Comments by "lordsneed" (@lordsneed9418) on "The Jewish IQ Myth: The Truth is Much Weirder" video.

24:00 "group differences seem do dumb to me" This is pure recovering-lib virtue signalling. You just spent 20 minutes pedantically showing large, roughly 1 standard group differences in important skills like mathematics and verbal skills. Without even getting into how much those differences are environmental and how much they're genetic , clearly these group differences exist and we would expect them to have a large effect on life outcomes and societal outcomes, so why are you trying to dismiss them as dumb? "hey we just showed these big differences between groups exist but now lets pretend they don't exist because they're dumb and it's distasteful to acknowledge mental differences between groups " ? Please. Come on.
103
43:00 "J are able to access this side path to power" If you're admitting that J , for whatever reason, disproportionately occupy positions of power and responsibility, then it logically follows that their nepotism will have a disproportionately bigger impact on society because they have more power to enact their nepotistic intentions EVEN IF psychologically the level of nepotism their brains hold as individuals is no greater than average for the nation. Which contradicts your earlier attempts to dismiss the idea that J have a large nepotistic effect on society around 35:00
54
26:45 "selecting for one mental competency may be a trade-off with selecting for another , which I think the data is showing here" This is generally not true, hence the existence of g factor at all. The reason IQ exists as a concept is because different tests of mental abilities seem to all positively correlate indicating that there is an underlying general factor of intelligence responsible for all of them.
35
40:00 "So why do Js outperform? We think it's their cultural values making them willing to spread dangerous and controversial ideas" This is a wholly inadequate explanation for why Js perform so much better even in fields that have nothing to do with "controversial ideas" like mathematics, physics and computer science. Success in those fields isn't about being an attention-grabbing, provocative orator, it's about real strength in logical reasoning and problem solving and proofs. There are some examples of J scientists who had good careers simply by being attention grabbing orators and having little rigour to back it up like Stephen Jay Gould or sigmund freud, but they are mainly in the softer science fields, and can't explain J dominance in mathematical fields .
33
35:50 " First let us assure you that there is no intentional J conspiracy" Wow that word "intentional" is doing a lot of work there isn't it? There doesn't need to be anything intentional or explicitly coordinated. All that is necessary is for J to have in-group preference, which they clearly do , and they'll organically, in a decentralised, unorchestrated way, pursue their shared interests. e.g. AIPAC, e.g. ADL , e.g. mass-immigration and multiculturalism advocacy e.g. being more likely to hire or recommend or promote or give contracts to other Js
29
25:06 "black americans have a cognitive advantage when it comes to music" lol. there is not going to be a single black music artist who is remembered in 200 or 300 years like Vivaldi or Beethoven or Mozart or JS Bach. The few contemporary musicians who are still widely played in 200+ years are going to be disproportionately non-black. black style music like "now watch me whip, watch me nae-nae" doesn't have staying power, they're flashes in a pan. Not powerful enough to be a classic.
22
6:09 "WW2 didn't select for int among J because J were overrepresented in int-demanding fields before WW2, and pogroms didn't select for int among J because pogroms also targeted romanis who do not have high int" The traditional argument for int being selected for in J history is not due to pogroms, the argument is that j were banned from many occupations where int is less important for success and only allowed into occupations where int is more important to success e.g. money lenders, merchants, clerical work . Thus stronger selection pressure for int among J than among gentiles (I'd assume including romanis) . This hypothesis has supporting evidence from Cochrane and Harpending's "A natural history of Ashkenazi intelligence" , such as the fact that J s have very high rates of genetic defects for several genes all in in the same metabolic pathway for myelination of neurons, and many of these mutations have heterozygous advantage for int. The fact that these mutations all lie on teh same metabolic pathway is very unlikely to occur by chance and indicates a selection pressure for these mutations.
19
use ephemisms and abbreviations and delicate turn of phrase to get around the filters. don't let them win.
18
10:45 "in order for ashkenazis to be a 1 standard deviation over, the rest of the population would need to be at least 1 standard deviation under" What if ashkenazim were only 108 , not 115 ? then the mizrahim would only need to be around 92, which is well in line for the average IQ in the countries they are arriving from. Also , there might possibly be a negative selection effect into israel, where the most high IQ Js are less likely to move to ISR because they're already so successful in the diaspora that ISR doesn't have much to offer them.
