Is (global) “race realism” still tenable?

I’ll note that I put up one the the strongest defenses of a genetic hypothesis, period. I went beyond even academics such as Rushton and Lynn and cleverly re-analyzed decades old studies using contemporary genetic findings. See, for example, my updated versions of “Witty and Jenkins (1936)” and “Scarr et al. (1977).” Moreover, I added new data to that decades old; see for example Blacks, IQ, and Color in the NLSY97 and “It Could be Culture, part I (The NAEP Black-Mixed-White gap).” Few places on the web will you find a more extensive defense of “race”, debunking of race debunking, defense of the genetic racial hypothesis, defense of within population hereditatianism, and so on. As I spend an undue amount of time on this issue, I write the following with deep disatisfaction…

Before attempting to explain the following, consider:

(1) The correlation between GCSE and g is substantial. To quote from Deary et al. 2006:

“This 5-year prospective longitudinal study of 70,000+ English children examined the association between psychometric intelligence at age 11 years and educational achievement in national examinations in 25 academic subjects at age 16. The correlation between a latent intelligence trait (Spearman’s g from CAT2E) and a latent trait of educational achievement (GCSE scores) was 0.81. General intelligence contributed to success on all 25 subjects. Variance accounted for ranged from 58.6% in Mathematics and 48% in English to 18.1% in Art and Design.” (Intelligence and educational achievement.)

Here was the 2004 relation between Cognitive ability tests and GCSE performance:


(source: http://www.gl-assessment.co.uk/education/resources/cat3/cat3.asp)

(Yes, I’m aware of the data reported by Lynn (2008). I discussed it here “The General Mental Ability (GMA) of Black British.” I most likely know more about this issue than you so don’t assume otherwise.)

(2a) African Immigrants to the UK are only so immigrant selected. Here’s a pick from “Is the brain drain good for Africa?”:

Generally, it is rather unlikely that Black African migrants represent more than the upper third of the African phenotypic g distribution (i.e., that they are more that 1.1 SD selected for g — or, to put it otherwise, that they fall, on average, above the 86th percentile.

A more reasonable scenario, to my mind, is that they represent no more than the 70th percentile of the g distribution or are no more than 0.55 SD above the phenotypic mean.

(2b) For a trait like g, with a typical narrow heritability of 0.6, children will regress 40% towards their parental population’s mean.

(2c) To put (2b) another way, parents need to be 1.7 standard deviation units selected per every 1 standard deviation units that their children are selected.

(2d) To put (2c) and (2a) in context, if we are dealing with large sample sizes, we can roughly estimate the genetic difference between European Whites and African/other Blacks as the difference between European Whites and 2nd+ generation Blacks in Europe minus 0.6 times our estimate of immigrant selectivity.

(3) The sample sizes are large. As of 2009/2010, Blacks represent 5% of the UK Age 16 school population. In comparison, Chinese, who do exceedingly well, only represent .4%. You can compare the Black sample size here (>24,000) to the summed sample size for IQ tests over a 40 year period reported by Lynn (2008) (>16,000).

(4) Academic Hereditarians agree that immigrant performance is a tests of the hereditarian hypothesis. To quote Lynn (2010):

The evolutionary theory does however predict that when different races occupy approximately similar environments, such as for instance in the United States, Britain and the Netherlands, the intelligence differences will remain. This prediction has been examined in twenty three societies worldwide in Lynn (2008) and has been confirmed in every case. If a multiracial society is found where these race differences in intelligence are absent, the evolutionary and genetic theory of these differences would be falsified. Those who maintain that there are no genetic differences in intelligence between the races are urged to attempt this task. (Consistency of race differences in intelligence over millennia: A comment on Wicherts, Borsboom and Dolan)

To quote Greg Cochran (2011):

As some of you already know, Henry and I have put forth the hypothesis that the observed high intellectual achievement of Ashkenazi Jews is a result of natural selection for intelligence over the Middle Ages. We think there’s a pretty good case. One important supporting fact is that high Ashkenazi intelligence shows up everywhere they live. You see it in Russia, the US, Latin America, Israel, etc. It doesn’t spring from a single cultural milieu: you saw it in Jewish kids raised in turn-of-the-century Vienna, in Israeli kibbutzes, in Bronx tenements, and in Stalinist Russia. It’s not a consequence of Talmudic study – you see the same results in religious and irreligious people of Ashkenazi descent….

…As Neil Risch forcefully put it, in an interview with Karen Kaplan on our paper about Ashkenazi Jews, “What are their theories about those on the opposite end of the spectrum? Do they have genetic theories about why Latinos and African Americans perform worse academically?” A truly perspicacious question – to ask it is to answer it. (Risch’s Conjecture).

Now, the findings needing explanation:

This is for 16 year olds; I included gender as a reference; since no g differences in gender were found in Deary’s study, the Male-Female difference is an index of non-g influences:

For reference, here are the standardized GSCE score differences based on the Longitudinal Study of Young People in England. Under KS2 is listed the average age 14 test score gaps (year 2004); under KS4 is listed the average age 16 point score gaps (year 2006). The calculation of point scores is described here: http://www.education.gov.uk/performancetables/schools_04/sec3b.shtml Value added technical information.

The difference of interest is the age 16 Black-African White gap, which is about 0.10 SD or virtually nonexistent.

Convergent evidence supports the non-existence of a gap. See: Strand and Lindsay, 2009. Ethnic disproportionality in special education: Evidence from an English population study.

Compare with the prediction of Lynn (2008): “Mental retardation is also partly the tail end of the normal distribution of intelligence and the incidence of this would be expected to be greater among the ethnic minorities because these have lower mean IQ and hence a greater proportion at the low end of the distribution.”

It seems that, in the UK, White Liberals closed the Black-White gap:

I will shortly contact a couple of UK academics and request CAT3 scores by ethnicity on the chance that the GCSE scores might not accurately represent g scores, for the populations in question. After I have certainty on this issue, assuming agreement between the two, I will discuss and evaluate possible modified versions of race realism (e.g., non-additive genetic models such as a race realist version of the Flynn and Dickens (2001) model, models which distinguish between local and global populations, etc.).

