inch more cranial capacity than Whites who average 5 cubic inches more than Blacks.

            “Neither the existence nor the size of race differences in IQ are a matter of dispute, only their cause,” write the authors. The Black-White difference has been found consistently from the time of the massive World War I Army testing of 90 years ago to a massive study of over 6 million corporate, military, and higher-education test-takers in 2001.

            “Race differences show up by 3 years of age, even after matching on maternal education and other variables,” said Rushton. “Therefore they cannot be due to poor education since this has not yet begun to exert an effect. That’s why Jensen and I looked at the genetic hypothesis in detail. We examined 10 categories of evidence.”

            1. The Worldwide Pattern of IQ Scores; East Asians average higher on IQ tests than Whites, both in the U. S. and in Asia, even though IQ tests were developed for use in the Euro-American culture. Around the world, the average IQ for East Asians centers around 106; for Whites, about 100; and for Blacks about 85 in the U.S. and 70 in sub-Saharan Africa.

            2. Race Differences are Most Pronounced on Tests that Best Measure the General Intelligence Factor (g); Black-White differences, for example, are larger on the Backward Digit Span test than on the less g loaded Forward Digit Span test.

            3. The Gene-Environment Architecture of IQ is the Same in all Races, and Race Differences are Most Pronounced on More Heritable Abilities; Studies of Black, White, and East Asian twins, for example, show the heritability of IQ is 50% or higher in all races.

            4. Brain Size Differences; Studies using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) find a correlation of brain size with IQ of about 0.40. Larger brains contain more neurons and synapses and process information faster. Race differences in brain size are present at birth. By adulthood, East Asians average 1 cubic inch more cranial capacity than Whites who average 5 cubic inches more than Blacks.

            5. Trans-Racial Adoption Studies; Race differences in IQ remain following adoption by White middle class parents. East Asians grow to average higher IQs than Whites while Blacks score lower. The Minnesota Trans-Racial Adoption Study followed children to age 17 and found race differences were even greater than at age 7: White children, 106; Mixed-Race children, 99; and Black children, 89.

            6. Racial Admixture Studies; Black children with lighter skin, for example, average higher IQ scores. In South Africa, the IQ of the mixed-race “Colored” population averages 85, intermediate to the African 70 and White 100.

            -June 2005, Psychology, Public Policy and Law, a journal of the American Psychological Association

            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

            According to a new study, just published in the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) newsroom, scientists have definitively found the genes which control brain size and intelligence.

            Dozens of studies have found race differences in brain size, whether measured by MRI, endocranial volume, brain weight at autopsy or external head size (with or without corrections for body size).

            Most were carried out on the three major races of East Asians, Europeans, and Africans. Averaging all the data, the following figures have emerged: Brain size average for East Asians = 1364cm; Whites = 1347cm; and Blacks = 1267cm.

            The overall mean for East Asians was 17cm more than for Whites and 97cm more than for Blacks.

            Since every cubic centimeter of brain tissue contains millions of brain cells and billions of synapses, the race differences in brain size help to explain the race differences in IQ.

            The latest overview, billed as the “world’s largest brain study to date,” saw a team of more than 200 scientists from 100 institutions worldwide collaborate to map the human genes that boost or sabotage the brain’s resistance to a variety of mental illnesses and Alzheimer’s disease.

            Additionally, the study (also published in the journal Nature Genetics), found new genes which control “differences in brain size and intelligence.”

            “We searched for two things in this study,” said senior author Paul Thompson, professor of neurology at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA and a member of the UCLA Laboratory of Neuro Imaging.

            “We hunted for genes that increase your risk for a single disease that your children can inherit. We also looked for factors that cause tissue atrophy and reduce brain size, which is a biological marker for disorders like schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression, Alzheimer’s disease and dementia.”

            Three years ago, Thompson’s lab partnered with geneticists Nick Martin and Margaret Wright at the Queensland Institute for Medical Research in Brisbane, Australia, and with geneticist Barbara Franke of Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre in the Netherlands.

            The four investigators recruited brain-imaging labs around the world to pool their brain scans and genomic data, and Project ENIGMA (Enhancing Neuro Imaging Genetics through Meta-Analysis) was born.

            “Our individual centers couldn’t review enough brain scans to obtain definitive results,” said Thompson, who is also a professor of psychiatry at the Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior at UCLA.

            “By sharing our data with Project ENIGMA, we created a sample large enough to reveal clear patterns in genetic variation and show how these changes physically alter the brain.”

            ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

            Recent reviews (by Nisbett et al. (2012b) and Mackintosh (2011)) confirm current data does show an average difference in brain size and head-circumference between American Blacks and Whites.

            Brain size is found to have a correlation of about .35 with intelligence and cites studies showing that genes may account for as much as 90% of individual variation in brain size, concluding that race differences in average brain size could be an important argument for genetic contribution to racial IQ gaps.

            – Considerations Relating to the Study of Group Differences in Intelligence, Earl Hunt1 and Jerry Carlson, The University of Washington
            – American Psychologist, Vol 67(6), Sep 2012, 503-504

            On the outside, there’s not a lot of difference between Black heads and White ones. There is a slight difference, however, with Whites having the larger heads. But the big difference is in the size of the brain. Blacks have thicker skulls, which means that a higher percentage of their head is bone instead of brain.

            Blacks are the only race without the derived form of MCPH1 microcephalin called haplogroup D which appeared about 37,000 years ago and is associated with increased brain volume.

            Empirical data obtained from brain weight at autopsy, endocranial volume of empty skulls, head size measurements by the U.S. military and NASA, and two dozen MRI volumetric studies have shown that brain volumes average 1427 cubic centimeters for Whites, but only 1361 cubic centimeters for Blacks.

            In weight measurements, the brains of African Blacks were found to weigh an average of 1157 grams, whereas those of pure Whites weighed an average of 1323 grams. The brains of US-resident Blacks, who have a bit of White mixture in their genetic makeup, average 1223 grams in weight.

            That 100-gram weight difference, between White Americans and US-resident Blacks, corresponds to an approximate 600 million neuron advantage for Whites. In 600 million neurons, there are about 600 billion synapses, each of which carries, as a minimum, one bit of cortical information.

            Also, Whites have a larger genus to splenium ratio (front to back part of corpus callosum), which indicates that Whites probably have more activity in the frontal lobes which are thought to be the seat of intelligence. One study found that White cerebrums exhibited 14% more sulsification, or fissuring, as compared with those of Blacks. So, not only are White brains larger, they are also significantly more complex.

            Blacks also have considerably smaller frontal lobes. Frontal lobes are responsible for planning complex cognitive behavior, personality expression, decision making and moderating social behavior.

            This is a genetic trait because even malnourished Asians from poor countries have a larger brain on average than well fed blacks from western countries.

            Sources:

            Willerman et al. (1991) Using MRI obtained r’s ranging from .26 to .56 between IQ and the size of specific brain structures and an overall r of .38 between full-scale IQ and gray matter volume when body size is controlled for. Replications by Raz et al. (1993) and Wickett, Vernon and Lee (1994) found correlations between IQ and brain size of .41 and .47-49. Egan et al. (1994) found an r of .32 between IQ and brain size in a sample whose SD for IQ was 9.3.

            Beals, K. L., Smith, C. L., & Dodd, S. M. (1984). Brain size, cranial morphology, climate, and time machines. Current Anthropology 25, 301–330.

            Jensen, A. R. (1998). The g Factor. Westport, CT: Praeger.

            Rushton, J. P. & Ankney, C. D. (1996). Brain size and cognitive ability: Correlations with age, sex, social class, and race. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 3, 21-36.

            Ho, K. C., Roessmann, U., Straumfjord, J. V., & Monroe, G. (1980). Analysis of brain weight: I and II. Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine 104, 635–645.

            Johnson F. W. & Jensen (1994). Race and sex differences in head size and IQ. Intelligence 18: 309–33

            Rushton JP. (1997). Cranial size and IQ in Asian Americans from birth to age seven. Intelligence 25: 7–20.

            Rushton JP (1991). Mongoloid-Caucasoid differences in brain size from military samples [and NASA]. Intelligence 15: 351–9.

            Cranial Capacities:

            Study                    Black               White                Asian             Black/White

            Ho et al., 1980          1267                1370                                   .92

            Gould, 1981              1356                1426                 1426              .95

            Beals, 1984             1276                1362                 1380              .93

            Herskovits, 1993         1295                1421                 1451              .91

            Ruston (Army) 92         1346                1361                 1403              .98

            Ruston (ILO), 1994       1228                1284                 1312              .95
                        

          • It is uncontested that brain size correlates with intelligence. It’s laughable that you are proposing that the small-brain population is as intelligent as the large-brain population — especially considering all the intelligence testing and real-world observations.

          • “Echo chamber analysis from flawed assumptions leads to 1000 confirmations of the initial error.”

            “africacheck.org” is not a scientific source, and your link there is to an opinion column, not a scientific study.

            Try Google Scholar.

            Brain Size and Weight by Race:  American Whites vs. American Blacks (average 24% White admixture)

            A study by Ho et al. (1980) recorded the brain weights of 1,261 Americans, including 416 White and 228 Black men, taken from five years of records at Case Western Reserve University.

                     RESULTS:
                     Whites: 1392 grams (1442cc)
                     Blacks: 1286 grams (1332cc)

            Adult brain weight in relation to body height, weight, and surface area (1980), by Ho, Roessmann, Straumfjord, and Monroe.
            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6893660

            A study by Bean (1906) recorded the brain weights of 125 Americans, including 37 White and 51 Black men, from an anatomical laboratory in Baltimore.

                     RESULTS:
                     Whites: 1341 grams (1389cc)
                     Blacks: 1292 grams (1339cc)

            Source: Some racial peculiarities of the Negro brain (1906), by Bean; page 408.
            http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/49594/1/1000050402_ftp.pdf

            A study by Pearl (1934) examined the recorded brain weights of 24 White and 379 Black soldiers who died during the War of Federal Tyranny (1861-65), most of whom died of pneumonia. Note the higher than average brain weights, perhaps due to the fact that these were strong young men in their prime and/or perhaps to a side-effect of pneumonia.

                     RESULTS:
                     Whites: 1471 grams (1524cc)
                     Blacks: 1342 grams (1390cc)

            Source: The Weight of the Negro Brain (1934), by Pearl.
            http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/pdf_extract/80/2080/431

            The largest autopsy study was performed by anthropologist Ralph Holloway (2004) at Columbia University Medical School on 1,391 Whites, 153 Hispanics, and 615 Blacks:

                     RESULTS:
                     Whites: 1285 grams (1331cc)
                     Hispanics: 1253 grams (1298cc)
                     Blacks: 1222 grams (1266cc)

            Measuring endocranial volume, the American anthropologist Samuel George Morton (1849) filled over 1,000 skulls with packing material and found that Blacks averaged about 5 cubic inches less cranial capacity than Whites. These results have stood the test of time (Gordon, 1934; Simmons, 1942; Todd, 1923).

            http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001071

            http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/14/science/14skull.html

            The largest study of race differences in endocranial volume was by Beals et al. (1984) with measurements of up to 20,000 skulls from around the world:

                     RESULTS:
                     Asians: 1415cc
                     Whites: 1362cc
                     Blacks: 1268cc

            Weighing brains at autopsy, Broca (1873) found that Whites averaged heavier brains than Blacks and had more complex convolutions and larger frontal lobes. Subsequent studies have found an average Black–White difference of about 100 g (Bean, 1906; Mall, 1909; Pearl, 1934; Vint, 1934). Some studies have found that the more White admixture (judged independently from skin color), the greater the average brain weight in Blacks (Bean, 1906; Pearl, 1934). In a study of 1,261 American adults, Ho et al. (1980) found that 811 White Americans averaged 1,323 g and 450 Black Americans averaged 1,223). Since the Blacks and Whites were similar in body size, differences in body size cannot explain away the differences in brain weight.

            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2668913/

          • You were bumbling at an attempt to prove causality, and then retreated to this meaningless place called “correlates.” This won’t do Robbie Smith. Neanderthals had larger brains than humans. Are you making the claim, here and forever more, that Neanderthals were smarter than your dark-skinned, blue-eyed African ancestors in Europe? Do tell.

          • It’s believed that Neanderthals made Europeans what they are today. The addition of Neanderthal genes was an enormous boost.

          • “It’s believed that Neanderthals made Europeans what they are today. The addition of Neanderthal genes was an enormous boost.”

            It’s called heterosis (or hybrid vigor).

            Neanderthals had much larger brains than modern man too (1,500 cc).

            Also, it’s not only Whites who benefited from the infusion of the Neanderthal DNA, but all non-Blacks benefited too.

            This is why Blacks got left behind evolutionarily.

            Brain Size and Weight by Race:  American Whites vs. American Blacks (average 24% White admixture)

            A study by Ho et al. (1980) recorded the brain weights of 1,261 Americans, including 416 White and 228 Black men, taken from five years of records at Case Western Reserve University.

                     RESULTS:
                     Whites: 1392 grams (1442cc)
                     Blacks: 1286 grams (1332cc)

            Adult brain weight in relation to body height, weight, and surface area (1980), by Ho, Roessmann, Straumfjord, and Monroe.
            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6893660

            A study by Bean (1906) recorded the brain weights of 125 Americans, including 37 White and 51 Black men, from an anatomical laboratory in Baltimore.

                     RESULTS:
                     Whites: 1341 grams (1389cc)
                     Blacks: 1292 grams (1339cc)

            Source: Some racial peculiarities of the Negro brain (1906), by Bean; page 408.
            http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/49594/1/1000050402_ftp.pdf

            A study by Pearl (1934) examined the recorded brain weights of 24 White and 379 Black soldiers who died during the War of Federal Tyranny (1861-65), most of whom died of pneumonia. Note the higher than average brain weights, perhaps due to the fact that these were strong young men in their prime and/or perhaps to a side-effect of pneumonia.

                     RESULTS:
                     Whites: 1471 grams (1524cc)
                     Blacks: 1342 grams (1390cc)

            Source: The Weight of the Negro Brain (1934), by Pearl.
            http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/pdf_extract/80/2080/431

            The largest autopsy study was performed by anthropologist Ralph Holloway (2004) at Columbia University Medical School on 1,391 Whites, 153 Hispanics, and 615 Blacks:

                     RESULTS:
                     Whites: 1285 grams (1331cc)
                     Hispanics: 1253 grams (1298cc)
                     Blacks: 1222 grams (1266cc)

            Measuring endocranial volume, the American anthropologist Samuel George Morton (1849) filled over 1,000 skulls with packing material and found that Blacks averaged about 5 cubic inches less cranial capacity than Whites. These results have stood the test of time (Gordon, 1934; Simmons, 1942; Todd, 1923).

            http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001071

            http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/14/science/14skull.html

            The largest study of race differences in endocranial volume was by Beals et al. (1984) with measurements of up to 20,000 skulls from around the world:

                     RESULTS:
                     Asians: 1415cc
                     Whites: 1362cc
                     Blacks: 1268cc

            Weighing brains at autopsy, Broca (1873) found that Whites averaged heavier brains than Blacks and had more complex convolutions and larger frontal lobes. Subsequent studies have found an average Black–White difference of about 100 g (Bean, 1906; Mall, 1909; Pearl, 1934; Vint, 1934). Some studies have found that the more White admixture (judged independently from skin color), the greater the average brain weight in Blacks (Bean, 1906; Pearl, 1934). In a study of 1,261 American adults, Ho et al. (1980) found that 811 White Americans averaged 1,323 g and 450 Black Americans averaged 1,223). Since the Blacks and Whites were similar in body size, differences in body size cannot explain away the differences in brain weight.

            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2668913/

          • “Are you making the claim, here and forever more, that Neanderthals were smarter than your dark-skinned, blue-eyed African ancestors in Europe?”

            There’s no way to be certain because they have all been hybridized with modern man (non-Blacks).

            But all evidence shows they were at least as intelligent as Blacks.

          • “Again — jury is out on the premises…..”

            Your own reference states, “We cannot confirm observations of a difference in circulating testosterone concentration between African-American and Caucasian men as reported previously in some studies…..”

            Further, you’re conflating serum and free-floating testosterone.

            The MAOA gene data is actually the most important cause for Black violence.

            Blacks have 21% higher free testosterone compared to Whites. Testosterone is associated with impulsive, aggressive, and violent behavior.

            Journal National Cancer Institute, 1986 Jan; 76(1):45-8. PMID: 3455741

            Richard et al. (2014) meta-analyzed data from 14 separate studies and found that Blacks had higher levels of free floating testosterone in their blood than Whites suggesting that testosterone levels may predispose Blacks towards higher rates of crime.

            Compounding this, a high percentage of Blacks have dysfunctional versions of the MAOA androgen receptor gene which is a key part of the mechanism by which testosterone has its effects throughout the body and brain.

            MAOA’s job is to break down crucial neurotransmitters which can build up in the brain and cause a loss of impulse control and an increase in violence and rage.

            The MAOA gene can come in the form of 2, 3, 3.5, 4, or 5 allele. A 3-repeat allele is considered dysfunctional and is what is referred to as the “warrior gene”. A 2-repeat (2R) allele is considered very dysfunctional.

            The 2-repeat allele does not produce a protein needed to break down old serotonin. It is strongly correlated to criminality and doubles the rate of violence of the 3R without needing an environmental interaction mechanism. People with a 2-repeat allele MAOA gene have a permanent chemical imbalance in their brain making the person more likely to be agitated, aggressive, and impulsive.

            Only 0.00067% of Asians and .5% of Whites have the MAOA 2-repeat allele version, compared to 4.7% of Blacks.

            That means Blacks are 9.4x more likely to have the very dysfunctional version of the MAOA gene than Whites. Considering that Blacks are 10x more likely to commit extreme violence and anti-social behavior than Whites, this is very significant.

            Blacks are also more likely to have versions of dopamine genes like ANKK1 and DAT1 that have been linked to antisocial behavior.

            A 2012 study using the Add Health data found that the 2-repeat version of the MAOA gene is significantly associated with antisocial behavior and the likelihood of criminality in Black males.

            Exploring the association between the 2-repeat allele of the MAOA gene promoter polymorphism and psychopathic personality traits, arrests, incarceration, and lifetime antisocial behavior — Kevin M. Beaver a, John Paul Wright b, Brian B. Boutwell c, J.C. Barnes d, Matt DeLisi e, Michael G. Vaughn

            ABTRACT:

            Analyses revealed that Black males who carried the 2-repeat allele were, in comparison with other Black male genotypes, significantly more likely to be arrested and incarcerated. Additional analyses revealed that Black male carriers of the 2-repeat allele scored significantly higher on an antisocial phenotype index and on measures assessing involvement in violent behaviors over the life course. There was not any association between the 2-repeat allele and a continuously measured psychopathic personality traits scale. The effects of the 2-repeat allele could not be examined in White males because only 0.1% carried it.

            https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/exploring-the-association-between-the-2-repeat-allele-of-the-maoa-gene.pdf

                     •   Black males age 18-35 years of age are only 3.3% of the U.S. population, yet have committed 52% of homicides from 1980-2008. Black males (all ages) are only 6% of the U.S. population, yet commit 46% of all violent crimes, and 50% of the gun homicides. If Blacks were removed from the equation, the U.S. gun homicide rate would be equal to Great Britain’s, who have some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the world.

                     •   The Black homicide rate is 17 per 100,000, a rate over 9x that of the White rate, and comparable to some of those most murderous countries in the world.

                     •   If the homicide rate for the U.S. were the White-only rate, the homicide rate would drop 84%, making the U.S. rate comparable to European countries.

                     •   Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving Blacks and Whites, Blacks commit 85 percent and Whites commit 15 percent. This means that a Black is 27 times more likely to attack a White person than vice versa.

                     •   For each one standard deviation increase in proportion of Black population, firearm homicide rate is increased by 82.8%. Therefore, the U.S. has a Black problem, not a gun or violent crime problem.

                     •   Murder is the leading cause of death for Black men, ages 15 to 34. Their murderers are almost always other Black men; 93 percent of Black homicide victims are killed by other Blacks.

                     •   When Blacks commit crimes of violence, they are nearly three times more likely than non-Blacks to use a gun, and more than twice as likely to use a knife.

                     •   Black males between 16-35 years of age are only 4.2% of the population, yet commit 72% of the street crime in America.

                     •   The single best indicator of violent crime levels in an area is the percentage of the population that is Black.

                     •   White men and women who choose to date or marry Blacks are much more likely to suffer abuse from their partners, particularly spousal homicide. The highest risk of death by spousal homicide is incurred by White women married to Black men. A White woman married to a Black man is over 12 times as likely to be murdered by her husband as a White woman married to a White man. A White man married to a Black woman is 21 times as likely to be murdered by his wife as a White man married to a White woman.

                     •   If New York City were all White, the murder rate would drop by 91 percent, the robbery rate by 81 percent, and the shootings rate by 97 percent. In an all-White Chicago, murder would decline 90 percent, rape by 81 percent, and robbery by 90 percent.

                     •   Black serial killers have comprised over half of documented serial killers since the dawn of the 21st century at 56 percent, making up a total of 40 percent in years dating back to 1900. Blacks constituted 44% of the known serial killers during the 1995-2004 period and 38.2% of all multiple murderers (serial, mass, and spree combined) during 1976-1998 period. During the 2000-2010 decade, 62% of serial killers were Black.

            The Color of Crime:

            https://www.scribd.com/doc/305240780/The-Color-of-Crime

            https://archive.org/details/6396bf06c11b81777c27ca0edcb4fdbb4ae17354576954101f6d6ce3a015b806

            https://archive.org/details/SerialKillerRate

          • Whites are only 10% of the world’s population, yet are the most industrious, ingenious, and innovative race the world has known. Whites have formed nations, built civilizations, assumed and administrated power, created the Renaissance, the Age of Discovery, the Industrial Revolution, automation, technology, the space program which landed men on the moon and launched probes exploring beyond the solar system, discovered electricity, created wonder drugs and architecture and have harnessed nuclear power, have unlocked the secrets of DNA and relativity, created computer science and the internet age…… sub-Saharan Africans still cannot even feed themselves.

            No pre-contact sub-Saharan African society ever created a written language, or weaved cloth, or forged steel, invented the wheel or plow, or devised a calendar, or code of laws, or any social organization, or formal religion, or system of measurement, or math, or built a multi-story structure or bridge or sewer, or infrastructure of any kind, and they never harnessed a river, or even drilled well or irrigated, or built a road or railway or sea-worthy vessel, they never domesticated animals, or exploited underground natural resources, or produced anything that could be considered a mechanical device.

            Blacks are the only race incapable of caring for themselves. Whites still have to provide food, medical, financial and engineering aid to Africans. They couldn’t survive without White charity. Blacks became an out-of-control invasive species after Whites domesticated them.

            Blacks lived alone in sub-Saharan Africa, a vast continent with temperate climates and abundant resources for 60,000 years; so they cannot blame racism, poverty, imperialism or anything else for their failures. How could they live with all that shoreline and never contemplate putting a sail on a ship like every other culture did?

            Blacks are the oldest race, they had a huge head-start so they should be the most advanced race; but they are the least advanced race. And in fact they never did develop until they were domesticated by Whites.

            19 of the 20 poorest countries are sub-Saharan African (Haiti). There has never been a successful Black country. No modern creations or civilization exists in sub-Saharan Africa that was not brought there by Whites.

            There are no White Third-World nations, but all Black ones are.

            Put Whites on an island and you get England; put Asians on an island and you get Japan; put Blacks on an island and you get Haiti.

            Nowhere Blacks live are they considered achievers. In fact they are universally viewed as unproductive and disruptive to society.

            Simply, life is an IQ test.

          • And if you don’t feel like reading all of that, then just ponder this simple historical analogy: What if the Romans had IQ tests? If the Romans had IQ tests and they tested the illiterate tribes of the remote province of Britain, what would they have found? They are both white people, but of course the Romans would score higher on the IQ tests than the Celts.

            Also, you might not know this but whiteness as a social construct in America didn’t always include all white-skinned people. I’m willing to bet you’re at least part Irish. “Scientific” racists at the turn of the 20th century produced all sorts of sketches to show that the Irish in fact possessed “Negroid” features.

          • The persistent desire of “whites” to eliminate Black populations from Europe, Asia, the Mediterranean coast and Sahara is interesting. Why do some “whites” persist in making these claims, while not restricting themselves to the “civilization” of the north central Asian steppes? The Black character of the civilizations upon which you rely for language, liturgy and identity was attested by the archaeological record and by the people who lived during that era. The revisionist claims here require evidence. Begin with a conversation centering Siberia and north central Asia and proceed from there.

          • Black-White IQ Distribution:

            For a graphical representation of the racial IQ gap Google: racial IQ bell curve

            Percentages below are from a cumulative percentages graph for readability:

            Blacks:
                             5% above 110 IQ
                             16% above 100 IQ
                             40% above 90 IQ
                             70% above 80 IQ
                             30% below 80 IQ
                             18% below 75 IQ
                             10% below 70 IQ

            Whites:
                             10% above 120 IQ
                             18% above 115 IQ
                             27% above 110 IQ
                             40% above 105 IQ
                             50% above 100 IQ
                             60% below 105 IQ
                             35% below 95 IQ
                             15% below 85 IQ

            So, the smartest 16% of Blacks are as intelligent as smartest 50% of Whites. 80% of Blacks score at or below the “low functioning” category.

            The least intelligent ten percent of Whites have IQs below 80; forty percent of Blacks have IQs that low.

            Only one Black in six is more intelligent than the average White; five Whites out of six are more intelligent than the average Black.

            These differences show in every test of general cognitive ability that anyone, of any race or nationality, has yet been able to devise. And they are reflected in countless everyday situations, “Life is an IQ test.”

            Further, only one-in-3.5 million (.00003%) African Blacks have an IQ of 140 or higher (genius level). But one-in-83 (1.2%) U.S. Whites is a genius. Therefore the per capita genius rate for U.S.-resident Whites is 41,000 times higher than it is for African Blacks.

            As the New York Times put it, “…the difference in I.Q. points between the groups is quite significant. It means that the top sixth of Blacks score only as well on I.Q. tests as do the top half of Whites.”

            Black females have higher IQs than Black males. Black female IQ is 2.4 points higher than Black male IQ. There are twice as many Black females as Black males with IQs over 120 and five times as many Black females as Black males with IQs over 140.

          • Exactly what I’ve told: It’s only stats.
            The genetic markers of intelligence or empathy or agressivity are NOT linked to those of the colour of the skin or the colour of the eyes.
            You can be white skin and stupid or/and agressive or/and psychopathic.

          • “It’s only stats.”

            LOL……. is that what you got from my post??

            You are completely wrong.

            “Skin color” is irrelevant; race is.

            Intelligence and violence do correlate with race.

            Do you have any evidence of racial intellectual parity?

            Every test of intelligence ever devised shows a one standard deviation gap between Blacks and modern man. This also correlates with the racial brain size differences.

            Your final statement is correct; a Black can be a genius or a moron. BUT, not at the same rate as modern man. The same is true with violence.

            Again….. just search for “racial IQ bell curve

            As I stated, only one-in-3.5 million (.00003%) African Blacks have an IQ of 140 or higher (genius level). But one-in-83 (1.2%) U.S. Whites is a genius. Therefore the per capita genius rate for U.S.-resident Whites is 41,000 times higher than it is for African Blacks.

          • Let’s take into account that people of minority groups, have it harder because people like you have yet to see them as equals. I would like to point out that those numbers are not all the same. Furthermore, why are blacks not modern people? They have contributed to a great deal of American culture, music, food. And, even if they were slaves, it was because they were strong enough to do the work because white men were to soft to do it. Just because our life style is different doesn’t make it better. “Sub-Saharan Africans live off the land instead of terra-forming their environment to suit their needs. The Russians got into space before us by the way. The Renaissance wasn’t american dude, not even in this country.Many places had their own industrial revolutions. Most things, like the first printing press, were invented by people of other nationalities. That, and the Jews have been around longer than the whites too, and we’re doing fine. Whites have a melting pot of what everyone else had done. Whites didn’t do anything for the greater good, they did it for greed. So you keep going on with your numbers. Just because they aren’t as developed as us doesn’t mean anything, maybe they like their way of life. Where they live sucks….because whites came and took what was theirs. So can suck it, because in the end, it doesn’t matter, it shouldn’t we should all care for one another and help each other to the best of our abilities. This all came from a sixteen yr. old, why is it I know better than a white, egotistical, fat greedy american like you. I like your receding hairline by the way.

          • “Furthermore, why are blacks not modern people?”

            Blacks are proto-humans; modern man evolved from Blacks by hybridizing with the large-brain Neanderthals:

                     •   Blacks   =   2% Archaic admixture
                     •   Whites   =   4% Neanderthal
                     •   Asians   =   5% Neanderthal + Denisovan

            Genetic distance is a measure of the genetic divergence between populations. Blacks have a genetic distance of 0.23 from Whites and Asians, but only 0.17 from Erectus. That means Blacks are more genetically proximate to archaic man than to modern man.

            Blacks are the only race with no DNA from the large-brain Neanderthals. Civilizations didn’t begin until this hybridization created the larger brains in modern man.

          • Where in the sweet dying f*** did you learn that Neanderthals having larger brains were socially smarter than Sapiens? Neanderthals’ brains had larger visual cortices so they had better eye sight than us. They also had larger occipital lobes which was correlated with their much higher lean mass. Sapiens’ brains developed for more social capabilities while Neanderthals developed parts of their brain for individual survival. Neanderthals’ brain increased as their mass increased, giving them far superior control over their far larger and bulkier bodies. They were physically stronger than us, and could see far better. Our brains may have been smaller, but they were efficiently developed and used to solve social problems, Sapiens has been and always will be a teamworker.

          • “Where in the sweet dying f*** did you learn that Neanderthals having larger brains were socially smarter than Sapiens?”

            I never made that assertion.

            You made up that quote, attributed it to me, then argued with it.

            ~~~~~~~

            SCIENTIFIC FACT: Blacks are Sub-Humans

            Archaic Hominin Introgression in Africa
            Oxford Academic: Molecular Biology and Evolution
            Published: 21 July 2017
            DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/msx206

            ABSTRACT: A divergent MUC7 haplotype likely originated in an unknown African hominin population and introgressed into ancestors of modern Africans.

            Blacks have “wildly different” genes than modern man because they are cross-breed with literal NON-HUMANS!

            http://www.nzherald.co.nz/science/news/article.cfm?c_id=82&objectid=11894688

            https://academic.oup.com/mbe/article/doi/10.1093/molbev/msx206/3988100/Archaic-hominin-introgression-in-Africa

            Genetic distance is a measure of the genetic divergence between populations. Blacks have a genetic distance of 0.23 from Whites and Asians, but only 0.17 from Erectus. That means Blacks are more genetically proximate to archaic man than to modern man.

            So, to be consistent and objective with taxonomic classification systems, Blacks and Whites should be classified into separate species, or at least into different subspecies.

            The genetic distance between the races of man is also much greater than that between the breeds of dog, and anyone who has experience with dogs knows what a huge difference breed makes, not only in physical appearance but also in behavior and intelligence.

            We share 98.4 percent of our genes with chimpanzees, 95 percent with dogs, and 74 percent with microscopic roundworms. Only one chromosome determines if one is born male or female. There is no discernible difference in the DNA of a wolf and a Labrador retriever, yet their inbred behavioral differences are immense. Clearly, what’s meaningful is which genes differ and how they are patterned, not the percent of genes. A tiny number of genes can translate into huge functional differences.

            Modern man (Whites and Asians) has on average 5% Neanderthal DNA, therefore he would be an F4 (4th filial generation from full purebred Neanderthal). That is about the same as most claiming Cherokee ancestors today.

            It is equivalent to having one Neanderthal great-great-great-grandparent. Blacks also coexisted and interbred with archaic hominids (heidelbergensis) for longer than those who left Africa.

            Anyone can get their DNA tested (services such as 23andMe charge about $100). Non-Blacks will show about 5% Neanderthal, but no African ancestry.

            ~~~~

            Before modern humans “replaced” the Neanderthals, they had sex with them. The liaisons produced children, who helped to populate Europe, Asia, and the New World.

            This provides further evidence of the closeness of Neanderthals to modern humans (non-Blacks). Not only did the two interbreed; the resulting hybrid offspring were functional enough to be integrated into human society. Even now, at least thirty thousand years after the fact, the signal is discernible: all non-sub-Saharan Africans, from the New Guineans to the French to the Han Chinese, carry somewhere between one and four per cent Neanderthal DNA.

            This is one of the most basic ways modern humans differ from Neanderthals and, in Pääbo’s view, also one of the most intriguing. By about forty-five thousand years ago, modern humans had already reached Australia, a journey that, even mid-ice age, meant crossing open water. Archaic humans like Homo erectus “spread like many other mammals in the Old World,” Pääbo told me. “They never came to Madagascar, never to Australia. Neither did Neanderthals. It’s only fully modern humans who start this thing of venturing out on the ocean where you don’t see land. Part of that is technology, of course; you have to have ships to do it. But there is also, I like to think or say, some madness there. You know? How many people must have sailed out and vanished on the Pacific before you found Easter Island? I mean, it’s ridiculous. And why do you do that? Is it for the glory? For immortality? For curiosity? And now we go to Mars. We never stop.”

            Whites have the DRD4 7R gene which originated from the Neanderthal hybridization and is associated with risk-taking, sensation-seeking and novelty-seeking, and is correlated with openness to new experiences, intolerance to monotony, and exploratory behavior. This accounts for Whites’ innovations, discoveries, and achievements.

            Blacks never created a vessel capable of trans-oceanic voyages.

            https://www.yahoo.com/news/wasnt-just-neanderthals-ancient-humans-had-sex-other-171119367.html

            ~~~~~

            Civilizations began 5,800 years ago after the introduction into the human genome of the abnormal spindle-like microcephaly-associated protein (ASPM) gene. The gene was acquired through the hybridization of the large-brain Neanderthals and caused increased brain size in modern man.

            The appearance of the gene correlates with the development of written language, spread of agriculture, and development of cities. Notably, the ASPM gene is rare in Blacks and they are the only race with no DNA from the large-brain Neanderthals, which is why they have small brains and never civilized. Blacks never created a written language, agriculture, or a civilization.

            The ASPM gene is a specific regulator of brain size, and its evolution in the lineage leading to Homo sapiens was driven by strong positive selection. Here, we show that one genetic variant of ASPM in humans arose merely about 5800 years ago (coinciding with the development of written language) and has since swept to high frequency under strong positive selection. These findings, especially the remarkably young age of the positively selected variant, suggest that the human brain is still undergoing rapid adaptive evolution. Geographic variation was observed, with sub-Saharan populations generally having lower frequencies than others.

            In the two Science papers, the researchers looked at variations of microcephalin and ASPM within modern humans. They found evidence that the two genes have continued to evolve. For each gene, one class of variants has arisen recently and has been spreading rapidly because it is favored by selection. For microcephalin, the new variant class emerged about 37,000 years ago and now shows up in about 70 percent of present-day humans. For ASPM, the new variant class arose about 5,800 years ago and now shows up in approximately 30 percent of today’s humans. These time windows are extraordinarily short in evolutionary terms, indicating that the new variants were subject to very intense selection pressure that drove up their frequencies in a very brief period of time–both well after the emergence of modern humans about 200,000 years ago.

            Each variant emerged around the same time as the advent of “cultural” behaviors. The microcephalin variant appears along with the emergence of such traits as art and music, religious practices, and sophisticated tool-making techniques–which date back to about 50,000 years ago. The ASPM variant coincides with the oldest-known civilization, Mesopotamia, which dates back to 7,000 BC. “Microcephalin,” the authors wrote in one of the papers, “has continued its trend of adaptive evolution beyond the emergence of anatomically modern humans. If selection indeed acted on a brain-related phenotype, there could be several possibilities, including brain size, cognition, personality, motor control or susceptibility to neurological/psychiatric diseases.”

            http://www.evolocus.com/Publications/Evans2005.pdf

            ~~~~

            Blacks are the first humans, Humans 1.0. Modern man evolved from Blacks when they cross-breed with the Neanderthals (literally a different species).

            Blacks are the only race not hybridized with the large-brain Neanderthals. That’s why they have small, primitive brains and low IQs. Blacks were left behind the heterosis, or hybrid vigor, provided by the Neanderthal DNA.

            Genetic distance is a measure of the genetic divergence between populations. Blacks have a genetic distance of 0.23 from Whites and Asians, but only 0.17 from Erectus. That means Blacks are more genetically proximate to archaic man than to modern man.

            So to be consistent and objective with taxonomic classification systems Blacks and Whites should be classified into separate species, or at least into different subspecies.

            The genetic distance between the races of man is also much greater than that between the breeds of dog, and anyone who has experience with dogs knows what a huge difference breed makes, not only in physical appearance but also in behavior and intelligence.

            We share 98.4 percent of our genes with chimpanzees, 95 percent with dogs, and 74 percent with microscopic roundworms. Only one chromosome determines if one is born male or female. There is no discernible difference in the DNA of a wolf and a Labrador retriever, yet their inbred behavioral differences are immense. Clearly, what’s meaningful is which genes differ and how they are patterned, not the percent of genes. A tiny number of genes can translate into huge functional differences.

