ron unz’s rural/urban data…

…just don’t hold water.

yesterday, using the nesstar gss data, i showed that ron’s statement that…

“German-Americans … are significantly more rural than the white American average”

… is untrue. they are not. the white american average of “ruralness” is 27% (according to the nesstar gss data). thirty-three percent (33%) of german-americans live in rural areas. that’s just a six point difference from the average. it’s higher than average, but not a LOT. meanwhile, 41% of white american-americans (“american only”) live in rural areas. that’s significantly more than the white american average. (only ca. 10% of italian- and greek-americans live in rural areas.)

today i took a look at the sda gss data (no, apparently i don’t have a life). here’s a screenshot of my search parameters so you can see what the h*ck i did (click on image for LARGER view):

the results are — not all that different from yesterday’s results (click on image for LARGER view — should open in a new tab/window — you might have to click on it there to get it to be full-sized):

dutch-americans are, indeed, very rural. and italian- and greek- and yugoslav-americans are all very urban. german-americans are quite rural, but again not much more than anglo-, scots- or even irish-americans. and american-americans are more rural than german-americans.

for some of the groups, i added to the chart the iq scores that the awesome epigone calculated based on the gss wordsum test results. as the a.e. said:

“Contrary to Unz’ assertion, those of English or Welsh descent outscore Italians, Irish, Greeks, and Slavs, though the Dutch do not.”

nor do the germans.

ron’s idea is that urban living produces a sort-of super-flynn effect — at least for peoples of european stock. so you’d think that there ought to be a positive correlation between high average iqs for white americans and urban living — the more urban a group, the higher the iq, right?

well, i can’t find any such correlation. i get a correlation of precisely zip for white american urban-ness and high iq. below is a little chart showing that absent correlation. the x-axis represents my “rural-urban index” (“difference %rural-%urban” from my table above) — more urban is to the left, more rural is to the right. the y-axis represents the awesome epigone’s iq scores. as bob would say, that’s a scatter plot:

several of the highest white american iqs are held by rural groups: swiss-americans (103.6 – 42% rural), norwegian-americans (102.1 – 38% rural), danish-americans (102.6 – 32% rural), and anglo-americans (102.4 – 29% rural). the swiss and norwegians started off rural back in europe and stayed pretty rural in the u.s. — more so than the germans — but they’re awfully smart in the u.s. why don’t they have low average iqs? the danish- and anglo-americans started off pretty urban back in europe, but now they’re rural in the u.s., but they’re smart, too. what is going on?

meanwhile, white puerto ricans are some of the most urban (92% urban) of all these groups and their iq is only 89.9. and whites from mexico, too — very urban (80% urban) — but with an average iq of 87.7.

nope. i just don’t think this rural/urban explanation is gonna work.

previously: rural white americans

(note: comments do not require an email. i need a drink.)

Advertisements

39 Comments

  1. That’s odd, I used the Nesstar GSS data and got quite different results for some of the cases. For example, the Wordsum for all whites was 6.26, but was much higher for the Irish at 6.46, even higher for the Yugoslavs at 6.77, and still above average for the Greeks at 6.34 and Italians at 6.27, while the Germans were 6.25 and the Dutch 5.88. It’s hard to believe that the dataset differences of 1972-2006 vs. 1972-2010 could make that much of a difference. (And personally, I prefer not to convert Wordsum into IQ, since it’s just a rough proxy—you can also fill in all the missing pieces of your table directly from the GSS.)

    I’m no great expert in using the GSS, but the calculation seems to be a very simple one, so the discrepancy is strange.

    Reply

  2. @ron – i don’t know if the audacious epigone used the nesstar gss data or the sda gss data (it’s confusing that there’s two databases out there!). like you say though, you wouldn’t think that there should be that much difference between the two (there wasn’t between the urbanness/ruralness data).

    here’s what the a.e. said about his calculation:

    “To avoid issues with language fluency, immaturity, and senility, all respondents were born in the US and aged 25-65 at the time of their participation. All ethnic groups have sample sizes of at least 50, with most far exceeding that minimum threshold (both the ETHNIC and WORDSUM variables have been consistently employed since the survey’s inception in the early seventies). Mean wordsum values are converted to mean IQ scores under the assumption that a wordsum value of 6.32 equates to an IQ score of 98 (a reasonable estimate of the US average) with a standard deviation of 15 IQ points.”

    if you disagree with his methodology, you can duke it out with him. (~_^)

