It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


African Americans and Crime Rates in USA, WHY???

page: 12
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 6 2008 @ 03:42 AM
reply to post by DroolsAlot

People see what they want to see. When I watch cops rarely, I see the program taking place in mostly black populated areas. I also see an equal amount of white criminals versus black and hispanic criminals...

It is no surprise also that there are a lot of poor minorities that leads to crimes.

Even then there are greedy wealth criminals also...

Like i said people see what they want to see, and statistics are biased.

I can tell you though that also from a point of view White criminals seem to do extrodinary crimes, while Black criminals seem to commit simple spur of the moment crimes. Example Columbine, Texas Tower, Lynchings of Blacks in the 50's 60's, Racial Unequality, White only Rest rooms, White only water fountains, "Colored Bathrooms", White only resturants, Jeffrey Dammer, Son of Sam, Charles Manson, Bonny and Clyde, the Mafia, etc etc etc...

So you should do some more research before you post an opinion of what little knowledge you have about criminal history in the United States...

So how's that perspective... heh

posted on Dec, 6 2008 @ 03:49 AM
reply to post by DroolsAlot

when you grow up hearing "white people hate you" , you tend to believe it. When you believe that every negative life situation is the fault of white people, you have chosen ignorance

posted on Dec, 6 2008 @ 04:01 AM

Originally posted by herojoe
I think this thread is kind of rascist.
OK, you know, for the most part, I put post concerning UFOs and whatnot, but this is a question ive been wondering for some years not, its not a raicst question at all. If you think it is for some reason please tell me why?????? All im stating from the very beginning is what I have noticed in my life. And what i have noticed, isnt wrong. Statistics show my whole problem, IN NUMBERS. It really brings me down. It wouldnt be such a big deal but on fathers day i got robbed by multiple people, case is still going on, and ive been talking to a detective about the case since then, i came home to a black guy running out of my yard. I confronted him, but I didnt realize my house had been broken into at the time. So i went inside to call the cops, come to realize my house has been ransacked!!!! Like you see in the movies, drawers pulled out, everthing in the drawers pulled out. Just everything i have strewen out all over the place. And then a few weeks later, my neighbor was robbed by a black girl. I happend to see it thank got and she got busted. But, this post wasnt meant to be racist, its just what i have seen so far, i mean crap, when i first moved here, i saw two black guys try to do the (money for drugs)handshake, if you know what that is and dude dropped his drugs on the ground!!! Let me say an officer was right on the sidewalk across the road and he didnt see it. THEY DO THEIR DEALS IN FRONT OF COPS!!!!!! Thats how bad it is. I know i dont live in the best neighborhood, but, it shouldnt be like that.

[edit on 6-12-2008 by DroolsAlot]

posted on Dec, 6 2008 @ 04:02 AM
And I do appreciate everyone giving there opinions on the matter. I have read every post.

posted on Dec, 6 2008 @ 04:07 AM

Originally posted by hannamtong
reply to post by DroolsAlot

when you grow up hearing "white people hate you" , you tend to believe it. When you believe that every negative life situation is the fault of white people, you have chosen ignorance

Ok so that makes it ok to just start robbing people and doing crimes?

posted on Dec, 6 2008 @ 04:14 AM

Originally posted by hannamtong
reply to post by DroolsAlot

when you grow up hearing "white people hate you" , you tend to believe it. When you believe that every negative life situation is the fault of white people, you have chosen ignorance

Ok, I feel that the way you see things isnt going towards a good direction. Ok, first of all, im not white, 80% native american. So, as far as race goes, dont tell me I dont understand. But, at the same time, I dont give a crap about my ancestorial history. I mean, I do, but im not going to go through live thinking americans are bad and think its my right to rob and klll, because this originally was my land. You gotta step back and think about what you are saying before you say it.

posted on Dec, 6 2008 @ 04:22 AM
I thought you all may find this an interesting read.

Many IQ advocates argue that a general index of cognitive ability is the single best predictor of virtually all criteria considered necessary for success in life in the Western part of the developed world (Jensen, 1998; Schmidt, Ones & Hunter, 1992), and maintain that the average undergraduate, “those who graduate from college or university”, must possess an IQ that is no lower than 115 (Ostrowsky, 1999; Gottfredson, 1998), while individuals who are able to obtain a graduate level degree must on average, possess an IQ in the range of 125 (Gottfredson, 1998).