            Modern man (Whites and Asians) has on average 5% Neanderthal DNA, therefore he would be an F4 (4th filial generation from full purebred Neanderthal). That is about the same as most claiming Cherokee ancestors today.

            It is equivalent to having one Neanderthal great-great-great-grandparent. Blacks also coexisted and interbred with archaic hominids (heidelbergensis) for longer than those who left Africa.

            Anyone can get their DNA tested (services such as 23andMe charge about $100). Non-Blacks will show about 5% Neanderthal, but no African ancestry.

            And, we’re not necessarily from the same genetic stock.

            http://www.nature.com/news/oldest-homo-sapiens-fossil-claim-rewrites-our-species-history-1.22114

            https://www.yahoo.com/news/300-000-old-moroccan-fossils-170044488.html

          • “They have contributed to a great deal of American culture, music, food.”

            They didn’t create a thing in the 60,000 years they lived alone in Africa.

            Blacks can only achieve because they are mixed with White genes or because they reside in White societies. Not enough of them are smart enough to even build sufficient infrastructure to allow the Black intellectual elite to achieve.

          • “Just because our life style is different doesn’t make it better.”

            Tell that to the million of Africans risking their lives to get to any non-Black nation.

            Blacks are the only race incapable of even providing for themselves. Whites have to provide food, medical, financial, and engineering aid to every Black nation. Blacks can’t survive without White charity.

            How can you possibly argue that their way of life is better?

          • Do you have the body count on heads of state murdered by US, UK, FR, Ger who refused to surrender national resources for a pittance? It’s a significant number and drives your exodus calculation. We know the exodus numbers are recent, and they have a context. Gotta do the whole job…not just the hit piece victimhood woe-is-me part.

          • “The Russians got into space before us by the way. The Renaissance wasn’t american dude, not even in this country.”

            National boundaries are transitory and arbitrary.

            We’re debating the intellectual inferiority of the Black race, not of nationalities.

          • You haven’t defined the Black race. You’re debating your sense of history based on delusions.

          • “You haven’t defined the Black race.”

            Are you pretending to be dumb?

            Black = the population who can trace their origins to Africa.

          • By “trace” I imagine then, that this would include the peoples of Yemen, Arabia, ancient Sumeria, the Indus Valley and ancient China. Or — are you positing a single-generation framework where “whites” born in America are not really from Central Asia, but from other mythical homeland. How far back do you “trace”?

          • I hope you’re not one of those True Negro Nuts that deny the genetic diversity of African populations – and who waltz around with zero knowledge of trans-Saharan populations…you couldn’t be THAT much on the lunatic fringe? Could you?

          • “I hope you’re not one of those True Negro Nuts that deny the genetic diversity of African populations – and who waltz around with zero knowledge of trans-Saharan populations…”

            Name a “trans-Saharan population”.

            The fact is, Blacks never migrated from sub-Saharan African until Whites discovered them just 400 years ago when they were still living in the Stone Age.

            Anyone can get their DNA tested (services such as 23andMe charge about $100). Non-Blacks will show about 5% Neanderthal, but no African ancestry.

          • “Just because they aren’t as developed as us doesn’t mean anything……..”

            It means they’re dumb.

            Should modern man be breeding with Blacks?

          • This degree of intellectual laziness is appalling. It’s like you only read the second set of books on Africa. The first set, written by people who actually went there give lie to all your newbie fabrications. You read the books by the people who never left “Europe” and had no idea what they hell they were talking about. It’s like a forensic accounting fail on steroids. Start your learning over, as we should all do every day.

          • “This degree of intellectual laziness is appalling. It’s like you only read the second set of books on Africa. The first set, written by people who actually went there give lie to all your newbie fabrications.”

            OK, so educate me.

            Civilization cannot exist without written language. Name a written language created by Blacks.

          • I call bullshit. The Celts were a long time civilisation and culture, They functioned by spoken language, the Bards kept history through song and passed it down to the younger generations. Until the Romans and Christians came along and wiped out most of their culture. Saying that civilization cannot exist without written language only applies to certain ones, that fact is about as false as the fact I am wearing socks right now. (I am not, by the way) Only the civilizations we know of have written languages, which is why we know of them. Civilizations are forgotten without it, but it doesn’t mean that they didn’t exist.

          • “I call bullshit. The Celts were a long time civilisation and culture…”

            There you go again making up a quote, attributing it to me, then arguing with it.

            I stated, “Civilization cannot exist without written language. Name a written language created by Blacks.”

            You then replied that the Celts had a “culture”. Well, so did Blacks — but neither had a civilization.

            Blacks are the only race never to have civilization. Everything Blacks have was given to them by Whites.

            Definition: civilization

            the stage of human social development and organization that is considered most advanced.

            https://www.google.com/search?q=definition

          • Civilization is but a sedentary organization of people. The fact that it can only be achieved through written language and written records is factual.

            “1 a : a relatively high level of cultural and technological development; specifically : the stage of cultural development at which writing and the keeping of written records is attained…”

            https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/civilization

            Celts didn’t record written language and chose to pass it down orally instead of through written works. They valued honor, war, ornate metal engravings and their oral traditions for passing history.

            The Celts themselves were also white as well, their territories spread as far as the British Iles and Spain to Turkey.

            Celtic written languages were developed in the 3rd century CE by the Irish which was the Ogham tree alphabet. It was supposedly used to trace genealogies, not so much history.

            On the bright side, it’s said that some of the things the Celts invented were soap, the fiddle, the bagpipe, linen, plaids and pants, which personally I’d trade civilization for any day!

          • “Celtic written languages were developed in the 3rd century CE by the Irish which was the Ogham tree alphabet.”

            False. It’s traceable to at least the first century BC. And, the Celts were using other writing systems until adopting Latin-based alphabets into Ogham.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogham

            http://www.cip.ifi.lmu.de/~langeh/test/1975%20-%20Carney%20-%20The%20Invention%20of%20the%20Ogom%20Cipher.pdf

            “On the bright side, it’s said that some of the things the Celts invented were soap, the fiddle, the bagpipe…….”

            False, false, and false. Again, you keep just making stuff up.

          • I’ve been always taught that Wikipedia wasn’t a good source for research. However I’m not making anything up, Unless the sites I’ve been using for research appear only for my own personal informational consumption and then disappear. I’m not sure why, but you seem rather triggered and seem to have a stick up your behind.

            Anyhow, perhaps
            i should start listing sources for everything I say.

            here’s a few for the Ogham

            https://www.ancient.eu/Ogham/

            This one states a few different theories of it’s origins. Only theories. Placing a chronological date on the origins of Ogham.

            https://ogham.ie/history/ogham-alphabet/

            – 6th paragraph, 3rd line.
            Here, in this document it specifies that Ogham was created at a specific time. That being between the 3rd and 4th centuries.

            This is the page I used for their discoveries. When I originally stated them, in my previous comment.

            http://celts.mrdonn.org/inventions.html

            Now, as for the soaps and what not.

            http://www.soaphistory.net/soap-history/who-invented-soap/

            this site states that the ancient Babylonians were the first. however…

            Starting in the 4th paragraph of this article:

            https://enchantmentsschool.blogspot.ca/2011/03/celts-and-their-inventions-we-rely-on.html

            It states that the Celts were ‘attributed’ to inventing soap, why they were and not the Babylonians puzzles me as well. Followed by many other inventions that they may or may not have invented. (According to your informational sources.)

            As you can easily see; unless you are visually challenged; I am not making up information. I’m only stating what I find on the net. If someone else is, that’s not my fault. The only thing I may be at fault for, is not stating my sources or not doing excessive research.

          • “I’ve been always taught that Wikipedia wasn’t a good source for research.”

            Why? All the assertions are sourced. I even provided the source for you from Google Scholar. Did you bother to read the references? It clearly demonstrated that Ogham dates to at least the first century BC and is derivative of Latin characters.

            On the contrary, the claims from your links are unsourced and from hobby and/or activist websites.

            Further, all of your claims about Celt inventions are unfounded.

            I’m done with this.

          • Your profile image is an ankh, an ancient Egyptian hieroglyphic ideograph symbolizing “life”.

            For your information, the ancient Egyptians were Whites:

            Nature | International Journal of Science
            June 1, 2017

              •   Mummy DNA unravels ancestry of ancient Egyptians
              •   Genetic analysis reveals a close relationship with Middle Easterners, not central Africans.

            This is the first glimpse of the genetic history of Egypt. Strikingly, the mummies were more closely related to ancient Europeans than to modern Egyptians. Both types of genomic material recovered showed that ancient Egyptians shared little DNA with modern sub-Saharan Africans.

            The tombs of ancient Egypt have yielded golden collars and ivory bracelets, but another treasure — human DNA — has proved elusive. Now, scientists have captured sweeping genomic information from Egyptian mummies. It reveals that mummies were closely related to ancient Middle Easterners, hinting that northern Africans might have different genetic roots from people south of the Sahara desert.

            Egypt’s searing climate and the ancient practice of embalming bodies has made the recovery of intact genetic material daunting. The first DNA sequences thought to be from a mummy were probably the result of modern contamination, and many scientists are sceptical of purported genetic information acquired from the mummy of King Tutankhamun.

            The latest analysis succeeded by bypassing soft tissue — often abundant in Egyptian mummies — to seek DNA from bone and teeth. Researchers carefully screened the DNA to rule out contamination from anyone who had handled the mummies since their excavation a century ago in the ancient town of Abusir el-Meleq.

            The team succeeded where previous studies on Egyptian mummies have failed or fallen short.

            The samples recovered from this Middle Egyptian community span around 1,300 years of ancient Egyptian history from the New Kingdom to the Roman Period (radiocarbon dated to 1388BCE–426CE). The New Kingdom (also referred to as the Egyptian Empire) was Egypt’s most prosperous time and marked the peak of its power.

            The analyses revealed that ancient Egyptians shared more ancestry with Near Easterners and Europeans than present-day Egyptians, who received additional sub-Saharan admixture in more recent times.

            The researchers say that there was probably a pulse of sub-Saharan African DNA into Egypt roughly 700 years ago. The mixing of ancient Egyptians and Africans from further south means that modern Egyptians can trace 8% more of their ancestry to sub-Saharan Africans than can the mummies from Abusir el-Meleq.

            https://www.nature.com/news/mummy-dna-unravels-ancient-egyptians-ancestry-1.22069

            http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms15694

            The Egyptians were fastidious record-keepers and placed great importance on their lineage. They also painted and made statues of themselves so we know exactly what they looked like.

            The first pyramid was engineered and designed by the Kingdom’s chief architect, Imhotep in 2630 B.C., who is White:

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imhotep

            The Great Pyramid’s architect, Hemiunu

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemiunu

            This is the brother of 4th Dynasty pharaoh Khufu who commissioned the construction of the Great Pyramid in 2589 B.C. (he even has blue eyes):

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Rahotep

            Khufu’s daughter, Neferetiabet:

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nefertiabet

            Look at the mummy of 19th Dynasty pharaoh Ramses II (1303 BC) — he has White features, even including stringy red hair and an aquiline nose:

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramesses_II

          • “Furthermore, why are blacks not modern people?”

            Because they have 0% Neanderthal DNA and are unevolved compared to race groups who have Neanderthal DNA.

            ” And, even if they were slaves, it was because they were strong enough to do the work because white men were to soft to do it.”

            That’s like calling someone lazy for inventing or using a tool.
            Who do you think built Europe?
            Who do you think built the ships that sailed to Africa?

            It’s called comparative advantage.

            ” Where they live sucks….because whites came and took what was theirs. ”

            So it’s just coincidence that sub-Saharans were living in the stone age until contact with other race groups?

            “Many places had their own industrial revolutions.”

            And not a one in sub-Saharan Africa

            “Just because they aren’t as developed as us doesn’t mean anything, maybe they like their way of life. ”

            Is that the reason they are literally dying to get to white countries?

          • Me thinks that you are very racist…just read over what you are saying and change “white” to “black” and see what you think then.

          • “Let’s take into account that people of minority groups, have it harder because people like you have yet to see them as equals.”

            Why weren’t Blacks ever successful in Africa?

            The fact is, Blacks are the only race never to have civilized (they never even created a written language). Everything Blacks have was given to them by Whites.

            Where have Blacks ever been successful? Name a single contribution from sub-Saharan Africans to the world.

            Do you dispute Blacks have small brains?

          • “Whites have a melting pot of what everyone else had done.”

            Provide an example.

            “Whites didn’t do anything for the greater good, they did it for greed.”

            Provide an example.

            “Where they live sucks….because whites came and took what was theirs.”

            Provide an example.

          • I am in the process of doing a study on the occurrence of violent behaviors and “failure to thrive” in society, if you will, and the amount of Neanderthal and Denisovan genes a race or group may have. Native Americans have a very high amount of Neanderthal and Denisovan genes, higher than Europeans, who also have a mix of the two relatives..where blacks have none.

        • Came across this old discussion today and read some of the comments I have missed. Most of the discussion has been rendered less significant in my opinion since I read Sapolsky’s “Behave” this fall. fMRI observation of real-time behavior across populations leaves DNA difference obviously far less influential on actual behavior than predicated by other types of study. If nothing else, one learns again that generalizations are dangerous.

          • “Most of the discussion has been rendered less significant in my opinion since I read Sapolsky’s “Behave” this fall.

            Explain. Why are you seemingly dismissing the stunning correlation between the MAOA gene and violence?

            Do you dispute that testosterone influences impulsiveness and aggression?

            If nothing else, one learns again that generalizations are dangerous.

            Really? Are we not able to state that males are taller than females even though you may find a particular female who is taller than a particular male?

            Your attempt to make a point about generalizations is itself a fallacious statement about generalizations (while making a sweeping statement about them). The irony of it is rich.

          • I won’t try to summarize the huge book that describes the results obtained over the past decade or so by technical advances used to directly observe brain behavior in controlled stimulation. From evidence presented by Sapolsky, the role of testosterone is a fitting example. It plays a role in aggression and and it plays a role in bonding between individuals and groups. What testosterone does is determined by other stimuli that are received from internal and external sources as moderated by the prefrontal cortex. We can stipulate that statistical measurement finds males are taller than females but cannot stipulate why one individual is taller than another. My neighbor is taller than I and she stipulates it is because people are always pulling her leg. After reading “Behave” by Sapolsky I understand her viewpoint.

          • Blacks have 21% higher free testosterone compared to Whites. Testosterone is associated with impulsive, aggressive, and violent behavior.

            Journal National Cancer Institute, 1986 Jan; 76(1):45-8. PMID: 3455741

            Richard et al. (2014) meta-analyzed data from 14 separate studies and found that Blacks had higher levels of free floating testosterone in their blood than Whites suggesting that testosterone levels may predispose Blacks towards higher rates of crime.

            Compounding this, a high percentage of Blacks have dysfunctional versions of the MAOA androgen receptor gene which is a key part of the mechanism by which testosterone has its effects throughout the body and brain.

            MAOA’s job is to break down crucial neurotransmitters which can build up in the brain and cause a loss of impulse control and an increase in violence and rage.

            The MAOA gene can come in the form of 2, 3, 3.5, 4, or 5 allele. A 3-repeat allele is considered dysfunctional and is what is referred to as the “warrior gene”. A 2-repeat (2R) allele is considered very dysfunctional.

            The 2-repeat allele does not produce a protein needed to break down old serotonin. It is strongly correlated to criminality and doubles the rate of violence of the 3R without needing an environmental interaction mechanism. People with a 2-repeat allele MAOA gene have a permanent chemical imbalance in their brain making the person more likely to be agitated, aggressive, and impulsive.

            Only 0.00067% of Asians and .5% of Whites have the MAOA 2-repeat allele version, compared to 4.7% of Blacks.

            That means Blacks are 9.4x more likely to have the very dysfunctional version of the MAOA gene than Whites. Considering that Blacks are 10x more likely to commit extreme violence and anti-social behavior than Whites, this is very significant.

            Blacks are also more likely to have versions of dopamine genes like ANKK1 and DAT1 that have been linked to antisocial behavior.

            A 2012 study using the Add Health data found that the 2-repeat version of the MAOA gene is significantly associated with antisocial behavior and the likelihood of criminality in Black males.

            Exploring the association between the 2-repeat allele of the MAOA gene promoter polymorphism and psychopathic personality traits, arrests, incarceration, and lifetime antisocial behavior — Kevin M. Beaver a, John Paul Wright b, Brian B. Boutwell c, J.C. Barnes d, Matt DeLisi e, Michael G. Vaughn

            ABTRACT:

            Analyses revealed that Black males who carried the 2-repeat allele were, in comparison with other Black male genotypes, significantly more likely to be arrested and incarcerated. Additional analyses revealed that Black male carriers of the 2-repeat allele scored significantly higher on an antisocial phenotype index and on measures assessing involvement in violent behaviors over the life course. There was not any association between the 2-repeat allele and a continuously measured psychopathic personality traits scale. The effects of the 2-repeat allele could not be examined in White males because only 0.1% carried it.

            https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/exploring-the-association-between-the-2-repeat-allele-of-the-maoa-gene.pdf

                     •   Black males age 18-35 years of age are only 3.3% of the U.S. population, yet have committed 52% of homicides from 1980-2008. Black males (all ages) are only 6% of the U.S. population, yet commit 46% of all violent crimes, and 50% of the gun homicides. If Blacks were removed from the equation, the U.S. gun homicide rate would be equal to Great Britain’s, who have some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the world.

                     •   The Black homicide rate is 17 per 100,000, a rate over 9x that of the White rate, and comparable to some of those most murderous countries in the world.

                     •   If the homicide rate for the U.S. were the White-only rate, the homicide rate would drop 84%, making the U.S. rate comparable to European countries.

                     •   Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving Blacks and Whites, Blacks commit 85 percent and Whites commit 15 percent. This means that a Black is 27 times more likely to attack a White person than vice versa.

                     •   For each one standard deviation increase in proportion of Black population, firearm homicide rate is increased by 82.8%. Therefore, the U.S. has a Black problem, not a gun or violent crime problem.

                     •   Murder is the leading cause of death for Black men, ages 15 to 34. Their murderers are almost always other Black men; 93 percent of Black homicide victims are killed by other Blacks.

                     •   When Blacks commit crimes of violence, they are nearly three times more likely than non-Blacks to use a gun, and more than twice as likely to use a knife.

                     •   Black males between 16-35 years of age are only 4.2% of the population, yet commit 72% of the street crime in America.

                     •   The single best indicator of violent crime levels in an area is the percentage of the population that is Black.

                     •   White men and women who choose to date or marry Blacks are much more likely to suffer abuse from their partners, particularly spousal homicide. The highest risk of death by spousal homicide is incurred by White women married to Black men. A White woman married to a Black man is over 12 times as likely to be murdered by her husband as a White woman married to a White man. A White man married to a Black woman is 21 times as likely to be murdered by his wife as a White man married to a White woman.

                     •   If New York City were all White, the murder rate would drop by 91 percent, the robbery rate by 81 percent, and the shootings rate by 97 percent. In an all-White Chicago, murder would decline 90 percent, rape by 81 percent, and robbery by 90 percent.

                     •   Black serial killers have comprised over half of documented serial killers since the dawn of the 21st century at 56 percent, making up a total of 40 percent in years dating back to 1900. Blacks constituted 44% of the known serial killers during the 1995-2004 period and 38.2% of all multiple murderers (serial, mass, and spree combined) during 1976-1998 period. During the 2000-2010 decade, 62% of serial killers were Black.

            The Color of Crime:

            https://www.scribd.com/doc/305240780/The-Color-of-Crime

            https://archive.org/details/6396bf06c11b81777c27ca0edcb4fdbb4ae17354576954101f6d6ce3a015b806

            https://archive.org/details/SerialKillerRate

  3. Tabitha, as a commenter points out, that “rational rant” was by me, John Horgan, not my former boss at Scientific American John Rennie. Otherwise, nice piece!

  5. I just want to add that there are experiments done which did not find a correlation with MAOA genotype(allele variation) and MAOA activity/levels. As in the variant had no distinguishable effect on the function of the gene. Links below.

    There are 3 of them from what I know.
    The first one found a correlation with methylation of the gene not the variant. These studies use some fancy medical methods and technology to get info from the tissues themselves.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22948232
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17141746

    …and opposite activity in this Han Chinese population.
    http://fsjournal.cpu.edu.tw/content/vol6.no.2/960202.pdf

    I’m pretty sure there are more out there but are harder to find than the positive associations because of publication bias against negative finding espeically in psychology.

    http://forecastingprinciples.com/files/pdf/Publication%20Bias.pdf
    http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/2014/09/15/publication-bias-negative-findings-detrimental/
    http://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2013/feb/27/psychologists-bmc-psychology

    If I were you I wouldn’t trust studies such as this even a little bit.

  6. Great discussion…I have MAO. I went ahead and did my 23andme. I wouldn’t say I’m antisocial. In fact, I’m kind of a social butterfly. With all that said I find that most people’s discussions are pretty boring….but I do love it when I can get people to engage in very deep discussions…which btw is pretty often. I do find that I have to patiently endure and listen at times and let others have the reigns in the course of polite and fruitful discussion. I’m definitely violent or anything. In fact, I’m kind of the opposite. I prefer to be at peace and interact with folks even when there is not total agreement. I do find I have strong impulsivities. But never have I had violent impulsivities. It’s more like oooh look at this…wow….wow look at this over here. etc.

  13. Im glad Im passing these genes on to my descent. May they ever use their quicker reflexes, faster ability to analyze and freeze frame time, and rapid action muscles to kick the ass of any who want to socially engineer them. :)

  14. I find it interesting that a study from Finland, where child abuse is quite low, but alcoholism quite high, would shun the MAOA/abuse connection in favor of an MAOA/alcohol connection. The author fails to point out that there are sub-classes of MAOA and that only one of those sub-classes MAOA-3R is associated with child abuse.

  15. How I understand the connection of genes influencing behavior and personality, from what I’ve read in scientific literature, is nature and nurture work together in producing an individual. If the warrior gene thesis is true, the gene sets a range of potential behavior, but the person’s upbringing is what determines whether or not they become a violent career criminal or a legit, but ruthless business man.

  17. Why not call it the coward gene. Those that lack it are cowards.
    Was the control group ‘salted’?
    Any professional military, law enforcement or firefighters? Run the test over, using people that run into burning buildings as a control group.
    Remember ‘crime’ is a POV thangie.

  18. Ah, yes. Lies, Damned Lies and statistics. What gene were you using to determine black? What gene combination? What if they are only 15/16ths black? It might be that 1/16th that is the problem.
    I would suggest you look deeper into this amazing discovery, except I suspect your eyes are too close together to get a good look.

    • The words “black” and “race” are semantic traps. Human individuals, families, interbreeding groups and major continental population lineages have a variety of gene-influenced differences, both statistical and absolute. There may be some correlation if not direct causation between pigmentation and behavior.

          • The brains of northern peoples are probably the result of selective adaptation to a testing prehistoric climate; this is quite an old idea, but developed by Possony & Weyl in their study of the geography of the intellect. I put it as a student to Otto Klineberg at London University in the 1960s and he replied that there was no direct link between pigmentation and the brain; and then at a much later date raised it at the (then) Eugenics Society (sitting alongside Hans Eysenck) to Richard Lynn, who has subsequently taken up the idea.

          • “I put it as a student to Otto Klineberg at London University in the 1960s and he replied that there was no direct link between pigmentation and the brain….”

            Not “pigmentation”, but race.

            Brain Size and Weight by Race:  American Whites vs. American Blacks (average 24% White admixture)

            A study by Ho et al. (1980) recorded the brain weights of 1,261 Americans, including 416 White and 228 Black men, taken from five years of records at Case Western Reserve University.

                     RESULTS:
                     Whites: 1392 grams (1442cc)
                     Blacks: 1286 grams (1332cc)

            Adult brain weight in relation to body height, weight, and surface area (1980), by Ho, Roessmann, Straumfjord, and Monroe.
            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6893660

            A study by Bean (1906) recorded the brain weights of 125 Americans, including 37 White and 51 Black men, from an anatomical laboratory in Baltimore.

                     RESULTS:
                     Whites: 1341 grams (1389cc)
                     Blacks: 1292 grams (1339cc)

            Source: Some racial peculiarities of the Negro brain (1906), by Bean; page 408.
            http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/49594/1/1000050402_ftp.pdf

            A study by Pearl (1934) examined the recorded brain weights of 24 White and 379 Black soldiers who died during the War of Federal Tyranny (1861-65), most of whom died of pneumonia. Note the higher than average brain weights, perhaps due to the fact that these were strong young men in their prime and/or perhaps to a side-effect of pneumonia.

                     RESULTS:
                     Whites: 1471 grams (1524cc)
                     Blacks: 1342 grams (1390cc)

            Source: The Weight of the Negro Brain (1934), by Pearl.
            http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/pdf_extract/80/2080/431

            The largest autopsy study was performed by anthropologist Ralph Holloway (2004) at Columbia University Medical School on 1,391 Whites, 153 Hispanics, and 615 Blacks:

                     RESULTS:
                     Whites: 1285 grams (1331cc)
                     Hispanics: 1253 grams (1298cc)
                     Blacks: 1222 grams (1266cc)

            Measuring endocranial volume, the American anthropologist Samuel George Morton (1849) filled over 1,000 skulls with packing material and found that Blacks averaged about 5 cubic inches less cranial capacity than Whites. These results have stood the test of time (Gordon, 1934; Simmons, 1942; Todd, 1923).

            http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001071

            http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/14/science/14skull.html

            The largest study of race differences in endocranial volume was by Beals et al. (1984) with measurements of up to 20,000 skulls from around the world:

                     RESULTS:
                     Asians: 1415cc
                     Whites: 1362cc
                     Blacks: 1268cc

            Weighing brains at autopsy, Broca (1873) found that Whites averaged heavier brains than Blacks and had more complex convolutions and larger frontal lobes. Subsequent studies have found an average Black–White difference of about 100 g (Bean, 1906; Mall, 1909; Pearl, 1934; Vint, 1934). Some studies have found that the more White admixture (judged independently from skin color), the greater the average brain weight in Blacks (Bean, 1906; Pearl, 1934). In a study of 1,261 American adults, Ho et al. (1980) found that 811 White Americans averaged 1,323 g and 450 Black Americans averaged 1,223). Since the Blacks and Whites were similar in body size, differences in body size cannot explain away the differences in brain weight.

            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2668913/

          • A basic law of biology is that longer infancy is related to greater brain growth.

            Blacks are the only race not hybridized with the large-brained Neanderthals, and also the only race without the derived form of MCPH1 microcephalin called haplogroup D which produces increased brain volume.

            The correlation between brain size and IQ across 25 primate species is 0.77 (where 1.0 indicates that monozygotic twins have no variance in IQ and 0 indicates that their IQs are completely uncorrelated).

            Structural imaging of total brain gray and white matter volumes is perhaps the most obvious approach to correlate brain measures with general intelligence (Toga et al, 2005). Brain structure measured from MRI correlates with intelligence test scores as total brain volume (Gignac et al. 2003), as do the volumes of individual lobes and aggregate gray and white matter volumes (Posthuma et al. 2002).

            http://www.loni.usc.edu/~thompson/PDF/TT_ARN05.pdf

            Larger brains contain more neurons and synapses and process information faster. By adulthood, East Asians average one cubic inch more cranial capacity than Whites who average five cubic inches more than Blacks.

            In the commonly used Smith-Beals data set of 20,000 skulls worldwide, East Asians averaged 1415 cubic centimeters of brain volume. Ethnic Europeans averaged 1362 cubic centimeters, and sub-Saharan Africans averaged 1268 cubic centimeters.

            Brain Weight by Race:

                     •   Blacks   =   1261 g
                     •   Whites   =   1387 g
                     •   Asians   =   1374 g

            Brain Size by Race:

                     •   Blacks   =   1267 cm³
                     •   Whites   =   1347 cm³
                     •   Asians   =   1364 cm³

            Whites’ brains are faster, larger, denser, and more complex than Blacks’ brains:

                     •   7% larger
                     •   126 grams heavier
                     •   deeper fissuration in the frontal and occipital regions
                     •   more complex convolutions
                     •   larger frontal lobes
                     •   more pyramidal neurons
                     •   16% thicker supra-grandular layer
                     •   one standard deviation more cerebrum
                     •   react faster on mental chronometry tests
                     •   600 million more neurons

            Race differences start in the womb. Blacks are born earlier and grow quicker than Whites and Asians.

            Black babies mature more quickly than White babies, while Asian babies mature more slowly. Black babies in a sitting position are more able to keep their heads up and backs straight from the start. White babies often need six to eight weeks to do these things.

            Black babies spend the least time in the womb. 51% of Black children have been born by week 39 of pregnancy compared with 33% of White children.

            Black children sit, crawl, walk, and put on their own clothes earlier than Whites or Asians. The findings are measured by such tests as Bayley’s Scales of Mental and Motor Development and the Cambridge Neonatal Scales.

            Asian children, on the other hand, mature more slowly than do White children. Asian children often do not walk until 13 months. Walking starts at 12 months for white children and 11 months for Black children.

            MILESTONE: Being drawn up into a sitting position, able to prevent the head from falling backwards:

                     Black: Nine hours
                     White: Six weeks

            MILESTONE: With head held firmly, looking at the face of the examiner:

                     Black: Two days
                     White: Eight weeks

            MILESTONE: Supporting self in a sitting position and watching own reflection in a mirror:

                     Black: Seven weeks
                     White: Twenty weeks

            MILESTONE: Holding self upright:

                     Black: Five months
                     White: Nine months

            MILESTONE: Climbing the steps alone:

                     Black: 11 months
                     White: 15 months

            Sources:

            (Wilson, 1978). Also see (Levin, 1997; Freedman, 1969). “…the kinesthetic maturation rate of Black infants was two or three times that of White children.” (Simpson, 2003). Faster maturation goes along with a shorter life span. In 2002, Black Americans had 40.5% more deaths than they would have had with the White mortality rate. (A 2005 report by former U.S. Surgeon General David Satcher). The bodies of Blacks mature faster. (İşcan, 1987).

          • Blacks have small brains-

            http://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/04/15/brain-size-race-and-iq/

            Brain size and cognitive ability: Correlations with age, sex, social class, and race

            East Asians and their descendants = 1,364; Europeans and their descendants = 1,347; and Africans and their descendants = 1,267).

            Racial differences in head size appear early in life. Head circumference of White children are greater than that of Black children in each age category by a mean of 0.36 cm³ or approximately 0.2 SD. The greater head size of White children, however, is not a function of greater body size because Black children are taller than White children at both 4 and 7 years (Broman et al., 1987). From 7 to 17 years, the White advantage in cranial capacity is 16 cm³.

            https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758%2FBF03210739.pdf

            Blacks are the only race not hybridized with the large-brain Neanderthals. Blacks were left behind the heterosis, or hybrid vigor, provided by the Neanderthal DNA.

            Brain size by race-

            In the commonly used Smith-Beals data set of 20,000 skulls worldwide, East Asians averaged 1415 cubic centimeters of brain volume. Ethnic Europeans averaged 1362 cubic centimeters, and sub-Saharan Africans averaged 1268 cubic centimeters.

            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2668913/

            A study by Rushton (1992) estimated brain sizes based on head measurments of 6,325 military personnel (1,590 White and 1,381 Black men) taken by the U.S. Army in 1988.

            Results:

            Asian: 1416 cm³
            White: 1380 cm³
            Black: 1359 cm³

            Officers: 1393 cm³
            Enlisted: 1375 cm³

            Source: Cranial capacity related to sex, rank, and race in a stratified random sample of 6325 US military personnel (1992), by Rushton.

            http://philipperushton.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/iq-brain-size-rushton-intelligence-1992.pdf

            The 1.1 SD (16 IQ points) American Black (24% White admixture)-White IQ gap is present by age three. The IQ gap between African Blacks and Whites is 2 SD.

            Race differences show up by 3 years of age, even after matching on maternal education and other variables. Therefore, they cannot be due to poor education since this has not yet begun to exert an effect.

            https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/fryer/files/testing_for_racial_differences_in_the_mental_ability_of_young_children.pdf

            Racial-group differences in IQ appear early. For example, the Black and the White 3 year-old children in the standardization sample of the Stanford–Binet IV show a 1 standard deviation mean difference after being matched on gender, birth order, and maternal education (Peoples, Fagan, & Drotar, 1995). Similarly, the Black and the White 2 1⁄2- to 6-year-old children in the U.S. standardization sample of the Differential Aptitude Scale have a 1 standard deviation mean difference (Lynn, 1996). The size of the average Black–White difference does not change significantly over the developmental period from 3 years of age and beyond (see Jensen, 1974, 1998b).” (Rushton & Jensen, 2005, pp. 240-241.)

            Farkas & Beron (2004) reported that blacks score 17.2 points below whites on the PPVT in this dataset at age 36 months (p. 478). More recently, Bond & Lang (2012) reported a slightly smaller, 14.6 point gap for 3-year-olds in this dataset (p. 13).

            https://humanvarieties.org/2013/05/26/the-onset-and-development-of-b-w-ability-differences-early-infancy-to-age-3-part-1/

            THIRTY YEARS OF RESEARCH ON RACE DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY

            https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf

            Rushton, J. P. (1992). Cranial capacity related to sex, rank, and race in a stratified random sample of 6,325 U.S. military personnel. Intelligence, 16, 401-413.

            http://philipperushton.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/iq-brain-size-rushton-intelligence-1992.pdf

            Brain size and cognitive ability: Correlations with age, sex, social class, and race

            https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758%2FBF03210739.pdf

            ETHNIC GROUP DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT AND EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS: A META-ANALYSIS

            https://home.ubalt.edu/tmitch/645/articles/roth%20et%20al%20ethnic%20grp%20diff%20in%20cog%20abil%20ppsych%202001.pdf

    • ” What gene were you using to determine black?”

      Blacks are the only race with no DNA from the large-brain Neanderthal.

      Blacks are Humans 1.0; the other races evolved from Blacks and are Humans 2.0, the improved version. They were formed by hybridization with the large-brained Neanderthals which created larger, more complex brains:

           •   Blacks = 2% Archaic admixture
           •   Whites = 4% Neanderthal admixture
           •   Asians = Neanderthal + Denisovan

  19. I know i have the WG!I respect life,have honor that “many” don’t have and love nature!I have it inside me to protect anyone weaker than me (mentally or physically).it seems you want to wipe this out!?this is how “we” have survived for millenia. This “can’t” be bred out of the human species. It’s what we are.we can only “try” to control it.and I have.the WG is not evil!!

  20. shut up you racist little hick. I was treated like absolute shit by the whitest dude I know. He has ALL OF THESE TRAITS.

    Anti social, proud sociopath, violent little right wing terd who talks non challantly about how he wanted to torture me.

    I have NO DOUBT you also have this genetic defect

    • Using anecdotal evidence to refute a claim. Never seen that before. In general, blacks are the most violent. That doesn’t mean there aren’t exceptions. Is that so hard to understand?

      • Some blacks are smarter than most whites, Obama is definitely smarter than John Boehner, but Boehner is also definitely smarter than Congressman Hank Johnson who thought Guam would capsize if too many people were deployed there. But when we talk of averages, you must understand that it refers to the aggregate, half the population will be dumber than the average, have the people will be smarter. The average IQ of an American of primarily African descent is 85 and the average IQ of an American of primarily European descent is 103, From: THIRTY YEARS OF RESEARCH ON RACE
        DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY
        J. Philippe Rushton
        The University of Western Ontario
        Arthur R. Jensen

        • There is overlap. It’s called a bell curve. Just as we can say that men are taller than women, it can also be true that that woman is taller than that man.

          Google: racial IQ bell curve.

          Not all Blacks are morons, and not all Whites are geniuses. But Blacks have by far the lowest IQs of any race; 80% score at or below the “low functioning” category.

          Black-White IQ Distribution:

          Blacks:
                           5% above 110 IQ
                           16% above 100 IQ
                           40% above 90 IQ
                           70% above 80 IQ
                           30% below 80 IQ
                           18% below 75 IQ
                           10% below 70 IQ

          Whites:
                           10% above 120 IQ
                           18% above 115 IQ
                           27% above 110 IQ
                           40% above 105 IQ
                           50% above 100 IQ
                           60% below 105 IQ
                           35% below 95 IQ
                           15% below 85 IQ

          So, the smartest 16% of Blacks are as intelligent as smartest 50% of Whites. 80% of Blacks score at or below the “low functioning” category.

          The least intelligent ten percent of Whites have IQs below 80; forty percent of Blacks have IQs that low.

          Only one Black in six is more intelligent than the average White; five Whites out of six are more intelligent than the average Black.

          These differences show in every test of general cognitive ability that anyone, of any race or nationality, has yet been able to devise. And they are reflected in countless everyday situations, “Life is an IQ test.”

