Americans hate thinking

This month made me want to post this early for some reason.

Americans literally detest thinking.

They’d rather be electrocuted, actually.

Wilson et al. (2014) investigate whether it is easier for people to steer their thoughts in pleasant directions when the external world is not competing for their attention or whether it is more difficult to think in enjoyable ways even in the absence of competing external demands.
The results of 11 studies suggest that participants typically do not enjoy spending 6 to 15 minutes in a room by themselves with nothing to do but think, that they enjoy doing mundane external activities much more, and that many prefer to administer electric shocks to themselves instead of being left alone with their thoughts.
Ah! The fruits of multi-generational dysgenic breeding.
Law of attraction might be making America dumber.
Howzat Republic workin’ out for ya.

Beauty x Intelligence

Anyone who refutes the connection (caused by low genetic load) is coping.

It’s a K-selection process.

The difference is huge in both sexes, just a few points above would be major.

10+? Huge sexual selection pressure for both sexes.

Suddenly the “muh minority wage gap” complaints take on a new light, eh?

The problem with meditation rituals +IQ

Not meditation as in thought, contemplation but the Indian-seeming ritual.

Not yoga, which is a made-up substitute religion sold to Boomers, I already linked about that (it was in the New Yorker too).

Skip to the end at the IQ bit if you don’t care about genetic load and IQ as a related tangent.

New Age meditation is for rich people to pretend they have problems. If they were spiritual at all, they’d quit their vices. They would see how vice harms them and their soul. They connect with nothing real. It’s a hallucination projected on their bubble.
Meditation as it’s sold in the West is an opiate for idiots, they’re already mindless drones of conformity. As a form of prayer, it’s egocentric (muh Higher Self – do you mean Holy Spirit?). As a biological thing, Muh Scientism, it over-develops the parietal lobe (a bad thing, sloth ensues, fine if you’re a mountain man?) at the expense of the frontal lobe (a VERY bad thing, they’re crippling their critical thinking, humans need that rationality). An IQ study in fully developed adults who start meditation would be interesting, but they’d never be able to find a publisher* for the fact, with a good method, IQ would go down. Imagine all the products they couldn’t sell! The horror!

*Why you never hear the downsides of many antisocial practices, but meditation does reduce in-group loyalty, which “they” actually want (less genophilia, less love of your family where it should be, with your KIN). Phrased like that, the “love” rhetoric falls flat. If you cannot love your kin, you don’t love. Anyone.

Can Meditation Increase IQ?

Though no standardized test was developed as a result, the study interestingly demonstrated head size has almost nothing to do with intelligence.


Also, women can have larger heads than men and the men who don’t get this… are morons.

IQ is simply a good method for representing intelligence in an individual, compared to the general population. IQ testing has its limits, but there is a reason for its sustained and wide acceptance in psychology.

You have to act on your IQ. Bitching on reddit how “misunderstood” you are is worse than being average.

Genuine intelligence does seek out truth though, not just info to show off.

The biggest contributors, such as…

  • Genetics
  • Conditions in utero
  • Experiences at a very young age

…were never much under our control.

Yes, an individual’s IQ score can vary mildly throughout life, and more can almost always be learned, but there is simply very little evidence that intelligence itself can be increased over time.

It can’t. Anyone who says otherwise is selling you something. Most of it’s genetic.

Attention gains are often just using the idiot-phone less and avoiding EMF.

Think about it – where do they meditate? Low EMF areas. What don’t they do? Check their phone every five minutes. It isn’t the ritual. Put down the Apple products.

So wherever you are in the distribution, whether or not you’ve even taken an IQ test, is where you’ve been from a young age and where you will stay.

It’s a big pill to swallow.

That’s the main red pill. Most men in particular refute this and become full-blown sociologists (sociologist fallacy) going on and on about nurture-theories. Noooope.

DNA is destiny, dude.

Plus, logically, if your score were already high… you wouldn’t feel a need to increase it?

Hey, I’m just being rational, pretty sure that’s illegal. As a woman.

