# IQ Test Results from Global Study - Singapore highest then China and Korea



## East Asia United

These are calculated using both formal IQ tests and the very large international student assessment tests such as the TIMSS and PISA which correlate highly with IQ. Figures in brackets were estimated from neighboring countries. Note that the scores reflect that many countries are not racially homogenous and that the average IQs of the different races in a country often differ significantly from the average country IQ.

Singapore has the highest IQ (107.1), followed by China (105.8), Hong Kong (105.7), Korea and Taiwan (both 104.6), and Japan (104.2)

Race/Population group by IQ:

East Asia: 105

European/White: 99

Arctic Natives: 91

Latino Americans: 89

Southeast Asians: 87

American Indian: 86

Pacific Islanders: 85 (Maori in New Zealand have a mean IQ of 90)

African-Americans/Black British: 85

Middle Eastern/North African: 84

South Asians: 82

Sub-Saharan Africans: 67

Australian Aborigines: 62

Pygmies: 53

A full listing of the IQ's by country here: https://lesacreduprintemps19.files....l-sciences-richard-lynn-and-tatu-vanhanen.pdf

It should also be noted that this is for the 'native' populations of each population group/race (except the African-America/Black British category)

For example, Indians in India have a mean IQ of 82, but Indian-Americans have a mean IQ of around 112. Selection bias means that such immigrants are both high-IQ, and high caste, in Indian terms.

Also, the Ashkenazi Jewish IQ is around 110, the highest of any single ethnicity in the world, though the mean Jewish IQ is around 103 (due to lower IQ Mizrahim and Sephardi Jews).

Reactions: Positive Rating Positive Rating:
1 | Like Like:
6


----------



## WhiteMansBurden

Might want to check your figures buddy.

How are the South Asians at 82 while the Middle Eastern/North African are at only 84?

Also, they are both obviously more intelligent than African-Americans, so how does that work?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

WhiteMansBurden said:


> Might want to check your figures buddy.
> 
> How are the South Asians at 82 while the Middle Eastern/North African are at only 84?
> 
> Also, they are both obviously more intelligent than African-Americans, so how does that work?



The MENA region (Middle East-North Africa) has a depressed figure because of significant inbreeding rates.

The South Asian figure is slightly depressed because of the living conditions. The nutritional factors, infant brain development, etc.

sub-Saharan Africans have a genotypic IQ potential of 80, from their average at 67 currently.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WhiteMansBurden

karim3343 said:


> The MENA region (Middle East-North Africa) has a depressed figure because of significant inbreeding rates.
> 
> The South Asian figure is slightly depressed because of the living conditions. The nutritional factors, infant brain development, etc.
> 
> sub-Saharan Africans have a genotypic IQ potential of 80, from their average at 67 currently.



Errr... What? So Blacks have a potential of 80, even though they score a mean of 85 in America? Haha! Told you your data was off.


----------



## gslv

i posted my iq result in another post. it came out as 123.it was by mensa website. i dont believe its so hard to raise iq by proper education. btw i am a doctor.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## East Asia United

WhiteMansBurden said:


> Errr... What? So Blacks have a potential of 80, even though they score a mean of 85 in America? Haha! Told you your data was off.



Nope, look at the study. Blacks have a mean IQ of 85 instead of their max genetic potential at 80 because the average Af Americans has 17% Europoid genetic admixture.

In fact, do the math and it adds up. 20 IQ point difference between European and Black. 20x0.17 results in 3.4, so total Black IQ would be 83.4, not far off from the off-sited 85 figure.

Also, Blacks tend to have 1-1.1 SD (83.5-85) difference compared to Whites, so this is actually within the average range.



gslv said:


> i posted my iq result in another post. it came out as 123.it was by mensa website. i dont believe its so hard to raise iq by proper education. btw i am a doctor.



Like I said, these are only averages. Indian Americans have an average IQ of 112, so that's pretty high, but this is because of selective immigration. There's also a brain drain from India as the more intelligent (higher IQ) people tend to try to find better living standards and jobs in Europe and North America.

Also, it is actually very hard to raise IQ by environment if you are already at your limits. For example, in all of your tests, has your IQ ever budged more than a point or two? I think not.

Some people which have had mental illness due to iodine deficiency and cretinism will artificially lower average IQ below it's potential, so India has potential to increase her IQ even adjusted for Flynn effect.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WhiteMansBurden

karim3343 said:


> Nope, look at the study. Blacks have a mean IQ of 85 instead of their max genetic potential at 80 because the average Af Americans has 17% Europoid genetic admixture.
> 
> In fact, do the math and it adds up. 20 IQ point difference between European and Black. 20x0.17 results in 3.4, so total Black IQ would be 83.4, not far off from the off-sited 85 figure.
> 
> Also, Blacks tend to have 1-1.1 SD (83.5-85) difference compared to Whites, so this is actually within the average range.
> 
> 
> 
> Like I said, these are only averages. Indian Americans have an average IQ of 112, so that's pretty high, but this is because of selective immigration. There's also a brain drain from India as the more intelligent (higher IQ) people tend to try to find better living standards and jobs in Europe and North America.
> 
> Also, it is actually very hard to raise IQ by environment if you are already at your limits. For example, in all of your tests, has your IQ ever budged more than a point or two? I think not.
> 
> Some people which have had mental illness due to iodine deficiency and cretinism will artificially lower average IQ below it's potential, so India has potential to increase her IQ even adjusted for Flynn effect.



LOL so East Asians are superior to Whites? I think not.... Why has Europe accomplished more than everyone else combined? Why have we built everything you see around you?


----------



## Chinese-Dragon

Mainland beat Hong Kong?

I'm not surprised. They already beat us in the OECD scores a while back, and they are a lot more driven than we are.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Icewolf

WhiteMansBurden said:


> Might want to check your figures buddy.
> 
> How are the South Asians at 82 while the Middle Eastern/North African are at only 84?
> 
> Also, they are both obviously more intelligent than African-Americans, so how does that work?



The South Asian IQ figure is being weighed down by very low IQ India...

If you only take in account Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka's IQ, it will be around 90-95.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## East Asia United

WhiteMansBurden said:


> LOL so East Asians are superior to Whites? I think not.... Why has Europe accomplished more than everyone else combined? Why have we built everything you see around you?



No one is talking inferior or superior. If you can't take the data seriously, and have to come to a conclusion that the data is flawed because your peoples' average IQ is not where you want to be, you are immature and are not looking at things objectively.

East Asians do have higher IQ's, on average, than Whites, and the data clearly presents this. Besides, do you really have to have IQ data to see this? You can see it in educational attainment, income, life expectancy, propensity to commit crime (of any kind from homicide to burglary to rape), net worth, household debt, and many other indicators.

As to why Europeans have accomplished more, they have only accomplished more in the last 400 years. From 2000 BC - 1600 AD East Asia was generally regarded to be in the lead in technology and innovation, with China leading the way. India had largest world GDP every now and then as well.

List of countries by largest historical GDP - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Also, from 2,000 BC to 1890's, a timeline of nearly 4,000 years, China was the world's largest eocnomy. Now that China and East Asians in general have awoken from four centuries of slumber, the world is returning back to the way it was.

S. Korea has more patents than the *entire* EU combined. The EU has over 500 million people. That's 10x more than Korea. China has surpassed US as world's largest patentor. Japan has more patents per capita than any single country in the world.

Here is a list of innovations, discoveries, and inventions, most of which took place from 2,000 BC to 1600 AD, and then gradually stopped off.

List of Chinese discoveries - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of Chinese inventions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of Japanese inventions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of Korean inventions and discoveries - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As you can see, they are quite vast. This is the way it will be in a couple of decades, as China continues to reform, and Korea continues to increase her technical capacity and knowledge base faster than the West.



Chinese-Dragon said:


> Mainland beat Hong Kong?
> 
> I'm not surprised. They already beat us in the OECD scores a while back, and they are a lot more driven than we are.



Yes, but it's a very tiny difference. About to post the full IQ scores in a second. Just goes to show how accurate the results are. Hong Kong, China, Taiwan, Korea, and Japan all have IQ's pretty much within one point of each other.

Only exception is Singapore, but this is largely due to only the best and brightest immigrants being imported into Singapore.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## East Asia United

*NOTE: Figures in brackets were estimated from neighboring countries.*

Andorra (97)
Angola (71)
Antigua/Barbuda (74)
Argentina 92.8
Armenia 93.2
Australia 99.2
Austria 99
Azerbaijan 84.9
Bahamas (84)
Bahrain 85.9
Bangladesh 81
Barbados 80
Belarus (95)
Belgium 99.3
Belize 76.8
Benin (71)
Bermuda 90
Bhutan (78)
Bolivia 87
Bosnia 83.2
Botswana 76.9
Brazil 85.6
Brunei (89)
Bulgaria 93.3
Burkina Faso (70)
Burundi (72)
Cambodia (92)
Cameroon 64
Canada 100.4
Cape Verde (76)
Central African Republic 64
Chad (66)
Chile 89.8
China 105.8
Colombia 83.1
Comoros (77)
Congo (Brazzaville) 73
Congo (Zaire) 68
Cook Islands 89
CostaRica 86
Cote d'Ivoire 71
Croatia 97.8
Cuba 85
Cyprus 91.8
Czech Republic 98.9
Denmark 97.2
Djibouti (75)
Dominica 67
Dominican Republic 82
EastTimor (85)
Ecuador 88
Egypt 82.7
El Salvador 78
Equatorial Guinea (69)
Eritrea 75.5
Estonia 99.7
Ethiopia 68.5
Fiji 85
Finland 100.9
France 98.1
Gabon (69)
Gambia 62
Georgia 86.7
Germany 98.8
Ghana 69.7
Greece 93.2
Greenland 91
Grenada (74)
Guatemala 79
Guinea 66.5
Guinea-Bissau (69)
Guyana (81)
Haiti (67)
Honduras 81
Hong Kong 105.7
Hungary 98.1
Iceland 98.6
India 82.2
Indonesia 85.8
Iran 85.6
Iraq 87
Ireland 94.9
Israel 94.6
Italy 96.1
Jamaica 71
Japan 104.2
Jordan 86.7
Kazakhstan 85
Kenya 74.5
Kiribati (85)
Korea: North (104.6)
Korea: South 104.6
Kuwait 85.6
Kyrgyzstan 74.8
Laos 89
Latvia 95.9
Lebanon 84.6
Lesotho 66.5
Liberia (68)
Libya 85
Liechtenstein 100.3
Lithuania 94.3
Luxembourg 95
Macao 99.9
Macedonia 90.5
Madagascar 82
Malawi 60.1
Malaysia 91.7
Maldives (81)
Mali 69.5
Malta 95.3
Mariana Islands 81
Marshall Islands 84
Mauritania (74)
Mauritius 88
Mexico 87.8
Micronesia (84)
Moldova 92
Mongolia 100
Montenegro 85.9
Morocco 82.4
Mozambique 69.5
Myanmar/Burma (85)
Namibia 70.4
Nepal 78
Netherlands 100.4
Netherlands Antilles 87
New Caledonia 85
New Zealand 98.9
Nicaragua (84)
Niger (70)
Nigeria 71.2
Norway 97.2
Oman 84.5
Pakistan 84
Palestine 84.5
Panama 80
Papua New Guinea 83.4
Paraguay 84
Peru 84.2
Philippines 86.1
Poland 96.1
Portugal 94.4
Puerto Rico 83.5
Qatar 80.1
Romania 91
Russia 96.6
Rwanda 76
St Helena (86)
St Kitts & Nevis (74)
St Lucia 62
St Vincent 71
Samoa (Western) 88
Sao Tome & Principe (67)
Saudi Arabia 79.6
Senegal 70.5
Serbia & Montenegro 90.3/92
Seychelles 84.4
Sierra Leone 64
Singapore 107.1
Slovakia 98
Slovenia 97.6
Solomon Islands (83)
Somalia (72)
South Africa 71.6
Spain 96.6
Sri Lanka 79
Sudan 77.5
Suriname 89
Swaziland 75.4
Sweden 98.6
Switzerland 100.2
Syria 82
Taiwan 104.6
Tajikistan (80)
Tanzania 73
Thailand 89.9
Togo (70)
Tonga 86
Trinidad & Tobago 86.4
Tunisia 85.4
Turkey 89.4
Turkmenistan (80)
Uganda 71.7
Ukraine 94.3
United Arab Emirates 87.1
United Kingdom 99.1
USA 97.5
Uruguay 90.6
Uzbekistan (80)
Vanuatu (84)
Venezuela 83.5
Vietnam 94
Yemen 80.5
Zambia 74
Zimbabwe 72.1

Reactions: Like Like:
8


----------



## gslv

Icewolf said:


> The South Asian IQ figure is being weighed down by very low IQ India...
> 
> If you only take in account Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka's IQ, it will be around 90-95.



yup you speak truth .those people in swat valley and gun totting terrorist are highly intelligent. can beat amartya sen , ramanuzan, rabindranath tagore , venkateraman , j c bose, homi bhaba , meghanad saha , indra nuyi , vikram pandit . as a doctor i can say if you ever get the chance, see foreign editors in harrison book of internal medicine . all low iq indians there . iq level 0-10 in stanford binet scale. food for thought.

Reactions: Like Like:
15


----------



## East Asia United

Icewolf said:


> The South Asian IQ figure is being weighed down by very low IQ India...
> 
> If you only take in account Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka's IQ, it will be around 90-95.



Guys, I'm trying to keep this thread as respectful and courteous as possible, so we are not closed down.

I think that even implying superiority will get this thread closed and me charged with racism. Try to keep it civil. Thanks



gslv said:


> yup you speak truth .those people in swat valley and gun totting terrorist are highly intelligent. can beat amartya sen , ramanuzan, rabindranath tagore , venkateraman , j c bose, homi bhaba , meghanad saha , indra nuyi , vikram pandit . as a doctor i can say if you ever get the chance, see foreign editors in harrison book of internal medicine . all low iq indians there . iq level 0-10 in stanford binet scale. food for thought.



Do you work in India or overseas?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gslv

karim3343 said:


> Guys, I'm trying to keep this thread as respectful and courteous as possible, so we are not closed down.
> 
> I think that even implying superiority will get this thread closed and me charged with racism. Try to keep it civil. Thanks
> 
> 
> 
> Do you work in India or overseas?



i am a intern in a hospital in india.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Enemy

karim3343 said:


> Do you work in India or overseas?



Ask him what kind of doctor he is. Get the details first. 

*On topic*,

Let me a bit blunt, if Chinese IQ is higher than that of Indians, how come Indians manage to keep huge Chinese lands (as China claims) under its occupation? 

I mean, what makes India stronger than China?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## shuttler

Icewolf said:


> The South Asian IQ figure is being weighed down by very low IQ India...
> 
> If you only take in account Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka's IQ, it will be around 90-95.



it is wise to isolate the indians from the tests on south asians
bad eggs in a basket obviously

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Foo_Fighter

India 82.2 

Pakistan 84 + Bangladesh 81 + Sri Lanka 79 = 244 / 3 = 81.3

*EPIC FAIL!!!*



Icewolf said:


> The South Asian IQ figure is being weighed down by very low IQ India...
> 
> If you only take in account Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka's IQ, it will be around 90-95.



To you to as well.



shuttler said:


> it is wise to isolate the indians from the tests on south asians
> bad eggs in a basket obviously

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gslv

Enemy said:


> Ask him what kind of doctor he is. Get the details first.
> 
> *On topic*,
> 
> Let me a bit blunt, if Chinese IQ is higher than that of Indians, how come Indians manage to keep huge Chinese lands (as China claims) under its occupation?
> 
> I mean, what makes India stronger than China?



when i said harrison book of internal medicine you should get the drift. no need to ask. how many of general public read that book.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Enemy said:


> Ask him what kind of doctor he is. Get the details first.
> 
> *On topic*,
> 
> Let me a bit blunt, if Chinese IQ is higher than that of Indians, how come Indians manage to keep huge Chinese lands (as China claims) under its occupation?
> 
> I mean, what makes India stronger than China?



So in your opinion the disputed territories are in fact Chinese? Thanks for confirming.

Also, I think you will find it difficult to correlate Chinese land disputes and their resolvement (or lack thereof) with the IQ differences between the nations in question.

My reasoning is that China does not want to invade India and take the land by force, not because it is less powerful (even if it is this has no bearing on IQ) but because of the diplomatic ramifications that would follow.

As for asking him what kind of doctor he is, what are you talking about?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Enemy

gslv said:


> i am a intern in a hospital in india.



Which year did you complete your MBBS? Is that a private hospital?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## shuttler

Foo_Fighter said:


> India 82.2
> 
> Pakistan 84 + Bangladesh 81 + Sri Lanka 79 = 244 / 3 = 81.3



EPIC FAIL!!!



> To you to as well.



Pakistan is higher than indian
BD is just one point below
S Lankans has a smaller populations and just a few points lower

But they are humble honest people and they never have the "superlative djectives" as indians claim to have if you know what I mean!

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ares

shuttler said:


> it is wise to isolate the indians from the tests on south asians
> bad eggs in a basket obviously



Just like how it would be wise to isolate. likes of you from rest of the Chinese population??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Enemy

karim3343 said:


> So in your opinion the disputed territories are in fact Chinese? Thanks for confirming.
> 
> *Also, I think you will find it difficult to correlate Chinese land disputes and their resolvement (or lack thereof) with the IQ differences between the nations in question.
> 
> My reasoning is that China does not want to invade India and take the land by force, not because it is less powerful (even if it is this has no bearing on IQ) but because of the diplomatic ramifications that would follow.*
> 
> As for asking him what kind of doctor he is, what are you talking about?




So high IQ people, when they are robbed of their property by low IQ people, finds it appropriate not to get their property back but to forget about it. I don't understand IQ but such argument can only be given a loser.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gslv

Enemy said:


> Which year did you complete your MBBS? Is that a private hospital?



i will complete my mbbs this year. one of the govt college of odisha. got 500 rank in aipmt. admitted to it bcoz its in my hometown.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## shuttler

ares said:


> Just like how it would be wise to isolate. likes of you from rest of the Chinese population??



that is the best to have the other south asians separated for another test so as to reflect the true scores

I am honoured to be Chinese and vice versa all the people and institutions that I engage in are honoured to have me

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## East Asia United

Anyone who is interested in questioning the data for accuracy like 'Whitemansburden' I will be more than happy to respond.

I have analyzed this study for quite some time now, and I find it is the most accurate study to date (as it has amalgamated all the studies of the last few decades, added in international tests that have high correlation with IQ, and has no large differences from other studies).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Roybot

Enemy said:


> Ask him what kind of doctor he is. Get the details first.
> 
> *On topic*,
> 
> Let me a bit blunt, if Chinese IQ is higher than that of Indians, how come Indians manage to keep huge Chinese lands (as China claims) under its occupation?
> 
> I mean, what makes India stronger than China?



I wonder if pretending to be an Indian on the internet requires a lot of IQ or not 


@karim3343 whats the obsession with IQ? Didn't your other thread get closed down? 

http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/259548-iq-update-2012-singapore-highest-followed-china-korea.html#post4434405


----------



## Wright

Enemy said:


> So high IQ people, when they are robbed of their property by low IQ people, finds it appropriate not to get their property back but to forget about it. I don't understand IQ but such argument can only be given a loser.



I think it has more to do with the ability for a people to work together and establish a foundation of a civil society with lower corruption, respect for law, and the ability to maximize living standards. 

IQ averages do indicate the degree of government effectiveness. The nations ranking lower on this list are mired by civil wars, high corruption, resource depletion, government incompetence, etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## East Asia United

Enemy said:


> So high IQ people, when they are robbed of their property by low IQ people, finds it appropriate not to get their property back but to forget about it. I don't understand IQ but such argument can only be given a loser.



Enough with the childish insults, we are trying to keep ONE thread clean and modest for once, and you have to start acting like an infant.

Look, my simple opinion (and this is all it is) is that China would not want to create a huge crisis in the world by outright invading India. It would not be in her interests to do so, and it would not be in the interest of an Indian living in India to egg her on to do so.

Maybe if India and China were the only two countries on Earth, and their would be no economic, social, diplomatic, or military repercussions for doing such a thing, China would just invade and take her land back. But in this highly-globalized world, where everyone is trying to win over the 'rest' of the world, China will not invade India and make her international image look bad.

This is like saying, "Why doesn't a rich high-IQ man simply kill the poor low-IQ man that stole his iPhone". Well, it's a simple question and their is a simple answer. Being of higher-IQ doesn't make you God; it gives you an advantage in building a stronger and more prosperous economy, military, technology, etc. but you won't be able to just do as you wish.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Enemy

gslv said:


> i will complete my mbbs this year. one of the govt college of odisha. got 500 rank in aipmt. admitted to it bcoz its in my hometown.



Excellent rank indeed! 

Is AIPMT going to be replaced by NEET-UG?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Foo_Fighter

Whatever sails your boat mate, I just replied to Ice's statement and proved him wrong.



shuttler said:


> EPIC FAIL!!!
> 
> 
> 
> Pakistan is higher than indian
> BD is just one point below
> S Lankans has a smaller populations and just a few points lower
> 
> But they are humble honest people and they never have the "superlative djectives" as indians claim to have if you know what I mean!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Roybot said:


> I wonder if pretending to be an Indian on the internet requires a lot of IQ or not
> 
> 
> @karim3343 whats the obsession with IQ? Didn't your other thread get closed down?
> 
> http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/259548-iq-update-2012-singapore-highest-followed-china-korea.html#post4434405



Yes, I changed the thread composition so it would not be blocked on grounds of racism. Now we are just comparing educational scores and IQ's, with no argument as to who is inferior or superior.

Secondly, no obsession with IQ. I just like the research because I think that the best way to increase the intelligence of Humanity is through Eugenics and technological evolution. Not just for the low average IQ people, but the high average IQ people as well.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## shuttler

Enemy said:


> So high IQ people, when they are robbed of their property by low IQ people, finds it appropriate not to get their property back but to forget about it. I don't understand IQ but such argument can only be given a loser.



IQ is not born with to prevent thieves and vaillains just like the miserable indian girl who was a paramedic student with a much higher IQ has met her tragedy inflicted brutally on her by low IQ scumbags. Violence subdues IQ

IQ can prevent crimes by acquiring knowledge of the matters on fighting crime

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## ares

shuttler said:


> that is the best to have the other south asians separated for another test so as to reflect the true scores
> 
> I am honoured to be Chinese and vice versa all the people and institutions that I engage in are honoured to have me



Clearly your posts are not a reflection of much vaunted high IQ Chinese ..least of all humble honesty...what gives?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

This is slowly turning into a Chinese-Pakistani-Indian and God knows what hate thread, like all the others.

Can we keep it on-topic please?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Wright

Im glad there are 1 billion Chinese, keeps the world IQ average up.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Enemy

karim3343 said:


> Enough with the childish insults, we are trying to keep ONE thread clean and modest for once, and you have to start acting like an infant.
> 
> Look, my simple opinion (and this is all it is) is that China would not want to create a huge crisis in the world by outright invading India. It would not be in her interests to do so, and it would not be in the interest of an Indian living in India to egg her on to do so.
> 
> Maybe if India and China were the only two countries on Earth, and their would be no economic, social, diplomatic, or military repercussions for doing such a thing, China would just invade and take her land back. But in this highly-globalized world, where everyone is trying to win over the 'rest' of the world, China will not invade India and make her international image look bad.
> 
> This is like saying, "Why doesn't a rich high-IQ man simply kill the poor low-IQ man that stole his iPhone". Well, it's a simple question and their is a simple answer. Being of higher-IQ doesn't make you God; it gives you an advantage in building a stronger and more prosperous economy, military, technology, etc. but you won't be able to just do as you wish.



Did I ask China to invade anyone? 

It is in any state's interests to expand its territory along with political, economic and cultural influences. Isn't it? 

So India will expand no matter if someone likes it or not. When you expand you do it at someone's expense. There has to be someone who should lose so that you can win. 

Did India need to invade China to occupy Chinese lands?  IQ is something that makes you start thinking where your opponent stops. Bye.


----------



## shuttler

ares said:


> Clearly your posts are not a reflection of much vaunted high IQ Chinese ..least of all humble honesty...what gives?



we are what we are when we are pretty strong in many intellectual scores 
no need to be humble! It is just reflections of confidence when our scores are persistently strong in many aspects and tests that we have overcome, year on year, one test after another
we take them head on and score pretty well, with confidence!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Wright said:


> Im glad there are 1 billion Chinese, keeps the world IQ average up.



1.4 billion Chinese (including diaspora community), and 1.635 billion East Asians total.

Total people of European descent are 1.135 billion. These include a lot of Latinos that like to self-identify as White even though they are highly mixed.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Wright

Enemy said:


> Did I ask China to invade anyone?
> 
> It* is in any state's interests to expand its territory along with political, economic and cultural influences. Isn't it? *
> 
> So India will expand no matter if someone likes it or not. When you expand you do it at someone's expense. There has to be someone who should lose so that you can win.
> 
> e.



That only happens after a nation has its s*it in order. UK, Russia, USA, France, Japan all had their house in order and then looked outwards at expansion. There is no point in trying to expand when you are barely able to fully utilize what you already have. 


Good luck with trying to skip.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Enemy said:


> Did I ask China to invade anyone?
> 
> It is in any state's interests to expand its territory along with political, economic and cultural influences. Isn't it?
> 
> So India will expand no matter if someone likes it or not. When you expand you do it at someone's expense. There has to be someone who should lose so that you can win.
> 
> Did India need to invade China to occupy Chinese lands?  IQ is something that makes you start thinking where your opponent stops. Bye.



How does the low average IQ (compared to China) help in what you are saying? I really am not sure what you are asking.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gslv

karim3343 said:


> This is slowly turning into a Chinese-Pakistani-Indian and God knows what hate thread, like all the others.
> 
> Can we keep it on-topic please?



i agree . we should keep on topic. btw iodine deficiency is most common cause of preventable mental retardation. so goi should ban noniodinated salt in north india especially sub himalayan region.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## East Asia United

gslv said:


> i agree . we should keep on topic. btw iodine deficiency is most common cause of preventable mental retardation. so goi should ban noniodinated salt in north india.



Agreed, I stated earlier the problem with iodine deficiency and how this stunts IQ.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gslv

karim3343 said:


> Agreed, I stated earlier the problem with iodine deficiency and how this stunts IQ.



if we remove north and east india rest may come close to 100 i guess.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Srinivas

Just now took an IQ test online My IQ is 121.

I am a VLSI micro chip designer by profession

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## East Asia United

It's interesting to note that Israeli IQ is only around 95, while European Jews have average IQ's around 110 (though commonly stated as between 112-115).

Mizrahim and Sephardic Jews bring down the number, in addition to the fact that many of the most intelligent Jews left Israel for the USA. Arabs also make up 20% of the Israeli population, and this is also a contributor to the lower IQ.

Ashkenazi (European) Jews are now less than 50% of Israeli Jews, and are around 40% of Israeli population as a whole. Combine this with the Haredi Jews and Arabs having a higher birth rate, increasing intermarriage rates among Ashkenazim with other Jews, and I think that Israel may actually collapse in the coming decades. They already dropped below the European average, and they will continue to fall.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gslv

Srinivas said:


> Just now took an IQ test online My IQ is 121.
> 
> I am a VLSI micro chip designer by profession



which one mensa one?
if not take the mensa test it removes linguistic bias.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## East Asia United

gslv said:


> if we remove north and east india rest may come close to 100 i guess.



Don't have good facts on India, but I thought that North Indians were generally the more Caucasoid/Europoid peoples' of the subcontinent, and would therefore have higher mean IQ's and were in fact in higher development? Maybe I'm way off.

I saw somewhere that the genotypic potential in India is around 92-93 though I can't confirm if it's accurate. That would put them around the level of Southern Europeans.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gslv

s22.postimg.org/ko4b04ekx/image.png

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Srinivas said:


> Just now took an IQ test online My IQ is 121.
> 
> I am a VLSI micro chip designer by profession



Which IQ test? And how long did it take you? There are some very sketchy one's online. Didn't know their were legit one's online. Took mine at because of testing for ADD, ended up scoring 144 on the Stanford-Binets, which is 1 IQ point short of 'legal' genius... Lol

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Srinivas

gslv said:


> which one mensa one?
> if not take the mensa test it removes linguistic bias.



I took the test in this site 


IQTest.com

I just did it casually

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

gslv said:


> s22.postimg.org/ko4b04ekx/image.png



If that's Mensa then it must be legit obviously. Nice.



Srinivas said:


> I took the test in this site
> 
> 
> IQTest.com
> 
> I just did it casually



They are asking me to pay $10

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gslv

karim3343 said:


> Don't have good facts on India, but I thought that North Indians were generally the more Caucasoid/Europoid peoples' of the subcontinent, and would therefore have higher mean IQ's and were in fact in higher development? Maybe I'm way off.
> 
> I saw somewhere that the genotypic potential in India is around 92-93 though I can't confirm if it's accurate. That would put them around the level of Southern Europeans.


even though i a belong to eastern india i fing south india having better iq bcoz of good education.



karim3343 said:


> If that's Mensa then it must be legit obviously. Nice.
> 
> 
> 
> They are asking me to pay $10



yes it is mensa. mensa.dk or something. solved 36 qn in 14 mins then got bored. skiped a few.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Srinivas

karim3343 said:


> If that's Mensa then it must be legit obviously. Nice.
> 
> 
> 
> They are asking me to pay $10



They will send the mail to your address, that 9 dollar some thing is for complete report. Check the spam of your mail box.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Srinivas said:


> They will send the mail to your address, that 9 dollar some thing is for complete report. Check the spam of your mail box.



I guessed randomly and I scored 79, lol

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## gslv

79 lol feeble mindness.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Srinivas said:


> They will send the mail to your address, that 9 dollar some thing is for complete report. Check the spam of your mail box.



Take whatever Mensa one gslv is referring to. They would have to be accurate.



gslv said:


> 79 lol feeble mindness.



I would be highly intelligent in Pygmy society.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pakistanisage

These are average IQ scores and not individual IQ scores. Get rid of the dumb ones and your National average will rise....

Pakistan is fortunate because the Dumb TTP are being struck down all the time and Pakistan's average is rising....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gslv

Pakistanisage said:


> These are average IQ scores and not individual IQ scores. Get rid of the dumb ones and your National average will rise....
> 
> Pakistan is fortunate because the Dumb TTP are being struck down all the time and Pakistan's average is rising....



getting rid is not the answer .how to increase the no of educated person is. 
so if just ppl like me are there the avg would be 120 -125 . and for karim 144sque.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Pakistanisage

gslv said:


> getting rid is not the answer .how to increase the no of educated person is.
> so if just ppl like me are there the avg would be 120 -125 . and for karim 144sque.





Your claim of 120 is somewhat debatable because you obviously lack the finesse and understanding of when something is said in Jest and jokingly. I was just kidding my 120 IQ friend, I did not mean what I said. Try to discern this difference and your IQ might rise above 82.4....

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Pakistanisage

gslv said:


> getting rid is not the answer .how to increase the no of educated person is.
> so if just ppl like me are there the avg would be 120 -125 . and for karim 144sque.





Your claim of 120 is somewhat debatable because you obviously lack the finesse and understanding of when something is said in Jest and jokingly. I was just kidding my 120 IQ friend, I did not mean what I said. Try to discern this difference and your IQ might rise above 82.4....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## gslv

Pakistanisage said:


> Your claim of 120 is somewhat debatable because you obviously lack the finesse and understanding of when something is said in Jest and jokingly. I was just kidding my 120 IQ friend, I did not mean what I said. Try to discern this difference and your IQ might rise above 82.4....



i can very well see the smileys . no need to lecture me. and for your opinion on my iq , as if i care.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Pakistanisage said:


> These are average IQ scores and not individual IQ scores. Get rid of the dumb ones and your National average will rise....
> 
> Pakistan is fortunate because the Dumb TTP are being struck down all the time and Pakistan's average is rising....



Yes they are average. No one said otherwise. To be for individuals I would have to post all 7.2 billion individual IQ scores for every man, woman, and child on this page.

Regarding getting rid of the dumb one's, yes, that may work, but there's also a problem with that. The regression to the mean effect.

"In statistics, regression toward (or to) the mean is the phenomenon that if a variable is extreme on its first measurement, it will tend to be closer to the average on its second measurement&#8212;and, paradoxically, if it is extreme on its second measurement, it will tend to be closer to the average on its first. To avoid making wrong inferences, regression toward the mean must be considered when designing scientific experiments and interpreting data."

Regression toward the mean - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The IQ for a child birthed by two Pakistani parents with an IQ of 120, for example, will still tend (on average) to regress towards the mean genotypic IQ of the specific population group they belong to. Same if you have two Pakistani parents with an average IQ of 70. The children will, on average, move towards the standard IQ of the population/racial average.

This shows that IQ is not entirely heritable, and the children of fairly low-IQ parents could have above average IQ's, while the children of above-average IQ's could have lower IQ's (compared to their parents).

This is why you find a lot of deadbeats that come from very intelligent families, and in countries which allow great social mobility, quite a few geniuses, billionaires, etc. that have the rags-to-riches story.

EDIT: Just saw you were joking. Didn't get it initially because I am in circles where people speak of eugenics frequently and passively.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## liontk

Bunch of non sense, while there might be some ounces of truth like mental deficiency, the only thing that really count is effort and if you work hard, you will get ahead and it is simple as that. Hard work always beats talent in my opinion though again I have average IQ or at least the one I did on web (2 question one). I am just sceptic because through hard work you can atleast get to an equalizing level and this is coming from someone who used to be terrible at math during grade school but in university it is my favourite subject  .


----------



## East Asia United

liontk said:


> Bunch of non sense, while there might be some ounces of truth like mental deficiancy, the only thing that really count is effort and if you work hard, you will get ahead and it is simple as that. Hard work always beats talent in my opinion though again I have average IQ or at least the one I did on web (2 question one).



Well, this is not 100% true. Yes, living in a better environment with less serious nutritional factors influencing brain development will increase IQ, but take a look at the example of American or British Blacks.

The sub-Saharan African population has a mean IQ of 67. The AF American population has a mean IQ of 85. Now, this clearly shows that IQ can be changed through environment (although Blacks in America have on average 17% White admixture; adjusting for this would give a genetic potential of 80).

My question to you would be: If their is no innate genetic component to intelligence, why is it that Black Americans have not closed the 15 or so point IQ gap between Whites and themselves? The gap has stayed the same, even with Affirmative Action, racial preferences, and racial quotas, since the 1970's.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## sab

I dont belive they have tested IQ of so many countries with sufficient number of candidates. Total BAKWAS

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Wright

liontk said:


> Bunch of non sense, while there might be some ounces of truth like mental deficiency, the only thing that really count is effort and if you work hard, you will get ahead and it is simple as that. Hard work always beats talent in my opinion though again I have average IQ or at least the one I did on web (2 question one). I am just sceptic because through hard work you can atleast get to an equalizing level and this is coming from someone who used to be terrible at math during grade school but in university it is my favourite subject  .



It's debatable, but one cannot assume all humans developed equally in both mental and physical characteristics, considering the variations among phenotype and personality traits within different races.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## East Asia United

sab said:


> I dont belive they have tested IQ of so many countries with sufficient number of candidates. Total BAKWAS



To give you an example, the total number of people tested in the United States is over 20 million. This is not just one study. This is an amalgamation of all the studies of IQ tests that have been taken over the last few decades, in addition to international tests that correlate very highly with IQ tests (PISA, TIMSS, etc.).

There are no researchers today that deny the validity of IQ tests. They are used in court proceedings (people with an IQ of 70 or below cannot be executed in the United States, and the same with many other European countries), and to diagnose certain possible conditions. They are also used in the military. Anyone with an average IQ below 80 in the US Armed Forces cannot be on the "front-line" or do any duties that require strenuous effort.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## liontk

karim3343 said:


> Well, this is not 100% true. Yes, living in a better environment with less serious nutritional factors influencing brain development will increase IQ, but take a look at the example of American or British Blacks.
> 
> The sub-Saharan African population has a mean IQ of 67. The AF American population has a mean IQ of 85. Now, this clearly shows that IQ can be changed through environment (although Blacks in America have on average 17% White admixture; adjusting for this would give a genetic potential of 80).
> 
> My question to you would be: If their is no innate genetic component to intelligence, why is it that Black Americans have not closed the 15 or so point IQ gap between Whites and themselves? The gap has stayed the same, even with Affirmative Action, racial preferences, and racial quotas, since the 1970's.



I question the very basis one measures IQ, i think economic factors have alot to do with it as well as the inability of affirmative action however as far school goes, I have alot of friend that are from africa here on scholorship and they are definately on dean's list. The point is that the reason they do well is because of hard work, the potential of human mind is immense and it cannot become quantified or be measured in a parameter. Health, diet as well as doing certain activities can also improve your mind and at the end of the day not everybody is same but it doesn't mean you are destined to be stupid. Like i said i was terrible at math so judging by this IQ test, I should just moan about it rather than work hard and improve my short coming
@Wright, offcourse I am not denying that some are slower than others in understanding concepts but we have the power to overcomes those obstacles and it might take more time than it would take a genius but still at the end you can equalize those differences. As far as talent, everybody tends to have something they are great at, forexample does having high IQ mean you have leadership skills or public speaking or spatial abilities, i think intelligence is very difficult to measure and in truth it is probably a mix of everything similar to how our heights are.


----------



## East Asia United

Wright said:


> It's debatable, but one cannot assume all humans developed equally in both mental and physical characteristics, considering the variations among phenotype and personality traits within different races.



This is a good point. It's not at all surprising or racist to think that Black children will have dark skin color because their parents belong to a race/population group that has the genes that code for dark skin, and that White children will have a lighter skin color because their parents belong to a group that has the genes that (typically) code for White skin.

Therefore, I am confounded when I hear that, yes, their are real genetic differences when it comes to physical features (Blacks enjoy talking about how they are naturally physically superior, have larger penises, etc.), but it's insane to think their might be the *same* genetic factors for intelligence? It makes no sense.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

It appears that the thread is back up again? Awesome

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

liontk said:


> I question the very basis one measures IQ, i think economic factors have alot to do with it as well as the inability of affirmative action however as far school goes, I have alot of friend that are from africa here on scholorship and they are definately on dean's list. The point is that the reason they do well is because of hard work, the potential of human mind is immense and it cannot become quantified or be measured in a parameter. Health, diet as well as doing certain activities can also improve your mind and at the end of the day not everybody is same but it doesn't mean you are destined to be stupid. Like i said i was terrible at math so judging by this IQ test, I should just moan about it rather than work hard and improve my short coming
> @Wright, offcourse I am not denying that some are slower than others in understanding concepts but we have the power to overcomes those obstacles and it might take more time than it would take a genius but still at the end you can equalize those differences. As far as talent, everybody tends to have something they are great at, forexample does having high IQ mean you have leadership skills or public speaking or spatial abilities, i think intelligence is very difficult to measure and in truth it is probably a mix of everything similar to how our heights are.



Well, the problem with this is that IQ tests have been used for over a century; they are widely considered to be the greatest predictors of future potential, and no one, liberal or conservative, denies that IQ tests are highly correlated with future success.

Also, consider that IQ tests that are taken at age 7-9 already show the same Black-White gap, Black-Asian gap, etc. This is before they begin allowing the social and educational environment to influence them to the extent that they become different through culture.

I mean, how else to explain when the IQ gap of about 15 points is present at 7 years of age?

"As far as talent, everybody tends to have something they are great at, for example does having high IQ mean you have leadership skills or public speaking or spatial abilities"

Spatial abilities are actually a part of IQ. There are over 10 such subtests. Verbal, visuospatial, abstract-thinking, etc. Virtually everything that is considered to be intelligence is now taken into account. Remember, we have been doing this for a century; we have gotten pretty good at it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## liontk

karim3343 said:


> Well, the problem with this is that IQ tests have been used for over a century; they are widely considered to be the greatest predictors of future potential, and no one, liberal or conservative, denies that IQ tests are highly correlated with future success.
> 
> Also, consider that IQ tests that are taken at age 7-9 already show the same Black-White gap, Black-Asian gap, etc. This is before they begin allowing the social and educational environment to influence them to the extent that they become different through culture.
> 
> I mean, how else to explain when the IQ gap of about 15 points is present at 7 years of age?
> 
> "As far as talent, everybody tends to have something they are great at, for example does having high IQ mean you have leadership skills or public speaking or spatial abilities"
> 
> Spatial abilities are actually a part of IQ. There are over 10 such subtests. Verbal, visuospatial, abstract-thinking, etc. Virtually everything that is considered to be intelligence is now taken into account. Remember, we have been doing this for a century; we have gotten pretty good at it.



Nope still not buying it, you cannot quantify something in number especially intelligence and I still find definition of intelligence to be skewed. For example leadership in my opinion is the greatest and most difficult thing to work on but I have notice a lot of avg intelligent people that can lead a team work through a construction assignment better than your book smart engineer, so I understand that anecdotal evidence does not mean much but point being that don't put your faith on these test and work hard! I mean lets be honest if china had such smart people based on intelligence then how come they were humiliated for the last 300 years and I know I am being harsh but that is the reality. Give some time, you will see Africa pick up in the future and for that matter south america in general. History is a cycle every nation has it ups and every nation has it's down, in the future expect bright things from Canada  . Sorry for that long stretch rant but my friend you underestimate the human mind and it's potentials and numbers don't tell half the story.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## East Asia United

liontk said:


> Nope still not buying it, you cannot quantify something in number especially intelligence and I still find definition of intelligence to be skewed. For example leadership in my opinion is the greatest and most difficult thing to work on but I have notice a lot of avg intelligent people that can lead a team work through a construction assignment better than your book smart engineer, so I am now providing anecdotal evidence but point being that don't put your faith on these test and work hard! I mean lets be honest if china had such smart people based on intelligence then how come they were humiliated for the last 300 years and I know I am being harsh but that is the reality. Give some time, you will see Africa pick up in the future and for that matter south america in general. History is a cycle every nation has it ups and every nation has it's down, in the future expect bright things from Canada  . Sorry for that long stretch rant but my friend you underestimate the human mind and it's potentials and numbers don't tell half the story.



I'm sorry but you underestimate the meaning of consensus and fact in the scientific community.

What are the chances that one person (ie you) is correct over virtually 100% of the scientific community? There is literally almost no argument over the validity of IQ tests and their ability to predict intelligence. Out of the thousands of studies that will be published every year, I am doubtful that you can find one that shows IQ being refuted as means to assess intelligence.

As for China, being humiliated for 300 years is completely irrelevant. IQ does not predict your _*current*_ ability, it predicts your *potential and innate* ability. China was the 2nd poorest nation on Earth in 1980, as assessed by the IMF (only Mozambique was poorer). China also scored on par with other East Asian nations, leaving it as one of the smartest countries on Earth. And China's history doesn't show otherwise. Being the world's largest economy for almost 4,000 years. Being regarded as the world's greatest power (by plurality) from 2000 BC to 1600 AD (with a few holes every now and then).

IQ tests are not at all in contention. See here:

Intelligence is a better predictor of educational and work success than *any* other single score.

Some measures of educational SAT aptitude are essentially IQ tests; For instance Frey and Detterman (2004) reported a correlation of 0.82 between g (general intelligence factor) and SAT scores [75] another has found correlation of 0.81 between g and GCSE scores.

Correlations between IQ scores (general cognitive ability) and achievement test scores are reported to be 0.81 by Deary and colleagues, with the explained variance ranging "from 58.6% in Mathematics and 48% in English to 18.1% in Art and Design".

The American Psychological Association's report "Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns" states that wherever it has been studied, children with high scores on tests of intelligence tend to learn more of what is taught in school than their lower-scoring peers. The correlation between IQ scores and grades is about .50. This means that the explained variance is 25%. Achieving good grades depends on many factors other than IQ, such as "persistence, interest in school, and willingness to study" (p. 81).

It has been found IQ correlation with school performance depends on the IQ measurement used. For undergraduate students, the Verbal IQ as measured by WAIS-R has been found to correlate significantly (0.53) with the GPA of the last 60 hours. In contrast, Performance IQ correlation with the same GPA was only 0.22 in the same study.

According to Schmidt and Hunter, "for hiring employees without previous experience in the job the most valid predictor of future performance is general mental ability."[74] The validity of IQ as a predictor of job performance is above zero for all work studied to date, but varies with the type of job and across different studies, ranging from 0.2 to 0.6.[78] The correlations were higher when the unreliability of measurement methods was controlled for.[39] While IQ is more strongly correlated with reasoning and less so with motor function,[79] IQ-test scores predict performance ratings in all occupations.[74] That said, for highly qualified activities (research, management) low IQ scores are more likely to be a barrier to adequate performance, whereas for minimally-skilled activities, athletic strength (manual strength, speed, stamina, and coordination) are more likely to influence performance.[74] It is largely through the quicker acquisition of job-relevant knowledge that higher IQ mediates job performance.

In establishing a causal direction to the link between IQ and work performance, longitudinal studies by Watkins and others suggest that IQ exerts a causal influence on future academic achievement, whereas academic achievement does not substantially influence future IQ scores.[80] Treena Eileen Rohde and Lee Anne Thompson write that general cognitive ability, but not specific ability scores, predict academic achievement, with the exception that processing speed and spatial ability predict performance on the SAT math beyond the effect of general cognitive ability.[81]

The US military has minimum enlistment standards at about the IQ 85 level. There have been two experiments with lowering this to 80 but in both cases these men could not master soldiering well enough to justify their costs.[82]

Some US police departments have set a maximum IQ score for new officers (for example: 125, in New London, CT), under the argument that those with overly-high IQs will become bored and exhibit high turnover in the job. This policy has been challenged as discriminatory, but upheld by at least one US District court.[83]

The American Psychological Association's report "Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns" states that since the explained variance is 29%, other individual characteristics such as interpersonal skills, aspects of personality etc. are probably of equal or greater importance, but at this point there are no equally reliable instruments to measure them.[39]

While it has been suggested that "in economic terms it appears that the IQ score measures something with decreasing marginal value. It is important to have enough of it, but having lots and lots does not buy you that much.",[84][85] large scale longitudinal studies indicate an increase in IQ translates into an increase in performance at all levels of IQ: i.e., that ability and job performance are monotonically linked at all IQ levels.[86] Charles Murray, coauthor of The Bell Curve, found that IQ has a substantial effect on income independently of family background.[87]
The link from IQ to wealth is much less strong than that from IQ to job performance. Some studies indicate that IQ is unrelated to net worth.[88][89]

The American Psychological Association's 1995 report Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns stated that IQ scores accounted for (explained variance) about a quarter of the social status variance and one-sixth of the income variance. Statistical controls for parental SES eliminate about a quarter of this predictive power. Psychometric intelligence appears as only one of a great many factors that influence social outcomes.[39]

Some studies claim that IQ only accounts for (explains) a sixth of the variation in income because many studies are based on young adults, many of whom have not yet reached their peak earning capacity, or even their education. On pg 568 of The g Factor, Arthur Jensen claims that although the correlation between IQ and income averages a moderate 0.4 (one sixth or 16% of the variance), the relationship increases with age, and peaks at middle age when people have reached their maximum career potential. In the book, A Question of Intelligence, Daniel Seligman cites an IQ income correlation of 0.5 (25% of the variance).

A 2002 study[90] further examined the impact of non-IQ factors on income and concluded that an individual's location, inherited wealth, race, and schooling are more important as factors in determining income than IQ.

The American Psychological Association's 1995 report Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns stated that the correlation between IQ and crime was -0.2. It was -0.19 between IQ scores and number of juvenile offenses in a large Danish sample; with social class controlled, the correlation dropped to -0.17. A correlation of 0.20 means that the explained variance is less than 4%. It is important to realize that the causal links between psychometric ability and social outcomes may be indirect. Children with poor scholastic performance may feel alienated. Consequently, they may be more likely to engage in delinquent behavior, compared to other children who do well.[39]

In his book The g Factor (1998), Arthur Jensen cited data which showed that, regardless of race, people with IQs between 70 and 90 have higher crime rates than people with IQs below or above this range, with the peak range being between 80 and 90.

The 2009 Handbook of Crime Correlates stated that reviews have found that around eight IQ points, or 0.5 SD, separate criminals from the general population, especially for persistent serious offenders. It has been suggested that this simply reflects that "only dumb ones get caught" but there is similarly a negative relation between IQ and self-reported offending. That children with conduct disorder have lower IQ than their peers "strongly argues" for the theory.[91]

A study of the relationship between US county-level IQ and US county-level crime rates found that higher average IQs were associated with lower levels of property crime, burglary, larceny rate, motor vehicle theft, violent crime, robbery, and aggravated assault. These results were not "confounded by a measure of concentrated disadvantage that captures the effects of race, poverty, and other social disadvantages of the county."[92]

In addition, IQ and its correlation to health, violent crime, gross state product, and government effectiveness are the subject of a 2006 paper in the publication Intelligence. The paper breaks down IQ averages by U.S. states using the federal government's National Assessment of Educational Progress math and reading test scores as a source.[93]

The American Psychological Association's 1995 report Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns stated that the correlations for most "negative outcome" variables are typically smaller than 0.20, which means that the explained variance is less than 4%.[39]

Tambs et al.[94]found that occupational status, educational attainment, and IQ are individually heritable; and further found that "genetic variance influencing educational attainment ... contributed approximately one-fourth of the genetic variance for occupational status and nearly half the genetic variance for IQ." In a sample of U.S. siblings, Rowe et al.[95] report that the inequality in education and income was predominantly due to genes, with shared environmental factors playing a subordinate role.

A recent USA study connecting political views and intelligence has shown that the mean adolescent intelligence of young adults who identify themselves as "very liberal" is 106.4, while that of those who identify themselves as "very conservative" is 94.8.[96] Two other studies conducted in the UK reached similar conclusions.[97][98]

There are also other correlations such as those between religiosity and intelligence and fertility and intelligence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient#Social_outcomes

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## liontk

@karim3343, there is the big difference my friend, I believe in present situation rather than potential as some say. I also do want to point out that not every culture gives preference to education as say for example the west or east asian countries. For example my india peeps always keep rolling out data(sorry for putting you folks in the bus) about how they are the next super power while the ground reality is that it is still one of the most poorest regions in the world even if you take into account the strides they have made. I have done my time in the military so I believe physical abilities go hand in hand with intelligence from my personal experience rather than differentiating the two, for example in military college majority of the engineering students were as good shape as you see anywhere and still very smart though may not good as the colleges in Canada.

Personally I am a realist and looking back through history, it is not always the smarter person that comes to forefront but rather the one that see's the opportunity and in that concept lies the formula for success. For example Trotsky by most account was a smart gentleman yet uneducated Stalin came in to power and supplanted the entire intellectual soviet body through careful manoeuvring yet he did not even an iota of education, success is all based on opportunity though education does help increase the likelihood.

Edit: Wikipedia seriously  , come on monsieur you can do better!
@karim3343, I want your opinion on this proposition, from IQ tests it is clear that a guy going to college and say gets a masters in inorganic chemistry compare to a guy going to trade school and doing plumbing. By logic the guy coming out with a master becomes a researcher and makes around 48K, you can check on revenue Canada for the exact while the plumber here make 6 figures so who is really the smart one. <<<reality is different than potential capability<<<


----------



## Archdemon

What a bullshit.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

liontk said:


> @karim3343, there is the big difference my friend, I believe in present situation rather than potential as some say. I also do want to point out that not every culture gives preference to education as say for example the west or east asian countries. For example my india peeps always keep rolling out data(sorry for putting you folks in the bus) about how they are the next super power while the ground reality is that it is still one of the most poorest regions in the world even if you take into account the strides they have made. I have done my time in the military so I believe physical abilities go hand in hand with intelligence from my personal experience rather than differentiating the two, for example in military college majority of the engineering students were as good shape as you see anywhere and still very smart though may not good as the colleges in Canada.
> 
> Personally I am a realist and looking back through history, it is not always the smarter person that comes to forefront but rather the one that see's the opportunity and in that concept lies the formula for success. For example Trotsky by most account was a smart gentleman yet uneducated Stalin came in to power and supplanted the entire intellectual soviet body through careful manoeuvring yet he did not even an iota of education, success is all based on opportunity though education does help increase the likelihood.
> 
> Edit: Wikipedia seriously  , come on monsieur you can do better!
> @karim3343, I want your opinion on this proposition, from IQ tests it is clear that a guy going to college and say gets a masters in inorganic chemistry compare to a guy going to trade school and doing plumbing. By logic the guy coming out with a master becomes a researcher and makes around 48K, you can check on revenue Canada for the exact while the plumber here make 6 figures so who is really the smart one. <<<reality is different than potential capability<<<



"physical abilities go hand in hand with intelligence from my personal experience rather than differentiating the two"

Again, this is a fact that is not in contention. The data has conclusively shown that physical strength is inversely proportional. Strangely enough, it fits into our IQ data!

Blacks being the strongest, followed generally by Whites, followed generally be Asians (although Asians won a highly disproportionate amount of medalia at the Olympics, which shows that training and hard work go along way too.)

"Edit: Wikipedia seriously , come on monsieur you can do better!"

Dude, you do know that Wikipedia has links to the actual studies right? It's a really good way to copy-paste large amounts of info rather than going one by one into each 300 page study and looking for the conclusion.

"I want your opinion on this proposition, from IQ tests it is clear that a guy going to college and say gets a masters in inorganic chemistry compare to a guy going to trade school and doing plumbing."

I don't get it? Are you asking me which one is more intellectually stimulating? Or are you saying that regardless of the lower (supposed?) IQ of the plumber he still makes more?



Archdemon said:


> What a bullshit.



Thanks for the intellectually stimulating argument!

(I'm sure if Israeli mean IQ was 350 you'd be parroting this to all of your friends)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## liontk

karim3343 said:


> "physical abilities go hand in hand with intelligence from my personal experience rather than differentiating the two"
> 
> Again, this is a fact that is not in contention. The data has conclusively shown that physical strength is inversely proportional. Strangely enough, it fits into our IQ data!
> 
> Blacks being the strongest, followed generally by Whites, followed generally be Asians (although Asians won a highly disproportionate amount of medalia at the Olympics, which shows that training and hard work go along way too.)
> 
> "Edit: Wikipedia seriously , come on monsieur you can do better!"
> 
> Dude, you do know that Wikipedia has links to the actual studies right? It's a really good way to copy-paste large amounts of info rather than going one by one into each 300 page study and looking for the conclusion.
> 
> "I want your opinion on this proposition, from IQ tests it is clear that a guy going to college and say gets a masters in inorganic chemistry compare to a guy going to trade school and doing plumbing."
> 
> I don't get it? Are you asking me which one is more intellectually stimulating? Or are you saying that regardless of the lower (supposed?) IQ of the plumber he still makes more?
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for the intellectually stimulating argument!
> 
> (I'm sure if Israeli mean IQ was 350 you'd be parroting this to all of your friends)




Inversely proportional to what, you lost me so you are saying either you are smart or you are strong because of certain genetics, just because someone has preferable genetics does not make them good. You definitely have no workedout a single day in your life and are probably very unhealthy and some of your comment definitely are borderline racist and once again I will repeat as I have previously said that measuring intelligence is arbitrary based on a certain criteria. For example 7 century Bedouin Arabs within a century were able to conquer half the world and have left their mark behind hence you use their numerals. So going by your scale, it demonstrates that since arabs have low IQs they could not have achieved something so significant as this, or the Gaul once considered among the barbarians of Europe, were able unite themselves under Charles lament and became a potent force as France is today. all you have is bunch of numbers and no insight on reality. you are also making the assumption that people in life make rational decisions, the only thing SAT test do is measure your test taking skills and that is about it. This is why in Canada these test only account 40% max but rather your cumulative marks plus a huge interview, which really demonstrates whether you are capable or not. Sadly you are just another pseudo intellectual(i am sorry but you have not experienced life) that will be herded by someone with lower IQ based on his leadership and this is why kids we have dumb politicians but yet they rule us.(this is again going by your assumptions as a lot of politicians here are low educated however in reality politicians are the smartest folks in reality).


----------



## East Asia United

liontk said:


> Inversely proportional to what, you lost me so you are saying either you are smart or you are strong because of certain genetics, just because someone has preferable genetics does not make them good.



I'm saying that physical strength is inversely proportional to IQ differences in race/population groups. That is, Blacks tend to be the most physically strong, while at the same time being of the lowest IQ. And this continues along the same line.



> because of certain genetics, just because someone has preferable genetics does not make them good. You definitely have no workedout a single day in your life and are probably very unhealthy and some of your comment definitely are borderline racist and once again I will repeat as I have previously said that measuring intelligence is arbitrary based on a certain criteria



Now you are acting like a child. I work out five times a week, but what's it to you? What does this have to do with the data? And what in the hell are you talking about when you call me a racist? I am simply providing the data. That is all.



> I will repeat as I have previously said that measuring intelligence is arbitrary based on a certain criteria



And I will repeat in saying that 99.999% of researchers on the topic disagree with you. So what is it? Are you correct? Or are the people who developed this method of testing, who went to the best schools, and understand what scientific objectivity is, correct?



> For example 7 century Bedouin Arabs within a century were able to conquer half the world and have left their mark behind hence you use their numerals.



What an overstatement. Conquer? You mean migrate all over the Eurasian plains and then settle back into Arabia? There were no people or kingdoms or empires or nations to conquer. We were all hunter-gatherers back then.



> So going by your scale, it demonstrates that since arabs have low IQs they could not have achieved something so significant as this, or the Gaul once considered among the barbarians of Europe, were able unite themselves under Charles lament and became a potent force as France is today



No, I believe that Arabs certainly have the capability of migrating to other parts of the world (or 'conquering', as you put it) and then going back to North Africa. Having an average IQ around 84 doesn't make someone retarded. You are more than capable of creating a society in the Middle Ages or the pre-Industrial era with such an IQ. As for the Gauls, whose modern descendants would be the French, not sure your point. Just because of a bunch of Europeans, that would themselves be considered barbaric today, felt that the Franks were barbaric, gives no indication as to their IQ, nor does it give any indication to anything really. It's a strawman.

And who is Charles Lament?



> all you have is bunch of numbers and no insight on reality. you are also making the assumption that people in life make rational decisions, the only thing SAT test do is measure your test taking skills and that is about it



Ugh, we are not referring to SAT tests; we are referring to something called an IQ test. If you can't understand the difference please consult an encylopedia. Stop projecting onto me.



> Sadly you are just another pseudo intellectual(i am sorry but you have not experienced life) that will be herded by someone with lower IQ based on his leadership and this is why kids we have dumb politicians but yet they rule us



More childish comments. I have an IQ of 144, I study in one of the best Uni's in Korea, after coming from Emory University in Atl, and I've already made a small name for myself short selling stocks on the NYSE. Good luck with your overly-simplistic characterization of my personality though. I think I will derive a far more accurate portrait of you though, then you will of me by continuing to spout such imbecilic garbage.


----------



## liontk

karim3343 said:


> I'm saying that physical strength is inversely proportional to IQ differences in race/population groups. That is, Blacks tend to be the most physically strong, while at the same time being of the lowest IQ. And this continues along the same line.
> 
> 
> 
> Now you are acting like a child. I work out five times a week, but what's it to you? What does this have to do with the data? And what in the hell are you talking about when you call me a racist? I am simply providing the data. That is all.
> 
> 
> 
> And I will repeat in saying that 99.999% of researchers on the topic disagree with you. So what is it? Are you correct? Or are the people who developed this method of testing, who went to the best schools, and understand what scientific objectivity is, correct?
> 
> 
> 
> What an overstatement. Conquer? You mean migrate all over the Eurasian plains and then settle back into Arabia? There were no people or kingdoms or empires or nations to conquer. We were all hunter-gatherers back then.
> 
> 
> 
> No, I believe that Arabs certainly have the capability of migrating to other parts of the world (or 'conquering', as you put it) and then going back to North Africa. Having an average IQ around 84 doesn't make someone retarded. You are more than capable of creating a society in the Middle Ages or the pre-Industrial era with such an IQ. As for the Gauls, whose modern descendants would be the French, not sure your point. Just because of a bunch of Europeans, that would themselves be considered barbaric today, felt that the Franks were barbaric, gives no indication as to their IQ, nor does it give any indication to anything really. It's a strawman.
> 
> And who is Charles Lament?
> 
> 
> 
> Ugh, we are not referring to SAT tests; we are referring to something called an IQ test. If you can't understand the difference please consult an encylopedia. Stop projecting onto me.
> 
> 
> 
> More childish comments. I have an IQ of 144, I study in one of the best Uni's in Korea, after coming from Emory University in Atl, and I've already made a small name for myself short selling stocks on the NYSE. Good luck with your overly-simplistic characterization of my personality though. I think I will derive a far more accurate portrait of you though, then you will of me by continuing to spout such imbecilic garbage.



Arabs just migrated , once again proves that college education does to wonders to people. I believe in one thing and that is reality and education is a means of getting to a place in society. I think what we are arguing about is a very old concept all together and it is the concept of whether one picks his path in life or rather it's picked out for him. You believe in IQ however I believe in hard work and hard work alone and lets agree to disagree on this. As far as working out goes, how come China wins so many medals in the olympics in comparison to individual african countries, if your theory was really true. You have simply never worked out because if you did you would not believe this nonsense, however as far as body types are concerned, there is endomorph, ectomorph and mesomorph. 
Oh what the heck am I argueing about, you know what you are totally correct and I am discussing this on a defence forum too, i really have to do something better with my past times, sorry I apologize in advance if I lost my cool earlier but let stick to defence topic/international affairs as this thread has given me nada knowledge. 

Remember this statement monsieur, HARDWORK BEATS TALENT ANYDAY, this is what I believe in


----------



## liontk

@BDforever, sorry about the bad langue I posted above, hopefully you do not get offended mon ami. I lost my cool earlier because of getting into an argument about Intelligence, learned my lesson today .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## eddieInUK

The illiteracy in India influenced the test score, if we put illiteracy list and this test results together, we will see some interesting things.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## BDforever

liontk said:


> @BDforever, sorry about the bad langue I posted above, hopefully you do not get offended mon ami. I lost my cool earlier because of getting into an argument about Intelligence, learned my lesson today .



its ok .. btw i am not arab or chinese or african 

i do not believe this IQ result because if you check whoever have greater IQ result, have greater access in knowledge field.

It will be more accurate to get actual IQ result is providing same knowledge all parties and then see who gives better outcomes from the knowledge.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Arya Desa

Can we get an IQ by caste results posted? I am sure the average of India is weighed down by the dalits, shudra and vaishya.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## East Asia United

liontk said:


> Arabs just migrated , once again proves that college education does to wonders to people. I believe in one thing and that is reality and education is a means of getting to a place in society. I think what we are arguing about is a very old concept all together and it is the concept of whether one picks his path in life or rather it's picked out for him. You believe in IQ however I believe in hard work and hard work alone and lets agree to disagree on this. As far as working out goes, how come China wins so many medals in the olympics in comparison to individual african countries, if your theory was really true. You have simply never worked out because if you did you would not believe this nonsense, however as far as body types are concerned, there is endomorph, ectomorph and mesomorph.
> Oh what the heck am I argueing about, you know what you are totally correct and I am discussing this on a defence forum too, i really have to do something better with my past times, sorry I apologize in advance if I lost my cool earlier but let stick to defence topic/international affairs as this thread has given me nada knowledge.
> 
> Remember this statement monsieur, HARDWORK BEATS TALENT ANYDAY, this is what I believe in



Yes, Arabs migrated. Name the people they conquered on their way 'round the Earth. This should be fun.



> I believe in one thing and that is reality and education is a means of getting to a place in society.



Errr, yea, no disagreement there. I'm simply saying that those that tend to be more intelligent (as reflected in IQ tests) are more adept at getting the best education. There is no argument against this. No researchers disagree with me on this, just as no mathematicians disagree that 1+1=2. When you have 20 million people take IQ tests, and the overwhelming majority show very good accuracy in doing what you predicted them to do (regarding educational attainment, income, etc.) then I'd say you've got a pretty good system there.



> one picks his path in life or rather it's picked out for him.



It's a bit of both. Agree or disagree?



> You believe in IQ however I believe in hard work and hard work alone and lets agree to disagree on this



I don't think you seem to understand. You can't *believe* in something when you are trying to assess it objectively. It's either a fact or it isn't. You not 'believing in' IQ makes no difference to the fact that it is a great predictor of future success and outcomes, and therefore intelligence.

Your attempt at talking down to me by implying I don't believe in hard work (even though East Asians are generally regarded as the hardest working) is a testament to your impulse control. You find it very difficult to complete a sentence without getting some type of insult in.



> how come China wins so many medals in the olympics in comparison to individual african countries, if your theory was really true.



Happy to discuss this.

1: East Asian work ethic is second to none. I think this is pretty well-documented (but for the sake of argument you can annoy me on this too).

2: China has a high IQ society, so they are able to efficiently organize a centrally planned athlete training system, while most sub-Saharan African countries are below subsistence-level, and have a very low IQ (averaging 67), which degrades their ability to train their athletes at sufficient levels to compete with the best of the best.

3: China has a much larger pool of athletes to select from. China has 1.35 billion people, more than all of Western peoples' combined.

4: Finally, Blacks do very well in the Olympics when they are representatives in high-IQ societies. Blacks dominate many sports, but they are mostly from the US, Britain, etc. African countries simply don't have the resources or the training facilities. Also, many of the people are so impoverished I doubt that the first thing on their mind is the Olympics.



> You have simply never worked out because if you did you would not believe this nonsense, however as far as body types are concerned, there is endomorph, ectomorph and mesomorph.



As I said, I do work out, and since we are on the internet, you are just going to have to trust me. Regardless, what in the Hell does this have to do with anything? Are you implying that I'm saying because I am Asian I cannot increase muscle mass, etc.?

I'm not saying that. I'm simply saying that Blacks *tend* to be taller, more muscular structure, have higher bone densities, more fast twitch fibers, and can sprint faster (among many other things including higher aggression and generally larger build).



> HARDWORK BEATS TALENT ANYDAY, this is what I believe in



Man, that guy Einstein must have been a moron... Or did he get his intelligence from working more than everyone else in the history of the world? Hmmmm....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

BDforever said:


> its ok .. btw i am not arab or chinese or african
> 
> i do not believe this IQ result because if you check whoever have greater IQ result, have greater access in knowledge field.
> 
> It will be more accurate to get actual IQ result is providing same knowledge all parties and then see who gives better outcomes from the knowledge.



Only problem is, this has been done numerous times. For example Blacks at the highest Socioeconomic status, with average incomes of $80,000-$100,000, had children scoring on the SAT 461 on Math and 468 on verbal.

White families with the lowest Socioeconomic status, parents making less than $10,000 (level of *CHINA*), scored 478 on Math and 480 on verbal.

Surely the children of the wealthiest Blacks should have children scoring much higher than the POOREST White children? Instead we see Whites actually scoring quite a bit higher.

For Whites of incomes $80,000-$100,000, which is a much fairer comparison to the SES of the Blacks with income of $80,000-$100,000, they score 539 on verbal and 534 on Math.

How is this possible if their are not innate differences on the genetic level?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kloitra

Arya Desa said:


> Can we get an IQ by caste results posted? I am sure the average of India is weighed down by the dalits, shudra and vaishya.



Are they not Indians? It just means that govt has failed to provide education/resources to a large group of people.


----------



## East Asia United

Arya Desa said:


> Can we get an IQ by caste results posted? I am sure the average of India is weighed down by the dalits, shudra and vaishya.



There is no data for this particular study, but I know the mean IQ of Indian-Americans is 112.



Kloitra said:


> Are they not Indians? It just means that govt has failed to provide education/resources to a large group of people.



Or maybe some Indians are simply more intelligent than others? Or do you really feel that this is impossible?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kloitra

karim3343 said:


> Or maybe some Indians are simply more intelligent than others? Or do you really feel that this is impossible?



No, it more related to culture and opportunities.
Given proper resources and motivation, this supposedly low caste people perform very well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AADHAAR

Tibetans have a significantly different IQ than PRCians. 

Tibet should not be a part of PRC. 

On the side, what a disgrace .. that high IQ chinese toil in coal mines and their other high IQ folks do labour intensive and hazardous occupations in factories for 14-18 hours a day.

Or is it that coal miners were excluded from IQ tests ... since it is assumed that shanghai pigs and coal miners are expected to have same IQ and same lifespan?


----------



## Developereo

karim3343 said:


> I'm saying that physical strength is inversely proportional to IQ differences in race/population groups. That is, Blacks tend to be the most physically strong, while at the same time being of the lowest IQ. And this continues along the same line.



I don't know if such an inverse correlation (physical v/s mental abilities) has been broadly established.

The reason American blacks have superior physical abilities is generally attributed to selective breeding back in the slave days.

As for IQ, a very important factor is cultural emphasis on education and affinity towards certain professions. Many cultures prefer their kids to "go into business" rather than "work for someone else". These cultures would view a shop owner (who works for himself) better than a physicist or engineer (who works for someone else).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jade

The author is Richard Lynn is a racist and a misogynist who have no standing in scientific community. His sits on the board of some white supremacist journals.

According to Richard Lynn: Whites > Blacks, Men > Women. This is the theory he is propagating since 1979. 

Richard Lynn - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## huskie

this is not even a dick measuring contest. It is possible to measure dicks precisely, but those IQ tests are not that precise at all. actually what constitutes and defines intelligence still remains mysterious. 

nonetheless the list may reflect education level to some extent.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## timetravel

karim3343 said:


> I guessed randomly and I scored 79, lol



Let me tell you - Going by your posts, the IQ score above is your correct IQ level.

I just tried and got a score of 139 

http://www.free-iqtest.net/

the one thing I figured out in the first 2 minutes, is that anyone who believes that this IQ test has real correlation to a persons intelligence himself/herself has an IQ less then 50. 

Specially the Chinese - the real IQ of Chinese is less then 60. Why? because simple analysis like below is always the best.

Just look at how the Chinese accept orders without question from anyone (ccp). *In animals among the least IQ are donkeys because they just takes orders from everyone.*

*In this study, Chinese who are not even capable of ruling themselves are being given a IQ of 90... * I think US doesn't want them to know that they are slaves.

Also anyone who knows English well and has prepared for some kind of competitive entrance exam can easily score above 100+ in these meaningless tests.

*There are 400+ different languages spoken in India.

Did the people who printed above results conducted tests in India in 400 Languages? and does this test has a sample size of 10 Million Indians? *

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Arya Desa

Kloitra said:


> Are they not Indians? It just means that govt has failed to provide education/resources to a large group of people.



We are not homogenous people. It is clear that higher castes have higher IQ from historical privileges like resources and access to compounding knowledge. Therefore they are smarter by both genetics and environment.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Anonymous user

Analysis of what? Is this suppose to be a laugh at yourself?

East Asian cultures always have a respect for strong governance, if the government is good and strong the people will follow what's mandated because ultimately the governments are expected to provide the minimum which is infrastructure, education, order among the populace etc.

Pulling out the top ten cities in Asia from random sites.
Top 10: Asian Cities - AskMen
10.Luang Prabang : Asia: Top 10 Cities: Readers' Choice Awards : Condé Nast Traveler

Almost all countries are either East Asian or with East Asian influence

Indians come to Singapore and marvel at our orderliness and infrastructure made only possible with a Chinese culture/influence.

Don't compare a East Asian government with yours and wonder why people do accept what their government says. Its simply because one government works and the other doesn't

I'm not going to bring your governments inability to control issues going on with the ladies in your country out of respect for the other sensible Indian members but if you going to run a slander on Chinese culture make sure it makes sense first.



timetravel said:


> Let me tell you - Going by your posts, the IQ score above is your correct IQ level.
> 
> I just tried and got a score of 139
> 
> Free IQ Test - Fast, Free and Accurate Online IQ Test
> 
> the one thing I figured out in the first 2 minutes, is that anyone who believes that this IQ test has real correlation to a persons intelligence himself/herself has an IQ less then 50.
> 
> Specially the Chinese - the real IQ of Chinese is less then 60. Why? because simple analysis like below is always the best.
> 
> Just look at how the Chinese accept orders without question from anyone (ccp). *In animals among the least IQ are donkeys because they just takes orders from everyone.*
> 
> *In this study, Chinese who are not even capable of ruling themselves are being given a IQ of 90... * I think US doesn't want them to know that they are slaves.
> 
> Also anyone who knows English well and has prepared for some kind of competitive entrance exam can easily score above 100+ in these meaningless tests.
> 
> *There are 400+ different languages spoken in India.
> 
> Did the people who printed above results conducted tests in India in 400 Languages? and does this test has a sample size of 10 Million Indians? *

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Speeder 2

Therere still some misconceptions here, some of which are not entirely wrong, but just not accurate enough. Karim has done a great job in explaining many. I may have missed some but Ill troubleshoot a bit as far as I see:


1. IQ test = intelligence(full)

Not exactly. IQ test is a way that the humans develop to gauge intelligence. IQ test is statistically proven to be highly correlated to the actual intelligence it tries to measure, which is to say the higher the score of IQ test, the higher the actual intelligence is.



2.  The Blacks are physically superior than the rest (Karim)

This is plainly wrong, unfortunately. They are not, unless you think that having longer legs and more obvious stomach muscle and biceps as you see in the US or the UK, although visually impressive thus poster-friendly, means physically stronger. The muscles of the Blacks (both in Africa and the ones in the West from selective breeding) are evolutionarily built ideally for more efficient RUNNING and JUMPING only. Yet running faster or jumping higher is a far cry from the definition of being physically the strongest. 

Indeed as I argued earlier in another thread, a better example of physically the strongest, if it means the overall body capabilities such as strength, endurance and many other factors beyond, is weight lifting rather than 100m sprint or high jump. It is because weight lifting tests the muscle strength and endurance of not only biceps, but also different parts of legs, wrists, forearms, shoulders, neck, back, etc. 

For every visually strong muscle-rich big Black fellow you name, one can find perhaps more impressive Schwarzenegger, Stallone, or Japanese E Honda type sumos. Though shorter, weigh lighter and sprinting slower, a sturdy Bruce Lee or a Jet Li is more physically stronger than a Mike Tyson or a Denzel Washington. One could definitely make a point that East Asians, Euros and a mix of the two - Stanland Asians (they together hold ALL world records on weight lifting and dominate the sport), are actually more physically the strongest on average than the Blacks, if overall physical abilities including endurance, flexibilities, reflexes, balance, co-ordination, etc are taken into consideration as theyre bound to be.



3. On IQ of Indians. Indian  Cacausoid /Europids 


Indians have much to do with Europid as Koreans to South African Bushman.

Mainstreams recognise only 3 major races of Human beings: Caucasoid, Mongoloid and Negroid. The rest are hybrid. This is wrong. There are FOUR big races instead of 3. The 4th major race in fact is Australoid

Some Australoid look like Negroid, some look like dark skinned White with blonde fuzzy hair even, but they are neither. Australoid average IQ is believed to be even lower than Negroid . Australoids closest genetics cousins are Australian aboriginals (followed by Indian untouchables), whom a recent research indicates of containing a large amount of South Asian Indian genes. 

Though Anglo-led the West ( think British Raj) first categorised Indians as Caucasoid based on partial skull bone evidences apart from the necessity of political correctness of the British Empire, and still roughly categorise them so today as they do to entire North Africans (e.g. Ethiopians are Caucasoid, too) , modern Indians are actually overwhelmingly Australoid in origin, with some admixture, degrees varied from indian low castes to high castes, of different tribes of central Asian Caucasoid ( such as Persians, Arabs, dark-skinned Dravidians, etc), Mongoloid (Mogols), and Caucasoid/ Mongoloid mix such as Turks.

This explains why Indian average IQ are quite low, because most Indians, were talking about perhaps>95% of Indians both so-called highcastes and low castes, have significant percentages of Australoid genes, despite of speaking different languages, dialects or having skin tones slightly different ranging from being black, dark brown to light brown.


Therefore, a point can be made that there are much less considerable intelligence differences today between co-called high caste Indians from the Low castes to the degree of insignificance in most cases, as there were 1,000s of years ago when there were indeed high difference when Central Asian tribes invaded heavily Australoid-populated South Asia. Thereve been till now well over 100 generations of inter-breeding among them, even many have been forced through countless post war mass rapes, sex slaves, etc.

That modern highcaste Indians keep hitting the drums that they are different from the rest as if they were coming from Mars is deliberate misleading from their part to keep tight hold on their unfair social economical advantages in modern India. The fact that many dark-skinned Low caste southern Indians have more success on academia in the West than supposedly lighter skinned high castes from the North proves the point.



4. on  physical  mental inverse relations 

Not exactly precise. It should be  testosterone level  mental inverse relations. 

Testosterone level, instead of physical muscles, is The Key Master Switch of the all physics! 

Testosterone level determines male sex hormone level which affects a wide range of very important racial physical, psychological and social differences such as degrees and stages of body maturity, temperament, sexuality, aggression, self-concept (some research mistakenly call it self esteem, which is wrongly mystified further by a politically driven concept called EQ), altruism, etc. 

These factors in turn ultimately decide different survival strategies that different races have pursued over time  so called r-k Strategies in which East Asians Mongoloid have been forced by nature going for k Strategy followed closely by North of Alps Euro Caucasoid, while at the opposite end being r Strategy  driven Negroid and Australoid.

