All leftists please support this and move there. Fuck off for good. Thanks.

Other urls found in this thread: (2006) Estimating state IQ.pdf Review of Nisbett.pdf

yes please

The states that are welfare queens are the conservative Red States.

If California does secede the Midwest were mostly dumb honkies live would become failed states overnight.

Wouldn't expect you to know anything about economics though.

there is literally zero chance of this happening

I kind of want this.

Please fuck off for good. Many Californian companies are moving to Texas anyways.

You are a blight upon this nation. Fuck off and take the spics with you.

Hahahaha. New Hampshire is libertarian and would never form a union with socialist massholes. We like our guns.
Lkve free or die faggot.

Nevada would have to secede too, they get a ton of their water from the Colorado river.

Maine as well which just btfo'd gun control.

Lol truth hurts.

You're right about companies TRYING to move to Texas.

But that state is so backwards that most employees in Cali won't move their, and the workers in Texas are too poorly educated to replace them.

Remind me what happened the last time a state tried to secede due to a controversial Republican


Texas has a higher average Autism Level than Califailia. (2006) Estimating state IQ.pdf

Then why do companies keep going there?

Less regulations and low taxes for companies.

once again spic trash dragging down an entire state


You see left leaning states are becoming terrible for companies.

this please.

Death to America!

Also could you take all the niggers and muslims too in addition?

We'll extend the wall to separate you from us as well.

Is this Fallout?

Is that even legal?

Go back to your mainstream sites now.



based wordfilters

the based world filters do not work well in this situation, how do we fix them

Nah, keep them. It's still funnier.


The first suggestion was good boy points but the BO didn't like it. I am still salty about it.


good boy points would be better imo

You and me both, buddy.

It would have made this board look like a bunch of tendie stockbrokers whenever a stormfag waltzed in.


Some things never change

pic related

ou mean the guy who linked intelligence with penis size with stats he got from playboy magazine. Pity that the other sources which I have used have debunked this bullshit.

And to debunk the heredability theory , which is made by Rushton and Jensen

James Flynn (2012), pp. 140–1 argues that there is an inherent flaw in Jensen's argument that the correlation between g-loadings, test scores and heritability support a genetic cause of the gap. He points out that as the difficulty of a task increases a low performing group will naturally fall further behind, and heritability will therefore also naturally increase. The same holds for increases in performance which will first affect the least difficult tasks, but only gradually affect the most difficult ones. Flynn thus sees the correlation between in g-loading and the test score gap to offer no clue to the cause of the gap.

Hunt (2010), p. 415 states that many of conclusions of Jensen, and his colleagues rest on the validity of Spearman's hypothesis, and the method of correlated vectors used to test it. Hunt points out that other researchers have found this method of calculation to produce false positive results, and that other statistical methods should be used instead. According to Hunt, Jensen and Rushton's frequent claim that Spearman's hypothesis should be regarded as empirical fact does not hold, and that new studies based on better statistical methods would be required to confirm or reject the hypothesis that the correlation between g-loading, heritability and the Autism Level gap is due to Autism Level gaps consisting mostly of g.
Neisser (1996) >"There is certainly no such support for a genetic interpretation. At present, no one knows what causes this differential." Therefore, a high heritability measure does not imply that a trait is genetic or unchangeable, however, as environmental factors that affect all group members equally will not be measured by heritability and the heritability of a trait may also change over time in response to changes in the distribution of genes and environmental factors.

And yet here you are, sperging out

Proposed causes of the Flynn Effect include improvements in test-specific skills (Greenfield, 1998; Wicherts et al., 2004), improvements in nutrition (Lynn, 1989, 1990), urbanization (Barber, 2005), improvements in health care (Williams, 1998), a trend towards smaller families (Zajonc & Mullally, 1997), increases in educational attainment (Ceci, 1991), greater environmental complexity (Schooler, 1998), and the working of genotype by environment correlation in the increasing presence of more intelligent others (Dickens & Flynn, 2001). Many of these environmental variables have not undergone the improvement in developing sub-Saharan African countries that they have in the developed world over the last century.

