Debunk THIS

k

#NotAllWhites ::DDDD

It's literally already been debunked in the thread "Debunking Holla Forums".

None of his arguments are new.

source pls, upload some images if you got them

Sorry.
>>it's so unfair when my* people get accused of being racist
FTFM

Whether this is true or not will have a tremendous impact on our current blind trust of scientific papers and statistical analysis. I've had debates where pubmed and science direct articles were practically thrown in my face, later turning out to all be biased and poorly constructed.
My point is not that human beings cannot be approached statistically. They can. My point is that if this goes mainstream and is debunked, the days of "This study says…" are over. That is a good thing.
This could destroy logical positivism tbh. It's clear that we as a society blindly trust statistics despite their obvious flaws. 30 years into the future this very trust will be remembered as almost affirming racism.

IQ isn't that important. Only for academic accomplishments an Autism Level of 130+ is required, but otherwise it's pretty irrelevant.

Racial differences are real though

And it has nothing to do with leftypol

We are not SJWs

All UK data btw

(Sources for pics in unz.com/article/the-iq-gap-is-no-longer-a-black-and-white-issue/)

Basically (at least in the UK) variations between average ethnic Autism Level can easily be superseded by environmental factors (culture, nutrition, familial relationships, attitudes to work) when it comes to educational attainment.

The CAT (Cognitive Abilities Test) scores are shown to closely correlate with GCSEs results (gl-assessment.co.uk/sites/gl/files/images/Files/GCSE_Technical_Information.pdf). So whatever initial gap there was for african students at age 11 seems to be reversed for students from certain african countries by age 16 for the GCSEs (eg. Nigeria, Ghana, Sierra Leone).

Of course the age 16 data concerns only GCSEs but there doesn't really exist any type of standardised test at that age in the UK similar to the SATs. In any case, considering the trend of both Indian and Chinese immigrants performing better than white students (as you would expect in the US) it can probably be inferred that Autism Level and GCSE results would be closely correlated. Additionally with respect to selection pressure of the most intelligent immigrants, nearly all non-EU immigrants (e.g. Indians and Chinese) would be subject to such pressures yet certain black africans still come out on top.

Regardless, the poorest performing ethnicity regardless of socio-economic group are white British. Most explanations for this phenomenon largely focus on the cultural attitudes of the Brithsh white working class to education rather than "genetic limitations".

Why does this nigger with an "h"?

and yet when you lump all the whites together, and all the blacks together, there's the gap you would expect, and asians are the smartest too, just as predicted

also thanks for the 4th chart

What's the point? That there are statistical differences between races? We have already established that. Blacks have black skin, whites have white skin. That's a statistical difference too. So races exist! WOOOOO!

It's not that simply comrade. Race is an extremely nebulous and fluid concept. It is an invented system of classification used only for oppressive purposes and nothing else.

For example: Barack Obama's mother is "pure white" while his father is "pure black" yet most people don't think Obama is "mixed-race".

A*-C attainment is closely correlated to Autism Level as shown here (gl-assessment.co.uk/sites/gl/files/images/Files/GCSE_Technical_Information.pdf)
Additionally, it is not uncommon for Nigerians to come out on top in terms of the extremes e.g. 2010 highest performing student was Nigerian with 15 A*s

Is verbal reasoning not important?

Not in the 2011 data

That would only affect selection pressures however, both low and high-skilled immigration occurs from all African countries (proportion will vary on country of course)

I assume you're referring to the CAT scores test which is data from 2008/9 so demographics are different to what they are today. Also remember that the UK is around 87% white (by most recent data)

But that's the entire point. You shouldn't lump all African blacks together as they're from different countries with different cultures. For example the gap in scores between Somalis and Nigerians with respect to GCSEs is huge. On the other hand white British all happen to be from the UK (funnily enough).

He only needs to mention australian aboriginals, not even a leftist can deny their primitiveness and lack of intelligence.

Australia should be nuked. There are an excess of shitposters there.

You can spin it in whatever way you want. They are lumping C and A+ together. They are averaging English with math. The gap still exists. And it reeks of selective sampling based on the sample sizes.

Not even an alt rightist can deny that australian aborigines were genocided by the british empire based on that thinking , that they are "primitive and lack intelligence" therefore should make place for the civilizied british master race.

SJW's have such servantile minds.. they cannot imagine existence as anything but an endless list of conspiracies to constrain them.

Autism Level is a garbage standard to have.
Just shows how well you jump through hoops under capitalism and is only predicative under certain values. They also can't even agree on what "g" is. It's just constant reification.

...

Shouldn't they have made place?

Capitalists have such servantile minds.. they cannot imagine Socialism as anything but an endless list of conspiracies to constrain them. They will clean toilets for $8 an hour for ten years and call themselves "free"

...

So what's you explanation for white British being the lowest performing group out of those who are eligible for free school meals (seen as an indicator for low socio-economic group). If Africans average Autism Level was such a significant marker in their educational attainment they would come out below white British even in A*-C GCSEs scores. (Sample sizes for both groups are well above 1000.)

now that's rich

Why is this category relevant?
The gap still exists in your picture.
And you are comparing 1000 african kids (pretty sure there are way more black pupils than that) to 400,000 white brits

That the british genocided the australian aborigines just shows that they are less civilized than the australian aborigines. Might doesn't make right.

Also, lumping C and A+ together means that 90 = 100 even though 10 points is a huge gap

That's why you use actual scores

And you aren't free, every word you use is meticulously designed by The Man to keep you oppressed in the prison of the mind called language. It's all you ever will be, oppressed by some Man with some concept, a pure subject.

According to your ideology, that is.

They truly can't, that much has become clear from the ample discussions I've had with them.