To survive and to compete, the r Strategy evolutionarily demands:

- giving birth earlier (less pregnancy period) and relatively easier, thus with higher fertility per female, 

- earlier maturation of the body (e.g. a 9-yr-old Black kid has the equivalent body mass of a 13-yr-old East Asian. Many mistaken this as "more (innate)physical strengh". It is not. It's just earlier maturation) 

- giving birth easier demands having narrower female pelvis, hence giving birth to babies with smaller brains,

- smaller brains have less cranial capacities (vs. k strategy-driven East Asians), * hence different biological bottom lines AND ceilings for IQ!!! * 

- more aggressiveness in adulthood, 

- higher degree of self-concept (i.e. some mistakenly call it self esteem or even so-called EQ. e.g. researches show that Africans and Indians have the highest self-concept. In reality life one can think of gangster rap or legendary Indian style bragging as examples, with East Asians being the lowest in self-concept: strong emphasis of humbleness in Chinese culture in general, as a traditional virtue of East Asian societies. The same goes for Nothern Euros such as Scadinavians, Germans or even the Brits, whose societies traditionally have regarded humility highly.)

etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Roybot

Speeder 2 said:


> - higher degree of self-concept (i.e. some mistakenly call it self esteem or even so-called EQ. e.g. researches show that Africans and Indians have the highest self-concept. In reality life one can think of gangster rap or legendary Indian style bragging as examples, with East Asians being the lowest in self-concept: *strong emphasis of humbleness in Chinese culture* in general),
> 
> etc.



Yes as can be seen on this forum! Humbleness my as*.

And seriously? gangster rap and indian style bragging

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Anonymous user

Speeder with due respect you should not keep bringing in this race & IQ comparison

Firstly I don't buy into that BS, but even if you do its a sensitive topic and it only invite trolls and racism. 
If that's what you are after you should go start your own thread and not spoil the one created by the OP

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## shuttler

The IQ test or similar universal aptitude tests really put a certain country on the table and dispel some doubts about their capabilites, intellectually. 

Denial of the vailidity is the only way where they can recover solace. If they fare better in these tests instead of behaving like consistent bottom lot underperfomers and run away cowards, they will not vehemently negate the scientific / academic evaluations

If you say something you can deliver later on it is a show of confidence and competence.
If you say something you cannot deliver and fail miserably, it is bragging on a massive scale

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## timetravel

Donkey takes orders from everyone. It doesn't use its own brain, and that is why it works the most. This shows that among animals donkey has one of the least IQ.

and for a correlation to above,

Guess which country people only take orders, and guess which country is the cheapest factory of the world, then who has the least IQ?

Lastly it is only the weak minded people who need support from studies like this on IQ.


----------



## shuttler

liontk said:


> Bunch of non sense, while there might be some ounces of truth like mental deficiency, the only thing that really count is effort and if you work hard, you will get ahead and it is simple as that. Hard work always beats talent in my opinion though again I have average IQ or at least the one I did on web (2 question one). I am just sceptic because through hard work you can atleast get to an equalizing level and this is coming from someone who used to be terrible at math during grade school but in university it is my favourite subject  .



B/S!

Hardwork is an important virtue making up for mental disparity
You can only beat the marginal higher IQ due to their laziness
You can never beat the intelligent plus their hard working ethics
You cannot make the fastest supercomputer or inventing quantum communication by hardworking + average IQ

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## waz

Although Pakistan has a long way to go, it's still good to see it at the top in the subcontinent. However, decades of poor nutrition (brain development) and other issues such as inter marriage between cousins have had a very big toll on IQ. With a few corrections Pakistan should surge, which makes sense considering our ancestors were an incredibly advanced civilisation.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## shuttler

Something that are salient on all these intellectual and aptitude tests being carried out world wide on standardized platforms:

1. they are not tailored made in favour of one nations or race over the other
2. they are carried out by serious established institutions across the world
3. after they publish the results and I havent seen much rejections on the scores of the european or american counterparts. They all seem to accept the results with grace and move on in search of improvement
4. but the *following* is ridiculous and they are iconic cowardice scapegoating reactions which indicate they cant face the stark reality:



> *India*
> 
> Of the 74 countries tested in the PISA 2009 cycle including the "+" nations, the two Indian states came up 72nd and 73rd out of 74 in both reading and maths, and 73rd and 74th in science.
> 
> India's poor performance may not be linguistic as some suggested. 12.87% of US students, for example, indicated that the language of the test differed from the language spoken at home. while 30.77% of Himachal Pradesh students indicated that the language of the test differed from the language spoken at home, a significantly higher percent [17]
> 
> However, unlike American students, those Indian students with a different language at home did better on the PISA test than those with the same language.
> 
> *India's poor performance on the PISA test is consistent with India's poor performance in the only other instance when India's government allowed an international organization to test its students and consistent with India's own testing of its elite students in a study titled Student Learning in the Metro 2006. These studies were conducted using TIMSS questions. The poor result in PISA was greeted with dismay in the Indian media. The BBC reported that as of 2008, only 15% of India's students reach high school.*
> 
> *India pulled out of the 2012 round of PISA testing, in August, with the Indian government attributing its action to the unfairness of PISA testing to Indian students. The Indian Express reported on 9/3/2012 that "The ministry (of education) has concluded that there was a socio-cultural disconnect between the questions and Indian students. The ministry will write to the OECD and drive home the need to factor in India's "socio-cultural milieu".*
> 
> India's participation in the next PISA cycle will hinge on this".[23] The Indian Express also noted that "*Considering that over 70 nations participate in PISA, it is uncertain whether an exception would be made for India".*
> 
> Programme for International Student Assessment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## liontk

shuttler said:


> B/S!
> 
> Hardwork is an important virtue making up for mental disparity
> You can only beat the marginal higher IQ due to their laziness
> You can never beat the intelligent plus their hard working ethics
> You cannot make the fastest supercomputer or inventing quantum communication by hardworking + average IQ



monsieur, like I said before IQ is an important asset to have and by the way I redid my test that Karim was talking aout(116 average)  but all I am saying is that the successful people in our society have a higher EQ and MQ tend to be more successful. IQ is an important asset but connection is the real secret of society and a lot of people don't want to admit their success being based on conncetions. This comes from having a high EQ score and if you or Karim want, I can show you tons of studies reflecting that EQ score being a better predictor for success. Bright people will always outshine others no doubt and I saw that in school as they were able to pick up more but it is the hardwork ethic that makes the difference between a promotion to a major and captain in my personal opinion and likewise a lot of people with decent skills lack EQ and MQ. EQ is very tough to build in today's world and takes time while some are naturally good at it, so next time you notice someone with an undergrad being in a high position, you will realize that they only got there through being smart(EQ wise and may abit of IQ+MQ). In the end like most things the truth tends to be somewhere in the middle but even if you put MQ and IQ aside, EQ i have to admit is very important and this is something that is very hard to improve later in life.

Look For Employees With High EQ Over IQ - Forbes



shuttler said:


> B/S!
> 
> Hardwork is an important virtue making up for mental disparity
> You can only beat the marginal higher IQ due to their laziness
> You can never beat the intelligent plus their hard working ethics
> You cannot make the fastest supercomputer or inventing quantum communication by hardworking + average IQ



@ahaha actually you are right, i have to say way too many smart people drop out of university or colleges for very stupid reason!, I never understood why they don't use themselves to their potential


----------



## shuttler

liontk said:


> monsieur, like I said before IQ is an important asset to have and by the way I redid my test that Karim was talking aout(116 average)  but all I am saying is that the successful people in our society have a higher EQ and MQ tend to be more successful. IQ is an important asset but connection is the real secret of society and a lot of people don't want to admit their success being based on conncetions. This comes from having a high EQ score and if you or Karim want, I can show you tons of studies reflecting that EQ score being a better predictor for success. Bright people will always outshine others no doubt and I saw that in school as they were able to pick up more but it is the hardwork ethic that makes the difference between a promotion to a major and captain in my personal opinion and likewise a lot of people with decent skills lack EQ and MQ. EQ is very tough to build in today's world and takes time while some are naturally good at it, so next time you notice someone with an undergrad being in a high position, you will realize that they only got there through being smart(EQ wise and may abit of IQ+MQ). In the end like most things the truth tends to be somewhere in the middle but even if you put MQ and IQ aside, EQ i have to admit is very important and this is something that is very hard to improve later in life.
> 
> Look For Employees With High EQ Over IQ - Forbes
> 
> 
> 
> @ahaha actually you are right, i have to say way too many smart people drop out of university or colleges for very stupid reason!, I never understood why they don't use themselves to their potential



May be some reseach can shed lights on which is more important EQ or IQ
I'll take both any day!

And if you ask me whether the above IQ tests have any meaning I would say they have as educators researcher scientists have been using over time as measuring yardsticks to gauge on some issues and bring along all other connecting studies

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## huskie

chill out guys. I'll provide a first hand example to show why cross population tests may not be measuring the same thing. a couple of years ago I was on an Alzheimer disease project, which has two study groups, one in Japan and the other in US. One of the goals is to compare old people's language ability during mild cognitive impairment period. there are some batteries of tests designed by US researchers to measure language ability (which were proven valid and reliable in the states). the tests ask the subjects to briefly introduce yourself, randomly talk about things, etc, and at the end, the researchers will record how many words/sentences the subjects correctly use to each question. the initial wrong conclusion is that after controlling for other factors, American participants have higher verbal ability than their Japanese counterparts. however, this is flawed because due to the Japanese participants' humble and introvert nature compared to the Americans, Japanese people tend to speak less even if they have the same latent verbal ability, and therefore their score is affected by a population characteristic other than the REAL ability. the tests are valid among American people or Japanese people separately, but they are not valid when you combine the two population unless you control for other confounders.

this applies to the IQ batteries as well. Due to cultural difference, people tend to have different understanding about the test items and this may affect how they score. there is currently no universal test that can adjust for such difference.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## shuttler

huskie said:


> chill out guys. I'll provide a first hand example to show why cross population tests may not be measuring the same thing. a couple of years ago I was on an Alzheimer disease project, which has two study groups, one in Japan and the other in US. One of the goals is to compare old people's language ability during mild cognitive impairment period. there are some batteries of tests designed by US researchers to measure language ability (which were proven valid and reliable in the states). the tests ask the subjects to briefly introduce yourself, randomly talk about things, etc, and at the end, the researchers will record how many words/sentences the subjects correctly use to each question. the initial wrong conclusion is that after controlling for other factors, American participants have higher verbal ability than their Japanese counterparts. however, this is flawed because due to the Japanese participants' humble and introvert nature compared to the Americans, Japanese people tend to speak less even if they have the same latent verbal ability, and therefore their score is affected by a population characteristic other than the REAL ability. the tests are valid among American people or Japanese people separately, but they are not valid when you combine the two population unless you control for other confounders.
> 
> this applies to the IQ batteries as well. Due to cultural difference, people tend to have different understanding about the test items and this may affect how they score. there is currently no universal test that can adjust for such difference.



chill out man
IQ test is just one out of several reputable, established and universally conducted tests around the clock which manifest consistent results. It hurts you because you could be from the region of chronic underperformers and so negate the scores outright as usual!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## huskie

I see, you guys are here for wars. it is my fault to bring up some rational discussion. sorry for ruining your party, you guys keep up the good work.


shuttler said:


> chill out man
> IQ test is just one out of several reputable, established and universally conducted tests around the clock which manifest consistent results. It hurts you because you could be from the region of chronic underperformers and so negate the scores outright as usual!


----------



## shuttler

huskie said:


> I see, you guys are here for wars. it is my fault to bring up some rational discussion. sorry for ruining your party, you guys keep up the good work.



if there is any for war it has already ended with clear results

I am feeling a bit irate despite all the efforts by numerous researches and participation by a vast majority of pro-active aspiring serious soul searching countries and the results can be cheaply refuted by a bunch of exemplary coward losers and chronic bottom-lot underachievers!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## timetravel

I got a score of 139 on my very first attempt at any such test.

Take it from me, that if it were not for my grasp of English, my Education and Preparation for the competitive exams I would have never scored 139 on that test.

Simple Point: The IQ test is not measuring your IQ as a race or a country. It is just measuring your ability to solve basic aptitude level questions. But when it comes to battlefield a person who is a genius in IQ TESTS (doesnt mean he is intelligent!!!!) with score of 150+ even may fail and a person who is an experienced Commander would know how to react.

My take on these IQ Tests: they are bullcrap. They don't measure people's intelligence. 99% of first class engineers would score 100+ on these tests. Whereas 90% of the illiterate people would score from 20-30 on these tests.

So did GOD graciously grant IQ only to the engineers and not to the illiterates.  

Therefore let me conclude that this IQ test is a bullcrap and cannot measure the intelligence of even a monkey forget human beings.

Also the Chinese on this forum who jump up and down on these IQ and PESA Scores. You all know the level of posts of these Chinese posters. If I ask you to conclude their IQ from their posts I bet the answer would be between 20-30 isn't it.  

Overall anyone who believes these tests tell you about IQ of a country or race of people, at least about such people we can say their IQ is below average.

Universal Truth:

life tells you one clear thing. That Intelligence likes to control things, it doesn't like to be controlled. That is why Humans control the planet Earth and not donkeys, because Humans are the most intelligent beings at least on earth.

Can anyone deny the above statement? If no then tell me which country people on planet earth has never seen freedom even till now. Its the Chinese. The CCP does not consider them intelligent enough even to rule and govern themselves, and the Chinese are very good at taking orders. They never complain. That tells you something about their intelligence levels keeping in perspective the above universal truth. So I have no doubt that the intelligence level of Chinese is lower then those of Indians. (oops I am not talking about the IQ test scores but the intelligence levels.)

*IQ score and intelligence has ZERO Correlation.
*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SHAMK9

Damn, Pakistan ranks above other South Asian nations

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## shuttler

SHAMK9 said:


> Damn, Pakistan ranks above other South Asian nations



Pakistanis have greater potential than many people think!

Check out post 81 on this thread http://www.defence.pk/forums/china-far-east/249386-china-prepares-spend-billions-science-technology-6.html and go further to the affiliations on Physical Review Letters page, you can find one bright Pakistanis who has participated in this world class research: 

This gentleman Mr Q. A. Malik (42) of University of the Punjab, Lahore 54590, Pakistan!

So keep it up Pakistan!

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## East Asia United

AADHAAR said:


> Tibetans have a significantly different IQ than PRCians.
> 
> Tibet should not be a part of PRC.
> 
> On the side, what a disgrace .. that high IQ chinese toil in coal mines and their other high IQ folks do labour intensive and hazardous occupations in factories for 14-18 hours a day.
> 
> Or is it that coal miners were excluded from IQ tests ... since it is assumed that shanghai pigs and coal miners are expected to have same IQ and same lifespan?



The average IQ in Tibet is about 93 (though there aren't many IQ tests to go on so this could easily change as more data comes in). Tibetans though, are very small compared to the Han Chinese/other East Asian majority. This means that their lower mean IQ scores are not affecting the average that much.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Psyops

The IQ difference between Chinese and Indians sum up the massive gap between the 2 countries. India will never rival China in anything. We are just too smart, we will outsmart them everytime.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

timetravel said:


> Let me tell you - Going by your posts, the IQ score above is your correct IQ level.



Buddy, you just proved your own level of intelligence right here. I have taken an accredited IQ test at my university to test for ADD. I took one by a psychometrician. The *reason* I took the online IQ test was to *PROVE* that it was complete and utter BS.

If you are not functionally illiterate, you will read my previous posts indicating that I believe online IQ tests to be a complete farce.



> the one thing I figured out in the first 2 minutes, is that anyone who believes that this IQ test has real correlation to a persons intelligence himself/herself has an IQ less then 50.



I agree. Now go look at the forum of hundreds of people believing this IQ test. Most of them are Pakistanis. What does this mean?



> Specially the Chinese - the real IQ of Chinese is less then 60. Why? because simple analysis like below is always the best.



No, that would mean that the average Chinese would be functionally retarded, less intelligent than Blacks by a wide margin. Average Chinese IQ is 105-106. None of this is in contention. I think you are just jealous.



> Why? because simple analysis like below is always the best.



Your overly simplistic assessment shows your lack of intelligence.



> Also anyone who knows English well and has prepared for some kind of competitive entrance exam can easily score above 100+ in these meaningless tests.




These tests cannot be prepared for as they study innate intelligence. Also, the tests are in the *native* language of each population taking them.



> Did the people who printed above results conducted tests in India in 400 Languages? and does this test has a sample size of 10 Million Indians?



If you are capable of reading correctly, you would know that all of your questions are answered in the study. You are asking questions that have already been answered. And no, I don't know the total aggregate sample size of all IQ tests ever given to Indians.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Psyops

What IQ level is indicative of mental retardation and is India above it? Maybe touch and go.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Developereo said:


> I don't know if such an inverse correlation (physical v/s mental abilities) has been broadly established.
> 
> The reason American blacks have superior physical abilities is generally attributed to selective breeding back in the slave days




Well, if this were true, then almost no Black Africans would win gold medals. Ethiopians dominate long distance running. It is due to their innate physical superiority in running long distances. There are also many Blacks from moderately well-off countries (like Jamaica for example) that dominate things like sprinting and high jump. Why would that be the case?



> As for IQ, a very important factor is cultural emphasis on education and affinity towards certain professions. Many cultures prefer their kids to "go into business" rather than "work for someone else".



But then why do IQ tests taken at the age of 7 years already show the same IQ gaps as in the study? Surely at 7 years of age they are not being prepared to go into business, etc. etc.?



Jade said:


> The author is Richard Lynn is a racist and a misogynist who have no standing in scientific community. His sits on the board of some white supremacist journals.
> 
> According to Richard Lynn: Whites > Blacks, Men > Women. This is the theory he is propagating since 1979.
> 
> Richard Lynn - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



A few things Jade.

1: Calling Richard Lynn a racist is a subjective argument. There are no facts either way. He says he is not, and he just compares the intelligence differences between all groups. Also, he says that women only have lower IQ's of the men in *their* race, but only by ~3 IQ points (which is not very very large).

2: Let's call Richard Lynn a racist White supremacist Nazi. Ok, now what difference does that make in the data? None, whatsoever.

3: This is only data *collected* by Richard Lynn, from thousands of scientists who have conducted these studies over decades. This is not just Richard Lynn himself.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Arya Desa said:


> We are not homogenous people. It is clear that higher castes have higher IQ from historical privileges like resources and access to compounding knowledge. Therefore they are smarter by both genetics and environment.



Indeed, South Asia, and to an even larger extent, India, is one of the most heterogeneous places on Earth. I have seen IQ for Brahman that is sky-high, but I am not sure as to the validity of the study.

It's quite clear their are large genetic differences between the populations.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## timetravel

@karim3343 
I already told that anyone who believes these IQ tests give any idea of real intelligence has a below average IQ. Going by your posts it is evident you support this BS. So you are one of the below average IQ persons.

IQ tests are just bullcrap and cannot measure even a monkey's intelligence. Though can definately measure his IQ score. 

Apart from you there are lot of Chinese also on this forum who promote this BS. So my argument is against them also.


----------



## East Asia United

huskie said:


> this is not even a dick measuring contest. It is possible to measure dicks precisely, but those IQ tests are not that precise at all. actually what constitutes and defines intelligence still remains mysterious.
> 
> nonetheless the list may reflect education level to some extent.



You don't need IQ tests to see innate differences between population groups.

For example, Blacks at the highest Socioeconomic status, with average incomes of $80,000-$100,000, had children scoring on the SAT 461 on Math and 468 on verbal.

White families with the lowest Socioeconomic status, parents making less than $10,000 (level of CHINA), scored 478 on Math and 480 on verbal.

Surely the children of the wealthiest Blacks should have children scoring much higher than the POOREST White children? Instead we see Whites actually scoring quite a bit higher.

For Whites of incomes $80,000-$100,000, which is a much fairer comparison to the SES of the Blacks with income of $80,000-$100,000, they score 539 on verbal and 534 on Math.

How is this possible if their are not innate differences on the genetic level?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Speeder 2 said:


> There&#8217;re still some misconceptions here, some of which are not entirely wrong, but just not accurate enough. Karim has done a great job in explaining many. I may have missed some but I&#8217;ll troubleshoot a bit as far as I see:
> 
> 
> 1. &#8220;IQ test = intelligence(full)&#8221;
> 
> Not exactly. IQ test is a way that the humans develop to gauge intelligence. IQ test is statistically proven to be highly correlated to the actual intelligence it tries to measure, which is to say the higher the score of IQ test, the higher the actual intelligence is.
> 
> 
> 
> 2. &#8220; The Blacks are physically superior than the rest&#8221; (Karim)
> 
> This is plainly wrong, unfortunately. They are not, unless you think that having longer legs and more &#8220;obvious&#8221; stomach muscle and biceps as you see in the US or the UK, although visually &#8220;impressive&#8221; thus poster-friendly, means &#8220;physically stronger&#8221;. The muscles of the Blacks (both in Africa and the ones in the West from selective breeding) are evolutionarily built ideally for more efficient RUNNING and JUMPING only. Yet running faster or jumping higher is a far cry from the definition of being &#8220;physically the strongest&#8221;.
> 
> Indeed as I argued earlier in another thread, a better example of &#8220;physically the strongest&#8221;, if it means the overall body capabilities such as strength, endurance and many other factors beyond, is weight lifting rather than 100m sprint or high jump. It is because weight lifting tests the muscle strength and endurance of not only biceps, but also different parts of legs, wrists, forearms, shoulders, neck, back, etc.
> 
> For every &#8220;visually strong&#8221; muscle-rich big Black fellow you name, one can find perhaps more impressive Schwarzenegger, Stallone, or Japanese E Honda type sumos. Though shorter, weigh lighter and sprinting slower, a sturdy &#8220;Bruce Lee&#8221; or a &#8220;Jet Li&#8221; is more &#8220;physically stronger&#8221; than a &#8220;Mike Tyson&#8221; or a &#8220;Denzel Washington&#8221;. One could definitely make a point that East Asians, Euros and a mix of the two - Stanland Asians (they together hold ALL world records on weight lifting and dominate the sport), are actually more &#8220;physically the strongest&#8221; on average than the Blacks, if overall physical abilities including endurance, flexibilities, reflexes, balance, co-ordination, etc are taken into consideration as they&#8217;re bound to be.
> 
> 
> 
> 3. On IQ of &#8220;Indians&#8221;. &#8220;Indian &#8211; Cacausoid /Europids&#8221;&#8230;
> 
> 
> Indians have much to do with Europid as Koreans to South African Bushman.
> 
> Mainstreams recognise only 3 major races of Human beings: Caucasoid, Mongoloid and Negroid. The rest are hybrid. This is wrong. There are FOUR big races instead of 3. The 4th major race in fact is Australoid
> 
> Some Australoid look like Negroid, some look like &#8220;dark skinned White&#8221; with blonde fuzzy hair even, but they are neither. Australoid average IQ is believed to be even lower than Negroid . Australoid&#8217;s closest genetics cousins are Australian aboriginals (followed by Indian &#8220;untouchables&#8221, whom a recent research indicates of containing a large amount of South Asian &#8220;Indian&#8221; genes.
> 
> Though Anglo-led the West ( think British Raj) first categorised Indians as Caucasoid based on partial skull bone evidences apart from the necessity of political correctness of the British Empire, and still roughly categorise them so today as they do to entire North Africans (e.g. Ethiopians are Caucasoid, too) , modern Indians are actually overwhelmingly Australoid in origin, with some admixture, degrees varied from indian &#8220;low &#8221;castes to &#8220;high&#8221; castes, of different tribes of central Asian Caucasoid ( such as Persians, Arabs, dark-skinned Dravidians, etc), Mongoloid (Mogols), and Caucasoid/ Mongoloid mix such as Turks.
> 
> This explains why Indian average IQ are quite low, because most Indians, we&#8217;re talking about perhaps>95% of Indians both so-called &#8220;high&#8221;castes and &#8220;low&#8221; castes, have significant percentages of Australoid genes, despite of speaking different languages, dialects or having skin tones slightly different ranging from being black, dark brown to light brown.
> 
> 
> Therefore, a point can be made that there are much less considerable intelligence differences today between co-called &#8220;high&#8221; caste Indians from the &#8220;Low&#8221; castes to the degree of insignificance in most cases, as there were 1,000s of years ago when there were indeed high difference when Central Asian tribes invaded heavily Australoid-populated South Asia. There&#8217;ve been till now well over 100 generations of inter-breeding among them, even many have been forced through countless post war mass rapes, sex slaves, etc.
> 
> That modern &#8220;high&#8221;caste Indians keep hitting the drums that they are different from the rest as if they were coming from Mars is deliberate misleading from their part to keep tight hold on their unfair social economical advantages in modern India. The fact that many &#8220;dark-skinned&#8221; &#8220;Low&#8221; caste southern Indians have more success on academia in the West than supposedly &#8220;lighter skinned&#8221; &#8220;high&#8221; castes from the North proves the point.
> 
> 
> 
> 4. on &#8220; physical &#8211; mental inverse relations&#8221;
> 
> Not exactly precise. It should be &#8220; testosterone level &#8211; mental inverse relations&#8221;.
> 
> Testosterone level, instead of &#8220;physical muscles&#8221;, is The Key Master Switch of the all physics!
> 
> Testosterone level determines male sex hormone level which affects a wide range of very important racial physical, psychological and social differences such as degrees and stages of body maturity, temperament, sexuality, aggression, self-concept (some research mistakenly call it &#8220;self esteem&#8221;, which is wrongly mystified further by a politically driven concept called &#8220;EQ&#8221, altruism, etc.
> 
> These factors in turn ultimately decide different survival strategies that different races have pursued over time &#8211; so called &#8220;r-k Strategies&#8221; in which East Asians Mongoloid have been forced by nature going for k Strategy followed closely by North of Alps Euro Caucasoid, while at the opposite end being r Strategy &#8211; driven Negroid and Australoid.
> 
> To survive and to compete, the r Strategy evolutionarily demands:
> 
> - giving birth earlier (less pregnancy period) and relatively easier, thus with higher fertility per female,
> 
> - earlier maturation of the body (e.g. a 9-yr-old Black kid has the equivalent body mass of a 13-yr-old East Asian. Many mistaken this as "more (innate)physical strengh". It is not. It's just earlier maturation)
> 
> - giving birth easier demands having narrower female pelvis, hence giving birth to babies with smaller brains,
> 
> - smaller brains have less cranial capacities (vs. k strategy-driven East Asians), * hence different biological bottom lines AND ceilings for IQ!!! *
> 
> - more aggressiveness in adulthood,
> 
> - higher degree of self-concept (i.e. some mistakenly call it &#8220;self esteem&#8221; or even so-called &#8220;EQ&#8221;. e.g. researches show that Africans and Indians have the highest self-concept. In reality life one can think of gangster rap or legendary Indian style bragging as examples, with East Asians being the lowest in self-concept: strong emphasis of humbleness in Chinese culture in general, as a traditional virtue of East Asian societies. The same goes for Nothern Euros such as Scadinavians, Germans or even the Brits, whose societies traditionally have regarded humility highly.)
> 
> etc.



I have only one question: YOU POSTED ALL OF THIS BY MOBILE DEVICE!?!

Lol joking aside, you make a lot of sense, but I still think that Blacks dominate a highly disproportionate amount of sports, even in the US. Also, if this is due to selective breeding, rather than natural selection through biological evolution, I don't think it makes any difference in regards to Black 'superiority' in many (though certainly not all) physical traits.

Edit: Also quickly, I believe that even if their are not as significant IQ differences in different Indian population groups as I think, it's pretty clear that Indians are among the most heterogeneous people in the world.

There are quite a few Caucasoids in the northern plains, I believe.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jade

karim3343 said:


> Well, if this were true, then almost no Black Africans would win gold medals. Ethiopians dominate long distance running. It is due to their innate physical superiority in running long distances. There are also many Blacks from moderately well-off countries (like Jamaica for example) that dominate things like sprinting and high jump. Why would that be the case?
> 
> 
> 
> But then why do IQ tests taken at the age of 7 years already show the same IQ gaps as in the study? Surely at 7 years of age they are not being prepared to go into business, etc. etc.?
> 
> 
> 
> A few things Jade.
> 
> 1: Calling Richard Lynn a racist is a subjective argument. There are no facts either way. He says he is not, and he just compares the intelligence differences between all groups. Also, he says that women only have lower IQ's of the men in [Btheir[/B] race, but only by ~3 IQ points (which is not very very large).
> 
> 2: Let's call Richard Lynn a racist White supremacist Nazi. Ok, now what difference does that make in the data? None, whatsoever.
> 
> 3: This is only data *collected* by Richard Lynn, from thousands of scientists who have conducted these studies over decades. This is not just Richard Lynn himself.



And who are those *thousands* of scientists that are supporting Richard Lynn? 

I can show numerous studies refuting Richard Lynn. As far as I know Richard Lynn is retard with a IQ of 20.


----------



## East Asia United

liontk said:


> monsieur, like I said before IQ is an important asset to have and by the way I redid my test that Karim was talking aout(116 average)




Online IQ tests are bogus and are generally not reflective of the real thing. The real one's are much more diverse with far more material than these, and are actually accredited.



> that EQ score being a better predictor for success



This is not correct, but seeing as how you said you can provide a plethora of studies to support your argument, I am all ears!

Emotional quotient might get you ahead because of higher confidence, but this does not mean you are more intelligent than that shy person sitting in the corner. We are referring not to who can get ahead, but to differences in intelligence (though IQ/intelligence is a greater predictor of int. than EQ, so bring it on!)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## timetravel

@karim3343

when you posted the article and gave the opening comments, it gave away your game. You think an aptitude test on which illiterates score 20-30 and higher education folks easily clock 100+ is a measure of a human's intelligence.  

Even the most illiterate person (IQ test score 20) can be much more intelligent then the most educated unintelligent fools (IQ test score 150). So IQ score and intelligence has Zero Correlation. Only fools and inherently low intelligence people are taken for a ride by such stupid studies. So one advise for you. Stop posting such bull crap articles and studies.


----------



## East Asia United

huskie said:


> chill out guys. I'll provide a first hand example to show why cross population tests may not be measuring the same thing. a couple of years ago I was on an Alzheimer disease project, which has two study groups, one in Japan and the other in US. One of the goals is to compare old people's language ability during mild cognitive impairment period. there are some batteries of tests designed by US researchers to measure language ability (which were proven valid and reliable in the states). the tests ask the subjects to briefly introduce yourself, randomly talk about things, etc, and at the end, the researchers will record how many words/sentences the subjects correctly use to each question. the initial wrong conclusion is that after controlling for other factors, American participants have higher verbal ability than their Japanese counterparts. however, this is flawed because due to the Japanese participants' humble and introvert nature compared to the Americans, Japanese people tend to speak less even if they have the same latent verbal ability, and therefore their score is affected by a population characteristic other than the REAL ability. the tests are valid among American people or Japanese people separately, but they are not valid when you combine the two population unless you control for other confounders.
> 
> this applies to the IQ batteries as well. Due to cultural difference, people tend to have different understanding about the test items and this may affect how they score. there is currently no universal test that can adjust for such difference.



LOL, so East Asians might have an even higher score than others? East Asian genotypic potential, as assessed through educational attainment, income, and other factors in the US, show a mean IQ of 110-120.

Do you really think that the mean East Asian IQ could be up to 120, simply because E. Asians are doing far better in education, income, etc. than their IQ's would suggest?



Jade said:


> And who are those *thousands* of scientists that are supporting Richard Lynn?
> 
> I can show numerous studies refuting Richard Lynn. As far as I know Richard Lynn is retard with a IQ of 20.



Almost no scientists refute the IQ average. You are acting like a child with poor impulse control when you have to insult in every sentence. 

They are refuting the belief that most of the IQ gap is due to genetic conditions (Lynn's argument), and instead saying that most of it is due to environmental conditions.

Even the liberal-socialist James Flynn, the largest proponent and most famous scientist against Lynn, regards their to be a genetic component, though much smaller than Lynn suggests.

So, which scientists can you source, that say the IQ differences are not real?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

timetravel said:


> @karim3343
> 
> when you posted the article and gave the opening comments, it gave away your game. You think an aptitude test on which illiterates score 20-30 and higher education folks easily clock 100+ is a measure of a human's intelligence.
> 
> Even the most illiterate person (IQ test score 20) can be much more intelligent then the most educated unintelligent fools (IQ test score 150). So IQ score and intelligence has Zero Correlation. Only fools and inherently low intelligence people are taken for a ride by such stupid studies. So one advise for you. Stop posting such bull crap articles and studies.



Indeed, everyone from Einstein to the discoverer of DNA (James Watson) to the inventor of the transistor (William Shockley) are low-IQ idiots.

Conclusion: You are a typical low intelligence individual with very poor impulse control.


Also, many IQ tests are given at 7 years of age. They show the *exact* same IQ gap between races/population groups.

What possible educational differences could their be at the age of 7.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

SHAMK9 said:


> Damn, Pakistan ranks above other South Asian nations



Which is why the timetravel troll is spouting about his racial superiority over everyone. Acting like a low-IQ child. He is spouting his 10-minute online IQ test score, which is a complete joke. These are not even close to the real thing.



Psyops said:


> What IQ level is indicative of mental retardation and is India above it? Maybe touch and go.



For European countries it is around 70. For each population it is about 30 points below the average. For East Asians it would be around 75 then, but because the distribution curve is much smaller in E. Asian countries, it could be even higher.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jade

karim3343 said:


> LOL, so East Asians might have an even higher score than others? East Asian genotypic potential, as assessed through educational attainment, income, and other factors in the US, show a mean IQ of 110-120.
> 
> Do you really think that the mean East Asian IQ could be up to 120, simply because E. Asians are doing far better in education, income, etc. than their IQ's would suggest?
> 
> 
> 
> Almost no scientists refute the IQ average. You are acting like a child with poor impulse control when you have to insult in every sentence.
> 
> They are refuting the belief that most of the IQ gap is due to genetic conditions (Lynn's argument), and instead saying that most of it is due to environmental conditions.
> 
> Even the liberal-socialist James Flynn, the largest proponent and most famous scientist against Lynn, regards their to be a genetic component, though much smaller than Lynn suggests.
> 
> So, which scientists can you source, that say the IQ differences are not real?



You didn't answer me? And who are those 1000 scientists who support that retard

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Jade said:


> You didn't answer me? And who are those 1000 scientists who support that retard



Support him in what? Almost EVERYONE supports the fact that their are differences in IQ. I am supposed to name literally tens of thousands of scientists?

Their only disagreement is how much is due to genetic or environmental influence.

Now go ahead, point out those scientists that say their are no IQ differences (regardless as to why their are IQ differences).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## liontk

karim3343 said:


> Online IQ tests are bogus and are generally not reflective of the real thing. The real one's are much more diverse with far more material than these, and are actually accredited.
> 
> 
> 
> This is not correct, but seeing as how you said you can provide a plethora of studies to support your argument, I am all ears!
> 
> Emotional quotient might get you ahead because of higher confidence, but this does not mean you are more intelligent than that shy person sitting in the corner. We are referring to who can get ahead, but to differences in intelligence (though IQ/intelligence is a greater predictor of int. than EQ, so bring it on!)



I thought the point of the entire argument was who got ahead, not who is smarter as education/intelligence is just an asset to get to the point of self satisfaction. I did the official test and apparently spatial ability is my strength according to the so called IQ test but my EQ score is better but only in leadership , I will later give the links for EQ score and I truly believe in that because in life I have seen no so intelligence people getting way more success than they should based on their resume.(ie same old reference crap).

I have to go out right now I cannot chat with you karim, I will reply in full later but as far as identifying gene potential is considered, we are still a century behind before biohuman engineering truly begins and that I cannot refuse.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

liontk said:


> I thought the point of the entire argument was who got ahead, not who is smarter as education/intelligence is just an asset to get to the point of self satisfaction. I did the official test and apparently spatial ability is my strength according to the so called IQ test but my EQ score is better but only in leadership , I will later give the links for EQ score and I truly believe in that because in life I have seen no so intelligence people getting way more success than they should based on their resume.(ie same old reference crap).
> 
> I have to go out right now I cannot chat with you karim, I will reply in full later but as far as identifying gene potential is considered, we are still a century behind before biohuman engineering truly begins and that I cannot refuse.



OK, but do you doubt the validity of IQ tests or not? That's my only question.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jade

karim3343 said:


> Support him in what? Almost EVERYONE supports the fact that their are differences in IQ. I am supposed to name literally tens of thousands of scientists?
> 
> Their only disagreement is how much is due to genetic or environmental influence.
> 
> Now go ahead, point out those scientists that say their are no IQ differences (regardless as to why their are IQ differences).



Support him in the nonsense he say. I have seen many intelligent black people, and many many dumb east asians who cannot even add numbers.


----------



## East Asia United

Jade said:


> Support him in the nonsense he say. I have seen many intelligent black people, and many many dumb east asians who cannot even add numbers.



Hey buddy, those are called individuals.

We are speaking of averages.

Also, you have yet to provide me a single credible scientist refuting the idea of IQ differences.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jade

karim3343 said:


> Hey buddy, those are called individuals.
> 
> We are speaking of averages.
> 
> Also, you have yet to provide me a single credible scientist refuting the idea of IQ differences.



Where are the averages? I am an Indian, Richard Lynn did not come to me measure my IQ..so how did he concluded that average IQ of an Indian is 81.

There are hundreds of articles and books written on this subject. Doing a simple google search will give you the results that there is no correlation between race and IQ. 

Here is one

http://books.google.ie/books?id=FtY...accepted definition of intelligence."&f=false


----------



## East Asia United

Jade said:


> Where are the averages? I am an Indian, Richard Lynn did not come to me measure my IQ..so how did he concluded that average IQ of an Indian is 81.



Richard Lynn is not the only one taking averages. Literally thousands of scientists are.

Also, do you know what a sample is?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sample_(statistics)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChinaToday

karim3343 said:


> Hey buddy, those are called individuals.
> 
> We are speaking of averages.
> 
> Also, you have yet to provide me a single credible scientist refuting the idea of IQ differences.



you are wasting your time talking to jade his iq is roughly around 80-85 judging by his posts on pdf

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## East Asia United

ChinaToday said:


> you are wasting your time talking to jade his iq is roughly around 80-85 judging by his posts on pdf



Kind of funny the questions he is asking.

They are so basic I am actually quite astonished.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Archdemon

karim3343 said:


> Thanks for the intellectually stimulating argument!
> 
> (I'm sure if Israeli mean IQ was 350 you'd be parroting this to all of your friends)



Yet another bullshit.


----------



## Jade

karim3343 said:


> Richard Lynn is not the only one taking averages. Literally thousands of scientists are.
> 
> Also, do you know what a sample is?
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sample_(statistics)



If you are calling Richard Lynn's conclusions sound based on a 'sample' what is stopping you from saying that my conclusion are wrong that blacks are more intelligent than east Asians? Even my conclusion is based on a sample.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## El Weirdo

ChinaToday said:


> you are wasting your time talking to jade his iq is roughly around 80-85 judging by his posts on pdf



oye , Why why is Jade particularly bothering U ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jade

ChinaToday said:


> you are wasting your time talking to jade his iq is roughly around 80-85 judging by his posts on pdf



And your's is roughly 35-40  I think we have already discussed this.


----------



## ViXuyen

Archdemon said:


> Yet another bullshit.


The Korean are really obsessive with the IQ test. I see them touting their IQ on every single forum out there. They talk so much crap about the White men haviing lower IQ than them but ironically they need the White men to reassure their self worth with the IQ test, an invention of the White men

If IQ test is the real measure of intelligence then Nobel Prize & Fields Medal are truly a measurement of one's academic achievement and intelligience. Apparently, the only East Asian that can claim the "smart" title is the Japanese with their combined 20 Nobel Prize & Fields Medal. Jewish people on the other hand, everyone knows how smart you guys are with your numerous Nobel Prizes

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## timetravel

karim3343 said:


> Indeed, everyone from Einstein to the discoverer of DNA (James Watson) to the inventor of the transistor (William Shockley) are low-IQ idiots.
> 
> Conclusion: You are a typical low intelligence individual with very poor impulse control.
> 
> 
> Also, many IQ tests are given at 7 years of age. They show the *exact* same IQ gap between races/population groups.
> 
> What possible educational differences could their be at the age of 7.



 lol you cannot answer the question I posed but only be evasive. That's what low intelligence (but maybe high IQ test scores ) people do. Obviously Scientists being scientists are highly educated and have good IQ scores.

But you have no answer to my question. Illiterate people score 20-30 on such tests and engineers easily get 100+. This itself shows stupidity of such tests and the intelligence levels of people like you, who believe in such scores.

If basic intelligence is what they measure, then irrespective of whether one is literate or illiterate people should be able to score more on such tests. 

If you cannot grasp such a basic reasoning. Your IQ score maybe good as you told yourself, but your intelligence level is below ordinary. So again proves IQ test score and intelligence has no correlation. Thanks for another proof.

It is so easy to fool people like you, and then you say we don't trust the white people. Actually white people make people like you dance on their fingertips like fooling you around by such stupid tests. You just cannot use your own brain to see through that these tests cannot measure intelligence.


----------



## East Asia United

Jade said:


> If you are calling Richard Lynn's conclusions sound based on a 'sample' what is stopping you from saying that my conclusion are wrong that blacks are more intelligent than east Asians? Even my conclusion is based on a sample.



Is the sample large enough that the margin of error is not signifcant?

For example, find me one sample that shows Indians with a mean IQ of 100. Or one sample that shows Black IQ's with a mean higher than East Asians.

Wouldn't this happen if the samples were always inaccurate? Wouldn't you have Indian IQ at 81-82 one day, and then 105 the other and then 65 the other and then 120 the other? If this was inaccurate, this would happen.

Yet the thousands of different studies show the same number.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## senheiser

Study is BS, if russia has 96 IQ why it had best education results in 2011 of all non East Asian Countries?

watch the video if you want to know the smartest countries who did participate in the test not some neo nazi studies.


----------



## ChinaToday

El Weirdo said:


> oye , Why why is Jade particularly bothering U ?
> 
> and hey how come U got to teh UK? were U trafficked there by a chinese agent , just saying it from the news etc I read , as U guys are the most trafficked people on the face of the earth, even more than the Africans.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ^^ these poor souls were rescued from a brickworks factory in China!!
> Chinese the most trafficked people!!
> Do U want the link to the news or do U know it already from personal POV?



how I got to the uk what has it got to do with you? why don't you just mind your own business and stay on topic

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Jade

karim3343 said:


> Is the sample large enough that the margin of error is not signifcant?
> 
> For example, find me one sample that shows Indians with a mean IQ of 100. Or one sample that shows Black IQ's with a mean higher than East Asians.
> 
> Wouldn't this happen if the samples were always inaccurate? Wouldn't you have Indian IQ at 81-82 one day, and then 105 the other and then 65 the other and then 120 the other? If this was inaccurate, this would happen.
> 
> Yet the thousands of different studies show the same number.



And how do you know his sample were sound. As far as I know Indian government don't allow these kind of tests to be conducted.


----------



## East Asia United

5Star said:


> The Korean are really obsessive with the IQ test. I see them touting their IQ on every single forum out there. They talk so much crap about the White men haviing lower IQ than them but ironically they need the White men to reassure their self worth with the IQ test, an invention of the White men
> 
> If IQ test is the real measure of intelligence then Nobel Prize & Fields Medal are truly a measurement of one's academic achievement and intelligience. Apparently, the only East Asian that can claim the "smart" title is the Japanese with their combined 20 Nobel Prize & Fields Medal. Jewish people on the other hand, everyone knows how smart you guys are with your numerous Nobel Prizes



If you think that Nobel Prizes are the best indicator of average intelligence then you are hilariously dumb.

How about intelligence? Maybe it is intelligence that is the best predictor of intelligence? Or is that difficult for you to understand? IQ is not in contention. It is the only real measure of intelligence that is used by scientists today.

Even if Koreans were the poorest and most destitute people on the planet, if their IQ shows that they are more intelligent than other groups, then case closed. It matters not whether they are poor or rich, their intelligence is based on their intelligence, not on how many Nobel Prizes they collect or their incomes or educational attainment.



timetravel said:


> lol you cannot answer the question I posed but only be evasive. That's what low intelligence (but maybe high IQ test scores ) people do. Obviously Scientists being scientists are highly educated and have good IQ scores.
> 
> But you have no answer to my question. Illiterate people score 20-30 on such tests and engineers easily get 100+. This itself shows stupidity of such tests and the intelligence levels of people like you, who believe in such scores.
> 
> If basic intelligence is what they measure, then irrespective of whether one is literate or illiterate people should be able to score more on such tests.
> 
> If you cannot grasp such a basic reasoning. Your IQ score maybe good as you told yourself, but your intelligence level is below ordinary. So again proves IQ test score and intelligence has no correlation. Thanks for another proof.
> 
> It is so easy to fool people like you, and then you say we don't trust the white people. Actually white people make people like you dance on their fingertips like fooling you around by such stupid tests. You just cannot use your own brain to see through that these tests cannot measure intelligence.



Thanks for showing that you are functionally illiterate.

Again, how do IQ tests which measure 7 year olds show the *same* gap as those that measure adults of different population groups?

You can't seem to grasp that 7 year olds don't have highly different educations by that age.



senheiser said:


> Study is BS, if russia has 96 IQ why it had best education results in 2011 of all non East Asian Countries?
> 
> watch the video if you want to know the smartest countries who did participate in the test not some neo nazi studies.



Because you are only looking at *ONE* test. What were Russia's PISA test scores for example?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChinaToday

Jade said:


> And your's is roughly 35-40  I think we have already discussed this.



see this is exactly what I mean thanks for proving my point the iq of your posts is on the border line of retard

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## That Guy

My IQ is 100, which it turns out is average for Canada (100.4). Then again, I took the test in the middle of massive distractions, which means that it could probably be higher because the questions that I glanced over quickly (because of distractions), I got wrong.

Huh, guess I'm average.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## East Asia United

Jade said:


> And how do you know his sample were sound. As far as I know Indian government don't allow these kind of tests to be conducted.



You keep jumping from one irrational question to another. You are not trying to look at things objectively, or else you would have studied all the tests and come to the same conclusion.

These tests have been conducted for *decades*

I'll ask you to show me an IQ test which gives Indians much higher IQ than 81-82. Surely there are some, seeing as how they are completely sampled wrong?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jade

ChinaToday said:


> see this is exactly what I mean thanks for proving my point the iq of your posts is on the border line of retard



Yes I think we have already gone through this and agreed that I am border line of retard and you are complete retard 



karim3343 said:


> You keep jumping from one irrational question to another. You are not trying to look at things objectively, or else you would have studied all the tests and come to the same conclusion.
> 
> These tests have been conducted for *decades*
> 
> I'll ask you to show me an IQ test which gives Indians much higher IQ than 81-82. Surely there are some, seeing as how they are completely sampled wrong?



Now you are now taking irrational. If tests have not been conducted in India, how come that retard came to the conclusion that Indians have an IQ of 81.


----------



## senheiser

karim3343 said:


> If you think that Nobel Prizes are the best indicator of average intelligence then you are hilariously dumb.
> 
> How about intelligence? Maybe it is intelligence that is the best predictor of intelligence? Or is that difficult for you to understand? IQ is not in contention. It is the only real measure of intelligence that is used by scientists today.
> 
> Even if Koreans were the poorest and most destitute people on the planet, if their IQ shows that they are more intelligent than other groups, then case closed. It matters not whether they are poor or rich, their intelligence is based on their intelligence, not on how many Nobel Prizes they collect or their incomes or educational attainment.
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks for showing that you are functionally illiterate.
> 
> Again, how do IQ tests which measure 7 year olds show the *same* gap as those that measure adults of different population groups?
> 
> You can't seem to grasp that 7 year olds don't have highly different educations by that age.
> 
> 
> 
> Because you are only looking at *ONE* test. What were Russia's PISA test scores for example?



it was in 2009 this is from 2011


----------



## East Asia United

I probably should not have expected any better from people.

Anyone who takes a quick look at their nations' average IQ score, and considers it to be low, will *immediately* dismiss it without even caring about whether or not the study *itself* was correct.

This is what people of *low* intelligence and *low* emotional quotient do.

I shouldn't have expected any less.



senheiser said:


> it was in 2009 this is from 2011



So Russian intelligence exploded in 2 years? Or are the tests simply different, and therefore show different outcomes?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## El Weirdo

ChinaToday said:


> how I got to the uk what has it got to do with you? why don't you just mind your own business and stay on topic




Apologies mate... got carried away.  
edited my previous post.


----------



## East Asia United

Jade said:


> Yes I think we have already gone through this and agreed that I am border line of retard and you are complete retard
> 
> 
> 
> Now you are now taking irrational. If tests have not been conducted in India, how come that retard came to the conclusion that Indians have an IQ of 81.



What? Tests *HAVE* been conducted in India.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## timetravel

karim3343 said:


> Thanks for showing that you are functionally illiterate.
> 
> Again, how do IQ tests which measure 7 year olds show the *same* gap as those that measure adults of different population groups?
> 
> You can't seem to grasp that 7 year olds don't have highly different educations by that age.
> 
> 
> 
> Because you are only looking at *ONE* test. What were Russia's PISA test scores for example?



again you show how easy it is to fool you.

at least you now agree that the IQ test scores of Adults are nothing but bullcrap. Good to see you used your brain to accept reality finally.

Now coming to the 7 year old levels. Intelligence is a basic human trait. If we assume that by 7 the intelligence of a human is fully developed (which is again bullcrap as a 7 year old does not have his intelligence fully developed). But for sake of argument if I accept this stupid notion that a 7 year old has fully developed intelligence, then those differences in intelligence should remain even in adulthood.

but that's not the case. Out of two 7 year old kids, the one who goes on to study engineering would 99 times out of 100 would do better on these tests then those kids who didn't get to study. Even if the kid who didn't get to study (due to number of reasons) might have done much better then the other kid who got to study higher levels.

So these stupid IQ tests intelligence measure of two kids change like the price of stocks change on NYSE over a decade. So let me repeat these tests cannot measure the intelligence of even a monkey, but can measure yours (as you insist not me) 

and lastly if they can measure intelligence of a 7 year old kid (who is by no means fully developed as a person) then I am pretty sure they can also measure the intelligence of the fetus inside the mother.  and some high IQ score people would support that also.


----------



## ChinaToday

El Weirdo said:


> Apologies mate... got carried away.
> edited my previous post.



no problem mate don't take everything seriously we all here to have fun that is all

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## senheiser

karim3343 said:


> I probably should not have expected any better from people.
> 
> Anyone who takes a quick look at their nations' average IQ score, and considers it to be low, will *immediately* dismiss it without even caring about whether or not the study *itself* was correct.
> 
> This is what people of *low* intelligence and *low* emotional quotient do.
> 
> I shouldn't have expected any less.
> 
> 
> 
> So Russian intelligence exploded in 2 years? Or are the tests simply different, and therefore show different outcomes?



the education system was reformed at that time. You do like intelligence is granted but its only true for 75%.


----------



## That Guy

Incidentally, does anyone know what the global IQ average is?

Also, what should it be, before you're considered a dumb-dumb?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jade

karim3343 said:


> What? Tests *HAVE* been conducted in India.



India is caste based society. Any such tests and studies can be used against particular caste and can lead to unrest. Hence no such studies are approved by Indian government.


----------



## East Asia United

timetravel said:


> again you show how easy it is to fool you.
> 
> at least you now agree that the IQ test scores of Adults are nothing but bullcrap. Good to see you used your brain to accept reality finally.



No, adult IQ tests are also not in contention by all of us idiot scientists. Idiots like the discoverer of DNA and the inventor of the transistor agree that DNA tests in adults are factually accurate.



> then those differences in intelligence should remain even in adulthood



And they do you. Testing these children in adulthood shows no difference whatsoever in their IQ.



> the one who goes on to study engineering would 99 times out of 100 would do better on these tests then those kids who didn't get to study



The one who is studying engineering is able to do that because he has a higher IQ/intelligence in the *FIRST* place.



> So these stupid IQ tests intelligence measure of two kids change like the price of stocks change on NYSE over a decade



As I said, the facts show that the IQ tests do *NOT* show any changes when taken in adulthood.

People like Albert Einstein, James Watson, and William Shockley are FAR more intelligent than you will ever be. I'll trust them on the validity of intelligence tests and racial differences, not some uncouth Indian trolling on the internet (who also believes that online IQ tests are real!! )

Take a real IQ test, I'm sure you won't be too happy with the results.


----------



## ViXuyen

karim3343 said:


> If you think that Nobel Prizes are the best indicator of average intelligence then you are hilariously dumb.
> 
> How about intelligence? Maybe it is intelligence that is the best predictor of intelligence? Or is that difficult for you to understand? IQ is not in contention. It is the only real measure of intelligence that is used by scientists today.
> 
> Even if Koreans were the poorest and most destitute people on the planet, if their IQ shows that they are more intelligent than other groups, then case closed. It matters not whether they are poor or rich, their intelligence is based on their intelligence, not on how many Nobel Prizes they collect or their incomes or educational attainment.


So the intelligence of an individual or group is based on taking a test called "intellgience quotient"? You simpleton really makes my day with that kind of belief. 

Nobel Prizes and Fields Medal are world-class awards given to individuals for their oustanding achievement in science and technology. Scoring a score on a test called "IQ" does not achieve anything and this test has never proven to be the best indicator in intelligience other than the test has its name "intelligence" attached to it.

If Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals are not the best indicator of intellgience, then what is? Putting a man on the Moon? Apparently when the world think of the most intelligience people, they only think of the American for putting the man on the Moon and Jewish people for winning numerous Nobel Prizes; they don't even think of anyone who scores what not on a test.


----------



## Hyperion

Damn, these are some really sad figures, and people fighting over who is more stupid.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

senheiser said:


> the education system was reformed at that time. You do like intelligence is granted but its only true for 75%.



Russian IQ is not low, it is within the European average. Do you think that Slavs are genetically more intelligent than Western Europeans, or what?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## timetravel

karim3343 said:


> Take a real IQ test, I'm sure you won't be too happy with the results.



For all I care for such stupid tests. I know your intelligence level is far below the average intelligence of a rationally thinking intelligent being.


----------



## East Asia United

5Star said:


> So the intelligence of an individual or group is based on taking a test called "intellgience quotient"? You simpleton really makes my day with that kind of belief.
> 
> Nobel Prizes and Fields Medal are world-class awards given to individuals for their oustanding achievement in science and technology. Scoring a score on a test called "IQ" does not achieve anything and this test has never proven to be the best indicator in intelligience other than the test has its name "intelligence" attached to it.
> 
> If Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals are not the best indicator of intellgience, then what is? Putting a man on the Moon? Apparently when the world think of the most intelligience people, they only think of the American for putting the man on the Moon and Jewish people for winning numerous Nobel Prizes; they don't even think of anyone who scores what not on a test.



Scoring on a test does not prove anything, NOR does being awarded the Nobel prize.

It is what you have DONE to be awarded the Nobel Prize, and what your underlying GENES say about you, that give you the IQ score and the Nobel Prize.

Nobel Prizes are awarded to a very small group of people. If you really think that Nobel Prize winners are reflective of the average intelligence of the population group they come from, then you are far too funny.

Also, Nobel Prize has been around only for a century, not millennia. ALSO, these are not reflective of the average individual of each society, something I would have thought would be clear to you. ALSO, Barack Obama (before even becoming president) was awarded one. The European Union (for collapsing Europe) was awarded one. They are quickly becoming a joke, and are subjective to the whims of a few Scandinavians.

It's a simple conclusion. Nobel Prizes are not correlated with average intelligence. How many Black winners are their? Two? So what then? Are Blacks equal to having an IQ of 10?

Really dumb argument.



timetravel said:


> For all I care for such stupid tests. I know your intelligence level is far below the average intelligence of a rationally thinking intelligent being.



Indeed, which is why dumb, uncouth, and insecure individuals like yourself are only capable of responding to personal insults. You have not responded to *any* other part of the statement, which I will take as you flying the white flag of surrender

(Poor impulse control is also highly correlated with low intelligence/IQ, which is probably why you insult a lot, and can only focus on insults being thrown back at you, rather than the argument at hand.)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## timetravel

karim3343 said:


> Indeed, which is why dumb, uncouth, and insecure individuals like yourself are only capable of responding to personal insults. You have not responded to *any* other part of the statement, which I will take as you flying the white flag of surrender
> 
> (Poor impulse control is also highly correlated with low intelligence/IQ, which is probably why you insult a lot, and can only focus on insults being thrown back at you, rather than the argument at hand.)



Your reasoning is so dumb, it didn't warrant a response. An average school dropout would be more intelligent then you, irrespective of your or his IQ test scores 

and while you advise me on impulse, please watch your bp meter

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Archdemon

That Guy said:


> Incidentally, does anyone know what the global IQ average is?
> 
> Also, what should it be, before you're considered a dumb-dumb?



Amm, 100 maybe? not for nothing its called average score


----------



## senheiser

karim3343 said:


> Russian IQ is not low, it is within the European average. Do you think that Slavs are genetically more intelligent than Western Europeans, or what?



Why not? the study i showed shows russians are best non east asians. And its logical since russians mixed with most north east asians of all europeans, same for finland which is also good at pisa.


----------



## East Asia United

timetravel said:


> Your reasoning is so dumb, it didn't warrant a response. An average school dropout would be more intelligent then you, irrespective of your or his IQ test scores
> 
> and while you advise me, please watch your bp meter



Like I said, you have surrendered. It is a typical excuse of people who cannot respond. If it is dumb, it should be easy to respond, right?

Bye bye now keyboard warrior, you lose.



senheiser said:


> Why not? the study i showed shows russians are best non east asians. And its logical since russians mixed with most north east asians of all europeans, same for finland which is also good at pisa.



Doubtful. If so, why are you referring only to one test? What about all of the other tests that Russia is not number 1 in? Do they count? Or only high Russian performance counts? When Russians score low, then it's irrelevant...



Jade said:


> India is caste based society. Any such tests and studies can be used against particular caste and can lead to unrest. Hence no such studies are approved by Indian government.



LOL, there is even a MENSA in India, where Indians are admitted into.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## timetravel

karim3343 said:


> Like I said, you have surrendered. It is a typical excuse of people who cannot respond. If it is dumb, it should be easy to respond, right?
> 
> Bye bye now Hindu keyboard warrior, you lose.



if it is dumb again and again. how many times one can reply to a dumb person.  please go and sleep. and dont post such stupid articles again and remember the bashing on this thread.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Archdemon said:


> Amm, 100 maybe? not for nothing its called average score



100, is not the average, it is the average European/White.

The global average is something like 93.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Kloitra

karim3343 said:


> Bye bye now Hindu keyboard warrior, you lose.



WTF, where did this come from?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

timetravel said:


> if it is dumb again and again. how many times one can reply to a dumb person.  please go and sleep. and dont post such stupid articles again and remember the bashing on this thread.



Average IQ of Indian: 81

Hence the lack of content in your posts.

Can you please stop posting here? You are taking up too much space on my thread with nonsense. I would like people have actually want to have a debate to post instead.

Thanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## senheiser

karim3343 said:


> Like I said, you have surrendered. It is a typical excuse of people who cannot respond. If it is dumb, it should be easy to respond, right?
> 
> Bye bye now Hindu keyboard warrior, you lose.
> 
> 
> 
> Doubtful. If so, why are you referring only to one test? What about all of the other tests that Russia is not number 1 in? Do they count? Or only high Russian performance counts? When Russians score low, then it's irrelevant...
> 
> 
> 
> LOL, there is even a MENSA in India, where Indians are admitted into.



there are only timss and pisa

but i can show other things

russia has 3 times more patents than germany only east asian countries and america invent more than russia it seems.







Russian economy is also based on recourses it shouldnt be dependent on innovation


----------



## East Asia United

Kloitra said:


> WTF, where did this come from?



I had enough of him calling East Asians mentally retarded, and I don't like insults on my thread.

If he can't take it, he should not dish it out. Anyway, I realize there are other Indians on the thread so I will edit it out.



senheiser said:


> there are only timss and pisa
> 
> but i can show other things
> 
> russia has 3 times more patents than germany only east asian countries and america invent more than russia it seems.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Russian economy is also based on recourses it shouldnt be dependent on innovation



Russia also has almost double the population... Besides, how many of these patents are as important as German patents?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## timetravel

karim3343 said:


> Average IQ of Indian: 81



Intelligence of a average school drop out >>>> your intelligence. 

hence the level of your belief in such stupid studies.

thanks.

and do not tell me I posted anything against East Asians in general. Maybe your brain cant decipher even simple things like this. 

to say again : I just said such studies are useless and bullcrap and cannot measure even a monkey's intelligence. Further I did say Chinese have low intelligence then Indians based on their liking for such threads. But I never said anything against East Asians in General.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WhiteMansBurden

5Star said:


> So the intelligence of an individual or group is based on taking a test called "intellgience quotient"? You simpleton really makes my day with that kind of belief.
> 
> Nobel Prizes and Fields Medal are world-class awards given to individuals for their oustanding achievement in science and technology. Scoring a score on a test called "IQ" does not achieve anything and this test has never proven to be the best indicator in intelligience other than the test has its name "intelligence" attached to it.
> 
> If Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals are not the best indicator of intellgience, then what is? Putting a man on the Moon? Apparently when the world think of the most intelligience people, they only think of the American for putting the man on the Moon and Jewish people for winning numerous Nobel Prizes; they don't even think of anyone who scores what not on a test.



I agree. No one can doubt the superiority of the White race!



timetravel said:


> Intelligence of a average school drop out >>>> your intelligence.
> 
> hence the level of your belief in such stupid studies.
> 
> thanks.



Shitskins need to stop being so embarrassed about their inferiority.

You are what you are, IQ tests are 100% valid, and your race scores low on them because of your genetic inferiority.

What do you want? Proof? Look at India. My British ancestors were able to outwit and conquer your subcontinent. They came from a tiny island nation with 1/30 the population. You outnumbered them 30 to 1, yet we took over the ENTIRE thing.

No one can doubt the intelligence of the White race.

We have conquered all peoples' (except the Chinese).


----------



## senheiser

karim3343 said:


> I had enough of him calling East Asians mentally retarded, and I don't like insults on my thread.
> 
> If he can't take it, he should not dish it out. Anyway, I realize there are other Indians on the thread so I will edit it out.
> 
> 
> 
> Russia also has almost double the population... Besides, how many of these patents are as important as German patents?



so what the european patents office which all the EU countries together with 503 Million People is only twice as big as russia who has 143. And like i said EU countries and east asians are depent on these since they have no recourses. Russians still invent despite having recourses.


----------



## Jade

karim3343 said:


> LOL, there is even a MENSA in India, where Indians are admitted into.



MENSA is a different thing. Conducting scientific test to measure IQ of a population to compare with other populations is different. I hope you realize the difference. 

The underlying thing is these type of studies are not allowed in India, because these test could lead widespread social unrest and further segregation of society.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kbd-raaf

WhiteMansBurden said:


> I agree. No one can doubt the superiority of the White race!
> 
> 
> 
> Shitskins need to stop being so embarrassed about their inferiority.
> 
> You are what you are, IQ tests are 100% valid, and your race scores low on them because of your genetic inferiority.
> 
> What do you want? Proof? Look at India. My British ancestors were able to outwit and conquer your subcontinent. They came from a tiny island nation with 1/30 the population. You outnumbered them 30 to 1, yet we took over the ENTIRE thing.
> 
> No one can doubt the intelligence of the White race.
> 
> We have conquered all peoples' (_*except the Chinese*_).



You only think that because you are Chinese.


----------



## timetravel

WhiteMansBurden said:


> I agree. No one can doubt the superiority of the White race!
> 
> 
> 
> Shitskins need to stop being so embarrassed about their inferiority.
> 
> You are what you are, IQ tests are 100% valid, and your race scores low on them because of your genetic inferiority.
> 
> What do you want? Proof? Look at India. My British ancestors were able to outwit and conquer your subcontinent. They came from a tiny island nation with 1/30 the population. You outnumbered them 30 to 1, yet we took over the ENTIRE thing.
> 
> No one can doubt the intelligence of the White race.
> 
> We have conquered all peoples' (except the Chinese).



dont make me laugh. the Japanese, Chinese and the East Asians in General have a high IQ as per the same study. So what white race superiority. You are inferior to the Chinese, Japanese and the North Koreans even.  

So how much inferior you are to Chinese? 50%, 70%, maybe 80% is reasonable? whats your pick.  

and Keep your inferiority to yourself. don't spread it around.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Jade said:


> MENSA is a different thing. Conducting scientific test to measure IQ of a population to compare with other populations is different. I hope you realize the difference.
> 
> The underlying thing is these type of studies are not allowed in India, because these test could lead widespread social unrest and further segregation of society.



If I take the average IQ in India it is not illegal. And these tests were all taken in India. I don't understand your point.

It is illegal to compare Indian IQ to other countries? Well then, Indian authorities should invade the USA or Korea to arrest me.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Okemos

IQ of a nation's citizens is certainly relevant. The question is how we should capitalize our human resources more effectively. The glaring example is North Korea and South Korea. Thus, political system and other factors also have huge impact on a nation's success. When one day in future, which I hope is not remote, all nations have similar political systems with all citizens enjoying similar freedoms etc, then it would be a competition of quality of its citizens.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WhiteMansBurden

kbd-raaf said:


> You only think that because you are Chinese.



The Chinese were not conquered by Whites. It's a fact, but that doesn't mean we *can't*

One nuclear warhead in Beijing, and all the little yellow mooncakes start screaming in terror.


----------



## Jade

karim3343 said:


> If I take the average IQ in India it is not illegal. And these tests were all taken in India. I don't understand your point.
> 
> It is illegal to compare Indian IQ to other countries? Well then, Indian authorities should invade the USA or Korea to arrest me.



The point is they are not allowed in India. If they are not allowed how come the Richard Lynn came to the conclusion that Indian IQ is 81?


----------



## kbd-raaf

WhiteMansBurden said:


> The Chinese were not conquered by Whites. It's a fact, but that doesn't mean we *can't*
> 
> One nuclear warhead in Beijing, and all the little yellow mooncakes start screaming in terror.



Is your mother also your sister? Cos your posts sound akin to one from an inbred fool.


----------



## WhiteMansBurden

timetravel said:


> dont make me laugh. the Japanese, Chinese and the East Asians in General have a high IQ as per the same study. So what white race superiority. You are inferior to the Chinese, Japanese and the North Koreans even.
> 
> So how much inferior you are to Chinese? 50%, 70%, maybe 80% is reasonable? whats your pick.
> 
> and Keep your inferiority to yourself. don't spread it around.



Buddy, you just said these tests don't make sense. I agree! Whites do NOT score lower (due to anti-White racism, selection bias, sampling errors, etc.) than East Asians. We have created the world you see around you today. Our average IQ's are probably closer to 120 than 100. East Asians are smart but they are 2nd in the world, following us whenever we say follow.

The browns of South Asia do not even measure close to us. The tiny island nation of Britain wiped the floor with you. Not only are you nowhere near the yellow Mongoloid chickens, you can never best the beauty and intelligence of the White race!


----------



## Okemos

WhiteMansBurden said:


> The Chinese were not conquered by Whites. It's a fact, but that doesn't mean we *can't*
> 
> One nuclear warhead in Beijing, and all the little yellow mooncakes start screaming in terror.



wow, didn't you finally come out and live up true to your "whitemansburden" name? ? little yellow mooncakes? Can you be more demeaning?

This guy should be banned outright. Also take a chill pill. I am worried about people standing next to you.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## WhiteMansBurden

kbd-raaf said:


> Is your mother also your sister? Cos your posts sound akin to one from an inbred fool.



Yea, we are the least inbred race of all. If we are inbred, then what does that make the brownskin?


----------



## senheiser

karim if india is really so dumb why are there so many successful indians living abroad like bussines men and entrepreneurs?


in fact Hindus are the richest religion by average earnings of households in america. After them comes judaism and after that orthodox, now who could be the main reason for orthodoxy being the richest christianity  ? I thought we russians are dumber than anglos?


----------



## Wright

Okemos said:


> wow, didn't you finally come out and live up true to your "whitemansburden" name? ? little yellow mooncakes? Can you be more demeaning?
> 
> This guy should be banned outright. Also take a chill pill. I am worried about people standing next to you.



He's trolling. Thats the 1st time I heard such a phrase.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Jade said:


> The point is they are not allowed in India. If they are not allowed how come the Richard Lynn came to the conclusion that Indian IQ is 81?



Then what is MENSA doing in India? Can you provide me a source that IQ tests are illegal?

Even Indian companies which go to an engineering college campus give students IQ tests.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ViXuyen

Okemos said:


> IQ of a nation's citizens is certainly relevant. The question is how we should capitalize our human resources more effectively. The glaring example is North Korea and South Korea. Thus, political system and other factors also have huge impact on a nation's success. When one day in future, which I hope is not remote, all nations have similar political systems with all citizens enjoying similar freedoms etc, then it would be a competition of quality of its citizens.


North and South Korea is not a good example. Without the technology transfers from the U.S, Europe, Israel, and even Japan to South Korea, South Korea would be a backwater country like North Korea today. Technology transfer is the decisive factor that propel SK out of their agarian society. North Korea is the reality of South Korea without the technology transfers from the mentioned parties. In fact, without the technogy transfer, both Koreas would have a lower GDP/capita than Cambodia or Laos today.

You should find a better example between countries with the same level of technology transfers or countries with the same level of not receiving any major tech transfers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kbd-raaf

WhiteMansBurden said:


> Buddy, you just said these tests don't make sense. I agree! Whites do NOT score lower (due to anti-White racism, selection bias, sampling errors, etc.) than East Asians. We have created the world you see around you today. *Our* average IQ's are probably closer to 120 than 100. East Asians are smart but they are 2nd in the world, following us whenever we say follow.
> 
> The browns of South Asia do not even measure close to *us*. The tiny island nation of Britain wiped the floor with you. Not only are you nowhere near the yellow Mongoloid chickens, you can never best the beauty and intelligence of the White race!



Stormfront - White Nationalist Community << you might be in the wrong forum.

Stop talking about us, let's start talking about you.

I can guarantee that:

a) I'm FAR, FAR more physically fit than you.
b) I'm far more successful than you.
c) I'm far more intelligent than you.

Stop trying to live vicariously through the success of other people, most of whom will be loathe to be associated with the likes of you.


----------



## Jade

karim3343 said:


> Then what is MENSA doing in India? Can you provide me a source that IQ tests are illegal?
> 
> Even Indian companies which go to an engineering college campus give students IQ tests.



Tests are allowed, Scientific studies on IQs are not allowed. Why are ask the same question again and again?


----------



## East Asia United

senheiser said:


> karim if india is really so dumb why are there so many successful indians living abroad like bussines men and entrepreneurs?
> 
> 
> in fact Hindus are the richest religion by average earnings of households in america. After them comes judaism and after that orthodox, now who could be the main reason for orthodoxy being the richest christianity  ? I thought we russians are dumber than anglos?



This is due to selective immigration. The USA is purposely selecting immigrants with the highest abilities (and surprise surprise, the highest IQ's).

I have already stated this multiple times. The mean Indian-American IQ is 112.



Wright said:


> He's trolling. Thats the 1st time I heard such a phrase.



Hear it all the time. Looked up his username. There's a guy with the EXACT same name on Stormfront. Could be him.


----------



## Okemos

5Star said:


> North and South Korea is not a good example. Without the technology transfers from the U.S, Europe, Israel, and even Japan to South Korea, South Korea would be a backwater country like North Korea today. Technology transfer is the decisive factor that propel SK out of their agarian society. North Korea is the reality of South Korea without the technology transfers from the mentioned parties. In fact, without the technogy transfer, both Koreas would have a lower GDP/capita than Cambodia or Laos today.
> 
> You should find a better example between countries with the same level of technology transfers or countries with the same level of not receiving any major tech transfers.



Well then I would have to find some African tribes living in remote areas that have never received any outside technology transfers in human history. Wonder why some countries didn't receive or what technology transfer. I don't want to derail this thread into American ally this, ally that, etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## senheiser

karim3343 said:


> This is due to selective immigration. The USA is purposely selecting immigrants with the highest abilities (and surprise surprise, the highest IQ's).
> 
> I have already stated this multiple times. The mean Indian-American IQ is 112.
> 
> 
> 
> Hear it all the time. Looked up his username. There's a guy with the EXACT same name on Stormfront. Could be him.



thats why 30 million illegal getting a citizenship granted because the US is selective


----------



## Jade

karim3343 said:


> This is due to selective immigration. The USA is purposely selecting immigrants with the highest abilities (and surprise surprise, the highest IQ's).
> 
> I have already stated this multiple times. The mean Indian-American IQ is 112.
> 
> 
> 
> Hear it all the time. Looked up his username. There's a guy with the EXACT same name on Stormfront. Could be him.



Why does the selective migration theory not applicable to other populations in US?

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## East Asia United

5Star said:


> North and South Korea is not a good example. Without the technology transfers from the U.S, Europe, Israel, and even Japan to South Korea, South Korea would be a backwater country like North Korea today. Technology transfer is the decisive factor that propel SK out of their agarian society. North Korea is the reality of South Korea without the technology transfers from the mentioned parties. In fact, without the technogy transfer, both Koreas would have a lower GDP/capita than Cambodia or Laos today.
> 
> You should find a better example between countries with the same level of technology transfers or countries with the same level of not receiving any major tech transfers.



What an unbelievably stupid comment.

South Korea is a country with a market economy and allows citizens to pursue their own career path and to make money.

North Korea does not. This is what separates the two.

Why do Korean Americans, who have to put up with Affirmative Action for everyone (including Whites) still do very well, better than even White Americans?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kbd-raaf

Okemos said:


> Well then I would have to find some African tribes living in remote areas that have never received any outside technology transfers in human history. Wonder why some countries didn't receive or what technology transfer. I don't want to derail this thread into American ally this, ally that, etc.



Agreed. In the modern world, everybody trades with everybody, technology and knowledge is transferred throughout the world, no one country can do everything and claiming that such is a standard for development is fallacious at best.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Wright

senheiser said:


> thats why 30 million illegal getting a citizenship granted because the US is selective



They are illegal, the process is entirely different.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## East Asia United

Jade said:


> Tests are allowed, Scientific studies on IQs are not allowed. Why are ask the same question again and again?



Again, provide a source for this. I think you are just outright lying.

Either way, once I have my average IQ data, I'm done. I can go outside the country and compare them to other people. I don't have to write up the scientific study in India.

Still though, I'd like to see the source for your comment.



senheiser said:


> thats why 30 million illegal getting a citizenship granted because the US is selective



No, that's because they are already in the country.

You want to know why they selectively choose immigrants from India, Africa, and Europe, and not from South and Central America?

Ask THEM, not me.



Jade said:


> Why does the selective migration theory not applicable to other populations in US?



They are, with the exception of Latinos.

All immigrant IQ's for minorities are substantially higher than 2nd or 3rd generation, etc. thus proving what I'm saying.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## senheiser

5Star said:


> North and South Korea is not a good example. Without the technology transfers from the U.S, Europe, Israel, and even Japan to South Korea, South Korea would be a backwater country like North Korea today. Technology transfer is the decisive factor that propel SK out of their agarian society. North Korea is the reality of South Korea without the technology transfers from the mentioned parties. In fact, without the technogy transfer, both Koreas would have a lower GDP/capita than Cambodia or Laos today.
> 
> You should find a better example between countries with the same level of technology transfers or countries with the same level of not receiving any major tech transfers.



thats very true korea used to be a third wolrd country











but other countries did received just as much aid as them like philipphnes yet they are still poor in comparison to korea. China, Vietnam and Russia need to stick together to modernize because yankee empire wont help us.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jade

karim3343 said:


> Again, provide a source for this. I think you are just outright lying.
> 
> Either way, once I have my average IQ data, I'm done. I can go outside the country and compare them to other people. I don't have to write up the scientific study in India.
> 
> Still though, I'd like to see the source for your comment.
> 
> 
> 
> No, that's because they are already in the country.
> 
> You want to know why they selectively choose immigrants from India, Africa, and Europe, and not from South and Central America?
> 
> Ask THEM, not me.



Prove that Richard Lynn conducted his study in India.

Here is the criticism of Richard Lynn's study



> Many of the data points in Lynn's book IQ and the Wealth of Nations were not based on residents of the named countries. The datum for Suriname was based on tests given to Surinamese who had emigrated to the Netherlands, and the datum for Ethiopia was based on the IQ scores of a highly selected group that had emigrated to Israel, and, for cultural and historical reasons, was hardly representative of the Ethiopian population. The datum for Mexico was based on a weighted averaging of the results of a study of "Native American and Mestizo children in Southern Mexico" with results of a study of residents of Argentina.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## East Asia United

senheiser said:


> thats very true korea used to be a third wolrd country



Correlation does not equal causation. We did it ourselves, and our IQ's are a testament to this. And this is why China will become a rich country. Even Vietnam will become a fairly rich country, with an IQ equal to some Southern European countries.



Jade said:


> Prove that Richard Lynn conducted his study in India.
> 
> Here is the criticism of Richard Lynn's study



Errr no, that was the argument against a previous and much older study, not this one. Try again.

Also, I am not supposed to prove he did his study in India. What kind of stupidity is this? You are the one making the claim. YOU prove he didn't. The evidence lies with the one making the claim.

You have already lied. You said that scientific studies on IQ are banned. You cannot be trusted.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Okemos

Jade said:


> Why does the selective migration theory not applicable to other populations in US?



That's probably because most Indian immigrants are relatively new immigrants on student visas, etc. I believe I saw a statistics that India now is the largest country with EB1-3 applications. On the other hand, other immigrants have mixture of old and new. Take for example, majority of Chinese immigrants are several generations old and even new immigrants are mostly from SE Asia and political asylum seekers (whether true or false is another matter); while EB1-3 based immigrants are minority.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Jade

karim3343 said:


> Correlation does not equal causation. We did it ourselves, and our IQ's are a testament to this. And this is why China will become a rich country. Even Vietnam will become a fairly rich country, with an IQ equal to some Southern European countries.
> 
> 
> 
> Errr no, that was the argument against a previous and much older study, not this one. Try again.
> 
> Also, I am not supposed to prove he did his study in India. What kind of stupidity is this? You are the one making the claim. YOU prove he didn't. The evidence lies with the one making the claim.
> 
> You have already lied. You said that scientific studies on IQ are banned. You cannot be trusted.



