/pol/ BTFO for all eternity
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/02/26/liberals.atheists.sex.intelligence/
>Explaining this may be a complicated matter, but Nosek has put forth a pretty decent theory. He believes that a lower cognitive capacity makes people more attracted to simplifying ideologies. On the surface it certainly seems to make sense. Some of the findings by Brock University are quantified in the chart plotting mean adolescent intelligence against adult political ideology.
>>77489092
>Measuring intelligence by political beliefs is okay
>Measuring intelligence by race isn't.
>>77489092
>Regressive Left
>Liberal
No.
>>77489275
>Literally a feelgood fact
"DID YOU KNO THAT messy people who procrastinate are in fact the most intelligent ones ?? like if you agree ;)"
t. facebook
Of course, suicides correlate with intelligence as well. Along with pretty much all anxiety disorders.
Doesn't mean suicide or anxiety is right or itself intelligent.
>>77489293
You don't know what liberal means.
Liberal:
>pro gay marriage
>pro choice
>pro equal rights for women in any regards
>against any kind of social conservatism
>etc.
>>77489092
Intelligent people make more money, so will their children.
Working class people are therefore on aaverage a few IQ points below academics.
Academics can support Multiculturalism because they are not the ones that are going to live next to arabs. Their children are not going to go to 60% migrant schools.
They wont compete with migrants about minimum wage jobs.
The upper-class can vote green and enjoy their spicy italian, french and japanese food and talk to their persian taxi driver while the working class people need to deal with all the shit that swaps over the border which causes them to be more conservative
The author seems pretty level-headed for a liberal
from his wikipedia page:
>Kanazawa claims that Americans are unable to win in the Middle East—and in the "global clash of civilizations"—because they do not hate their enemies enough
>>77489092
Asia
Well I'm a fairly conservative guy and actually had my iq tested and have one of 136 and graduated with honors so I think I'm good. Let's look into iq by race next
>>77489559
So political opinions are nothing but an unwanted side-effect?
Why are you on this board then?
>scientists will soon know why people vote conservative
Gee I wonder who's behind these studies
pure shill propaganda. sage.
(((scientists)))>>77489933
When the same author stated that black women are less attractive than women of other races, there was an outrage. I do believe that on average very religious people tend to be lower I.Q than others, but this is also true for hardcore liberals, cuckolds and people that support mass immigration.
IQ and income are correlated:
https://analyseeconomique.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/income-inequality-and-iq-figure-2-1.png
income and politics are correlated:
http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/gelman.jpg
ergo, IQ and politics are correlated
btfo
>>77489092
Just because you are smart does not mean you follow or are knowledgable about politics or world affairs.
The most prolific mathematician alive, probably the greatest scientist in the world right now, Terrence Tao just wrote a blog post about how Donald Trump is unfit to be president, and his evidence were speeches by John Oliver and Mitt Romney...
Is he one of the 5 greatest mathematicians ever and the smartest person on the planet? Yes.
Does that means he is competent about politics? Of course not.
https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2016/06/04/it-ought-to-be-common-knowledge-that-donald-trump-is-not-fit-for-the-presidency-of-the-united-states-of-america/
Couple other research level mathematicians grill him in the comments
>>77489794
It's a double-bind. You either admit that people's opinions are relevant regardless of their IQ, like >>77489654 does, or you racially discriminate people based on IQ - in which case you must discriminate conservatives too.
Either way, you're fucked, unless you just call the study Jewish propaganda like >>77490033
>>77489092
Wow, is the left saying Muslims are less intelligent than them? Why are liberals such racist bigots?
>>77490392
>The study looked at a large sample from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent health, which began with adolescents in grades 7-12 in the United States during the 1994-95 school year. The participants were interviewed as 18- to 28-year-olds from 2001 to 2002.
Yeah, I'm sure this study is 100% accurate and unassailably factual.
>>77489092
>>77489092
If progressives are so fucking smart, why are they willingly wrecking their homelands by importing millions of illiterate shitskins?
>>77490263
What?
Are you actually this retarded?
If A is correlated with B, and B is correlated with C, that does NOT mean A is correlated with C.
Simple example:
You want an example? I flip two fair coins and have to wash the dishes if either one is heads.