This suggests that the Flynn Effect has great potential in sub-Saharan Africa (Wicherts, Borsboom, & Dolan, 2010b). >Although the implications of our psychometric findings for the potential of the Flynn Effect in sub-Saharan Africa remain unclear, the Raven's tests and other Autism Level tests have shown robust increases in many populations (Daley et al., 2003; Flynn, 2007). So suppose that there were a well-validated Autism Level test that showed measurement invariant scores between westerners and Africans. Even then, lower Autism Levels of Africans still would not support Lynn and Vanhanen's (2002, 2006) assertion that countries in sub-Saharan Africa are poorly developed economically because of their low "national Autism Level". Wicherts, Borsboom, and Dolan (2010b) found that "national Autism Levels" are rather strongly confounded with the developmental status of countries. Given the well-documented Flynn Effect, we know that "national Autism Levels" are subject to change. An average Autism Level around 80 among Africans may appear to be low, but from a historical perspective this average is not low at all. A representative sample of British adults, who took the SPM in 1948 would have an average Autism Level of 81 in terms of the British norms of 1992 (J. C. Raven, 1960; J. C. Raven et al., 1996). Using older British norms, the average Autism Level of Africans would be much closer to 100. This is evident in Figure 2, where we compared SPM scores of Africans to older norms. In this figure, the average Autism Level of several African samples is near or above 100. Present-day sub-Saharan Africa is one of the poorest regions in the world and the home to some of the world's most deprived children. The majority of sub-Saharan children are chronically malnourished, not only from lack of food but particularly from food lacking vital elements related to both physical growth and intellectual development. It has been estimated that up to 70 percent of rural children live in absolute poverty and 90 percent suffer severe deprivation (Gordon, Nancy, Pantazis, Pemberton, & Townsend, 2003). A substantial number of sub-Saharan African children are under-educated. According to Garcia, Gillian, and Dunkelberg (2008), only about 12 percent of sub-Sahara African children have attended preschool, and this generally for well less than a year. They note that children who do not attend or have only minimal experience in pre-primary school tend to do less well in primary school than children who have had that experience. Further, it is important that the preschool experience be successful. For example, Jaramillo and Mingat (2008) have shown that children who have a poor experience in preschool and have to repeat a year or part of a year have a high drop-out rate in primary school (r = -0.875). The probability of preschool without repetition and who complete primary school is low but positive (r = 0.209). With or without preschool experience, approximately only fifty-five percent of 10-14 year-olds in sub-Saharan Africa complete primary school.

And please explain why black kids are doing better in Britain than white kids?

Furthermore, race doesn't exist as you stormfags like to say it does

Roberts, Dorothy (2011). Fatal Invention. London, New York: The New Press. "The genetic differences that exist among populations are characterized by gradual changes across geographic regions, not sharp, categorical distinctions. Groups of people across the globe have varying frequencies of polymorphic genes, which are genes with any of several differing nucleotide sequences. There is no such thing as a set of genes that belongs exclusively to one group and not to another. The clinal, gradually changing nature of geographic genetic difference is complicated further by the migration and mixing that human groups have engaged in since prehistory. Human beings do not fit the zoological definition of race. A mountain of evidence assembled by historians, anthropologists, and biologists proves that race is not and cannot be a natural division of human beings."

Lee et al. 2008: "We caution against making the naive leap to a genetic explanation for group differences in complex traits, especially for human behavioral traits such as Autism Level scores"


Yeah, who are the new mods. Actually leave the posts up. It's weird having to BTFO of race realists and not have their arguements put up.

Holla Forums 2: Autism Rising

Yes please. Start falling apart, america. Destroy each other. I'm all for it.

Top kek. I don't know why we have the current one, it's a bad meme.

nice deletion and mods defending you

Nisbett got btfo here: Review of Nisbett.pdf

Flynn effect does not occur on g therefore it does not mean shit. Niggers are not seeing increases in general intelligence.


they literally are not

Screencapping this post and posting it on Holla Forums. Find the thread and debate me out of your safe soace.

Pic related


Nisbett (2012) suggests that high SES individuals are more likely to be able to develop their full biological potential, whereas low SES individuals are likely to be hindered in their development by adverse environmental conditions. The same review also points out that adoption studies generally are biased towards including only high and high middle SES adoptive families, meaning that they will tend to overestimate average genetic effects. They also note that studies of adoption from lower-class homes to middle-class homes have shown that such children experience a 12 - 18 pt gain in Autism Level relative to children who remain in low SES homes.

A large number of studies have shown that systemically disadvantaged minorities, such as the African American minority of the United States generally perform worse in the educational system and in intelligence tests than the majority groups or less disadvantaged minorities such as immigrant or "voluntary" minorities, as stated by Neisser.