          Further, only one-in-3.5 million (.00003%) African Blacks have an IQ of 140 or higher (genius level). But one-in-83 (1.2%) U.S. Whites is a genius. Therefore the per capita genius rate for U.S.-resident Whites is 41,000 times higher than it is for African Blacks.

          As the New York Times put it, “…the difference in I.Q. points between the groups is quite significant. It means that the top sixth of Blacks score only as well on I.Q. tests as do the top half of Whites.”

          Also, American Blacks average 28% White admixture. The more White a Black has in them the higher the IQ. That is why American Blacks score higher on IQ tests than pure African Blacks (who have no Neanderthal DNA or the derived form of MCPH1 microcephalin called haplogroup D which produces increased brain volume).

          For every one gifted Black there are 8 gifted Whites, 80% of gifted Blacks are mixed race. The genetic distance between H.Sapien and H.Erectus is only 0.17, while the genetic distance between Africans and Eurasians is 0.23.

          The IQ distribution for US-resident Blacks having an average IQ of 85 and a standard deviation of 12.4 doesn’t mean that there are no Blacks at all with IQs above 140; it means that only one Black in about 218,000 will have an IQ above 140. Meanwhile one-in-83 Whites have an IQ above 140. So given equal sized populations there will be about 2,600 times more White geniuses than Black geniuses. Since there are about 5.5 times more Whites than Blacks in the United States, White geniuses will outnumber Black geniuses by a ratio of about one-to-14,300. Therefore, if all the White people in the USA were replaced by Blacks having the IQ distribution of US-resident Blacks the number of geniuses in the country would fall from about 2.4 million to only about 1,000.

          Even when Blacks invent, they are either improvements to White creations, or not of the same significance as White inventions. Also, Blacks cannot achieve in Africa because there are not enough intelligent Blacks to even develop an infrastructure for the Black intellectual elite to achieve. Blacks can only achieve in White nations. And they are usually mixed with White DNA which makes them more intelligent

          Education cannot create mental power, it can only develop that which is innate. And environment can serve to bring out the genetic potential but it cannot compensate for what doesn’t exist. Genetics limits an individuals’ upper limit to IQ, and environment determines how much of that innate genetic potential will be reached. No amount of nurturing can make one exceed innate genetic potential.

        • If it lets me post the paper, here’s some further reading. Low IQ general means a greater tendency to commit crime, but there are many many other factors. You’re not going to have a person dealing meth or doing drive by shootings an upper class neighbourhood because there would be private security cameras and the perpetrators would be caught and convicted very quickly. http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/PPPL1.pdf

          • JP Rushton, president of the eugenicist Pioneer fund, was a discredited racist idiot who was considered a laughingstock in his field and in all of the scientific community at large. His methodologies were repeatedly shown to be manipulative by subsequent attempts to replicate his results (See Gorey and Cryns, Cernovsky)

            Ditto for his successor Richard Lynn (Wicherts et al 2010)

          • You say Eugenics like it’s inherently a bad thing, it just means good genes, would you rather your child have a bunch of genetic disorders that produce illness, or not have those genes? Would you rather your child be short and ugly or tall and attractive? would you rather your child be mentally retarded or have genius intelligence? If given the choice and you chose the latter of any of these, you’re engaging in eugenics.

          • Justin’s egalitarianism probably won’t allow him to admit that some genes are superior to others.

          • You’re conflating stuff like gene editing and designer babies (which is similarly ethically iffy) with eugenics (sterilizing or euthanizing people who are considered inferior).

            Regardless, it doesn’t change the fact that Rushton was a god-awful researcher, who is known for, among other things, citing an article in Penthouse Forum in a scholarly journal.

            He also had a bizarre theory that genital size and IQ were inversely correlated, which led me to develop my own theory that he had a small penis and a racial inferiority complex.

            He coerced students into doing surveys about intimate details of their sex life by giving them an alternative of writing a long paper instead. That data included penis size, sexual partners and how far they could ejaculate.

            He also tried to support his data with a convenience sample from a Toronto Mall of 50 people from three different racial groups and caught flack for paying them. Even by (lower-division) undergraduate standards of social science methodology this was weak af.

          • “JP Rushton, president of the eugenicist Pioneer fund, was a discredited racist idiot who was considered a laughingstock in his field and in all of the scientific community at large. Ditto for his successor Richard Lynn…”

            You references don’t support your assertion at all. Provide an except from a scientific study where Ruston’s and Lynn’s studies were “discredited”.

            Do you have any evidence of racial intellectual parity?

            Do you dispute that Blacks have small brains?

            Blacks have small brains-

            Brain size and cognitive ability: Correlations with age, sex, social class, and race

            East Asians and their descendants = 1,364; Europeans and their descendants = 1,347; and Africans and their descendants = 1,267).

            Racial differences in head size appear early in life. Head circumference of White children are greater than that of Black children in each age category by a mean of 0.36 cm³ or approximately 0.2 SD. The greater head size of White children, however, is not a function of greater body size because Black children are taller than White children at both 4 and 7 years (Broman et al., 1987). From 7 to 17 years, the White advantage in cranial capacity is 16 cm³.

            https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758%2FBF03210739.pdf

            Blacks are the only race not hybridized with the large-brain Neanderthals. Blacks were left behind the heterosis, or hybrid vigor, provided by the Neanderthal DNA.

            Brain size by race-

            In the commonly used Smith-Beals data set of 20,000 skulls worldwide, East Asians averaged 1415 cubic centimeters of brain volume. Ethnic Europeans averaged 1362 cubic centimeters, and sub-Saharan Africans averaged 1268 cubic centimeters.

            https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2668913/

            A study by Rushton (1992) estimated brain sizes based on head measurments of 6,325 military personnel (1,590 White and 1,381 Black men) taken by the U.S. Army in 1988.

            Results:

            Asian: 1416 cm³
            White: 1380 cm³
            Black: 1359 cm³

            Officers: 1393 cm³
            Enlisted: 1375 cm³

            Source: Cranial capacity related to sex, rank, and race in a stratified random sample of 6325 US military personnel (1992), by Rushton.

            http://philipperushton.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/iq-brain-size-rushton-intelligence-1992.pdf

            The 1.1 SD (16 IQ points) American Black (24% White admixture)-White IQ gap is present by age three. The IQ gap between African Blacks and Whites is 2 SD.

            Race differences show up by 3 years of age, even after matching on maternal education and other variables. Therefore, they cannot be due to poor education since this has not yet begun to exert an effect.

            https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/fryer/files/testing_for_racial_differences_in_the_mental_ability_of_young_children.pdf

            Racial-group differences in IQ appear early. For example, the Black and the White 3 year-old children in the standardization sample of the Stanford–Binet IV show a 1 standard deviation mean difference after being matched on gender, birth order, and maternal education (Peoples, Fagan, & Drotar, 1995). Similarly, the Black and the White 2 1⁄2- to 6-year-old children in the U.S. standardization sample of the Differential Aptitude Scale have a 1 standard deviation mean difference (Lynn, 1996). The size of the average Black–White difference does not change significantly over the developmental period from 3 years of age and beyond (see Jensen, 1974, 1998b).” (Rushton & Jensen, 2005, pp. 240-241.)

            Farkas & Beron (2004) reported that blacks score 17.2 points below whites on the PPVT in this dataset at age 36 months (p. 478). More recently, Bond & Lang (2012) reported a slightly smaller, 14.6 point gap for 3-year-olds in this dataset (p. 13).

            https://humanvarieties.org/2013/05/26/the-onset-and-development-of-b-w-ability-differences-early-infancy-to-age-3-part-1/

            THIRTY YEARS OF RESEARCH ON RACE DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY

            https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf

            Rushton, J. P. (1992). Cranial capacity related to sex, rank, and race in a stratified random sample of 6,325 U.S. military personnel. Intelligence, 16, 401-413.

            http://philipperushton.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/iq-brain-size-rushton-intelligence-1992.pdf

            Brain size and cognitive ability: Correlations with age, sex, social class, and race

            https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758%2FBF03210739.pdf

            ETHNIC GROUP DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT AND EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS: A META-ANALYSIS

            https://home.ubalt.edu/tmitch/645/articles/roth%20et%20al%20ethnic%20grp%20diff%20in%20cog%20abil%20ppsych%202001.pdf

          • 1. Brain size

            the difference is actually marginal when you consider that the amount of variation within groups is about 130 cu. cm. Brain size is very weakly correlated with IQ. In vivo brain size isn’t necessarily genetic. The brain is plastic. It’s size is not fixed. You can increase the size of your brain by learning to juggle. Environmental factors can affect your brain size like lead exposure in infancy/childhood as well as maternal nutrition. Also, Nisbett compared the average black brain size to measurements of Einstein’s brain and the average was higher. Furthermore, most research seems to point to intelligence being a function of brain structure not size.

            2. Admixture

            No study to date has shown a correlation between levels of European admixture and IQ. Even Rushton and Jensen admit as much:

            Racial admixture studies have clearly failed to support the hereditarian
            interpretation of the Black–White IQ gap. Instead, they have provided
            evidence that seems to contradict it. Even Rushton and Jensen (2005)
            acknowledged that “blood groups distinguishing African from European
            ancestry did not predict IQ scores in Black samples” (p. 262), but on the
            same page they claimed inexplicably that “studies of racial hybrids are
            generally consistent with the genetic hypothesis, [although] to date
            they are not conclusive”. Nisbett (2005, p. 309) responded to Rushton
            and Jensen with what seems like a more reasonable conclusion: “The
            most directly relevant research concerns degree of European ancestry
            in the Black population. There is not a shred of evidence in this literature,
            which draws on studies having a total of five very different designs,
            that the gap has a genetic basis.”

            https://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/npb/people/amc/articles-pdfs/racediff

            3. African IQs vs. American Black IQs

            The estimate of Africa IQ being on average 2 SD below is based on Lynn’s cherry-picked data. A systematic review showed that Lynn artificially reduced the average by at least 12 points. Countries like Swaziland even have a higher national IQ than American blacks with zero European mixture. Also the BW gap in the US has been reduced by .33 SD to around 9. Toxic lead exposure in childhood can reduce IQs by 6 points and black children have 50 percent higher blood-lead content on average due to the environmental effects of housing segregation. Known social and environmental factors can account for most if not all the gap.

            https://jeltewichertsdotnet.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/wichertsravenafr2010rej.pdf
            http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/amp-67-2-130.pdf

          • Brain size:

            “the difference is actually marginal when you consider that the amount of variation within groups is about 130 cu. cm.”

            LOL……. so is the height difference between genders if you use that same criteria. That’s how averages work.

            References here:

            “A large number of studies have been conducted with uniformly positive correlations, leading to the general safely concluded that larger brains predict greater intelligence.[12][13] In healthy adults, the correlation of total brain volume and IQ is ~ 0.4 [14]”

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuroscience_and_intelligence

            ~~~~~~~~~

            Race and IQ: A Theory-Based Review of the Research in Richard Nisbett’s

            Intelligence and How to Get It

            J. Philippe Rushton1,* and Arthur R. Jensen2

            http://philipperushton.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/Race-and-IQ-A-Theory-Based-Review-of-the-Research-in-Richard-Nisbett%E2%80%99s-Intelligence-and-How-to-Get-It-2010-by-John-Philippe-Rushton-Arthur-Robert-Jensen.pdf

            ~~~~~~

            “…the BW gap in the US has been reduced by .33 SD to around 9.”

            Completely false.

            In the 20-year period from 1994-2014, the Black-White difference increased on the SAT-verbal from .91 to .96 SDs, and on the SAT-math from .95 to 1.03 SDs, despite substantial resources targeted to reducing this gap.

            ~~~~~~~~~

            So again……… Provide any evidence that Blacks are as intelligent as modern man. Why hasn’t there been a single IQ study where they have scored equally to Whites and Asians?

          • “The estimate of Africa IQ being on average 2 SD below is based on Lynn’s cherry-picked data.”

            Completely false.

            “Also the BW gap in the US has been reduced by .33 SD to around 9.”

            You misrepresented your source:

            “Dickens and Flynn (2006a) analyzed data from nine standardization samples for four major tests of cognitive ability. They found that Blacks gained 5.5 IQ points on Whites between 1972 and 2002. The gap between Blacks and Whites on a measure of g had narrowed almost to the same degree, that is, by 5.13 points.

            It is important to note that there is a dramatic decline of Black IQ with age. Four-year-old Blacks are only about 5 points below Whites of the same age, whereas at age 24, Blacks are 17 points below Whites.”

            This is a response to that study:

            http://unamusementpark.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/race-iq-gap-still-remains.pdf

            THIRTY YEARS OF RESEARCH ON RACE DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY

            https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf

            And, the 1.1 SD IQ gap is still reflected in every academic exam:

            ACT Scores by Race:

                   Year              White             Black               Asian
                   2009              22.2               16.9                 23.2
                   2010              22.3               16.9                 23.4
                   2011              22.4               17.0                 23.6
                   2012              22.4               17.0                 23.6
                   2013              22.2               16.9                 23.5
                   2014              22.3               17.0                 23.5
                   2015              22.4               17.1                 23.9
                  
            Source: ACT, Inc.

            ~~~~~~~

            Black-White SAT Score Gap by Year:

                   Year              White             Black               Gap
                   1985              1038               839                 199
                   1990              1031               849                 185
                   1996              1052               857                 195
                   2000              1060               859                 201
                   2005              1061               863                 197
                   2010              1063               855                 208
                   2015              1047               846                 201

            (Source: U.S. Dept. of Education, 2016)

            https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=171

            The SAT correlates with an IQ test at 0.86, almost the same as an IQ test correlates with itself. For this reason, we can very reliably take SAT scores and convert them to IQ scores.

            In the 20 year period from 1994-2014 the Black-White difference increased on both the verbal and math SATs. On the reading test, it rose from .91 to .96 standard deviations. On the math test, it rose from .95 to 1.03 standard deviations.

            In 2015 only 15% of Blacks scored 1550 or higher, the threshold the College Board calls the “college and career readiness” level.

            In fact, the truncated nature of the SAT math score distribution suggests that these race gaps would be even larger given a harder exam with a bigger score variance. Note for example how the black score distribution is cut off at the bottom while the Asian score distribution is cut off at the top. That suggests that a redesigned exam might feature even more pronounced race gaps.

            Percent by Race Reaching the SAT College and Career Readiness Benchmark:

                             15% = Black
                             24% = Non-White Hispanic
                             35% = Native American
                             53% = White
                             56% = Asian

            Source: The College Board, 2014

            ~~~~~~~

            PISA scores by race:

                          White             Black               Asian
                          531               433                  525

            (National Center for Education Statistics, 2015)

            https://isteve.blogspot.com/2013/12/overall-pisa-rankings-include-america.html

            New York Times, 2003:

            Large-scale meta-analyses by researchers at the University of Minnesota have found that SAT performance is as good of a predictor of overall college grade point average as it is of freshman grade point average, and Vanderbilt researchers David Lubinski and Camilla Benbow have documented that the SAT predicts life outcomes well beyond the college years, including income and occupational achievements.

            Furthermore, the SAT is largely a measure of general intelligence. Scores on the SAT correlate very highly with scores on standardized tests of intelligence, and like IQ scores, are stable across time and not easily increased through training, coaching, or practice. SAT preparation courses appear to work, but the gains are small — on average, no more than about 20 points per section.

            Vanderbilt University researchers tracked the educational and occupational accomplishments of more than 2,000 people who as part of a youth talent search scored in the top 1 percent on the SAT by the age of 13. Scores on the SAT correlate so highly with I.Q. that they are described as a “thinly disguised” intelligence test. The remarkable finding of their study is that, compared with the participants who were “only” in the 99.1 percentile for intellectual ability at age 12, those who were in the 99.9 percentile — the profoundly gifted — were between three and five times more likely to go on to earn a doctorate, secure a patent, publish an article in a scientific journal or publish a literary work. A high level of intellectual ability gives you an enormous real-world advantage.

            The Widening Racial Scoring Gap on the SAT College Admissions Test

            “The racial scoring gap on the SAT test has now become wider than has been the case for the past two decades. Many believe that in the years to come the gap may grow smaller, not because blacks are catching up to whites in educational achievement, but rather because the test makers are adding a writing component to the test that may be manipulated to lessen racial differences and therefore reduce public criticisms of the test.

            If we eliminate Asians and other minorities from the calculations and compare only Blacks and Whites, we find that 0.2 percent of all Black test takers scored 750 or above on the verbal SAT compared to 2.2 percent of all White test takers. Thus, Whites were 11 times as likely as Blacks to score 750 or above on the verbal portion of the test. Overall, there were 49 times as many Whites as Blacks who scored at or above the 750 level.

            On the math SAT, only 0.16 percent of all Black test takers scored 750 or above compared to 1.8 percent of White test takers. Thus, Whites were more than 11 times as likely as Blacks to score 750 or above on the math SAT. Overall, there were more than 61 times as many Whites as Blacks who scored 750 or above on the math section of the SAT.

            In a race-neutral competition for the approximately 50,000 places for first-year students at the nation’s 25 top-ranked universities, high-scoring Blacks would be buried by a huge mountain of high-scoring non-Black students. Today, under prevailing affirmative action admissions policies, there are about 3,000 Black first-year students matriculating at these 25 high-ranking universities, about 6 percent of all first-year students at these institutions. But if these schools operated under a strict race-neutral admissions policy where SAT scores were the most important qualifying yardstick, these universities could fill their freshman classes almost exclusively with students who score at the very top of the SAT scoring scale. As shown previously, Black students make up at best between 1 and 2 percent of these high-scoring groups.”

            http://www.jbhe.com/features/49_college_admissions-test.html

          • “Countries like Swaziland even have a higher national IQ than American blacks with zero European mixture.”

            Every source I can find places the Swaziland National IQ at 68, which is the Black average. American Blacks (24% White admixture) average 85.

          • “Furthermore, most research seems to point to intelligence being a function of brain structure not size.”

            Blacks not only have smaller brains than modern man, but slower and less complex ones too.

  21. I knew someone who made me want to study this

    He has ALL of the traits associated with the warrior gene.

    He’s even learning MMA and has completely changed his image to look like an MMA fighter.

    He was an incredibly stupid, right winger who would make fun of me for having cancer.

    He would non chalantly talk about how he wishes he could torture me.

    He would talk about the rape scenes in game of thrones like they were the most amazing thing he’s ever seen.

    He’s a complete sociopath and racist. Anti social. Hates people. He’s the exact type of person taht would go shoot up a black church.

  23. ” either “chronic antisocial lifestyles” or men predisposed to “socially
    adaptive traits such as a strong achievement motivation, leadership,
    fair bargaining behaviors, and social assertiveness.” ”

    I’m rather hoping the “fair bargaining behavior” isn’t part of that “teh ebulz of the warrior gene” we’re going on about, are we? Because I’m tempted to dismiss this as anti-capitalist crap just for that.

  24. Even if that is true, violent tendencies are inherited, not chosen. What is your excuse for being judgemental, narrow minded and stupid? No one chooses to whom they are born, their IQ score, various talents or even the ability to work hard and be successful. Violent behavior can be helped with treatment, stupid can’t.

  25. Blacks are violent

    Blacks have mean testosterone levels 19% higher than in whites. This is why 1-in-4 Black men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer but only 1-in-8 White men and 1-in-13 Asian men will. Testosterone is associated with impulsive, aggressive and violent behavior. The most aggressive animal on the planet is the Bull Shark, which has the highest testosterone levels.

    Although tribal conflict is endemic to sub-Saharan Africa, Blacks have been unable to invent weapons or assemble themselves into large forces. The very individual aggressiveness that yields a higher Black crime rate, also obstructs the formation of effective Black armies.

    Black males age 18-35 are only 4% of the U.S. population, yet commit 50% of homicides. Black males (all ages) are only 6% of the U.S. population, yet commit 46% of all violent crimes, and 50% of the gun homicides. If Blacks were removed from the equation, the U.S. gun homicide rate would be equal to Great Britain’s, who have some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the world. Therefore, the U.S. has a Black problem, not a gun or violent crime problem.

    Blacks also have the highest rates of the dysfunctional version of the MAOA gene which does not produce a protein needed to break down old serotonin in their brains. Tihs causes them to be agitated, aggressive and impulsive. The popular term for this is the “warrior gene” which could be considered propaganda to put a positive spin on those who possess this dysfunctional trait.

    Comprehensive Psychiatry published a large study on the rates at which black and white Americans carry shortened, or dysfunctional, MAOA genes.

    The gene can come in the form of 2, 3, 3.5, 4, or 5 allele. A 3-repeat allele is considered dysfunctional and is what is referred to as the “warrior gene”. A 2-repeat allele is considered very dysfunctional. People with a 2-repeat allele MAOA gene have a permanent chemical imbalance in their brain making the person more likely to be agitated, aggressive, and impulsive.

    According to the study published in Comprehensive Psychiatry, 34.6% of Whites and 53.4% of Blacks have 2-repeat allele or less. However, only .5% of whites have the 2-repeat allele version compared to 4.7% of blacks.

    That means Blacks are 9.4 times more likely to have the extremely dysfunctional version of the gene than Whites. Considering that Black Americans are 9 times more likely to commit murder, this is very significant.

    Other studies have shown even higher rates of occurrence of the 2-repeat (2R) allele version of the gene in Blacks.

    It was discovered that Black males carrying 2R were more likely to be involved in extreme violence (shooting and stabbing) than Black men with other MAOA variants. The relationship between the rare MAOA version and antisocial behaviors has raised eyebrows because, quite simply, this gene is not distributed equally across ethnic groups. In the Add Health database, 5.5% of African American men, 0.9% of Caucasian men, and 0.00067% of Asian men have 2R.

    The association between 2R and committing a shooting or stabbing crime was statistically significant. The MAOA-2R has become a symbol of a new era in behavioral genetics research — an era that has reintroduced race into the nature versus nurture debate over the source of ethnic behavioral differences

    Notes: There are other genes associated with violent and/or impulsive behavior. The MAOA gene is only one of them. However, the effects of a shortened MAOA gene are well documented. The chemical imbalance its creates can be observed in a laboratory.

    Blacks possess 10x more of the dysfunctional MAOA (or “warrior gene”) that is associated with violent and/or impulsive behavior.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~

    Abstract:

    A line of research has revealed that a polymorphism in the promoter region of the MAOA gene is related to antisocial phenotypes. Most of these studies examine the effects of low MAOA activity alleles (2-repeat and 3-repeat alleles) against the effects of high MAOA activity alleles (3.5-repeat, 4-repeat, and sometimes 5-repeat alleles), with research indicating that the low MAOA activity alleles confer an increased risk to antisocial phenotypes. The current study examined whether the 2-repeat allele, which has been shown to be functionally different from the 3-repeat allele, was associated with a range of antisocial phenotypes in a sample of males drawn from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health. Analyses revealed that African-American males who carried the 2-repeat allele were, in comparison with other African-American male genotypes, significantly more likely to be arrested and incarcerated. Additional analyses revealed that African-American male carriers of the 2-repeat allele scored significantly higher on an antisocial phenotype index and on measures assessing involvement in violent behaviors over the life course. There was not any association between the 2-repeat allele and a continuously measured psychopathic personality traits scale. The effects of the 2-repeat allele could not be examined in Caucasian males because only 0.1% carried it.

    Authors: Kevin M. Beavera, John Paul Wright, Brian B. Boutwell, J.C. Barnesd, Matt DeLisie, Michael G. Vaughnf

    doi:10.1016/j.paid.2012.08.014

    ~~~

    Serum testosterone levels in healthy young black and white men.

    Blacks in the United States have the highest prostate cancer rate in the world and nearly twice that of whites in the United States. The 2:1 black-to-white ratio in prostate cancer rates is already apparent at age 45 years, the age at which the earliest prostate cancer cases occur. This finding suggests that the factor(s) responsible for the difference in rates occurs, or first occurs, early in life. Testosterone has been hypothesized to play a role in the etiology of prostate cancer, because testosterone and its metabolite, dihydrotestosterone, are the principal trophic hormones that regulate growth and function of epithelial prostate tissue. Mean testosterone levels in blacks were 19% higher than in whites, and free testosterone levels were 21% higher. Both these differences were statistically significant. A 15% difference in circulating testosterone levels could readily explain a twofold difference in prostate cancer risk.

    J Natl Cancer Inst. 1986 Jan;76(1):45-8.

    PMID: 3455741

    ~~~~~~

    MAOA — an enzyme that degrades neurotransmitters such as serotonin and dopamine in the brain — is coded for by the MAOA gene. Neurotransmitters play a pivotal role in mood, arousal, and emotions, even affecting impulse control. Since the 1990s scientists have identified several versions of the MAOA, which are usually categorized as low-activity or high-activity variants. MAOA genes are classified based on how many times a short sequence — a functional strip of DNA — repeats itself within a variable region of the gene. The most common variant, MAOA-4R, has four repeats and is associated with high-activity breakdown of neurotransmitters. Alternate forms of the MAOA, including the 2-repeat (2R) and 3-repeat (3R) versions, contain fewer repeat sequences.

    The 2R and 3R variants are often lumped together in studies of the low-activity MAOA gene. (Although the 5R version has a large number of repeats, it too is less active than the 4R version.) The two classes of MAOA versions correlate with different behavioral tendencies. Low-activity variants are thought to lead to reduced levels of MAOA in the brain, possibly shifting mood by changing serotonin levels.

    But it was 2R — the “extreme warrior gene” — that captivated researchers searching for a still illusive genetic basis of criminal predispositions. Guo’s team analyzed data on male youth from Add Health — a national sample of adolescents in grades 7-12. Their findings showed that the rare variant, 2R, was correlated with higher levels of self-reported serious and violent delinquency.

    More recently, Beaver’s team has focused only on the 2R variant rather than the low-expression variants combined. He and his colleagues have discovered that African American males carrying 2R were more likely to be involved in extreme violence — shooting and stabbing — than African American men with other MAOA variants. The relationship between the rare MAOA version and antisocial behaviors has raised eyebrows because, quite simply, this gene is not distributed equally across ethnic groups. In the Add Health database, 5.5% of African American men, 0.9% of Caucasian men, and 0.00067% of Asian men have 2R. Since the rare MAOA variant is virtually non-existent in whites, all of the males in Beaver’s study were black Americans.

    Beaver’s sample of 133 African American men from the Add Health database included 6% that carried 2R. Overall, 5.6% of the men in the sample reported shooting or stabbing someone at some point in their lifetime. The association between 2R and committing a shooting or stabbing crime was statistically significant. Based on Beaver’s evidence, 2R appears to increase the risk of shooting or stabbing a victim during adolescence or adulthood. For some commentators in the public arena, MAOA-2R has become a symbol of a new era in behavioral genetics research — an era that has reintroduced race into the nature versus nurture debate over the source of ethnic behavioral differences.

    Beaver’s studies have shown that the 2R variant has a robust association with violent behaviors, arrest, and incarceration. His research is applauded by supporters of behavioral genetics, but it has also drawn criticism. It focuses on an antisocial-linked gene that reportedly occurs more frequently in African American men than in males of other ethnic groups. This has led some popular writers to speculate that MAOA-2R might account for — or at least play a significant role in — the relatively higher rates of violent crime in African Americans.

    ~~~~~

    Mass and Serial Killers

    Mass Killers:

    There have been 70 mass shooters since 1982.

    45 by whites, 11 by blacks, 6 by Asians, 4 by Latinos, 3 by Native American.

    Per capita:

    Whites make up 77.7% of the populations and 64% of the shootings -13.7
    Latinos make up 17.1% of the populations and 5.7% of the shootings -11.4
    Blacks make up 13.2% of the populations and 15% of the shootings +1.8
    Asians make up 5.3% of the populations and 8.5% of the shootings +3.2
    Native Americans make up 1.2% of the populations and 4% of the shootings +2.8

    Serial Killers:

    According to the FBI 90 percent of serial killers are male, and 46 percent of those are white.

    Black serial killers have comprised over half of documented serial killers since the dawn of the 21st century at 56 percent, making up a total of 40 percent in years dating back to 1900.

    As Blacks are only 13% of the U.S. population they are heavily over-represented as serial killers.

    Criminal profiler Pat Brown says serial killers are usually reported as white because the media typically focuses on “All-American” white and pretty female victims who were the targets of white male offenders, that crimes among minority offenders in urban communities, where crime rates are higher, are under-investigated, and that minority serial killers likely exist at the same ratios as white serial killers for the population. She believes that the myth that serial killers are always white might have become “truth” in some research fields due to the over-reporting of white serial killers in the media.

    According to some sources, the percentage of serial killers who are African American is estimated to be between 13 and 22 percent. Another study has shown that 16 percent of serial killers are African American, what author Maurice Godwin describes as a “sizeable portion”. However, the 2013 Radford/FGCU Serial Killer Database annual statistics show, for the decades 1900–2010, that the percentage of African American serial killers is 40.7%. Popular racial stereotypes about the lower intelligence of African-Americans, and the stereotype that serial killers are white males with “bodies stacked up in the basement and strewn all over the countryside” may explain the media focus on serial killers that are white and the failure to adequately report on those that are black.

    Child Molesters:

    Myth: Whites Are More Likely to be Pedophiles and Child Molesters

    There is a long-standing myth that Whites are more likely to molest children than any other race. This goes back to some stereotype of the creepy, nerdy, weirdo White guy who can’t get laid so he molests kids.

    % of total child abusers:

    White 51%
    African American 25%
    Hispanic 15%
    American Indian/Alaska Natives 2%
    Asian/Pacific Islanders 1%

    Relative to their population, likelihood of child abuse compared to background population rate:
    American Indian +100%
    Blacks +92%
    Hispanics no difference
    Whites -35%
    Asian -67%

    ~~~~~

    FBI Table 43 (2013)

    Blacks are 13 percent of the population and commit 32.5% of all crimes against family and children. That is 2.5 times their population.

    Whites are 66 percent of the population and commit 65% of all crimes against family and children. That is 1 times their population.

    Therefore, a Black is 2.5 times more likely to be a pedophile than a White.

    • Blacks are dumb

      General intelligence is inherited and not equally distributed among human races. IQ tests are designed to measure the general innate and immutable mental capability that involves abstract and cognitive thinking, spatial-relations skills, and logical reasoning. They are designed to measure the ability to:

           •   solve novel problems
           •   retain knowledge and apply skills
           •   comprehend complex ideas
           •   plan and learn quickly and from experience
         
      IQ tests are not designed to measure how much a person has learned, but rather whether a person is capable of learning.

      Intelligence, so defined, can be measured, and intelligence tests measure it well. They are among the most accurate (in technical terms, reliable and valid) of all psychological tests and assessments.

      It was discovered that people who did well on one mental test did well on others, regardless of their content. It was reasoned that different tests must draw on the same global capacity, and dubbed that capacity g, for general intelligence.

      Individual differences in general cognitive ability are reliably measured by IQ tests. IQ is strongly related, probably more than any other single measurable trait, to many important educational, occupational, economic and social variables. IQ is also correlated with a number of variables of the brain, including its size, electrical potentials, and rate of glucose metabolism during cognitive activity. Individual differences in adult IQ are largely genetic, with heritability of about 70 percent. So far, attempts to raise IQ by educational or psychological means have failed to show appreciable lasting effects on cognitive ability and scholastic achievement. The IQ distribution between Blacks and Whites is represented by two largely overlapping bell curves with their means separated by about 15 points, a difference not due to test bias. IQ has the same meaning and practical predictive validity for both groups. Tests do not create differences; they merely reflect them.

      Straight IQ tests take about an hour and a half to complete and require recalling strings of numbers, assembling puzzles, arranging cartoon panels and wrestling with various abstractions. The test taker gets a score ranking his overall standing among other people his age. The average score is set at 100, and everyone is rated accordingly. Expressed this way, IQs for a whole population can be arrayed on a single graph. Roughly two thirds of all Americans fall between 85 and 115, in the fat midsection of the bell-shaped curve, and 95 percent score between 70 and 130.

      By computing a value known as the correlation coefficient, a scientist can measure the degree of association between any two phenomena that are plausibly linked. The correlation between unrelated variables is 0, while phenomena that vary in perfect lock step have a correlation of 1. A correlation of .4 would tell you that 40 percent of the variation in one thing is matched by variation in another, while 60 percent of it is not.

      Current estimates for heritability of IQ ranges up to 0.8 (where 1.0 indicates that monozygotic twins have no variance in IQ and 0 indicates that their IQs are completely uncorrelated). See the Minnesota Twin Family Study, conducted from 1979 to 1999, which followed identical and fraternal twins who were separated at an early age for some fascinating revelations about the powerful influence of genes.

      Studies find no IQ correlation among grown adoptive siblings. But the typical correlations are roughly .35 for half siblings (who share a quarter of their genes), .47 for full siblings (who share half of their genes) and .86 for identical twins (who share all their genes).

      Millions of IQ tests and psychometric experiments conducted world-wide over 100 years have been normed for every conceivable variable and bias, yet demonstrate an intractable intellegence divide between Blacks and the other races. Blacks score lowest on every intelligence test ever devised, including “life”. There has never been an IQ test administered anywhere in the world where the racial rankings didn’t follow the same pattern; Asians, Whites, non-White Hispanics, and then finally Blacks.

      Racial activist groups have tried to create their own tests to demonstrate intellectual parity of the races and also attack the integrity of the existing tests and have hired anti-bias experts, but the rankings are always the same; African Blacks average a 70 IQ (only 2% of Whites score this low), but American Blacks average 85 due to mixing with Whites (28% on average), non-White Hispanics 87, Whites 100, Asians 106 and Ashkenazi Jews 115.

      Blacks have by far the lowest IQs of any race; 80% score at or below the “low functioning” category. In fact, only the top 16% of Blacks score as high as the top 50% of Whites. Blacks are socially functional at 70 IQ because that is only one standard deviation below their mean; that equates to a White at 85 IQ.

      Even using tests created by Black psychologists and non-verbal tests designed to be culture-free and unbiased, no amount of testing or wishful thinking shows any improvement in Black IQ. Tests that only require the subject to push buttons in response to flashing lights or memorizing sequences of colored squares projected on a screen Blacks perform worse than Whites, and the gap increases as the patterns become more complicated. The test involves rows of colored squares where one from each row has to be matched with another. More complex images which have distinctive features linked by that feature to other images in an increasing number of rows.

      Another test is a list of numbers read aloud and the subject has to repeat them back in forward and reverse order. The subject is given a relevant fact that has to be considered when making otherwise simple manipulations of numbers and identify designated figures or characters in a given amount of time. The “backward digit span” test is not reinforced by any socialization and is not a taught skill for either race; Whites score better at recalling digits presented in order, but recalling the digits in reverse order requires mental transformation and is a good predictor of IQ. The race gap for the backward digit span is twice as great as for the forward test.

      Raven’s Progressive Matrices is a completely non-verbal test of pattern recognition and reasoning and contains no culturally-specific information, African Blacks scored 70 IQ. Interestingly, the mixed-race students in South Africa had an IQ of 85 — the same as Blacks in the United States, Britain, and the Caribbean. This is a standard deviation above pure Blacks, but also a standard deviation below Whites.

      Genetics limits an individuals’ upper limit to IQ, and environment determines how much of that innate genetic potential will be reached. No amount of nurturing can make one exceed innate genetic potential.

      The IQ race gap doesn’t begin to correlate firmly with adult IQ until about age five, but studies reveal a one standard deviation race gap present by age three.

      In the United States, self-identified Blacks and Whites have been the subjects of the greatest number of studies. The tests show a Black-White IQ difference of about 15 to 18 points (or about one standard deviation) which implies that between 11 and 16 percent of the black population have an IQ above 100 (the general population median). Consistent results were found for college and university application tests such as the Scholastic Aptitude Test and Graduate Record Examination as well as for tests of job applicants in the corporate sector and in the military.

      The least intelligent ten percent of Whites have IQs below 81; forty percent of Blacks have IQs that low. Only one Black in six is more intelligent than the average White; five Whites out of six are more intelligent than the average Black. These differences show in every test of general cognitive ability that anyone, of any race or nationality, has yet been able to devise. And they are reflected in countless everyday situations, “Life is an IQ test.”

      Further, only one-in-3.5 million (.00003%) African Blacks have an IQ of 140 or higher (genius level). But one-in-83 (1.2%) U.S. Whites is a genius. Therefore the per capita genius rate for U.S.-resident Whites is 41,000 times higher than it is for African Blacks.

      The IQ distribution for US-resident Blacks having an average IQ of 85 and a standard deviation of 12.4 doesn’t mean that there are no Blacks at all with IQs above 140; it means that only one Black in about 218,000 will have an IQ above 140. Meanwhile one-in-83 Whites have an IQ above 140. So given equal sized populations there will be about 2,600 times more White geniuses than Black geniuses. Since there are about 5.5 times more Whites than Blacks in the United States, White geniuses will outnumber Black geniuses by a ratio of about one-to-14,300. Therefore, if all the White people in the USA were replaced by Blacks having the IQ distribution of US-resident Blacks the number of geniuses in the country would fall from about 2.4 million to only about 1,000.

      For every one gifted Black there are 8 gifted Whites, 80% of gifted Blacks are mixed race.

