Done. (For now). Here was my conclusion with regards to the evidence: In sum, after looking at 19 lines of evidence, I conclude that the hereditarian hypothesis (+14) is more supported than the environmental hypothesis (-10). Overall, the data is equivocal.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to

  1. statsquatch says:

    -4 for Eyfurth? Maybe if there were 4 replications. You are being quite generous.

    Regardless of where you would rate the current evidence, what evidence would you need to get you to 100 vs. -10? Can the question everybe settled without a thorough understanding, almost a catalogue of, intelligence genes?

  2. Chuck says:

    What evidence would I need to get to 100?

    Intraracial intelligence comparisons using modern genotyping techniques as outlined by Reed, 1997; Rowe, 2005; Hunt and Carlson, 2007; and Lee, 2010. Basically, a modern replication of the Scarr et al. study. For all intents and purposes, that would resolve the issue with regards to ancestral differences. Of course, differences could have arose otherwise — such as by differential breeding rates and selection — but the above studies would effectively resolve the West African-European version of the H^2 hypothesis.

    I assumed this was obvious.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s