A study published by Dan Simons and colleagues looked at these brain training games, and only found:

  • Strong evidence of subjects improving in the trained tasks themselves. Meaning, the more they played the game, the better they got at the game.
  • Less evidence that subjects had improved performance at closely-related tasks.
  • Little evidence that the subjects increased performance on distant-related tasks (anything outside the game, in the real world) or enhanced their everyday cognition in general (meaning, no raise in IQ).

Let them profit off idiots. By going for that IQ boost stuff, you’re admitting you’re low IQ already.

It’s like men who take dating advice from other men, especially bachelors. At least talk to really old, happily married men? But noooooo. Or since the sexes are mentally different, talk to women about how they assess men to become the best competitor (and other men ARE your competition). …And they wonder why they attract angry, manjaw women – because they’re vibing with what another man told them.

Men also tend to give one another terrible advice, consciously or subconsciously to scupper competition. Rarely even trust relatives, same fact sadly holds with women.

Money shot:

Meditation can’t increase intelligence because there is little evidence intelligence can be increased by anything at all.

That’s it, that’s the fact.


Stop looking.

However, meditation can help you increase your IQ score by sharpening your mind and maximizing your ability to focus.

No such thing. Marketing gimmick you cannot measure (see study above, no real results, self-report is crap). ADD is also bullshit, it’s the new dyslexia (as Spectator leaked) for describing low IQ offspring to narcissistic parents who also refused to discipline their brain as babies and toddlers (easy to spot, the baby holding an iPad). You cannot have an attention deficit, that would make you a vegetable, in a COMA. It’s an alternative state of consciousness like anesthesia, which literally winds down your attention to a deficit aka below consciousness (it can be measured by EEG). They literally give the kids amphetamines, club drugs, because a key sign of low IQ in kids is low energy, listlessness, ennui (side effect arrogant atheism), later called “failure to thrive” (as spiteful mutants) since the mutation load doesn’t process for energy in the body effectively. Think about it – they’re only slow, compared to the genetically healthy norm of age peers. Again, their genetic inferiority -compared to the norm population of the parents requires them to take SPEED.

What is the Amphetamine Speed?

“The amphetamine speed is actually a “slang” name for the entire class of drugs known as amphetamines. All amphetamines, whether legal or illegal, activate chemical processes throughout the brain and body and so “speed up” most every bodily function.”

They have degenerated that far down. The drug category of speed. Why would energy level drugs “help” unless the root issue is genetic?

esp when the effects inc.

  • Loss of interest in sex
  • Impotence
  • Restlessness
  • Irritability
  • Agitation


Impotence and no libido is great for depopulation efforts. But they want the low IQ to be productive workers for the companies.

But isn’t a supposed symptom of ADHD already the last three?

Yeah, don’t expect logic. Low IQ people often self-medicate with drugs anyway. It’s the dirty little secret of drug addicts. They often lack the full frontal lobe function for impulse control. Making it legal makes them worse, it enables them.

How can we tell it’s genetic? Look for a paternal age effect. All fathers biologically contribute is DNA.

ding ding ding

Researchers examined all births that happened in Sweden between 1973 and 2001, and found a child born to a 45-year-old dad was 25 times more likely to have bipolar disorder, 13 times more likely to have ADHD, 3.5 times more likely to have autism, 2.5 times more likely to exhibit suicidal behavior or a substance abuse problem, and twice as likely to have a psychotic disorder like schizophrenia when compared to kids born to a 24-year-old father.

13x more likely past middle age

13, men have a right to be told this stuff in Sex Ed, family planning is important

and yes paternal is a bigger risk:

the real QED? missing link:

Children born to older fathers don’t perform as well on tests of thinking skills during infancy and early childhood, while those born to older mothers have higher scores on the same tests, a study shows.


It’s like how single parent fathers also have kids with crap outcomes and test scores. The manosphere is in serious, life-ruining denial. Any single parent is a crap-shoot. Men have a right to know this young, to prepare.

The reason for this discrepancy is simple and evolutionary.

In fathers, early breeding (20s) is a sign he can mature faster than peers and lock down a quality woman earlier. He’s just a better man. Sorry.

Society shouldn’t enable dysgenic men to breed at all, especially in the teens. Also, sorry. But social policy matters here.

