Thursday, July 20, 2017

Sowell- Liberal intellectuals and hard questions about race differences- Trump era may force them to focus?



This post reviews Thomas Sowell's book: "Intellectuals and Race."  Many conservatives have hailed it- and on Amazon it maintains a robust 4 to 4.5 rating among the faithful. But many positive reviews are thick on uncritical applause, and thin on detail, and it is in many ways, a disappointing read:  full of old examples, avoidance of much of contemporary debates in the area, and  curiously, omits work Sowell himself has done on "Race and intellectuals" when it involves possible criticism of right-wing intellectuals and friends like conservative intellectual Charles Murray. It also, again quite curiously, avoids mention of how CONTEMPORARY RIGHT-WING INTELLECTUALS use and manipulate race, and interesting omission for a book that purports to analyze "intellectuals and race." The work of one of the most prominent, JP Rushton for example, articulates a number of propositions widely accepted by right wing intellectuals- such as  that "altruism" and "law abidingness" brain size, etc prove that differences between the "races" reflect an "ordering" of the races from lower to higher. This is no  mere isolated set of arguments- they are articles of faith among many on the right. Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray brush off Rushton's critics, writing, "Rushton's work is not that of a crackpot or a bigot" (The Bell Curve- pg 642) . As we shall see below, Thomas "Studied Silence" Sowell, seems anxious in this book to avoid critically examining many of such propositions put forward by his libertarian, conservative or "hereditarian" brethren, including those that disparage blacks like himself. This pattern of avoidance involves:

--A focus on old news and examples rather than contemporary data
--Avoidance of discussing many contemporary right wing intellectuals views on race
--A focus on bashing "the liberals" and their sins but maintaining studied silence on right wing scholars
--Avoidance of discussion on the "cosmic solutions" on race that prominent right wing intellectuals endorse
--Omission of Sowell's own critical work where it would substantially call right wing claims into question




The curiously missing members of the right-wing intelligentsia..


Let's bash "the liberals" but Sowell's discussion of numerous right-wing intellectuals on race is curiously missing. 

 As far as right wing intellectuals for example he mostly stops any detailed analysis after about 1940, save for a few exceptions as we shall see. In Chapter 3, we read about Madison Grant, Robert Stoddard, and the racist remarks of H.L. Menecken for example but then Sowell suddenly stops when it comes to any significant analysis of CONTEMPORARY right-wing intellectuals. The exception is Charles Murray, but even when discussing the Bell Curve, Sowell spends some 5 pages talking about critics of Murray and their liberalism while omitting any serious analysis of the weaknesses in Murray's work. More on this below. Sowell does discuss Arthur Jensen, a dean of IQ and race studies, whose seminal 1969 work, established a post 1960s narrative leaning towards genetic determinism. Sowell tries several times to soften Jensen's determinism, citing various qualifying statements made by Jensen. This is not unreasonable, but he likewise skips over statements by Jensen on the opposite end of the pole.

To his credit, Sowell does mention the research of James Flynn, and his "Flynn Effect" and how IQ scores have been rising for years, not only among US blacks who have scores above "100-normal" if calibrated for 1950s scoring norms, but internationally across many nations and cultures as well. This [progress has been concealed by "test norming." This is solid stuff at last, not 2 pages of fluff about "black thugs" (see below). He also notes that Flynn pointed to possible negative influences of US black subculture in depressing IQ scores, since the children of black fathers reared in Germany post higher IQ scores than similar children in the US race environment. Sowell's observations on certain negative aspects of some urban black culture seems borne out by IQ patterns which in very young black children are not that much different from whites, but by high school, the blacks have slipped well behind Asians and Whites. Sowell also does mention over-achievement relative to IQ as with Asians with the same or lower IQ scores, ad his discussion does cast doubt on geneticist claims. But he is careful to spend time bashing "the liberals" while going easy on right-wing geneticist colleagues. Notice that its Professor Jensen's "alternative genetic explanation" below versus "multiculturalist doctrine" below. Apparently Jensen and right-wing intellectuals like Rushton, Lynn, Micahel Levin or Gottfredson, or Dsouza do not have any "doctrine" to criticize. Quote:

"The importance of other factors besides IQ is not a blank check for downplaying or disregarding mental test scores when making employment, college admissions or other decisions. Although empirical evidence shows that Chinese Americans and Japanese Americans tend to perform better in educational institutions than whites with the same mental test scores as themselves, other empirical evidence shows that blacks tend to perform below the level of those whites with the same test scores as themselves.18 Clearly, then, with blacks as with Chinese and Japanese Americans, other factors besides IQs have a significant influence on actual educational outcomes, even though these other factors operate in a different direction for different groups.."

""Professor Jensen offers an alternative, genetic explanation for this pattern, but a similar pattern was also found among low-IQ European immigrant groups in studies in 1916 to 1920, and among white American children in isolated mountain communities studied in 1930 and 1940,70 so it is not a racial peculiarity in a genetic sense. Professor Flynn’s explanation of this same pattern is consistent with the data cited by Klineberg. But these data are completely inconsistent with the prevailing multiculturalists’ doctrine that all cultures are equal. Flynn’s cultural explanation of black-white differences in IQ is also consistent with the otherwise puzzling anomaly that the mental test scores of white soldiers from various Southern states during the First World War were lower than the mental test scores of black soldiers from various Northern states at that time."
--Sowell pages 107-128




Black IQ gains over time. Flynn cannot be said to be in the right-wing camp of scholars like Murray, Rushton or Lynn, and Sowell does skips over one of the notable findings of Flynn- that Black Americans have gained some 4 to 6 IQ points relative to non-Hispanic whites between 1972 and 2002 on 4 major tests of cognitive ability.  Dickens and Flynn (2006) make no claim that their finding covers all tests, and other instruments do not show as large a gain (2-3 points versus 4 to 6.) Nevertheless, depending on the test taken, gains small and large, relative to whites are real, and the range of years showing improvement covers the evils of the welfare state as well as the evil affirmative action years. Yet within this period, the gains were registered. Per Dickens and Flynn- QUOTE:

"It is often asserted that blacks have made no IQ gains on whites, despite relative environmental gains, and that this adds credibility to the case that the black/white IQ gap has genetic origins. Until recently, there have been no adequate data to measure black IQ trends. We analyze data from nine standardization samples for four major tests of cognitive ability. These suggest that blacks have gained 5 or 6 IQ points on non-Hispanic whites between 1972 and 2002. Gains have been fairly uniform across the entire range of black cognitive ability."
--Dickens WT(1), Flynn JR. 2006. Black Americans Reduce the Racial IQ Gap: Evidence from Standardization Samples. Psychol Sci. 2006 Oct;17(10):913-20


Asian advantages up to one-standard deviation. Such gains are in keeping with steadily rising IQs demonstrated by the "Flynn Effect." Even Rushton and Jensen (2005- Thirty Years of research on race differences in cognitive ability) found East Asians to hold a 6 point IQ advantage over whites (106 versus 100), with the strongest Asian performances on more abstract elements such as math. Where Asians are not hampered by a language barrier in comparison to whites such as in math, the East Asian advantage is on the magnitude of one standard deviation or more greater than whites. Per one study (Nisbett 2009):

".. math achievement of the Asian students was leagues beyond that of the U.S. students. The identical problems were given to Japanese, Taiwanese, and American children. By the fifth grade, Taiwanese children scored almost 1 SD better in mathematics than American children, and the Japanese scored 1.30 SDs better than American children..."