12
17:00 " they weren't IQ tests, they were vocab tests" IIRC vocab tests generally correlate with g higher than the likes of ravens progressive matrices, with the former being r = 0.9 and the latter being r = 0.88, so if you're lacking the funding to give thousands of people a 45 minute administered battery, giving them a vocab test is pretty good and not necessarily dishonest. Provided you're testing a sample who all went through roughly the same educatinal system. More intelligent people tend to seek out more stimulating material so naturally acquire broader vocabs on average.
9
26:00 " we need to get away from this idea that different groups of humans have differences in overall IQ , but rather they have different skill sets in certain parts of IQ. there must be a trade-off between different mental abilities or else why wouldn't all humans have high IQ?" Just like some environments clearly select for different physical characteristics in humans, e.g. jungle environments selecting for extremely small stature and quick maturation e.g. pygmies, why couldn't some environments select for high IQ more strongly than other environments? Why would high IQ be equally evolutionarily advantageous in all ancestral environments? That's what you're assuming when you ask "why don't all humans have high IQ" ? There's research which looks at which human gene locations have had the most differentiation between different modernhuman populations, and genes involved in the brain have had among the most differentiation , significantly more than the skin pigmentation or hair follicle development which mainstream culture assumes is the main difference between ethnic groups . Wu and Zhang 2011
9
@dieselphiend I have struggled with the same thing .There are certain topics where if you try and write a long post then it will get hidden. But still for most controversial topics you can get around it, you just need to check after submitting a post whether it is visible to a non-signed in account a couple of minutes later. And if need be split the post into multiple parts only 1 line long. I admit that I have had to give up sometimes but oonly about 5%
8
53:00 "It's sad and pathetic when I see people picking fights about this when it just doesn't matter" If it doesn't matter then why are you picking a fight about it rather than just conceding? are you being "sad and pathetic" , would you say? If it doesn't matter then why not just admit the truth? Rather than this dishonest, unconvincing "x is false, but even if x is true it doesn't matter" act.
8
50:30 " the more genetic variation , the better" total hogwash. There are billions of different potential genetic variants, and nearly all of them are detrimental. Only a tiny fraction of the possible genetic variants actually improve performance. So it's actually not diversity that is a strength, it's selectivity that is a strength. Diversity is not in itself a strength because it is not true that the more diversity a group has, the better it performs. ashkenaz J themselves are a good example of this. They perform very well despite having one of the narrower, less diverse genepools among ethnic groups. ashkenaz Js perform so well because they have narrowly selected for the traits that matter most to performance. So diversity is not a strength, selectivity and discernment and cohesion and unity and in-group preference are.
8
9:10 " If J had higher int then ISR's average int would be higher" the claim is specifically about Ashkenazi int though. What's the average int among ISR ashkenazim?
7
@JakeBananas I refute that later point they make too. see my comment starting with 38:00
7
I am sending out the bat signal to Nathan Cofnas to deboonk this video.
7
They aren't. They seem screamish about preferring those who share more genes with them over those who share less genes with them , only adopting this principle for very close relatives. Furthermore, they've made several statements echoing liberal philosubsaharanism. They also seem to talk much more often and more passionately about antisemitism than antiwhite (gentile) discrimination, marginalisation and hostility.
6
50:00 " the urban monoculture is dedicated to attacking any notion or evidence that there might be biological differences in IQ " On display are staggering levels of either chutzpah or self-awareness. This is exactly what you guys are doing when you flimsily deny and downplay the mountains of evidence for differences in IQ between groups being in large part due to genetics. You're either acting in self-interest and think it's better for you to deny it or you have huge left-over indoctrination from your urban monoculture upbringing that you haven't deprogrammed yet.
6
52:28 " there's going to be a 1 standard deviation drop in IQ in the future so all the race IQ differences today won't matter" That 1 standard deviation drop is going to be caused by low IQ races having more kids than high IQ races, so yes, those differences will still be there in the future and will sitll matter.
6
38:15 "as people who associate with lots of Js I have not seen them be more nepotistic than other groups" Why would you see that behaviour unless you were undercover and tricked them into thinking you were Js? If they were nepotistic and decently high IQ then they would hide that behaviour to some degree while you were present. You can easily see that Js are much more nepotistic than European-descent gentiles from how there are socially accepted , active, powerful J interest groups like AIPAC and ADL and AJC and how commonly Js talk about what is good for J interests ,but European-descent gentiles almost never do the same and any group attempting to further European-descent gentile interests is maligned and margnialised and legally and politically persecuted.