"The differential between the mean intelligence test scores of Blacks and Whites (about one standard deviation, although it may be diminishing) does not result from any obvious biases in test construction and administration, nor does it simply reflect differences in socio-economic status. Explanations based on factors of caste and culture may be appropriate, but so far have little direct empirical support. There is certainly no such support for a genetic interpretation. At present, no one knows what causes this differential."

You posted here, you debate here.


As written in this article , the author writes that the graph "shows the Achievement Quotients for all four groups, normalized against the UK TIMSS results". Not sure what procedure he used but he gives as a source for the Bermuda data p. 11 of the file at (maybe he averaged together the scores on the four types of tests shown in fig. 13 on that page, then used the "UK TIMSS results" to normalize the numbers in some way).

And as mentioned in previous evidence, race is not an explanation for low intelligence.

In regards to the Autism Level gap the question becomes whether racial groups can be shown to be influenced by different environmental factors that may account for the observed differences between them. Jensen originally argued that given the high heritability of Autism Level the only way that the Autism Level gap could be explained as caused by the environment would be if it could be shown that all blacks were subject to a single "x-factor" which affected no white populations while affecting all black populations equally, as covered by Jensen (1998

Jensen considered the existence of such an x-factor to be extremely improbable, but Flynn's discovery of the Flynn effect showed that in spite of high heritability environmental factors could cause considerable disparities in Autism Level between generations of the same population, showing that the existence of such an x-factor was not only possible but real, (Flynn 2012)

Today researchers such as Hunt (2010), Nisbett (2012) and Mackintosh (2011) consider that rather than a single factor accounting for the entire gap, probably many different environmental factors differ systematically between the environments of White and Black people converge to create part of the gap and perhaps all of it. They argue that it does not make sense to talk about a single universal heritability figure for Autism Level, rather, they state, heritability of Autism Level varies between and within groups. They point specifically to studies showing a higher heritability of test scores in White and medium-high SES families, but considerably lower heritability for Black and low-SES families. This they interpret to mean that children who grow up with limited resources do not get to develop their full genetic potential.

In addition Jensen's MCV has been criticized with regards to the claim that it supports the later formulation of Spearman's hypothesis. Dolan et al. (2004) argue that MCV lacks specificity: that is, that instances not including g differences could create a positive correlation between the magnitude of the group differences and the g-loadings. Dolan et al. (2004) note that they are specifically criticizing MCV as a way of proving that group differences largely or totally represent g differences; they don't argue against Spearman's hypothesis as originally formulated and they do not argue that the larger body of evidence does not support Spearman's hypothesis as later formulated. Hunt and Carlson summarize criticism:
The essence of these objections is that the method of correlated vectors does not consider alternative hypotheses concerning the latent traits that might give rise to the observed difference in test scores. When a more appropriate method of analysis, multigroup confirmatory factor analysis, is applied, it has been found that Spearman's hypothesis (i.e., that the difference is due to differences in general intelligence) is only one of several models that could give rise to the observed distributions in test scores (Dolan, 2000). These findings render the method of correlated vectors ambiguous—which is not the same as saying that the Jensen-Rushton position is incorrect. Our point is that the argument for the default hypothesis is an indirect one. It would be far better if a direct causal argument could be made linking racial/ethnic genetic differences to studies of the development of the brain.
Flynn argues that the most g-loaded and heritable tests are those that have seen the highest increases due to the Flynn effect. More generally, Flynn (2010) has criticized the basic assumption that confirmation of Spearman's hypothesis would support a partially genetic explanation for Autism Level differences. He argues that environmental causes for average group Autism Level differences would cause the differences to be greater for more complex tasks.
Here's another link which displays nutrition has a significant effect on intelligence

And in regards to Rushton (this is pitiful how easily debunked your """"evidence""" is)

Rushton and Ankney do not use raw measurements of cranial capacity, instead they attempt to adjust the values using a mathematical formula that's meant to compensate for the effect of overall body size on brain size, but the formula they use is disputed by other scientists, see :
Rushton's attempt to apply r/K selection theory to different groups of humans is seen as ignorant by actual evolutionary biologists (Rushton was a psychology professor, as far as I know he had no training in evolutionary biology), see and in particular the section titled "Selection Scenario for Race Differences in r and K" which says:

>>>Holla Forums8212276

I support the falling apart of the USA

lmao, what is the rightist obsession with the discredited Autism Level test?