And this pattern of one-standard deviation repeats itself for US based East Asians in some studies- Quote:


"By the time they were in high school, the Chinese Americans were scoring one-third of a standard deviation higher than European Americans on achievement tests. At a given IQ level, the Chinese Americans performed one-half of a standard deviation higher on typical achievement tests, compared with European Americans. The overachievement was particularly great on mathematics tests. In tests of calculus and analytic geometry, the Chinese Americans surpassed European Americans by a full standard deviation.
--Richard E. Nisbett. 2009. Intelligence and How to Keep It.  p 163-170


Asians post performances one standard deviation ahead of whites in things like math, but Asians can also concede whites several points in IQ overall to start, yet still outmatch them in university admissions and occupational status, as data from as early as the 1960s shows. PEr Flynn 2012:

".. young people whose parents had come from East Asia made a powerful impression on the public imagination. They were about 2% of the population, but 14% of those at Harvard, 16% at Stanford, 20% at MIT, 21% at Cal Tech, 25% at Berkeley (Flynn, 1991a). When journalists approached Arthur Jensen for an explanation, he said they did so well because they are smarter (Brand, 1987). Anyone who dines at a Chinese restaurant and sees a child sleeping over his school books wake up, stretch, and pick up a book knows that something other than intelligence causes the academic achievements of Chinese-Americans. Flynn (1991a) analyzed the class that graduated from high school in 1966. During their senior year, the Coleman Report confirmed that they had no higher IQs than their white counterparts. However, they could concede whites 4.5 IQ points and match them on the SAT, and concede them almost 7 IQ points and match them for high-school grades. This meant that they could secure entry to the same universities as whites despite lower IQs. In the fall of 1966, Chinese entering Berkeley had an IQ threshold 7 points below whites... When Chinese tell other Chinese that their child has failed, the first question is, a fail or a Chinese fail'? The latter usually means they did not top the class."
--James Flynn. 2012. Are We getting Smarter Yet.  p 177





But aside from the above, also missing are numerous contemporary right-wing intellectuals on race, such as J.P Ruston, (whose books have received supportive praise by the leading conservative publication National Review), Linda Gottfredson, Richard Lynn or Tatu VanHaven. These persons are scholars with advanced credentials. Indeed over 50 scholarly intellectuals such as Professor Linda Gottfredson signed a well publicized Manifesto in the 1990s, (drafted by Gottfredson and published in the prestigious Wall Street Journal) defending the methods of the Bell Curve book. Thomas Sowell somehow can't find room to mention many of these leading right-wing intellectuals, dealing directly with his topic, yet he does manage to find room to mention the finances of Jesse Jackson. He also conveniently skips over lesser qualified, but quite prominent popular right-wing public intellectuals such as Dinesh Dsouza who has written prominently on race as in his own specific book on race- "The End of Racism." These are significant figures on the right-wing side of the racial intellectual spectrum, yet Sowell ducks discussing them- a very curious skip in a book supposedly about "intellectuals and race." He has plenty to say about "the liberals" though- and their would be errors and fallacies on race, and their connection to various "politically correct" organizations, movements or institutions.

Such selectivity certainly serves an ideological function for Sowell. It avoids exposing the fallacies and errors on the other side of the intellectual fence- that is among right wingers. And while the liberals and their PC institutions are freely mentioned, such selectivity avoids the similar connections of the right-wingers to a well financed network of conservative or racialist think thanks, journals, books, conferences, and Internet forums and websites- all energetically propagating a rightward racialist or even racist party-line. Sowell maintains a convenient "politic silence" on what his contemporary right wing buddies are writing, despite a book claiming to examine the wide impact, including the damaging impact of intellectuals on society.


Some popular contemporary right wing intellectuals want to roll back the Civil Rights Act of 1964- Sowell remains silent. Much touted right-wing intellectual Dinesh Dsouza for example, in his 1996 book "The End of Racism" calls for a rollback of numerous protections of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Quote: "Am I calling for a repeal of the Civil Rights Act of 1964? Actually, yes. The law should be changed so that its nondiscrimination provisions apply only to government." (Dsouza, 1996. The End of Racism, p 544).

Other top mainstream conservative intellectuals like William F. Buckley are on record as supporting white supremacy and black inferiority. Thomas Sowell is silent. "In a 1957 editorial, “Why the South Must Prevail” (8/24/57), NR founder William F. Buckley cited the “cultural superiority of white over Negro” in explaining why whites were “entitled to take such measures as are necessary to prevail, politically and culturally, in areas where [they do] not predominate numerically.” Appearing on NPR‘s Fresh Air  in 1989 (rebroadcast 2/28/08), he stood by the passage. “Well, I think that’s absolutely correct,” Buckley told host Terry Gross when she read it back to him." (http://fair.org/extra/william-f-buckley-rest-in-praise/). Buckely is an important public intellectual in his own right, though dedicated to conservatism. Yet, like JP Rushton, he does not even rate a mention in Sowell's book, though marginal figures on the topic like politician Jesse Jackson, get higher billing. As detailed above, the reasons are not hard to fathom.. Given the clear racialism of many right-wing intellectuals, and the weaknesses in their various claims, it is not surprising that Sowell hops and skips around to avoid putting the whole record on the table.


Africans' "failure" to domesticate the dangerous Cape buffalo is evidence of their mental
handicaps say some well known and cited right-wing intellectuals..

Some contemporary right-wing intellectuals seriously distort African history and culture and intellect- Sowell, the master of data analysis, remains silent. For example, in their 2002 book, IQ and the Wealth of Nations,  conservative scholars Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen, advance a farrago of distortion including chastising Africans for "failing" to domesticate species such as the African Cape buffalo, one of the hugest, fiercest ungulates in the world- (it should be noted that in Asia, similar fierce species have not been domesticated either). People opted for milder tempered cattle. But only Africans are condemned as "backward" with seemingly "low mental capacities" for the eminently sensible choice of avoiding large unpredictable, dangerous beasts that are apt to attack nearby humans.