In the mean time, I will be happy to hear HBDish explanations for the above which take into consideration points 1-4. (If you comment please specify the magnitude of the genetic Black African-White European racial gap that you think is tenable.)

(The good news is that, to the extent the g gap can be closed, the West as an economic entity will not be doomed by massive Black immigration and “integration.” The bad news is that the West as an ethnic entity now surely is. From a philosophical point of view, it appears that science in the mode of “scientific racism” can not save White people. As I discussed a while back, Western science is so interwoven with Western philosophy, that the two are virtually inseparable:

Jung’s point here is important — in the West, “the real” was largely narrowly identified in terms of the rational and objective. In general, this applied not just to Western philosophy but also to Western spirituality and theology, which was one reason why the scientific revolution and the enlightenment had such a deleterious impact on the traditional Western world-views, and why they precipitated the radicalism that they did (Nihilism, positivism, philosophical Liberalism, biological nationalism, Marxism, etc.). Given the strong association, in the West, between the rational and objective and the philosophical, spiritual, and theological, reevaluations of the former radically affected the later, in a manner not comparable to the affects that equivalent reevaluations had in other cultures, often inducing systematic re-valuations and with them pervasive dysnomia. One can compare, for example, the impact that the scientific revolution had on Christianity to the impact it had on Hinduism; the later, though equally non-empirical, was never shaken in the degree that the former was. Hindus never experienced the angst that (European) Christians did over the conflict between science and religion, since, for Hindus, religion and science largely existed in different mental spaces. I would extend Jung’s point: Western man’s great silliness was his superficiality. I tangentially discussed this here, in Why the West Discovered the Modern World; in short, as Nietzsche noted, the very thing that led to the stellar rise of the West, underlies its undoing, not unlike the ring of Niblung and the fate of Gods of Asgard.

The cultural association between science and philosophy, specifically between the objective and subjective, is why White people, as and ethnic group, can be empirically disproved out of existence, in a way that no other group can. To put it another way, the existence of White people is contingent on the existence of biological racial difference, which is why many of us have invested so much energy in trying to establish the latter and establish it by showing differences in one of the supreme Western values*. Based on my analysis above, the support for existence of White people, then, is greatly weakened.)

*I, for one, have made it clear over the past 2 years that this was part of my agenda — I am — or was — an unapologetic scientific racialist, where that means using science to establish metascientific positions, such as the psychological importance of “race.” This type of activity is what more intellectually sophisticated antiracists — who also try to use science to establish metascientific positions, just in the reverse way — mean when they speak of “scientific racism.” I post the above — about “race realism” — because I am interested advancing intellectually defensible versions of “racialism.” If “race realism,” in this or that objective sense, is untenable, then defenses must be retuned.

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

54 Responses to Is (global) “race realism” still tenable?

  1. soren says:

    You’re not the first one to bring this up and I really wish someone would look into it.

    http://racialreality.blogspot.com/2010/06/underperformance-of-poor-white-british.html

    • Chuck says:

      The relative performance of poor white people, per se, doesn’t mean anything. For one, heritability increases with SES conditioned on age. At young ages, two groups that are both reared in equally low SES conditions will show little differences even if there is a large difference in genetic potential. In the US, the poor White-Black gap is small and at times negative. Hereditarians routinely acknowledge this. See my post here:
      http://occidentalascent.wordpress.com/2012/01/19/ses-and-the-gap-its-worse-than-that/
      So racial reality’s conclusion does not follow. What’s happening is that poor Whites who are genetically less intelligent than other whites are being compared to Blacks in a situation in which the effects of genes on IQ is attenuated.

      Above, however, I am making a stronger case, to my chagrin, against race differences.

  2. soren says:

    Related from The Economist:

    The forgotten underclass
    Muslims and blacks get more attention. But poor whites are in a worse state

    http://www.economist.com/node/8089315

  3. Kiwiguy says:

    I note Deary’s findings above about the GCSE, but it seems these are regarded as being much easier than the old “O level” exams.

    “Why? Because GCSEs are a joke. As one teacher told the Times a couple of years back in a test that showed clearly that O-levels were far harder:

    At GCSE you get marks for trying to do the question and showing your working out even if you don’t get the right answer. You can even get marks for writing “F*** off’. You get marks for expressing yourself, for creativity, rather than for precision. I think the O-levels are harder than GCSEs on the basis of these papers.

    But while we’re too scared of hurting teenagers’ feelings to tell them that these exams are leaving them as woefully under-prepared for life as an hour paint-balling would be for combat in Afghanistan, the Chinese are not so sentimental. They have chosen traditional English education standards because they know they are better than their replacements.”

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100050518/are-gcses-to-be-replaced-by-o-levels/

    They also seem to place greater emphasis on course work/internal assessment and girls now outperform boys.

    “Girls do better at coursework, and boys do better when sitting structured exams, he said.”

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/girls-continue-to-outperform-boys-at-gcse-2060708.html

    Another thing to look at is the type of subjects being entered.

    “Gillborn cites the reason that schools try to protect their position in league tables: teachers enter black children into GCSE exams in which they can only get a maximum grade of C because if they were entered for harder exams they might fail, lowering the school’s results.”

    http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/tag/education/

    • Chuck says:

      1. “If you comment please specify the magnitude of the genetic Black African-White European racial gap that you think is tenable.”
      2. As for GCSE, it’s Deary’s findings and the findings of the testing company gl assessment.
      3. The Learning disabled/MR discrepancy needs to be explained too. These diagnoses are
      typically based on CAT performance.
      4. For a definitive answer, we will have to wait until either I or someone else (e.g., you) get a hold of the CAT3 data. I don’t imagine that the scores will be that off. When I get a chance I will post a paper I found that shows that GCSE passings correspond to UK SAT and CAT scores. In that paper from 2006, there was a 0.5 SD Black White difference on all three (Black N= ~175).