      Incidentally, though the average IQ of East Asians is 6 points higher than the average non-Jewish White, the percentage distribution of East Asians with IQs above 140 is slightly lower. The reason for this is that the range of cognitive variation among Whites is greater than among East Asians. Specifically, Asians’ IQs are more clustered around the mean; therefore, Whites produce more geniuses, but also more morons.

      Psychometricians generally regard IQ tests as having high statistical reliability. A high reliability implies that although test-takers may have varying scores when taking the same test on differing occasions, and they may have varying scores when taking different IQ tests at the same age, the scores generally agree with one another and across time. Like all statistical quantities any particular estimate of IQ has an associated standard error that measures uncertainty about the estimate. For modern tests the standard error of measurement is about three points. Clinical psychologists regard IQ scores as having sufficient statistical validity for many clinical purposes and within the scientific domain are still considered critical evaluators and predictors of performance. Data is collected every year across a huge sample of the population and catalogued by race, gender, age, socioeconomic factors, etc.

      Standardized intelligence testing has been called one of psychology’s greatest successes and is the field’s most widely-used invention. Since standardized tests were first used to identify learning-impaired children in the early 1900s they have become one of the primary tools for identifying children with learning disabilities, they assist the military place new recruits, job screening and for evaluating professional athletes.

      Some occupations seek candidates within specific IQ ranges. There was a recent case where a police officer candidate was rejected after he scored too high on an intelligence test.

      The NFL famously uses the Wonderlic test in their scouting combines and the racial disparity is evident. Out of a perfect score of 50; offensive tackles=26, centers=25, quarterback=24; versus safeties=19, cornerbacks=18 and receivers=17.

      Black-White IQ Distribution (Google: racial IQ bell curve):

      Blacks:
                       5% above 110 IQ
                       16% above 100 IQ
                       40% above 90 IQ
                       70% above 80 IQ
                       30% below 80 IQ
                       18% below 75 IQ
                       10% below 70 IQ

      Whites:
                       10% above 120 IQ
                       18% above 115 IQ
                       27% above 110 IQ
                       40% above 105 IQ
                       50% above 100 IQ
                       60% below 105 IQ
                       35% below 95 IQ
                       15% below 85 IQ

      So, the top 16% of Black intellectual elites are only as intelligent as the top 50% of Whites.

      As the New York Times put it, “…the difference in I.Q. points between the groups is quite significant. It means that the top sixth of Blacks score only as well on I.Q. tests as do the top half of Whites.”

      IQ scores are used as predictors of educational achievement, special needs, job performance and income. They are also used to study IQ distributions in populations and the correlations between IQ and other variables. The same is true for other cognitive tests such as No Child Left Behind mandated state tests and NAEP tests. All of these cognitive tests show the same racial patterns in test score distribution with Ashkenazi Jews, East Asians (Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans), and Whites showing higher scores than Pacific Islanders, Native Americans, Hispanics, and Blacks showing lower scores.

      The scores on the SAT (especially the SAT-math) and the ACT are for all practical purposes interchangeable with IQ test scores. In 2005, 153,132 Black Americans took the SAT test. They made up 10.4 percent of all SAT test takers. But only 1,132 Black college-bound students scored 700 or above on the math SAT and only 1,205 scored at least 700 on the verbal SAT. On the math SAT, only 0.7 percent of all Black test takers scored at least 700 compared to 6.3 percent of all White test takers. Thus, Whites were nine times as likely as Blacks to score 700 or above on the math SAT. Only 0.16 percent of all Black test takers scored 750 or above compared to 1.8 percent of White test takers. Thus, Whites were more than 11 times as likely as Blacks to score 750 or above on the math SAT.

      This gap is so significant that colleges give a “race bonus” of 230 points to Blacks, 185 to non-White Hispanics and penalize Asians by 50 points, all in an effort to help the low-IQ races gain admittance.

      A person’s level of moral reasoning is correlated with intelligence. Studies sequencing the stages of moral development support what we all know; you have to be cognitively mature to reason morally. IQ tests correlate with moral maturity.

      There is also a strong correlation between IQ and success. Economists have started taking an interest in the value of human capital, particularly the factor that psychologists call cognitive ability. In other words, it’s the ability of a person to solve a problem most efficiently. Not with violence, but by thinking. It is worth noting here that Blacks possess 9.4 times more of the dysfunctional MAOA gene (“warrior gene”) and have mean testosterone levels 19% higher than in Whites, both strongly correlated with impulsive, aggressive and violent behavior.

      Researchers collected information on 90 countries, including far-off lands from the U.S. to New Zealand and Colombia to Kazakhstan. They also collected data on the country’s excellence in science and technology, including the number of patents granted per person and how many Nobel science laureates the country’s people had won in science (there has never been a Black Nobel science laureate).

      They found that intelligence made a difference in gross domestic product. For example, some of the highest National IQs:

                •   108      Singapore
                •   106      South Korea
                •   105      Japan
                •   105      China
                •   102      Italy
                •   101      Iceland
                •   101      Mongolia
                •   101      Switzerland
                •   100      Austria
                •   100      Luxembourg
                •   100      Netherlands
                •   100      Norway
                •   100      United Kingdom

      And the lowest:

                •   69        Malawi
                •   69        Niger
                •   68        Chad
                •   68        Somalia
                •   68        Swaziland
                •   67        Guinea
                •   67        Haiti
                •   67        Liberia
                •   66        Gambia
                •   64        Cameroon
                •   64        Gabon
                •   64        Sierra Leone
                •   64        Mozambique
                •   59        Equatorial Guinea

      Blacks are archaic proto-humans, a different species from Whites and Asians;

      Blacks are the only racial group with no DNA from the large-brained Neanderthals who lived in Europe. The trans-Saharan African migrants mated with the Neanderthals and Denisovans to create a composite hybrid that is modern man. Therefore, we do not share a common ancestor.

      Neanderthals are a different species than Whites, and yet produced fertile offspring (as do many interspecies hybrids). In fact all modern humans (Whites and Asians) are products of that hybridization.

      Blacks have a genetic distance closer to archaic human than to modern human. That genetic distance is farther apart than it is for many species.

      Genetic distance is a measure of the genetic divergence between species or between populations within a species. Populations with many similar genes have small genetic distances. This indicates that they are closely related and have a recent common ancestor.

      The genetic distance between H.Sapien and H.Erectus is only 0.17, while the genetic distance between Blacks and Eurasians is 0.23. Therefore Blacks are more genetically proximate to archaic humans than to modern man (Whites and Asians).

      For comparison, the genetic distance between Blacks and modern man is greater than the genetic distance between the common chimpanzee and the bonobo (0.103, or half the Black-White distance) and between the Gorilla gorilla and the Gorilla beringei (0.04, or 1/6 the Black-White distance). Thus, Whites and Blacks are more genetically distant than two different chimpanzee species, two different gorilla species, Eurasians and Neanderthals, and Eurasians and H.Erectus.

      To be taxonomically consistent Blacks and Whites should be classified into separate species, or at the very least into different subspecies.

      When humans evolved from Blacks they hybridized with the large-brained Neanderthals in southern Europe and created an increase in cranium capacity and a heavier, more developed brain. Blacks are also the only race without the derived form of MCPH1 microcephalin called haplogroup D which produces increased brain volume and density.

      Non-Black humans average 5% Neanderthal DNA. This is significant because there is only 1.5% difference between human and chimpanzee DNA. It is equivalent to having one Neanderthal great-great-great-grandparent. Blacks are the only race with no Neanderthal genes. Blacks also coexisted and interbred with archaic sapiens (H.heidelbergensis) for longer than those who left Africa. At least 30% of the Neanderthal genome made its way into non-Black humans.

      Blacks are Humans 1.0; the other races evolved from Blacks and are Humans 2.0, the improved version. They were formed by hybridization with the large-brained Neanderthals which created larger, more complex brains:

           •   Blacks = 2% Archaic admixture
           •   Whites = 6% Neanderthal admixture
           •   Asians = Neanderthal + Denisovan

      Pure H.Sapiens are Blacks; modern man (Whites and Asians) is mixed with Neanderthal. Just as Africanized honey bees are aggressive and non-productive, the European honey bees are social and productive; the improved version.

      Blacks belong in the Stone Age, where they were found just 400 years ago.

      Sub-Saharan Blacks did not receive Neanderthal or Denisovan gene introgression, which partly explains why Blacks are the most genetically distant of all the human races.

      In other words, all non-Black races are genetically closer to one another than any of them are to Blacks (even those which superficially “look like” blacks; for example, Papua New Guineans, Australian Aborigines, Jarawas, etc.).

      However, Blacks received significant gene introgression from other early (and unknown) hominid species, which the other races do not have because they left sub-Sahara before the introgression occurred. These early hominids remain “unknown” due to the simple fact that their DNA has not been retrieved nor sequenced, Only Neandertal and Denisovan DNA have been, thus far.

      Sooner or later we may have to address the credible scientific possibility that the significant, ongoing, and seemingly irreconcilable cognitive and temperamental differences between blacks and non-blacks have their origins in our DNA. It is established that high testosterone and the so-called “warrior gene” in Blacks contribute to Black aggression, impulsiveness, and violence.

      Forensic scientists can determine race by cranium shape; Blacks have a small frontal lobe and sloping frontal plane and a smaller cranium-to-mandible ratio. Whites have the largest craniums, an almost vertical frontal slope and a massive frontal lobe. The Asian is very similar and also more evolved. It is the frontal lobe that separates our behavior most from the animals and is responsible for language and rational thought.

      Blacks show primitive traits associated with lower primates, such as prognathism, which is the slope of the face from the forehead to the jaws. A protruding jaw is associated with a sloping forehead which indicates a smaller prefrontal cortex, the area of the brain that handles planning, inhibition and self-control.

      Blacks have more robust cranial bones, simpler cranial sutures, a higher rate of unclosed sutures, a lower cephalic index, a higher rate of saggital keel, more post-orbital constriction, a more sloped forehead, more rectangular eye sockets, a wider nasal index, less nasal prominence, a higher rate of joined nasal bones, a higher rate of sub-nasal prognathism, a lower facial angle, the presence of the “Simian shelf”, a more rectangular palate, larger and wider-apart teeth, fur instead of hair, less spinal curvature, shorter spinal length, a lower sacral index, and longer arms and legs.

      At birth Africans have fewer cranial bones than Eurasians. The skull and other bones in Blacks are thicker and denser, even in the fetus, making them more difficult to break. The Black skull is smaller, with less space in the forehead, but proportionately more at the back.

      Blacks are the only racial group with no DNA from the large-brained Neanderthals, and also the only race without the derived form of MCPH1 microcephalin called haplogroup D which produces increased brain volume and density. This is why their brains are smaller, and less complex.

      Eurasian women have a wider pelvic inlet, and shallower anteroposterior outlet than Black women due to the difference in brain size.

      Larger brains contain more neurons and synapses and process information faster. By adulthood, East Asians average 1 cubic inch more cranial capacity than Whites who average 5 cubic inches more than Blacks.

      The average White brain is 1438cc while the average Black brain is 1343cc, or 93% of the average White brain. The heritability of brain size is extremely strong at 0.90 and not one study to date has shown larger brain size for Blacks. The White and Asians brain also has a higher degree of fissuring (higher complexity) in the cerebral cortex of their brains, where abstract and conceptual thought is performed.

      Based on studies of brain weight at autopsy, endocranial volume of empty skulls, head size measurements by the U.S. military and NASA, and two dozen MRI volumetric studies Blacks’ brain size is 7% smaller than Whites’, and 8% smaller than Asians’. There is a correlation of brain size with IQ of about 0.40 and that these racial differences in brain size are present at birth.

      In addition to brain size are differences in brain shape, fissuration, number of pyramidal neurons and supra-grandular layer thickness. The depth of fissuration is related to superior intelligence and the brains of Whites have deeper fissures in the frontal and occipital regions. The supra-grandular layer of Blacks’ brains is 16% smaller than it is for Whites’ brains.

      The average human brain contains 86 billion neurons. Whites, on average, have 600 million more neurons than Blacks. Each neuron carries about 600 billion synapses, each of which carries, as a minimum, one bit of cortical information.

      Further, this reflects what we observe in real life (including the large and persistent so-called “Achievement Gap”). People have made long-term observations of the different races and reached rational conclusions; the more White a society is the more prosperous, inventive and safe it is. 19 of the 20 poorest countries are sub-Saharan African (Haiti). In sub-Saharan Africa the only countries that could be considered successful were White-governed, (Rhodesia and S. Africa). To this day they still can’t even feed themselves even though they lived alone in Africa, a vast continent with temperate climates and abundant resources, for 60,000 years. So they cannot blame racism, poverty, imperialism or anything else for their failures.

      Sub-Saharan Africans have never made a contribution to the world. No pre-contact sub-Saharan African society ever created a written language (or even words for abstract ideas), weaved cloth, forged steel, invented the wheel or plow, or devised a calendar or code of laws or any social organization, or system of measurement or math or built a multi-story structure or bridge or sewer or road or railway or a sea-worthy vessel, domesticated animals, exploited underground natural resources or produced anything that could be considered a mechanical device.

      IQ distribution by race/ethnicity:

           •   Ashkenazi Jews = 115
           •   East Asians = 106
           •   Whites = 100
           •   South East Asians = 87
           •   Non-White Hispanics = 86
           •   American Blacks = 85 (average 28% White admixture)
           •   Middle East and North Africans = 84
           •   Sub-Saharan Blacks = 67 (Only 2% of Whites score this low)
           •   Australian Aborigines = 62

      Sub-Saharan Africans never even created a written language. It was the White colonialists who gave the gift of literacy to them.

      No pre-contact sub-Saharan African society ever created a written language or words for abstract ideas, weaved cloth, forged steel, invented the wheel or plow or devised a calendar or code of laws or any social organization or formal religion or system of measurement or math or built a multi-story structure or bridge or sewer or infrastructure of any kind and they never harnessed a river or even drilled well or irrigation or road or railway or sea-worthy vessel, they never domesticated animals or exploited underground natural resources, understood the biological origins of disease, or produced anything that could be considered a mechanical device.

      Blacks are the oldest race, so they should be the most advanced race; but they are the least advanced race. And in fact they never did develop until they were domesticated by Whites.

      When Whites discovered Blacks just 400 years ago they were still living in the Stone Age.

      Blacks lived alone in sub-Saharan Africa, a vast continent with temperate climates and abundant resources for 60,000 years; so they cannot blame racism, poverty, imperialism or anything else for their failures.

      How could they live with all that shoreline and never think about putting a sail on a ship like every other culture did? Columbus sailed across the ocean 500 years ago — Blacks STILL are incapable of such a feat.

      19 of the 20 poorest countries are sub-Saharan African (Haiti). There has never been a successful Black country. No modern creations or civilization exists in sub-Saharan Africa that was not brought there by Whites. There are no White Third-World nations, but all Black ones are.

      Blacks are the only race incapable of caring for themselves. Whites still have to provide food, medical, financial and engineering aid to Africans. They couldn’t survive without White charity. Blacks became an out-of-control invasive species after Whites domesticated them.

      The 41 nations of sub-Saharan Africa produce no more wealth than the tiny country of Belgium, which has only 1/45 the population. Of all of the region’s economic production, White-run South Africa accounts for three-quarters. That Whites are only 8% of South Africa’s population, it demonstrates how productive and industrious Whites are that so relative few can carry the load for so many unproductive Blacks. But a constantly A constantly dwindling number of Whites are at the mercy of a predatory welfare class and it’s possible they can’t and won’t carry the rest of the population. If things get worse for them, they will simply flee the country.

      Sub-Saharan Africans have never made a contribution to the world. Blacks can only achieve either because they are mixed with White genes or because they reside in White societies. Blacks are unable to achieve within their own race because not enough of them are smart enough to build a sufficient infrastructure. If allowed to become too numerous they destroy previously-thriving and safe White cities.

      This is why Blacks seethe with jealousy and hatred of Whites yet can’t seem to stay away because they want what we create and maintain, no matter if they deserve it or not. They want our peaceful and clean neighborhoods, our law and order, our technology and science, our school systems, our inventions, the jobs we create, the food we grow, the transportation we invent, the entertainment we provide….. Blacks hate us but can’t live without us. That’s why they demand that we take care of them and give them special rights and privileges that we don’t grant ourselves, just to compensate for their inability at living in a modern and technologically-advanced civilization.

      Some groups succeed all the time, everywhere. Some have never succeeded anywhere. Blacks are the oldest race so they should be the most advanced, but they have never been successful anywhere. Civilization didn’t advance until humans evolved from Blacks by hybridizing with the large-brained Neanderthals which produced a modern human (Eurasians) with an increase in cranium capacity and a heavier, more developed brain. Blacks are also the only race without the derived form of MCPH1 microcephalin called haplogroup D which produces increased brain volume and density.

      Google: “race and IQ”, “national IQ”, “race and MAOA gene”, “Neanderthal DNA”, “smaller black brains”, “correlation brain size and IQ”, “achievement gap”, “IQ correlation to achievement”, “NIH Blacks 21% greater testosterone”, Cumoe, D. & Thorne, A. – 2003. Number of Ancestral Human Species: a Molecular Perspective, Rushton, J. Philippe; Jensen, Arthur R (2005). “Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability”, Psychology, Public Policy and Law 11 (2): 246–8, Current Biology, Vol. 13, R134–R136, February 18, 2003, ©2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. PII S0960-9822(03)00074-5; Categorization of humans in biomedical research: genes, race and disease — Genome Biology 2002.

      Racial brain size differences: Whole Brain Size and General Mental Ability: A Review, Int J Neurosci. 2009 Apr; 119(5): 692–732, PMCID: PMC2668913. Rutgers Anthropologist Sets Record Straight on Brain Size and Race. A NYT article that shows claims of racism in measuring skulls was false: Scientists Measure the Accuracy of a Racism Claim. Mismeasuring Skulls: New Research Resolves Historical Controversy, Shows Science Resists Bias; Stanford Department of Anthropology. Brain size, IQ, and racial-group differences: Evidence from musculoskeletal traits, J.Philippe Rushton, Intelligence Volume 31, Issue 2, March–April 2003, Pages 139–155. Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability, Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 2005, Vol. 11, No. 2, 235–294, Copyright 2005 by the American Psychological Association, DOI: 10.1037/1076-8971.11.2.235

      Heritibility of intelligence: Molecular Psychiatry (2015) 20, 98–108; doi:10.1038/mp.2014.105; published online 16 September 2014, Genetics and intelligence differences: five special findings; Common DNA Markers Can Account for More Than Half of the Genetic Influence on Cognitive Abilities, Genetic contributions to variation in general cognitive function: a meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies in the CHARGE consortium (N=53949).

      One standard deviation racial IQ gap by age three: (Broman et al, Montie and Fagan, Brooks-Gunn, Klebanov and Duncan)

    • Where is the evidence of Black intelligence?

      Blacks have by far the lowest IQs of any race; 80% score at or below the “low functioning” category.

      The least intelligent 10% of Whites have IQs below 80; 40% of Blacks do.

      Only one-in-six Blacks is more intelligent than the average White; five-in-six Whites are more intelligent than the average Black.

      Only the top 16% of Blacks score as high as the top 50% of Whites. Or as the New York Times put it, “…the difference in I.Q. points between the groups is quite significant. It means that the top sixth of Blacks score only as well on I.Q. tests as do the top half of Whites.”

      Only one-in-3.5 million (.00003%) African Blacks have an IQ of 140 or higher (genius level). But one-in-83 (1.2%) U.S. Whites is a genius. Therefore the per capita genius rate for U.S.-resident Whites is 41,000 times higher than it is for African Blacks.

      US-resident Blacks have higher intelligence than African Blacks due to the approximately 28% average White admixture.

      IQ distribution by race/ethnicity:

      • Ashkenazi Jews = 115
      • East Asians = 106
      • Whites = 100
      • South East Asians = 87
      • Non-White Hispanics = 86
      • American Blacks = 85 (average 28% White admixture)
      • Middle East and North Africans = 84
      • Sub-Saharan Blacks = 67 (Only 2% of Whites score this low)
      • Australian Aborigines = 62

      Therefore, the IQ distribution for US-resident Blacks having an average IQ of 85 and a standard deviation of 12.4 doesn’t mean that there are no US-resident Blacks at all with IQs above 140; it means that only one US-resident Black in about 218,000 will have an IQ above 140.

      So given equal sized populations there will be about 2,600 times more White geniuses than Black geniuses. Since there are about 5.5 times more Whites than Blacks in the United States, White geniuses outnumber Black geniuses by a ratio of about one-to-14,300. Therefore, if all the White people in the USA were replaced by Blacks having the IQ distribution of US-resident Blacks the number of geniuses in the country would fall from about 2.4 million to only about 1,000.

      That is why Blacks are incapable of creating a civilization; there simply are not enough smart Blacks to create an infrastructure for the Black intellectual elite to achieve.

      Racial intelligence differences show in every test of general cognitive ability that anyone, of any race or nationality, has yet been able to devise. And they are reflected in countless everyday situations, “Life is an IQ test.”

      While some tirelessly criticize studies that show Black intelligence to be lower than White they can cite no Black performance that indicates high mean intelligence and instead insist that Black ability is present but hidden by bias. But everyday observation together with no evidence that the races are equal disconfirms racial parity.

      The positive relationship between IQ tests, academic tests and real-world observances demonstrates the existence of a general mental ability. How can there be group or individual differences in intelligence if there is no such trait?

      If the races are equal in intelligence then there should be evidence that they are; absence of such evidence is itself evidence that the races are not equal.

      When similarly-performing Black, White and Asian children are compared for age Black children match White children two years younger, and Asian children three years younger. To account for this lag, the IQ test critic must posit a mechanism that somehow keeps information available to Asian children from White children for one year and from Black children for three years.

      It is an ethological rule that the earlier and more regularly a phenomenon appears in a population the more likely it is genetically controlled. Genetics limits an individuals’ upper limit to IQ, and environment determines how much of that innate genetic potential will be reached. No amount of nurturing can make one exceed innate genetic potential.

      Blacks are a separate species from Whites and Asians; Blacks are the only race with no DNA from the large-brained Neanderthals, and therefore do not share a common ancestor with modern man. Blacks have 2% archaic admixture, Whites are hybridized with Neanderthal, and Asians have both Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA.

      Humans didn’t create a civilization until this hybridization. Blacks were still living in the Stone Age when Whites discovered them just 400 years ago.

      Sub-Saharan Blacks did not receive Neanderthal or Denisovan gene introgression, which is why Blacks are the most genetically distant of all the human races.

      Blacks received significant gene introgression from other early hominid species, which the other races do not have because they left sub-Sahara before the introgression occurred. These early hominids remain unknown due to the simple fact that their DNA has not been retrieved nor sequenced; only Neandertal and Denisovan DNA have been, thus far.

      Blacks are also the only race without the derived form of MCPH1 microcephalin called haplogroup D which produces increased brain volume and density.

      Genetic distance is a measure of the genetic divergence between species or between populations within a species. Populations with many similar genes have small genetic distances. This indicates that they are closely related and have a recent common ancestor.

      Blacks have a genetic distance of 0.23 from Whites and Asians, but only 0.17 from Erectus. That means Blacks are more closely related to archaic hominids than to modern man.

      For comparison, the genetic distance between Blacks and modern man is greater than the genetic distance between the common chimpanzee and the bonobo (0.103, or half the Black-White distance) and between Gorilla gorilla and the Gorilla beringei (0.04, or 1/6 the Black/White distance) which are classified as separate species.

      So to be consistent and objective with taxonomic classification systems Blacks and Whites should be classified into separate species, or at least into different subspecies.

      The genetic distance between the races of man is also much greater than that between the breeds of dog, and anyone who has experience with dogs knows what a huge difference breed makes, not only in physical appearance but also in behavior and intelligence.

      We share 98.4 percent of our genes with chimpanzees, 95 percent with dogs, and 74 percent with microscopic roundworms. Only one chromosome determines if one is born male or female. There is no discernible difference in the DNA of a wolf and a Labrador retriever, yet their inbred behavioral differences are immense. Clearly, what’s meaningful is which genes differ and how they are patterned, not the percent of genes. A tiny number of genes can translate into huge functional differences.

      Modern man (Whites and Asians) has on average 5% Neanderthal DNA, therefore he would be an F4 (4th filial generation from full purebred Neanderthal). That is about the same as most claiming Cherokee ancestors today.

      It is equivalent to having one Neanderthal great-great-great-grandparent. Blacks also coexisted and interbred with archaic hominids (heidelbergensis) for longer than those who left Africa.

      Genetics determines the upper limit to IQ, but the environment dictates what percentage of your potential you will reach.

      Larger brains contain more neurons and synapses and process information faster. By adulthood, East Asians average 1 cubic inch more cranial capacity than Whites who average 5 cubic inches more than Blacks.

      The average White brain is 1438cc while the average Black brain is 1343cc, or 93% of the average White brain. The heritability of brain size is extremely strong at 0.90 and not one study to date has shown larger brain size for Blacks. The White and Asians brain also has a higher degree of fissuring (higher complexity) in the cerebral cortex of their brains, where abstract and conceptual thought is performed.

      Based on studies of brain weight at autopsy, endocranial volume of empty skulls, head size measurements by the U.S. military and NASA, and two dozen MRI volumetric studies Blacks’ brain size is 7% smaller than Whites’, and 8% smaller than Asians’. There is a correlation of brain size with IQ of about 0.40 and that these racial differences in brain size are present at birth.

      In addition to brain size are differences in brain shape, fissuration, number of pyramidal neurons and supra-grandular layer thickness. The depth of fissuration is related to superior intelligence and the brains of Whites have deeper fissures in the frontal and occipital regions. The supra-grandular layer of Blacks’ brains is 16% smaller than it is for Whites’ brains.

      The average human brain contains 86 billion neurons. Whites, on average, have 600 million more neurons than Blacks. Each neuron carries about 600 billion synapses, each of which carries, as a minimum, one bit of cortical information.

      Whites are only 10% of the world’s population, yet are the most industrious, ingenious, and innovative race the world has known. Whites have formed nations, built civilizations, assumed and administrated power, created the Renaissance, the Age of Discovery, the Industrial Revolution, automation, technology, the space program which landed men on the moon and launched probes exploring beyond the solar system, discovered electricity, created wonder drugs and architecture and have harnessed nuclear power, have unlocked the secrets of DNA and relativity, created computer science and the internet age…… sub-Saharan Africans still cannot even feed themselves.

      A fundamental basis for any civilization is a written language. That allows for a steady or constant formation of commerce, science, government, and any other form of social interaction larger than that of a simple family/village unit. The same with the ability to conceive and express abstract ideas. But Sub-Saharan Africans never even created a written language, or any word for an abstract idea. It was the White colonialists who introduced written language to them.

      No pre-contact sub-Saharan African society ever created a written language, or words for abstract ideas, or weaved cloth, or forged steel, invented the wheel or plow, or devised a calendar, or code of laws, or any social organization, or formal religion. or system of measurement, or math, or built a multi-story structure or bridge or sewer, or infrastructure of any kind, and they never harnessed a river, or even drilled well or irrigated, or built a road or railway or sea-worthy vessel, they never domesticated animals, or exploited underground natural resources, or produced anything that could be considered a mechanical device.

      Blacks lived alone in sub-Saharan Africa, a vast continent with temperate climates and abundant resources for 60,000 years; so they cannot blame racism, poverty, imperialism or anything else for their failures. How could they live with all that shoreline and never contemplate putting a sail on a ship like every other culture did? They had a large head-start so they should be the most advanced race; but they are the least advanced race. And in fact they never did develop until they were domesticated by Whites.

      19 of the 20 poorest countries are sub-Saharan African (Haiti). There has never been a successful Black country. No modern creations or civilization exists in sub-Saharan Africa that was not brought there by Whites.

      There are no White Third-World nations, but all Black ones are.

      Sub-Saharan Africans have never made a contribution to the world. Blacks can only achieve either because they are mixed with White genes or because they reside in White societies. For every one gifted Black there are 8 gifted Whites and 80% of gifted Blacks are mixed-race.

      Blacks are the only race incapable of caring for themselves. Whites still have to provide food, medical, financial and engineering aid to Africans. They couldn’t survive without White charity. Blacks became an out-of-control invasive species after Whites domesticated them.

      Today there are 738 million Europeans and 1.2 billion Africans. In 2050, according to the latest U.N. projections, Europe’s population will have dipped to 707 million, while Africa’s population will be 2.4 billion. By 2100, half of all children on earth will be African. On current trends, within 35 years, 1 in every 4 people will be sub-Saharan African. By 2100, there will be 4.4 billion Africans – two of every five human beings overall — and Europe’s population will be just 646 million.

      There are 1.1 billion people in Africa, but they don’t even have an automobile manufacturing industry.

      The 41 nations of sub-Saharan Africa produce no more wealth than the tiny country of Belgium, which has only 1/45 the population. Of all of the region’s economic production, White-run South Africa accounts for three-quarters of it. That Whites are only 8% of South Africa’s population demonstrates how productive and industrious Whites are that so relative few can carry the load for so many unproductive Blacks.

      Blacks are unable to achieve within their own race because not enough of them are smart enough to even build a sufficient infrastructure to allow for the Black intellectual elite to achieve. If allowed to become too numerous, they destroy previously-thriving and safe White cities.

      Blacks cannot achieve on their own without the intervention of Whites giving them all the things they could never produce or maintain themselves. Without the continuous intervention of charity into Black Africa they could not even maintain what they have been given.

      All current Black civilization is in fact transplanted White civilization. There is no Black society on Earth that has independently developed and maintained its own technological way of life. All of the Black nations with the highest GDPs benefited from White-created enterprise to exploit their natural resources.

      Some groups succeed all the time, everywhere. Some have never succeeded anywhere. Blacks are the oldest race so they should be the most advanced, but they have never been successful anywhere. Civilization didn’t advance until humans evolved from Blacks by hybridizing with the large-brained Neanderthals which produced a modern human with an increase in cranium capacity and a heavier, more developed brain. Blacks are also the only race without the derived form of MCPH1 microcephalin called haplogroup D which produces increased brain volume density.

      This is why Blacks seethe with jealousy and hatred of Whites yet can’t seem to stay away because they want what we create and maintain, no matter if they deserve it or not. They want our peaceful and clean neighborhoods, our law and order, our technology and science, our school systems, our inventions, the jobs we create, the food we grow, the transportation we invent, the entertainment we provide….. Blacks hate us but can’t live without us. That’s why they demand that we take care of them and give them special rights and privileges that we don’t grant ourselves, just to compensate for their inability at living in a modern and technologically-advanced civilization.

      Put Whites on an island and you get England; put Asians on an island and you get Japan; put Blacks on an island and you get Madagascar.

      Nowhere Blacks live are they considered achievers. In fact they are universally viewed as unproductive and disruptive to society.

      Simply, life is an IQ test.

      Is it just a coincidence that Blacks have the smallest brains, and have the lowest IQs, and have never created a successful nation?

      There hasn’t been a single contribution from sub-Saharan Africans to the world. Show me any community, city or state that is predominantly inhabited and run by Blacks anywhere in the world that is equal or superior to a comparable White one. By their fruits ye shall know them. Show me the fruits of that intelligence.

    • Black-White IQ Distribution:

      For a graphical representation of the racial IQ gap Google: racial IQ bell curve

      Percentages below are from a cumulative percentages graph for readability:

      Blacks:
      5% above 110 IQ
      16% above 100 IQ
      40% above 90 IQ
      70% above 80 IQ
      30% below 80 IQ
      18% below 75 IQ
      10% below 70 IQ

      Whites:
      10% above 120 IQ
      18% above 115 IQ
      27% above 110 IQ
      40% above 105 IQ
      50% above 100 IQ
      60% below 105 IQ
      35% below 95 IQ
      15% below 85 IQ

      So, the smartest 16% of Blacks are as intelligent as smartest 50% of Whites. 80% of Blacks score at or below the “low functioning” category.

      The least intelligent ten percent of Whites have IQs below 80; forty percent of Blacks have IQs that low.

      Only one Black in six is more intelligent than the average White; five Whites out of six are more intelligent than the average Black.

      These differences show in every test of general cognitive ability that anyone, of any race or nationality, has yet been able to devise. And they are reflected in countless everyday situations, “Life is an IQ test.”

      Further, only one-in-3.5 million (.00003%) African Blacks have an IQ of 140 or higher (genius level). But one-in-83 (1.2%) U.S. Whites is a genius. Therefore the per capita genius rate for U.S.-resident Whites is 41,000 times higher than it is for African Blacks.

      As the New York Times put it, “…the difference in I.Q. points between the groups is quite significant. It means that the top sixth of Blacks score only as well on I.Q. tests as do the top half of Whites.”

      Professer Jensen, of Berkeley, looked at the social competency of people with low IQs and found that Blacks at low IQ were more socially competent than Whites. When you analyze a White person with a 70 IQ, then you’re looking at someone who is 2 SD below the White mean IQ, while a Black with an IQ of 70 is only 1 SD below the Black IQ mean.

      Blacks with a 70 IQ are more socially competent than Whites with the same IQ. A Black can be clinically retarded without this retardation being fully socially expressed because Black children of 70 IQ are normal. American Black’s have a mean IQ of 85, so 70 IQ is only one standard deviation below the Black mean. 16% of Black kids in the U.S. are below one standard deviation for the Black population. They are normal Black kids in terms of normality, though not in terms of ability; they were rather like white kids of IQ 85 who are one standard deviation below the white IQ mean of 100. A full 16% of white kids are below one standard deviation of the white intelligence mean. Only about 2% of white kids are below two standard deviations, IQ 70, whereas 16% of black kids are.

      In sum, a higher percentage of Whites at 70 IQ (two standard deviations below the White mean) have something wrong with their brains due to injury or genetic disorder, and a larger percentage of Blacks at 70 IQ are normal for Blacks (one standard deviation below the Black mean IQ).

      ~~~~~

      Digit Span Tests

      In digit span tests, the respondents are asked to repeat a string of digits. There are two variants of the test, forward digit span (FDS) and backward digit span (BDS). In FDS, the digits are repeated in the order of their presentation, while in BDS they must be repeated in the reverse order. The largest number of digits that a person can repeat without error is his or her forward or backward digit span.

      That the Black-White gap on FDS is substantially smaller than on BDS is a robust finding confirmed in new analysis. This poses a challenge to the argument that racial differences in exposure to the kinds of information that are needed in cognitive tests cause the Black-White test score gap. The informational demands of the digit span tests are minimal, as only the knowledge of numbers from 1 to 9 is required. FDS is a simple memory test assessing the ability to store information and immediately recall it. The informational demands of BDS are the same as those of FDS, but the requirement that the digits be repeated in the reverse order means that it is not simply a memory test, but one that also requires mental transformation or manipulation of the information presented.

      Black-White Digit Span:

      Forward Digit Span Difference

      Age 7 Age 9 Age 11
      0.01 0.04 0.16

      Backward Digit Span Difference

      Age 7 Age 9 Age 11
      0.43 0.31 0.36

      It was predicted that forward digit span (FDS) should correlate less with IQ than backward digit span (BDS), and age and race should interact with FDS-BDS, with the FDS-BDS difference decreasing as a junction of age and a greater White-Black difference in BDS than in FDS. The predictions were substantiated at a high level of significance in large representative samples of 669 White and 622 Black 5-12 yr olds who were given the revised WISC. Socioeconomic differences accounted for less of the predicted effects than race. (25 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)

      The “backward digit span” test is not reinforced by any socialization and is not a taught skill for either race; Whites score better at recalling digits presented in order, but recalling the digits in reverse order requires mental transformation and is a good predictor of IQ. The race gap for the backward digit span is twice as great as for the forward test.

      In sum, race differences are most pronounced on tests that best measure the General Intelligence Factor (g). Black-White differences, for example, are larger on the Backward Digit Span test than on the less g loaded Forward Digit Span test.

      ~~~~~

      Black-White SAT Score Gap by Year:

      Year White Black Gap
      1986 1038 839 199
      1990 1031 849 185
      1996 1052 857 195
      2000 1060 859 201
      2005 1061 863 197
      2010 1063 855 208

      Source: U.S. Dept. of Education, Digest of Education Statistics, 2012

      Frey and Detterman (2003) analyzed the correlation of SAT scores with intelligence test scores. They found SAT scores to be highly correlated with general mental ability, or g (r=.82 in their sample).

      Abstract

      This research established the relationship between SAT and g, as well as the appropriateness of the SAT as a measure of g, and examined the SAT as a premorbid measure of intelligence. In Study 1, we used the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979. Measures of g were extracted from the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery and correlated with SAT scores of 917 participants. The resulting correlation was.82 (.86 corrected for nonlinearity). Study 2 investigated the correlation between revised and recentered SAT scores and scores on the Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices among 104 undergraduates. The resulting correlation was.483 (.72 corrected for restricted range). These studies indicate that the SAT is mainly a test of g. We provide equations for converting SAT scores to estimated IQs; such conversion could be useful for estimating premorbid IQ or conducting individual difference research with college students.

      Frey MC, Detterman DK.

