"These findings should encourage caution among those who claim that the frequently trivial variance attributed to shared environments in behavioral genetic models means that families, schools, and neighborhoods do not meaningfully influence these outcomes."

Yeah there is a difference between a critique of the methodology behind twin studies and actually producing some empirical evidence that contradicts them lol

yes, they just encourage caution

they don't claim to be some big btfo

and I don't know how people have responded to them

` Using monozygotic twin fixed effects models, which compare outcomes among genetically identical pairs, we show that many characteristics of objectively shared environments significantly moderate the effects of nonshared environments on adolescent academic achievement and verbal intelligence, violating the additivity assumption of behavioral genetic methods. `

I'll have to investigate that

Damn, they do more than encourage caution

How dishonest can you be?

I just quoted them

They aren't JUST encouraging caution

```Another study, commissioned by the editor of the journal Science, looked at genetics and IQ. The Minnesota researchers found that about 70 percent of IQ variation across the twin population was due to genetic differences among people, and 30 percent was due to environmental differences. The finding received both praise and criticism, but an updated study in 2009 containing new sets of twins found a similar correlation between genetics and IQ.```

I didn't say they were

https://www.livescience.com/19692-genes-brain-size-intelligence.html

I said that was their conclusion

and I'm right

lol

He's offering sociological shit

You could literally cite me an infinite number of heritability studies, @TheUserNameofPeace, and it won't budge me one inch

Sociology is literally only able to survive so long as PC HR departments are around

@TheUserNameofPeace critique the study, sophist

Prove that

@BabygottBach I already defeated you

Show proof of that claim

You are just dogmatic

Won't change

No you haven't

Set piece

Your dogma is literally "sociology bad"

no proof

You haven't read any of the studies

you can't address the studies directly

Why are twin, separated at birth, so similar in every respect?

You still haven't confronted this

All you have are parthetic, pitiful, ad hom attacks on sociology

we show that many characteristics of objectively shared environments significantly moderate the effects of nonshared environments on adolescent academic achievement and verbal intelligence, violating the additivity assumption of behavioral genetic methods.

Oh my

this doesn't make any sense to me

nice deflection