  4. soren says:

    I have a couple ideas to pursue…

    What are the difference between the UK, Canada, Australia(iffy here), and Massachusetts when it comes to the “black-white” gap. IIRC, blacks in Massachusetts preform about the same(though still slightly below IIRC) as whites in Mississippi yet “the gap” persists within both states.

    It would be nice if the PISA score racial breakdowns were available for all countries with significant racial diversity.

    • Steve Sailer says:

      You can look at NAEP scores by white-black-Hispanic for almost all American states. You see similar gaps just about everywhere, although Hispanics are more variable: Puerto Ricans score poorly in Connecticut, but the Hispanics in Missouri do pretty well (St. Louis has had a small but prosperous community of various Latin American elites for a long time. A Latino was mayor of St. Louis back in the 1960s.) The smallest white-black gap is in Hawaii, where most of the blacks students are children or grandchildren of military people.

  5. Steve Sailer says:

    You should split out the data by sex. I’m not familiar with the terminology of the different school tests in England, but on some of them there is an extraordinary gender gap, with even Chinese males doing badly. I wrote about the British gender gap and the rise of anti-intellectual “laddishness” back in 2005:

    http://www.vdare.com/articles/wrong-answer-the-wall-street-journal-on-englands-math-gender-gap

    Sacha Baron Cohen’s Ali G, who either a Pakistani or a white named Alister Graham, is the canonical parody of the modern British young male.

    • Chuck says:

      Steve, you can see the Age x Race x Gender x SES interactions in Research Report DCSF-RR029 “Minority Ethnic Pupils in the Longitudinal Study of Young People in England Extension Report on Performance in Public Examinations at Age 16 2010)”:
      https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationDetail/Page1/DCSF-RR029
      The Data comes from the Longitudinal Study of Young People in England; for 16 year olds, this would have been in 2006 (when there was an appreciable GCSE gap). The data here is based on GCSE “high stakes” test scores. The Black African gap here is larger than the Black West Indian gap. But the Black African-White gap is only .10 SD. See page 10, table 2. The latter is what I am having trouble with (as it is, we might have predicted that Black West-Indians would have performed better because they are more admixed.) The low Black West Indian scores are largely driven by the extra poor performance of Black boys.

      I don’t find immigration selection to be that compelling of an explanation. As I noted above, even if we conjectured that Black migrants represent, on average, the 86th percentile of the Blacks-African g distribution (i.e., 1.1 SD above the mean) — a conjecture which I find barely plausible, given that 2nd generation Black Africans only perform .1 SD below Whites on fairly g-loaded “high stakes” tests, and given regression to the mean, representative samples of Black Africans could only be 0.7 SD below the mean. If the GCSE test scores here — match with CAT scores — I take this to mean that 0.7 SD is the very upper bounds of the Black African-White European difference. (Consider that we have yet to take SES or Language into account, with regards to the test score difference.) I imagine though that Blacks Africans are much less g selected than some think — maybe the 70th percentile (~ .55 SD) at most, putting the upper bounds at maybe 0.4 SD, on the assumption that the adult narrow heritability of g is in fact around 0.6 in Africa.

      • Chuck says:

        Well, the KS2 data is based on actual tests. The KS4 data is based on some exotic point scale. I guess one could argue that the .35 difference between African Blacks and UK Whites is the true high stakes test difference and that the point scale difference is heavily influenced by non-g factors.

        I’ll have to look at JL’s findings below some more. Particularly with regards to the CATs. My point about immigration selection stands, though. So given JL’s possible 0.5 SD or so gap, the maximum race difference would be between 0.5 SD + (1.1 x 0.6 SD) and 0.5 SD + (.55 x 0.6 SD) or between 1.2 and 0.8 SD, migration assumptions depending. Maybe a little higher if we assume that the g difference is a little higher than the other differences — as was the case with the data reported by Scott and Anderson (2003), which was congruent with Spearman’s hypothesis.

        As I pointed out to JL, the mixed race data doesn’t fit an additive genetic model’s prediction. So I call maybe a half-falsification. I guess I’ll have to look into the degree of assortative mating in the UK.

  6. Steve Sailer says:

    I offered a few theories on why working class white males seem more decayed in Britain than their distant cousins in the U.S. in a follow-up here:

    http://www.vdare.com/articles/how-much-ruin-in-a-nation-uk-vs-us-white-working-class

    • Chuck says:

      Steve,

      Thanks for commenting. I think this is an important line to investigate. To quote Lynn (2010) again, “If a multiracial society is found where these race differences in intelligence are absent, the evolutionary and genetic theory of these differences would be falsified.” For a definitive conclusion we need the CAT — Cognitive ability test –data (and better estimates of immigrant selection). As Kiwiguy notes, it’s plausible that among UK Blacks the correlation between GCSE and g, as measured by CATs, is low. I did find one source that listed a large CAT differences — in “Evers, te Nijenhuis, and van der Flier (2005)’s “Ethnic Bias and Fairness in Personal Selection: Evidence and Consequences,” Scott and Anderson (2003) is cited as showing a 1.7 g gap circa 2000. I contacted one of the authors (Anderson, I think) and he confirmed the difference — but this was for adults and he couldn’t give me a sample size. Given point (2a), this large difference might be more evidence against a genetic hypothesis or the results could be spurious, based on small n’s.. So what is needed is the CAT data from the kids.

      Perhaps you could contact Chris Brand and ask him to ask Deary.. Or someone. Someone has it broken down by ethnicity — maybe Steve Strand. As I noted in exasperation before, I fail to understand why “race realists” — you included — don’t keep an eye on these things. For myself. I have data files on Dutch gaps, Canadian Gaps, South Africans Gaps (Whites versus coloreds), Scandinavian Gaps. This is the largest violation of Lynn’s prediction that I have found to date (though I have found others) — which is why I posted about it.

