Racial Differences

Lipton Matthews Interviews Richard Lynn

Richard Lynn is a distinguished academic and prolific researcher whose interests span a fascinating array of topics. Professor Lynn is a pioneer in the field of intelligence research and is well regarded for his numerous books documenting the association between intelligence and social outcomes.
1.Professor Lynn, you have written extensively on the predictive power of IQ, so could you explain why intelligence is such an important predictor of success?
Intelligent people learn faster and more effectively, and can solve problems that unintelligent people are unable to solve.
2. Contemporary economists infrequently examine the role of IQ in explaining disparities across countries, but you denounce this stance. Can you explain the mechanisms by which intelligence affects development?
Intelligent people are able to create more efficient institutions including government and industry.
3. Disparities in development between Northern and Southern Italy are usually ascribed to environmental factors, but should we assign a role to IQ?
There is about a 10-point IQ difference between North and South Italy which cannot be explained by environmental factors. The issue is examined in my paper “IQs in Italy are higher in the North: A reply to Felice and Giugliano.” These critics have contended that school quality could be responsible for the North-South differences. The first problem with this is that it does not account for the effect of intelligence in creating better schools. Secondly, the lower IQs in the south are attributable to the admixture of North African and Middle Eastern ancestry shown by the frequency of the haplogroup E1b1b.
4. James Flynn observed that throughout the twentieth century, IQ scores increased, but is the Flynn effect measuring g or specific cognitive skills that are environmentally determined?
Flynn attributed the secular increase in intelligence to a number of factors including improved nutrition, better schooling and a more stimulating environment. But many contend that these are a consequence of adaptations to changes in the cultural environment. Michael Woodley of Menie has shown that the Flynn effect is weakly related to g.
5. Researchers are documenting a reversal of the Flynn Effect. What is the cause of this occurrence?
My own research has shown that the decline in genotypic intelligence is caused by the negative association between intelligence and fertility, since highly intelligent people have fewer children. This subject is covered in my 2004 paper “New evidence of dysgenic fertility for intelligence in the United States.” In a more recent study “The Negative Flynn Effect: A Systematic Review,” co-written with Edward Dutton and Dimitri Van der Linder we list immigration and dysgenic fertility as explanations for the reversal.
Ole Rogeburd and his co-authors argue: “Our results remain consistent with a number of proposed hypotheses of IQ decline: changes in educational exposure or quality, changing media exposure, worsening nutrition, and social spillovers from increased immigration.” For this assertion to be sound the authors must provide evidence that schooling and nutrition are getting worse.
6. Sex differences in intelligence are observable and you argue that they become demonstrable during adolescence. Why is this the case?
In the evolutionary past men were responsible for hunting and warfare and this would have selected for greater intelligence and spatial abilities. In addition, intelligent men would have been more successful in competing for women. The sex difference in intelligence appears at the age of 16 years because the development of girls ceases at this age, whereas it continues for boys. Becker and Rindermann (2017) have confirmed that sex differences in intelligence appear during later adolescence.
7. Intelligence is unequally distributed across societies; therefore, could you provide an evolutionary account for the unequal distribution of intelligence.
The intelligence of societies increases in colder environments as an adaptation to the greater cognitive demands. I have called this the Cold Winters Theory. Peoples in cold environments needed a greater variety of complex tools than peoples in tropical and sub-tropical environments. Torrance (1983) has documented a link between latitude and the number and complexity of tools used by contemporary hunter-gatherers. He has shown that hunter-gatherers in tropical and subtropical latitudes like the Amazon Basin and New Guinea typically have been 10 and 20 different tools, while those in the colder northern latitudes of Siberia, Alaska and Greenland have been 25 and 60 different tools. The studies of Donald Templer, Satoshi Kanazawa, Bryan Pesta and Joseph Ryan have confirmed the link between cold climates and intelligence.
8. Some invoke the average intelligence of people living in the Arctic as a refutation of the Cold Winters Theory. Are they misinterpreting the theory?
This is explained in my book Race Differences in Intelligence: An Evolutionary Analysis (2015). The explanation lies in the small numbers of the Arctic Peoples whose population at the end of the twentieth century was only approximately 56,000 as compared with approximately 1.4 billion North East Asians. While it is impossible to make precise estimates of population sizes during the main Würm glaciation, there can be no doubt that the North East Asians were many times more numerous than the Arctic Peoples. The effect of the difference in population size will have been that mutations for higher intelligence occurred and spread in the North East Asians that never appeared in the Arctic Peoples. The North East Asians consisting of the Chinese, Koreans and Japanese would have formed a single extended breeding population of demes in which mutant alleles for high intelligence would have spread but would not have been transmitted to the Arctic peoples isolated by high mountain ranges and long distance. The Arctic peoples did, however, evolve a large brain size, approximately the same as that of the North East Asians, so it is curious that they do not have the same intelligence. A possible explanation for this is that the Arctic peoples have evolved a strong visual memory that would have been needed when they went out on long hunting expeditions and needed to remember landmarks in order to get home in largely featureless environments of snow and ice. An increase of this ability would have required an increase in brain size but is not measured in intelligence tests. A further possibility is that one or more new mutant alleles for more efficient neurophysiological processes underlying intelligence may have appeared in the North East Asians but not in the Arctic Peoples.
9. Although it is one of the most replicated findings in psychological research, many still doubt the validity of the Black-White IQ gap. Could you shed light on its genetic component?
Based on numerous sources which I discuss in Race Differences in Intelligence, Blacks consistently obtain lower IQs than Whites. This gap is present even when compared to Whites of a similar socio-economic status and in all countries. Furthermore, the study by Sandra Scarr [see S. Scarr, R. Weinberg, 1976; R. Weinberg, S. Scarr & I. D. Waldman, 1992; summarized by Lynn, 1994], showed that Black infants adopted by middle class whites do not gain an IQ advantage, showing that genetics must be responsible for the lower black IQ.
10. Exploring racial differences in personality traits like psychopathy and self-control is the next frontier in psychological research. How do you suggest researchers articulate their findings to a mainstream audience?
By publishing their findings. These will no doubt be ignored by mainstream media but eventually, the facts will be accepted.