A: Coin 1 is heads
B: I wash the dishes
C: Coin 2 is heads
A and C are uncorrelated, but both correlate positively with B.
Intelligent kids go to college.
They receive political and Marxist brainwashing in college. Many of them become liberal.
Done.
>>77489569
Nee domme mof, liberal is in its real sense means both social and economic freedom (which is libertarianism in the US now).
>>77490547
>Yeah, I'm sure this study is 100% accurate and unassailably factual.
And your problem with the methodology is?
>>77490635
>why are they willingly wrecking their homelands
Are they?
Angela Merkel is conservative. The people who started the wars in the ME are conservatives.
>>77489569
>>pro equal rights for women in any regards
Which is what the regressives don't want.
>>77490912
Yeah pretty much.
Thus, even though I have a (university) Masters in finance and history and a PhD with regards to option financing, I am stupid for being a classic liberal nativist (which in american context is a very conservative)?
This is most certainly not bait, or is it?
>>77489275
fpbp
>>77490801
Kek.
Your retarded example of "washing the dishes" is unquantifiable. You can't calculate a correlation between things that aren't quantifiable, and there's no relationship between the variables in your retarded counterexample anyway (so duh, no correlation).
Of course it fails - you designed a frankly stupid qualitative example to make it fail.
>>77491301
If you did any phd related to economics or finance in anywhere other than the states, yes, you are :^)
>>77490392
You ignored his point.
The Left by and large does not ever walk it's talk on racial immigration all the while cheering things like forced integration on lower class whites.
Stuff like that will drive lower class whites toward more conservative ways of living.
Does the study really claim that knowledge of mathematics makes you a wanna be butt fucker?
When most professors are some kind of liberal, you really think their "do what every you feel as long as liberals approve of it" bias doesn't creep into their lessons?
1+1 equals 2 not 11. According the way the equation is written. Are you going to say that such knowledge is a road to homosexuality and welfare promotion?
If you do you are losing control of the narrative in a very big way. It will be fun watching the left wing self destruct.
I do think Hillary will be elected because of her husband Bill's signage of NAFTA and her eventual signage of TPP.
I will hedge my bets because you never really do know with politics.
Try getting all the white liberals you know to self integrate into a society where non whites have vast majority control of the government and local law enforcement.
>>77491626
Yes, of course I did, most of our universities are not only far older and more established than american colleges, but also outrank a significant portion of them.
>>77489275
IQs can increase/decrease, so race doesn't matter, just make sure your kids read a lot and challenge their brain often
>>77489092
Hello Shill my old friend, would you kindly use a leaf proxxy instead?
The funny thing is, this doesn't seem like an even remotely decent statistics. From what we currently know this will be on par with the "conservatives more psychotic" which turned out to not just be a hoax but the inverse.
>>77491616
Let X and Y be independent random variables:
A = X
B = X + Y
C = Y
Happy, dumbass? You can let x and y be whatever real world events you want.
You can think of uncorrelated as orthogonal vectors in your data space. So let A and C be orthogonal vectors, then for n>2 there is always B not orthogonal to either (ie correlated)
>>77491867
You're right. If we just educate Africans correctly they'll be getting to the moon in no time.
>>77491072
Hillary is not a conservative.
Merkel is not a conservative but has always been a GDR mole as she as amply shown.
And yes, they are. Very much so. Basically every European nation has gone to utter shit under their rule as they spread and enforce leftist ideology.
Faggotry , Atheism and sexual deviancy all point to one root cause: demon possession.
Also recorded as granting unnatural intelligence
>>77492011
there ARE intelligent black people. you can educate everyone but if they don't want to learn then it's useless
>>77491867
Sorry, what? A large part of IQ is genetic. Even American blacks with huge white admixture are dumb as hell. Funnily enough, they also all vote extremly left. Which is an odd thing to behold and might be the reason why the graph our friendly shill has shown us here starts at 94~ and ends at 105~ all of which is still very much inside the average.
>>77489092
>>77489569
>German flags, defines liberal like an amerifat
PAID Shill detected.
Get your narrative straight, yiu disgused me.
>>77489092
Ad hominen on an idiological scale
It measures average. All this means is that the mildly intelligent fall for liberalism
>>77492297
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regression_toward_the_mean
>>77492297
Sure there are, the vast mayority of them however aren't. Which is what's important. Even the intelligent people are outliers who usually will regress towards the norm with each following generation. Which is actually a pretty good argument for not letting them immigrate into your country.