  7. The data still shows a Black-White gap. Whites outperform Blacks on the A*-C pass rate but not on the A*-G pass rate. But the gap is larger for A*-C than it is for A*-G. I think a likely (partial?) explanation is that the Black students tended to be more motivated to get good grades. They probably took less challenging courses since we can see that the White advantage is much greater when English and Math are included (these are probably more rigorous subjects). And Blacks probably put more effort into the school work relative to IQ. Since effort probably exhibits diminishing returns that could explain why Blacks perform better using the lower threshold A*-G pass rate metric. Another possibility is that markers knew the race of their students in some cases and were easier on the Black ones. It is also the case that blacks in the UK are not representative of Blacks in general as a result of the immigrant Blacks. Furthermore, since Blacks mature earlier than Whites, it might be the case that Whites were not fully mature when the GCSEs were taken, and that this explains part of what is going on. The regression to the mean would be incomplete for children of African immigrants if they had not yet reached full maturity (regression increases with age).

    The Black-White gap, it seems to me, could be fully explained by hereditary differences, even after accounting for the data given in this post.

    As for your points 1-4:
    1) The chart given still leaves lots of room for other factors to interfere and generate the anomalous results. The chart indicates that there is about a 12% chance for a person with an IQ of 85 to pass 5 or more GCSEs at the A*-C grade level. 12% strikes me as being pretty large for such a low IQ.
    2) I’m not sure why you conclude that Black African immigrants are so unlikely to be more than 1.1 stdv above the African mean.
    3) Fair enough. Though sample size does not have to be the problem for there to be a problem.
    4) There really isn’t anything to address.

    As for justifying racialism:
    For me, the most important justification for Racialism is Aesthetic. As a member of the White race, I consider the White race to be uniquely beautiful. It is therefore vary important to me that the White race survives. But the White race will only survive if there is sufficient White racialism. There is no need to rely upon considerations of intelligence etc to justify White racialism. Furthermore, evolutionary theory and other data suggest that Whites are probably genetically programmed to prefer their own race in terms of aesthetics etc (other races are probably programmed to prefer their own too). Included in this category are Fisherian runaway sexual selection, other sexual selection and the data on the existence of race biases.

    • Chuck says:

      I agree that the gap increases with difficulty. It goes from -0.05 standard deviations in 5A*-G passes to 0.15 SD in 5A*-C +Math and English passes and 0.10 in 2A*-C only science passes. But the difference is minute. The virtual lack of difference can not be explained by age As noted in my figure this is for Keysone 4 and the kids are about 16. The narrow heritability of g at this age should be around 0.5. The virtual lack of difference also can’t be accounted for by differences in difficult classes taken; there’s little difference in the 2A*-C only science passes. Systematic bias for Blacks seems implausible given the sample size and the consistency across regions in England (– take a look at the data yourself; I provided the address and search terms.) “Motivational factors” sounds like the typical implausible environmentalist explanation. I have data on that too, though. When I dig it up, I will provide a link; that doesn’t account for the virtual lack of a gap. You are left with immigration selection. What magnitude are you proposing? (I said: “If you comment please specify the magnitude of the genetic Black African-White European racial gap that you think is tenable” so I could reply to such claims.) To some extent, we can see the effect of immigrant selection by looking at the performance of Somalian immigrants who are/were not educationally selected. (To the extent they are g selected it is because they were smart enough to get a “humanitarian visa” — that ability doesn’t sound to g-loaded to me.) Look up research report DCSF-RR226, “Drivers and Challenges in. Raising the Achievement of Pupils from Bangladeshi, Somali and. Turkish Backgrounds (2010).” In that report, motivation is added as a control. The gap between native whites and 1st and 2nd generation Somalians for whom English is the main language is about 0.5 SD (see table 31.) This compares to a Black-White US NAEP AND CLASS GRADE gap of around 0.8 SD (See: http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/naepdata/ i.e., “The Data Explorer for the High School Transcript Study)

    • Chuck says:

      “For me, the most important justification for Racialism is Aesthetic. As a member of the White race, I consider the White race to be uniquely beautiful…There is no need to rely upon considerations of intelligence etc to justify White racialism.”

      I agree that there is no need, per se, but I argue that our Western concept of race is, for better or worse, culturally tied to science in a way that makes it rather vulnerable to attack. Western man’s racial or ethnic existence can be disproved or at least challenged on empirical grounds in a way that other’s existence can not. I’m not sure that the White race can be re-envisioned subjectively. I guess aesthetics, though, bridges the objective and subjective.

  8. statsquatch says:

    You should wait for the CAT3 scores. This is probably a sampling artifact. Given that there are ~780K 16 year-olds in the UK and the discrepancies between your table and graph in the percent completion, the N in your table are the number of students who SAT for the test. So your ds are invalid. You need to use the total population N as in the graph. Comparing the table and graph it looks like a higher proportion of whites than blacks sit for the test. Looking at the graph only, the d between the Irish and the Black Caribbean students is about .5 SD. This could be consistent with variation on who sets for the test or differential immigration. If regular white pass rateis closer to .75 then the d is about.8 SDs.

    • Chuck says:

      I was hoping that I would inspire someone else to try to acquire the scores. I have found that UK academics are not too forthcoming with data when it comes to race.

  9. Kiwiguy says:

    Another point is that in terms of admission to the most prestigious colleges (Oxford & Cambridge) black students are underrepresented.* Oxford had a press release explaining this here in terms of A level results and subject choice:

    Oxford’s research shows that school attainment is the single biggest barrier to getting more black students to Oxford. In 2007, for example, around 23% of all white students nationally gained three As at A level (excluding General Studies), but just 9.6% of black students. Or look at it in numbers, in 2009: 29,000 white students got the requisite grades for Oxford (AAA excluding General Studies) compared to just 452 black students.

    Once black students do apply, Oxford’s own recent analysis shows that subject choice is a major reason for their lower success rate. Black students apply disproportionately for the most oversubscribed subjects. 44% of all black applicants apply for Oxford’s three most oversubscribed subjects (compared to just 17% of all white applicants). That means that nearly half of black applicants are applying for the same three subjects, and these are the three toughest subjects for admission.

    http://www.ox.ac.uk/media/behind_the_headlines/101307.html

    * http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/universityeducation/8964154/Fewer-black-students-at-Oxford-and-Cambridge.html

  10. Steve Sailer says:

    “As I noted in exasperation before, I fail to understand why “race realists” — you included — don’t keep an eye on these things.”