    Reply

  3. This is all guesswork on my part but i find it interesting so…

    If there was an ancient-valley type of IQ inbreeding depression based simply on having a very low breeding population for a very long time then logically (i think) it should only display where

    1) Within the same country where the people in the ancient-valleys have a depressed IQ relative to their cousins who moved to the towns *and* who didn’t maintain the same marriage links to their original valleys.

    or

    2) Between two countries if (and only if?) a population from an ancient-valley moves *as a group* to another country like the USA and settles in another remote rural area *as a group* which as far as i know happened mainly with religious groups. So are groups like the Amish, Mennonites, Hutterites distinct on things like wordsum and if so is that impacting the German scores and if so are the rural Dutch descended from similar groups?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hutterite

    “Nearly extinct by the 18th and 19th centuries, the Hutterites found a new home in North America. Over 125 years their population grew from 400 to around 42,000.”

    Reply

  4. @g.w. – “So are groups like the Amish, Mennonites, Hutterites distinct on things like wordsum and if so is that impacting the German scores and if so are the rural Dutch descended from similar groups?”

    would you stop thinking my thoughts! it’s very disturbing. (^_^) (…or gratifying knowing that someone else is thinking along the same lines.)

    i hadn’t thought about your idea of “an ancient-valley type of inbreeding depression” — you’re obviously right, i think — but i was wondering about groups like the amish who are inbred in their own way and if they are “germans” in the gss. definitely something to be investigated! (i hadn’t thought of the hutterites, tho!)

    Reply

  5. @ron – “you can also fill in all the missing pieces of your table directly from the GSS”

    are you saying i should check the gss again? *sigh* but i’m tired of talking about iq! (^_^)

    ok, ok. maybe tomorrow. and i’ll just harvest the straight wordsum scores.

    have a good evening/night there everybody!

    Reply

  6. This is all guesswork on my part but i find it interesting so…

    If there was a kind of ancient-valley type of inbreeding IQ depression based simply on having a very low breeding population over a very long period of time then logically (i think) it should only display:

    1) Within the same country between the cousins who stayed in their ancient valley and those who moved to the towns (if they didn’t maintain the same family marriage links).

    or

    2) Between different countries if a group from the same ancient-valley moved *as a group* to another country like the USA and settled in a new remote rural spot *as the same group* which i think mainly happened with religious groups like the Amish, Mennonites, Hutterites etc. So is there a wordsum distinction with these groups and if so does it effect the German average and if so do a proportion of the rural Dutch descend from similar groups?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hutterite

    “Nearly extinct by the 18th and 19th centuries, the Hutterites found a new home in North America. Over 125 years their population grew from 400 to around 42,000.”

    Reply

  7. “would you stop thinking my thoughts! it’s very disturbing”

    ~spooky music~

    :)

    Reply

  8. The real divide is north and south. Those born south of the Mason-Dixon line in the last 200 years have achieved very little intellectually, apart from Lincoln and Thomas Stearns Eliot and, I suppose, E.O. Wilson, though I’m not sure about Wilson. While up north there is Unz and others too numerous to count.

    Charles Murray covers this well.

    Reply

  9. >>”Those born south of the Mason-Dixon line in the last 200 years have achieved very little intellectually, apart from Lincoln and Thomas Stearns Eliot and, I suppose, E.O. Wilson, though I’m not sure about Wilson. While up north there is Unz and others too numerous to count.”

    Remind again what it is which Unz has “achieved .intellectually”?

    Reply

  10. HBChick: well, i can’t find any such correlation. i get a correlation of precisely zip for white american urban-ness and high iq.

    I’m not sure your analysis is the best approach to testing my rural/urban hypothesis.

    Consider that although I strongly criticized a rigidly IQ-determinist model, I actually proposed “the Weak IQ Hypothesis” as a possible alternative, namely that various European peoples might indeed differ in innate IQ, but that those differences were quite small compared to the gigantic ones suggested by Lynn. Obviously, lots of other factors such as local cultural and socio-economic patterns might also play a role.

    Therefore, I would suggest that it would be better to examine those cases in which there was a seemingly large IQ shift between the ethnicity in Europe and in America, and try to detect a clear pattern. As I pointed out, Greeks, Yugoslavs, Irish, and South Italians were all very low in Europe and are high or at least above average in the U.S. Meanwhile, the Dutch and Germans are very high in Europe and very low or at least below average in America. There are other examples as well. These changes exactly track the rural/urban ones.