Women settle earlier, the lazier they are (dysgenic, r-select) from less discernment, the feminine trait. High IQ women complete education first, before assortative mating with a man in their class and general IQ band (eugenic, K). Child IQ maps most onto maternal IQ, as previously linked about if you search. The mother is the one raising it, don’t choose a bimbo. Also, her DNA having a high mutation load in utero will hamper the kid’s IQ regardless of the father. You’ll note in men with more than one wife, the kids with the wife who settled later are smarter, she’s more feminine and discerning. Women prepare for marriage and kids too. You need a woman who isn’t just a breeding sow. A woman who takes kids seriously and wants them, not a meal ticket. Avoid the Meghans.

McGrath’s team analyzed data from a large study called the U.S. Collaborative Perinatal Project, which recruited pregnant women from 12 sites in the U.S. from 1959 to 1965. The data from this ongoing project has been a “treasure trove” for researchers, McGrath says.

His team looked at more than 33,000 children born between 1959 and 1965 and then looked at their results on cognitive tests administered at ages 8 months, 4 years, and 7 years. The tests evaluated the children’s ability to think and reason, measuring such skills as concentration, learning, speaking, reading, arithmetic, memory, and motor skills such as coordination.

Finally, they looked for links with the father’s age, the mother’s age, and in one analysis also adjusted for socioeconomic factors such as family income and parental education.

The average age of the fathers in the study was 28.4 and ranged from 14 to 66. The mother’s average age was 24.8 and ranged from 12 to 48.

same average as the middle ages

In recent years, according to the paper, it has become very common for couples to delay having children until their late 30s.

They’re falsely told it makes the kids smarter, only in the case of good genetics (and so higher natural IQ), solid education before (no Marxism) and only the woman (who can then raise the kid better). Men constantly regenerate gametes so mutate in a compounding way. Their DNA becomes more mutated with age. Eventually it’ll be seen as child abuse to delay on purpose too long (when you already found the right person and have your health). Women are born with most of our eggs for this reason, to maintain the species. What’s eugenic in a woman is dysgenic in a man, the sexes are opposites! This gives men incentives to improve his tribe. Nature doesn’t hate you, it’s a challenge and men are failing by assuming they’re like women.

The older the father, the more likely the child was to score lower on the tests, except for one measure of motor skills.

When they looked at the mother’s age, however, they found that the older the mother, the higher the children scored on the thinking skills tests. (That finding, reported in earlier studies as well, may be due to a more nurturing home environment if the mother is older, but this study suggests children of older fathers don’t reap the same benefit.)

I love how they try to nurture it away. Nope. It’s biological mainly.

However, when the researchers adjusted for such factors as the parents’ socioeconomic status, including income and education, it modified the effect of both parents’ ages on the intelligence tests. For instance, the average score on the Stanford Binet Intelligence Scale was nearly 6 points lower for children born to fathers age 50 compared to those born to fathers age 20. But when the socioeconomic factors were taken into account, the difference dropped to 2.2 points.

Incentives for high IQ men. Only low IQ men complain about fitness tests.

While the study findings may suggest the best combination of parents is an older woman with a younger man, McGrath says it’s too early to make any specific recommendations.

Suuuuure, PC liar. Protect those feels at all costs! Baby-killers.

They don’t mean by much, a few years, but modern men commonly lack any maturity to have a commitment in their twenties. I have noticed a trend of older women (5,10 years) settling with younger men, though. They also seem oddly fertile? The birth rate cult must take serious note of this. Older men regret not freezing their sperm but the egg freezing jokes are misplaced. Gametes degrade vastly faster in men. Sorry, you’re not like women?

If you really care about fixing sub-replacement fertility, look at what the data says is ideal and not your ego.

What’s behind the link between older fathers and lower IQ? “There is a growing body of evidence suggesting that the sperm of older dads develop more mutations, that is, spelling mistakes in the DNA code,” McGrath says. His team is researching this idea further in animal studies comparing young mice with older ones.

ding ding ding genetic load

Their train of thought is the same as mine.

They’re avoiding getting this out in case more men take paternity leave they don’t deserve (since men can’t give birth and have nothing to recover from medically). They’ll tiptoe around old guy’s feels about impotence even if it gives their eventual, panic spawn a low IQ and bipolar disorder. Don’t pin your hopes on having grandkids in that case, what a waste.