You are the OP. You claim that Indians have an IQ of 82. So the onus lies with you to prove that to me. Or disagree with the study.



Okemos said:


> That's probably because most Indian immigrants are relatively new immigrants on student visas, etc. I believe I saw a statistics that India now is the largest country with EB1-3 applications. On the other hand, other immigrants have mixture of old and new. Take for example, majority of Chinese immigrants are several generations old and even new immigrants are mostly from SE Asia and political asylum seekers (whether true or false is another matter); while EB1-3 based immigrants are minority.



The case is not only with Indians in US, Even in UK, Indians are the richest community.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## StarCraft_ZT

Jade said:


> You are the OP. You claim that Indians have an IQ of 82. So the onus lies with you to prove that to me. Or disagree with the study.
> 
> 
> 
> The case is not only with Indians in US, Even in UK, Indians are the richest community.



In US, every year, more than half of the H-1B Visa are issued to Indians, far more than any other races.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## East Asia United

Jade said:


> You are the OP. You claim that Indians have an IQ of 82. So the onus lies with you to prove that to me. Or disagree with the study.



My friend, if you want to disagree or agree with the study, do so. I would only recommend that you read the study first.

Indians have an average IQ of 81-82 because the tests show they have an average IQ of 81-82. How is it I am supposed to prove that the thousands of different researchers (since the 1980's) actually went to India to get these averages? Do you think their is some sort of conspiracy going on against India? That all of the studies ever conducted in India were not actually conducted in India? And that all of these researchers are in on it?

I can't phone them up and ask for their plane ticket or boarding pass. Sorry.



> The case is not only with Indians in US, Even in UK, Indians are the richest community.



Not sure about the UK, but it is true for the US.

Edit: Indians do not have the highest net worths, they have the highest household incomes.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Wright

karim3343 said:


> My friend, if you want to disagree or agree with the study, do so. I would only recommend that you read the study first.
> 
> Indians have an average IQ of 81-82 because the tests show they have an average IQ of 81-82. How is it I am supposed to prove that the thousands of different researchers (since the 1980's) actually went to India to get these averages? Do you think their is some sort of conspiracy going on against India? That all of the studies ever conducted in India were not actually conducted in India? And that all of these researchers are in on it?
> 
> I can't phone them up and ask for their plane ticket or boarding pass. Sorry.
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure about the UK, but it is true for the US.
> 
> Edit: Indians do not have the highest net worths, they have the highest household incomes.



There are also tests done on the Roma people (gypsies) who originate from India.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## East Asia United

Wright said:


> There are also tests done on the Roma people (gypsies) who originate from India.



Indeed, and for some reason they generally score about the same as Indians in India! I wonder why?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Lux de Veritas

India is way more uncivilize than all nations in the world. Their people has low IQ. These guys will deny their imbecile and they will impose a straight ban on attempts to test their IQ.

Few years ago, India sent Himachal Pradesh and Tamil Nadu to take PISA. Indian students were such a disgrace that India pull out of PISA citing it is tested bias against Indian.

Waste no time in arguing with them point by point. They are here is disturb.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## East Asia United

Lux de Veritas said:


> India is way more uncivilize than all nations in the world. Their people has low IQ. These guys will deny their imbecile and they will impose a straight ban on attempts to test their IQ.
> 
> Few years ago, India sent Himachal Pradesh and Tamil Nadu to take PISA. Indian students were such a disgrace that India pull out of PISA citing it is tested bias against Indian.
> 
> Waste no time in arguing with them point by point. They are here is disturb.



It's quite funny actually. I made no case for anything, yet a bunch of uncouth Indians started making racial insults, especially that idiot timetravel. I am actually recognizing the genetic differences simply by the way many of these people handle a debate. Rude and dumb is their modus operandi.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Lux de Veritas

Have you worked with Indians? If you have, you will not be surprise of their behavior and why everybody in the earth despise them. You go to visit blog and forum of engineers in USA and you will know all nation unite in their contempt against Indians.

India population is 70% rural. You cannot expect illiterate to have high IQ. Also India let its student rot. The successful Indians you find in USA are mostly are high caste Indians who are the cognitive elites and are self-selected group. They have access to education resource. India has hereditary occupation system. They have hereditary prostitute, hereditary priest..etc. 

Their priest class, the Brahmins engage in scholastic activities for 3000 years, living parasitically on Dalits, who are exploited. The parasite Brahmins are people you find in western countries and they have high IQ. They are successful and extremely dishonest. 

While Chinese is 50% urban. So China IQ will be high due to development of human capital, by putting many people in urban environment. Its no surprise that Shanghai scored well in PISA.

What amaze me is that even Zhejiang province which is significant rural has extremely high IQ. It will point to a future of Chinese hegemony in future intellectual pursuit. It was verified by PISA.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## nastikan

Why is high IQ china still so much poorer and devoid of any innovation compared to other lower IQ countries like Australia and European countries?



Lux de Veritas said:


> Have you worked with Indians? If you have, you will not be surprise of their behavior and why everybody in the earth despise them. You go to visit blog and forum of engineers in USA and you will know all nation unite in their contempt against Indians.
> 
> India population is 70% rural. You cannot expect illiterate to have high IQ. Also India let its student rot. The successful Indians you find in USA are mostly are high caste Indians who are the cognitive elites and are self-selected group. They have access to education resource. India has hereditary occupation system. They have hereditary prostitute, hereditary priest..etc.
> 
> Their priest class, the Brahmins engage in scholastic activities for 3000 years, living parasitically on Dalits, who are exploited. The parasite Brahmins are people you find in western countries and they have high IQ. They are successful and extremely dishonest.
> 
> While Chinese is 50% urban. So China IQ will be high due to development of human capital, by putting many people in urban environment. Its no surprise that Shanghai scored well in PISA.
> 
> What amaze me is that even Zhejiang province which is significant rural has extremely high IQ. It will point to a future of Chinese hegemony in future intellectual pursuit. It was verified by PISA.



Yes Americans hate Indians and love Chinese lol.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## my2cents

Wright said:


> Im glad there are 1 billion Chinese, keeps the world IQ average up.



It is no mean feat to educate 1 billion plus people and keep the standards high. This is a testimony to Chinese hard working nature and pride in their culture and people. Congratulations China !

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Lux de Veritas

China was the richest country in the whole until around 1700. By late 19th century, Chinese GDP is still the highest in the world. That is the natural world order. After the fall of Rome, no other civilization achieve the heights of Chinese. The Arabic caliphate is a bright spark, but then it is rather short lived as a unitary state, and in its output in knowledge. 

The white man wealth is a result of scientific explosion, incubating in the 16th, unleash in 19th century industrial revolution. 

Right now, the world is back to the old order again where China will lead in intellectual output. It will happen sooner than you think.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

IQ topics always end in mass flaming,trolling and even racist rants on all sides.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmwLPU5H6_Q

'its not who i am,but what i do that defines me'-words to live by for all trollers.


----------



## That Guy

Archdemon said:


> Amm, 100 maybe? not for nothing its called average score



I don't know, you'd think that the Global average would be lower, considering that most of the nations of the planet (according to the report) was lower 100 IQ.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

nastikan said:


> Why is high IQ china still so much poorer and devoid of any innovation compared to other lower IQ countries like Australia and European countries?
> 
> 
> 
> Yes Americans hate Indians and love Chinese lol.



Because IQ measures potential success, not current success, which is further proof that IQ is not a cultural/educational phenomena, but a genetic one.

As for the reason why it's taken so long for Chinese to develop, it's because of the Communist system, which is actually still in place today.

Funny thing: Chinese people believe that it was the Communist party that put them on the path to stability, and if it wasn't for the CPC, China would not be where it is today.

Couldn't be more wrong. The facts are, with or without CPC, with democracy, or mixed economy, or Singapore-style, or Western liberal, it really matters not. Either way, Chinese show the genetic potential to succeed, and they will get there.



my2cents said:


> It is no mean feat to educate 1 billion plus people and keep the standards high. This is a testimony to Chinese hard working nature and pride in their culture and people. Congratulations China !



First positive comment from person of one nationality to another.

Congrats sir, you win the internet.



AUSTERLITZ said:


> IQ topics always end in mass flaming,trolling and even racist rants on all sides.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmwLPU5H6_Q
> 
> 'its not who i am,but what i do that defines me'-words to live by for all trollers.



Do you think Einstein is considered the smartest person in history, not because of his brain and genes, but because he worked harder and longer than any man, woman, or child in the history of Humanity?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

That Guy said:


> I don't know, you'd think that the Global average would be lower, considering that most of the nations of the planet (according to the report) was lower 100 IQ.



I can't remember the study, but most put the global mean at around 90

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## nastikan

karim3343 said:


> Because IQ measures potential success, not current success, which is further proof that IQ is not a cultural/educational phenomena, but a genetic one.
> 
> As for the reason why it's taken so long for Chinese to develop, it's because of the Communist system, which is actually still in place today.
> 
> Funny thing: Chinese people believe that it was the Communist party that put them on the path to stability, and if it wasn't for the CPC, China would not be where it is today.
> 
> Couldn't be more wrong. The facts are, with or without CPC, with democracy, or mixed economy, or Singapore-style, or Western liberal, it really matters not. Either way, Chinese show the genetic potential to succeed, and they will get there.
> 
> 
> 
> First positive comment from person of one nationality to another.
> 
> Congrats sir, you win the internet.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think Einstein is considered the smartest person in history, not because of his brain and genes, but because he worked harder and longer than any man, woman, or child in the history of Humanity?



Looks like having high IQ is't very useful afterall. If it was a generic thing there wouldn't be so much variation in scores among white people. If communism was the reason china's poverty, china would have been rich before communism.


----------



## Lux de Veritas

nastikan said:


> Looks like having high IQ is't very useful afterall. If it was a generic thing there wouldn't be so much variation in scores among white people. If communism was the reason china's poverty, china would have been rich before communism.




How many times must I reply that China is the richest country in the whole world for at least 1700 years. The emergence of the west is a fairly late event. 

In 600 AD, China Chang An is the world largest city. Then London and Paris are still village.

China's prosperity is very consistent.

By early 15th century, admiral Zheng He of China has already reach Africa. More than 80 years later, Portuguese Vasco Da Gama arrived India. We were already rich long before communism. That is the reason that we have awed Marco Polo.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## nastikan

Lux de Veritas said:


> How many times must I reply that China is the richest country in the whole world for at least 1700 years. The emergence of the west is a fairly late event.
> 
> In 600 AD, China Chang An is the world largest city. Then London and Paris are still village.
> 
> China's prosperity is very consistent.
> 
> By early 15th century, admiral Zheng He of China has already reach Africa. More than 80 years later, Portuguese Vasco Da Gama arrived India. We were already rich long before communism. That is the reason that we have awed Marco Polo.


By that logic, india and china were comparable economies throughout hiStory. Sometimes china was larger and sometimes India was. the biggest economy doesn't mean rich. China was not even colonized by invaders. But still managed to remain dirt poor till the 90's. higher IQ clearly hasn't helped in thinking clear .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## That Guy

karim3343 said:


> I can't remember the study, but most put the global mean at around 90



huh, the more you know.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Lux de Veritas

nastikan said:


> By that logic, india and china were comparable economies throughout hiStory. Sometimes china was larger and sometimes India was. the biggest economy doesn't mean rich. China was not even colonized by invaders. But still managed to remain dirt poor till the 90's. higher IQ clearly hasn't helped in thinking clear .



There is no such thing as "India" before the arrival of British. India is named after the Hindus river which flows mainly in Pakistan. The people living around Hindus river are the biggest hater of Indian. Serve the Indian right as they are wicked race.

"India" is never a unified country but a fragmented state. Asoka and Aurangzeb's India lasted less than 40 years never even came close to "unified" India. Both did not build an extensive civil service that is a key feature of an empire.

And there is doubts whether Asoka's Mauryan really hold so much land, as there are scan reliable evidence.

Throughout history, India consists of hundreds and thousands of small fragmented states. 

And the most natural being of India is to get fragmented.

There are indication to show that China is indeed the most wealthy. Research have shown Chinese civilization to be the most productive. You can equate productivity will wealth.

While China was not colonized, we were ravaged by revolution and war, started by Japanese. That is bankrupt us and acerbate social tension. Else we will not even have communism. India is quite peaceful since the day of British colonization and yet she is not a shxt hole. There must be reasons for it.

Besides, Indians are despise in the world for their conduct manifested everywhere clearly indicated in this forum.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## nastikan

Lux de Veritas said:


> There is no such thing as "India" before the arrival of British. India is named after the Hindus river which flows mainly in Pakistan. The people living around Hindus river are the biggest hater of Indian. Serve the Indian right as they are wicked race.
> 
> "India" is never a unified country but a fragmented state. Asoka and Aurangzeb's India lasted less than 40 years never even came close to "unified" India. Both did not build an extensive civil service that is a key feature of an empire.
> 
> And there is doubts whether Asoka's Mauryan really hold so much land, as there are scan reliable evidence.
> 
> Throughout history, India consists of hundreds and thousands of small fragmented states.
> 
> And the most natural being of India is to get fragmented.
> 
> There are indication to show that China is indeed the most wealthy. Research have shown Chinese civilization to be the most productive. You can equate productivity will wealth.
> 
> While China was not colonized, we were ravaged by revolution and war, started by Japanese. That is bankrupt us and acerbate social tension. Else we will not even have communism. India is quite peaceful since the day of British colonization and yet she is not a shxt hole. There must be reasons for it.
> 
> Besides, Indians are despise in the world for their conduct manifested everywhere clearly indicated in this forum.



Actually china was not a unified country either. Tibet was a separate kingdom for most of history. So we're xingiang and Manchuria. So people state the combined economies of these kingdoms when they say Chinese economy. I guess most of this history is whitewashed in communist Chinese history books.

There is more negative opinion about china than India. Chinese people's are also considered among the rudest. So yeah you should be more open minded.

For such a cleaver people, the Chinese have made some terrible decisions and suffered the consequences don't you think?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

karim3343 said:


> Because IQ measures potential success, not current success, which is further proof that IQ is not a cultural/educational phenomena, but a genetic one.
> 
> As for the reason why it's taken so long for Chinese to develop, it's because of the Communist system, which is actually still in place today.
> 
> Funny thing: Chinese people believe that it was the Communist party that put them on the path to stability, and if it wasn't for the CPC, China would not be where it is today.
> 
> Couldn't be more wrong. The facts are, with or without CPC, with democracy, or mixed economy, or Singapore-style, or Western liberal, it really matters not. Either way, Chinese show the genetic potential to succeed, and they will get there.
> 
> 
> 
> First positive comment from person of one nationality to another.
> 
> Congrats sir, you win the internet.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think Einstein is considered the smartest person in history, not because of his brain and genes, but because he worked harder and longer than any man, woman, or child in the history of Humanity?



Just so u know einstein's IQ was 160,many people around the world have been found since with greater IQs,some over 200.Do they have same impact as einstein?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Lux de Veritas

nastikan said:


> Actually china was not a unified country either. Tibet was a separate kingdom for most of history. So we're xingiang and Manchuria. So people state the combined economies of these kingdoms when they say Chinese economy. I guess most of this history is whitewashed in communist Chinese history books.
> 
> There is more negative opinion about china than India. Chinese people's are also considered among the rudest. So yeah you should be more open minded.



So is NE India where India conduct its rape and ethnic cleansing. Assam Rifles are units of rapist.

The USA elites like Indian but USA people is diametrically opposite. Just survey what Silicon valley engineers forum and blog you will know. I do not want to list out one by one the numbers of hate attacks by USA people against Indian.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Lux de Veritas

AUSTERLITZ said:


> Just so u know einstein's IQ was 160,many people around the world have been found since with greater IQs,some over 200.Do they have same impact as einstein?



Jews and gentile white has great impact on civilization advancement. Agree with both hands. But question is whether Chinese is catching up now.

The USA Intel prize and National Merit Scholarship in USA are the best indicator of cognitive prowess is now flooded with Asians. Jews are the minority there. Among the Asians, signs are showing even in the top cognitive elites that Chinese are able to beat Indians there. Population of Chinese vs Indians is roughly 6:4.

I still believe Chinese standing is due to our hard work. Our kids work 12 hours a day. That may not be good for creativity.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## nastikan

Lux de Veritas said:


> So is NE India where India conduct its rape and ethnic cleansing. Assam Rifles are units of rapist.
> 
> The USA elites like Indian but USA people is diametrically opposite. Just survey what Silicon valley engineers forum and blog you will know. I do not want to list out one by one the numbers of hate attacks by USA people against Indian.


For a high IQ person, you are pretty brash and unsophisticated. What does rape have anything to do with IQ? If High IQ prevents rape, Japanese wouldnt have raped as many Chinese women during WWII


----------



## Lux de Veritas

nastikan said:


> For a high IQ person, you are pretty brash and unsophisticated. What does rape have anything to do with IQ? If High IQ prevents rape, Japanese wouldnt have raped as many Chinese women during WWII



You have mentioned Tibet, so I mentioned NE India. You are out of scope in the first place. Let stick to topic. I do not want a tit for tat. And please be more logical. No one mention high IQ prevent rape but you. 

East Asian has high IQ - true
Indians has low IQ - true

East Asian is the most prosperous in since AD 0 - true
India is a shyt hole - true

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## nastikan

Lux de Veritas said:


> *East Asian is the most prosperous in since AD 0 - true
> India is a shyt hole * - true



Not really. China was as big a shyt hole as India was for the majority of its history. Try to read more than your government history books. Looks like those make racist douches out of chinese citizens. It was in fact the chinese scholars who came to India for studying during the medieval period and not the other way round. 

High IQ chinese have had miserable existence for most of the last century and even earlier. They had a repressive feudal system enslaving the masses into bonded labor which was replaced by a single tyrant named Mao who caused tens of millions of Chinese deaths due to his "high IQ" decisions and arrogance. If the Chinese really started thinking for themselves using their high IQ, they wouldn't be worshiping this mass murderer and make him into a God like figure. They would also stop being the world's sweat shop and make something original.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## East Asia United

nastikan said:


> Looks like having high IQ is't very useful afterall. If it was a generic thing there wouldn't be so much variation in scores among white people. If communism was the reason china's poverty, china would have been rich before communism.



Good questions.

White people are not all genetically indistinguishable. I can tell a Greek person from a Norwegian person simply by looking at their mtDNA and Y-chromosome DNA. I cannot tell a Danish person from a Norwegian.

Environmental influence aside, people who are genetically indistinguishable on the population/race level should have around the same IQ's.

This is true, as you can see by the data.

As for China, she was leading the world until the 1600's. Regardless, there is not IQ data for those times, and we don't actually know how much innate intelligence played when their was a lack of ability to engage in the building of your country (because of absolute monarchies holding the power, fascist-like and militarist dictatorships being the norm, and so on).

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## anonymus

karim3343 said:


> I can't remember the study, but most put the global mean at around 90



IQ is measured as deviation from mean with mean taken as 100.

Chinese in this forum are noodledick and need to bolster their ego with dubious and stupid studies. Extrapolating from maturity of their posts, IQ of chinese posters here is below 70.




karim3343 said:


> I guessed randomly and I scored 79, lol



This is your correct IQ.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## nastikan

karim3343 said:


> Good questions.
> 
> White people are not all genetically indistinguishable. I can tell a Greek person from a Norwegian person simply by looking at their mtDNA and Y-chromosome DNA. I cannot tell a Danish person from a Norwegian.
> 
> Environmental influence aside, people who are genetically indistinguishable on the population/race level should have around the same IQ's.
> 
> This is true, as you can see by the data.
> 
> As for China, she was leading the world until the 1600's. Regardless, there is not IQ data for those times, and we don't actually know how much innate intelligence played when their was a lack of ability to engage in the building of your country (because of absolute monarchies holding the power, fascist-like and militarist dictatorships being the norm, and so on).



Han ethnicity isn't as homogeneous either. It is considered to have the highest variation within a single ethnicity. Han was also not one single ethnicy always. Different tribes were included into the ethnicity at different points of time.


----------



## Developereo

karim3343 said:


> Well, if this were true, then almost no Black Africans would win gold medals. Ethiopians dominate long distance running. It is due to their innate physical superiority in running long distances.



Ideally, we would expect the medal tally to be spread evenly across the board. However, sports medals depend a lot on the training and support regimen back home. People from developing countries typically excel in events which do not require expensive training facilities.

Whites and Asians dominate in swimming, which is one of the toughest sports in terms of endurance. How does that correlate with your inverse IQ thesis?



karim3343 said:


> There are also many Blacks from moderately well-off countries (like Jamaica for example) that dominate things like sprinting and high jump. Why would that be the case?



Jamaica was a British slave colony, so it is possible that the same selective breeding regimen took place there as in the American South.



karim3343 said:


> But then why do IQ tests taken at the age of 7 years already show the same IQ gaps as in the study? Surely at 7 years of age they are not being prepared to go into business, etc. etc.?



Is the IQ disparity as large amongst kids as in adults?
I don't view anything within one standard deviation as significant, so 85-115 IQ is essentially the same, meaning that proper training will override the genetic component.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## East Asia United

AUSTERLITZ said:


> Just so u know einstein's IQ was 160,many people around the world have been found since with greater IQs,some over 200.Do they have same impact as einstein?



Does someone with an IQ of 200 who does art have the same impact as Einstein? No, and IQ only measure potential to succeed, not your impact factor on society.

Besides, Einstein was a one-trick pony. There are very few people that are compared to him in the layman's' mind.

Regardless, what is the alternative? That Einstein worked harder and longer than any anyone in Human history?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

anonymus said:


> IQ is measured as deviation from mean with mean taken as 100.
> 
> Chinese in this forum are noodledick and need to bolster their ego with dubious and stupid studies. Extrapolating from maturity of their posts, IQ of chinese posters here is below 70.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This is your correct IQ.



My correct IQ, as taken and timed by a psychometrician, on the Stanford Binets scale, is 144.

And your overly simplistic analysis of the Chinese on the forum, with the typical ad hominem assessment of individual IQ common in dumb and lacking-in-creativity posters, leads me to believe that you have nothing to contribute to the thread.

And yes, the mean is 100, because that is the White average; this has absolutely nothing to do with the global average. So I guess I can write that down due to your stupidity, as you have done with me.



nastikan said:


> Not really. China was as big a shyt hole as India was for the majority of its history. Try to read more than your government history books. Looks like those make racist douches out of chinese citizens. It was in fact the chinese scholars who came to India for studying during the medieval period and not the other way round.
> 
> High IQ chinese have had miserable existence for most of the last century and even earlier. They had a repressive feudal system enslaving the masses into bonded labor which was replaced by a single tyrant named Mao who caused tens of millions of Chinese deaths due to his "high IQ" decisions and arrogance. If the Chinese really started thinking for themselves using their high IQ, they wouldn't be worshiping this mass murderer and make him into a God like figure. They would also stop being the world's sweat shop and make something original.



1: Mao is still respected because of conformity in East Asian culture.

2: Copying occurs in all nations that are still developing. Being poor does not give you time to innovate and create new technologies. Japan and Korea were the same if you are old enough to remember.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## East Asia United

nastikan said:


> Han ethnicity isn't as homogeneous either. It is considered to have the highest variation within a single ethnicity. Han was also not one single ethnicy always. Different tribes were included into the ethnicity at different points of time.



The overwhelming majority of Han Chinese are not genetically distinguishable from each other. This is the main factor.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## anonymus

karim3343 said:


> My correct IQ, as taken and timed by a psychometrician, on the Stanford Binets scale, is 144.
> 
> And your overly simplistic analysis of the Chinese on the forum, with the typical ad hominem assessment of individual IQ common in dumb and lacking-in-creativity posters, leads me to believe that you have nothing to contribute to the thread.
> 
> And yes, the mean is 100, because that is the White average; this has absolutely nothing to do with the global average. So I guess I can write that down due to your stupidity, as you have done with me.



Again proved that you are 79 IQ chinese and 144 was an error.

The fact that IQ is measured as deviation from mean with mean being hundred means that the mean IQ, when it is being plotted would be 100 for an extensive sample.

If the sample is for whole world, 100 would be taken as mean IQ and IQ scores would be worked according to the deviation they show from mean.Not grasping this simplistic statistical truth means that

1. You are not bright.

2. The blog writer himself does not know how IQ is measured.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Marshmallow

karim3343 said:


> *NOTE: Figures in brackets were estimated from neighboring countries.*
> 
> Andorra (97)
> Angola (71)
> Antigua/Barbuda (74)
> Argentina 92.8
> Armenia 93.2
> Australia 99.2
> Austria 99
> Azerbaijan 84.9
> Bahamas (84)
> Bahrain 85.9
> Bangladesh 81
> Barbados 80
> Belarus (95)
> Belgium 99.3
> Belize 76.8
> Benin (71)
> Bermuda 90
> Bhutan (78)
> Bolivia 87
> Bosnia 83.2
> Botswana 76.9
> Brazil 85.6
> Brunei (89)
> Bulgaria 93.3
> Burkina Faso (70)
> Burundi (72)
> Cambodia (92)
> Cameroon 64
> Canada 100.4
> Cape Verde (76)
> Central African Republic 64
> Chad (66)
> Chile 89.8
> China 105.8
> Colombia 83.1
> Comoros (77)
> Congo (Brazzaville) 73
> Congo (Zaire) 68
> Cook Islands 89
> CostaRica 86
> Cote d'Ivoire 71
> Croatia 97.8
> Cuba 85
> Cyprus 91.8
> Czech Republic 98.9
> Denmark 97.2
> Djibouti (75)
> Dominica 67
> Dominican Republic 82
> EastTimor (85)
> Ecuador 88
> Egypt 82.7
> El Salvador 78
> Equatorial Guinea (69)
> Eritrea 75.5
> Estonia 99.7
> Ethiopia 68.5
> Fiji 85
> Finland 100.9
> France 98.1
> Gabon (69)
> Gambia 62
> Georgia 86.7
> Germany 98.8
> Ghana 69.7
> Greece 93.2
> Greenland 91
> Grenada (74)
> Guatemala 79
> Guinea 66.5
> Guinea-Bissau (69)
> Guyana (81)
> Haiti (67)
> Honduras 81
> Hong Kong 105.7
> Hungary 98.1
> Iceland 98.6
> *India 82.2*
> Indonesia 85.8
> *Iran 85.6*
> Iraq 87
> Ireland 94.9
> Israel 94.6
> Italy 96.1
> Jamaica 71
> Japan 104.2
> Jordan 86.7
> Kazakhstan 85
> Kenya 74.5
> Kiribati (85)
> Korea: North (104.6)
> Korea: South 104.6
> Kuwait 85.6
> Kyrgyzstan 74.8
> Laos 89
> Latvia 95.9
> Lebanon 84.6
> Lesotho 66.5
> Liberia (68)
> Libya 85
> Liechtenstein 100.3
> Lithuania 94.3
> Luxembourg 95
> Macao 99.9
> Macedonia 90.5
> Madagascar 82
> Malawi 60.1
> Malaysia 91.7
> Maldives (81)
> Mali 69.5
> Malta 95.3
> Mariana Islands 81
> Marshall Islands 84
> Mauritania (74)
> Mauritius 88
> Mexico 87.8
> Micronesia (84)
> Moldova 92
> Mongolia 100
> Montenegro 85.9
> Morocco 82.4
> Mozambique 69.5
> Myanmar/Burma (85)
> Namibia 70.4
> Nepal 78
> Netherlands 100.4
> Netherlands Antilles 87
> New Caledonia 85
> New Zealand 98.9
> Nicaragua (84)
> Niger (70)
> Nigeria 71.2
> Norway 97.2
> Oman 84.5
> *Pakistan 84*
> Palestine 84.5
> Panama 80
> Papua New Guinea 83.4
> Paraguay 84
> Peru 84.2
> Philippines 86.1
> Poland 96.1
> Portugal 94.4
> Puerto Rico 83.5
> Qatar 80.1
> Romania 91
> Russia 96.6
> Rwanda 76
> St Helena (86)
> St Kitts & Nevis (74)
> St Lucia 62
> St Vincent 71
> Samoa (Western) 88
> Sao Tome & Principe (67)
> Saudi Arabia 79.6
> Senegal 70.5
> Serbia & Montenegro 90.3/92
> Seychelles 84.4
> Sierra Leone 64
> Singapore 107.1
> Slovakia 98
> Slovenia 97.6
> Solomon Islands (83)
> Somalia (72)
> South Africa 71.6
> Spain 96.6
> Sri Lanka 79
> Sudan 77.5
> Suriname 89
> Swaziland 75.4
> Sweden 98.6
> Switzerland 100.2
> Syria 82
> Taiwan 104.6
> Tajikistan (80)
> Tanzania 73
> Thailand 89.9
> Togo (70)
> Tonga 86
> Trinidad & Tobago 86.4
> Tunisia 85.4
> Turkey 89.4
> Turkmenistan (80)
> Uganda 71.7
> Ukraine 94.3
> United Arab Emirates 87.1
> United Kingdom 99.1
> USA 97.5
> Uruguay 90.6
> Uzbekistan (80)
> Vanuatu (84)
> Venezuela 83.5
> Vietnam 94
> Yemen 80.5
> Zambia 74
> Zimbabwe 72.1



look at iran,Pakistan India's % iran n pak are ahead than india

@Ayush @Aka123 @SOHEIL @iranigirl2

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Jade

karim3343 said:


> My friend, if you want to disagree or agree with the study, do so. I would only recommend that you read the study first.
> 
> Indians have an average IQ of 81-82 because the tests show they have an average IQ of 81-82. How is it I am supposed to prove that the thousands of different researchers (since the 1980's) actually went to India to get these averages? Do you think their is some sort of conspiracy going on against India? That all of the studies ever conducted in India were not actually conducted in India? And that all of these researchers are in on it?
> 
> I can't phone them up and ask for their plane ticket or boarding pass. Sorry.
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure about the UK, but it is true for the US.
> 
> Edit: Indians do not have the highest net worths, they have the highest household incomes.



You could not prove the scientific nature of the study.
You could not prove whether study was conducted everywhere.
You could not prove whether the samples were scientific and represent the population. 
You could not prove whether the study has been endorsed by the scientific community.
You could not prove whether the study has been published by a peer reviewed scientific journals. 

For a study to be scientific and accepted all the above are a necessity.

I am not going to waste my time discussing a study that is not worth discussing. Anybody with even a 50 IQ can say such study as worthless. Only retards and who don't understand science or racists or @ss**les who believe in conspiracy theories will hang on such studies.

And please don't reply to my post.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## East Asia United

Developereo said:


> Ideally, we would expect the medal tally to be spread evenly across the board. However, sports medals depend a lot on the training and support regimen back home. People from developing countries typically excel in events which do not require expensive training facilities.



Yes, I said this previously. You need to train your athletes since the average African is not going to do well against the White or East Asian (or ANY) Olympic-level athlete. The point is, with all things holding true, being given the same training facilities, regimens, etc. Blacks would dominate most (though not all) sports.



> Whites and Asians dominate in swimming, which is one of the toughest sports in terms of endurance. How does that correlate with your inverse IQ thesis?



The same inflexible ankles that make Blacks good sprinters also make them bad swimmers. They are also larger and therefore are heavier, which gives them a less strong kick overall.



> Jamaica was a British slave colony, so it is possible that the same selective breeding regimen took place there as in the American South.



Good point. Wasn't thinking of that when I wrote it!



> Jamaica was a British slave colony, so it is possible that the same selective breeding regimen took place there as in the American South.



Really? Even 3 IQ points is quite significant, in that differences are measurable.

Jews are only 10 IQ points (.66 SD) above Whites, yet this is what leads to them being what they are relative to Whites.

A difference of 15 (1SD) is humongous.



> so 85-115 IQ is essentially the same, meaning that proper training will override the genetic component.



The worst scoring American ethnic group (Af-Americans) shows no differences in performance than the highest scoring American ethnic group (Indian-Americans or Jews)???

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

anonymus said:


> Again proved that you are 79 IQ chinese and 144 was an error.



Indeed, an error in an IQ test of 65 points.




> The fact that IQ is measured as deviation from mean with mean being hundred means that the mean IQ, when it is being plotted would be 100 for an extensive sample.



It's OK that you are slow. I am here to help.



> If the sample is for whole world, 100 would be taken as mean IQ and IQ scores would be worked according to the deviation they show from mean.Not grasping this simplistic statistical truth means that



Wrong. The sample is for the mean is the United Kingdom. Read the study again, or did you read it at all? And the European average is very close to the UK average, hence the reason for me stating that the IQ test has Whites at the mean (which, in fact, almost all of them do).

Your arrogance coupled with your lack of accuracy makes you sound like a very spiteful and dumb fellow.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Jade said:


> You could not prove the scientific nature of the study.
> You could not prove whether study was conducted everywhere.
> You could not prove whether the samples were scientific and represent the population.
> You could not prove whether the study has been endorsed by the scientific community.
> You could not prove whether the study has been published by a peer reviewed scientific journals.
> 
> For a study to be scientific and accepted all the above are a necessity.
> 
> I am not going to waste my time discussing a study that is not worth discussing. Anybody with even a 50 IQ can say such study as worthless. Only retards and who don't understand science or racists or @ss**les who believe in conspiracy theories will hang on such studies.
> 
> And please don't reply to my post.



The study is accepted by the scientific community, because they do not care to collect the planet ticket receipts of the researchers. You, in the eyes of the scientific community, would be called an imbecile.

Individuals like yourself, only capable of insulting and demeaning, are probably incapable of understanding such a study.

I doubt that you looked at this objectively, and probably already had predetermined conclusions before you even came onto this thread.

In fact, I *know* to a high degree of certainty that you barely read the study, which shows your level of credibility.



> And please don't reply to my post.



Because you have poor impulse control and would not be able to stand the testosterone-fuelled attraction at replying to my post, as will be proved soon enough.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Developereo

karim3343 said:


> Yes, I said this previously. You need to train your athletes since the average African is not going to do well against the White or East Asian (or ANY) Olympic-level athlete. The point is, with all things holding true, being given the same training facilities, regimens, etc. Blacks would dominate most (though not all) sports.



That's a speculative statement that's hard to prove one way or another. All we know is that richer countries dominate sports which require formal training facilities, whereas poorer countries (regardless of racial composition) eek out a niche in the other sports.



karim3343 said:


> The same inflexible ankles that make Blacks good sprinters also make them bad swimmers. They are also larger and therefore are heavier, which gives them a less strong kick overall.



Exactly.

There is no blanket physical superiority or inferiority across races. Specific physical features have pros or cons in specific contexts.

I don't know if an average African is heavier and more muscular than an average Swede or Russian.



karim3343 said:


> Really? Even 3 IQ points is quite significant, in that differences are measurable.
> 
> Jews are only 10 IQ points (.66 SD) above Whites, yet this is what leads to them being what they are relative to Whites.
> 
> A difference of 15 (1SD) is humongous.
> 
> 
> 
> The worst scoring American ethnic group (Af-Americans) shows no differences in performance than the highest scoring American ethnic group (Indian-Americans or Jews)???



There are huge cultural differences between the groups at either extreme. Hard to know how much is genetic (although I don't deny that there is a genetic component), and how much is pure environment.

Have there been studies of black kids raised by Jewish parents, and vice versa?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## chinapakistan

Enemy said:


> Ask him what kind of doctor he is. Get the details first.
> 
> *On topic*,
> 
> Let me a bit blunt, if Chinese IQ is higher than that of Indians, how come Indians manage to keep huge Chinese lands (as China claims) under its occupation?
> 
> *I mean, what makes India stronger than China?*



 Your question shows your IQ.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## East Asia United

Developereo said:


> That's a speculative statement that's hard to prove one way or another. All we know is that richer countries dominate sports which require formal training facilities, whereas poorer countries (regardless of racial composition) eek out a niche in the other sports.



Not true. We see Blacks dominating sports in the USA far more than their population suggests. It's not just 'rich' countries outperforming 'poor' countries.

For example, Blacks are 13% of the US population, yet they are:

1: 75% of NBA players

2: 65% of NFL players

3: 47% of NCAA Football Bowl Subdivision

4: 59% of NCAA Division I basketball



> There is no blanket physical superiority or inferiority across races. Specific physical features have pros or cons in specific contexts.



Agree, and I hate using the word superiority. Shouldn't have used it when I said it. The point I am trying to make is that Blacks out-compete most other groups in a highly disproportionate amount of sports and physical activities.



> I don't know if an average African is heavier and more muscular than an average Swede or Russian.



Yes, they generally tend to be.



> There are huge cultural differences between the groups at either extreme. Hard to know how much is genetic (although I don't deny that there is a genetic component), and how much is pure environment.
> 
> Have there been studies of black kids raised by Jewish parents, and vice versa?



Not that I know of, but their have been numerous studies of East Asians and Blacks being raised by Whites in Belgium and the USA.

Blacks IQ went up by up to 4 points (about 89), and the East Asians scored higher than their parents in both Belgium and the US.

So for Blacks it had some increase in IQ, and for East Asians it changed nothing.

Type in transracial adoption studies and you will see what I am referring to.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Developereo

karim3343 said:


> Not true. We see Blacks dominating sports in the USA far more than their population suggests. It's not just 'rich' countries outperforming 'poor' countries.



I think we have already covered former slave populations as being unrepresentative of the global population.



karim3343 said:


> So for Blacks it had some increase in IQ, and for East Asians it changed nothing.
> 
> Type in transracial adoption studies and you will see what I am referring to.



OK. Thanks.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Developereo said:


> I think we have already covered former slave populations as being unrepresentative of the global population.
> 
> 
> 
> OK. Thanks.



True, but how much selective effect do you think this would have in the 100 years or so of slavery? We are talking 4-5 generations of this, no more.

Regardless, I think that simply taking a look at sub-Saharan African populations, and checking out the difference in muscle mass and density, number of fast twitch muscle fibers, heightened aggression due to Monoamine oxidase A ('warrior' gene), and many other factors, prove my point of a mainly biological argument.

Besides, saying that Blacks have not accomplished such feats because of innate biological differences would posit the hypothesis that they did this through better training regimes, working harder, etc.

We know that Blacks have not had that tendency in almost all other fields, so it's quite hard to posit that for only this one.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Developereo

karim3343 said:


> True, but how much selective effect do you think this would have in the 100 years or so of slavery? We are talking 4-5 generations of this, no more.



Keep in mind that the starting population itself was carefully chosen based on physical characteristics. It's not as if the slave traders threw a wide net and picked up a random distribution.



karim3343 said:


> Regardless, I think that simply taking a look at sub-Saharan African populations, and checking out the difference in muscle mass and density, number of fast twitch muscle fibers, heightened aggression due to Monoamine oxidase A ('warrior' gene), and many other factors, prove my point of a mainly biological argument.



I do remember reading something about differences in fast twitch muscle fibers across different races, although I don't remember if the study included global samples, or just from within the US.



karim3343 said:


> Besides, saying that Blacks have not accomplished such feats because of innate biological differences would posit the hypothesis that they did this through better training regimes, working harder, etc.
> 
> We know that Blacks have not had that tendency in almost all other fields, so it's quite hard to posit that for only this one.



One again, cultural factors dominate. Sports performance is valued much more highly amongst African-Americans than, say, Jewish Americans or Asian Americans.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Stardust

Turkey 89.4. Puhahahahaha really high score for us )

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Speeder 2

Okemos said:


> That's probably because most Indian immigrants are relatively new immigrants on student visas, etc. I believe I saw a statistics that India now is the largest country with EB1-3 applications. On the other hand, other immigrants have mixture of old and new. Take for example, majority of Chinese immigrants are several generations old and even new immigrants are mostly from SE Asia and political asylum seekers (whether true or false is another matter); while EB1-3 based immigrants are minority.



Very true.



Indian American mean IQ = 112, if it is true, tells us A LOT.


Indian average household income - "the highest in America": this is an apple-orange redherring, and a false claim ( I bet Norwegian American average is WAY higher, so are Dutch, German, Austrian, etc) 

Most indians have come to America in the last 2 decades. Most of them are on H1B high-salary-paying working visas say > $50,000. Of course their average household income is higher than White Americans and Chinese Americans whose average family covers all walks of life, being researchers, civil service, police, nurses, doctors, garbage collectors, etc and includes many unemployeed with 0 income except some govt benefits. Don't think an Indian garbage collector or an unemployed could get a high flying H1B to immigrate to America though. Of course Indian Americans (largely H1Bs) have higher average income. It's a classic apple-orange comparison and proves nothing on the IQ of Indians in India.

If it proves anthing, this fact proves exactly why India avearge IQ is very low. Think about it: the ones immigrate to the US must be at least 2 o 3 SD above Indian average, since not anyone in India can get highly-paid H1B. If average IQ of these "highly smart" (in Indian standard)Indians in America is ONLY 112, one can more or less see what's the India average - 2 or 3 SD lower to low 80s.

In comparsion, I know some Dutch and Belgian (Euros)working visa holders to America in the recent years. The average IQ and household income of Dutch /Blegian H1B holders are probably in the ball park of >125 and $150,000 respectively, WAY higher than their Indian Amercian counterparts. 

Furthermore, the fact that Indian H1B holders are largely Indian "high" castes and Brahmins (i.e. the average IQ of some of the smartest Brahmin Americans self-selected from >200 million Indian Brahmin population is about 112) proves that the Brahmins have LOW average IQ indeed in global standard, slightly higher than Indian average perhaps but still low. 

Therefore, The Brahmins, contrary to their "high IQ propaganda", are just a tribe originated from the Middle East with average IQ perhaps in range of 85 to 90, similar to current Persian or Turk average.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Type 052D

Jade said:


> And how do you know his sample were sound. As far as I know Indian government don't allow these kind of tests to be conducted.



It's all bullshit. We all know karim3343. But lets not get all politically correct over here.

African-born blacks comprise about 16 percent of the U.S. foreign-born black population (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000), and are considerably more educated than other immigrants. The vast majority of these immigrants come from minority white countries in East and West Africa (e.g. Kenya and Nigeria). While less than 2 percent originate from North or South Africa (CIA World Factbook, 2004; Yearbook of immigration Statistics, 2003). An analysis of Census Bureau data by The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education (1999-2000) and the Lewis Mumford Center for Comparative Urban and Regional Research (2003) find that Black African immigrants to the United States are more likely to be college educated than any other immigrant group, which included those from Europe, North America and Asia (see also Nisbett, 2002; U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000). African immigrants have also been shown to be more highly educated than any native-born ethnic group including white and Asian Americans (Logan & Deane, 2003; Williams, 2005; The Economist, 1996; Arthur, 2000; Selassie, 1998; Nisbett, 2002).


----------



## Type 052D

karim3343 said:


> Yes, I said this previously. You need to train your athletes since the average African is not going to do well against the White or East Asian (or ANY) Olympic-level athlete. The point is, with all things holding true, being given the same training facilities, regimens, etc. Blacks would dominate most (though not all) sports.
> 
> 
> 
> The same inflexible ankles that make Blacks good sprinters also make them bad swimmers. They are also larger and therefore are heavier, which gives them a less strong kick overall.
> 
> 
> 
> Good point. Wasn't thinking of that when I wrote it!
> 
> 
> 
> Really? Even 3 IQ points is quite significant, in that differences are measurable.
> 
> Jews are only 10 IQ points (.66 SD) above Whites, yet this is what leads to them being what they are relative to Whites.
> 
> A difference of 15 (1SD) is humongous.
> 
> 
> 
> The worst scoring American ethnic group (*Af-Americans) shows no differences in performance than the highest scoring American ethnic group (Indian-Americans or Jews)???*


 
True, but Ethnic groups from West Africa (Like the Akan people from Ghana) that immigrated to the United States tend to have higher IQ then African Americans. Psychologist Crawford-Nutt found that African black students enrolled in westernized schools scored higher on progressive matrix tests than did American white students. Both British West Indies and Af.American score lower than African immigrants who have the same luxuries of good education, good health care and effective transport systems.


----------



## Type 052D

Stardust said:


> Turkey 89.4. Puhahahahaha really high score for us )



It's 94 now... same level as Israel.


----------



## Type 052D

Indian created great Mathematicians and invented and created many Mathematical models and equations throughout history. In contrast, Northern Europeans only developed complex Maths in the 15th/16th century, after the Italian Renaissance had taken root. Don't forget Arabic scientific principle had created the notion of 'Empirical Measurement and Experimentation' which helped further the cause of science in the Scientific revolution (17th century) in the Protestant nations of England (later Britain), Scotland, Non-Catholic German States like Purissia etc.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Type 052D

Speeder 2 said:


> Very true.
> 
> 
> 
> Indian American mean IQ = 112, if it is true, tells us A LOT.
> 
> 
> Indian average household income - "the highest in America": this is an apple-orange redherring, and a false claim ( I bet Norwegian American average is WAY higher, so are Dutch, German, Austrian, etc)
> 
> Most indians have come to America in the last 2 decades. Most of them are on H1B high-salary-paying working visas say > $50,000. Of course their average household income is higher than White Americans and Chinese Americans whose average family covers all walks of life, being researchers, civil service, police, nurses, doctors, garbage collectors, etc and includes many unemployeed with 0 income except some govt benefits. Don't think an Indian garbage collector or an unemployed could get a high flying H1B to immigrate to America though. Of course Indian Americans (largely H1Bs) have higher average income. It's a classic apple-orange comparison and proves nothing on the IQ of Indians in India.
> 
> If it proves anthing, this fact proves exactly why India avearge IQ is very low. Think about it: the ones immigrate to the US must be at least 2 o 3 SD above Indian average, since not anyone in India can get highly-paid H1B. If average IQ of these "highly smart" (in Indian standard)Indians in America is ONLY 112, one can more or less see what's the India average - 2 or 3 SD lower to low 80s.
> 
> In comparsion, I know some Dutch and Belgian (Euros)working visa holders to America in the recent years. The average IQ and household income of Dutch /Blegian H1B holders are probably in the ball park of >125 and $150,000 respectively, WAY higher than their Indian Amercian counterparts.
> 
> Furthermore, the fact that Indian H1B holders are largely Indian "high" castes and Brahmins (i.e. the average IQ of some of the smartest Brahmin Americans self-selected from >200 million Indian Brahmin population is about 112) proves that the Brahmins have LOW average IQ indeed in global standard, slightly higher than Indian average perhaps but still low.
> 
> Therefore, The Brahmins, contrary to their "high IQ propaganda", are just a tribe originated from the Middle East with average IQ perhaps in range of 85 to 90, similar to *current Persian or Turk average.*



I agree with your statements about the Turks... Nevertheless the Persians made significant contribution to science throughout the post-Neolithic world, from the biologist/medic Avicinna of 9th century Rey (Tehran) to the greatest poly-Mathematician Omar-Khyamm and Tusi of the 11th century. They still make great progress in science today, and the Iranian diaspora like the Chinese diaspora contribute and integrate well in the west.


----------



## Speeder 2

Type 052D said:


> Indian created great Mathematicians and invented and created many Mathematical models and equations throughout history. In contrast, Northern Europeans only developed complex Maths in the 15th/16th century, after the Italian Renaissance had taken root. Don't forget Arabic scientific principle had created the notion of 'Empirical Measurement and Experimentation' which helped further the cause of science in the Scientific revolution (17th century) in the Protestant nations of England (later Britain), Scotland, Non-Catholic German States like Purissia etc.





India's historical contribution to maths is trivial(!), unlike what modern propaganda says, compared to the Greeks. no, European's sci-tech-maths quest didn't start only from the Renaissance. Without any dounbt from both the depth and width of maths knowldge as we know today Euros have contributed the majority of it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shinigami

Speeder 2 said:


> India's historical contribution to maths is trivial(!), unlike what modern propaganda says, compared to the Greeks. no, European's sci-tech-maths quest didn't start only from the Renaissance. Without any dounbt from both the depth and width of maths knowldge as we know today Euros have contributed the majority of it.



 kid, the brahmins (who tends to have a higher IQ than what most chinese can dream of getting) constructed the entire basics of mathematics that we use today. do some research before you start ratting off.

Indian mathematics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

in fact just near my area, there was a medieval brahmin who came up with the entire infinite series and integration before newton did

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TiKoB8nlid0

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AADHAAR

karim3343 said:


> The average IQ in Tibet is about 93 (though there aren't many IQ tests to go on so this could easily change as more data comes in). Tibetans though, are very small compared to the Han Chinese/other East Asian majority. This means that their lower mean IQ scores are not affecting the average that much.



So, another proof that Tibet is not a part of China.


----------



## Shinigami

> *Charges of Eurocentrism*[edit]
> 
> It has been suggested that Indian contributions to mathematics have not been given due acknowledgement in modern history and that many discoveries and inventions by Indian mathematicians were known to their Western counterparts, copied by them, and presented as their own original work; and further, that this mass plagiarism has gone unrecognised due to Eurocentrism.
> 
> According to G. G. Joseph:
> 
> [Their work] takes on board some of the objections raised about the classical Eurocentric trajectory. The awareness [of Indian and Arabic mathematics] is all too likely to be tempered with dismissive rejections of their importance compared to Greek mathematics. The contributions from other civilisations &#8211; most notably China and India, are perceived either as borrowers from Greek sources or having made only minor contributions to mainstream mathematical development. An openness to more recent research findings, especially in the case of Indian and Chinese mathematics, is sadly missing"[84]
> The historian of mathematics, Florian Cajori, suggested that he and others "suspect that Diophantus got his first glimpse of algebraic knowledge from India."[85] However, he also wrote that "it is certain that portions of Hindu mathematics are of Greek origin".[86]
> More recently, as discussed in the above section, the infinite series of calculus for trigonometric functions (rediscovered by Gregory, Taylor, and Maclaurin in the late 17th century) were described (with proofs) in India, by mathematicians of the Kerala school, remarkably some two centuries earlier. Some scholars have recently suggested that knowledge of these results might have been transmitted to Europe through the trade route from Kerala by traders and Jesuit missionaries.[87] Kerala was in continuous contact with China and Arabia, and, from around 1500, with Europe. The existence of communication routes and a suitable chronology certainly make such a transmission a possibility. However, there is no direct evidence by way of relevant manuscripts that such a transmission actually took place.[87] According to David Bressoud, "there is no evidence that the Indian work of series was known beyond India, or even outside of Kerala, until the nineteenth century."[74][88]
> Both Arab and Indian scholars made discoveries before the 17th century that are now considered a part of calculus.[75] However, they were not able to, as Newton and Leibniz were, to "combine many differing ideas under the two unifying themes of the derivative and the integral, show the connection between the two, and turn calculus into the great problem-solving tool we have today."[75] The intellectual careers of both Newton and Leibniz are well-documented and there is no indication of their work not being their own;[75] however, it is not known with certainty whether the immediate predecessors of Newton and Leibniz, "including, in particular, Fermat and Roberval, learned of some of the ideas of the Islamic and Indian mathematicians through sources we are not now aware."[75] This is an active area of current research, especially in the manuscripts collections of Spain and Maghreb, research that is now being pursued, among other places, at the Centre National de Recherche Scientifique in Paris.[75]



Indian mathematics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Speeder 2

Type 052D said:


> Indian created great Mathematicians and invented and created many Mathematical models and equations throughout history. In contrast, Northern Europeans only developed complex Maths in the 15th/16th century, after the Italian Renaissance had taken root. Don't forget Arabic scientific principle had created the notion of 'Empirical Measurement and Experimentation' which helped further the cause of science in the Scientific revolution (17th century) in the Protestant nations of England (later Britain), Scotland, Non-Catholic German States like Purissia etc.






Strictly speaking, apart from positional notation 0, the ONLY significant contribution to arithmetic which facilitates calculation operations, India has made NO contribution to the Maths that worth mentioning prior to the modern era.

Historical Indian maths ( Pre- BC), science, astrology, etc , along with those from Arab/Persian maths, had received HEAVY and DIRECT knowledge/heritage from the translated (by the Arabs) ancient Greek works. No argument on that with a straight face.

There was NO single historical Indian, Arab or Persian name , (and rarely Chinese ones for that matter, if there were a few to be honest), that is worth mentioning alongside Sophocles, Euripides, Aeschylus, Aristotle, Euclid, Pythagoras or Ptolemy, measured by the sheer depth and width of achievements. Sorry, but no argument.

France is only a fraction of the West, As were at Indian maths, however, the sheer number, width and depth of the contribution of French mathematicians alone of the last 200 years are of orders of magnitude more than what Indian sub continent, Persian and Arab putting together in their entire history. Now think about that.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## redhat

Chinese historically have low iq.They don't have much contributions to science and technology backed by theorems ,proofs ,equations .What they have are discoveries by chance, over a large period,which don't require much iq.

Their contributions to maths are negigible.

They never had any mathematician even remotely close to Ramanujan ,and will never have one in future.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Developereo

Speeder 2 said:


> Pythagoras



Pythagoras, a math genius? Not by Babylonian standards - CNN.com

Babylonians were using Pythagorean theorem 1000 years before Pythagoras was born.

Biography of Pythagoras - math word definition - Math Open Reference

_Ten years later, when Persia invaded Egypt, Pythagoras was taken prisoner and sent to Babylon (in what is now Iraq), where he met the Magoi, priests who taught him sacred rites. Iamblichus (250-330 AD), a Syrian philosopher, wrote about Pythagoras, "He also reached the acme of perfection in arithmetic and music and the *other mathematical sciences taught by the Babylonians*..."_

I am not suggesting that Pythagoras simply copied ancient Babylonian mathematics, but he clearly built upon their work.


----------



## AADHAAR

redhat said:


> Chinese historically have low iq.They don't have much contributions to science and technology backed by theorems ,proofs ,equations .What they have are discoveries by chance, over a large period,which don't require much iq.
> 
> Their contributions to maths are negigible.
> 
> They never had any mathematician even remotely close to Ramanujan ,and will never have one in future.



True.. but chinese have always been very good labour class.

The "Great Wall of China" is a historical symbol dedicated to china's labour class.

Chinese carry the high traditions of "great wall" in the labour factories they work in now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Lux de Veritas

redhat said:


> Chinese historically have low iq.They don't have much contributions to science and technology backed by theorems ,proofs ,equations .What they have are discoveries by chance, over a large period,which don't require much iq.
> 
> Their contributions to maths are negigible.
> 
> They never had any mathematician even remotely close to Ramanujan ,and will never have one in future.



Chinese is not on par with Greece curiosity and inference on natural science so is ALL other tribes. Jews did not contribute much to natural science in ancient world. Jewish scientific output spike suddenly only after Napoleonic emancipation. Other than Ashkenazi Jews, all other Jewish tribes do not not have significant output in natural science. So I would say science itself is a culture of Greece and you will only be good at it after importing some Greece culture which is what modernization and westernization is about.

Indians might have a few salient geniuses but its inconclusive to say whether Indians is better than Chinese in natural science in the past. 

In present time, Chinese culture beat Indian completely in Maths. Indians have won no field medal. Chinese won 2 field medal. The total field medal won by yellow is 6, 2 Chinese, 3 Japanese and 1 Vietnamese. All belongs to the Sinitc culture sphere. The mixture of Greece and Sinitic culture produce an explosive output of science in Sinitic culture.

Not yet in Hindic culture, or probably Hindic will never attain that greatness.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AADHAAR

Lux de Veritas said:


> Chinese is not on par with Greece curiosity and inference on natural science so is ALL other tribes. Jews did not contribute much to natural science in ancient world. Jewish scientific output spike suddenly only after Napoleonic emancipation. Other than Ashkenazi Jews, all other Jewish tribes do not not have significant output in natural science. So I would say science itself is a culture of Greece and you will only be good at it after importing some Greece culture which is what modernization and westernization is about.
> 
> Indians might have a few salient geniuses but its inconclusive to say whether Indians is better than Chinese in natural science in the past.
> 
> In present time, Chinese culture beat Indian completely in Maths. Indians have won no field medal. Chinese won 2 field medal. The total field medal won by yellow is 6, 2 Chinese, 3 Japanese and 1 Vietnamese. All belongs to the Sinitc culture sphere. The mixture of Greece and Sinitic culture produce an explosive output of science in Sinitic culture.
> 
> Not yet in Hindic culture, or probably Hindic will never attain that greatness.



"Father of Pentium" - Vinod Dham

Vinod Dham - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Littlewood commented, "I can believe that he's at least a Jacobi",[80] while Hardy said he "*can compare him only with [Leonhard] Euler or Jacobi*." 

Srinivasa Ramanujan - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Nobel prize in Physics - C.V. Raman

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C._V._Raman

Ahh.. I can easily get tired .. there's just so much more .. and more.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Lux de Veritas

AADHAAR said:


> True.. but chinese have always been very good labour class.
> 
> The "Great Wall of China" is a historical symbol dedicated to china's labour class.
> 
> Chinese carry the high traditions of "great wall" in the labour factories they work in now.



Great wall culture is a double edge sword. 

I agree that Chinese culture can be very oppressive and people normally have no way to fight back. Chinese government over since Qin dynasty are willing to use very high intensity of violent to ensure its survival.

The good thing is Chinese government is able to mobilize people to whatever endeavor they like without much opposition. This is the most fundamental pre-requisite for China to overtake the west.

Unlike the western government, all Sinitic civilization governments are willing and able to sacrifice as much people as they desire, to ensure long term well being. This is what we are seeing now in China's exploitive factories. The workers are much better than slave labor but nevertheless, there are serious exploitation.

I think such highly centralize power is mix bag of good and bad. Without it, we would not survive as a unitary state for more than 2000 years, and we would not be able to win the west in civilization war. But the tyranny in Chinese culture also incur many serious human right violations. The recent Great Leap Forward see 30 million Chinese killed.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Sam1980

This report is worthless, has anyone actually cared to read their methodology? 
If the IQ is to be measured at a national level, samples must be taken from a population with similar criteria.

This guy Richard Lynn is a racist/sexist who is against immigration and women, don't take this guy seriously, I'm very familiar with this asshole's works. I myself am a MENSA member since 2003, and let me assure you, anyone with an average IQ can become a member as MENSA questions tend to be quite repetitive. 

Let me put it this way, don't take people with Psychology degrees very seriously...

It doesn't matter what your IQ is, all that matters is what you have achieved.

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## Lux de Veritas

AADHAAR said:


> "Father of Pentium" - Vinod Dham
> 
> Littlewood commented, "I can believe that he's at least a Jacobi",[80] while Hardy said he "*can compare him only with [Leonhard] Euler or Jacobi*."
> 
> Nobel prize in Physics - C.V. Raman
> 
> 
> Ahh.. I can easily get tired .. there's just so much more .. and more.



Let measure top cognitive power by using Nobel prize natural science and economics as a benchmark instead of brandishing engineers like Vinod Dham.

Lets consider Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka as Hindic.

Hindic civilization has 6 Nobel prize winner. India alone has 5 winners.

Chinese has 9 winners. 

Japan has 20 winners.

As the development of China is quite late starting in 1980, the Chinese Nobel prize winner is expect to hike exponentially.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## kbd-raaf

Sam1980 said:


> This report is worthless, has anyone actually cared to read their methodology?
> If the IQ is to be measured at a national level, samples must be taken from a population with similar criteria.
> 
> This guy Richard Lynn is a racist/sexist who is against immigration and women, don't take this guy seriously, I'm very familiar with this asshole's works. I myself am a MENSA member since 2003, and let me assure you, anyone with an average IQ can become a member as MENSA questions tend to be quite repetitive.
> 
> Let me put it this way, don't take people with Psychology degrees very seriously...
> 
> It doesn't matter what your IQ is, *all that matters is what you have achieved*.



Exactly, a couple of people I've met in University over here, including the Beazley award winner have agreed MENSA membership is a no-brainer.

The bolded part is very important, it doesn't matter if you have an IQ of 180 if all you do is watch **** and post angry comments on internet forums.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AADHAAR

Lux de Veritas said:


> Let measure top cognitive power by using Nobel prize natural science and economics as a benchmark instead of brandishing engineers like Vinod Dham.
> 
> Lets consider Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka as Hindic.
> 
> Hindic civilization has 6 Nobel prize winner. India alone has 5 winners.
> 
> *Chinese has 9 winners.* PRC = 0
> 
> Japan has 20 winners.
> 
> As the development of China is quite late starting in 1980, the Chinese Nobel prize winner is expect to hike exponentially.



Your stupidity is incurable ... things which can't be cured, must be endured.

Get well soon.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## redhat

Lux de Veritas said:


> In present time, Chinese culture beat Indian completely in Maths. Indians have won no field medal. Chinese won 2 field medal. The total field medal won by yellow is 6, 2 Chinese, 3 Japanese and 1 Vietnamese. All belongs to the Sinitc culture sphere. The mixture of Greece and Sinitic culture produce an explosive output of science in Sinitic culture.
> 
> Not yet in Hindic culture, or probably Hindic will never attain that greatness.




Can you list some reference to these field medalists' works,especially Chinese, 

like this - TeX Samples |


----------



## Archdemon

karim3343 said:


> 100, is not the average, it is the average European/White.
> 
> The global average is something like 93.



Isn't IQ relativistic? IQ score indicate intelligence compared to general population

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Lux de Veritas

AADHAAR said:


> Your stupidity is incurable ... things which can't be cured, must be endured.
> 
> Get well soon.



I do not think oversea Chinese or PRC Chinese matters and many are still indeed holding Chinese passport. At the time of communist rule, smart people inside China has no chance. The very few lucky one that escape to the west is able show Chinese intellectual prowess. Now China is emerging, soon you will see Nobel laureates doing their entire work in PRC institution.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SOHEIL

karim3343 said:


> *NOTE: Figures in brackets were estimated from neighboring countries.*
> 
> Andorra (97)
> Angola (71)
> Antigua/Barbuda (74)
> Argentina 92.8
> Armenia 93.2
> Australia 99.2
> Austria 99
> Azerbaijan 84.9
> Bahamas (84)
> Bahrain 85.9
> Bangladesh 81
> Barbados 80
> Belarus (95)
> Belgium 99.3
> Belize 76.8
> Benin (71)
> Bermuda 90
> Bhutan (78)
> Bolivia 87
> Bosnia 83.2
> Botswana 76.9
> Brazil 85.6
> Brunei (89)
> Bulgaria 93.3
> Burkina Faso (70)
> Burundi (72)
> Cambodia (92)
> Cameroon 64
> Canada 100.4
> Cape Verde (76)
> Central African Republic 64
> Chad (66)
> Chile 89.8
> China 105.8
> Colombia 83.1
> Comoros (77)
> Congo (Brazzaville) 73
> Congo (Zaire) 68
> Cook Islands 89
> CostaRica 86
> Cote d'Ivoire 71
> Croatia 97.8
> Cuba 85
> Cyprus 91.8
> Czech Republic 98.9
> Denmark 97.2
> Djibouti (75)
> Dominica 67
> Dominican Republic 82
> EastTimor (85)
> Ecuador 88
> Egypt 82.7
> El Salvador 78
> Equatorial Guinea (69)
> Eritrea 75.5
> Estonia 99.7
> Ethiopia 68.5
> Fiji 85
> Finland 100.9
> France 98.1
> Gabon (69)
> Gambia 62
> Georgia 86.7
> Germany 98.8
> Ghana 69.7
> Greece 93.2
> Greenland 91
> Grenada (74)
> Guatemala 79
> Guinea 66.5
> Guinea-Bissau (69)
> Guyana (81)
> Haiti (67)
> Honduras 81
> Hong Kong 105.7
> Hungary 98.1
> Iceland 98.6
> India 82.2
> Indonesia 85.8
> Iran 85.6
> Iraq 87
> Ireland 94.9
> Israel 94.6
> Italy 96.1
> Jamaica 71
> Japan 104.2
> Jordan 86.7
> Kazakhstan 85
> Kenya 74.5
> Kiribati (85)
> Korea: North (104.6)
> Korea: South 104.6
> Kuwait 85.6
> Kyrgyzstan 74.8
> Laos 89
> Latvia 95.9
> Lebanon 84.6
> Lesotho 66.5
> Liberia (68)
> Libya 85
> Liechtenstein 100.3
> Lithuania 94.3
> Luxembourg 95
> Macao 99.9
> Macedonia 90.5
> Madagascar 82
> Malawi 60.1
> Malaysia 91.7
> Maldives (81)
> Mali 69.5
> Malta 95.3
> Mariana Islands 81
> Marshall Islands 84
> Mauritania (74)
> Mauritius 88
> Mexico 87.8
> Micronesia (84)
> Moldova 92
> Mongolia 100
> Montenegro 85.9
> Morocco 82.4
> Mozambique 69.5
> Myanmar/Burma (85)
> Namibia 70.4
> Nepal 78
> Netherlands 100.4
> Netherlands Antilles 87
> New Caledonia 85
> New Zealand 98.9
> Nicaragua (84)
> Niger (70)
> Nigeria 71.2
> Norway 97.2
> Oman 84.5
> Pakistan 84
> Palestine 84.5
> Panama 80
> Papua New Guinea 83.4
> Paraguay 84
> Peru 84.2
> Philippines 86.1
> Poland 96.1
> Portugal 94.4
> Puerto Rico 83.5
> Qatar 80.1
> Romania 91
> Russia 96.6
> Rwanda 76
> St Helena (86)
> St Kitts & Nevis (74)
> St Lucia 62
> St Vincent 71
> Samoa (Western) 88
> Sao Tome & Principe (67)
> Saudi Arabia 79.6
> Senegal 70.5
> Serbia & Montenegro 90.3/92
> Seychelles 84.4
> Sierra Leone 64
> Singapore 107.1
> Slovakia 98
> Slovenia 97.6
> Solomon Islands (83)
> Somalia (72)
> South Africa 71.6
> Spain 96.6
> Sri Lanka 79
> Sudan 77.5
> Suriname 89
> Swaziland 75.4
> Sweden 98.6
> Switzerland 100.2
> Syria 82
> Taiwan 104.6
> Tajikistan (80)
> Tanzania 73
> Thailand 89.9
> Togo (70)
> Tonga 86
> Trinidad & Tobago 86.4
> Tunisia 85.4
> Turkey 89.4
> Turkmenistan (80)
> Uganda 71.7
> Ukraine 94.3
> United Arab Emirates 87.1
> United Kingdom 99.1
> USA 97.5
> Uruguay 90.6
> Uzbekistan (80)
> Vanuatu (84)
> Venezuela 83.5
> Vietnam 94
> Yemen 80.5
> Zambia 74
> Zimbabwe 72.1



this is bullsh!t ...

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AUSTERLITZ

Lux de Veritas said:


> Chinese is not on par with Greece curiosity and inference on natural science so is ALL other tribes. Jews did not contribute much to natural science in ancient world. Jewish scientific output spike suddenly only after Napoleonic emancipation. Other than Ashkenazi Jews, all other Jewish tribes do not not have significant output in natural science. So I would say science itself is a culture of Greece and you will only be good at it after importing some Greece culture which is what modernization and westernization is about.
> 
> Indians might have a few salient geniuses but its inconclusive to say whether Indians is better than Chinese in natural science in the past.
> 
> In present time, Chinese culture beat Indian completely in Maths. Indians have won no field medal. Chinese won 2 field medal. The total field medal won by yellow is 6, 2 Chinese, 3 Japanese and 1 Vietnamese. All belongs to the Sinitc culture sphere. The mixture of Greece and Sinitic culture produce an explosive output of science in Sinitic culture.
> 
> Not yet in Hindic culture, or probably Hindic will never attain that greatness.



First person i'm seeing accusing indians of being useless at math.


----------



## Lux de Veritas

Indians like to talk and brag a lot. They are good in marketing. Indians say they are good in software but that is a big lie or big brag. 

Base on field medalist and International Mathematical Olympiad, yellow is far better than maths than Indians. In fact Jews is best in maths. No one brag and brag other than Indians.

Also Indians brag they are good in software. Base on Turing prize, there is one Indians and one Chinese. Chinese never boast. Indians shout on the roof top they are good. In fact, Jews are the biggest recipient of turing prize. Never see them brag so hard as Indians.

Unlike Chinese was devastated by war and revolution, open up late in 1980, Indians got into contact with British early and India is generally peaceful. 

If India cannot attained the intellectual height when China is sleeping, now when China wakes up, she cannot never trump China. When the very few oversea Chinese can win more Nobel prize and field medals than the entire Indians, when China emerge, India will have no chance. Before, just 1% or 10 million of Chinese who are in oversea has access to education. Today, its 100% and 13 billion of Chinese is educated. 

Go imagine.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## timetravel

Jade said:


> I am not going to waste my time discussing a study that is not worth discussing. Anybody with even a 50 IQ can say such study as worthless. Only retards and who don't understand science or racists or @ss**les who believe in conspiracy theories will hang on such studies.
> 
> And please don't reply to my post.



 Befitting Reply.. 

@Lux de Veritas the above quote fits you perfectly.


----------



## timetravel

Jade said:


> I am not going to waste my time discussing a study that is not worth discussing. Anybody with even a 50 IQ can say such study as worthless. Only retards and who don't understand science or racists or @ss**les who believe in conspiracy theories will hang on such studies.
> 
> And please don't reply to my post.



 Befitting Reply.. 
 @Lux de Veritas the above quote fits you perfectly.


----------



## timetravel

Jade said:


> I am not going to waste my time discussing a study that is not worth discussing. Anybody with even a 50 IQ can say such study as worthless. Only retards and who don't understand science or racists or @ss**les who believe in conspiracy theories will hang on such studies.
> 
> And please don't reply to my post.



 Befitting Reply.. 
 @Lux de Veritas the above quote fits you perfectly.


----------



## ViXuyen

According to karim, the innate ability/intelligence of a group is revealed by taking a test and the score of the test will determine who is more intelligent than others. 

If that is the case, then why does Korea need the technology transfers from countries with lower IQ test scores than Korea? Korea received high-speed train tech from France, submarine building licensing from Germany, UAV tech from Israel, nuclear power reactor license building from the U.S, automobile engine licensing from Japan, shipbuilding technology transfer from Europe, satellite launch technology from Russia etc..of of those countries score lower on the intelligence test than Korea? The obvious reason is Korea reaches the zenith of their intelligence level wall and they could not go higher; hence they need countries with lower scores on the intelligence test to help them; sound really contradicting isn't it? Hence; the scores on the intelligence test is a serious flaw in revealing who is more intelligent than others

Let us reverse role and say that instead of Korean receiving all the technology assistance/licensing/transfers from the above mentioned countries with lower scores on the intelligence test than Korea; it is Korea who transfer those technologies to them. Can we say that those countries are more intelligent than Korea because they need massive assistances from Korean?

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## for truth

Lux de Veritas said:


> Unlike Chinese was devastated by war and revolution, open up late in 1980, *Indians got into contact with British early and India is generally peaceful. *
> .



I request you to stop it here.Up until now, i thought you were man with stuff,now with this BullSH!T claim,better go read some south Asian history.


----------



## Okemos

Members from high IQ countries in the list celebrate the list, while members from relatively low IQ countries in the list cry about the list and dismiss it as stupid, worthless. 

What other responses can you expect from that kind of list? lol You will never get any objective and rational discussion on this kind of topic. That's probably why IQ is a taboo topic in science community.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GDan

Sam1980 said:


> Let me put it this way, don't take people with Psychology degrees very seriously...


My father is a doctor of psychology, and he and his professional friends say that Lynn is a laughing stock among academics. Lynn never controls for bias, uses extremely small sample groups(Equitorial Guinea would need a sample of about 1100 to establish a margin of error of 4%. Lynn only used 48), and employs imaginary data for nations he doesn't have test results for. The fact that any of the people in this thread are taking Lynn's "study" seriously says they are willing to sacrifice their integrity to validate their own nationalist and ethnic biases. It's pathetic.

Reactions: Like Like:
9


----------



## Wright

GDan said:


> My father is a doctor of psychology, and he and his professional friends say that Lynn is a laughing stock among academics. Lynn never controls for bias, uses extremely small sample groups(Equitorial Guinea would need a sample of about 1100 to establish a margin of error of 4%. Lynn only used 48), and employs imaginary data for nations he doesn't have test results for. The fact that any of the people in this thread are taking Lynn's "study" seriously says they are willing to sacrifice their integrity to validate their own nationalist and ethnic biases. It's pathetic.




And what about differences in brain mass between races?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GDan

Wright said:


> And what about differences in brain mass between races?


It may or may not be significant. I'm not in a position to say. I'll wait until someone publishes a study on the subject that isn't riddled with methodology errors.


----------



## rohitshubham

i just took the test and it was 144 on IQtest.com.

doing engineering in NIT Patna


----------



## senheiser

Lux de Veritas said:


> China was the richest country in the whole until around 1700. By late 19th century, Chinese GDP is still the highest in the world. That is the natural world order. After the fall of Rome, no other civilization achieve the heights of Chinese. The Arabic caliphate is a bright spark, but then it is rather short lived as a unitary state, and in its output in knowledge.
> 
> The white man wealth is a result of scientific explosion, incubating in the 16th, unleash in 19th century industrial revolution.
> 
> Right now, the world is back to the old order again where China will lead in intellectual output. It will happen sooner than you think.




List of regions by past GDP (PPP) per capita - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Europe states always used to be richer than china and india. China and india had just bigger economies because they had more people. Italy was richer than china per capita.

Second rome never went under only the west roman empire. The eastern roman empire managed to survive under the name byzantium and was probably the richest country until it was conquered in 1452.


----------



## Type 052D

Speeder 2 said:


> India's historical contribution to maths is trivial(!), unlike what modern propaganda says, compared to the Greeks. no, European's sci-tech-maths quest didn't start only from the Renaissance. Without any dounbt from both the depth and width of maths knowldge as we know today Euros have contributed the majority of it.



LOL Indian Mathematics is far ahead of Ancient Greek Maths, and you must an fool to think that Pythagoras theorem was invented just by the Greeks. It was developed in the Warring States period and Ancient India independently. It's is clear that your an Chinese who have an inferiority complex to Europeans. 'European Sci-Tech Maths quest did'nt start only in the Renaissance' your right, it started in Cordoba . You do know that talking about Germanic peoples right? The same 'high IQ' people you seem to butt-lick that only had written language from the 4th century.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Archdemon

rohitshubham said:


> i just took the test and it was 144 on IQtest.com.
> 
> doing engineering in NIT Patna



You paid? ..........


----------



## Lux de Veritas

senheiser said:


> Europe states always used to be richer than china and india. China and india had just bigger economies because they had more people. Italy was richer than china per capita.
> 
> Second rome never went under only the west roman empire. The eastern roman empire managed to survive under the name byzantium and was probably the richest country until it was conquered in 1452.
> 
> There are opinions stating that Angus Maddison where the wiki data was drawn was too pessimistic for Han China. On the other hand, Joseph Needham a argued favorably on China's productivity per capita.
> 
> Personally I view Maddison GDP attribution of 809 and 450 to Rome Italy and Han China, pretty dubious. The reason is Italy is mountainous while Han is main population is on plain, and it is endowed with abundant water and river. I cannot see the how Maddison come up with the numbers.
> 
> Also Rome are using slave labor and Han China is no longer in slavery production more. Han China is a mix economy of free farmers, and exploited farmers. The exploited farmers are those who need to pay rent to landlord.
> 
> I do not see how economy using slave labor can be more productive than free man.
> 
> *Europe states always used to be richer than china and india. China and india had just bigger economies because they had more people. Italy was richer than china per capita.
> 
> Second rome never went under only the west roman empire. The eastern roman empire managed to survive under the name byzantium and was probably the richest country until it was conquered in 1452.*
> 
> There are opinions stating that Angus Maddison where the wiki data was drawn was too pessimistic for Han China. On the other hand, Joseph Needham a argued favorably on China's productivity per capita.
> 
> Personally I view Maddison GDP attribution of 809 and 450 to Rome Italy and Han China, pretty dubious. The reason is Italy is mountainous while Han is main population is on plain, and it is endowed with abundant water and river. I cannot see the how Maddison come up with the numbers.
> 
> Also Rome are using slave labor and Han China is no longer in slavery production more. Han China is a mix economy of free farmers, and exploited farmers. The exploited farmers are those who need to pay rent to landlord.
> 
> I do not see how economy using slave labor can be more productive than free man.


----------



## W.11

it was found in the study that indian IQ was lower then buffalo


----------



## East Asia United

Type 052D said:


> True, but Ethnic groups from West Africa (Like the Akan people from Ghana) that immigrated to the United States tend to have higher IQ then African Americans. Psychologist Crawford-Nutt found that African black students enrolled in westernized schools scored higher on progressive matrix tests than did American white students. Both British West Indies and Af.American score lower than African immigrants who have the same luxuries of good education, good health care and effective transport systems.



Indeed, but this is due to selective immigration. I think you said previously (and correctly) that those that were immigrating to the US from India had very high-IQ's because the US wasn't simply selecting the garbage man on the street.

Same with the recent African immigrants to the US.


----------



## armchairPrivate

Interesting topic indeed.

If I may jump in. I too have taken several IQ tests in different stages of my life. I have doubts about its validity and usefulness. Whether or not, the IQ scores of different races, different ethnicity, different cultures have any merits or not. I found Intelligence Quotient is too clinical.

On the other hand, the measurement of aptitude is a better tool for evaluating a person's ability. It is more real, practical and pragmatic than the cold number of an IQ score.

When you put the fastest cpu in a motherboard doesn't necessary make it the best computer.

Do you know Einstein was poor in mathematics? Most of the equations in the relativity theories were done by his colleagues.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Type 052D said:


> It's all bullshit.



Prove it.



> We all know karim3343



Indeed, so prove I am being a liar or a racist or whatever you are implying. I simply provided that data, accumulated from thousands of different researchers over decades.

If you have a rebuttal, you are more than free to provide it.



AADHAAR said:


> So, another proof that Tibet is not a part of China.