    But the Norwegians tend to be rural in both locations with IQ close to 100 in Europe and a bit higher in America. Meanwhile, the British IQ is normalized to 100 in Europe and the English/Scottish/Welsh IQ is slightly above that in America, where they’re a somewhat more rural than the white average. So none of these shifts are nearly as extreme or striking as the several mentioned just above, and tend to be much weaker evidence.

    Probably the most thorough approach would be determining the complex correlation between the relative Europe/America differences in IQ and the differences in rural/urban factors, but that would be fairly complex to work out.

    Reply

  11. @ron – “As I pointed out, Greeks, Yugoslavs, Irish, and South Italians were all very low in Europe….”

    you haven’t convinced me of this.

    one of your main references for this is thomas sowell’s Ethnic America. this conversation forced me to dig out my copy of that book (something for which i’m both grateful to and annoyed with you for — it’s been buried in packing boxes for far too long and i’m glad to have it out on the shelf again, but it was a lot of work rummaging around for it! (~_^) ) ’cause i wanted to see sowell’s references for his claims that these immigrant groups to america had low average iqs on arrival.

    here, for example, from pg. 121, about the italians:

    “The notorious failures of Italian children in the public schools led many ‘experts’ of the time to contend that they were genetically mentally inferior. Italian adults and children of that period both scored very low on mental tests[160] — no higher than among blacks today — but Italian IQ scores rose over the decades as their social and economic assimilation progressed.[161] Italian-American IQs have fluctuated around the national average since the 1950s.[162]”

    sowell’s footnotes there — 160, 161 and 162 — all reference — thomas sowell! i.e. “Race and I.Q. Reconsidered” in Essays and Data on American Ethnic Groups (pub. 1978).

    that’s fine but, while i have a lot of respect for thomas sowell, he does seem to have a dislike for the “hard hereditarian” position (as you call it). the man’s entitled to his opinion, of course — but i don’t think i’d use him as one of my main references to demonstrate what the iqs of the immigrant italian and irish groups were.

    what primary sources did sowell use (i don’t have a copy of “Essays and Data…”)? it would be useful if you referenced them. have you looked at them?
    _____

    some of the other data you used to demonstrate the low iq of these groups seems questionable, too. the irish data showing an average iq of 87, for instance — from the one and only survey (a problem in itself) from the 1970s — and, as i’ve pointed out, collected as part of a master’s thesis. maybe it’s all well and good, but it is just one set of data.

    it could very well be correct though! and, again, as i (two times!) — and anatoly — have pointed out, there’s a very good, possible demographic reason for it — which you keep ignoring.
    _____

    nope. you haven’t made a convincing argument for this point, yet, ron. more primary sources. that might help.

    Reply

  12. @ron – “I’m not sure your analysis is the best approach to testing my rural/urban hypothesis.”

    no, i don’t think so, either.

    but if you’re right that urban-ness makes people europeans clever, you would think that there would be some correlation between urban-ness and high iqs amongst whites in the u.s. but there was nothing. i got a perfect zero (0). i haven’t actually ever gotten a perfect zero correlation with any data that i’ve played around with (not that i’ve done that much) — it certainly left an impression on me!

    Reply

  13. @ron – i said: “if you’re right that urban-ness makes people europeans clever…”

    in support of your rural/urban theory (i don’t only want to knock it — really!) — i didn’t quite follow your argument about why east asians don’t seem to fit your pattern — but haven’t an awful lot of east asians (chinese esp.) been urban for a really long time? maybe they’ve already been squeezed through the rural/urban iq selection process/super-flynn-effect thingie — ages ago, perhaps. dunno. just a thought.

    Reply

  14. HBDChick: “Greeks, Yugoslavs, Irish, and South Italians were all very low in Europe”—you haven’t convinced me of this…one of your main references for this is thomas sowell’s Ethnic America…sowell’s footnotes there — 160, 161 and 162 — all reference — thomas sowell! i.e. “Race and I.Q. Reconsidered”…that’s fine but, while i have a lot of respect for thomas sowell, he does seem to have a dislike for the “hard hereditarian” position…what primary sources did sowell use

    Please do give me a little credit on these matters. My Sowell reference was *not* to Ethnic America, but instead to his original American Ethnic Groups book, which contained exactly the source essay you mention. However, I naturally then located and checked the original references which Sowell had used, which included Clifford Kirkpatrick’s 1926 Immigration and Intelligence, and the data was exactly along the lines Sowell claimed. Furthermore, Kirkpatrick seems to have been a very reputable and careful scholar. If you check, you’ll see that I mentioned all of this in my “Rejecting the Ostrich Reponse” column from just a few days ago.

