Could african IQ results be skewed by the fact that tests are administered in the colonial lingua franca rather than first languages? An igbo speaker may not do as well on an english IQ test because that is a second language for them.

Compare it to prominence of french on a map, see if the results are 1:1

>>16703367 (OP)
Can you even express the ideas in an IQ test with unga bunga language?

>>16703367 (OP)
>Could it be every reason under the sun
No. The amount of brainpower expended on this issue, the direction of entire fields of science, billions of dollars at home and abroad, and no matter what they do they can't avoid the true scientifically derived answer:
They are niggers.

>>16703367 (OP)
>the fact that tests are administered in the colonial lingua franca
>the fact
[citation needed]

>colonial
They hadn't invented wheels or boats or division yet when white people showed up 200 years ago and you think an average IQ in the 70s is unrealistic?

>>16703367 (OP)
They're skewed by the fact that the human brain doesn't develop correctly without proper nutrition and thought-expanding devices such as books.

>>16703367 (OP)
I dont believe in IQ

>59
Holy fucking shit. 59 is the middle of the bell curve. Fifty fucking nine. This implies at least 25% of the population has an IQ lower than that. Fuck how do their organs function? How do they feed themselves?

>>16703846
Almost 40% of the country is under fifteen years old. Eight percent of babies die before their fifth birthday, a rate that until recently was three times higher (population growth is now 3.5% per year). You're not going to find many rocket surgeons there.

>>16703696
How are we supposed to believe everyone is magically equal if science keeps proving we aren't?

>>16703861
But young people are scored higher in IQ test by default. That is the nature of the test. The score drops as a function of age deliberately, so unless I'm mistaken your argument is fallacious.

>>16703696
Thread

Evolution doesn’t select for high intelligence in warm climates with abundant food. Whites and Northern Asians are smarter because surviving cold winters requires a certain level of planning and forethought.

>>16703976
You have an awful lot of faith in the methodology used in a country with an average IQ of 59.

>>16703769
I don't believe in gravity. Wtf why aren't I floating???

>>16704006
Gravity is real, IQ isnt real. Its that simple.
IQ is a social construction. A made up idea with no physical reality.
It was something some frenchman invented in the 19th century.

>>16703696
>The amount of brainpower expended on this issue, the direction of entire fields of science, billions of dollars at home and abroad, and no matter what they do they can't avoid the true scientifically derived answer:
You'd be surprised by the little amount that is actually invested as opposed to other fields. There's been very little work done on proving a genuine causation between race and intelligence. Even then, most results indicates that no, race doesn't cause the magic intelligence gene to go up/down. Even the minnesota transracial study, when accounted for attrition, had similar iq for white and black participants.

>>16704043
is intelligence real? if so, is there a way to quantify it?

>>16704422
>is there a way to quantify it?
Best i can do is a binary scale, good enough for school/not good enough for school
Not good enough includes antisocial behavior, not caring about the test, its all the same: Not fit for school
The original IQ test was just to determine what kids were fit for public school. That doesnt mean intelligence, but a bunch of personality traits

>>16703942
Evolution only happened from the neck down, geographically isolated gene pools couldn't possibly result in divergent phenotypic expression of brain structure and, thus, of cognitive ability. If you question that you're a racist chud. Trust the science!

>>16703367 (OP)
How credible is that map? I find huge differences across short distances, if we are to believe the map.

>>16703367 (OP)
>91 average iq
>48% literacy rate
yeah no

>>16703367 (OP)
Yes, the results are actually skewed upwards because those languages make them smarter.

>>16703682
>Can you even express the ideas in an IQ test with unga bunga language?
Given several languages don't have a word for maintenance or repair... distinct possibility no. Would still mean the tests are accurate though, they still wouldn't have higher order thinking without the words necessary. Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.

>>16705232

>>16703861
IQ tests are weighted based on age. Not how that works.
But it tells me you're probably in the single digits yourself.

>>16703846
It would be interesting to see the distribution. That 59 might be tightly clustered. According to >>16705232 Equatorial Guinea with that 59 IQ also has a 95% literacy rate, highest on the chart. Which implies they're all retarded, but all equally retarded and only mildly so.
If it's generally not clustered, the internet says you can be a minimum-functioning member of society all the way down to 35. You're mentally a 1st grader. But you can kind of be relied on to do basic shit. Doing some largely improper statistical math, that's a 24 point range, so for every 35 they'd have an 83, and 15 point SD that's most everybody between 74 and 44.