They don’t wanna get sued, so they won’t tell men how serious this is. Better have no kids than invest in a sickly one and have no grandkids. But Big Pharma doesn’t like that.

We have known about the paternal age effect for many years,” says Harry Fisch, MD, director of the Male Reproductive Center and director of urologic microsurgery at Columbia University Medical Center of New York Presbyterian Hospital. Yet, he says, “We are just starting to scratch the surface.”

Testosterone levels begin to decline slowly at age 30, Fisch says. Ideally, men should father children “sooner rather than later,” he says.

No, supplements aren’t bio-available the way real T is. Your DNA is still being damaged.

“The 20s and early 30s are ideal, but real life intervenes,” he says, making that time frame not feasible due to lack of a partner, difficulty getting pregnant, financial restraints, or a host of other factors.

Fix the economy so high IQ men can settle in their 20s. Stop forcing them to fund the kids of the feckless men.

That’ll sort sub-replacement fertility AND the spiteful mutants won’t bother anyway. People are not genetically equal. Spiteful mutants actually think they can have kids and avoid being a parent. You can’t just hand the kid to the mother 100% and act like a bachelor. Then the kids won’t give you grandkids out of actual spite, as happens to narcissistic parents. Abandonment is abuse, and that includes Don Draper careerism.

In a perspective on the study, published in the same issue of PLoS Medicine, Mary Cannon, MD, of the Royal College of Surgeons in Dublin, Ireland, says it is important to take socioeconomic factors into account when looking at the effect of a father’s age (as well as a mother’s).

IQ predicts SES so no. Shut up, Mary.

Men reap as they sow. They wanted to shirk patriarchy first. The ‘Sexual Revolution’ killed patriarchy in part by making it kill itself. Yes, waste your best sperm jacking it to porn, you’re free. Your sperm will be super potent for autism by the time you figure it out. Wait until they find out all those clubbing STDs make mutations more damaging.

Is it a coincidence the Boomers are the first generational product of ‘free love’? I think not. I have a pet theory the bad type of Boomer’s father picked up STDs during the war from brothels (men were enticed to attend by YKW) and warped their brain development by passing to the mother. The military won’t do that study.

Back to meditation.

The frontal lobe issues “muh concentration, et al.” are low IQ, from their heavy genetic load; the dumbness, the dense quality of them is a symptom of the IQ range. AKA being thick. Attention is filtered by your brain structure and informed by genetics.

from top:

It’s there at that maximum level of focus where you are the smartest you can possibly be. But unfortunately, neither meditation, or anything else, can increase where that limit is.

Denial of humanity is narcissism, denial of human limits. Pure egocentrism, spiritual bypassing for the ritualists.

It’s funny how both groups (New Agers and ADD/ADHD excuse-makers) are often also IQ denialists, while simultaneously wanting to ‘boost’ the thing they claim doesn’t exist? Deny mutation load, bitches. When we can test for it at birth, welcome to Gattaca. IQ tends to predict certain personality traits e.g. laziness, so people would actually be happier. Telling everyone we’re genetically equal makes the stupid miserable. They assume the system is against them, actually their parents.

Many relaxation symptoms of meditation rituals are just coping with a coffee addiction, mostly Starbucks, which they never drop. They love Starbucks more than any God. The breathing exercise kind isn’t meditation. It’s most commonly fighting a histamine, pesticide, GMO and/or mycotoxin response from a bad diet and sleep pattern. It’s suppressing your immune system from healing the damage. Like mega-dosing antioxidants means those free radicals can’t kill the cancer in you – so the cancer kills you. Stop trying to fix your biology, the train is fine.

They never mention that parietal/frontal issue but cranial space is at a premium, when one part grows, another is damaged and atrophies. When a person is stressed, they must address the causes in their life, rather than hoping for some genie to wing it for them. Opening your mind up invites all sorts of trauma and bad karma in, like opening your front door and leaving it unguarded overnight. Guard your heart, your mind and your soul. Cynically, the New Age people probably know what they’re doing, and they’re injuring the competition. Do not assume their sincerity. Most New Agers are deeply intellectually dishonest and they rip one another off all the time. A person who believes in moral absolutes and karma would never! Avoid the communal narcissists who are basically cult leaders. In another time they’d be leading witch trials for a girl who rejected them. If their object is material, that’s an abuse of the spiritual. Look at the vice in their personal life, where it cannot hide. Drink, drug, debauchery problems? They help no one, they are Will O Wisps guiding you to your own destruction. Siren songs are not a myth. They constantly travel, to hide from themselves? They seem weirdly lonely and depressed when not distracted by travel? Don’t take their life advice, they cannot be happy. The particular reasons for them don’t matter. Don’t let it be your problem. Spiteful mutants are nomads. They cannot settle – in a job, in a country, by marriage. They’ll search until they die.