    But anyway, none of my claims here had to do with Sowell’s American data, but instead with the European figures. The low Irish IQ figures come from the massive IQ study in 1972 plus Lynn’s testimony regarding his years of personal research in the late 1960. A few years ago, Lynn published results claiming that even today the Sicilians are down around 89 in IQ, with the South Italians were scarcely better. And the low Greek and South Slav figures come straight from Lynn. Furthermore, even today the PISA results for Greece, Serbia, and Croatia are terrible, and since the overall Italian results are just so-so, I’d bet a lot that the Southern Italian ones are also dreadful.

    in support of your rural/urban theory…haven’t an awful lot of east asians (chinese esp.) been urban for a really long time?

    Nope, it’s exactly the other way round. For nearly all of its thousands of years of history, China has been almost entirely rural, and that continued up until the present time. Until well into the 20th century, probably something like 95% of all Chinese had always been rural peasants, and Japan also has an overwhelmingly rural tradition. By contrast, major parts of Western Europe became much more heavily urbanized over the last few hundred years, even before the Industrial Revolution.

    Reply

  15. @g.w. – “So are groups like the Amish, Mennonites, Hutterites distinct on things like wordsum and if so is that impacting the German scores and if so are the rural Dutch descended from similar groups?’

    well, it was a nice idea, but it doesn’t have wings. afaics, there’s a grand total of ONE amish person in the gss. (~_^)

    the germans in the gss are mostly pretty run of the mill religious-wise: ca. 4700 protestants and ca. 1500 roman catholics. of the protestants, they’re mostly (in this order): lutherns, baptists, “others”, methodists and episcopalians. the “others” (all 835 of them) belong to a whole range of little religious sects, mostly one or two of them in each. none are amish, and i don’t think any of them were hutterites either.

    pretty similar story for the dutch-americans, too.

    p.s. – forgot my search terms. nesstar gss – two searches: 1) RACE, ETHNIC (COUNTRY OF FAMILY ORIGIN), RELIGION IN WHICH RAISED, and 2) RACE, ETHNIC (COUNTRY OF FAMILY ORIGIN), RELIGION IN WHICH RAISED, DENOMINATION IN WHICH RAISED.

    Reply

  16. @ron – “My Sowell reference was *not* to Ethnic America, but instead to his original American Ethnic Groups book….”

    sorry! i thought it was Ethnic America.

    @ron – “Please do give me a little credit on these matters…. I naturally then located and checked the original references which Sowell had used, which included Clifford Kirkpatrick’s 1926 Immigration and Intelligence, and the data was exactly along the lines Sowell claimed.”

    well, i’d like to give you lots of credit, but neither i nor the rest of your readers are mind-readers! you should’ve referenced kirkpatrick in your TAC article, which is the one from which i’ve been working. i’ll check out your “Rejecting the Ostrich Reponse” post, though.

    i know you say it’s strange to include charts and graphs and lots of references in magazine articles, but i think it would be useful for us all if you got over those “old media” hang-ups and just start referencing everything you’ve looked at. i see kirkpatrick’s book is available on google books. link to it so the rest of us can easily double-check what you have to say! just ’cause an article in TAC isn’t an academic work doesn’t mean you can’t be a bit rigorous in your argument/presentation.

    @ron – “The low Irish IQ figures come from the massive IQ study in 1972 plus Lynn’s testimony regarding his years of personal research in the late 1960.”

    already addressed that.

    @ron – “A few years ago, Lynn published results claiming that even today the Sicilians are down around 89 in IQ, with the South Italians were scarcely better.”

    that could be due to inbreeding depression.

    also, i’m not sure you can extrapolate backwards from current sicilian data and 1970s irish data to the nineteenth century for both groups — but i’ll have a look at kirkpatrick.

    @ron – “And the low Greek and South Slav figures come straight from Lynn. Furthermore, even today the PISA results for Greece, Serbia, and Croatia are terrible, and since the overall Italian results are just so-so, I’d bet a lot that the Southern Italian ones are also dreadful.”

    the low greek scores might also be inbreeding depression. not sure about the southern slavs, but i suspect they’ve been inbreeding/endogamously mating, too.

