First, welcome to WUFYS - always nice to see new readers contribute - especially, with topics as interesting and controversial as this one.

I haven't thought about this subject much, but from reading your post and the articles you referenced I was able to form a very rudimentary position on this issue, which will probably evolve if the opportunity arises to think about it more.

But first a couple of important points/questions:

1. A racialist is far different from a racist.The former sees inherent differences, but respects other races. The latter does not.  I am convinced that DD is a racialist.  It's too bad that they used the same root word to describe both.
2. I wonder if the good Dr. Watson objects to NIH "patenting" the genome for reasons similar to my own.  If so, that would make him a very smart man indeed - culturally, that is.

Now, for an excerpt from the article which I thought was notable:

If such differences in intelligence were purported to have a genetic basis, as David Duke proclaimed on his Web site with such naked glee, all of the social intervention in the world could have only so much effect. (Head Start? Why bother, when nature is to blame.)

This statement or the conclusion it draws from its premise either assumes that every difference in intelligence has a genetic basis or that a difference in one area of intelligence means that the same difference in every area of intelligence exists.

That is, say a white man is better at quantum physics than a black man - then this line of thinking might assume that the white man is more intelligent than the black man in other complex areas of knowledge as well. This is patently false.

When taken a step further, if you agree - which I do - that different ways of looking at a field or area of knowledge sometimes yields astonishing breakthroughs, then you can further conclude that introducing someone who is highly intelligent in the social sciences to the nuts and bolts of quantum physics or vice versa you may get extraordinary results.

Therefore, the conclusion that “no amount of social intervention in the world can alter a racial group’s ability to excel in certain areas of intelligence” falls.

In that respect, both Watson and Azixx make valid points – yes there probably are intellectual differences between races based on genetic differences but there are also intellectual differences between races based on cultural differences. Further, the genetic and cultural variables that exist for any given person are so numerous and intermingle at so many levels so as to preclude any precise measurement or attribution of specific intellectual successes to either one or the other basis.

Finally, the author of the article also concluded:

Sooner or later, in a time of increasing economic scarcity, members of these supposedly "different" or "lesser" ethnic groups or genetic populations could very well find their life possibilities limited and perhaps even regulated.

First of all, there is no such thing as naturally occurring economic scarcity – it’s manufactured. 

Second, a stratified economy already exists and it’s not simply because “the people on top” think that they are genetically wired differently from the people below. It’s because ‘the people on top’ assume credit for their own talents, for their own successes, indeed for their own GENES. In other words, THEY WORSHIP THEMSELVES.

They are short sighted, selfish and extremely arrogant. And because they cannot imagine that their talents, their successes, indeed their genes are gifts from an Almighty God who bestows on others different talents, different successes, and different gifts the value of which they are too ignorant to appreciate, instead of treating other human beings as equals, as a Just and Benevolent God commanded us to do, they treat them as lesser creations, taking advantage of them at every turn, indeed MANUFACTURING the circumstances that keep them at a perpetual disadvantage from themselves, generation after generation.

To witness this mentality in action, you need look no further than the ghettos of Gaza or the massive destruction in Lebanon in 2006 or the inner city slums of almost every state of our nation. Zionists are the quintessential racial supremacists – so convinced not only of their own superiority, but that they alone deserve the credit for it, that they persist in creating the conditions (political, economic, and cultural) that keep others down. They act like gods – constantly engaging in social, political, cultural, and economic engineering to advance their own interests. And when all else fails to keep others down they employ BRUTE FORCE resulting in murderous physical annihilation.

So genetics is simply the last frontier for these supremacists who believe that there is no Just God that created ALL men and women equally. They will struggle to control it just as they have largely succeeded in controlling every other body of knowledge – to advance their own interests and maintain their own political, intellectual, and economic status above the rest of humanity.

What they have failed to consider is that by doing so they have secured for themselves the lowest position in the deepest depths of hell for the rest of eternity.

___________________________

"Money" has no value - people do.

Who cares? Does that make it okay for Jews to stomp on everyone else? This is the problem one runs into with neo-Nazis. They think that because whites have generally higher IQs than Blacks that it's somehow okay to destroy Black civilization and enslave them. How is this any different from the Jewish attitude? It's all bad. Those with higher intelligence should put it to good use and instead of tearing other peoples down, help build them up. China is doing a wonderful job in Africa right now. They have put the white man to shame as far as fair treatment of Africans in their own continent. Maybe the Chinese are a better people and they do, in fact, have higher IQs than white people (generally). Maybe whites need to be ruled for a change.