Meditation amplifies your emotion, the way it’s packaged now to rich people will be interesting as they lose their fortunes. Especially Boomers, with no time to recoup or ability to compete in the Brave New Multicultural World they generally voted to import in. Sorry Boomer, you’re too white and male to be manager this time! Here’s your AA boss.

They haven’t tried it from a state of loss and deprivation, but a bubble of delusion and “I deserve this”. Meditating from any bad place, as a ritual, is like the surest way to become suicidal. New Agers know but never talk about this. If you ask around, people know this commonly but the topic gets banned or taken down. It’s ritualised rumination. Rumination is actively bad for your health (unless your health is already bad and you mistake normal for good).

That’s a cult indicator, forbidden bad experience discussion, it puts off new recruits.

They prefer to shame people for bad results, like that’s the first person it ever happened to.

(There’s drug abuse purging from the body years after the fact, a common cause of sudden health problems and ‘depression’ or ‘anxiety’ in celebrities. It takes years for drugs to fully leave all the organs. Who cares?)

Manifesto to the Governments and Peoples of the Christian Nations

“Manifesto to the Governments and Peoples of the Christian Nations Threatened by Judaism” 1882

The predictions are…. alarming.

For other related materials

Funky music in this:

Einstein ripped off Henri Poincare, his own mathematician wife (whom he divorced), Olinto De Pretto for the equation, George Fitzgerald and Hendrik Lorentz.

Tesla also tried to come up with an e=m type equation for the Swami, explained at length in the press as uniting all things (yet who is known for trying that?) and spoke to Einstein later. Years later.

Swami Vivekananda, late in the year 1895 wrote in a letter to an English friend, “Mr. Tesla thinks he can demonstrate mathematically that force and matter are reducible to potential energy.

Einstein was fifteen or sixteen at the time.

Tesla, on Einstein later: “like a beggar clothed in purple, whom ignorant people take for a king.” 

The Origin of the Equation E = mc2

“Professor Bartocci traced a link between De Pretto and Einstein, through Einstein’s best friend, Michele Besso.”

Studies have generally found Ashkenazi Jews to have an average IQ in the range of 107 to 115, 

That is FULLY average.

The bulk of studies in the field have found they are average.

Hold my dreidel.

and Ashkenazi Jews as a group have had successes in intellectual fields far out of proportion to their numbers.


A 2005 scientific paper, “Natural History of Ashkenazi Intelligence”,[1] proposed that Jews as a group inherit significantly higher verbal and mathematical intelligence and somewhat lower spatial intelligence than other ethnic groups, on the basis of inherited diseases

One paper?

Verbal is education, being bilingual in a married household with books. They never control for this, nor “tutoring” classes giving the kids a maths advantage, mathematics can fully be taught. That is not testing adults.

Lower spatial is the real money, spatial is connected to creativity, innovation and genius.

There shouldn’t be a verbal section at all, (a bilinguistic confound presents) nor a math one in children (class confound).

Verbal is just a memory test, maths a precocious procedure taught. Nothing INNATE.


Consider the following:

~The proportion of Jews with IQ’s of 140 or more is estimated to be about six times the proportion of any other ethnic group.

Not average. Stop fiddling with figures.

~ Although Jews constitute only about two-tenths of one percent of the world’s population, Jews won 29 percent of the Nobel Prizes in literature, medicine, physics and chemistry in the second half of the 20th century. So far this century, the figure is 32 percent. And these Jews of whom we speak were almost exclusively male Jews primarily of western European ancestry (less than one-tenth of one percent of the world’s population), in spite of pervasive discrimination, numerous legal barriers, frequent persecution, and the Holocaust.

