Scientists claim black people less intelligent than whites in Channel 4 show, page 8

privacy

Pages: << 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 18 times

reply posted on 26-10-2009 @ 09:35 PM by DChenO

aborigines in huts?

regardless those tests are context based.

one example is a question given to a little southwestern latino kid on an IQ test. how many people live in a 2 bed room house? he says 13 and fails the question.

i've taught kids of all colors, races and from every continent except australia...
and evenly across the board some are hecka brilliant and some aren't.
while the 'past tense' minorities by and large mostly have really hard economic and social environments and that has wiped out the middle achievers. though they are still sharp they are just street wise not work for the man wise...

reply posted on 27-10-2009 @ 05:08 AM by pieman

i watched the program yesterday evening, it turned out to be fairly interesting.

the skewed test results exist and studies have shown that black people get lower scores on average and east asians get higher scores on average. the race element comes in when conclusions are drawn from the studies, it's all about how you look at the data.

one group says that it's clealy a genetic predisposition to IQ based on your race and some people said it shows that the tests are culturally biased.

there was a better explanation offered though, which i thought sounded intuitively right. the IQ tests measure your ability to think in a catagorised way rather than a linear way, the example the presenter gave was, when asked the question "what is the relationship between a dog and a rabbit?" linear thinkers say "the dog chases the rabbit" and categorisers will say "they're both mammals".

apparently, everyones ability to do this is improving as we are exposed to the modern world, where categorisation is needed, and so our average IQ scores are going up every year.

black IQ's are increasing, in this manner, faster than whites, which just suggests that the thing being measured in the IQ tests, categorisation, is becoming more universally required.

IQ never measured intelligence, it measured the ability to think in a categorised manner.

exposure to education and the drive towards eduction explain the rest of the gap.
the number of asians with a high level of classical education relevant to the number of aboriginal austrailians with a high level of classical education is fairly proportionate to their average scores on a test designed to measure your level of classical education.
wow, what a shock.

[edit on 27/10/09 by pieman]

reply posted on 27-10-2009 @ 05:18 AM by serenecalamityz

And in the same week we have the leader from the BNP on the BBC Question Time. A couple of days later Sky News announces 22% of people polled would now consider voting for the BNP. Follow that up with Black people are less intelligent than white, wow the media are going all out this week!
How to cause unrest and tension in three easy shows.
IQ tests are great for christmas jinx, but to seriously believe someone is smarter than you because they now which shape follows the next sequence, is a joke!

Lastly how many dumb smug racists do you think saw the title of the show, and decided no need to watch thats all the confirmation I need.

[edit on 27-10-2009 by serenecalamityz]

[edit on 27-10-2009 by serenecalamityz]

reply posted on 27-10-2009 @ 05:23 AM by unicorn1

Well lets not focus on the whites here.
I used to work in Uganda. Most of the businesses were owned by Asians and there were more Asian managers. You could clearly see a difference between the mindset of Ugandan Asians and Ugandan blacks. Whether this was just down to a different way of thinking or innate intelligence I don't know. One thing immediately obvious was that the Asians were more ambitious and more organised. Whereas the black Ugandans tended to live in the moment, for that day. Whatever - in everyday function, it gave the Asians the advantage.
Plus my friends ran a safari business there and they used to actually distinguish between the different black cultures and bring in staff from certain other countries.
Just calling it like it was.

[edit on 27-10-2009 by unicorn1]

[edit on 27-10-2009 by unicorn1]

[edit on 27-10-2009 by unicorn1]

reply posted on 8-4-2010 @ 09:46 AM by misteRee

Originally posted by Unlimitedpossibilities
reply to post by ItIsWhatItIs

So you think 'intelligence directly depends on race and it is because of the genetic makeup of certain peoples?

There's a multitude of other factors, such as: living conditions, wealth gap, poor education due to being poor, etc, that contribute to such disparities.

Then you have low income which usually leads to poor housing/environment which usually leads to poor education which usually leads to eating mal-nutritious foods. It goes on and on. From what I just said, in tandem with low occurrences of large social mobility, we have what we have today - a large discrepancy in "IQ test" scores.

