Whatever role genetics play in IQ are most certainly not manifested in the concentration of melanin in one's skin or the coarseness of one's hair or the color of one's eyes or the size of one's nose or any of the other crude heuristics we use to group people up as "races".
Still, even with a racial component to genetic IQ, we know that "tech" is not some enlightened trade where only high IQ employees are considered, outside of the elite firms like Google, Apple etc you're going to find a glut of pretty average programmers and plenty of idiots to boot.
You are making the case that intraracial facial structures all resemble each other, but internally how people are connected (brain structure) does not follow the same pattern. Some how over thousands of years of almost complete seperation, people managed to genetically grow different facial strucutres but stayed completely the same on the inside? The whole tenant of evolution is that great effective genes are passed on and reflected in offspring. By arguing that there is no genetic difference you are arguing that IQ cannot be passed on and that different environments did not select for and need different levels of IQ. If you are arguing that, then you are denying evolution as a theory.
No, my point is precisely the opposite. I'm making the case that facial structures are a crude approximation for genetic classification because it's not true that all "black" people have a dark skin complexion, not all "black" people have thick kinky hair, there is genetic diversity within the "black" community because the definition of "black" is fluid and based on an amalgamation of regional, political, cultural and apparent (as in apparent to the naked eye) genetic factors.
Do you think white peoples under representation in US pro sports is more due to genetics or environmental influence?
Having worked in Sillycon Valley for a long time I think it's funny/sad how the whole scene pretends to be PC about race and diversity issues when pretty much all the tech employees there are white or Indian males.
What's even funnier is that white people are only a small percentage of world population but have the audacity to refer to all other races as 'minorities'.
I don't know any good solution to systemic race/diversity issues other than making mushrooms legal and mandatory.
In Europe, say, Africans play a lot of football. But there's also just as many whites who do- so are African Americans only endowed with the kind of genetics that help them play good basketball? Or are Africans in general endowed with good _basketball_ genetics, but not good _football_ genetics?
And what about European basketball? Why are basketball teams in Europe not predominantly African American?
[Where "football" read "soccer" if you're on the other side of the pond, please]
I am fairly certain that is because they are often referring to other races in their own countries. If you live in the US, most of your news is about North America and Europe, both continents that are predominantly filled with white people.
I would bet a large percentage of Americans couldn't identify their home state on a map of the world.