>>16703701
>They hadn't invented wheels or boats or division yet when white people showed up 200 years ago
Wheels aren't much use without flat ground or roads, and boats aren't much use when the biggest gathering of water in 100 miles is something you can swim across in less than 5 minutes. And most of their continentally native animals are too rebellious or dangerous to domesticate. I can handwave all of those as shit starting conditions. If necessity is the mother of invention, then lack of necessity because an invention is untenable or wouldn't be beneficial is stillbirth.

No, the actual indictment of them as a people is the fact they can be handed all this knowledge pre-solved, and even be forced to implement it for a number of decades, and then the moment force stops they completely collapse. And then when aid is sent, say by giving them 30 head of cattle to start basic agriculture, even after having the concept of husbandry and dairy and the benefits of long-term growth explained they chose to just immediately kill and eat them.
https://x.com/UltraDane/status/1935077927345090720
What little major scale farming operations they do have feeding them are all owned by like Indians and shit.

>>16705295
>9- or 10-year-olds cannot read
honestly, american deep south is almost that bad
>and understand sentences in ANY language
what the actual fuck?
they out here teaching the damn chimps in zoos to sign.
These kids are so much stupider they can't talk at all?

You know, I'm not normally for this sort of thing, but have they considered eugenics? Just cull all the ones too dumb to breath, make some breathing room in the gene pool for the few that don't have microcephaly.

>>16705321
>>They hadn't invented wheels
>Wheels aren't much use without flat ground or roads

>africa isn't flat
>roads naturally spawned in the environment everywhere except africa

>>16704468
I was pretty shit at school, always bad grades. But I was great at the subjects I liked personally, like history, philosophy, and foreign languages. Although I was and still am shit at math. What does that say?

>>16705328
The scots didn't have wheels until 1200BC, which is 2800 years behind the wheel's first invention. They nearly had blacksmithing before the wheel. Hilly country, wooden wheels are brittle, just not all that useful until people started to need to build big forts to protect themselves from frequent land squabbles.

The aztecs put wheels on children's toys, hell their damn calendar is a wheel, they had the concept, but had no carts for transportation, no wheels for practical purposes. they domesticated the llama for that. Because their empire was built on top of a mountain.

West Africa had SOME wheel use pre-colonial, but West Africa... also has plains.
It's also the sole semi-valid claim to Kangz in Sub-Sahara other than Ethiopia which borders the middle east and thus has as much influence as North Africa. They were slaver kingdoms, their prisoners of war the source of transatlantic chattel. But they were kingdoms.
Are they so much smarter than all the other sub-saharan regions? According to OP's chart and the literacy chart, probably not. Aside from a couple high 80s and low 90s, they're some of the lowest on the chart.

So no, if you have shitty land for wheels, and you never establish the massive infrastructure required to build flat roads to force the matter, you're not going to bother with the wheel. It's kind of a global universal wheel.

>>16705329
that you're some breed of neurodivergent, either autistic, ADHD, or gifted.

>>16703367 (OP)
>Rwanda (Significant Tutsi "Master Race" Pop) IQ 70
>South African (Significant Dutch Whites/Anglo/Jewish Pop) IQ 77
>Congolese (Pure Bantu/Pigmy Pop) IQ..... 78

Even looking at this from a racist perspective this seems like bullshit man.

>>16705321
We domesticated wolves and wild cats, what are you talking about?
And of course domesticated animals are docile- they've been bred to be so for thousands of years. You have no idea how aggressive/uncooperative the first ancestors of modern day livestock were. Do you think Europe was populated by modern day pigs and horses during the Holocene?
Also, Europeans domesticated zebras the moment we got there.

>>16705350
>not all that useful until people started to need to build big forts to protect themselves from frequent land squabbles.

>africa doesn't have territorial disputes
>forts are somehow more useful in european wars than african wars

>>16705352
To domesticate something you have to be smarter than it.

>>16705352
>We domesticated wolves and wild cats, what are you talking about?
1. no, cats domesticated themselves.
2. Easy to feed animals that have a social hierarchy to supplant, and whose lifespans are relatively short allowing for selective breeding so we can breed out aggression, yes.

