Fight BS with More Powerful BS. Drown them in their own feces and let them dig their way out.
Key Critiques of Drum's Arguments:
Migration and Selection Pressures (Reason One):
Critique: The claim that 40,000 years is insufficient for significant genetic adaptation is dismissed as unfounded. The process of selection is exponential and depends on the intensity of selection pressures and genetic variation, not merely time.
Counterpoint: Historical evidence of selection for traits related to intelligence undermines the idea that genetic differences are implausible within this timeframe.
Heritability and Environmental Influence (Reason Two):
Critique: Drum's reliance on a simplified understanding of heritability ignores the nuanced findings that shared environmental effects on intelligence diminish by adulthood, leaving little room for systematic environmental differences to explain the racial IQ gap.
Counterpoint: The statistical necessity for large, systematic environmental differences (which are unsupported by data) further weakens this argument.
Flynn Effect (Reason Three):
Critique: The Flynn effect, which is primarily a secular increase in test scores rather than latent intelligence, lacks measurement invariance and is unrelated to racial IQ differences. It cannot be used as evidence of environmental effects explaining the racial gap.
Counterpoint: Flynn effect changes occur across racial groups equally, leaving the racial gap intact.
European National IQ Differences (Reason Four):
Critique: Drum's argument fails to account for the potential genetic underpinnings of within-Europe IQ differences and misinterprets the implications of small genetic differences. He also overlooks issues of measurement invariance across countries.
Counterpoint: IQ differences between European nations, though smaller, do not negate genetic contributions to differences in intelligence.
Marginalization of Groups (Reason Five):
Critique: The historical claims about immigrant groups' low IQs lack robust, invariant psychometric evidence and may be artifacts of linguistic or cultural bias. The idea that marginalization directly lowers IQ through internalized perceptions is speculative.
Counterpoint: Differences between earlier immigrant groups and Black Americans in terms of history and socio-environmental contexts make such comparisons unconvincing.
Irish IQ (Reason Six):
Critique: Drum’s argument suffers from the same weaknesses as Reason Five. There is no clear evidence that Irish IQs were ever as low as claimed or that environmental improvements fully explain their modern IQs.
Counterpoint: The rise in Irish IQ scores likely reflects broader socioeconomic changes, not a direct parallel to Black-White differences.
Eyferth Study (Reason Seven):
Critique: The Eyferth study and its Japanese replication are criticized for methodological flaws, small sample sizes, and lack of representativeness. Subsequent studies with better methodologies show mixed-race children scoring intermediate between parental racial groups.
Counterpoint: The evidence from genetic ancestry studies supports a relationship between genetic factors and IQ.
Narrowing of the IQ Gap (Reason Eight):
Critique: Empirical evidence does not support a significant narrowing of the Black-White IQ gap. Studies showing minor gains are inconsistent and often fail to account for measurement invariance or g-loadings.
Counterpoint: Claims of gap narrowing rely on selective interpretation and projected trends, not psychometrically sound data.
Broader Issues:
Measurement Invariance: The critique highlights the importance of psychometric rigor in assessing whether IQ tests measure the same constructs across groups. Without measurement invariance, comparisons of mean differences lack validity.
Environmental Explanations: The lack of systematic environmental variables sufficient to account for the magnitude of the Black-White IQ gap is repeatedly emphasized. Speculative factors like "marginalization" are insufficient without robust empirical support.
Genetic Contributions: The counterarguments underscore the consistency of genetic influences on intelligence within and across groups, using evidence from heritability studies, genomic research, and the observed relationship between ancestry and cognitive outcomes.