Biology Is Blasphemy: Racist Reality Meets Anti-Racist Inanity

“Shocked, confused, and frankly horrified!” As Steve Sailer has reported, that’s how an anti-racist radiologist called Luke Oakden-Rayner sums up the reaction of himself and other medical researchers to a dark, dangerous, and deeply disturbing discovery in artificial intelligence (AI). What have they found? That AI has what Oakden-Rayner calls the “worst superpower.” It’s guilty of “medical racism,” because it can identify racial identity in X-rays and other medical images that, to human eyes, contain absolutely no clue as to race.

Emotion vs intellect

Is this a White lung or a Black lung or a Chinese lung? Humans can’t tell. But AI can. And ditto for the heart, the liver, the pancreas, the spleen, and, it appears, everything else in the human body. As that medical researcher despairingly concludes: “[T]here is no easy way to remove racial information from images. It is everywhere and it is in everything.”

Can I sympathize with his shock and horror? In fact, I can. As a kid, I once turned over a piece of old carpet in a shed and was startled and disgusted to see a host of plump and pale larvae chewing away at the underside. Ugh! But that was an instinctive reaction, not a scientific one. Today I hope I’d quickly overcome my disgust at a similar discovery with some amateur science: What species do the larvae belong to? How can they nourish themselves on carpet? How do they get water? And so on.

The blasphemous brain

Scientists quâ scientists shouldn’t be “shocked, confused and horrified” by an unexpected discovery. No, they should be pleased and interested. Unexpected discoveries, like the presence of microscopic life in tooth-scrapings or anomalies in the orbit of Mercury, are often gateways to greater things, to an expansion or overturning of previous scientific understanding. And the anti-racist radiologist Luke Oakden-Rayner and his colleagues were certainly not expecting what they have discovered:

Firstly, the performance of these [AI] models ranges from high to absurd. An AUC [Area Under the Curve, or correct identification] of 0.99 for recognising the self-reported race of a patient, which has no recognised medical imaging correlate? This is flat out nonsense.