This often serves the implied purpose of suggesting that blacks and other minorities can not go on to, or graduate from institutions of higher learning - and ultimately move on to professional careers and economic success – and that this is not because of matters relating to personal interest, financial ability, or the quality of schooling received in the past, but instead because of factors relating to IQ (e.g. Jensen, 1969; Gottfredson, 1998). These arguments also tend to base themselves within the tiresome framework of nature vs. nurture; in this case, does more school develop high IQ, or does a high IQ equal more school and greater opportunity (Jensen, 1998)? To put it another way, these researchers believe that a student’s level of academic attainment is predestined by their genes.


African-born blacks comprise 16 percent of the U.S. foreign-born black population and are considerably more educated than other immigrants (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000). The vast majority of these immigrants come from minority white countries in East and West Africa (e.g. Kenya and Nigeria), and less than 2 percent originate from North or South Africa (World Factbook, 2004; Yearbook of immigration Statistics, 2003).

In an analysis of Census Bureau data by the Journal of Blacks in higher education, African immigrants to the United States were found more likely to be college educated than any other immigrant group, which included those from Europe, North America and Asia (also see Nisbett, 2002; U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000). African immigrants have also been shown to be more highly educated than any native-born ethnic group including white and Asian Americans (Logan & Deane, 2003; Williams, 2005; The Economist, 1996; Arthur, 2000; Selassie, 1998; Nisbett, 2002).

Most data suggest that between 43.8 and 49.3 percent of “all” African immigrants in the United States hold a college diploma (Nisbett, 2002; Charles, 2007; U.S. Census, 2000). This is slightly more than the percentage of Asian immigrants to the U.S., substantially greater than the percentage of European immigrants, nearly “double” that of native-born white Americans, nearly four times the rate of native-born African Americans, and more than “8 times” that of some Hispanic groups (Williams, 2005; Nisbett, 2002; The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 1999-2000; U.S. Census, 2000).

Black immigrants from Africa have also been shown to have rates of college graduation that are “more” than double that of the U.S.-born population, in general (Williams, 2005). For example, in 1997, 19.4 percent of all adult African immigrants in the United States held a “graduate degree”, compared to 8.1 percent of adult whites (a difference of “more than” double) and 3.8 percent of adult blacks in the United States, respectively (The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 1999-2000). This shows that America has an equally large achievement gap between white Americans and African born immigrants as between native born white and black Americans.

In the UK, 1988, the Commission for Racial Equality conducted an investigation on the admissions practices of St. George's, and other medical colleges, who set aside a certain number of places for minority students. This informal quota system reflected the percentage of minorities in the general population. However, minority students with Chinese, Indian, or black African heritage had higher academic qualifications for university admission than did whites (Blacks in Britain from the West Indies had lower academic credentials than did whites).

In fact, blacks with African origins over the age of 30 had the highest educational qualifications of any ethnic group in the British Isles. Thus, the evidence pointed to the fact that minority quotas for University admissions were actually working against students from these ethnic groups who were on average more qualified for higher education than their white peers (Cross, 1994; Also see, Dustmann, Theodoropoulos, 2006).

Dustmann and Theodoropoulos (2006) provide a first thorough investigation of educational attainment and economic behavior of ethnic minority immigrants and their children in Britain. They studied how British born minorities perform in terms of education, employment and wages, when compared to their parent generation as well as to comparable groups of white natives, using 27 years of LFS data (Labour Force Survey). In terms of educational attainment their results showed a strong educational background for Britain’s ethnic minority immigrant population. In addition, they showed that second generation ethnic minorities do better than their parents, and substantially better than their white peers! For both generations Black Africans topped the list in both years of schooling/educational qualifications and wages/employment (ibid).

Again, when comparing immigrants in the United States one quickly finds that the racialist models adopted by many Psychologists do not always predict outcomes in the way one might expect. For example, it has been shown that black immigrants born from Zimbabwe (96.7 percent), Botswana (95.5 percent) have high school graduation rates that far exceed all white immigrant and native born groups. While the average Nigerian immigrant (58.6 percent) living in the United States is “eight times” more likely to have obtained a bachelors degree than the average Portuguese born (7.3 percent) (Dixon D, 2006; Dixon D, 2005)!


posted on Dec, 6 2008 @ 04:25 AM
The African born in the United States are concentrated in management or professional and sales or office-related occupations. Of the employed population age 16 and older in the civilian labor force, the African born are much more likely than the foreign born in general to work in management and professional occupations as well as sales and office occupations (i.e. clerical/administrative). Additionally, the African born are less likely to work in service, production, transportation, material moving, construction, and maintenance occupations than the foreign born in general (Dixon D, 2006). In the UK a study by Dr Yaojun Li, from Birmingham University, and Professor Anthony Heath, from Oxford University, found that Africans are more likely to be in professional and managerial jobs than white British men, with a large proportion, about 40%, holding these positions (Li and Heath, 2006).