Lynn and Vanhanen show a penchant for making remarkable claims off a flawed dataset and methodology. The estimate "national IQ" of several countries for example by simply using the scores of nearby nations- analogous to say taking New York IQ scores and using them to "represent" Canada. Sample sizes are small and unrepresentative in many cases. As one credible reviewer puts it:

"Of the 185 countries in the sample, ‘direct evidence’ of the ‘national IQ’ is available for only 81.. National IQs for 101 countries are simply estimated from ‘most appropriate neighbouring countries’, that is, the ‘known IQs’ (sic) of their ‘racial groups’ (p 72). But, even for most of the others, ‘direct evidence’ is putting it strongly, as even a cursory glance at the motley tests, dates, ages, unrepresentative samples, estimates, and corrections show. A test of 108 9–15-year olds in Barbados, of 50 13–16-year olds in Colombia, of 104 5– 17-year olds in Ecuador, of 129 6–12-year olds in Egypt, of 48 10–14-year olds in Equatorial Guinea, and so on, and so on, all taken as measures of ‘national IQ’... Their scheme is to take the British Ravens IQ in 1979 as 100, and simply add or subtract 2 or 3 to the scores from other countries for each decade that the relevant date of test departs from that year. The assumptions of size, linearity and universal applicability of this correction across all countries are, of course, hugely questionable if not breathtaking.

Flynn’s original results were from only 14 (recently extended to twenty) industrialised nations, and even those gains varied substantially with test and country and were not linear. For example, recent studies report increases of eight points per decade among Danes; six points per decade in Spain; and 26 points over 14 years in Kenya (confirming the expectation that newly developing countries would show more rapid gains). It is obvious that larger or smaller corrections over larger or smaller numbers of years can transform relative scores and rank orders, especially if the gains are nonlinear. With the measures of GDP, L&V admit that estimates may be ‘highly unreliable for developing countries’ (p 83), excluding up to 50% of the workforce, with often huge differences between males and females, and thus often ‘not strictly comparable across regions’ (p 83). This whole empirical license becomes absurd when the correlation between ‘IQ’ and GDP is extended back to 1820, nearly a century before the IQ test was invented (yes, we just get more ’estimates’)."

--K.Richardson 2004. BOOK REVIEW: IQ and the Wealth of Nations. Heredity (2004) 92, 359-360





It should be noted that Lynn and Vanhanen are not random bloggers off the web, but highly educated degreed professionals, and professors at established universities. Theirs is a serious scholarly attempt to prove that that the great variation presently observed in the per capita wealth of the nations of the world can be explained largely as the effect of the differences in inherited mental capacity existing between prosperous and impoverished countries, capacities that are demonstrated in certain racial groups. If anything should call out for serious analysis in a book on "Intellectuals and race" this book should, for Lynn and Vanhanen are widely cited and recognized for their "racial" work. Other conservative authors it should be noted have directly taken on the Lynn/Vanhanen claims and debunked them thoroughly.  But curiously, Thomas Sowell is a no-show in this book, and does not even mention them in his copious footnotes, which find space for such marginal topics as Jesse Jackson's finances.

Again the pattern of selective cherry-picking and avoidance of anything that might significantly clash with other right wing scholars reveals itself. We will see this pattern repeated below on discussions of Charles Murray. Lynn and Vanhanen's work fits in quite well with the similar "IQ Supreme" arguments of right-wing and libertarian types, including Charles Murray. If anything is tailor-made for examination of "Intellectuals and Race" it is Lynn and Vanhaven's sweeping thesis and detailed statistics. Indeed some of their statistics are shaky- including the use of very small samples and "guessestimates" to make sweeping conclusions about African peoples. If "the liberals" showed such weaknesses, Sowell is on it, like white on rice. But where is Thomas Sowell when it comes to examining such work by his right wing fellow travelers? He is a missing in action.


Woe to ye liberal oppressors and multiculturalists

In Chapter 4, Sowell discusses how intellectuals have ginned up race cards to oppress various minorities. His examples are fair- such as anti-Semitism in Europe, anti-Tamil agitation and violence in Sri Lanka,  the expulsion of Asians in Uganda, and sandbagging of Chinese in Malaya.  In these cases the more efficient or advanced "middleman minorities" were indeed oppressed, and Sowell is quick to point out that this oppression was the product of left-wing or "liberal"/left-influenced elements of those societies, such as those influenced by socialism. These are valid points. But again,Sowell curiously has little to say about RIGHT-WING INTELLECTUALS and how they have ginned up race agitation to oppress minorities. Jews have been massive victims of right-wing intellectuals, but it is not only "advanced peoples" who have suffered. Right-wing  intellectuals in the United States and South Africa have also ginned up massive brews of racism against vulnerable minorities like blacks. Such right-wing activities receive curiously little attention in a book that supposedly deals with Intellectuals and Race.

Curiously, Sowell skips over the cosmic solutions of right-wing intellectuals.. an IQ supremacist society with gutted or eliminated social programs such as Medicaid..


'Final" or "cosmic" solutions to the Race problem- Curious silence on the solutions of right-wing intellectuals.

Negro crime. In Chapter 7- Race and Cosmic Justice" Sowell slams liberal intellectuals for attempting to deliver "justice" to overturn circumstances caused by a wide variety of neutral factors and group behaviors. In short the liberals ignore real world differenced between races, holding for example that all cultures are equally valid, and ominously- quote: "leaving nothing but an agenda of resentment-building and crusades on the side of the angels against the forces of evil." This is certainly true as to SOME "PC" venues to such as some college campuses. He then launches into a discussion of race and crime, where he cites racist author Colin Flatherty on blacks attacking whites as if this were the sum total of the "race and crime" universe, and opines that liberal "celebration of cultural differences" is part of the reason for such crimes or "condoning" of them. But this only illustrates Sowell's shaky strawman approach. No credible black legislator or civil rights leader "celebrated" or "condoned" the black on white attacks, nor attempted to "justify" them in the name of "diversity." As regards various "knockout" attacks carried out by black youths for example, people like the infamous Al Sharpton, the classic bogeyman himself, actually vigorously CONDEMNED them, but such is not mentioned by Sowell in his cherry-picked illustrations of "the liberals" and how they are "condoning" black crime. See: ("Knockout Games-The Biggest Form of Cowardice; by Rev. Al Sharpton". Huffingtonpost.com. 2013-11-25. Retrieved 2013-12-08)

Sowell then jumps to slavery and speaks extensively that black slavery was not the only type of slavery, slavery is an old phenomenon, and so on. Indeed, but all this is rather obvious. It it really news that there were slaves in the white Roman empire? And who is "denying" that blacks polities on Africa sold numerous blacks to Europeans to be slaves on Western Hemisphere plantations? Oh, and the word "slave" is derived from the Eastern European "slav." This is really fresh news. And then, suddenly the chapter ends. Sowell has little more to say.