Every radiologist I have told about these results is absolutely flabbergasted, because despite all of our expertise, none of us would have believed in a million years that x-rays and CT scans contain such strong information about racial identity. Honestly we are talking jaws dropped — we see these scans everyday and we have never noticed. (AI has the worst superpower… medical racism, Luke Oakden-Rayner, 2nd August 2021)

But in fact this discovery about racial information in “x-rays and CT scans” shouldn’t have been unexpected, let alone “shocking, confusing and frankly horrifying.” Anatomists have known for centuries that race can be identified from the skeleton — indeed, from the skull alone. If bones carry “racial information,” why not organs? And in fact, just as the skull commits blasphemy and betrays the reality of race, so does the brain inside the skull:

Modeling the 3D Geometry of the Cortical Surface with Genetic Ancestry

  • Geometry of the human cortical surface contains rich ancestral information
  • The most informative features are regional patterns of cortical folding and gyrification
  • This study provides insight on the influence of population structure on brain shape

… Here, we demonstrate that the three-dimensional geometry of cortical surface is highly predictive of individuals’ genetic ancestry in West Africa, Europe, East Asia, and America, even though their genetic background has been shaped by multiple waves of migratory and admixture events. The geometry of the cortical surface contains richer information about ancestry than the areal variability of the cortical surface, independent of total brain volumes. Besides explaining more ancestry variance than other brain imaging measurements, the 3D geometry of the cortical surface further characterizes distinct regional patterns in the folding and gyrification of the human brain associated with each ancestral lineage. (Modeling the 3D Geometry of the Cortical Surface with Genetic Ancestry, Current Biology, Volume 25, Issue 15, 3rd August 2015)

Leftist lies about the human brain: an anti-racist propaganda poster

That brain-study was published six years ago, which is a long time by the standards of rapidly advancing modern science. But at the same time as science is advancing, leftists are doing their best to obscure, distort, and deny any of its findings that contradict leftism. If the structure and size of the brain differ by race, an obvious conclusion follows: so do the functioning of the brain and the cognitive performance of different races. How could they not? The human intellect isn’t a ghost in the machine, but a product of the machine, that is, of the immensely complex electro-chemical mechanisms of the brain. Even if all humans were running the same neurological software, we wouldn’t be running it on the same systems. Some brains are faster and more efficient, some are slower and less efficient.

“Race is everywhere and in everything”

And those differences in the brain arise in decisive part from genetic differences, both within races and between them. The same applies to every other part of the human body. As the anti-racist doctor said: “[Race] is everywhere and it is in everything.” This isn’t surprising, because “everything” — every organ and aspect of physiology — is under different selective pressures in different physical and cultural environments. For example, lungs and red blood-cells that work well in low-lying Tahiti won’t work so well in elevated Tibet. As the racist Charles Darwin taught us, it’s a basic rule of biology that living organisms become adapted to their environments. Modern humans evolved in Africa, then migrated across the world, entering new environments and acquiring new adaptations, both directly, by natural selection, and indirectly, by inter-breeding with previous human migrants like Neanderthals, Denisovans, and other now-extinct members of the Homo genus.

Leftists like to pride themselves on their intellectual sophistication and their ability to cope with “complexity.” But when it comes to human biology and evolution, they become as hungry for simplicity and comforting falsehoods as any fundamentalist Christian. Rather than accept our rich and fascinating racial differences, leftists cling to the nonsensical slogan of “There’s only one race — the human race!” What could be simpler than that? And what could be falser? Reality says that racial differences are much more than skin-deep. They’re brain-deep, lung-deep, liver-deep, kidney-deep, and everything-else-deep. Luke Oakden-Rayner, the anti-racist doctor, claims that “There is no causal pathway linking racial identity and the appearance of, for example, pneumonia on a chest x-ray. By definition these features are spurious.”

GIF from Luke Oakden-Rayner’s blog: “Is this the darkest timeline? Are we the baddies?”

The soothing simplicity of falsehood

In fact they’re “spurious” only “by definition” within the dogmas of leftism. But reality is racist and doesn’t care about leftist dogma. Disease affects different races in different ways. Leftists want to ignore this complexity and insist on the soothing simplicity of “No race but the human race!” They don’t recognize the crypto-religious nature of their own behaviour. For example, leftists jeer at and mock fundamentalist Christians for their rejection of Darwinism. The fundamentalists are disturbed by the idea of humans descending from ape-like ancestors and have sought refuge in the soothing simplicity of a God-created Adam and Eve from whom we all descend. But leftist denial of race serves the same psychological function. Indeed, its simplicity doesn’t just shield leftists from disturbing reality, but also allows them to indulge in an ancient religious custom: hunting for scapegoats.