The presented information above suggests that African born blacks residing in western countries as a group possess IQs that are between 5 points and a full standard deviation (15 IQ points) above that of whites living in these countries (see, Gottfredson, 1998; Ostrowsky, 1999; Richardson, 2002; Cross, 1994; Williams, 2005; Nisbett, 2002) - This is especially true for those in the United States and in the UK. One may also expect to find, according to much of the corroborative literature that relates IQ with education, approximately twice the number of African born immigrants with IQs in the 115 range, than among the general white American population (Gottfredson, 1998; Ostrowsky, 1999; Williams, 2005; Nisbett, 2002), and “more” than twice the number of African immigrants in the 125 IQ range (see Gottfredson, 1998; Nisbett, 2002; The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education, 1999-2000).

For example, in the United States, African born blacks and their offspring have been reported to exceed American born whites in several socio-economic indicators - particularly in the areas of educational attainment and occupational status - in ways that resemble the gaps observed between native born white and black Americans, in the same indicators (Nisbett, 2002; Charles, 2007; Le, 2007; Le, 2007; US Census Bureau, Census 2000. "5% Public Use Microdata Sample.").

Some advantages to using academic attainment comparisons for the analysis of major group differences in IQ in Western industrialized nations are that they provide very big numbers, with sample sizes often in the hundreds of thousands, that are genuinely random; and consequently specific ethnicities can be compared with statistical confidence. The differences in overall educational attainment observed between African born blacks in the United States and native born white Americans are quite spectacular! Indeed, if one chooses to adopt the hereditarian thinking of Jensen (1998), Herrnstein and Murray (1994) or Gottfredson (1998), these disparities become suggestive of underlying intelligence differences between the two populations; with these differences in strong “favor” of African born blacks. Though higher cognitive indices are said by some to be predictive of more educational achievements and more education predictive of higher intellectual outcomes (e.g., Brody, 1997; Ceci & Williams, 1997), so that there are reciprocal relationships. Most who study African immigrants attribute their inclination toward academic attainment to be the result of positive cultural factors (Arthur, 2000; Selassie, 1998).

In the United States today, most claims regarding intelligence differences between ethnic populations in relationship to IQ are based on statistically derived data relating to scholastic aptitude tests and academic achievement (e.g. Flynn, 2002). Keeping this in mind, and acknowledging the superior educational attainment of most African blacks in the united states (and elsewhere), it can thus be argued, because of their higher educational levels, that they must also be expected to pass far more (in number), and more difficult scholastic aptitude tests, which would require higher level IQs (see Gottfredson, 1998; Ostrowsky, 1999). Moreover, as whites on average do not, or are unable to attain the same levels of academic achievement within these (their own!) institutional frameworks they must also, by racialist thinking, possess significantly lower cogitative indices on the group level (e.g. Jensen, 1998; Gottfredson, 1986). In fact, attainment differences of these magnitudes would suggest that (American) whites are at an intellectual handicap when matched against black African immigrants.

African born blacks residing in Western countries tend also to be concentrated in higher level professional occupations, which are considered by many to be more cognitively demanding, requiring more intellectual ability (Jensen, 1998; Gottfredson, 1986; Herrnstein and Murray, 1994), than the average occupations of either American or British born whites (Dixon, 2006; Li and Heath, 2006). According to IQ advocates and social Darwinists, alike, these occupational differences should also indicate higher levels of intelligence among black African immigrants than among whites (e.g. Gottfredson, 1986; Jensen 1998). In fact, as virtually all IQ tests in popular use today are designed specifically for the purposes of predicting academic success and occupational status, it could thus be argued that the west’s hereditarian “Cognitive Elite” (discussed in “The Bell Curve”) are best described as black men and women from Africa. That is, if we assume the outcome measure of IQ tests to be a truly independent measure, and that a positive correlation between IQ tests and the criterion establishes predictive validity.


posted on Dec, 6 2008 @ 04:27 AM
Something else to note, according to the New York Times (Roberts, 2005), for the first time in history more blacks are coming to the United States from Africa than during the entire span of the transatlantic slave trade. Immigration figures show that since 1990 more Africans have arrived voluntarily than the total who disembarked in chains before the United States outlawed international slave trafficking in 1807. For example, research shows that around 15% of Ghana’s 20million citizens live aboard (Owusu-Ankomah 2006). Similar trends can be observed among other African states. In other words: black African achievement can not simply be dismissed as that of a “small group” of elites entirely unrepresentative of the greater continent. Moreover, the academic attainment and occupational achievements of black Africans are not only documented in the United States, but also the UK (Li and Heath, 2006; Dustmann, Theodoropoulos, 2006) and Canada (Guppy and Davies, 1998; Boyd, 2002).