You, my friend, should definitely research into what I have stated above. Based on the premise that we, the human species, are all homosapiens, one CANNOT conclude what you stated based on "race" alone.

Further, there is a big difference in being "intelligent" and being "educated". Although we as humans try to judge each other based off of "IQ tests", in class exams, etc, it seems we do not have a full understanding of what it means to be intelligent. I.e. Where do we draw the line between intelligent and unintelligent.

[edit on 16-10-2009 by Unlimitedpossibilities]

Something is really bugging me though...History?

Why is it that white men colonised most of the world and managed to use their resources and progressed.... while blacks and other races were still throwing spears at things? And its not a case of living conditions; for example, Africa has more potential than say the UK for resources.

I AM NOT A RACIST. I just want to know why theres been very few inventions from the black man (i.e. onces which have been pivotal points for progression, technology and discovery)? Please someone help me. Peace out. Any theories greatly appreciated.

reply posted on 8-4-2010 @ 09:55 AM by misteRee

reply to post by atlscribe

Again, your statement is aside from the point. Everyone has the capacity to learn, at least to some degree. And depending on your enviroment, friends, wealth, ambition will ultimately decide your intelligence (to a point)

But i am asking is there some genetic descrepency that gives a white man OR a black man the capacity to think better and harder than the other.

I'm not a racist, but i don't understand why say a resourceful country like africa didn't develop like britain or america did, and so many life changing discoveries/technologies are made by white men. Again, i'm not saying black men havn't invented anything. I'm just saying go out there and take a look around.

It seems the proof is in the pudding.

reply posted on 8-4-2010 @ 10:22 AM by Fromabove

When I was younger, about 20 years ago, I heard a theory of why IQ may lack in some, and it wasn't race but the shape of the skull cavity that revealed this. I'll break it down as I heard it.

1. A cavity that allows for a pronounced forehead and high crest (top) with a somewhat smaller back shows increased mental awareness, intellect, and deeper thought.

2. A cavity that shows a smaller forehead and crest (top) and smaller back, relating to equal proportions shows a lower IQ, less intellect, and more shallow thought patterns. Such a person becomes easily confused and exhibits a more aggressive attitude. The person tends to follow commands at times without question believing things that are told without thinking it through.

3. A cavity where there is a sloping forehead and high crest (top) and pronounced back show athletic ability and a heightened sense of awareness and agility. The senses are keener sharper than the above two cases. The person will exhibit a low to average IQ, but will not be limited as in the description above in number 2. This person tends to stay to the physical ability attributes and this often compensates for the lack of intellect. Learning is slightly more difficult but not impossible.

For some time I did some observation as to if this had some validity, and this is what I noticed. Athletic achievers tend to be the third case. Criminals tend to be the second case. Scientists tend to be the first case. This goes across the racial spectrum and does not presuppose a racial bias.

Type 1 people:
Albert Einstien
Stephen Hawkins
Jeffry Dalmer
Bill gates
Jim Jones
Barak Obama
Bill Clinton
Sarah Palin
Hillary Clinton
Nancy Pelosi
Bill Cosby
Michelle Obama
Barbara Bush
Vladamir Putin
Tony Blair

Note: You will notice here that there are some murderers and serial killers included. They use their high IQ for the hunt and to gain the ultimate satisfaction of completing the planned outcome. Yet in all cases, these people plan, plot, and execute their plan.

Type 2
Criminals, druggies, Often work low wage jobs doing what they're told. get into fights a lot.

Type 3
Super athletes requiring great agility and stamina where the sport is rigorous and less IQ is needed. Type 1 can be athletes using IQ, such as the Olympics. Cycling, Hockey, Baseball etc.

Race is not a factor in IQ, the shape of your brain cavity is.