      PMID: 15147489 [PubMed – indexed for MEDLINE]

      ~~~~~

      New York Times, 2003:

      The SAT captures more than a narrow range of skills, important only in the first year or two of college. Large-scale meta-analyses by researchers at the University of Minnesota have found that SAT performance is as good of a predictor of overall college grade point average as it is of freshman grade point average, and Vanderbilt researchers David Lubinski and Camilla Benbow have documented that the SAT predicts life outcomes well beyond the college years, including income and occupational achievements.

      Furthermore, the SAT is largely a measure of general intelligence. Scores on the SAT correlate very highly with scores on standardized tests of intelligence, and like IQ scores, are stable across time and not easily increased through training, coaching or practice. SAT preparation courses appear to work, but the gains are small — on average, no more than about 20 points per section.

      ~~~~~

      ACT Scores by Race:

      Year White Black Asian
      2009 22.2 16.9 23.2
      2010 22.3 16.9 23.4
      2011 22.4 17.0 23.6
      2012 22.4 17.0 23.6
      2013 22.2 16.9 23.5

      Source: ACT, Inc.

      Note that there is no closing of the large and persistent so-called “achievement gap”.

      In 2015 only 16% of Blacks scored 1550 or higher, the threshold the College Board calls the “college and career readiness” level.

      This racial achievement gap is so significant that colleges give a “race bonus” of 230 points to Blacks and penalize Asians by 50 points to try to keep it even.

      ~~~~~~

      Percent by Race Reaching the SAT College and Career Readiness Benchmark:

      15% = Black
      24% = Non-White HIspanic
      35% = Native American
      53% = White
      56% = Asian

      Source: The College Board, 2014

      ~~~~~

      Black-White SAT Score Gap by Income:

      Year White Black Gap
      -$20k 978 798 180
      $40k 995 836 159
      $60k 1017 864 153
      $80k 1032 889 143
      $100k 1052 908 144
      $120k 1066 922 144
      $140k 1073 926 147
      $160k 1087 942 145
      $200k 1091 943 148
      +200k 1130 981 149

      Source: The College Board, 2008

      So, Blacks from families earning more than $200k only scored 3 points higher than Whites from families earning less than $20k.

      We will continue with racial preferences in college admissions and job hiring. We will continue to blame black underachievement on racism. We will continue to dumb down education and occupational standards in order to achieve higher proportions of Blacks.

      Differences in intelligence between income groups are not larger than intelligence differences between racial groups in the US, nor do differences in income or wealth account for the racial differences. Whites from households in the lowest income bracket have higher IQ scores than blacks from households in the highest income bracket.

      Black students coming from families earning over $70,000 USD are doing worse on their SATs on average than White students from families in the lowest income group.

      One of the largest modern sociology studies of American students found that ethnicity was the single most important predictor of academic achievement:

      “Beyond the Classroom,” by Laurence Steinberg, B. Bradford Brown and Sanford M. Dornbusch, concludes “Of all the demographic factors we studied in relation to school performance, ethnicity was the most important. In terms of school achievement, it is more advantageous to be Asian than to be wealthy, or to have non-divorced parents, or to have a mother who is able to stay at home full time.”

      A number of experiments are able to test all of these environmental theories. Transracial adoption experiments control for all the shared aspects of the environment that differ between Whites and Blacks (parenting, income, nutrition, neighborhood), while structural equation models test for possible uncommon factors between Whites and Blacks that could be acting on IQ (which would include things like racism). These experiments do not lend support to any existing or plausible environmental theories for the remaining lower intelligence scores of people of African descent in Western societies. The Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study found that, by adulthood, the difference in IQ scores between adopted black and adopted White children raised side by side in the same high income households in mostly homogeneous Northern US upper class neighborhoods was 18 IQ points.

      ~~~~~~~

      The large and persistent so-called “achievement gap” has remain steady since it was first observed.

      Evidence of the racial achievement gap has been manifested through standardized test scores, high school dropout rates, high school completion rates, college acceptance and retention rates, and longitudinal trends.

      It has been found to exist before students enter kindergarten for their first year of schooling. At the start of kindergarten, Black students have math and reading scores substantially lower than those of White students. In a study published in 2009, Reardon and Galindo (2009) specifically examine test scores by race. The data comes from the ECLS-K, sponsored by the National Center for Education Statistics. The ECLS-K contains data on a nationally representative sample of approximately 21,400 students from the kindergarten class of 1998–1999. Students in the sample were assessed in reading and mathematics skills six times from 1998 to 2004. The content areas of the tests are based on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) fourth-grade content areas, adapted to be age appropriate at each grade level. The assessments were scored using a three-parameter Item Response Theory (IRT) model. Reardon and Galindo found that average Black students begin kindergarten with math scores three quarters of a standard deviation lower than those of White students. Six years later the gap widens by about a third.

      The racial group differences across admissions tests, such as the SAT, ACT, GRE, GMAT, MCAT, LSAT, Advanced Placement Program examinations and other measures of educational achievement, have been consistent. Since the 1960s, the population of students taking these assessments has become increasingly diverse. Consequently, the examination of ethnic score differences have been more rigorous. Specifically, the largest gaps exist between White and Black students. On average, Blacks score about .82 to 1.18 standard deviations lower than White students in composite test scores.

      The National Assessment of Educational Progress reports the national Black-White gap in math and reading assessments, measured at the 4th and 8th grade level. The trends show the achievement gaps staying the same.

      ~~~~~~~

      Racial Scoring Gap on Standardized Graduate Tests

      — Black Student Score Results on the Medical College Admission Test

      In 2005 the mean combined score for Black students who took the Medical College Admission Test was 21.2. (Each of the three sections of the MCAT test is scored on a scale of 1 to 15.) For Whites, the mean score on the combined three portions of the MCAT test was 28.5. Therefore, the White score was about 18 percent higher than the mean score for Blacks.

      — The Racial Scoring Gap on the Test for Admission to Business School

      The mean Black score on the GMAT was 425. (The test is scored on the familiar 200 to 800 scale used for each section of the SAT test.) For Whites, the mean GMAT score was 532. This is 107 points or 18 percent higher than the mean score for Blacks.

      The average GMAT score for admitted students at the nation’s leading business schools is over 700. Perhaps only 1 or 2 percent of all Black GMAT test takers score at this level. Therefore, without continuing affirmative action admissions programs at Harvard, Penn, Stanford, Northwestern, MIT, and other top MBA programs, the nation’s leading business schools will have very few Black students.

      The latest JBHE survey shows that Blacks make up about 5 percent of the students at the nation’s leading business schools. If affirmative action admissions programs were to be discontinued, Black enrollments at these schools might drop by 75 percent.

      — Very Few Blacks Score at the Highest Levels of the Law School Admission Test

      In 1998 the mean score of White students taking the Law School Admission Test (LSAT) was 151.96. (The LSAT is graded on a scoring scale of 120 to 180.) The mean score for Black students taking the test that year was 141.80, about 17 percent lower than the mean score of Whites.

      The latest data shows a slight improvement for both Blacks and Whites, but there was no progress in closing the racial scoring gap. In 2004 the mean score for Whites on the LSAT was 152.47. For Blacks, the mean score was 142.43. The 10 point, or 17 percent, scoring gap has remained constant throughout the period with only very minor fluctuations.

      Students seeking admission to the nation’s highest-ranked law schools such as Yale, Harvard, and Stanford have a mean LSAT score of about 170. Data obtained by JBHE from the Law School Admission Council shows that very few Blacks nationwide score at this level.

      In 2004, 10,370 Blacks took the LSAT examination. Only 29 Blacks, or 0.3 percent of all LSAT test takers, scored 170 or above. In contrast, more than 1,900 White test takers scored 170 or above on the LSAT. They made up 3.1 percent of all White test takers. Thus Whites were more than 10 times as likely as Blacks to score 170 or above on the LSAT. There were 66 times as many Whites as Blacks who scored 170 or above on the test.

      Even if we drop the scoring level to 165, a level equal to the mean score of students enrolling at law schools ranked in the top 10 nationwide but not at the very top, we still find very few Blacks. There were 108 Blacks scoring 165 or better on the LSAT in 2004. They made up 1 percent of all Black test takers. For Whites, there were 6,689 test takers who scored 165 or above. They made up 10.6 percent of all White students who took the LSAT examination.

      The nation’s top law schools could fill their classes exclusively with students who scored 165 or above on the LSAT. But if they were to do so, these law schools would have almost no Black students.

      — The Racial Scoring Gap on the Graduate Record Examination

      The vast majority of Black graduate students do not attend professional schools of law, business, or medicine. Most Black students are enrolled in graduate programs in other academic disciplines including education, natural sciences, mathematics, foreign languages, the humanities, the arts, history, psychology, and the social sciences. For these students the important test is the Graduate Record Examination (GRE).

      This test begins with two analytical writing sections, one where the student is given a choice of topics. The analytical writing section is scored on a scale of 0 to 6. Then there is a 30-minute verbal reasoning test and a 45-minute quantitative section. The test is given on a computer terminal and the test is adaptive, meaning that the test questions are selected based on correct or incorrect responses to previous questions. These two sections are scored on the familiar 200 to 800 scale used for the SAT test.

      Each year about 300,000 college students seeking admission to graduate programs in fields such as education, the humanities, the natural sciences, and the social sciences sit for the GRE. In 2003, the latest year for which there is complete data available, 27,267 Blacks took the GRE test. Therefore, Blacks made up 8.8 percent of all students who took the GRE.

      In 2003 the mean score for Blacks on the combined verbal and quantitative sections of the GRE was 821. For Whites, the mean combined score was 1062. Thus the mean White score was 241 points, or 20 percent, higher than the mean score for Blacks. This racial scoring gap is even wider than the persistent and growing gap on the SAT test.

      In 2003 the mean Black score on the analytical writing section was 3.7 on a scale of 0 to 6. For Whites, the mean score was 4.5, a difference of about 13 percent. There is no way to compare the trend in the gap on this portion of the GRE because the 0 to 6 scale was recently instituted. Previously the analytical section of the test was scored on the 200 to 800 scale.

      The GRE scoring gap between Blacks and Whites varies to a large degree depending on the field of proposed study in graduate school. Black students planning to study in the field of engineering scored on average 187 points below whites who plan to pursue a graduate degree in engineering. In the physical sciences, Black students on average scored 247 points below Whites.

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      So-called “diversity degrees” were created with soft curricula to allow Blacks an easier opportunity to earn a degree than is possible in the hard sciences.

      College majors with the highest percentage of Whites (63% of U.S. population):

      Forestry: 93% White
      Natural Resources Management: 92% White
      Agriculture Production and Management: 92% White
      Plant Science and Agronomy: 92% White
      Nuclear Engineering: 91% White
      Animal Sciences: 91% White
      Soil Science: 91% White
      Miscellaneous Agriculture: 90% White
      Agricultural Economics: 90% White
      Art and Music Education: 90% White

      College majors with the highest percentage of Asians (6% of U.S. population):

      Computer Engineering: 33% Asian
      Statistics and Decision Science: 30% Asian
      Neuroscience: 27% Asian
      Biomedical Engineering: 26% Asian
      Other Foreign Languages: 26% Asian
      Electrical Engineering: 22% Asian
      Military Technologies: 22% Asian
      Biochemical Sciences: 20% Asian
      Applied Mathematics: 20% Asian
      Pharmacy Pharmaceutical Sciences and Administration: 20% Asian

      College majors with the highest percentage of Blacks (14% of U.S. population):

      School Student Counseling: 38% Black
      Human Services and Community Organization: 21% Black
      Counseling Psychology: 20% Black
      Health and Medical Administrative Services: 18% Black
      Public Administration: 18% Black
      Social Work: 16% Black
      Miscellaneous Social Sciences: 16% Black
      General Medical and Health Services: 15% Black
      Public Policy: 15% Black

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      Effects of Affirmative Action

      The SAT scores of White applicants to U.S. colleges and universities have been, on average, about 200 points higher than those of their Black counterparts. Nonetheless, Black students have been admitted to virtually all academically competitive schools at much higher rates than Whites. At Amherst College in 1995, for instance, 51 percent of Black applicants were admitted vs. just 19 percent of White applicants. At Rice University that same year, the corresponding numbers were 52 percent and 25 percent for Blacks and Whites, respectively. At Bowdoin College, the figures were 70 percent and 30 percent.

      At the five most elite American, Black applicants whose SAT scores fell within the 1200 to 1249 range had a 60 percent chance of admission, whereas Whites with similar scores had just a 19 percent chance.

      At medical schools the situation is much the same. The Medical College Admissions Test (MCAT) scores of Blacks who are accepted are actually lower than those of Whites who are rejected. At the University of Maryland Medical School in 2000, Blacks with college GPAs of B or B+ and MCAT scores in the bottom half of all test-takers had a 70 percent chance of admission; for Whites and Asians of similar credentials, the chance was 2 percent.

      At America’s top law schools, Blacks are admitted at fully 17 times the rate that a colorblind process would allow. At UCLA Law School in 1994, a Black applicant with a college GPA between 2.5 and 3.5, and an LSAT score between 60 and 90, had a 61 percent chance of admission. The corresponding rates for similarly qualified Asians and Whites were 7 percent and 1 percent, respectively. Consider also Texas Law School, which in 1992 rejected 668 White applicants before rejecting a single Black. Fully 100 percent of Blacks who scored between 189 and 192 in the school’s academic rating system were admitted, as compared to just 6 percent of Whites.

    • Blacks have small brains

      Would you expect a population of small-brain people to have a higher, lower or equal IQ as compared to a population of large-brain people?

      The correlation between brain size and IQ across 25 primate species is 0.77 (where 1.0 indicates that monozygotic twins have no variance in IQ and 0 indicates that their IQs are completely uncorrelated).

      Larger brains contain more neurons and synapses and process information faster. By adulthood, East Asians average 1 cubic inch more cranial capacity than Whites who average 5 cubic inches more than Blacks.

      The average White brain is 1438cc while the average Black brain is 1343cc, or 93% of the average White brain. The heritability of brain size is extremely strong at 0.90 and not one study to date has shown larger brain size for Blacks. The White and Asians brain also has a higher degree of fissuring (higher complexity) in the cerebral cortex of their brains, where abstract and conceptual thought is performed.

      Based on studies of brain weight at autopsy, endocranial volume of empty skulls, head size measurements by the U.S. military and NASA, and two dozen MRI volumetric studies Blacks’ brain size is 7% smaller than Whites’, and 8% smaller than Asians’. There is a correlation of brain size with IQ of about 0.40 and that these racial differences in brain size are present at birth.

      In addition to brain size are differences in brain shape, fissuration, number of pyramidal neurons and supra-grandular layer thickness. The depth of fissuration is related to superior intelligence and the brains of Whites have deeper fissures in the frontal and occipital regions. The supra-grandular layer of Blacks’ brains is 16% smaller than it is for Whites’ brains.

      The average human brain contains 86 billion neurons. Whites, on average, have 600 million more neurons than Blacks. Each neuron carries about 600 billion synapses, each of which carries, as a minimum, one bit of cortical information.

      Blacks are the only racial group with no DNA from the large-brained Neanderthals, and also the only race without the derived form of MCPH1 microcephalin called haplogroup D which produces increased brain volume.

      Even before birth, population group differences in average brain size are found from the ninth week of intrauterine life with White fetuses averaging larger brain cases and smaller faces Black fetuses, with the differences becoming more prominent over the course of fetal development.

      Weighing brains at autopsy, Whites averaged heavier brains than Blacks and had more complex convolutions and larger frontal lobes. Subsequent studies have found an average Black–White difference of about 100 g. Studies have found that the more White admixture (judged independently from skin color), the greater the average brain weight in Blacks. In a study of 1,261 American adults, Ho et al. (1980) found that 811 White Americans averaged 1,323 g and 450 Black Americans averaged 1,223 g. Since the Blacks and Whites were similar in body size, differences in body size cannot explain away the differences in brain weight.

      The same three-way pattern of race differences has been found using the simplest culture-free cognitive measures such as reaction time tasks, which 9- to 12-year-old children perform in less than 1 s. Lynn (2006) found that East Asian children from Hong Kong and Japan were faster than European children from Britain and Ireland, who in turn were faster than African children from South Africa. Using similar tasks, this pattern of racial differences was also found in California (Jensen, 1998; Rushton & Jensen, 2005). Within each group, the children with higher IQ scores perform faster those with lower scores.

      Race differences start in the womb. Blacks are born earlier and grow quicker than Whites and Asians. The three-way race pattern occurs in milestones such as sexual maturity, family stability, crime rates, and population growth.

      Black babies mature more quickly than White babies, while Asian babies mature more slowly. Black babies in a sitting position are more able to keep their heads up and backs straight from the start. White babies often need six to eight weeks to do these things. It is unlikely that social factors could produce these differences. A basic law of biology shows that longer infancy is related to greater brain growth.

      Black babies spend the least time in the womb. In America, 51% of Black children have been born by week 39 of pregnancy compared with 33% of White children. In Europe, Black babies of even professional mothers are born earlier than White babies.

      Black children sit, crawl, walk, and put on their own clothes earlier than Whites or Asians. The findings are measured by such tests as Bayley’s Scales of Mental and Motor Development and the Cambridge Neonatal Scales.

      Asian children, on the other hand, mature more slowly than do White children. Asian children often do not walk until 13 months. Walking starts at 12 months for white children and 11 months for Black children.

      ~~~~~~~~

      Brain mass differences between racial groups in the US

      Jensen (1998) summarizes the brain mass findings from the Case-Western Reserve (1980) study (N= 811 W, 450 B). An age matched and height adjusted B-W differences of ~100g (~.78SD) was found, which is commensurate with the findings of Bean (1906), Mall (1909), Pearl (1934), and Vint (1934) as described in Rushton and Ankney (2009). Holloway (2002) found a B-W difference of 63 grams (N = 1,391 W; 615 Black). Similar findings have been found based in imaging studies (see 5). In their study, Isamah, et al. (2010) found that African Americans have 1 SD less total cerebrum volume than European Americans.

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      Contrary to most purely environmental theories, racial differences in brain size show up early in life. Data from the U.S. National Collaborative Perinatal Project on 19,000 Black children and 17,000 White children showed that Black children had a smaller head perimeter at birth and, although Black children were born shorter in stature and lighter in weight than White children, by age 7 ‘catch-up growth’ led Black children to be larger in body size than White children. However, Blacks remained smaller in head perimeter (Broman et al., 1987). Further, head perimeter at birth, 1 year, 4 years, and 7 years correlated with IQ scores at age 7 in both Black and White children (r = 0.13 to 0.24).

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      Brain Size Differences. Studies using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) find a correlation of brain size with IQ of about 0.40. Larger brains contain more neurons and synapses and process information faster. Race differences in brain size are present at birth. By adulthood, East Asians average 1 cubic inch more cranial capacity than Whites who average 5 cubic inches more than Blacks.

      “Neither the existence nor the size of race differences in IQ are a matter of dispute, only their cause,” write the authors. The Black-White difference has been found consistently from the time of the massive World War I Army testing of 90 years ago to a massive study of over 6 million corporate, military, and higher-education test-takers in 2001.

      “Race differences show up by 3 years of age, even after matching on maternal education and other variables,” said Rushton. “Therefore they cannot be due to poor education since this has not yet begun to exert an effect. That’s why Jensen and I looked at the genetic hypothesis in detail. We examined 10 categories of evidence.”

      1. The Worldwide Pattern of IQ Scores; East Asians average higher on IQ tests than Whites, both in the U. S. and in Asia, even though IQ tests were developed for use in the Euro-American culture. Around the world, the average IQ for East Asians centers around 106; for Whites, about 100; and for Blacks about 85 in the U.S. and 70 in sub-Saharan Africa.

      2. Race Differences are Most Pronounced on Tests that Best Measure the General Intelligence Factor (g); Black-White differences, for example, are larger on the Backward Digit Span test than on the less g loaded Forward Digit Span test.

      3. The Gene-Environment Architecture of IQ is the Same in all Races, and Race Differences are Most Pronounced on More Heritable Abilities; Studies of Black, White, and East Asian twins, for example, show the heritability of IQ is 50% or higher in all races.

      4. Brain Size Differences; Studies using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) find a correlation of brain size with IQ of about 0.40. Larger brains contain more neurons and synapses and process information faster. Race differences in brain size are present at birth. By adulthood, East Asians average 1 cubic inch more cranial capacity than Whites who average 5 cubic inches more than Blacks.

      5. Trans-Racial Adoption Studies; Race differences in IQ remain following adoption by White middle class parents. East Asians grow to average higher IQs than Whites while Blacks score lower. The Minnesota Trans-Racial Adoption Study followed children to age 17 and found race differences were even greater than at age 7: White children, 106; Mixed-Race children, 99; and Black children, 89.

      6. Racial Admixture Studies; Black children with lighter skin, for example, average higher IQ scores. In South Africa, the IQ of the mixed-race “Colored” population averages 85, intermediate to the African 70 and White 100.

      -June 2005, Psychology, Public Policy and Law, a journal of the American Psychological Association

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      According to a new study, just published in the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) newsroom, scientists have definitively found the genes which control brain size and intelligence.

      Dozens of studies have found race differences in brain size, whether measured by MRI, endocranial volume, brain weight at autopsy or external head size (with or without corrections for body size).

      Most were carried out on the three major races of East Asians, Europeans, and Africans. Averaging all the data, the following figures have emerged: Brain size average for East Asians = 1364cm3; Whites = 1347cm3; and Blacks = 1267cm3.

      The overall mean for East Asians was 17cm3 more than for Whites and 97cm3 more than for Blacks.

      Since every cubic centimeter of brain tissue contains millions of brain cells and billions of synapses, the race differences in brain size help to explain the race differences in IQ.

      The latest overview, billed as the “world’s largest brain study to date,” saw a team of more than 200 scientists from 100 institutions worldwide collaborate to map the human genes that boost or sabotage the brain’s resistance to a variety of mental illnesses and Alzheimer’s disease.

      Additionally, the study (also published in the journal Nature Genetics), found new genes which control “differences in brain size and intelligence.”

      “We searched for two things in this study,” said senior author Paul Thompson, professor of neurology at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA and a member of the UCLA Laboratory of Neuro Imaging.

      “We hunted for genes that increase your risk for a single disease that your children can inherit. We also looked for factors that cause tissue atrophy and reduce brain size, which is a biological marker for disorders like schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, depression, Alzheimer’s disease and dementia.”

      Three years ago, Thompson’s lab partnered with geneticists Nick Martin and Margaret Wright at the Queensland Institute for Medical Research in Brisbane, Australia, and with geneticist Barbara Franke of Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre in the Netherlands.

      The four investigators recruited brain-imaging labs around the world to pool their brain scans and genomic data, and Project ENIGMA (Enhancing Neuro Imaging Genetics through Meta-Analysis) was born.

      “Our individual centers couldn’t review enough brain scans to obtain definitive results,” said Thompson, who is also a professor of psychiatry at the Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior at UCLA.

      “By sharing our data with Project ENIGMA, we created a sample large enough to reveal clear patterns in genetic variation and show how these changes physically alter the brain.”

      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

      Recent reviews (by Nisbett et al. (2012b) and Mackintosh (2011)) confirm current data does show an average difference in brain size and head-circumference between American Blacks and Whites.

      Brain size is found to have a correlation of about .35 with intelligence and cites studies showing that genes may account for as much as 90% of individual variation in brain size, concluding that race differences in average brain size could be an important argument for genetic contribution to racial IQ gaps.

      – Considerations Relating to the Study of Group Differences in Intelligence, Earl Hunt1 and Jerry Carlson, The University of Washington
      – American Psychologist, Vol 67(6), Sep 2012, 503-504

      On the outside, there’s not a lot of difference between Black heads and White ones. There is a slight difference, however, with Whites having the larger heads. But the big difference is in the size of the brain. Blacks have thicker skulls, which means that a higher percentage of their head is bone instead of brain.

      Blacks are the only race without the derived form of MCPH1 microcephalin called haplogroup D which appeared about 37,000 years ago and is associated with increased brain volume.

      Empirical data obtained from brain weight at autopsy, endocranial volume of empty skulls, head size measurements by the U.S. military and NASA, and two dozen MRI volumetric studies have shown that brain volumes average 1427 cubic centimeters for Whites, but only 1361 cubic centimeters for Blacks.

      In weight measurements, the brains of African Blacks were found to weigh an average of 1157 grams, whereas those of pure Whites weighed an average of 1323 grams. The brains of US-resident Blacks, who have a bit of White mixture in their genetic makeup, average 1223 grams in weight.

      That 100-gram weight difference, between White Americans and US-resident Blacks, corresponds to an approximate 600 million neuron advantage for Whites. In 600 million neurons, there are about 600 billion synapses, each of which carries, as a minimum, one bit of cortical information.

      Also, Whites have a larger genus to splenium ratio (front to back part of corpus callosum), which indicates that Whites probably have more activity in the frontal lobes which are thought to be the seat of intelligence. One study found that White cerebrums exhibited 14% more sulsification, or fissuring, as compared with those of Blacks. So, not only are White brains larger, they are also significantly more complex.

      Blacks also have considerably smaller frontal lobes. Frontal lobes are responsible for planning complex cognitive behavior, personality expression, decision making and moderating social behavior.

      This is a genetic trait because even malnourished Asians from poor countries have a larger brain on average than well fed blacks from western countries.

      Sources:

      Willerman et al. (1991) Using MRI obtained r’s ranging from .26 to .56 between IQ and the size of specific brain structures and an overall r of .38 between full-scale IQ and gray matter volume when body size is controlled for. Replications by Raz et al. (1993) and Wickett, Vernon and Lee (1994) found correlations between IQ and brain size of .41 and .47-49. Egan et al. (1994) found an r of .32 between IQ and brain size in a sample whose SD for IQ was 9.3.

      Beals, K. L., Smith, C. L., & Dodd, S. M. (1984). Brain size, cranial morphology, climate, and time machines. Current Anthropology 25, 301–330.

      Jensen, A. R. (1998). The g Factor. Westport, CT: Praeger.

      Rushton, J. P. & Ankney, C. D. (1996). Brain size and cognitive ability: Correlations with age, sex, social class, and race. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 3, 21-36.

      Ho, K. C., Roessmann, U., Straumfjord, J. V., & Monroe, G. (1980). Analysis of brain weight: I and II. Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine 104, 635–645.

      Johnson F. W. & Jensen (1994). Race and sex differences in head size and IQ. Intelligence 18: 309–33

      Rushton JP. (1997). Cranial size and IQ in Asian Americans from birth to age seven. Intelligence 25: 7–20.

      Rushton JP (1991). Mongoloid-Caucasoid differences in brain size from military samples [and NASA]. Intelligence 15: 351–9.

      Cranial Capacities:

      Study                    Black               White                Asian             Black/White

      Ho et al., 1980          1267                1370                                   .92

      Gould, 1981              1356                1426                 1426              .95

      Beals, 1984             1276                1362                 1380              .93

      Herskovits, 1993         1295                1421                 1451              .91

      Ruston (Army) 92         1346                1361                 1403              .98

      Ruston (ILO), 1994       1228                1284                 1312              .95
                  

      ————–

      Abstract:

      Genome-wide association studies establish that human intelligence is highly heritable and polygenic.

      General intelligence is an important human quantitative trait that accounts for much of the variation in diverse cognitive abilities. Individual differences in intelligence are strongly associated with many important life outcomes, including educational and occupational attainments, income, health and lifespan. Data from twin and family studies are consistent with a high heritability of intelligence, but this inference has been controversial. We conducted a genome-wide analysis of 3511 unrelated adults with data on 549 692 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) and detailed phenotypes on cognitive traits. We estimate that 40% of the variation in crystallized-type intelligence and 51% of the variation in fluid-type intelligence between individuals is accounted for by linkage disequilibrium between genotyped common SNP markers and unknown causal variants. These estimates provide lower bounds for the narrow-sense heritability of the traits. We partitioned genetic variation on individual chromosomes and found that, on average, longer chromosomes explain more variation. Finally, using just SNP data we predicted ~1% of the variance of crystallized and fluid cognitive phenotypes in an independent sample (P=0.009 and 0.028, respectively). Our results unequivocally confirm that a substantial proportion of individual differences in human intelligence is due to genetic variation, and are consistent with many genes of small effects underlying the additive genetic influences on intelligence.

      Molecular Psychiatry, 2011: 996-1005. doi: http://doi.org/10.1038/mp.2011.85

      ————–

      Intelligence Genes Discovered

      “We know that genetics plays a major role in intelligence but until now haven’t known which genes are relevant,” said Dr Michael Johnson, lead author of the study from the Department of Medicine at Imperial College.

      “This research highlights some of genes involved in human intelligence, and how they interact with each other.

      “What’s exciting about this is that the genes we have found are likely to share a common regulation, which means that potentially we can manipulate a whole set of genes whose activity is linked to human intelligence.

      “Our research suggests that it might be possible to work with these genes to modify intelligence, but that is only a theoretical possibility at the moment – we have just taken a first step along that road.”

      In the study, published in the journal Nature Neuroscience, the team of researchers looked at samples of human brain from patients who had undergone neurosurgery for epilepsy.

      They analysed thousands of genes expressed in the human brain, and then combined the results with genetic information from healthy people who had undergone IQ tests and from people with neurological disorders such as autism spectrum disorder and intellectual disability.

      They conducted various computational analyses and comparisons in order to identify the gene networks influencing healthy human cognitive abilities. Remarkably, they found that some of the same genes that influence human intelligence in healthy people were also the same genes that cause impaired cognitive ability and epilepsy when mutated, networks which they called M1 and M3.

      Dr Johnson added: “Traits such intelligence are governed by large groups of genes working together – like a football team made up of players in different positions.

      “We used computer analysis to identify the genes in the human brain that work together to influence our cognitive ability to make new memories or sensible decisions when faced with lots of complex information.

      “We found that some of these genes overlap with those that cause severe childhood onset epilepsy or intellectual disability.

      Previously it was thought that intelligence was determined by the formation of the cerebral cortex, the outermost layer of the human brain, also known as ‘grey matter.’ Grey matter plays a key role in memory, attention, perceptual awareness, thought and language.

      In contrast shared environmental factors such as home and school environment contributed between 14 and 21 per cent. The rest was made up by individual external influences such as diseases or friends.

      Nature Neuroscience, Imperial College London, December 2015

      —————

      Brain size and intelligence are related
      Published on June 19, 2005 at 3:09 PM

      People with bigger brains are smarter than their smaller-brained counterparts, according to a study conducted by a Virginia Commonwealth University researcher published in the journal “Intelligence.”

      The study could settle a long-standing scientific debate about the relationship between brain size and intelligence. Ever since German anatomist and physiologist Frederick Tiedmann wrote in 1836 that there exists “an indisputable connection between the size of the brain and the mental energy displayed by the individual man,” scientists have been searching for biological evidence to prove his claim.

      “For all age and sex groups, it is now very clear that brain volume and intelligence are related,” said lead researcher Michael A. McDaniel, Ph.D., an industrial and organizational psychologist who specializes in the study of intelligence and other predictors of job performance.

      The study is the most comprehensive of its kind, drawing conclusions from 26 previous – mostly recent – international studies involving brain volume and intelligence. It was only five years ago, with the increased use of MRI-based brain assessments, that more data relating to brain volume and intelligence became available.

      McDaniel, a professor in management in VCU’s School of Business, found that, on average, intelligence increases with increasing brain volume. Intelligence was measured with standardized intelligence tests, which have important consequences on peoples’ lives, such as where they’ll go to college or what kind of job they get. Critics have called the tests inaccurate or irrelevant to the real world, he said.

      “But when intelligence is correlated with a biological reality such as brain volume, it becomes harder to argue that human intelligence can’t be measured or that the scores do not reflect something meaningful,” said McDaniel.

      As an industrial and organizational psychologist, McDaniel works with employers to screen job applicants and measure their performance. He said employers will appreciate his findings because intelligence tests are the single best predictor of job performance.

      “On average, smarter people learn quicker, make fewer errors, and are more productive,” McDaniel said. “The use of intelligence tests in screening job applicants has substantial economic benefits for organizations.”

      Before MRIs, scientists often used external skull measurements or waited until a person died to estimate brain size. The external skull measurements were only approximate estimates of brain volume.

      —————

      A collaborative study led by researchers at the Montreal Neurological Institute (MNI), McGill University has demonstrated a positive link between cognitive ability and cortical thickness in the brains of healthy 6 to 18 year olds. The correlation is evident in regions that integrate information from different parts of the brain.

      The imaging study published this week in a special issue of scientific journal Intelligence is the largest and most comprehensive of its kind with a representative sample of healthy children and adolescents.

      This study stems from the NIH MRI Study of Normal Brain Development, for which the MNI was the data coordinating centre. The database contains MRI scans and other data on the structure and function of the developing brains. More than 500 children and adolescents from newborns to 18-year-olds had brain scans multiple times over a period of years as well as intelligence, neuropsychological, verbal, non-verbal and behavioural tests. This information is now contained within the database allowing scientists to study how normal developmental changes in brain anatomy relate to motor and behavioural skills, such as motor coordination and language acquisition. Even higher-order skills like planning, IQ, and organizational skills can be assessed.

      Previous studies have shown that intelligence and cognitive ability are correlated with regional brain structure and function. The association between regional cortical thickness and intelligence has been little studied and most previous studies of normal children had a relatively small sample. So with improvements in MRI-based quantification of cortical thickness and a much larger sample, researchers aimed to examine this relationship and to further characterize and identify brain areas where cortical thickness was associated with cognitive performance.

      The project was funded by National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, the National Institute on Drug Abuse, the National Institute of Mental Health, and the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and the Fonds de Recherché en Santé du Quebec (FRSQ).

    • Google: National IQ Congo

      ….then: IQ Koko the gorilla

      LOL

      IQ correlates strongly to job performance, increased wealth, increased income, economic growth, livability in a U.S. state, cooperation, life expectancy and infant mortality.

      It is estimated that a minimum IQ of 90 is required just to maintain a technological society.

      The more White a society is the more successful (safe and prosperous) it is.

      The following intelligence scores came from work carried out earlier this decade by Richard Lynn, a British psychologist, and Tatu Vanhanen, a Finnish political scientist, who analysed IQ studies from 113 countries, and from subsequent work by Jelte Wicherts, a Dutch psychologist. Lynn and Vanhanen benchmarked their IQ results so that Britain is 100. America scores 98 on this scale, and the world average is 90. IQ`s are assumed to form a normal probability distribution (“bell curve”) with the standard deviation set at 15.

      National IQ correlates at 0.73 with living standard.