Really wish upside down Poland was more like real Poland.
>>77489092
Cough cough... niggers IQ =85
Spics=90
>>77492350
there's no way. life can't be this unfair. everyone has the same opportunity to be great. and having low IQ permanently means there's no point to even live. it's just like having a micropenis
>>77491975
>Implying you can find a good valid and reliable concomitant relationship
>Implying you can proof the elimination of any other possible causal factors
>Implying (like ausbro said) qualitative research in this context will give conclusive evidence about causality.
>>77489092
>Have 134 IQ
>Be Nationalist Libertarian
This is Facebook-tier propaganda.
>>77492573
i'm just one person please don't make me hate my country and culture. i don't want to be seen as bad and stupid and ugly by white people
>the left cares about the poor
>ugh, fucking uneducated lower class, voting conservative
>77492648
Nice bait, Dutch-indies.
>>77492136
>Hillary is not a conservative.
yes she is, literally look up democratic part political compass
>Merkel is not a conservative
>but a GDR mole
topkek. Don't forget to put on your tinfoil hat.
>>77491867
IQ is pretty much done in the late teens, you cant improve it after that
Who the fuck would boast about a 106 iq?
>>77491072
>And your problem with the methodology is?
Oh, am I supposed to argue with you? lol
>>77492816
Dont take achmed serious. He is just a shill trying to stage an ideological intimidation tactic.
like using the compass unironic her
>>77492971
I wonder how this looks if you flip the axes and extend it to IQs that are actually significantly different
>>77489092
>mean adolescent intelligence
>no direct link to the papers
>(((cnn)))
Into the trash.
>>77489092
Your chart doesn't even list me, 134, and no, I'm not a liberal faggot.
>>77489092
>He believes that a lower cognitive capacity makes people more attracted to simplifying ideologies
How is being a liberal any more complex than being a conservative?
liberals have it easy since their beliefs dont even have to be self consistent.
>>77489092
I'm intelligent, at least I hold my own well, and I'm conservative. I can tell you why in two statements. It's not the government's job to bend over backwards, making special allowances for every interest that comes along and feels it needs distinctive privilege. Government should be concerned with governing, not catering, pandering, to every self-absorbed group which comes along expecting government to stick its nose where it doesn't belong.
That's the biggest reason. All liberalism is, to me: an appeal for what you can't earn on your own merit.
>>77493424
To add, maybe that's why they seem smart. They're able to manipulate well. That only goes so far.
>>77493290
This.
>The IQ differences, while statistically significant, are not stunning -- on the order of 6 to 11 points
>The study found that young adults who said they were "very conservative" had an average adolescent IQ of 95, whereas those who said they were "very liberal" averaged 106.
Now lets go find out where actual smart people land and where the literal retards come in at.
>>77492971
stupid lefty meme, selling out your country to immigrants is not conservative
there is a natural iq increase per generation
the younger generation is usually liberal and they would have higher iq's because of things like better teaching and complexity of today's world
not even surprising desu
>>77491703
You still don't get it. You're in a predicament you can't explain away. The reasons are irrelevant. You either believe that groups of people should be treated differently based on average IQ, or you don't.
>Does the study really claim that knowledge of mathematics makes you a wanna be butt fucker?
Funnily enough, I remember reading a study how 40% of male Cambridge students had sex with a man once.
>>77493974
>there is a natural iq increase per generation
No. I don't believe or accept this. People age 20 today are exactly as people, age 20, two decades ago. Having more data available to you does not equal IQ, and hey, I'm one who believes an IQ standard has some merit, but availability of choice doesn't make choices better.
>>77493790
Too bad her party and the whole of Germany disagrees with you.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CDU/CSU
>>77494007
>the reason people hate niggers is because of their low IQ scores
Oh, wow. Check this retard out.
>>77494219
>No. I don't believe or accept this
But it's true you moron.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect
>/pol/ in a nutshell
>>77489569
>pro gay marriage
I'm gay myself so I'm in favour of this
>pro choice
in favour because it kills niggers far more than the police does
>pro equal rights
In favour, only if it also means equal responsibilities, and to have "equal rights" things like affirmative action and sex selective benefit programs have to go.
