CANADA BTFO

This

Intelligence research is often abused by retarded ideologues for political ends but IQ itself is a pretty useful instrument for many purposes, and easily the most valid and reliable construct in psychology.

the only reason your national IQ is 99 is because the Chinese(with average IQ 120) are bringing it up. You would be even worse than Iraq if we remove Chinese people from the stats.

Sometimes I wonder if Molymeme is aware that even under the history of the ancient Greeks they admitted that they didn't know how to read or use numbers until taught by North Africans.

>ancient mesopotamians were not arabs, who invaded later
>Iraqis have an objectively low average IQ
Extremely poor argument, Nassim

There are so many environmental and social factors that resulted in the achievements of mesopotamia. To think ancient is comparable to modern here is dumbfuckery of the highest order. Islam has cursed that part of the world since the mongols had their way, and it has severely impacted the ability to produce intelligent citizens capable of reasoning with the world. That said, I havent heard of IQ's since the 90's

topkek. Who gives a shit? I wasn't even born in Canada.

Attached: 1535672662246.jpg (650x493, 76K)

Go back to twitter, Molyneux. We all know it's you.
No academic takes IQ research very seriously. There are too many variables that influence IQ; claiming you have a method that accurately records this will get you laughed out of a job.
Your argument is even worse. If you knew the history of the area you'd know they have been mixed/mixing for thousands of years before the Arabians ever invaded.

>No academic takes IQ research very seriously. There are too many variables that influence IQ; claiming you have a method that accurately records this will get you laughed out of a job.
Are you a high school student? IQ is perpetually used to diagnose intellectual disability.

Iraq has a higher IQ than India or Panama

Mesopotamia used to be Zoroastrian civilisation, later muzzies invaded and inhabited the area. so i dont think Nassim got a point.

You have it upside down. Religions are an expression of a nation's collective unconscious and soul. Just as Catholicism is an expression of the Mediterranean Latin soul and Lutheranism is an expression of the Germanic soul, Islam is an expression of the Arab Semitic soul. Just as their national collective created their religion, it too creates their dysfunctional societies.

What successful things have you done with your "IQ"?

Where? Pattern recognition and spatial awareness tests are what we actually use on children and people who suffer head injuries in adulthood.

>IQ is perpetually used to diagnose intellectual disability.
A diagnosis of intellectual disability is not made based on IQ alone.

>No academic takes IQ research very seriously.

If this were the case, it would be very odd indeed that institutions like Harvard and the US Airforce use g loaded entrance exams to screen applicants. It would also be news to many tenured intelligence researchers and psychometricians at leading universities.

>There are too many variables that influence IQ; claiming you have a method that accurately records this will get you laughed out of a job.

I think you are confusing the heritability of IQ with the validity of IQ: these are two different discussions.

This is so unbelievably stupid. How do you explain Catholicism in Latin America and Africa? Islam in India, Africa or Malaysia? Even the first actual Christian kingdom was in Armenia you mong.

For example:
UK and EU
patient.info/doctor/general-learning-disability

Attached: Screenshot from 2019-01-09 01:28:00.png (715x209, 20K)

>Mesopotamia used to be Zoroastrian civilisation
Why do the most ignorant speak so confidently?

Attached: 1511582179441.jpg (951x972, 104K)

I did not say it was the only thing used to diagnose intellectual disability. It nevertheless is used.

I'm mentally retarded by not self-conscious about it.

IQ testing involving standardised tests is not the same as IQ research. I should've been more specific, by IQ research I meant research done akin to Richard Lynns work.

>by IQ research I meant research that angers me and hurts my fee fees

Does that include pic related?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ

Attached: Screenshot from 2019-01-09 01:33:50.png (1146x114, 28K)

iq fags and their obsession with it, should unironically kill themselves.

Having never to wage-slave ever again, while only getting average results back in elementary school, tells you alot about nature versus nurture debate

I would also like to point out that heritability is a statistic which describes how much of the variance around a mean can be ascribed to genetics in a particular population at a specified time. It does not necessarily tell you anything about the nature or cause of differences between the means of distinct populations.

You have a heart of gold. Don't let them take it from you.

Attached: download (4).jpg (474x474, 29K)

Attached: aztecs.jpg (300x316, 49K)

Except the people that inhabit Iraq now are probably not the same as the smart folks from Mesopotamia.

Yeah, Iraqis have lower average IQ and they're incapable of mantaining an advanced society like white countries do.

>that angers me and hurts my fee fees
It doesn't anger me. Honestly I reckon it's only Richard Lynn and his research that bothers me. Lynn's work simply shouldn't be taken seriously. You should research how Lynn actually arrived at the numbers he allocated to countries. It goes against all scientific principles. I'm just gonna restate my main argument; there are many variables that influences IQ to claim that there is an accurate method of recording it.

>Honestly I reckon it's only Richard Lynn and his research that bothers me.
OK. You're the one who brought him up. Who cares?
>You should research how Lynn actually arrived at the numbers he allocated to countries.
Why? You brought him up. I don't care.
>there are many variables that influences IQ to claim that there is an accurate method of recording it.
That doesn't follow. Many variables influence height like nutrition and genetics but you can easily record it.