You can't tame a zebra, they recognize no master, not even among other zebras.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOmjnioNulo

>>16705352
>Also, Europeans domesticated zebras the moment we got there.
Straight up lies, and I challenge you to provide even a single modicum of proof. It's even a classic example used when describing non-domesticatable animals.

>>16705355
Subsaharan Africa didn't actually have that many largescale disputes until the colonial period. Little tribal feuds, sure, but until british merchants were in the market to buy slaves there was no capital W wars. How could there be? True wars require civilization, and they were, and some still are, living as hunter-gatherers in mudhuts.

>>16705361
NTA and don't agree with his argument but there is a person living 10 minutes from me who's wife really wanted a Zebra, and so they have a domesticated Zebra which roams around on the hillside. It is rideable. This is in NH. Has a little barn for the winters and everything.

You can domesticate Zebras. But you can't spread technical innovations without trade routes which they didn't have given the geography.

Tons of African tribes dont even have a real number system, it only goes up to 2. So instead of saying "5 rocks" they say 2 rocks 2 times and 1 rock

>>16705373
they have a TAMED zebra. You can tame damn near any animal with enough time and effort.
that is not the same as domestication. If you don't understand the difference, ask Roy Horn to explain it to you. Actually, nevermind, if memory serves he couldn't talk after the attack.

If you're going to opine at least know what you're talking about or do some research.

>>16705395
Spergouts aside an animal which can be tamed can be domesticated over thousands of years.

The argument you're trying to make - otherwise known as the GGS cope - doesn't even work in the Zebras case. They are heard animals, not solitary predators. (Putting to the side the fact this is a very stupid argument to begin with, as jungle fowl -> chicken, wildcat -> house cat and wolf -> dog don't follow this pattern either.)

You really shouldn't argue from his GGS ideas, its one of the worst most transparently cope ridden books ever written, and thoroughly discredited on every point.
The premise is silly as well, as animal domestication was a very rare thing in general, there aren't really any rules, other than you needed to be part of trade networks to inherit them, as most cultures did.


The bigger problem and potential racist talking point for Africa is the lack of crop domestication, which most cultures can claim multiple examples of, and which the GGS thinkers have never adequately addressed beyond "it le didn't happen, therefore, there must not be domesticatable crops in sub-Saharan Africa. (nonsense as he himself makes clear in his own book, most crops were domesticated out of poisonus/nutritionally useless grasses and roots)

>>16705407
did any of you even watch the video I so graciously provided before trying to lecture me about how the completely undomesticatable zebra is somehow domesticatable?

It's right there. It's only 6 minutes. Why talk out your ass when you can just learn something for once?

>>16705407
You need reliable farmland to grow crops. Africa's weather is unpredictable, frequently changing what areas are actually fertile any given year.
How do you domesticate crops when you can't reliably own farmable land?

Africa is reliably farmable NOW, with all our modern knowledge and technologies. The fact that they continue to flounder even with teaching and frequent handouts is proof that they are indeed dim bulbs.

But the point is, is that there was no productive way to tackle the continent at all, short of leaving entirely for a few thousand years and coming back with a fully-loaded tech tree. Never has been, that's why all the rest of us left. They stayed where it's inhospitable because they're the ones who were too dumb to leave for greener pastures, in the same way brits are grin-and-bear-it fatalistic pessimists because all the optimists and rebels left for (or were forcibly exiled to) the colonies' risky land of opportunity.

>>16703978
snow gives autism

>>16705329
>What does that say?
It means you would not be fit for school if there were limited slots available. Today school is meant to be universal, no kid left behind etc, initially public school was only for those who were seen as worthy, because there were not that many schools. A bit like public universities, they are paid by the government but admission is limited by the supply

>>16705423
>Africa's weather is unpredictable,
Africa is too big for you to say something like this with a straight face. This means you are gay

>>16703682
You can express anything in any human language, though you might need to paraphrase/explain things there isn't a preexisting single word for.

>>16703696
It can simultaneously be true that there is a genetic gap and that the measured gap is larger than the genetic gap due to various factors. Whether black people raised in identical environments to white people will be on average 15 points dumber or only 5 is not irrelevant to their prospects for integration into a functioning society.

>>16705326
>>9- or 10-year-olds cannot read
>honestly, american deep south is almost that bad

No!
I live in the deep South and I taught at a high school... American Blacks can read.

