Message from @bleachgang
Discord ID: 471521920094044160
You're not current in your understanding of the field. I encourage you to dig deeper.
You can beleive a phsyciatrist is a valid profession but 90% is not based in science.
It is based on behaviour studies. Not the same.
Your assertions imagined
Ok.
Papers do a good job highlighting to fallacy
Invalid; do the math
The fallacy isn't there.
A fallacy can exist; in IQ studies it doesn't - potential problems have all been accounted for
"As of now, the predictions are not highly accurate. The DNA variations that have been linked to test scores explain less than 10 percent of the intelligence differences between the people of European ancestry who’ve been studied."
Where is the control variable?
Lol
Do you even understand what that is saying....
If it were correct. they would have to study ALL not just european
for a contrast
It's saying race is real
there is no contrast
Racial differences
but their study doesn't do work on other races for intelligence; says so right there
It's saying it's can't differentiate within a race as well as among the different races
Because races groups are so similar
Lol
You're trolling me
Read the whole thing
Every month that passes they map more genes
European!
Still, the issue is accuracy—or lack of it. Right now, the polygenic scores capture only a fraction of the genetic determinants of intelligence and none of the environmental ones. That means the predictions remain fuzzy.
"none of the environmental ones. "
Because why
ANd there it is
Nature AND Nurture
It's not measuring environmental ones
That's not what IQ measures
If you ONLY examine NATURE, you conclusions are OF COURSE going to be based ONLY on nature
Until they examine both, 'willl be fuzzy'
It's only a measure of general intelligence
It's fuzzy why?
It says why
No, it's fuzzy because all the genome isn't mapped yet..... So it's margin of error is an issue