Whites and Asians are inherently more intelligent than other races

First off, I will like to wish a good debate and hope that what we bring may bring light to others the opposing sides of this question. Main Sources IQ and Global Inequality (https://books.google.com...) IQ and the Wealth of Nations (https://books.google.com...) Lynn and Vanhanen have made major contributions to this field of IQ and its relations to other factors, usually socio-economic, so I will be referencing a lot of their studies. Breakdown for each round: Round 1: A general discussion and defining the premise of the argument. I will define a few key terms and give a lot of historical/background info on the topic. I will also state my argument basis or thesis. I will also give evidence to my first factor in the below thesis, low fertility. Round 2: The historical implications of the regions and how natural resources and geography helped those implications. I will breakdown the history of the regions and how prevalent they were, while explaining natural attributes of those regions. Round 3: Closing statements and tying back to the modern era and what we have now by taking a look into socio-economics and intelligence. Thesis of Argument Higher intelligence in countries that are predominately White or Asian is due to many different factors, such as: historical prevalence, natural environmental attributes of the region, low fertility, and socio-economics. Definitions First let's define the center piece of this, which is IQ. IQ - an intelligence test score that is obtained by dividing mental age, which reflects the age-graded level of performance as derived from population norms, by chronological age and multiplying by 100: a score of 100 thus indicates a performance at exactly the normal level for that age group. (http://www.dictionary.com...) Fertility and Intelligence IQ is defined based on the population norms and what would be the average of an age group in that population. One research duo, Vanhanen and Lynn, believed it was inversed of the fertility to intelligence known as dysgenic fertility (http://www.sciencedirect.com...). Why am I bringing that up? Well, based on an IQ map (Which I had to google, since you never linked any sources that I may go off) and a fertility map, we would see a correlation of the IQ being higher in those areas with low fertility. Now, we need to look at one other map to explain the small discrepancies, health and wellness. See, low fertility in the more undeveloped regions can be explained as a core fault of the healthcare infrastructure of that area, which can also lead to a lower IQ (see map) such as South America, specifically northern region. Now, why the lower fertility in more developed nations? Above are two maps. The left one is IQ of the world, and the right one was the fertility projection of the world. As you can see, on most cases, IQ correlated with a lower fertility in most cases. The breakdown being: with median IQ maintaining around a fertility of 2.5-3, high IQ maintaining around 1.4-2, and low IQ going from 4+. Well, contraceptives seem to play a part. In nations, higher on the developed index, contraceptives were used by a larger percentage of the female population compared to more under-developed nations (i.e. many in Africa and South America). (http://www.un.org...) This is also the case for permanent contraceptives. Reasoning for this would be, better healthcare would mean safer procedures and therefore more women or men taking the chance at ridding their fertility. This ties in well into the whole premise of healthcare and its relation to the developed status of a nation. A nation with better healthcare would not need to increase fertility and have more children due to the fact the offspring will have a higher chance of living. Infant mortality has always been a good basis on the number of children an area would have. The higher the mortality, the higher the number of children in a family. It is the quality vs quantity idea. If you have better quality of life, you do not need 10 children to carry on lineage because the two you just had will be much more likely to survive. Here is a good paper on fertility rates and some other points on why it is higher in undeveloped regions and why developed regions have a lower and even declining birth rate. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... Conclusion and Questions That concludes my first argument point, fertility and its correlation to IQ and regions. The next round will better tie the history and backing on why it just so happens these regions have a higher darker range of skin tones compared to the northern regions of our world which happen to be more developed, for the most part. I wish to close with a few questions: 1) Are you looking at this at more psychological stand point, or a sociological? Do you see what we are and how we act as a by-product of our inheritance and genetics, or as outcomes of our environments and society? 2) How are you classing these races? Is complexion based, or is based on how society has called out to what is what race? I am getting mixes of psychology and sociology from you. Are you not classifying Russia, India, or island regions of Asia? India has an IQ on par to many areas of Africa? 3) How is athleticism tying into the intelligence argument? Athletics help with intelligence and the ability to absorb information. A good body is needed for a good mind, in most cases. Links to the maps: IQ - http://memolition.com... Fertility - http://www.geocurrents.info...