>>16705294
Some weak forms of Sapir-Whorf are considered to be plausibly evidenced, but stronger forms of it are generally considered discredited. Basically, language may subtly influence thought, but does not determine it.

>>16705326
>These kids are so much stupider they can't talk at all?
Cannot [read and understand], not cannot [read] or [understand]. That is, it's not saying they can't understand spoken sentences, but written sentences.

>>16706332
didnt the transracial adoption study show it basically regresses to the natural gap? like the childhood scores are much closer in the white parent black child groups vs white/white, but by their young adulthood the scores are pretty much as bad as before.

if im remembering that correctly its likely because childhood iq testing is reputedly bullshit. so ive heard.

It makes absolutely no evolutionary sense for a race to be significantly smarter than another one. Skin differences, for example, come from selective environmental pressure (in sunlight, mostly). Intellect is a favourable trait in pretty much every known environment, so the genetics for greater intellect would be selected in all human populations at approximately the same rate.

Also, middle class and rich black people have similar performances to white people of the same class in iq tests; the same happens with poor blacks and poor whites

Tl;dr yes, it's only socioeconomical differences

>>16706921
Why do you think so? Bugs and all matter of lesser creatures have gone perfectly fine without intelligence. Seems like your model of evolution is nonsense.

>>16703978
africa was very unpopulated before the modern era when 'colonialism' brought civilization there

>>16706925
Bugs are a different species. When we're talking about blacks, white and asians, we're talking about the same species, homo sapiens sapiens

>>16706921
this is bait so convincing i almost replied to it seriously

>>16703367 (OP)
>african languages
If only you knew how bad things really are.

>>16703367 (OP)
This was solved by using diagrams and pictures.

>>16703846
Ed Dutton did a substack video about this a few weeks ago. Basically they have a low iq to us, and probably couldn’t function in their society, but since, as you said, the average is 60 they’re competing against other low iq people just as they’ve always done. IQ tests are really measuring the niggers against white Europeans, but you get flabbergasting results such as these. You really just have to understand the context of their environment and society. They can get by with a 60 iq so that’s what the average is.

>>16706921
>Also, middle class and rich black people have similar performances to white people of the same class in iq tests;
Yes because they have higher IQs than the average black guy and that is why they have money not the other way around.

Higher IQ individuals migrated from Africa leaving the brainlets. Perfect evolutionary explanation of low IQ. Some of these numbers are do to malnutriton but even those in advanced nations will have lower IQs than the average white person if you look at the statistics.

If IQ is influenced by human development, such as education and educational institutions, these metrics could be heavily influenced by the political suppression of colonialism.

If someone from a certain ethnic group performs differently academically depending on their environment, nurture, then we can't deny that this has an influence on our attempts to measure intelligence.

This advanced structure, an educational institution, was built by native Muslims in Niger. The Islamic kingdoms of West Africa had literacy (Arabic) and enlightened civilization.

Similarly, consider the European Afrikaans who live in destitution in South Africa without access to the pillars of civilization.

IQ may be useful as a metric, but it is not a complete picture of intelligence and the influence of social environmental factors shows that nurture is undeniably a part of our attempts to understand intelligence.

>>16707278

This notion of denouncing an entire ethnic group as a lesser form of human being due to genetic differences in intelligence was historically used to defend the institution of slavery.

A friend of mine from childhood is an Ethiopian Muslim who performed well beyond the intellectual abilities of his peers of all races and went on to work at prestigious institutions.

How can humanity denounce Africans as a lesser people in the light of examples of African excellence? I am not buying it, especially as a Muslim. I believe in the potential of Africans and Africa, especially African unification which is the political answer to colonization.

>>16707185

>IQ is why someone has money

Really? Landords exist. Pornographers. Drug dealers. Corrupt politicians.

It is more likely about access to the same educational institutions.

In very low income areas the schools are literally designed to funnel people into prison slavery.

This is why we need more madrasas.

>>16707281
I mean, you're assuming that high IQ = morality, which i dont think its true

>>16703367 (OP)
>>16703846
The person behind these results is a fraud. His work is one of the worst example of data manipulation in psychology, and thus this map has no scientific validity.

There was no standardized method to infer IQ values. Many of the "IQ tests" were rather reaction tests, mirror tests or draw-a-man tests. It was always administered in the colonial lingua franca. Lynn collected the results from pre-existing studies and excluded the majority of the samples that did not match his agenda, e.g in Nigeria and Ghana.