      Each 10 point increase in IQ generally doubles economic growth, assuming the country has a market economy:

      • 108 Singapore
      • 106 South Korea
      • 105 Japan
      • 105 China
      • 102 Italy
      • 101 Iceland
      • 101 Mongolia
      • 101 Switzerland
      • 100 Austria
      • 100 Luxembourg
      • 100 Netherlands
      • 100 Norway
      • 100 United Kingdom
      • 99 Belgium
      • 99 Canada
      • 99 Estonia
      • 99 Finland
      • 99 Germany
      • 99 New Zealand
      • 99 Poland
      • 99 Sweden
      • 98 Andorra
      • 98 Australia
      • 98 Czech Republic
      • 98 Denmark
      • 98 France
      • 98 Hungary
      • 98 Latvia
      • 98 Spain
      • 98 United States
      • 97 Belarus
      • 97 Malta
      • 97 Russia
      • 97 Ukraine
      • 96 Moldova
      • 96 Slovakia
      • 96 Slovenia
      • 96 Uruguay
      • 95 Israel
      • 95 Portugal
      • 94 Armenia
      • 94 Georgia
      • 94 Kazakhstan
      • 94 Romania
      • 94 Vietnam
      • 93 Argentina
      • 93 Bulgaria
      • 92 Greece
      • 92 Ireland
      • 92 Malaysia
      • 91 Brunei
      • 91 Cambodia
      • 91 Cyprus
      • 91 Lithuania
      • 91 Thailand
      • 90 Albania
      • 90 Bosnia
      • 90 Chile
      • 90 Croatia
      • 90 Kyrgyzstan
      • 90 Turkey
      • 89 Cook Islands
      • 89 Costa Rica
      • 89 Laos
      • 89 Mauritius
      • 89 Serbia
      • 89 Suriname
      • 88 Ecuador
      • 88 Mexico
      • 88 Samoa
      • 87 Azerbaijan
      • 87 Bolivia
      • 87 Brazil
      • 87 Guyana
      • 87 Indonesia
      • 87 Iraq
      • 87 Myanmar
      • 87 Tajikistan
      • 87 Turkmenistan
      • 87 Uzbekistan
      • 86 Kuwait
      • 86 Philippines
      • 86 Seychelles
      • 86 Tonga
      • 85 Cuba
      • 85 Eritrea
      • 85 Fiji
      • 85 Kiribati
      • 85 Peru
      • 85 Trinidad and Tobago
      • 85 Yemen
      • 84 Afghanistan
      • 84 Bahamas
      • 84 Belize
      • 84 Colombia
      • 84 Iran
      • 84 Jordan
      • 84 Marshall Islands
      • 84 Micronesia
      • 84 Morocco
      • 84 Nigeria
      • 84 Pakistan
      • 84 Panama
      • 84 Paraguay
      • 84 Saudi Arabia
      • 84 Solomon Islands
      • 84 Uganda
      • 84 United Arab Emirates
      • 84 Vanuatu
      • 84 Venezuela
      • 83 Algeria
      • 83 Bahrain
      • 83 Libya
      • 83 Oman
      • 83 New Guinea
      • 83 Syria
      • 83 Tunisia
      • 82 Bangladesh
      • 82 Dominican Republic
      • 82 India
      • 82 Lebanon
      • 82 Madagascar
      • 82 Zimbabwe
      • 81 Egypt
      • 81 Honduras
      • 81 Maldives
      • 81 Nicaragua
      • 80 Barbados
      • 80 Bhutan
      • 80 El Salvador
      • 80 Kenya
      • 79 Guatemala
      • 79 Sri Lanka
      • 79 Zambia
      • 78 Congo
      • 78 Nepal
      • 78 Qatar
      • 77 South Africa
      • 76 Cape Verde
      • 76 Congo
      • 76 Mauritania
      • 76 Senegal
      • 74 Mali
      • 74 Namibia
      • 73 Ghana
      • 72 Tanzania
      • 71 Central African Republic
      • 71 Grenada
      • 71 Jamaica
      • 71 St Vincent, Grenadines
      • 71 Sudan
      • 70 Antigua, Barbuda
      • 70 Benin
      • 70 Botswana
      • 70 Rwanda
      • 70 Togo
      • 69 Burundi
      • 69 Cote d’Ivoire
      • 69 Ethiopia
      • 69 Malawi
      • 69 Niger
      • 68 Angola
      • 68 Burkina Faso
      • 68 Chad
      • 68 Djibouti
      • 68 Somalia
      • 68 Swaziland
      • 67 Dominica
      • 67 Guinea
      • 67 Guinea-Bissau
      • 67 Haiti
      • 67 Lesotho
      • 67 Liberia
      • 67 Saint Kitts
      • 67 Sao Tome
      • 66 Gambia
      • 64 Cameroon
      • 64 Gabon
      • 64 Sierra Leone
      • 64 Mozambique
      • 62 Saint Lucia
      • 59 Equatorial Guinea

      A least developed country (LDC) is a country that, according to the United Nations, exhibits the lowest indicators of socioeconomic development, with the lowest Human Development Index ratings of all countries in the world. A country is classified as a Least Developed Country if it meets three criteria:

      Poverty (adjustable criterion: three-year average GNI per capita of less than US $992, which must exceed $1,190 to leave the list as of 2012)

      Human resource weakness (based on indicators of nutrition, health, education and adult literacy) and

      Economic vulnerability (based on instability of agricultural production, instability of exports of goods and services, economic importance of non-traditional activities, merchandise export concentration, handicap of economic smallness, and the percentage of population displaced by natural disasters)

      34 of the 47 LDCs are sub-Saharan African. There are a combined 48 sub-Saharan countries with a total population of one billion earning an annual per capita GDP of $1,720 in 2014 USD and a life expectancy of 57 years.

      Some groups succeed all the time, everywhere. Some have never succeeded anywhere. Blacks are the oldest race so they should be the most advanced, but they have never been successful anywhere. Civilization didn’t advance until humans evolved from Blacks by hybridizing with the large-brained Neanderthals which produced a modern human with an increase in cranium capacity and a heavier, more developed brain. Blacks are also the only race without the derived form of MCPH1 microcephalin called haplogroup D which produces increased brain volume and density.

        • There are a billion Indians.

          Also, each population has a different range of distribution.

          To see it, Google: racial IQ bell curve

          For example, though the average IQ of East Asians is 6 points higher than the average non-Jewish White, the percentage distribution of East Asians with IQs above 140 is slightly lower. The reason for this is that the range of cognitive variation among Whites is greater than among East Asians. Specifically, Asians’ IQs are more clustered around the mean; therefore, Whites produce more geniuses, but also more morons.

          In India’s case, this could be reinforced by the enforced segregation by the social caste system.

      • I’m late to the party but i just stumbled across this article, very interesting facts you’re presenting, but how do you explain the enormous civilisation achievements by the Greeks and Egyptians when their IQ is on 92 and 81 respectively ?

    • Primitive Traits

      Blacks are a separate species from Whites and Asians

      In addition to brain size are differences in brain shape, fissuration, number of pyramidal neurons and supra-grandular layer thickness. The depth of fissuration is related to superior intelligence and the brains of Whites have deeper fissures in the frontal and occipital regions. The supra-grandular layer of Blacks’ brains is 16% smaller than it is for Whites’ brains.

      Blacks are the only racial group with no DNA from the large-brained Neanderthals, and also the only race without the derived form of MCPH1 microcephalin called haplogroup D which produces increased brain volume.

      Even before birth, population group differences in average brain size are found from the ninth week of intrauterine life with White fetuses averaging larger brain cases and smaller faces than Black fetuses, with the differences becoming more prominent over the course of fetal development.

      Weighing brains at autopsy, Whites averaged heavier brains than Blacks and had more complex convolutions and larger frontal lobes. Subsequent studies have found an average Black–White difference of about 100 g. Studies have found that the more White admixture (judged independently from skin color), the greater the average brain weight in Blacks. In a study of 1,261 American adults, Ho et al. (1980) found that 811 White Americans averaged 1,323 g and 450 Black Americans averaged 1,223 g. Since the Blacks and Whites were similar in body size, differences in body size cannot explain away the differences in brain weight.

      The same three-way pattern of race differences has been found using the simplest culture-free cognitive measures such as reaction time tasks, which 9- to 12-year-old children perform in less than 1 s. Lynn (2006) found that East Asian children from Hong Kong and Japan were faster than European children from Britain and Ireland, who in turn were faster than African children from South Africa. Using similar tasks, this pattern of racial differences was also found in California (Jensen, 1998; Rushton & Jensen, 2005). Within each group, the children with higher IQ scores perform faster those with lower scores.

      Race differences start in the womb. Blacks are born earlier and grow quicker than Whites and Asians. The three-way race pattern occurs in milestones such as sexual maturity, family stability, crime rates, and population growth.

      Black babies mature more quickly than White babies, while Asian babies mature more slowly. Black babies in a sitting position are more able to keep their heads up and backs straight from the start. White babies often need six to eight weeks to do these things. It is unlikely that social factors could produce these differences. A basic law of biology shows that longer infancy is related to greater brain growth.

      Black babies spend the least time in the womb. In America, 51% of Black children have been born by week 39 of pregnancy compared with 33% of White children. In Europe, Black babies of even professional mothers are born earlier than White babies.

      Black children sit, crawl, walk, and put on their own clothes earlier than Whites or Asians. The findings are measured by such tests as Bayley’s Scales of Mental and Motor Development and the Cambridge Neonatal Scales.

      Asian children, on the other hand, mature more slowly than do White children. Asian children often do not walk until 13 months. Walking starts at 12 months for white children and 11 months for Black children.

      In a combination of 19 studies on Black and White brain sizes, every single one shows Whites with a significantly larger brain size than Blacks. The calculated average White brain is 1398g and 1438cc while the average Black brain is 1275g and 1343cc – 91% and 93% of the average White brain. The heritability of brain size is extremely strong at 0.90 and not one study to date has shown larger brain size for Blacks, nor has any study shown anywhere close to equal brain size or structure for Blacks and Whites.

      The White brain has a high degree of fissuring (higher complexity) and the Black brain has a lower degree of fissuring (lower complexity) in the cerebral cortex of their brains, where abstract and conceptual thought is performed.

      Blacks have smaller skulls than Whites and a lower brain capacity. The long, narrow skull of Blacks is superior at dissipating heat and the more spherical skulls of Whites better retains heat which is explainable by the fact that Blacks evolved in a hot climate (Africa) and Whites evolved in a cold climate (Europe).

      Prognathism, the absence of “Facial flatness”, is significantly higher in Blacks than Whites and even higher in apes. The facial angle for Whites is 82°, 70° for Blacks as well as H.Habilis and H.Erectus, and 60° for gorillas. Prognathism is associated with a sloping forehead, which corresponds to a smaller frontal lobe, which is the part of the brain responsible for abstract and conceptual thinking.

      Blacks have higher rates of primitive traits compared to Whites. Blacks have more robust cranial bones, simpler cranial sutures, a higher rate of unclosed sutures, a lower cephalic index, a higher rate of saggital keel, more post-orbital constriction, a more sloped forehead, more rectangular eye sockets, a wider nasal index, less nasal prominence, a higher rate of joined nasal bones, a higher rate of sub-nasal prognathism, a lower facial angle, the presence of the “Simian shelf”, a more rectangular palate, larger and wider-apart teeth, less spinal curvature, shorter spinal length, a lower sacral index, and longer arms and legs.

      One can undeniably attribute the vast majority of these traits more strongly to chimpanzees, gorillas, H.Erectus, and archaic H.Sapiens compared to modern anatomical humans, hence justifying the label “Primitive.”

      The dome of the Asian skull is round and the face is flat. Although the Caucasian skull is a bit longer, it is very similar to the Asian skull, indicating that the Asians and Caucasians did not separate into two races all that long ago, or that there was interbreeding between their lineages.

      The African skull is quite different from the Asian and Caucasian skulls, indicating a much greater genetic distance between Eurasians and Africans than between Europeans and Asians. Compared to Asian and Caucasian skulls, the African skull is narrower. The bones of the skull (and the rest of the body) are denser and thicker. The eye sockets are rounder and proportionately larger and the distance between them is greater. The slight bump at the top of the head suggests a “saggital keel,” a ridge along the top of the head from the forehead to the back of the skull for attaching chewing muscles and strengthening the skull from blows received in fighting. The opening for the nose is wider, the nose bones protrude less, and the teeth more massive, with the incisors meeting at an angle.

      The most noticeable difference is the protruding jaw, a condition known as “prognathism,” a trait found in apes and in ancient human fossil skulls, even those not from Africa. The considerable gap between the cheekbones (“zygomatic arches”) and the indentation on the sides behind the eye sockets (“post-orbital constriction”) indicate that the more massive jaw was serviced by powerful chewing muscles that passed through the gap.

      At birth, Africans have fewer cranial bones than Eurasians. The skull bones (and other bones) in Africans are thicker and denser, even in the fetus, making them more difficult to break, which is an aid in head butting and fighting as blows to the head can easily be fatal. Some anthropologists believe skulls got thicker about 1.6 to 1.8 million years ago when erectus developed clubs as weapons, resulting in more cracked skulls. Denser bones (and less fat) make Africans less buoyant and less capable swimmers, but reduce their susceptibility to osteoporosis.

      The long, narrow skull of the Africans (dolichocephalic) loses heat the fastest and the more spherical skull of the Asians (brachycephalic) better retains heat. Comparing black, white, and Northeast Asian (Mongol) skulls, the black skull is more simian as it is long and narrow. The white and Mongol skulls are rounder and about the same size, but the cheek bones flair out more on the Mongol skull. There is a correlation of 0.37 between cranial capacity and the cephalic index, i.e., the long, narrow skulls of Africans have a smaller cranial capacity.

      The African skulls are very different from the skulls of all the other populations, even the Australian aborigines. The Black skull is smaller, with less space in the forehead, but proportionately more at the back.

      The difference between Eurasians and Africans in their nasal spines is dramatic. The anterior nasal spine is a small bone that extends outward from the middle of the base of the nasal cavity; it supports a nose that protrudes. The nasal spine is prominent in Caucasians, less so in Asians and small or absent in Africans. The race of a skull can be determined by placing a pen across the base of the nasal cavity. If the pen is held in place by the nasal spine, the skull is Caucasian; if it rolls off, the skull is African; chimpanzees and gorillas also lack a true anterior nasal spine.

      Simian prognathism (a protruding jaw with a recessed nose) is a very primitive trait that is characteristic of apes. A jutting jaw is needed if the teeth are large, plus it is an advantage in fighting as it permits a bigger bite and makes the eyes less vulnerable.

      Prognathism, the absence of “facial flatness” can be measured by means of the facial angle, the slope of the face from the forehead to the jaws. The facial angle is 70° for the “Black” (i.e., Congoids); H. habilis and H. erectus also have a facial angle of about 70°. An angle of 60° has been given for the Hottentots and Bushmen, and 66.6° for the Australian aborigines below the nose. Orangutans have a facial angle of 58°. A facial angle of 100° as the epitome of beauty. Africans have “remarkable prognathism.”

      A protruding jaw is usually associated with a sloping forehead which indicates a smaller prefrontal cortex, the area of the brain that handles planning, inhibition, and self control. Thus, the absence of prognathism is seen as less bestial and an indication of higher intelligence.

      In Eurasians, the upper teeth usually overlap the lower incisors, but in Africans the upper incisors are mounted in the jaw at an angle and project forward so that they meet the lower at an angle. The gorilla’s teeth meet at an even greater angle. African teeth are more primitive than Eurasian teeth and there are many other differences in their structures.

      A larger diameter pelvis will be selected for if baby head size, and therefore brain size, increases. Africans, with the smallest skulls, also have the smallest pelvis and give birth more easily. Pelvic measurements can be used not only to distinguish males from females, but even American white males from American black males, with about 75% accuracy.

      The sacral index is the breadth of the sacrum (the five fused vertebrae that are connected to the pelvis) as a percentage of its length. Walking upright increased the sacral index, enabling the sacrum to better support the internal organs, so a low sacral index is more primitive and a high sacral index is more modern. As usual, Blacks are closest to the apes. Note that the Blacks and the Andamenese are close together, especially for the females. The hips of blacks are also narrower, which makes walking and running more efficient for them. Overall Europeans have the highest sexual dimorphism, even before birth, and Asians the lowest.

      Vertebrae can also be used to help determine race. A “simian notch,” a much narrower second sacral vertebra, that is much narrower laterally than the first or third vertebrae, is characteristic of pongids [apes] and is frequent in Africans, among whom it appears to be a primary character.

      The heel bone projects more in Africans and differs in length, breadth, shape, and position, giving Africans a greater ability to sprint and jump. This is one reason why Africans excel in sports that require jumping. African feet are flatter and there is more separation between the first and second toes.

      Blacks have arms which are longer, relative to body height, than those of Whites. This feature, together with their much thicker cranial bones, gives Black athletes an advantage over Whites. The skeletal and muscular peculiarities of Blacks’ lower limbs have given them considerable success as sprinters, but have left them relative undistinguished as distance runners.

      The hair of a Black is black, crispy, and “woolly” in texture, it is flat and elliptical with no central canal or duct like the hair of Whites.

      The nose is thick, broad and flat, often turned up nostrils exposing the red inner lining of the mucous membrane similar to an ape.

      The arms and legs of the Black are relatively longer than the White. The humerus is shorter and the forearm longer thereby approximating the simian form.

      The eyes are prominent, iris black and the orbits large. The eye often has a yellowish sclerotic coat over it like that of a gorilla.

      The Black has a shorter trunk the cross-section of the chest is more circular than Whites. The pelvis is narrower and longer as it is in an ape.

      The mouth is wide with very thick, large and protruding lips.

      Black skin has a thick superficial layer which resists scratching and impedes the penetration of germs.

      The Black has a larger and shorter neck akin to that of anthropoids.

      The cranial sutures are more simple than in the white type and close together earlier.

      The ears of Blacks are roundish, rather small, standing somewhat high and detached thus approaching the simian form.

      The Black is more powerfully developed from the pelvis down and the White more powerfully developed in the chest.

      The jaw is larger and stronger and protrudes outward which, along with lower retreating forehead, gives a facial angle of 68 to 70 degrees as opposed to a facial angle of 80 to 82 degrees for Whites.

      The hands and fingers are proportionally narrower and longer. The wrist and ankles are shorter and more robust.

      The frontal and paricial bones of the cranium are less excavated and less capacious. The skull is thicker especially on the sides.

      The brain of the Black on the average is 9% smaller than Whites.

      The teeth are larger and are wider apart than in the White race.

      The three curvatures of the spine are less pronounced in the Black than in the White and thus more characteristic of an ape.

      The femur of the Black is less oblique, the tibia (shin bone) more curved and bent forward, the calf of the leg high and but little developed.

      The heel is broad and projecting, the foot long and broad but slightly arched causing flat soles, the great toe is shorter than in the White.

      The two bones proper of the nose are occasionally united, as in apes.

      Genetic distance is a measure of the genetic divergence between species or between populations within a species. Populations with many similar genes have small genetic distances. This indicates that they are closely related and have a recent common ancestor.

      Blacks have a genetic distance of 0.23 from Whites and Asians, but only 0.17 from Erectus. That means Blacks are more closely related to archaic hominids than to modern man.

      This is intuitive because we understand that humans evolved from Blacks in Africa.

      For comparison, the genetic distance between Blacks and modern man is greater than the genetic distance between the common chimpanzee and the bonobo (0.103, or half the Black-White distance) and between Gorilla gorilla and the Gorilla beringei (0.04, or 1/6 the Black/White distance) which are classified as separate species.

      So to be consistent and objective with taxonomic classification systems Blacks and Whites should be classified into separate species, or at least into different subspecies.

      The genetic distance between the races of man is also much greater than that between the breeds of dog, and anyone who has experience with dogs knows what a huge difference breed makes, not only in physical appearance but also in behavior and intelligence.

      Blacks are the only race with no DNA from the large-brain Neanderthal (Blacks have 2% archaic admixture). Whites are hybridized with Neanderthal, and Asians have both Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA.

      Modern man has on average 5% Neanderthal DNA, therefore he would be an F4 (4th filial generation from full purebred Neanderthal). That is about the same as most claiming Cherokee ancestors today.

      It is equivalent to having one Neanderthal great-great-great-grandparent. Blacks also coexisted and interbred with archaic hominids (heidelbergensis) for longer than those who left Africa.

      • You’re fantastic, and these facts speak for themselves. But you know the postmodernist race deniers will use epistemological relativism to dodge the implications.

    • Years ago I, a white guy of a “thin, skinny” body type took a legal precursor to testosterone. It had a big effect on me, making me more extroverted and confidant as well as more motivated to exert in workouts and able to lift more. I had been lifting at that time for a few years so was well able to gauge this.

      I am by nature mildly to sometimes very shy, and totally lost any concern from what others thought apart from obvious things we know. I only stopped because I had to stop the workouts because I had become unaccustomely reckless and while making gains I had never seen before or since did some rotator cuff damage so had to stop.

      Only point is that the legal precursor I used couldn’t have pushed my level up 15 to 20%. If I wasn’t already introverted and normally withdrawn, and already a grown man I might well have gotten into fights due to cocky aggressiveness. The difference of that much testosterone on average speaks strongly to me.

    • Your stats are wack. Can’t use stats where a certain race is a target anyway. Said “blacks make up 50% of the prison population” I wonder why? Because they are targeted. You should be smart enough to know that

          • Obama isn’t Black.

            …and I meant as a race.

            Every race produces geniuses, but not at the same rate.

            Black-White IQ Distribution:

            For a graphical representation of the racial IQ gap Google: racial IQ bell curve

            Percentages below are from a cumulative percentages graph for readability:

            Blacks:
                             5% above 110 IQ
                             16% above 100 IQ
                             40% above 90 IQ
                             70% above 80 IQ
                             40% below 80 IQ
                             18% below 75 IQ
                             10% below 70 IQ

            Whites:
                             10% above 120 IQ
                             18% above 115 IQ
                             27% above 110 IQ
                             40% above 105 IQ
                             50% above 100 IQ
                             60% below 105 IQ
                             35% below 95 IQ
                             15% below 85 IQ

            So, the smartest 16% of Blacks are as intelligent as smartest 50% of Whites. 80% of Blacks score at or below the “low functioning” category.

            The least intelligent ten percent of Whites have IQs below 80; forty percent of Blacks have IQs that low.

            Only one Black in six is more intelligent than the average White; five Whites out of six are more intelligent than the average Black.

            Only one-in-3.5 million (.00003%) African Blacks have an IQ of 140 or higher (genius level). But one-in-83 (1.2%) U.S. Whites is a genius. Therefore the per capita genius rate for U.S.-resident Whites is 41,000 times higher than it is for African Blacks.

            Black females have higher IQs than Black males. Black female IQ is 2.4 points higher than Black male IQ. There are twice as many Black females as Black males with IQs over 120 and five times as many Black females as Black males with IQs over 140.

            As the New York Times put it, “…the difference in I.Q. points between the groups is quite significant. It means that the top sixth of Blacks score only as well on I.Q. tests as do the top half of Whites.”

            The standard deviation for African Blacks (IQ 67) is 9, meaning that 99% have an IQ of less than 100. The standard deviation for US-resident Blacks (IQ 85) is 12.4, meaning only one US-resident Black in about 218,000 will have an IQ above 140.

          • Your arguments would be more convincing were they not sourced from Lynn, Rushton or Jensen or some other Pioneer Fund grantee with an obvious agenda.

            Stop copy-pasting from “The Bell Curve” and actually make an intellectual argument based on a real understanding of genetics, history, politics, geography, etc.

          • YOU are the one demonstrating an obvious agenda.

            Provide an example of an assertion I made that you believe is factually incorrect.

          • That was a dodge…and not a very good one. If your bob and weave looks anything like that, it’s chicklets. You should resume the conversation by establishing the legitimacy of the data. Good luck Robbie Rob.

          • I’m not going to waste my time picking through Rushton’s nonsense. He was a joke. He once cited an article from Penthouse Forum in a scholarly journal.

            He mostly relied on literature reviews for his data and everyone who tried to replicate the results he got from the data had dramatically different results and found signs of manipulation in his methodology (Gorey, Cryns, 1994; Cernovsky 1995).

            Gorey compared his data with a random sample of data from the same pool. And he found that only 20 percent of the studies controlled for socioeconomic status vs. nearly 50 percent in the random sample. On average they were 10 years older than the random sample.

            While I’m debunking Rushton, I’ll debunk Lynn. Wicherts tried to replicate the data for “IQ and the Wealth of Nations” and it was the same thing. Lynn used data from some studies as old as the 1950s and he had a habit of selecting those that would bring the lowest results, e.g. poor tribes in Nigeria and illiterates in South Africa. They also used a variety of different IQ tests, some of which are outdated.

          • “Stop copy-pasting from “The Bell Curve”……

            Cite an assertion I made which you claim is from The Bell Curve.

            Provide an example of an assertion from The Bell Curve that you dispute.

          • Would you rather they quoted Gould or Montague, or some other Marxist with an even less thinly-veiled agenda?

          • I wouldn’t say the Pioneer Fund’s agenda is even thinly veiled. A bride is thinly veiled. The Pioneer Fund was founded to promote the propagation of the descendants of the “white pioneers” and one of its first grantees was a project modeled on the Nazi Lebensborn program to breed soldiers of “superior stock.” The political beliefs of any particular scientist— Gould or Lewontin or whoever — are irrelevant. The vast majority of the natural and social sciences are united on the issue of whether folk biological taxonomies are meaningful constructs. They’re not. All of the race reductionists are psychologists, including all of the ones I named. Isn’t it conspicuous that there’s not a single person with a degree in genetics among them?

          • What about Steve Hsu? It’s interesting to note that East Asians have no problem with the facts of human subspeciation, whereas white westerners do. Of course the East Asians have several advantages in getting to the truth of the matter, namely that they haven’t been infested by the postmodernism and epistemic relativism that we in the west have been subjected to. Sociology and the humanities have been completely corrupted by cognitive relativism, and I fear there is nothing left to be salvaged from those disciplines, if you can even call them that.

          • Before I even get into Steve Hsu and how much he sucks, let me try to follow your logic, regarding “East Asians” and the “facts” of “human subspeciation.” Reducing “East Asians” to a homogenous group obscures the motivations of a particular subset of East Asians, i.e the Chinese, with whom Hsu is working at the Beijing Genomics Institute.

            You dismiss Gould for being an ideologically motivated Marxist and then counter, saying that Chinese research is somehow more objective because they aren’t affected by the same taboos. But taboos have nothing to do with it.

            I live in China and without going into specifics about my occupation for the sake of privacy, I’m pretty intimately familiar with Chinese research. China practices a form of corporatism in which the Party is involved in every aspect of civil society and the BGI is closely affiliated with the Chinese Academy of Science, a Party-controlled Marxist/nationalist organization. So basically what you are saying is “Don’t listen to this group of scientists. They’re a bunch of Marxists. Listen to these other Marxist scientists who say things I agree with.”

            In other words, you are judging the reliability of sources by the degree to which their claims match your own preconceived notions rather than the degree to which they conform to the bulk of empirical evidence and scientific literature.

            I can tell you from first-hand experience that a lot of Chinese research is ideologically motivated, not by Marxism but by nationalist ideology. For years, the Chinese resisted the dominant recent African origins and taught in schools that Chinese people evolved separately from homo erectus.

            You’re right that they don’t have the same taboos. But that’s not necessarily a good thing. The family-planning departments that enforced the one-child policy were also called “Eugenics” departments and they forced sterilized people and their zealous practices resulted in sex-selective abortion and female infanticide.

          • There’s a big difference between regular Marxism and the cultural Marxism espoused by postmodernist academics. You neglected to respond to my comment about the infestation of postmodernism in the social sciences and humanities, so I can only assume that you may be infected also.

            You could say Chinese research is ideologically motivated, and that may be true, but the results are not tainted in the same way as they are in the west. The postmodernist miasma is so thick in the atmosphere of our academia, one cannot breathe without being subjected to its effects.

            Taboos have everything to do with it. Look what happened to E.O. Wilson in the 70’s, or to James Watson more recently.

          • I’m not going to get into some big wankfest about post-modernism with you. The basic point is that the argument that biological races aren’t a meaningful category comes from genetics and biology, not the social sciences.

            It comes from basically all the sciences, except for a fringe group that I can almost count on one hand. And the major commonality among that group is they are all tied to the Pioneer Fund, as board members (Richard Lynn), heads (JP Rushton) or or as grantees (Linda Gottfredson, Jensen, Murray,).

            The irony is that the only race reductionists left in academia are almost exclusively in the social sciences, and as I pointed out before, they all are tied to one another and the same eugenicist fund. They all cite each other extensively in their “research.” That is when they are not citing research from 1920.

            Rushton was and Lynn is an awful scholar and I imagine they were pretty bad human beings as well. Rushton famously cited an article from Penthouse Forum, from which I’m guessing he derived most of his scholarly inspiration.

            That would be the basis of his wacky r/k selection theory in which he posited that intelligence was inversely correlated with dong size size and it was a reflection of some kind of evolutionary adaption.

            Basically, his hypothesis was black man penis big = not smart. Chinaman penis small = smart. White man penis and brain = just right. Maybe it sounds really dumb when I write it like that.That’s because it is. This is dumb. Really, really dumb.

            Lynn of course, is carrying on Rushton’s insane torch with his own extensive examination (of the topic) of black men’s genitals “An examination of Rushton’s theory of differences in penis length and circumference and r-K life history theory in 113 populations”

            And compare the citations from the above paper, with the most recent position paper from the APA. It has leading psychologists from multiple institutions and pages upon pages of citations.

            http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/amp-67-2-130.pdf

            So let me ask you. Say you go to 99 doctors and they diagnose you with cancer, then prescribe you chemotherapy. Then you see one doctor of alternative medicine who bases his theories on the humors. He decides that you’re bilious and prescribes a tincture of mercury.

            Who are you going to go with?

          • But back to Hsu. Steve Hsu is not a geneticist either. He’s a theoretical physicist. It’s true that he works with the Beijing Genomics Institute, but they hired him for his abilities as a research administrator, not his expertise in genetics.

            It’s a pretty common practice for Chinese companies to try to snag a big-name Western expert to give their projects credibility and “face.” But it’s kind of telling that they couldn’t find an actual geneticist with relevant research management experience who was willing to fill the role.

            Most of the serious geneticists probably thought it was a fools errand to try identify all the genes associated with a polygenic trait like intelligence, which is estimated to involve thousands of genes.

            To quote an article in Nature about the BGI project: “If they think they’re likely to get much useful data out of this study, they’re almost certainly wrong,” says Daniel MacArthur, a geneticist at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston. He is not against intelligence studies in principle, despite the visceral reactions they provoke in some people. “Studying intelligence is useful for understanding cognitive function, or diseases” that affect it, he says. But he questions whether the study will work.

          • I feel compelled to ask, to what extent is the debate even scientific anymore? There doesn’t seem to be any scientific dispute. Everyone agrees with the genetics, everyone agrees that the migrations into different parts of the world and the resulting isolation resulted in morphological differences. The debate seems to be entirely conceptual and outside the sphere of actual science. I sense epistemological relativism lurking in the background; the view that concepts are how we organize experience or carve up reality. The modern take isn’t that concepts are ways to carve up reality, but are abilities to track and re-identify stable patterns in nature. In other words, you start with the realist ontology and then ask how people manage to track these real patterns in nature, in order to identify what is ontologically the same at various times and under various conditions. To apply to the race debate, you start with the phenomena that people in different places display characteristic features. We then ask scientists to explain this phenomena. We have a perfectly good explanation for it – that people migrated into different parts of the world and developed different traits. The genetics are interesting in that they show how these migrations and adaptations are preserved in the genetic record. But what you don’t do is claim that the phenomena isn’t there or isn’t real or that the groupings aren’t based in nature. Sometimes science does show that a phenomena isn’t real, but usually what it does is challenge explanations for phenomena and offer better ones (fire is not phlogiston, mental illness isn’t witchcraft). But that’s not what is happening here. No one is challenging the explanation for the phenomena of race; namely, that race is the result of migration and isolation. Instead they’re challenging whether the phenomena exists at all, which is insane.

            Alas, it seems that today a fact that cannot be mentioned is the reality of differences between distinct geographical populations. We are supposed to believe that there’s no general IQ difference between Ashkenazi Jews and African pygmies, that there’s no meaningful difference in physical attributes between white Europeans and Australian aborigines. The often hysterical hypersensitivity surrounding these facts is understandable in light of the slavery and genocides of the last two centuries, but facts are facts, and some of the social differences in the world can only be properly understood when we take certain fundamental biological differences into account.

          • You can’t possibly expect me to that marathon of sophistry and pseudointellectual masturbation. You talk about “epistemological relativism” but that’s not an issue. Science and rationality are the dominant epistemologies and genetics and biology follow the method of science as a way of knowing.

            This isn’t all an issue of semantics. Taxonomy is pretty central to biology. Without it, the whole thing kinda falls apart. Defining a “biological race” isn’t arbitrary, and it’s defined by what is functionally useful in research. Clines and population clusters are useful. Races aren’t.

            As I said Africa has many population clusters and the greatest genetic diversity. Some separate population clusters even live in different parts of the same country. It’s pretty unscientific to group them all together as (Negroid).

            I really think you have a strange concept of how academia works. It’s not a matter of people being “squeamish” or a taboo about the research. They just kind of feel it would be like trying to disprove gravity.

          • Yes it is an issue, because people like you make it one. You don’t try to deconstruct animal taxonomy, only human taxonomy, because the implications disturb you. But we are animals, and all animals have subspecies. Humanity is not a divine exception to the rule. Africa has the greatest genetic diversity, you say? I guess that’s why so many Africans have multiple hair colours, eye colours and so forth. I know that the issue of negro primitiveness is a particularly sensitive subject, but the evidence to me seems pretty damning, and we ignore it at our peril. One points out the disturbing physiological traits they share with archaic hominids and is met with “that’s racist”, which is not a rebuttal. It’s indignation, which counts for nothing. Please read the Boetel and Fuerst paper and save me further effort.

          • But in terms of Hsu’s argument and the standard argument that folk taxonomies (or “races”) are meaningful biological constructs, I will rebut that briefly here.

            1.) Though the 2005 study by Rosenberg et. al and others found that self-identified racial groups accurately reflected continental origins, Rosenberg explicitly stated in the study that this should not be taken as evidence that “races” are useful constructs for the purposes of biology. Biologists prefer to use clines and population clusters, which don’t show discrete differences in genetic based on continental lines, but rather gradual changes.

            A good example of this is Michael Jackson’s daughter who is just as black genetically as Barack Obama, and “self-identifies” as black, though phenotypically she looks white and will have a life that much more closely resembles an average white person’s life in terms of opportunities and how society treats her. But you could look at her genes and say that her origins can be traced back to Africa and it matches her “self-identified” race.

            Also, just grouping a population by continental origins is not meaningful, especially when you are talking about Africa, which has the highest human genetic diversity on the planet, so it’s ludicrous to call Africans one “race.” Sickle-cell anemia is considered a “black disease” in the US, but it’s actually equally common in parts of the Middle East and India, where there is a high incidence of malaria.

            2.) What we know about evolution and how long it takes, doesn’t support “sub-speciation.” It takes about 1 million years for significant evolutionary change to occur even in extreme isolation. Humans left Africa about 100,000-50,000 years ago, so that is not enough time for significant changes to occur genetically except for the phenotypical adaptations most relevant to environment, i.e. skin color, which is why you have people in equatorial regions of Southeast Asia and Australian aborigines with skin almost as dark as black Africans, but totally different genetics.

            Furthermore, the selection mechanism of evolution obviously started to slow down as societies settled and formed civilizations. For natural selection to occur, poor adaptation to a species environment has to prevent the species from reaching reproductive age. Once settled, most humans were able to reach reproductive age with no problem, so evolution slowed down and largely became a social phenomenon of adapting, not genetically but through forms of social organization and technology.

            3.) The biological definition for race and subspecies is about 17 percent to 25 percent genetic difference. The general consensus among the genetics community is that Genetic difference between *any* given population is less than 10 percent.

            So as you can see, it’s not “sociology” or the “humanities” that define race as a social construct. It’s the hard sciences, i.e. biology and genetics, that take this view. The only dissenters against this consensus are all in the soft sciences (mostly psychology) and the vast majority of them (Jensen, Rushton, Gottfredson, Lynn, MacDonald) are funded by the Pioneer Fund, which got its start collaborating with Nazi eugenicists.

            If Steve Hsu is the best example of someone in the natural sciences, you can come up with, then you’re in trouble. “But he’s a theoretical physicist, so he must be smart, right?” Yeah, but he also authored a bunch of Bible books and religion and Biology aren’t exactly sympatico. Ben Carson is a brain surgeon, but I don’t really trust his theories about who built the pyramids and for what purpose.

          • Now you’re getting further and further from credible sources. I asked for specific papers and research from someone with genetics credentials, not some links to a neoreactionary with no science background, who’s known for, among other things, saying black people really had it pretty good under slavery and that Leopold II wasn’t such a bad guy after all.

            And I have had the misfortune of visiting the Alternative Hypothesis. Half of the studies he cites don’t actually say what he says they say. And the other half are the usual suspects (Lynn, Rushton)

            For example, in the article “Debunking a Denier” he cites Rosenberg, 2005, but explicitly omits the part where the paper states that “biological races” are not meaningful constructs. He also skips over a lot of Debunking Denialism’s better points, especially his explanation of the meaning of heritability.

            I suggest you read “Modern Throughput Genomics vs. Race Realism” on debunking denialism’s page.

          • It’s funny how you don’t get geneticists debating whether animal species are meaningful constructs. I guess it’s because human dignity isn’t on the line there, so they have no motivation to deconstruct it. This kind of Boasian obscurantism is to be expected, but if none of that was good enough for you, please download the Boetel and Fuerst paper.

        • “Where have Blacks ever been successful?”

          What little success blacks have ever achieved on the planet had that opportunity afforded to them by another race.
          And of course that success pales in comparison to the disproportionate amount of dysfunction and destruction blacks cause.

    • Rob – love the comment, but you made an error: Great Britain’s gun homicide rate is certainly not 50% that of the USA’s. It’s less than one tenth that of the USA.

      • Samuel Hall – And what does the CDC say about how much “hire” black STD/HIV/AIDS rates are than when compared to whites?

        Whites aren’t really worried about skin cancer: They invented sunscreen.
        But yet the average Negro can’t even protect himself from life-threatening disease by using something as simple as a condom.

          • On the other hand you’ve got nothing meaningful to say about his claims so your only angle of attack is spelling which isn’t relevant at all in the current discussion… Nice attempt at trying to change the subject but sadly for you things don’t work that simply especially on the internet.

  27. I disagree with banning them from imbibing or ingesting certain chemicals after their sentence is served, certainly they should be given information about such environmental triggers and advised on that taking part in such will make them more likely to reoffend and or making no alcohol or illicit drugs part of their parole conditions, but once someone has served their sentence, they’re a free man, their debt to society is paid and they should be entitled to the same rights and treatment as any other citizen.

  28. But it doesn’t take the focus off genes or the legitimacy of genetic testing for behaviour. The instigation of social controls for people on the basis of what they might do comes purely from the interpretation of a few specific genes This whole argument is just sleight of hand. And the plea to not pick holes in it is appalling obvious. Don’t worry about the science, just do what I say. You know it makes sense. This is satire isn’t it? Seems like a joke to me.

