brain size indicates blacks are less intelligent than whites

Neanderthals may have died via us killing them all, but a more accepted theory in science is that one winter we happened to be more resourceful than the Neanderthals, and they did not get enough to survive. Yes, it does not have to be exactly the same, but if the difference is as far as 6 to 4.3125, there seems to be something wrong with "brain size = IQ". You seem to have failed to address my original points (Or..... any of my original points actually aside from one.) I admired your debating skills at the start, but I'm slightly disappointed- you failed to respond to half my points. I will repeat the points you ignored here. 1. "Shows IQ to be overwhelmingly genetic" is just a lie. The letter to the Wall street journal has 25 conclusions, none of which mentioned that IQ and genes were related. The closest thing to it is the conclusion that "IQ is strongly related, probably more so than any other single measurable human trait, to many important educational, occupational, economic, and social outcomes ... Whatever IQ tests measure, it is of great practical and social importance" Which clearly is more the fault of the whites having not yet restored true equality. And it's more of a cultural attitude- Asian families are known for bringing up children in a very study focused method, which means that it makes sense that the average is dragged upwards by these families efforts to make sure their children are as smart as possible. Black families are still suffering from centuries of Europeans putting them at a disadvantage- having not been properly educated and still not having much money when Europeans started giving blacks rights is something that blacks will have to try and get out of for at least another few decades. Until then, any tests as to the intellect of random members of the Asian, European and Black population are biased by the environment they live in. So no, it's not genetic, and the journal certainly did not say it was genetic- other science journals may prove this, if so then please inform me and the general public a source where we could find these. 2. "Identical twins separated at birth are significantly more similar in IQ than fraternal twins raised together with a genetic correlation of.80" Well think about it. Most people want to be special- siblings that live together would realistically try and get their own characteristics to distinguish them from their sibling. So one would try and do great at school while another would try to be a social star or something- the point is, for this to truly be an accurate experiment they would have to separate fraternal twins as well and see whether the IQ differs much. If the test did not do this, then the test is not accurate, and can not be relied on. 3. "The link between cranial size and intelligence are strongly established in several scientific studies published in journals" And it's been disproved by many as well. ( https://www.psychologytoday.com...... ) Until the link between cranial size and intelligence is (dis)proved by something other than our own arrogant wish to put ourselves as top dogs, this cannot be used as an argument. 4."Blacks are better athletes" Well if they can't afford to be educated properly, they need to be tough. It's less that they're stronger and because of this they are more stupid- it's more that because they aren't educated the same way other races are they score lower in tests and so they have to rely on their physical skill instead of mental skill. You know point 3 was my actual main argument originally..... You just ignored it, not noticing that I shook off any "evidence" that there was a link between the size of your skull and brainpower ages ago...... I'm sorry, I can't respect a debater who just refuses to acknowledge any real points. You make a flashy entrance, but I am disappointed in your later arguments. Ah well, may the best debater win I suppose.