Let's just say Jews do have a higher IQ

Why? I've encountered many Jewish people with very high IQs, but I've met more than my fair share of Jewish dumbasses. I've also come across plenty of white people who are patently dumber than average and more than a few black people who are brighter than average.  Ditto with Chinese and Indians, they have their geniuses and dullards in proportions more or less equal to the rest of us.  For example, even though India is busy telling the world how much better at IT their people are, I have no shortage of experiences of dealing with clueless technical support agents based in Bombay - every bit as clueless as the tech support people were in the countries from which the jobs were outsourced.

Please don't give this Jewish supremacist fantasy of 'superior intelligence' any more consideration than it is worth - which is none whatsoever.

The traditional measurement for intelligence is IQ (Intelligence Quotient) testing.

This usually consists of 3 kinds of ability test.

1. Language
2. Mathematical
3. Visio-spatial (innate)

Generally 3. can be used to test nearly all cultures and all stages of educational development. It is therefore a universal test as it simply requires you to find the "odd man out" and the likes from pictures. So that you only need to understand basic words in the question and process of finding the "odd man out" picture and recording your answer.

1. and 2. depend on education and sometimes culture (language). Females tend to score higher in 1. and males tend to score higher in 2.

There are other techniques which can be used. But these are the main techniques and are successful and comparable throughout Europe, America, Asia (eg Japan/China and Australasia).

The test are completed on a "time" basis the more questions you answer correctly in the given time the higher your IQ score.
If you complete all the questions correctly on any IQ test paper within side the given time then the result is your minimum IQ and you will need to complete further more arduous time frame (more questions in the same time frame or a shorter time frame or more difficult questions) testing.

The high IQ society MENSA has a membership whose IQ has been measured to be in the top 2% of population average.

An IQ of 100 is considered (historically since the 1960's) the population average.

Persons with higher than 100 IQ score are considered to be more intelligent that average and those with IQ less than 100 are considered to have a lower IQ that average.

IQ has a genetic, educational/social ("developed") origin.

Whilst most humans have a similar genetic basis - it is likely there is some basis for genetic link to intelligence.

From studies with ambidexterity and Artificial Intelligence (AI) there is a consistent finding that IQ is developed as a result of "Least-Bias" behavior (a theory consistent with the development a maximized entropy AI reasoning systems).

Essentially, high IQ is markedly seen amongst Japanese, who use both hands to write with (often simultaneously).

Also, in cultures where the language is written from left to right (eg english), where the population norm are right handed. Then left-handed people, who are living in a right-handed world develop more ambidexterity than right-handers. In such culture left-handers tend to have a higher IQ than right handers, the highest IQ's seen with those who are more ambidextrous with regards their strength of left or right handedness.

The reverse begin true for cultures where the language is written from right to left eg jews. In Israel (or those taught written Hebrew first) left handedness would tend (it may take some generations)
to be the norm and right handers the odd ones with the higher IQ.

Of course, jews living in the foreign cultures writing both left to right and right to left will tend to be more ambidextrous and that therefore tends to improve their IQ.

In particular, the Nazis did a study on jews which seemed to show that those of Ashkenazi origin had low "genetic" IQ. And those of sephardic origin had high "developed" IQ. This study would square the apparent conflict gentiles find when dealing with jews. Some experience high intelligence, others very low intelligence.

The term "developed" IQ, does not mean, something that can be learned from books. Instead it means something that comes along with reading, writing, mathematic and other skills (Intellect development).

It is my opinion (I am an expert on AI and IQ), that most people start with roughly the same ability to develop intelligence and that, as they develop, they develop the particular skills they need to survive and be happy.

In some case the intelligence is put into abstract thinking (such as innate IQ), in other cases it is put into maths and language skills (& IQ). In others, it may be abilities to lie or deceive or to invent stories (such as those required to survive child abuse). In others, a highly developed state of near paranoia keeps a person alive into adult hood. Others develop excessive conformity or productivity (those seeking approval) skills. Others may develop sports or hunting or manual skills.

Whilst most of these skills are all part of "intelligence" few are used in the formal IQ tests we know as IQ testing. Although generally, a person who has a very high IQ will also probably have well developed intelligence skills in all these areas. And so we get the very high IQ all rounder that many corporations attempt to locate as management trainees.

very interesting ... thanks, for the info!

btw, welcome to WUFYS!

___________________________

"Money" has no value - people do.