If you believe it's environmental, then why do Blacks with an income $80,000-$100,000 have kids that averaged 461 on Math and 468 on verbal on the SAT, while Whites with incomes under $10,000 had kids that averaged 478 on Math and 480 on verbal?
And if you want to make it even more fair, compare Whites with income of $80-100k with Blacks of $80-100k. The Whites scored 539 on verbal and 534 on Math.
The data shown here reconfirms the jarring observation that has won the minds of many a race realist: Whites whose parents earn less than $10,000 score almost as high on the SAT as Blacks whose parents earn more than $100,000 (and score even higher than those Blacks whose parents are in the $80k-$100k bracket). No amount of controlling for x, y, and z explains that gap.
Also, the twin studies and longitudinal adoption studies demonstrate unequivocally that heredity, not the environment, is responsible for the vast majority of the variation in IQ scores. If you have ever studied psychometrics, you may recall that the narrow-sense heritability of IQ is roughly 0.5, meaning that heredity is responsible for 50% of the variance in IQ, within the range of environments sampled by the twin studies. This estimate is a floor, not a ceiling -- people conveniently forget that the "environmental" component also factors in things like dominance, epistasis, and other genetic effects that usually add up to a total of 75% by adulthood.
And if you have heard somewhere that twin studies are racist, evil, and irredeemably flawed (all of these are lies), we have multiple GWAS studies that largely replicate the same heritability figures for IQ. None of these are biased by the confounding variables that are traditionally blamed for inflating the genetic component to IQ.
By the way, that 25% that is environmental has almost nothing to do with parenting, school quality, choice of neighborhood, or any other variables that children in the same household share in common until they leave the nest. The longitudinal adoption studies are especially compelling on this matter. (See: the Colorado adoption study) Developmental psychologists (who, by the way, are wrong about just about everything) are beside themselves trying to explain away the pesky fact that the children of low IQ parents, who are adopted by the wealthy, score no higher on IQ tests at age 21 than their siblings who were never given up for adoption.
If you are incredulous, consider that IQ scores are no higher among whites in egalitarian, Nordic Sweden than they are in socially stratified America, and may even be slightly lower. How's that for the power of the environment? And if you don't believe my words, controlling for race, Americans also score higher on tests of actual academic achievement than every single country in the world. White Americans scores higher on the PISA than any European country. Asian Americans too sweep the board on these tests, scoring higher than even Chinese in Shanghai and Singapore. Latin Americans, too, score higher than any Latin American country that has been tested, although they still score significantly lower than the former two groups.
Military reach always goes along with national interests outreach, we are not Indian in 2030, we have a long way to go, so we have no global military existence.
