r u serious

No

The website shows

Most of the time the conclusion is abstract and doesn't reflect the data

the data is more important lol exactly run 50

MULTIPLE articles

where they both contradict each other

It's been proven that nurture means very little with regard to IQ lol

Because it's genetic

Proof?

GG @ElectraX, you just advanced to level 10!

Why is this a debate

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/race-iq-and-wealth/

Ok

The rest of the paper is in French, making it hard for me to read it closely, but its summary table (on page 67 and unnumbered) is clear enough: the sample’s mean score on the WISC/WPPSI was 116.6 with a standard deviation of 11.04. The mean VIQ was 110.8 and the mean PIQ was 119.8. Making the same Flynn effect adjustment as for Frydman and Lynn [11] leads to a mean VIQ of 99 and a mean PIQ of 96–100, both less than the Belgian norm. Subtracting an adoptive boost effect would bring them lower.

Ok so the oh so pure white race which I’m guessing you are part of. They sampled iqs in a bunch of European countries which have effectively identical genes and they found 10 point or more differences in iq

It’s due almost entirely to environmental factors

Not genetic factors

Pomp isn't white

lol

@ElectraX https://archive.is/o/LRe05/www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/016028969290028P

lol

You're trying to link race realism to racial supremacy and it's cringe

You just showed them scoring higher

yes whites scoring higher

than blacks in white households

on average

it says

Under the Scarr and Weinberg st4udy

White is 25

Blacks adopted by whites is

68

and blacks raised by black is

im talking abt iq

29

How do you account for the massive iq differences between the genetically similar European countries

those are all

IQ tests

but they are weighed different

by different studies