[edit on 8-4-2010 by Fromabove]

reply posted on 8-4-2010 @ 10:57 AM by Faiol

Originally posted by ItIsWhatItIs
reply to post by kiwifoot

I don't see the problem. If it's a scientifically proven fact that blacks are genetically less intelligent, then I think it's time for people to accept that.

But I think they need to include the fact that blacks are physically superior genetically. Or whatever other possible strengths they have. So they might not be too smart but what white man can go toe-to-toe with Michael Jordan.

[edit on 15-10-2009 by ItIsWhatItIs]

here, black people have the right to enter in colleges for free, simply because they are black

its just disgusting ... if they were giving opportunities to poor people is one thing, but to some people because their race, thats is racism

reply posted on 8-4-2010 @ 11:30 AM by Wildbob77

This is a ticklish subject to say the least.

Here in the US African Americans continue to underachieve in school. (That does not mean that all African Americans underachieve but that a significant number do)

The public schools systems are always trying the latest fad teaching method to bring the test scores of African Americans up to the level of the "White" students.

The only successful programs have been ones that cherry picked students. When they try to ramp up the programs, they don't work.

So the questions remains why do underachievers continue to underachieve? Does it have something to do with basic intelligence? Does it have something to do with coming from an economically disadvantaged family? Does it have something to do with coming from a single parent home? Does it have to do with nutrition?

Underachievers come in all races. But, why are some races over represented in the underachiever category?

I do think that this is a valid area for research. I don't think that the answers are all in yet. Perhaps, based on real research, we can figure out what it would take to help people who fall into the underachiever category.

reply posted on 8-4-2010 @ 12:00 PM by cenpuppie

reply to post by misteRee

Something is really bugging me though...History?

Why is it that white men colonised most of the world and managed to use their resources and progressed.... while blacks and other races were still throwing spears at things? And its not a case of living conditions; for example, Africa has more potential than say the UK for resources.

I AM NOT A RACIST. I just want to know why theres been very few inventions from the black man (i.e. onces which have been pivotal points for progression, technology and discovery)? Please someone help me. Peace out. Any theories greatly appreciated.

Sadly holds his head in his hands. It's called a book and Google, use them. You'll find out that technological advancements run across the whole spectrum..IE everyone contributed to get us where we are, technologically wise that is...you pick it it's been done, science, astronomy, math, even agriculture.

What kills me is that there are some white people (i hope it's a small majority) that actually believe that they did everything on their own while everyone was...as you put it..throwing spears...

So..i will haphazard a guess and say that you don't know where the very FIRST university was located huh?

reply posted on 8-4-2010 @ 12:13 PM by Grumble

No time to read the whole thread, but I just want to say this: we are different, not better or worse, just different.

To deny the differences is to accept delusion over truth. Clearly, subgroups within the human race have evolved different physiques, and clearly they have evolved different mental abilities.

But, ask the cat to take a dog IQ test, and he will fail. Ask the dog to take a cat IQ test and he will fail. Both species are what they are, and they are perfectly suited to be that. Just different.

reply posted on 8-4-2010 @ 03:19 PM by misteRee

Originally posted by Fromabove
When I was younger, about 20 years ago, I heard a theory of why IQ may lack in some, and it wasn't race but the shape of the skull cavity that revealed this. I'll break it down as I heard it.

1. A cavity that allows for a pronounced forehead and high crest (top) with a somewhat smaller back shows increased mental awareness, intellect, and deeper thought.

2. A cavity that shows a smaller forehead and crest (top) and smaller back, relating to equal proportions shows a lower IQ, less intellect, and more shallow thought patterns. Such a person becomes easily confused and exhibits a more aggressive attitude. The person tends to follow commands at times without question believing things that are told without thinking it through.

3. A cavity where there is a sloping forehead and high crest (top) and pronounced back show athletic ability and a heightened sense of awareness and agility. The senses are keener sharper than the above two cases. The person will exhibit a low to average IQ, but will not be limited as in the description above in number 2. This person tends to stay to the physical ability attributes and this often compensates for the lack of intellect. Learning is slightly more difficult but not impossible.

.....Race is not a factor in IQ, the shape of your brain cavity is.