How so? Because they have different IQ's?

India is probably the most heterogeneous countries in the world. I guess Dalits, Brahmins, etc. should all have their own country? Seeing as how they are going to have very diverse levels of intelligence.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Archdemon said:


> Isn't IQ relativistic? IQ score indicate intelligence compared to general population



IQ score indicate intelligence compared to whichever population is placed at 100.

If European/White is placed at around 100, then global average will be around 90-93.



SOHEIL said:


> this is bullsh!t ...



You looked at your country, saw that it was low, concluded with three words.

Thanks for playing.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## East Asia United

5Star said:


> According to karim, the innate ability/intelligence of a group is revealed by taking a test and the score of the test will determine who is more intelligent than others.



No, IQ is highly correlated with almost everything, from GDP per capita to literacy, to educational attainment, to household income.

You want to complain, go and complain to the 99% of scientists which use this data as a basis for studying the differences between populations.



> then why does Korea need the technology transfers from countries with lower IQ test scores than Korea?



I have to keep repeating myself to you. IQ measures *potential*. Do you understand the definition of potential?

China has an IQ of 105-106, yet they are still poor compared to lower-IQ countries. It does not show what China is today, it shows their genetic potential.

Korea today is fully developed and can use her genetic potential in combination with her strong technical and knowledge foundations to innovate by herself.

For example, we have more patents than all of the EU combined. One country, with a population of 50 million has more patents than a continental organization with 10x the number of people (500 million). And the patents are of about the same quality too.

So really, go consult people like the inventor of the transistor of the discoverer of DNA. The geniuses of the world recognize the legitimacy of intelligence tests, and going up against them doesn't make them look stupid. It makes you look stupid.



GDan said:


> My father is a doctor of psychology, and he and his professional friends say that Lynn is a laughing stock among academics. Lynn never controls for bias, uses extremely small sample groups(Equitorial Guinea would need a sample of about 1100 to establish a margin of error of 4%. Lynn only used 48), and employs imaginary data for nations he doesn't have test results for. The fact that any of the people in this thread are taking Lynn's "study" seriously says they are willing to sacrifice their integrity to validate their own nationalist and ethnic biases. It's pathetic.



Shows how much you know.

You are talking about a study from 6 years ago. This is the most recent one, and it is not using just Lynn's data. It is using data from anywhere we can find it.

Also, the 'imaginary' data is well-established. I made it VERY clear (and so did he) that the data for countries that are missing is in brackets.



> Lynn never controls for bias



LOL, what bias? Eurocentric bias? Well, East Asians are not European. English-language bias? The languages are for the native countries; and most Chinese can't speak a lick of English.

So really, what 'bias'.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

GDan said:


> It may or may not be significant. I'm not in a position to say. I'll wait until someone publishes a study on the subject that isn't riddled with methodology errors.



Show me the 'methodological errors' present in these studies. The data is quite clear.

Average Brain Size for the Three Races &#8211; Greg Laden's Blog

Considerations Relating to the Study of Group Differences in Intelligence

http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/Brain%20Size%20and%20Cognitive%20Ability.pdf

http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/1996reviewRushton.pdf

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

Sex differences in relative brain size: The mismeasure of woman, too?

Race differences in average IQ are largely genetic

Brain size and correlates with IQ | Race, genes, and disparity

Brain size, IQ, and racial-group differences: Evidence from musculoskeletal traits

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## GDan

karim3343 said:


> You are talking about a study from 6 years ago. This is the most recent one, and it is not using just Lynn's data. It is using data from anywhere we can find it.



That's correct. I'm only making reference to Lynn's earlier work, and nothing else. To be fair, I never actually read any of your posts.



karim3343 said:


> Show me the 'methodological errors' present in these studies. The data is quite clear.



I don't intend to, and that's assuming that they indeed have errors. To invest the time necessary to do so doesn't particularly interest me, as I don't actually care whether they are right or not. I'm not a nationalist or racial supremacist, but at the same time I realize that people are different. Things are what they are, but I am an individual. I will rise and fall by my own strengths and weaknesses. I hope you aren't insulted by my failure to grant your request.



karim3343 said:


> Shows how much you know.


I only know one thing, and that is that I know nothing.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## SOHEIL

karim3343 said:


> You looked at your country, saw that it was low, concluded with three words.
> 
> Thanks for playing.



What is your goal ? 

"koreans are genius" !?


----------



## Shinigami

SOHEIL said:


> What is your goal ?
> 
> "koreans are genius" !?



he is pakistani



W.11 said:


> it was found in the study that indian IQ was lower then buffalo



you read it wrong. it said an indians strength is lower than a buffalo. 
strong animal. are there any in pakistan?


----------



## StarCraft_ZT

5Star said:


> If that is the case, then why does Korea need the technology transfers from countries with lower IQ test scores than Korea?



After WW2, US aided Japan, S.Korea, and all the western Euro countries. War destroyed everything, they need rebuild.
As for Meiji Restoration from 1868 to 1912, Japan trained thousands of scholars, technical workers. All of this laid the foundation of being a rich and innovative country in the future, they lack nothing but money to develop, so US aided them, they rise quickly. S. Korea is a little different, after the war, the government started to aided several plutocrat. 5 plutocrat controlled 30% of national wealth. That's why samsung and Hyundai are famous all over the world. 
East Asian countries have always been highly literate, they have the experience to manage a country and do business. Look at the Four Asian Tigers, all of them are influenced by East Asian and Chinese culture, so they are literate and smart. Although Singapore is SE. Asian, but Han Chinese descendant occupied 75% of the whole population, although Singapore is small and lack of natrual resources , the 75% population are smart, they are good at doing business, so they developed. While as for Philippines and other countries, although they have rich natural resources, they are actually very weak, because the people are not so literate as Chinese and East Asians.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shinigami

Someone had mentioned about indian americans earlier



> India:
> 
> Brahmins, 5%
> Upper Castes, 15%
> Backward Castes, 40%
> Muslims, 15%
> Dalits [Untouchables] and Tribals, 25%
> 
> Indians in the U.S.A.
> 
> US Brahmins, 25%
> US forward castes, 50%
> US backward castes, 25%
> 
> The British exported castes as per their requirements.
> 
> Singapore:
> 
> 30% upper caste
> 40% backward caste
> 30% Dalit.
> In the UK, the British wanted factory workers after WW2, so they did not import dalits (agricultural workers). They imported peasant backward castes from Indian Punjab and Pakistani Punjab. The British knew that Dalits may not be able to work in factories while the backward castes could be trainable
> 
> Later in 1970, Idi Amin fell in love with an Indian woman in Uganda. Her family sent her off to India to protect her from Idi Amin's lust. In revenge, Idi Amin expelled the Indians in Uganda, who were mostly small traders, forward merchant castes, and these went to UK
> So, in UK:
> 
> Forward caste 60%
> Backward caste 40%
> 
> Pakistanis in UK are all [descended from] backward castes [who converted to Islam].
> 
> In Pakistan, few forward castes and brahmins and dalits converted to islam. They remained hindu and went to Indian Punjab
> 
> Pakistanis in Pakistan are [by descent]
> 
> Forward caste, 10%
> Backward caste 80%
> and dalit 10%
> 
> Bangladeshis in UK are
> 
> Backward caste 50%
> Dalit 50%
> 
> Similarly, Bangladeshis in Bangladesh are
> Backward caste 50%
> Dalit 50%
> 
> Razib of GNXP.com comments:
> 
> 
> US Brahmins, 25%
> US forward castes, 50%
> US backward castes, 25%



Indian IQ, Part 1: Diaspora Demographics | VDARE.com

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

SOHEIL said:


> What is your goal ?
> 
> "koreans are genius" !?



My goal is to simply respond to those that are either trolling or those that come on this thread and dismiss the study without reading it.

That is all.

And 'genius' would be 3 standard deviations above the mean. With Europeans or the global average as the mean, Koreans are still not 'geniuses' by that standard.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

GDan said:


> That's correct. I'm only making reference to Lynn's earlier work, and nothing else. To be fair, I never actually read any of your posts.
> 
> 
> 
> I don't intend to, and that's assuming that they indeed have errors. To invest the time necessary to do so doesn't particularly interest me, as I don't actually care whether they are right or not. I'm not a nationalist or racial supremacist, but at the same time I realize that people are different. Things are what they are, but I am an individual. I will rise and fall by my own strengths and weaknesses. I hope you aren't insulted by my failure to grant your request.
> 
> 
> I only know one thing, and that is that I know nothing.



Fair enough. I was responding with the assumption that you were like all of the other trolls who simply dismissed the study and screamed racism, all because their country is not listed very high.

Never mind, though I just want to make it clear that this study does not have the same errors you described, and the study had already indicated that any country with missing data is bracketed.


----------



## Archdemon

karim3343 said:


> IQ score indicate intelligence *compared to whichever population is placed at 100*.
> 
> If European/White is placed at around 100, then global average will be around 90-93.


and that population has an IQ of 100 compared to?


----------



## East Asia United

Archdemon said:


> and that population has an IQ of 100 compared to?



They are the basis with which everyone is compared to.

In this study, the United Kingdom is placed at 100, and everyone else is compared to this.

So if the US has an IQ of 97, and China has an IQ of 106, then China has an IQ 6 points higher than the UK, as well as 9 points higher than the US.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Developereo

Archdemon said:


> and that population has an IQ of 100 compared to?



He is saying that 100 is not the average, but the reference point.

So, if Ashkenazi Jews were set as the reference point, then everyone else would have an IQ under 100.
Conversely, if the lowest score were set as the reference point, then everyone else would have an IQ over 100.

However, in practice, I imagine the reference point (100) would be set to the highest point of the typical bell curve.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Sam1980 said:


> This report is worthless, has anyone actually cared to read their methodology?
> If the IQ is to be measured at a national level, samples must be taken from a population with similar criteria.
> 
> This guy Richard Lynn is a racist/sexist who is against immigration and women, don't take this guy seriously, I'm very familiar with this asshole's works. I myself am a MENSA member since 2003, and let me assure you, anyone with an average IQ can become a member as MENSA questions tend to be quite repetitive.
> 
> Let me put it this way, don't take people with Psychology degrees very seriously...
> 
> It doesn't matter what your IQ is, all that matters is what you have achieved.



You must actually read the study before making such blanket statements:



> Reliability of National IQs Several critics of the national IQs given in our previous studies have asserted that the IQs obtained in different studies from the same countries are inconsistent and therefore that the IQ figures have poor reliability. For instance, Astrid Ervik (2003, p. 408) wrote that there are "large disparities in test scores for the same country" and "the authors fail to establish the reliability of intelligence (IQ) test scores". A similar criticism has been made by Susan Barnett and Wendy Williams (2004): "When more than one sample is used to estimate a national IQ, it is unsettling how great the variability often is between samples from the same
> country". The reliability of a psychometric test means the extent to which the score it provides can be replicated in a further study. The reliability of a test is best assessed by making two measurements of an individual or set of individuals and examining the extent to which the two measurements give the same results. Where the two measurements are made on a set of
> individuals the correlation between the two scores gives a measure of the degree to which they are consistent and is called the reliability coefficient. In our IQ and the Wealth of Nations we examined the reliability of the measures by taking 45 countries in which the intelligence of the population has been measured in two or more investigations. This is the same procedure that is used to examine the reliability of tests given to sets of individuals. We reported that the correlation between two measures of national IQs is 0.94, showing that the measures give high consistent results and have high reliability. This reliability coefficient is closely similar to that of tests of the intelligence of individuals, which typically lies in the range between 0.85 and 0.90 (Mackintosh, 1998, p. 56). In our IQ and Global Inequality we examined the consistency of the IQs for 65 countries for which there were two or more scores. The correlation between the two extreme IQs (i.e. the highest and lowest) was 0.93 and is highly statistically significant. This method underestimates the true reliability because it uses the two extreme values. As an alternative method we excluded the two extreme scores and used the next lowest and highest scores. There were 13 countries for which we had five or more IQ scores (China, Congo-Zaire, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Israel, Jamaica, Japan, Kenya, Morocco, South Africa-blacks, South Africa-Indians, and Taiwan). Using this method, the correlation between the two scores was 0.95. These figures established that the national IQs used in our earlier work had high reliability.
> 
> To estimate the reliability of the national IQs obtained from intelligence tests and used in present study, we have adopted the following procedure. In the list of national IQs given in Appendix 1, there are 88 countries for which there are two or more IQs. To calculate the reliability coefficient we have taken the last two studies for each country (in the case of South Africa, blacks, colored and Indians separately, N=90). The correlation between these is 0.876 and represents the reliability coefficient. To select two IQs for each country from which to calculate the reliability coefficient, the rules adopted are as follows. Where there are two studies, use both; with three studies, use the first and third; with four studies, use second and fourth; with five studies, use second and fourth; with six studies, use second and fourth; with seven studies, use third and fifth; with eight studies, use second and fourth; with nine studies, use third and sixth; with ten
> studies, use third and sixth; with eleven studies, use fourth and eight; with twelve studies, use fourth and eight; with 23 studies, use eight and sixteenth; with 25 studies, use ninth and
> seventeenth. The correlation between the two studies obtained in this way was was 0.85 and represents the reliability coefficient. An estimate of the reliability of national Final IQs used in present study can be obtained from the correlation between the national IQs obtained from intelligence tests and the school achievement scores treated as alternative measure of national intelligence. The correlation between these is 0.907 for the 87 countries having
> both measures.
> 
> Validity of National IQs Critics have also asserted that our national IQs lack validity. For instance, Ervik (2003) has written that we fail to establish the cross-cultural comparability (i.e. validity) of intelligence and Barnett and Williams (2004) who argues that the tests are not valid measures of the intelligence of peoples in many economically developing nations. More recently, Hunt (2011, p. 439) has written that "Lynn and Vanhanen disregard any question about the validity of various intelligence tests across different countries and cultures". Contrary to these assertions, we have gone to considerable trouble to demonstrate that our national IQs are valid. The validity of an intelligence test is the extent to which it measures what it purports to measure and is established by showing that it is highly correlated with other measures of cognitive ability. Foremost among these is educational attainment. As noted in section 2 above, at the level of individuals, intelligence and educational attainment are typically correlated at between 0.5 and 0.8. We have demonstrated that our national IQs are valid by showing that this association is also present at the national level. In our first book, we showed that our national IQs are correlated with national scores on mathematics at 0.881 and with national scores on science at 0.868 (Lynn and Vanhanen, 2002, p. 71). In our second book, we showed that our national IQs are correlated with national scores on mathematics scores obtained by 15 year old school students in PISA 2000 at 0.876 and with national scores on science obtained in PISA 2000 at 0.833 (Lynn and Vanhanen, 2006, p. 69). We have confirmed these high correlations in subsequent studies with larger data sets and shown the correlations between the results of national IQ tests and scholastic assessments are in the vicinity of 0.9 (Lynn and Mikk, 2007; Lynn, Meisenberg, Mikk and Williams, 2007). These results have been confirmed by Rindermann (2007). In a later study of 108 nations, we have shown that national scores aggregated from the PISA and TIMSS studies are perfectly correlated with national IQs (r=1.0) (Lynn and Meisenberg, 2010). To examine further the association between national IQs and school achievement scores, the correlation between these (given in Table 2.1) is 0.907 for the 87 countries having both measures, as noted in Section 4. This confirms our numerous previous studies showing that national IQs and school achievement scores are measures of the same latent construct of cognitive ability of intelligence. This justifies the combination of the school achievement scores with IQ scores to form the Final IQs given in the right hand column of Table 2.1. The validity of intelligence tests is not only demonstrated by a high correlation between IQs and educational achievement. The validity of the tests can also be established by showing that they are correlated with other phenomena that IQs partly determine such as earnings, life expectancy, and (negatively) crime and religious belief. The results of numerous studies showing correlations of this kind are summarized in Chapter 3 and show beyond dispute that our national IQs have high validity.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## rohitshubham

Archdemon said:


> You paid? ..........



nah
they send the mail to the spam folder... try to check there


----------



## Sam1980

karim3343 said:


> You must actually read the study before making such blanket statements:



I probably know this guy longer than you do, I know him for his book "The Bell Curve" which I received as a gift when I was really young. I have also followed all his "studies" thoroughly, in short, all of them were nonsense (mainly based on his methodology and sample size).

If you want to know about human intelligence and brain development you have to consider the biological approaches, as you will not find the answer in psychology! 

If you are really interested in human brain development and intelligence, I suggest you buy and read this: Prospects for the biology of human intelligence - Springer


----------



## kalu_miah

karim3343 said:


> You must actually read the study before making such blanket statements:



Hello karim3343. Welcome to the forum.

By the way, I have posted about this article before:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...rld-order-road-map-future-14.html#post2941596

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

kalu_miah said:


> Hello karim3343. Welcome to the forum.
> 
> By the way, I have posted about this article before:
> http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...rld-order-road-map-future-14.html#post2941596



Your study was from 2006, a bit older than this new and updated one, but yes it's interesting.



Sam1980 said:


> I probably know this guy longer than you do, I know him for his book "The Bell Curve" which I received as a gift when I was really young. I have also followed all his "studies" thoroughly, in short, all of them were nonsense (mainly based on his methodology and sample size).
> 
> If you want to know about human intelligence and brain development you have to consider the biological approaches, as you will not find the answer in psychology!
> 
> If you are really interested in human brain development and intelligence, I suggest you buy and read this: Prospects for the biology of human intelligence - Springer



Lol, you just did the same thing. You dismissed the study, without reading anything at all, and offering no refutation in any way.

I don't think you know much about the topic, or about objectiveness.

And if you were at all intelligent, you would have at least read the study, so as to not respond with ignorance. The IQ statistics are *not* his; they are from other studies that have been published over the last few decades, and compared to his own studies, and indeed averaged as well.

There's nothing wrong with his work. If there was you wouldn't just post the same one-liner again and again. You would actually refute it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## liontk

The Business Case for Emotional Intelligence | Joshua Freedman - Academia.edu

Karim also I will try to find a study done where it reflects how diet, environment and lifestyle can increase or decrease mental capability. As i have said in the past and I will say it again, there is some variables you can control and there is some you can't so it is all relative and hard to measure. Also i will apologize but I do not take the field of pyschology seriously but rather do believe in the inherit biological differences no doubt and also by the way nice try at posting a racist study  . Likewise your opinion about exercising and physical capabilities was very much debunked earlier so stop repeating those things and please post a defence or current event thread. This has nothing to do with any world affairs topic monsieur however South korea as a nation is a very interesting topic.

I mean we have lost too many Canadien soldiers in Korean war and I am quite proud how your nation is a symbol of shining democracy minus the couple of dictators that are rotting in prison. As far as observing your previous post, I do feel you are on the racist tinge personally but still very respectable member and what is this east asien nationalism you been harping on. Be proud of your countrie instead of lumping yourself in some phony nationalism, I mean do you really want to be seen as a vassel of Chine for another thousand years  . I pretty much killed your case about IQ being the best predictor of measure above and also if you want to improve IQ do Soduko every morning


----------



## liontk

@karim3343, I will repeat again so monsieur you can understand me clearly, IQ is a great asset to have but it means nothing if you have low EQ because in time of pressure/deadlines(talking from engineer perspective) you are good as sheep and very useless to the organization. This is why EQ is so much important, read through the entire link throughly and if you want personally look through page 3,6 and 7 especially in the link and this is where this thread ends. It was good discussing this topic and I dunno where I read this but some experts give IQ about 15% leyway in determining success, however EQ picks up the major chunk plus MQ, which I think with future research will also trump EQ in one way or another. Seriously EQ is very hard to increase in my opinion unlike IQ which can increase gradually through puzzles and healthy lifestyle. On the other hand having a high EQ is necessary because if you cannot deal with other individuals/emotions/excessive stress in today's workforce, you end being very useless to the organization at large and it will make it difficult to progress forward in your career.

I will give more links about MQ but now I must look through some Turquie defence thread/Altay pics monsieur, nice chatting look forward to your response.


----------



## Sam1980

karim3343 said:


> Your study was from 2006, a bit older than this new and updated one, but yes it's interesting.
> 
> 
> 
> Lol, you just did the same thing. You dismissed the study, without reading anything at all, and offering no refutation in any way.
> 
> I don't think you know much about the topic, or about objectiveness.
> 
> And if you were at all intelligent, you would have at least read the study, so as to not respond with ignorance. The IQ statistics are *not* his; they are from other studies that have been published over the last few decades, and compared to his own studies, and indeed averaged as well.
> 
> There's nothing wrong with his work. If there was you wouldn't just post the same one-liner again and again. You would actually refute it.



I don't post "one-liners", I provide facts and I expect people to know how to use a search engine, I'm not a summarizing tool.

Many studies suggest that the very concept of IQ is nothing but a myth. And for someone like myself who has gone through "IQ Test" at MENSA Australia to find out that according to the results he is more intelligent than 99% of the rest of the planet; advocating lack of credibility of this person's "research" or criticizing the very credibility of IQ measurements may seem a rather unintelligent thing to do! 

However, real studies suggest that the real contributing factors to the human brain development and intelligence are socioeconomic and environmental. Genes certainly do play a role, but not as much as you would like them to.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

liontk said:


> @karim3343, I will repeat again so monsieur you can understand me clearly, IQ is a great asset to have but it means nothing if you have low EQ because in time of pressure/deadlines(talking from engineer perspective) you are good as sheep and very useless to the organization. This is why EQ is so much important, read through the entire link throughly and if you want personally look through page 3,6 and 7 especially in the link and this is where this thread ends. It was good discussing this topic and I dunno where I read this but some experts give IQ about 15% leyway in determining success, however EQ picks up the major chunk plus MQ, which I think with future research will also trump EQ in one way or another. Seriously EQ is very hard to increase in my opinion unlike IQ which can increase gradually through puzzles and healthy lifestyle. On the other hand having a high EQ is necessary because if you cannot deal with other individuals/emotions/excessive stress in today's workforce, you end being very useless to the organization at large and it will make it difficult to progress forward in your career.
> 
> I will give more links about MQ but now I must look through some Turquie defence thread/Altay pics monsieur, nice chatting look forward to your response.



Define Emotional Quotient. Go on, define it. EQ is not take seriously in any field.

Besides, if homicide (crime in general), level of civility, level of corruption, conformity, etc. are taken into account, we all know who would score highest. Blacks would score dead last, and Whites and East Asians would score the highest (with East Asians in the front).

Again, you just responded with nothing to refute IQ. IQ is accepted by most of everyone, including people like the inventor of the transistor and the co-discoverer of DNA. I will listen to them, rather than you. 



> I pretty much killed your case about IQ being the best predictor of measure



You killed nothing, and your un-professionalism is shining. Actually debate and 'kill' it, stop making it a contest.



> your opinion about exercising and physical capabilities was very much debunked earlier



These are facts. They cannot be debunked. Do you deny that the 2R and 3R alleles of Monoamine Oxidase A lead to higher aggression levels? Do you deny that it is disproportionately found in Blacks, thereby making Blacks more aggressive, therefore increasing their biological tendency to commit crime?

These are all facts. You can't 'debunk' them.


----------



## East Asia United

Sam1980 said:


> I don't post "one-liners", I provide facts and I expect people to know how to use a search engine, I'm not a summarizing tool.
> 
> Many studies suggest that the very concept of IQ is nothing but a myth. And for someone like myself who has gone through "IQ Test" at MENSA Australia to find out that according to the results he is more intelligent than 99% of the rest of the planet; advocating lack of credibility of this person's "research" or criticizing the very credibility of IQ measurements may seem a rather unintelligent thing to do!
> 
> However, real studies suggest that the real contributing factors to the human brain development and intelligence are socioeconomic and environmental. Genes certainly do play a role, but not as much as you would like them to.



You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Yet again, you have stated an opinion, not a fact.



> like myself who has gone through "IQ Test" at MENSA Australia to find out that according to the results he is more intelligent than 99% of the rest of the planet; advocating lack of credibility of this person's "research" or criticizing the very credibility of IQ measurements may seem a rather unintelligent thing to do!



Here we go again with the feigning of innocent objectivity, coupled with the tinge of passive superiority (ie I have a higher IQ than you so it's "unintelligent" to point out my ignorance).

I have taken the Stanford-Binet. I have an IQ of 3 SD above the mean (around 145). So what?

Start arguing with facts, instead of arguing about how we should trust you because you are *telling us* you are intelligent. It actually makes you look like an elitist idiot, with no intelligence at all.

You can argue with facts, or don't argue at all.

The entire scientific community considers IQ tests to be a very good indicator of intelligence. This is why there aren't any real arguments against it. The arguments are how much of the difference in the IQ-gap are due to environmental conditions, and how much can be reduced to genetic factors.

This is really it. You are arguing about something which is not even in contention. IQ tests are demonstrably accurate, as they have very high correlations with everything from income to propensity to commit crime to educational attainment.

If you find high correlations between a 7-year-old's chances of success, regardless of parental IQ, parental socioeconomic status, or anything else, what does that mean? How can that be due to the environment?

Two brothers from wealthy families, the one with a higher IQ has a much better chance at success than the one with the lower IQ.

Again, how do you account for this?


----------



## JayAtl

Here is the deal with IQ tests-- they are and can be fudged by the govt reporting it. 

*A true indicator of IQ- a false paradigm in reality* or success is when you see everyone on the same playing field. when you have a large enough sample of immigrants from all countries in a successful environment. Then you truly know the real IQ. Where evetbody has an equal chance at success and equal opportunity to shine. 

LIKE: Indians far out do others and in fact leave them in the proverbial " dirt". 

*BTW* US has over 1% Indians now ( good enough for required sample size), entering into 3 generations. So these are kids who have grown up in the US.


----------



## StarCraft_ZT

JayAtl said:


> Here is the deal with IQ tests-- they are and can be fudged by the govt reporting it.
> 
> *A true indicator of IQ- a false paradigm in reality* or success is when you see everyone on the same playing field. when you have a large enough sample of immigrants from all countries in a successful environment. Then you truly know the real IQ. Where evetbody has an equal chance at success and equal opportunity to shine.
> 
> LIKE: Indians far out do others and in fact leave them in the proverbial " dirt".
> 
> *BTW* US has over 1% Indians now ( good enough for required sample size), entering into 3 generations. So these are kids who have grown up in the US.



Middle of the pyramid
The billion adults in the USD 10,000&#8211;100,000 range form the middle class from the perspective 
of global wealth. With USD 32 trillion in total wealth, it certainly carries economic weight. This 
tier has the most regionally balanced membership, although China now contributes almost a third of the total. The wealth range would cover the median person over most of his adult life in high income countries. In middle income countries it would apply to a middle class person in middle age. However, in low-income countries only those in the top decile qualify, restricting membership to significant landowners, successful businessmen, professionals and the like


















*Indians, where is your position?*

*The statistics comes from global wealth report by credit suisse. You can download it from google.*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## StarCraft_ZT

JayAtl said:


> Here is the deal with IQ tests-- they are and can be fudged by the govt reporting it.
> 
> *A true indicator of IQ- a false paradigm in reality* or success is when you see everyone on the same playing field. when you have a large enough sample of immigrants from all countries in a successful environment. Then you truly know the real IQ. Where evetbody has an equal chance at success and equal opportunity to shine.
> 
> LIKE: Indians far out do others and in fact leave them in the proverbial " dirt".
> 
> *BTW* US has over 1% Indians now ( good enough for required sample size), entering into 3 generations. So these are kids who have grown up in the US.



*China*







*India*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JayAtl

szft517 said:


> Middle of the pyramid
> The billion adults in the USD 10,000&#8211;100,000 range form the middle class from the perspective
> of global wealth. With USD 32 trillion in total wealth, it certainly carries economic weight. This
> tier has the most regionally balanced membership, although China now contributes almost a third of the total. The wealth range would cover the median person over most of his adult life in high income countries. In middle income countries it would apply to a middle class person in middle age. However, in low-income countries only those in the top decile qualify, restricting membership to significant landowners, successful businessmen, professionals and the like



Really dude, you are going to have a tough time in our country comprehending stuff( presuming you came here to study) , if simple things like this just flies by your head. what does that have to do with immigrants groups in the criteria I gave? besides stats provided by your govt? hmmm...

I can compare you to the US and you would look like child's play. Topic is about IQ and claims of Chinese being superior. 

Can someone tell me , if you guys truly have such high IQ's - how is that your own govt thinks your mentally not stable to handle free press or read any article , even if dissent is written in just mere words? Why do they ban it from you?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## StarCraft_ZT

JayAtl said:


> Here is the deal with IQ tests-- they are and can be fudged by the govt reporting it.
> 
> *A true indicator of IQ- a false paradigm in reality* or success is when you see everyone on the same playing field. when you have a large enough sample of immigrants from all countries in a successful environment. Then you truly know the real IQ. Where evetbody has an equal chance at success and equal opportunity to shine.
> 
> LIKE: Indians far out do others and in fact leave them in the proverbial " dirt".
> 
> *BTW* US has over 1% Indians now ( good enough for required sample size), entering into 3 generations. So these are kids who have grown up in the US.



*China*







*India*







*Something Else, I cannot see where is India on the list*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JayAtl

^^^^ per your own stats, if that is the answer to having higher IQ- then Americans then have a higher IQ than Chinese? 

do you understand that... forget it, this must the Chinese IQ of comprehension


----------



## StarCraft_ZT

JayAtl said:


> ^^^^ per your own stats, if that is the answer to having higher IQ- then Americans then have a higher IQ than Chinese?
> 
> do you understand that... forget it, this must the Chinese IQ of comprehension



Every country is making progress, even India is making progress. But, China and India are on the same level in 1950s, India is even better, why there is such a large gap today?

The economic growth of China has always been higher than US, with a higher speed, we can surpass US. This is our IQ, we are faster than US so we can catch up. Look at you, much lower economic growth than China, besides we have a much larger economic gross than you. The gap has always been expanding between China and India, why is that? You are even better than China in 1950s. IQ makes the difference. Face it bravely.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## senheiser

szft517 said:


> *Something Else, I cannot see where is India on the list*



List of countries by the number of US dollar billionaires - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millionaire#Number_of_millionaires_by_country


----------



## JayAtl

szft517 said:


> Every country is making progress, even India is making progress. But, China and India are on the same level in 1950s, India is even better, why there is such a large gap today?
> 
> The economic growth of China has always been higher than US, with a higher speed, we can surpass US. This is our IQ, we are faster than US so we can catch up. Look at you, much lower economic growth than China, besides we have a much larger economic gross than you. The gap has always been expanding between China and India, why is that? You are even better than China in 1950s. IQ makes the difference. Face it bravely.



So your IQ just kicked in? Your IQ was what below retarded levels before? With all the GDP you have you still have lower standard of living vs. developed countries. your own premier calls you a 3rd world nation. Your IQ is so good that your govt treats you like a child ... face that bravely.


----------



## StarCraft_ZT

JayAtl said:


> So your IQ just kicked in? Your IQ was what below retarded levels before? With all the GDP you have you still have lower standard of living vs. developed countries. your own premier calls you a 3rd world nation. Your IQ is so good that your govt treats you like a child ... face that bravely.



Yes, that is definitely correct about we are the 3rd world, I do admit that. But if it is really the case, probably you are the 3*n world.

YOU dont even look the post before, it is already proven that in China in 1950s, IQ is 105, nothing changed. We have got rid of
war and Mao's mistake policy, so it is time we are catching up with our IQ, that is what we are doing right now.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## StarCraft_ZT

senheiser said:


> List of countries by the number of US dollar billionaires - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> Millionaire - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Yes, 1.2 billion indians have 55 billionaires, 7 million HK residents have 39 billionaires. 

1.2 billion indians have 137,000 millionaires, 50 million S. Koreans have 147,000 millionaires.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## redhat

When did China have all of these billionaires?. Your IQ popped up all of a sudden ?

Remember ,China was known as the sick man of Asia.

What is this High IQ about?

If its about scientific inventions,innovations,no of Geniuses,then China is has very low IQ.

If its about High per capita income ,then places like Qatar should have very high IQ. and North Korea has low IQ. So East Asian high IQ is flawed.


----------



## JayAtl

szft517 said:


> Yes, that is definitely correct about we are the 3rd world, I do admit that. But if it is really the case, probably you are the 3*n world.
> 
> YOU dont even look the post before, it is already proven that in China in 1950s, IQ is 105, nothing changed. We have got rid of
> war and Mao's mistake policy, so it is time we are catching up with our IQ, that is what we are doing right now.



if you are so smart then why does your own govt treat you like kids not capable of reading words of dissent?


----------



## StarCraft_ZT

JayAtl said:


> if you are so smart then why does your own govt treat you like kids not capable of reading words of dissent?



China is a centralized country for many centuries, so Chinese politicians have already established the experience of running a such large country. I have to say, the Chinese politicians are very experienced, although they are good at promoting the economy, they do not want to lose power. Yes, many citizens are angry that the gov treat us like kids, they approving many industrial projects that may harm the environment without our approve. Our citizen consciousness has woke up, and the gov has compromise to some extent. That is our development.

I defend my country and people, but I criticize the government's policy, that is what I did on Chinese fourms too. They treat us like kids not because we want to...Look at Taiwanese, same culture, same race, same country (we insist that), but different political structure, they develop well with democracy, they are smart with 105. We are really smart, because more and more Chinese have realized people should have the right to decide whether to say yes or no toward gov's actions.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## kalu_miah

karim3343 said:


> Your study was from 2006, a bit older than this new and updated one, but yes it's interesting



I would like to get your opinion on some theories I came up with:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...orld-order-road-map-future-8.html#post2750953
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...orld-order-road-map-future-8.html#post2758071
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...orld-order-road-map-future-8.html#post2772238
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...orld-order-road-map-future-8.html#post2772275

All 4 posts above are on same page 8 of the thread. You can go to the first link and read the whole page. You can then post your reply in this other thread, as the above thread is now closed:
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/180755-geopolitics-asean-region-15.html

Would appreciate your input.


----------



## East Asia United

JayAtl said:


> Here is the deal with IQ tests-- they are and can be fudged by the govt reporting it.
> 
> *A true indicator of IQ- a false paradigm in reality* or success is when you see everyone on the same playing field. when you have a large enough sample of immigrants from all countries in a successful environment. Then you truly know the real IQ. Where evetbody has an equal chance at success and equal opportunity to shine.
> 
> LIKE: Indians far out do others and in fact leave them in the proverbial " dirt".
> 
> *BTW* US has over 1% Indians now ( good enough for required sample size), entering into 3 generations. So these are kids who have grown up in the US.



Seeing as how US immigration is highly selective for immigrants from South Asia and Africa, immigrant IQ is probably the worst display of a level playing field.

Besides, why is it that Indians do not have a level playing field? Are you going to say that Indians in India are being taken advantage of by other countries, and therefore Indian IQ is not a true reflection of their innate intelligence?

If so, why is the 2nd most populous country in the world unable to assert herself against these other 'inferior' countries?

There are no excuses.


----------



## East Asia United

redhat said:


> When did China have all of these billionaires?. Your IQ popped up all of a sudden ?
> 
> Remember ,China was known as the sick man of Asia.
> 
> What is this High IQ about?
> 
> If its about scientific inventions,innovations,no of Geniuses,then China is has very low IQ.
> 
> If its about High per capita income ,then places like Qatar should have very high IQ. and North Korea has low IQ. So East Asian high IQ is flawed.



1: Qatar has wealth because of oil and gas, which make up 90% of government revenue

2: IQ measure potential, not current success, further proving that IQ measures genetic potential, not the environment (although IQ can be raised a bit with a huge increase in standard of living).

3: If it was all enviromental then we should be able to teach sharks, chimpanzees, and flies to be equally as intelligent as Humans, all with the right education and equal opportunity.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## liontk

@karim3343, ahhaha define EQ, folks the debate has finished, I posted an extensive study in the link yet you refuse to comment but rather ask for EQ. @JayAtl stop wasting time, i posted a link, which covered a whole sample of studies in corporated world and mr karim did not comment once on the link and asks us whether there is a definition of EQ. 
Karim i repeat read through the link and then argue and this reflected your EQ as i went personal by purpose and you responded in a personal tone and i brought you from your high chair, i argued the same thing earlier that Iq has no exact criteria and you refused to acknowledge. now faced with extensive studies and reasoning including test done on royal marines, intel corporate and numerous other notable tests done, i can safely conclude that you have not debunked the study i posted so please keep your EQ stable and respond again. Also i will give you the definition of EQ, the day you define IQ with a universal defintion until then au revoir chez mon ami 

Also so just in case you need another collection of studies give me a heads up and yes personal attacks do cloud judgement, if you want i can post a study on that too and i do apologize but i needed to prove a point and you fell in like a sheep in military lingo as they say. Dont worry this basic trick works on anyone after a level of pressure, there is Psych 101 for you and next time dont respond with racial crap when superior reasoning defies you.


----------



## liontk

Here is excerpts done from the study since you will not bother to comment on the study done:
A range of implementation strategies have been used to deploy EQ, primarily in selection and development. The competencies are measurable and learnable;they can be improved through training and coaching. The most effective implementation strategies seek to integrate EQ into the organizational culture.While there are numerous implementation strategies, researched EQ applications include:
&#8226;

increased sales performance through recruiting and training moreemotionally intelligent salespeople.
&#8226;

improved customer service through recruiting higher EQ customerservice reps.
&#8226;
superior leadership performance by developing and recruiting forexecutive EQ.

*Research has provided clear evidence that emotionally intelligent leaders are more successful. Many of these studies yield bottom-line results: At PepsiCo,for example, executives selected for EQ competencies generated 10% more productivity. High EQ sales people at L&#8217;Oreal brought in $2.5 million more insales. An EQ initiative at Sheraton helped increase market share by 24%. The US Airforce is using EQ to screen para rescue jumpers to save $190 million.One of the most important applications of EQ is in helping leaders foster a workplace climate conducive to high performance. These workplaces yield significantly higher productivity, retention, and profitability, and emotional intelligence appears key to this competitive advantage.|*

*The Harvard Business Review* (HBR), one of the most *prestigious *sources of *business-best-practice*, has released several articles on emotional intelligence.Their 1997 article on EQ by psychologist and author Daniel Goleman ranks as their most requested article ever. This popularity led the HBR to re-examine the data on emotional intelligence again in 2003. Their conclusion:"In hard times, the soft stuff often goes away. But emotional intelligence, it turns out, isn't so soft. If emotional obliviousness jeopardizes your ability to perform, fend off aggressors, or be compassionate in a crisis, no amount of attention to the bottom line will protect your career. Emotional intelligence isn't a luxury you can dispense with in tough times. It's a basic tool that,deployed with finesse, is the key to professional success.

Some people just get along with others,respond carefully even in the face of challenge, and truly connect with people.They are proactive, balanced, operate with integrity, and have great insight into themselves and others. All these come from a set of skills called emotional intelligence, or EQ. These skills are learn able, measurable,and are valuable at work &#8211; especially in complex roles. EQ skills assist in engaging people, influencing across boundaries and cultures, being proactive,caring for customers, building enduring sales relationships, and creating workplaces where people can excel.

http://htmlimg3.scribdassets.com/2l2c01py801d5iup/images/8-b896073749.jpg


So do emotionally intelligent leaders create more effective teams, or are&#8220;business smarts&#8221; and traditional intelligence all it takes? In a study of relationships between emotional intelligence and leadership, 261 members of the British Royal Navy were administered measures of intellectual competency,managerial competency, emotional intelligence competency, overall performance, and personality.
13
Participants in the study were divided into two levels of seniority, Officers and Ratings (non-officers). The results broadly illustrated the importance of emotional intelligence in predicting leadership trends. For example, compared to both managerial and IQ competencies, the EQ competencies were better able to predict:
&#8226;

Overall performance
&#8226;

Leadership Further, EQ competencies made a greater contribution to leadership and performance at higher levels of the organization (i.e., *EQ mattered even more for senior officers*).

http://htmlimg1.scribdassets.com/2l2c01py801d5iup/images/12-ab5c557307.jpg


----------



## East Asia United

liontk said:


> @karim3343, ahhaha define EQ, folks the debate has finished, I posted an extensive study in the link yet you refuse to comment but rather ask for EQ. @JayAtl stop wasting time, i posted a link, which covered a whole sample of studies in corporated world and mr karim did not comment once on the link and asks us whether there is a definition of EQ.
> Karim i repeat read through the link and then argue and this reflected your EQ as i went personal by purpose and you responded in a personal tone and i brought you from your high chair, i argued the same thing earlier that Iq has no exact criteria and you refused to acknowledge. now faced with extensive studies and reasoning including test done on royal marines, intel corporate and numerous other notable tests done, i can safely conclude that you have not debunked the study i posted so please keep your EQ stable and respond again. Also i will give you the definition of EQ, the day you define IQ with a universal defintion until then au revoir chez mon ami
> 
> Also so just in case you need another collection of studies give me a heads up and yes personal attacks do cloud judgement, if you want i can post a study on that too and i do apologize but i needed to prove a point and you fell in like a sheep in military lingo as they say. Dont worry this basic trick works on anyone after a level of pressure, there is Psych 101 for you and next time dont respond with racial crap when superior reasoning defies you.





> the day you define IQ with a universal defintion



An IQ test is a test designed to assess intelligence, in addition to having almost universal acceptance among scientists.

Yet again, you refer to EQ without giving a proper definition.

Let me help you. This discussion did not focus on EQ, but on IQ and the differences between countries and race-ethnicities.

If you continue to post long-winded posts on EQ, rather than attempt to focus on the discussion (regarding IQ), then I will ask the Admin to block you from posting on this thread.

Keep it on topic.

(And I see you feel that posting huge amounts of posts on EQ somehow refutes the wide acceptance of IQ. It does not)


----------



## liontk

Ethical Leadership(lets talk about ethical behaviour since you might be curious from this perspective as a lot of liberals/hippies accuse business community towards this.)
In the wake of the 2009 economic crisis, the issues of ethnical leadership are gaining more attention. In part due to increasing demands for corporate transparency, and in part due the recognition of the terrible destruction caused by unethical business decisions, many organizations are re-evaluating the ways they ensure that leaders have the capacity to make ethical decisions.In 2008, *Kidwell and Valentine* studied the link between workplace climate and ethics in the military. Perhaps unsurprisingly, they found that in a more positive workplace, people were more ethical (they were less likely to withhold effort or neglect job duties).
19
The implication is that leaders who create a more positive workplace climate will also reap the rewards of increased effort as well as in creased ethics.In a recent study (2009), business students were given an assessment of emotional intelligence skills and tested to see how they evaluated their own and others&#8217; ethnical behavior. Empathy, the ability to connect with others&#8217;emotions, was correlated with the ability to recognize others&#8217; ethical decisions.
20
In other words, emotional awareness is tied to ethical awareness.One of these researchers conducted a similar experiment in a with physiciansand nurses in a US hospital and, again, found that higher EQ scores predicthigher performance in ethics.
21


In 2002, Sigal Barsade of Yale University examined the effect of emotionalcontagion within teams. In her experiment, a trained actor was placed withingroups and directed to participate in the groups&#8217; activities while enactingvarying levels of pleasantness and energy. The groups were working to assign apay bonus; they had a fixed amount of money they could spend and had toallocate it based on a set of performance criteria.
97% of employees surveyed saidthey could be more productive;49% said they couldincrease productivity by 50% or more.
30




PAGE 16
White Paper The Business Case for Emotional Intelligence 
When the actor was a negative group member, it disrupted the groups and reduced efficacy. Conversely when the actor played a positive confederate, the teams tended to show increased cooperation, fewer group conflicts, and heightened task performance.
24
Likewise, in a similar study, Alice Isen (1993) assessed radiologists, finding positive mood enhanced their accuracy. Positive mood has a far-reaching effect on work performance, supervision, decision-making, and even on team members voluntarily acting for the good of the organization
.
25
The overall mood of the organization could be described as &#8220;organizationalclimate&#8221; &#8211; and a leader&#8217;s EQ skills are a key ingredient in shaping the climate: Ina study of randomly selected car manufacturing managers in Iran, emotional intelligence (particularly awareness of own and other&#8217;s feelings) predicted the quality of the organizational climate.
26
So EQ skills affect climate &#8211; and climate affects performance; in one study, Hakan Ozcelik, Nancy Langton, HowardAldrich, (2008) assessed 229 entrepreneurs and small business owners in Canada to see if they used emotionally intelligent behaviors in shaping the organizational climate. They followed up 18 months later, and leaders who created more positive climate had more revenue as well as increased growth.
27


*Also as we are going through this study, keep in mind the numbers indicate source numbers as it is difficult to copy and paste exact eh!*


incidentally, emotionally intelligent leaders are able to use a wide range of feelings effectively.In some situations a &#8220;bad mood&#8221; is more useful. For example, in the entrepreneur study above - Brundin, Patzelt, and Shepherd (2008) &#8211;the researches found that &#8220;negative moods&#8221;helped in certain high-risk situations where attention to detail is more critical. In another study, Elsbach and Barr (1999) found that people in negative moods use a more structured approach to decision-making which is effective in some problem-solving situations.
29
Productivity is also tied to the relationship between the individual and the workplace.Almost a third of someone's productivity can be attributed to four "human"factors. 28% of productivity is predicted by the presence of useful feedback,choice in work, seeing the value of the work, and having a positive climate.
30
In other words, if emotional intelligence helps leaders understand and meet employee&#8217;s human needs, it will have a profound impact on productivity and individual success. Perhaps that's one reason why after a Motorola manufacturing facility used HeartMath's stress and EQ programs, 93% of employees had an increase in productivity.
31
Likewise, after supervisors in a manufacturing plant received training in emotional competencies, lost-time accidents were reduced by 50%, formal grievances were reduced from an average of 15 per year to 3 per year, and the plant exceeded productivity goals by $250,000.
32
The growing base of research consistently finds a powerful relationship between emotional intelligence and leadership effectiveness. It is not surprising, then,that experts propose that EQ may be the key to advanced understanding of leadership and social influence.
3


Sales and Customer Loyalty: The CustomerPerspective
Whatever kind of organization you run, aprimary measure of success will be the wayyour customers perceive you. Theorganization's ability to attract and retaincustomers requires far more than customersatisfaction &#8211; as Benjamin Schneider wrote inthe Sloan Management Review, to create loyalcustomers, organizations must endeavor for"customer delight."
34

EQ Sales Advantage
Sanofi-Aventis + $2m/moL'Oreal + $2,558,360MetLife + 37%Amex Advisors + 2%
Salespeople withhigher EQ develop&#8230;
More accountsHigher salesStrongercustomer serviceBetter customerretention



PAGE 19
White Paper The Business Case for Emotional Intelligence 
Emotional intelligence is at the core of relationships, and a sales maxim is that"relationships are everything." Just how much do relationship factors affectsales and the customer's view of your organization? And what internal skills doyour people need to create customer delight?A powerful study by Benjamin Palmer and Sue Jennings demonstrates that theskills of emotional intelligence are worth over $2million per month.
35
At Sanofi-Aventis, a pharmaceutical company, a group of salespeople was randomly splitinto a control and development group. The development group receivedemotional intelligence training and increased their EQ by 18% (on average), afterwhich they out-sold the control group by an average of 12%, or $55,200 each x40 reps = 2,208,000.00 per month better. The company calculated that theymade $6 for every dollar they invested in the training.

http://htmlimg1.scribdassets.com/2l2c01py801d5iup/images/19-bda593953f.jpg (graph data since it cannot be posted properly)

At L&#8217;Oreal, sales agents selected on the basis of certain emotional competenciessignificantly outsold salespeople selected using the company&#8217;s standardselection procedure. On an annual basis, salespeople selected on the basis of emotional competence sold $91,370 more than other salespeople did, for a netrevenue increase of $2,558,360.
36
More recently, Rozell, Pettijohn and Parker (2006) explored relationshipsbetween emotional intelligence and performance in a sample of medical device
9:;<=<<<&9::<=<<<&9:><=<<<&9:?<=<<<&9@<<=<<<&9@;<=<<<&9@:<=<<<&)"A2&.82&B3C&
!"#$%&'('()#*+%#,&-./#
'(&D%#+0"$&4302%3,&
!"#$%&'
EF@G:H&EIGFH&)#,"-A"3A,"&%#0$35,J&-3%2"$&+023&;&/%3KA-L&2M3-"&NM3&%"8"+C"$&'(&2%#+0+0/&3K2OA"%73%5"$&2M"+%&A""%-&PJ&F;H&
Q@&



PAGE 20
White Paper The Business Case for Emotional Intelligence 
salespeople. Once again, emotional intelligence proved to be a highly reliablepredictor of performance leading to the conclusion that salespeople who arepositive, happy, and who perceive the &#8220;best&#8221; in situations combined with lowlevels of anger, negativity and the like will obtain the highest performancelevels.
37
The Sheraton Studio City in Orlando engaged in a year-long project to improve guest satisfaction, sales, and employee morale and collaboration. After conducting an employee climate survey, an outside consultant pinpointed three "hotspot" areas for improvement and engaged in aseries of short training sessions to raise awareness and improve EQ skills. The leadership team worked to create a more positive, consistent, and trust-based culture. The results included a dramatic increase in guest satisfaction and market share, and a significant reduction in turnover.
38
The results continued to improve for at least two years after the intervention

http://htmlimg4.scribdassets.com/2l2c01py801d5iup/images/20-50f8f6b88a.jpg


----------



## liontk

karim3343 said:


> An IQ test is a test designed to assess intelligence, in addition to having almost universal acceptance among scientists.
> 
> Yet again, you refer to EQ without giving a proper definition.
> 
> Let me help you. This discussion did not focus on EQ, but on IQ and the differences between countries and race-ethnicities.
> 
> If you continue to post long-winded posts on EQ, rather than attempt to focus on the discussion (regarding IQ), then I will ask the Admin to block you from posting on this thread.
> 
> Keep it on topic.
> 
> (And I see you feel that posting huge amounts of posts on EQ somehow refutes the wide acceptance of IQ. It does not)



Is it universally accepted or not? You resort to saying almost when it isn't correct. I just made a business case for EQ being more important than IQ and you did nothing to make a case against that and a business one at that. Also racial and genetic discussion are borderline banned on this forum and you are basically treading the wrong water mon ami since you cannot argue with logic unless you bring counter data to assess that IQ is more important that EQ, until then it is simply just another claim and in fact IQ does not determine intelligence at all especially in a corporate environment unless EQ is extensively coupled with it.


----------



## redhat

karim3343 said:


> 1: Qatar has wealth because of oil and gas, which make up 90% of government revenue
> 
> 2: IQ measure potential, not current success, further proving that IQ measures genetic potential, not the environment (although IQ can be raised a bit with a huge increase in standard of living).
> 
> 3: If it was all enviromental then we should be able to teach sharks, chimpanzees, and flies to be equally as intelligent as Humans, all with the right education and equal opportunity.





1. So if we have oil and gas,we don't need IQ ,Right?.So IQ is required for success.

2. Chinese don't have any kind of genetic potential for anything.Their recent success was due to cheap labour.You should thank the westerners for that.The entire East Asian success should be attributed to western help.

3.You are right.That is why there are no geniuses from East Asia .Even with right education and opportunity, you can at max make a copy paste bot out of chinese ,who cannot invent anything of his own.


----------



## liontk

I quote your post 124 on June22 @karim3343

*'This is not correct, but seeing as how you said you can provide a plethora of studies to support your argument, I am all ears!
*
Emotional quotient might get you ahead because of higher confidence, but this does not mean you are more intelligent than that shy person sitting in the corner. We are referring not to who can get ahead, but to differences in intelligence (though IQ/intelligence is a greater predictor of int. than EQ, so bring it on!)"

Source: http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...highest-then-china-korea-9.html#ixzz2XKQ4Yd7c

Unless you don't consider bringing greater returns from these corporate companies mentioned in the study as a greater sign of intelligence and yes Emotional intelligence is a type of intelligence and unless you can make a business case that IQ is more important measure of intelligence than EQ until then my argument stands that EQ is a better measure of intelligence!
Also Karim3343 if your score came low, don't worry you can increase those scores but it will take hard time so for example with me, confidence in public speaking will take a while until you can trust your confidence so do not worry and just work hard at it.


----------



## Dash

Fellas, I have a simple question....what is the importance of this IQ?, so if I have low IQ, does that mean that I am inferior?


----------



## JayAtl

karim3343 said:


> Seeing as how US immigration is highly selective for immigrants from South Asia and Africa, immigrant IQ is probably the worst display of a level playing field.
> 
> Besides, why is it that Indians do not have a level playing field? Are you going to say that Indians in India are being taken advantage of by other countries, and therefore Indian IQ is not a true reflection of their innate intelligence?
> 
> If so, why is the 2nd most populous country in the world unable to assert herself against these other 'inferior' countries?
> 
> There are no excuses.



The sample base is big enough where your excuse of immigrant IQ not being good enough is laughable. 

why do Indians not having a level playing ground ?- because India is not a developed country like the US. that was a low IQ question. What does IQ have to do with asserting on countries? India asserted it's will in 71, why has china not done so in Taiwan? it even hesitates in HK. Being that China is 2nd largest GDP, being still designated as a 3rd world country by its own premier has " no excuses"...


----------



## East Asia United

liontk said:


> Is it universally accepted or not?



Buddy, you need to learn how to argue. 'Almost' as in some idiots will deny it, in the same way some scientists deny that Humans evolved from a common ancestor of Chimpanzees.

Get it?



> IQ does not determine intelligence



For the 6th and last time, IQ is the only arbiter of intelligence.

1: EQ is not taken seriously amongst serious scientists

2: EQ is not a reflection of intelligence, even among the scientist which support EQ as a valid scientific variable

3: Define EQ so we can get an understanding as to what you are even blabbering about

4: Which population group generally scores higher on EQ tests? Is it East Asians followed by Whites, followed by Blacks? I would guess so (making your whole argument completely pointless)

5: Last but not least, this thread is on IQ and the IQ-gap between populations. 

By the way you speak and your level of English fluency, I can clearly tell you are not a native Canadian. Where are you from? Perhaps Africa, seeing as how you are taking far too much offense to these studies?

Regardless, you have yet to understand the concept of debating. You stay on-topic and stop bringing in random new arguments (like this EQ nonsense). I don't care if EQ tells you how much Jesus-blood you have, it is not the topic of this thread.



Dash said:


> Fellas, I have a simple question....what is the importance of this IQ?, so if I have low IQ, does that mean that I am inferior?



Inferior is a term used to insult and degrade. It reflects the intelligence of a person. That is all.


----------



## East Asia United

redhat said:


> 1. So if we have oil and gas,we don't need IQ ,Right?.So IQ is required for success.



Mostly right. Nigeria has oil but they are living in destitution and poverty. There seems to be a minimal level of intelligence needed to successfully hire foreign countries to extract and purchase the oil, all without most individuals stealing the wealth.



> Chinese don't have any kind of genetic potential for anything.Their recent success was due to cheap labour.You should thank the westerners for that.The entire East Asian success should be attributed to western help.



Chinese genotypic potential stands at 110-120. Also, East Asian IQ is around 105-106, not factoring in genotypic potential.



> You are right.That is why there are no geniuses from East Asia .Even with right education and opportunity, you can at max make a copy paste bot out of chinese ,who cannot invent anything of his own.



East Asian inventions:

List of Chinese inventions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of Chinese discoveries - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of Korean inventions and discoveries - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of Japanese inventions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

South Asian inventions:

List of Indian inventions and discoveries - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of Pakistani inventions and discoveries - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Notice the difference.

Japan and Korea are among the most innovative nations on Earth. China won't be any different when it becomes developed.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## liontk

karim3343 said:


> Buddy, you need to learn how to argue. 'Almost' as in some idiots will deny it, in the same way some scientists deny that Humans evolved from a common ancestor of Chimpanzees.
> 
> Get it?
> 
> 
> 
> For the 6th and last time, IQ is the only arbiter of intelligence.
> 
> 1: EQ is not taken seriously amongst serious scientists
> 
> 2: EQ is not a reflection of intelligence, even among the scientist which support EQ as a valid scientific variable
> 
> 3: Define EQ so we can get an understanding as to what you are even blabbering about
> 
> 4: Which population group generally scores higher on EQ tests? Is it East Asians followed by Whites, followed by Blacks? I would guess so (making your whole argument completely pointless)
> 
> 5: Last but not least, this thread is on IQ and the IQ-gap between populations.
> 
> By the way you speak and your level of English fluency, I can clearly tell you are not a native Canadian. Where are you from? Perhaps Africa, seeing as how you are taking far too much offense to these studies?
> 
> Regardless, you have yet to understand the concept of debating. You stay on-topic and stop bringing in random new arguments (like this EQ nonsense). I don't care if EQ tells you how much Jesus-blood you have, it is not the topic of this thread.
> 
> 
> 
> Inferior is a term used to insult and degrade. It reflects the intelligence of a person. That is all.



A: Prove EQ is not taken seriously by social scientist when the studies you are showing have such a small sample size.
B: You still have not argued against the studies that I have posted but rather walking your away around it.
Last but not least, I have quoted you from the post on 24th, where you clearly said that show me studies that reflect that EQ is a better measure of intelligence and this is what I have done with posting that study so hence making your statement invalid . Also english is my second langue and I prefer to speak in langue francaise(quèbecois) so you are correct in your assertion but as per forum rule, english is the only langue for communication purposes sadly. 

Also next time I will report you if you insult religious figures, thanks/merci, also bring a better study to counter prove your assertion and please do revisit the quote that asked for the studies proving that EQ is a better measure of intelligence. By the way keep your assertion about EQ scores from a racial perspective to your self as EQ can be improved if you work hard at it though some do naturally have knack for it though not as you describe it. However it does display a racial tone of superiority in face of superior logic , which is amusing to say the least chez mon ami.


----------



## East Asia United

JayAtl said:


> The sample base is big enough where your excuse of immigrant IQ not being good enough is laughable



What sample base? What are you talking about? The 'sample' is a 'sampling' of the high IQ immigrants that were selected to come to India. Read correctly before making a mockery of yourself. It is a fact that the US is selectively allowing only the most intelligent Indians into the country. There aren't too many street sweepers getting H1-B's, but there are quite a few Ivy League graduates.



> because India is not a developed country like the US. that was a low IQ question.



And that was a low IQ answer. Your comment implies that eventually all countries will become developed, and their will be negligible differences in everything from per capita GDP to literacy. This is typical of Indians which look into the far future because of the horridness of the present.

India is stupid not because it is poor, it is poor because it is stupid.



> India asserted it's will in 71, why has china not done so in Taiwan? it even hesitates in HK



This may be a reflection of lower-IQ peoples demanding instant gratification now, rather than wait for potential rewards in the future.



> low intelligence is associated with "present- orientation", i.e. a propensity to seek immediate gratification without regard to the possibility of future punishment; that those with low IQs typically have a weak moral sense and poor moral reasoning ability





> Row 6 shows a correlation of 0.70 between national IQ and low time preference in 10 Asian countries. Time preference was measured by responses to the question "Would you prefer $3400 this month or $3800 next month?" Choosing the second option indicates low time preference or in psychological terms, present- orientation, delay discounting and a capacity to delay gratification. It has been shown in a meta-analysis of 24 studies that a low time preference (a capacity to delay gratification) is correlated with IQ at 0.23 (Shamosh and Gray, 2008)



(oh and India 'asserting its will' has never been particularly impressive to anyone)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## redhat

LOl, East Asians don't even have a basic number system of their own.

The Chinese Ancient discoveries are insignificant.

The innovations from korea and Japan are the result of excessive western help.So it is effectively western technology.

Can any one name any famous Japanese ,Korean or Chinese scientist name ?


The Indian mathematical discoveries alone are superior to you innovations over western technololgy.

Japanese simply excelled in rebranding western technology.


----------



## East Asia United

liontk said:


> A: Prove EQ is not taken seriously by social scientist when the studies you are showing have such a small sample size



Sample size for United States IQ: 15,000

Sample size for UK IQ: 5,000

Sample size for IQ correlations US: *21 million*

Sample size for IQ correlates UK: *3 million*



> You still have not argued against the studies that I have posted but rather walking your away around
> Last but not least, I have quoted you from the post on 24th, where you clearly said that show me studies that reflect that EQ is a better measure of intelligence and this is what I have done with posting that study so hence making your statement invalid



I read your posts. You *STILL* have yet to give a definition of EQ.

You *STILL* have not given any EQ test results.

Also, what happened to you not having faith or trust in psychologists? Looks like that changes on a minute-by-minute basis, doesn't it?



> Also next time I will report you if you insult religious figures



What religious figures? You mean giving the sarcastic example of EQ proving that you had Jesus' blood? You are an oversensitive liberal child.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

redhat said:


> LOl, East Asians don't even have a basic number system of their own.
> 
> The Chinese Ancient discoveries are insignificant.
> 
> The innovations from korea and Japan are the result of excessive western help.So it is effectively western technology.
> 
> Can any one name any famous Japanese ,Korean or Chinese scientist name ?
> 
> 
> The Indian mathematical discoveries alone are superior to you innovations over western technololgy.
> 
> Japanese simply excelled in rebranding western technology.



So Indians basically have to go back to the concept of zero and the invention of ancient Mathematical principles from 3,000 years ago to find a genuine innovation out of you? LOL

Flat Panel Display was invented in Japan. The Bullet Train. Flash Memory, Blue Laser, and Continuously variable transmission.

The CD (Compact Disk) was invented by Japanese. Blu-ray was invented by Japanese. Androids were invented by Japanese. The videocassette was invented by Japanese.

Need I go on?

CD player, Digital audio tape recorder, pocket calculator, portable CD player, and countless more.

Korea invented MP3 player, retina display, touch screen cell phone, LTE service, co-discoverer of Graphene, virtual store, capacitive touchscreen cell phone, and countless others.

This is from a country with 50 million people, while Indians have not done 1/100 of this with a country of 1.2 billion.

You don't need IQ tests to show what is the truth.



> Japanese simply excelled in rebranding western technology.



And Indians didn't even succeed at that.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## liontk

karim3343 said:


> Sample size for United States IQ: 15,000
> 
> Sample size for UK IQ: 5,000
> 
> Sample size for IQ correlations US: *21 million*
> 
> Sample size for IQ correlates UK: *3 million*
> 
> 
> 
> I read your posts. You *STILL* have yet to give a definition of EQ.
> 
> You *STILL* have not given any EQ test results.
> 
> Also, what happened to you not having faith or trust in psychologists? Looks like that changes on a minute-by-minute basis, doesn't it?
> 
> 
> 
> What religious figures? You mean giving the sarcastic example of EQ proving that you had Jesus' blood? You are an oversensitive liberal child.



Bringing random numbers does not change anything, you still have no brought a universal definition of intelligence and have personally said that it is accepted by most when it isn't. I have also brought an almost universal definition like you said but the fact is that you still have not debunk Freedmen so my theory stands and in fact in practical life with the amount of data in comparison to your study with a small sample size(N). Also please give sources with those correlations preferable a graph instead of posting bunch of numbers. Also the measure of the dependant variables is still somewhat questionable, I have given EQ test results in the study but you have refused to look into and this only implies lack of comprehension or faced with superior logic. Unless you can change reality, your sad study does not reflect the business environment nor the intelligence required to succeed in it. Please keep racial overtones out of it mon ami, I am not a liberal but rather I do not go as low as insulting someone's personal belief. 

Unless you can debunk the study with better data and less assumptions, I think until then my point will stand but the fact ist hat you have not thoroughly read the study I posted and are simply wasting people's time with a psychologist that we already all know much about. I do not put much faith in psychologists with likes of Lyn but even I cannot refuse scientific data proving EQ is a measure of intelligence , when increase in profits has increased by nearly 10% for some companies. However EQ is something you can improve similar to IQ but EQ is a better measure of intelligence in today's corporate environment. Please next debunking the study, bring a study that argues that IQ is a better measure of intelligence and preferably a study in corporate environment would be appreciated.


----------



## redhat

karim3343 said:


> So Indians basically have to go back to the concept of zero and the invention of ancient Mathematical principles from 3,000 years ago to find a genuine innovation out of you? LOL



You don't know the history of mathematics and India's contribution to that.



> Flat Panel Display was invented in Japan. The Bullet Train. Flash Memory, Blue Laser, and Continuously variable transmission.
> 
> The CD (Compact Disk) was invented by Japanese. Blu-ray was invented by Japanese. Androids were invented by Japanese. The videocassette was invented by Japanese.
> 
> Need I go on?
> 
> CD player, Digital audio tape recorder, pocket calculator, portable CD player, and countless more.
> 
> Korea invented MP3 player, retina display, touch screen cell phone, LTE service, co-discoverer of Graphene, virtual store, capacitive touchscreen cell phone, and countless others.
> 
> This is from a country with 50 million people, while Indians have not done 1/100 of this with a country of 1.2 billion.
> 
> You don't need IQ tests to show what is the truth.



Everything developed with western technology using wetern tools.That is why no unique invention is associated with East Asia.

This is no diffrent from Indians working in various silicon valley companies.


----------



## liontk

karim3343 said:


> So Indians basically have to go back to the concept of zero and the invention of ancient Mathematical principles from 3,000 years ago to find a genuine innovation out of you? LOL
> 
> Flat Panel Display was invented in Japan. The Bullet Train. Flash Memory, Blue Laser, and Continuously variable transmission.
> 
> The CD (Compact Disk) was invented by Japanese. Blu-ray was invented by Japanese. Androids were invented by Japanese. The videocassette was invented by Japanese.
> 
> Need I go on?
> 
> CD player, Digital audio tape recorder, pocket calculator, portable CD player, and countless more.
> 
> Korea invented MP3 player, retina display, touch screen cell phone, LTE service, co-discoverer of Graphene, virtual store, capacitive touchscreen cell phone, and countless others.
> 
> This is from a country with 50 million people, while Indians have not done 1/100 of this with a country of 1.2 billion.
> 
> You don't need IQ tests to show what is the truth.
> 
> 
> 
> And Indians didn't even succeed at that.



Monsieur, Androids the linux software is not invented by Japanese  , mp3 was created by a german company not that it matters. Also George Heilmeier is the one responsible for pioneering the LCD tv so please do save your racial rhetoric for someone with no data. 

Are you from a math background, I find that zero is very useful to the point that majority of our advances in this field are the very reason due to it. I mean think about differentials , thermo fluid based calculus and other areas of mathematics, where it would nearly be impossible to advance without 'Zero'. However lets go back to the study I posted because now you are talking almost like enfant because If i start on what the west has accomplished, I think we can safely agree that Canada would on top of that racial hierarchy monsieur and that is not including the fact that korea follows western philosophy in governing(democracy)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

liontk said:


> you still have no brought a universal definition of intelligence



You are intellectually inept. I already did.



> personally said that it is accepted by most when it isn't



It is accepted by almost 100% of social scientists. Can you even list the handful of people that do not accept the validity of IQ?

Go on, list them all here. They are so few in number that I in fact don't know a single one of them.



> data in comparison to your study with a small sample size



So apparently 20 million people for the USA alone is 'small'. You are seriously failing.



> I have given EQ test results in the study



Again, no idea what you are even posting. You posted no differences in EQ between populations or between nations.



> Unless you can debunk the study with better data and less assumptions



"bring a study that argues that IQ is a better measure of intelligence"

Half of the EQ Wikipedia page is just scientists refuting and criticising EQ. Hahaha!

Name 5 studies that argue that EQ is a better measure of intelligence. It is a widely regarded fact that IQ is the very best and *only* predictor of intelligence in the world today.

You have nothing, no argument and nor ability to comprehend such a simple understanding of debate. So I will ask for what I believe is the 7th time:

You *STILL* have yet to give a definition of EQ.

You *STILL* have not given any EQ test results.



> Psychometricians generally regard IQ tests as having high statistical reliability. A high reliability implies that&#8212;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&#8212;the scores generally agree with one another and across time. A test-taker's score on any one IQ test is surrounded by an error band that shows, to a specified degree of confidence, what the test-taker's true score is likely to be. For modern tests, the standard error of measurement is about three points, or in other words, the odds are about two out of three that a person's true IQ is in range from three points above to three points below the test IQ. Another description is there is a 95% chance the true IQ is in range from four to five points above to four to five points below the test IQ, depending on the test in question. Clinical psychologists generally regard them as having sufficient statistical validity for many clinical purposes.



And for EQ:



> Research of EI and job performance shows mixed results: a positive relation has been found in some of the studies, in others there was no relation or an inconsistent one. This led researchers Cote and Miners (2006)[53] to offer a compensatory model between EI and IQ, that posits that the association between EI and job performance becomes more positive as cognitive intelligence decreases, an idea first proposed in the context of academic performance (Petrides, Frederickson, & Furnham, 2004). The results of the former study supported the compensatory model: employees with low IQ get higher task performance and organizational citizenship behavior directed at the organization, the higher their EI.
> A meta-analytic review by Joseph and Newman[50] also revealed that both Ability EI and Trait EI tend to predict job performance much better in jobs that require a high degree of emotional labor (where 'emotional labor' was defined as jobs that require the effective display of positive emotion). In contrast, EI shows little relationship to job performance in jobs that do not require emotional labor. In other words, emotional intelligence tends to predict job performance for emotional jobs only.
> A more recent study suggests that EI is not necessarily a universally positive trait.[54] They found a negative correlation between EI and managerial work demands; while under low levels of managerial work demands, they found a negative relationship between EI and teamwork effectiveness. An explanation for this may suggest gender differences in EI, as women tend to score higher levels than men.[50] This furthers the idea that job context plays a role in the relationships between EI, teamwork effectiveness, and job performance.
> Another interesting find was discussed in a study that assessed a possible link between EI and entrepreneurial behaviors and success.[55] In accordance with much of the other findings regarding EI and job performance, they found that levels of EI only predicted a small amount of entrepreneurial behavior.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## liontk

yo @redhat, good luck arguing with him, I even posted a study and he started getting racial once he could not debunk it , ignore him and move on with your day. You will not get an iota of intelligence involving yourself in this uber-racial (a la KKK) debate with a failed psychologist, who is the laughing stock in academic world for his books let alone this study. I mean if I start bringing Canada's achievement, this whole thread would be flooded.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

redhat said:


> You don't know the history of mathematics and India's contribution to that.
> 
> 
> 
> Everything developed with western technology using wetern tools.That is why no unique invention is associated with East Asia.
> 
> This is no diffrent from Indians working in various silicon valley companies.



Inventing a technology that didn't previously exist has nothing to do with anyone except the people who invented it. If you can't understand such a simple concept then you don't have the tools needed to succeed in anything.

I suppose that if someone invented a Strong AI you would say that it runs on 'Western' electricity, and therefore the West deserves to take credit for it.

All of the technologies I listed did not even exist on Earth before they were invented. They were solely inventions of Japanese and Koreans, not 'copies'.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

liontk said:


> Monsieur, Androids the linux software is not invented by Japanese  , mp3 was created by a german company not that it matters. Also George Heilmeier is the one responsible for pioneering the LCD tv so please do save your racial rhetoric for someone with no data.





> The world's first android, DER 01, was developed by a Japanese research group, The Intelligent Robotics Lab, directed by Hiroshi Ishiguro at Osaka University, and Kokoro Co., Ltd. The Actroid is a humanoid robot with strong visual human-likeness developed by Osaka University and manufactured by Kokoro Company Ltd. (the animatronics division of Sanrio). It was first unveiled at the 2003 International Robot Exposition in Tokyo, Japan. The Actroid woman is a pioneer example of a real machine similar to imagined machines called by the science fiction terms android or gynoid, so far used only for fictional robots. It can mimic such lifelike functions as blinking, speaking, and breathing. The "Repliee" models are interactive robots with the ability to recognise and process speech and respond in kind.



So you are a liar.



> The first portable MP3 player was launched in 1997 by Saehan Information Systems,[18] which sold its "MPMan" player in Asia in spring 1998.



Again, liar.



> The first flat-panel displays were the flat CRTs[110][111] used by Sony in their Watchman series (the FD-210 was introduced in 1982). One of the last flat-CRT models was the FD-120A.



And... liar.

LOL, next time don't try this. I don't BS.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## liontk

@karim3343, first of all android software on our phone is patented by google and I am not talking about robot. You said "Android"

A complete history of Android | News | TechRadar

So you did not specify so do not blame me! 

MP3 Player History | Invention Story of MP3 Player
You again said Mp3 player not portable mp3(solid state) so you are clearly wrong and apologize for calling me a liar(not that I mind). Once again you are proved wrong and next...

James Fergason - History of Liquid Crystal Display or LCD
Again you are lying and stop taking credit for other people's inventions racist  , now stop calling liars and start looking into your claim or atleast specify instead of ranting on and on. Also in your last post you still did not deduce the study and brought weak counter arguement so until you deduce the study , my point is still valid as it clearly reflects the EQ needed to be in position in intel corp, L'oreal, Royal marines and other big organizations. I have no time left arguing so may be a week from now I can come back and debunk more points, but have to go work my friend. Nice chatting with you and have a great day.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## redhat

karim3343 said:


> Inventing a technology that didn't previously exist has nothing to do with anyone except the people who invented it. If you can't understand such a simple concept then you don't have the tools needed to succeed in anything.
> 
> I suppose that if someone invented a Strong AI you would say that it runs on 'Western' electricity, and therefore the West deserves to take credit for it.
> 
> All of the technologies I listed did not even exist on Earth before they were invented. They were solely inventions of Japanese and Koreans, not 'copies'.




I'm not against Japanese or Koreans working on American technology.These countries would be nothing without American technology.

Japanese were once pumping low quality items just like China is doing now.

If you look closely on each Japanese technology,you would know from where the core technology comes from.


If I start like you ,I can claim USB was invented by Indian,Pentium processor was invented by Indian ,Wireless was invented by Indian etc ,but that would be without any basis.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## JayAtl

karim3343 said:


> What sample base? What are you talking about? The 'sample' is a 'sampling' of the high IQ immigrants that were selected to come to India. Read correctly before making a mockery of yourself. It is a fact that the US is selectively allowing only the most intelligent Indians into the country. There aren't too many street sweepers getting H1-B's, but there are quite a few Ivy League graduates.



once again your true low IQ shines. The sampling base is from all immigrant population that have a decent base in the US. It is not from just new immigrants or H1 visas. These are citizens too- no H1 visa person is also a citizen. Happy to show you the link to the pew research as i get it maybe mentally tough for you to do so. Indians are 3 or more generations deep in the US. Maybe be too much for your pea brain to comprehend , but it is what it is. 

I'll give you that US allows too many dumb Chinese into the country  - you are spot on about that!





> And that was a low IQ answer. Your comment implies that eventually all countries will become developed, and their will be negligible differences in everything from per capita GDP to literacy. This is typical of Indians which look into the far future because of the horridness of the present.
> India is stupid not because it is poor, it is poor because it is stupid.



My comment was on why there is no level paying field. how in the hell you got that all countries eventually become developed is one for the books in Chinese IQ history. Typical Chinese , whose IQ is so great that their own govt knows to treat it like morons. telling aint it? your IQ is so good that you are still considered a 3rd world country while being 2nd largest GDP. telling aint it :lol

Let's face it IQ numbers get fudged by the Chinese, like its economic data ( note: your own govt found that export numbers were fudged) and it( real IQ) shows in the chart I provided. 



> (oh and India 'asserting its will' has never been particularly impressive to anyone)



maybe not to lambs grazing in field but to military minds, think tanks and history it is... on the other hand we are still waiting for the great HK and Taiwan takeover...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Banglar Lathial

1. Who defined the "races" of the world? 

*2. There is no such thing as a "South Asian" race. How come all of the Middle East, North Africa or South Asia is termed as one region belonging to one race, while countries of the authors' choices are broken up into component races? 
*



3. Administer culture fair, language neutral, IQ tests annually, around the world's countries to representative samples, and document the results for all to see. 


4. As of now, this hodge podge of a study fails to do so because it uses no "standard" IQ Test, but a hodge podge of tests without any order or pattern. Then they administered these tests to some countries of their choices regularly, while in other cases, they substitute statistics from 50 or 60 years ago. 


5. There is much that is wrong with the methodology used to catalogue the test results. They should have sought help from professional Statisticians. 


6. Otherwise, even though IQ tests have their own limitations and quite unpredictable beyond a certain (high) IQ score, they are quite useful for determining a general population's intellectual potential.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dash

karim3343 said:


> Inferior is a term used to insult and degrade. It reflects the intelligence of a person. That is all.



So if my IQ scores are high, then I am intelligent?


----------



## East Asia United

Dash said:


> So if my IQ scores are high, then I am intelligent?



Generally speaking, it means you have potential to succeed, which most people would classify as intelligent. Intelligence is an arbitrary term, but yes that is essentially correct.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Dash

karim3343 said:


> Generally speaking, it means you have potential to succeed, which most people would classify as intelligent. Intelligence is an arbitrary term, but yes that is essentially correct.



How close these two terms are, common sense and intelligent?


----------



## East Asia United

liontk said:


> @karim3343, first of all android software on our phone is patented by google and I am not talking about robot. You said "Android"
> 
> A complete history of Android | News | TechRadar
> 
> So you did not specify so do not blame me!
> 
> MP3 Player History | Invention Story of MP3 Player
> You again said Mp3 player not portable mp3(solid state) so you are clearly wrong and apologize for calling me a liar(not that I mind). Once again you are proved wrong and next...
> 
> James Fergason - History of Liquid Crystal Display or LCD
> Again you are lying and stop taking credit for other people's inventions racist  , now stop calling liars and start looking into your claim or atleast specify instead of ranting on and on. Also in your last post you still did not deduce the study and brought weak counter arguement so until you deduce the study , my point is still valid as it clearly reflects the EQ needed to be in position in intel corp, L'oreal, Royal marines and other big organizations. I have no time left arguing so may be a week from now I can come back and debunk more points, but have to go work my friend. Nice chatting with you and have a great day.