>against any kind of social conservatism
Define or go fuck yourself
>etc
Define or go fuck yourself with a cactus
I'm also
>against gun control
>against big government
>against religion protection
>not an atheist
What one defines as "liberal" or "conservative" is subjective, those labels are subjective and only exist to create an easy target to attack. If /pol/ wants to be serious about discussing politics it should drop the identity targeting and discuss issues on a objective and specific way.
>>77494369
No, the study says:
>people who hate niggers also have a low IQ score
Now you can conjecture that both a low IQ score and hate for niggers are caused by being stupid - but that's up to you.
Maybe hating niggers makes you stupid? So many possibilities.
>>77494392
It doesn't relate in practical application.
Hey guys, guess which ideology has on average the highest IQ
Shame they went full autism this year
>>77492648
Welcome to life, it's not fair. Never was never will be.
>>77493122
Listen, I know you guys are inbred as hell but even you must recognize I and that shill aren't the same person. Heck our positions are completely opposite.
>>77492971
Wow nice try. By that same argumentation Lenin wasn't a leftist because Stalin was further left. Her being not as left as some others doesn't mean she isn't a leftist.
As for Angela, the stuff is quite easily accessible. She had ties with the GDR, she was part of various GDR organizations, she joined a party anathema to everything she stood for before while still low key shilling for various leftist ideas and then when she had a chance to further leftist junk, she leaped at it.
Using tinfoil hat on /pol/ really makes you seem like a newfag, even for a shill.
>>77494664
>people who hate niggers also have a low IQ score
Oh, does the study say that? Where exactly?
Watching you doing these mental gymnastics like this sure is entertaining.
Dance monkey! Dance!
>>77494253
Angela Merkel is a classic case of "mole in charge". The CDU/CSU grass roots and even the CSU in general want her gone. The only ones still protecting and siding with her are her own cronies and other higher ups who have too much to lose from her fall from grace.
The CDU itself has claimed to be a "party of the middle" in recent times. But nice try!
>>77490912
>>77491111
>>77492544
>>77494621
The political ideology was self-identified. That means that you can't reason about what the labels mean. You poll people and get their average opinion about what the label means (which could be wrong by any dictionary or standard definition, be contradictory, make no sense, etc.) to understand what the survey quantifies.
>>77494621
>What one defines as "liberal" or "conservative" is subjective
No it isn't. There's a dictionary definition of the words.
>>77494752
Just go read a book. Not some racist book, but an actual book.
>>77489092
people who do these researches want to get these results. its not just cheating or manipulation of the research but maybe just conf. bias or things like that. 99% of people in psychology or sociology are liberal or even SJW.
t. doing my PhD in a related field
>>77494664
I want a link to the direct studies, I want to see which methodology they used, they also have cited "mean adolescent intelligence" which is not the same as IQ, want to see a specific indication of what they considered to be "liberal" and "conservative" values. Until all of this is specifically stated there can be no serious discussion because we cannot see how impartial the study was.
I disagree
>>77492971
Kill yourself you obvious first day shill
>>77489275
>Measuring intelligence by race is ok.
>Measuring intelligence by political beliefs isn't.
Pretty sure this is a "fuck you" to all racists who post IQ statistics segmented by race.
>>77495217
Except that people who self report "liberal" and "conservative" most often don't know the "official" definition themselves, so that definition is literally useless.
>>77495390
I'm pretty sure you're a kike shill who is astroturfing us on the orders of five eyes
>>77495013
>Oh, does the study say that? Where exactly?
In the OP. Provided we agree that people labeled "conservative" are also more likely to hate niggers.
>>77495013
It doesn't. They're bullshitting. Either the stuff is just plain wrong, it's the inverse such as political leaning and psychosis which they had to rectify recently or they on purpose cut out a small part of something to present as "proof".
If you look at the chart he posted initially, it started at 94 and ended at 106. Because that is the one segment supporting his claim. If he goes further down people swing left again. Further up and they increasingly turn right.
It's basically the "smug group", people smart enough to make it into college but not smart enough to not be wholly indoctrinated and having leftist leanings hammered into them. The 94~ group is statistically still inside the average and tends to be working class, people who are exposed to migrants and other groups on a daily basis and form their opinions upon their interactions with them.
It's low tier Antifa shilling.
