It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
If people get proper nutrition, education, parenting and whole list of other things, they generally maximize their IQ. This should be our goal. Africa, for example, has a LOT of room to grow. Focusing on the genetics aspect is just an excuse for racism since it's not as easily changed.
Keep in mind that the average IQ of african-americans in the US is not a good measure of their average IQ since the african-american population is still recovering from segregation and poverty. Imagine if the average white caucasion american was as poor as an african-american. But since white americans tend to live in more wealthy neighborhoods, they tend to have more opportunities to enrich themselves and to be their best. We KNOW that poor populations have very low college graduation rates. This may or may not be connected to IQ since success is tied to lots of things, not just IQ. I would argue that poverty stunts developing children and thus keeps their IQ low.
Adjustments for socioeconomic conditions almost completely eliminate differences in IQ scores between black and white children, according to the study's co-investigators. They include Jeanne Brooks-Gunn and Pamela Klebanov of Columbia's Teachers College, and Greg Duncan of the Center for Urban Affairs and Policy Research at Northwestern University
IMHO, we all have plusses and minuses. We're a big human family. Help each other.
Originally posted by WWu777
Why do liberals and politically correct people always seem to deny the genetic factor in human behavior
Originally posted by kimish
Point being, Their is a difference amongst the races and if we were to acknowledge that and embrace it I guarantee that our school system would be better, crime rate would go down, etc.
Originally posted by beezzer
Hold on there! As a conservative, I take issue.
There isn't, really. As a mixed race individual, I've had the oppourtunity to study this aspect, since my masters degree is in Developmental Neurobiology.
Originally posted by Rastus3663
reply to post by WWu777
Traditionally it is the right wing of the republican party that denies science.
Originally posted by robobbob
reply to post by kaylaluv
I am a conservative and know full well that there is a genetic component. I also know that environmental factors can cause the activation or silencing of genes. I would suspect that homosexuality would be a recessive trait (or humanity would have vanished eons ago) that typically wouldn't express itself. In most cases, it would not manifest, except in cases of environmental promotion, which in this case has taken on a political dimension.
So I really don't understand what your point is other than to take a cheap shot at claiming conservatives are scientifically retarded because most do not believe in providing environmental support to what would be a self limiting recessive gene failure, and are against encouraging recessive gene expression.
For poking a stick at conservatives, I have a question for you. It is now easy to select children on numerous things with sex or eye color being quite popular. Once the genes on sexual orientation are identified and treatment is made available, ie RvsW, where will you stand then? which of your dogmas will you throw over the side?edit on 27-10-2012 by robobbob because: x
Originally posted by robobbob
reply to post by kaylaluv
I am a conservative and know full well that there is a genetic component. I also know that environmental factors can cause the activation or silencing of genes. I would suspect that homosexuality would be a recessive trait (or humanity would have vanished eons ago) that typically wouldn't express itself.
So I really don't understand what your point is other than to take a cheap shot at claiming conservatives are scientifically retarded because most do not believe in providing environmental support to what would be a self limiting recessive gene failure, and are against encouraging recessive gene expression.
For poking a stick at conservatives, I have a question for you. It is now easy to select children on numerous things with sex or eye color being quite popular. Once the genes on sexual orientation are identified and treatment is made available, ie RvsW, where will you stand then? which of your dogmas will you throw over the side?
Originally posted by Wotaneyed
For one, that old argument of equality could no longer be used for unequal treatment.
Originally posted by Dante2117
reply to post by MrDesolate
So you don't believe the concept of race exists...?