Genetic differences explain racial IQ gaps

Genetic cause as the default hypothesis:- Distinct populationsWe must begin with the acknowledgment that the populations which are commonly referred to as "black", "white"/European, Asian, etc. - or generally, the races of mankind - are genetically distinct and distinguishable.For example, a 2010 paper found that: "using all available SNPs, assignment of individuals to their self-reported populations of origin is essentially perfect." [4]As Neven Sesardic wrote on the matter: "Indeed, a quick look into the literature confirms this. For instance, a study that covered 17 populations over the world and that relied on 34 different measurements managed to assign 98% of the specimens to their correct major racial group (Brues 1990, 6). Another more recent study had a success rate of 80% in distinguishing between American Whites and Blacks, although it used just two variables. With seven variables, however, it reached the reliability of 95%, and with 19 variables the probability of correct classification rose to 97% (Ousley et al. 2009). Also, estimating generally the reliability of attributing a given data point to one of the five racial categories, another team of experts calculated that under some realistic conditions it is sufficient to use as few as 13 characteristics to have the posterior probability of the correct classification attain the value of 99% (Konigsberg et al. 2009)."[3] (emphasis mine)For a visual representation of these distinctions, refer to Figure 1 from Zakharia et al. 2009 [1] : This principal comonent analysis (PCA) chart plots the genetic distance between Europeans, African-Americans, and a variety of African populations.Another PCA chart, made with data from (see Table 5), shows the following arrangement:(The particular clusters are Nigerian (sky blue), European (green and red), and Northeast Asian (purple and blue)) - Other differences, or, why would evolution stop at the neck?So now that we have conclusively established human "races", as they are popularly thought to exist, are in fact distinct groupings. Of course, this by itself does not tell us anything. Humans have been dispersed throughout the world for dozens of thousands of years, of course there would be genetic marks of such migrations. But does this make it reasonable to expect important differences - those that can influence phenotype - beyond mere superficials?The answer is, of course, yes! It is very well established that, among other things, different human populations differ in:- Susceptibility to sickle-cell disease [14]- Suitability to live at high altitudes [15]- Cranial structure- Brain size [17]- Brain structure [16]- Probability of the a priori assumptionRegarding mental abilities, and other race differences, anthrpologists Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending wrote in The 10,000 Year Explosion: "the biological equality of human races and ethnic groups is not inevitable: In fact, it’s about as likely as a fistful of silver dollars all landing on edge when dropped" (p. 121). There is simply no reason to assume or expect uniform selection.In the absence of evidence, it is significantly more likely that racial gaps in IQ are genetic than otherwise. But we don't have to speculate, given that which is already available.Historic-genetic precedent and evidence:- Neanderthal ancestryOne of the most damning pieces of evidence in favor of the genetic explanation, is the uneven degree of Neanderthal ancestry between the races [12].Some argue that Neanderthal admixture was likely neutral, and had no effects on populations that received it. However, this argument is extremely dubious. For one example, take the FOXP2 gene, which is required [5] for proper speech development. A 2007 paper [6] found that Neanderthals carried the same variation of the gene that modern humans do - before us. Anthropologist Henry Harpending wrote [7] on the subject: "I don't know how else to explain that except to suggest we got it from Neanderthals"- Population differentiationThere is evidence that concerns the genomic impact of human evolution. Take for example, Wu and Zhang's 2011 paper [8] on population differentiation on functional genes: Figure 1 [8]Note the level of differentiation in pigmentation, as opposed to that of, say, neuron or hindbrain development.Explanatory power and consistency:- Accross the economic spectrumThe racial differences in average IQ also persist in spite of economic disparities. For a few examples, refer to the following table: Made with World Bank [10] and Census [9] income data, as well as Lynn and Vanhanen's global IQ data [11], the table shows next-to-no association between IQ and socioeconomic status. Certainly not enough for a causal relationship.- Mixed-race peopleAs a hereditarian position would predict, the average IQs of mixed-race people fall between those of their parents' populations. A 2014 article [13], which analyzed 31 studies on racial admixture, found that their results "support a racial hereditarian hypothesis along with others that predict a fairly internationally consistent association between continental ancestry and cognitively correlated indices of socioeconomic status such as education, income, and job prestige" [13].ConclusionIt has been demonstrated that the populations recognized as "races" are significantly distinct in a genetic sense, that these genetic differences lead to a variety of important phenotypic differences in a multitude of areas, and that there is no good reason to assume cognitive capacity would be an exception. It has also been demonstrated that, given the uneven history of admixture with archaic hominids, consistence and persistence of the gaps, and GWAS analyses, the evidence favors a genetic explanation for at least part of the IQ gaps..At this point, the important question is not "why should we believe this?", but rather, "why should we expect anything else?"Sources:1] https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com...2] www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v16/n12/full/ejhg2008210a.html3] http://www.ln.edu.hk...4] http://jmg.bmj.com...5] http://www.nature.com...6] http://www.academia.edu...7] http://www.pbs.org...8] http://bmcevolbiol.biomedcentral.com...9] https://www.census.gov...10] http://data.worldbank.org...11] http://www.ttu.ee...12] http://science.sciencemag.org...13] http://humanvarieties.org...14] http://www.cdc.gov...15] http://pubmed.gov...16] https://media.8ch.net...[17] http://news.rutgers.edu...