Message from @ETBrooD
Discord ID: 625097091273981952
idk, I haven't purchased the paper
It is of course possible to "train" for low heritability subtests, as it is possible to train to use Photoshop
But the main point about IQ tests are high heritability subtests
i was watching the clip from People's Veto , seems very interesting
Which are the main source for infering about g factor and, in turn, racial gaps
The point is just that IQ is a mixture of genetics, environment and training
No shit
Congrats on finding something apriori
Yeah but people who say that genetics is number one lack the evidence for that, that's why I'm saying this
That no one here contested
Well when someone says 80% is genetics, they do kinda contest it
and since we cant change genetics, and we dont need everyone to be equal in IQ at 130 or some shit....
How? @ETBrooD
Because that number is nonsense
What do you think the rest 20% is?
It isn't
It's all inferred from research
There's a lot of research to the contrary, you can choose to believe that number is accurate, but it makes no sense to believe that
LMAO
Do you even read before you post nonsense
It of course "makes sense" as far as the data indicates it does
And of course there exist many studies
Hence you take a meta analysis
Only if you select your data specifically to support the 80%
Not a single study
Have you read the numbers from the link I posted?
>muh huwhite man manipulating data
lul
You're clearly I'll equipped to have this conversation
"My data is not manipulated, not biased, and conclusive, but yours is not"
@ETBrooD That's why we do a meta analysis you dumbfuck
Ad homs win all arguments
Meta analysis literally means an aggregate of various studies
It's not an ad hom if it also contains a rebuttal
If you want to debate me learn to be civil
Saying you're a dumbfuck would be ad hom
Saying "you should read about meta analysis you dumbfuck" isn't an ad hom
LMFAO
Sure sure