    Having written perhaps ten thousands words over the last decade lamenting the chavisness of the British working class over the last decade, including during last summer’s riots and even in my review of Charles Murray’s new book in the new American Conservative issue, I can say I do keep an eye on these things.

    Here’s something to look at besides the gender gap: compare the performance of West Indian blacks to African blacks in Britain. In the U.S., West Indians famously do better than African-Americans, but in Britain, West Indians have lagged behind African immigrants. The usual selection is that there has been more mass migration from Jamaica to Britain, while immigration from Africa to Britain has been more selective. I don’t know how true it is, but it at least attempts to explain the pattern.

    Another thing to look at is whether high end performance (e.g, getting into Oxbridge) is in line with these small GSCE gaps. I don’t believe that is terribly the case.

  11. Steve Sailer says:

    Here we go, on high end gaps, from The Guardian in 2010:

    “There are seven times fewer black or black British Caribbean students at Oxford and Cambridge than there are on average at other universities, the report shows.”

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/feb/03/oxbridge-black-ethnic-minority-mix?INTCMP=ILCNETTXT3487

    • Kiwiguy says:

      @ Steve,

      My comment on this point has been caught in moderation for two links I think, but Oxford issued a press release this in terms of A level results and subject choice:

      Oxford’s research shows that school attainment is the single biggest barrier to getting more black students to Oxford. In 2007, for example, around 23% of all white students nationally gained three As at A level (excluding General Studies), but just 9.6% of black students. Or look at it in numbers, in 2009: 29,000 white students got the requisite grades for Oxford (AAA excluding General Studies) compared to just 452 black students.

      Once black students do apply, Oxford’s own recent analysis shows that subject choice is a major reason for their lower success rate. Black students apply disproportionately for the most oversubscribed subjects. 44% of all black applicants apply for Oxford’s three most oversubscribed subjects (compared to just 17% of all white applicants). That means that nearly half of black applicants are applying for the same three subjects, and these are the three toughest subjects for admission.

      http://www.ox.ac.uk/media/behind_the_headlines/101307.html

      • Steve Sailer says:

        When the British use the term “black,” are they using it the away Americans use it? Or are South Asians also being included in it?

      • Kiwiguy says:

        ***When the British use the term “black,” are they using it the away Americans use it? Or are South Asians also being included in it?***

        I think they’re using it in the way the Americans use it. For instance, I think it was also pointed out at the time that Oxford was overrepresented in terms of asian students (including East & South East Asian).

  12. Gilbert Pinfold says:

    Point 1 posits correlation between GPA (to use US term) and g. This is based on 2004 and earlier research. Back in those days there was a gap. In the last few years considerable effort has been put in to closing the gap in GPA. The effort seems to have brought results. You don’t think this begs the question?

  13. JL says:

    I looked at gaps in A-levels, which are taken after the GCSE. I uploaded some results here. I don’t know how to calculate effect sizes for these data, so I included Chinese students as a reference group in addition to whites and blacks. There are substantial racial differences in “achieving 3 or more A grades” and in “Average GCE/VCE A/AS Point Score” (whatever that is).

    • Gilbert Pinfold says:

      Yes, JL, that is the question being begged. How much do GCSE scores still correlate with g?
      Because the results are extrordinary. Such a rapid convergence. Could it be Jamie Oliver’s school dinners providing better nutrition? Magic dust in the drinking water.

      Rather, what it looks like is a concerted effort by educators tasked with closing the gap. What I mean by educators is bureaucrats, administrators, curriculum developers, examiners, and sundry data torturers. And how does one close, say, a fifteen point gap when one’s performance bonus depends upon it? One point at time, I should have thought: A point here by tweaking the definition of Black. (eg, where are the numerous S Asians in the spreadsheet? Does this explain the dicrepancies between the ssheet and the line graph? Are Algerians black?, etc); a point there tweaking the definition of white (again; reconciling the graph with the ssheet, are Gypsies folded into white in the ssheet?); inflating grades (changing the definitions of As, Bs and Cs); selective teaching to the test; selective leaking of tests; creating new ‘cant-miss’ subjects; creating new pseudo g subjects such as Math ‘Applications’ (versus Math Math) or English ‘Communication’ (versus Literature); sympathetic grading of certain topics and themes; filtering out of hopeless blacks prior to assessed population; retaining of hopeless whites; etc; etc.

      Pretty soon your bonus is in the bank.

  14. JL says:

    The GCSE data in the Deary et al. study are from 2002. In 2002, about 47% of all students obtained fewer than 5 GCSEs at grade C or above, whereas in 2009 the proportion was only 25% (see graph 1). It’s obvious that there’s been lots of grade inflation between Deary’s study (and that 2004 graph) and your 2009-10 GCSE numbers, so GCSE results must be much less g-loaded these days. It seems that the b-w gap on the GCSE has decreased hand in hand with decreasing g-loadings.

  15. JL says:

    I found the CAT scores by race. See here (table 4). Full-scale scores aren’t available, only sub-scale scores. The gaps are about 7 points on each scale. I don’t know what the full-scale or g score difference would be, but in the US, the subscale b-w gaps are a couple of points smaller than the full-scale gap on the WISC. Mean scores for different Asian groups are also available at the link.

    It seems that the b-w gap is substantially smaller in the UK than the US, but it is certainly not non-existent.

    • Chuck says:

      Well don’t you think you’re special, Mr. Race realist knowitall? I see virtually no White/mixed Black gap, so I call half-falsified!

      • JL says:

        Yeah, falsifying your anti-HBD rants is getting a bit boring 😉

        The argument that the existence of white people is contingent on the existence of biological races is a very good one. A while ago I read some book where the Weberian argument about the greater rationality of the West was made. The claim seemed very abstract and difficult to prove, but in the context of the race debate it rings totally true. The Japanese or the African Americans do not have to rely on genetics or psychometrics so as to prove that race is an important category. They can draw on myths, but whites can’t — the Nazis tried that, but they were utterly annihilated by other whites. This is also why I think that establishing HBD as a scientific fact could have major political repercussions.