  29. “Therefore, a Black is 2.5 times more likely to be a pedophile than a White”

    That’s not what we’re seeing in reality. There must be something else that is more common to people of european descent causing it.

  31. Race is an artificial categorization of people based primarily on physical features and primary geographic nodes of origin.

    Please direct me to scientific studies that have mapped all coded and non-coded genetic materials to any one group of people.

    And Real Objectifiying Belligerenets, please provide me with the certification that you are therefore 100% of anything.

  33. I will now copy-pasta a previous comment I made on this kind of post.

    When you consider that blacks are still in the waning periods of social mobility in the United States, you’ll understand the crime rates. Genetics doesn’t have much (if any at all) to do with it. Humans are taught how to act- molded by societal structures, external stresses, and parental figures. When you place humans in conditions imperiled by Jim Crow, formalic poverty, and racism, you increase their proclivity to crime. Adults born into crime often birth children who take up crime, reinforced by an environment that sustains itself on crime.

    So of course, minority races will have higher crime rates when their positions have been hamstrung. You don’t see nature, you see the result of a niche within human society struggling to catch up.

    • “When you consider that blacks are still in the waning periods of social mobility in the United States, you’ll understand the crime rates. Genetics doesn’t have much (if any at all) to do with it.”

      Completely false.

      Blacks have 21% higher free testosterone compared to Whites. Testosterone is associated with impulsive, aggressive, and violent behavior.

      Journal National Cancer Institute, 1986 Jan; 76(1):45-8. PMID: 3455741

      Richard et al. (2014) meta-analyzed data from 14 separate studies and found that Blacks had higher levels of free floating testosterone in their blood than Whites suggesting that testosterone levels may predispose Blacks towards higher rates of crime.

      Compounding this, a high percentage of Blacks have dysfunctional versions of the MAOA androgen receptor gene which is a key part of the mechanism by which testosterone has its effects throughout the body and brain.

      MAOA’s job is to break down crucial neurotransmitters which can build up in the brain and cause a loss of impulse control and an increase in violence and rage.

      The MAOA gene can come in the form of 2, 3, 3.5, 4, or 5 allele. A 3-repeat allele is considered dysfunctional and is what is referred to as the “warrior gene”. A 2-repeat (2R) allele is considered very dysfunctional.

      The 2-repeat allele does not produce a protein needed to break down old serotonin. It is strongly correlated to criminality and doubles the rate of violence of the 3R without needing an environmental interaction mechanism. People with a 2-repeat allele MAOA gene have a permanent chemical imbalance in their brain making the person more likely to be agitated, aggressive, and impulsive.

      Only 0.00067% of Asians and .5% of Whites have the MAOA 2-repeat allele version, compared to 4.7% of Blacks.

      That means Blacks are 9.4x more likely to have the very dysfunctional version of the MAOA gene than Whites. Considering that Blacks are 10x more likely to commit extreme violence and anti-social behavior than Whites, this is very significant.

      Blacks are also more likely to have versions of dopamine genes like ANKK1 and DAT1 that have been linked to antisocial behavior.

      A 2012 study using the Add Health data found that the 2-repeat version of the MAOA gene is significantly associated with antisocial behavior and the likelihood of criminality in Black males.

      Exploring the association between the 2-repeat allele of the MAOA gene promoter polymorphism and psychopathic personality traits, arrests, incarceration, and lifetime antisocial behavior — Kevin M. Beaver a, John Paul Wright b, Brian B. Boutwell c, J.C. Barnes d, Matt DeLisi e, Michael G. Vaughn

      ABTRACT:

      Analyses revealed that Black males who carried the 2-repeat allele were, in comparison with other Black male genotypes, significantly more likely to be arrested and incarcerated. Additional analyses revealed that Black male carriers of the 2-repeat allele scored significantly higher on an antisocial phenotype index and on measures assessing involvement in violent behaviors over the life course. There was not any association between the 2-repeat allele and a continuously measured psychopathic personality traits scale. The effects of the 2-repeat allele could not be examined in White males because only 0.1% carried it.

      https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/exploring-the-association-between-the-2-repeat-allele-of-the-maoa-gene.pdf

               •   Black males age 18-35 years of age are only 3.3% of the U.S. population, yet have committed 52% of homicides from 1980-2008. Black males (all ages) are only 6% of the U.S. population, yet commit 46% of all violent crimes, and 50% of the gun homicides. If Blacks were removed from the equation, the U.S. gun homicide rate would be equal to Great Britain’s, who have some of the most restrictive gun control laws in the world.

               •   The Black homicide rate is 17 per 100,000, a rate over 9x that of the White rate, and comparable to some of those most murderous countries in the world.

               •   If the homicide rate for the U.S. were the White-only rate, the homicide rate would drop 84%, making the U.S. rate comparable to European countries.

               •   Of the nearly 770,000 violent interracial crimes committed every year involving Blacks and Whites, Blacks commit 85 percent and Whites commit 15 percent. This means that a Black is 27 times more likely to attack a White person than vice versa.

               •   For each one standard deviation increase in proportion of Black population, firearm homicide rate is increased by 82.8%. Therefore, the U.S. has a Black problem, not a gun or violent crime problem.

               •   Murder is the leading cause of death for Black men, ages 15 to 34. Their murderers are almost always other Black men; 93 percent of Black homicide victims are killed by other Blacks.

               •   When Blacks commit crimes of violence, they are nearly three times more likely than non-Blacks to use a gun, and more than twice as likely to use a knife.

               •   Black males between 16-35 years of age are only 4.2% of the population, yet commit 72% of the street crime in America.

               •   The single best indicator of violent crime levels in an area is the percentage of the population that is Black.

               •   White men and women who choose to date or marry Blacks are much more likely to suffer abuse from their partners, particularly spousal homicide. The highest risk of death by spousal homicide is incurred by White women married to Black men. A White woman married to a Black man is over 12 times as likely to be murdered by her husband as a White woman married to a White man. A White man married to a Black woman is 21 times as likely to be murdered by his wife as a White man married to a White woman.

               •   If New York City were all White, the murder rate would drop by 91 percent, the robbery rate by 81 percent, and the shootings rate by 97 percent. In an all-White Chicago, murder would decline 90 percent, rape by 81 percent, and robbery by 90 percent.

               •   Black serial killers have comprised over half of documented serial killers since the dawn of the 21st century at 56 percent, making up a total of 40 percent in years dating back to 1900. Blacks constituted 44% of the known serial killers during the 1995-2004 period and 38.2% of all multiple murderers (serial, mass, and spree combined) during 1976-1998 period. During the 2000-2010 decade, 62% of serial killers were Black.

      The Color of Crime:

      https://www.scribd.com/doc/305240780/The-Color-of-Crime

      https://archive.org/details/6396bf06c11b81777c27ca0edcb4fdbb4ae17354576954101f6d6ce3a015b806

      https://archive.org/details/SerialKillerRate

      • Can’t accept your point at face value, your sources don’t account for socio-economic differences, upon which my point was made.

        The data you have here doesn’t mean crap if you can’t apply it properly. More MAOA in blacks doesn’t mean that the earlier, unrelated point is untrue.

        Not sure if you’re trying to engage in bad faith debating, a troll, or genuinely new at this.

        • “….your sources don’t account for socio-economic differences……”

          Yes, they do. Did you read them?

          How about this; provide evidence of racial intellectual parity given same SES.

          • I’m afraid that’s not how it works, you said that my point was completely false, yet didn’t provide samples of intellectual incapability being caused by race despite SES, look for the works of Sophie von Stumm and Robert Plomin for more information about SES and intelligence if you must, but until you actually disprove my point, I’m not going to spend my time on you.

            Re-read your sources, I found them to be lacking. They don’t account for SES.

            Put up, or stop wasting my time.

        • Brain Size and Weight by Race:  American Whites vs. American Blacks (average 24% White admixture)

          A study by Ho et al. (1980) recorded the brain weights of 1,261 Americans, including 416 White and 228 Black men, taken from five years of records at Case Western Reserve University.

                   RESULTS:
                   Whites: 1392 grams (1442cc)
                   Blacks: 1286 grams (1332cc)

          Adult brain weight in relation to body height, weight, and surface area (1980), by Ho, Roessmann, Straumfjord, and Monroe.
          http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6893660

          A study by Bean (1906) recorded the brain weights of 125 Americans, including 37 White and 51 Black men, from an anatomical laboratory in Baltimore.

                   RESULTS:
                   Whites: 1341 grams (1389cc)
                   Blacks: 1292 grams (1339cc)

          Source: Some racial peculiarities of the Negro brain (1906), by Bean; page 408.
          http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/49594/1/1000050402_ftp.pdf

          A study by Pearl (1934) examined the recorded brain weights of 24 White and 379 Black soldiers who died during the War of Federal Tyranny (1861-65), most of whom died of pneumonia. Note the higher than average brain weights, perhaps due to the fact that these were strong young men in their prime and/or perhaps to a side-effect of pneumonia.

                   RESULTS:
                   Whites: 1471 grams (1524cc)
                   Blacks: 1342 grams (1390cc)

          Source: The Weight of the Negro Brain (1934), by Pearl.
          http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/pdf_extract/80/2080/431

          The largest autopsy study was performed by anthropologist Ralph Holloway (2004) at Columbia University Medical School on 1,391 Whites, 153 Hispanics, and 615 Blacks:

                   RESULTS:
                   Whites: 1285 grams (1331cc)
                   Hispanics: 1253 grams (1298cc)
                   Blacks: 1222 grams (1266cc)

          Measuring endocranial volume, the American anthropologist Samuel George Morton (1849) filled over 1,000 skulls with packing material and found that Blacks averaged about 5 cubic inches less cranial capacity than Whites. These results have stood the test of time (Gordon, 1934; Simmons, 1942; Todd, 1923).

          http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001071

          http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/14/science/14skull.html

          The largest study of race differences in endocranial volume was by Beals et al. (1984) with measurements of up to 20,000 skulls from around the world:

                   RESULTS:
                   Asians: 1415cc
                   Whites: 1362cc
                   Blacks: 1268cc

          Weighing brains at autopsy, Broca (1873) found that Whites averaged heavier brains than Blacks and had more complex convolutions and larger frontal lobes. Subsequent studies have found an average Black–White difference of about 100 g (Bean, 1906; Mall, 1909; Pearl, 1934; Vint, 1934). Some studies have found that the more White admixture (judged independently from skin color), the greater the average brain weight in Blacks (Bean, 1906; Pearl, 1934). In a study of 1,261 American adults, Ho et al. (1980) found that 811 White Americans averaged 1,323 g and 450 Black Americans averaged 1,223). Since the Blacks and Whites were similar in body size, differences in body size cannot explain away the differences in brain weight.

          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2668913/

        • A basic law of biology is that longer infancy is related to greater brain growth.

          Blacks are the only race not hybridized with the large-brained Neanderthals, and also the only race without the derived form of MCPH1 microcephalin called haplogroup D which produces increased brain volume.

          The correlation between brain size and IQ across 25 primate species is 0.77 (where 1.0 indicates that monozygotic twins have no variance in IQ and 0 indicates that their IQs are completely uncorrelated).

          Structural imaging of total brain gray and white matter volumes is perhaps the most obvious approach to correlate brain measures with general intelligence (Toga et al, 2005). Brain structure measured from MRI correlates with intelligence test scores as total brain volume (Gignac et al. 2003), as do the volumes of individual lobes and aggregate gray and white matter volumes (Posthuma et al. 2002).

          http://www.loni.usc.edu/~thompson/PDF/TT_ARN05.pdf

          Larger brains contain more neurons and synapses and process information faster. By adulthood, East Asians average one cubic inch more cranial capacity than Whites who average five cubic inches more than Blacks.

          In the commonly used Smith-Beals data set of 20,000 skulls worldwide, East Asians averaged 1415 cubic centimeters of brain volume. Ethnic Europeans averaged 1362 cubic centimeters, and sub-Saharan Africans averaged 1268 cubic centimeters.

          Brain Weight by Race:

                   •   Blacks   =   1261 g
                   •   Whites   =   1387 g
                   •   Asians   =   1374 g

          Brain Size by Race:

                   •   Blacks   =   1267 cm³
                   •   Whites   =   1347 cm³
                   •   Asians   =   1364 cm³

          Whites’ brains are faster, larger, denser, and more complex than Blacks’ brains:

                   •   7% larger
                   •   126 grams heavier
                   •   deeper fissuration in the frontal and occipital regions
                   •   more complex convolutions
                   •   larger frontal lobes
                   •   more pyramidal neurons
                   •   16% thicker supra-grandular layer
                   •   one standard deviation more cerebrum
                   •   react faster on mental chronometry tests
                   •   600 million more neurons

          Race differences start in the womb. Blacks are born earlier and grow quicker than Whites and Asians.

          Black babies mature more quickly than White babies, while Asian babies mature more slowly. Black babies in a sitting position are more able to keep their heads up and backs straight from the start. White babies often need six to eight weeks to do these things.

          Black babies spend the least time in the womb. 51% of Black children have been born by week 39 of pregnancy compared with 33% of White children.

          Black children sit, crawl, walk, and put on their own clothes earlier than Whites or Asians. The findings are measured by such tests as Bayley’s Scales of Mental and Motor Development and the Cambridge Neonatal Scales.

          Asian children, on the other hand, mature more slowly than do White children. Asian children often do not walk until 13 months. Walking starts at 12 months for white children and 11 months for Black children.

          MILESTONE: Being drawn up into a sitting position, able to prevent the head from falling backwards:

                   Black: Nine hours
                   White: Six weeks

          MILESTONE: With head held firmly, looking at the face of the examiner:

                   Black: Two days
                   White: Eight weeks

          MILESTONE: Supporting self in a sitting position and watching own reflection in a mirror:

                   Black: Seven weeks
                   White: Twenty weeks

          MILESTONE: Holding self upright:

                   Black: Five months
                   White: Nine months

          MILESTONE: Climbing the steps alone:

                   Black: 11 months
                   White: 15 months

          Sources:

          (Wilson, 1978). Also see (Levin, 1997; Freedman, 1969). “…the kinesthetic maturation rate of Black infants was two or three times that of White children.” (Simpson, 2003). Faster maturation goes along with a shorter life span. In 2002, Black Americans had 40.5% more deaths than they would have had with the White mortality rate. (A 2005 report by former U.S. Surgeon General David Satcher). The bodies of Blacks mature faster. (İşcan, 1987).

        • Blacks have small brains-

          Brain size and cognitive ability: Correlations with age, sex, social class, and race

          East Asians and their descendants = 1,364; Europeans and their descendants = 1,347; and Africans and their descendants = 1,267).

          Racial differences in head size appear early in life. Head circumference of White children are greater than that of Black children in each age category by a mean of 0.36 cm³ or approximately 0.2 SD. The greater head size of White children, however, is not a function of greater body size because Black children are taller than White children at both 4 and 7 years (Broman et al., 1987). From 7 to 17 years, the White advantage in cranial capacity is 16 cm³.

          https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758%2FBF03210739.pdf

          Blacks are the only race not hybridized with the large-brain Neanderthals. Blacks were left behind the heterosis, or hybrid vigor, provided by the Neanderthal DNA.

          Brain size by race-

          In the commonly used Smith-Beals data set of 20,000 skulls worldwide, East Asians averaged 1415 cubic centimeters of brain volume. Ethnic Europeans averaged 1362 cubic centimeters, and sub-Saharan Africans averaged 1268 cubic centimeters.

          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2668913/

          A study by Rushton (1992) estimated brain sizes based on head measurments of 6,325 military personnel (1,590 White and 1,381 Black men) taken by the U.S. Army in 1988.

          Results:

          Asian: 1416 cm³
          White: 1380 cm³
          Black: 1359 cm³

          Officers: 1393 cm³
          Enlisted: 1375 cm³

          Source: Cranial capacity related to sex, rank, and race in a stratified random sample of 6325 US military personnel (1992), by Rushton.

          http://philipperushton.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/iq-brain-size-rushton-intelligence-1992.pdf

          The 1.1 SD (16 IQ points) American Black (24% White admixture)-White IQ gap is present by age three. The IQ gap between African Blacks and Whites is 2 SD.

          Race differences show up by 3 years of age, even after matching on maternal education and other variables. Therefore, they cannot be due to poor education since this has not yet begun to exert an effect.

          https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/fryer/files/testing_for_racial_differences_in_the_mental_ability_of_young_children.pdf

          Racial-group differences in IQ appear early. For example, the Black and the White 3 year-old children in the standardization sample of the Stanford–Binet IV show a 1 standard deviation mean difference after being matched on gender, birth order, and maternal education (Peoples, Fagan, & Drotar, 1995). Similarly, the Black and the White 2 1⁄2- to 6-year-old children in the U.S. standardization sample of the Differential Aptitude Scale have a 1 standard deviation mean difference (Lynn, 1996). The size of the average Black–White difference does not change significantly over the developmental period from 3 years of age and beyond (see Jensen, 1974, 1998b).” (Rushton & Jensen, 2005, pp. 240-241.)

          Farkas & Beron (2004) reported that blacks score 17.2 points below whites on the PPVT in this dataset at age 36 months (p. 478). More recently, Bond & Lang (2012) reported a slightly smaller, 14.6 point gap for 3-year-olds in this dataset (p. 13).

          https://humanvarieties.org/2013/05/26/the-onset-and-development-of-b-w-ability-differences-early-infancy-to-age-3-part-1/

          THIRTY YEARS OF RESEARCH ON RACE DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY

          https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf

          Rushton, J. P. (1992). Cranial capacity related to sex, rank, and race in a stratified random sample of 6,325 U.S. military personnel. Intelligence, 16, 401-413.

          http://philipperushton.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/iq-brain-size-rushton-intelligence-1992.pdf

          Brain size and cognitive ability: Correlations with age, sex, social class, and race

          https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758%2FBF03210739.pdf

          ETHNIC GROUP DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT AND EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS: A META-ANALYSIS

          https://home.ubalt.edu/tmitch/645/articles/roth%20et%20al%20ethnic%20grp%20diff%20in%20cog%20abil%20ppsych%202001.pdf

        • ACT Scores by Race:

                 Year              White             Black               Asian
                 2009              22.2               16.9                 23.2
                 2010              22.3               16.9                 23.4
                 2011              22.4               17.0                 23.6
                 2012              22.4               17.0                 23.6
                 2013              22.2               16.9                 23.5
                 2014              22.3               17.0                 23.5
                 2015              22.4               17.1                 23.9
                
          Source: ACT, Inc.

          ~~~~~~~

          Black-White SAT Score Gap by Year:

                 Year              White             Black               Gap
                 1985              1038               839                 199
                 1990              1031               849                 185
                 1996              1052               857                 195
                 2000              1060               859                 201
                 2005              1061               863                 197
                 2010              1063               855                 208
                 2015              1047               846                 201

          (Source: U.S. Dept. of Education, 2016)

          https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=171

          The SAT correlates with an IQ test at 0.86, almost the same as an IQ test correlates with itself. For this reason, we can very reliably take SAT scores and convert them to IQ scores.

          In the 20 year period from 1994-2014 the Black-White difference increased on both the verbal and math SATs. On the reading test, it rose from .91 to .96 standard deviations. On the math test, it rose from .95 to 1.03 standard deviations.

          In 2015 only 15% of Blacks scored 1550 or higher, the threshold the College Board calls the “college and career readiness” level.

          In fact, the truncated nature of the SAT math score distribution suggests that these race gaps would be even larger given a harder exam with a bigger score variance. Note for example how the black score distribution is cut off at the bottom while the Asian score distribution is cut off at the top. That suggests that a redesigned exam might feature even more pronounced race gaps.

          Percent by Race Reaching the SAT College and Career Readiness Benchmark:

                           15% = Black
                           24% = Non-White Hispanic
                           35% = Native American
                           53% = White
                           56% = Asian

          Source: The College Board, 2014

          New York Times, 2003:

          Large-scale meta-analyses by researchers at the University of Minnesota have found that SAT performance is as good of a predictor of overall college grade point average as it is of freshman grade point average, and Vanderbilt researchers David Lubinski and Camilla Benbow have documented that the SAT predicts life outcomes well beyond the college years, including income and occupational achievements.

          Furthermore, the SAT is largely a measure of general intelligence. Scores on the SAT correlate very highly with scores on standardized tests of intelligence, and like IQ scores, are stable across time and not easily increased through training, coaching, or practice. SAT preparation courses appear to work, but the gains are small — on average, no more than about 20 points per section.

          Vanderbilt University researchers tracked the educational and occupational accomplishments of more than 2,000 people who as part of a youth talent search scored in the top 1 percent on the SAT by the age of 13. Scores on the SAT correlate so highly with I.Q. that they are described as a “thinly disguised” intelligence test. The remarkable finding of their study is that, compared with the participants who were “only” in the 99.1 percentile for intellectual ability at age 12, those who were in the 99.9 percentile — the profoundly gifted — were between three and five times more likely to go on to earn a doctorate, secure a patent, publish an article in a scientific journal or publish a literary work. A high level of intellectual ability gives you an enormous real-world advantage.

          The Widening Racial Scoring Gap on the SAT College Admissions Test

          “The racial scoring gap on the SAT test has now become wider than has been the case for the past two decades. Many believe that in the years to come the gap may grow smaller, not because blacks are catching up to whites in educational achievement, but rather because the test makers are adding a writing component to the test that may be manipulated to lessen racial differences and therefore reduce public criticisms of the test.

          If we eliminate Asians and other minorities from the calculations and compare only Blacks and Whites, we find that 0.2 percent of all Black test takers scored 750 or above on the verbal SAT compared to 2.2 percent of all White test takers. Thus, Whites were 11 times as likely as Blacks to score 750 or above on the verbal portion of the test. Overall, there were 49 times as many Whites as Blacks who scored at or above the 750 level.

          On the math SAT, only 0.16 percent of all Black test takers scored 750 or above compared to 1.8 percent of White test takers. Thus, Whites were more than 11 times as likely as Blacks to score 750 or above on the math SAT. Overall, there were more than 61 times as many Whites as Blacks who scored 750 or above on the math section of the SAT.

          In a race-neutral competition for the approximately 50,000 places for first-year students at the nation’s 25 top-ranked universities, high-scoring Blacks would be buried by a huge mountain of high-scoring non-Black students. Today, under prevailing affirmative action admissions policies, there are about 3,000 Black first-year students matriculating at these 25 high-ranking universities, about 6 percent of all first-year students at these institutions. But if these schools operated under a strict race-neutral admissions policy where SAT scores were the most important qualifying yardstick, these universities could fill their freshman classes almost exclusively with students who score at the very top of the SAT scoring scale. As shown previously, Black students make up at best between 1 and 2 percent of these high-scoring groups.”

          http://www.jbhe.com/features/49_college_admissions-test.html

          ~~~~~~

          Blacks score so poorly on academic exams that colleges give them 230 “race bonus” SAT points to help them qualify for admission:

          http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-adv-asian-race-tutoring-20150222-story.html

          https://www.princeton.edu/~tje/files/webAdmission%20Preferences%20Espenshade%20Chung%20Walling%20Dec%202004.pdf

          ~~~~~~~~~~

          Bill Gates, after pulling philanthropic funding from Common Core, “When disaggregated by race, we see two Americas. One where White students perform along the lines of the best in the world with achievement comparable to countries like Finland and Korea. And another America, where Black and Latino students perform comparably to the students in the lowest performing OECD countries, such as Chile and Greece.”

          ~~~~~~~

          Blacks and Whites with Equal Educational Attainment Differ in Cognitive Ability

          Black and White Americans with the same formal level of education differ significantly in their cognitive abilities. Specifically, within any given level of formal education Whites consistently outperform Blacks. Moreover, this effect is so strong that Blacks often underperform Whites who have lower levels of formal education than they do.

          Consider the following data from the General Social Survey. This public data is frequently used in social science research and contains a test of verbal intelligence as well as measurements of participant’s self-identified race and highest educational degree obtained. Verbal intelligence tests correlate at around .75 with full-scale IQ and so this data can also be taken as a fair measure of intelligence in general (Lynn, 1998). If we set the White mean score on this test to 100 and the standard deviation to 15, we can come up with an “IQ” style scale.

          As can be seen, using this method Blacks with a graduate degree have a level of verbal intelligence indistinguishable from that of Whites with a junior college degree. Blacks with a four-year degree are roughly on par with Whites who never went to college at all.

          IQ BY RACE AND HIGHEST DEGREE EARNED (1972 – 2014):

          Highest Degree                      White IQ               Black IQ               Gap
          High School Drop-out:                 89                         82                      7
          High School Diploma                   98                         90                      8
          Junior College Degree               102                         95                      7
          Bachelor’s Degree                      108                       100                     8
          Graduate Degree                        113                       102                    11
                      
          This data is consistent with evidence from the National Adult Literacy Survey (NALS) which administered tests of cognitive ability to 26,000 US adults in 1992. These tests were designed to measure how well people could take information and use it in a way which would help them function in modern society.

          ~~~~~~~

          Blacks are such poor academic achievers that the National Achievement Scholarship Program was created with lower standards for Black candidates only, instead of the National Merit Scholarship Program which is open to everyone else.

          THE SMARTEST STUDENTS: The National Merit Scholarship Program was founded to identify and honor scholastically talented American youth and to encourage them to develop their abilities to the fullest.

          BLACK STUDENTS ONLY: The National Achievement Scholarship Program was initiated specifically to identify academically promising Black American youth and encourage their pursuit of higher education.

          They are both measured on the PSAT.

          Minimum score for National Achievement: 190
          Minimum score for National Merit: 220

          Roughly, PSAT x 10 = SAT (out of 2400)

          • Riiiight. You’ve yet to properly reply to anything in any manner that isn’t spewing data out sans relevant argumentation.

            Bring me something worthy of a reply, something worthy of discourse, otherwise, I’m just going to let you go.

        • “…..your sources don’t account for socio-economic differences….”

          Blacks have small brains-

          Brain size and cognitive ability: Correlations with age, sex, social class, and race

          East Asians and their descendants = 1,364; Europeans and their descendants = 1,347; and Africans and their descendants = 1,267).

          Racial differences in head size appear early in life. Head circumference of White children are greater than that of Black children in each age category by a mean of 0.36 cm³ or approximately 0.2 SD. The greater head size of White children, however, is not a function of greater body size because Black children are taller than White children at both 4 and 7 years (Broman et al., 1987). From 7 to 17 years, the White advantage in cranial capacity is 16 cm³.

          https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758%2FBF03210739.pdf

          Blacks are the only race not hybridized with the large-brain Neanderthals. Blacks were left behind the heterosis, or hybrid vigor, provided by the Neanderthal DNA.

          Brain size by race-

          In the commonly used Smith-Beals data set of 20,000 skulls worldwide, East Asians averaged 1415 cubic centimeters of brain volume. Ethnic Europeans averaged 1362 cubic centimeters, and sub-Saharan Africans averaged 1268 cubic centimeters.

          https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2668913/

          A study by Rushton (1992) estimated brain sizes based on head measurments of 6,325 military personnel (1,590 White and 1,381 Black men) taken by the U.S. Army in 1988.

          Results:

          Asian: 1416 cm³
          White: 1380 cm³
          Black: 1359 cm³

          Officers: 1393 cm³
          Enlisted: 1375 cm³

          Source: Cranial capacity related to sex, rank, and race in a stratified random sample of 6325 US military personnel (1992), by Rushton.

          http://philipperushton.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/iq-brain-size-rushton-intelligence-1992.pdf

          The 1.1 SD (16 IQ points) American Black (24% White admixture)-White IQ gap is present by age three. The IQ gap between African Blacks and Whites is 2 SD.

          Race differences show up by 3 years of age, even after matching on maternal education and other variables. Therefore, they cannot be due to poor education since this has not yet begun to exert an effect.

          https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/fryer/files/testing_for_racial_differences_in_the_mental_ability_of_young_children.pdf

          Racial-group differences in IQ appear early. For example, the Black and the White 3 year-old children in the standardization sample of the Stanford–Binet IV show a 1 standard deviation mean difference after being matched on gender, birth order, and maternal education (Peoples, Fagan, & Drotar, 1995). Similarly, the Black and the White 2 1⁄2- to 6-year-old children in the U.S. standardization sample of the Differential Aptitude Scale have a 1 standard deviation mean difference (Lynn, 1996). The size of the average Black–White difference does not change significantly over the developmental period from 3 years of age and beyond (see Jensen, 1974, 1998b).” (Rushton & Jensen, 2005, pp. 240-241.)

          Farkas & Beron (2004) reported that blacks score 17.2 points below whites on the PPVT in this dataset at age 36 months (p. 478). More recently, Bond & Lang (2012) reported a slightly smaller, 14.6 point gap for 3-year-olds in this dataset (p. 13).

          https://humanvarieties.org/2013/05/26/the-onset-and-development-of-b-w-ability-differences-early-infancy-to-age-3-part-1/

          THIRTY YEARS OF RESEARCH ON RACE DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY

          https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf

          Rushton, J. P. (1992). Cranial capacity related to sex, rank, and race in a stratified random sample of 6,325 U.S. military personnel. Intelligence, 16, 401-413.

          http://philipperushton.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/iq-brain-size-rushton-intelligence-1992.pdf

          Brain size and cognitive ability: Correlations with age, sex, social class, and race

          https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758%2FBF03210739.pdf

          ETHNIC GROUP DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT AND EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS: A META-ANALYSIS

          https://home.ubalt.edu/tmitch/645/articles/roth%20et%20al%20ethnic%20grp%20diff%20in%20cog%20abil%20ppsych%202001.pdf

          • Strange, my comments don’t seem to be going through. In any case, I’m done with this, you haven’t made a valid refutation and continue to use bad-faith debating techniques.

          • I think I’ve said as much on another thread, but in case you haven’t seen it: I’m done with you. You’re points don’t connect, and you’re simply trying to weedle me into a wasteful discussion in which no points are actually debated in a meaningful way.

            Are you actually pursuing a point, or is this just fun for you?

            Nevermind, don’t answer that, I won’t bother to interact with you again unless something well thought out and context relevant is brought up. And with your current track record, I might not even do that. It’s old, exhausting, and unstimulating.

  35. Man’s first written language were hieroglyphics which were created by the ancient Egyptians, who were Whites. History’s first alphabet was created by the Phoenicians, who were also Whites.

    Blacks never created a written language.

    https://www.nature.com/news/mummy-dna-unravels-ancient-egyptians-ancestry-1.22069

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3611457/Ancient-DNA-study-finds-Phoenician-Carthage-European-ancestry.html

    ~~~

    Whites are only 10% of the world’s population, yet are the most industrious and innovative race the world has known. Whites unlocked the secrets of DNA and relativity, launched satellites, created automation, discovered electricity and nuclear energy, invented automobiles, aircraft, submarines, radio, television, computers, medicine, telephones, light bulbs, photography, and countless other technological miracles. Whites were the first to circumnavigate the planet by ship, and orbit it by spacecraft, to walk on the moon, probe beyond the solar system, climb the highest peaks, reach both poles, exceed the sound barrier, descend to the oceans depths… Blacks cannot even feed themselves.

    Whites have to provide food, medical, financial, and engineering aid to every Black nation. Blacks cannot survive without White charity.

    No pre-contact Black society ever created a written language, or weaved cloth, or forged steel, or invented the wheel, or plow, or devised a calendar, or code of laws, or system of measurement, or math, or built a multi-story structure, or sewer, or drilled a well, or irrigated, or created any agriculture, or built a road, or sea-worthy vessel. They never domesticated animals, or exploited underground natural resources, or produced anything that could be considered a mechanical device.

    Blacks were still living in the Stone Age when Whites discovered them just 400 years ago.

    Blacks are the oldest race, so they should be the most advanced — but they never advanced at all. Blacks lived alone in Africa, a vast continent with temperate climates and abundant resources for 60,000 years so they cannot blame slavery, racism, colonialism, culture, environment, or anything else for their failures.

    Simply, life is an IQ test.

  36. The ancient Egyptians were Whites:

    Nature | International Weekly Journal of Science
    June 1, 2017

      •   Mummy DNA unravels ancestry of ancient Egyptians
      •   Genetic analysis reveals a close relationship with Middle Easterners, not central Africans.

    This is the first glimpse of the genetic history of Egypt. Strikingly, the mummies were more closely related to ancient Europeans than to modern Egyptians. Both types of genomic material recovered showed that ancient Egyptians shared little DNA with modern sub-Saharan Africans.

    The tombs of ancient Egypt have yielded golden collars and ivory bracelets, but another treasure — human DNA — has proved elusive. Now, scientists have captured sweeping genomic information from Egyptian mummies. It reveals that mummies were closely related to ancient Middle Easterners, hinting that northern Africans might have different genetic roots from people south of the Sahara desert.

    Egypt’s searing climate and the ancient practice of embalming bodies has made the recovery of intact genetic material daunting. The first DNA sequences thought to be from a mummy were probably the result of modern contamination, and many scientists are sceptical of purported genetic information acquired from the mummy of King Tutankhamun.

    The latest analysis succeeded by bypassing soft tissue — often abundant in Egyptian mummies — to seek DNA from bone and teeth. Researchers carefully screened the DNA to rule out contamination from anyone who had handled the mummies since their excavation a century ago in the ancient town of Abusir el-Meleq.

    The team succeeded where previous studies on Egyptian mummies have failed or fallen short.

    The researchers say that there was probably a pulse of sub-Saharan African DNA into Egypt roughly 700 years ago. The mixing of ancient Egyptians and Africans from further south means that modern Egyptians can trace 8% more of their ancestry to sub-Saharan Africans than can the mummies from Abusir el-Meleq.

    https://www.nature.com/news/mummy-dna-unravels-ancient-egyptians-ancestry-1.22069

    http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms15694

    ~~~

    Phoenicians were Whites.

    They created the world’s first alphabet and circumnavigated Africa 2,600 years ago. Blacks to this day still cannot build a vessel capable of such a feat. And Blacks never even mapped their own land.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3611457/Ancient-DNA-study-finds-Phoenician-Carthage-European-ancestry.html

  37. You used the word “racist” in plenty of your replies to other people, so I know your angle. Egalitarian through and through. Oh, and for your information, it used to be a freely accessible paper, so it’s not my fault if some money-grubbing bastard has obscured it behind a paywall since I last read it.

    So, you have nothing to say about the primitive craniofacial traits of blacks, among other things? Their morphology shares a disturbing number of simian traits with our archaic hominid ancestors, but I take it you “don’t find that very interesting”, as one mainstream anthropologist is on record as saying when presented with these horrifying facts. Fucking hell, every time I remember that quote, I am utterly shocked. Not only is it incredibly interesting, it’s also incredibly important to take these facts into account. Fuck me, the future of civilisation is on the line here! Did you read the astonishing list of primitive negro traits posted by Rob? Go ahead, tell me how all those anatomical facts are socially constructed. Sarcasm aside, I bet you actually will.

    This, this right here, is the bullshit you’re expecting me to believe:

    https://ii.yuki.la/a/4e/f658796a4fbab5e8e096191ead079d63f86edbe9bbd526a838d4523e483164ea.jpg

  38. The ancient Egyptians were Whites:

    Nature | International Weekly Journal of Science
    June 1, 2017

    • Mummy DNA unravels ancestry of ancient Egyptians
    • Genetic analysis reveals a close relationship with Middle Easterners, not central Africans.

    This is the first glimpse of the genetic history of Egypt. Strikingly, the mummies were more closely related to ancient Europeans than to modern Egyptians. Both types of genomic material recovered showed that ancient Egyptians shared little DNA with modern sub-Saharan Africans.

    The tombs of ancient Egypt have yielded golden collars and ivory bracelets, but another treasure — human DNA — has proved elusive. Now, scientists have captured sweeping genomic information from Egyptian mummies. It reveals that mummies were closely related to ancient Middle Easterners, hinting that northern Africans might have different genetic roots from people south of the Sahara desert.

    Egypt’s searing climate and the ancient practice of embalming bodies has made the recovery of intact genetic material daunting. The first DNA sequences thought to be from a mummy were probably the result of modern contamination, and many scientists are sceptical of purported genetic information acquired from the mummy of King Tutankhamun.

    The latest analysis succeeded by bypassing soft tissue — often abundant in Egyptian mummies — to seek DNA from bone and teeth. Researchers carefully screened the DNA to rule out contamination from anyone who had handled the mummies since their excavation a century ago in the ancient town of Abusir el-Meleq.

    The team succeeded where previous studies on Egyptian mummies have failed or fallen short.

    The researchers say that there was probably a pulse of sub-Saharan African DNA into Egypt roughly 700 years ago. The mixing of ancient Egyptians and Africans from further south means that modern Egyptians can trace 8% more of their ancestry to sub-Saharan Africans than can the mummies from Abusir el-Meleq.

    https://www.nature.com/news/mummy-dna-unravels-ancient-egyptians-ancestry-1.22069

    http://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms15694

  39. Brain Size and Weight by Race:  American Whites vs. American Blacks (average 24% White admixture)

    A study by Ho et al. (1980) recorded the brain weights of 1,261 Americans, including 416 White and 228 Black men, taken from five years of records at Case Western Reserve University.