Nothing has ever been stolen in academia ever. Say, who invented the so-called Nobel? Who votes?

~From 1870 until 1950, Jewish leadership in such fields as literature, music, visual arts, biology, chemistry, physics, mathematics, and philosophy equaled somewhere from four to fourteen times the Jewish proportion of the population in Europe and North America.

~In 1954, 28 children in the New York City public school system were found to have IQ’s of 170 or higher – 24 of these were Jewish.

What was the religion of the person testing them? Were they all tested again as adults?

Oh, so it’s okay if they say they’re privileged?

At the same time, Christians were doing just the opposite: priests and monks of the dominant Roman Catholic Church – also usually among the best and brightest in their communities– were prohibited from marrying, thus “selecting out” through celibacy most of these intellectually superior men from the gene pool.

True. Catholicism hates intelligence. Look at the Irish.

Source: The DANK Meme Press

The crime-genius connection in extreme IQ men

The biographies of 280 scientists indicate that the distribution of their age at the time of their greatest scientific contributions in their careers (age–genius curve) is similar to the age distribution of criminals (age–crime curve). The age–genius curves among jazz musicians, painters and authors are also similar to the age–crime curve. Further, marriage has a strong desistance effect on both crime and genius. I argue that this is because both crime and genius stem from men’s evolved psychological mechanism which compels them to be highly competitive in early adulthood but “turns off” when they get married and have children. Fluctuating levels of testosterone, which decreases when men get married and have children, can provide the biochemical microfoundation for this psychological mechanism. If crime and genius have the same underlying cause, then it is unlikely that social control theory (or any other theory specific to criminal behavior) can explain why men commit crimes and why they desist.

the same underlying cause being extremes of IQ

volatile extremes

obviously they’re not the bloody same

But yes, marriage has a good effect on some people. And?

Should we reward criminals with breeding and punish genius genes?

Tesla’s highest achievement we know was done before aged 30. Clearly, something isn’t right here.

Makes more sense as a sexual selection strategy to attract a mate.

High IQ – prosocial.

Low IQ – antisocial.

General intelligence, Emotional Intelligence, leadership

Emphasizing the importance of cross-border effectiveness in the contemporary globalized world, we propose that cultural intelligence—the leadership capability to manage effectively in culturally diverse settings—is a critical leadership competency for those with cross-border responsibilities. We tested this hypothesis with multisource data, including multiple intelligences, in a sample of 126 Swiss military officers with both domestic and cross-border leadership responsibilities. Results supported our predictions:

(1) general intelligence predicted both domestic and cross-border leadership effectiveness;

(2) emotional intelligence was a stronger predictor of domestic leadership effectiveness, and

(3) cultural intelligence was a stronger predictor of cross-border leadership effectiveness. Overall, results show the value of cultural intelligence as a critical leadership competency in today’s globalized world.

EI and EQ, so girly, right? What bullshit.

Smarter people are still smart once they leave their magic dirt, really?

Are kids of teenage mothers dumber?

The creeps are wrong again.

Teenage motherhood has been associated with a wide variety of negative offspring outcomes including poorer cognitive development. In the context of limitations of previous research, this paper assesses the contemporary relevance of this finding. In this study we investigate the long-term cognitive status (IQ) among 21 year adult offspring born to teenage parents using the Mater University Study of Pregnancy- a prospective birth cohort study, which recruited all pregnant mothers attending a large obstetrical hospital in Brisbane, Australia, from 1981 to 1983. The analyses were restricted to a sub-sample of 2643 mother-offspring pair. Offspring IQ was measured using the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test at 21 year. Parental age was reported at first clinic visit. Offspring born to teenage mothers (<20 years) have -3.0 (95% Confidence Interval (CI): -4.3, -1.8) points lower IQ compared to children born to mothers ≥20 years and were more likely to have a low IQ (Odds Ratio (OR) 1.7; 95% CI: 1.3, 2.3). Adjustment for a range of confounding and mediating factors including parental socioeconomic status, maternal IQ, maternal smoking and binge drinking in pregnancy, birthweight, breastfeeding and parenting style attenuates the association, though the effect remains statistically significant (-1.4 IQ points; 95% CI: -2.8,-0.1). Similarly the risk of offspring having low IQ remained marginally significantly higher in those born to teenage mothers (OR 1.3; 95% CI: 1.0, 1.9).

