>>11066545>>11066546>>11066547>>11066548>>11066549It sounds to me like you're literally just collecting studies with conclusions that inadequately support your preexisting beliefs, ignoring both all possible alternative explanations for the data AND all studies that indicate to the contrary. Considering that most of these studies you've cited are freestanding and completely unreplicable, let's go through the points you made one by one and briefly explain why they're retarded:
1) Your first and most important paper by Scarr is literally based on pure estimation of ancestry based on skin color. If you knew literally anything about genetics you'd see that this is absolutely absurd and completely invalidates the study right off the bat - you're essentially making wild guesses about genetic makeup based on a single phenotypical aspect. The other study you cited, depending on adopting various children into various races of families, literally only indicates that environment has a bigger effect on producing consistently capable individuals - which we've known for FUCKING DECADES.
All you would have done to learn that is looking up the fact that kids from wealthier families are significantly more intelligent regardless of heritage. And yet, when you actually equalize the background and environment, we consistently find that wealthy black kids are significantly dumber than wealthy white kids, and poor black kids are significantly dumber than poor white kids.
2) Your only other real argument is against sub-saharan IQ scores, to which your argumentative claim is simply that they are low due to poor cultures, food security, etc. and that western nations were just as dumb fifty years ago. This is pretty patently moronic -- not only do we not have accurate data from that time and so this is literally a completely baseless claim, but it's also an utterly nonsensical one that utterly fails to account why IQ in Africa has totally stagnated over the last century.