>>77492785
>Be Nationalist Libertarian
>liberal
What definition?
A modern liberal like Hillary is on the right of a 60s Rockefeller Republican.
What's conservative yesterday may be liberal today.
What's liberal today may be conservative tomorrow.
American definition of liberal is just progressive and for conservative it's keeping the status quo.
Those definitions are fluid as fuck
>>77489092
>>77495217
>Read a book
You acting as if reading wasn't a normal thing to do but something to be smug about kinda makes you come off as pretentious at best.
You guys ignore the genetic component of IQ, you've done so for quite some time and it has lead to a complete disaster where low IQ populations are concerned who have moved into the West because of you effectively bribing them to do so.
>>77489092
By Elizabeth Landau, CNN
February 26, 2010 -- Updated 2203 GMT (0603 HKT)
I thought this was /pol/ not /his/
We've had the most politically tumultuous couple of weeks and you drag up an article from 6 years ago?
>>77495500
>Provided we agree that people labeled "conservative" are also more likely to hate niggers.
lol, pic related. Please fucking kill yourself.
>believing the iJew test
>>77489092
Maybe it's because I live in Arizona. But everyone I meet (relative to Scottsdale) seems to be conservative despite their education.
Our blacks are even conservative. That being said, our Mexicans are obviously not.
>>77489092
>He believes that a lower cognitive capacity makes people more attracted to simplifying ideologies.
>I want to be flooded with violent niggers and welfare leeches
>Jews can do no wrong because they were victims once
>having a stable family is outdated because a small percentage of the population is mentally ill
>You don't understand this complete tearing down of western civilization because it's too complex
OK, I guess I'm retarded then, where's my disability cheque and tax-free status?
>>77495849
>You acting as if reading wasn't a normal thing to do
I wish it was.
>You guys ignore the genetic component of IQ
Like I said, the reasons are irrelevant. See >>77490392
>>77492785 nationalist with a 138 IQ liberals are the retarded one
>>77495217
>Just go read a book. Not some racist book, but an actual book.
What I'm stating has nothing to do with racism. It's across the board.
I believe that to which you're pointing is a fundamental flaw in the testing apparatus we use to diagnose intelligence. Look at it this way. If, for the last 80-some years we're literally seeing people in general growing more intelligent, then we should, by and large, be seeing people making fewer and fewer bad decisions. We don't see people making what could objectively be called better decisions.
The times change, but the song remains the same. There are smart people and really smart people, there are dumb people and really dumb people. There are smart people who make bad decisions, there are dumb people who make smart decisions. That's not going to change, ever. Don't you expect, if human advancement were as you portray, we'd see fewer and fewer making poor decisions in the perspective of given situation? We don't. We won't.
IQ is the ability to take given data and work with and within such given data to arrive at a correct end within a given period of time. This is not improving in a calculable manner for all humankind. It "may" be improving in given demographics, as a result of better "teaching", but if the recipients of such education are the basis for the results, it's not empirical, demonstrable across "all".
>>77495496
I am. The new strategy is to just admit to shilling to confuse retards on this shit site. So I am a shill paid straight up by Trudeau. But an important part of the mantra of every Nazi on this shit site is "lol, the source of the claim doesn't matter, so what if I'm just a sadistic asshole on the internet who wants billions of people murdered, I can still be factually correct occasionally." So so what if I am a paid shill? The source and motivations don't matter, right? That's the only piece of reasoning you can use to justify why the world ought to take you seriously. You just gonna throw that out?
2002, so the Iraq war where everyone was against the republican party. I'm the farthest thing from a lib tard but I too listened to Eminem mosh and thought the republicans were evil at that time. Then I grew up.
>>77496119
First leaf with common sense.
>>77495892
IQ is a good measure of average intelligence but it fails miserably at rating very smart individuals and very stupid individuals. Beyond a certain score, I think it's 130, it's basically not useful to measure how smart that person is.
>>77489092
i believe that a liberal world politic will be the future. but we (humans) are not ready yet, some of us (africa, middle east) need 1000 more years to evolve for this to happen.
>>77496444
>fundamental flaw in the testing apparatus we use to diagnose intelligence
There is no "testing apparatus" we use to "diagnose intelligence". There are tests called IQ tests, just a sheet of paper with questions, and with time people of the same age tend to perform better on them - i.e. have a higher IQ score.
