>>16764043
>the “racial” IQ gap
First of all, you're an anon with powerful rhetorical capacity, and that's pretty rare out there.
IQ tests are legitimate for evaluating specific cognitive traits and have practical uses, but they are not an infallible gauge of overall intelligence or potential, we cannot actually measure intelligence in its entirety.

A person's height is a straightforward, objective, and a universally defined physiological trait measured in standard units cm for me. It’s one dimensional.
And if you acknowledge that the Flynn effect (massive environmental gains causing IQ to rise globally) is real, you cannot then argue that current gaps between groups must be primarily genetic, especially when those groups live under vastly different environmental conditions.

Furthermore, there are no "IQ genes" that are “race”specific. While studies have identified many genes associated with educational attainment and cognitive function, these genes are found in all human populations. Their frequency varies only slightly; there are no known "smart genes" that exist exclusively in one population and are absent in others. The small average differences are merely shifts in the frequency of common genes across huge, diverse populations.

In a nutshell, the argument for a genetic racial “IQ” gap fails on multiple fronts: historical context, ongoing environmental factors, test validity, population genetics, neuroscience, and basic logic. The scientific consensus is clear: observed average differences in IQ scores between racial groups are best explained by environmental, social, and historical factors, not genetics.