The first Android. What do you think that meant? ANDROIDS, not Android software. You can't tell the difference? It's your fault your English makes you sound functionally illiterate.

Again, MP3 PLAYER, not just MP3. Again, you are trying to find holes where there aren't any.

Flat Panel Display - List of Japanese inventions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So you failed with your Euro-revisionist history. Try again.

As for your EQ argument, I'm tired of your low intelligence ramblings.

I will simply post the same thing I already said, just so that others can watch your avoidance of the topic.

Name 5 studies that argue that EQ is a better measure of intelligence. It is a widely regarded fact that IQ is the very best and only predictor of intelligence in the world today.

You have nothing, no argument and nor ability to comprehend such a simple understanding of debate. So I will ask for what is the 8th time:

You *STILL* have yet to give a definition of EQ.

You *STILL* have not given any EQ test results.



> Psychometricians generally regard IQ tests as having high statistical reliability. A high reliability implies that&#8212;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&#8212;the scores generally agree with one another and across time. A test-taker's score on any one IQ test is surrounded by an error band that shows, to a specified degree of confidence, what the test-taker's true score is likely to be. For modern tests, the standard error of measurement is about three points, or in other words, the odds are about two out of three that a person's true IQ is in range from three points above to three points below the test IQ. Another description is there is a 95% chance the true IQ is in range from four to five points above to four to five points below the test IQ, depending on the test in question. Clinical psychologists generally regard them as having sufficient statistical validity for many clinical purposes.



And for EQ:



> Research of EI and job performance shows mixed results: a positive relation has been found in some of the studies, in others there was no relation or an inconsistent one. This led researchers Cote and Miners (2006)[53] to offer a compensatory model between EI and IQ, that posits that the association between EI and job performance becomes more positive as cognitive intelligence decreases, an idea first proposed in the context of academic performance (Petrides, Frederickson, & Furnham, 2004). The results of the former study supported the compensatory model: employees with low IQ get higher task performance and organizational citizenship behavior directed at the organization, the higher their EI.
> 
> A meta-analytic review by Joseph and Newman[50] also revealed that both Ability EI and Trait EI tend to predict job performance much better in jobs that require a high degree of emotional labor (where 'emotional labor' was defined as jobs that require the effective display of positive emotion). In contrast, EI shows little relationship to job performance in jobs that do not require emotional labor. In other words, emotional intelligence tends to predict job performance for emotional jobs only.
> A more recent study suggests that EI is not necessarily a universally positive trait.[54] They found a negative correlation between EI and managerial work demands; while under low levels of managerial work demands, they found a negative relationship between EI and teamwork effectiveness. An explanation for this may suggest gender differences in EI, as women tend to score higher levels than men.[50] This furthers the idea that job context plays a role in the relationships between EI, teamwork effectiveness, and job performance.
> 
> Another interesting find was discussed in a study that assessed a possible link between EI and entrepreneurial behaviors and success.[55] In accordance with much of the other findings regarding EI and job performance, they found that levels of EI only predicted a small amount of entrepreneurial behavior.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

redhat said:


> I'm not against Japanese or Koreans working on American technology.These countries would be nothing without American technology.
> 
> Japanese were once pumping low quality items just like China is doing now.
> 
> If you look closely on each Japanese technology,you would know from where the core technology comes from.
> 
> 
> If I start like you ,I can claim USB was invented by Indian,Pentium processor was invented by Indian ,Wireless was invented by Indian etc ,but that would be without any basis.



Since when were Intel or Compaq Indian companies run by Indian individuals?

Are Sony, Sharp, Hitachi, Samsung, Toshiba, etc etc etc founded and run by Koreans and Japanese, in Korea and Japan? Yes, they are.



> The sampling base is from all immigrant population that have a decent base in the US.



You don't seem to understand. I'll help you.

As a proportion of the Indian population, how many were let in as asylum seekers, refugees, and random Green card lottery?

Now, how many were let in by H1-Bs and the like?

You know and so do I. Most of the Indians in the US were selected for their intelligence. They didn't come here randomly like Mexicans.



> Typical Chinese , whose IQ is so great that their own govt knows to treat it like morons. telling aint it? your IQ is so good that you are still considered a 3rd world country while being 2nd largest GDP. telling aint it



LOL, Korea is more developed than any other country in Asia except Japan and Singapore. You are an imbecile. And you are so dumb that you think I am Chinese. You don't even know the difference between Korean and Chinese flags! Hahahaha!



> Let's face it IQ numbers get fudged by the Chinese



1: Provide evidence for your meaningless accusation.

2: IQ data cannot be fudged when the Chinese government doesn't take IQ tests anyway. Idiot.

3: IQ data is assessed by independent researchers, mostly from Europe and the US (like Richard Lynn)

4: IQ for Korea and Japan are not falsified. They are virtually the same, proving the negligible differences in East Asian IQ.



> how in the hell you got that all countries eventually become developed is one for the books in Chinese IQ history



Because of this dummy:



> why do Indians not having a level playing ground ?- because India is not a developed country like the US



You imply that India will only be on a level playing field when it is as developed as the USA. This implies that Indians will reach that level because their are no genetic weaknesses stopping India from catching-up to the US. This is wrong, as I have already proven.



> on the other hand we are still waiting for the great HK and Taiwan takeover...



Hong Kong belongs to China. What an imbecile.



Banglar Lathial said:


> 1. Who defined the "races" of the world?
> 
> *2. There is no such thing as a "South Asian" race. How come all of the Middle East, North Africa or South Asia is termed as one region belonging to one race, while countries of the authors' choices are broken up into component races?
> *
> 
> 
> 
> 3. Administer culture fair, language neutral, IQ tests annually, around the world's countries to representative samples, and document the results for all to see.
> 
> 
> 4. As of now, this hodge podge of a study fails to do so because it uses no "standard" IQ Test, but a hodge podge of tests without any order or pattern. Then they administered these tests to some countries of their choices regularly, while in other cases, they substitute statistics from 50 or 60 years ago.
> 
> 
> 5. There is much that is wrong with the methodology used to catalogue the test results. They should have sought help from professional Statisticians.
> 
> 
> 6. Otherwise, even though IQ tests have their own limitations and quite unpredictable beyond a certain (high) IQ score, they are quite useful for determining a general population's intellectual potential.



They are deciding based on population groups. That is, South Asia consists of a heterogeneous group, but also a homogenous intelligence (most South Asian IQ averages around low-80's).

IQ tests were provided in the native language of the speakers.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## redhat

karim3343 said:


> Since when were Intel or Compaq Indian companies run by Indian individuals?
> 
> Are Sony, Sharp, Hitachi, Samsung, Toshiba, etc etc etc founded and run by Koreans and Japanese, in Korea and Japan? Yes, they are.
> .



The companies like Sony ,Hitachi are all multi-national companies with R&D in America established in as early as 1950's .All of them have technologies licensed from American companies.

These companies benefited hugely from the invention of transistors to Integrated Circuits.




> In the early 1950s, Ibuka traveled in the United States and heard about Bell Labs' invention of the transistor.[12] He convinced Bell to license the transistor technology to his Japanese company, for use in communications.




If you can list Japanese Technologies(Which are in fact American technologies) ,I can list mention Indians working in silicon valley.Behind most of today's technology,there is an Indian brain.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

redhat said:


> The companies like Sony ,Hitachi are all multi-national companies with R&D in America established in as early as 1950's .All of them have technologies licensed from American companies.
> 
> These companies benefited hugely from the invention of transistors to Integrated Circuits.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> If you can list Japanese Technologies(Which are in fact American technologies) ,I can list mention Indians working in silicon valley.Behind most of today's technology,there is an Indian brain.



Buddy, no one ever claimed the transistor is a Japanese invention. Your quote is useless. As for Indians being behind most of the technological advances in the world, you just lost your credibility right there.

So I guess because the first person to develop a capacitive touchscreen was Samsung, and because iPhone uses this technology that Samsung invented, then the iPhone and all other touchscreens are the invention of Koreans?

Stop making things so overly complicated. It's really quite simple. If it was invented by Japanese people, then it's a Japanese invention. If it was invented by Koreans it was a Korean invention.

You can keep running yourself through mental hoops and trying to find holes in this simple statement, but their aren't any.

Americans were the first on the Moon. You can say that the Germans were because they developed the rocket technology, but that would make you sound like an idiot.

Face it, Indians have not invented any of the modern technologies, and East Asians have developed many.

Oh, and 'Indians' who are actually American citizens don't count. Or else we will have to count the countless East Asians like the product managers of Lockheed and the F-22 Raptor, in addition to many of the technology companies like YouTube and Yahoo.


----------



## redhat

karim3343 said:


> Buddy, no one ever claimed the transistor is a Japanese invention. Your quote is useless. As for Indians being behind most of the technological advances in the world, you just lost your credibility right there.
> 
> So I guess because the first person to develop a capacitive touchscreen was Samsung, and because iPhone uses this technology that Samsung invented, then the iPhone and all other touchscreens are the invention of Koreans?
> 
> Stop making things so overly complicated. It's really quite simple. If it was invented by Japanese people, then it's a Japanese invention. If it was invented by Koreans it was a Korean invention.
> 
> You can keep running yourself through mental hoops and trying to find holes in this simple statement, but their aren't any.
> 
> Americans were the first on the Moon. You can say that the Germans were because they developed the rocket technology, but that would make you sound like an idiot.
> 
> Face it, Indians have not invented any of the modern technologies, and East Asians have developed many.
> 
> Oh, and 'Indians' who are actually American citizens don't count. Or else we will have to count the countless East Asians like the product managers of Lockheed and the F-22 Raptor, in addition to many of the technology companies like YouTube and Yahoo.




You can go in loops to claim East Asian high IQ,but not body is going to take you seriously.Indians may or may not have invented anything.After all we have R&D most major MNC companies here in India. But we don't claim that to be Indian technology,the way you did for Japanese companies. 

The East Asians have almost zero contribution to Science,Engineering and Technology.If you have doubt you can
check for East Asian names in classical Engineering or Computer Science Textbooks.Their contributions to Maths are even worse .Maths is right representation of IQ .You seriously lack in those areas.


Rocket is indeed a German technology and not American.If Japan sends a rocket ,we don't call it Japanese technology.Taking Laser Disc and making it CDROM or DVD doesn't make it high end technology.

What we call Japanese technology is actually developed in several countries,with huge input and technical help from America.Japanese don't have the brain to develop complex technologies like westerners,Face it, you people are nothing.Japan became prosperous by pumping cheap goods like China is doing now. 


Projecting western inventions as your own ,doesn't make your IQ high.East Asians don't have high IQ. 
You cannot measure the IQ of a country using some IQ test,especially for a complex country like India.


----------



## gslv

Enemy said:


> Excellent rank indeed!
> 
> Is AIPMT going to be replaced by NEET-UG?


 sorry for replying late . NEET already replaced AIPMT this year.


----------



## Lux de Veritas

*To show which race has super cognitive talent, best place is go Intel prize 2013.*

Bhattacharya, Paulomi (The Harker School) 
Cupertino, California
A Novel AAA-ATPase p97/VCP Inhibitor Lead for Multiple Myeloma by Fragment-Based Drug Design: A Computational Binding Model and NMR/SPR-Based Validation
Bhupatiraju, Surya (Lexington High School) 
Lexington, Massachusetts
On the Complexity of the Marginal Satisfiability Problem
Bowman, Adam (Montgomery Bell Academy) 
Brentwood, Tennessee
Apparatus and Analysis Techniques for Portable, Low-Voltage Pulsed Plasma Sources
Chan, Jennifer (Academy for Medical Science Technology) 
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey
Activation-induced Cytidine Deaminase (AID): A Common Target for ER-Dependent and ER-Independent Breast Cancer Therapies
Chen, Kevin (Mission San Jose High School) 
Fremont, California
Development of a Low-Cost Analyzer for Ferroelectric Characterization
Chin, Lillian (The Westminster Schools) 
Decatur, Georgia
Agent-Based Modeling of Collective Cell Movement During Wound Healing
Cordwell, Katherine (Manzano High School) 
Albuquerque, New Mexico
Lower Central Series Quotients of Finitely Generated Algebras over the Integers
* Dai, Annie (Desert Vista High School)
Phoenix, Arizona
Development of "Smart" Hydrogels for Three-Dimensional (3D) Dynamic Tactile Displays
* Unable to participate
Dantzler, Alexa (Bishop O'Connell High School) 
Manassas, Virginia
Quantification of Perchloroethylene Residues in Dry Cleaned Fabrics
Garbe, Kevin (Saratoga High School) 
Saratoga, California
Patterns in the Coeffecients of Powers of Polynomials Over a Finite Field
Gunderman, Lane (The University of Chicago Laboratory High School) 
Chicago, Illinois
Investigating the Fenna-Matthews-Olson Complex Using Molecular Dynamics Simulations: Exploring the Mechanics of Energy Transport in Photosynthesis
Johnson, Jacob (Acton-Boxborough Regional High School) 
Boxborough, Massachusetts
Integrative Genomic Analysis of a Mouse Model of Malignant Breast Cancer Reveals Crucial and Novel Cancer Drivers
Kallenbach, Jonah (Germantown Academy) 
Ambler, Pennsylvania
Characterizing and Identifying Interactions of Intrinsically Disordered Proteins
Kraft, Peter (Munster High School) 
Munster, Indiana
Synthesis and Analysis of Novel Coordination Polymers Containing 3- or 4-Pyridylnicotinamide and Benzenedicarboxylates
Larson, Hannah (South Eugene High School) 
Eugene, Oregon
Classification of Some Fusion Categories of Rank FOUR
Le Breton, Stephen (Greenwich High School) 
Greenwich, Connecticut
In vivo Regeneration of Tooth Enamel using an Innovative Hydrophilic Polymer-Coated Retainer
McQuaid, Daniel (Ossining High School) 
Ossining, New York
Identification of Post-Translational Regulation Sites on the KLF6 Tumor Suppressor as Novel Targets for Cancer Therapies
Mehrotra, Pavan (Sierra Canyon School) 
Simi Valley, California
Facile, Single Step Conversion of Biomass to Electricity
Mundkur, Naethan (duPont Manual High School) 
Louisville, Kentucky
Investigation into the Thermal and Rheological Properties of CuO Nanofluids for Heat Transfer Applications
O'Leary, Vincent (Wheeling Central Catholic High School) 
Wheeling, West Virginia
A Multi-Year Analysis of Orconectid Crayfish Invasion Dynamics in West Virginia Utilizing Laboratory and Field Methodologies
Padmanabha, Akshay (Houston High School) 
Collierville, Tennessee
Predicting, Detecting, and Treating Seizures through Vagus Nerve Stimulation
Peng, Jiayi (Horace Greeley High School) 
Chappaqua, New York
A Cellular Automaton Model for Critical Dynamics in Neuronal Networks
Popova, Lilia (Ann Arbor Huron High School) 
Ann Arbor, Michigan
Elucidating Environmental and Genetic Mechanisms of Magnetically Altered Plant Growth
Scibelli, Samantha (Burnt Hills-Ballston Lake High School) 
Burnt Hills, New York
Census of Blue Stars in the Eighth Data Release of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey
Selvakumar, Raja (Milton High School) 
Alpharetta, Georgia
Gastro Microbial Fuel Cell: A Novel Implementation of a GMFC in Capsular Nanorobotics
Shah, Naomi (Sunset High School) 
Portland, Oregon
The Toxicological Effect of Airborne Pollutants on Lung Health
Shea, Meghan (Unionville High School) 
West Chester, Pennsylvania
Optimizing the Coagulating Property of Moringa oleifera Seeds: A Novel Approach to Water Purification Techniques in Low-Income Countries
Shi, Kensen (A&M Consolidated High School) 
College Station, Texas
Lazy Toggle PRM: A Single-Query Approach to Motion Planning
Solimano, Jamie (Stuyvesant High School) 
New York, New York
Super-Resolution STED Microscopy Provides Insight Into the Dynamics of Intraflagellar Transport and Reveals Novel Distribution of Adenylate Cyclase III in Primary Cilia
Sridhar, Mayuri (Kings Park High School) 
Kings Park, New York
Computational Analysis of the DNA-Binding Mechanism of the p53 Tumor Suppressor and its Inactivation through the R249S Mutation
Takahashi, Jack (Lynbrook High School) 
Saratoga, California
Wnt Independent ß-catenin Activation is Associated With Increased Pulmonary Artery Smooth Muscle Cell Proliferation in Idiopathic Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension
Traver, Chris (Croton-Harmon High School) 
Croton-on-Hudson, New York
Investigating Noise Pollution Using Smartphones and Citizen Scientists
Tripathi, Raghav (Westview High School) 
Portland, Oregon
Design and Synthesis of Novel Fatty Acid Binding Protein Inhibitors for Analgesic and Anti-Inflammatory Effects through Increases in Endogenous Anandamide Concentrations
Vasudevan, Sahana (Gnyanam Academy) 
Palo Alto, California
Minimizing the Number of Carries in the Set of Coset Representatives of a Normal Subgroup
Volz, Sara (Cheyenne Mountain High School) 
Colorado Springs, Colorado
Optimizing Algae Biofuels: Artificial Selection to Improve Lipid Synthesis
Wang, Joy (Parkland High School) 
Orefield, Pennsylvania
Polyoxovanadate-based Surfactants: The Search for an Effective Heterogeneous Catalyst
Wenger, Brittany (Out-of-Door Academy) 
Sarasota, Florida
Global Neural Network Cloud Service for Breast Cancer
Wong, Catherine (Morristown High School) 
Morristown, New Jersey
A Novel Design for Wireless Low-Cost Cardiac Examination Over the Mobile Phone Platform: Telemedicine for the Developing World
Zbarsky, Samuel (Montgomery Blair High School) 
Rockville, Maryland
On Improved Bounds for Bounded Degree Spanning Trees for Points in Arbitrary Dimension
Zhang, Kelly (The College Preparatory School) 
Orinda, California
Fluorescent Imaging for Nano-Detection (FIND) of Cancer Cells for Future Surgery
Zhang, Michael (Smithtown High School East) 
Saint James, New York
Role-Inducted Perspective Visual Behavior during Scene Free-Viewing

There are 10 South Asian, and 11 East Asian (10 Chinese 1 Jap).

I n 2013 Intel prize, there are 10 South Asian, and 11 East Asian (10 Chinese 1 Jap).

*In 2013 Intel prize, there are 10 South Asian, and 11 East Asian (10 Chinese 1 Jap).*


----------



## drunken-monke

I took my first IQ test about 6 months back.. Again took today MENSA and surprisingly both the scores were same.. The score was 123 both the times.. By the way I am research scientist in one of the large pharmaceutical organizations who supply medicine to USA and Europe.... 

One question does IQ has anything to do with educational qualification one attains?? Can OP answer this??

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## StarCraft_ZT

redhat said:


> You can go in loops to claim East Asian high IQ,but not body is going to take you seriously.Indians may or may not have invented anything.After all we have R&D most major MNC companies here in India. But we don't claim that to be Indian technology,the way you did for Japanese companies.
> 
> The East Asians have almost zero contribution to Science,Engineering and Technology.If you have doubt you can
> check for East Asian names in classical Engineering or Computer Science Textbooks.Their contributions to Maths are even worse .Maths is right representation of IQ .You seriously lack in those areas.
> 
> 
> Rocket is indeed a German technology and not American.If Japan sends a rocket ,we don't call it Japanese technology.Taking Laser Disc and making it CDROM or DVD doesn't make it high end technology.
> 
> What we call Japanese technology is actually developed in several countries,with huge input and technical help from America.Japanese don't have the brain to develop complex technologies like westerners,Face it, you people are nothing.Japan became prosperous by pumping cheap goods like China is doing now.
> 
> 
> Projecting western inventions as your own ,doesn't make your IQ high.East Asians don't have high IQ.
> You cannot measure the IQ of a country using some IQ test,especially for a complex country like India.



By your logic, God create humans, humans invented modern things, so god is the most innovative and intelligent, right??? ridiculous&#65281;&#65281;&#65281; Whatever advance that based on previous breakthroughs on technology is due to the people who is working on it. People have always been making progress by referring to the world's most cutting edge inventions, product or culture. No one can be excluded. People invented helicopter with inspiration of dragonfly, so dragonfly is the most intelligent, right?? This is your logic. According to you, whatever we have done is the consequence of the most most most original thing, God.

Actually, no exaggerate, the most famous and the only invention I heard about India is curry. I am going to have a taste of curry chicken today and enjoy your greatest inventions. It really suprises me.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## StarCraft_ZT

Lux de Veritas said:


> *To show which race has super cognitive talent, best place is go Intel prize 2013.*
> 
> Bhattacharya, Paulomi (The Harker School)
> Cupertino, California
> A Novel AAA-ATPase p97/VCP Inhibitor Lead for Multiple Myeloma by Fragment-Based Drug Design: A Computational Binding Model and NMR/SPR-Based Validation
> Bhupatiraju, Surya (Lexington High School)
> Lexington, Massachusetts
> On the Complexity of the Marginal Satisfiability Problem
> Bowman, Adam (Montgomery Bell Academy)
> Brentwood, Tennessee
> Apparatus and Analysis Techniques for Portable, Low-Voltage Pulsed Plasma Sources
> Chan, Jennifer (Academy for Medical Science Technology)
> Upper Saddle River, New Jersey
> Activation-induced Cytidine Deaminase (AID): A Common Target for ER-Dependent and ER-Independent Breast Cancer Therapies
> Chen, Kevin (Mission San Jose High School)
> Fremont, California
> Development of a Low-Cost Analyzer for Ferroelectric Characterization
> Chin, Lillian (The Westminster Schools)
> Decatur, Georgia
> Agent-Based Modeling of Collective Cell Movement During Wound Healing
> Cordwell, Katherine (Manzano High School)
> Albuquerque, New Mexico
> Lower Central Series Quotients of Finitely Generated Algebras over the Integers
> * Dai, Annie (Desert Vista High School)
> Phoenix, Arizona
> Development of "Smart" Hydrogels for Three-Dimensional (3D) Dynamic Tactile Displays
> * Unable to participate
> Dantzler, Alexa (Bishop O'Connell High School)
> Manassas, Virginia
> Quantification of Perchloroethylene Residues in Dry Cleaned Fabrics
> Garbe, Kevin (Saratoga High School)
> Saratoga, California
> Patterns in the Coeffecients of Powers of Polynomials Over a Finite Field
> Gunderman, Lane (The University of Chicago Laboratory High School)
> Chicago, Illinois
> Investigating the Fenna-Matthews-Olson Complex Using Molecular Dynamics Simulations: Exploring the Mechanics of Energy Transport in Photosynthesis
> Johnson, Jacob (Acton-Boxborough Regional High School)
> Boxborough, Massachusetts
> Integrative Genomic Analysis of a Mouse Model of Malignant Breast Cancer Reveals Crucial and Novel Cancer Drivers
> Kallenbach, Jonah (Germantown Academy)
> Ambler, Pennsylvania
> Characterizing and Identifying Interactions of Intrinsically Disordered Proteins
> Kraft, Peter (Munster High School)
> Munster, Indiana
> Synthesis and Analysis of Novel Coordination Polymers Containing 3- or 4-Pyridylnicotinamide and Benzenedicarboxylates
> Larson, Hannah (South Eugene High School)
> Eugene, Oregon
> Classification of Some Fusion Categories of Rank FOUR
> Le Breton, Stephen (Greenwich High School)
> Greenwich, Connecticut
> In vivo Regeneration of Tooth Enamel using an Innovative Hydrophilic Polymer-Coated Retainer
> McQuaid, Daniel (Ossining High School)
> Ossining, New York
> Identification of Post-Translational Regulation Sites on the KLF6 Tumor Suppressor as Novel Targets for Cancer Therapies
> Mehrotra, Pavan (Sierra Canyon School)
> Simi Valley, California
> Facile, Single Step Conversion of Biomass to Electricity
> Mundkur, Naethan (duPont Manual High School)
> Louisville, Kentucky
> Investigation into the Thermal and Rheological Properties of CuO Nanofluids for Heat Transfer Applications
> O'Leary, Vincent (Wheeling Central Catholic High School)
> Wheeling, West Virginia
> A Multi-Year Analysis of Orconectid Crayfish Invasion Dynamics in West Virginia Utilizing Laboratory and Field Methodologies
> Padmanabha, Akshay (Houston High School)
> Collierville, Tennessee
> Predicting, Detecting, and Treating Seizures through Vagus Nerve Stimulation
> Peng, Jiayi (Horace Greeley High School)
> Chappaqua, New York
> A Cellular Automaton Model for Critical Dynamics in Neuronal Networks
> Popova, Lilia (Ann Arbor Huron High School)
> Ann Arbor, Michigan
> Elucidating Environmental and Genetic Mechanisms of Magnetically Altered Plant Growth
> Scibelli, Samantha (Burnt Hills-Ballston Lake High School)
> Burnt Hills, New York
> Census of Blue Stars in the Eighth Data Release of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey
> Selvakumar, Raja (Milton High School)
> Alpharetta, Georgia
> Gastro Microbial Fuel Cell: A Novel Implementation of a GMFC in Capsular Nanorobotics
> Shah, Naomi (Sunset High School)
> Portland, Oregon
> The Toxicological Effect of Airborne Pollutants on Lung Health
> Shea, Meghan (Unionville High School)
> West Chester, Pennsylvania
> Optimizing the Coagulating Property of Moringa oleifera Seeds: A Novel Approach to Water Purification Techniques in Low-Income Countries
> Shi, Kensen (A&M Consolidated High School)
> College Station, Texas
> Lazy Toggle PRM: A Single-Query Approach to Motion Planning
> Solimano, Jamie (Stuyvesant High School)
> New York, New York
> Super-Resolution STED Microscopy Provides Insight Into the Dynamics of Intraflagellar Transport and Reveals Novel Distribution of Adenylate Cyclase III in Primary Cilia
> Sridhar, Mayuri (Kings Park High School)
> Kings Park, New York
> Computational Analysis of the DNA-Binding Mechanism of the p53 Tumor Suppressor and its Inactivation through the R249S Mutation
> Takahashi, Jack (Lynbrook High School)
> Saratoga, California
> Wnt Independent ß-catenin Activation is Associated With Increased Pulmonary Artery Smooth Muscle Cell Proliferation in Idiopathic Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension
> Traver, Chris (Croton-Harmon High School)
> Croton-on-Hudson, New York
> Investigating Noise Pollution Using Smartphones and Citizen Scientists
> Tripathi, Raghav (Westview High School)
> Portland, Oregon
> Design and Synthesis of Novel Fatty Acid Binding Protein Inhibitors for Analgesic and Anti-Inflammatory Effects through Increases in Endogenous Anandamide Concentrations
> Vasudevan, Sahana (Gnyanam Academy)
> Palo Alto, California
> Minimizing the Number of Carries in the Set of Coset Representatives of a Normal Subgroup
> Volz, Sara (Cheyenne Mountain High School)
> Colorado Springs, Colorado
> Optimizing Algae Biofuels: Artificial Selection to Improve Lipid Synthesis
> Wang, Joy (Parkland High School)
> Orefield, Pennsylvania
> Polyoxovanadate-based Surfactants: The Search for an Effective Heterogeneous Catalyst
> Wenger, Brittany (Out-of-Door Academy)
> Sarasota, Florida
> Global Neural Network Cloud Service for Breast Cancer
> Wong, Catherine (Morristown High School)
> Morristown, New Jersey
> A Novel Design for Wireless Low-Cost Cardiac Examination Over the Mobile Phone Platform: Telemedicine for the Developing World
> Zbarsky, Samuel (Montgomery Blair High School)
> Rockville, Maryland
> On Improved Bounds for Bounded Degree Spanning Trees for Points in Arbitrary Dimension
> Zhang, Kelly (The College Preparatory School)
> Orinda, California
> Fluorescent Imaging for Nano-Detection (FIND) of Cancer Cells for Future Surgery
> Zhang, Michael (Smithtown High School East)
> Saint James, New York
> Role-Inducted Perspective Visual Behavior during Scene Free-Viewing
> 
> There are 10 South Asian, and 11 East Asian (10 Chinese 1 Jap).
> 
> I n 2013 Intel prize, there are 10 South Asian, and 11 East Asian (10 Chinese 1 Jap).
> 
> *In 2013 Intel prize, there are 10 South Asian, and 11 East Asian (10 Chinese 1 Jap).*



How about previous years' record or the historical statistics?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Lux de Veritas

I have another data set out. The Intel Prize semi finalist has 117 East Asian name and 73 South Asian name. So East Asian vs South Asian is 61.5 : 38.5.


India and East Asian are roughly the same at super congitive level. But other that range Indians' IQ fall rapidly. In Intel Final prize Indian is almost equal to East Asian. In Intel Prize semi finalist, I estimate East Asian vs Indians is more than 6:4. Indians' high IQ is narrow base.

East Asian not only equal Indians in the top cogitive range, our IQ is also broad base.

This verify my hypothesis. And Indian IQ is going to further drop after this "semi finalist" bracket.

Intel STS - 2013 Semifinalists - Society for Science & the Public


----------



## AADHAAR

szft517 said:


> By your logic, God create humans, humans invented modern things, so god is the most innovative and intelligent, right??? ridiculous&#65281;&#65281;&#65281; Whatever advance that based on previous breakthroughs on technology is due to the people who is working on it. People have always been making progress by referring to the world's most cutting edge inventions, product or culture. No one can be excluded. People invented helicopter with inspiration of dragonfly, so dragonfly is the most intelligent, right?? This is your logic. According to you, whatever we have done is the consequence of the most most most previous thing, God.
> 
> Actually, no exaggerate, *the most famous *and the only invention I heard about India is curry. I am going to have a taste of curry chicken today and enjoy your greatest inventions. It really suprises me.



India's contribution is: *ZERO*.

Eh.. that's half the binary world.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## redhat

szft517 said:


> By your logic, God create humans, humans invented modern things, so god is the most innovative and intelligent, right??? ridiculous&#65281;&#65281;&#65281; Whatever advance that based on previous breakthroughs on technology is due to the people who is working on it. People have always been making progress by referring to the world's most cutting edge inventions, product or culture. No one can be excluded. People invented helicopter with inspiration of dragonfly, so dragonfly is the most intelligent, right?? This is your logic. According to you, whatever we have done is the consequence of the most most most previous thing, God.
> 
> Actually, no exaggerate, the most famous and the only invention I heard about India is curry. I am going to have a taste of curry chicken today and enjoy your greatest inventions. It really suprises me.



Who told you God created humans?


I made a Web Page. Will that make it high tech Indian technology?. That is how your East Asian technologies appear to me.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Banglar Lathial

karim3343 said:


> They are deciding based on population groups. That is, South Asia consists of a heterogeneous group, but also a homogenous intelligence (most South Asian IQ averages around low-80's).
> 
> IQ tests were provided in the native language of the speakers.





This is where your favouritism towards the authors fails. 

You can not use 1950s GDP of America and compare it with 2013 GDP of Germany to claim that German economy is larger than American one. 

The yardstick used should be consistent and factually accurate. 

How do you (as an intelligent person) support this nonsense that all these heterogeneous groups around the Middle East, North Africa, South Asia would have the same mean IQ, while countries like Singapore, South Africa, America, or so called "Israel" would be 'broken up' according to the authors' whims?

Did you even analyze the studies? Most of them are flawed for the simple reason - same yardstick not used, culture fair, language neutral tests were not used (so called IQ tests relying on ANY LANGUAGE are NEVER administered by even a low IQ society like MENSA; you should know that if you have been a member). 

Another example: How about we use the fact that South Korean GDP is around 1,000 trillion won, and US GDP is around US$15 trillion, to claim that South Korean GDP>US GDP (because 1000 trillion>15 trillion). 


*I ask again, have you analyzed the test results in the appendix? I have showed already why it is flawed (arbitrary assignment of races, usage of data from 1950s and 1960s etc). *


You should only use data for those groups that have been tested extensively and have confirmed low IQs (like Hindustan).



Lux de Veritas said:


> I have another data set out. The Intel Prize semi finalist has 117 East Asian name and 73 South Asian name. So East Asian vs South Asian is 61.5 : 38.5.
> 
> 
> India and East Asian are roughly the same at super congitive level. But other that range Indians' IQ fall rapidly. In Intel Final prize Indian is almost equal to East Asian. In Intel Prize semi finalist, I estimate East Asian vs Indians is more than 6:4. Indians' high IQ is narrow base.
> 
> East Asian not only equal Indians in the top cogitive range, our IQ is also broad base.
> 
> This verify my hypothesis. And Indian IQ is going to further drop after this "semi finalist" bracket.
> 
> Intel STS - 2013 Semifinalists - Society for Science & the Public




Mate, this has nothing to do with IQ testing. IQ tests are far different from some "national science talent search" (where the judges' personal choices will affect the outcomes, and there is no independent and objective way of arriving at a final result). 


Apart from that, I agree, Hindustanis (low consumption of iodized salt, and consumption of cow dung and cow urine), have low IQs.


----------



## East Asia United

drunken-monke said:


> I took my first IQ test about 6 months back.. Again took today MENSA and surprisingly both the scores were same.. The score was 123 both the times.. By the way I am research scientist in one of the large pharmaceutical organizations who supply medicine to USA and Europe....
> 
> One question does IQ has anything to do with educational qualification one attains?? Can OP answer this??



No it does not. You can't study for an IQ test and improve your score more than 3 points, showing the reliability of an IQ test.



Banglar Lathial said:


> This is where your favouritism towards the authors fails.
> 
> You can not use 1950s GDP of America and compare it with 2013 GDP of Germany to claim that German economy is larger than American one.
> 
> The yardstick used should be consistent and factually accurate.
> 
> How do you (as an intelligent person) support this nonsense that all these heterogeneous groups around the Middle East, North Africa, South Asia would have the same mean IQ, while countries like Singapore, South Africa, America, or so called "Israel" would be 'broken up' according to the authors' whims?
> 
> Did you even analyze the studies? Most of them are flawed for the simple reason - same yardstick not used, culture fair, language neutral tests were not used (so called IQ tests relying on ANY LANGUAGE are NEVER administered by even a low IQ society like MENSA; you should know that if you have been a member).
> 
> Another example: How about we use the fact that South Korean GDP is around 1,000 trillion won, and US GDP is around US$15 trillion, to claim that South Korean GDP>US GDP (because 1000 trillion>15 trillion).
> 
> 
> *I ask again, have you analyzed the test results in the appendix? I have showed already why it is flawed (arbitrary assignment of races, usage of data from 1950s and 1960s etc). *
> 
> 
> You should only use data for those groups that have been tested extensively and have confirmed low IQs (like Hindustan).
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Mate, this has nothing to do with IQ testing. IQ tests are far different from some "national science talent search" (where the judges' personal choices will affect the outcomes, and there is no independent and objective way of arriving at a final result).
> 
> 
> Apart from that, I agree, Hindustanis (low consumption of iodized salt, and consumption of cow dung and cow urine), have low IQs.



My friend, IQ tests measure potential, and therefore innate genetic intelligence, so your argument about measuring past GDP vs. present is not correct in this regard.

Read a little about what IQ tests measure. They are not measuring whatever is happening at the moment, seeing as how the score of someone who is 10-years old doesn't change much when they are 20 years old.

Does this mean that they are of the same intelligence? This 20-year old is just as dumb as when he was 10? No, because it measure potential to succeed (which we correlate with intelligence), so his IQ should stay the same for most of his life.


----------



## East Asia United

redhat said:


> You can go in loops to claim East Asian high IQ,but not body is going to take you seriously.Indians may or may not have invented anything.After all we have R&D most major MNC companies here in India. But we don't claim that to be Indian technology,the way you did for Japanese companies.
> 
> The East Asians have almost zero contribution to Science,Engineering and Technology.If you have doubt you can
> check for East Asian names in classical Engineering or Computer Science Textbooks.Their contributions to Maths are even worse .Maths is right representation of IQ .You seriously lack in those areas.
> 
> 
> Rocket is indeed a German technology and not American.If Japan sends a rocket ,we don't call it Japanese technology.Taking Laser Disc and making it CDROM or DVD doesn't make it high end technology.
> 
> What we call Japanese technology is actually developed in several countries,with huge input and technical help from America.Japanese don't have the brain to develop complex technologies like westerners,Face it, you people are nothing.Japan became prosperous by pumping cheap goods like China is doing now.
> 
> 
> Projecting western inventions as your own ,doesn't make your IQ high.East Asians don't have high IQ.
> You cannot measure the IQ of a country using some IQ test,especially for a complex country like India.



I just want everyone who has read this thread to check out this post:



> You cannot measure the IQ of a country using some IQ test



I am at a loss for words.... truly.... Not sure how to respond to this amazing level of intelligence.


----------



## redhat

karim3343 said:


> I just want everyone who has read this thread to check out this post:
> 
> 
> 
> I am at a loss for words.... truly.... Not sure how to respond to this amazing level of intelligence.



Coming to a south Asian forum and racially profiling south Asians using some obscure IQ test,what response do you expect?.


----------



## rott

karim3343 said:


> IQ score indicate intelligence compared to whichever population is placed at 100.
> 
> You looked at your country, saw that it was low, concluded with three words.
> 
> Thanks for playing.



ROFL....

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Banglar Lathial

karim3343 said:


> My friend, IQ tests measure potential, and therefore innate genetic intelligence, so your argument about measuring past GDP vs. present is not correct in this regard.
> 
> Read a little about what IQ tests measure. They are not measuring whatever is happening at the moment, seeing as how the score of someone who is 10-years old doesn't change much when they are 20 years old.
> 
> Does this mean that they are of the same intelligence? This 20-year old is just as dumb as when he was 10? No, because it measure potential to succeed (which we correlate with intelligence), so his IQ should stay the same for most of his life.




My friend, do read up on IQ tests, and take real (as in, those administered by real high IQ societies, of which MENSA is the most popular because its entry criterion is the most lax) IQ tests. No real IQ tests rely on languages, or culture specific nuances. 

My friend, IQ scores DO vary for individuals between the age of 10 and 20. 

How come somebody as eager as you on the topic of IQ tests does not know this fact? Generally, a person's IQ is an indication (estimation) of his intellectual capability when compared to an 'adult' (*assumed* to be one who is 18 years of age, for no scientific reason, though). If a 10 year old obtains the same raw score as an 18 year old in an IQ test, the 10 year old's IQ would be estimated to be higher than the 18 year old person's. 

*Didn't you know that?*



---------------------------------



Did you read up on nutrition (like intake of iodized salt, lack of which is the most common cause of preventable brain damage in the world; and for which Hindustan is the worst affected 'country' in the world, explaining its consistently and scientifically confirmed low IQ) affecting cognitive abilities?


WHO | Iodization of salt




> *Iodine deficiency is the main cause of preventable brain damage and reduced IQ in children worldwide.*





Thus, if you take an unreliable or unrepresentative sample in Congo or Central Africa in 1950s, and compare with the performance of some samples in highly developed Qatar, UAE, Japan or Hong Kong after 2000, the results will be skewed in favour of the later group. 


What I am saying is, *you need to control for all other variables* when constructing such tables, and plotting regression lines. Otherwise, it is simply statistically invalid a dataset and of no meaningful use in strict statistical sense. Even when I have *not * obtained a PhD/DSc in Statistics, with my limited (completed upto a few "advanced" courses a long time ago, and haven't reviewed them in close to a decade) knowledge of statistics, I can easily see the humongous list of errors made by the *authors*. 

The only 'saving grace' may be the appendix itself, listing the test scores obtained for different sample populations in different countries at different times for different tests, but even then thorough investigation may expose further scientific limitations of those studies. 


-----------------------------


GDP is actually the closest 'common' statistic that I can compare IQ with, because most people agree that neither of these two indicators are 'perfect', yet both of them are very useful for indicating certain capabilities (the first indicates economic output of economies, the second indicates intellectual potential of human beings/others). 

Both of them also vary between countries, and from year to year. 

For example, many developing countries would have had 50% or 90% or more people who were hungry, malnourished or did not know why iodized salt is important back in the 1960s. But, even in the most backward country on Earth, more people (in % and absolute number) today have access to these basic amenities. 

In these few decades, the *population* has also changed. 

When tests were conducted in 1950s, they were for the "grandfathers'" generation, when tests are conducted today, that's for "today's" generation. 


So, there are *multiple variables* that affect the final outcome (like in all statistical models of some significance), which means, that these multiple variables need to be controlled for to find out the real difference between countries for that single variable (IQ). 

This is standard procedure for any statistical model used in almost all fields of physical or social science, policy research and what have you.


----------------------------------------



Also, you avoided the question with a hasty, ill conceived, answer (probably because you don't know the answer, or want to avoid this altogether): *How were the races in the world categorized?*

Nobody can say that all the Middle East, North Africa, South Asia (which has a large Muslim population, a large percentage of which is of foreign, i.e. Central Asian, Middle Eastern etc descent), South East Asia etc belong to a single race. 

A single country like Nigeria has more than 250 ethnic groups, as does Indonesia. Their 'scores' are all lumped into one, but a teeny tiny red *** like Singapore is broken up into "four races", why again?


For any scientifically valid statistical study, we must delineate very clearly what variables we are going to use. If 'races' will be variables, we must define them clearly. Isn't it? 



------------------------------------------------


Again, to help you understand, the example of GDP will help. You can not measure the GDP of a country by taking random samples, and making linear/polynomial/logarithmic/log-linear etc extrapolations. 

For example, you can not say we measured the average annual economic output of 200 boulangeries in Lyon, France, and multiplying the mean income of these 200 bakers by the total population of France, we can estimate the annual GDP of France for 2012, similarly, we would like to measure the average annual economic output of all the oligarch-owned business units in Moscow (because Russia is 'so vast', we take Moscow as a 'representative sample'), and multiplying the population of Russia with the mean incomes of these oligarchs, we can estimate the GDP of Russia. 

The statistically sound method is to conduct extensive surveys and document the results. 

The less sound but more affordable alternative is to conduct extensive, annual tests from a wide number of representative, samples using the same standard (same test, culture fair, language neutral test) to a *representative sample*. 


Finally, IQ tests are very useful indeed (upto a certain high IQ, beyond which its 'validity' is in question - because 'test creators' themselves find it difficult to determine how to rank two very high IQ persons when their own IQs are lower) as measures of intellectual potential.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Battle of Kursk

@Banglar Lathial

ever since I've seen this thread I was itching to post something similar, albeit less detailed, but since explaining statistics is not something I find of interest I could never make myself.

I want to thank you for the effort.


----------



## Banglar Lathial

IQ tests are very much valid, when they are administered properly (of course, that goes for other tests as well). 

You can not test a sample of American physicists in French, Japanese or Russian and claim that since they scored low, their knowledge of Physics is poor. 

Likewise, IQ tests have to be administered in "language neutral, culture fair" manner, and such tests are regularly administered for membership into any High IQ society of note. 

If the authors' poor grasp of statistical sciences is overcome thanks to some knowledgeable statistician, then these regression plots will be more scientifically valid. 

Also, you can not claim that German GDP is more than American GDP by comparing German GDP of 2013 and American GDP of 1963.


----------



## Sam1980

szft517 said:


> Every country is making progress, even India is making progress. But, China and India are on the same level in 1950s, India is even better, why there is such a large gap today?
> 
> The economic growth of China has always been higher than US, with a higher speed, we can surpass US. This is our IQ, we are faster than US so we can catch up. Look at you, much lower economic growth than China, besides we have a much larger economic gross than you. The gap has always been expanding between China and India, why is that? You are even better than China in 1950s. IQ makes the difference. Face it bravely.



That is a pretty dumb explanation from a supposedly genius person! 
China's economic development is mainly dependent on U.S. companies (China's good economic policies also attract investors better compared to India's, but with emergence of new Asian players like Indonesia and Bangladesh that distribute the investors evenly between these countries situation is going to change), therefore you have to thank the U.S. companies for outsourcing to China (for your economic development). It doesn't have anything to do with intelligence, as a matter of fact it shows that U.S. companies want to make more profit by cutting their operational costs. It also has to do with China's monopoly on rare earth metals.

It's interesting that people who are obsessed about IQ are not even able to understand simple logic.

As for Karim, this guy is beyond help, I wouldn't waste my time trying to educate this guy.


----------



## Banglar Lathial

I just realized that two Hindutva terrorists thanked my post, in which I confirmed that Hindustan is a proven low IQ country and has the highest number of braindamaged people due to low consumption of iodized salt.


----------



## StarCraft_ZT

Sam1980 said:


> That is a pretty dumb explanation from a supposedly genius person!
> China's economic development is mainly dependent on U.S. companies (China's good economic policies also attract investors better compared to India's, but with emergence of new Asian players like Indonesia and Bangladesh that will distribute the investors evenly between these countries situation is going to change), therefore you have to thank the U.S. companies for outsourcing to China (for your economic development). It doesn't have anything to do with intelligence, as a matter of fact it shows that U.S. companies want to make more profit by cutting their operation costs. It also has to do with China monopoly on rare earth metals.
> 
> It's interesting that people who are obsessed about IQ are not even able to understand simple logic.
> 
> As for Karim, this guy is beyond help, I wouldn't waste my time trying to educate this guy.



Below is export/GDP percentage in 2010

China 3%, US -3.5%, France -2.3%, UK -3.2%, Japan 1.14%, Russia 8.1%, Brazial -1% 

It is widely accepted that the fluctuations of export/GDP % is normal between -5% and 5%. While it seems every nation except Russia qualified, because Russia maintains a predominant natrual resource export economy.

First Stage: balancing trade by increasing import and consumption.
In 2009, favourable balance of China has decreased to 196 billion USD, that is a good sign that we do not rely heavily on export as previous. In March 2010, unfavourable balance of trade occured, we have been transforming from a predominant export economy to an investing driven economy. Labour cost rise, raw material cost rise, rent rise, inferior position to our national company, such western multinational companies have been leaving for SE Asia. The most fundamental reason of their leaving is due to our power of consumption and investing. Outsourcing and low labour cost is no longer the reason why mutlinational companies favor China.

Second Stage: endogenous growth make China economy more independent.
Tell you that, China is planning its urbanization up to 70% in 2030, average 1% per year. During the process, there will be totally 400 millions immigrant workers who are gonna settle down in cities and the most developed urban areas. Every one worker will expense 0.1 million pulic services fees only excluding express highway construction and other infrastructure expense. 400 millions immigrant workers means 40 trillion Investment, can you believe that? This 40 trillion Investment is highly due to ourselves' demand, we want better education, living standard, etc... so it is not due to western companies. This is our endogenous growth, which means we can maintain a sustaining growth by the consumption of our residents or investment even with tiny export. That is why, in the long run, China will be more independent, btw a lower proportion of export of GDP will ease the stress of RMB appreciation, which means we will be independent both on international trade and financial situation
Got it?

Whether you believe or not, Karim is telling the truth.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Sam1980 said:


> That is a pretty dumb explanation from a supposedly genius person!
> China's economic development is mainly dependent on U.S. companies (China's good economic policies also attract investors better compared to India's, but with emergence of new Asian players like Indonesia and Bangladesh that distribute the investors evenly between these countries situation is going to change), therefore you have to thank the U.S. companies for outsourcing to China (for your economic development). It doesn't have anything to do with intelligence, as a matter of fact it shows that U.S. companies want to make more profit by cutting their operational costs. It also has to do with China's monopoly on rare earth metals.
> 
> It's interesting that people who are obsessed about IQ are not even able to understand simple logic.
> 
> As for Karim, this guy is beyond help, I wouldn't waste my time trying to educate this guy.



Seeing as how you didn't even bother responding to my post, I doubt you even have the requisite intelligence needed to even understand the validity of IQ tests.


----------



## East Asia United

Banglar Lathial said:


> My friend, IQ scores DO vary for individuals between the age of 10 and 20.



Hahaha. Go look up the data. By how many points? Generally speaking, IQ tests after around age 10 do *NOT* vary more than 2-3 points on the same test.

DID YOU KNOW THAT?



> Did you read up on nutrition



Buddy, the authors and I made it very clear that there are nutritional factors that artificially bring down IQ scores. Sub-Saharan Africa has a genotypic potential around 80. Did you actually *READ* the study?



> How were the races in the world categorized?



They *werent* They were categorized based on geographical region. In fact, if you even *READ* the study, you will see this.



Battle of Kursk said:


> @Banglar Lathial
> 
> ever since I've seen this thread I was itching to post something similar, albeit less detailed, but since explaining statistics is not something I find of interest I could never make myself.
> 
> I want to thank you for the effort.



Read my response.


----------



## Banglar Lathial

karim3343 said:


> Hahaha. Go look up the data. By how many points? Generally speaking, IQ tests after around age 10 do *NOT* vary more than 2-3 points on the same test.
> 
> DID YOU KNOW THAT?
> 
> 
> 
> Buddy, the authors and I made it very clear that there are nutritional factors that artificially bring down IQ scores. Sub-Saharan Africa has a genotypic potential around 80. Did you actually *READ* the study?
> 
> 
> 
> They *werent* They were categorized based on geographical region. In fact, if you even *READ* the study, you will see this.
> 
> 
> 
> Read my response.





My friend, why all the "ha ha ha"? 

I thought you were a serious poster.

Is it that you are trolling? Or is it that you are finding it difficult to provide sufficient argumentation? 


You say, countries were categorized on their geographical regions? Why were Singapore, so called "Israel", USA, and South Africa categorized into different "races" then? Why not lump them together with their "neighbours? 

You can not run away from the fact that, just like GDP measurements are very much valid, but likes have to be compared with likes (e.g. you can not compare 1963 GDP of USA with 2013 GDP of Germany to say Germany's GDP is greater than USA's GDP), same is true for IQ (or any other) studies. 

My friend, why do you say IQ scores do not 'vary' by more than 2-3 points on the same test for the same person at different stages (i.e. different age) of his life? 

Again, you are apparently completely ignorant of the fact that IQ scores for somebody of age 10 would be calculated by multiplying his 'raw score' by a multiplicative factor to correct for his 'lower age', while that's not the case for somebody above the age of 18, usually. 

By default, then, the same person at the age of 10 is likely to score higher than he would score at the age of 65. 


And, where did you find "genotypic potential" from? 

By default, to determine the "genotypic potential" of a group, you need to identify and list all the groups involved. 

Did the authors do that? Did the authors list all the "races" to begin with? 

The topic of IQ studies is very much valid, only that these authors 'mucked up' due to their poor knowledge of statistics. 

Also, you did not address most of the points I mentioned. I think you can go back and re-read my earlier post.


----------



## Type 052D

karim3343 said:


> Hahaha. Go look up the data. By how many points? Generally speaking, IQ tests after around age 10 do *NOT* vary more than 2-3 points on the same test.
> 
> DID YOU KNOW THAT?
> 
> 
> 
> Buddy, the authors and I made it very clear that there are nutritional factors that artificially bring down IQ scores. Sub-Saharan Africa has a genotypic potential around 80. Did you actually *READ* the study?
> 
> 
> 
> They *werent* They were categorized based on geographical region. In fact, if you even *READ* the study, you will see this.
> 
> 
> 
> Read my response.



Ok High IQ OP, answer this simple GCSE (age 16) Maths question:

Rearrange this formula to get y in terms of x

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Type 052D

Banglar Lathial said:


> My friend, why all the "ha ha ha"?
> 
> I thought you were a serious poster.
> 
> Is it that you are trolling? Or is it that you are finding it difficult to provide sufficient argumentation?
> 
> 
> You say, countries were categorized on their geographical regions? Why were Singapore, so called "Israel", USA, and South Africa categorized into different "races" then? Why not lump them together with their "neighbours?
> 
> You can not run away from the fact that, just like GDP measurements are very much valid, but likes have to be compared with likes (e.g. you can not compare 1963 GDP of USA with 2013 GDP of Germany to say Germany's GDP is greater than USA's GDP), same is true for IQ (or any other) studies.
> 
> My friend, why do you say IQ scores do not 'vary' by more than 2-3 points on the same test for the same person at different stages (i.e. different age) of his life?
> 
> Again, you are apparently completely ignorant of the fact that IQ scores for somebody of age 10 would be calculated by multiplying his 'raw score' by a multiplicative factor to correct for his 'lower age', while that's not the case for somebody above the age of 18, usually.
> 
> By default, then, the same person at the age of 10 is likely to score higher than he would score at the age of 65.
> 
> 
> And, where did you find "genotypic potential" from?
> 
> By default, to determine the "genotypic potential" of a group, you need to identify and list all the groups involved.
> 
> Did the authors do that? Did the authors list all the "races" to begin with?
> 
> The topic of IQ studies is very much valid, only that these authors 'mucked up' due to their poor knowledge of statistics.
> 
> Also, you did not address most of the points I mentioned. I think you can go back and re-read my earlier post.



It's funny how he talks about Genetic fixation of IQ levels of different human populations yet Genetics shows that there is more differences inside an 'racial group' then between races..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Banglar Lathial

Type 052D said:


> It's funny how he talks about Genetic fixation of IQ levels of different human populations yet Genetics shows that there is more differences inside an 'racial group' then between races..



That is all fine. I do not have any problem as such with his stance, or with your stance. 

One thing must be clarified, nevertheless.

What are the list of "races"? 

If we are to categorize races by IQ, then we must list these races.

In the same way, that if we are to categorize countries by GDP, then we must list these countries. 

-----


Randomly making up 'races' according to one's own wish, or lumping dozens of countries together into 'one race' of the author's own choice (because he does not know better), does not mean that's the reality. 

We should first define the 'races' uniquely, then we should go about measuring certain aspects of these 'races' if we want to do so.



Type 052D said:


> Ok High IQ OP, answer this simple GCSE (age 16) Maths question:
> 
> Rearrange this formula to get y in terms of x




I see that you visit the "studentroom", quite often? 


Anyhow, let's not change the thread topic. He may be a low IQ, medium IQ or high IQ person. That has nothing to do with the topic. 

However, any study must be conducted in a scientifically accurate manner. 

You can not compare GDP of Germany in 2013 with GDP of America in 1963 to say German GDP is more than American GDP. 

Likewise, you can not compare alleged mean IQs of Congo or Central Africa in 1960 (two generations ago) with alleged mean IQs of Western European countries today. 

Nobody can say that all of Africa is one race, while teeny tiny fake country like so called "Israel", or red d0t Singapore, or South Africa are different cases altogether because of no other reason but the author's own personal whim.


----------



## Banglar Lathial

Just for the sake of titillating the grey matter of our interested, high IQ friends, would any of you consider the following "tests" an "IQ test"?




Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE)




> Mini Mental State Examination gives the 'mini-mental state' examination of cognitive function. This is a 5-minute bedside test that is useful as a screen and in assessing the degree of cognitive dysfunction in patients with diffuse brain disorders. It correlates well with more time-consuming Intelligence Quotient (IQ) tests, but it will not as easily pick up cognitive problems caused by focal brain lesions. A score of 23 or less will pick up about 90% of patients with cognitive impairments, with about 10% false positives.
> 
> --------------------------------------------------
> 
> *The mini-mental state examination
> *
> 
> 
> Orientation
> 
> *Score one point for each correct answer:
> *
> 
> *What is the: time, date, day, month, year? Maximum: 5 points
> 
> What is the name of: this ward, hospital, district, town, country? 5 points
> *
> 
> Registration
> 
> *Name three objects only once. Score up to a maximum of 3 points for each correct repetition. 3 points
> 
> Repeat the objects until the patient can repeat them accurately (in order to test recall later).
> *
> 
> Attention and calculation
> 
> *Ask the patient to subtract 7 from 100 and then 7 from the result four more times.
> 
> Score 1 point for each correct subtraction. 5 points
> *
> 
> Recall
> 
> *Ask the patient to repeat the names of the three objects learnt in the registration test. 3 points
> *
> 
> Language
> 
> *Score 1 point for each of two simple objects named (e.g. pen and a watch). 2 points
> 
> Score 1 point for an accurate repetition of the phrase: 'No ifs, ands or buts'. 1 point
> 
> Give a 3-stage command, scoring 1 point for each part correctly carried out; e.g. 'With the index finger of your right hand touch your nose and then your left ear'. 3 points
> *
> 
> *Write 'Close your eyes' on a blank piece of paper and ask the patient to follow the written command. Score 1 point if the patient closes the eyes. 1 point
> *
> 
> *Ask the patient to write a sentence. Score 1 point if the sentence is sensible and contains a noun and a verb. 1 point
> *
> 
> 
> *Draw a pair of intersecting pentagons with each side approximately 1 inch long. Score 1 point if it is correctly copied. 1 point
> *
> 
> *TOTAL MAXIMUM SCORE 30 POINTS
> *






*I am sure many of our eager friends must have taken real IQ tests administered by high IQ societies and admitted to those high IQ socities, so they should know exactly why I am asking the question above. 
*


@karim3343


----------



## Speeder 2

Banglar Lathial said:


> My friend, do read up on IQ tests, and take real (as in, those administered by real high IQ societies, of which MENSA is the most popular because its entry criterion is the most lax) IQ tests. No real IQ tests rely on languages, or culture specific nuances.
> 
> My friend, IQ scores DO vary for individuals between the age of 10 and 20.
> 
> How come somebody as eager as you on the topic of IQ tests does not know this fact? Generally, a person's IQ is an indication (estimation) of his intellectual capability when compared to an 'adult' (*assumed* to be one who is 18 years of age, for no scientific reason, though). If a 10 year old obtains the same raw score as an 18 year old in an IQ test, the 10 year old's IQ would be estimated to be higher than the 18 year old person's.
> 
> *Didn't you know that?*
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> Did you read up on nutrition (like intake of iodized salt, lack of which is the most common cause of preventable brain damage in the world; and for which Hindustan is the worst affected 'country' in the world, explaining its consistently and scientifically confirmed low IQ) affecting cognitive abilities?
> 
> 
> WHO | Iodization of salt
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thus, if you take an unreliable or unrepresentative sample in Congo or Central Africa in 1950s, and compare with the performance of some samples in highly developed Qatar, UAE, Japan or Hong Kong after 2000, the results will be skewed in favour of the later group.
> 
> 
> What I am saying is, *you need to control for all other variables* when constructing such tables, and plotting regression lines. Otherwise, it is simply statistically invalid a dataset and of no meaningful use in strict statistical sense. Even when I have *not * obtained a PhD/DSc in Statistics, with my limited (completed upto a few "advanced" courses a long time ago, and haven't reviewed them in close to a decade) knowledge of statistics, I can easily see the humongous list of errors made by the *authors*.
> 
> The only 'saving grace' may be the appendix itself, listing the test scores obtained for different sample populations in different countries at different times for different tests, but even then thorough investigation may expose further scientific limitations of those studies.
> 
> 
> -----------------------------
> 
> 
> GDP is actually the closest 'common' statistic that I can compare IQ with, because most people agree that neither of these two indicators are 'perfect', yet both of them are very useful for indicating certain capabilities (the first indicates economic output of economies, the second indicates intellectual potential of human beings/others).
> 
> Both of them also vary between countries, and from year to year.
> 
> For example, many developing countries would have had 50% or 90% or more people who were hungry, malnourished or did not know why iodized salt is important back in the 1960s. But, even in the most backward country on Earth, more people (in % and absolute number) today have access to these basic amenities.
> 
> In these few decades, the *population* has also changed.
> 
> When tests were conducted in 1950s, they were for the "grandfathers'" generation, when tests are conducted today, that's for "today's" generation.
> 
> 
> So, there are *multiple variables* that affect the final outcome (like in all statistical models of some significance), which means, that these multiple variables need to be controlled for to find out the real difference between countries for that single variable (IQ).
> 
> This is standard procedure for any statistical model used in almost all fields of physical or social science, policy research and what have you.
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> Also, you avoided the question with a hasty, ill conceived, answer (probably because you don't know the answer, or want to avoid this altogether): *How were the races in the world categorized?*
> 
> Nobody can say that all the Middle East, North Africa, South Asia (which has a large Muslim population, a large percentage of which is of foreign, i.e. Central Asian, Middle Eastern etc descent), South East Asia etc belong to a single race.
> 
> A single country like Nigeria has more than 250 ethnic groups, as does Indonesia. Their 'scores' are all lumped into one, but a teeny tiny red *** like Singapore is broken up into "four races", why again?
> 
> 
> For any scientifically valid statistical study, we must delineate very clearly what variables we are going to use. If 'races' will be variables, we must define them clearly. Isn't it?
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> Again, to help you understand, the example of GDP will help. You can not measure the GDP of a country by taking random samples, and making linear/polynomial/logarithmic/log-linear etc extrapolations.
> 
> For example, you can not say we measured the average annual economic output of 200 boulangeries in Lyon, France, and multiplying the mean income of these 200 bakers by the total population of France, we can estimate the annual GDP of France for 2012, similarly, we would like to measure the average annual economic output of all the oligarch-owned business units in Moscow (because Russia is 'so vast', we take Moscow as a 'representative sample'), and multiplying the population of Russia with the mean incomes of these oligarchs, we can estimate the GDP of Russia.
> 
> The statistically sound method is to conduct extensive surveys and document the results.
> 
> The less sound but more affordable alternative is to conduct extensive, annual tests from a wide number of representative, samples using the same standard (same test, culture fair, language neutral test) to a *representative sample*.
> 
> 
> Finally, IQ tests are very useful indeed (upto a certain high IQ, beyond which its 'validity' is in question - because 'test creators' themselves find it difficult to determine how to rank two very high IQ persons when their own IQs are lower) as measures of intellectual potential.







Some of those are all right; while some are wrong.


Most importantly, I really can't see what you are arguing against.  


-are you against IQ? But you agree IQ is a valid measure.

- are you for IQ? But you repeatedly bringing in some usual "variables", as if standard modern IQ tests hadn't considered these "variables" at all, yet in fact they do, and pretty thoroughly with statistics validation.



What are you trying to argue indeed? 



1. on race: oke you don't know which race you belong? really? ( I see you put on BD flag, why is that? Is your random guess?) Any 5-yr-old knows which race he/she belongs using natural instinct with 100% accuracy. ppl in mid Eurasia, ME are mixed race of the 4 major races nearby. A mixed race in itself is a "standalone race" in its own right thus. It that a rocket science?

2. IQ of the same person varies throughout the lifetime. Yet not by much, only a few points. A guy with 100 IQ won't become 80 no matter how well he eats or not eats, culture or no culture, literate or illiterate. And vice versus. IQ( as large as 80% determined by genes) is almost like one's eye colour (almost 100%), it won't change that much during life time, because both are largely determined by innate genes which have been selected throughout 10s if not 100s thousands of years of evolution, with fancy and trivial "Iodization of salt", "Nike Snickers", "GDP/per cap", or not.



3. You seem to rebuke IQ tests relying on some "seemly correct" yet truly absurd excuses, which more or less are 

i. there're no races ( already discussed in point 1), 

ii. there are so many ethnic groups within each major race that we dunno which is whichrofl: so here somehow you seem to admit the existence of "race" very readily when it suits you?), and

iii. there're too many variables that unless one controls all variables at all time and do tests on each country on each sun ethnic group for many many years we shall get no conclusion.


Both your ii and iii can be easily dealt with as they have been throughout decades!!!

On ii : average mixed race IQ can be estimated VERY accurately via their composing major races, and their "standalone race" average, via IQ tests, SAT, PISA, TIMSS etc numerous statistical valid methods and proxies.


On iii: we humans have never been to places beyond Moon, yet we can very accurately know what kind of atmosphere and surface compositions are for all planets in Solar system and many many far beyond. So according to you, how the fcuk we know that, since obviously like IQ tests we've never been to those places and tehre're so many so called "variables" are seemingly "uncontrollable" or even unknown from where we sit???

--Answer A: statistics! We know other planets/stars through statistics analysis on random asteroids and comets that we've got, just like we know the average IQ of Liberia, even if we've never been there, thru its nearby closest racial groups in Ivory Coast and Nigeria, and thru average IQ of random Liberia immigrants (from and into)in other lands such as the US and the Caribbean throughout years. 
--Answer B: hundreds of large scale studies on trans-racial trans-cultural and trans-lingua adoptions ( in which ALL variables you can name of are controlled because they are the SAME!) : e.g. average IQ of Korean , Japanese and Chinese Infants adopted by the White and Black couples (of varied economical classes) in the US and in Belgium...average IQ of adopted African ( being Liberia, Congo or whatever) infants In Canada, UK and US average IQ of Eastern European/Russian infants and kids adopted by White, Black and Oriental couples in the US, Australia etc. etc.



See, scientific methods , and the logic underneath, enable us to know lots of things in nature, including IQ of different races along with the liquid gas compositions of Jupiter, with * pinpoint accuracy *, even though we dont have to be at all the places at all times and do the testings year after year and one by one.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AADHAAR

Speeder 2 said:


> Some of those are all right; while some are wrong.
> 
> 
> Most importantly, I really can't see what you are arguing against.
> 
> 
> -are you against IQ? But you agree IQ is a valid measure.
> 
> - are you for IQ? But you repeatedly bringing in some usual "variables", as if standard modern IQ tests hadn't considered these "variables" at all, yet in fact they do, and pretty thoroughly with statistics validation.
> 
> 
> 
> What are you trying to argue indeed?
> 
> 
> 
> 1. on race: oke you don't know which race you belong? really? ( I see you put on BD flag, why is that? Is your random guess?) Any 5-yr-old knows which race he/she belongs using natural instinct with 100% accuracy. ppl in mid Eurasia, ME are mixed race of the 4 major races nearby. A mixed race in itself is a "standalone race" in its own right thus. It that a rocket science?
> 
> 2. IQ of the same person varies throughout the lifetime. Yet not by much, only a few points. A guy with 100 IQ won't become 80 no matter how well he eats or not eats, culture or no culture, literate or illiterate. And vice versus. IQ( as large as 80% determined by genes) is almost like one's eye colour (almost 100%), it won't change that much during life time, because both are largely determined by innate genes which have been selected throughout 10s if not 100s thousands of years of evolution, with fancy and trivial "Iodization of salt", "Nike Snickers", "GDP/per cap", or not.
> 
> 
> 
> 3. You seem to rebuke IQ tests relying on some "seemly correct" yet truly absurd excuses, which more or less are
> 
> i. there're no races ( already discussed in point 1),
> 
> ii. there are so many ethnic groups within each major race that we dunno which is whichrofl: so here somehow you seem to admit the existence of "race" very readily when it suits you?), and
> 
> iii. there're too many variables that unless one controls all variables at all time and do tests on each country on each sun ethnic group for many many years we shall get no conclusion.
> 
> 
> Both your ii and iii can be easily dealt with as they have been throughout decades!!!
> 
> On ii : average mixed race IQ can be estimated VERY accurately via their composing major races, and their "standalone race" average, via IQ tests, SAT, PISA, TIMSS etc numerous statistical valid methods and proxies.
> 
> 
> On iii: we humans have never been to places beyond Moon, yet we can very accurately know what kind of atmosphere and surface compositions are for all planets in Solar system and many many far beyond. So according to you, how the fcuk we know that, since obviously like IQ tests we've never been to those places and tehre're so many so called "variables" are seemingly "uncontrollable" or even unknown from where we sit???
> 
> --Answer A: statistics! We know other planets/stars through statistics analysis on random asteroids and comets that we've got, just like we know the average IQ of Liberia, even if we've never been there, thru its nearby closest racial groups in Ivory Coast and Nigeria, and thru average IQ of random Liberia immigrants (from and into)in other lands such as the US and the Caribbean throughout years.
> --Answer B: hundreds of large scale studies on trans-racial trans-cultural and trans-lingua adoptions ( in which ALL variables you can name of are controlled because they are the SAME!) : e.g. average IQ of Korean , Japanese and Chinese Infants adopted by the White and Black couples (of varied economical classes) in the US and in Belgium...average IQ of adopted African ( being Liberia, Congo or whatever) infants In Canada, UK and US&#8230; average IQ of Eastern European/Russian infants and kids adopted by White, Black and Oriental couples in the US, Australia etc. etc.
> 
> 
> 
> See, scientific methods , and the logic underneath, enable us to know lots of things in nature, including IQ of different races along with the liquid gas compositions of Jupiter, with * pinpoint accuracy *, even though we don&#8217;t have to be at all the places at all times and do the testings year after year and one by one.



Do you eat pigs ?


----------



## Banglar Lathial

Speeder 2 said:


> Some of those are all right; while some are wrong.
> 
> 
> Most importantly, I really can't see what you are arguing against.




Let me help you.

I am arguing against the use of unscientific methods in carrying out statistical analyses. 




> -are you against IQ? But you agree IQ is a valid measure.



It is not for anybody to decide if he is against/for IQ. 

In the same way, it is for nobody to decide if he is against/for GDP, life expectancy or infant mortality rates. 

These are just 'statistics', which have to collected accurately, in a scientifically accurate manner. 




> - are you for IQ? But you repeatedly bringing in some usual "variables", as if standard modern IQ tests hadn't considered these "variables" at all, yet in fact they do, and pretty thoroughly with statistics validation.




This exposes your poor understanding of statistics. 

Like any statistical study, in studies involving IQ tests, people must include many variables, and they do include many variables. 

These variables need to be controlled for, as in any other statistical study. 

Then, through a thoroughly scientific statistical study, you arrive at a more precise result based on data gathered from extensive surveys. 





> What are you trying to argue indeed?



Read my posts again to understand them better. 



> 1. on race: oke you don't know which race you belong? really? ( I see you put on BD flag, why is that? Is your random guess?) Any 5-yr-old knows which race he/she belongs using natural instinct with 100% accuracy. ppl in mid Eurasia, ME are mixed race of the 4 major races nearby. A mixed race in itself is a "standalone race" in its own right thus. It that a rocket science?




Nonsense.

Let me ask you, who was "Ikhtir uddin Muhammad Bakhtiar Khilji"? And what was his "race"? 

Then, what is the race of "low IQ, urine drinkers" near the polluted Ganges? 

Are they the same "races"? 

If not, what are the races? Are they called "Standalone race 1", and "Standalone race 2"?





> 2. IQ of the same person varies throughout the lifetime. Yet not by much, only a few points. A guy with 100 IQ won't become 80 no matter how well he eats or not eats, culture or no culture, literate or illiterate. And vice versus. IQ( as large as 80% determined by genes) is almost like one's eye colour (almost 100%), it won't change that much during life time, because both are largely determined by innate genes which have been selected throughout 10s if not 100s thousands of years of evolution, with fancy and trivial "Iodization of salt", "Nike Snickers", "GDP/per cap", or not.




I do not believe or care about evolution. 

What I care about is facts. 

We are talking about IQ, not biological sciences (which is NOT my area of specialization, so spare me any discussion on that topic).

*Do you know how to calculate the IQ of a 10 year old person ?* Simple question. 

Don't beat about the bush, provide a straightforward answer. 




> 3. You seem to rebuke IQ tests relying on some "seemly correct" yet truly absurd excuses, which more or less are
> 
> i. there're no races ( already discussed in point 1),
> 
> ii. there are so many ethnic groups within each major race that we dunno which is whichrofl: so here somehow you seem to admit the existence of "race" very readily when it suits you?), and
> 
> iii. there're too many variables that unless one controls all variables at all time and do tests on each country on each sun ethnic group for many many years we shall get no conclusion.




This is your misunderstanding. 

Re-read my posts again. 

You are making up statements, or arguments, which do not logically follow from my statements. 




> Both your ii and iii can be easily dealt with as they have been throughout decades!!!
> 
> On ii : average mixed race IQ can be estimated VERY accurately via their composing major races, and their "standalone race" average, via IQ tests, SAT, PISA, TIMSS etc numerous statistical valid methods and proxies.




1. SAT is NO IQ test. PISA or TIMSS are no IQ tests. 

*IQ tests are culture fair, language neutral tests. *

My goodness, are you a member of ANY high IQ society or not? 

If you are a member, you must have taken any of those culture fair, language neutral IQ tests. 


2. First, define the races, and 'allocate' the racial distribution of populations around the countries of the world. 

In order to rank countries by GDP, we must list the countries first. Right? 

Then, we must list the 'races' first, so that we can rank them later. 

What are the races, and what are their distributions around the world? This is a simple question, that the author, karim3343 or you has not even addressed. 




> On iii: we humans have never been to places beyond Moon, yet we can very accurately know what kind of atmosphere and surface compositions are for all planets in Solar system and many many far beyond. So according to you, how the fcuk we know that, since obviously like IQ tests we've never been to those places and tehre're so many so called "variables" are seemingly "uncontrollable" or even unknown from where we sit???




This is a red herring. 

Without carrying out a test, you can not find out the results. 

There is no need to introduce red herrings. 

This is as simple as that. 

We could estimate the 'ranges' of North Korean missiles as much as we want, but without accurate information (from sources that have measured the required variables), or from our own measurements, we simply can not determine the 'ranges' of North Korean ballistic missiles due to lack of sufficient information.

We can estimate all that we like, our estimates may turn out to be true, 'close enough' to the true value to be of comfort, or wildly out of place. 




> --Answer A: statistics! We know other planets/stars through statistics analysis on random asteroids and comets that we've got, just like we know the average IQ of Liberia, even if we've never been there, thru its nearby closest racial groups in Ivory Coast and Nigeria, and thru average IQ of random Liberia immigrants (from and into)in other lands such as the US and the Caribbean throughout years.
> --Answer B: hundreds of large scale studies on trans-racial trans-cultural and trans-lingua adoptions ( in which ALL variables you can name of are controlled because they are the SAME!) : e.g. average IQ of Korean , Japanese and Chinese Infants adopted by the White and Black couples (of varied economical classes) in the US and in Belgium...average IQ of adopted African ( being Liberia, Congo or whatever) infants In Canada, UK and US average IQ of Eastern European/Russian infants and kids adopted by White, Black and Oriental couples in the US, Australia etc. etc.




This is nonsense. 

We do not know about other planets from random asteroids, who told you that? Have you ever studied any course in astronomy? 

Whatever is said to be known about other planets comes from sound scientific analysis based on photographic, and other evidence (using interferometry etc) using other different means.




> See, scientific methods , and the logic underneath, enable us to know lots of things in nature, including IQ of different races along with the liquid gas compositions of Jupiter, with * pinpoint accuracy *, even though we dont have to be at all the places at all times and do the testings year after year and one by one.




For that to happen, we must list the 'races' first, their locations and distribution. 

Then, we must test them using *scientifically sound methods*, and arrive at the natural conclusion. 

You can not estimate the GDP of China in 2012 by extrapolating from the statistics for 2011. 

You have to measure it year after year, quarter after quarter, adjusting for inflation and double-counting, as well as intra-province trade/exchange.


----------



## Speeder 2

AADHAAR said:


> Do you eat pigs ?



Don't be barbaric, shall we? 

I eat pork, for that matter pork steak, pork sausage and pork ribs... bbqed, roasted and pan-fried...what's your point?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Jade

Speeder 2 said:


> Don't be barbaric, shall we?
> 
> I eat pork, for that matter pork steak, pork sausage and pork ribs... bbqed, roasted and pan-fried...what's your point?



His point is there was a international study conducted which says that people who eat pork have an average IQ of 50.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AADHAAR

Jade said:


> His point is there was a international study conducted which says that people who eat pork have an average IQ of 50.



Yes, an average of 50, with a negligible standard deviation.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Speeder 2

Banglar Lathial said:


> Let me help you.
> 
> I am arguing against the use of unscientific methods in carrying out statistical analyses.
> 
> It is not for anybody to decide if he is against/for IQ.
> 
> In the same way, it is for nobody to decide if he is against/for GDP, life expectancy or infant mortality rates.




Then of course it is! 

in your logic, it is for nobody to decide anything at all, let alone for or against "IQ" or "green eyes" or "he's man or woman", because that is precisely what you are arguing.





Banglar Lathial said:


> These are just 'statistics', which have to collected accurately, in a scientifically accurate manner.
> 
> 
> This exposes your poor understanding of statistics.
> 
> Like any statistical study, in studies involving IQ tests, people must include many variables, and they do include many variables.
> 
> These variables need to be controlled for, as in any other statistical study.
> 
> Then, through a thoroughly scientific statistical study, you arrive at a more precise result based on data gathered from extensive surveys. .



Are you trying to copy a chapter of General Statistics 101 here?

Unlike you, I could feel a little bit bored spending a day arguing about the known facts such as the sky is blue, the earth is big and stats are impotant... of course they are, mister, but what is your point? 




Banglar Lathial said:


> Read my posts again to understand them better.



I prefer read a stats textbook from a decade ago from the bottom shelf of my study. guess what, it could be more accurate.





Banglar Lathial said:


> Nonsense.
> 
> Let me ask you, who was "Ikhtir uddin Muhammad Bakhtiar Khilji"? And what was his "race"?



Ok, let me enlighten you:

his race is not Oiental Mogoloid, neither pure Negroid nor Australoid. He is either Cacausoid or a mixed race of any 2 or 3 of above 4.





Banglar Lathial said:


> Then, what is the race of "low IQ, urine drinkers" near the polluted Ganges?



Their race is not Oiental Mogoloid, neither pure Negroid. they're either Cacausoid or Cacausoid/Australoid mix, more likely the later.




Banglar Lathial said:


> Are they the same "races"?
> 
> 
> If not, what are the races? Are they called "Standalone race 1", and "Standalone race 2"?



Could be, if they both Cacausoid( note Ethiopian Africans are Cacausoid, too), or not if one is Cacausoid while the other Cacausoid/Australoid mix.











Banglar Lathial said:


> I do not believe or care about evolution.



Well congrads, neither does a cucumber, in an obvious way of course.




Banglar Lathial said:


> What I care about is facts.



But...didn't you just say I do not believe or care about evolution? C'mon boy, yes or no, make up your mind.






Banglar Lathial said:


> *We * are talking about IQ, not biological sciences (which is NOT my area of specialization, so spare *me* any discussion on that topic).




again, "we", or "you" only? make up yout mind before babbering.

"I am talking about my wet dream BS, not about any science, so spare me any discussion on that topic", is that you're saying? 





