The World's IQ = 86

Few subjects arouse as much ire as national IQs. Questions are asked about the cultural appropriateness of the tests, whether they have sufficient scope to assess the different talents of racial and cultural groups, the representativeness and size of the samples, and even whether those results are reported correctly.

National scholastic achievements, on the other hand, are greeted with widespread publicity, discussed anxiously in government and educational circles, and sometimes rather naively accepted as an unerring measure of a nation’s educational system. In some ways this is understandable, because PISA and similar studies are well-funded, are global in scope, and repeated at regular intervals, allowing progress to be monitored. Yes, every test can be gamed, and national results vary considerably in coverage, representativeness, and probably also in levels of cheating. However, these are matters for the sort of people who read the supplementary annexes, and persons of that sort cannot be considered normal.

Every test, either “school near” as those designed for PISA or “school far” as designed for intelligence testing, are subject to the same concerns about sampling, measurement invariance, individual item analysis, and the appropriateness of summary statistics. Why the difference in public response to these two different points on the assessment spectrum? Perhaps it is as simple as noting that in scholastic attainment there is always room to do better (or to blame the quality of schooling) whereas in intelligence testing there is an implication of an immutable restriction, unfairly revealed by tricky questions of doubtful validity.

Perhaps it is a matter of publicity. PISA has the money for brochures, briefing papers, press conferences, meetings with government officials. Richard Lynn put his list together in his study, and came up with results that many were happy to bury.

Neon Knight wrote:Ireland's is low as well.

There's so much room for argument in this field that it's hard to know what to conclude about race and intelligence. Maybe in future there will be a direct way of measuring intelligence through brain scanning or something.

I've seen a video of a lecture by Prof. Richard Lynn where he says that the West is declining because of immigration lowering the average IQ and that the Chinese will eventually rise to superiority.

Here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tLowyAEA54


That Unz Review looks like a good news site by the way. I'll bookmark it.

OsricPearl wrote:

Neon Knight wrote:Ireland's is low as well.

There's so much room for argument in this field that it's hard to know what to conclude about race and intelligence. Maybe in future there will be a direct way of measuring intelligence through brain scanning or something.

I've seen a video of a lecture by Prof. Richard Lynn where he says that the West is declining because of immigration lowering the average IQ and that the Chinese will eventually rise to superiority.

Here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tLowyAEA54


That Unz Review looks like a good news site by the way. I'll bookmark it.

It is a good site. It has a lot of "out of bounds" authors but it isn't DailyStormer. I really like how he (Unz) is willing to give nearly everyone a platform. I've seen essays by Chompsky, for example, and Buchannan.

Anyway, I think that thing get murky with IQ and developing countries because it's hard to believe that people can build buildings (even huts), clothes, and hunt with an IQ of 70. It just doesn't make sense. Clearly, there is something that IQ tests are missing, even if they can predict certain outcomes in Western/Modern civs.

Neon Knight wrote:

OsricPearl wrote:

Neon Knight wrote:Ireland's is low as well.

There's so much room for argument in this field that it's hard to know what to conclude about race and intelligence. Maybe in future there will be a direct way of measuring intelligence through brain scanning or something.

I've seen a video of a lecture by Prof. Richard Lynn where he says that the West is declining because of immigration lowering the average IQ and that the Chinese will eventually rise to superiority.

Here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8tLowyAEA54


That Unz Review looks like a good news site by the way. I'll bookmark it.

It is a good site. It has a lot of "out of bounds" authors but it isn't DailyStormer. I really like how he (Unz) is willing to give nearly everyone a platform. I've seen essays by Chompsky, for example, and Buchannan.

Anyway, I think that thing get murky with IQ and developing countries because it's hard to believe that people can build buildings (even huts), clothes, and hunt with an IQ of 70. It just doesn't make sense. Clearly, there is something that IQ tests are missing, even if they can predict certain outcomes in Western/Modern civs.

I remember seeing some evidence of clear racial differences in American educational tests. Do you know anything about that?

On the whole issue, the  possibility of racial differences in mental and physical performance is a scientific question and we should not let the politically correct brigade close down these debates.

OsricPearl wrote:That's a good map, and looks about right. But when it comes to East Asian IQ, I'm something of a contrarian. I do not believe that East Asians are significantly more intelligent than westerners. Either their IQ distribution is more narrow, or there is some dishonesty in the part of EAs to get those high numbers (I wouldn't discount that).

IQ 97 for Spain and 95 for Portugal is probably right. I don't think this is anything to cry on our pillows about though.