Also should add;
>A common error is to assume that a heritability figure is necessarily unchangeable. The value of heritability can change if the impact of environment (or of genes) in the population is substantially altered.[18] If the environmental variation encountered by different individuals increases, then the heritability figure would decrease. On the other hand, if everyone had the same environment, then heritability would be 100%. The population in developing nations often has more diverse environments than in developed nations.[citation needed] This would mean that heritability figures would be lower in developing nations.
>You're the one who brought him up
I didn't, Molyneux does. So do you (if this is you). That number comes from Lynns "research."
>Why?
Why not? Why deny yourself learning something new?
>Many variables influence height like nutrition and genetics but you can easily record it
Don't play stupid. Are you actually comparing something like IQ to height? I hope this isn't bait.

>>Don't play stupid. Are you actually comparing something like IQ to height? I hope this isn't bait.
I am showing you that your syllogism doesn't work.
1.X is based on many variables
2.Therefore X cannot be recorded accurately.

It actually was zoroastrian under Persian rule before the muslim invasion though

Except X in this case is a little more abstract than how long a human is.

Attached: 1463825952018.jpg (318x359, 34K)

>Except X in this case is a little more abstract than how long a human is.
That's a separate issue. Your syllogism is still invalid.

BTW, are you an Arab Muslim? Because your brain seems to malfunction and be incapable of handling deductive reasoning like most of the Arabs I've met.

>That's a separate issue.
It really isn't.
>BTW, are you an Arab Muslim? Because your brain seems to malfunction and be incapable of handling deductive reasoning like most of the Arabs I've met.
LOL imagine resorting to insults because you can't handle a conversation. To answer your question, I'm not an Arab or a Muslim. I'm not white though. Does that affect you in anyway?

>Catholicism in Latin America
Latin America was colonized and populated by Iberian Latins, who mixed with local Amerindians, hence certain syncretic stuff like Santa Muerte integrated into their version of Catholicism.

>Catholicism in Latin America
Most of Catholic Africa was colonized by the French, who imposed borders on a bunch of unconnected tribes who have nothing in common but their French colonizers' culture, hence many of these nations still using French as their main language. This carries over into the imposition of French religion as well.

>Islam in India, Africa or Malaysia
Comparable to what I just said about Africa with the French.

>Even the first actual Christian kingdom was in Armenia you mong.
Catholicism is a schism from the so-called Great Church that preceded the schism in 1054. The Armenian Apostolic Church split off some 500 years earlier and is completely irrelevant to my thesis of Catholicism as Latin Christianity; if anything, their creation of their own schismatic church for their distinct ethnic group lends credence to my idea.

>LOL imagine resorting to insults because you can't handle a conversation. To answer your question, I'm not an Arab or a Muslim. I'm not white though. Does that affect you in anyway?
It's very relevant given that you are evidently not intelligent enough to understand how the counterexample I gave shows your syllogism is invalid. Likewise this is a discussion about IQ and countries. Are you Pakistani then?

>be the first people to melt crude bronze
>WE invented metallurgy, WE WUZ creating alloys and crafting with steel

>be the first people to boil water
>WE Invented chemistry, WE WUZ studying in labs whilst wypipo climbed trees

>use a herb to treat illness for the first time
>WE INVENTED modern pharmaceuticals. Chemotherapy? WE did that. HIV treatment? My people :)

>notice a star and name it
>WE WUZ mapping the galaxy n shieet real interstellar niggas

You completely ignore the fact that IQ isn't as easily measured as height is and thus cannot be held to the same standard. You resort to insults because you've run out of arguments to make. It's really quite embarrassing.
>Are you Pakistani then?
Chinese.

>You completely ignore the fact that IQ isn't as easily measured as height is and thus cannot be held to the same standard. You resort to insults because you've run out of arguments to make. It's really quite embarrassing.
I am not taking height to the same standard as IQ. It was a counterexample to your syllogism. I will give you another counterexample.

1. Temperature outside is affected by many variables (cloud cover, latitude, height above sea level, distance from sea, ocean currents, etc.).
2. Therefore temperature cannot be recorded accurately.

I am harping on this because you are hilariously confounded.

>Mesopotamia
>invented metallurgy

Ahhhh, I see what you mean.
>because you are hilariously confounded.
Yeah your height analogy threw me off a bit. To be fair, both of these examples are not the best to relate to something like IQ. This argument can go on forever, and I don't have the energy for that.

How advanced were the Hittites though?

>t.molyneux

Never thought id see a leaf tear an australian a new one yet here we are...

/thread

>This argument can go on forever
No it can't, because you're wrong. It's already over, and you got BTFO by a leaf.

Zoroastrian and Islam negatively affected the gene pool of said areas due to incest. They would also predictably beat Europe to agriculture, and then associated civilizational achievements, seeing as its pretty hard to farm on a glacier.

Exactly, my Ugric brother. Agglutinative Sumerians were Finns.