             RESULTS:
             Whites: 1392 grams (1442cc)
             Blacks: 1286 grams (1332cc)

    Adult brain weight in relation to body height, weight, and surface area (1980), by Ho, Roessmann, Straumfjord, and Monroe.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6893660

    A study by Bean (1906) recorded the brain weights of 125 Americans, including 37 White and 51 Black men, from an anatomical laboratory in Baltimore.

             RESULTS:
             Whites: 1341 grams (1389cc)
             Blacks: 1292 grams (1339cc)

    Source: Some racial peculiarities of the Negro brain (1906), by Bean; page 408.
    http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/49594/1/1000050402_ftp.pdf

    A study by Pearl (1934) examined the recorded brain weights of 24 White and 379 Black soldiers who died during the War of Federal Tyranny (1861-65), most of whom died of pneumonia. Note the higher than average brain weights, perhaps due to the fact that these were strong young men in their prime and/or perhaps to a side-effect of pneumonia.

             RESULTS:
             Whites: 1471 grams (1524cc)
             Blacks: 1342 grams (1390cc)

    Source: The Weight of the Negro Brain (1934), by Pearl.
    http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/pdf_extract/80/2080/431

    The largest autopsy study was performed by anthropologist Ralph Holloway (2004) at Columbia University Medical School on 1,391 Whites, 153 Hispanics, and 615 Blacks:

             RESULTS:
             Whites: 1285 grams (1331cc)
             Hispanics: 1253 grams (1298cc)
             Blacks: 1222 grams (1266cc)

    Measuring endocranial volume, the American anthropologist Samuel George Morton (1849) filled over 1,000 skulls with packing material and found that Blacks averaged about 5 cubic inches less cranial capacity than Whites. These results have stood the test of time (Gordon, 1934; Simmons, 1942; Todd, 1923).

    http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1001071

    http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/14/science/14skull.html

    The largest study of race differences in endocranial volume was by Beals et al. (1984) with measurements of up to 20,000 skulls from around the world:

             RESULTS:
             Asians: 1415cc
             Whites: 1362cc
             Blacks: 1268cc

    Weighing brains at autopsy, Broca (1873) found that Whites averaged heavier brains than Blacks and had more complex convolutions and larger frontal lobes. Subsequent studies have found an average Black–White difference of about 100 g (Bean, 1906; Mall, 1909; Pearl, 1934; Vint, 1934). Some studies have found that the more White admixture (judged independently from skin color), the greater the average brain weight in Blacks (Bean, 1906; Pearl, 1934). In a study of 1,261 American adults, Ho et al. (1980) found that 811 White Americans averaged 1,323 g and 450 Black Americans averaged 1,223). Since the Blacks and Whites were similar in body size, differences in body size cannot explain away the differences in brain weight.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2668913/

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    A basic law of biology is that longer infancy is related to greater brain growth.

    Blacks are the only race not hybridized with the large-brained Neanderthals, and also the only race without the derived form of MCPH1 microcephalin called haplogroup D which produces increased brain volume.

    The correlation between brain size and IQ across 25 primate species is 0.77 (where 1.0 indicates that monozygotic twins have no variance in IQ and 0 indicates that their IQs are completely uncorrelated).

    Structural imaging of total brain gray and white matter volumes is perhaps the most obvious approach to correlate brain measures with general intelligence (Toga et al, 2005). Brain structure measured from MRI correlates with intelligence test scores as total brain volume (Gignac et al. 2003), as do the volumes of individual lobes and aggregate gray and white matter volumes (Posthuma et al. 2002).

    http://www.loni.usc.edu/~thompson/PDF/TT_ARN05.pdf

    Larger brains contain more neurons and synapses and process information faster. By adulthood, East Asians average one cubic inch more cranial capacity than Whites who average five cubic inches more than Blacks.

    In the commonly used Smith-Beals data set of 20,000 skulls worldwide, East Asians averaged 1415 cubic centimeters of brain volume. Ethnic Europeans averaged 1362 cubic centimeters, and sub-Saharan Africans averaged 1268 cubic centimeters.

    Brain Weight by Race:

             •   Blacks   =   1261 g
             •   Whites   =   1387 g
             •   Asians   =   1374 g

    Brain Size by Race:

             •   Blacks   =   1267 cm³
             •   Whites   =   1347 cm³
             •   Asians   =   1364 cm³

    Whites’ brains are faster, larger, denser, and more complex than Blacks’ brains:

             •   7% larger
             •   126 grams heavier
             •   deeper fissuration in the frontal and occipital regions
             •   more complex convolutions
             •   larger frontal lobes
             •   more pyramidal neurons
             •   16% thicker supra-grandular layer
             •   one standard deviation more cerebrum
             •   react faster on mental chronometry tests
             •   600 million more neurons

    Race differences start in the womb. Blacks are born earlier and grow quicker than Whites and Asians.

    Black babies mature more quickly than White babies, while Asian babies mature more slowly. Black babies in a sitting position are more able to keep their heads up and backs straight from the start. White babies often need six to eight weeks to do these things.

    Black babies spend the least time in the womb. 51% of Black children have been born by week 39 of pregnancy compared with 33% of White children.

    Black children sit, crawl, walk, and put on their own clothes earlier than Whites or Asians. The findings are measured by such tests as Bayley’s Scales of Mental and Motor Development and the Cambridge Neonatal Scales.

    Asian children, on the other hand, mature more slowly than do White children. Asian children often do not walk until 13 months. Walking starts at 12 months for white children and 11 months for Black children.

    MILESTONE: Being drawn up into a sitting position, able to prevent the head from falling backwards:

             Black: Nine hours
             White: Six weeks

    MILESTONE: With head held firmly, looking at the face of the examiner:

             Black: Two days
             White: Eight weeks

    MILESTONE: Supporting self in a sitting position and watching own reflection in a mirror:

             Black: Seven weeks
             White: Twenty weeks

    MILESTONE: Holding self upright:

             Black: Five months
             White: Nine months

    MILESTONE: Climbing the steps alone:

             Black: 11 months
             White: 15 months

    Sources:

    (Wilson, 1978). Also see (Levin, 1997; Freedman, 1969). “…the kinesthetic maturation rate of Black infants was two or three times that of White children.” (Simpson, 2003). Faster maturation goes along with a shorter life span. In 2002, Black Americans had 40.5% more deaths than they would have had with the White mortality rate. (A 2005 report by former U.S. Surgeon General David Satcher). The bodies of Blacks mature faster. (İşcan, 1987).

  40. ACT Scores by Race:

           Year              White             Black               Asian
           2009              22.2               16.9                 23.2
           2010              22.3               16.9                 23.4
           2011              22.4               17.0                 23.6
           2012              22.4               17.0                 23.6
           2013              22.2               16.9                 23.5
           2014              22.3               17.0                 23.5
           2015              22.4               17.1                 23.9
          
    Source: ACT, Inc.

    ~~~~~~~

    Black-White SAT Score Gap by Year:

           Year              White             Black               Gap
           1985              1038               839                 199
           1990              1031               849                 185
           1996              1052               857                 195
           2000              1060               859                 201
           2005              1061               863                 197
           2010              1063               855                 208
           2015              1047               846                 201

    (Source: U.S. Dept. of Education, 2016)

    https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=171

    The SAT correlates with an IQ test at 0.86, almost the same as an IQ test correlates with itself. For this reason, we can very reliably take SAT scores and convert them to IQ scores.

    In the 20 year period from 1994-2014 the Black-White difference increased on both the verbal and math SATs. On the reading test, it rose from .91 to .96 standard deviations. On the math test, it rose from .95 to 1.03 standard deviations.

    In 2015 only 15% of Blacks scored 1550 or higher, the threshold the College Board calls the “college and career readiness” level.

    In fact, the truncated nature of the SAT math score distribution suggests that these race gaps would be even larger given a harder exam with a bigger score variance. Note for example how the black score distribution is cut off at the bottom while the Asian score distribution is cut off at the top. That suggests that a redesigned exam might feature even more pronounced race gaps.

    Percent by Race Reaching the SAT College and Career Readiness Benchmark:

                     15% = Black
                     24% = Non-White Hispanic
                     35% = Native American
                     53% = White
                     56% = Asian

    Source: The College Board, 2014

    ~~~~~~~

    PISA scores by race:

                  White             Black               Asian
                  531               433                  525

    (National Center for Education Statistics, 2015)

    https://isteve.blogspot.com/2013/12/overall-pisa-rankings-include-america.html

    New York Times, 2003:

    Large-scale meta-analyses by researchers at the University of Minnesota have found that SAT performance is as good of a predictor of overall college grade point average as it is of freshman grade point average, and Vanderbilt researchers David Lubinski and Camilla Benbow have documented that the SAT predicts life outcomes well beyond the college years, including income and occupational achievements.

    Furthermore, the SAT is largely a measure of general intelligence. Scores on the SAT correlate very highly with scores on standardized tests of intelligence, and like IQ scores, are stable across time and not easily increased through training, coaching, or practice. SAT preparation courses appear to work, but the gains are small — on average, no more than about 20 points per section.

    Vanderbilt University researchers tracked the educational and occupational accomplishments of more than 2,000 people who as part of a youth talent search scored in the top 1 percent on the SAT by the age of 13. Scores on the SAT correlate so highly with I.Q. that they are described as a “thinly disguised” intelligence test. The remarkable finding of their study is that, compared with the participants who were “only” in the 99.1 percentile for intellectual ability at age 12, those who were in the 99.9 percentile — the profoundly gifted — were between three and five times more likely to go on to earn a doctorate, secure a patent, publish an article in a scientific journal or publish a literary work. A high level of intellectual ability gives you an enormous real-world advantage.

    The Widening Racial Scoring Gap on the SAT College Admissions Test

    “The racial scoring gap on the SAT test has now become wider than has been the case for the past two decades. Many believe that in the years to come the gap may grow smaller, not because blacks are catching up to whites in educational achievement, but rather because the test makers are adding a writing component to the test that may be manipulated to lessen racial differences and therefore reduce public criticisms of the test.

    If we eliminate Asians and other minorities from the calculations and compare only Blacks and Whites, we find that 0.2 percent of all Black test takers scored 750 or above on the verbal SAT compared to 2.2 percent of all White test takers. Thus, Whites were 11 times as likely as Blacks to score 750 or above on the verbal portion of the test. Overall, there were 49 times as many Whites as Blacks who scored at or above the 750 level.

    On the math SAT, only 0.16 percent of all Black test takers scored 750 or above compared to 1.8 percent of White test takers. Thus, Whites were more than 11 times as likely as Blacks to score 750 or above on the math SAT. Overall, there were more than 61 times as many Whites as Blacks who scored 750 or above on the math section of the SAT.

    In a race-neutral competition for the approximately 50,000 places for first-year students at the nation’s 25 top-ranked universities, high-scoring Blacks would be buried by a huge mountain of high-scoring non-Black students. Today, under prevailing affirmative action admissions policies, there are about 3,000 Black first-year students matriculating at these 25 high-ranking universities, about 6 percent of all first-year students at these institutions. But if these schools operated under a strict race-neutral admissions policy where SAT scores were the most important qualifying yardstick, these universities could fill their freshman classes almost exclusively with students who score at the very top of the SAT scoring scale. As shown previously, Black students make up at best between 1 and 2 percent of these high-scoring groups.”

    http://www.jbhe.com/features/49_college_admissions-test.html

    ~~~~~~

    Blacks score so poorly on academic exams that colleges give them 230 “race bonus” SAT points to help them qualify for admission:

    http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-adv-asian-race-tutoring-20150222-story.html

    https://www.princeton.edu/~tje/files/webAdmission%20Preferences%20Espenshade%20Chung%20Walling%20Dec%202004.pdf

    ~~~~~~~~~~

    Bill Gates, after pulling philanthropic funding from Common Core, “When disaggregated by race, we see two Americas. One where White students perform along the lines of the best in the world with achievement comparable to countries like Finland and Korea. And another America, where Black and Latino students perform comparably to the students in the lowest performing OECD countries, such as Chile and Greece.”

    ~~~~~~~

    Blacks and Whites with Equal Educational Attainment Differ in Cognitive Ability

    Black and White Americans with the same formal level of education differ significantly in their cognitive abilities. Specifically, within any given level of formal education Whites consistently outperform Blacks. Moreover, this effect is so strong that Blacks often underperform Whites who have lower levels of formal education than they do.

    Consider the following data from the General Social Survey. This public data is frequently used in social science research and contains a test of verbal intelligence as well as measurements of participant’s self-identified race and highest educational degree obtained. Verbal intelligence tests correlate at around .75 with full-scale IQ and so this data can also be taken as a fair measure of intelligence in general (Lynn, 1998). If we set the White mean score on this test to 100 and the standard deviation to 15, we can come up with an “IQ” style scale.

    As can be seen, using this method Blacks with a graduate degree have a level of verbal intelligence indistinguishable from that of Whites with a junior college degree. Blacks with a four-year degree are roughly on par with Whites who never went to college at all.

    IQ BY RACE AND HIGHEST DEGREE EARNED (1972 – 2014):

    Highest Degree                      White IQ               Black IQ               Gap
    High School Drop-out:                 89                         82                      7
    High School Diploma                   98                         90                      8
    Junior College Degree               102                         95                      7
    Bachelor’s Degree                      108                       100                     8
    Graduate Degree                        113                       102                    11
                
    This data is consistent with evidence from the National Adult Literacy Survey (NALS) which administered tests of cognitive ability to 26,000 US adults in 1992. These tests were designed to measure how well people could take information and use it in a way which would help them function in modern society.

    ~~~~~~~

    Blacks are such poor academic achievers that the National Achievement Scholarship Program was created with lower standards for Black candidates only, instead of the National Merit Scholarship Program which is open to everyone else.

    THE SMARTEST STUDENTS: The National Merit Scholarship Program was founded to identify and honor scholastically talented American youth and to encourage them to develop their abilities to the fullest.

    BLACK STUDENTS ONLY: The National Achievement Scholarship Program was initiated specifically to identify academically promising Black American youth and encourage their pursuit of higher education.

    They are both measured on the PSAT.

    Minimum score for National Achievement: 190
    Minimum score for National Merit: 220

    Roughly, PSAT x 10 = SAT (out of 2400)

  41. IQ correlates strongly to job performance, wealth, income, economic growth, livability, cooperation, life expectancy, and infant mortality.

    The average national IQ of the world is only 90. Fewer than one in five nations have National IQs of 100. Almost half have National IQs of 90 or less.

    Google: National IQs

    It is estimated that a National IQ of 90 is threshold for a technological economy:

    African Black (IQ 67) + White (IQ 102) = American Black, 24% White admixture (IQ 85).

    The more White a society is the more safe and prosperous it is.

    National IQ correlates at 0.73 with living standard.

    For each one-point increase in a country’s average IQ, the per capita GDP was $229 higher, and can go up to $468 higher for each additional point.

    Each 10 point increase in IQ generally doubles economic growth, assuming the country has a market economy.

    The following intelligence scores came from work carried out earlier this decade by Richard Lynn, a British psychologist, and Tatu Vanhanen, a Finnish political scientist, who analysed IQ studies from 113 countries, and from subsequent work by Jelte Wicherts, a Dutch psychologist. The study was published in IQ and the Wealth of Nations and has nearly a a thousand cites. Lynn and Vanhanen benchmarked their IQ results so that Britain is 100. America scores 98 on this scale, and the world average is 90.

    Do you observe a pattern?

              •   108      Singapore
              •   106      South Korea
              •   105      Japan
              •   105      China
              •   102      Italy
              •   101      Iceland
              •   101      Mongolia
              •   101      Switzerland
              •   100      Austria
              •   100      Luxembourg
              •   100      Netherlands
              •   100      Norway
              •   100      United Kingdom
              •   99        Belgium
              •   99        Canada
              •   99        Estonia
              •   99        Finland
              •   99        Germany
              •   99        New Zealand
              •   99        Poland
              •   99        Sweden
              •   98        Andorra
              •   98        Australia
              •   98        Czech Republic
              •   98        Denmark
              •   98        France
              •   98        Hungary
              •   98        Latvia
              •   98        Spain
              •   98        United States
              •   97        Belarus
              •   97        Malta
              •   97        Russia
              •   97        Ukraine
              •   96        Moldova
              •   96        Slovakia
              •   96        Slovenia
              •   96        Uruguay
              •   95        Israel
              •   95        Portugal
              •   94        Armenia
              •   94        Georgia
              •   94        Kazakhstan
              •   94        Romania
              •   94        Vietnam
              •   93        Argentina
              •   93        Bulgaria
              •   92        Greece
              •   92        Ireland
              •   92        Malaysia
              •   91        Brunei
              •   91        Cambodia
              •   91        Cyprus
              •   91        Lithuania
              •   91        Thailand
              •   90        Albania
              •   90        Bosnia
              •   90        Chile
              •   90        Croatia
              •   90        Kyrgyzstan
              •   90        Turkey
              •   89        Cook Islands
              •   89        Costa Rica
              •   89        Laos
              •   89        Mauritius
              •   89        Serbia
              •   89        Suriname
              •   88        Ecuador
              •   88        Mexico
              •   88        Samoa
              •   87        Azerbaijan
              •   87        Bolivia
              •   87        Brazil
              •   87        Guyana
              •   87        Indonesia
              •   87        Iraq
              •   87        Myanmar
              •   87        Tajikistan
              •   87        Turkmenistan
              •   87        Uzbekistan
              •   86        Kuwait
              •   86        Philippines
              •   86        Seychelles
              •   86        Tonga
              •   85        Cuba
              •   85        Eritrea
              •   85        Fiji
              •   85        Kiribati
              •   85        Peru
              •   85        Trinidad and Tobago
              •   85        Yemen
              •   84        Afghanistan
              •   84        Bahamas
              •   84        Belize
              •   84        Colombia
              •   84        Iran
              •   84        Jordan
              •   84        Marshall Islands
              •   84        Micronesia
              •   84        Morocco
              •   84        Nigeria
              •   84        Pakistan
              •   84        Panama
              •   84        Paraguay
              •   84        Saudi Arabia
              •   84        Solomon Islands
              •   84        Uganda
              •   84        United Arab Emirates
              •   84        Vanuatu
              •   84        Venezuela
              •   83        Algeria
              •   83        Bahrain
              •   83        Libya
              •   83        Oman
              •   83        New Guinea
              •   83        Syria
              •   83        Tunisia
              •   82        Bangladesh
              •   82        Dominican Republic
              •   82        India
              •   82        Lebanon
              •   82        Madagascar
              •   82        Zimbabwe
              •   81        Egypt
              •   81        Honduras
              •   81        Maldives
              •   81        Nicaragua
              •   80        Barbados
              •   80        Bhutan
              •   80        El Salvador
              •   80        Kenya
              •   79        Guatemala
              •   79        Sri Lanka
              •   79        Zambia
              •   78        Congo
              •   78        Nepal
              •   78        Qatar
              •   77        South Africa
              •   76        Cape Verde
              •   76        Congo
              •   76        Mauritania
              •   76        Senegal
              •   74        Mali
              •   74        Namibia
              •   73        Ghana
              •   72        Tanzania
              •   71        Central African Republic
              •   71        Grenada
              •   71        Jamaica
              •   71        St Vincent, Grenadines
              •   71        Sudan
              •   70        Antigua, Barbuda
              •   70        Benin
              •   70        Botswana
              •   70        Rwanda
              •   70        Togo
              •   69        Burundi
              •   69        Cote d’Ivoire
              •   69        Ethiopia
              •   69        Malawi
              •   69        Niger
              •   68        Angola
              •   68        Burkina Faso
              •   68        Chad
              •   68        Djibouti
              •   68        Somalia
              •   68        Swaziland
              •   67        Dominica
              •   67        Guinea
              •   67        Guinea-Bissau
              •   67        Haiti
              •   67        Lesotho
              •   67        Liberia
              •   67        Saint Kitts
              •   67        Sao Tome
              •   66        Gambia
              •   64        Cameroon
              •   64        Gabon
              •   64        Sierra Leone
              •   64        Mozambique
              •   62        Saint Lucia
              •   59        Equatorial Guinea

    Germany was bombed into rubble less than 100 years ago, lost millions of its citizens and a third of its land to foreign powers. Today it is the wealthiest country in Europe, has a higher standard of living than the US, builds some of the world’s finest automobiles, and was just rated the top country in the world. Japan had nuclear bombs dropped on it less than 100 years ago, instantly losing hundreds of thousands of its people. It also has very limited resources, yet today is an extremely peaceful and prosperous country. They make excellent cars and electronics. Jews were slaves in Africa, victims of genocide less than 100 years ago losing over six million of their people. Israel is located in the middle of the desert and surrounded by hostile enemies yet is one of the world’s most innovative countries and enjoys a high standard of living. So, what is the excuse for Blacks never becoming civilized?

    Today there are 738 million Europeans and 1.2 billion Africans. In 2050, according to the latest U.N. projections, Europe’s population will have dipped to 707 million, while Africa’s population will be 2.4 billion. By 2100, half of all children on earth will be African. On current trends, within 35 years, 1 in every 4 people will be sub-Saharan African. By 2100, there will be 4.4 billion Africans – two of every five human beings overall — and Europe’s population will be just 646 million.

    The 41 nations of sub-Saharan Africa produce no more wealth than the tiny country of Belgium, which has only 1/45 the population. The entire continent of Africa produces less than 1% of the world’s manufactured goods. Of all of the region’s economic production, White-run South Africa accounts for three-quarters of it. That Whites are only 8% of South Africa’s population demonstrates how productive and industrious Whites are that so relative few can carry the load for so many unproductive Blacks.

    Blacks are unable to achieve within their own race because not enough of them are smart enough to even build a sufficient infrastructure to allow for the Black intellectual elite to achieve. If allowed to become too numerous they destroy previously thriving and safe White cities.

    A least developed country (LDC) is a country that, according to the United Nations, exhibits the lowest indicators of socioeconomic development, with the lowest Human Development Index ratings of all countries in the world. A country is classified as a Least Developed Country if it meets three criteria:

    Poverty (adjustable criterion: three-year average GNI per capita of less than US $992, which must exceed $1,190 to leave the list as of 2012)

    Human resource weakness (based on indicators of nutrition, health, education and adult literacy) and

    Economic vulnerability (based on instability of agricultural production, instability of exports of goods and services, economic importance of non-traditional activities, merchandise export concentration, handicap of economic smallness, and the percentage of population displaced by natural disasters)

    34 of the 47 LDCs are sub-Saharan African. There are a combined 48 sub-Saharan countries with a total population of one billion earning an annual per capita GDP of $1,720 in 2014 USD and a life expectancy of 57 years.

    In the 1980s when there was still European colonialism, sub-Saharan Africa’s Human Development Index was equal to Southeast Asia’s. Now with Black rule, it has been left far behind.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Development_Index

  42. “Correlation between brain size and intelligence has already been debunked.”

    False.

    Further, Blacks not only have smaller brains than modern man, but slower and less complex ones too.

  43. Hanabiko “Koko” (born July 4, 1971) is a female western lowland gorilla who is known for having learned a large number of hand signs from a modified version of American Sign Language.

    She has learned to use over 1,000 signs and understands approximately 2,000 spoken English words. Further, she understands these signs sufficiently well to adapt them or combine them to express new meanings that she wants to convey.

    Koko was tested on the Cattell Infant Intelligence Scale, Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, Ravens Progressive Matrices, Wechsler Preschool, Primary Scale of Intelligence, and several administrations of the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale and in spite of the human cultural bias of the tests her scores ranged from 85-95, which is a standard deviation higher than African Blacks score on the same tests.

         IQ 85    =    Koko the gorilla
         IQ 85    =    American Blacks (24% White admixture)
         IQ 67    =    African Blacks

    http://www.koko.org/sites/default/files/root/pdfs/teok_book.pdf

    Western lowland gorillas can be distinguished from other gorilla subspecies by their slightly smaller size, their brown-grey coats and auburn chests. They also have wider skulls with more pronounced brow ridges and smaller ears.

    Likewise, Blacks can be distinguished from modern man by the primitive, less evolved traits they possess. The simple fact is, they even look like apes. Compared to modern man, Blacks have:

             •   more robust cranial bones, simpler cranial sutures, a higher rate of unclosed sutures, a lower cephalic index, a higher rate of saggital keel, more post-orbital constriction, a more sloped forehead, more rectangular eye sockets, a wider nasal index, less nasal prominence, a higher rate of joined nasal bones, a higher rate of sub-nasal prognathism, a lower facial angle, the presence of the “simian shelf”, a more rectangular palate, larger and wider-apart teeth, less spinal curvature, shorter spinal length, a lower sacral index, and longer arms and legs.

             •    a narrower skull. The bones of the skull (and the rest of the body) are denser and thicker. The eye sockets are rounder and proportionately larger and the distance between them is greater. The slight bump at the top of the head suggests a “saggital keel”, a ridge along the top of the head from the forehead to the back of the skull for attaching chewing muscles and strengthening the skull from blows received in fighting. The opening for the nose is wider, the nose bones protrude less, and the teeth more massive, with the incisors meeting at an angle. The Black skull is quite different from the Asian and White skulls, indicating a much greater genetic distance between Eurasians and Blacks than between Whites and Asians.

             •    a protruding jaw known as “prognathism” (or the absence of facial flatness), a trait found in apes and in ancient human fossil skulls, even those not from Africa. The considerable gap between the cheekbones (“zygomatic arches”) and the indentation on the sides behind the eye sockets (“post-orbital constriction”) indicate that the more massive jaw was serviced by powerful chewing muscles that passed through the gap.

    Prognathism can be measured by means of the facial angle, the slope of the face from the forehead to the jaws.

    Prognathism by race/species:

             •   Modern man = 100°
             •   Black = 70°
             •   H. habilis = 70°
             •   H. erectus = 70°
             •   Australian aborigine = 66°
             •   Khoikhoi = 60°
             •   Bushmen = 60°

    Vertebrae can also be used to determine race. A “simian notch,” a much narrower second sacral vertebra, that is much narrower laterally than the first or third vertebrae, is characteristic of pongids [apes] and is common in Blacks, among whom it appears to be a primary character.

    Other primitive physical characteristics of Blacks:

             •    Their fur is black, crispy, and “woolly” in texture. It is flat and elliptical with no central canal or duct like the hair of modern man. This protects from lice infestations.

             •    Their noses are thick, broad and flat, often turned up nostrils exposing the red inner lining of the mucous membrane similar to an ape.

             •    Their arms and legs are relatively longer than in modern man. The humerus is shorter and the forearm longer thereby approximating the simian form.

             •    Their eyes are prominent, iris black and the orbits large. The eye often has a yellowish sclerotic coat over it like that of a gorilla.

             •    The ears of the Black are roundish, rather small, standing somewhat high and detached thus approaching the simian form.

             •    The jaw is larger and stronger and protrudes outward which, along with lower retreating forehead, gives a facial angle of 68 to 70 degrees as opposed to a facial angle of 80 to 82 degrees for Whites.

             •    The hands and fingers are proportionally narrower and longer. The wrist and ankles are shorter and more robust.

             •    The teeth are larger and are wider apart than in the White race and have a denser and tougher alveolar bone.

             •    The frontal and paricial bones of the cranium are less excavated and less capacious. The skull is thicker especially on the sides.

             •    The three curvatures of the spine are less pronounced in the Black than in the White and thus more characteristic of an ape.

             •    The femur of the Black is less oblique, the tibia (shin bone) more curved and bent forward, the calf of the leg high and but little developed.

             •    The heel is broad and projecting, the foot long and broad but slightly arched causing flat soles, the great toe is shorter than in the White.

             •    The two bones proper of the nose are occasionally united, as in apes.

             •    The Black is more powerfully developed from the pelvis down and the White more powerfully developed in the chest.

             •    They have a shorter, more circular trunk than modern man. The pelvis is narrower and longer as it is in an ape.

             •    Their mouths are wide with very thick, large and protruding lips.

             •    Their skin has a thick superficial layer which resists scratching and impedes the penetration of germs.

             •    They have a larger and shorter neck, akin to that of anthropoids.

             •    Their cranial sutures are more simple and close together earlier.

    Race differences start in the womb. Blacks are born earlier and grow quicker than Whites and Asians.

    Black babies mature more quickly than White babies, while Asian babies mature more slowly. Black babies in a sitting position are more able to keep their heads up and backs straight from the start. White babies often need six to eight weeks to do these things.

    Black babies spend the least time in the womb. 51% of Black children have been born by week 39 of pregnancy compared with 33% of White children.

    Black children sit, crawl, walk, and put on their own clothes earlier than Whites or Asians. The findings are measured by such tests as Bayley’s Scales of Mental and Motor Development and the Cambridge Neonatal Scales.

    Asian children, on the other hand, mature more slowly than do White children. Asian children often do not walk until 13 months. Walking starts at 12 months for white children and 11 months for Black children.

    MILESTONE: Being drawn up into a sitting position, able to prevent the head from falling backwards:

             Black: Nine hours
             White: Six weeks

    MILESTONE: With head held firmly, looking at the face of the examiner:

             Black: Two days
             White: Eight weeks

    MILESTONE: Supporting self in a sitting position and watching own reflection in a mirror:

             Black: Seven weeks
             White: Twenty weeks

    MILESTONE: Holding self upright:

             Black: Five months
             White: Nine months

    MILESTONE: Climbing the steps alone:

             Black: 11 months
             White: 15 months

    Sources:

    (Wilson, 1978). Also see (Levin, 1997; Freedman, 1969). “…the kinesthetic maturation rate of Black infants was two or three times that of White children.” (Simpson, 2003). Faster maturation goes along with a shorter life span. In 2002, Black Americans had 40.5% more deaths than they would have had with the White mortality rate. (A 2005 report by former U.S. Surgeon General David Satcher). The bodies of Blacks mature faster. (İşcan, 1987).

    Google: National IQs

    Notice a pattern?

              •   108      Singapore
              •   106      South Korea
              •   105      Japan
              •   105      China
              •   102      Italy
              •   101      Iceland
              •   101      Mongolia
              •   101      Switzerland
              •   100      Austria
              •   100      Luxembourg
              •   100      Netherlands
              •   100      Norway
              •   100      United Kingdom

    [snip]

              •   68        Angola
              •   68        Burkina Faso
              •   68        Chad
              •   68        Djibouti
              •   68        Somalia
              •   68        Swaziland
              •   67        Dominica
              •   67        Guinea
              •   67        Guinea-Bissau
              •   67        Haiti
              •   67        Lesotho
              •   67        Liberia
              •   67        Saint Kitts
              •   67        Sao Tome
              •   66        Gambia
              •   64        Cameroon
              •   64        Gabon
              •   64        Sierra Leone
              •   64        Mozambique
              •   62        Saint Lucia
              •   59        Equatorial Guinea

  44. Blacks have small brains-

    Brain size and cognitive ability: Correlations with age, sex, social class, and race

    East Asians and their descendants = 1,364; Europeans and their descendants = 1,347; and Africans and their descendants = 1,267).

    Racial differences in head size appear early in life. Head circumference of White children are greater than that of Black children in each age category by a mean of 0.36 cm³ or approximately 0.2 SD. The greater head size of White children, however, is not a function of greater body size because Black children are taller than White children at both 4 and 7 years (Broman et al., 1987). From 7 to 17 years, the White advantage in cranial capacity is 16 cm³.

    https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758%2FBF03210739.pdf

    Blacks are the only race not hybridized with the large-brain Neanderthals. Blacks were left behind the heterosis, or hybrid vigor, provided by the Neanderthal DNA.

    Brain size by race-

    In the commonly used Smith-Beals data set of 20,000 skulls worldwide, East Asians averaged 1415 cubic centimeters of brain volume. Ethnic Europeans averaged 1362 cubic centimeters, and sub-Saharan Africans averaged 1268 cubic centimeters.

    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2668913/

    A study by Rushton (1992) estimated brain sizes based on head measurments of 6,325 military personnel (1,590 White and 1,381 Black men) taken by the U.S. Army in 1988.

             Results:

             Asian: 1416 cm³
             White: 1380 cm³
             Black: 1359 cm³

             Officers: 1393 cm³
             Enlisted: 1375 cm³

    Source: Cranial capacity related to sex, rank, and race in a stratified random sample of 6325 US military personnel (1992), by Rushton.

    http://philipperushton.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/iq-brain-size-rushton-intelligence-1992.pdf

    The 1.1 SD (16 IQ points) American Black (24% White admixture)-White IQ gap is present by age three. The IQ gap between African Blacks and Whites is 2 SD.

    Race differences show up by 3 years of age, even after matching on maternal education and other variables. Therefore, they cannot be due to poor education since this has not yet begun to exert an effect.

    https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/fryer/files/testing_for_racial_differences_in_the_mental_ability_of_young_children.pdf

    Racial-group differences in IQ appear early. For example, the Black and the White 3 year-old children in the standardization sample of the Stanford–Binet IV show a 1 standard deviation mean difference after being matched on gender, birth order, and maternal education (Peoples, Fagan, & Drotar, 1995). Similarly, the Black and the White 2 1⁄2- to 6-year-old children in the U.S. standardization sample of the Differential Aptitude Scale have a 1 standard deviation mean difference (Lynn, 1996). The size of the average Black–White difference does not change significantly over the developmental period from 3 years of age and beyond (see Jensen, 1974, 1998b).” (Rushton & Jensen, 2005, pp. 240-241.)

    Farkas & Beron (2004) reported that blacks score 17.2 points below whites on the PPVT in this dataset at age 36 months (p. 478). More recently, Bond & Lang (2012) reported a slightly smaller, 14.6 point gap for 3-year-olds in this dataset (p. 13).

    https://humanvarieties.org/2013/05/26/the-onset-and-development-of-b-w-ability-differences-early-infancy-to-age-3-part-1/

    THIRTY YEARS OF RESEARCH ON RACE DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY

    https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf

    Rushton, J. P. (1992). Cranial capacity related to sex, rank, and race in a stratified random sample of 6,325 U.S. military personnel. Intelligence, 16, 401-413.

    http://philipperushton.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/iq-brain-size-rushton-intelligence-1992.pdf

    Brain size and cognitive ability: Correlations with age, sex, social class, and race

    https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.3758%2FBF03210739.pdf

    ETHNIC GROUP DIFFERENCES IN COGNITIVE ABILITY IN EMPLOYMENT AND EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS: A META-ANALYSIS

    https://home.ubalt.edu/tmitch/645/articles/roth%20et%20al%20ethnic%20grp%20diff%20in%20cog%20abil%20ppsych%202001.pdf

    ~~~~~~

    Race differences in intelligence: An evolutionary analysis.
    Lynn, Richard (2006)

    ABSTRACT
    It is widely accepted that race differences in intelligence exist, but no consensus has emerged on whether these have any genetic basis. The present book is the first fully comprehensive review that has ever been made of the evidence on race differences in intelligence worldwide. It reviews these for ten races rather than the three major races (Africans, Caucasians, and East Asians) analyzed by Rushton (2000). The races analyzed here are the Europeans, sub-Saharan Africans, Bushmen, South Asians and North Africans, Southeast Asians, Australian Aborigines, Pacific Islanders, East Asians, Arctic Peoples, and Native American Indians. (PsycINFO Database Record, 2016 APA)

    http://www.niggermania.com/library/Race%20Differences%20In%20Intelligence.pdf

    ~~~~~~

    African Blacks Average IQ 67

    The average IQ of sub-Saharan Africans
    Intelligence 38 (2010) 21–29
    Richard Lynn and Gerhard Meisenberg
    September 25, 2009

    http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/lynn2010.pdf

    IQ of Sub-Saharan Africa:

    http://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/04/15/iq-of-sub-saharan-africa/

    ~~~~~

    Race Differences are Most Pronounced on Tests that Best Measure the General Intelligence Factor (g): Black-White differences are larger on the Backward Digit Span test than on the less g loaded Forward Digit Span test.

    Forward and Backward Digit Span Interaction with Race and IQ

    https://archive.org/details/ERIC_ED102265

    http://humanvarieties.org/2013/12/21/racial-differences-on-digit-span-tests/

    The g Factor: The Science of Mental Ability:
    http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/The-g-factor-the-science-of-mental-ability-Arthur-R.-Jensen.pdf

    Clocking The Mind: Mental Chronometry and Individual Differences

    http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/Arthur_R._Jensen_Clocking_the_Mind_Mental_ChronBookos.org_.pdf

  45. Blacks received the MAOA genome from whites who received it from Neanderthals. Pure Africans don’t have the MAOA gene, because they don’t have Neanderthal or Denisovan ancestors. To paint a narrative to make blacks seem more violent, racists tested American blacks for the MAOA gene, when they know it was passed down to them from whites. They didn’t test pure Africans, because they knew they didn’t get the gene passed down to them from whites.

    http://dukereaderproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/BIO-554_model-feedback.pdf

  46. Pingback: Ben Shapiro Is Wrong: Israel Is An Ethnostate (and There’s Nothing Wrong With That) – America First Media

Leave a Comment

 

News on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.

Send this to a friend