      • Chuck says:

        JL,

        “The argument that the existence of white people is contingent on the existence of biological races is a very good one.”

        JL, you’re so awesome. I think my comments make little sense to everyone else. By the way, did you see my novel reinterpretation of Witty and Jenkins (1936). It’s an adaption of one made by Jensen against Scarr.

        “It might be worthwhile to explore the results in some more detail to show how consistent they are with a genetic hypothesis. To do this properly, we would need an estimate of the mean and variance of admixture in the 1930 Chicago Black population, which we obviously don’t have. We do have estimates for the 1990 to 2000 national population, which we can use as a substitute. According to Zakharia, et al. (2009):

        “Numerous studies have estimated the rate of European admixture in African Americans; these studies have documented average admixture rates in the range of 10% to 20%, with some regional variation, but also with substantial variation among individuals [1]. For example, the largest study of African Americans to date, based on autosomal short tandem repeat (STR) markers, found an average of 14% European ancestry with a standard deviation of approximately 10%, and a range of near 0 to 65% [1], whereas another study based on ancestry informative markers (AIMs) found an average of 17.7% European ancestry with a standard deviation of 15.0% [2].…
        …These results were confirmed in the estimation of IA by using the program frappe (also in Figure 1). The amount of European ancestry shows considerable variation, with an average (± SD) of 21.9% ± 12.2%, and a range of 0 to 72% (Table 1).”

        If, based on this, we assume a 1930 Chicago admixture of 20% with a standard deviation of about 15%, we can infer a predicted IQ-ancestry correlation, given a genetic hypothesis which proposes that 75% of the 1 SD Black-White difference is genetic. From this we can calculate how much more admixed we would have expected Jenkins youth to be.

        One interpretation of a correlation coefficient is: amount of change in x, change y or, in this case, the amount of change in admixture per change in genetically conditioned test score. 
In this case the genetically conditioned difference between Blacks and White would be 0.75 SD, since we are proposing that 75% of the gap is genetic; the ancestry difference would be 5.3 SD, which is the number of SDs separating Blacks who are 20% White and Whites, given that 1 SD of admixture equals 15% Whiteness ((100-20)/15=5.3). The correlation between test scores and genotypic ancestry, in this population, would then be 0.75/5.3 or 0.14. This means that Blacks, in this population, who were selected 1 SD for intelligence would be selected 0.14 SD for white ancestry or that they would be 2% more admixed. This is a little more than what was seen in Jenkins’ 2nd test results but not significantly so. It’s worth noting, at this point, that other studies of admixture and IQ in the African-American population have show a correlation between genealogy and cognitive ability (e.g., Tanser (1939); Tanser (1941)). These are, of course, ignored by proponents of radical environmentalism.

        In the case of Jenkins’ first test, which was the more powerful one, the difference between the selected and unselect children was about 3 SD, so the children should have been 3 X 0.14 SD more admixed or 6.3% more admixed than the reference population. If we compare these results with those found from genetic analysis, we will see that in no way do they contradict a genetic hypothesis – rather they are quite consistent with it.”

        I have been preparing a rebuttal to Nisbett et al — which I will email to the “IQ Ameliorists” when I finish. In it I try to go through every piece of data Nisbett offered there and elsewhere as evidence against a genetic hypothesis. With regards to the above, given the small standard deviations of admixture in the African American population virtually all of data on racial admixture, save when it comes to hybrids, is worthless, since the genetic correlations would be extremely low. Jensen speculated on this in an 1981 paper — and in the G-factor — but at that time estimates of the admixture SD were unknown.

        What is amazing is that environmentalist have been able to get away with their shoddy arguments.

    • Chuck says:

      So, when I upload the GL pdf I can read it and see table 4. But when I try to save it the wordpress, the content of table 4 disappears. It almost looks like table 4 was edited in. Have any ideas?

  16. Steve Sailer says:

    Regarding the big black African v. black Caribbean split in educational achievement in Britain, at Oxford in 2009, only one kid of black Caribbean background was accepted v. 23 of black African background.

    http://www.straightstatistics.org/article/racist-or-meritocratic-oxbridge-maligned?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

    I think two things are going on: you have more selective immigration from Africa (e.g., doctors to work for National Health) versus mass immigration from Jamaica, and then you have an interaction effect with the Jamaicans partly assimilating into white chav culture, and lower class white culture assimilating into Jamaican culture, in a way you don’t see in the U.S. As historian David Starkey said after the English looting of August, which were started by blacks but then saw a lot of whites join in: “The whites have become black.”

    You don’t see much of that kind of thing in America. I suspect stronger gun control makes it safer for low class whites to hang out with low class blacks in Britain. In the U.S., the homicide rate is so high, that poor whites head as far out of town as possible to get away from blacks, even if they like rap.

    • Kiwiguy says:

      ***Jamaicans partly assimilating into white chav culture, and lower class white culture assimilating into Jamaican culture, in a way you don’t see in the U.S.***

      Yes, the economist talked about the culture issue and African-Caribbean males having particular issues recently following the London riots.

      “Black children are disproportionately likely to be excluded from school, and black adults to go to prison (see chart). African-Caribbean males are a special worry. African-Caribbean boys do much worse in school than African-Caribbean girls or African boys. The most recent available analysis of GCSE results by race and sex, which was done in 2009, shows that 56% of African-Caribbean boys got five A-C grades at GCSE, compared with 65% of African boys and 70% of African-Caribbean girls (for all pupils, the figure was 74%)…

      He points out that, while family breakdown is increasingly prevalent in white society, it is far more common among blacks: 65% of black Caribbean children in Britain grow up in a single-parent family; nine out of ten of those households are headed by women. Children brought up in one-parent families are more likely to take drugs, drop out of school and end up in prison….