That is exactly what you denied in your original post, and it turned out you were wrong. So I don't see why you bother writing down your inane ideas and uneducated theories that I won't even read.
hmm...
>>77497134
really... makes... you... think...
>>77489092
>>77493701
I was gonna post this. Here's a few concerns that image brings up:
>blacks overwhelmingly vote liberal
>blacks have an average IQ of 85
>Hispanics overwhelmingly vote liberal
>Hispanics have an average IQ of 90
>whites overwhelmingly vote conservative
>whites have an average IQ of 100
>Asians and jews are avg IQ 105 and overwhelmingly liberal, but statistically irrelevant
So what these people are saying is that the average IQ of white liberals is so high that it outweighs the downward skew of black and hispanic voters, meaning the average white liberal IQ would have to be well over the graph's depicted "average liberal/very liberal" IQ of 105, which is itself already well above the white average
Now it may just be my inferior conservative phrenology, but it seems to me that something here doesn't add up
>>77489092
If you read the study, it has more to do with the false idea that conservatives are basically racist and less open to other's ideas. Presupposing a false point to make your narrative seem true is silly.
>>77489275
Niggers aren't as smart as us whites, but that doesn't change the fact that you rednecks are not as smart as us
>>77491301
I've seen other IQ studies which affirm that classical liberals have the highest average IQ when compared with conservatives and "liberals". One study actually revealed that Republicans have a higher average IQ than Democrats; the low-IQ conservative Republicans are offset by the high-IQ classical liberal Republicans.
It's quite likely that "liberal" in OP's study refers to classical liberals, and that it wasn't made explicit in the CNN article because of political bias or plain ignorance.
>>77491818
In what regard? US Ivy League colleges are most of the top ten colleges in the world
>>77497330
Which is why they have no link to the original studies, they don't want anyone seeing which questions or which methodology they used.
>>77497256
>my inferior conservative phrenology
So your conservative way of studying the skull shape to determine personality traits of people? lmao
>but it seems to me that something here doesn't add up
Yes, because you're stupid.
kek'd enough for today, thanks /pol/
>>77497256
There's a reason liberals dominate academia and academic prizes
>>77489092
(((cnn)))
yeah nigger
>>77497634
>i.e. "I have no argument so I'll just insult you"
>>77497634
>So your conservative way of studying the skull shape to determine personality traits of people? lmao
So it's true, germans have no sense of humour, and turks obviously can't identify sarcasm
>>77497091
What do you think an "IQ test is" and on what basis do you believe it's constituted? Do you really believe it's just "a sheet of paper with questions" and with time, people get "better" at those questions? That's not a mechanism, or apparatus, for quantifiably measuring intelligence quotient, that is a "minimal competency" exam, that is an SAT/ACT, that is an ASVAB.
You're not grasping a significant concept here. I understand you don't understand this. It's pretty difficult to just illustrate in a 4chan post "what" and "how", exactly, intelligence is, and we're learning more about what that word means all the time.
It's not simply passing a test, man. I know plenty of people, genius in their desired interests, who have trouble filling out a job application. I also know plenty of people with 4 year or better degrees who are completely fucking rock stupid when you talk to them or ask them to help figure out something new, together. There's simply more to it that what you seem to "get". That's probably why you disagree with me, and will continue to do so.
People are not getting smarter. If anything, the availability of choice from the explosive data of the internet age is crippling people, making them substantially less capable of working quickly on their feet.
>>77497256
You take datapoints from a curve that spans over 70-130 (ignoring tails because they account for a small %) and shift them all 12 points and the average still gets shifted 12 points even though many are still in the 82-100 range. In other words, black liberals might be smarter than average blacks just like white liberals are smarter than average whites. You just assumed that black IQ stays the same and that the difference is only made up by whites.
Also, given blacks tend to have lower IQs, they might also tend to be conservative, meaning they simply make up a smaller portion of the liberal base. And, no, being democrat does not mean you are liberal. Like 45% of democrats identify as liberal.
>>77492785
>anecdotal evidence is proof that this is wrong
Maybe you're not as smart as that online IQ test indicates
>>77489275
fpbp
>>77489827
He means the chart's a silly average. Taking that chart seriously is already a sign of low IQ.
