Ustwo

So would using the males of my paternal family line which have been scientists of some kind for the last 5 generations. Which is my point, its just a limited sub group and that lots of groups of whites would differ from other whites.

You seem touchy on this and I'm not sure why. The 'data' in this case would be any racial IQ which crossed so many sub groups. These data would be meaningless due to the subgrouping. Lets say you used 'whites' from Minnesota as part of your study. Even if you had 10,000 randomly selected IQ scores, you would be oversampling the Scandinavian sub group.

I suppose I'm using IQ to represent intelligence and thats where the hang up is. I took a myrid of IQ tests as a child and I was average in spatial ability, superior in verbal ability and off the charts for deductive reasoning. These tests were done when I was about 8 and have remained surprisingly true up until my last standardized test which was the GRE about 7 years ago. (and much to my chagrin they have taken the deductive reasoning section out of the GRE and rely on the basics only now). It should be easy to break down 'races' on subgroups as well if they could do it to a 8 year old child.

But my point isn't about the deficiencies of the IQ exam. Its that trying to measure any form of intelligence as applied to our current definition of race is rather meaningless.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.