      A second concern is culture. Tony Sewell, whose charity, Generating Genius, promotes maths and science among black boys, fingers the rap and hip-hop music that MTV popularised from the 1980s: “Black popular culture used to be based on spirituality and social justice…Now we have a music that glorifies violence, materialism and sex.” Lindsay Johns, a writer who mentors young black people in Peckham, south London, adds another bugbear: “achingly PC educationalists, who call ghetto-speak ‘culturally rich’ and ‘empowering’. Rubbish. It’s a mashed-up, debased language that spectacularly disables our young people, because nobody will give them a job if they talk like that.”

      its youngsters especially susceptible to these influences. Yet they reach others too. “Black male culture is powerful stuff,” says Mr Sewell. Firms use black street culture to sell fashionable goods such as trainers. As a result, he says, it has far more sway among other ethnic groups than it did 20 years ago. “Youngsters in other communities want to be part of it; so if it is a problem for the black community, it becomes a problem for everybody.”

      http://www.economist.com/node/21528285

  17. Steve Sailer says:

    So, my overall model of Britain’s social system v. America’s is that the former is dominated by class and the latter by race. The British system tends to be better for blacks because they have less pressure on them to Act Black all the time, while it’s worse for poorer whites because they are constantly pressured by their peers not to Act Toff by like, you know, reading. Combined with strict gun control, this allows for more integration.

    In the American system dominated by race, with lots of guns in the hands of criminals, blacks tend to be isolated and discouraged from Acting White. Poorer whites stay away from them, and see things like crime as a Black Thing. This tends to be better for whites and worse for blacks.

  18. Steve Sailer says:

    Here’s something from the Economist:

    http://www.economist.com/node/8089315

    “One reason poor British whites have escaped scrutiny is that they are less associated with serious criminality than other ethnic groups, particularly Afro-Caribbeans. British blacks are disproportionately young and tend to live in big cities, which are heavily policed. They may be more likely to commit the sort of extravagantly violent crimes that attract stiff sentences. It is this reason, rather than any racial bias in the criminal-justice system, that explains why they are over-represented in prison compared with whites.

    “But whites actually commit more crime. A large survey carried out by the Home Office in 2003 found that white men were more likely to admit to having broken the law in the past year than were blacks, Asians or people of mixed race. Fully 18% of whites aged 10 to 25 admitted to a violent crime, and 15% said they had committed a theft. Young whites are also most likely to take Class-A drugs (the most serious kind).

    “Despite their occasionally sharp language, most poor whites are not deeply racist. More children are now born to one white and one Afro-Caribbean parent than to two Afro-Caribbean parents. Even in west Leicester, a solitary middle-aged Jamaican man can walk into a pub on an almost entirely white housing estate without fear of trouble.”

    So, if you have a model in mind, where nature and nurture are split about 50-50 in influencing IQ, as I usually do, then the British results seem pretty explicable.

    • Gilbert Pinfold says:

      Another cultural difference is that Blacks are not the primary ethnic competitor with Whites in the UK. There is some common ground between Blacks and Whites vis a vis the Muslim and South Asian ‘threat’. I raise this only as another reason the Steve/Starkey are on to something, ie, the explanation is in part the aberrant behaviour of the British Whites on the left side of the curve, who seem happy to dive into the ‘undertow’.

  19. Steve Sailer says:

    You see a lot of Yob Pride behavior in Britain that you don’t see in America.

  20. jewamongyou says:

    The British establishment is so extreme in its anti-white position, and so desperate to degrade its own native population in favor of blacks and Asians, that we should not take any official figures from Britain seriously. They fudge crime statistics, lie, cheat, steal and use every underhanded trick in the book in order to advance their genocidal agenda – so I fail to see how any rational person could trust them with test results such as these. They have no credibility.

  21. Galtonian says:

    Some factors that together may explain the unusually small Black-White test score gap in the UK, particularly in relation to the GCSE five A*C including English and Math endpoint.

    1) Selection. In the USA blacks from recent immigration from Caribbean and Africa tend to be of higher academic ability, several years ago there were some articles claiming that more than half of Blacks at Harvard were from these backgrounds. I suspect that the IQ of UK Blacks is probably pretty close to 90 rather than 85 (USA blacks) or 70 (African blacks).

    2) Low end criterion, probably not highly g-dependent, of the GCSE five A*C including English and Math endpoint. This criterion basically hinges on whether or not the student is able to earn a C grade in Math and English. Probably anyone with an IQ of greater than 85 is capable of getting at least a C in the Math and English GCSEs if he/she has sufficient self discipline and determination, especially if not a new speaker of English. Lower class Whites, with IQs in the 85 – 100 range who are immersed in the Chav culture probably fail to get the C grades in Math and English more out of laziness and rebellion rather than lack of IQ. See below discussion of a higher end criterion, probably more highly g-dependent, the A-levels (Average Level 3 QCDA Point Score Per Student).

    3) A significant fraction of the higher IQ Whites are omitted from the data because they are in private (independent) schools, most of the data reported by the UK dept of education only include state maintained schools.

    According to data on the total score from all students in England who are remaining in school for the last two years, called “sitting for A-levels” (which includes about 50% of Whites about 60% of Blacks, and about 100% of Chinese), the inclusion of the less than 10% of students who are in private (independent) schools raises the A-levels score (Average Level 3 QCDA Point Score Per Student) about 18 to 20 points.

    2006 2007 2008 2009
    State & Ind Schools 721.5 731.2 740.0 739.3
    State Schools 700.9 711.2 721.3 721.3
    data source:
    http://www.education.gov.uk/performancetables/16to18_09.shtml

    2009 data on ethnic group scores
    Total 315080 721.1
    White 247925 731.6
    Black 13112 635.0
    Chinese 2196 864.6
    data source:
    http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk

    If most of the students at private (independent) schools in England are White, then I would suspect that the true figure for the White group would be about 750 rather than the 731.6 figure that includes only data from state maintained schools.