It is taken for granted by many in the United States and much of the developed world, that children who do well on standardized tests are intelligent. However, different cultures have their on views of what intelligence is (Sternberg, 2007; Cole, 1990; Cole et al. 1971; Greenfield). In this respect children that are considered intelligent may vary from one culture to another, along with the acts that constitute intelligent behavior (Sternberg, 2007). It has been said, for example, that the comparison of IQ scores of different nationalities or cultural groups is, at best, a hazardous enterprise, to be undertaken with caution and humility, and at worst, a nonsensical and mischievous waste of time (Mackintosh, 1998). Cronbach (1949/1970, p. 182) states that IQ tests require experience common to the (mainstream) US culture and is of dubious value for comparing cultural groups. In addition, there are countless empirical and theoretical studies that thoroughly debunk the suspicious racial thinking involved in IQ testing; with good examples being Schonemann (1997a; 1997c) and Guttman (1992).

In spite of this, few researchers attempt to provide examples where the disadvantaged or culturally distinct groups actually do better on standardized measures than do members of the more culturally dominant group, who impose these kinds of measures. In addition, few researchers will apply standardized measures that are either preferred or devised in favor of those who must operate within more informal sectors and/or economically disadvantaged circles to members of the more dominant or mainstream group and/or formal sectors, in order to provide balance. It has been shown, for example, that tests which are highly novel in one culture or subculture may be quite familiar in the next (Valsiner, 2000). For example, unschooled subjects will fail at classification tasks characteristic of school learning contexts and succeed with classification relevant to their everyday practical experience (Cole, 1990; Cole et al. 1971). That is, even if components of information processing are the same, the experiential novelty to which they are applied may be different (Valsiner, 2000). People will be good at doing the things that are important to them and that they have opportunities to do often.

An example of this phenomenon can be seen in a study by Serpell R. (1979), in which Zambian and English children were asked to reproduce patterns in three media: wire models, clay models, or pencil and paper. The Zambian children excelled in the wire medium with which they were familiar, while the English children were best with pencil and paper. Both groups performed equally well with clay. Thus, children performed better with materials that were more familiar to them, from their own environments. Carraher, Carraher, and Schliemann (1985) studied a group of Brazilian children and found that the same children who were able to do the mathematics needed to run their street businesses were little able to do the same mathematics when presented in a more formal (grade schooling) context.

Cole et al (1971) studied a tribe in Africa: The Kpelle tribe. In this study adults were asked to sort items into categories; however, rather than producing taxonomic categories (e.g. "fruit" for apple), Kpelle participants sorted items into functional groups (e.g. "eat" for apple). After trying and failing to teach them to categorize items taxonomically they were asked as a last resort how a “stupid” person would do the task. At that point, according to the researchers, without any hesitation, the Kpelle sorted the items into taxonomic categories (Cole et al., 1971)! Demonstrating that not only where these participants able to do the presented tasks, but in their own culture, what was considered intelligent by western standards was believed to be “stupid.”

Crawford-Nutt (1976) found that African black students enrolled in westernized schools scored higher on progressive matrix tests than did American white students. The study was meant to examine perceptual/cultural differences between groups, and demonstrated that one’s performance on western standardized tests correspond more closely with the quality and style of schooling that one receives more so than other factors. Buj (1981) also showed Ghanaian adults in one study to score higher on a supposedly ‘culture fair’ intelligence test than did Irish adults; scores were 80 (Ghanaian) and 78 (Irish), respectively. Shuttleworth-Edwards et al (2004) conducted a study with black South Africans between the ages of 19–30, where highly significant effects for both level and quality of education within groups whose first language was an indigenous black African language, was revealed. Black African first language groups (as well as white English speaking groups) with advantaged education were comparable with the US standardization in IQ test scores (e.g. WAIS-III).


posted on Dec, 6 2008 @ 04:29 AM
In another study, Serpell et al (2006) took 162 low-income African American and white fourth graders and randomly assigned them to ethnically homogeneous, communally structured groups of three to work on a motion acceleration task using either computer simulation or physical tools; or to a control group that did not participate in the learning activities. The results of this study showed African American and White students to perform equally well on the test of initial learning, with both groups scoring significantly higher than the control group. However, African Americans’ transfer outcomes were superior to those of their White counterparts (Serpell et al., 2006). This study demonstrated empirically that not only do African American children learn as well as white children, but that they also exceeded white children in their ability to transfer learned abilities to real tasks.