Strangely missing- the "cosmic" right-wing solution of massive government cutbacks in social programs, including elimination of Medicaid, Unemployment Insurance, and Worker's Compensation.  Interestingly, as regards "cosmic justice" Sowell does not substantially discuss right-wing intellectuals and their search for "cosmic justice." Such intellectuals for example have invoked a number of "solutions" where blacks are concerned- ranging from deportation of blacks "back to Africa", to contemporary eugenics,  to the systematic disenfranchisement and denial of basic rights and opportunities available to white Americans. In south Africa, the white apartheid government's "cosmic" solution to the race problem was to develop segregated, widely fragmented "Bantusans" on a tiny fraction of the worse land, while whites controlled and owned 90% of the land. Apartheid regime organs cranked out detailed intellectual justifications for this "separate development" policy. In the United States, Richard Herrenstein and Charles Murray worked out their own "cosmic solution" to the race problem. Since IQ was such a strong predictor of life outcomes why bother with all the social programs in place to help the poor, particularly poor blacks? Part of the cosmic solution package for these excessively dependent low IQ people would therefore involve the "tough love" advocated in earlier books such as "Losing Ground." The solution would involve - quote: "completely scrapping the entire federal welfare and income-support structure for working aged persons, including AFDC, Medicaid, Food Stamps, Unemployment Insurance, Worker's Compensaion, subsidized housing, disability insurance and the rest." (Murray, Losing Ground, p 227-228).

While he later backtracked to generously posit some aid, such as food aid to hungry children, or a small level of unemployment insurance, Murray's fundamental vision remains fundamentally unchanged in The Bell Curve. It should be noted also that Arthur Jensen regarded compensaatory social programs as useless, given what he sees as fixed racial genetic capabilities. But curiously, Sowell has nothing to say about such right-wing "cosmic solutions" even though- they were put into practical operation in South African apartheid, and put in place partially during the 1980s era Reagan cutback regime. In other words, they are/were more than mere intellectual "thought experiments." Since the bulk of the pain by the right wing "solutions" would be felt by lower IQ blacks, the "solution" obviously has racial implications. 

Indeed,  much of the research cited by Bell Curve authors Murray and Herrenstein was funded by the racialist, right-wing eugenics advocating Pioneer Fund, of which several key right-wing intellectuals have received money- such as Linda Gottfredson, a Pioneer Fund grant recipient . J.P. Rushton too, has benefited handsomely from the Pioneer Fund which funded the research and distribution of 35,000 unsolicited copies of his book Race, Evolution and Behavior: A Life History Perspective to psychologists, sociologists, and anthropologists in Canada and the United States. A 2nd edition of the book (also abridged) was sent out, again unsolicited, to scholars in 2000." The Fund was set up in 1937 by Wickliffe Draper, a millionaire who advocated sending blacks back to Africa. The foundation's charter set forth the group's missions as "racial betterment" and aid for people "deemed to be descended primarily from white persons who settled in the original 13 states prior to the adoption of the Constitution of the United States." The charter was slightly toned down in 1985 in reaction to critical scrutiny but its controllers have never renounced its fundamental objectives completely. The racial basis of the "cut off spending on them" solutions is obvious, despite proponents attempt to veil it, and it has hearty endorsement by two of the leading right-wing intellectuals, Charles Murray and Richard Herrenstein, and even Arthur Jensen. Yet Sowell, while quick to condemn "the liberals," is curiously silent on such matters. 

Doing the "prima facie" limbo..

Sowell presents an alarming picture of "courts gone wild" on race- Quote:


"When an employer’s mix of employees shows an “underrepresentation” of designated minorities (or women), either in general or in more advanced positions, that is taken as prima facie evidence of discrimination, whether deliberate or as a result of using criteria with a “disparate impact” on particular groups... No speck of evidence is required from those who implicitly assume that employee composition would be similar to population composition, in the absence of discrimination. Moreover, not one flesh-and-blood human being who even claims to have been discriminated against is necessary for “disparate impact” cases to go forward in a costly legal process. Statistics alone are sufficient to establish the “disparate impact” case that employers must rebut." (page 197)

But this is disingenuous, and shows Sowell's penchant for cherry picking anecdotes, and/or misrepresenting complex issues to fit his particular ideological basket. Few sane employment discrimination plaintiffs show up in court with merely a statistical showing that say, blacks are underrepresented in a particular job. As any basic book on employment law shows or even personnel management textbook that discusses employment discrimination in detail shows, plaintiffs definitely have to bring more than "a speck" of proof. Plaintiffs also typically have to show such things as whether the employer has a history of discrimination, whether the employer's practices -such as white only "word of mouth" recruitment approaches were appropriate, and so on. Furthermore courts considering "disparate impact" have recognized that Plaintiffs must show a sufficiently large number of samples for any statistics proffered to be significant or credible (Haggard 2009-below). 

Sowell footnotes the landmark Griggs versus Duke case in a discussion of testing and job criteria but the very case he cites in his book debunks his "courts gone wild" insinuations. In Griggs versus Duke, the plaintiffs had to show up with proof of past discrimination practices, including how blacks were sandbagged for years into lesser skilled positions, and how "new" test requirements grand- fathered in all the whites in their higher slots, without them having to take any of the new tests. The Court in Griggs indeed noted that the fact that a practice or policy has disparate impart on minorities does not conclusively establish its illegality, and unintentional discriminatory effects could be justified. Quote: "The touchstone is business necessity.." Plaintiffs in Griggs showed up not with a "speck" of "mere" statistics, but a virtual dump truck of many types of proof.

Furthermore in Griggs, the Court found that new, allegedly "needed" job qualifications that served to sandbag black employees, did not bear much relation to job performance. The employer in this case suddenly implemented the "new" job requirement layers shortly after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 passed, ensuring that black workers would not derive substantial benefit. In view of such blunt realities, "disparate impact" can be a valid way (it is not a perfect mechanism) of ferreting out illegal employer behavior. In another important case, Albermarle Paper v. Moody the Supreme Court actually laid out a systematic three step process for proving disparate impact- relevant statistics, business necessity, and sufficient rebuttal by the Plaintiff that Defendant could use bona fide alternative practices not having disparate impact. All this is far from the "courts gone wild" picture insinuated by Sowell. (See such basic texts for example as Thomas R. Haggard. 2009 Understanding Employment Discrimination Law).  


Curses! Disparate impact again! The end of legal tradition is nigh..