For Equatorial Guinea, they tested 50 retarded kids in a mental institution in Spain, that's how you find 59.
For other countries like Somalia or Ethiopia, they took a small group of refugees in another country, still children.
For other countries like DRC, they took a small group of kids in the middle of a major conflict.
For almost half of the nations, they "estimated" the IQ based on neighboring countries... Or on the workforce composition (more farm workers supposedly implying a lower average IQ).

The data is also from the 20th century. Famine, war, diseases, unsanitary conditions and illiteracy have been reduced considerably in 3 decades, all of which affect IQ.

>>16705382
Name an African language with this feature

>>16707445
ok surely someone did some updated tests and we have better values now? what are they?

>>16706955
Elaborate.

>>16703367 (OP)
>if africans consistently score low on intelligence aptitude tests, it's wypipo's fault
https://odysee.com/@Realfake_Newsource:9/RFNS-11.21-002-030:f

>>16703367 (OP)
Modern IQ tests Re specifically designed to be, amongst other things, culture agnostic.
It has been argued countless times, over and over, that europeans performed better on IQ tests than other people because it waseuropeans who designed them.
Then explain how south east asiansand some jewish races perform better than the europeans who designed the test. Are those south east asians more european than the europeans?
It is not the cultural differences scewing the test results. But cultural differences may be to blame for the results.
Things that are realistically on the table still:
Genetic factors
Healthcare and disease
Education
Culture
Nutrition
There is relatively strong evidence for the genetic explanation. It has been shown many times that the differences depend strongly on ancestry, even if all other factors re controlled for, for example through permanent and generational residence in the global north, adoption etc. And it would make sense as differing environments have put different selective pressure on populations over a long enough time to cause all sorts of adaptions and differences. Why would this not happen in terms of IQ?

>>16707445
Too bad this guy doesn't know either. But that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It's quite fascinating how some cultures never had the need to count things. Most of the languages reflecting this are australian aboriginal languages:
Nunggubugu (4)
Kamilaroi (6)
Gumulga (6)
Mabuiag (6)
All languages listed that have distinct words for numbers up to 6 do this by compounding the words for the lesser numbers. Usually thkse languages also know a word for any number that is 7 or more and it can then be translated as 'many'.
Australian aboriginal people do not happen to score high on IQ tests on average (interesting enough it seems that cases of highly intelligent outliers appear qith comparable frequency across all people and cluster around the same IQ. This, especially the clustering, again may be a flaw in the tests that are designed to show small deviations from 100 and are generally not designed and optimized to differentiate between the group in the highest percentile).

>>16706333
Functional literacy in the southern population is pretty ass.

>>16707470
A guy using an orphan of mentally disabled kids as a data point for Equatorial Guinea is gonna skew results real bad. As is using test form the mid-1900s where the adults never attended any schooling.

>>16706975
Anon a 60 IQ is legit CANNOT FUNCTION levels of IQ. As in need active help every single day to put on clothing.

>IQ tests are really measuring the niggers against white Europeans, but you get flabbergasting results such as these
It's a guy using old ass IQ tests and trying to "translate" it to a much later scoring metric while trying to scrub thee context of these data points.

>>16703367 (OP)
Reminder that south and west Africans are a braided river of old early modern human lineages that weren't a part of the OOA diaspora in the northeast and aren't ancestral to anyone outside of Africa.

>>16706930
I looked it up and in the year 1000 the estimate was 50 to 80 million vs 1.4 billion and rapidly growing today. Does anybody think the world is ready for 2 billion niggers?

>>16706330
Allegedly the Piraha and Mura languages had no words for numbers and syntactically cannot be recursive. There's some debate over that, though.

>>16707446
someone posted a table here once of like 30+ distinct global iq surveys and every single one of them comported with observed reality (ie, sub saharan africans markedly lower than whites, asians at the top, etc)

>>16703367 (OP)
If you gave iq tests to medieval europeans, they would get very low scores too

>>16707970
Your point being?...

>>16707968
it figures. theres no happy ending with the race and iq story, as sad as that is. i would like it if africans could score as high as us, but the fact we havent heard of a single fucking instance of this happening ever under any circumstance means that its pretty much a sealed deal. this is even considering how incredibly fraudulent a lot of academic research is now, and how people would love to get the results they want.