From 95 to 105 IQ, no one's a genius, truth of the matter most people have no idea about economics and what's best for them.
What really matters here is the smartest quintil here, but chart does not show this.
All that chart shows is that liberals are likely college students that attend social studies and currently live their lives studying things that wont even help them get a job.
Lower IQ conservatives are likely people who have to work instead of attending college, may not score as high in IQ test but know the real world.
>>77491072
>Are they?
'Conservative' in Europe these days is equivalent to a center-left American. 'Far right-wing' are equivalent to 'conservatives.'
Unless you think it's conservatives out there claiming that national borders are racist.
>>77500442
>Oy vey, you and your anecdote. Listen to our objective poll and let us tell you how smart you really are!
Less intelligent people in our society are more likely to be conservative. It is passed down by religion and by it simply being our culture. This is why the mean IQ for conservatism is brought down. A young developing intellectual is much more likely to be liberal, an older, practiced intellectual gradually shifts more to the moderate as is the same for consertive intellectuals.
Not everybody in society can be an intellectual that thinks for themselves. Religion and culture is what instilled these values into the masses. This does not mean conservatism is a less intelligent ideology overall. It just means it has more culturally instilled values to influence those who do not think for themselves.
If Churches historically enforced heavily liberal values and that became the default attitude of our culture, you would then see that "very liberal" would be the least intelligent result on this poll.
>>77502639
> It is passed down by religion
Religion is simply an admission you can't know everything. If you ever grow up, you will question about metaphysical things and you will find togetherness in a given "flavor". The most intelligent among us, left to their own devices, have come to these conclusions. Being skeptical is fine, even encouraged. Skepticism still leaves room for wonder.
>>77489092
I'm not being funny, but people on /pol/ have some of the most nuanced political beliefs I've ever encountered; they seem simple on the surface, but its usually backed by mountains of experience, evidence, et al.
Meanwhile, most people are just ARE YOU KIDDING ME??? tier
>>77504066
I'm not anti-skepticism or even religious for that matter.
To be frank, I have no idea what the fuck you're talking about.
>>77494392
>>77494392
>Some studies have found the gains of the Flynn effect to be particularly concentrated at the lower end of the distribution. Teasdale and Owen (1989), for example, found the effect primarily reduced the number of low-end scores, resulting in an increased number of moderately high scores, with no increase in very high scores.[8] In another study, two large samples of Spanish children were assessed with a 30-year gap. Comparison of the IQ distributions indicated that the mean IQ-scores on the test had increased by 9.7 points (the Flynn effect), the gains were concentrated in the lower half of the distribution and negligible in the top half, and the gains gradually decreased as the IQ of the individuals increased.[9] Some studies have found a reverse Flynn effect with declining scores for those with high IQ.
>Some studies have found the gains of the Flynn effect to be particularly concentrated at the lower end of the distribution.
>Some studies have found a reverse Flynn effect with declining scores for those with high IQ.
So essentially, the retards get aborted and the entire nation has adequate nutrition for proper growth.
>>77494664
https://jaymans.wordpress.com/2012/06/01/liberalism-hbd-population-and-solutions-for-the-future/
Current liberal ideology is dysgenic, the smartest liberals don't breed. Thus, our peak IQ scores drop, while the retards get aborted. This results in a net increase of median IQ, but less high achievers that are necessary to make technological breakthroughs.
>>77491867
>Actually believing the IQ meme
>This deducts 50 (((IQ))) points from your account
You'd believe a nigger could actually sort and assign nuggets and watermelon slices very well
>>77489092
"Race" is easily definable and involves genetics (unchangeable)
Political affiliation in Adults compared to adolescent intelligence is not easily definable and does not involve genetics (unchangeable)
Someone might be conservative when the situation calls for conservatism or liberal when that seems like the best option.
Invalid research.
> I'm guessing you are not a German.
>watching all these delusional faggots trying to refute what is clear as day
face it /pol/, you're a bunch of mentally handicapped man-children
>>77492552
Protip: all regression to the mean means is that, if a second measurement differs from the first, it's more likely to be something more likely than something less likely; it's practically a tautology. It's not a magic variation destroyer.
>>77492573
Depends on the stock, assortive mating can counter this among the intelligent minorities but it is very much a concern in large numbers.