Sowell further insinuates race cases as peculiarly sinister to legal tradition - Quote: 

"Not only in the American media and popular discourse, but in academic institutions and in courts of law— all the way up to the Supreme Court of the United States— no burden of proof whatever is required for the presumption that disparate outcomes at a given institution constitute prima facie evidence of discrimination at that institution, which legally shifts the burden of proof of innocence to the accused, contrary to legal traditions in other contexts, where it is the accuser who has the burden of proof, whether in criminal or civil cases." (pg 34)

No burden of proof whatsoever? Huh? What about having credible sample sizes to make statistical claims or other items that are weighed by judges as detailed above? And is it really only where such race cases are concerned that accusers have an initially low burden of proof? Really? This is hyped drama. A relatively low prima facie requirement is nothing unusual- such appear throughout the legal systems. For example, in patent cases, various materiality rules  are sometimes cited as just such a low bar, likewise the same phenomenon occurs in domain name registration cases. Interestingly enough, white Jews have made profitable use of statistical "disparity" arguments in opening up long denied opportunities- see for example- (Harold Wechsler. 2014. The Qualified Student: A History of Selective College Admission in America). There is a reason for low bars, and they have been useful in cracking entrenched systems of  discrimination in employment. As anyone who has learned anything about discrimination law would know, a low bar for a prima facie case does not mean "no bar." A low bar only stops your case from being quickly thrown out initially. You still have to make a convincing case before the judge(s).  

Employment discrimination plaintiffs almost always face an uphill battle. Employers have numerous advantages including the ability to simply wear down the typically unemployed plaintiff by dragging out the legal process, a favorable monopoly on many types of evidence kept on company premises, and having a favorable lineup of witnesses they control- usually other employees. They also only need show credible business necessity for a policy or practice- in which case the burden shifts to the Plaintiff. Recognition of these disadvantages and imbalances of power is in part, the reason courts or legislators set an initial low prima facie bar. But that is only initially. And discrimination plaintiffs face a costly legal process themselves- often unemployed, having to front lawyer's fees, paying various admin costs, and waiting YEARS for resolution. And they don’t go to court immediately, they first have to go through the EEOC bureaucracy which has a case backlog measured in YEARS for those content to wait. Even those who obtain a streamlined EEOC release, still have to go to court and face years of legal struggle, with all their attendant costs. Does all the above mean that there have been no abuses of disparate impact or weak cases? NO of course not. But abuses and weak cases occur in every field of litigation- race discrimination cases are not any "unusual" phenomenon supposedly "destroying" the system. And as already shown above, modest prima facie requirements in legal conflicts are nothing special, and there is no "easy" road requiring a mere "speck" of something, as dramatically insinuated by Thomas Sowell.  






Wither the Bell Curve? Sowell spends  a lot of time lashing back at critics but mysteriously hops and skips around his own earlier analysis that revealed the weaknesses of the Bell Curve's arguments.

Up above it was noted that Sowell is mysteriously missing in action when it appears he might have to substantially critique the works of right-wing intellectuals. His discussion of Charles Murray's "The Bell Curve" may seem like an exception, but... He devotes almost 8 pages to it in chapter 5, much of the time defending authors Charles Murray against the charge of being genetic determinists, But again, a curious omission. In the 1995 book, "The Bell Curve Wars," Sowell specifically discusses the book and while noting its strengths, also discusses a number of glaring weaknesses- including how the Flynn effect undermines certain Bell Curve arguments, and the naive use of statistical correlations. Amazingly, while Sowell has the time and space to devote 2 pages to "black thugs" attacking white people, and even works in Jesse's finances, he can barely muster 2 lines specifically addressing weaknesses in one of the most prominent books impacting the race issue by a public intellectual in the last 20 years. But that is not surprising since the intellectual is a right-wing author and a personal friend of Sowell. Sowell quickly ducks and runs, saying that he "elsewhere" addressed the Bell Curve. Now why such a curious omission when you have space for 8 pages of pro-Bell Curve argument, and at least 2 for "negro thugs"? Turns out that Sowell's  critique highlights some arguments of his right-wing intellectual colleague in a very unflattering light. Let's quote what Thomas Sowell can't seem to find space for:


QUOTE:
"[Herrnstein and Murray] seem to conclude... that... biological inheritance of IQ... among members of the general society may also explain IQ differences between different racial and ethnic groups.... Such a conclusion goes... much beyond what the facts will support....

[T]he greatest black-white differences are not on the questions which presuppose middle-class vocabulary or experiences, but on abstract questions such as spatial perceptual ability.... [Herrnstein and Murray's] conclusion that this "phenomenon seems peculiarly concentrated in comparisons of ethnic groups" is simply wrong. When European immigrant groups in the United States scored below the national average on mental tests, they scored lowest on the abstract parts of those tests. So did white mountaineer children in the United States tested back in the early 1930s. So did canal boat children in Britain, and so did rural British children compared to their urban counterparts, at a time before Britain had any significant non-white population. So did Gaelic-speaking children as compared to English-speaking children in the Hebrides Islands. This is neither a racial nor an ethnic peculiarity. It is a characteristic found among low-scoring groups of European as well as African ancestry.

 ...... quote by Sowell from the Bell Curve Wars (1995), continued.. 

In short, groups outside the cultural mainstream of contemporary Western society tend to do their worst on abstract questions, whatever their race might be.... Perhaps the strongest evidence against a genetic basis for intergroup differences in IQ is that the average level of mental test performance has changed very significantly for whole populations over time and, moreover, particular ethnic groups within the population have changed their relative positions during a period when there was very little intermarriage to change the genetic makeup of these groups.

While The Bell Curve cites the work of James R. Flynn, who found substantial increases in mental test performances from one generation to the next in a number of countries around the world, the authors seem not to acknowledge the devastating implications of that finding for the genetic theory of intergroup differences, or for their own reiteration of long-standing claims that the higher fertility of low-IQ groups implies a declining national IQ level. This latter claim is indeed logically consistent with the assumption that genetics is a major factor in interracial differences in IQ scores. But ultimately this too is an empirical issue--and empirical evidence has likewise refuted the claim that IQ test performance would decline over time.

Even before Professor Flynn's studies, mental test results from American soldiers tested in World War II showed that their performances on these tests were higher than the performances of American soldiers in World War I by the equivalent of about 12 IQ points. Perhaps the most dramatic changes were those in the mental test performances of Jews in the United States. The results of World War I mental tests conducted among American soldiers born in Russia--the great majority of whom were Jews--showed such low scores as to cause Carl Brigham, creator of the Scholastic Aptitude Test, to declare that these results "disprove the popular belief that the Jew is highly intelligent." Within a decade, however, Jews in the United States were scoring above the national average on mental tests, and the data in The Bell Curve indicate that they are now far above the national average in IQ.