[edit on 8-4-2010 by Fromabove]

I cannot see any logic in these findings. There is no methodology for you to simply conclude these 3 category types based on a "skull cavity" size.

Ok, Take an inventor, "shows increased mental awareness, intellect, and deeper thought" :-

a) Your theory suggests that you cannot be an inventor but a great sports person at the same time.

b)It suggests that in his or her life time, he/she would never use his intellgience for a crime like you suggested in category 2 because his cavity size caused him/her to use his brain to invent like Einstein and not be easily confused and agressive. So someone can not work in the scientific realm but using it to commit crimes, gain money and wealth?

c)Your super athlete theory does not fit- its a matter of training and dedication. Granted, your genetic makeup might give you a boost building mass, or running. Better body structure, etc.

You claim it has to do with the Skull Cavity...., well isn't this a genetic difference? I.e. a difference that would be apparent between a black man and a white man?

I can't see any logic in what you have said, it's a lot more complicated than just 3 categories.

Prove me wrong though, add some more research facts, figures, variables, examples....science basically and i will consider this theory more seriously.

...Further provoking my question again: do white people have the capacity for more intelligence than black people? I.e. why didn't they colonise other countries, travel the world, have great philosophers, invent electricity, enslave white people?

reply posted on 8-4-2010 @ 03:34 PM by misteRee

reply to post by cenpuppie

Apologies, i did come across rather harsh and i didn't mean to make such a broad stereotype.

I do read books and Google is my friend but i am thinking on my own, trying to think outside of the box and activily encouraging debate. I'll admit when i'm wrong and happily encourage people to put me right on some mis-understandings that i have.

I will put it in a different way: why isn't Africa a thriving technological civilisation such as england, france, spain in medievil times? I'm not just being narrow minded and thinking africa but worldwide, i.e. the aboriginals of Australia.

I know inventions come from all around the world and different races have contributed but i just pose the question, have i been mis-informed in my youth....in my education...

I mean most of the pivotal inventions that changed man kind have come from a man with white skin. world changing, mankind improving discoveries such as Electricity, the steam train, the motor car, the jet engine, transistor. Famous travellers and philosophers such as Christopher Columbus and Sigmund Froid, Einstein, Tesla.

I'm interested in science and i read a lot of thesis and articles, and discuss with friends regularly When i think of astromoners, physisists, great scientists, when i look for inspiration, why do i never see a black man?

...Again, i am not racist; i have many black friends.

reply posted on 8-4-2010 @ 05:35 PM by OhZone

How about we reverse the question?
Instead of why didn't Africa .......?

Make it, Why did white europeans become inventors, philosophers and explorers?
Why didn't they just keep on with the hunting and gathering lifestyle?

reply posted on 9-4-2010 @ 10:18 AM by misteRee

Originally posted by OhZone
How about we reverse the question?
Instead of why didn't Africa .......?

Make it, Why did white europeans become inventors, philosophers and explorers?
Why didn't they just keep on with the hunting and gathering lifestyle?

Either way, I would still be asking the same question; why?

[edit on 9//4/1010 by misteRee]

reply posted on 9-4-2010 @ 10:43 AM by cenpuppie

reply to post by misteRee

I will put it in a different way: why isn't Africa a thriving technological civilisation such as england, france, spain in medievil times? I'm not just being narrow minded and thinking africa but worldwide, i.e. the aboriginals of Australia.

Whew, good! I can understand your question now honestly, heh

. Now for your question, some parts of Africa wasn't concerned with trappings of civilization. The Europeans weren't living longer than anyone else.

Africa did have a thriving civilization prior to the muslim invasion and failed colonialism..you have to dug it up (not being sarcastic, but really info like that you gotta do some hunting). The muslims where impressed by their lower Saharan brothers and sisters. Unlike NOW and in Europe..women were not treated as objects or eye candy...rights of Ascension where claimed through the women. If you wanted to be a big wig, your momma or wife better have some kind of noble heritage...not to mention the fact that if a slave master mistreated their slave..the slave had a right to whip that ass...