6
45:33 "these schema are counter productive and lead you to pick fights with people you have no beef with, like leather apron club. many of the people best pushing right-leaning politics are J" Yes and no. This is incorrect because there is a large and powerful subset of J in the diaspora who believe their interests lie in directly opposing and undermining European-descent gentile interests by pushing anti-christian, anti-white, pro massimmigration, pro-multiculturalism , pro-open borders agendas. For an explanation of this see for example the video Paul Gottfried the influence of the J lobby. But this is correct in that this is only a subset of the J corresponding to the secular, liberal diaspora, whereas Js who are Israeli or orthodox or rightwing do not tend to share this outlook and RWers often tend to paint with too broad a brush and end up making an enemy out of these J unnecessarily.
5
51:30 " who cares about racial IQ differences when in a few decades we'll have embryo selection and CRISPR. It doesn't matter anymore so just stop talking about it !!!" The reason why we should care is because the current day discrimination and marginalisation against white people is only going to get worse as long as mainstream society falsely believes that black people have the same average mental ability as white people. The reason why fortune 500 companies massively discriminate against white people and only had 4% white people among their new hires last year is because they believe that racial IQ differences are non-existent and so any differences in outcomes between races must be due to an unjust white supremacist society which need to be counterbalanced with "diverse" , "equitable" discrimination. Our society's most important organising principle is based around redistributing resources in order to try and gerrymander racial outcomes caused by IQ differences. Is that a good enough reason not to close our eyes and stuff our ears and stick out heads in the sand Simone? How many of your relatives and descendants and people who share your blood need to be marginalised in order for you to care? Another reason why you should care is because if different groups have different genetic IQ potentials then that effects which groups you should want to immigrate into your country. Does that sound like an important enough issue to care about Malcolm? Furthermore , there is no reason to be so certain that embryo selection and CRISPR will have the effects you two are assuming within a few decades. Especially if there continues to be a fertility collapse then the amount of research into this field might dramatically slow down or stop as countries struggle and fail to keep the lights on and maintain the output. The best polygenic scores for IQ only capture 10% of the variance within-families for IQ IIRC , so using currently available technologies , it would take many generations of successive use before you got a big advantage, so more like centuries than decades . Furthermore, these polygenic scores used as embryo selectors will be most useful to people with average genes whose embryos typically have mediocre polygenic scores. For people like malcolm and simone who already have very good genes for IQ, their embryos will mostly max out today's polygenic score rating anyway, so using those polygenic scores as embryo selectors will offer much less benefit to them than to average people. So while average people might be able to increase their IQ from 100 to 120 in x generations using PGS embryo selection, If simone and malcolm want to increase their descendents IQs from 140 to 160 using PGS embryo selection, it will take a lot more than x generations.
5
19:00 If j were naturally high average int then wouldn't the average J dayschool seem elite in comparison to average gentile schools ? Finding a J school serving low Socio-econonmic status Js would in fact be cherry picking lower since the average J would be high socioeconomic status. So complaining that the J dayschool was elite and served high SES Js isn't necessarily a valid complaint.
5
53:00 "society really needs to get over this idea that there aren't IQ differences between individuals" Society also needs to get over the idea that there aren't IQ differences between groups. "When I'm talking to someone at stanford business school saying that everyone has the same shot to get in as I have" Yeah this is just as false if he were to say "every group has the same genetic cognitive potential for getting in as I have" . Different groups have different average genes for int.
5
38:00 " yeah Js are nepotistic, but so are mormons and Jehova's witnesses! And how about fraternities and sorities and effective altruists? They're nepotistic too, so J nepotism is insignificant" Mormons don't have much reach and influence within institutions outside Utah. JWs even less. Fraternities and sororities and other secular societies/cults like effective altruists are open to both jews and gentiles so we would expect their nepotism to equally benefit both groups . But the J nepotism itself is a different, unique advantage to Js because there is no gentile nepotism to counter-act it. If you have population A which is colourblind and population B which is nepotistic and both populations have the same distribution of talent, then over time population B will disproprortioantely occupy more and more positions of power because in any hiring and promotion committee made up of As and Bs, the As on the committee will give fair ratings whether the applicant is A or B, but the Bs on the committee will give extra favourable ratings only to the applicants who are B. White gentiles are like the As in this situation and Js are like the Bs. And so nepotism aka in-group preference is a rational, effective, dominant strategy and white gentiles need to utilise it more just like every other group does to a greater degree. If you extend colourblind, fair treatment to every group when they do not return the favour then you are just letting yourself be taken advantage of like a door mat.
5
@StarboyXL9 If 20th century physics is made up then how do nuclear bombs work? don't deny science when there is working technology based on that science, that would be as foolish as denying gunpowder chemistry when working firearms exist.