 ...... quote by Sowell from the Bell Curve Wars (1995), continued.. 
The implications of such rising patterns of mental test performance is devastating to the central hypothesis of those who have long expressed the same fear as Herrnstein and Murray, that the greater fertility of low-IQ groups would lower the national (and international) IQ over time. The logic of their argument seems so clear and compelling that the opposite empirical result should be considered a refutation of the assumptions behind that logic....

A man who scores 100 on an IQ test today is answering more questions correctly than his grandfather with the same IQ answered two-generations ago, then someone else who answers the same number of questions correctly today as this man's grandfather answered two generations ago may have an IQ of 85.

Herrnstein and Murray openly acknowledge such rises in IQ and christen them "the Flynn effect," in honor of Professor Flynn who discovered it. But they seem not to see how crucially it undermines the case for a genetic explanation of interracial IQ differences. They say:

"The national averages have in fact changed by amounts that are comparable to the fifteen or so IQ points separating blacks and whites in America. To put it another way, on the average, whites today differ from whites, say, two generations ago as much as whites today differ from blacks today. Given their size and speed, the shifts in time necessarily have been due more to changes in the environment than to changes in the genes."
 ...... quote by Sowell from the Bell Curve Wars (1995), continued.. 
While this open presentation of evidence against the genetic basis of interracial IQ differences is admirable, the failure to draw the logical inference seems puzzling. Blacks today are just as racially different from whites of two generations ago as they are from whites today. Yet the data suggest that the number of questions that blacks answer correctly on IQ tests today is very similar to the number answered correctly by past generations of whites. If race A differs from race B in IQ, and two generations of race A differ from each other by the same amount, where is the logic in suggesting that the IQ differences are even partly racial?

  Herrnstein and Murray do not address this question, but instead shift to a discussion of public policy..

Perhaps the most intellectually troubling aspect of The Bell Curve is the authors' uncritical approach to statistical correlations. One of the first things taught in introductory statistics is that correlation is not causation. It is also one of the first things forgotten, and one of the most widely ignored facts in public policy research. The statistical term "multicollinearity," dealing with spurious correlations, appears only once in this massive book.

  Multicollinearity refers to the fact that many variables are highly correlated with one another, so that it is very easy to believe that a certain result comes from variable A, when in fact it is due to variable Z, with which A happens to be correlated. In real life, innumerable factors go together. An example I liked to use in class when teaching economics involved a study showing that economists with only a bachelor's degree had higher incomes than economists with a master's degree and that these in turn had higher incomes than economists with Ph.D.'s. The implication that more education in economics leads to lower incomes would lead me to speculate as to how much money it was costing a student just to be enrolled in my course. In this case, when other variables were taken into account, these spurious correlations disappeared. In many other cases, however, variables such as cultural influences cannot even be quantified, much less have their effects tested statistically...."
ENDQUOTE
--Thomas Sowell, 1995. The Bell Curve Wars



Summary and bottom line

Notice how several points above contradict the Bell Curve. Sowell does not even bother to summarize his critique, just skips it altogether, though he has plenty of space for "negro thugs." All is not avoidance. Sowell in Chapter 5 does mention things such as the similarly low IQ scores for white people suffering from isolation or poverty. And he notes IQ gaps are not unusual among and within groups and yes, Asians do post higher IQs hat whites. But none of these SUBSTANTIALLY touches the arguments of right wing intellectuals, and Sowell does not want too much scrutiny applied to them, as compared to "the liberals." Among these arguments is repealing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and total elimination of many social programs and spending such as Medicare, unemployment insurance and workers compensation. Other arguments maintain black genetic inferiority and roll out numerous shaky statistics and methodology in support. Sowell avoids most of it. Such ducking serves an important ideological function- exempting RIGHT-WING intellectuals from too much scrutiny, particularly those to whom he is connected financially and ideologically. Given all the omissions, the result is a book that is much less useful than it could have been in understanding "Intellectuals and race."

While some of Sowell's work is still good, a significant slice of it must be taken with a grain of salt, considering the many libertarian and hereditarian ideological axes he grinds, the things he omits, and the right wingers he avoids. Modern day workers in this area like Zambian scientist Chanda Chisala offer a more nuanced view, with more current data. He does not duck taking on right-wing intellectuals, or "hereditarian" racialists here for example, where he demonstrates that the higher test performances of African immigrants undermines assorted "racial regression" claims.

------------------------------------------------




LINKS TO OTHER POSTS:


Sowell 3- new data shows backward tropical evolution? Wealth and Poverty- An International Perspective in Trump era
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2017/07/sowell-3-new-data-shows-backward.html

Sowell 2- Wealth, Poverty and Politics- International Perspective - Trump era to bring these issues into sharper focus?
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2017/07/sowell-2-wealth-poverty-and-politics.html

Sowell- Liberal intellectuals and hard questions about race differences- Trump era may force them to focus?
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2017/07/sowell-liberal-intellectuals-and-hard.html


Trump properties discriminated against black tenants lawsuit finds
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2016/07/trump-properties-discriminated-against.html

Stealing credibility- Dinesh D'souza has prison epiphany- after hanging with the homies- Hallelujah Hilary!
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2016/05/straining-credibility-dinesh-dsouza-has.html

Shame on you, and your guilt too- A review of Shelby Steele's 'Shame'
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2016/05/a-review-wealth-poverty-and-politics.html


Go with the flow 3- more DNA and cranial studies show ancient African migration to, or African presence in ancient Europe
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2016/04/go-with-flow-3-more-dna-and-cranial.html

Go with the flow 2- African gene flow into Europe in various eras
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2015/11/go-with-flow-2-african-gene-flow-into.html


DNA studies show African movement to Europe from very ancient times
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2015/09/dna-studies-show-african-movement-to.html

Guilt3- Why the "white privilege industry" is not all there
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2015/09/guilt3-why-white-privilege-industry-is.html

Guilt2- Media collaborates with guilt mongers - or how to play the white victim card
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2015/09/guilt2-media-collaborates-with-guilt.html

How Obama plays on white guilt
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2015/08/how-obama-plays-upon-white-guilt-hilary.html

Blacks oppose free speech- more ramshackle "research" from "the East"..
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2015/08/blacks-oppose-free-speech-ramshackle.html

Hands off the Confederate flag
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2015/06/hands-off-confederate-flag.html

Despite much more wealth than blacks, whites collect about the same rate of welfare and are treated more generously
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2015/06/despite-much-more-wealth-than-blacks.html

African "boat people" ushering in European demographic decline
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2015/05/african-boat-people-ushering-in.html



