Hacker News Reader

FYI, I specially created this account to post on this thread, because I was scared of being called a racist and didn't want that tarnishing my normal account.

I think it is funny that you talk about how we "should not be scared of things 'you can't say" and about how we should "try to get an accurate view of reality" when you have basically created a sockpuppet to post this. If you really believe these things and think rational discussion about them is important, you should be using your normal account.

I guess I was being rhetorical. The fact is, you can't say these things in America without risking significant career damage.

A very small data set:

On my street, there were 8 black children. All 8 scored above 1200 on their SATs -- 5 of them scored 1500 or above, with one garnering perfect score. One (myself) scored a perfect score on the ASVAB (Military IQ test, as you put it -- I have not met anyone else, black or white, who has done this). Two to MIT, one to U Chicago, 5 to four-year public institution (although three of the five were accepted into Ivy League schools, and indeed offered scholarships).

I have no problem with facts. If there is currently an IQ gap between races, then that's a fact. We can study the reasons, that's fine too.

But it's the potential for assigning social roles to certain groups because of some "natural" disposition that I find troubling.

I agree. I think that's why so people ( including me once upon a time) want to avoid talking about genetic explanations for the IQ gap as long as there is any possibility of it being environmental.

But I also think a lot of damage can be done by avoiding talk of genetic differences. The media, politicians, and educational institutions have been telling black people that the problems in the black community are all a result of racism. This has created a hostility towards whites that only harms the cause of economic advancement.

I agree with the first part of your post.

Regarding the second part of our post:

1) if black communities are still feeling the negative effects of slavery and discrimination, then we should recognize this, regardless of its effects on economic advancement (ie, tell the truth, even when it hurts)

2) the phrase "telling black people that" really bothers me because it subtly implies black people can't figure it out without help

3) maybe it's because I live in Texas or maybe because I'm a minority, but I sense more hostility from whites towards blacks than vice versa

4) I haven't seen any research that has tied racial hostilities to lack of economic advancement in the US. You could actually argue the opposite since US became an economic powerhouse after WWII, and racial tensions were very high then

maybe it's because I live in Texas or maybe because I'm a minority, but I sense more hostility from whites towards blacks than vice versa

My experience as a white person living in northern cities is very different. I've been called racial slurs when walking through black neighborhoods, and several of my friends have been mugged. Walking through black neighbords and hearing hip-hop blasting that demonizes people of my skin color is not a very comfortable experience. This blog post is good introduction to the topic, from the black northerner perspective: http://www.ta-nehisi.com/2008/07/a-very-uncomfortable-post-a...

the phrase "telling black people that" really bothers me because it subtly implies black people can't figure it out without help

Most people rely on the media and educational institutions for their information, that's the job of those institutions. And a lot of it is black leaders telling black people that racism is the problem.

I haven't seen any research that has tied racial hostilities to lack of economic advancement in the US. You could actually argue the opposite since US became an economic powerhouse after WWII, and racial tensions were very high then

In the north, there is far more residential segregation today than there was fifty years ago. I think a major factor for this is that it's just not very safe for a white person to live in many predominately black neighborhoods. This ends up cutting off the black community economically.

About your second point, unfortunately _most_ people, regardless of race, believe what they are told. Unfortunate as it may be, his remark was valid.

I find your posts to be a bit over-generalizing and lacking of supporting evidence.

Examining the physiques of West Africans versus East Africans makes the genetic explanation pretty obvious.

What's obvious and could you share it with the rest of us?

From the article shared below (http://www.fims.org/default.asp?pageID=782860264):

"In a study of the demographic characteristics of elite Ethiopian athletes, 38% of the elite marathon runners were from the region of Arsi, which accounts for less than 5% of the Ethiopian population 2. As shown in Figure 1, these findings were mirrored in Kenya, where 81% of the best Kenyan runners originated from the Rift Valley province, which accounts for less than a quarter of the Kenyan population 1. "

"These initial studies of elite Kenyan athletes by Saltin et al. 6;14 demonstrate that factors such as increased childhood physical activity and hard training are probably the major contributors to the superior performances of Kenyan runners"

"The concept of ‘black’ athletic superiority is based on a preconception that each race constitutes a genetically homogeneous group, with race defined simply by skin colour. This belief is contrary to the assertion that there is more genetic variation among Africans than between African and Eurasian populations 24."

"interesting that Ethiopia and Kenya do not share a similar genetic ancestry, as defined by mtDNA 22;43, but what they do share is a similar environment: moderate altitude and high levels of physical activity. Few other regions of the world have such high levels of childhood physical activity combined with such cultural/financial importance being placed on distance running. This information clearly implicates environmental factors as being more influential than genetic factors in the success of East African distance runners. In an economically deprived region such as East Africa, economic factors also provide an additional motivation, if not a necessity, to succeed in distance running. In summary, it is unjustified at present to regard the phenomenon of East African running success as genetically mediated; to justify doing so one must identify the genes that are important. To do so also disregards the intense training regimens for which East African athletes are famous 56."

conclusion: not based on color of skin, nor based on genetics.

I don't doubt that environment plays a role. And note that the paper you cite did not rule out genetics, and I think he quite overstated the conclusion based on the evidence presented. For the opposing case, try this article: http://www.jonentine.com/reviews/UPI_reconstruction.htm

Even more telling is the case of West African sprinters:

1) In the past six olympics, all 48 male finalists in the 100 meter dash were of West African descent. The chances of this happening by chance is infantesimally small.

2) Despite having the same West African descent, they all grew up in very different environments ( West Africa itself, the Carribean, U.S., Canada, England)

3) Sprinting is one of the most universal of all human activities. It's also one that requires the least number of hours to acheive world class training and conditioning ( I believe I've read world class sprinters only train about 10-20 hours a week ).

Studies have also shown that men of West African decent have more fast twitch muscle and higher levels of testostorone. The evidence for a substantial genetic component seems overwhelming to me.

>Studies of IQ highly correlate with latitude. People of northern Chinese and Mongolian origin score higher than the Vietnamese. In limited studies, Intuits score higher than Native Americans from Central America. 60,000 years is actually quite a long time, and the skills necessary to survive harsh northern winters are very different than those needed to survive in tropical jungles.

Hpw about Ashkenazi Jews, whom have the highest IQ and yet do not originate from a high latitude?

They originate from a higher latitude than they like to think. That's why they look so different from sephardic Jews. (But this is also a controversial topic.)

Can you cite a credible source?

Here is a very interesting review article discussing genetics and its unproven role in East Africans' ability to win marathons: http://www.fims.org/default.asp?pageID=782860264

I think you mean "Inuit" not "Intuit" ?

1.Marian Woronin of poland ran 9.992 2.According to The Economist several groups of immigrants to America(italians, swedish, german etc) showed an iq of about 90 before integrating to society and about 100 after.Black americans seem to be stuck around 90.One possible explanation would be that they have a harder time integrating(if a swedish immigrant learn english good enough he can hide the fact that he is "a squarehead", what does it take for a black person?)