Banglar Lathial said:


> *Do you know how to calculate the IQ of a 10 year old person ?* Simple question.
> 
> Don't beat about the bush, provide a straightforward answer.



Ok, My answer:

I decide to spare you any discussion on the IQ of 10-year-old, completely satisfying your burning urge that "I do not believe or care about evolution." Fair enough?









Banglar Lathial said:


> This is your misunderstanding.
> 
> Re-read my posts again.



No, mister, my triple digit IQ forces me to let you know that YOU need to re-read MINE post, at least 3 times, before venturing into ANY related discussion beyond your true capability.




Banglar Lathial said:


> You are making up statements, or arguments, which do not logically follow from my statements.



Believe me, it's kinda hard for me to logically follow from your statements. It is unfair, for me. It's like to force a Ferrari run like a rickshaw.  I guess probably that's to eliminate at leasat 3 SD from my horsepower. So, you know...





Banglar Lathial said:


> 1. SAT is NO IQ test. PISA or TIMSS are no IQ tests.



They're not. 

But they are highly and positively correlated with IQ, whatever that "blackbox" is, with statistics validation. 

To logiscally follow your above statement and its "conclusion", I must say the following: 

1. a person's left eye is highly and postively correlated with his right eye ( think of position, size, color, etc), or even with his left foot ( think of the general distance btw the 2, weight, etc) . This is statistically proven, that is, except unusaly cases where a guy's left eye is severely damaged by accidents. YES?

2. Since your left eye is NOT your right eye - your assumption.

3. therefore, your left eye can be any (think of position, size, color, etc). - your conclusion.

Oh mine, just when I thought you're good at copying stats 101 above...





Banglar Lathial said:


> *IQ tests are culture fair, language neutral tests. *



Correct. 

Thank you for saying the obvious.

I guess whenever I answer your queries at any time, "the sky is blue" would be a good enough answer, isn't it? 

And your point being?





Banglar Lathial said:


> My goodness, are you a member of ANY high IQ society or not?



I am. 

Then you, mister, are you a member of ANY low IQ society? 

Nice to meet you!






Banglar Lathial said:


> If you are a member, you must have taken any of those culture fair, language neutral IQ tests.



I did. 

Your point being?





Banglar Lathial said:


> 2. First, define the races, and 'allocate' the racial distribution of populations around the countries of the world.



here we go... 





Banglar Lathial said:


> In order to rank countries by GDP, we must list the countries first. Right?



what GDP? Come again?





Banglar Lathial said:


> What are the races, and what are their distributions around the world? This is a simple question, that the author, karim3343 or you has not even addressed.



You said in the first line "I do not believe or care about evolution", didn't you?

Then you care about defintion of race since you refuse to believe the science is the first place?

I beleive, therefore, that logically you don't care about not only race definition, but also defintions of sex(man or woman), age (aging), etc. either, as they as products of natural evolution.

Hence apart from being an logical Marxist, you have another area which is quite intriguing as well. Are you transexual btw? Cool!






Banglar Lathial said:


> This is a red herring.
> 
> Without carrying out a test, you can not find out the results.
> 
> There is no need to introduce red herrings.
> 
> This is as simple as that.




It is a red herring?

No.

But I think you, mister, ARE a red herring. Got you! 





Banglar Lathial said:


> We could estimate the 'ranges' of North Korean missiles as much as we want, but without accurate information (from sources that have measured the required variables), or from our own measurements, we simply can not determine the 'ranges' of North Korean ballistic missiles due to lack of sufficient information.
> 
> We can estimate all that we like, our estimates may turn out to be true, 'close enough' to the true value to be of comfort, or wildly out of place.



Your point is?

Estimation is valid mathamatical and statiscal concept. Accually the entire technological progress of human race and knowledge we gain on the world and universe ARE BASED on logically valid and statistically proven estimations.

Of course, as a cool Marxist and likely a transexual you don't give a 2 figs on scienftific BS, do ya?







Banglar Lathial said:


> This is nonsense.
> 
> We do not know about other planets from random asteroids, who told you that? Have you ever studied any course in astronomy?
> 
> Whatever is said to be known about other planets comes from sound scientific analysis based on photographic, and other evidence (using interferometry etc) using other different means.



Don't you dare tring to divert the attention with misleading logic. You hear me?

We in fact know those things by all means, whatever, at our disposal, except being there physically - that's my point, and that's exactly what you argue against!







Banglar Lathial said:


> For that to happen, we must list the 'races' first, their locations and distribution.
> 
> Then, we must test them using *scientifically sound methods*, and arrive at the natural conclusion.
> 
> You can not estimate the GDP of China in 2012 by extrapolating from the statistics for 2011.
> 
> You have to measure it year after year, quarter after quarter, adjusting for inflation and double-counting, as well as intra-province trade/exchange.



what GDP? 

Lynn has 2 books on IQ and Wealth of nations. It's a well known and recognised fact that GDP positively correlated with the corresponding IQ by the social science communities around the world for ages, except some outlier cases such as communism, oil export etc. 

Again, GDP is NOT IQ, but it is positively correlated with the corresponding IQ. What is there to argue about this simple logical fact? Are you bi-polar or what?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Banglar Lathial

Speeder 2 said:


> Then of course it is!
> 
> in your logic, it is for nobody to decide anything at all, let alone for or against "IQ" or "green eyes" or "he's man or woman", because that is precisely what you are arguing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you trying to copy a chapter of General Statistics 101 here?
> 
> Unlike you, I could feel a little bit bored spending a day arguing about the known facts such as the sky is blue, the earth is big and stats are impotant... of course they are, mister, but what is your point?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I prefer read a stats textbook from a decade ago from the bottom shelf of my study. guess what, it could be more accurate.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, let me enlighten you:
> 
> his race is not Oiental Mogoloid, neither pure Negroid nor Australoid. He is either Cacausoid or a mixed race of any 2 or 3 of above 4.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Their race is not Oiental Mogoloid, neither pure Negroid. they're either Cacausoid or Cacausoid/Australoid mix, more likely the later.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Could be, if they both Cacausoid( note Ethiopian Africans are Cacausoid, too), or not if one is Cacausoid while the other Cacausoid/Australoid mix.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well congrads, neither does a cucumber, in an obvious way of course.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But...didn't you just say I do not believe or care about evolution? C'mon boy, yes or no, make up your mind.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> again, "we", or "you" only? make up yout mind before babbering.
> 
> "I am talking about my wet dream BS, not about any science, so spare me any discussion on that topic", is that you're saying?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok, My answer:
> 
> I decide to spare you any discussion on the IQ of 10-year-old, completely satisfying your burning urge that "I do not believe or care about evolution." Fair enough?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, mister, my triple digit IQ forces me to let you know that YOU need to re-read MINE post, at least 3 times, before venturing into ANY related discussion beyond your true capability.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Believe me, it's kinda hard for me to logically follow from your statements. It is unfair, for me. It's like to force a Ferrari run like a rickshaw.  I guess probably that's to eliminate at leasat 3 SD from my horsepower. So, you know...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They're not.
> 
> But they are highly and positively correlated with IQ, whatever that "blackbox" is, with statistics validation.
> 
> To logiscally follow your above statement and its "conclusion", I must say the following:
> 
> 1. a person's left eye is highly and postively correlated with his right eye ( think of position, size, color, etc), or even with his left foot ( think of the general distance btw the 2, weight, etc) . This is statistically proven, that is, except unusaly cases where a guy's left eye is severely damaged by accidents. YES?
> 
> 2. Since your left eye is NOT your right eye - your assumption.
> 
> 3. therefore, your left eye can be any (think of position, size, color, etc). - your conclusion.
> 
> Oh mine, just when I thought you're good at copying stats 101 above...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Correct.
> 
> Thank you for saying the obvious.
> 
> I guess whenever I answer your queries at any time, "the sky is blue" would be a good enough answer, isn't it?
> 
> And your point being?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I am.
> 
> Then you, mister, are you a member of ANY low IQ society?
> 
> Nice to meet you!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I did.
> 
> Your point being?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> here we go...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what GDP? Come again?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You said in the first line "I do not believe or care about evolution", didn't you?
> 
> Then you care about defintion of race since you refuse to believe the science is the first place?
> 
> I beleive, therefore, that logically you don't care about not only race definition, but also defintions of sex(man or woman), age (aging), etc. either, as they as products of natural evolution.
> 
> Hence apart from being an logical Marxist, you have another area which is quite intriguing as well. Are you transexual btw? Cool!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It is a red herring?
> 
> No.
> 
> But I think you, mister, ARE a red herring. Got you!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your point is?
> 
> Estimation is valid mathamatical and statiscal concept. Accually the entire technological progress of human race and knowledge we gain on the world and universe ARE BASED on logically valid and statistically proven estimations.
> 
> Of course, as a cool Marxist and likely a transexual you don't give a 2 figs on scienftific BS, do ya?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Don't you dare tring to divert the attention with misleading logic. You hear me?
> 
> We in fact know those things by all means, whatever, at our disposal, except being there physically - that's my point, and that's exactly what you argue against!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> what GDP?
> 
> Lynn has 2 books on IQ and Wealth of nations. It's a well known and recognised fact that GDP positively correlated with the corresponding IQ by the social science communities around the world for ages, except some outlier cases such as communism, oil export etc.
> 
> Again, GDP is NOT IQ, but it is positively correlated with the corresponding IQ. What is there to argue about this simple logical fact? Are you bi-polar or what?





Listen youngster, drop your personal attacks, then your posts will carry some weight, perhaps. 

You admitted to being a member of a high IQ society, and taking culture fair, language neutral IQ test, then why did not you talk anything about "Mini Mental State Examination"? Is that an IQ test? 

-------

Your ignorance is on full display here youngster, read your comment again:



> But they are highly and positively correlated with IQ, whatever that "blackbox" is, with statistics validation.
> ...
> To logiscally follow your above statement and its "conclusion", I must say the following:
> 
> 1. *a person's left eye is highly and postively correlated with his right eye *( think of position, size, color, etc), or even with his left foot ( think of the general distance btw the 2, weight, etc) . This is statistically proven, that is, except unusaly cases where a guy's left eye is severely damaged by accidents. YES?
> 
> 2. Since your left eye is NOT your right eye - your assumption.
> 
> 3. therefore, your left eye can be any (think of position, size, color, etc). - your conclusion




You just exposed your ignorance. 

The rest of your rants can be discarded altogether, it's of no use. 

Maybe you don't understand what I am writing about, simply because it is too hard for you to understand, but facts are facts.

Let's not expose your ignorance time and again.


----------



## liontk

@Banglarlathial, this kid does not understand the differenced between correlation and causation, first chapter of stat1060. Karim himself cannot provide a universal evidence of iq and uses questionable data to back up racial superior theories, which are joke in all fairness for anyone with a basic background on stats. I know you will understand this clearly that corrleation cannot be assumed to causation, i dont know how folks with bad math can get into these high iq society, if i was in charge of the world i had make everyone do mechanics and material so they can understand life in a different angle. This is why i was argueing that EQ is complimentry with IQ as we humans are very rational creatures and fixate on the very small things and whether a fast or slow processor, as long as nobody trust u, it does not matter what iq you have, you will never get ahead and my study statiscally pointed that and accounted for independent variables which lyn failed to do.


----------



## Speeder 2

Banglar Lathial said:


> Listen youngster, drop your personal attacks, then your posts will carry some weight, perhaps.
> 
> You admitted to being a member of a high IQ society, and taking culture fair, language neutral IQ test, then why did not you talk anything about "Mini Mental State Examination"? Is that an IQ test?
> 
> -------
> 
> Your ignorance is on full display here youngster, read your comment again:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You just exposed your ignorance.
> 
> The rest of your rants can be discarded altogether, it's of no use.
> 
> Maybe you don't understand what I am writing about, simply because it is too hard for you to understand, but facts are facts.
> 
> Let's not expose your ignorance time and again.




You're a complete a waste of time and space.

I knew that before replying you.

I've torn you to pieces in arguments with ease, almost sentence by sentence akin to teaching a child putting 2+3 together, make no mistake about it. 


Your ignorance of science and scientific methods in general, almost complete lack of stats (it's one of majors) understanding no matter how many half-cooked stats wordings you C+V there, your intelletual dishonesty through a large volumn of postings full of obfuscation(deliberate and/or unintentional, a typical way of how some Indians argue in Internet hoping to bury the opponents in a sea of logically unrelated words, concepts and "statements" which they themselves do not quite grasp though), your lack of, or complete miss sometimes, of logical coherence, right up to your countless self-contradictions and outright lies make you, and your intelletual pal "liontk", an easy picking, and a laughingstock to be 100% honest, for any educated person. 

My arguments are not directed at you actually. Apart from obvious casual fun, they are mainly to inform and educate those lurkers on this thread taking advantage of your low cognitive capabilities to make an example.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Banglar Lathial

Speeder 2 said:


> You're a complete a waste of time and space.
> 
> I knew that before replying you.
> 
> I've torn you to pieces in arguments with ease, almost sentence by sentence akin to teaching a child putting 2+3 together, make no mistake about it.
> 
> 
> Your ignorance of science and scientific methods in general, almost complete lack of stats (it's one of majors) understanding no matter how many half-cooked stats wordings you C+V there, your intelletual dishonesty through a large volumn of postings full of obfuscation(deliberate and/or unintentional, a typical way of how some Indians argue in Internet trying to bury the opponents in a sea of words which they themselves do not quite understand though), your lack of, or complete missing sometimes, of logical coherance, right up to your countless self-contradictions and outright lies make you, and your intelletual pal "liontk", an easy picking, and a laughingstock to be 100% honest, for any educated person.
> 
> My arguments are not directed at you actually. They are mainly to inform and educate those lurkers on this thread taking advantage of your low cognitive capabilities to make an example.




Yours is the low IQ argument. 

This was posted by you. 



> But they are highly and positively correlated with IQ, whatever that "blackbox" is, with statistics validation.
> ...
> To logiscally follow your above statement and its "conclusion", I must say the following:
> 
> 1. *a person's left eye is highly and postively correlated with his right eye* ( think of position, size, color, etc), or even with his left foot ( think of the general distance btw the 2, weight, etc) . This is statistically proven, that is, except unusaly cases where a guy's left eye is severely damaged by accidents. YES?
> 
> 2. Since your left eye is NOT your right eye - your assumption.
> 
> 3. therefore, your left eye can be any (think of position, size, color, etc). - your conclusion




There was no argument you provided, it was full of trash. You merely admitted you have no clue of statistics, that you blindly believe in evolution, and are a low IQ person who never understood what culture fair, language neutral tests are. 

Your childish personal attacks aside, all that you have shown is that you are just another of those persons most fitted to arguing with Hindustanis because of your common attribute - lack of knowledge of what you write about. 

----

Tell us (since you claim to be a statistics "major"):

*1. If the correlation coefficient of variables X and Y is 0.8 and the correlation coefficient of variables X and Z is 0.9, then what is the correlation coefficient of variables Y and Z? 
*


a) 0.8*0.9
b) 0.8+0.9
c) sqrt(0.8*0.9)
d) More information is needed (if so, what other information is needed?)
e) sqrt ([0.8]^2+[0.9]^2-2(0.8)(0.9)) 
f) (0.8)+(0.9)-(0.8)(0.9)


-------

Let's see you expose your ignorance once again, since you don't even know the very basics of statistics that you argue about.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Banglar Lathial

liontk said:


> @Banglarlathial, this kid does not understand the differenced between correlation and causation, first chapter of stat1060. Karim himself cannot provide a universal evidence of iq and uses questionable data to back up racial superior theories, which are joke in all fairness for anyone with a basic background on stats. I know you will understand this clearly that corrleation cannot be assumed to causation, i dont know how folks with bad math can get into these high iq society, if i was in charge of the world i had make everyone do mechanics and material so they can understand life in a different angle. This is why i was argueing that EQ is complimentry with IQ as we humans are very rational creatures and fixate on the very small things and whether a fast or slow processor, as long as nobody trust u, it does not matter what iq you have, you will never get ahead and my study statiscally pointed that and accounted for independent variables which lyn failed to do.




1. Any scientific study is devoid of emotions. We can not care if the author is racist, nationalist, monkeyist, donkeyist or any other -ist. 

We must always evaluate his study based on its scientific validity. 


2. Correlation of two variables is not a 'fixed number'. Anybody who has conducted any study involving statistics *MUST* know this simple fact. How come the low IQ teenagers harping on this thread do not know this simple fact? 

Question (not directed at you): What would happen to the correlation coefficient of interest if more variables are added to a multiple regression model? Would the correlation coefficient always increase, always decrease, always remain unchanged, or increase/decrease/stay stable depending on circumstances? 


3. It defies logic that there are people arguing that statistics from 1960s can be compared with statistics from 2010 for two different sets of objects!

Can we say German GDP is more than American GDP, because German GDP of 2013> American GDP of 1963? 

4. IQ Tests are only those that are IQ tests (yes, this is stating the obvious for some of our low IQ members). 

SAT, or other 'verbal'/other culture-biased tests are simply NOT, IQ tests. 


5. He can propagate racial superiority, inferiority or whatever theories he likes. 

BUT, it must be backed by facts.

In order to support his theory, he MUST define the races first.

Did any of the childish members harping about statistics without any understanding or knowledge of statistics tell us *what are the races in the world, and what are their distributions?*

You don't even need to know statistics to understand this. You want to rank 100 countries by GDP? Then, you must list those 100 countries!

If you can't list all the races and their distributions, then how can you even rank races? It's a logical contradiction from the get go. 


6. I have little to no idea about EQ. 

7. Lynn failed to conduct a simple statistical study, BUT, that would not be an issue if he could have them corrected by an acknowledged statistician or two. 


8. One teenager ranted about his homosexual or transexual tendencies a bit, but he can not dare to show his face, when asked to explain if the following is an IQ test? 


Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE)



> Mini Mental State Examination gives the 'mini-mental state' examination of cognitive function. This is a 5-minute bedside test that is useful as a screen and in assessing the degree of cognitive dysfunction in patients with diffuse brain disorders. It correlates well with more time-consuming Intelligence Quotient (IQ) tests, but it will not as easily pick up cognitive problems caused by focal brain lesions. A score of 23 or less will pick up about 90% of patients with cognitive impairments, with about 10% false positives.
> 
> --------------------------------------------------
> 
> The mini-mental state examination
> 
> 
> 
> Orientation
> 
> Score one point for each correct answer:
> 
> 
> What is the: time, date, day, month, year? Maximum: 5 points
> 
> What is the name of: this ward, hospital, district, town, country? 5 points
> 
> 
> Registration
> 
> Name three objects only once. Score up to a maximum of 3 points for each correct repetition. 3 points
> 
> Repeat the objects until the patient can repeat them accurately (in order to test recall later).
> 
> 
> Attention and calculation
> 
> Ask the patient to subtract 7 from 100 and then 7 from the result four more times.
> 
> Score 1 point for each correct subtraction. 5 points
> 
> 
> Recall
> 
> Ask the patient to repeat the names of the three objects learnt in the registration test. 3 points
> 
> 
> Language
> 
> Score 1 point for each of two simple objects named (e.g. pen and a watch). 2 points
> 
> Score 1 point for an accurate repetition of the phrase: 'No ifs, ands or buts'. 1 point
> 
> Give a 3-stage command, scoring 1 point for each part correctly carried out; e.g. 'With the index finger of your right hand touch your nose and then your left ear'. 3 points
> 
> 
> Write 'Close your eyes' on a blank piece of paper and ask the patient to follow the written command. Score 1 point if the patient closes the eyes. 1 point
> 
> 
> Ask the patient to write a sentence. Score 1 point if the sentence is sensible and contains a noun and a verb. 1 point
> 
> 
> 
> Draw a pair of intersecting pentagons with each side approximately 1 inch long. Score 1 point if it is correctly copied. 1 point
> 
> 
> TOTAL MAXIMUM SCORE 30 POINTS






Edit:

Don't you worry, our self proclaimed "statistics major" who can not even stitch together a logical argument, is still struggling with the "correlation coefficient" question. 

Let him come up with his convenient excuse.


----------



## liontk

Banglar Lathial said:


> 1. Any scientific study is devoid of emotions. We can not care if the author is racist, nationalist, monkeyist, donkeyist or any other -ist.
> 
> We must always evaluate his study based on its scientific validity.
> 
> 
> 2. Correlation of two variables is not a 'fixed number'. Anybody who has conducted any study involving statistics *MUST* know this simple fact. How come the low IQ teenagers harping on this thread do not know this simple fact?
> 
> Question (not directed at you): What would happen to the correlation coefficient of interest if more variables are added to a multiple regression model? Would the correlation coefficient always increase, always decrease, always remain unchanged, or increase/decrease/stay stable depending on circumstances?
> 
> 
> 3. It defies logic that there are people arguing that statistics from 1960s can be compared with statistics from 2010 for two different sets of objects!
> 
> Can we say German GDP is more than American GDP, because German GDP of 2013> American GDP of 1963?
> 
> 4. IQ Tests are only those that are IQ tests (yes, this is stating the obvious for some of our low IQ members).
> 
> SAT, or other 'verbal'/other culture-biased tests are simply NOT, IQ tests.
> 
> 
> 5. He can propagate racial superiority, inferiority or whatever theories he likes.
> 
> BUT, it must be backed by facts.
> 
> In order to support his theory, he MUST define the races first.
> 
> Did any of the childish members harping about statistics without any understanding or knowledge of statistics tell us *what are the races in the world, and what are their distributions?*
> 
> You don't even need to know statistics to understand this. You want to rank 100 countries by GDP? Then, you must list those 100 countries!
> 
> If you can't list all the races and their distributions, then how can you even rank races? It's a logical contradiction from the get go.
> 
> 
> 6. I have little to no idea about EQ.
> 
> 7. Lynn failed to conduct a simple statistical study, BUT, that would not be an issue if he could have them corrected by an acknowledged statistician or two.
> 
> 
> 8. One teenager ranted about his homosexual or transexual tendencies a bit, but he can not dare to show his face, when asked to explain if the following is an IQ test?
> 
> 
> Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit:
> 
> Don't you worry, our self proclaimed "statistics major" who can not even stitch together a logical argument, is still struggling with the "correlation coefficient" question.
> 
> Let him come up with his convenient excuse.




Bravo, It seems you have a decent background in stats and my point originally was against the so called concept of IQ test without incorporating EQ so I am arguing from a different perspective. However when I looked back to my stats text book, you are right in your assertion that the way the data was manipulated including the independent variables, the study appears to be very poorly done and I am surprise this person is an academic with such pathetic excuse of stat collection, I mean even simple 2nd year engineering students can take that into account let alone a professional statistician. Sorry for my poor communication anglais ahahaha, are you a francophone by any chance since bangladaise was very close with France back in the day 

Also please post a harder question, I think any individual given the time to think can get the answer to that question, r=  I will not write the answer for the sake of your point.


----------



## Type 052D

Banglar Lathial said:


> 1. Any scientific study is devoid of emotions. We can not care if the author is racist, nationalist, monkeyist, donkeyist or any other -ist.
> 
> We must always evaluate his study based on its scientific validity.
> 
> 
> 2. Correlation of two variables is not a 'fixed number'. Anybody who has conducted any study involving statistics *MUST* know this simple fact. How come the low IQ teenagers harping on this thread do not know this simple fact?
> 
> Question (not directed at you): What would happen to the correlation coefficient of interest if more variables are added to a multiple regression model? Would the correlation coefficient always increase, always decrease, always remain unchanged, or increase/decrease/stay stable depending on circumstances?
> 
> 
> 3. It defies logic that there are people arguing that statistics from 1960s can be compared with statistics from 2010 for two different sets of objects!
> 
> Can we say German GDP is more than American GDP, because German GDP of 2013> American GDP of 1963?
> 
> 4. IQ Tests are only those that are IQ tests (yes, this is stating the obvious for some of our low IQ members).
> 
> SAT, or other 'verbal'/other culture-biased tests are simply NOT, IQ tests.
> 
> 
> 5. He can propagate racial superiority, inferiority or whatever theories he likes.
> 
> BUT, it must be backed by facts.
> 
> In order to support his theory, he MUST define the races first.
> 
> Did any of the childish members harping about statistics without any understanding or knowledge of statistics tell us *what are the races in the world, and what are their distributions?*
> 
> You don't even need to know statistics to understand this. You want to rank 100 countries by GDP? Then, you must list those 100 countries!
> 
> If you can't list all the races and their distributions, then how can you even rank races? It's a logical contradiction from the get go.
> 
> 
> 6. I have little to no idea about EQ.
> 
> 7. Lynn failed to conduct a simple statistical study, BUT, that would not be an issue if he could have them corrected by an acknowledged statistician or two.
> 
> 
> 8. One teenager ranted about his homosexual or transexual tendencies a bit, but he can not dare to show his face, when asked to explain if the following is an IQ test?
> 
> 
> Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE)
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Edit:
> 
> Don't you worry, our self proclaimed "statistics major" who can not even stitch together a logical argument, is still struggling with the "correlation coefficient" question.
> 
> Let him come up with his convenient excuse.



Banglar! Why waste time with such an troll? BTW I'm still waiting for the OP's (Karim) response to my Math question...

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Speeder 2

Banglar Lathial said:


> Yours is the low IQ argument.
> 
> This was posted by you.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> There was no argument you provided, it was full of trash. You merely admitted you have no clue of statistics, that you blindly believe in evolution, and are a low IQ person who never understood what culture fair, language neutral tests are.
> 
> Your childish personal attacks aside, all that you have shown is that you are just another of those persons most fitted to arguing with Hindustanis because of your common attribute - lack of knowledge of what you write about.
> 
> ----
> 
> Tell us (since you claim to be a statistics "major"):
> 
> *1. If the correlation coefficient of variables X and Y is 0.8 and the correlation coefficient of variables X and Z is 0.9, then what is the correlation coefficient of variables Y and Z?
> *
> 
> 
> a) 0.8*0.9
> b) 0.8+0.9
> c) sqrt(0.8*0.9)
> d) More information is needed (if so, what other information is needed?)
> e) sqrt ([0.8]^2+[0.9]^2-2(0.8)(0.9))
> f) (0.8)+(0.9)-(0.8)(0.9)
> 
> 
> -------
> 
> Let's see you expose your ignorance once again, since you don't even know the very basics of statistics that you argue about.



you are a complete and a very disgraced liar as I repeatedly exposed you. 

Find a Q&A book on what is E=MC2 doesn't make a kid suddenly become an expert on relativity, as using whatever stats execise book Q&As and listing some of Qs here doesn't make you sound like a guy who knows stats somwhow. 

it is because you are wrong, not on 1 thing, not on 2 things, but on many many different stats things, repeatedly , constantly, on basic concepts of stats, on basic logical process of the stats. true need to control variables, yet statisticians have many ways to get around it as standard precedures. Again, C&V some stats here doesn't make you statistician. 

The logic of yours, if there is ANY logic at all for most of the time, is no that much better than a guy high on drugs, namely without notable coherence, since your thought process can be best described as random with countless leaps of faith and self-contradiction, if not just plain and simple lying. On race, a simple question you should ask yourself is that Are you a Negroid from Western Africa origin? I think you are. Prove to us that you are not.
I suspect you dont even realise it yourself how utterly hopeless you are when trying to stick your messy thoughts together as a guy like myself, with AT LEAST 2 SD above your IQ shown throguhout the argument, sees it. I am tried looking at your mess!

Don't you feel even a bit embarrassment when you raise your pathetic questions and really believe that you would somehow sound like a somebody? I am wasting my time on people like you here



Type 052D said:


> Banglar! Why waste time with such an troll? BTW I'm still waiting for the OP's (Karim) response to my Math question...



and you , a notorious false-flagger really think that high iq people will take you as an average chinese with your Type052D sticker on and some wacko copy paste job of some Chinese characters? Are you an Islamist btw?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Speeder 2

On OP:




* Chapter 1
Race Is More Than Skin Deep* 


Is race real? Do the races differ in
behavior as well as in body? Are such views
just the result of white racism? Modern
science shows a three-way pattern of race
differences in both physical traits and
behavior. On average, Orientals are slower
to mature, less fertile, less sexually active,
less aggressive, and have larger brains
and higher IQ scores. Blacks are at the
other pole. Whites fall in the middle,
but closer to Orientals than to Blacks.



White men can't jump. Asian men cant either. But according to Jon Entines new book, Taboo:
Why Black Athletes Dominate Sports and Why We Are Afraid to Talk About It, Black men  and women  sure can. The usual reason given for Black athletic success is that Blacks have little chance to get ahead elsewhere. But Entines new book shows that in sports, Blacks have a genetic edge.


The physical facts Entine reviews are quite well known. Compared to Whites, Blacks have
narrower hips which gives them a more efficient stride. They have a shorter sitting height which provides a higher center of gravity and a better balance. They have wider shoulders, less body fat, and more muscle. Their muscles include more fast twitch muscles which produce power. Blacks have from 3 to 19% more of the sex hormone testosterone than Whites or East Asians. The testosterone translates into more explosive energy.


Entine points out that these physical advantages give Blacks the edge in sports like boxing,
basketball, football, and sprinting. However, some of these race differences pose a problem for Black swimmers. Heavier skeletons and smaller chest cavities limit their performance.
Race differences show up early in life. Black babies are born a week earlier than White babies, yet they are more mature as measured by bone development. By age five or six, Black children excel in the dash, the long jump, and the high jump, all of which require a short burst of power. By the teenage years, Blacks have faster reflexes, as in the famous knee-jerk response.


East Asians run even less well than Whites. The same narrow hips, longer legs, more muscle, and more testosterone that give Blacks an advantage over Whites, give Whites an advantage over East Asians.

But admitting these genetic race differences in sports leads to the greater taboo area  race differences in brain size and crime. That is why it is taboo to even say that Blacks are better at many sports.

The reason why Whites and East Asians have wider hips than Blacks, and so make poorer runners is because they give birth to larger brained babies. During evolution, increasing cranial size meant women had to have a wider pelvis. Further, the hormones that give Blacks an edge at sports makes them restless in school and prone to crime.




* Race in History* 


Even before there were any intelligence tests, philosophers, statesmen, merchants, and others thought there was a link between race, intelligence, and cultural achievement. Aristotle, Plato, Voltaire, and David Hume all believed this. So did Broca, Darwin, Galton, and all the founders of evolution and anthropology. Even Freud believed in some race differences. But this began to change in the 1920s with Franz Boas and James B. Watson, who believed that culture could change just about anything. Today, writers like Jared Diamond in Guns, Germs and Steel (1997) and S. J. Gould in The Mismeasure of Man (1996) tell us there is no link between race, intelligence, and culture. The differences we see are all just because of bad luck or White racism.


The first explorers in East Africa wrote that they were shocked by the nudity, paganism,
cannibalism, and poverty of the natives. Some claimed Blacks had the nature "of wild animals... most of them go naked... the child does not know his father, and they eat people." Another claimed they had a natural sense of rhythm so that if a Black "were to fall from heaven to earth he would beat time as he goes down." A few even wrote books and made paintings of Africans with over-sized sex organs.


Sound familiar? All just a reflection of racism? Maybe so, but these examples are not from 19th Century European colonialists or KKK hate literature. They come from the Muslim Arabs who first entered Black Africa over 1,200 years ago (in the 700s), as detailed in Bernard Lewiss 1990 book, Race and Slavery in the Middle East.


Several hundred years later, European explorers had the same impressions. They wrote that
Africans seemed to have a very low intelligence and few words to express complex thoughts. They praised some tribes for making fine pottery, forging iron, carving wooden art, and making musical instruments. But more often, they were shocked by the near nakedness of the people, their poor sanitary habits, simple houses, and small villages. They found no wheels for making pots, grinding corn, or for transport, no farm animals, no writing, no money, and no numbering systems.



The Whites who explored China were just as racist as those who explored Africa, but their
descriptions were different from what they and the Arabs had written about Africans. In 1275 Marco Polo arrived in China from his native Italy to open trade with the Mongol Empire. He found that the Chinese had well built roads, bridges, cities connected by canals, census takers, markets, standardized weights and measures, and not only coins, but paper money as well. Even a postal system was in existence. All of these made him marvel when he compared the Chinese to what he saw in Europe and the Middle East.
Even though he was an Italian, proud of his people and well aware of the greatness of Ancient Rome, Marco Polo wrote: "Surely there is no more intelligent race on earth than the Chinese."



Historical research bears out Marco Polos impressions. As early as 360 B.C., the Chinese used the cross bow and changed the face of warfare. Around 200-100 B.C., the Chinese used written exams to choose people for the civil service, two thousand years before Britain. The Chinese used printing about 800 A.D., some 600 years before Europe saw Gutenbergs first Bible. Paper money was used in China in 1300, but not in Europe until the 19th and 20th centuries. By 1050 Chinese chemists had made gunpowder, hand grenades, fire arrows, and rockets of oil and poison gas. By 1100, factories in China with 40,000 workers were making rockets. Flame throwers, guns, and cannons were used in China by the
13th century, about 100 years before Europe.



The Chinese used the magnetic compass as early as the 1st century. It is not found in European records until 1190. In 1422, seventy years before Columbuss three small ships crossed the Atlantic, the Chinese reached the east coast of Africa. They came in a great fleet of 65 ocean going ships filled with 27,000 soldiers and their horses, and a years supply of grain, meat, and wine. With their gunpowder weapons, navigation, accurate maps and magnetic compasses, the Chinese could easily have gone around
the tip of Africa and discovered Europe!


In the last five centuries, the European nations leapfrogged over the Chinese in science and
technology. Since 1950, however, Japan has beaten the West in the production of many high-tech products. Other Pacific Rim countries (China, Taiwan, Singapore, and South Korea) now follow Japans path. Africa, on the other hand, has fallen further behind. The poor conditions of African countries and Black America have become a concern to many. Much of the optimism of the U.S. Civil Rights movement of the 1960s is gone, along with the high hopes for independent African nations. Trillions of dollars of foreign aid have poured into Africa. Yet African economies have declined since the Europeans left.


Neglect and decay are seen everywhere in Africa and much of the West Indies. International
corporations often have to provide their own power, their own water, and their own phones. In the age of computers, fax machines, and the world wide web, getting a dial tone in many African cities is difficult.




( -----RACE, EVOLUTION,AND BEHAVIOR: A Life History Perspective


2nd Special Abridged Edition

Professor J. Philippe Rushton)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Aegis DDG

Speeder 2 said:


> On OP:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> * Chapter 1
> Race Is More Than Skin Deep*
> 
> 
> Is race real? Do the races differ in
> behavior as well as in body? Are such views
> just the result of white racism? Modern
> science shows a three-way pattern of race
> differences in both physical traits and
> behavior. On average, Orientals are slower
> to mature, less fertile, less sexually active,
> less aggressive, and have larger brains
> and higher IQ scores. Blacks are at the
> other pole. Whites fall in the middle,
> but closer to Orientals than to Blacks.
> 
> 
> 
> White men can't jump. Asian men can&#8217;t either. But according to Jon Entine&#8217;s new book, Taboo:
> Why Black Athletes Dominate Sports and Why We Are Afraid to Talk About It, Black men &#8212; and women &#8212; sure can. The usual reason given for Black athletic success is that Blacks have little chance to get ahead elsewhere. But Entine&#8217;s new book shows that in sports, Blacks have a genetic edge.
> 
> 
> The physical facts Entine reviews are quite well known. Compared to Whites, Blacks have
> narrower hips which gives them a more efficient stride. They have a shorter sitting height which provides a higher center of gravity and a better balance. They have wider shoulders, less body fat, and more muscle. Their muscles include more fast twitch muscles which produce power. Blacks have from 3 to 19% more of the sex hormone testosterone than Whites or East Asians. The testosterone translates into more explosive energy.
> 
> 
> Entine points out that these physical advantages give Blacks the edge in sports like boxing,
> basketball, football, and sprinting. However, some of these race differences pose a problem for Black swimmers. Heavier skeletons and smaller chest cavities limit their performance.
> Race differences show up early in life. Black babies are born a week earlier than White babies, yet they are more mature as measured by bone development. By age five or six, Black children excel in the dash, the long jump, and the high jump, all of which require a short burst of power. By the teenage years, Blacks have faster reflexes, as in the famous knee-jerk response.
> 
> 
> East Asians run even less well than Whites. The same narrow hips, longer legs, more muscle, and more testosterone that give Blacks an advantage over Whites, give Whites an advantage over East Asians.
> 
> But admitting these genetic race differences in sports leads to the greater taboo area &#8212; race differences in brain size and crime. That is why it is taboo to even say that Blacks are better at many sports.
> 
> The reason why Whites and East Asians have wider hips than Blacks, and so make poorer runners is because they give birth to larger brained babies. During evolution, increasing cranial size meant women had to have a wider pelvis. Further, the hormones that give Blacks an edge at sports makes them restless in school and prone to crime.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> * Race in History*
> 
> 
> Even before there were any intelligence tests, philosophers, statesmen, merchants, and others thought there was a link between race, intelligence, and cultural achievement. Aristotle, Plato, Voltaire, and David Hume all believed this. So did Broca, Darwin, Galton, and all the founders of evolution and anthropology. Even Freud believed in some race differences. But this began to change in the 1920s with Franz Boas and James B. Watson, who believed that culture could change just about anything. Today, writers like Jared Diamond in Guns, Germs and Steel (1997) and S. J. Gould in The Mismeasure of Man (1996) tell us there is no link between race, intelligence, and culture. The differences we see are all just because of bad luck or White racism.
> 
> 
> The first explorers in East Africa wrote that they were shocked by the nudity, paganism,
> cannibalism, and poverty of the natives. Some claimed Blacks had the nature "of wild animals... most of them go naked... the child does not know his father, and they eat people." Another claimed they had a natural sense of rhythm so that if a Black "were to fall from heaven to earth he would beat time as he goes down." A few even wrote books and made paintings of Africans with over-sized sex organs.
> 
> 
> Sound familiar? All just a reflection of racism? Maybe so, but these examples are not from 19th Century European colonialists or KKK hate literature. They come from the Muslim Arabs who first entered Black Africa over 1,200 years ago (in the 700s), as detailed in Bernard Lewis&#8217;s 1990 book, Race and Slavery in the Middle East.
> 
> 
> Several hundred years later, European explorers had the same impressions. They wrote that
> Africans seemed to have a very low intelligence and few words to express complex thoughts. They praised some tribes for making fine pottery, forging iron, carving wooden art, and making musical instruments. But more often, they were shocked by the near nakedness of the people, their poor sanitary habits, simple houses, and small villages. They found no wheels for making pots, grinding corn, or for transport, no farm animals, no writing, no money, and no numbering systems.
> 
> 
> 
> The Whites who explored China were just as racist as those who explored Africa, but their
> descriptions were different from what they and the Arabs had written about Africans. In 1275 Marco Polo arrived in China from his native Italy to open trade with the Mongol Empire. He found that the Chinese had well built roads, bridges, cities connected by canals, census takers, markets, standardized weights and measures, and not only coins, but paper money as well. Even a postal system was in existence. All of these made him marvel when he compared the Chinese to what he saw in Europe and the Middle East.
> Even though he was an Italian, proud of his people and well aware of the greatness of Ancient Rome, Marco Polo wrote: "Surely there is no more intelligent race on earth than the Chinese."
> 
> 
> 
> Historical research bears out Marco Polo&#8217;s impressions. As early as 360 B.C., the Chinese used the cross bow and changed the face of warfare. Around 200-100 B.C., the Chinese used written exams to choose people for the civil service, two thousand years before Britain. The Chinese used printing about 800 A.D., some 600 years before Europe saw Gutenberg&#8217;s first Bible. Paper money was used in China in 1300, but not in Europe until the 19th and 20th centuries. By 1050 Chinese chemists had made gunpowder, hand grenades, fire arrows, and rockets of oil and poison gas. By 1100, factories in China with 40,000 workers were making rockets. Flame throwers, guns, and cannons were used in China by the
> 13th century, about 100 years before Europe.
> 
> 
> 
> The Chinese used the magnetic compass as early as the 1st century. It is not found in European records until 1190. In 1422, seventy years before Columbus&#8217;s three small ships crossed the Atlantic, the Chinese reached the east coast of Africa. They came in a great fleet of 65 ocean going ships filled with 27,000 soldiers and their horses, and a year&#8217;s supply of grain, meat, and wine. With their gunpowder weapons, navigation, accurate maps and magnetic compasses, the Chinese could easily have gone around
> the tip of Africa and &#8220;discovered&#8221; Europe!
> 
> 
> In the last five centuries, the European nations leapfrogged over the Chinese in science and
> technology. Since 1950, however, Japan has beaten the West in the production of many high-tech products. Other Pacific Rim countries (China, Taiwan, Singapore, and South Korea) now follow Japan&#8217;s path. Africa, on the other hand, has fallen further behind. The poor conditions of African countries and Black America have become a concern to many. Much of the optimism of the U.S. Civil Rights movement of the 1960s is gone, along with the high hopes for independent African nations. Trillions of dollars of foreign aid have poured into Africa. Yet African economies have declined since the Europeans left.
> 
> 
> Neglect and decay are seen everywhere in Africa and much of the West Indies. International
> corporations often have to provide their own power, their own water, and their own phones. In the age of computers, fax machines, and the world wide web, getting a dial tone in many African cities is difficult.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ( -----RACE, EVOLUTION,AND BEHAVIOR: A Life History Perspective
> 
> 
> 2nd Special Abridged Edition
> 
> Professor J. Philippe Rushton)



What about the Kingdom of Axum (Abyssinia)? I know Ethiopians and Puntic (Cusheitc) populations originate from the Near East nevertheless they were East Africans and established one of the big 5 civilizations of Antiquity (Rome, Han China, Murayan and Gupta India and Persian/Iranshar). BTW What are your opinions on Ancient Persia and Parthia's relations with China? Thank you for taking note.


----------



## Speeder 2

Aegis DDG said:


> What about the Kingdom of Axum (Abyssinia)? I know Ethiopians and Puntic (Cusheitc) populations originate from the Near East nevertheless they were East Africans and established one of the big 5 civilizations of Antiquity (Rome, Han China, Murayan and Gupta India and Persian/Iranshar). BTW What are your opinions on Ancient Persia and Parthia's relations with China? Thank you for taking note.



Sorry that I have no expert on that hence my personal opinion is of little importance.


----------



## East Asia United

Banglar Lathial said:


> You say, countries were categorized on their geographical regions? Why were Singapore, so called "Israel", USA, and South Africa categorized into different "races" then? Why not lump them together with their "neighbours



Post page number and quote.



> why do you say IQ scores do not 'vary' by more than 2-3 points on the same test for the same person at different stages (i.e. different age) of his life?




Because they do not vary by more than 2-3 points at any time post-adolescence.

IQ tests are adjusted for age, but around 16-18 and up you are taking the same test (on the Stanford-Binets for example) as everyone else. There are no significant changes after adolescence. What are you waiting for? Look it up.



> And, where did you find "genotypic potential" from?



Listen, you are clearly asking questions that are easily answered in the study. It's quite clear you probably haven't gotten past the introduction. I'm tired of answering questions that are already answered for you in the study I actually posted. That is the topic of discussion, and you are showing your ignorance on said study.



> Did the authors list all the "races" to begin with?



No, the author did not. Yet again, read the study. I only mentioned the genotypic IQ of sub-Saharan Africans, and it looks quite accurate without reading too much into it. Af-Americans have a mean IQ of 85, and are living in one of the wealthiest countries in the world. Discounting their average 20% European ancestry, they have an IQ of around 80. It fits perfectly with the estimate.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Type 052D said:


> Ok High IQ OP, answer this simple GCSE (age 16) Maths question:
> 
> Rearrange this formula to get y in terms of x



No, I won't answer irrelevant questions.



> that there is more differences inside an 'racial group' then between races.



LOL! And the Bangar guy actually liked this post too. I guess neither one of you even have a basic understanding of Human population genetics (or logic for that matter).

Do you even understand the logical contradiction within your statement? How can someone be more genetically distant to their brother than their girlfriend? How can someone be more genetically different to their fellow Nigerian than a random person of Finnish descent?

What you meant to say (no worries, I'll fix it for you), is that two random people from one group are almost as similar (or different) as two random individuals from anywhere on the planet. This is of course farcical, but this is what you meant.

It is incorrect; "Two Caucasians are more similar to each other genetically than a Caucasian and an Asian." - Edwards



> The picture that begins to emerge from this and other analyses of human genetic variation is that variation tends to be geographically structured, such that most individuals from the same geographic region will be more similar to one another than to individuals from a distant region.



Human Genetic Diversity: Lewontin's Fallacy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Human genetic diversity: Lewontin's fallacy. [Bioessays. 2003] - PubMed - NCBI

Genetic variation, classification and 'race' - Nature Genetics



Banglar Lathial said:


> Likewise, you can not compare alleged mean IQs of Congo or Central Africa in 1960 (two generations ago) with alleged mean IQs of Western European countries today.



Yes you can, when you adjust for the Flynn effect. It's done all the time in this field (though I admit that this specific example, two African nations, would be problematic considering all of the serious nutritional deficiencies that would lead to an even lower IQ than today).



> Just for the sake of titillating the grey matter of our interested, high IQ friends, would any of you consider the following "tests" an "IQ test"?



What is the correlation coefficient between MMSE and IQ (both Spearman rank and Pearson product momentum, if you have the data).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

liontk said:


> you will never get ahead and my study statiscally pointed that and accounted for independent variables which lyn failed to do.



The stench of ignorance is too much for me.

Lynn devoted some odd 30 pages to the "independent variables" and their ability to explain everything from GDP per capita to infant mortality.

You are functionally illiterate if you managed to read these pages yet still conclude your post with the gibberish above.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## liontk

karim3343 said:


> The stench of ignorance is too much for me.
> 
> Lynn devoted some odd 30 pages to the "independent variables" and their ability to explain everything from GDP per capita to infant mortality.
> 
> You are functionally illiterate if you managed to read these pages yet still conclude your post with the gibberish above.



Stats101>>> correlation does not equal causation and here I conclude my conversation with you. If you have any expertise with your high IQ in weapons or defence system, please do join the regular forum and as of now most people consider you in the long list of racial supremacist but don't worry on this forum, we have hindu, islamist, l'european, african and now asians supremacist  .


----------



## Aegis DDG

Speeder 2 said:


> Sorry that I have no expert on that hence my personal opinion is of little importance.



Thanks for taking it into consideration.


----------



## Banglar Lathial

karim3343 said:


> Yes you can, when you adjust for the Flynn effect. It's done all the time in this field (though I admit that this specific example, two African nations, would be problematic considering all of the serious nutritional deficiencies that would lead to an even lower IQ than today).




No, you can't. As you have admitted, nutritional factors alone are different for past generations of Congolese (1950's) and today's Congolese. 





> What is the correlation coefficient between MMSE and IQ (both Spearman rank and Pearson product momentum, if you have the data).




My goodness, do you even know what you are writing about? 

This was the simple question. 



> Just for the sake of titillating the grey matter of our interested, high IQ friends, would any of you consider the following "tests" an "IQ test"?
> 
> (*MMSE *being the 'following test' referred to in that post).




Seeing that not only your knowledge is lacking but that of most other members, let me enlighten all of them all at once. 

*There is no "the correlation coefficient" between any two variables?*


Your question "What *is the* correlation coefficient between MMSE and IQ...." alone exposes your ignorance of introductory statistics, forget advanced statistics.

You don't even know what "correlation coefficient" measures, the same as Richard Lynn, otherwise none of you would have made the same repeated errors time and again. 

Correlation coefficient, to put it in simple words, merely provides a measure of the 'co-movement' (or movement towards the same direction) of two variables. 

------------------

Anybody can assign visible colours numerical values according to their emitted EM frequency, and plot graphs on the colours of underwears of American citizens, and their height. 

Does that mean the "correlation coefficient" *for that dataset* would tell us anything about the relationship between American citizens' heights and the colours of their underwear? 


-----------------


"Correlation coefficient" is not a constant, like "pi" (the ratio of the circumference to the diameter of a circle), rather, it is simply a convenient measure to help 'trace' the comovements of variables, so to speak. For one sample, the correlation coefficient could be 0.8 for variables X and Y, while that for another sample, the correlation coefficient could be 0.2 (those are just random examples). 


I have intentionally abused some terms, but that's only for teaching all the uneducated posters and lurkers who have no clue about basic statistics. 


Note: I did not react abusively towards you, like some other childish member in this thread has done to other members. 

If I had done so, I would have laughed at your "(both Spearman rank and *Pearson product momentum*, if you have the data)."


I turn a blind eye to this, hoping that was either, a typo, or your lack of knowledge. 

That's not a big issue. 


------------------------------

Here's some information on the MMSE (that some idiots like to substitute for real IQ tests administered by high IQ societies) to help you understand better. 

17.16 Mini Mental Status Examination (MMSE) | ERABI




> The Mini-Mental State Examination was developed as a brief screening tool to provide a quantitative assessment of cognitive impairment and to record cognitive changes over time (Folstein et al. 1975). While the tools original application was the detection of dementia within a psychiatric setting, its use has become widespread.
> 
> The MMSE consists of 11 simple questions or tasks. Typically, these are grouped into 7 cognitive domains; orientation to time, orientation to place, registration of three words, attention and calculation, recall of 3 words, language, and visual construction. Administration by a trained interviewer takes approximately 10 minutes. The test yields a total score of 30 and provides a picture of the subjects present cognitive performance based on direct observation of completion of test items/tasks. A score of 23/24 is the generally accepted cutoff point indicating the presence of cognitive impairment (Dick et al. 1984). Levels of impairment have also been classified as none (24-30); mild (18-24) and severe (0-17) (Tombaugh & McIntyre 1992).
> 
> An expanded version of the MMSE, the modified mini-mental state examination (3MS) was developed by Teng & Chui (1987) increasing the content, number and difficulty of items included in the assessment. The score of the 3MS ranges from 0  100 with a standardized cut-off point of 79/80 for the presence of cognitive impairment. This expanded assessment takes approximately 5 minutes more to administer than the original MMSE.
> 
> Table 17.38 Characteristics of the Mini Mental State Examination
> 
> Reliability
> In an extensive review, *Tombaugh & McIntyre (1992) reported moderate to high test-retest reliability citing correlations of 0.38 to 0.99* in studies having a retest interval of < 2 months (24/30 studies r >0.75).
> 
> Interobserver reliability: Molloy and Standish (1997) reported an ICC of 0.69 for the traditional MMSE; Dick et al. (1984) K = 0.63; concordance correlation coefficient = 0.87 between evaluations performed by GPs & those performed by psychologists (Fabrigoule et al. 2003)
> Internal consistency: Cronbachs a coefficient of 0.54  0.96 reported by Tombaugh & McIntyre (1992)
> Validity
> Concurrent Validity: Tombaugh & McIntyre (1992) reported correlations of 0.70 to 0.90 between MMSE scores and other measures of cognitive impairment
> 
> Construct validity - correlations between ADL scores and the MMSE of 0.40  0.75. (Tombaugh & McIntyre, 1992) support importance of cognitive status to functional outcome. Grace et al. (1995) reported significant association between FIM scores and MMSE scores (p<0.05); Agrell & Dehlin (2000) reported significant correlations between MMSE scores and BI, MADRS and Zung Depression Scale (p<0.05); demonstrated expected lower MMSE scores, stroke patients vs. controls (p<0.001)  factor analysis revealed 3 factors explaining 53% variance; *the MMSE showed strong correlations with the WAIS  verbal (r=0.78) and performance- IQ (r=0.66) scores (Folstein et al. 1975)*; *Dick et al (1984) reported r=0.55 and r=0.56 for verbal & performance IQ,* respectively.
> 
> Construct validity (known groups): MMSE scores could discriminate between groups based on categories of vocational recommendations (return to work, vocational training, supported work and continued remedial therapy; p<0.0001), MMSE scores accounted for 36% variance between cell means (Mysiw et al. 1989); DePaolo and Folstein (1978) reported the MMSE able to distinguish between patients with cerebral abnormalities and those with peripheral disorders only (p<0.0005)
> Predictive validity:. Ozdemir et al. (2001) reported relationships between baseline MMSE scores & change in motor-FIM from admission to discharge among stroke rehabilitation patients (r=0.31; p<0.04), suggesting MMSE baseline scores are somewhat predictive of functional improvement.
> Sensitivity & Specificity: Tombaugh & McIntyre (1992) reported an average sensitivity of 75% among dementia patients. Among general neurology and psychiatry patients, sensitivity was lower; ranging from 21  76%. - major variable in sensitivity was level of impairment; sensitivity of the MMSE increased with level of impairment. Low level of sensitivity is supported (Dick et al. 1984  not sensitive to changes in patients with right-sided disease  not useful in discriminating focal vs. diffuse disease) particularly among stroke patients (Grace et al. 1995  sensitivity 44%, area under curve = 0.7097; Agrell & Dehlin, 2000  56%). Agrell & Dehlin (2000) reported MMSE could discriminate between patients with left-sided and infratentorial lesions (p<0.05) though not between right-sided and left-sided lesion groups.
> Tombaugh & McIntyre (1992) reported specificity of 62% - 100%; 80% (Agrell & Dehlin, 2000); 84% (Grace et al. 1995).
> Blake et al., 2002 reported sensitivity = 62% and specificity = 88% in group of stroke patients no suitable cut-off point could be identified if MMSE is used as a screening measure for verbal or visual memory deficits
> Responsiveness
> N/a
> Tested for ABI patients?
> Mysiw et al. (1989) reported that the MMSE was able to distinguish between TBI patients classified by vocational recommendations. Keith et al. (1998) have used the MMSE as the tool against which the Cognitive Drug Research system was validated for use among brain injured patients, however, the MMSE itself has not, apparently, undergone a similar evaluation in this specific population.
> Other Formats
> Modified Mini-mental State Examination (3MS): Grace et al. (1995) compared the MMSE directly to 3MS. The test-retest stability of the 3MS was reported as r=0.80; p<0.001). Concurrent/Construct Validity - the 3MS correlated strongly with the MMSE at admission and discharge (r=0.84 & 0.85, respectively; p<0.001); correlated with a battery of neuropsychological assessments (COWA, BNT, HVOT, LM, VR  immediate and delayed, WMS-R, LM immediate & delayed); association with functional outcome (FIM) -- stronger for the 3MS than for the MMSE (t=3.28; p<0.05). Using the standardized cut-off points for cognitive impairment & ROC analysis, the 3MS showed greater sensitivity than the MMSE (69% vs. 44%) and similar specificity (80% vs. 79%)  area under the curve  0.7977 for 3MS.
> 3MS + Clock-drawing: To increase 3MS sensitivity among patients with right hemisphere stroke, Suhr & Grace (1999) advocate the addition of the Wilson clock-drawing test. A clock-drawing task added < 2 min. to administration; increased sensitivity among stroke patients with right hemisphere lesions (87%). This testing format maintained a strong association with FIM scores (p<0.005).
> 
> Standardized MMSE (SMMSE): Molloy & Standish(1997) developed detailed instructions for administration and scoring of each item. Test retest variance was reduced by 86% and interobserver variance by 76% when the standardized MMSE was used. (SSMSE - ICC = 0.90; MMSE- ICC = 0.69).
> Telephone Version  ALFI-MMSE: Includes 22/30 of the original MMSE items, the majority of which were removed from the last section (language and motor skills). Correlations between phone and face-to-face versions = 0.85 (p<0.0001). Patients tended to do slightly better on in-person testing than on the telephone. Sensitivity (using a brief neurological screening test as the criterion) of 67% and specificity of 100% were reported in a population of elderly, community-dwelling individuals. This was similar to the sensitivity/specificity reported for screening with the traditional MMSE (68%; 100%). (Roccaforte et al. 1992)
> 
> T-MMSE (26 item version of the ALFI-MMSE, Roccaforte et al. cited in Newkirk et al., 2004): T-MMSE correlated with the MMSE (r = 0.88; p<0.001), neither hearing impairment nor years of education were associated with T-MMSE scores. On the 22 points in common between the 2 scales, scores were correlated (r=0.88 p<0.001), however, telephone scores tended to be higher than in-face scores (p<0.01) (Newkirk et al, 2004). The authors provide tables for the conversion of T-MMSE scores to MMSE scores.
> 
> Use by Proxy?
> N/A
> Advantages. The Mini-mental State Examination is brief, inexpensive and simple to administer. Its widespread use and accepted cutoff scores increase its interpretability.
> 
> Limitations. It has been suggested that the MMSE may attempt to assess too many functions in one brief test. An individuals performance on individual items or within a single domain may be more useful than interpretation of a single score. (Wade 1992;Tombaugh & McIntyre 1992). However, an acceptable cut-off for the identification of the presence of an impairment may be possible only when the test is used as a measure of cognitive impairment (Blake et al. 2002). Blake et al. (2002) reported that when the test is used to screen for problems of visual or verbal memory, orientation or attention acceptable cut-off scores could not be identified.
> 
> *MMSE scores have been shown to be affected by age, level of education and sociocultural background (Tombaugh & McIntyre, 1992; Bleeker et al. 1988; Lorentz et al. 2002).* These variables may introduce bias leading to the misclassification of individuals. Though perhaps the prevalent view, such biases have not always been reported. For instance, Agrell & Dehlin (2000) found neither age nor education to influence scores. Lorentz et al. (2002) expressed concern that adjustments made for these biases may limit the general utility of the MMSE.
> 
> Perhaps the greatest limitation of the MMSE is its low reported levels of sensitivity particularly among individuals with mild cognitive impairment (Tombaugh & McIntyre, 1992; de Koning et al. 1998), in patients with focal lesions, particularly those in the right hemisphere (Tombaugh et al. 1992), within a general neurological patient population (Dick et al. 1984) and within a stroke population (Suhr & Grace 1999; Blake et al., 2002). It has been suggested that its low level of sensitivity derives from the emphasis placed on language items and a paucity of visual-spatial items (Tombaugh et al. 1992; Grace et al. 1995; de Koning et al. 1998; Suhr & Grace, 1999; de Koning et al. 2000). Various solutions have been proposed to the problem of the MMSEs poor sensitivity including the use of age-specific norms (Bleecker et al. 1988) and the addition of a clock-drawing task to the test (Suhr & Grace, 1999). Clock-drawing tests themselves have been assessed as acceptable to patients, easily scored and less affected by education, age and other non-dementia variables than other very brief measures of cognitive impairment (Lorentz et al. 2002) and would have little effect on the simplicity and accessibility of the test.
> 
> The MMSE has been thoroughly evaluated for use among a variety of neurological populations. Unfortunately, at present, information regarding the reliability and validity of the MMSE when used among patients with TBI/ABI is extremely limited.
> 
> Summary  Mini Mental State Examination
> 
> Practicality
> Interpretability: The MMSE is widely used and has generally accepted cutoff scores indicative of the presence of cognitive impairment. Documented age and education effects have led to the development of stratified norms (Ruchinskas & Curyto 2003)
> Acceptability: The test is brief requiring approximately 10 minutes to complete. It may be affected by such patient variables as age, level of education and sociocultural background. As it is administered via direct observation of task completion, it is not suitable for use with a proxy respondent.
> Feasibility: The test requires no specialized equipment and little time, making it inexpensive and portable. A survey conducted by Lorentz et al. (2002) revealed participant physicians found the MMSE too lengthy and unable to contribute much useful information.





In brief, MMSE is a (faulty) test for cognitive impairment, which has little to do with IQ tests (which are culture fair, and language neutral tests). 


No real IQ test administered by high IQ societies are affected by people's age, culture, religion, language, education, earnings, or whatever. They are intended to measure IQ, not any of the other socioeconomic factors. 

Using unrelated tests to measure IQ must be avoided, and only real IQ tests must be administered uniformly everywhere, at the same time around the world, year after year, to help build datasets which can then be worked on for providing accurate statistical inference.


----------



## Banglar Lathial

Speeder 2 said:


> you are a complete and a very disgraced liar as I repeatedly exposed you.
> 
> Find a Q&A book on what is E=MC2 doesn't make a kid suddenly become an expert on relativity, as using whatever stats execise book Q&As and listing some of Qs here doesn't make you sound like a guy who knows stats somwhow.
> 
> it is because you are wrong, not on 1 thing, not on 2 things, but on many many different stats things, repeatedly , constantly, on basic concepts of stats, on basic logical process of the stats. true need to control variables, yet statisticians have many ways to get around it as standard precedures. Again, C&V some stats here doesn't make you statistician.
> 
> The logic of yours, if there is ANY logic at all for most of the time, is no that much better than a guy high on drugs, namely without notable coherence, since your thought process can be best described as random with countless leaps of faith and self-contradiction, if not just plain and simple lying. On race, a simple question you should ask yourself is that Are you a Negroid from Western Africa origin? I think you are. Prove to us that you are not.
> I suspect you dont even realise it yourself how utterly hopeless you are when trying to stick your messy thoughts together as a guy like myself, with AT LEAST 2 SD above your IQ shown throguhout the argument, sees it. I am tried looking at your mess!
> 
> Don't you feel even a bit embarrassment when you raise your pathetic questions and really believe that you would somehow sound like a somebody? I am wasting my time on people like you here
> 
> 
> 
> and you , a notorious false-flagger really think that high iq people will take you as an average chinese with your Type052D sticker on and some wacko copy paste job of some Chinese characters? Are you an Islamist btw?




Your rambling sounds funny, indeed. 

Since you the "self proclaimed statistics major" can not answer a simple question on 'correlation coefficients' posed by a "non-statistics major", it is very funny indeed when you resort to use such low-IQ arguments as "Are you an African?", or "You are a proven liar" (even though all our posts are saved, and people can browse through them to see which one is the liar - self proclaimed "statistics major" who can not answer a simple question on "correlation coefficient", *yet likes to use the same concept all the time without realizing what he is using it for*!


As I have said already, 



> Tell us (since you claim to be a statistics "major"):
> 
> 1. If the correlation coefficient of variables X and Y is 0.8 and the correlation coefficient of variables X and Z is 0.9, then what is the correlation coefficient of variables Y and Z?
> 
> 
> 
> a) 0.8*0.9
> b) 0.8+0.9
> c) sqrt(0.8*0.9)
> d) More information is needed (if so, what other information is needed?)
> e) sqrt ([0.8]^2+[0.9]^2-2(0.8)(0.9))
> f) (0.8)+(0.9)-(0.8)(0.9)
> 
> 
> -------
> 
> *Let's see you expose your ignorance once again, since you don't even know the very basics of statistics that you argue about.
> *




And true to expectations, so you did.


----------



## Banglar Lathial

Type 052D said:


> Banglar! Why waste time with such an troll? BTW I'm still waiting for the OP's (Karim) response to my Math question...




1. Whether troll or not, many people are actually convinced of the statistical validity of Lynn's book even though Lynn is poor in statistics (browsing through his book strengthens this notion). 

Some of the members are convinced that the arguments posed by Lynn are true, but they do not know how to disprove it, so they say IQ tests are invalid, or EQ is a better measure, or that "correlation does not imply causation" (a common "adage" taught in introductory statistics, nowadays, but grossly misleading for reasons that would take sometime to explain). 


2. Other members are also convinced that Lynn's arguments are valid, and so they just copy-paste Lynn's arguments without any knowledge of statistics. 

3. Both of these sides are wrong! 

4. There are numerous unscientific methods applied by Lynn, which would require another book to criticize completely, to be fair. 

Thus, I have been arguing for providing standardized real IQ tests (i.e. culture fair, language neutral IQ tests) to people around the world simultaneously each year, document the results and then conduct statistical analyses. 

5. The first group is not eager to accept this (hypothetical) proposal because they are afraid it would expose some of their long cherished beliefs.

6. The second group is also not eager to accept this (hypothetical) proposal because they are afraid they don't know how to conduct statistical analyses.


----------



## Speeder 2

Banglar Lathial said:


> Your rambling sounds funny, indeed.
> 
> Since you the "self proclaimed statistics major" can not answer a simple question on 'correlation coefficients' posed by a "non-statistics major", it is very funny indeed when you resort to use such low-IQ arguments as "Are you an African?", or "You are a proven liar" (even though all our posts are saved, and people can browse through them to see which one is the liar - self proclaimed "statistics major" who can not answer a simple question on "correlation coefficient", *yet likes to use the same concept all the time without realizing what he is using it for*!
> 
> 
> As I have said already,
> 
> 
> And true to expectations, so you did.





*
Oke, kid, are you seriously bragging that distinguished world class scientists such as Richard Lynn, Charles Murray, Linda Godsmith, Philippe Rushton, Richard Herrnstein, William Shockley, James Watson, etc . just to name a few, with some hanging Nobel Science on their belts, across all major fields of Psychology, Economics, Anthropology, Physiology, Philosophy, Physics, Biochemistry, Evolutionary Biology, Cellular Biology etc. (oke, some long established sciences that voodoo illiterates like you dont even believe in, let alone have a faint idea of what they are) of life and social sciences in worldwide scientific community, publish their works in peer-reviewed science journals, while having no clues on what are stats, the CORE methodology and kitbox with which they conduct their daily scientific research for the last century, or what is r, the simplest & cheapest invariant for intellectually-challenged 2-digit IQ beginners and liars like yourself?


You talk me on the simplest stats abc variables while I am amongst those who are designing and implementing econometrics-based high frequency stats arbitrage strategies on a daily basis its not even funny, for god sake, when I was doing my Stats main course in uni you probably still were wearing your diapers. 


Meanwhile, a liar that you are even have gall laughing at my low IQ question that Are you a Negroid? Yes, you feel being insulted, dont you?


But, why are you are so sure? No any doubt?


Oh, my bad, then of course I would have known that its unfair for your 2-digit brain to get around that possibility that perhaps, I, with more than 2 SD lead on your thick skull, was NOT trying to insult Negroid as a race at all with that question, not the least, but just want to expose your lie via your own mouth, right here, for all to see, that when the fact comes out that YOU automatically dismiss the notion that you belong to Negroid race but some other to separate yourself apart in a second, you are instinctly using the very natural concept of RACE you have in your mind all the time yet repeatedly PRETEND, DENY, LIE, OBFYSCATE and LAUGH AT in pretty much all of your posts throughout this thread!


If this is not enough a proof that you are a sociopath liar with dim intelligence, I dont know what is. 


Au revoir, Kid. *

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Banglar Lathial

Speeder 2 said:


> Oke, kid, are you seriously bragging that distinguished world class scientists such as Richard Lynn, Charles Murray, Linda Godsmith, Philippe Rushton, Richard Herrnstein, William Shockley, James Watson, etc . just to name a few, with some hanging Nobel Science on their belts, across all major fields of Psychology, Economics, Anthropology, Physiology, Philosophy, Physics, Biochemistry, Evolutionary Biology, Cellular Biology etc. (oke, some long established sciences that voodoo illiterates like you don&#8217;t even believe in, let alone have a faint idea of what they are) of life and social sciences in worldwide scientific community, publish their works in peer-reviewed science journals, while having no clues on what are stats, the CORE methodology and kitbox with which they conduct their daily scientific research for the last century, or what is r, the simplest & cheapest invariant for intellectually-challenged 2-digit IQ beginners and liars like yourself?
> 
> 
> You talk me on the simplest stats abc variables while I am amongst those who are designing and implementing econometrics-based high frequency stats arbitrage strategies on a daily basis&#8230; it&#8217;s not even funny, for god sake, when I was doing my Stats main course in uni you probably still were wearing your diapers.
> 
> 
> Meanwhile, a liar that you are even have gall laughing at my &#8220;low&#8221; IQ question that &#8220;Are you a Negroid&#8221;? Yes, you feel being insulted, don&#8217;t you?
> 
> 
> But, why are you are so sure? No any doubt?
> 
> 
> Oh, my bad, then of course I would have known that it&#8217;s unfair for your 2-digit brain to get around that possibility that perhaps, I, with more than 2 SD lead on your thick skull, was NOT trying to insult Negroid as a race at all with that question, not the least, but just want to expose your lie via your own mouth, right here, for all to see, that when the fact comes out that YOU automatically dismiss the notion that you belong to Negroid race but some other to separate yourself apart in a second, you are instinctly using the very natural concept of RACE you have in your mind all the time yet repeatedly PRETEND, DENY, LIE, OBFYSCATE and LAUGH AT in pretty much all of your posts throughout this thread!
> 
> 
> If this is not enough a proof that you are a sociopath liar with dim intelligence, I don&#8217;t know what is.
> 
> 
> Au revoir, Kid.





Au revoir, Charlatan, who lies consistently through his teeth and can not answer a simple question about correlation coefficients that was very closely linked to one of the concepts being used in your arguments.



Edit:

2 digit IQ must be yours, since you have never been a member of a high-IQ society, thus you don't know what culture fair IQ tests are!

Never mind, I am certain that all the information I have provided has already caused your sparse brain cells to stretch themselves to the limit, so much so that you call Richard Lynn and Rushton Nobel prize winners. 




Second edit:

As a tried and tested fraud, you call somebody who you have no idea about a "kid", yet you can not answer a simple question about correlation coefficients (whose answers can not be found in introductory statistics textbooks) *despite you claiming to be a statistics major*. 

What a nincompoop!


----------



## East Asia United

liontk said:


> Stats101>>> correlation does not equal causation and here I conclude my conversation with you. If you have any expertise with your high IQ in weapons or defence system, please do join the regular forum and as of now most people consider you in the long list of racial supremacist but don't worry on this forum, we have hindu, islamist, l'european, african and now asians supremacist  .



Apparently being a supremacist is the equivalent to looking at the science, posted by genuine researchers (that know far more than you), and agreeing with them. You anti-science bigots are among the least intelligent of all people on the planet.

Do you really think that James Watson doesn't know what he is talking about when he says that East Asians are the most intelligent, and Black Africans are the least intelligent? The co-discoverer of DNA doesn't know more than YOU regarding his own field?

Hahahaha, you are farcical at best.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## East Asia United

Banglar Lathial said:


> No, you can't. As you have admitted, nutritional factors alone are different for past generations of Congolese (1950's) and today's Congolese.



OK, I apologize, apparently every single scientist and researcher is incorrect, and you are correct. Let it be known that you are far more intelligent than all of the scientific community combined.

Those dumb scientists don't know what they are talking about when they measure the IQ of past populations and adjust for the Flynn effect.



> Correlation coefficient, to put it in simple words, merely provides a measure of the 'co-movement' (or movement towards the same direction) of two variables.



So you laugh and smirk like a child when you don't know what you are talking about?

The correlation with TIMSS and PISA has been consistently measured in the 0.8-0.95 range. Do you then summarily dismiss TIMSS and PISA as good measures of intelligence with all of your obfuscation?



> If I had done so, I would have laughed at your "(both Spearman rank and Pearson product momentum, if you have the data)."



What's wrong with Pearson r? Are you speaking of the typo (momentum instead of moment?). Stop acting like a child; typing fast so obviously gonna be some errors.



> In brief, MMSE is a (faulty) test for cognitive impairment, which has little to do with IQ tests (which are culture fair, and language neutral tests).



Buddy, with all due respect, SCREW the MMSE. The tests we are referring to are also WAIS, Stanford-Binets, and Ravens Progressive Matrices (surely among others). These researchers have factored in all of your concerns.


----------



## Aegis DDG

karim3343 said:


> Apparently being a supremacist is the equivalent to looking at the science, posted by genuine researchers (that know far more than you), and agreeing with them. You anti-science bigots are among the least intelligent of all people on the planet.
> 
> Do you really think that James Watson doesn't know what he is talking about when he says that East Asians are the most intelligent, and Black Africans are the least intelligent? The co-discoverer of DNA doesn't know more than YOU regarding his own field?
> 
> Hahahaha, you are farcical at best.



Banglor is Banned so never-mind about arguing with him .16% of Watson's DNA is of African origin. And Watson said many stupid things like 'Irish people are inherently stupid and alcoholic' so he isn't really an reliable source. An many people claim that R.Franklin was the discover of DNA (Via X-ray Cartography), but that's an different story to discuss. Nevertheless I agree with most of your posts. But I do think the Near-East (with the Exception of some Gulf Arab states) can improve their IQ levels to Indo-European Standards as there is few genetic Barriers. Iran has over 40% R1B like most Europeans and various Semitic populations have high IQ levels. If religious fundamentalism is halted and Economic and academic growth is encouraged, the Middle-East can return to it's glory days.

Africa looks bleak to me, maybe it was destined to be that way?


----------



## East Asia United

Aegis DDG said:


> .16% of Watson's DNA is of African origin.



So what?



> And Watson said many stupid things like 'Irish people are inherently stupid and alcoholic'



No he didn't. What he said was: "[the] historic curse of the Irish, which is not alcohol, it's not stupidity. But it's ignorance."



> If religious fundamentalism is halted and Economic and academic growth is encouraged, the Middle-East can return to it's glory days.



Inbreeding has probably caused a lot of issues. Also, the IQ is far too low compared to European levels, averaging around 85 or below. Too much Negroid admixture has happened in the last few centuries.

Still, no one is sure of the genotypic potential. Is an increase to a mean IQ of 90 possible? Maybe.


----------



## Aegis DDG

I just looked at R.Lynn's publication's and concluded this:
The Near East IQ can improve but not Latin America, e.g. Iranian IQ matched Irish IQ levels in 1991, but Ireland's political and economic situation has changed (unlike Iran) and increased it's cognitive initiative (increased to 93-99). Countries like Iran has an chance as it's young population get's less conservative and more open minded/Nationalistic. The average IQ of Iranians communities in SE Asia is 105, like other Orientals. Iraq has pretty good IQ equilibrium considering it's current state.


----------



## Aegis DDG

karim3343 said:


> So what?
> 
> 
> 
> No he didn't. What he said was: "[the] historic curse of the Irish, which is not alcohol, it's not stupidity. But it's ignorance."
> 
> 
> 
> Inbreeding has probably caused a lot of issues. Also, the IQ is far too low compared to European levels, averaging around 85 or below. Too much Negroid admixture has happened in the last few centuries.
> 
> Still, no one is sure of the genotypic potential. Is an increase to a mean IQ of 90 possible? Maybe.



I said with the exceptions of Some gulf States (and N.Africa), Turkic people in Anatolia has 13% mongoloid Admixture and largely East/South Slavic, Georgian, Finno-Ugaric, Iranic (Armenians), Semitic (Gassaids and Assyrian) and Hellenistic phenotype. They even have Etruscan origins in Western Turkey and Celtic R1 Type genes in Central Anatolia. Therefore I see no genetic barriers for Turks to increase their IQ levels (focus on education and economic development). While many Arab groups mixed with Africans, Iran was the exception. After the collapse of the Sassanian Empire, Arab rule over the Iranian Plateau collapsed quickly as gorgan wall (Persian Equivalent to the Great of China) was not guarded and fortifited against Ataic Mongoloid Nomadic Invaders from C.Asia/Transoxnnia and East Asia (like Gokturks, Curmans, Uzbeks, and later the Mongols). Iranian continued to mix with Mongoloids in the 16th century (You just need to travel Herat and N.Iran) and Gulf Arabs mixed Heavily with African Slaves. I do see hope for Syria, Lebanon, Iran and Israel, but not for G.Arabs nations, N.Africans.


----------



## qamar1990

Foo_Fighter said:


> India 82.2
> 
> Pakistan 84 + Bangladesh 81 + Sri Lanka 79 = 244 / 3 = 81.3
> 
> *EPIC FAIL!!!*
> 
> 
> 
> To you to as well.




well i always knew deep down inside that pakistanis were smarter then indians.


----------



## Foo_Fighter

Probability is a possibility.



qamar1990 said:


> well i always knew deep down inside that pakistanis were smarter then indians.


----------



## East Asia United

Aegis DDG said:


> I just looked at R.Lynn's publication's and concluded this:
> The Near East IQ can improve but not Latin America, e.g. Iranian IQ matched Irish IQ levels in 1991, but Ireland's political and economic situation has changed (unlike Iran) and increased it's cognitive initiative (increased to 93-99). Countries like Iran has an chance as it's young population get's less conservative and more open minded/Nationalistic. The average IQ of Iranians communities in SE Asia is 105, like other Orientals. Iraq has pretty good IQ equilibrium considering it's current state.



Well Irish IQ is around 95, meaning it didn't really increase a lot.

Also, where is your evidence for Iranian IQ of 105 in SE Asia? And what Iranians? There is virtually no community.


----------



## Aegis DDG

karim3343 said:


> Well Irish IQ is around 95, meaning it didn't really increase a lot.
> 
> Also, where is your evidence for Iranian IQ of 105 in SE Asia? And what Iranians? There is virtually no community.



Long read of an Malaysian Article. Iranians are prodimenat in SE Asia, particularly Indonesia and Malaysia. They also dominate Dubai's (UAE) economy and have an successful diaspora. There is an large number of Chinese of partial Persian Ancestry (Hui Chinese). The Moderator of the Chinese defense forum in DPk stated that his ancestors was from Persian traders in Xianjiang.


----------



## Speeder 2

Ok, can't resist it... here are my 2 cents:



Aegis DDG said:


> ... But I do think the Near-East (with the Exception of some Gulf Arab states) can improve their IQ levels to * Indo-European Standards*



There's no IQ level for "Indo-European", which is more a linguistic term referring to the linkage btw Hindi and those of Europe. Hindi is no more than a language of small waves of Aryans (northern invaders) who conquered the masse native Indians (largely Autraloid and Autraloid / Dravidian Caucasoid mix) hence Aryans own language, poems (such as Veda) and technological, cultural, mathemetical achievements becoming Indias, and acutally becoming India's single best moment in history - we are talking about the peak of Indus Valley Civilisation, at around 2,000BCE!



Those Aryans are generally believed to be ME tribes with average IQ, probably ( my guess), in the high 80s. 