You have to understand that the Christians and Muslims actually had a conference on which way which would go (i forget the name, it's been awhile since i read material on it). The Christians went west..and the muslims went South...that is why the world is divided religiously the way it is.

You should look up the contributions of Henry McCoy, he invented portable refrigeration, that's just one! When you look back, while Europe was stuck in the dark ages (middle ages) other societies were not only thriving but making major impacts on various disciplines.

The muslims in the Ottoman empire gave us the scientific method for example. I myself found it "coincidental" that Europe went into the so called "Renaissance" after they kicked the Moors out of Spain (they were there for about 500 yrs) and finally got access to their library (not 100% on the name). Kind of like when Greece finally got ahold of Egypt..then all of a sudden we get these so called mathematical "advancements" credited to Greeks or when the Europeans ran across the Mayans...then all of a sudden they have the "correct" calender. Hell, the Indians gave us actual numbers...the romans where using their own roman numerials..don't ask what the Greeks were using cuz i dunno.

We all piggybacked off of someone else...and to me at least, making the claim of the inferiority or superiority of one group is fallacious. If you want the name of a invention that drastically changed the way of life for us humans that an actual African came up with...their is always something called agriculture...i believe that counts!

I hope that helps enough for you to do some digging. You know alot of people (not just a single group fyi) think that the Europeans propped humanity on it's shoulders while everyone was wearing animal skins and throwing pointy sticks at each other, your not the only one. You'd be surprised at how much history has been "bleached" to make it fit common misconceptions, and those black folks on this forum that know know this...it's one of those "things" we talk about.

reply posted on 9-4-2010 @ 11:06 AM by misteRee

reply to post by cenpuppie

Interesting theory, i think it is impossible to research this in order to reach a definitive conclusion. Most is lost in history.

And i agree with you, a lot of history has been changed, covered up, lied about, concealed so i don't think anyone really understands our origins and why things are the way they are.

i don't think my question can be answered as there seems to be too many factors such as immigration, mixed races, situations such as resources in countries, and weather changing body development or food sources etc.

reply posted on 9-4-2010 @ 11:23 AM by cenpuppie

reply to post by misteRee

i don't think my question can be answered as there seems to be too many factors such as immigration, mixed races, situations such as resources in countries, and weather changing body development or food sources etc.

Exactly, that's pretty much where i was going. Back in the day..they didn't have skin color issues..it was strictly based on nationality..there were alot..alot of black greeks. Arguing over who contributed what is moot, this racial problem was recently purposely constructed...so while we arguing amongst each other...those in the background rob us blind!

reply posted on 9-4-2010 @ 11:38 AM by John_Rodger_Cornman

Originally posted by kiwifoot
Wow, I thought we were beyond this.

Scientist s claim black people less intelligent than whites in Channel 4 show

Campaigners have criticised Channel 4 over plans to screen a controversial documentary in which scientists claim ethnic minorities are less intelligent than their white counterparts.

I just cannot believe that the Channel that was responsible for the Big Brother racism scandal, could think it a good idea to air this show.

In the documentary Psychology professor Richard Lynn from the University of Ulster will say there is a global "league table", using evidence from IQ tests, to claim that intelligence is linked to race, with north-east Asians in the top tier and Australian aborigines at the bottom. He says on the programme that African IQs “don’t rise up to the same level as Europeans”.

British born psychology professor J Philippe Rushton is also interviewed on the programme.

He claims the differences between black and white and East Asian brains is due to general intelligence.

He believes that while women have smaller brain sizes as men, they are just as intelligent as men, but that black people have smaller brain sizes than white people but are not as intelligent as white people.

Can you believe they are showing this to mark Black History Month.

flame baiting? lol

Why do racist trolls bring pseudoscience in here to get people to argue with them? Attention whoring?

Well I am black and my IQ is high I guess his opinion/pseudo-science is unfounded.

reply posted on 9-4-2010 @ 11:43 AM by expat2368