The forgotten Holocaust- King Leopold's "Congo Free State" - 10 million victims
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-forgotten-holocaust-10-million-in.html


Are violent minorities taking over California and the West?
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2015/04/are-violent-minorities-taking-over.html

Presidential hopeful Ben Carson meets and Greeks
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2015/03/presidential-hopeful-ben-carson-meet.html

Contra "ISIS" partisans, there have been some beneficial effects of Christianity
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2015/03/contra-isis-partisans-there-are-some.html


The social construction of race, compared to biology- Graves
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2015/02/the-social-construction-of-race_8.html

Why HBD or hereditarianism lacks credibility
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2014/10/why-hbd-or-hereditarianism-lacks.html

Leading Scientists criticize hereditarian claims
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2014/08/leading-scientists-criticize.html

Thai me down - Thais fall behind genetically related southern Chinese, Tibetans below genetically related East Asians like Koreans and other Chinese
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2014/08/thai-me-up-thai-me-down.html

Time for liberals to respect "the south" ... in a way of speaking.. the south of Egypt that is..
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2014/08/time-for-liberals-to-respect-south-in.html

Irony 2: touted High IQ "G-men" cannot reproduce themselves 
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2014/07/irony-2-higher-iqs-correlated-with_25.html



Unz and Sowell: Unz debunking Lynn's IQ and Wealth of Nations. Sowell debunking the Bell Curve
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2014/07/unz-and-sowell-unz-debunking-lynns-iq.html

Irony 1: touted High IQ types are more homosexual, more atheist, and more liberal (HAL)
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2014/06/irony-high-iqs-produce-more-atheists.html


Elite white universities discriminate against Asians using reverse "affirmative action"
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2014/06/elite-white-universities-discriminate.html

Deteriorating state of white America
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2014/05/deteriorating-state-of-white-america.html


Racial Cartels (The Affirmative Action Propaganda machine- part 2
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-affirmative-action-propaganda.html

Hereditarian's/HBD's "Great Black Hope"
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2014/04/blog-post.html



Exploding nonsense: the 10,000 Year Explosion
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2014/03/exploding-nonsense-review-of-cochran_8.html


We need "rational racism"- Convicted felon Dinesh Dsouza becomes his own test case
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2014/01/we-need-rational-racism-proponent.html

The Affirmative Action Propaganda Machine- part 1
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2014/01/the-affirmatve-action-propaganda.html

Two rules for being "really" black- no white wimmen, no Republican
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2014/01/to-be-really-black-you-cant-have-white.html

The Axial age reconsidered
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2014/01/the-axial-age-reconsidered.html

Cannibal seasonings: dark meat on white
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2013/12/i.html

"Affirmative Action" in the form of court remedies has been around a long time- since the 1930s- benefiting white union workers against discrimination by employers
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2013/09/affirmative-action-as-term-appears-in.html

Mugged by reality 1: White quotas, special preferences and government jobs
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2013/06/mugged-by-reality-1-white-quotas.html


Lightweight enforcement of EEO laws contradicts claims of "flood" of minorities "taking jobs"
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2013/06/blog-post.html

Railroaded 3: white violence and intimidation imposed quotas
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2013/06/railroaded-3-white-violence-and.html

Railroaded 2: how white quotas and special preferences blockade black progress...
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2013/06/railroaded-2-thow-white-quotas-and.html

Railroaded 1: How white affirmative action and white special preferences destroyed black railroad employment...
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2013/06/railroaded-how-white-affirmative-action.html

Affirmative action: primary beneficiaries are white women
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2011/04/affirmative-action-primary.html

7 reasons certain libertarians and right-wingers are wrong about the Civil Right Act
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2012/05/7-reasons-libertarians-may-be-wrong.html

Assorted "Role models" debunked- hypocritical hereditarianism
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2009/11/hbd-debunked-debunking-hypocritical.html


Social philosophy of Thomas Sowell
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2011/07/social-philosophy-of-thomas-sowell.html


Additional gene flow data... :)


Bogus "biodiversity" theories of Kanazawa, Ruston, Lynn debunked
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2010/09/blog-post.html

JP Rushton, Michael Levin, Richard Lynn debunked. Weaknesses of Jared Diamond's approach. 
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2010/04/blog-post_1818.html

In the Blood- debunking "HBD" and Neo-Nazi appropriation of ancient Egypt
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2009/11/blog-post_29.html

early Europeans and middle Easterners looked like Africans. Peoples returning or "backflowing" to Africa would already be looking like Africans
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2010/05/blog-post_1754.html

 Ancient Egypt: one of the world's most advanced civilizations- created by tropical peoples
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2010/09/blog-post_06.html

Playing the "Greek defence" -debunking claims of Greeks as paragons of virtue or exemplars of goodness
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2013/03/playing-greek-defence-review-of-thornton.html

Quotations from mainstream academic research on the Nile Valley peoples
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2010/04/blog-post_9251.html


http://egyptsearchreloaded.proboards.com/thread/15/basic-database-nile-valley-studies



OTHER LINKS
Race, IQ, and Wealth: What the facts tell us about a taboo subject By Ron Unz


HBD EVOLUTION, BRAIN SIZE AND NATIONAL IQ CLAIMS DEBUNKED
Evolution, brain size, and the national IQ of peoples ... - Jelte Wicherts 2010
http://wicherts.socsci.uva.nl/wichertsPAIDrejoinder.pdf
------------------------------------

Why national IQs do not support evolutionary theories of intelligence - WIcherts, Borsboom and Dolan 2010
Personality and Individual Differences 48 (2010) 91-96
http://wicherts.socsci.uva.nl/wicherts2010.pdf
----------------------------- -------------

Are intelligence tests measurement invariant over time? by JM Wicherts - ?2004
 --Dolan, Wicherts et al 2004. Investigating the nature of the Flynn effect. Intelligence 32 (2004) 509-537
http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/wicherts2004.pdf
-------------------------------------------

LYNN AND VANHAVEN'S IQ AND THE WEALTH OF NATIONS DEBUNKED
---------------- -------

www.anth.uconn.edu/faculty/mcbrearty/Pdf/McB%20&%20Brooks%202000%20TRTW.pdf

------------------------

Race and other misadventures: essays in honor of Ashley Montagu... By Larry T. Reynolds, Leonard Lieberman

http://books.google.com/books?id=5DLrgG_MflgC&pg=PA190&dq=r-+k-+selection+races&cd=1#v=onepage&q=r-%20k-%20selection%20races&f=false
--------------------------------