In the United States, when matched for IQ with Whites, American Blacks show superior “Working Memory” (Nijenhuis et al., 2004); an interesting finding, as African Americans are typically taught by less qualified teachers than their white counterparts and are provided with less challenging school work (Hallinan 1994; Diamond et al., 2004). In Chicago, for example, the vast majority of schools placed on academic probation as part of the district accountability efforts were majority African-American and low-income (Diamond and Spillane 2004). Educational inequality is primarily a consequence of housing. Since the majority of states determine school funding based on property taxes, schools in wealthier neighborhoods receive more funding per student. As home values in white neighborhoods are higher than minority neighborhoods, local schools receive more funding via property taxes (Kelly, 1995).

Studies have also shown that up to 99% of group IQ score differences between black and white Americans are eliminated after controlling simply for cultural factors. For example, Manly et al (1998) found in an empirical research study, that after cultural factors such as linguistic behavior (e.g. black vs. standard English) are taken into consideration between healthy black and white Americans that IQ score differences, particularly on the Wais-R (Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale--Revised), become statistically insignificant in all but one area (a reading section)! Other studies also show similar results after controlling for cultural factors. Fagan and Holland (2002) found that where exposure to specific information was required; whites knew more about the meanings of different sayings than did Blacks (due to exposure). But, when comprehension was based on generally available information, Whites and Blacks did not differ (Fagan and Holland, 2002). This study also found that when Blacks and Whites are matched as to comprehension of sayings requiring specific knowledge that Blacks were superior to Whites on intelligence tests (ibid).

Williams and Rivers (1972b) showed that test instructions in Standard English penalized the black child and that if the language of the test is put in familiar labels, without training or coaching, the black child’s performances on the tests increase significantly. It has also been pointed out that ideally a child’s language development should be evaluated in terms of his progress toward the norms for his particular speech community (Cadzen, 1966). This kind of evaluation is rarely, if ever, done with respect to African Americans. For example, studies using sentence repetition tasks have found that, at both third and fifth grades, white subjects repeat Standard English sentences significantly more accurately than black subjects, while black subjects repeated nonstandard English sentences significantly more accurately than white subjects (Marwit et al, 1977), however, students in American school are only tested in Standard English, which puts African Americans at a disadvantage.

Teng and Manly (2005) argue that tests developed for members of the majority culture are often inappropriate for ethnic minorities, especially those who speak a different language, have little or no formal education, and grow up in vastly different circumstances (see also, Williams, 1972). These researchers argue further that variables that directly affect test performance, such as education and acculturation instead of race or ethnicity, should be considered as explanatory variables for test performance (Teng and Manly, 2005). One research team, for example, found that discrepancy in reading and education level was associated with worse psychological test performance, while racial/ethnic minority status was not (Ryan et al 2005)! That is, after reading and education levels are accounted for, there is no difference in IQ and other tests scores between blacks and whites (ibid).

Barnes (1972) noted that the Stanford-Binet, and the Wisc IQ tests are examples of “Culture specific tests”, and that the culture in this instance is what is frequently referred to as “white middle class.” Lyman (1970) designed a cross cultural test called the “American Cross Culture Ethnic Nomenclature Test”, or “ACCENT.” The instrument contained 20 black biased and 20 white biased items. In one experiment this test was administered to 110 undergraduates (91 whites and 19 blacks). It was found that the black participants out performed the white participants, with blacks obtaining a mean of 15.3 on the black items and 11.1 on the white items, while white subjects obtained a mean of 12.7 on the white items and 8.3 on the black items. The results indicate that when blacks and whites are tested cross-culturally, blacks may outperform whites.

There is also evidence showing that traditional psychological assessment is based on skills that are considered important within white, western, middle-class culture, but which may not be salient or valued within African-American culture (Helms, 1992; Helms, 1997; Hilliard, 1995). When test stimuli are more culturally pertinent to the experiences of African Americans, performance improves (Hayles, 1991; Williams and Rivers, 1972b). Research shows, for example, that “Black Culture” depicts problem solving as an integrative hemispheric endeavor rather than a linear, analytical process (Bell, 1994), and that in this culture "psychological closeness" is necessary for one’s involvement in the phenomena which he seeks to understand. It has also been shown that culturally diverse learners are often (CONT)

posted on Dec, 6 2008 @ 04:30 AM
excluded in educational programs through misidentification, misassessment, miscategorization, misplacement, and misinstruction-misintervention (Obiakor and Utley, 2004). Kwate (2001) provides evidence that IQ tests are antagonistic and incompatible with an African centered conception of intelligence and mental health.

There are undoubtedly very strong cultural biases built into IQ tests (Helms 1992, 1997; Richardson, 2002, 2000; Kwate, 2001). IQ tests were originally created to simply identify individuals who had already been deemed ‘intelligent’ by other more subjective criteria (Richarson, 2002; Richardson, 2000). These criteria often involved “norm-referencing”, as well as the personal opinions and biases of the test designers. In norm-referenced tests, items which do not discriminate between preselected groups are rejected or simply thrown out (Williams, 1972). In this respect, not only will one find examples of cultural bias built into IQ tests, but also, “observer bias.”