A recent DNA-based study argues though that the a small wave of Aryans could also include some nearby Slavic and/or Baltic tribes who have average IQ > 95 - think current days North of Ukraine - I guess this explains some very rare green/blue eyes in current India (Bollywood), Pakistan and more in Afghanistan, etc. along the Aryan invading path. This seems make more sense to me, considering the average IQ of those were possiblely behind the first known horse-taming and wheel-making. 






Aegis DDG said:


> as there is few genetic Barriers. Iran has over 40% R1B like most Europeans and various Semitic populations have high IQ levels.



I doubt R1B is the only marker that affects the innate intelligence, though.

Current Semitic population in the ME have IQ in the mid 80s, except Ashkenazi Jews who actually have considerable North of Alps European admixture. 




Aegis DDG said:


> If religious fundamentalism is halted and Economic and academic growth is encouraged, the Middle-East can return to it's glory days.



Religious Extremism (e.g. from some sects of Christian ) hasnt made New England a backward place.

Religious Extremism ( e.g. Maoism in current North Korean or Mao-era China) havent prevent them from having high IQs, which were formed during Ice Ages. And only 2 groups of races are cold-tested: Mongoloid and Euro Caucasoid. On the other hand, e.g., with some of the highest GDP per cap for ages, none of the Gulf States is even close to being industrialised. Qatars PISA and TIMSS scores are not very encouraging either, compared to say Panama or Mexico.

Religious Extremism impedes to some extend on economic development, yes, yet to IQ, no.

e.g.. I make up a simplest question of a g-loaded IQ test such as Raven Matrices:

Yellow, Yellow, Black, White, White, Black, Yellow

What is the next colour?

Now no matter what religion you have how extreme it may be, I am convinced that the correct answer just can NOT be Green! unless we are including the potential of the existence of 800 IQ level.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Wright

Speeder 2 said:


> Ok, can't resist it... here are my 2 cents:
> 
> 
> 
> There's no IQ level for "Indo-European", which is more a linguistic term referring to the linkage btw Hindi and those of Europe. Hindi is no more than a language of small waves of Aryans (northern invaders) who conquered the masse native Indians (largely Autraloid and Autraloid / Dravidian Caucasoid mix) hence Aryans own language, poems (such as Veda) and technological, cultural, mathemetical achievements becoming Indias, and acutally becoming India's single best moment in history - we are talking about the peak of Indus Valley Civilisation, at around 2,000BCE!
> 
> 
> 
> Those Aryans are generally believed to be ME tribes with average IQ, probably ( my guess), in the high 80s.
> 
> A recent DNA-based study argues though that the a small wave of Aryans could also include some nearby Slavic and/or Baltic tribes who have average IQ > 95 - think current days North of Ukraine - I guess this explains some very rare green/blue eyes in current India (Bollywood), Pakistan and more in Afghanistan, etc. along the Aryan invading path. This seems make more sense to me, considering the average IQ of those were possiblely behind the first known horse-taming and wheel-making.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I doubt R1B is the only marker that affects the innate intelligence, though.
> 
> Current Semitic population in the ME have IQ in the mid 80s, except Ashkenazi Jews who actually have considerable North of Alps European admixture.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Religious Extremism (e.g. from some sects of Christian ) hasnt made New England a backward place.
> 
> Religious Extremism ( e.g. Maoism in current North Korean or Mao-era China) havent prevent them from having high IQs, which were formed during Ice Ages. And only 2 groups of races are cold-tested: Mongoloid and Euro Caucasoid. On the other hand, e.g., with some of the highest GDP per cap for ages, none of the Gulf States is even close to being industrialised. Qatars PISA and TIMSS scores are not very encouraging either, compared to say Panama or Mexico.
> 
> Religious Extremism impedes to some extend on economic development, yes, yet to IQ, no.
> 
> e.g.. I make up a simplest question of a g-loaded IQ test such as Raven Matrices:
> 
> Yellow, Yellow, Black, White, White, Black, Yellow
> 
> What is the next colour?
> 
> Now no matter what religion you have how extreme it may be, I am convinced that the correct answer just can NOT be Green! unless we are including the potential of the existence of 800 IQ level.



Arabs have higher living standards, they have also achieved better engineering feats. The worlds tallest building is in an Arab nation - Not an east Asian one.


----------



## East Asia United

Wright said:


> Arabs have higher living standards, they have also achieved better engineering feats. The worlds tallest building is in an Arab nation - Not an east Asian one.



Depends on which Arabs. The Egyptians are living in the Third World. So are the Iraqis, the Tunisians, Algerians, Moroccans, Syrians, Jordanians, Yemenis, Palestinians, and to a lesser extent the Lebanese and Libyans. Also, if you include the Sudanese, Mauritanians, Somalians and Djibouti as Arab, they're living in the Third World as well.

The only countries with a per capita GDP comparable to Western or East Asian countries are the six Gulf nations with large reserves of oil: Oman, Qatar, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia. They were all built by oil revenues.

Take the example of Oman and Yemen. Countries which are largely similar in every respect; the area of the country, culture, traditions, language, and religion. They border each other too.

Only major difference? One has oil, the other does not. Oman has a per capita GDP (PPP) of $29,000, while Yemen stands at $2,300.

Besides, with such large reserves, and such a small population (relatively speaking) I would expect Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Oman to have a per capita GDP (PPP) in the top 5, rather than comparable to Italy or Spain.



> The worlds tallest building is in an Arab nation - Not an east Asian one.



The worlds tallest building was done by Westerners and East Asians, not Arabs. Engineering was done by Skidmore, Owings and Merrill (Western) and the contracting was done by Samsung C&T (East Asian).

Besides, China's about to top them next year anyway.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## StarCraft_ZT

karim3343 said:


> Depends on which Arabs. The Egyptians are living in the Third World. So are the Iraqis, the Tunisians, Algerians, Moroccans, Syrians, Jordanians, Yemenis, Palestinians, and to a lesser extent the Lebanese and Libyans. Also, if you include the Sudanese, Mauritanians, Somalians and Djibouti as Arab, they're living in the Third World as well.
> 
> The only countries with a per capita GDP comparable to Western or East Asian countries are the six Gulf nations with large reserves of oil: Oman, Qatar, Bahrain, Qatar, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia. They were all built by oil revenues.
> 
> Take the example of Oman and Yemen. Countries which are largely similar in every respect; the area of the country, culture, traditions, language, and religion. They border each other too.
> 
> Only major difference? One has oil, the other does not. Oman has a per capita GDP (PPP) of $29,000, while Yemen stands at $2,300.
> 
> Besides, with such large reserves, and such a small population (relatively speaking) I would expect Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Oman to have a per capita GDP (PPP) in the top 5, rather than comparable to Italy or Spain.
> 
> 
> 
> The worlds tallest building was done by Westerners and East Asians, not Arabs. Engineering was done by Skidmore, Owings and Merrill (Western) and the contracting was done by Samsung C&T (East Asian).
> 
> Besides, China's about to top them next year anyway.



Yes, oil makes the difference between Yemen and Qatar, UAE.... Without oil, they collapse , they lack the intelligence to make a country prosperous in the long run. Another good example is the difference between Israel and other middle east countries.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 474474

szft517 said:


> Yes, oil makes the difference between Yemen and Qatar, UAE.... Without oil, they collapse , they lack the intelligence to make a country prosperous in the long run. Another good example is the difference between Israel and other middle east countries.



Is that what they feed you in murrica? Please be so kind as to tell me how much oil reserves Dubai has?
Oil and Gas contribute less than 6% to the Dubai economy


----------



## 474474

karim3343 said:


> The worlds tallest building was done by Westerners and East Asians, not Arabs. Engineering was done by Skidmore, Owings and Merrill (Western) and the contracting was done by Samsung C&T (East Asian).
> 
> Besides, China's about to top them next year anyway.



You do realise building the world's tallest building has some prerequisites (such as viable transport for raw materials, enough supply of qualified labor for example) which apparently few other countries can fulfill. AND more importantly the ones who own this building don't care in the least bit about it, what actually matters is the immediate area is profiting immensely and the property prices for locations near BK have gone through the roof (which again, none of these smartass east asians invested in) the main purpose was letting the world know about Dubai.
We also have Lamborghinis and Bentleys in our police livery, which again aren't Arab made but only Dubai had the idea to use it this way and it's all over the news(hence publicity).


----------



## StarCraft_ZT

474474 said:


> Is that what they feed you in murrica? Please be so kind as to tell me how much oil reserves Dubai has?
> Oil and Gas contribute less than 6% to the Dubai economy



Intersting. How about the history Dubai began prosperous? In 1970s, it depend on oil trade as well, most dubai residents' income is due to oil AT THAT TIME IN 1970S. Like I said, if the other middile east countries do not have oil and uncountable oil revenues, Dubai will not be developed as now, because Dubai highly depends on internation trade, it is a window or a link to the whole world, if middle east countries do not possess such huge amount of funds derived from OIL, the world will not focus on it, likewise Dubai will be nothing, no one want to trade with countries only with desert, cactus and camel. BTW, maybe zoo will prefer some camel from desert to attract tourist.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 474474

szft517 said:


> Intersting. How about the history Dubai began prosperous? In 1970s, it depend on oil trade as well, most dubai residents' income is due to oil AT THAT TIME IN 1970S. Like I said, if the other middile east countries do not have oil and uncountable oil revenues, Dubai will not be developed as now, because Dubai highly depends on internation trade, it is a window or a link to the whole world, if middle east countries do not possess such huge amount of funds derived from OIL, the world will not focus on it, likewise Dubai will be nothing, no one want to trade with countries only with desert, cactus and camel. BTW, maybe zoo will prefer some camel from desert to attract tourist.



That doesn't even make sense, there are dozens of example from sub saharan africa to Pakistan where we have deep water ports yet aren't as successful as Dubai, I can't speak for Arabs in general but the rulers of Dubai had great ingenuity and foresight (hint intelligence) on their own to bring Dubai to this point.
Bandar Abbas, Gawadar and Dubai are ports in the same general area, which do you think is most popular?


----------



## 474474

karim3343 said:


> Apparently being a supremacist is the equivalent to looking at the science, posted by genuine researchers (that know far more than you), and agreeing with them. You anti-science bigots are among the least intelligent of all people on the planet.
> 
> Do you really think that James Watson doesn't know what he is talking about when he says that East Asians are the most intelligent, and Black Africans are the least intelligent? The co-discoverer of DNA doesn't know more than YOU regarding his own field?
> 
> Hahahaha, you are farcical at best.



The guys is white, and could easily chose to prove himself superior but still talks with humlity.
About the last part, Jews are known to be the most intelligent obviously.


----------



## Speeder 2

Arabs and Indians both have average IQ in the 80s, with Arab average slightly higher. 

But the ways how they have emerged so are very different, almost a mirror image of each other:

1, Indians have been smarten-up constantly in history: 

Original "Indians" were mostly < 70 IQ Australoid. 

The first "smarten up" expericens was by large group of dark-skinned Dravidians from ME with avg IQ of 80s. This raised Indian avergae IQ a lot...

...then by many small waves of northern invaders of India, such as "Aryans", Persians, Yurks, Mogols, Brits, etc. Each time India was invaded in history, its average IQ actually raised a bit.  Nowadays it stands at low 80s from the original below 70.



2. Arabian process, though, was totally different.

Arabs(and Persians, too), I believe, had avg IQ > 90 at least in pre- 10th century era, when they were quite prosperious serving as the civilisational link btw Roman Empire and Han Dynasty.At a time, Arabs showed flashes of genius from time to time in both maths, arts, architecture, etc. Yet that fact that Arabs' failure to conquer Southen Europe ( avergae IQ>95) showed their abg IQ was similar to but likely not greater than 95.

Reverse to Indian situation, 2 things in the last 1, 000 years "dumbed down" Arabs innate IQ: inter-breeding with >70IQ Sub-Sahara black slaves whom teh Arab were engaging; and secondly massive in-breeding btw themselves. So their avg IQ has dropped to the 80s from their original 90+. 

[more or less Ditto Persians. But Turks are different, Their IQ raised from mid 80s to high 80s due to large-scale mingling with nearby Mongoloid (Mongolians) and Euro Caucasoid(Greeks).]



Arabs are not all the same though. Some pockets of Arabian world such as parts of Syria, Jordan, Lebanen etc. likely have avg IQ in the high 80s due to less/ or few inter-racial breeding with Blacks.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## East Asia United

474474 said:


> The guys is white, and could easily chose to prove himself superior but still talks with humlity.
> About the last part, Jews are known to be the most intelligent obviously.



Why are East Asians at the top if he's a White supremacist? This is just propaganda on your part.

And the last part, only European Jews are smart (mean IQ of 110). The total mean Jewish IQ is 103, which is even lower than East Asians. This is because of ME Jews (Mizrahim) having a mean IQ of 91, and Sephardi Jews having a mean IQ of 98.

Comparing the top Jews (Ashkenazim) with the average East Asian (of which there are 1.6 billion anyway) is dumb. You might as well compare the top 30% of the East Asians just to make it fair.

Compare the average Jew (mean IQ 103), to the average East Asian (mean IQ 105-106), and you'll sound much more intelligent.



Speeder 2 said:


> Arabs and Indians both have average IQ in the 80s, with Arab average slightly higher.
> 
> But the ways how they have emerged so are very different, almost a mirror image of each other:
> 
> 1, Indians have been smarten-up constantly in history:
> 
> Original "Indians" were mostly < 70 IQ Australoid.
> 
> The first "smarten up" expericens was by large group of dark-skinned Dravidians from ME with avg IQ of 80s. This raised Indian avergae IQ a lot...
> 
> ...then by many small waves of northern invaders of India, such as "Aryans", Persians, Yurks, Mogols, Brits, etc. Each time India was invaded in history, its average IQ actually raised a bit.  Nowadays it stands at low 80s from the original below 70.
> 
> 
> 
> 2. Arabian process, though, was totally different.
> 
> Arabs(and Persians, too), I believe, had avg IQ > 90 at least in pre- 10th century era, when they were quite prosperious serving as the civilisational link btw Roman Empire and Han Dynasty.At a time, Arabs showed flashes of genius from time to time in both maths, arts, architecture, etc. Yet that fact that Arabs' failure to conquer Southen Europe ( avergae IQ>95) showed their abg IQ was similar to but likely not greater than 95.
> 
> Reverse to Indian situation, 2 things in the last 1, 000 years "dumbed down" Arabs innate IQ: inter-breeding with >70IQ Sub-Sahara black slaves whom teh Arab were engaging; and secondly massive in-breeding btw themselves. So their avg IQ has dropped to the 80s from their original 90+.
> 
> [more or less Ditto Persians. But Turks are different, Their IQ raised from mid 80s to high 80s due to large-scale mingling with nearby Mongoloid (Mongolians) and Euro Caucasoid(Greeks).]
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs are not all the same though. Some pockets of Arabian world such as parts of Syria, Jordan, Lebanen etc. likely have avg IQ in the high 80s due to less/ or few inter-racial breeding with Blacks.



Yes, but don't forget the Turks had a shining moment as well (Ottoman Empire), and conquered the majority of SE Europe. I think they were close to the same as the mean Southern European IQ. Don't know what happened afterwards.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Aegis DDG

karim3343 said:


> Why are East Asians at the top if he's a White supremacist? This is just propaganda on your part.
> 
> And the last part, only European Jews are smart (mean IQ of 110). The total mean Jewish IQ is 103, which is even lower than East Asians. This is because of ME Jews (Mizrahim) having a mean IQ of 91, and Sephardi Jews having a mean IQ of 98.
> 
> Comparing the top Jews (Ashkenazim) with the average East Asian (of which there are 1.6 billion anyway) is dumb. You might as well compare the top 30% of the East Asians just to make it fair.
> 
> Compare the average Jew (mean IQ 103), to the average East Asian (mean IQ 105-106), and you'll sound much more intelligent.
> 
> 
> 
> Yes, but don't forget the Turks had a shining moment as well (Ottoman Empire), and conquered the majority of SE Europe. I think they were close to the same as the mean Southern European IQ. Don't know what happened afterwards.



In Western and Central Turkey, it's IQ level is 97.2 to 99 since 2004. Source:
Are We Getting Smarter?: Rising IQ in the Twenty-First Century - James R. Flynn, James Robert Flynn - Google Books

If you look at Eastern provinces of Turkey, you will understand why the Mean average is 90 because of the cultural backwardness of the SE Anatolia. Take an look at Van (East) and Izmir (West) and you see the main problems. It's similar situation to South Africa....


----------



## Aegis DDG

Speeder 2 said:


> Arabs and Indians both have average IQ in the 80s, with Arab average slightly higher.
> 
> But the ways how they have emerged so are very different, almost a mirror image of each other:
> 
> 1, Indians have been smarten-up constantly in history:
> 
> Original "Indians" were mostly < 70 IQ Australoid.
> 
> The first "smarten up" expericens was by large group of dark-skinned Dravidians from ME with avg IQ of 80s. This raised Indian avergae IQ a lot...
> 
> ...then by many small waves of northern invaders of India, such as "Aryans", Persians, Yurks, Mogols, Brits, etc. Each time India was invaded in history, its average IQ actually raised a bit.  Nowadays it stands at low 80s from the original below 70.
> 
> 
> 
> 2. Arabian process, though, was totally different.
> 
> Arabs(and Persians, too), I believe, had avg IQ > 90 at least in pre- 10th century era, when they were quite prosperious serving as the civilisational link btw Roman Empire and Han Dynasty.At a time, Arabs showed flashes of genius from time to time in both maths, arts, architecture, etc. Yet that fact that Arabs' failure to conquer Southen Europe ( avergae IQ>95) showed their abg IQ was similar to but likely not greater than 95.
> 
> Reverse to Indian situation, 2 things in the last 1, 000 years "dumbed down" Arabs innate IQ: inter-breeding with >70IQ Sub-Sahara black slaves whom teh Arab were engaging; and secondly massive in-breeding btw themselves. So their avg IQ has dropped to the 80s from their original 90+.
> 
> [more or less Ditto Persians. But Turks are different, Their IQ raised from mid 80s to high 80s due to large-scale mingling with nearby Mongoloid (Mongolians) and Euro Caucasoid(Greeks).]
> 
> 
> 
> Arabs are not all the same though. Some pockets of Arabian world such as parts of Syria, Jordan, Lebanen etc. likely have avg IQ in the high 80s due to less/ or few inter-racial breeding with Blacks.



Greece has an IQ of 95 and scored 92 in the 1990s and the original Turks were pure Mongoloids, and mixed with Indo-Europeans wells before the Battle of Manzikurt in the 10th century. And Negroids mixed with Arabs but Mongoloids mixed mainly with Persians/Iranians in the Near East (Even before the Arab conquest of Persia). I do agree with your Hypothesis on Interbreeding.


----------



## nastikan

Neha Ramu, Teen With Higher IQ Than Einstein, Says Comparison Is 'Not Right' (VIDEO)


----------



## Yabgu

Turkish IQ is 100+ however as their are other races which brings the average IQ lower. Turks in &#304;zmir and western and even central cities have IQ of 90+.


----------



## Aegis DDG

Yabgu said:


> Turkish IQ is 100+ however as their are other races which brings the average IQ lower. Turks in &#304;zmir and western and even central cities have IQ of 90+.


There is an heavy Celtic Admixture in Central Turkey, esp in places like Ankara (native population) which is why red-hair is common there.


----------



## East Asia United

nastikan said:


> Neha Ramu, Teen With Higher IQ Than Einstein, Says Comparison Is 'Not Right' (VIDEO)



So you posted an Indian girl with a genius-level IQ. So what? Their are literally millions of them in the world, mostly in Europe/Northern American and East Asia.



Yabgu said:


> Turkish IQ is 100+ however as their are other races which brings the average IQ lower. Turks in &#304;zmir and western and even central cities have IQ of 90+.



Do you have a source for 100+ Turkish mean IQ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## nastikan

karim3343 said:


> So you posted an Indian girl with a genius-level IQ. So what? Their are literally millions of them in the world, mostly in Europe/Northern American and East Asia.
> 
> 
> 
> Do you have a source for 100+ Turkish mean IQ?



your claim that chinese race is inherently intelligent is flawed and an archaic notion. People of any race can have high IQ in a level playing field. Ex. kinds of Indian and Chinese immigrants from similar background perform equally well. But a kid of an Indian doctor would most probably perform better than a kid of a poor chinese shopkeeper in china town. similarly, in Malaysia or Singapore, a kid of an indian plantation worker would most probably perform worse than a kid of a well to do chinese family.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1mhx42dGxo

http://www.theweekendleader.com/Success/822/Beyond-her-years.html


----------



## East Asia United

nastikan said:


> your claim that chinese race is inherently intelligent is flawed and an archaic notion. People of any race can have high IQ in a level playing field. Ex. kinds of Indian and Chinese immigrants from similar background perform equally well. But a kid of an Indian doctor would most probably perform better than a kid of a poor chinese shopkeeper in china town. similarly, in Malaysia or Singapore, a kid of an indian plantation worker would most probably perform worse than a kid of a well to do chinese family.
> 
> Mensa Marvel: Two-Year-Old Girl&#39;s 156 IQ - YouTube
> 
> Eleven-year-old Indian girl rated with highest IQ in the world | Success |



Not true. You are finding the highest IQ Indians and pointing them out as the future of India? No, they are the top 0.01%.

Most Indians do not have 160 IQ's.... or else they would have 160 IQ's.

Your IQ does not change throughout your life by more than a few points.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Coumarane

Hi everybody
I am new to this forum.
A lot lhave been written regarding indians and their Iq.
Well,i am living in France for many years.
French pupils are living in a home with 24 hours electricity and water supply.They mostly have a proper room 
to rest and study.
Every french pupil has plenty of high nutricious food.
School is compulsory and free and the teachers here are very motivated.They want their pupils to succeed and they
take these jobs very seriously.

These according me explain the high IQ of westen pupils.

If you take India for exemple,not every child has its own room.
In some family they have no home and some people even live in small room.
Electricity and water are not working 24 hours a day.

Teachers in India are not all very devoted and that is why a lot of childer(50 per cent according
the head of Premji foundation ) do not understad what they read.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## mike2000

All this IQ stuff is bullshit talk. If Chinese and east Asians have such high IQ and are so smart then why is it that we(the west) still play you among each other and still have military bases there? In fact if East asia was so smart/high IQ then why are they still so divided/hate each other unlike we in the west/U.S?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Coumarane

Hi
if you look carefully the results,we find that Qataris have an average IQ even if they 
are very rich.
One would expect rich nations to have high IQ but for many countries it is not the case.

Anyway can anybody give me a definition of intelligence and 
let us discuss .
Qataris even if they have an average IQ are well known to be good 
investors in the west.


----------



## northeast

mike2000 said:


> All this IQ stuff is bullshit talk. If Chinese and east Asians have such high IQ and are so smart then why is it that we(the west) still play you among each other and still have military bases there? In fact if East asia was so smart/high IQ then why are they still so divided/hate each other unlike we in the west/U.S?


Because IQ is just a part of human intelligence.And human intelligence is just a factor to whether a person or an group is successful.The world is so complicated


----------



## JSCh

*Are we becoming more STUPID? IQ scores are decreasing | Mail Online*
By Sarah Griffiths for MailOnline
Published: 08:50 EST, 21 August 2014 | Updated: 09:42 EST, 21 August 2014

IQs have largely increased since the 1930s thanks to better living conditions and education - a trend known as the Flynn effect
But IQ test results suggest people in the UK, Denmark and Australia have become less intelligent in the past decade
Opinion is divided as to whether the downwards trend is long-term
Some studies have shown the average IQ of Westerners has plunged 10 points or more since Victorian times and others claim it will keep decreasing
But other experts argue that even if we are becoming more stupid, better healthcare and technology means the 'problem' will regulate itself
Technology may be getting smarter, but humans are getting dumber, scientists have warned.

Evidence suggests that the IQs of people in the UK, Denmark and Australia have declined in the last decade.

Opinion is divided as to whether the trend is long-term, but some researchers believe that humans have already reached intellectual peak.
*



*
Dumb and dumber? Evidence suggests the IQs of people in the UK, Denmark and Australia have declined in the last decade. A study by the University of Hartford claims the larger the global population becomes, the less intelligent we will be, dropping by around eight IQ points by the year 2110 - and other estimates are even more pessimistic

An IQ test used to determine whether Danish men are fit to serve in the military has revealed scores have fallen by 1.5 points since 1998.

And standard tests issued in the UK and Australia echo the results, according to journalist Bob Holmes, writing in New Scientist.

The most pessimistic explanation as to why humans seem to be becoming less intelligent is that we have effectively reached our intellectual peak.

Between the 1930s and 1980s, the average IQ score in the US rose by three points and in post-war Japan and Denmark, test scores also increased significantly - a trend known as the ‘Flynn effect’.

This increase in intelligence was due to improved nutrition and living conditions - as well as better education - says James Flynn of the University of Otago, after whom the effect is named.






An image of the future? Some experts believe we are starting to see the end of the Flynn effect in developed countries – and that IQ scores are leveling out and even declining. Pessimistic scientists think that our descendants may struggle to understand subjects we can grasp (illustrated with a stock image)

Now some experts believe we are starting to see the end of the Flynn effect in developed countries – and that IQ scores are not just levelling out, but declining.

*'HUMAN INTELLIGENCE HAS DECLINED SINCE VICTORIAN ERA'
*
Westerns have lost 14 IQ points on average since the Victorian age, according to a study published by the University of Amsterdam last year.

Jan te Nijenhuis thinks this could be because intelligent women tend to have less children than women who are not as clever, The Huffington Post reported.

The perceived link between IQ and fertility is a very contentious one.

Dr Nijenhuis studied the results of 14 intelligence studies conducted between 1884 and 2004 to come to his conclusion.

Each study measured peoples' reaction times - how long they took to press a button after being prompted.

It is claimed that reaction time mirrors mental processing speed - so it reflects intelligence.

They found that visual reaction times averaged 194 milliseconds in the late 19th Century, but in 2004, they had increased to 275 milliseconds.

This would suggest that people have become less intelligent, they said.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Schutz

YOU DOCTOR YET


----------



## syedali73

Being a medical professional, I have come to a conclusion that IQ is crap. I could never score more than 65, still am doing pretty good in my profession. I have been a distinction holder, published 33 papers, obtained 8 patents, graduated 5 PhDs, several MS etc. IQ (if there is something like this) is only one of several factors which contribute in the success of a person.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Schutz

syedali73 said:


> Being a medical professional, I have come to a conclusion that IQ is crap. I could never score more than 65, still am doing pretty good in my profession. I have been a distinction holder, published 33 papers, obtained 8 patents, graduated 5 PhDs, several MS etc. IQ (if there is something like this) is only one of several factors which contribute in the success of a person.



It is crap, I score highly on IQ tests as I have quite good mathematical and logic/problem solving skills but I couldnt even finish my degree due to laziness, something IQ does not factor in! haha.

Then I have friends who would struggle to score 100 on an IQ test just because they never really paid attention in school and didnt develop the skills to score well on a test but they have good jobs and are good at their jobs and earn very good money for their age, one of them earns about £50,000 and hes only 23 yet to speak to him you would think hes a simpleton.


----------



## Edison Chen

They say 1/3 engineers of Apple are Indians. The CEO of MS is also Indian. IQ itself doesn't speak much for intelligence, biotech research on this is also a waste of time. Due to the absence of resources spent on education, people may have lower literacy rate, but this situation is getting better. I mean congenital factors are not important at all, most people are just average on intelligence in any society, just like the normal distribution, the extremists are just few. What really matters is nurture, people are not born smart, though only a few of them could be gifted, which I don't deny.

As for China and some East Asia countries, it's a little special I think. China associated education with examination and career since roughly 900 AD, late Tang Dynasty. Poor people can participate examination by learning Confucius classics, and thus to get promoted to become the upper class. As time went by, being educated is reckoned an honor for the whole family, a career success for himself and a noble status to be admired by root class. Education means fortune. Through education, they get smart. So this is training by nurture, not nature. Other countries also have this system, but I think China invented it first. LOL, correct me if wrong.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## WAR-rior

http://www.free-iqtest.net/images/badges2/l140.gif


----------



## mehboobkz

Edison Chen said:


> They say 1/3 engineers of Apple are Indians. The CEO of MS is also Indian. IQ itself doesn't speak much for intelligence, biotech research on this is also a waste of time. Due to the absence of resources spent on education, people may have lower literacy rate, but this situation is getting better. I mean congenital factors are not important at all, most people are just average on intelligence in any society, just like the normal distribution, the extremists are just few. What really matters is nurture, people are not born smart, though only a few of them could be gifted, which I don't deny.
> 
> As for China and some East Asia countries, it's a little special I think. China associated education with examination and career since roughly 900 AD, late Tang Dynasty. Poor people can participate examination by learning Confucius classics, and thus to get promoted to become the upper class. As time went by, being educated is reckoned an honor for the whole family, a career success for himself and a noble status to be admired by root class. Education means fortune. Through education, they get smart. So this is training by nurture, not nature. Other countries also have this system, but I think China invented it first. LOL, correct me if wrong.





> An *intelligence quotient,* or *IQ,* is a score derived from one of several standardized tests designed to assess human intelligence





> A *standardized test* is a test that is administered and scored in a consistent, or "standard", manner. Standardized tests are designed in such a way that the questions, conditions for administering, scoring procedures, and interpretations are consistent and are administered and scored in a predetermined, standard manner.





> Any test in which the same test is given in the same manner to all test takers is a standardized test. Standardized tests need not be high-stakes tests, time-limited tests, or multiple-choice tests. The opposite of a standardized test is a _non-standardized test_. Non-standardized testing gives significantly different tests to different test takers, or gives the same test under significantly different conditions (e.g., one group is permitted far less time to complete the test than the next group), or evaluates them differently (e.g., the same answer is counted right for one student, but wrong for another student).
> 
> Standardized tests are perceived as being more fair than non-standardized tests. The consistency also permits more reliable comparison of outcomes across all test takers.


----------



## Hiptullha

mehboobkz said:


> Frankly speaking I do not believe you or any Pakistani ever since their lies were nailed during Osama Bin Laden's presence in Pakistan.



Nothing wrong with a little skepticism.
But the way you started things, was a little offensive for me.
If he was lying or telling the truth is no concern to me. He wouldn't have gained anything from saying that he had 5 patents or he lived in Malaysia. 



mehboobkz said:


> The following ID did a
> *Houdini *on me and vanished into the thin air, not because of anything but for his own follies/contradictions/tall claims that he could not substantiate:
> 
> View attachment 45072
> 
> 
> I maintain:
> I never used an "Un-parliamentary" language ever...


----------



## somsak

1 vs 1 China probably higher IQ than white.
team vs team Chinese and East Asia lost IQto white badly.
Coz ego and politics in workplace.


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

somsak said:


> 1 vs 1 China probably higher IQ than white.
> team vs team Chinese and East Asia lost IQto white badly.
> Coz ego and politics in workplace.



In fact, today's Chinese society emphasizes more about the collectivism than the individualism.

Thanks to CPC, our society will not be plagued by the sophistries such as individualism, personal freedom, etc.

These are selfish reasons to prevent people to work together.


----------



## Audio

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> In fact, today's Chinese society emphasizes more about the collectivism than the individualism.



Collectivism in Chinese sense means, everyone works for the top guy without questions. In the strictest of sense it is the untold contract between CCP and Chinese people that the people should sacrifice themselves selflessly through being underpaid, working in dangerous conditions for the greater good of the nation- so that once again-or so the CCP tells you, you will be able to ascend to the pinnacle of world nations.
What the person you quoted was refering to i suspect, was teamwork, the kind where (almost) every member of the team can provide input.

If i'm not mistaken, Haier already transitioned to a almost manager free type of model, where engineers recruit each other in teams and brainstorm ideas for possible new products. So, here we are already seeing that successful Chinese companies are adopting a more western style model of free interaction and exchange of ideas.



ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Thanks to CPC, our society will not be plagued by the sophistries such as individualism, personal freedom, etc.



Individualism and personal freedom is not a threat that threatens to endanger progress, rampant nepotism and cronyism are. But ofcourse, you won't be allowed to talk about that too much.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## somsak

cold evolved societies are superior.
Smartest , I believe, are white societies and North pole Mongoloid societies like Inuits, Yakutts. In thai language, the Only vocabulary for "superior" is "nue kwa", which means "more north".


----------



## ShahidT

richard lynn's study has been proven unscientific by just about every respectable science/medical journal out there. the way he collected data, and the magnitude of bias in his methodology renders the study quite useless. people who quote it are often knuckle dragging stormfront users, who wouldn't know distortion or weak statistical validity if it smacked them in the face, or north east asians for self pats on the back.

just a straightforward question to those who have done even rudimentary research. do tests in various languages, if the content is standardized (in the study it was not), allow for meaningful quantitative comparison accurately to the precise iq number as purported? furthermore, can the sample of a few dozen/hundred/thousand be extrapolated to whole populations, especially if they are disproportionately (and perhaps deliberately) taken from underdeveloped pockets of certain nations or well-to-do pockets from others? food for thought.


----------



## KingMamba

gslv said:


> i posted my iq result in another post. it came out as 123.it was by mensa website. i dont believe its so hard to raise iq by proper education. btw i am a doctor.



Mensa is not an iq test doctor sahib, I have taken many online iq tests and have scored a max of 153 after multiple attempts but my average is 150. I find it hard to believe your iq isn't at least equal to my own. 

Here are two I have tried out online- IQTest.com
Free IQ Test - Fast, Free and Accurate Online IQ Test


----------



## Schutz

Has individualism been prevalent among Chinese for a while?

Some of the Chinese girls I lived with were really nice people who immersed themselves into a different country and made friends etc very well but when it came to work/study they tended to just lock themselves away on their own, no group study or asking for help whereas all the other students, whites, arabs, blacks etc would just mix and study together and sadly one of the girls had to resit the first year something like 4 times which could have been resolved with getting help from others.

I think in China there is alot of what you said, education = money/power, but these days universities are full of people who are really not fit for their jobs. My ex girlfriend, she had a first in law from a decent university here and was always getting top grades throughout school but she was just clueless about life in general, no knowledge of history/current affairs etc, just typical automated robotic reading and memorising books.


----------



## 55100864

There is indeed an average IQ gap between different ethnic groups, but the IQ study has been somehow seen as taboo，the scientists who study on this were marginalised because some political correct bullshits. the reason why the west is ahead of east asian is because their higher level of aggressiveness and assertiveness. but i do agree there is little connection between individual success and IQ. east asian should rebuild its Militarism（尚武精神). we used to be very aggressive and assertive as well.


----------



## gslv

KingMamba said:


> Mensa is not an iq test doctor sahib, I have taken many online iq tests and have scored a max of 153 after multiple attempts but my average is 150. I find it hard to believe your iq isn't at least equal to my own.
> 
> Here are two I have tried out online- IQTest.com
> Free IQ Test - Fast, Free and Accurate Online IQ Test


the iq test that you quoted, i scored 150 something at first attempt.
the test i appeared , link
http://s22.postimg.org/ko4b04ekx/image.png
BTW kitna purana post log khodke nikalte hain.i almost forgot that i ever had a post here on this thread. man its almost 1 year old post. that too based on a not so fool proof test.
Btw i simply know i dont belong to 150+ iq category. i belong to high intelligence not genius level.the test i appeared was suggested by slavdefence in one of his threads or another pakistani member if i remember correctly.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Progressive1

btw is there any study involving IQ with respect to GDP per capita/living standard etc.?


----------



## Chak Bamu

mehboobkz said:


> Look at these people!
> They not only put false flag, but brag billion times about anything under the sun...
> The guy can not even answer the well known fact that I know as a tourist in Malaysia....
> And he claims to be from Malaysia - And calls other False flag-er?
> 
> Uber shame? Lol
> 
> And to be honest, If I would have bragged like you did...
> PDF Morale police would have swooped on me, as they hoover around a la drone...And boom..here came CHAK BAMU......



"Bravado might stir a crowd" - indeed! If you had courage, you would actually put a "@" before my ID so that I may know that your theatrics are more than just bravado.

When you choose to hide your flags, you have no right to criticize others. That is why you should not troll others who show their flags honestly. @syedali73 is an honest and respected poster.



mehboobkz said:


> I am glad You got exposed tonight...For not substantiating the facts...even 5%...
> And you know what?
> 
> Bravado may stir the crowd, but the courage needs no audience!!!
> 
> Mull it over..
> 
> Next time do not discharge horse manure here on PDF please...



The only person getting expose is you. PDF admins know the concerned poster and respect him. Only thing akin to Horse Manure is your incessant trolling a senior and respectable poster. Perhaps he reminds you of your own inadequacies? Hence the lashing out?



mehboobkz said:


> Frankly speaking I do not believe you or any Pakistani ever since their lies were nailed during Osama Bin Laden's presence in Pakistan.



Then what the are you doing here on PDF, if you believe none of us?



mehboobkz said:


> How many "Little India's in Malaysia?
> Those who live here know it...and can count it on their fingers!
> 
> Sir JI...Atte me namak milao - Namak me atta nahi...
> You failed on simple fact being in Malaysia...
> While I am talking Turkey - You are running away as a chicken on simple facts..





mehboobkz said:


> Call your friends a la phone a friend...





mehboobkz said:


> I maintain:
> I never used an "Un-parliamentary" language ever...



Just read your submissions and see how you troll.



mehboobkz said:


> “I can teach you how to bottle fame, brew glory, even put a stopper on death.”
> ― J.K. Rowling, _Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone_



The only thing being stoppered is you.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## waz

creed04 said:


> btw is there any study involving IQ with respect to GDP per capita/living standard etc.?



"IQ and the Wealth of Nations".

Dr Richard lynn.


----------



## mehboobkz

Chak Bamu said:


> "Bravado might stir a crowd" - indeed! If you had courage, you would actually put a "@" before my ID so that I may know that your theatrics are more than just bravado.
> 
> When you choose to hide your flags, you have no right to criticize others. That is why you should not troll others who show their flags honestly. @syedali73 is an honest and respected poster.
> 
> 
> 
> The only person getting expose is you. PDF admins know the concerned poster and respect him. Only thing akin to Horse Manure is your incessant trolling a senior and respectable poster. Perhaps he reminds you of your own inadequacies? Hence the lashing out?
> 
> Just read your submissions and see how you troll.
> 
> 
> 
> The only thing being stoppered is you.
> 
> Then what the are you doing here on PDF, if you believe none of us?



I knew its coming - And here it is!
Boom...I even predicted your name..

The poster in question from Malaysia has a tally of claims never heard before on this Forum, nobody came close, not even any moderator or Webmaster.....Who can match his imagery caliber...Lol

But its okey with you people, because you seem to be hand in gloves, partners in crime to not question him - WHY?

Because he is one of your stock...

If you are rational dude, question him about his claims - because you just had good time with mine...

But I know you will not do that = Islamic bhaichara?

I know it...
Its your trait here/

I come here to debunk Pakistani lies...Any question?

You lack guts to ask him about his Patents that are non existent?


----------



## waz

KingMamba said:


> Mensa is not an iq test doctor sahib, I have taken many online iq tests and have scored a max of 153 after multiple attempts but my average is 150. I find it hard to believe your iq isn't at least equal to my own.
> 
> Here are two I have tried out online- IQTest.com
> Free IQ Test - Fast, Free and Accurate Online IQ Test



I got 126 bro, I screwed up on the squares and leaf question. Numbers, shapes and word placing are my strengths.

I was about to email the results to my dad expecting something like 200, but I won't now, because he might beat me up for it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## C130

mike2000 said:


> All this IQ stuff is bullshit talk. If Chinese and east Asians have such high IQ and are so smart then why is it that we(the west) still play you among each other and still have military bases there? In fact if East asia was so smart/high IQ then why are they still so divided/hate each other unlike we in the west/U.S?



Chinese students are known to cheat like crazy
Chinese students found cheating to get into U.S. colleges - Jul. 1, 2014
Riot after Chinese teachers try to stop pupils cheating - Telegraph


IMO I.Q means little.
but we're going down the drain here in the U.S though.
kids don't want an education especially African Americans.


----------



## KingMamba

waz said:


> I got 126 bro, I screwed up on the squares and leaf question. Numbers, shapes and word placing are my strengths.
> 
> I was about to email the results to my dad expecting something like 200, but I won't now, because he might beat me up for it.



Lol yeah if you take a few others tests online you will notice the type of questions are always similar. Yeah don't send it, need to watch out for the chapals. 



gslv said:


> the iq test that you quoted, i scored 150 something at first attempt.
> the test i appeared , link
> http://s22.postimg.org/ko4b04ekx/image.png
> BTW kitna purana post log khodke nikalte hain.i almost forgot that i ever had a post here on this thread. man its almost 1 year old post. that too based on a not so fool proof test.
> Btw i simply know i dont belong to 150+ iq category. i belong to high intelligence not genius level.the test i appeared was suggested by slavdefence in one of his threads or another pakistani member if i remember correctly.



Yeah someone must have bumped the thread I didn't realize the date when I quoted you lol. 
Actually according to this scale 150 is actually genius category but there are other categories that are much higher. IQ scale Idk which scale the site I gave you uses though but afaik the highest iq is 200 and nothing can be higher. Some sites quote iqs over 200 for some famous people in history but that is bogus.


----------



## gslv

KingMamba said:


> Lol yeah if you take a few others tests online you will notice the type of questions are always similar. Yeah don't send it, need to watch out for the chapals.
> 
> 
> 
> Yeah someone must have bumped the thread I didn't realize the date when I quoted you lol.
> Actually according to this scale 150 is actually genius category but there are other categories that are much higher. IQ scale Idk which scale the site I gave you uses though but afaik the highest iq is 200 and nothing can be higher. Some sites quote iqs over 200 for some famous people in history but that is bogus.


The IQ scale that i read in medical college classifies IQ above 130 as brilliant and 140 as genius. thats what i read in psychiatry books.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Donatello

mike2000 said:


> All this IQ stuff is bullshit talk. If Chinese and east Asians have such high IQ and are so smart then why is it that we(the west) still play you among each other and still have military bases there? In fact if East asia was so smart/high IQ then why are they still so divided/hate each other unlike we in the west/U.S?




Most people studying high tech subjects, Mathematics/Physics/Medicine in the west are now of Asian origin. Asians are catching up fast. I have studied in both the US and UK, and let me assure you, the mathematical ability of the Asians is far superior to Americans or British and they also seem to have a much better view of the world around them compared with westerners. They have problems with English, but English is not our first language. In fact, it is not even my second language.


----------



## dray

I checked my IQ, and this was the result!!


----------



## waz

KingMamba said:


> Lol yeah if you take a few others tests online you will notice the type of questions are always similar. Yeah don't send it, need to watch out for the chapals.



I have done others and I usually score far higher. I must be getting old. 



DRAY said:


> I checked my IQ, and this was the result!!



I just did another test and the result read.






And gave me this print out.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Armstrong

waz said:


> "IQ and the Wealth of Nations".
> 
> Dr Richard lynn.



Waz Bhai abbb aaap lift hi nahin karvateiii....no reply ?


----------



## Chak Bamu

mehboobkz said:


> I knew its coming - And here it is!
> Boom...I even predicted your name..
> 
> The poster in question from Malaysia has a tally of claims never heard before on this Forum, nobody came close, not even any moderator or Webmaster.....Who can match his imagery caliber...Lol
> 
> But its okey with you people, because you seem to be hand in gloves, partners in crime to not question him - WHY?
> 
> Because he is one of your stock...
> 
> If you are rational dude, question him about his claims - because you just had good time with mine...
> 
> But I know you will not do that = Islamic bhaichara?
> 
> I know it...
> Its your trait here/
> 
> I come here to debunk Pakistani lies...Any question?
> 
> You lack guts to ask him about his Patents that are non existent?



Most Indians come here to debunk Pakistani 'lies'. You are just a common troll, nothing more.

I have no problem with @syedali73 's claims. Its not my business to quiz him. I am more concerned with his on-line demeanor. He is a respectable and serious poster. If he acted like you, I would certainly question him.

You seem to be in love with yourself, but seems as though the reality of your situation forces you to look for people to troll. Pakistanis happen to be ones, trolling whom seems to bring you more satisfaction.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Coumarane

Yeah
and a IQ does not mean success.
I personaly know many High IQ persons who have problems 
in studies even if they are brilliants.


----------



## StormShadow

Coumarane said:


> Hi everybody
> I am new to this forum.
> *A lot lhave been written regarding indians and their Iq.*
> Well,i am living in France for many years.
> French pupils are living in a home with 24 hours electricity and water supply.They mostly have a proper room
> to rest and study.
> Every french pupil has plenty of high nutricious food.
> School is compulsory and free and the teachers here are very motivated.They want their pupils to succeed and they
> take these jobs very seriously.
> 
> These according me explain the high IQ of westen pupils.
> 
> *If you take India for exemple,not every child has its own room.
> In some family they have no home and some people even live in small room.
> Electricity and water are not working 24 hours a day.
> 
> Teachers in India are not all very devoted and that is why a lot of childer(50 per cent according
> the head of Premji foundation ) do not understad what they read*.


Welcome back @Shatterpoint


----------



## Chak Bamu

Coumarane said:


> Hi everybody
> I am new to this forum.
> A lot lhave been written regarding indians and their Iq.
> Well,i am living in France for many years.
> French pupils are living in a home with 24 hours electricity and water supply.They mostly have a proper room
> to rest and study.
> Every french pupil has plenty of high nutricious food.
> School is compulsory and free and the teachers here are very motivated.They want their pupils to succeed and they
> take these jobs very seriously.
> 
> These according me explain the high IQ of westen pupils.
> 
> If you take India for exemple,not every child has its own room.
> In some family they have no home and some people even live in small room.
> Electricity and water are not working 24 hours a day.
> 
> Teachers in India are not all very devoted and that is why a lot of childer(50 per cent according
> the head of Premji foundation ) do not understad what they read.



Welcome to PDF. Do introduce yourself in the members introduction section: Members Introduction


----------



## SR-91

gslv said:


> i posted my iq result in another post. it came out as 123.it was by mensa website. i dont believe its so hard to raise iq by proper education. btw i am a doctor.



I took an iq test on july 9 2014, and was feeling dumb. I only scored 122. I dropped out of college the first year.Im feeling better now


----------



## Arya Desa

yourwrongimright said:


> First of all, you should know better than to go off of one study. I have a study too that was done in the UK which contradicts that. Indians, with enough food, have an IQ of 100.
> oi50,tinypic,com/2nuqf6g.jpg
> Pakistanis are of course lower than blacks at 93
> 
> You can argue selective immigration for the US, but not the UK. Europe has the most liberal immigration policies in the world.
> 
> Secondly,* south indians are smarter than north indians. *Don't fall for the "aryan" fantasies. South indians can have black skin, but they are still caucasoids with sharp noses and facial features
> photos,modelmayhem,com/photos/110630/01/4e0c381a98c0a.jpg
> 
> Haryana and punjab are the most misogynist states, Bihar is the most poverty stricken, etc. (all north india)
> 
> It is very possible that higher castes are smarter than lower castes on average, but I doubt the difference will be great except for dalits



lol insecure south Indian. Prove it, you guys have nothing over us. We created Indian culture, dravids merely submitted to it.


----------



## $elf

yourwrongimright said:


> First of all, you should know better than to go off of one study. I have a study too that was done in the UK which contradicts that. Indians, with enough food, have an IQ of 100.
> oi50,tinypic,com/2nuqf6g.jpg
> Pakistanis are of course lower than blacks at 93
> 
> You can argue selective immigration for the US, but not the UK. Europe has the most liberal immigration policies in the world.
> 
> Secondly, south indians are smarter than north indians. Don't fall for the "aryan" fantasies. South indians can have black skin, but they are still caucasoids with sharp noses and facial features
> photos,modelmayhem,com/photos/110630/01/4e0c381a98c0a.jpg
> 
> Haryana and punjab are the most misogynist states, Bihar is the most poverty stricken, etc. (all north india)
> 
> It is very possible that higher castes are smarter than lower castes on average, but I doubt the difference will be great except for dalits


Arya desa is a khalistani , ignore him and his views


----------



## Nova2

yourwrongimright said:


> * south indians are smarter than north indians.*
> photos,modelmayhem,com/photos/110630/01/4e0c381a98c0a.jpg
> Haryana and punjab are the most misogynist states, Bihar is the most poverty stricken, etc. (all north india)


Welcome to the forum !!
We knew you were smart but we didn't knew you were this smart 
btw there's a world outside ,bangalore ,chennai ,hyderabad ,etc. that is still in poverty and low on literacy.


----------



## Arya Desa

$elf said:


> Arya desa is a khalistani , ignore him and his views



In no way, shape, or form am I Khalistani. Neither am I a suscriber to dravidofantasies that they are superior to North Indians yet they believe in North Indian culture.


----------



## A1Kaid

gslv said:


> yup you speak truth .those people in swat valley and gun totting terrorist are highly intelligent. can beat *amartya sen , ramanuzan, rabindranath tagore , venkateraman , j c bose, homi bhaba , meghanad saha , indra nuyi , vikram pandit *. as a doctor i can say if you ever get the chance, see foreign editors in harrison book of internal medicine . all low iq indians there . iq level 0-10 in stanford binet scale. food for thought.




Those people and others like them represent a very small number out of the total population of India. Surely you as a "doctor" would be able to figure that out on your own.


----------



## MastanKhan

mike2000 said:


> All this IQ stuff is bullshit talk. If Chinese and east Asians have such high IQ and are so smart then why is it that we(the west) still play you among each other and still have military bases there? In fact if East asia was so smart/high IQ then why are they still so divided/hate each other unlike we in the west/U.S?




Hi,

There is a difference between being INTELLIGENT and being CLEVER------south Asians are very clever people---very sharp----but over all they lack INTELLIGENCE-----.

Clever people look for their welfare only----intelligent people build the nation.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## gslv

A1Kaid said:


> Those people and others like them represent a very small number out of the total population of India. Surely you as a "doctor" would be able to figure that out on your own.


isnt population of FATA and swat valley significant. the poster icewolf that i quoted was trying to project as if rest of south asia is somehow superior to India. That aint true. many people of Indain origin who have same genes as us are also respected in western countries. btw India proprtionally holds more awards in science that any other south asian country. I said proportionally.
Atleast few states of India has HDI on higher side that any pakistani province. india also has a higher literacy rate that pakistan.


----------



## sms

Srinivas said:


> Just now took an IQ test online My IQ is 121.
> I am a VLSI micro chip designer by profession





gslv said:


> which one mensa one?
> if not take the mensa test it removes linguistic bias.



I've tried many web sites (including Mensa) the IQ result ranges between 142 ~163. I'm considered an old retard by most in my friends and relatives


----------



## gslv

sms said:


> I've tried many web sites (including Mensa) the IQ result ranges between 142 ~163. I'm considered an old retard by most in my friends and relatives


well may be you are a retard compared to them LOL.j/k. congrats bro , i mean old man. you should throw the results on their face and tell them to STFU.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## waz

Armstrong said:


> Waz Bhai abbb aaap lift hi nahin karvateiii....no reply ?



Sorry bro, I'll respond today.


----------



## mike2000

MastanKhan said:


> Hi,
> 
> There is a difference between being INTELLIGENT and being CLEVER------south Asians are very clever people---very sharp----but over all they lack INTELLIGENCE-----.
> 
> Clever people look for their welfare only----intelligent people build the nation.



You make valid points Bro. I agree with that. However, in geo politics Clever people dont mattter much. Intelligence is what counts. In fact the west/U. still uses Divide and rule in 'clever/high IQ' Asia just like we do in Africa/middle east. 
On that note, the west beats any region/continent/country by far. No country has military bases on western/U.S soil or controls the west/U.S but the West/U.S controls/has military bases all over Asia and counting........so much for high IQ/cleverness.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## tonyget

mike2000 said:


> On that note, the west beats any region/continent/country by far. No country has military bases on western/U.S soil or controls the west/U.S but the West/U.S controls/has military bases all over Asia and counting........so much for high IQ/cleverness.




Apparently, nomads conquered Euro-Asia and barbarians conquered Roma not because of they were smarter


----------



## somebozo

Icewolf said:


> The South Asian IQ figure is being weighed down by very low IQ India...
> 
> If you only take in account Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka's IQ, it will be around 90-95.



You took words out of my mouth

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## xyxmt

While Talking about IQ
Title should read as Singapore Higher than China and Korea...or *Singapore is the highes*t which implies it is higher than any other country


----------



## tranquilium

WhiteMansBurden said:


> Might want to check your figures buddy.
> 
> How are the South Asians at 82 while the Middle Eastern/North African are at only 84?
> 
> Also, they are both obviously more intelligent than African-Americans, so how does that work?



The biggest factor that affects IQ tests is the education infrastructure. The actual biological difference is quite small, but countries with better education system will beat the ones without.



WhiteMansBurden said:


> LOL so East Asians are superior to Whites? I think not.... Why has Europe accomplished more than everyone else combined? Why have we built everything you see around you?



Eh, out of the five thousand years of human history, Europe is only on top for about 300 years. Also remember, a large part of European renassaince (which Europe generally credit as the event that start their rise) is learning knowledge from the Islamic world of the time.

But that is neither here or there. Biologically speaking, the IQ between various group is rather small. Small enough that IQ test mostly show the diffence in education standards, infrastructure and a lot of times culture attitude on education. All these are latter day acquired factors.



Speeder 2 said:


> Religious Extremism (e.g. from some sects of Christian ) hasnt made New England a backward place.
> 
> Religious Extremism ( e.g. Maoism in current North Korean or Mao-era China) havent prevent them from having high IQs, which were formed during Ice Ages. And only 2 groups of races are cold-tested: Mongoloid and Euro Caucasoid. On the other hand, e.g., with some of the highest GDP per cap for ages, none of the Gulf States is even close to being industrialised. Qatars PISA and TIMSS scores are not very encouraging either, compared to say Panama or Mexico.



Dude, you do realize that the North Koreans national IQ is about the same as South Koreans, ie, among the highest in the world right?

I also looked up information in Chinese intelligence during Mao-era. Mao's era is mark by a rapid rise of Chinese population intelligence.

This is because IQ test is a product of EDUCATION. Take North Korea for example, while it is economically isolate in the past two decades, you need to remember that before the collapse of USSR, North Korea was actually one of the better developed nation in East Asia. As the result, its education infrastructure remained and its population still receive the benefit today. Similarly, at the start of Mao's era, China has just ended a century long struggle with foreign imperialism and civil war. Because Mao is able to establish a stable nation with rapidly improving living standards and infrastructure, the education quality and general education level rised rapidly.

Also I want to note, why would North Korea has Maoism? When Sino-USSR split occurs, North Korea sided with USSR, so the relationship between China and North Korea has always been cold, even today.

Another thing to note is that Vietnam, another communist country, also have fairly high IQ comparing to the rest of the region. This is not a coincidence, but actually has to do with communism itself. A lot of the communist countries have higher IQ than their peer *assuming they are at the similar infrastructure level*.

The reason isn't because communism magically influencing people's brain chemistry. The reason actually comes from the need for additional labor forces. The Eastern communist nations, such as USSR, China, North Korea, Vietnam all went through industrial revolution in the 20th century. This means all these nations have to exploit every last drop of its internal resources to fuel its transition. Hence all available bodies are made into viable work force and the *corresponding education happens according*. To make a simple example, in many western families, woman stayed at home instead of working. For these staying at home woman, education is hardly necessary because it doesn't provide any benefit. In contrast, if your entire population is expected to work at some point, then you need to have the education and training appropriate for it. This also explain why Cuba doesn't have an exceptional high score. It is an island nation without heavy demand for a large educated work force, so there is no need to obtain as much education as possible.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## TruthSeeker

East Asia United said:


> Guys, I'm trying to keep this thread as respectful and courteous as possible, so we are not closed down. Try to keep it civil. Thanks



Thank you for this thread. I wish that politicians in my country, the USA, and elsewhere in the world, would take into account these IQ differences when they make "one size fits all" policy decisions. (Especially immigration policy ...)

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Malik Alashter

Crappy stuff







The south and north korean have the same score thats just cant be.


----------



## tranquilium

Malik Alashter said:


> Crappy stuff
> 
> View attachment 358111
> 
> 
> The south and north korean have the same score thats just cant be.



Why is that surprising? North Koreans does rather well on international math competition as well. Like I said, it used to be quite prosperous. The Kims are not idiots. While it is not long enough to draw conclusion on the current one, the two previously genreations are actually quite competent. So they have a rather decent education infrastructure.
Their problem is that they picked the losing side in cold war and made their economy depending on it. In fact, they picked THE losing side. In allying with USSR, not only they made US and Europe its enemy, it also pissed ALL of its immediate neighbour, such as China, South Korea and Japan. (Western audience seem to have this ludicrous idea that China and North Korea are buddy buddy with each other. No, China tolerates North Korea and recognize its significance as a strategic barrier and potentially useful force in dealing with US in Eastern Asia business, but there is very little love between the two countries.)



TruthSeeker said:


> Thank you for this thread. I wish that politicians in my country, the USA, and elsewhere in the world, would take into account these IQ differences when they make "one size fits all" policy decisions. (Especially immigration policy ...)



Unfortunately, US' immigration policy has far deeper roots. Here is my take on the necessary existence of US immigration policy despite the drawbacks. One obvious reason is the need for continuous injection of fresh labor, but that is only part of it.

The other part and deeper reason is the continuous injection of multiple culture groups to prevent any existing group from gaining too much influence (and challenge the current status quo). Unlike old world nations, US is a relatively new nation formed by multiple groups of immigrants. The original immigrants are from England, but later there are also huge influx of Irish, German originaled Europeans in the 19th century. Of course, the slave trade brought a lot of African into US. There is also the hispanic groups (which itself is a very diverse group) and the latter groups such as South Asian, Southeast Asians and East Asians.

Historically, there are generally two approaches in culture integration. The first one is absorption. In this case, the current dominant group will absorb the rest into its culture. A prime example will be the Chinese. The modern day dominant han Chinese group actually consists of thousands of absorbed groups over the past five millennia and it is still absorb more ethnic groups through economic and cutlure integration. (For Chinese readers, hint, there is a reason we give out bonus scores to minority groups on college entrance exams. You get the best and brightest from the minor group and put them in a Han dominate university and give them a skill set that fit perfect well with a han dominated city, where do you think they will be in a few generations? A lot of suposed minority group today actually has no difference at all with Han group.)

However, due to the lack of a (large enough) dominant group in US, the first approach is not possible. So the second approach is that if you can't have a unified, super big one, then you make every group small by continuously bringing in more groups. If the groups are all small, then they can't gain enough political or military power to start a civil or persecute otheres. For example, with all the hate on Middle Eastern Muslims and conspiracy of they are taking over the country, did people consider how on earth are these immigrants suppose to actually band together? For example, Syrians are not going to get along with Turks despite they are all Muslims. Even among the same nation group, there are still multiple branches have their disputes.

Personally, I don't think this is the best possible approach, but given the reality and historical background, this is the best one US can take.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## samsara

_A writing established few years ago, yet still poses some relevance to enlighten us in grasping some of the background situation though some realities do change over time..._

*China and India - awakening giants, feet of clay - VOX*

Welcome to Vox Talks, a series of audio interviews with leading economists from around the world. My name is Romesh Vaitilingam, and today's interview is with *Professor Pranab Bardhan* of the University of California, Berkeley. Pranab and I met at the London School of Economics in May 2010 where we spoke about his new book "_Awakening Giants, Feet of Clay: Assessing the Economic Rise of China and India_", and I began by asking him what he saw as the value of comparing these two enormous countries.

(Just search the article at VOX, CEPR’s Policy Portal)


----------



## XenoEnsi-14

Edit


----------



## AndrewJin

If indians are so smart, why do they chicken out from the PISA test since ranking among the lowest two in 2009?


----------



## SDS1

Icewolf said:


> The South Asian IQ figure is being weighed down by very low IQ India...
> 
> If you only take in account Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka's IQ, it will be around 90-95.


lol yet still we have ahead in everything.


----------



## Shinigami

AndrewJin said:


> If indians are so smart, why do they chicken out from the PISA test since ranking among the lowest two in 2009?


*China is Cheating the World Student Rankings System*
*Enough is enough: Beijing must supply national data to assessors and not simply the results of a small minority of elite students*

http://thediplomat.com/2013/12/china-cheats-the-pisa-exams/
http://world.time.com/2013/12/04/china-is-cheating-the-world-student-rankings-system/

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## AndrewJin

Shinigami said:


> *China is Cheating the World Student Rankings System*
> *Enough is enough: Beijing must supply national data to assessors and not simply the results of a small minority of elite students*
> 
> http://thediplomat.com/2013/12/china-cheats-the-pisa-exams/
> http://world.time.com/2013/12/04/china-is-cheating-the-world-student-rankings-system/



*Are the Chinese cheating in PISA or are we cheating ourselves?*

It seems that OECD officers do not agree with trolls.
And this China-related article does not answer *why india (only two states, cheating??) ranked the worst two and chicken out in all subsequent tests.*

*Such reaction from RSSers probably reflects the results shown by the previous test.*


----------



## Shinigami

AndrewJin said:


> *Are the Chinese cheating in PISA or are we cheating ourselves?*
> 
> It seems that OECD officers does not agree with trolls.
> And this China-related article does not answer *why india (only two states, cheating??) ranked the worst two and chicken out in all subsequent tests.*
> 
> *Such reaction from RSSers probably reflects the results shown by the previous test.*



so a guest author from a 3rd class website is credible?  

if india is ranked worst 2
why are indian engineers the most sought after in the world?
why are indian managers the most sought after in the world?
why are indian doctors from AIIMS the most sought after in the world?
how did india manage to put a sattellite in mars while china failed?

another source:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2013/12/15/did-shanghai-cheat-on-pisa/

*china is #1 in one thing alone: CHEATING*

*Chinese Officials Admit They Faked Economic Figures*
*http://fortune.com/2015/12/14/china-fake-economic-data/*


----------



## AndrewJin

Shinigami said:


> so a guest author from a 3rd class website is credible?
> 
> if india is ranked worst 2
> why are indian engineers the most sought after in the world?
> why are indian managers the most sought after in the world?
> why are indian doctors from AIIMS the most sought after in the world?
> how did india manage to put a sattellite in mars while china failed?
> 
> another source:
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2013/12/15/did-shanghai-cheat-on-pisa/
> 
> *china is #1 in one thing alone: CHEATING*
> 
> *Chinese Officials Admit They Faked Economic Figures*


LMAO.
Ask your students why they sucked not us....
You can write to OECD about it, it seems that they don't agree with trolls.
It seems that indians and non-indians are living in different universes......
Is this sometimes related to low life expectancy and high child wasting rate?
*And by chickening out in the PISA test does not make one nation's average IQ increase from 82 to a higher number....*

p.s., your comment makes india really sound stupid, pls stop humiliating a country. R you a non-indian?


----------



## Shinigami

AndrewJin said:


> LMAO.
> Ask your students why they sucked not us....
> You can write to OECD about it, it seems that they don't agree with trolls.
> It seems that indians and non-indians are living in different universes......
> Is this sometimes related to low life expectancy and high child wasting rate?
> *And by chickening out in the PISA test does not make one nation's average IQ increase from 82 to a higher number....*


why are you so smug? chinese iq is about 85 (without cheating)


----------



## AndrewJin

Shinigami said:


> why are you so smug? chinese iq is about 85 (without cheating)


whatever....
You can argue with IQ experts, they say your IQ is 82 not us.
If you want to argue, write to them instead of whining to us.

Or you can file more patents in WIPO (do you know what is that?) to prove your have IQ.
Check WIPO 2016 ranking.
https://defence.pk/threads/world-in...-2016-global-ranking-of-171-countries.462744/


----------



## Shinigami

AndrewJin said:


> whatever....
> You can argue with IQ experts, they say your IQ is 82 not us.
> If you want to argue, write to them instead of whining to us.
> 
> Or you can file more patents in WIPO (do you know what is that?) to prove your have IQ.
> Check WIPO 2016 ranking.
> https://defence.pk/threads/world-in...-2016-global-ranking-of-171-countries.462744/


the chinese IQ in the official charts are the smartest chinese, whereas the indian IQ in the charts are that of mostly lower castes from government schools. as of now, the best way to compare indians vs chinese is in the diaspora in US UK etc


----------



## Kyusuibu Honbu

Malik Alashter said:


> Crappy stuff
> 
> View attachment 358111
> 
> 
> The south and north korean have the same score thats just cant be.


Hush!
You dare questioning the integrity of the IQ measurement, given the Chinese intellectual sensitivities associated to it? 

We are all low IQ and Chinese are all high IQ, just accept it and move on


----------



## AndrewJin

Shinigami said:


> the chinese IQ in the official charts are the smartest chinese, whereas the indian IQ in the charts are that of mostly lower castes from government schools. as of now, the best way to compare indians vs chinese is in the diaspora in US UK etc


You'd better learn more about Bell Curve, some basic IQ distribution theory.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCPxEbSYb19vOZ6XEL9Wiicw

And if you feel confident, pls contact OECD to test your students instead of chickening out in all tests since 2009.
If you want to argue about OECD's methodology on selection of students in certain states in a statistical way (the most unbiased so far), you should email them.

Another way to make you feel better is to hire internationally renowned IQ experts to retest Indians, probably will change the original number 82.


----------



## Shinigami

AndrewJin said:


> You'd better learn more about Bell Curve, some basic IQ distribution theory.
> 
> And if you feel confident, pls contact OECD to test your students instead of chickening out in all tests since 2009.
> If you want to argue about OECD's methodology on selection of students in certain states in a statistical way (the most unbiased so far), you should email them.
> 
> Another way to make you feel better is to hire internationally renowned IQ experts to retest Indians, probably will change the original number 82.


i'll repeat it one more time:india does not prioratize international prestige the way china does (which is why it does not control its media) so the 82 you guys keep ranting on about is the average of the lower castes from low end schools. the upper and middle castes are a different story.

the distribution in indian genes and therefore IQ is much greater than china which means the top 1% of china can compete with the top 10% of india & the bottom 1% of china is as bad as the bottom 10% of india. hope that clarifies


----------



## django

HAHAHAHHAA Indians have high IQ LOL, they have a billion plus population, of course their are going to be some smart people, but the vast majority of these so-called smart folks are just bookworms who cannot even dream about thinking out of the box, hell even their IIT students would be completely lost outside of the box.
As for the average Hindian peasant, he will be amongst the lowest in the World!
@The Sandman @Zibago


----------



## Shinigami

django said:


> HAHAHAHHAA Indians have high IQ LOL, they have a billion plus population, of course their are going to be some smart people, but the vast majority of these so-called smart folks are just bookworms who cannot even dream about thinking out of the box, hell even their IIT students would be completely lost outside of the box.
> As for the average Hindian peasant, he will be amongst the lowest in the World!


has pakistan developed a 2 wheeler engine yet? or a bicycle?


----------



## AndrewJin

Shinigami said:


> i'll repeat it one more time:india does not prioratize international prestige the way china does (which is why it does not control its media) so the 82 you guys keep ranting on about is the average of the lower castes from low end schools. the upper and middle castes are a different story.
> 
> the distribution in indian genes and therefore IQ is much greater than china which means the top 1% of china can compete with the top 10% of india & the bottom 1% of china is as bad as the bottom 10% of india. hope that clarifies


Whatever you like to say, if it makes you feel better, fine by me.

Now the priority for you is to stop the world from acknowledging the scientific finding: 82.
Again, pls study "Bell Curve". It can tell you, even in a country with average IQ like 80, smart people can be found there.
But we are talking about "average" of a nation.


----------



## django

Shinigami said:


> has pakistan developed a 2 wheeler engine yet? or a bicycle?


HAHAHAHAHAH, the complete nuclear fuel cycle and then some,,,,,,you have well over a billion people yet because the vast majority are remedial, your nation is on par with sub-Saharan Africa when it comes to the living condition of the majority


----------



## Shinigami

AndrewJin said:


> Whatever you like to say, if it makes you feel better, fine by me.
> 
> Now the priority for you is to stop the world from acknowledging the scientific finding: 82.
> Again, pls study "Bell Curve". It can tell you, even in a country with average IQ like 80, smart people can be found there.
> But we are talking about "average" of a nation.


i have already rubbished this narrative in simple terms in my previous post. please read

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## AndrewJin

django said:


> HAHAHAHAHAH, the complete nuclear fuel cycle and then some,,,,,,you have well over a billion people yet because the vast majority are remedial, your nation is on par with sub-Saharan Africa when it comes to the living condition of the majority


I find indians of arryan invasion origin smarter.
But many of them are moving abroad.

Yes, on average, scientific findings find similar outcome in India and SSA.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Shinigami

django said:


> HAHAHAHAHAH, the complete nuclear fuel cycle and then some,,,,,,you have well over a billion people yet because the vast majority are remedial, your nation is on par with sub-Saharan Africa when it comes to the living condition of the majority


actually AQ "photocopy" Khan stole those nuclear secrets from a european company. the rest was provided by the chinese. 
and the delivery systems of pakistan comes from north korea


----------



## django

AndrewJin said:


> *I find indians of arryan invasion origin smarter*.
> But many of them are moving abroad.
> 
> Yes, on average, scientific findings find similar outcome in India and SSA.


Those folk reside in the North, North Indian are definitely smarter than the Southerners who really are known to be bookworms because they have to make up for their lack of natural ability.Kudos sir



Shinigami said:


> actually AQ "photocopy" Khan stole those nuclear secrets from a european company. the rest was provided by the chinese.
> and the delivery systems of pakistan comes from north korea


HAHAHAHAHAAA Pakistan designed indigenously state of the art centrifuges, you can cry all you like, the truth is the vast majority of your people not only look pitiful but they are pitiful.Kudos


----------



## Shinigami

AndrewJin said:


> I find indians of arryan invasion origin smarter.
> But many of them are moving abroad.
> 
> Yes, on average, scientific findings find similar outcome in India and SSA.


no. actually the smartest indians come from the brahmin caste. they(or should i say we?) almost single handedly came up with the core fundamentals of mathematics we use today, from decimal systems to infinite series. the other "aryan invasion" upper castes come in a distant 2nd.


----------



## AndrewJin

django said:


> HAHAHAHHAA Indians have high IQ LOL, they have a billion plus population, of course their are going to be some smart people, but the vast majority of these so-called smart folks are just bookworms who cannot even dream about thinking out of the box, hell even their IIT students would be completely lost outside of the box.
> As for the average Hindian peasant, he will be amongst the lowest in the World!
> @The Sandman @Zibago


Spot on.

Such finding is about "*average*".
I hope people of self-claimed high IQ can comprehend that word.

In the theory of "Bell Curve", even in a country of average IQ of 80, smart people could be still found.
If the population is big, then found easier....

However, a country's success is largely determined by aggregate wisdom and talents not just some top one (and those top one tend to migrate if the rest of the nation are not so smart at large). You can't justify a country's average wisdom by some top intellectuals' success. There are many articles studying such selective immigration's outstanding performances. But, you have to study a country to determine the national wisdom back home.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## alwaysfair

Pointless thread . Best closed. Fact on the ground is that the chinese are 4 times wealthier than us Indians at the moment. Rest all is moot.


----------



## endyashainin

Shinigami said:


> the chinese IQ in the official charts are the smartest chinese, whereas the indian IQ in the charts are that of mostly lower castes from government schools. as of now, the best way to compare indians vs chinese is in the diaspora in US UK etc


----------



## Shinigami

django said:


> Those folk reside in the North, North Indian are definitely smarter than the Southerners who really are known to be bookworms because they have to make up for their lack of natural ability.Kudos sir


do some research moron. 
south indian upper castes have the highest IQ in asia




django said:


> HAHAHAHAHAAA Pakistan designed indigenously state of the art centrifuges, you can cry all you like, the truth is the vast majority of your people not only look pitiful but they are pitiful.Kudos


denial. the famous pakistani passtime
use this time to develop a bicycle


----------



## django

Shinigami said:


> south indians upper castes have the *LOWEST* IQ in asia


My dear chap that goes without saying.Kudos


----------



## AndrewJin

alwaysfair said:


> Pointless thread . Best closed. Fact on the ground is that the chinese are 4 times wealthier than us Indians at the moment. Rest all is moot.


This is not really about wealth.
North Koreans are equally smart as south Koreans. 

Though China is adding an entire indian GDP every 3 years, it does not talk about IQ or PISA.
At least, it can't be directly proved, some indirect links might be found.


----------



## Shinigami

django said:


> My dear chap that goes without saying.Kudos


let me put it this way.
in terms of intelligence,
smartest pakistani who ever lived = average high caste south indian

thats why you guys cant develop a cycle


----------



## django

Shinigami said:


> let me put it this way.
> in terms of intelligence,
> smartest pakistani who ever lived = average high caste south indian
> 
> thats why you guys cant develop a cycle


HAHAHAHAHHAAAA young fella you watch too much of Arnab Goswami.


----------



## alwaysfair

My last input on this thread ..
Is an average american richer than an av Indian or Chinese because of his high IQ ?
Can we eat or live in a higher IQ ?
All this discussion is just childish my daddy is stronger BS.
Bye.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ShoutB

when world was wearing ghas phoos / skirt of straw, South Asians were in silk and meditating and writing. Reading hymns of Vedas, Egyptians were building pyramids. Half of the knowledge these greek took from Taxilla aur humey ab sikhate hai lodu chand. 
BS!

apney hisab ke test rakhte hai phir kehte hai bc ki IQ yeh hai woh hai ..
Zara akar 41 degrees mein comfort zone se bahar nikal kar test dein na.. salo ko toh pani se dhona bhi nahi ata.. baat kartey hai IQ ki.

It is all marketing technique to implement their model of education.


----------



## Shinigami

django said:


> HAHAHAHAHHAAAA young fella you watch too much of Arnab Goswami.


easily proved.
for eg, if your iq was above 90, you would not feel the need to start every sentence with "HAHAHAHAHHAAAA"


----------



## django

Shinigami said:


> easily proved.
> for eg, if your iq was above 90, you would not feel the need to start every sentence with "HAHAHAHAHHAAAA"


A friendly word of advice young man, log off, you are embarrassing your fellow southern ******** as well as yourself.Kudos


----------



## AndrewJin

endyashainin said:


>



I can't really agree to talk about a region as whole instead of studying a country case by case.
(labelling an entire region with 80+ is an insult to many smart nations in the same region)

But one thing quite objective from this professor's work is the test in the home country.
It refrains from selective immigration effects.







p.s. It seems that, one can't even study country by country, since some people from a certain country have shown such diverse IQ differences among different peoples living in the same country.


----------



## ShoutB

AndrewJin said:


> I can't really agree to talk about a region as whole instead of studying a country case by case.
> (labelling an entire region with 80+ is an insult to many smart nations in the same region)
> 
> But one thing quite objective from this professor's work is the test in the home country.
> It refrains from selective immigration effects.
> 
> View attachment 358186




IQ is not just related to intellect but taste, sense, smell and other things also.


----------



## AndrewJin

ShoutB said:


> IQ is not just related to intellect but taste, sense, smell and other things also.


It does have something to do with cognitive development after birth.
So, there is another notion called "IQ genetic ceiling".
That number is about the highest average IQ one nation could get when their cognitive development is perfect.


----------



## ShoutB

AndrewJin said:


> It does have something to do with cognitive development after birth.
> So, there is another notion called "IQ genetic ceiling".
> That number is about the highest average IQ one nation could get when their cognitive development is perfect.



But here results which has been poster are basically based on people and their mathematics and reasoning skill taught in school.


----------



## AndrewJin

ShoutB said:


> But here results which has been poster are basically based on people and their mathematics and reasoning skill taught in school.


That's in the dimension of cognition. 

Genetic ceiling is about when every post-birth condition is perfect, such as nutrition, eduction, under-5 child fatality, etc, one country's highest IQ that could be achieved within the genetical capability.


----------



## ShoutB

AndrewJin said:


> That's in the dimension of cognition.
> 
> Genetic ceiling is about when every post-birth condition is perfect, such as nutrition, eduction, under-5 child fatality, etc, one country's highest IQ that could be achieved within the genetical capability.



thats why i in my first post on this thread mentioned that, they should come out of comfort zone stay without lights and current in 41 degrees eat one fourth of the meal what they eat in a day and then manage to score even 50. I bet africans will do better than them.


----------



## AndrewJin

ShoutB said:


> thats why i in my first post on this thread mentioned that, they should come out of comfort zone stay without lights and current in 41 degrees eat one fourth of the meal what they eat in a day and then manage to score even 50. I bet africans will do better than them.


It's a complicated issue.
Due to potential racism, such studies are now considered politically incorrect.
But there are some studies such as the twins study to show the effect of non-genetics factors.
That is to say, compare twins one living in the original country, one in a developed country.
Or one in the wealthy family, the other in an underprivileged family.
Some find out there is some statistical difference, but not that high.

A developing country with average IQ of 103 could probably get 108 if it becomes a developed country. There are tons of such studies, but one need courage to read. People could be offended by racism they feel, though racism is not the intended outcome of those scientific studies.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCPxEbSYb19vOZ6XEL9Wiicw



I would refrain from any further comments in this thread now because I don't want to be labeled as someone like I was by some members elsewhere.

If one is interested in such topics, I suggest reading Belt Curve or books by Richard Lynn.
https://www.amazon.com/Bell-Curve-Intelligence-Structure-Paperbacks/dp/0684824299

Regards


----------



## waz

Shinigami said:


> let me put it this way.
> in terms of intelligence,
> smartest pakistani who ever lived = average high caste south indian
> 
> thats why you guys cant develop a cycle



Oh really?????????

https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country

Pakistan is ranked higher than India in terms of average IQ. You talk rubbish, enjoy your ban. 