...

The aborigines genocided and raped each other all the time. I can't see a reason why their presence should have made the fertile lands of Australia off limits to others.

nice

It's relevant as it's seen as an indicator of a pupil coming from a lower income background. In other words, subject to different material conditions to students from higher income backgrounds. Obviously this will have an effect on educational performance.

I said this in my post (free school meal = low socio-economic group) so you either have trouble reading or you're purposefully ignoring my posts.

Note I said well over 1000 - i.e.into the 10s of thousands for BOTH groups

see

The american cowboys shoot each other all the time. Can't see a reason why Russia shouldn't just invade the U.S., cleanse it from the anglo-saxon dysgenics and repopulate it with superior slavic people.

kek

...

C (60) is the same as A+ (100)

When you actually use gradual scores the gap is there

It's easy to hide a gap equating a 60 to a 100

More recent data

But that didn't happen, and you know why, there was no vacuum of stone age primitives to be naturally filled with Russians.

Stop being so idealist.

...

Roma are truly the worst race.

also

If the Autism Level distribution carried so much importance with respect to educational attainment then the fact it's covering A*-C would still be irrelevant.

Also refer to this gl-assessment.co.uk/sites/gl/files/images/Files/GCSE_Technical_Information.pdf where it says clearly GCSE A*-C grade is closely correlated with CAT score (i.e. Autism Level).

see gl-assessment.co.uk/sites/gl/files/images/Files/GCSE_Technical_Information.pdf

who achieve five or more A* to C grades. For example only 13% of students with a mean CAT score of 85 obtain 5+ A*-C grades; in contrast about 97% of students with a mean CAT score of 115 achieve 5+ A*-C grades."

The correlation isn't strong, it's between 0.4 and 0.6

the table of correlations is all between 0.4 and 0.6

it goes to show equating C and A+ is a bad system

IQ has a 0.9 correlation with SAT, much better

In any case considering the differences in average Autism Level level African blacks should still come below white British. But they don't. So either you're suggesting that GCSEs favour african students or you're refusing to accept anything that runs contrary to your own biases.

Irrelevant as it only concerns US blacks who have completely different cultural pressures to that of African blacks

also, how about they release CAT scores by race and income – instead of releasing a proxy that's only 40-60% correlated?

we have lots of SAT scores by race and income in the USA

We are talking about correlations, not racial differences. The studies that show the correlation between Autism Level and SAT have nothing to do with race.

GSCE (i.e.: a system where four A's and one F is worse than five C's) is only 40-60% correlated with CAT

IQ is 90% correlated with SAT

Why is this necessary? Even if racial differences in intelligence exist they are no justification to discriminate individual members of a group.

The case against bigotry is not a factual claim that humans are biologically indistinguishable. It is a moral stance that condemns judging an individual according to the average traits of certain groups to which the individual belongs. Enlightened societies choose to ignore race, sex, and ethnicity in hiring, promotion, salary, school admissions, and the criminal justice system because the alternative is morally repugnant. Discriminating against people on the basis of race, sex, or ethnicity would be unfair, penalizing them for traits over which they have no control. It would perpetuate the injustices of the past, in which African Americans, women, and other groups were enslaved or oppressed. It would rend society into hostile factions and could escalate into horrific persecution. But none of these arguments against discrimination depends on whether groups of people are or are not genetically indistinguishable.

This whole discussion is pointless. Whether innate racial differences in intelligence exists is totally irrelevant.

Already posted ITT. Also for primary education 12% of white British students are in a low socio-economic group (LSC), for secondary 15%. Black african 46% and 35% respectively (unzcloud.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Chisala-10.png). So for high income blacks to be favoured in the CAT scores there would have to be extremely selective sampling.

What on earth is your point?

My point is…
1. CAT are almost equivalent to Autism Level tests
2. CAT scores correlate fairly well with 5 A*-C grades
3. Therefore in absence of a standardised test at age 16, the best measure we have are GCSEs
4. African blacks perform better at GCSEs (in the 5 A*-Cs) than white British especially from certain countries such as Nigeria and Ghana

And I quite literally don't care about SATs and Autism Level tests in the US as there are completely different environmental conditions (culture significantly) experienced by African Americans and Black Africans. Therefore it doesn't serve as an adequate comparison. To argue otherwise is bad science.

Correction: percentages for low socio-economic group for white British should be reversed for secondary/primary education

It's not.
You don't even need to take a grand overarching moral position. All you need to do is say you enjoy the company of other races.

The CAT correlation with GCSES is much stronger than 0.5 for key subjects by the way:

Science core: 0.7
Maths: 0.8
English Language: 0.69

The lower end are:
Art&Design: 49
Drama and Theatre studies: 0.48
Physical education: 0.51

All very relevant right :^)

Stop being so nihilist.
You probably subscribe to some idealistic idea of "progress", which is why you think it is important and justified that "stone age primitives" make place for the master race, so that it can develop more technology to pollute the planet and accelerate the extinction of all life on planet earth, thereby proving its "superiority" over stone age primitives.

^this
/threat

But i don't. I only tolerate it due to morality.

THIS. Holla Forums's own graphs show that, broad trends aside, the overwhelming majority of people from all races overlap in native ability.

beat me to it.

...

muh overlap

what difference does 10 or 20 points make anyway

If might made right he wouldn't be in jail JEJ

People who use the Bell Curve are mostly idiots

Dumb Holla Forumsyp

bell curve is just one of dozens

also
non-logic

It's not the average Autism Level person who made the scientific progress possible.
Whether you have an Autism Level of 100 or 80 makes no big difference.
Whether you have an Autism Level of 110 or 130 does.