Psychometric theory states that differences in raw test scores (eg, IQ-scores) of different groups cannot be used to infer group differences in theoretical attributes (e.g. intelligence) unless the test scores accord with a particular set restrictions (Borsboom, 2006). Namely, the same attribute must relate to the same set of observations in the same way in each group (Borsboom, 2006; Mellenbergh, 1989). Weschler (1944) “himself” warned that his Weschler Bellevue test norms were to be used exclusively for the white population, stating: “Our norms cannot be used for the colored population of the United states. Though we have tested a large number of colored persons, our standardization is based upon white subjects only (pg. 107).” This not only renders most psychometric restrictions violated, but also calls into serious question the WISC’s usefulness, cross-culturally. In fact, virtually all IQ tests in common use today were designed for the purpose of evaluating people from only one cultural setting, and do not include materials that consider the culture, values or dialectal differences of those from communities outside of the reference group: which is usually what is referred to as “white middle class,” (see also, Richarson, 2002; Greenfield, 1997; Sternberg, 2004; Valsiner, 2000; Kwate, 2001; Helms, 1992; Helms, 1997), and thus group differences in test scores can in many instances be irrelevant.


Research has shown that IQ test scores tend to correlate negatively with scores of practical intelligence (Sternberg, 2001, 2004). Practical intelligence can be described as a person’s ability to apply learned skills and knowledge to everyday, real life tasks; or how to handle challenging situations. There is currently a lot of evidence demonstrating IQ tests to be unable to gauge a person’s overall potential or aptitude for learning (see Bradshaw, 2001; Siegel, 1989; Sternberg & Grigorenko, 2002a). What this means essentially is that a person who scores unusually high on an IQ test may not be a great learner (Sternberg, 2001). In fact, high scoring individuals may actually be demonstrating deficits in other areas; particularly in areas involving adaptive behavior or “practical intelligence” (See Sternberg, 2001).

It may also be argued based on the negative correlations observed between Practical Intelligence and IQ scores that those who score moderately or even very poorly on IQ tests may possess important strengths elsewhere. These strengths would relate more closely with adaptive kinds of behaviors and the application of learned skills and knowledge to real life tasks. These practical skills in addition to their full learning capabilities would place people of high Practical intelligence at a distinct advantage over high IQ individuals with respect to most important real life everyday tasks. This is because high IQ individuals demonstrate strengths in relationship to the acquisition and retention of knowledge, but are usually weak when it comes to putting this knowledge to use in real life practical ways; this is essentially the difference between knowing and doing. Co-incidentally, practical kinds of skills are of the kind that most Anthropologists and paleoanthropologists credit with helping to make the human species so evolutionarily formidable (Tattersall and Scwartz 2000; Kuhn and Stiner 1998).

Empirical research has shown Practical intelligence to be a better predictor of numerous real life outcomes. For example, Chawarski (2002), found that among scientists immigrating to Israel from the USSR those who were rated highest on levels of practical intelligence tended to adapt better than those who were not. Moreover, higher practical intelligence tended to predict overall success in research and development jobs; with correlations at times reaching as high as .60 (Chawarski, 2002). Correlations this high are rarely if ever obtained with IQ tests with respect to any criteria, be they academic or real life (Schonemann, 1997c; Bradshaw, 2001). Another study found that teachers of high practical intelligence were rated more effective by their school principals and were better able to handle problematic situations (Grigorenko et al, 2006). While Sternberg (2001) reported that among academics, measures of practical intelligence predict productivity, citation rates, and quality ratings of the institution at which one is teaching over and above those obtained from IQ tests (2001).

A study by Bilali? et al (2007) found when an elite subsample of 23 children was tested for IQ that their scores were not a significant factor in chess skill, and that, if anything, IQ tended to correlate negatively with chess skill. The study demonstrated the dangers of focusing on a single factor in complex real-world situations where a number of closely interconnected factors operate. It has been argued, for example, that IQ test scores are little more than examples of developed competencies (Sternberg, 2001); much like this particular chess study has shown of chess skill. .......

posted on Dec, 6 2008 @ 04:31 AM
Race and brainsize: Do Black have Larger Brains?