Here is a target map of IQ scores.

http://www.targetmap.com/viewer.aspx?reportId=2812


----------



## shadows888

Amri said:


> Well, PISA test results on Indians living outside of India are available. And as expected, the scores are higher than Chinese. Which means that given the same education, they will outperform you.
> 
> humanvarietiesfiles
> files
> wordpress
> com
> slash
> 2014/06/2006-levels-immigrant-pisa
> dot
> pdf
> 
> 
> 
> Indians in Australia score 576 on maths and 566 on reading in PISA.
> 
> Indians in New Zealand score 529 reading and 534 on maths in PISA.
> 
> Indians in Scotland score 504 reading and 525 on maths in PISA.
> 
> Indians in Ireland score 496 reading and 496 on maths in PISA.
> 
> As a comparison,
> 
> Chinese in Australia score 569 on maths and 541 on reading in PISA.
> 
> Chinese in New Zealand score 506 reading and 555 on maths in PISA.
> 
> Chinese in Scotland score 498 reading and 555 on maths in PISA.
> 
> Chinese in Ireland score 430 reading and 475 on maths in PISA.
> 
> *Mean scores of Chinese and Indians living in Anglo-sphere:-*
> 
> Chinese: 563 maths, 526 reading.
> 
> Indians: 561 maths, 552 reading.
> 
> And the gap is consistent from 2003.
> 
> Bangladeshis in Scotland, UK score 583 maths, 561 reading.
> 
> I would suggest you to read up on history of immigration from india and china to these nations. And you will lead to same conclusion that Indians are much smarter than you. If you think PISA measures smartness. No pun intended.
> 
> Similarly, up to 20 pc population in Himachal Pradesh is Tibetans who fall in same genetic cluster as Chinese. And they score below average Indian on educational scores like PISA.
> 
> And is consistent with PISA test scores all over the globe that Indians and Chinese following same educational systems will have same pattern of scores
> 
> As far as India on PISA is concerned, there seems to be a big educational gap between PISA's questions and Indian school curriculum.
> 
> Can you expect someone to solve a maths problem asking you to calculate the area of a right angled triangle with 2 sides given without knowing Pythagoras theorem or other such formulas ?
> 
> Simply no.
> 
> And hence India decided to leave PISA rankings. Until it improves educational system.
> 
> And poor educational systems in Western World is the reason why Chinese score lower than in their homeland.
> 
> Chinese in Ireland who come from Singapore and Hong Kong scored 475 on maths (dataset is above). Even though they migrated as smart immigrants, the scores are at par with bottom 10 pc of Singapore.
> 
> So, educational systems in Ireland over-rides ability.
> 
> If you are looking for other cognitive scores on India, then you have SAT, GMAT, GRE. Which will be very high as well.
> 
> And given the scores of India at 15 yo level where 100 pc kids couldn't find area of triangle, the high scores (higher than UK, USA) at GMAT, etc. only reflect better learning/ability in educational stage after 15 years of age.



The absolute smartest Chinese stay in china because there's more opportunity. Not the case in India.


----------



## TMA

waz said:


> Oh really?????????
> 
> https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country
> 
> Pakistan is ranked higher than India in terms of average IQ. You talk rubbish, enjoy your ban.
> 
> Here is a target map of IQ scores.
> 
> http://www.targetmap.com/viewer.aspx?reportId=2812


Yes but still the average IQ score of Pakistan is poor. Pakistan must improve this.


----------



## 52051

Amri said:


> Well, PISA test results on Indians living outside of India are available. And as expected, the scores are higher than Chinese. Which means that given the same education, they will outperform you.
> 
> humanvarietiesfiles
> files
> wordpress
> com
> slash
> 2014/06/2006-levels-immigrant-pisa
> dot
> pdf
> 
> 
> 
> Indians in Australia score 576 on maths and 566 on reading in PISA.
> 
> Indians in New Zealand score 529 reading and 534 on maths in PISA.
> 
> Indians in Scotland score 504 reading and 525 on maths in PISA.
> 
> Indians in Ireland score 496 reading and 496 on maths in PISA.
> 
> As a comparison,
> 
> Chinese in Australia score 569 on maths and 541 on reading in PISA.
> 
> Chinese in New Zealand score 506 reading and 555 on maths in PISA.
> 
> Chinese in Scotland score 498 reading and 555 on maths in PISA.
> 
> Chinese in Ireland score 430 reading and 475 on maths in PISA.
> 
> *Mean scores of Chinese and Indians living in Anglo-sphere:-*
> 
> Chinese: 563 maths, 526 reading.
> 
> Indians: 561 maths, 552 reading.
> 
> And the gap is consistent from 2003.
> 
> Bangladeshis in Scotland, UK score 583 maths, 561 reading.
> 
> I would suggest you to read up on history of immigration from india and china to these nations. And you will lead to same conclusion that Indians are much smarter than you. If you think PISA measures smartness. No pun intended.
> 
> Similarly, up to 20 pc population in Himachal Pradesh is Tibetans who fall in same genetic cluster as Chinese. And they score below average Indian on educational scores like PISA.
> 
> And is consistent with PISA test scores all over the globe that Indians and Chinese following same educational systems will have same pattern of scores
> 
> As far as India on PISA is concerned, there seems to be a big educational gap between PISA's questions and Indian school curriculum.
> 
> Can you expect someone to solve a maths problem asking you to calculate the area of a right angled triangle with 2 sides given without knowing Pythagoras theorem or other such formulas ?
> 
> Simply no.
> 
> And hence India decided to leave PISA rankings. Until it improves educational system.
> 
> And poor educational systems in Western World is the reason why Chinese score lower than in their homeland.
> 
> Chinese in Ireland who come from Singapore and Hong Kong scored 475 on maths (dataset is above). Even though they migrated as smart immigrants, the scores are at par with bottom 10 pc of Singapore.
> 
> So, educational systems in Ireland over-rides ability.
> 
> If you are looking for other cognitive scores on India, then you have SAT, GMAT, GRE. Which will be very high as well.
> 
> And given the scores of India at 15 yo level where 100 pc kids couldn't find area of triangle, the high scores (higher than UK, USA) at GMAT, etc. only reflect better learning/ability in educational stage after 15 years of age.



This pathetic low iq and lying indian pasted his debunked gabage again, and this lowly indian claim he is a PhD?


http://www.oecd.org/pisa/PISA-2015-china.pdf










Guess what? I happen to be a PhD in applied mathematics, and I never think PhD degree is something to brag, it is more of a choice of life instead of a certificate of some sort abilities.

And don't make up number out of thin air my poor dumb indian boy, and citing the same old1980s era China's industrial pollution village studies

And immgrant mean shit when immgrant rule come into play, if America only accept PhDs to grant citizenship then even monkeys from zoo who get US citizenship will be PhD-level educated, but thats doest mean shit about average of the monkeys in the zoo, same can be said about Indians.

Same can be said for Singapore, everyone and their dogs know most Singapore politcans are believer of racial superiority, and Li Denghui, the long-time Singapore leader himself is a very open racist.

No wonder Singapore has a racial-based immgrantion rule that greatly favor Chinese-ethnicity, I cannot believe they welcome indians with open-arms unless they have to.


----------



## 52051

Amricool said:


> Well, more than half of the studies are after 2000. But somehow your missing brain didn't pick it up I guess. Even in optimum living conditions (zero fluoride, iodine efficient conditions), they underscore on IQ. Many of them are in places like Baotau.
> 
> I never claimed to be a PhD but thanks for awarding me one. That quora post is not a post made by me. I never knew it will be so easy to get recognized as PhD among Chinese.
> 
> Having high IQ data on your nation isn't a big deal and nothing to brag about. There are plenty of those on India. Go and find on internet or on that quota page. But I guess for some race with monkey sized intellect that's a big deal. Which is why we see so many comments citing the same studies on internet by Chinese. Isn't it.
> 
> Yes, Singapore is a race based society that favors only Chinese immigration, Chinese welfare. Most immigration is high skilled immigration from china.
> 
> Immigration from india happened in British empire as slave labourers. And it is Britishers that brought them.
> 
> So, I guess your PhDs are at par with our slave labourers as evident in Singapore. That's the kind of immigration that happened from India in past.
> 
> Fair enough. Chinese in US who are themselves selected for intelligence pissed their pants and are crying over immigrant policies for India. So, they should do far better in Singapore where supposedly the smartest Chinese are living (as per thousands of claims by chinese) and labour class indians from Tamil Nadu, (one of the dumbest state of india which scores lowest on local cognitive tests as shown in my last post) are living. It should be a cakewalk for Chinese there to outperform Indians in Singapore.
> 
> But they don't outperform them and rather under-perform. So, your average genotypic IQ in Singapore cannot be higher than India.
> 
> Anyways we have Chinese and Tibetans living in india that are shining shoes. So, neither the monkeys coming from your zoo to US and Singapore with PhD degrees have a brain.
> 
> Nor the chinese and Tibetans living in India have the intellect to compete with indigenous Indian population. We have 60 million of them living in india that is sufficient to generalize all 1.3 billion people living in china.
> 
> 
> Lastly, Hong Kong where Indians came as bodyguards in British empire also outperform locals.
> 
> So, you are not capable of competing with Indians that go to USA (let's say they are PhD educated). Indian slave labourers to Singapore. Indian bodyguards that went to Hong Kong.
> And indigenous Indian population as even in india, you are shining, oh wait shining shoes.
> 
> What's more. Should we send mentally retarded people from india to see if they can succeed in East Asian society where everyone is mentally retarded ? As their self proclaimed geniuses in Singapore couldn't even compete with slave labourers from India and we may need to lower the bar for your people.
> 
> High IQ races thrive in low IQ societies and low IQ races struggle in high IQ society.
> 
> Status of Indians in Singapore, Hong Kong. While status of 60 million Chinese and Tibetans in India is a more concrete proof as to where smart people are living than a few IQ studies shown by you. Obviously obtained by rejecting all low IQ studies on china, calling them rural or whatever.
> 
> As they say, you can tweak data, ignore low IQ studies on your nation. But you cannot cheat mother nature.



Are you mental you fucking joker indian? recycling the same bullshit again and again

I provided national wide IQ studies with 38000 sample size, and provided IQ studies on each province of China, and it is 2005.

Your Chinese studies as 1980 era industrial pollution stuides on villages with heavy and different types of industrial pollution, also done by Chinese publich health studies.

And since when indians has XXX million Chinese there? provide genetic studies to prove that you dumb indians

Secondly, like I said before with immigrantation rule even monkeys in one countries can be all-PhDs.

None of any Chinese terrority like HK/Singpore and the like, have favorable opinioin towards India, they certainly wont take in any indians and actually would rather depart all of them if possible.

So guess what? they only take in indians as many as they have to, like on business or during the british era, as public officials.

Monkeys can do just as good in such cases, so just learn to live it, althrough better than Indians is nothing to brag about, just check your genetic stocks you know the reason.

And dont make numbers out of thin air my dumb indian boy, PISA 2015 in China sampling the four region as a whole as their document clearly stated, and that means they will sample them by population proportation, my dumb indian boy.

You are just a typical low iq indian boy who love to lie and pray to one of your many rat gods that someone as dumb as you can buy your dumb shit, hehe.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Kuwaiti Girl

East Asia United said:


> These are calculated using both formal IQ tests and the very large international student assessment tests such as the TIMSS and PISA which correlate highly with IQ. Figures in brackets were estimated from neighboring countries. Note that the scores reflect that many countries are not racially homogenous and that the average IQs of the different races in a country often differ significantly from the average country IQ.
> 
> Singapore has the highest IQ (107.1), followed by China (105.8), Hong Kong (105.7), Korea and Taiwan (both 104.6), and Japan (104.2)
> 
> Race/Population group by IQ:
> 
> East Asia: 105
> 
> European/White: 99
> 
> Arctic Natives: 91
> 
> Latino Americans: 89
> 
> Southeast Asians: 87
> 
> American Indian: 86
> 
> Pacific Islanders: 85 (Maori in New Zealand have a mean IQ of 90)
> 
> African-Americans/Black British: 85
> 
> Middle Eastern/North African: 84
> 
> South Asians: 82
> 
> Sub-Saharan Africans: 67
> 
> Australian Aborigines: 62
> 
> Pygmies: 53
> 
> A full listing of the IQ's by country here: https://lesacreduprintemps19.files....l-sciences-richard-lynn-and-tatu-vanhanen.pdf
> 
> It should also be noted that this is for the 'native' populations of each population group/race (except the African-America/Black British category)
> 
> For example, Indians in India have a mean IQ of 82, but Indian-Americans have a mean IQ of around 112. Selection bias means that such immigrants are both high-IQ, and high caste, in Indian terms.
> 
> Also, the Ashkenazi Jewish IQ is around 110, the highest of any single ethnicity in the world, though the mean Jewish IQ is around 103 (due to lower IQ Mizrahim and Sephardi Jews).


East Asians / Far Easterners for the win! 

You guys should take over the world already!


----------



## Offshore

52051 said:


> Are you mental you fucking joker indian? recycling the same bullshit again and again
> 
> I provided national wide IQ studies with 38000 sample size, and provided IQ studies on each province of China, and it is 2005.
> 
> Your Chinese studies as 1980 era industrial pollution stuides on villages with heavy and different types of industrial pollution, also done by Chinese publich health studies.
> 
> And since when indians has XXX million Chinese there? provide genetic studies to prove that you dumb indians
> 
> Secondly, like I said before with immigrantation rule even monkeys in one countries can be all-PhDs.
> 
> None of any Chinese terrority like HK/Singpore and the like, have favorable opinioin towards India, they certainly wont take in any indians and actually would rather depart all of them if possible.
> 
> So guess what? they only take in indians as many as they have to, like on business or during the british era, as public officials.
> 
> Monkeys can do just as good in such cases, so just learn to live it, althrough better than Indians is nothing to brag about, just check your genetic stocks you know the reason.
> 
> And dont make numbers out of thin air my dumb indian boy, PISA 2015 in China sampling the four region as a whole as their document clearly stated, and that means they will sample them by population proportation, my dumb indian boy.
> 
> You are just a typical low iq indian boy who love to lie and pray to one of your many rat gods that someone as dumb as you can buy your dumb shit, hehe.




No need to argue with Indian...
Indian being Indian is a joke already..
They can brag all the way they want.. it's the only thing they good at..
Reality speaks the most..
End of story..


----------



## 52051

Amri said:


> factsanddetails
> com/southeast-asia/Singapore/sub5_7a/entry-3710
> 
> Indian immigration to Singapore:-
> 
> "Indians had become Singapore's second largest community by 1860, numbering more than 11,000. Some of these people were laborers or traders, who, like the Chinese, came with the hope of making their fortune and returning to their homeland. Some were troops garrisoned at Singapore by the government in Calcutta. Another group were convicts who were first brought to Singapore from the detention center in Bencoolen in 1825, after Bencoolen was handed over to the Dutch. Singapore then became a major detention center for Indian prisoners."
> 
> "The British brought in Tamil convicts to work in the brick kilns in the 1920s. [Source: Library of Congress *]"
> 
> More than 60 percent population of Indians in Singapore is descended from slave labourers, criminals, etc. from British era.
> Remaining came as construction workers:-
> 
> Source:
> migrationpolicy
> org/article/rapid-growth-singapores-immigrant-population-brings-policy-challenges
> 
> "Due to policies instituted in the 1990s to recruit the highly skilled in nontraditional source countries, however, the majority of skilled workers (apart from Malaysians) are now from China and India"
> 
> themigrationist
> net/2014/01/08/riot-in-singapores-little-india/
> 
> "Of these, 760,000 are ‘low-skilled’ male migrant workers on work permit."
> 
> "It has been estimated that South Asian men number around 300,000, they fall under the ‘low-skilled’ category and are hired largely in the construction industry."
> 
> Mark this information properly that majority Indian population came as construction workers. These immigration data is from government sites.
> 
> And even low class indians outperform Chinese in Singapore.
> 
> You can always call them business professionals and lie about their roots to make your genetic stock look good. But you are not allowed to distort history.
> 
> OK, let's say your IQ data is correct. And fluoride and iodine studies from 2000 onwards (called as 1980s studies by you) is not.
> 
> ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3018494/
> 
> IQ of 107 as a community sample. 4 zones in Chennai and 12 schools were selected randomly. Sample size of 717. 606 children belonged to families with less than 6500 INR monthly income. And 130 had illiterate mothers. If anything, the selection bias towards socio-economic status is downward.
> 
> 
> People in Singapore have same IQ as low income citizens living in Chennai.
> 
> Which is consistent with observation that low grade Indian immigrants from Tamil Nadu (dumbest Indian state) that migrated to Singapore outclass average Chinese there. Fair enough.
> 
> Lastly, I don't need to provide genetic studies for Chinese living in India. If news articles are openly calling them Chinese, then they are Chinese. Whether you trust it or not. Your government would have made a fuss if Indian news channels had wrongly claimed that Chinese are shoe makers in India. The information is even acknowledged by Chinese.



LOL you low iq indians believe singapore would take low skill indians, in which world you dream?

And guess what, your indian "IQ" studies with a sample *size of 5-20* mean shit.

Even from the 2005 natinal IQ survey you can see, *there are province/region where Chinese has a mean IQ over 120+ and a sample size over 1000*.

And no, your 5-20 sample sized "studies" 's one subject of 10x's score mean little, guess what?


*This 2013 Sichuan province studies show on some IQ test subject even bloody brain-disease/mental diseased problem Chinese in Sichuan has a mean IQ of 104-105*

http://79.125.112.176/ioppn/depts/f...performanceIQinafirstepisodeschizophrenia.pdf



Offshore said:


> No need to argue with Indian...
> Indian being Indian is a joke already..
> They can brag all the way they want.. it's the only thing they good at..
> Reality speaks the most..
> End of story..



Yes, you are right, I think I waste my time on this poor indian moron, he just keep recylcing his old debunked gargage again and again and pray to his 2988861213 indian rats gods to hope someone can eventually get tired and buy his dumb shit


----------



## eldamar

Why are people still replying to this delusional low iq f**ktard? i thought he was banned?

he talked about 'how indians were faring better then the chinese in SIngapore' to a Singaporean like me. lolz.

Until now he still has so much of the same repeated grandmother story to tell in order to assert his superior indian 'high iq'


----------



## 52051

Amri said:


> Lol. Low IQ brain couldn't even see the sample size on the research paper. It is 717. Seven hundred seventeen. Not 5-20
> 
> Your sample has low sample size. Lastly, schizophrenia does not lower IQ. even in your paper, the control group and affected group that is only affected for 10 months have almost same IQ. Lol.
> 
> Plus socio-economic status is also mentioned for people tested which is 3x below average income in Chennai. So, our maids have same IQ as Singaporeans.
> 
> Yes, I am talking how Indians are performing in Singapore to a Singaporean with educational data from your Singapore government. Not your grandmother approved self deluded data. Don't talk about whores with me. Lol.
> 
> I guess I wasted my time arguing with low IQ races who cannot see the date of publication, sample size on a research article. Lol. How embarrassing.



Are you kidding me you dumb indian shit?

Your so-called 107 score is from some rubblish indian IQ test method called bharat rats or whatever and normalized to indian's national mean, so it merely means 107% of indian average

Try any international IQ test and with scoring standard, the studies I cited all use international IQ test methods like Raven's RPM or WAIS-RC whatever.

Stop wasting my time and nobody take you seriously, they just pity you


----------



## eldamar

Amri said:


> Lol. Low IQ brain couldn't even see the sample size on the research paper. It is 717. Seven hundred seventeen. Not 5-20
> 
> Your sample has low sample size. Lastly, schizophrenia does not lower IQ. even in your paper, the control group and affected group that is only affected for 10 months have almost same IQ. Lol.
> 
> Plus socio-economic status is also mentioned for people tested which is 3x below average income in Chennai. So, our maids have same IQ as Singaporeans.
> 
> Yes, I am talking how Indians are performing in Singapore to a Singaporean with educational data from your Singapore government. Not your grandmother approved self deluded data. Don't talk about whores with me. Lol.
> 
> I guess I wasted my time arguing with low IQ races who cannot see the date of publication, sample size on a research article. Lol. How embarrassing.


whats this 'educational data from your Singpore government'?


----------



## Offshore

52051 said:


> Are you kidding me you dumb indian shit?
> 
> Your so-called 107 score is from some rubblish indian IQ test method called bharat rats or whatever and normalized to indian's national mean, so it merely means 107% of indian average
> 
> Try any international IQ test and with scoring standard, the studies I cited all use international IQ test methods like Raven's RPM or WAIS-RC whatever.
> 
> Stop wasting my time and nobody take you seriously, they just pity you



That's why we have a saying in china for this Indian clown...

Indian fart through their mouth
Talked through their @ss..


----------



## eldamar

eldarlmari said:


> whats this 'educational data from your Singpore government'?



oh n i just find it hilarious how u've created a new account (after getting banned) jsut to cum back n continue ur ranting on and defending low indian iq


----------



## 52051

Amri said:


> That uses the same norms as Stanford Binet scale.
> 
> Even half of your crap data is based on rural test for china norms.



Your studie clearly shown that it is based on Chinese norms

*As for Chinese norms, are you sure you want to bring out this? be sure about what you wish for my low iq indian friend,* I bet you should not use them since Chinese norm will be much higher than the international norm *so this mean Chinese try to downscoring their IQ test scores*, and my studies are conducted with *British scholars from King College London*, and they certainly know how to do normalization I am afraid

No wonder the cherry-picking two indian states stand at dead last in international PISA assement and PISA officials complain that the two states's sampling method is not up to PISA standard quanlity so that mean Indians tried their best to "cherry-sampling" them (to the degree PISA filed an official complaint) yet still stand at rock bottom

Just accept it, you are just a dumb low iq indian thats why no matter how hard you try to cheat you are still at the rock bottom of the world as proved by PISA assement you are so afraid of and IQ studies.

To be honest, I feel pity for a pathetic race like you


----------



## 52051

Amri said:


> Being at the rock bottom. Look who is talking. You should then write a book on how to be rock bottom in a society where people have rock bottom IQ scores as your chinese which migrated to India an are no way below average are shoe makers in second or third generations. While our Indians will write stuff on how dumb people are in Singapore and Hong Kong. I feel pity for your people.
> 
> IQ samples on China:-
> 
> Wang, 2001 (Average IQ of 76-81)
> fluoridealert
> org/wp-content/uploads/wang-2001.pdf
> Shandong province, china.
> 
> Hong, 2001 (Average IQ of 65-82)
> fluoridealert
> org/wp-content/uploads/hong-2001.pdf
> Shandong province, china.
> 
> Li, 1995 (Average IQ of 79-89)
> fluoridealert
> org/wp-content/uploads/li-1995.pdf
> Guizhou province, china.
> 
> Yang, 1994 (Average IQ of 76,81)
> fluoridealert
> org/wp-content/uploads/yang-1994.pdf
> Jinan, China.
> 
> An, 1992 (Average IQ of 76,84)
> fluoridealert
> org/wp-content/uploads/an-1992.pdf
> Guyang county, inner Mongolia.
> 
> Guo, 1991 (Average IQ of 76,81)
> fluoridealert
> org/wp-content/uploads/guo-1991.pdf
> Hunan province, china.
> 
> Li, 2003 (Average IQ of 92)
> fluorideresearch
> org/412/files/FJ2008_v41_n2_p161-164.pdf
> Baotou, Inner Mongolia, China
> 
> Zhang, 1998 (Average IQ of 80,85,87)
> fluoridealert
> org/wp-content/uploads/zhang-1998.pdf
> Kuitun region, Urumqi, China
> 
> Yao, 1997 (Average IQ of 92-100)
> fluoridealert
> org/wp-content/uploads/yao-1997.pdf
> Chaoyang City, Liaoning Province, China
> 
> Guiyang, Guizhou Province, China
> 
> Xu, 1994 (Average IQ of 69-83)
> fluoridealert
> org/wp-content/uploads/xu-1994.pdf
> Shandong Province, China
> 
> Sun, 1991 (Average IQ of 69-85)
> fluoridealert
> org/wp-content/uploads/sun-1991.pdf
> Guizhou Province, China
> 
> Ren, 1989 (Average IQ of 75-85 appx.)
> fluoridealert
> org/wp-content/uploads/ren-1989.pdf
> Shandong Province, China
> 
> Lin, 1991 (Average IQ of 71, 77, 79, 96)
> fluoridealert
> org/wp-content/uploads/lin-1991.pdf
> Hetian prefecture, Xinjiang, China
> 
> *14 more IQ studies showing low average IQ on China:-*
> Qian, 2009 (14 IQ studies showing 81-90 average IQ)
> 
> 000do4q.myregisteredwp
> com/wp-content/uploads/sites/1836/2016/05/china-iodine-study.pdf
> 
> *Overall IQ result:- Iodine sufficient (optimum conditions):-
> 84.7, 86.9, 87.2, 75.1, 75.1, 88.34, 85.15, 86.9, 88.65, 90.89, 87.56, 87.31, 97.8, 81.44*
> 
> This is what is called "being at the rock bottom". Last but not the least, IQ of China is not higher than mid-East and India. You can argue with me for hours, but why do want to loose. And you can use whatever normalization schemes.
> 
> If you are able to locate a few places in India where people scored in mid 80s IQ in 1970s. Then I will expose thousands of places in China where they score 60s and 70s in fluoride environment. And 80-85 in optimum conditions.
> 
> People in India have tried all norms (western, indian, chinese) and they produce same results within 1-2 IQ. That's why they are internationally accepted norms.


Wow, still recycling the garbage 

Show me one single study that have *working link *and you dumb low IQ indian and listing the sampling method.

And many of the list score are clearly stated normalizied according to Chinese norm my poor indian boy.

And all studies show* controlled area are also from industrial pollution/illness rural sector and controlled for just one type of illness*, most are from 1980 era, yet last time I checked India dont have industry, so stop making excuse my dumb indian boy OK?

Do you low iq indian even understand the purpose of "*control*", I guess you self-claimed indian standard PhD dont need understand any such concepts

Btw, according to your link, even the rock bottom end of Chinese in your 1980era studies with serious different type of health problems are smarter than the average indians using any international IQ test method


----------



## 52051

Amri said:


> Well the ability to think seems to be so low with this commentor. PhD from china indeed. OMG. Check the publication dates. Most are after 2000. Only one study is before 1990.
> 
> 
> Lol. I just posted a link where it is clearly mentioned that average IQ is normalized to Chinese norms. The area and sampling method is mentioned. Which is a village in india. And a government school.
> 
> I am not going to make you go through each and every stuff as I am not your superior.
> 
> Lol, the chinese studies show the effect of fluoride on IQ. Where one region is fluoride effected. And another region is where non affected areas are listed known as optimum environment. You can continue with your people on the results from the same.
> 
> Lowly people don't need to understand the meaning of optimum environment as it is beyond your understanding capability.
> 
> Similarly in iodine study, one area is iodine deficiency. And another is with iodine efficient environment.
> 
> Both have low IQ.
> What a pathetic liars these Chinese are. Trying to tag their genes as illness and disease.
> 
> Your pathetic genome is the disease which these samples show.



*Most are after 2000? there only two are after 2000 and the one is from 2001, the 2009 studies cite all the studies in 1980s -1990s on idine and health problems, and many studies are not even normalized.*

*All from rural sector in China and all studies are for illness/heavy industrial pollution and all are controlled for one type of illness/pollution they studied.*

Next time you can try test mental school students's IQ to try representing China instead my low iq indian friend

The sad reality is even heavy industrial polluted 1980 era Chinese students with various health problem still score higher IQ score on any international standard IQ test than my poor indian boy.

This is consistent with PISA and most international assement, this is also confirmed by genetic studies, since most indians are closely related to native austrualians type old asians, and the latter happen to be has the lowest possible intelligence among all human beings, so just learn to live with it, my poor indian boy.

Actualy I may feel pity for you guys if you guys are not so annoyed


----------



## 52051

Amri said:


> This is the text from the article:-
> 
> "Group II. The effect size of the 8 studies was an increase of 0.82 SIQP (95% CI: 0.56, 1.08), for children who lived in IS areas compared with those who lived in ID areas with inadequate iodine supplementation.
> 
> Group III.
> The effect size of these 2 studies was 0.32 (total sample = 434), comparing children who lived in IS areas with those who lived in ID areas, but who had received iodine during their mothers’ pregnancy and after birth
> 
> Group IV. The total effect size of the 21 entries was an increase of 0.58 SIQP in the group receiving iodine supplementation during pregnancy and after birth based on 7607 subjects, compared with that of children whose mothers were chronially exposed to ID."
> 
> It is clear that data is on those kids who don't face any iodine deficiency and received sufficient iodine as per WHO regulations.
> 
> This is an optimum condition called IS (iodine sufficient conditions, probably faced by top few Percentage of rural Chinese population or >80 IQ ones).
> 
> And there is no disease which you face even if you have ID (iodine deficiency).
> 
> What pollution and disease are you talking about retard ?
> 
> Iodine sufficient conditions are known as optimum conditions.




*Do you even know how to "control" and you dumb indian dare to claim you get a PhD degree?*

Control means you have a theory to test, and you believe a factor can contribute to your result: (in this case, IQ or whatever), and you take some samples with significant value of this factor and comparing to a group with low/insignifcant value of this factor and *KEEP THE REST AS THE SAME, and then you can test you theory through statisitcal analysis to see whether the factor is significant, otherwise your statistical test will become meaningless on the subject since maybe other factors outside of your test design is actually dominating the outcome instead, so the control group has to be also from the same village and or villages with comparable same other pollution/health problems but controlled for just one pollution/health factor you want to study.

Ever wonder why the difference bewteen province/rural-wide mean IQ and the control group IQ from health/pollution studies now? despite all of them are conducted by Chinese scholar and many are conducted by western scholars as well. My poor blood low iq indian "PhD"*

Indians are just like that, good at nothing but lying and making a completely fool out of themselves, I guess thats the only way they can overcome their inferiority complexity (althrough I think they do have a very good reason to have such).


----------



## 52051

Amri said:


> Show me which health problems they are referring to that is not optimized in control group. It is clearly mentioned that control group has optimum fluoride, iodine and other stuff.
> There is no other major thing that lowers IQ other than fluoride, malnourishment and iodine.
> 
> So, control group IQ is your genetic potential. While affected group IQ is your current IQ.
> 
> Lol. Losers trying to invent a hypothetical disease or illness to overcome their inferiority.



They are from the same village from a same industrial pollution area and anyone know industrial pollution tend to not limit to one type, since no industy will limit to one type of element production, if the river/well is polluted in the village and if the health care suck, they tend to affect all people within it.
*
I bet even a low iq indian like you know that, thats why you only try to cite Chinese studies on health/pollution villages and leave all the west/Chinese studies on IQ, ubran or rural away, I dare you citing one, west or Chinese.*

Cherry-picking wont fool nobody but you stupid self, maybe you need to pray your 3782739379173 rat gods harder and spend less time on PhD stuff


----------



## eldamar

Until now, u still avoid showing me this 'government data' u were imaginarily talking about

Haha. A sparrow who tries to convince others its a phoenix haha

U should do humanity a favor by abstaining from reproducing so that there will be less substandard iq genetics being propaganded.


----------



## Nabil365

Its funny to see chinese and indians arguing here.Funfact:Top schools like Raffles instituition and Anglo Chinese Independent in Singapore are dominated by both chinese and indians.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 52051

Its funny lowly indians always try to associate themselve with Chinese yet they are shit comparing to China

The IQ studies done by West scholars with quick google search date as far as before world war II, and I can found ones done by even Nazi era (for some reason this fucked-up forum decide not to show my collection of links on Chinese IQ studies done by west scholars on small towns, cities and rural in China).

Fronto-parietal white matter microstructural deficits are linked to performance IQ in a first-episode schizophrenia Han Chinese sample
https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...se-samplediv/C2162AD9A9E68647EC34062DB29D9F24

Effects of prenatal polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon exposure and environmental tobacco smoke on child IQ in a Chinese cohort
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935112000023

Intelligence of Chinese and Japanese children
http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/edu/17/6/361/

IQ of Mongolians
http://search.proquest.com/openview/afedc48036a65d39771f3ba77a3dd408/1?pq-origsite=gscholar

Sex Differences on the Chinese Standardization Sample of the WAIS-R
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00221325.1993.9914744

Differences in intelligence across thirty-one regions of China and their economic and demographic correlates
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289613001025

An increase of intelligence measured by the WPPSI in China, 1984–2006
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289612000098

Chinese sex differences in intelligence: Some new evidence
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886914006333

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/iq-test-...-china-and-korea.259586/page-40#ixzz4UXzX3hCV

Muslim also has test higher IQ scores than Indians, so indians cannot blame their former rulers like muslim turks/afghanistans etc for their very inferior intelligence and other capablities.

IQ and Mathematics Ability of Tibetans and Han Chinese
http://search.proquest.com/openview/b3f22939b0dee27e32ee6a2c898834c5/1?pq-origsite=gscholar

Two Studies of Recent Increases of Intelligence in Taiwan: [1]
http://search.proquest.com/openview/b0c5bcf7e3f9611fd77885c0d0958c42/1?pq-origsite=gscholar

INTELLIGENCE IN TAIWAN: PROGRESSIVE MATRICES MEANS AND SEX DIFFERENCES IN MEANS AND VARIANCES FOR 6- TO 17-YEAR-OLDS
https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...year-oldsdiv/9A5685A42A5FDE2F87719246C1FEADF8


----------



## eldamar

Amri said:


> Well. It's there on page number 38. Third last comment from me.
> I have attached a comment from Amricool.
> Dot gov SG link is the Singapore government data where they have uploaded a documentation.
> It shows percentage of resident population who achieved different educational qualification by race, Chinese Malays and Indian. Like below secondary, university educated, diploma.
> Data for 2000 and 2010 is given.


I will see the chart once i get home, but then again what has university enrollment got to do with IQ? And how does this translate to ypur bold statement of how' local Indians are faring better then the local chinese in singapore'?

You guys are are not even in our league haha.

Haha. Would love to see what other grandmother story u have up your smelly indian armpit to fight your way through all these massive debunkment of your PISA-rejecting grandfather stories.

Ps*

'the other user', 'i have attached a comment from Amricool':

Y keep using a 3rd person perspective to refer to yourself (Amri, Amricool, Amritroll, AmriHighIQ, whatever)? Every1 can see how much free time u have on your hands to create another acvount just to come b n troll again n make it sound like your wall text-long of grandmother stories are supported by others(which wouldnt matter anyway).

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## DESERT FIGHTER

I took online IQ tests when i was preparing for my ISSB (2009-10) ... it was about 115... i was 17-18 back than.

I guess i just use it for evil purposes (suites me... i became a lawyer)... as my school teachers used to say... smart boy... just doesnt pay agttention in class.


----------



## SOHEIL

Bullshit !!!


----------



## Indus Pakistan

I saw this. My 'intelligence' articulated only one thing. We better have higher IQ then India. And guess what? Yessss it is ! Ahhhh.


Iran - 85
Pakistan - 84
India - 82%
Bangladesh - 81%

Now let the Indian's consult their book of 101 excuses .........

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## untitled

Having high IQ is good only if we put our mental faculties too good use. High IQ does not necessarily translate in to success. There are other factors like motivation which come in to play too

How much IQ does a microbe have when it makes us high IQ humans sick?


----------



## eldamar

T


Nabil365 said:


> Its funny to see chinese and indians arguing here.Funfact:Top schools like Raffles instituition and Anglo Chinese Independent in Singapore are dominated by both chinese and indians.


The thread is about OECD n PISA anyway, and Anglo-Chinese School(just next to my primary school down the same scretch of road- Swiss Cottage Primary School) is 'dominated' by chinese only with a few handful of Indian students.


----------



## eldamar

eldarlmari said:


> I will see the chart once i get home, but then again what has university enrollment got to do with IQ? And how does this translate to ypur bold statement of how' local Indians are faring better then the local chinese in singapore'?
> 
> You guys are are not even in our league haha.
> 
> Haha. Would love to see what other grandmother story u have up your smelly indian armpit to fight your way through all these massive debunkment of your PISA-rejecting grandfather stories.
> 
> Ps*
> 
> 'the other user', 'i have attached a comment from Amricool':
> 
> Y keep using a 3rd person perspective to refer to yourself (Amri, Amricool, Amritroll, AmriHighIQ, whatever)? Every1 can see how much free time u have on your hands to create another acvount just to come b n troll again n make it sound like your wall text-long of grandmother stories are supported by others(which wouldnt matter anyway).






Amri said:


> While our Indians will write stuff on how dumb people are in Singapore and Hong Kong. I feel pity for your people.





> What's more. Should we send mentally retarded people from india to see if they can succeed in East Asian society where everyone is mentally retarded ? As their self proclaimed geniuses in Singapore couldn't even compete with slave labourers from India and we may need to lower the bar for your people.
> 
> Source: https://defence.pk/threads/iq-test-...-china-and-korea.259586/page-38#ixzz4UYthMx7I




.






> And Indians simply outperform Chinese and Malays since long times.





> Plus in my article, the socio-economic status is also mentioned for people tested which is 3x below average income in Chennai. So, our maids have same IQ as Singaporeans. Oh wait, the smartest Chinese that have migrated to india are competing with our maids. Lol.
> 
> Yes, I am talking how Indians are performing in Singapore to a Singaporean with educational data from your Singapore government. Not your grandmother approved self deluded data. Don't talk about whores like your grandma with me. Lol.


https://www.moe.gov.sg/docs/default-source/document/publications/education-statistics-digest/esd-2016.pdf

starts at page 47- 60.

page 60 is the overall percentage of Singaporean students who progressed to post-secondary education.

Enjoy your orgasm
*
In addressing our dear poster Amri' s statements:*



> Indians outperform Chinese virtually everywhere both Indians and Chinese live in one environment conditions.
> 
> I already attached PISA scores of people living in Anglo sphere. Singapore government income stats. Migration stats from india as to what kind of Indians go to Singapore.
> Status of Chinese in india.
> 
> I conclude that Indians show higher IQ than Chinese in same conditions.



*
High IQ Bharati Indian + local Indian construction workers/toilet cleaners/road sweepers/garbage collectors living a high, comfortable and prosperous life- faring better in society then the Chinese in Singapore lulz:*



































> Fair enough. Chinese in US who are themselves selected for intelligence pissed their pants and are crying over immigrant policies for India. So, they should do far better in Singapore where supposedly the smartest Chinese are living (as per thousands of claims by chinese) and labour class indians from Tamil Nadu, (one of the dumbest state of india which scores lowest on local cognitive tests as shown in my last post) are living. It should be a cakewalk for Chinese there to outperform Indians in Singapore.
> 
> Source: https://defence.pk/threads/iq-test-...-china-and-korea.259586/page-38#ixzz4UYqyfRrk



u r right indeed- it's a piece of cake to outperform the dumb low iq Indian Dalit slaves and convicts from Tamil nadu, whose descendants are still mainly engaged in the same few occupation as their Dalit forebears- even in Singapore today. lulz.


----------



## eldamar

eldarlmari said:


> https://www.moe.gov.sg/docs/default...ions/education-statistics-digest/esd-2016.pdf
> 
> page 47- 60.
> 
> page 60 is the overall percentage of Singaporean students who progressed to post-secondary education.
> 
> Enjoy, troll.
> 
> 
> *
> 
> 
> High IQ Bharati Indian construction workers, + Indian locals living a high and comfortable life- faring better in society then the Chinese in Singapore lulz:*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> u r right indeed- it's a piece of cake to perform the dumb low iq Indian Dalit slaves and convicts from Tamil nadu



Waiting for more grandmother stories hidden in your smelly armpit about high Indian IQ please.


----------



## ashok mourya

The Singapore Department of Statisticsdefines 'Indians' as a 'race' (or 'ethnic group'), comprising "_persons of Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi or Sri Lankan origin such as Tamils, Malayalis, Punjabis, Bengalis, Sinhalese etc._"


----------



## eldamar

eldarlmari said:


> .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.moe.gov.sg/docs/default-source/document/publications/education-statistics-digest/esd-2016.pdf
> 
> starts at page 47- 60.
> 
> page 60 is the overall percentage of Singaporean students who progressed to post-secondary education.
> 
> Enjoy your orgasm
> *
> In addressing our dear poster Amri' s statements:*
> 
> 
> 
> *
> High IQ Bharati Indian + local Indian construction workers/toilet cleaners/road sweepers/garbage collectors living a high, comfortable and prosperous life- faring better in society then the Chinese in Singapore lulz:*
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> u r right indeed- it's a piece of cake to outperform the dumb low iq Indian Dalit slaves and convicts from Tamil nadu, whose descendants are still mainly engaged in the same few occupation as their Dalit forebears- even in Singapore today. lulz.



BTW, the reason why Singapore has to import so much construction workers in the first place is because these are the jobs that the local Chinese shun- nobody wants to work in these laborous, physically demanding jobs under the sun. There used to be lotsa PRC Chinese during the 90s and early 2000s, but now one can hardly even see one working in these type of jobs as most of them have returned home with the tons of pay-paying opportunities awaiting for them back home. Thus, only sufficient amounts(interested employees) could be sourced from Bangladesh and India.

Seems like High IQ Indians are undermining their high status by coming to work as construction workers in Singapore lulz

But i think it's ok for them, since they have their fellow local SG Indians working as cleaners/garbage collectors/landscapers/road sweepers to accompany them in our little island lulz.

Foreign workforce numbers
*Pass Type* *Dec 2012* *Dec 2015*
- Work Permit (Foreign Domestic Worker) 209,600 231,500
- Work Permit (Construction) 293,300 326,000
Other Work Passes2 9,300 23,600
Total Foreign Workforce 1,268,300 1,387,300
5 more rows
*Foreign workforce numbers - Ministry of Manpower*
www.mom.gov.sg/documents-and-publications/foreign-workforce-numbers


----------



## eldamar

Amri said:


> Well. It's there on page number 38. Third last comment from me.
> I have attached a comment from Amricool.
> Dot gov SG link is the Singapore government data where they have uploaded a documentation.
> It shows percentage of resident population who achieved different educational qualification by race, Chinese Malays and Indian. Like below secondary, university educated, diploma.
> Data for 2000 and 2010 is given.



Come on, how do u expect to get away with your trolling (about Singapore current state of affairs or statistics) against someone who is born and raised (and will probably die) in the small tropical island of Singapore- like me?

lulz


----------



## eldamar

Amri said:


> That's simply another grandma story told by you. That local Indians are construction workers while expats are super successful.
> 
> themigrationist
> net/2014/01/08/riot-in-singapores-little-india/
> 
> "Of these, 760,000 are ‘low-skilled’ male migrant workers on work permit."
> 
> "It has been estimated that South Asian men number around 300,000, they fall under the ‘low-skilled’ category and are hired largely in the construction industry."
> 
> 
> Most of the Indians on work permit are low end workers. Check link above.



Most Indians on work permits in SG are indeed dumb, low IQ indians working as construction workers. Whats wrong with that? u just reaffirmed my point yourself.

So i dont get it- so what's the disagreement here? Furthermore, what i said was also in response to your trolling comment of:



> "It has been estimated that South Asian men number around 300,000, they fall under the ‘low-skilled’ category and are hired largely in the construction industry."
> 
> Mark this information properly that majority Indian population came as construction workers. These immigration data is from government sites.
> 
> And even low class indians outperform Chinese in Singapore.



Source: https://defence.pk/threads/iq-test-...-china-and-korea.259586/page-38#ixzz4Ua8J7Vdu



> It's clear from Singapore migration data that the workers are expats, not local born indians. Next time you claim something, do attach proper data and not grandma stories.
> 
> You are trying to tell me that Indians born in Singapore don't make it to universities ?
> 
> There are appx. 88/1200 Indians. 2-3 whites. Remaining Chinese and Malays.



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

and u still avoid answering my question on how university enrollment translates to higher IQ lulz.



> physics.nus.edu
> sg/~phyips/SJPO2011_results.pdf
> 
> physics.nus.edu
> sg/~phyips/SJPO2012_results.pdf
> 
> physics.nus.edu
> sg/~phyips/SJPO2014_results2.pdf
> 
> physics.nus.edu
> sg/~phyips/SJPO2015_results.pdf



what's all these?* i only see names and names of students* *after students* participating in 'Singapore Junior Physics Olympiad 2012 Results' and the awards they've received. Nice cheapshot red herring attempt:

_School Name Award Hwa Chong Institution Bryan Wang Peng Jun Gold NUS HIGH School of Math & Science CHIA JIN QUAN MATTHEW Gold NUS HIGH School of Math & Science CHOO YI KAI Gold NUS HIGH School of Math & Science CLARENCE CHEW XUAN DA Gold NUS HIGH School of Math & Science DARREN WAYNE LIM Gold NUS HIGH School of Math & Science DYLAN TOH SHAN HONG Gold NUS HIGH School of Math & Science ELIJAH YAP MING LOONG Gold NUS HIGH School of Math & Science JEDIDIAH KOH KEE HAO Gold NUS HIGH School of Math & Science JOHN ZHOU ERLI Gold NUS HIGH School of Math & Science KEITH LOI JUN XIAN Gold NUS HIGH School of Math & Science LAM TZE KING Gold NUS HIGH School of Math & Science LU ZIYOU Gold NUS HIGH School of Math & Science LUO KAICHUN Gold NUS HIGH School of Math & Science ONG HONG MING TEDDY Gold NUS HIGH School of Math & Science SETH CHEW HEW PENG Gold NUS HIGH School of Math & Science SIDHARTH CHAMBOCHERI VEETIL Gold Raffles Institution Bradley Teo Wei Jie Gold Raffles Institution HAN RUOBIN Gold Raffles Institution Lim Jun Heng Gold Raffles Institution LIN HONG Gold Raffles Institution MA ZHAO YU Gold Raffles Institution MUZAMMIL ARIF DIN S/O ABDUL JABBAR Gold Raffles Institution SHI ZHE HAO, MATTHEW Gold Raffles Institution TAN XUE LIANG Gold Raffles Institution Wittmann Goh Ghin Fong Gold School Name Award Anglo Chinese School (Independent) Abhijeet Vats Silver Anglo Chinese School (Independent) Goh Kai-En Russell Silver Anglo Chinese School (Independent) Lee Shi Hao Silver Bukti View Secondary School Jonathan Chee Xian Kuan Silver Catholic High School POON ZONG WEI JULIAN Silver Hwa Chong Institution Choong Zheng Yang Silver Hwa Chong Institution Cui ZiZai Silver Hwa Chong Institution Sim Yew Chong Silver Hwa Chong Institution Wang An Aloysius Silver National Junior College Wo Junjie, Damien Silver NUS HIGH School of Math & Science CHAN GERALD Silver NUS HIGH School of Math & Science CHEN PANG YEN BYRON Silver NUS HIGH School of Math & Science CHIA YIT LOONG, BENJAMIN Silver NUS HIGH School of Math & Science DANIEL LEONG ZHI MING (LIANG ZHIMING) Silver NUS HIGH School of Math & Science ELIJAH SEOW MING ERN Silver NUS HIGH School of Math & Science FELICIA TAI YING FEI Silver NUS HIGH School of Math & Science HUANG FEIYANG Silver NUS HIGH School of Math & Science JIANG JIAHUI Silver NUS HIGH School of Math & Science JUSTIN FIDELIS WONG JUN WEN Silver NUS HIGH School of Math & Science LEE YU HAO Silver NUS HIGH School of Math & Science LI KANG CHEN Silver NUS HIGH School of Math & Science LIM LI Silver NUS HIGH School of Math & Science PEH KAI MIN RYAN Silver NUS HIGH School of Math & Science SIM EE EN, IAN (SHEN YI'EN) Silver NUS HIGH School of Math & Science WONG MING HIN Silver NUS HIGH School of Math & Science ZACK SOH GER YI (SU ZEYU) Silver NUS HIGH School of Math & Science ZHANG JINGZHENG Silver Raffles Girls' School Wang Beini Silver Raffles Institution Fong Khi Yung Silver Raffles Institution IVIN LEE JIEH WEN Silver Raffles Institution Lee Jia Ming Silver Raffles Institution Li Chang Silver Raffles Institution LIM HUR Silver Raffles Institution LIU YUYANG Silver Raffles Institution LUCAS YEO (YANG YUXU) Silver Raffles Institution Pan Liyu Silver_





> Indians are over-represented compared to their population size in Singapore National Physics Olympiad. Resident Indian population is 4.5 pc with 3 pc being expat construction workers as shown with proper sources.



what 'proper' grandmother sources'? show me lulz



> If Indians born and educated in Singapore are over represented compared to their population size in science Olympiads.



based on what?



> Then you can expect higher university enrollment as well.



yayayayaya nice grandmother assumption lulz.



> Indians were 3x over-represented in University of Malaya. V/S Chinese who were 1.3x over-represented. In 1960–1980s.
> 
> Initial bunch of Indians that were brought to Malaysia to work as field labourers and convicts were far smarter than Chinese.
> Same with Singapore.



apex of delusional superiority.







*time to take your medicine <= lulz









*
FInally, how does all the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring and  https://logfall.wordpress.com/proof-by-verbosity/ articles that you've linked *refute the fact that Indians have a substandard average IQ score of 82 lulz?

still waiting for more of your grandmother theories hidden in your smelly indian armpit*


----------



## Nabil365

eldarlmari said:


> T
> 
> The thread is about OECD n PISA anyway, and Anglo-Chinese School(just next to my primary school down the same scretch of road- Swiss Cottage Primary School) is 'dominated' by chinese only with a few handful of Indian students.


Lol no,dominated by both races. Take a step into that school and you will realise...


----------



## Offshore

Nabil365 said:


> Lol no,dominated by both races. Take a step into that school and you will realise...



Only in your lala dream..


----------



## 52051

Nabil365 said:


> Lol no,dominated by both races. Take a step into that school and you will realise...





Amri said:


> If you have higher IQ. Then you have better chances of making it to universities. That's why Indians have higher percentage of university admits than Chinese in Singapore as shown via Singapore government stats. Despite Chinese being much hardworking.
> 
> Indians have iq of 82 ? Where will you put the chinese then. At 30 IQ ?
> 
> heapol.oxfordjournals
> org/content/17/4/420.full.pdf+html
> 
> "Influence of housing on intelligence quotients of children in an urban slum"
> 
> IQ of kids of slum dwellers in india who have attended schools is 96.7 (plot area) and 93.2 (shady houses).
> 
> You are trying to tell me that average IQ in india is 15 points below homeless slum dwellers in Delhi. Bottom 2 pc of Indian population who couldn't even buy homes ?
> 
> Thanks. I had a good laugh.
> 
> I already showed low average IQ samples on china (in 80s). Followed by 2 page rebuttal from one of the commentor here as how they are rural and facing imaginary diseases. Lol.
> 
> Let's face it. Local Indians in Singapore (peasants and convicts) simply outclass Chinese. Other than dumb workers who are expats.



*First of all, the study you cited use Indian normalized test, which regard indian's mean as being 100, so that merely means your slumdogs's IQ is 92.5% of indian's average.*

And there is not a single west study show anything suggesting indian's iq score beyond the 80 level, after proper normalization.

A lowly indian like you knowing your iq well, and and seem like you get zero problem making up outright lies, despite of being debunked countless time, I guess a slumdog has zero shame here.

And I guess you dont need to be honest your zillion rat gods.

But whatever lies/excuses you made, that doesnt change the fact international scholar put your iq score as low 80s, and your score is well consistent with all international education assement and all international competitions as well.

Different race has different strength, don't worry, your strength lies in making up lowly shameless and easy to debunk lies and making a completely fool out of your pathetic self.

To be honest, I feel very sorry for your race and your existence, wishing you born as an non-indian in your next life such that your inferiority complexity would not have driven you as crazy and pathetic as you are now, sincerly.


----------



## 52051

Amri said:


> I already showed you previously the results of iq tests on India using combined Raven test for rural china. Which also shows higher IQ. On your norms. So, Indian villagers are 107 per cent age smarter than Chinese.
> 
> All normalizations will have same method of adjustment which will show the results in same range of IQ.
> 
> If you doubt this, then I suggest you to consult an expert.
> 
> If you think that Indians will score low on western norms. Then here are results from Indian villages using Raven coloured Progressive Matrices norms.
> 
> jcdr
> net/article_fulltext.asp?issn=0973-709x&year=2015&month=November&volume=9&issue=11&page=ZC10&id=6726
> 
> Average IQ in villages in UP in optimum environment is 110.
> 
> Fair enough. I showed you IQ data on low side Indian population using western, Chinese and Indian norms.



Which west norm? Lynn's studies usually use UK's norm as the benchmark, and others use different set of norms, of cause many Chinese studies use Chinese norm method.

If you find after proper normalization indian's IQ should be 110 instead of 80, you should publish a peer-reviewed research paper and inform that to world reknown scholars on IQ studies like Flynn/Lynn to tell they are all wrong.

Dont waste my time, I think I have spent enough time on an hopeless pathetic indian like you.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 52051

Amri said:


> Yes. It is like that. In 110 range in Indian villages in optimum environment after normalizing it to UK's norms. Nobody cares about what Lynn says. He even claims that Chinese are not creative. You should probably write a paper to disprove him. His IQ data on china is in East china normal university and he is using it in average IQ calculation for china.
> 
> 
> Let me tell you about Western norm I am talking about.
> 
> It is called Raven coloured Progressive Matrices.
> 
> In the above paper, the scores are as follows:-
> 
> Out of 429 children enrolled in the study, 241 individuals whose fluorosis level was graded as normal had CPM score 29.67±4.05 (Mean IQ 110.1±9.0).
> 
> The CPM scorers on kids in UK:-
> 
> eyeonsociety
> co
> uk/resources/RPMChangeAndStability.pdf&hl=en&sa=X&scisig=AAGBfm0HocR3PVxaJXaqmemFFRnVkLZl8g&nossl=1&oi=scholarr&ved=0ahUKEwjGuMrJiaPRAhXGQ48KHXCeBjQQgAMIHSgCMAA
> 
> Mean scores of Britishers is close to 20, 9 points below indians.
> 
> So, after normalizing it for scores from UK. The IQ will be 110.



Dont waste our time, just do publish a peer-reviewed paper to make a fool out of all the established scholars on IQ to prove the indians are da best


----------



## 52051

Amri said:


> That's already a published paper which I am showing to you. If the scientific community has accepted the paper then it is already proven that indian villages have iq of 110 in optimum environment.



Tell me when they get published/not rejected, and inform Lynn on his opinion on that paper, probably he is sitting the editoral broad through and dont waste my time on you fucking joke.


----------



## dani958

they are very smart singapur


----------



## 52051

Amri said:


> It's already published you dumb retard.
> Lynn's opinions ? Who cares. Just read about Lynn's opinions from other scientists.
> He will cite this paper and a paper from china in East china normal university. And will call it average IQ dataset on both nations. And show that Chinese are smarter.
> 
> Like he has done in his several books.
> Don't embaras yourself by asking his opinion.
> 
> Let me show his work to you.
> 
> sciencedirect
> com/science/article/pii/S0160289610000450
> 
> The person claims that Mauritius has an IQ of 89. And test score of 73 IQ.
> He hasn't cited a proper source and baselessly claimed that Mauritius will score that much on PISA. Which he has put on EA test scores for Mauritius in his paper.
> 
> Mauritius participated in PISA and scored 420 points. At 85-88 IQ.
> His work was published in July 2010. And pisa results came later.
> Yet he didn't change the number in his book, "intelligence a unifying construct" published in 2012.
> 
> Half of his numbers are crap. More than 84 nations have never been tested and he is claiming hypothetical numbers for those nations.
> 
> Sorry to say that I am smart enough to not even bother asking his opinions.
> 
> Maybe someone who is more acknowledged like Jason Malloy will tell his opinions once he finishes his work on average IQ in India and China. You may have to wait for a few years for that.
> 
> Bye.


In the link I posted, there are many Lynn's work on Chinese IQ studies, in various citieis and county, and even among different ethnicities, I guess you cannot even read.

As for you pathetic indians, if you believe indian's genetic potential IQ is 110 at a UK norm  just kindly write a paper to say if it can pass peer-review stage, such that you can make a fool out of all the world renown scientists in this area and establish yourself as the world first hoodoo IQ expert, congrats!

By disproving Lynn or Flynn's work, who get thousands of citions, you sure will become the world number 1 curry IQ expert

Your smelly and insane inferority complexity is so overwheming, such that I cannot bare to talk with you anymore, please seek help since I can only help you that far.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 52051

Amri said:


> What a shameful lier that you are calling your attached articles as done in Chinese counties.
> 
> This is an attached article by you:-
> 
> psycnet.apa
> org/journals/edu/17/6/361/
> 
> "Five hundred Chinese and Japanese children attending the public elementary schools in the city of Vancouver were tested individually by the Pintner-Paterson "Scale of Performance Tests."
> 
> If you are living in this universe, then you will know that city of Vancouver is in Canada and is not a county in China as told by you.
> 
> If you want to compare your IQ in North America with Indians, then here is a big data-set with large sample size:-
> 
> humanvarieties
> org/2015/10/30/asian-american-subgroup-sat-performance
> 
> Indians born in USA have the highest genotypic IQ, higher than Jews and East Asians. *At 114 IQ (0.92 Standard deviation above whites). *
> 
> Chinese born in USA have a geno-typic IQ of *110.*
> 
> Let me debunk all your other IQ studies cited by you and farted as "chinese county IQ samples".
> 
> Wait for some time.
> 
> This link does not work.
> 
> cambridge
> org/core/jour...se-samplediv/C2162AD9A9E68647EC34062DB29D9F24
> 
> Share it properly.
> 
> "Differences in intelligence across thirty-one regions of China and their economic and demographic correlates".
> 
> By Richard Lynn:-
> 
> sciencedirect
> com/science/article/pii/S0160289613001025
> 
> Method:-
> 
> "_Data on IQs for 31 regions of China were obtained for a sample of 63,636 participants who took the test on a Chinese online IQ testing website._"
> 
> Let me tell you that this IQ sample is considered invalid. It is clearly stated in the method that Chinese participants who took the test on an online IQ website are presented.
> 
> The date of sample is 2013.
> Internet penetration in China was 45%. The urban and sub-urbs have access to internet while the counties don't have an access to internet. So, it is not your county data-set again.
> 
> That already biases a population based on intelligence.
> 
> If I consider test results on internet website as true where anyone can make a name and put results. Then some internet sites where people have taken IQ tests:-
> 
> iq-test
> co
> uk/stats/
> 
> Such a large number of nations have average IQ of people who have taken IQ tests on this site in 114+. South Africa with 70% black population has average IQ of 104.
> 
> Over the internet where you don't have a control over the testing person who can make multiple accounts. Use online calculators. The IQ test results on internet are generally considered as invalid.



*Where is your 114 IQ score, out of your ***? show me the link, dont tell me its your voodoo maths *

Can you provide a study not a blog, you need help seriously.

As for Chinese IQ, fine, just correlate Beijing's IQ score at internet with other area in China, and compare it with non-internet ones.

I have already provided national wide IQ studies on China, by Chinese and by west scholars, I checked every link and they all worked.

None report anything blow 100, including China's department of Public Health's IQ studies and all counties's study.

If internet IQ studies are not reliable, fine the rest are all non-interenet study.

And dont waste my time, write a paper to prove the indians has a genetic potential IQ of 110 on UK norm

*There are just not a single bloody international studies report indians have any IQ or IQ potential near 100, just get over with it.*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 52051

http://humanvarieties.org/2015/11/13/measured-proficiency-of-ethnic-groups-in-canada/

Look like this mental's post in he beloved Mollys someone's blog, it looks like he just spam his blog with his voodoo maths to try to beg them to claim indian is da best despite of low iq and low any performance benchmark



Amri said:


> Wait. I am writing about rest of the studies. I have already shared a link on NPSAS scores in USA, which is similar to IQ test.
> 
> humanvarieties
> org/2015/10/30/asian-american-subgroup-sat-performance
> 
> Indians born in US have NPSAS score of 0.96 standard deviation above whites in 1996. And 0.88 standard deviation above whites in 2000.
> 
> Chinese born in US have NPSAS score of 0.66 standard deviation above whites in 1996. And 0.64 standard deviation above whites in 2000.
> 
> 0.92 standard deviation above US white average correlates to 114 IQ, Mr. PhD in maths.
> 
> That particular link from cambridge does not work. Put it properly if you want me to see.



Where is the translation from SAT score to IQ?

Why you use SAT instead of SAT maths to represent IQ? aint that more closely related to IQ test?

OK, OK, I give up, cannot waste any more time, you just call me when you publish a paper on your voodoo maths like Indians has a potental IQ of 110, Indian americans' IQ is 114, congrats you win


----------



## Nabil365

52051 said:


> *First of all, the study you cited use Indian normalized test, which regard indian's mean as being 100, so that merely means your slumdogs's IQ is 92.5% of indian's average.*
> 
> And there is not a single west study show anything suggesting indian's iq score beyond the 80 level, after proper normalization.
> 
> A lowly indian like you knowing your iq well, and and seem like you get zero problem making up outright lies, despite of being debunked countless time, I guess a slumdog has zero shame here.
> 
> And I guess you dont need to be honest your zillion rat gods.
> 
> But whatever lies/excuses you made, that doesnt change the fact international scholar put your iq score as low 80s, and your score is well consistent with all international education assement and all international competitions as well.
> 
> Different race has different strength, don't worry, your strength lies in making up lowly shameless and easy to debunk lies and making a completely fool out of your pathetic self.
> 
> To be honest, I feel very sorry for your race and your existence, wishing you born as an non-indian in your next life such that your inferiority complexity would not have driven you as crazy and pathetic as you are now, sincerly.


First of all I am a Singaporean bengali.Secondly I studied in that school so please,I know way more than you.And please take in the factor like thr ratio of chiness and indians staying in Singapore.And you stooped so low to discriminate a race...Wow.



Nabil365 said:


> First of all I am a Singaporean bengali.Secondly I studied in that school so please,I know way more than you.And please take in the factor like thr ratio of chiness and indians staying in Singapore.And you stooped so low to discriminate a race...Wow.


#the ratio


----------



## Nabil365

Amri said:


> Why waste your time on retards who seem to be victims of inferiority ? Keep him begging to claim they are smarter. People who are losers in real life need some assertion from others.
> 
> SAT is more than 0.8 correlated to IQ to an extent that it can be used as a proxy for IQ. Everyone including your favorite scientist Lynn does that. So, Indian Americans will have a higher IQ than Chinese Americans.
> 
> I already showed you many IQ samples on Indian villages where average is 110. I guess your retarded brain does not know how to interpret information. So, there does not seem any point in discussing things with a troll like you. The moderator should probably block this user as he is being disrespectful.
> 
> 
> I am being frank and truthful with information that I am providing. Don't ask me to insult you as I am not into such things. As far as your samples are concerned on chinese counties,
> 
> I showed that one is from a top city in Canada (cited as a chinese county by you).
> One link does not work.
> One is done on internet.
> 
> Two studies are from Taiwan. And I will not consider that as IQ sample on China.
> 
> "
> An increase of intelligence measured by the WPPSI in China, 1984–2006
> "
> 
> This sample is correct and reliable.
> 
> Remaining ones are inaccessible and must be reliable pr not, I simply don't care until the results are below Indians.
> 
> one link is citing defence pk link and don't embarrass yourself by citing comments on this forum as IQ data.
> 
> If you think average person in India is least smart among all nations, then you should write a book on how your race managed to be shoe makers in the dumbest society.
> 
> Then you will understand the IQ samples in optimum environment in Indian villages at 110 average IQ shown by me (on all norms chinese, western and indian norms) and what is the consequence of a low IQ race like Chinese migrating to high IQ society like India, and vice versa in Singapore and Hong Kong. And why the average IQ is 109 in Indian villages and 114 among Indians in USA. And why it is 105 in China and 110 in Chinese American community. Equal selection bias for both these groups in USA.
> 
> 
> 
> I have nothing more to say. So, bye TC.


There is no such thing as one smart race.You have to provide education,have a competitve education system and lots of opportunities to the younger generations.For now India is seriously lacking in it.But we still have lots of indians and chinese representing schools like Raffles Instituition.


----------



## eldamar

Nabil365 said:


> Lol no,dominated by both races. Take a step into that school and you will realise...





Amri said:


> If you have higher IQ. Then you have better chances of making it to universities. That's why Indians have higher percentage of university admits than Chinese in Singapore as shown via Singapore government stats. Despite Chinese being much hardworking.
> 
> Indians have iq of 82 ? Where will you put the chinese then. At 30 IQ ?
> 
> heapol.oxfordjournals
> org/content/17/4/420.full.pdf+html
> 
> "Influence of housing on intelligence quotients of children in an urban slum"
> 
> IQ of kids of slum dwellers in india who have attended schools is 96.7 (plot area) and 93.2 (shady houses).
> 
> You are trying to tell me that average IQ in india is 15 points below homeless slum dwellers in Delhi. Bottom 2 pc of Indian population who couldn't even buy homes ?
> 
> Thanks. I had a good laugh.
> 
> I already showed low average IQ samples on china (in 80s). Followed by 2 page rebuttal from one of the commentor here as how they are rural and facing imaginary diseases. Lol.
> 
> Let's face it. Local Indians in Singapore (peasants and convicts) simply outclass Chinese. Other than dumb workers who are expats.



1)Richard lynn and Tatu Vahanen already stated the average IQ of India is 82- u can argue heaven and hell with all your grandmother stories and theories all you want.

2)https://www.moe.gov.sg/docs/default-source/document/publications/education-statistics-digest/esd-2016.pdf
page 47-60 already debunked all your grandmother stories. you can relish and enjoy your orgasm that Indians have slightly higher overall passes(not grades attained) in English language then the Chinese though lulz.

answer the rest of the questions please? y avoid answering them? (post 607)

still the same statement:

*How the f**k you expect to bluff your way through about Singapore to a born and bred Singaporean like me? lulz*

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## eldamar

Amri said:


> This is the power of having better genes. That despite having worse educational system, you do better.
> 
> And if you think that Chinese can outscore Indians on PISA, then I have previously attached PISA results from all over the globe where Chinese and Indians are following same educational systems. You loose again.



yayayaya so says AmriHighIQ lulz.



> You will lead to same conclusion that indians are over-represented compared to their population size.
> As someone mentioned that top schools in Singapore have large of indians. Even your government has released stats that indians have higher university enrollment rates. So, there is no question in discussing any more stats regarding to the same here.



1)My grandmother just said Indians were all enrolled in Special schools too. lulz.
2)Also,i already highlighted this to you- read page 60 carefully. Singapore education system dont work your 'AmriHighIQ' way.



> I already answered your question that university admits is correlated to intelligence.
> And about the rest, I put links for Singapore Physics olympiads for past 4 years. Just calculate the # of indian names and divide it by population size.


sorry im not gonna see it that way by the 'AmriHighIQ' method lulz.



> To see the top side of distribution, you need to see university admits.


yayaya so says AmriHighIQ lulz.





> That Chinese have higher pass rate on maths and lower on language



1)Why cherry-pick and omit the fact that despite having lower pass rates in English, the Chinese still have the highest grades attained in it? Ans:to suit your own https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-serving_bias despite being debunked again and again lulz

2)Why cherry-pick and omit the fact that the Chinese have higher pass rates for their own mother tongue then the Indians themselves. Ans: once again, to suit your own https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-serving_bias despite being debunked again and again lulz

3)Also, why choose to omit the fact that the Chinese topped ALL other subjects(other then the 2 subjects mentioned above, lower overall passes in English and Mother tongue, but highest grades attained). Ans: Because it doesnt suit your own https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-serving_bias .

Once again:

*How the f**k you expect to bluff your way through to a Singaporean like me lulz~*


----------



## Nabil365

eldarlmari said:


> 1)Richard lynn and Tatu Vahanen already stated the average IQ of India is 82- u can argue heaven and hell with all your grandmother stories and theories all you want.
> 
> 2)https://www.moe.gov.sg/docs/default-source/document/publications/education-statistics-digest/esd-2016.pdf
> page 47-60 already debunked all your grandmother stories. you can relish and enjoy your orgasm that Indians have slightly higher overall passes(not grades attained) in English language then the Chinese though lulz.
> 
> answer the rest of the questions please? y avoid answering them? (post 607)
> 
> still the same statement:
> 
> *How the f**k you expect to bluff your way through about Singapore to a born and bred Singaporean like me? lulz*


Why would I lie to you WTF.You claim to be singaporean and you say Singaporean indians are dumber than chinese.Just take a look at the number of Indians in schools like RI,ACSI and SJI.Pls dont say more chinese are in these schools cause you gotta compare the ratio of indians and chinese in SG.


----------



## my2cents

East Asia United said:


> These are calculated using both formal IQ tests and the very large international student assessment tests such as the TIMSS and PISA which correlate highly with IQ. Figures in brackets were estimated from neighboring countries. Note that the scores reflect that many countries are not racially homogenous and that the average IQs of the different races in a country often differ significantly from the average country IQ.
> 
> Singapore has the highest IQ (107.1), followed by China (105.8), Hong Kong (105.7), Korea and Taiwan (both 104.6), and Japan (104.2)
> 
> Race/Population group by IQ:
> 
> East Asia: 105
> 
> European/White: 99
> 
> Arctic Natives: 91
> 
> Latino Americans: 89
> 
> Southeast Asians: 87
> 
> American Indian: 86
> 
> Pacific Islanders: 85 (Maori in New Zealand have a mean IQ of 90)
> 
> African-Americans/Black British: 85
> 
> Middle Eastern/North African: 84
> 
> South Asians: 82
> 
> Sub-Saharan Africans: 67
> 
> Australian Aborigines: 62
> 
> Pygmies: 53
> 
> A full listing of the IQ's by country here: https://lesacreduprintemps19.files....l-sciences-richard-lynn-and-tatu-vanhanen.pdf
> 
> It should also be noted that this is for the 'native' populations of each population group/race (except the African-America/Black British category)
> 
> For example, Indians in India have a mean IQ of 82, but Indian-Americans have a mean IQ of around 112. Selection bias means that such immigrants are both high-IQ, and high caste, in Indian terms.
> 
> Also, the Ashkenazi Jewish IQ is around 110, the highest of any single ethnicity in the world, though the mean Jewish IQ is around 103 (due to lower IQ Mizrahim and Sephardi Jews).



I just tested mine and got 135 and I consider myself average IQ.


----------



## eldamar

Amri said:


> Why cherry-pick and omit the fact that the Chinese have higher pass rates for their own mother tongue then the Indians themselves ?
> 
> Because that's not true. Page 55.
> 
> Pass rates in mother tongue language (O-level):-
> 
> Indians: 96.5, 97, 97.7, 97.6, 96.6, 95.7, 96.7, 96.3, 96.8, 96.5
> Chinese: 96, 96.5, 96.8, 96.6, 96.6, 96.4, 96.8, 97.3, 97.4, 98.2
> 
> Indians have higher pass rate in MTL since past 5 years.
> 
> A-level: Page 59
> 
> Grades in MTL
> 
> Indians have higher results in 2013, 2014. And below in other years.



ok for O levels, 0.5% more Indians are passing their own Mother tongue than the CHinese are.

for A-levels, 3% more Chinese are passing their own Mother tongue than the Indians are.

Ok so Indians have HIGH iq then the Chinese becos 0.5% more indians are passing their own Mother Tongue in O levels, even though 3% more Chinese are passing in a higher examination like A-levles. y omit this?

lulz~



> *
> Next one:*
> 
> Why cherry-pick and omit the fact that despite having lower pass rates in English, the Chinese still have the highest grades attained in it?
> 
> It's not in the data anywhere. English O-level grades are not in the ESD data. Go and fool others.
> 
> 2 things are mentioned for english. Percentage of PSLE students who score A*-C in English.
> 
> That's PSLE results and not O-level results that I am talking about.
> 
> Even in that, Indians had higher results in 2006, 2007, 2008 and same results in 2009. And below afterwards.
> 
> Page 54: O-level pass rate.
> O-level results are higher for Indians for all years.



page 54 1.1% more indians pass English language then the Chinese = OK

So Indians are 'smarter' just becos 1.1% more indians are passing English language than the chinese are. lulz~



> *
> Next one:*
> 
> Also, why choose to omit the fact that the Chinese ALL other subjects(besides the 2 subjects mentioned above) ?
> 
> Because that's not true. Page 58 General Paper on Knowledge and Inquiry (A-level). Indians have higher pass rate than Chinese.
> 
> Next time, if you show any pdf here. Make sure you have read it.
> 
> I guess that you are talking about PSLE exams.
> 
> Anyways, 1 percent here and there is nothing much of a difference.
> Major difference in O-level data-sets is Chinese outscoring Indians on maths by 10-12 percentile passing rates. And Indians outscoring by 4 percentile on english.





> Science scores are a combination of maths and language scores.



This is the most creative statement from u so far- so creative it turns ridiculous. so says AmrihighIQ. SG government should revoke physics, biology and chemistry examinations based on ur statement.



> Remaining O-level data is in between 2 percentage range and I don't talk about insignificant data here. And I never talked about PSLE and A-level data here.
> So, stop mixing all three exams.



A-levels = Advanced Level Examinations
O-levels = Ordinary Level Examinations

Now, you're asking me not to mix them becos u discovered the results do not serve your self-serving bias ? A-levels is a higher educational examination then O-levels. You're from the British empire and u should know full well about that . y skip it? because it doesnt serve ur own self-serving bias- u choose to avoid it?

Your requesting of me 'not to mix them' is like having a fat one stuck up in your mouth and shoved down your throat for good.

Debunked shit.
Lulz



> Most important result will be percentage of students with 5 O-level passes. That shows bottom end of Singaporean population (those who fail even one subject).
> To see top end of IQ distribution in Singapore, you have to see how many people are making it to universities.
> 
> Bye. TC.



yayayaya so says the grandmother theories of AmriHighIQ



Still the same:

*How the f**k you expect to bluff your way through about Singapore to a Singaporean like me? You might have better luck with your fellow circle-jerking Bharatis about this. The figures and situation of Singapore are already established and ingrained in our national system.

i can afford to play with u on this becos i already knew you are trolling about Singapore right from the very beginning. i dont even have to try hard- while u have to constantly wreck your brains in and out, trying to turn black into white, white into black. 

a trolling 'high' iq Indian trying to dissect Singpore's educational statistics to a Singaporean.

lulz




Anyways the discussion here is getting repetitive. so, the thread is better closed.

Click to expand...

*


> Source: https://defence.pk/threads/iq-test-...-china-and-korea.259586/page-42#ixzz4UeOUKLyy





> Bye. TC.


yayayayaya more like an excuse to get off the stage- that's admiting you're a debunked troll.
go suck your thumb with your *substandard Indian IQ of 82

Rank Country IQ
1




Hong Kong 108
1



Singapore 108
2



South Korea 106
3



Japan 105
3



China 105
4



Taiwan 104
25



India 82

https://www.google.com.sg/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=average iq by nation*

*Jai Hind~*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## eldamar

Nabil365 said:


> Why would I lie to you WTF.You claim to be singaporean and you say Singaporean indians are dumber than chinese.Just take a look at the number of Indians in schools like RI,ACSI and SJI.Pls dont say more chinese are in these schools cause you gotta compare the ratio of indians and chinese in SG.



i was talking to AmriHighIQ



> Just take a look at the number of Indians in schools like RI,ACSI and SJI.Pls dont say more chinese are in these schools cause you gotta compare the ratio of indians and chinese in SG.



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







Anyway, what are u trying to say here? Indians are smart because some of them r in Raffles Inst, Angle-chinese and st josephs?



> You claim to be singaporean



As if Im Obliged to prove to you im a Singaporean.

Or are u trying to say i cannot be a Singaporean if im saying indians are dumb?

big lulz


----------



## 52051

The poor indian boy is 100% a mental, just have look at how he spam his beloved Mollys's IQ blog, nobody there even bother to reply to his hoodoo IQ theory and hoodoo maths, it make me ROFL

Everyone should pay a visit to Mollys' blog to have a good laugh over this hoodoo mental (You dont even need to bother with his zillioin screen name to identify that mental):

http://humanvarieties.org/2015/11/13/measured-proficiency-of-ethnic-groups-in-canada/

May his zillion rat gods let him born as a non-hoodoo in his next life such that he would not be such a mental and tortured soul as he is


----------



## Nabil365

eldarlmari said:


> i was talking to AmriHighIQ
> 
> 
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_premise
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Anyway, what are u trying to say here? Indians are smart because some of them r in Raffles Inst, Angle-chinese and st josephs?
> 
> 
> 
> As if Im Obliged to prove to you im a Singaporean.
> 
> Or are u trying to say i cannot be a Singaporean if im saying indians are dumb?
> 
> big lulz


I'm not supporting Indians nether am I against the Chinese.All I'm say is that give Indians better education and opportunities they will be as good as Chinese.Now take into consideration how many Chinese are living in SG and how many Indians are living here.Then you see how many Indians are on top institutions like a ratio of both things then you get a better idea.Have a good day and please don't take anything personally.



Amri said:


> No need to reply to mentally disturbed clowns here. Let them claim whatever they want. Chinese Singaporeans are a laughing stock in Singapore among indians.
> 
> Keep them begging on Pak defence forum to be considered as equals. By showing one or two percent data like a chest thumping victory.
> 
> Pigs need to be slaughtered. And such people who speak like shit about others need to be insulted.
> 
> 
> 
> Don't lower my standard my poor, inferior, mentally disturbed, inferiority complex Chinese PhD. I empathize on you. I don't need to pray to be born as Chinese. Because if people like me are born in china, it will increase your national IQs by several points.
> 
> Nobody cares about your mentally sick comments here.
> 
> When they loose an argument, they start abusing like uncivilized people. Same way as whites describe blacks in America.
> 
> As I am not into going by chinese way of abusing (well suited with behavior of low iq groups), I will leave it to others to counter your crap comments about south asians here.
> 
> Lets keep the dogs barking. To be laughed at by everyone.


Both race are equally smart.But India is seriously lacking in providing quality education to its future-generation.


----------