4
Overall, the best evidence that ash ken naz J naturally have higher int is their total dominance of 20th century physics, the best and most parsimonious explanation for which is that they naturally have higher int. Other explanations fail. You can't explain it with nepotism because J held basically no university posititions at beginning of 20th century because they were barred from teaching in the early and mid 19th century. You can't explain it with "they just had a culture that valued academia and research more" because at the end of the 19th century and early 20th century they did not have such a culture at all, they held much more hardnosed and even grubby with social prestige and pressure encouraging business and lucrative careers than studying physics and other academia which did not pay well at all. You can't explain it with "they had a more argumentative culture which makes them more likely to publish and say provocative things which get noticed" because physics/maths/compsci success is not about being an attention-grabbing orator but having strong , rigorous reasoning and problem solving ability. If they really do have lower than average results in some subtests of standard IQ test batteries then given their real-world dominance of everything important, I think it's more reasonable to downgrade the weighting of those subtests than to conclude that really Js are not higher int despite their far superior performance in most fields.
4
wrong. IQ predicts outcomes like future wealth, future job productivity , future career path, likelihood of making major scientific discovery. if IQ was just made up and didn't mean anything about human cognitive performance then IQ would not be able to predict these outcomes. look up predictive validity of IQ
4
@dandavis8300 This cannot explain why J performed so much better in 20th century and very late 19th century physics because J held almost no university positions at beginning of 20th century because they were barred from being professors in universities in the early and mid 19th century.
3
@annatardlordofderps9181 the diaspora J (especially secular ones) have high levels of support for mass immigration, liberalism, anti-nationalism, white guilt, etc. because they recognise from history that they have done better in countries that are more ethnically diverse (e.g. 19th and 20th century usa vs Europe, e.g. medieval ottoman empire vs christendom. ) Paul gottfried explains this in his presentation on youtube on the J lobby. UK J voted labour more than the general population in most recent election. indigenous gentile brits voted con much more.
3
29:50 "maybe J success in mathematical and verbal fields is due to J superior abilities in math and verbal skills, this seems possible but not interesting . [...] We are not dwelling on that possiblity because it is probably not the case and boring if true" Wow that sure is convincing. Where's the argument that it's probably not the case? You seemed to sneak that claim in there. I guess we shouldn't believe in it then since it's "not interesting" and "boring" (read, depressing to a recovering-lib worldview). Seems like motivated reasoning from here on out.
3
28:50 "jews have marginally higher math and verbal scores, only 5-10%" , And what's the standard deviation in percentage points? A 5-10% difference in averages could mean huge differences at the positive and negative tails if the standard deviation is roughly the same size or smaller. Given that jews dramatically outperform at the positive tail in mathematic and verbal fields, this difference doesn't seem that marginal at all.
3
@StarboyXL9 if 20th century physics is made up then how do nuclear bombs work? magic? pure fluke? You embarrass us as Europeans when you deny things where there are clear examples of that technology working.
2
@annatardlordofderps9181 this is a good point.
1
@Ilyak1986 I wish I could but youtube uses AI filters which makes long posts talking about certain issues invisible
1
@JimastaJ hahahaha If you actually listened to them , they bend over backwards to deny the low average IQ of subsaharans being caused in large part by genes and claim that it doesn't matter even if it is true. in another video they also claim that subsaharan-descent people are unfairly disadvantaged by racist society and this is why they do not perform well. They are actually philosubsaharans like most white liberals.
1
@JimastaJ "I guess methhead Billy in SF has more IQ than me" If you were int enough to understand what an average is , you would realise that this is not what is being claimed.
1
@ not all tests are equally G loaded, but for two mental abilities to truly be in a tradeoff they'd need to be negatively correlated, and afaik all subtests are positively correlated. at least when looking at the overall population. I've heard that the higher your IQ , the less correlated different subtests tend to be , e.g. among high IQ people you're more likely to get people who are disproportionately good at maths in particular relative to other subtests
1
@ This doesn't show a trade off. within men spatial reasoning int. is positively correlated with face-reading int. And similarly within women. The fact that different populations have different average subtest scores doesn't show that being good at one subtest hinders you from being good at another subtest. the fact that different populations have different average subtest scores does show that it's not quite as simple as IQ being a single dimensional quality , however G factor does capture most of what's going on and it's a lot more accurate of a model that explains things a lot better than multiple intelligences theory or imagining that different mental abilities are in tradeoffs with each other. In general the more you select for intelligence the more you select for being good at all mental tasks and problem solving and pattern recognition and being able to predict what actions will bring about what outcomes in general.
1