The majority of empirical studies on the matter of racial differences in brain size suggest that blacks from comparable environments will have larger brains than do others. Brain sizes vary considerably within any species, but this variation is not usually related to intelligence. Instead, it correlates loosely with body size: large people tend to have larger brains (Gould, 1981). As a result, women on average will have smaller brains than men (Peters, 1991). However, this does not indicate that the level of male intelligence is higher than female intelligence; Neanderthals had on average larger brains than anatomically modern humans (Tattersall, 1995; Gould, 1981) but most would agree that they were considerably less intelligent than Homo sapiens (Tattersal, 1995, 2004; Gould, 1981; Mithen 1998). In addition, female brains are structured in a way that would more than make up for any size differences.

Tobias (1970) compared 7 racial and national groups in a study on brain size, in which he reported that the brain size of American blacks was larger than any white group, (which included American, English and French whites) except those from the Swedish sub sample (who had the largest brains of any of the groups measured), and American blacks were also estimated to have some 200 million more neurons than American whites (See Tobias 1970; Weizmann et al. 1990). Gould (1981, 1996) discovered upon recalculating Morton’s skull data that the crania of blacks in his sample were on average larger than those of whites. Morton included in his sample of black skulls more females than he included in the white sample. For example, in his analysis of Hottentotts (black tribe from South Africa) all measured crania were of females; the Englishmen were all mature men. Also, Morton did some early measurements with seed instead of shot. When he discovered that this method gave inconsistent results, he re did the Caucasian values with shot, but not the blacks (See Gould, 1981, 1996). After correcting these errors it was shown that the black sample had larger crania (and presumably, larger brains) than did whites (ibid).

Interestingly, during the time periods in which the data for the above mentioned studies were collected anthropomorphic research has shown that blacks were on average physically smaller in stature than whites and received poorer nutrition (e.g. Alan, 2006). Indicating that in spite of relatively lower anthropomorphic measurements and poorer nutritional intake, blacks still demonstrated larger brain volume.

Empirical evidence shows that there is virtually no correlation between the intensity of different selective force gradients (e.g. latitude/temperature) and cranial morphology (Harvati and Weaver, 2006; Keita, 2004; Roseman and Weaver, 2004; Roseman, 2004; Gould, 1981, 1996; Brace, 2001). Indeed, positive geographic selective force correlations relating to craniometric variables are usually only (vaguely) observed when people from extreme cold (arctic) environments, such as Inuit types and Siberians, are included in analysis (Roseman, 2004; Harvati and Weaver, 2006). For example, Harvati and Weaver (2006) found a weak association between cranial centroid sizes and climatic variables, which approached, but did not reach, significance. This effect disappeared when an Inugsuk (a group from Greenland similar to Eskimos) sample was removed from the analysis (ibid). Roseman (2004) observed similar findings with a Siberian sample – once the Serbian sample was removed from the analysis, there was no indication that environmental temperature or latitude played ‘any’ role in cranial morphology. In sum, recent studies comparing craniometric and neutral genetic affinity matrices have concluded that, on average, human cranial variation fits a model of neutral expectation.

Keita (2004) in his principal components analysis on male crania from the northeast quadrant of Africa and selected European and other African series also found no consistent ‘size differences’ between regional groups, as all samples showed marked variation in size. There were however some distinguishing differences in relationship to cranial shape between European and African samples, particularly with respect to nasal aperture and changes in the maxilla (part of the upper jaw from which the teeth grow). The primary goal of this study was to assess the anatomical basis of patterns of craniofacial variation along an African–European continuum, with special interest on North Africa. There was Interest in whether there was a sharp boundary separating any of these groups from each other (see Keita, 2004). In terms of overall cranial size, tropical African groups were found in many instances to have larger crania than European groups. For example, on close inspection of the 2 dimensional PC scatter plots, designating cranial size/shape, the Zulu sample appeared to have the largest crania of any group in the analysis, followed by Norse (Norway) and then Teita (Kenya). African crania were also found to be broader (wider) than European crania on average. Surprisingly, one European sample, Berg (Hungarian), correlated more closely with African samples in this respect than with other European samples.

Tremendous overlap between all groups was observed in this study, for most variables (see Keita, 2004). Extensive research in human genetics on ‘presumably’ neutral loci has also shown that the overwhelming majority of human diversity is found among individuals within local populations. Previous studies of craniometric diversity are similar to these genetic apportionments, implying that interregionally differing selection pressures have played a limited role in producing contemporary human cranial diversity (Roseman and Weaver, 2004; Brace, 2001).

Other physical anthropological research has also shown that the crania of Sub-Saharan Africans are generally wider than European and North African samples, verbatim. For example sub-Saharan specimens show a generalized vertical facial flattening, with consequent widening of the entire structure (Bruner and Manzi, 2004). This pattern involves interorbital and orbital enlargement, widening and flattening of the nasal bones and aperture, maxillary development and upper rotation, and a general widening and lowering of the face. The face shortens vertically and this flattening leads to a relative lateral enlargement of the whole morphology.....