Race and intelligence: separating science from myth. By Jefferson M. Fish. Routledge 2002. See Templeton's detailed article referenced above also inside the book

http://books.google.com/books?id=t9OdPPLIgMAC&pg=PA64&dq=r-+k-+selection+races&cd=7#v=onepage&q=r-%20k-%20selection%20races&f=false
------------------------

http://www.ogiek.org/indepth/what-they-mean.htm
---------------- -------

Oubre, A (2011) Race Genes and Ability: Rethinking Ethnic Differences, vol 1 and 2. BTI Press
For summary see: http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/05-02-18/
---------------- -------

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~chance/course/topics/curveball.html

-----------------------------------------------------------

--S OY Keita, R A Kittles, et al. "Conceptualizing human variation," Nature Genetics 36, S17 - S20 (2004)
http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n11s/pdf/ng1455.pdf


--S.O.Y. Keita and Rick Kittles. (1997) *The Persistence ofRacial Thinking and the Myth of Racial Divergence. AJPA, 99:3
http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/pageDocuments/WAURRSZQOE.pdf
---------------- -------

HBD RACE EVOLUTION CLAIMS DEBUNKED BY GENETICISTS
Alan Templeton. "The Genetic and Evolutionary significnce oF Human Races." pp 31-56. IN: J. FiSh (2002) Race and Intelligence: Separating scinnce from myth.

IQ claims and miscellaneous data
HBD RACE AND INTELLIGENCE CLAIMS DEBUNKED
 J. FiSh (2002) Race and Intelligence: Separating science from myth.

------------------------------------------





MORE HBD DEBUNKING
-------------------------------- ---------------------



Oubre, A (2011) Race Genes and Ability: Rethinking Ethnic Differences, vol 1 and 2. BTI Press
----------------------------------------------

Krimsky, S, Sloan.K (2011) Race and the Genetic Revolution: Science, Myth, and Culture
-------------------------------


Wicherts and Johnson, 2009. Group differences in the heritability of items and test scores
http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2009/04/24/rspb.2009.0238.full


http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2013/06/coming-apart-can-murrays-down-with.html


"SELECTION FOR"- "SELECT FOR" HDB CLAIMS DEBUNKED- "SELECTION" IS NOT THE ONLY KEY FORCE DRIVING CHANGE
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2012/12/demic-diffusion-notes-and-tropical.html

http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2012/05/7-reasons-libertarians-may-be-wrong.html

http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2012/08/cro-magnons-are-us-debunking-claims.html

http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2014/03/exploding-nonsense-review-of-cochran_8.html



--Joseph Graves, 2006. What We Know and What We Don’t Know: Human Genetic Variation and the Social Construction of Race
http://raceandgenomics.ssrc.org/Graves/

J. Kahn (2013) How a Drug Becomes "Ethnic" - Yale Journal of Health Policy, Law and Ethics, v4:1
http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1072&context=yjhple

------------------------------------ -----------------

http://evolution.binghamton.edu/evos/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/PageProofs-Graves_race.pdf

-------------------------------------------- ----------------------------



other links



Evolution, brain size, and the national IQ of peoples ... - Jelte Wicherts 2010
http://wicherts.socsci.uva.nl/wichertsPAIDrejoinder.pdf
------------------------------------

Why national IQs do not support evolutionary theories of intelligence - WIcherts, Borsboom and Dolan 2010
Personality and Individual Differences 48 (2010) 91-96
http://wicherts.socsci.uva.nl/wicherts2010.pdf
----------------------------- -------------

Are intelligence tests measurement invariant over time? by JM Wicherts - ?2004
 --Dolan, Wicherts et al 2004. Investigating the nature of the Flynn effect. Intelligence 32 (2004) 509-537
http://www.iapsych.com/iqmr/fe/LinkedDocuments/wicherts2004.pdf
-------------------------------------------

LYNN AND VANHAVEN'S IQ AND THE WEALTH OF NATIONS DEBUNKED
---------------- -------

www.anth.uconn.edu/faculty/mcbrearty/Pdf/McB%20&%20Brooks%202000%20TRTW.pdf

------------------------

Race and other misadventures: essays in honor of Ashley Montagu... By Larry T. Reynolds, Leonard Lieberman

http://books.google.com/books?id=5DLrgG_MflgC&pg=PA190&dq=r-+k-+selection+races&cd=1#v=onepage&q=r-%20k-%20selection%20races&f=false
--------------------------------

Race and intelligence: separating science from myth. By Jefferson M. Fish. Routledge 2002. See Templeton's detailed article referenced above also inside the book

http://books.google.com/books?id=t9OdPPLIgMAC&pg=PA64&dq=r-+k-+selection+races&cd=7#v=onepage&q=r-%20k-%20selection%20races&f=false
------------------------

http://www.ogiek.org/indepth/what-they-mean.htm
---------------- -------

Oubre, A (2011) Race Genes and Ability: Rethinking Ethnic Differences, vol 1 and 2. BTI Press
For summary see: http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/05-02-18/
---------------- -------

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~chance/course/topics/curveball.html

-----------------------------------------------------------

--S OY Keita, R A Kittles, et al. "Conceptualizing human variation," Nature Genetics 36, S17 - S20 (2004)
http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n11s/pdf/ng1455.pdf


--S.O.Y. Keita and Rick Kittles. (1997) *The Persistence ofRacial Thinking and the Myth of Racial Divergence. AJPA, 99:3
http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/pageDocuments/WAURRSZQOE.pdf
---------------- -------

HBD RACE EVOLUTION CLAIMS DEBUNKED BY GENETICISTS
Alan Templeton. "The Genetic and Evolutionary significnce oF Human Races." pp 31-56. IN: J. FiSh (2002) Race and Intelligence: Separating scinnce from myth.


HBD RACE AND INTELLIGENCE CLAIMS DEBUNKED
 J. FiSh (2002) Race and Intelligence: Separating science from myth.

------------------------------------------




MORE HBD DEBUNKING
-------------------------------- ---------------------

Oubre, A (2011) Race Genes and Ability: Rethinking Ethnic Differences, vol 1 and 2. BTI Press
----------------------------------------------

Krimsky, S, Sloan.K (2011) Race and the Genetic Revolution: Science, Myth, and Culture
-------------------------------


Wicherts and Johnson, 2009. Group differences in the heritability of items and test scores
http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2009/04/24/rspb.2009.0238.full


http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2013/06/coming-apart-can-murrays-down-with.html


"SELECTION FOR"- "SELECT FOR" HDB CLAIMS DEBUNKED- "SELECTION" IS NOT THE ONLY KEY FORCE DRIVING CHANGE
http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2012/12/demic-diffusion-notes-and-tropical.html

http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2012/05/7-reasons-libertarians-may-be-wrong.html

http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2012/08/cro-magnons-are-us-debunking-claims.html

http://nilevalleypeoples.blogspot.com/2014/03/exploding-nonsense-review-of-cochran_8.html

No comments: