The Impact of Genetic Heritability on Intelligence: Fact or Fiction?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Paleo-Conservative
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Iq
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers around the heritability of intelligence and its implications for race and societal structures. Professor Jensen's research suggests that the heritability of IQ increases with age, paralleling findings in physical traits like height. Concerns are raised about how this information might be misused, particularly regarding eugenics and potential oppression of minority groups. The conversation also touches on the need for a humane approach to education and policy, emphasizing that knowledge should be integrated thoughtfully to avoid negative societal impacts. Ultimately, the dialogue highlights the complexities of addressing intelligence differences while advocating for equitable treatment across racial lines.
  • #101
BlackVision said:
Cause YOU are the one fixating on him. Trying to remove credibility of 80 years of psychology research from one person. Do you think there aren't hundreds of others that did their own researches that didn't draw the same conclusion as he did? Again, what is your fixation with him?
I'm not fixated, *you* are the one that keeps bringing him up and refuses to move on.

BlackVision said:
Can you fix this link? It doesn't seem to work.
Sorry, here it is. http://www.anatomy.usyd.edu.au/danny/anthropology/anthro-l/archive/november-1994/0088.html

BlackVision said:
Debunked? Really? Hmm. So nobody here shares the same viewpoint I have? Why do I find that hard to believe.
Yes, really. There is you, Nachtwolf & hitssquad.

I will respond to your other items when I return. Or maybe it would be better to just give you the other threads that already go over all of this in boring repetitive detail.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #102
BlackVision said:
IQ tests are approximately 70-80% genetic.
Really? Please post the studies done that have proven this, I've somehow missed them in all my research on the subject.
 
  • #103
BlackVision said:
IQ tests are approximately 70-80% genetic. I'm quite sure no one will say that it's completely genetic. That being said, better environments will have slight improvements in IQ. But by no means can someone jump from an IQ of 100 to an IQ of 130 regardless of environment. No environment in the world will give someone Einstein like IQ level. Genetics is the predominating factor.
one of the sites YOU posted cites a study that says blacks adopted by white families don't show real IQ difference.

of course everybody has limits. Not everyone can be Einstein. People like that are extreme cases.
 
  • #104
Evo said:
I'm not fixated, *you* are the one that keeps bringing him up and refuses to move on.
What the hell are you talking about? You're the one constantly trying to discredit 80 years of consistent psychology research by pointing out the "supposed" flaws of one guy.

Sorry, here it is. http://www.anatomy.usyd.edu.au/danny/anthropology/anthro-l/archive/november-1994/0088.html
This is your best source? Could of at least attempted to find a reliable source with doctors and bibliographical notes. What is this?

Also note that I never even brought up brain size so not sure why you brought it up. We were discussing IQ weren't we?

Yes, really. There is you, Nachtwolf & hitssquad.
How long have you been here? I'd been here for like a week and I'd read more support than just those 2. Simply naming the two most vocal ones doesn't mean those are the only ones.

The Bell Curve also has been widely accepted in the psychology world. Are there vocal opposers? Of course. For such a taboo subject it's expected. But it certainly has a wide area of support. Including black professors and academics.

I will respond to your other items when I return. Or maybe it would be better to just give you the other threads that already go over all of this in boring repetitive detail.
You think you've debated this a lot? You have any idea how much I have? You and I both know how it'll end up.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #105
Evo said:
Really? Please post the studies done that have proven this, I've somehow missed them in all my research on the subject.
Seeing how there's probably well over 50,000 sources that will give you the 70% and 80% figures, I would say that it's quite substantiated. Did your bias just have a tendency to simply skip over each and every single one of them in your so called "researches"?
 
  • #106
Concept said:
one of the sites YOU posted cites a study that says blacks adopted by white families don't show real IQ difference.
Such studies have shown slight IQ improvements but nothing drastic.
 
  • #107
PubMed citations for TJ Bouchard

Evo said:
Bouchard's study is not considered to have valid scientific merit due to the lack of peer review, among other things.
PubMed returns 47 citations for bouchard+tj+twin:


  • 1: Johnson W, McGue M, Krueger RF, Bouchard TJ Jr.
    Marriage and personality: a genetic analysis.
    J Pers Soc Psychol. 2004 Feb;86(2):285-94.
    PMID: 14769084 [PubMed - in process]
    2: Krueger RF, Markon KE, Bouchard TJ Jr.
    The extended genotype: the heritability of personality accounts for the heritability of recalled family environments in twins reared apart.
    J Pers. 2003 Oct;71(5):809-33.
    PMID: 12932211
    3: Bouchard TJ Jr, McGue M.
    Genetic and environmental influences on human psychological differences.
    J Neurobiol. 2003 Jan;54(1):4-45. Review.
    PMID: 12486697
    4: Markon KE, Krueger RF, Bouchard TJ Jr, Gottesman II.
    Normal and abnormal personality traits: evidence for genetic and environmental relationships in the Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart.
    J Pers. 2002 Oct;70(5):661-93.
    PMID: 12322856
    5: Johnson W, Krueger RF, Bouchard TJ Jr, McGue M.
    The personalities of twins: just ordinary folks.
    Twin Res. 2002 Apr;5(2):125-31.
    PMID: 11931690
    6: Bouchard TJ Jr, Loehlin JC.
    Genes, evolution, and personality.
    Behav Genet. 2001 May;31(3):243-73. Review.
    PMID: 11699599
    7: Michalowicz BS, Pihlstrom BL, Hodges JS, Bouchard TJ Jr.
    No heritability of temporomandibular joint signs and symptoms.
    J Dent Res. 2000 Aug;79(8):1573-8.
    PMID: 11023277
    8: DiLalla DL, Gottesman II, Carey G, Bouchard TJ Jr.
    Heritability of MMPI Harris-Lingoes and Subtle-Obvious subscales in twins reared apart.
    Assessment. 1999 Dec;6(4):353-66.
    PMID: 10539982
    9: Bouchard TJ Jr, McGue M, Lykken D, Tellegen A.
    Intrinsic and extrinsic religiousness: genetic and environmental influences and personality correlates.
    Twin Res. 1999 Jun;2(2):88-98.
    PMID: 10480743
    10: Michalowicz BS, Wolff LF, Klump D, Hinrichs JE, Aeppli DM, Bouchard TJ Jr, Pihlstrom BL.
    Periodontal bacteria in adult twins.
    J Periodontol. 1999 Mar;70(3):263-73.
    PMID: 10225542
    11: Hur YM, Bouchard TJ Jr, Eckert E.
    Genetic and environmental influences on self-reported diet: a reared-apart twin study.
    Physiol Behav. 1998 Jul;64(5):629-36.
    PMID: 9817574
    12: Ziegler DK, Hur YM, Bouchard TJ Jr, Hassanein RS, Barter R.
    Migraine in twins raised together and apart.
    Headache. 1998 Jun;38(6):417-22.
    PMID: 9664744
    13: Newman DL, Tellegen A, Bouchard TJ Jr.
    Individual differences in adult ego development: sources of influence in twins reared apart.
    J Pers Soc Psychol. 1998 Apr;74(4):985-95.
    PMID: 9569654
    14: Bouchard TJ Jr.
    Genetic and environmental influences on adult intelligence and special mental abilities.
    Hum Biol. 1998 Apr;70(2):257-79. Review.
    PMID: 9549239
    15: McGue M, Bouchard TJ Jr.
    Genetic and environmental influences on human behavioral differences.
    Annu Rev Neurosci. 1998;21:1-24. Review.
    PMID: 9530489
    16: Bouchard TJ Jr, Hur YM.
    Genetic and environmental influences on the continuous scales of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator: an analysis based on twins reared apart.
    J Pers. 1998 Apr;66(2):135-49.
    PMID: 9529660
    17: Hur YM, Bouchard TJ Jr.
    The genetic correlation between impulsivity and sensation seeking traits.
    Behav Genet. 1997 Sep;27(5):455-63.
    PMID: 9336082
    18: Bouchard TJ Jr.
    Experience Producing Drive Theory: how genes drive experience and shape personality.
    Acta Paediatr Suppl. 1997 Jul;422:60-4. Review.
    PMID: 9298795
    19: Fox PW, Hershberger SL, Bouchard TJ Jr.
    Genetic and environmental contributions to the acquisition of a motor skill.
    Nature. 1996 Nov 28;384(6607):356-8.
    PMID: 8934520
    20: DiLalla DL, Carey G, Gottesman II, Bouchard TJ Jr.
    Heritability of MMPI personality indicators of psychopathology in twins reared apart.
    J Abnorm Psychol. 1996 Nov;105(4):491-9.
    PMID: 8952182
    21: Hur YM, Bouchard TJ Jr.
    Genetic influences on perceptions of childhood family environment: a reared apart twin study.
    Child Dev. 1995 Apr;66(2):330-45.
    PMID: 7750369
    22: Bouchard TJ Jr.
    Genes, environment, and personality.
    Science. 1994 Jun 17;264(5166):1700-1. Review. No abstract available.
    PMID: 8209250
    23: Conry JP, Messer LB, Boraas JC, Aeppli DP, Bouchard TJ Jr.
    Dental caries and treatment characteristics in human twins reared apart.
    Arch Oral Biol. 1993 Nov;38(11):937-43.
    PMID: 8297257
    24: Lykken DT, Bouchard TJ Jr, McGue M, Tellegen A.
    Heritability of interests: a twin study.
    J Appl Psychol. 1993 Aug;78(4):649-61.
    PMID: 8407707
    25: Segal NL, Bouchard TJ Jr.
    Grief intensity following the loss of a twin and other relatives: test of kinship genetic hypotheses.
    Hum Biol. 1993 Feb;65(1):87-105. Erratum in: Hum Biol 1993 Apr;65(2):following 336.
    PMID: 8436394
    26: Lykken DT, McGue M, Tellegen A, Bouchard TJ Jr.
    Emergenesis. Genetic traits that may not run in families.
    Am Psychol. 1992 Dec;47(12):1565-77.
    PMID: 1476327
    27: Michalowicz BS, Aeppli DP, Kuba RK, Bereuter JE, Conry JP, Segal NL, Bouchard TJ Jr, Pihlstrom BL.
    A twin study of genetic variation in proportional radiographic alveolar bone height.
    J Dent Res. 1991 Nov;70(11):1431-5.
    PMID: 1960253
    28: Michalowicz BS, Aeppli D, Virag JG, Klump DG, Hinrichs JE, Segal NL, Bouchard TJ Jr, Pihlstrom BL.
    Periodontal findings in adult twins.
    J Periodontol. 1991 May;62(5):293-9.
    PMID: 2072240
    29: Hanson B, McGue M, Roitman-Johnson B, Segal NL, Bouchard TJ Jr, Blumenthal MN.
    Atopic disease and immunoglobulin E in twins reared apart and together.
    Am J Hum Genet. 1991 May;48(5):873-9.
    PMID: 2018039
    30: Bouchard TJ, Lykken DT, McGue M, Segal N, Tellegen A.
    When kin correlations are not squared.
    Science. 1990 Dec 14;250(4987):1498. No abstract available.
    PMID: 2274774
    31: Bouchard TJ Jr, Lykken DT, McGue M, Segal NL, Tellegen A.
    Sources of human psychological differences: the Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart.
    Science. 1990 Oct 12;250(4978):223-8.
    PMID: 2218526
    32: Lykken DT, McGue M, Bouchard TJ Jr, Tellegen A.
    Does contact lead to similarity or similarity to contact?
    Behav Genet. 1990 Sep;20(5):547-61.
    PMID: 2288545
    33: Grove WM, Eckert ED, Heston L, Bouchard TJ Jr, Segal N, Lykken DT.
    Heritability of substance abuse and antisocial behavior: a study of monozygotic twins reared apart.
    Biol Psychiatry. 1990 Jun 15;27(12):1293-304.
    PMID: 2364118
    34: Lykken DT, Bouchard TJ Jr, McGue M, Tellegen A.
    The Minnesota Twin Family Registry: some initial findings.
    Acta Genet Med Gemellol (Roma). 1990;39(1):35-70.
    PMID: 2392892
    35: Bouchard TJ Jr, Segal NL, Lykken DT.
    Genetic and environmental influences on special mental abilities in a sample of twins reared apart.
    Acta Genet Med Gemellol (Roma). 1990;39(2):193-206.
    PMID: 2239105
    36: Tellegen A, Lykken DT, Bouchard TJ Jr, Wilcox KJ, Segal NL, Rich S.
    Personality similarity in twins reared apart and together.
    J Pers Soc Psychol. 1988 Jun;54(6):1031-9.
    PMID: 3397862
    37: Lykken DT, Iacono WG, Haroian K, McGue M, Bouchard TJ Jr.
    Habituation of the skin conductance response to strong stimuli: a twin study.
    Psychophysiology. 1988 Jan;25(1):4-15. No abstract available.
    PMID: 3353484
    38: Eckert ED, Bouchard TJ, Bohlen J, Heston LL.
    Homosexuality in monozygotic twins reared apart.
    Br J Psychiatry. 1986 Apr;148:421-5.
    PMID: 3730708
    39: Kohler PF, Rivera VJ, Eckert ED, Bouchard TJ Jr, Heston LL.
    Genetic regulation of immunoglobulin and specific antibody levels in twins reared apart.
    J Clin Invest. 1985 Mar;75(3):883-8.
    PMID: 4038983
    40: Knobloch WH, Leavenworth NM, Bouchard TJ, Eckert ED.
    Eye findings in twins reared apart.
    Ophthalmic Paediatr Genet. 1985 Feb;5(1-2):59-66.
    PMID: 4058873
    41: McGue M, Bouchard TJ Jr.
    Adjustment of twin data for the effects of age and sex.
    Behav Genet. 1984 Jul;14(4):325-43. No abstract available.
    PMID: 6542356
    42: Segal NL, Bouchard TJ Jr.
    Zygosity diagnosis of twins in medical research.
    Arch Intern Med. 1984 Jul;144(7):1505, 1509. No abstract available.
    PMID: 6539582
    43: Hanson BR, Halberg F, Tuna N, Bouchard TJ Jr, Lykken DT, Cornelissen G, Heston LL.
    Rhythmometry reveals heritability of circadian characteristics of heart rate of human twins reared apart.
    Cardiologia. 1984 May-Jun;29(5-6):267-82. No abstract available.
    PMID: 6542411
    44: Bouchard TJ Jr, McGue M.
    Familial studies of intelligence: a review.
    Science. 1981 May 29;212(4498):1055-9.
    PMID: 7195071
    45: Bouchard TJ Jr, Heston L, Eckert E, Keyes M, Resnick S.
    The Minnesota study of twins reared apart: project description and sample results in the developmental domain.
    Prog Clin Biol Res. 1981;69 Pt B:227-33. No abstract available.
    PMID: 7199166
    46: Bouchard TJ Jr.
    The study of mental ability using twin and adoption designs.
    Prog Clin Biol Res. 1981;69 Pt B:21-3. No abstract available.
    PMID: 7199164
    47: Eckert ED, Heston LL, Bouchard TJ Jr.
    MZ twins reared apart: preliminary findings of psychiatric disturbances and traits.
    Prog Clin Biol Res. 1981;69 Pt B:179-88. No abstract available.
    PMID: 7199161
 
  • #108
OVID PsycINFO citations for TJ Bouchard

Evo said:
Bouchard's study is not considered to have valid scientific merit due to the lack of peer review
OVID PsycINFO returns 54 citations for (bouchard t j or bouchard thomas j or bouchard thomas j jr).au. and (twin or twins).mp:
  • 1. Johnson, Wendy; McGue, Matt; Krueger, Robert F; Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr. Marriage and Personality: A Genetic Analysis. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology. Vol 86(2) Feb 2004, 285-294. American Psychological Assn, US

    • •
    2. Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr. The genetics of personality. Blum, Kenneth (Ed); Noble, Ernest P. (Ed); et al. (1997). Handbook of psychiatric genetics. (pp. 273-296). Boca Raton, FL, US: CRC Press. 498pp.

    • •
    3. Bouchard, Thomas J; Lykken, David T; McGue, Matthew; Segal, Nancy L; et al. "Sources of human psychological differences: The Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart": Response. Science. Vol 252(5003) Apr 1991, 191-192. American Assn for the Advancement of Science, US

    • •
    4. Krueger, Robert F; Markon, Kristian E; Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr. The Extended Genotype: The Heritability of Personality Accounts for the Heritability of Recalled Family Environments in Twins Reared Apart. Journal of Personality. Vol 71(5) Oct 2003, 809-833. Blackwell Publishing, United Kingdom

    • •
    5. Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr; Segal, Nancy L; Tellegen, Auke; McGue, Matt; Keyes, Margaret; Krueger, Robert. Evidence for the construct validity and heritability of the Wilson-Patterson Conservatism Scale: A reared-apart twins study of social attitudes. Personality & Individual Differences. Vol 34(6) Apr 2003, 959-969. Elsevier Science, United Kingdom

    • •
    6. Johnson, Wendy; Bouchard, Thomas J. JR; Segal, Nancy L; Keyes, Margaret; Samuels, Jay. The Stroop Color-Word Test: Genetic and environmental influences; Reading, mental ability, and personality correlates. Journal of Educational Psychology. Vol 95(1) Mar 2003, 58-65. American Psychological Assn, US

    • •
    7. Markon, Kristian E; Krueger, Robert F; Bouchard, Thomas J. JR; Gottesman, Irving I. Normal and abnormal personality traits: Evidence for genetic and environmental relationships in the Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart. Journal of Personality. Vol 70(5) Oct 2002, 661-693. Blackwell Publishers, US

    • •
    8. DiLalla, David L; Gottesman, Irving I; Carey, Gregory; Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr. Heritability of MMPI Harris-Lingoes and Subtle-Obvious subscales in twins reared apart. Assessment. Vol 6(4) Dec 1999, 353-366. Psychological Assessment Resources Inc, US

    • •
    9. Bouchard, Thomas J. Genes, environment, and personality. Ceci, Stephen J. (Ed); Williams, Wendy M. (Ed). (1999). The nature--nurture debate: The essential readings. Essential readings in developmental psychology. (pp. 97-103). xi, 294pp.

    • •
    10. McCourt, Kathryn; Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr; Lykken, David T; Tellegen, Auke; Keyes, Margaret. Authoritarianism revisited: Genetic and environmental influences examined in twins reared apart and together. Personality & Individual Differences. Vol 27(5) Nov 1999, 985-1014. Elsevier Science, England

    • •
    11. Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr; Pedersen, Nancy. Twins reared apart: Nature's double experiment. LaBuda, Michele C. (Ed); Grigorenko, Elena L. (Ed). (1999). On the way to individuality: Current methodological issues in behavioral genetics. (pp. 71-93). xi, 252pp.

    • •
    12. McGue, Matt; Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr. Genetic and environmental influences on human behavioral differences. Annual Review of Neuroscience. Vol 21 1998, 1-24. Annual Reviews, US

    • •
    13. Hur, Yoon-Mi; Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr; Eckert, Elke. Genetic and environmental influences on self-reported diet: A reared-apart twin study. Physiology & Behavior. Vol 64(5) Jul 1998, 629-636. Elsevier Science, US

    • •
    14. Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr; McGue, Matt; Hur, Yoon-Mi; Horn, Joseph M. A genetic and environmental analysis of the California Psychological Inventory using adult twins reared apart and together. European Journal of Personality. Vol 12(5) Sep-Oct 1998, 307-320. John Wiley & Sons, US

    • •
    15. Hur, Yoon-Mi; Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr; Lykken, David T. Genetic and environmental influence on morningness-eveningness. Personality & Individual Differences. Vol 25(5) Nov 1998, 917-925. Elsevier Science, England

    • •
    16. Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr; Hur, Yoon-Mi. Genetic and environmental influences on the continuous scales of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator: An analysis based on twins reared apart. Journal of Personality. Vol 66(2) Apr 1998, 135-149. Blackwell Publishers, US

    • •
    17. Newman, Denise L; Tellegen, Auke; Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr. Individual differences in adult ego development: Sources of influence in twins reared apart. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology. Vol 74(4) Apr 1998, 985-995. American Psychological Assn, US

    • •
    18. Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr. IQ similarity in twins reared apart: Findings and responses to critics. Sternberg, Robert J. (Ed); Grigorenko, Elena L. (Ed). (1997). Intelligence, heredity, and environment. (pp. 126-160). xvii, 608pp.

    • •
    19. Hur, Yoon-Mi; Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr. The genetic correlation between impulsivity and sensation seeking traits. Behavior Genetics. Vol 27(5) Sep 1997, 455-463. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, US

    • •
    20. Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr. The genetics of personality. Blum, Kenneth (Ed); Noble, Ernest P. (Ed); et al. (1997). Handbook of psychiatric genetics. (pp. 273-296). 498pp.

    • •
    21. DiLalla, David L; Carey, Gregory; Gottesman, Irving I; Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr. Heritability of MMPI personality indicators of psychopathology in twins reared apart. Journal of Abnormal Psychology. Vol 105(4) Nov 1996, 491-499. American Psychological Assn, US

    • •
    22. Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr; Lykken, David T; Tellegen, Auke; McGue, Matthew. Genes, drives, environment, and experience: EPD theory revised. Benbow, Camilla Persson (Ed); Lubinski, David John (Ed). (1996). Intellectual talent: Psychometric and social issues. (pp. 5-43). xii, 428pp.

    • •
    23. Segal, Nancy L; Wilson, Steven M; Bouchard, Thomas J; Gitlin, Dinah G. Comparative grief experiences of bereaved twins and other bereaved relatives. Personality & Individual Differences. Vol 18(4) Apr 1995, 511-524. Elsevier Science, England

    • •
    24. Hur, Yoon-Mi; Bouchard, Thomas J. Genetic influences on perceptions of childhood family environment: A reared apart twin study. Child Development. Vol 66(2) Apr 1995, 330-345. Blackwell Publishers, US

    • •
    25. Arvey, Richard D; McCall, Brian P; Bouchard, Thomas J; Taubman, Paul; et al. Genetic influences on job satisfaction and work value. Personality & Individual Differences. Vol 17(1) Jul 1994, 21-33. Elsevier Science, England

    • •
    26. Bouchard, Thomas J. Genes, environment, and personality. Science. Vol 264(5166) Jun 1994, 1700-1701. American Assn for the Advancement of Science, US

    • •
    27. Betsworth, Deborah G; Bouchard, Thomas J; Cooper, Catherine R; Grotevant, Harold D; et al. Genetic and environmental influences on vocational interests assessed using adoptive and biological families and twins reared apart and together. Journal of Vocational Behavior. Vol 44(3) Jun 1994, 263-278. Elsevier Science, US

    • •
    28. Baker, L. A; Asendorpf, J; Bishop, D; Boomsma, D. I; Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr; Brand, C. R; Fulker, D. W; Gardner, H; Kinsbourne, M; et al. Group report: Intelligence and its inheritance--A diversity of views. Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr. (Ed); Propping, Peter (Ed). (1993). Twins as a tool of behavioral genetics. Life sciences research report, 53. (pp. 85-108). xvi, 310pp.

    • •
    29. Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr; Propping, Peter. Twins: Nature's twice-told tale. Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr. (Ed); Propping, Peter (Ed). (1993). Twins as a tool of behavioral genetics. Life sciences research report, 53. (pp. 1-15). xvi, 310pp.

    • •
    30. Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr. (Ed); Propping, Peter (Ed). Twins as a tool of behavioral genetics. (1993). xvi, 310pp.

    • •
    Book Series Title
    Life sciences research report, 53.
    31. Waller, Niels G; Bouchard, Thomas J; Lykken, David T; Tellegen, Auke; et al. Creativity, heritability, familiality: Which word does not belong? Psychological Inquiry. Vol 4(3) 1993, 235-237. Lawrence Erlbaum, US

    • •
    32. McGue, Matt; Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr; Iacono, William G; Lykken, David T. Behavioral genetics of cognitive ability: A life-span perspective. Plomin, Robert (Ed); McClearn, Gerald E. (Ed). (1993). Nature, nurture & psychology. (pp. 59-76). xvi, 498pp.

    • •
    33. Lykken, David T; Bouchard, T. J; McGue, M; Tellegen, Auke. Heritability of interests: A twin study. Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol 78(4) Aug 1993, 649-661. American Psychological Assn, US

    • •
    34. Lykken, David T; McGue, Matt; Tellegen, A; Bouchard, T. J. Emergenesis: Genetic traits that may not run in families. American Psychologist. Vol 47(12) Dec 1992, 1565-1577. American Psychological Assn, US

    • •
    35. Keller, Lauren M; Bouchard, Thomas J; Arvey, Richard D; Segal, Nancy L; et al. Work values: Genetic and environmental influences. Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol 77(1) Feb 1992, 79-88. American Psychological Assn, US

    • •
    36. Bouchard, Thomas J; Arvey, Richard D; Keller, Lauren M; Segal, Nancy L. Genetic influences on job satisfaction: A reply to Cropanzano and James. Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol 77(1) Feb 1992, 89-93. American Psychological Assn, US
 
  • #109
OVID PsycINFO citations for TJ Bouchard (cont.)

  • 37. Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr. A twice-told tale: Twins reared apart. Cicchetti, Dante (Ed); Grove, William M. (Ed). (1991). Thinking clearly about psychology: Essays in honor of Paul E. Meehl, Vol. 1: Matters of public interest; Vol. 2: Personality and psychopathology. (pp. 188-215). xxiii, 744pp.

    • •
    38. Segal, Nancy L; Grove, William M; Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr. Psychiatric investigations and findings from the Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart. Tsuang, Ming T. (Ed); Kendler, Kenneth S. (Ed); et al. (1991). Genetic issues in psychosocial epidemiology. Series in psychosocial epidemiology, Vol. 8. (pp. 247-266). xvi, 280pp.

    • •
    39. Moloney, Daniel P; Bouchard, Thomas J; Segal, Nancy L. A genetic and environmental analysis of the vocational interests of monozygotic and dizygotic twins reared apart. Journal of Vocational Behavior. Vol 39(1) Aug 1991, 76-109. Elsevier Science, US

    • •
    40. Bouchard, Thomas J; Lykken, David T; McGue, Matthew; Segal, Nancy L; et al. "Sources of human psychological differences: The Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart": Response. Science. Vol 252(5003) Apr 1991, 191-192. American Assn for the Advancement of Science, US

    • •
    41. Bouchard, Thomas J; Lykken, David T; McGue, Matthew; Segal, Nancy L; et al. Sources of human psychological differences: The Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart. Science. Vol 250(4978) Oct 1990, 223-228. American Assn for the Advancement of Science, US

    • •
    42. Lykken, David T; McGue, Matt; Bouchard, T. J; Tellegen, A. Does contact lead to similarity or similarity to contact? Behavior Genetics. Vol 20(5) Sep 1990, 547-561. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, US

    • •
    43. Bouchard, Thomas J; Segal, N. L; Lykken, D. T. Genetic and environmental influences on special mental abilities in a sample of twins reared apart. Acta Geneticae Medicae et Gemellologiae. Vol 39(2) 1990, 193-206. Associazione Instituto de Genetica Medica e Gemellologia Gregorio Mendel, Italy

    • •
    44. Grove, William M; Eckert, Elke D; Heston, Leonard; Bouchard, Thomas J; et al. Heritability of substance abuse and antisocial behavior: A study of monozygotic twins reared apart. Biological Psychiatry. Vol 27(12) Jun 1990, 1293-1304. Elsevier Science, US

    • •
    45. Bouchard, Thomas J; McGue, Matthew. Genetic and rearing environmental influences on adult personality: An analysis of adopted twins reared apart. Journal of Personality. Vol 58(1) Mar 1990, 263-292. Blackwell Publishers, US

    • •
    46. Waller, Niels G; Kojetin, Brian A; Bouchard, Thomas J; Lykken, David T; et al. Genetic and environmental influences on religious interests, attitudes, and values: A study of twins reared apart and together. Psychological Science. Vol 1(2) Mar 1990, 138-142. Blackwell Publishers, US

    • •
    47. Segal, Nancy L; Dysken, Maurice W; Bouchard, Thomas J; Pedersen, Nancy L; et al. Tourette's disorder in a set of reared-apart triplets: Genetic and environmental influences. American Journal of Psychiatry. Vol 147(2) Feb 1990, 196-199. American Psychiatric Assn, US

    • •
    48. McGue, Matt; Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr. Genetic and environmental determinants of information processing and special mental abilities: A twin analysis. Sternberg, Robert J. (Ed). (1989). Advances in the psychology of human intelligence, Vol. 5. (pp. 7-45). x, 236pp.

    • •
    49. Arvey, Richard D; Bouchard, Thomas J; Segal, Nancy L; Abraham, Lauren M. Job satisfaction: Environmental and genetic components. Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol 74(2) Apr 1989, 187-192. American Psychological Assn, US

    • •
    50. Tellegen, Auke; Lykken, David T; Bouchard, Thomas J; Wilcox, Kimerly J; et al. Personality similarity in twins reared apart and together. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology. Vol 54(6) Jun 1988, 1031-1039. American Psychological Assn, US

    • •
    51. Eckert, Elke D; Bouchard, Thomas J; Bohlen, Joseph; Heston, Leonard L. Homosexuality in monozygotic twins reared apart. British Journal of Psychiatry. Vol 148 Apr 1986, 421-425. Royal Coll of Psychiatrists, England

    • •
    52. McGue, Matt; Bouchard, Thomas J; Lykken, David T; Feuer, Dale. Information processing abilities in twins reared apart. Intelligence. Vol 8(3) Jul-Sep 1984, 239-258. Elsevier/JAI Press Inc, US

    • •
    53. McGue, Matt; Bouchard, Thomas J. Adjustment of twin data for the effects of age and sex. Behavior Genetics. Vol 14(4) Jul 1984, 325-343. Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, US

    • •
    54. Bouchard, Thomas J. Do environmental similarities explain the similarity in intelligence of identical twins reared apart? Intelligence. Vol 7(2) Apr-Jun 1983, 175-184. Elsevier/JAI Press Inc, US
 
  • #110
hitssquad said:
OVID PsycINFO returns 54 citations for (bouchard t j or bouchard thomas j or bouchard thomas j jr).au. and (twin or twins).mp:
  • 1. Johnson, Wendy; McGue, Matt; Krueger, Robert F; Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr. Marriage and Personality: A Genetic Analysis. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology. Vol 86(2) Feb 2004, 285-294. American Psychological Assn, US[\QUOTE]

    hitssquad, this is meaningless, this isn't peer review of the study. This is just a listing of articles where Bouchard was mentioned.

    "And yet, Bouchard's twin studies, which are now in their second decade, have still NEVER been published in a scholarly journal or monograph, nor have they been subjected to peer review by other researchers, nor have other scientists replicated them. Although Bouchard promised to publish a full-length study by 1987, he has failed to do so. (Mehler 1997) Since then he has refused to let any other researcher examine the case histories he claims to have studied."


    "Bouchard's group promised a book length study a decade ago, but it never appeared. The Human Genome Issue of Science published a review article by Bouchard covering research that Science's peer reviewers had earlier rejected."

    http://csf.colorado.edu/mail/matfem/current/msg00173.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #111
Bouchard's Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart

Evo said:
hitssquad said:
OVID PsycINFO returns 54 citations for (bouchard t j or bouchard thomas j or bouchard thomas j jr).au. and (twin or twins).mp:
  • 1. Johnson, Wendy; McGue, Matt; Krueger, Robert F; Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr. Marriage and Personality: A Genetic Analysis. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology. Vol 86(2) Feb 2004, 285-294. American Psychological Assn, US
  • hitssquad, this is meaningless, this isn't peer review of the study. This is just a listing of articles where Bouchard was mentioned.
  • None of these are articles mentioning Bouchard (except where he refers to his own publications). Every one of these citations lists Bouchard as an author. In OVID PsycINFO, .au means author. In PubMed, any letter string followed by exactly one or two letters is parsed as author.

    All of these publications mention twins. Some of these publications are reviews of twin studies in general or summaries of Bouchard's own findings. Some of these publications are replies to comments. The rest of these publications are of initial findings or of methods and findings from Bouchard's Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart.




    "And yet, Bouchard's twin studies, which are now in their second decade, have still NEVER been published in a scholarly journal or monograph, nor have they been subjected to peer review by other researchers, nor have other scientists replicated them. Although Bouchard promised to publish a full-length study by 1987, he has failed to do so. (Mehler 1997) Since then he has refused to let any other researcher examine the case histories he claims to have studied."

    "Bouchard's group promised a book length study a decade ago, but it never appeared. The Human Genome Issue of Science published a review article by Bouchard covering research that Science's peer reviewers had earlier rejected."
    http://csf.colorado.edu/mail/matfem/current/msg00173.html
    The Human Genome Issue of Science was dated 16 February 2001 Volume 291 Number 5507. Bouchard published his complete article on his twin study, Sources of human psychological differences: the Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart, in the Oct 12, 1990 issue of Science. You can read the PDF of that article http://www.jstor.org/browse/00368075/di002138/00p0025p/0 (click DOWNLOAD[/color]). Since then more findings have been published by Bouchard in peer-reviewed journals. His latest article on his findings from his twin study is Marriage and Personality: A Genetic Analysis, published in the Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, Vol 86(2) Feb 2004.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #112
hitssquad said:
None of these are articles mentioning Bouchard (except where he refers to his own publications). Every one of these citations lists Bouchard as an author. In OVID PsycINFO, .au means author. In PubMed, any letter string followed by exactly one or two letters is parsed as author.
Being an "author" doesn't mean didly squat.

hitssquad said:
All of these publications mention twins. Some of these publications are reviews of twin studies in general or summaries of Bouchard's own findings. Some of these publications are replies to comments. The rest of these publications are of initial findings or of methods and findings from Bouchard's Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart in the Oct 12, 1990 issue of Science. You can read the PDF of that article here (click DOWNLOAD). Since then more findings have been published by Bouchard in peer-reviewed journals. His latest article on his findings from his twin study is Marriage and Personality: A Genetic Analysis, published in the Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, Vol 86(2) Feb 2004.
Meaningless again. I don't care that he had an article published. Having snippets of articles posted here & there doesn't validate his research. As I posted, he has published a LOT of stuff, none of it validated. Show me the findings of other legitimate researchers that have examined the case histories he claims to have studied and have validated Bouchard's "eerie anecdotes" as they're jokingly referred to.

Don't forget the fraudulent twin studies done by Sir Cyril Burt used by Jensen and others to base theories of hereditary racial IQ differences. What an embarrassment that was!

I have found nothing that validates Bouchard's so called research.
 
  • #113
Has Bouchard's twins work been peer-reviewed

Evo said:
hitssquad said:
Sources of human psychological differences: the Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart, in the Oct 12, 1990 issue of Science. You can read the PDF of that article http://www.jstor.org/browse/00368075/di002138/00p0025p/0:


  • Research Articles (up to ~4500 words or ~5 journal pages) are expected to present a major advance. Research Articles include an abstract, an introduction, up to 6 figures or tables, sections with brief subheadings, and a maximum of 40 references. Materials and Methods should usually be included in supporting online material, which should also include information needed to support the paper's conclusions.

Bouchard's October 1990 Science Magazine article was six pages, so it qualifies under Science Magazine's guidelines as a Research Article since that is the longest manuscript type Science Magazine accepts save for Reviews.



Further on, Science's guidelines say:


  • Most submitted papers are rated for suitability by members of Science's Board of Reviewing Editors. The editors at Science consider this advice in selecting papers for in-depth review; priority is given to papers that reveal novel concepts of broad interest. Authors of papers that are not highly rated are notified promptly, within about 1 to 2 weeks. Authors are notified of decisions by e-mail only. Membership in AAAS is not a factor in selection of manuscripts for publication.

    Papers are reviewed in depth by two or more outside referees. It is the policy of Science that reviewers are anonymous. Reviewers are contacted before being sent a paper and asked to return comments within 1 week to 10 days for most papers. We are able to expedite the review process significantly for papers that require rapid assessment. Selected papers are edited to improve accuracy and clarity and to shorten, if necessary. Papers cannot be resubmitted over a disagreement on interest or relative merit. If a paper was rejected on the basis of serious reviewer error, resubmission will be considered.



    Conditions of Acceptance
    When a paper is accepted for publication in Science, it is understood that:

  • Any reasonable request for materials, methods, or data necessary to verify the conclusions of the experiments reported must be honored.

  • Authors agree to disclose all affiliations, funding sources, and financial or management relationships that could be perceived as potential sources of bias, as defined by Science's conflict of interest policy.



Additionally, correspondence regarding Bouchard's 1990 Science Magazine article took place within the pages of Science Magazine between Bouchard and respondents to the article. Potential faults were pointed out and Bouchard responded to those criticisms. Correspondence also took place within the pages of the Journal of Applied Psychology regarding another publication of findings from the twin study published there. And finally, response to criticism was published in Sternberg's 1997 Intelligence, heredity, and environment.


  • 3. Bouchard, Thomas J; Lykken, David T; McGue, Matthew; Segal, Nancy L; et al. "Sources of human psychological differences: The Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart": Response. Science. Vol 252(5003) Apr 1991, 191-192. American Assn for the Advancement of Science, US
    AN: Peer Reviewed Journal: 1991-27358-001.
    • •
    Responds to criticism by R. M. Dudley (see record 1991-27363-001) and J. Beckwith et al (see record 1991-27352-001) of studies by T. J. Bouchard et al (see record 1991-21275-001). In response to Dudley, it is argued that the heritability of IQ in the reported sample could be high, and the correlation between co-twin differences and a feature of the environment could also be high. Beckwith et al's complaint that the similarities between monozygotic twins reared apart might be explained by unreported environmental similarities is considered highly unlikely.

  • 18. Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr. IQ similarity in twins reared apart: Findings and responses to critics. Sternberg, Robert J. (Ed); Grigorenko, Elena L. (Ed). (1997). Intelligence, heredity, and environment. (pp. 126-160). xvii, 608pp.
    AN: Chapter: 1997-97582-005.
    • •
    (from the chapter) Bouchard considers the findings of his and others' twin studies and also critiques of these studies. Bouchard concludes that there is no plausible alternative to genetic influence for explaining the similarities in IQ in monozygotic twins reared apart. Bouchard notes that results from these studies are consistent with the results of other kinds of behavior-genetic studies, such as of adult kinships, and also concludes that genetics predominates over environment in the transmission of human intelligence, at least in modern Western societies.

  • 36. Bouchard, Thomas J; Arvey, Richard D; Keller, Lauren M; Segal, Nancy L. Genetic influences on job satisfaction: A reply to Cropanzano and James. Journal of Applied Psychology. Vol 77(1) Feb 1992, 89-93. American Psychological Assn, US
    AN: Journal Article: 1992-18811-001.
    • •
    Responds to the points made by R. Cropanzano and K. James (see record 1991-00462-001) concerning the article by R. D. Arvey et al (1989). The authors acknowledge that the Arvey et al study is based on a single design, makes use of a small and special sample, and, as such, is vulnerable to threats of internal and external validity. Nevertheless, after providing a more comprehensive conceptual and empirical context for the study, and after reviewing a number of the issues raised by Cropanzano and James, the authors conclude that it is not premature to accept the idea that work attitudes are partially genetically influenced. Indeed, the authors use behavioral genetic theory, together with data gathered in the Arvey et al study, to make specific point predictions regarding the outcomes of an array of studies that easily can be undertaken. Finally, the authors acknowledge that the comments and issues raised by Cropanzano and James, along with the interchange, can offer directions for future research in this important area.

  • Dudley, Richard M. "Sources of human psychological differences: The Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart": Comment. Science. Vol 252(5003) Apr 1991, 191. American Assn for the Advancement of Science, US
    AN: Peer Reviewed Journal: 1991-27363-001.
    • •
    Criticizes the use of IQ score correlation of monozygotic twins reared apart as an estimate of IQ heritability in the population at large as reported by T. J. Bouchard et al (see record 1991-21275-001). It is argued that Bouchard et al erroneously assumed no environmental similarity for co-twins.

  • Beckwith, Jonathan; Geller, Lisa; Sarkar, Sahotra. "Sources of human psychological differences: The Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart": Comment. Science. Vol 252(5003) Apr 1991, 191. American Assn for the Advancement of Science, US
    AN: Journal Article: 1991-27352-001.
    • •
    Criticizes the claim of T. J. Bouchard et al (see record 1991-21275-001) that several psychological traits are highly heritable and therefore genetic in origin. It is argued that some of their data have not been published in a format that permits independent scrutiny. Bouchard et al also fail to cite articles containing case studies of the impact of environment on twins.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #114
Mainstream Science on Intelligence - advert in the WSJ

BlackVision said:
"identical twins are roughly 85 percent similar for IQ, fraternal twins about 60 percent."
Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-sr...wins/twins2.htm

want me to post the article from "Wall Street Journal" Here. I'd like to you try and attempt and say Wall Street Journal is racist.

Mainstream Science on Intelligence
The Wall Street Journal
December 13, 1994
The first item you referenced above, BlackVision, is a January 11, 1998 article published in the Washington Post. The second item you referenced, "http://home.comcast.net/~neoeugenics/wsj.htm," is a December 13, 1994 advertisement taken out in the Wall Street Journal. While the first item is genuinely an article, the second is merely a collective position statement. Being a paid advertisement, it does not necessarily represent the views of the Wall Street Journal, its owners, its staff, its editors, or its patrons. Calling it an "article from 'Wall Street Journal'" is a stretch.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #115
hitssquad said:
Conditions of Acceptance
When a paper is accepted for publication in Science, it is understood that:

[*]Any reasonable request for materials, methods, or data necessary to verify the conclusions of the experiments reported must be honored.
Ok, I will accept this as a peer reviewed article. Based on this Bouchard was discredited. He refused to adhere to conditions listed above. Bouchard has refused to allow anyone access to any of the above.

hitssquad said:
[*]Authors agree to disclose all affiliations, funding sources, and financial or management relationships that could be perceived as potential sources of bias, as defined by Science's conflict of interest policy.[/list]
And we know about the Pioneer Fund paying for this.

hitssquad said:
Additionally, correspondence regarding Bouchard's 1990 Science Magazine article took place within the pages of Science Magazine between Bouchard and respondents to the article. Potential faults were pointed out and Bouchard responded to those criticisms.
LOL. Yes he responded by saying he was "right", but failed to provide any information that answered any of the questions or would prove he was right.

Here are a couple of examples. I don't even see responses from Bouchard on the last couple of entries disputing Bouchard's validity.

hitssquad said:
[*]18. Bouchard, Thomas J. Jr. IQ similarity in twins reared apart: Findings and responses to critics. Sternberg, Robert J. (Ed); Grigorenko, Elena L. (Ed). (1997). Intelligence, heredity, and environment. (pp. 126-160). xvii, 608pp.
AN: Chapter: 1997-97582-005.

• •

(from the chapter) Bouchard considers the findings of his and others' twin studies and also critiques of these studies. Bouchard concludes that there is no plausible alternative to genetic influence for explaining the similarities in IQ in monozygotic twins reared apart. Bouchard notes that results from these studies are consistent with the results of other kinds of behavior-genetic studies, such as of adult kinships, and also concludes that genetics predominates over environment in the transmission of human intelligence, at least in modern Western societies.
See, this is exactly what I am talking about. He offers no proof. This is meaningless.


hitssquad said:
[*]Dudley, Richard M. "Sources of human psychological differences: The Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart": Comment. Science. Vol 252(5003) Apr 1991, 191. American Assn for the Advancement of Science, US
AN: Peer Reviewed Journal: 1991-27363-001.

• •

Criticizes the use of IQ score correlation of monozygotic twins reared apart as an estimate of IQ heritability in the population at large as reported by T. J. Bouchard et al (see record 1991-21275-001). It is argued that Bouchard et al erroneously assumed no environmental similarity for co-twins.

[*]Beckwith, Jonathan; Geller, Lisa; Sarkar, Sahotra. "Sources of human psychological differences: The Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart": Comment. Science. Vol 252(5003) Apr 1991, 191. American Assn for the Advancement of Science, US
AN: Journal Article: 1991-27352-001.

• •

Criticizes the claim of T. J. Bouchard et al (see record 1991-21275-001) that several psychological traits are highly heritable and therefore genetic in origin. It is argued that some of their data have not been published in a format that permits independent scrutiny. Bouchard et al also fail to cite articles containing case studies of the impact of environment on twins.[/list]

hitssquad, you are awesome when it comes to finding information. :smile:

Have you been able to find where Bouchard allowed other researchers access to his data and they concurred that his study was vaild?
 
  • #116
BlackVision said:
What the hell are you talking about? You're the one constantly trying to discredit 80 years of consistent psychology research by pointing out the "supposed" flaws of one guy.
You used Bouchard as your source, I showed he was wrong. You have yet to show me that I am wrong. So, either show me the studies done by other researchers that Bouchard allowed access to his data and proved his study to be sound, or stop beating a dead horse.

BlackVision said:
This is your best source? Could of at least attempted to find a reliable source with doctors and bibliographical notes. What is this?

Also note that I never even brought up brain size so not sure why you brought it up. We were discussing IQ weren't we??
This is the information from the actual research that was used by Rushton for that debunked study *you* cited stating Asians and whites had higher IQ's. You don't know about the supposed correlation of brain size to IQ? It's all part of the same argument.

BlackVision said:
How long have you been here? I'd been here for like a week and I'd read more support than just those 2. Simply naming the two most vocal ones doesn't mean those are the only ones.
I am not aware of any others that once they were presented with additional information continued with the debate. I have a lot of respect for hitssquad. He and I obviously see things differently, but he backs up his arguments with facts. Usually not facts I agree with, but he's a tough adversary, something you are not.

BlackVision said:
You think you've debated this a lot? You have any idea how much I have? You and I both know how it'll end up.
Yes, I will win because when you are presented with information that debunks something you have stated, you are consistently incapable of responding with valid new information to support your position.
 
  • #117
BlackVision said:
Seeing how there's probably well over 50,000 sources that will give you the 70% and 80% figures, I would say that it's quite substantiated. Did your bias just have a tendency to simply skip over each and every single one of them in your so called "researches"?
Well, you should have no problem posting a few of those studies here as I previously requested, which you have failed to do.

BlackVision, you will find that when you start making things up like your above statement "there's probably well over 50,000 sources that will give you the 70% and 80% figures" you will immediately lose your credibility here.
 
  • #118
Evo said:
You used Bouchard as your source, I showed he was wrong. You have yet to show me that I am wrong. So, either show me the studies done by other researchers that Bouchard allowed access to his data and proved his study to be sound, or stop beating a dead horse.
Did you even READ all the articles I posted? Obviously not. First read them, and then come back.

This is the information from the actual research that was used by Rushton for that debunked study *you* cited stating Asians and whites had higher IQ's. You don't know about the supposed correlation of brain size to IQ? It's all part of the same argument.
Do you have ANY idea how many researches came up with Asians and Jews with the highest IQ? Let's see...Pretty much every single research done on the taboo subject of race and intelligence. Arthur Jensen for example decades ago but also even before him. What is your constant fixation with one person? You fail to discredit a person but you act like if you do, that every other study on the matter for the past 80 years somehow gets discredited.

I am not aware of any others that once they were presented with additional information continued with the debate. I have a lot of respect for hitssquad. He and I obviously see things differently, but he backs up his arguments with facts. Usually not facts I agree with, but he's a tough adversary, something you are not.
And you're so tough. Oh no. Pioneer Fund. Whenever you mention it, I already know you have no argument. Either that or you completely blow off my questions. Let's see. How many questions so far have you ignored of mine?

Yes, I will win because when you are presented with information that debunks something you have stated, you are consistently incapable of responding with valid new information to support your position.
Incapable of responding with valid new information? Hmmm. Let's see. I think what you mean is all the times you refused to answer my question except go "I will answer later when I have time" Right...later...sure you will.

Perhaps while you answer those "later", you should also write a letter to all the academics in elite universities and also tell them they are wrong. You've got to be kidding yourself if you don't think this viewpoint isn't a popular one in the academic circles. The Bell Curve information was general knowledge in the science community far before the book was published. It proved nothing new. Why such a support in academic circles for something that's "debunked"
 
Last edited:
  • #119
Evo said:
Well, you should have no problem posting a few of those studies here as I previously requested, which you have failed to do.
Hmmm funny it seems I already posted 4. Would you like to me post another 10?

BlackVision, you will find that when you start making things up like your above statement "there's probably well over 50,000 sources that will give you the 70% and 80% figures" you will immediately lose your credibility here.
Seems you have no more credibility to even lose. Putting political correctness and your own political motives before science.

And that's a made up statement? Right...cause the majority of sources don't state that number. Is this you trying to kid yourself again? Continue to have your fingers stuck to your ears.
 
  • #120
BlackVision said:
Did you even READ all the articles I posted? Obviously not. First read them, and then come back.
I only responded to the Bouchard post. Since you have failed repeatedly to respond to my debunking of it, it is obvious you have nothing to prove me wrong. I have won this one. If you bring up this topic again without providing evidence to support your claims I will not respond as I have no time to deal with an idiot.

BlackVision said:
Do you have ANY idea how many researches came up with Asians and Jews with the highest IQ? Let's see...Pretty much every single research done on the taboo subject of race and intelligence. Arthur Jensen for example decades ago but also even before him.
Why don't you post a few?
BlackVision said:
What is your constant fixation with one person? You fail to discredit a person but you act like if you do, that every other study on the matter for the past 80 years somehow gets discredited.
Again, I don't have a fixation, *you* are the one that keeps bringing Bouchard up, why, I have no idea.

BlackVision said:
And you're so tough. Oh no. Pioneer Fund. Whenever you mention it, I already know you have no argument. Either that or you completely blow off my questions. Let's see. How many questions so far have you ignored of mine?
Because Bouchard, Rushton, Lynn, Jenson, etc... are all affiliated with the Pioneer Fund, see some connection here?

BlackVision said:
Incapable of responding with valid new information?
I have yet to see you post one single thing that can refute anything I've said.
BlackVision said:
Hmmm. Let's see. I think what you mean is all the times you refused to answer my question except go "I will answer later when I have time" Right...later...sure you will.
I've answered all of your questions that were on the topic we were discussing. I have a lot of posts to make, I have to get the information off another laptop and I simply haven't had the time. Since I am still waiting for you to respond to my first request, I didn't feel any urgency.

Perhaps while you answer those "later", you should also write a letter to all the academics in elite universities and also tell them they are wrong. You've got to be kidding yourself if you don't think this viewpoint isn't a popular one in the academic circles. The Bell Curve information was general knowledge in the science community far before the book was published. It proved nothing new. Why such a support in academic circles for something that's "debunked"
The Bell Curve is flawed. Read this.

Sloppy Statistics, Bogus Science and the Assault on Racial Equity

"The "science" of books like The Bell Curve is inherently flawed, mostly because the concept of distinct biological "races" that can be studied, compared and found to be "superior" or "inferior" is itself a misnomer."

http://www.raceandhistory.com/historicalviews/ukwise.htm
 
  • #121
BlackVision said:
Hmmm funny it seems I already posted 4. Would you like to me post another 10?
You have posted 0 in reponse to MY request. Please post them in reponse to this request, or admit you don't have anything to post. I'm waiting.

Evo said:
BlackVision, you will find that when you start making things up like your above statement "there's probably well over 50,000 sources that will give you the 70% and 80% figures" you will immediately lose your credibility here.

BlackVision said:
Seems you have no more credibility to even lose. Putting political correctness and your own political motives before science.

And that's a made up statement? Right...cause the majority of sources don't state that number. Is this you trying to kid yourself again? Continue to have your fingers stuck to your ears.
Again you have failed to respond with anything more than gibberish. I asked you to substantiate your claim by posting a few of these "50,000 sources" you claim knowledge of. Yes, it's a made up statement. BlackVision, you are a flake. Until you can post something that can back up your claims or admit you can't dispute my posts, I really don't have time for you. I have wasted a lot of time repeatedly asking you for the same information, which not only do you NOT provide, you ask totally unrelated questions seemingly in an ill disguised attempt to get away from something you can't answer.
 
  • #122
I only responded to the Bouchard post. Since you have failed repeatedly to respond to my debunking of it, it is obvious you have nothing to prove me wrong. I have won this one. If you bring up this topic again without providing evidence to support your claims I will not respond as I have no time to deal with an idiot.
Hasn't hitssquad already debunked your Bouchard comments? Enough said.

And this idiot is getting high honors in one of the most prestigious universities so :smile: And where exactly are you in life?

Why don't you post a few?
What the hell? Didn't I just say Arthur Jensen. Can you read. What do you think about Thomas Sowell, PhD. One of the most respected black academics. Graduate of Harvard University. Who agrees with Arthur Jensen on the consensus that part of the white-black IQ gap is genetically based.

Again, I don't have a fixation, *you* are the one that keeps bringing Bouchard up, why, I have no idea.
This isn't about Bouchard. You bring up Rushton. There certainly is far more in the field than just Rushton.

Because Bouchard, Rushton, Lynn, Jenson, etc... are all affiliated with the Pioneer Fund, see some connection here?
What did I tell you about funding? Look up "irrelevance" in your dictionary. An alien word to you. This is like saying any politician that accepts funding from Microsoft is tainted. Let's see who Microsoft donated to in the last election. Oh yes that's right both Bush AND gore. And pretty much funds any politician that runs every election.

Again if you want to be taken seriously, you're going to actually have to refute the statistics, the data. Going after funding, and making it your MAIN argument, shows your absolute weakness making your case.

I have yet to see you post one single thing that can refute anything I've said.
Funny how this is how I think about you.

I've answered all of your questions that were on the topic we were discussing. I have a lot of posts to make, I have to get the information off another laptop and I simply haven't had the time. Since I am still waiting for you to respond to my first request, I didn't feel any urgency.
What first request? And you've avoided my questions from the way beginning. Don't give me that BS. I asked for actual evidence that refutes the Bell Curve. The only thing you did was whine about the Pioneer Fund. This is your defense? Really?

The Bell Curve is flawed. Read this.

Sloppy Statistics, Bogus Science and the Assault on Racial Equity

"The "science" of books like The Bell Curve is inherently flawed, mostly because the concept of distinct biological "races" that can be studied, compared and found to be "superior" or "inferior" is itself a misnomer."

http://www.raceandhistory.com/histo...iews/ukwise.htm
You know you might want to try finding better sources that ones that go "date unknown by Tim Wise" Tim Wise? What is this? Not Dr. Tim Wise. Not Professor Tim Wise. But plain old Tim Wise. Oh I didn't know that just anybody had the ability to speak on this matter. Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein are PhDs out of Harvard and MIT. Richard Herrnstein holds the most respected chair in psychology at Harvard University. The Edgar Pierce Chair. The most respected chair, in the most repected university. And the person you come up with to try to refute this is Tim Wise?? Jesus Christ.

Not to mention this guy fails to even realize that their are real genetic differences in between races. A geneticist can easily tell a person's race, simply by looking at their DNA. That in itself is proof of genetic differences in between races.

And again calling it racist. Very weak case. Oh yes all these white academics are racist supremacists that like to put asians and jews as superior. Perfect logic here. Oh it could have absolutely nothing to do with looking at facts and an unbias perspective and coming up with the logic conclusions. And unlike you, real science involves not being politically correct, not putting your own political motives.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #123
Evo said:
You have posted 0 in reponse to MY request. Please post them in reponse to this request, or admit you don't have anything to post. I'm waiting.
I already posted 4. If you're too blind to see them then that's your own problem. And what request?

Again you have failed to respond with anything more than gibberish. I asked you to substantiate your claim by posting a few of these "50,000 sources" you claim knowledge of. Yes, it's a made up statement. BlackVision, you are a flake. Until you can post something that can back up your claims or admit you can't dispute my posts, I really don't have time for you. I have wasted a lot of time repeatedly asking you for the same information, which not only do you NOT provide, you ask totally unrelated questions seemingly in an ill disguised attempt to get away from something you can't answer.
How blind are you really? Does your brain just ignore information that it doesn't want to input? I already posted 4. Do you want me to simply post them again? You might want to go get that neurological disorder checked out.
 
  • #124
"The first reactions to The Bell Curve were expressions of public outrage. In the second round of reaction, some commentators suggested that Herrnstein and Murray were merely bringing up facts that were well known in the scientific community, but perhaps best not discussed in public. A Papua New Guinea language has a term for this, "Mokita". It means "truth that we all know, but agree not to talk about"---Professor Earl Hunt
 
  • #125
BlackVision said:
Hasn't hitssquad already debunked your Bouchard comments? Enough said.
No, he hasn't yet, but he is doing a great job of finding items to prove my previous article wrong. Something you are incapable of.

BlackVision said:
And this idiot is getting high honors in one of the most prestigious universities so :smile: And where exactly are you in life?
Making more money than you will ever hope to.

BlackVision said:
What the hell? Didn't I just say Arthur Jensen.
ROFLMAO! You think a name, without providing any information whatsoever, is a way to substantiate a claim you are making?

I'm not wasting anymore time with you, you can't even debate.

Oh, I loved where hitssquad showed that the "article" you said was in The Wall Street Journal, that you were throwing around to try to prove your point turned out to be an advertisement! HAHAHAHAHA! (that's my Nachtwolf imitation) :biggrin:
 
  • #126
What is this? Again with the avoiding of questions. Notice how short your replies are to in comparsion to my responses.

Evo said:
No, he hasn't yet, but he is doing a great job of finding items to prove my previous article wrong. Something you are incapable of.
And yet you fail to prove me wrong. Still fail to provide any shred of evidence.

Making more money than you will ever hope to.
And you live in the MIDDLE of America? Kansas? Oklahoma? Oh cause we all know the richest people live in Middle America right? You're obviously not rich enough to live by the coast. I live in the hills of Brentwood in Los Angeles. The average house here goes for over $1 million here. Not that it makes me a better person or anything but it is you that brought up money into this.

ROFLMAO! You think a name, without providing any information whatsoever, is a way to substantiate a claim you are making?
Wasn't it you that kept saying to provide names? I provided one and you completely ignored it. And do I really have to bother providing and explaining Arthur Jensen's work? Who's pretty much the most famous psychologist of all time? If you don't know his work, if I actually have to explain to you what he does, then that's quite sad.

I'm not wasting anymore time with you, you can't even debate.
Do us both a favor and don't waste my time. When you try to refute something, you have to actually say something that goes against the data, the statistics. Pioneer Fund. Well it just shows you have nothing.

Oh, I loved where hitssquad showed that the "article" you said was in The Wall Street Journal, that you were throwing around to try to prove your point turned out to be an advertisement! HAHAHAHAHA! (that's my Nachtwolf imitation) :biggrin:
I loved it when you kept telling me that I can't read and I didn't post a Washington Post article only to prove you wrong. :biggrin: (that's me laughing at you)
 
  • #127
BlackVision said:
What is this? Again with the avoiding of questions. Notice how short your replies are to in comparsion to my responses.
Because you are so dense, I will do this one last time. An intelligent person usually is able to respond with fewer words. I've only refused to be sidetracked and chosen not to answer questions that were unrelated to our discussion.

BlackVision said:
And yet you fail to prove me wrong. Still fail to provide any shred of evidence.
On the contrary, I proved YOU wrong in my first post, and you have yet to disprove me. End of discussion.

BlackVision said:
And you live in the MIDDLE of America? Kansas? Oklahoma? Oh cause we all know the richest people live in Middle America right? You're obviously not rich enough to live by the coast. I live in the hills of Brentwood in Los Angeles. The average house here goes for over $1 million here. Not that it makes me a better person or anything but it is you that brought up money into this.
If you live in LA and your house only costs $1 million, you're barely middle class dear.

BlackVision said:
Wasn't it you that kept saying to provide names?
Nope, I never asked for a name.
BlackVision said:
I provided one and you completely ignored it. And do I really have to bother providing and explaining Arthur Jensen's work? Who's pretty much the most famous psychologist of all time? If you don't know his work, if I actually have to explain to you what he does, then that's quite sad.
Oh, I am quite familiar with Jensen, he is a well known racist. I have quite a bit of information on him.

BlackVision said:
Do us both a favor and don't waste my time. When you try to refute something, you have to actually say something that goes against the data, the statistics. Pioneer Fund. Well it just shows you have nothing.
No, it is you that has proven you have nothing. Anyone reading this thread can see this for themselves. Alright, let me come down to your level so you can understand why the ties the researchers have to Pioneer Fund and Pioneer Fund's involvement in these studies has to be brought up. Let's call the Pioneer Fund the Ku Klux Klan, both are racist organizations, Pioneer Fund members don't wear white sheets though. Ok, a Ku Klux Klan member does a study to show that blacks are less intelligent than other races, his study is paid for by the Ku Klux Klan. You don't think it's important to mention the KKK when these so called "studies" are mentioned? Ok, now replace Ku Klux Klan with Pioneer Fund and we will have the answer to why the studies and researchers you refer to are not to be depended on as an unbiased source of information. Got it now?

BlackVision said:
I loved it when you kept telling me that I can't read and I didn't post a Washington Post article only to prove you wrong. :biggrin: (that's me laughing at you)
Uhm, you obviously can't read because I have NEVER said that you didn't post a Washington Post article. Go back, read all the posts then tuck your tail between your legs and admit you don't know what you are talking about. :biggrin:
 
Last edited:
  • #128
Evo said:
Because you are so dense, I will do this one last time. An intelligent person usually is able to respond with fewer words. I've only refused to be sidetracked and chosen not to answer questions that were unrelated to our discussion.
Ah so Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein wrote a 850 page book cause they're unintelligent. Alright. I always thought thoroughness was a good thing. Guess I'm wrong.

And choose not to answer or do not have the ability to answer?

On the contrary, I proved YOU wrong in my first post, and you have yet to disprove me. End of discussion.
Well you can keep thinking that but your lack of ability to answer any of my questions is proof in itself.

If you live in LA and your house only costs $1 million, you're barely middle class dear.
Los Angeles County: $209,300 median house value

But again. Economical status here is irrelevant.

Source: US Census Bureau

Nope, I never asked for a name. Oh, I am quite familiar with Jensen, he is a well known racist. I have quite a bit of information on him.
Yes yes cause anyone that doesn't agree with you is of course racist. No matter how much science and facts are behind it. Funny how Thomas Sowell, a black academic, has strong support for Arthur Jensen, this so called "racist"

No, it is you that has proven you have nothing. Anyone reading this thread can see this for themselves. Alright, let me come down to your level so you can understand why the ties the researchers have to Pioneer Fund and Pioneer Fund's involvement in these studies has to be brought up. Let's call the Pioneer Fund the Ku Klux Klan, both are racist organizations, Pioneer Fund members don't wear white sheets though. Ok, a Ku Klux Klan member does a study to show that blacks are less intelligent than other races, his study is paid for by the Ku Klux Klan. You don't think it's important to mention the KKK when these so called "studies" are mentioned? Ok, now replace Ku Klux Klan with Pioneer Fund and we will have the answer to why the studies and researchers you refer to are not to be depended on as an unbiased source of information. Got it now?
Again your decision to focus on funding shows the weakness of your case. Like I said, it doesn't matter if Hitler himself funds a project. That itself doesn't disprove anything. If you want to begin refuting something, you refute the facts. Since you are unable to do this, you choose to attack funding. Again very weak.

Uhm, you obviously can't read because I have NEVER said that you didn't post a Washington Post article. Go back, read all the posts then tuck your tail between your legs and admit you don't know what you are talking about. :biggrin:
"My article on IQ heritability WAS from the Washington Post. YOU were stating that my sources were tainted."--BlackVision

"WRONG. You really cannot read, can you?"--Evo

Yeah ok. :biggrin:
 
  • #129
BlackVision said:
Ah so Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein wrote a 850 page book cause they're unintelligent. Alright. I always thought thoroughness was a good thing. Guess I'm wrong.
Murray & Herrnstein have both been debunked.

BlackVision said:
Los Angeles County: $209,300 median house value
Yeah, including the ghettos. Homes where I live start at $2 million, they would be 10 times that on the west or east coast.

BlackVision said:
"My article on IQ heritability WAS from the Washington Post. YOU were stating that my sources were tainted."--BlackVision
Go back and read, you wrongly thought I was referring to your previous post, I corrected you and showed you I was referring to your links.

You just keep digging yourself in deeper and deeper. :biggrin:
 
  • #130
Evo said:
Murray & Herrnstein have both been debunked.
Simply saying it doesn't make it so.

Yeah, including the ghettos. Homes where I live start at $2 million, they would be 10 times that on the west or east coast.

How odd that the median house value of your neighborhood is higher than the richest town in America. And the only 2 towns here that could even be considered Middle America is Aspen, CO and Snowmass Village, CO. Are you going to tell me you live in either of these towns?

Top 10 Median Home Prices in America:

Jupiter Island, FL - $1,900,000
Aspen, CO - $1,750,000
Atherton, CA - $1,697,500
Belvedere, CA - $1,462,500
Rolling Hills, CA - $1,425,000
Hillsborough, CA - $1,380,000
Los Altos Hills, CA - $1,331,000
Mountain Village, CA - $1,325,000
Rancho Santa Fe, CA - $1,325,000
Snowmass Village, CO - $1,300,000

Source: http://realtytimes.com/rtnews/rtcpages/20000522_richestowns.htm

And homes in LA would cost more...really...I wonder why. Ever hear of supply and demand? And yet here you are trying to state that where you live, is richer than the richest town in Los Angeles. Hell richer than any town in California. No no. Richer than the richest town in America. Geez I wonder why I nor anyone else is going to believe you.

Go back and read, you wrongly thought I was referring to your previous post, I corrected you and showed you I was referring to your links.

You just keep digging yourself in deeper and deeper. :biggrin:
Um Washington Post WAS one of my links. I think you're getting deeper and deeper.
:biggrin:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #131
BlackVision said:
But if that article wasn't good enough for you, here you go.

"Like the prior, smaller studies of monozygotic twins reared apart, about 70% of the variance in IQ was found to be associated with genetic variation."

Source: http://www.mugu.com/cgi-bin/Upstream/Issues/psychology/IQ/bouchard-twins.html

"Particularly noteworthy are the heritabilities of around 80% found in adult twins reared apart"

Source: http://danny.oz.au/communities/anthro-l/debates/race-iq/

"Monozygotic Twins raised apart had a 74% correlation in IQ. Adopted childs had a 20% correlation in IQ"

Source: http://www.canberra.edu.au/uc/lectures/scides/sem992/unit4311/Lecture5.html

Of these links provided, the last two are just someone's lecture material, which may or may not be citing the studies correctly. The first is at least somewhat written up as a research report, but none of the tables or figures are included, so it's impossible to determine from that whether the claims are valid. The study does seem to be lacking proper controls. How does one determine the degree that IQ is associated with genetics when there is no comparison of the twins with non-related individuals? Indeed, the authors cite that the standard deviation of IQs for the group studied was lower than for the general population, suggesting even the non-related twins in the study were similar in IQ (meaning, if you paired the IQ results of one twin randomly with another person in the study who is not their twin, what is the likelihood of coming up with the same correlation?). The only conclusion those authors seem to be making is that there is no difference in the similarity of IQ between twins raised together vs raised apart. That still doesn't make it a genetic link, but just means other environmental factors could be similar even with the adopted families. From the description provided, the adoptive families sound quite similar...similar education and socioeconomic status of the adoptive parents. These alone could contribute to the similarities in IQ of the twins. Also, how do the population means compare between twins raised apart and twins raised together? Could it be that twins raised apart seem to have similar IQs because the stress of being separated from their twin at a young age has an overall suppressive effect on learning and development such that this masks any potential for differences had circumstances been different?

It is also relevant if these studies are all funded by a group with a specific agenda. It is called "conflict of interest" and is a valid concern related to scientific bias, which is why journals require disclosure of funding sources. Bias can work in more than one way. Even if you try to be unbiased, if you have a particular outcome in mind, it can be more difficult to notice the design flaws in a study and to more quickly accept the outcome when it fits with the preconcieved ideas of that outcome. This can happen in any area of science, even seemingly objective studies, and is the reason for analyzing data blind to the "treatment" groups and need for showing the results can be replicated.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #132
Of these links provided, the last two are just someone's lecture material, which may or may not be citing the studies correctly. The first is at least somewhat written up as a research report, but none of the tables or figures are included, so it's impossible to determine from that whether the claims are valid. The study does seem to be lacking proper controls. How does one determine the degree that IQ is associated with genetics when there is no comparison of the twins with non-related individuals? Indeed, the authors cite that the standard deviation of IQs for the group studied was lower than for the general population, suggesting even the non-related twins in the study were similar in IQ (meaning, if you paired the IQ results of one twin randomly with another person in the study who is not their twin, what is the likelihood of coming up with the same correlation?). The only conclusion those authors seem to be making is that there is no difference in the similarity of IQ between twins raised together vs raised apart. That still doesn't make it a genetic link, but just means other environmental factors could be similar even with the adopted families. From the description provided, the adoptive families sound quite similar...similar education and socioeconomic status of the adoptive parents. These alone could contribute to the similarities in IQ of the twins. Also, how do the population means compare between twins raised apart and twins raised together? Could it be that twins raised apart seem to have similar IQs because the stress of being separated from their twin at a young age has an overall suppressive effect on learning and development such that this masks any potential for differences had circumstances been different?

The differences between identical twins, fraternal twins, and adopted childs are listed. Here.

Mean IQ Correlation:

Identical Twins raised together: 85%
Identical Twins raised apart: 74%
Fraternal Twins raised together: 59%
Siblings raised together: 46%
Siblings raised apart: 24%
Single parent/child together: 41%
Single parent/child apart: 24%
Adopting parent/child together: 20%

http://www.canberra.edu.au/uc/lectures/scides/sem992/unit4311/Lecture5.html

It is also relevant if these studies are all funded by a group with a specific agenda. It is called "conflict of interest" and is a valid concern related to scientific bias, which is why journals require disclosure of funding sources. Bias can work in more than one way. Even if you try to be unbiased, if you have a particular outcome in mind, it can be more difficult to notice the design flaws in a study and to more quickly accept the outcome when it fits with the preconcieved ideas of that outcome. This can happen in any area of science, even seemingly objective studies, and is the reason for analyzing data blind to the "treatment" groups and need for showing the results can be replicated.

Evo tries to pass off Pioneer Fund as racist. Which it's not. The relation of Pioneer Fund of decades ago to today is like the relation of Volkswagen of decades ago to today. It's like saying if a group gets funding from Volkswagen, that it's racially bias against Jews cause Volkswagen is after all a company founded by Adolf Hitler.

Q&A of the Pioneer Fund:
http://www.pioneerfund.org/Controversies.html

Also even if you do think funding is suspicious, you nonetheless have to point out the flaws of the studies itself. Otherwise, as I've said, it doesn't matter who funds it. "The Bell Curve" "The g Factor" "Race, Evolution, and Behavior" were all peer reviewed. Cross examined by thousands before it was released.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #133
P.S. The Bell Curve was NOT funded by the Pioneer Fund. They were funded by the Bradley Foundation.
 
  • #134
Bouchard's responses in the April 12, 1991 issue of Science

Evo said:
I don't even see responses from Bouchard on the last couple of entries disputing Bouchard's validity.
The last couple of entries are Dudley's and Beckwith's separate criticisms of Bouchard's October 1990 Science article. Here again are those criticisms published in the April 12th, 1991 issue of Science:

  • Dudley, Richard M. "Sources of human psychological differences: The Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart": Comment. Science. Vol 252(5003) Apr 1991, 191. American Assn for the Advancement of Science, US
    AN: Peer Reviewed Journal: 1991-27363-001.
    • •
    Criticizes the use of IQ score correlation of monozygotic twins reared apart as an estimate of IQ heritability in the population at large as reported by T. J. Bouchard et al (see record 1991-21275-001). It is argued that Bouchard et al erroneously assumed no environmental similarity for co-twins.

  • Beckwith, Jonathan; Geller, Lisa; Sarkar, Sahotra. "Sources of human psychological differences: The Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart": Comment. Science. Vol 252(5003) Apr 1991, 191. American Assn for the Advancement of Science, US
    AN: Journal Article: 1991-27352-001.
    • •
    Criticizes the claim of T. J. Bouchard et al (see record 1991-21275-001) that several psychological traits are highly heritable and therefore genetic in origin. It is argued that some of their data have not been published in a format that permits independent scrutiny. Bouchard et al also fail to cite articles containing case studies of the impact of environment on twins.


Here again are Bouchard's responses to both Dudley's and Beckwith's criticisms in the same April 12th, 1991 issue of Science:

  • 3. Bouchard, Thomas J; Lykken, David T; McGue, Matthew; Segal, Nancy L; et al. "Sources of human psychological differences: The Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart": Response. Science. Vol 252(5003) Apr 1991, 191-192. American Assn for the Advancement of Science, US
    AN: Peer Reviewed Journal: 1991-27358-001.
    • •
    Responds to criticism by R. M. Dudley (see record 1991-27363-001) and J. Beckwith et al (see record 1991-27352-001) of studies by T. J. Bouchard et al (see record 1991-21275-001). In response to Dudley, it is argued that the heritability of IQ in the reported sample could be high, and the correlation between co-twin differences and a feature of the environment could also be high. Beckwith et al's complaint that the similarities between monozygotic twins reared apart might be explained by unreported environmental similarities is considered highly unlikely.


Edit:[/color] Here are jpegs of the first and second (of the two concerning Bouchard) pages of responses printed in the April 12th, 1991 issue of Science.

Edit2:[/color] Beckwith, in his criticism here, mentions that the case studies should be "fully published":
  • ...Given these essential problems in assessing the impact of the environment on twins, it is imperative that case studies be fully published. In 12 years, the Minnesota group have not provided these case studies, and the two apparently relevant articles cited by Bouchard et al (1) contain no relevant case studies.

    1. T. J. Bouchard, Jr., N. L. Segal, D. T. Lykken, Acta Geneticae Medicae et Gemellologiae, 39, 193 (1990); D. T. Lykken, T. J. Bouchard, Jr., M. McGue, A. Tellegan, ibid, p. 35.
 
Last edited:
  • #135
BlackVision said:
How odd that the median house value of your neighborhood is higher than the richest town in America. And the only 2 towns here that could even be considered Middle America is Aspen, CO and Snowmass Village, CO. Are you going to tell me you live in either of these towns?
I was referring to my neighborhood, since you mentioned your neighborhood, I don't see where I said that was the starting price for homes in town. Obviously you think a neighborhood is a town.

BlackVision said:
And homes in LA would cost more...really...I wonder why. Ever hear of supply and demand? And yet here you are trying to state that where you live, is richer than the richest town in Los Angeles. Hell richer than any town in California. No no. Richer than the richest town in America. Geez I wonder why I nor anyone else is going to believe you.
:biggrin: I love it, the more you write the more you show your lack of intelligence. LA is overpopulated, of course there is more demand for housing, this is why I choose to live here.

BlackVision said:
Um Washington Post WAS one of my links. I think you're getting deeper and deeper. :biggrin:
Uhm, no it wasn't. Here is your post, gee I don't see a link to the Washington Post, do you? You are the stupidist person I have ever run across.

BlackVision said:
But if that article wasn't good enough for you, here you go.

"Like the prior, smaller studies of monozygotic twins reared apart, about 70% of the variance in IQ was found to be associated with genetic variation."

Source: http://www.mugu.com/cgi-bin/Upstrea...hard-twins.html

"Particularly noteworthy are the heritabilities of around 80% found in adult twins reared apart"

Source: http://danny.oz.au/communities/anth...ebates/race-iq/

"Monozygotic Twins raised apart had a 74% correlation in IQ. Adopted childs had a 20% correlation in IQ"

Source: http://www.canberra.edu.au/uc/lectu...1/Lecture5.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #136
BlackVision said:
Evo tries to pass off Pioneer Fund as racist. Which it's not. The relation of Pioneer Fund of decades ago to today is like the relation of Volkswagen of decades ago to today. It's like saying if a group gets funding from Volkswagen, that it's racially bias against Jews cause Volkswagen is after all a company founded by Adolf Hitler.

Q&A of the Pioneer Fund:
http://www.pioneerfund.org/Controversies.html

Also even if you do think funding is suspicious, you nonetheless have to point out the flaws of the studies itself. Otherwise, as I've said, it doesn't matter who funds it. "The Bell Curve" "The g Factor" "Race, Evolution, and Behavior" were all peer reviewed. Cross examined by thousands before it was released.
Here's the CURRENT Pioneer Fund, a RACIST organization.

Race-based science might seem like a relic of the Victorian age, and eugenics an experiment in "human improvement" that passed away with Hitler.

But thanks in large part to the Pioneer Fund both subjects are still alive. Set up into "improve the character of the American people" by promoting eugenics and procreation by people of white colonial stock, Pioneer has financed a number of leading race scientists, lavishing more than $500,000 a year on those who work to "prove" inherent racial differences that the vast majority of scientists regard as balderdash.

Now, with the death of its long-time president and the appointment of a Canadian race scientist to replace him, the Pioneer Fund may be nearing the end, with plans to spend down its remaining endowment in the next few years.

Harry F. Weyher died on March 27 in La Grange, N.C. A corporate lawyer educated at Harvard, Weyher had administered the fund since 1958, giving money to "scientists" in pursuit of the Orwellian goal of "human race betterment," but also to more "mainstream" groups like the Federation for American Immigration Reform.

One of those people is Pioneer's new president, one of the most notorious race scientists in the world. Psychology professor Jean-Phillippe Rushton, who has been investigated for allegedly violating Canadian hate-speech laws, has been showered with Pioneer money in recent years.

Rushton, a British expatriate who teaches at the University of Western Ontario, first courted infamy in 1989 when he published work focusing on the sexual characteristics of different races. His findings: Blacks have larger genitals, breasts and buttocks — characteristics that Rushton alleged have an inverse relationship to brain size and, thus, intelligence.

When Rushton took the helm of the Pioneer Fund, he was joined on the board of directors by a scientist who may be even more extreme: Richard Lynn, a psychologist at the University of Ulster who published one of the most stunning recent examples of race science in the July 2002 issue of the eugenicist American Renaissance magazine.

Blacks are not only less intelligent than other races, Lynn asserted, but also "more psychopathic." Putting a new twist on the "science" that once supported slavery, Lynn concluded that because of their "psychopathic personalities," blacks are more aggressive than other races, less able to form long-term relationships, and more sexually promiscuous, reckless and prone to lying.

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=83
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #137
Pioneer Fund Facts

More on the Pioneer Fund.

A movement begins

After falling out of favor in the 1940s, eugenics started interesting researchers again in the 1960s, said Barry Mehler, a professor of history at Ferris State University in Big Rapids, Mich., and the director of the Institute for the Study of Academic Racism.

"In the '60s, we began to see a real trend toward the new eugenics, with a whole new generation for blatantly racist work by people like (Arthur) Jensen and (William) Shockley," Mehler said.

Jensen, a professor of education psychology at the University of California at Berkley, developed intelligence tests that led him to believe that blacks are genetically destined to be less intelligent.

Shockley, a Nobel Prize winner for his work in physics, researched the connection between heredity and intelligence for years and came to the same conclusion as Jensen.

As more research money became available in the last 10 years, the rekindled eugenics movement accelerated and attracted the attention of the Southern Poverty Law Center, Beirich said. "It's definitely re-emerging. At the early part of the (20th) century, eugenics was a very big topic of research ... in the last 10 years it's become resurgent because you have the funding," Beirich said.

She said that most of the research money is coming from the Pioneer Fund, a nonprofit organization that pays for the study of heredity and race. The fund supported the eugenics movement when it began in the 1930s and now spends millions each year on research that looks at genetic differences between the races.

The movement is also growing because researchers interested in eugenics are getting better organized, Beirich said.

Much of their work is published in American Renaissance and Mankind Quarterly, journals that are written in scientific language but don't follow such scientific conventions as peer review - the process that gives other researchers a chance to verify research results.

These researchers also move in the same circles, attend the same conferences, review each other's books and exchange correspondence.
"They know each other very well," Beirich said. "They have gotten their act together. They shouldn't be taken lightly because I think we're going to be hearing more from them in the future."

J. Philippe Rushton, a professor of psychology at the University of Western Ontario, is one of the researchers at the top of the watch list at the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Rushton has researched the differences between the races for years. He has compared IQ scores, brain size and fertility rates of blacks and whites. His studies have led him to conclude that blacks as a whole will never measure up to whites, he said.

"Give them the best opportunities. But I think we have to learn to live with the differences. On average, there are going to be fewer geniuses, fewer people in the top professions," Rushton said.

The Institute for the Study of Academic Racism tracks several academics who are researching race differences and nearly always coming up with results that favor whites.

One recommends "phasing out" people of incompetent cultures. Another claimed that Jews used eugenics to increase their intelligence, verbal skills and ability to manipulate and use propaganda.

Glayde Whitney, a Florida State University professor who recently died, wrote the introduction to David Duke's autobiography. He also did studies that tried to link the number of crimes in a city to the size of its black population.

http://www.ferris.edu/isar/arcade/sterilization2.htm
 
  • #138
Evo said:
I was referring to my neighborhood, since you mentioned your neighborhood, I don't see where I said that was the starting price for homes in town. Obviously you think a neighborhood is a town.
Believe it or not, each neighborhood has a name. I know this may come as a shock to you, but it's true. That listing was for the top neighborhoods/towns. Brentwood IS the name of the neighborhood I live in. It's also listed in the full version of the Richest neighborhood/town in America list. This "neighborhood" is part of Los Angeles the city. Among other celebrities, it's where Kobe Bryant lives.

But like I said, saying the median house value of your middle America neighborhood/town (take your pick) is higher than the median house value of the richest neighborhoods of Los Angeles (Did you forget how many rich people live here?) is quite laughable to say the least.


:biggrin: I love it, the more you write the more you show your lack of intelligence. LA is overpopulated, of course there is more demand for housing, this is why I choose to live here.
Overpopulated. Kinda the wrong word. I would say where you live is underpopulated. Awww no one wants to live in your town. How sad :(

Uhm, no it wasn't. Here is your post, gee I don't see a link to the Washington Post, do you? You are the stupidist person I have ever run across.

Here is my post:

IQ is about 80% genetic, 20% environment. These figures can accurately be drawn by studying identical twins raised in different environments.

"These statistics have shown that on average, identical twins tend to be around 80 percent the same in everything from stature to health to IQ to political views. The similarities are partly the product of similar upbringing. But evidence from the comparison of twins raised apart points rather convincingly to genes as the source of a lot of that likeness."

"identical twins are roughly 85 percent similar for IQ, fraternal twins about 60 percent."

Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-sr...wins/twins2.htm
LOL. You sure aren't too bright are you? You make yourself look dumber and dumber.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #139
You know spreading false propaganda about the Pioneer Fund doesn't exactly make it true.

Also "The Bell Curve" was NOT funded by the Pioneer Fund but by the Bradley Foundation. Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein DID NOT get a penny from the Pioneer Fund. They had absolutely no obligation to the Pioneer Fund.

How odd that you like to miss over this fact.
 
Last edited:
  • #140
And why is it that you like to go after the most prominent of all academics. Charles Murray, a Harvard graduate with a PhD from MIT. Richard Herrnstein, a Harvard PhD. Not only that but held the Edgar Pierce Chair. Arthur Jensen, a Berkeley graduate and a PhD from Columbia University. J Rushton, University of London, PhD.

I mean these are academics that come from the most respected and most prestigious universities. I would say they're more than qualified to speak of the field that they do.
 
  • #141
BlackVision said:
Believe it or not, each neighborhood has a name. I know this may come as a shock to you, but it's true. That listing was for the top neighborhoods/towns. Brentwood IS the name of the neighborhood I live in. It's also listed in the full version of the Richest neighborhood/town in America list. This "neighborhood" is part of Los Angeles the city. Among other celebrities, it's where Kobe Bryant lives.
I know Brentwood is a neighborhood, that's what I said. I guess you are confused again and have no point?

BlackVision said:
But like I said, saying the median house value of your middle America neighborhood/town (take your pick) is higher than the median house value of the richest neighborhoods of Los Angeles (Did you forget how many rich people live here?) is quite laughable to say the least.
I never said any such thing, go back and look. Again, why are you making up lies?

You keep making up things which anyone can go back & see isn't true. Do you think other people can't read?

BlackVision said:
Overpopulated. Kinda the wrong word. I would say where you live is underpopulated. Awww no one wants to live in your town. How sad :(
I'm loving this.

BlackVision said:
Here is my post:
IQ is about 80% genetic, 20% environment. These figures can accurately be drawn by studying identical twins raised in different environments.

"These statistics have shown that on average, identical twins tend to be around 80 percent the same in everything from stature to health to IQ to political views. The similarities are partly the product of similar upbringing. But evidence from the comparison of twins raised apart points rather convincingly to genes as the source of a lot of that likeness."

"identical twins are roughly 85 percent similar for IQ, fraternal twins about 60 percent."

Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-sr...wins/twins2.htm

LOL. You sure aren't too bright are you? You make yourself look dumber and dumber.
Since this isn't the post I responded to, looks like you just confirmed again that you have no idea what you are posting. You appear to be unable to remember who responded to you, what they said, what posts they replied to, who asked what. I suggest you go back, re-read the post you want to comment on, probably be a good idea if you did a "quote" of the post you are replying to, perhaps that way you could remember what you are talking about. It is really annoying when people like you that can't keep their thoughts straight get on a forum.

Here it is your post again that I commented on, gee I don't see any link to the Washington Post here. Do you see a link to the Washington Post here?
BlackVision said:
But if that article wasn't good enough for you, here you go.

"Like the prior, smaller studies of monozygotic twins reared apart, about 70% of the variance in IQ was found to be associated with genetic variation."

Source: http://www.mugu.com/cgi-bin/Upstrea...hard-twins.html

"Particularly noteworthy are the heritabilities of around 80% found in adult twins reared apart"

Source: http://danny.oz.au/communities/anth...ebates/race-iq/

"Monozygotic Twins raised apart had a 74% correlation in IQ. Adopted childs had a 20% correlation in IQ"

Source: http://www.canberra.edu.au/uc/lectu...1/Lecture5.html
Please highlight the link to the Washington Post that you claim is in your links above.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #142
BlackVision said:
You know spreading false propaganda about the Pioneer Fund doesn't exactly make it true.

Also "The Bell Curve" was NOT funded by the Pioneer Fund but by the Bradley Foundation. Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein DID NOT get a penny from the Pioneer Fund. They had absolutely no obligation to the Pioneer Fund.

How odd that you like to miss over this fact.
I never said that The Bell Curve was funded by the Pioneer Fund. You're confused again. Gee, you have yet to get one single statement in one single post of yours correct.
 
  • #143
BlackVision said:
And why is it that you like to go after the most prominent of all academics. Charles Murray, a Harvard graduate with a PhD from MIT. Richard Herrnstein, a Harvard PhD. Not only that but held the Edgar Pierce Chair. Arthur Jensen, a Berkeley graduate and a PhD from Columbia University. J Rushton, University of London, PhD.

I mean these are academics that come from the most respected and most prestigious universities. I would say they're more than qualified to speak of the field that they do.
Because they are all known racists with known racist agendas. Having a degree and using it to try to gain credibility for innacurate and biased data is disgusting.
 
  • #144
Evo said:
I know Brentwood is a neighborhood, that's what I said. I guess you are confused again and have no point?
Must I repeat it again? The richest neighborhoods in California aren't even listed at median values of $2 million. Yes neighborhoods not towns. Yet you're going to state that in the redneck area that you live, that it STARTS at $2 million. Right. You are hopeless.

I never said any such thing, go back and look. Again, why are you making up lies?
So you never stated in your neighborhood that the house values START at $2 million which is a value higher than the richest MEDIAN house value of any neighborhood in California. Hmmm. Good thing these posts are recorded to show I'm right. By the way, if it starts at $2 million, what's the median value? LOL.

You keep making up things which anyone can go back & see isn't true. Do you think other people can't read?
Fortunetely some people CAN read.

Since this isn't the post I responded to, looks like you just confirmed again that you have no idea what you are posting. You appear to be unable to remember who responded to you, what they said, what posts they replied to, who asked what. I suggest you go back, re-read the post you want to comment on, probably be a good idea if you did a "quote" of the post you are replying to, perhaps that way you could remember what you are talking about. It is really annoying when people like you that can't keep their thoughts straight get on a forum.
Since the ONLY thing I ever stated was that I DID post a Washington Post article, you are an idiot. What you were replying to is irrelevant. I ONLY said that I posted a Washington Post article. In which case afterwards you called me a liar. But keep pretending this didn't happen if it allows you to sleep at night.

Here it is your post again that I commented on, gee I don't see any link to the Washington Post here. Do you see a link to the Washington Post here? Please highlight the link to the Washington Post that you claim is in your links above.
See above comment.
 
  • #145
Evo said:
I never said that The Bell Curve was funded by the Pioneer Fund. You're confused again. Gee, you have yet to get one single statement in one single post of yours correct.
I NEVER said that you stated that the Bell Curve was funded by the Pioneer Fund. I simply pointed out the fact that they weren't since you like to use this Pioneer Fund argument oh so much.

The point was that The Bell Curve didn't receive any Pioneer Fund money. So even EVEN, and this is a big hypothetical, if the Pioneer Fund was racist, doesn't it seem rather irrelevant to The Bell Curve since they didn't receive any Pioneer Fund money?
 
  • #146
BlackVision said:
Must I repeat it again? The richest neighborhoods in California aren't even listed at median values of $2 million. Yes neighborhoods not towns. Yet you're going to state that in the redneck area that you live, that it STARTS at $2 million. Right. You are hopeless.

So you never stated in your neighborhood that the house values START at $2 million which is a value higher than the richest MEDIAN house value of any neighborhood in California. Hmmm. Good thing these posts are recorded to show I'm right. By the way, if it starts at $2 million, what's the median value? LOL.
Homes in the area in which I live start at a little over $2 miilion, some are over $10 million. My daughter's friend's home that was just completed was around $8 million. I live in a rural unincorporated area. People buy land here usually 50+ acres and build custom homes (referred to as estates here), most have horse stables, some have tennis courts, servants quarters, guest houses, the guy around the corner has 4 kitchens, a pond with an island, a bath house next to the pool almost the size of my house. I have one of the "cheaper" homes. Apparantly the fact that there are expensive homes here seems to unsettle you, why do you feel so threatened?

BlackVision said:
Since the ONLY thing I ever stated was that I DID post a Washington Post article, you are an idiot. What you were replying to is irrelevant. I ONLY said that I posted a Washington Post article. In which case afterwards you called me a liar. But keep pretending this didn't happen if it allows you to sleep at night.
Well, here are the posts, looks like you are lying when you claim you didn't say this. You're totally psycho. You have repeatedly been posting off the wall things about the Washington Post article and I keep telling you I have never mentioned the Washington Post article. What part of "I have never mentioned the Washington Post article" do you not get?

BlackVision said:
Post #126 I loved it when you kept telling me that I can't read and I didn't post a Washington Post article only to prove you wrong. (that's me laughing at you)
I rest my case. I never said anything about this article. You're nuts.

Evo said:
Post #127Uhm, you obviously can't read because I have NEVER said that you didn't post a Washington Post article.

BlackVision said:
Post #128 My article on IQ heritability WAS from the Washington Post. YOU were stating that my sources were tainted.
And I repeat, I have never posted anything about your stupid article, except to keep telling you I am not referring to it, which you keep insisting I am.

I keep waiting for you to post anything that can substantiate your wild claims, but you apparently can't. This discussion is not progressing because you have not contributed anything since my first post, (except for ridiculous claims of non-existant posts that anyone can see aren't even there).

Ok, enough time wasted on BlankVision, psycho delusionary poster. :biggrin:

Buh bye.
 
Last edited:
  • #147
Homes in the area in which I live start at a little over $2 miilion, some are over $10 million. My daughter's friend's home that was just completed was around $8 million. I live in a rural unincorporated area. People buy land here usually 50+ acres and build custom homes (referred to as estates here), most have horse stables, some have tennis courts, servants quarters, guest houses, the guy around the corner has 4 kitchens, a pond with an island, a bath house next to the pool almost the size of my house. I have one of the "cheaper" homes. Apparantly the fact that there are expensive homes here seems to unsettle you, why do you feel so threatened?
Ok. Do you have any logical sense at all? If the richest neighborhood in America has a median house value under $2 million, and you're stating that in your neighorhood houses START at $2 million. Do you honestly think that makes any sense at all? Logic is obviously a lost concept on you.

And oh yeah cause celebrities in Beverly Hills don't have 100s of acres and have tennis courts, water fountains, etc. Yeah you know cause celebrities don't like to live large.

And the MAIN value of a house is location. A rural unincorporated area? Talk about a codeword for a redneck zone. Yeah cause we all know of the such extraordinary high demand for such an area.

Well, here are the posts, looks like you are lying when you claim you didn't say this. You're totally psycho. You have repeatedly been posting off the wall things about the Washington Post article and I keep telling you I have never mentioned the Washington Post article. What part of "I have never mentioned the Washington Post article" do you not get?

Post #90 "My article on IQ heritability WAS from the Washington Post. YOU were stating that my sources were tainted."--BlackVision

Your DIRECT response to this quote.

Post #93 "WRONG. You really cannot read, can you?"--you

Again I must laugh at you. :biggrin:
 
Last edited:
  • #148
"The point was that The Bell Curve didn't receive any Pioneer Fund money. So even EVEN, and this is a big hypothetical, if the Pioneer Fund was racist, doesn't it seem rather irrelevant to The Bell Curve since they didn't receive any Pioneer Fund money?"

Having a problem answering this question? :smile:
 
  • #149
Was The Bell Curve funded by Pioneer

BlackVision said:
The Bell Curve didn't receive any Pioneer Fund money. ...irrelevant to The Bell Curve since they didn't receive any Pioneer Fund money?
Pioneer is relevant to The Bell Curve because studies cited in the Bell Curve http://www.pioneerfund.org/Controversies.html by Pioneer.


  • It is not surprising, however, that those who would like to remove The Bell Curve’s conclusions from public discussion attack the Pioneer Fund because much of the research it cited was conducted by Pioneer grantees.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #150
hitssquad said:
Pioneer is relevant to The Bell Curve because studies cited in the Bell Curve http://www.pioneerfund.org/Controversies.html by Pioneer.


  • It is not surprising, however, that those who would like to remove The Bell Curve’s conclusions from public discussion attack the Pioneer Fund because much of the research it cited was conducted by Pioneer grantees.
Do you have any idea how many sources the Bell Curve cites? It cites literally thousands. To say it's tainted cause a couple of sources such as Arthur Jensen is cited, (how the hell do you not make a IQ book without citing him) is quite ridiculous. So the thousands of other cites all of a sudden become irrelevant?

Botton line. The Bell Curve had no obligation to the Pioneer Fund. And it's work didn't even revolve around psychologists that received Pioneer Fund money.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

Can genetics and neuroscience unlock the secrets of intelligence in China?
Replies
2
Views
3K
My Thoughts On the Heritability of Intelligence and Eugenics
2
Replies
64
Views
9K
Genetics and intelligence, is your intelligence determined from birth?
Replies
15
Views
11K
Genetic Correlation Between Brain Size and Intelligence
Replies
23
Views
5K
Genetic groups in the modern world
Replies
3
Views
4K
Omnigenetic model for complex traits
Replies
2
Views
3K
Why Do Some People Obsess Over IQ Scores?
Replies
40
Views
6K
Robert J. Sternberg's Triarchic Theory of Intelligence
Replies
6
Views
22K
Smart Phones And The Flynn Effect
2
Replies
51
Views
5K
How Did Evolution Shape Human Intelligence?
Replies
2
Views
5K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top