[edit on 6-12-2008 by Cairowoman]

posted on Dec, 6 2008 @ 04:37 AM
I have more if you would like it I am sorry but I cant provide the link so I must post. The point can find studies that say what ever the # you want. We all bleed red. Its called divide and conquer....sheep.

As for the violence. Think about all who are afraid of Black crime may want to START LISTENING TO RAP GET SOME BAGGY PANTS AND TURN ALL THAT DAMN GOLD YOU ARE HORDING IN YOUR UNDERGROUND COMPOUND IN TO A CHAIN AND make friends with your testosterone filled, smaller brained Black gang members BEFORE TSHF....they are better armed than those white militia dudes in the me.

[edit on 6-12-2008 by Cairowoman]

posted on Dec, 6 2008 @ 04:40 AM

posted on Dec, 6 2008 @ 04:53 AM

Originally posted by DroolsAlot
Look, im not racist at all.

Clearly. Racists can punctuate contractions, capitalize and not drool.

Look, I'm not saying you're an uneducated, drooling, hillbilly that drinks his own urine and masturbates while thinking of his sister.

I'm saying people notice lots of things about people as they drive down the street (or read online).

For example... I just did!

Did you notice?

See how this works?

posted on Dec, 6 2008 @ 06:49 AM
The reason it looks like blacks commit more crime then whites is because of the way its covered. A white man runs a loan shark business, a black man shoots some one, guess which one makes the news? A white man hacks a computer, steals information, while a black man robs a store, who makes the news? A white man beats his wife, nothing. A black man hits his wife, its on the next episode of cops. Also, who gets the better lawyer? Unless you're OJ, you're stuck with a state appointed guy who hates his life and wants to get the case over with, no matter if you're innocent or not.

posted on Dec, 6 2008 @ 08:53 AM
I think blacks are lacking life purpose ; moreover the black race was originally brought from syrius by ETs ,they were made from scratch to be slaves; on the other hand whites were made locally here on Earth from the mix of primates and ETs royal genes so they dont have much of the slave attitude according to alex colier

posted on Dec, 6 2008 @ 09:08 AM
reply to post by rizla

Jews have been forced to live in ghettos. By and large they avoided all of this type of behavior. Other races have avoided the crime trap too. I have always wondered, what did the blacks see, in their own people, to put their own people into slavery for thousands of years, even unto today? What is it that would make blacks think that other blacks should be sold as slaves? Can you see a remnant of this today? Is crime that remnant?

posted on Dec, 6 2008 @ 01:08 PM
Crime is caused by an internal choice to solve problems by breaking the law.

Every criminal in jail or prison has a sibling, that sibling is responsible, productive law abiding citizen, black or white.

Choice is the key to crime and the answer as to why it happens.

Poverty, role model, a individual always chooses their role models, and other externally located controls are not the cause of crime.

Cause versus contribution, lots of external factors can be listed in an effort to place blame somewhere other than the particular individual choosing to commit the crime, but in the final analysis, and evidenced by world wide society rules and norms, the individual chooses to break the law.

posted on Dec, 6 2008 @ 01:45 PM
reply to post by k3456789

Lacking life purpose? We have seeded the 'whole' planet with philosophy and discoveries. As for theories that can explain things...Blacks did not come from sirius. It is said that all life from the universe come from sirius, I disagree with that also. Humans of color were made from earth and the earths clay. What you may find disturbing, a white man never evolved on earth. If a species develops under the sun, and by the sun, how can it be harmed by it. That is like an earthly plant being harmed by its sun, it doesnt happen. Which leads me to my conclusion, the original man was of a brown shade. Whites and Blacks are variations of the original brown man.
"created to be slaves"! This is absurd. If you look around the world Humans of color (blacks if your simple minded)have been perserving something that doesnt even fit into science. Something more grand than someones 5000 year old history. We have sciences dating back to when the earth was inhabitibal. Can you imagine that.
If you research you will see African-Americans and other people of color, possess an advanced ability to process vibrations(sounds). Whites "in your words" arent slaves, but they trust their whole life into the imperfect products of man.You will trust a machine rather than your mind. The technology people of color use is "UNIVERSE-SOUL". One may think they are superior because, "we have traveled to the moon, in search of". Other do not believe in superiority, but they have "unlocked" the memories of the planets and dna, using musical instruments(vibrations). Very highly advanced, show me where your "royalty" begins, please. Whites mastered slavery. Giving birth to a concept or an idea like that, is self enslaving.
Sorry for typos dont mean to offend.

top topics

<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in