    Reply

  17. @ron – “That’s odd, I used the Nesstar GSS data and got quite different results for some of the cases.”

    i double-checked just a couple of the wordsum means for any differences between the nesstar and dsa databases and, afaics, there isn’t much difference (which makes sense):

    germans nesstar: 6.25
    germans sda: 6.26

    irish nesstar: 6.46
    irish sda: 6.47

    the scores do pop up quite a bit if you exclude under-25s and over-65s:

    germans sda: 6.39
    irish sda: 6.61

    that must be why the audacious epigone’s figures are so different. plus he also excluded foreign-born individuals (i didn’t figure out how to do that).

    Reply

  18. @ron – “…and since the overall Italian results are just so-so, I’d bet a lot that the Southern Italian ones are also dreadful.”

    oh, you don’t have to bet. that’s already been well-established right here (and here) on this very blog (you should really stop by more often to keep up-to-date on these matters! (~_^) ). the southern spaniards are not too sharp either, btw.

    the best post to look at is actually the reluctant apostate’s — he put together some really great maps!

    Reply

  19. @ron – “Nope, it’s exactly the other way round. For nearly all of its thousands of years of history, China has been almost entirely rural, and that continued up until the present time.”

    ah, well. never mind!

    Reply

  20. @ron – “…those cases in which there was a seemingly large IQ shift between the ethnicity in Europe and in America, and try to detect a clear pattern. As I pointed out, Greeks, Yugoslavs, Irish, and South Italians were all very low in Europe and are high or at least above average in the U.S. Meanwhile, the Dutch and Germans are very high in Europe and very low or at least below average in America. There are other examples as well. These changes exactly track the rural/urban ones.”

    i’m liking very much greying wanderer’s theory (see his comments here and here) that what we’re seeing here, IF the early iq data for all these groups is correct, is the lifting of the effects of long-term inbreeding/endogamous mating — i.e. getting rid of inbreeding depression.

    if you’re right about the iqs of greeks, southern slavs, the irish and south italians going up dramatically after they left their old countries, a reversal of inbreeding depression could be the (an) answer. all of these groups — the greeks, the southern slavs (i think), the irish and the south italians have loooong histories of inbreeding/endogamous mating patterns. maybe those patterns changed once they got to the u.s. (that’s something that would need to be checked, however — sometimes immigrant groups outbreed when they get to a new place, but sometimes their inbreeding actually increases — think pakistanis in the u.k. today.) the southern italians are still inbreeding quite a lot, and their pisa scores are pretty low.

    this theory doesn’t explain why the dutch or german iqs would’ve gone down in the u.s. (if they have). unless they started to inbreed more in the u.s. (seems unlikely.)

    Reply

  21. @luke – “Did Ashkenazi iq’s go up after they immigrated to the US?”

    good question! i dunno. (mind you, i dunno if the other european groups’ iqs went up after they immigrated to the u.s. either.)

    Reply

  22. “Nope, it’s exactly the other way round. For nearly all of its thousands of years of history, China has been almost entirely rural, and that continued up until the present time. Until well into the 20th century, probably something like 95% of all Chinese had always been rural peasants, and Japan also has an overwhelmingly rural tradition.”

    *If* there is ancient-valley IQ inbreeding depression as well as the first cousin marriage version then i’d assume the effect (or lack of it) would depend on the total size of the breeding pool.

    Say for the sake of argument the average number of settlements in all the component ancient-valleys around the world in pre-modern times turned out to 20 settlements but that the settlement *sizes* varied according to terrain and food-getting methods. Then, again just for the sake of argument, say
    – the average settlement size in high pop. density rice-growing China and Japan was 2000 for a total breeding population of 40,000
    – the average settlement size in medium pop. density grain-growing Anatolia was 400 for a total breeding population of 8,000
    – the average settlement size in low pop. density marginal or pastoral land was a 50 strong extended family for a total breeding population of 1,000

    And say for the sake of argument the cut-off population size for ancient-valley inbreeding depression is around 40,000. (I assume, if a cut-off exists, it must be somewhere below Iceland’s population size as Icelanders seem to be fine with a population around 300,000 i believe.) The model would then predict very small changes for Japan and China on urbanization, both via Flynn effect and otherwise, because their ancient valley populations had been large enough to avoid the depression effect in the first place. On the other hand populations from the other end of the spectrum with very low pop. densities would show the biggest jumps on urbanization.

    (Also if the model is correct then the countries with the highest amount of inbreeding depression overall are likely to be the poorest. *If* – simply through human nature being the path of least resistance – the Flynn effect is an artifact of the people being tested being the children of the emergent middle class that developed in the capital city over 2-3 generations since independence then you’d expect the Flynn effect to be biggest in the poorest countries except where the inbreeding depression was a mixture of both the ancient-valley effect and the intentional cousin-marriage.)