    More evidence that students at UK private (independent) schools represent a cognitive elite is the fact that a large fraction of students who are admitted to professional schools come from this background.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/mar/16/quarter-medical-dentistry-students-private-schools

    In comparison to Whites, the Chinese really excel in the UK– just like in the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand’……

    Does anyone know how to find out the Standard Deviation of Average Level 3 QCDA Point Score Per Student values?
    Here is a link that describes the basis for determining the Average Level 3 QCDA Point Score Per Student
    http://www.education.gov.uk/performancetables/16to18_09/d4.shtml

    Chuck, if you really want to delve into the raw data on UK test scores then you should get permission to download data from the National Pupil Database (NPD) which referred to in these two links:

    http://www.poverty.org.uk/technical/npd.shtml
    http://www.adls.ac.uk/department-for-education/dcsf-npd/?detail

    • Chuck says:

      “2009 data on ethnic group scores…”

      How did you get these? Could you provide the exact link. (I could figure out myself, but I’m short of time.)

      “Chuck, if you really want to delve into the raw data on UK test scores then you should get permission to download data from the National Pupil Database (NPD) which referred to in these two links:”

      I saw that. I applied for permission for the “Longitudinal Study of Young People in England” data. It seems that the GCSE data is unreliable, so now I’m looking for CAT data or any data based purely on standardized tests.

  22. Galtonian says:

    1) click http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk

    2) click “Topics” link near bottom left

    3) click to expand “Education, Skills and Training” list of topic links

    4) click circle to right of “GCE/Applied GCE A/AS and Equivalent Examination
    Results (Level 3) for Young People by Ethnic Group, Referenced by Location of Student Residence”

    5) click “next” yellow circle blue arrow at bottom right

    6) new page shows links to 6 years of data (2005- 2010), select view or download, click “next” yellow circle blue arrow at bottom right

  23. Greying Wanderer says:

    In the same period the black-white gap was supposedly closed

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1336410/OECD-condemns-British-education-inferior-Estonias.html

    “the UK slipped from eighth to 28th in maths, from seventh to 25th in reading and from fourth to 16th in science…Even more disturbingly, the study found that a fifth of 15-year-old Britons are ‘functionally illiterate'”

    That’s how you close the gap. You dumb down your education system to the point of destruction.

    Also the gap miraculously comes back at A Level, (age 18), so the liberal elite’s kids don’t have to compete with gangstas for university places.

    • Steve says:

      If whites were more intelligent than blacks and the tests were made easier, the white kids would still do better on the easy tests. More A’s etc. Right?

      • Chuck says:

        Ceteris paribus, yes. But making the test easier increases the relative portion of non-g influence (e.g., motivation and memory). If Blacks have higher non-g ability of the relevant kind, then they can close the difference, if the tests are sufficiently non-g loaded, despite having lower g. This introduces some indeterminacy into the results. But I agree that the results above are not what I would expect where there g differences.

      • Chuck says:

        The UK data isn’t super consistent with a genetic hypothesis, but the US data is. In light of this inconsistency, I simply distinguish between highly positively selected UK Blacks and presumably negatively select, slave descended, extra dysgenic US Blacks.

  24. Catperson says:

    The numbers make perfect sense to me.  British immigrants from Africa probably have a mean IQ of 100 since 40% of them are university grads (probably in STEM fields) and this is the mean IQ of black engineering students in Africa.  Now let’s say their kids regress to the black African mean IQ of 67 by 40%, this gives the kids a mean IQ of about 87.  Now consider that being born and raised with first world nutrition adds almost 1 SD to the height and IQ of contemporary third worlders and it’s not surprising they would score as well as British whites.    
    They represent the seeds of africa’s academic super-elite planted in britain’s first-class soil.

    • bbobb says:

      black africans do not represent a pure sample of the elite as they do in the us since immigration restrictions are much more relaxed here. anecdotally, just consider the number of young africans involved in reported stabbings and other gang violence in london. for all the dentists, enginners and similar you have plenty working as cleaners or security guards.

  25. Greying Wanderer says:

    “If you comment please specify the magnitude of the genetic Black African-White European racial gap that you think is tenable.”

    No idea what it would be numerically. I’d say they mostly cover the same section of the bell curve as the unskilled segment of the white working class – maybe the unskilled and semi-skilled segments combined.

  26. chris says:

    Justifying racialism:
    Inclusive fitness.

    Diversity decreases inclusive fitness in society -> Cooperation (that is based on kin altruism) breaks down -> Social capital and civic society decreases/dissolves -> everyone is worse off.

    In fact wasn’t there a study from Putnam at Harvard which showed that diversity decrease social capital and civic involvement?

  27. Steve says:

    “Hindus never experienced the angst that (European) Christians did over the conflict between science and religion, since, for Hindus, religion and science largely existed in different mental spaces.”

    Perhaps it was also because science posed less of a threat to Hindu philosophy and seemed more compatible with it, on account of the depth and sophistication of Hindu philosophy. For example, one finds in traditional Christianity the idea that the earth (and the universe?) is several thousand years old and Adam and Eve are the beginning of the human race. In light of science, this appears child-like and stupid. In Hinduism, one finds the idea of eternal cycles of creation and destruction on truly universal time scales, similar to the idea found in cosmology that the universe expands from the big bang, then contracts to the starting point and expands again.

    You also find in Hinduism more explicit, mainstream ideas about the ultimate nature of reality, or the nature of the universe, or the nature of God and God’s relationship to the universe etc. Materialist challenges to Hindu spirituality are ancient and well known.

    Science didn’t come up with some shocking revelation like Darwinism that shook the foundations of Hinduism like it did Christianity. And Hinduism, philosophically, was ready for the metaphysical challenges of scientific materialism, since these discussions have been going on in India since ancient times.

    I’m not a Hindu btw. That’s just my two cents.

    • Steve says:

      To elaborate on the point about Darwinism… Christianity is more human centred and is about a historical relationship between God and man. It lends itself to a more anthroporphic and simplistic idea of a creator God. Hunduism has a range of interpretations of God and doesn’t really need to have a problem with the idea that God created the universe generally (in some sense), while natural processes within the universe brought about the beings there. Hindus just don’t really feel their beliefs are that challenged by evolutionary theory or anything else in science, whereas it seems to cast more serious doubts on Christianity.

      Even the idea of a multiverse of infinite universes…Hindus just shrug…they were talking about things like this long before science. If anything, it would seem like a confirmation of their beliefs.

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