In contrast, teenage fatherhood is not associated with adult offspring IQ, when adjusted for maternal age. Although the reduction in IQ is quantitatively small, it is indicative of neurodevelopmental disadvantage experienced by the young adult offspring of teenage mothers. Our results suggest that public policy initiatives should be targeted not only at delaying childbearing in the population but also at supporting early life condition of children born to teenage mothers to minimize the risk for disadvantageous outcomes of the next generation.

 The small but significant decrease in offspring IQ combined with other challenges often faced by children of teenage mothers may contribute to increased risk of poor educational performance and intergenerational transfer of psychosocial and health disadvantage. 

aka poor fitness among r-types

corroborates forensics in the history of anglos

Their bodies haven’t finished developing.

The smarter atheist myth

No! People on reddit lie!?

The myth of the smarter Atheist

What we see is a fairly weak relationship between national religiosity and average national IQ. Once we get up to about 20% of the population being Atheist, the IQ of the population flatlines at around 100 from then on. Even worse, in the ~0% Atheist range, there’s a wide range of national IQs from 64 to 100+ — with a cluster of low-IQ nations that appear to be driving the “trend.”

Indeed, if we look at income per capita instead of religiosity, we already see a much better correlation with average IQ. The correlation between religiosity and IQ is too weak to suggest that religiosity predicts intelligence on the national level. Anyone who claims otherwise is grasping at straws.

You could study it..

Religions and IQs driving that aren’t all the same uniformly across the planet.

Just look at the West? No?

 I created a less misleading version of Kanazawa’s plot below; judge the data for yourself.

Religious people are less likely to attend college, where tests are taken…

The most religious adults had an average IQ of 97.14, whereas the atheist adults had an average IQ of 103.09. That may seem like a wide gap — 6 whole IQ points — until we remember that anyone in the IQ range of 90-109 is classified as having “average intelligence.”

Yeah, it’s a bigger gap than same-race gender, at least?

Under two points, you must be so proud. What measurement error?

So really, all Kanazawa showed is that the average person has average intelligence regardless of how religious they are.

How Cognitive Genetic Factors Influence Fertility Outcomes: A Mediational SEM Analysis

Utilizing a newly released cognitive Polygenic Score (PGS) from Wave IV of Add Health (n = 1,886), structural equation models (SEMs) examining the relationship between PGS and fertility (which is approximately 50% complete in the present sample), employing measures of verbal IQ and educational attainment as potential mediators, were estimated. The results of indirect pathway models revealed that verbal IQ mediates the positive relationship between PGS and educational attainment, and educational attainment in turn mediates the negative relationship between verbal IQ and a latent fertility measure. The direct path from PGS to fertility was non-significant. The model was robust to controlling for age, sex, and race; furthermore, the results of a multigroup SEM revealed no significant differences in the estimated path coeficients across sex. These results indicate that those predisposed towards higher verbal IQ by virtue of higher PGS values are also predisposed towards trading fertility against time spent in education, which contributes to those with higher PGS values producing fewer offspring at this stage in their life course.

Jews score higher on verbal IQ….

Divorce risk x IQ

Don’t marry the bimbo.

Should also look at spousal IQ disparity.

Presumably, bigger = higher % divorce.

In ‘The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life’, Herrnstein and Murray reported a negative relation between intelligence and divorce risks. This article analyses the relationship between intelligence and divorce risks for two different Dutch cohorts, for which data on their intelligence measured during their childhood, are available. A positive relation between intelligence and divorce risk is found for the Dutch fifty-year-olds born around 1940. Among this older cohort, divorced respondents have a higher mean intelligence score than respondents who stayed together with their spouses. However, a negative relation between intelligence and divorce risk is found for the Dutch thirty-year-olds born around 1958. Among this younger cohort, divorced respondents have a lower mean intelligence than respondents who stayed together. A possible explanation of the shift is that the democratisation of divorce over time has altered the nature of divorce from a highly selective to a more normal event.

Or r-types stopped marrying as much, from pressure. Therefore, fewer divorces.