>>16705423
>They stayed where it's inhospitable

>Africa
>inhospitable
>but also the place where humans evolved in

>>16708091
why though? literally no one cries tears for whites scoring lower than east asians, it's only ever used against them, whatever the scenario.

the racial iq hierarchy is fucking evident to everyone on earth, people only lie about it because it's the path of least resistance and seems 'nice' but it creates exponentially growing issues for everybody in the long run.

>>16708106
the difference between whites and asians is like 3 points, not 1 whole sd lol

>>16708108
sure, but this topic is still framed like some aryan white supremacist thing.

they just need to stay where they are and they will benefit from all the technological advancements elsewhere. the absolute iq doesn't really matter if people don't have to compete in the same environment for some stupid reason.

>>16708108
It's also northern Asians, Korea, Japan and to an extent parts of China. Southern Asians and islanders are pretty average. And the slightly higher iq of Northern Asians is offset by the fact that they are autistic.

>>16703367 (OP)
Is eugenics the answer? What about gene editing over a period of 100 or so years?

>>16707974
Medieval Europeans had the same genes as modern Europeans, so IQ test results can't be purely the result of genes even if they're a factor.

>>16708101
Aren't humans outside of Africa effectively an invasive species?

>>16708240
>over a period of 100 years
who knows, but it's not within our grasp at all. direct effects in studies within families show very little. the best we can do right now is something like 2.5 iq points higher than a random sibling, and imagine doing embryo selection for every single birth among billions of people.
the most effective eugenic measure is still encouraging smart couples to have more children and especially weeding out the very bottom of the population by culling criminals, but we're globally doing the opposite.

getting the data necesary for better prediction is not easy either, how do you get whole genome sequencing and cognitive testing from millions of people in this environment?

>>16708263
it's not like we have iq test data from back then, but the common story is that the plague was a massive eugenic selection event, and caused the enlightenment.

>>16707278
these are the Architects. A persian Woman and a french born Nigerian

>>16708271
Still doesn't mean late medieval data would be comparable to modern data, considering the sizeable rise we have even within the time period we do have data for. The Flynn effect is real.

>>16708266
I'm curious how long it takes to go from invasive to native since there were pre sapiens people on Eurasia like 500kya. And Siberians only entered the America's about 25 kya.

Wait, Libya is 83? Go figure, no wonder we fell for the western propaganda about Gaddafi.

I wonder what would happen if I posted a bunch of scientific papers debunking scientific racist

>>16708462
A very simple criterium exists and you could have easily looked it up. When not specificed otherwise it is concensus that distribution through human action is the key concept used to differenciate and more clearly the pre-colombian era or the year 1492 marks the cutoff for neobiotia. The concept is not applied to humans.

>>16707284
Conventional success is generally a product of many highly undesireable traits. Usually it is not strongly related with intellectual ability. Also extraordinary intellectual ability is often times equally or even more crippling than very low intellectual ability.

>>16705232
>Libya scores higher than Egupt
Doubt
>South Africa, having collaped its educational system, scores even higher
Doubt x 2

>>16705232

>>16705361
No land animal that can be bred in captivity is undomesticable. Zebras can and have been domesticated. I once saw a book by a Brit from the 19th century. He was her majesties guy in charge of horses. He wrote a very extensive book on horse handling. Zebras, which he tamed in person in Africa only required a half page from him. He had heard rumors that zebras were untamable, so he got some wild zebras and tamed them to a rideable state in a matter of days. Just to prove a point. Sadly I have forgotten the title of the book.

>>16705414
Look, if an animal can be tamed, it can be domesticatedgiven enough time. Zebras are not an exception to this. If Africans had farmed them for their meat for a thousand years, we'd have docile zebras giving us meat and milk.

>>16705423
The farmland in the ME wasn't reliable either. The early agrarian societies in near Asia and Europe constantly collapsed for thousands of years before agrarianism lead to Babylon and Ur

>>16709081
retards will continue to assert that this simply means the test was faulty and biased

>>16709081
Dont university entrance exams work by ranking the students? So even if they all did bad the ones who did slightly better would get in?

>>16709137
Actually it seems insane. What kind of test has a 100% rejection rate? What is it even selecting for?

>>16703701
>hadn't invented boats
>Europeans showed up 200 years ago
jesus fucking christ almighty