If humans are all the same under the skin, then only one thing can explain why Blacks, for example, fail so badly and behave so badly. It can’t be anything innate or intrinsic to Blacks, so it must be an external force of evil: White racism! Whites are responsible for Black failure. Whites are oppressing and exploiting Blacks. What else could explain White success and Black failure? Well, it could be (and is) innate racial differences in cognition and psychology. That’s why the medical researchers described above are “shocked, confused, and frankly horrified” by what AI is telling them about biological reality. Their findings contradict their ideology and, like good leftists but unlike good scientists, they value ideology far above reality. In fact, they don’t seem to value reality at all, as you can see from one very telling reference in the anti-racist doctor’s blog-post. He lists examples of unacceptable racial discrimination, including the horrific fact that “Black newborns are substantially more likely to survive if they are treated by a Black doctor.”

Grinding non-Whites into the dirt

There you have it: White racism is killing Black babies! Or is it? In fact, no. Consider that patients with ingrowing toenails “are substantially more likely to survive” than patients with brain-cancer. Does this prove that chiropodists are better and more caring doctors than brain-surgeons and radiologists? Obviously not. As Greg Cochran pointed out at West Hunter, Black newborns with dangerous medical problems are more likely to be treated by White doctors than by Black doctors, who are “a much smaller percentage of specialists.” That explains the difference in survival rates. Meanwhile, Hispanic newborns in America have lower mortality and higher life-expectancy than White newborns. How can this be, when White racism and White supremacy are at work non-stop in America, remorselessly grinding Hispanics and other non-Whites into the dirt?

Anti-racism is the Church of the Damned: Whites are racist “no matter what” (see rule 10)

Well, leftists don’t ask how that can be, because they’re not interested in the truth. For leftists, ideology trumps reality, which is why they believe in censorship and suppression, not free speech and open debate. And what they can’t censor or suppress, they will distort and deny. At American Renaissance Gregory Hood has reported these highly revealing words by the leftist philosopher Daniel Dennett: “[I]f I encountered people conveying a message I thought was so dangerous that I could not risk giving it a fair hearing, I would be at least strongly tempted to misrepresent it, to caricature it for the public good. I’d want to make up some good epithets, such as genetic determinist or reductionist or Darwinian Fundamentalist, and then flail those straw men as hard as I could. As the saying goes, it’s a dirty job, but somebody’s got to do it.”

The innate evil of Whites

Countless other leftists think in the same way, because truth does not matter to them. The message of racial difference cannot be given a “fair hearing,” because it’s too “dangerous.” So instead of the truth about race, leftists insist on a lie about race: that it doesn’t exist and that all non-White failure is due to the greed, selfishness, and malevolence of Whites. This lie incites non-White violence against Whites and justifies systemic discrimination against Whites in education and employment. But underneath that leftist insistence on the non-existence of race is a contradictory belief in the innate evil of Whites and the immaculate conception of non-Whites, who are born without hereditary stain or spot. As Gregory Hood has said at AmRen: for Whites, anti-racism is a Church of the Damned, offering no hope of salvation or redemption. Whites are racist whatever they do, say or think. The only solution is dissolution. In the words of the late, great anti-racist Dr Noel Ignatiev (1940-2019), we have to “Abolish the white race.”

The late, great Jewish anti-racist Dr Noel Ignatiev

Ignatiev edited a magazine called Race Traitor, whose catchy strap-line was “Treason to whiteness is loyalty to humanity.” But during what New Yorker magazine called his “Long Fight against Whiteness,” he always said that “abolition” of “the white race” meant merely abolition of the concept and privileges of “whiteness,” not the physical subjugation or extermination of Whites. I don’t believe his disclaimers. Ignatiev was a White-hating extremist, which is why it should come as no surprise that he was also Jewish — a Jew pretending to be a “fellow-white” representing himself as a traitor to his race. You’ve seen above how we can read race reliably from the human body. But I think we can also read race reliably in a more literal way: from the words people use and the ideas they promote.

It is no surprise, for example, that a Jew was the inventor of the slogan “Abolish the white race” and the editor of an anti-White magazine called Race Traitor. Nor is it a surprise that Jewish biologists like Stephen Jay Gould, Richard Lewontin, Leon Kamin, and Steven Rose have led the fight to deny the existence of race. You can read their Jewish psychology in their words and I think you can also read their Jewish genetics. Psychology is under decisive genetic influence, after all. I predict that artificial intelligence could also be trained to identify race from samples of written or spoken language. Language is another aspect of human biology and that anti-racist doctor captured a central truth of human biology when he said: “Race is everywhere and in everything.” To put it another way: Biology is blasphemy because reality is racist.