    Reply

  23. As an aside the lifting of inbreeding depression might be part of what is seen as hybrid vigor.

    Reply

  24. @g.w. – “As an aside the lifting of inbreeding depression might be part of what is seen as hybrid vigor.”

    ha! YOU are on a roll! (^_^)

    Reply

  25. “well, it was a nice idea, but it doesn’t have wings. afaics, there’s a grand total of ONE amish person in the gss”

    dratz

    Reply

  26. Another aside. I occasionally browse youtube and randomly clicked on this for what should be fairly obvious skin-related reasons and it turned out to be very relevant to this discussion.

    In total i think she mentions (for both her and her husband)
    – german
    – french
    – czech
    – dutch-irish(?)
    – english
    – swedish
    – swiss
    – yugoslav

    Reply

  27. I was looking at West Hunter as i’m wondering if the ancient-valley thing is just another way of saying mutational load

    http://westhunt.wordpress.com/2012/02/27/typos/

    http://westhunt.wordpress.com/2012/04/10/more-thoughts-on-genetic-load/

    http://westhunt.wordpress.com/2012/07/14/too-darn-hot/

    and others.

    I thought i remembered reading on there that larger breeding populations have a greater ability to get rid of junk dna somehow – which might fit the inbreeding depression thing – but i couldn’t find it. However there was an interesting comment possibly related to the post above about the size of the average ancient-valley breeding population size.

    “The IQ gradient across China could be related to rice vs wheat consumption. In Japanese children, rice eaters are 4 IQ points smarter than wheat eaters. In China, rice is the staple in the south, wheat in large parts of the north.”

    If the rice-eaters had a higher pop. density (?) and pop. density compensates or partially compensates for mutational load (?) then that would fit nicely.

    Reply

  28. >>”As I pointed out, Greeks, Yugoslavs, Irish, and South Italians were all very low in Europe and are high or at least above average in the U.S.”

    You certainly made that allegation, but you did not “point it out”. One “points out” facts, and your allegation is not a fact.

    Reply

  29. OK, now that I am back, a couple of points:

    “The IQ gradient across China could be related to rice vs wheat consumption. In Japanese children, rice eaters are 4 IQ points smarter than wheat eaters. In China, rice is the staple in the south, wheat in large parts of the north”

    Future blog post, but yes. This likely has something to do with how these crops are grown, because rice growing in warm temperate climates was actually very challenging (as opposed to tropical climates, where rice growing is easy, or cold temperate climates, where rice growing is impossible).

    I was looking at West Hunter as i’m wondering if the ancient-valley thing is just another way of saying mutational load

    Probably has similar effects, but still likely a distinct process. As for genetic load, there may indeed be something to it, when you consider physical attractiveness.

    I will also add that I don’t think that the lowered average IQ of inbred peripheral European areas is solely due to inbreeding depression (though that’s clearly part of the problem), but rather, that the selective pressures are different in inbred societies.

    Reply

  30. I always use the SDA interface because it contains more recent data than the nesstar does. It’s a little clunky, but once you get the hang of it and start memorizing variable filters, it’s pretty slick.

    Reply

  31. Jayman
    “I will also add that I don’t think that the lowered average IQ of inbred peripheral European areas is solely due to inbreeding depression”

    Sure i’m just running with it as it’s interesting to me as an alternative. Alo if there’s an element of truth in it i’d say the effect must have been universal once but it *lifted* at varying speeds depending on time and place i.e.faster in places with high pop. density like Ancient Egypt, Sumeria and bits of India and China and slower (or not at all) in other places. So it’s not like there would be a clear distinction between the core and the periphery it would be that the core has a *higher proportion* of high pop. density regions where the depression had lifted while the periphery had a *lower proportion* of regions where it had.

    Reply

  32. HBD Chick,

    As someone said on an email list:

    “You don’t get it, do you? Unz is not in the disinterested pursuit of truth business. He’s in the magazine / shaping public opinion business. You could provide him with 2 mountains of data showing all his his assertions are wrong and he’d keep writing the same nonsense. He’s more missionary than scholar and, although not a Zionist per se, he has the same fanatical zeal for his causes (such as flooding the US with mestizos).”

    Reply

  33. @xu – i’m inclined to agree. (~_^)

    all the more reason, though, to engage in the debate and make sure, should any part of his theory not hold (which i think is pretty clear so far that large parts do not), that that be made public.

    Reply

Leave a Reply to Frank Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s