I appreciate the effort," however there are a couple of blind spots on the topic of IQ and race that are unbearable to me. I invite everyone in the comment section to discuss this with me after they read the following carefully and do their research in case of any doubt in regard to the facts stated. <br>1. Foremost", you have to understand that the concept of “race” is NOT a concept based on genetics at all. Other than the skin color, two “black” people from different populations most likely have just as much or even more genetic differences in between them as when compared to people of any other “race”. Grouping people into “races” merely based on some superficial difference in between them is NOT SCIENCE, but racism.  It is simply not correct to assume that “black” people have similar genetics in general. In fact," the genetic variety within Africans is the highest. So that two Africans from the same country can have a higher genetic disparity than one of them has compared to a “white” European. <br>2. Second", the comparison made between “blacks” and “whites” is mostly based on Afro-Americans vs white Americans. Afro-Americans are the only human population living today that has a history of being enslaved, irregularly bred, and systematically broken down culturally. The purpose of that was to create submissive but enduring slaves, intelligence was not desired. So it is not a stretch to consider that being highly intelligent was a sure way to get yourself hanged as a slave. While being sort of a Jock who was not smart but strong and enduring would make you preferred breeding material. So there has been a negative selection regarding high IQ in the Afro-American population in recent history. That negative selection exists foremost on the sociological level. Talking intelligently in the lower class Afro-American community is called out for sounding “white” to this very day. Regarding the biological level through breeding: According to science and recorded history, the timespan of slavery is too short to have a biological impact. Also, there was no systematic breeding going on during slavery. <br>3. The studies regarding Africans IQ by Lynn are proven to be flawed as well. No surprise, since they basically claim that the average African is mentally retarded. How can someone with any real world experience actually believe that crap? It's obvious that poverty and poor education most definitely have a negative impact on IQ measured through any test. The world has gone insane, again.<br>4. Civilization started in Africa, 6,000 years ago. It took another 4,000 years for civilization to emerge in Europe. While Africa and the Middle East were already developing all the basis for our modern world, like literature, mathematics, etc. Even the first European civilizations, namely the Greeks, were not Caucasians but Mediterraneans. The same is true for the roman civilization. Only after the fall of Rome, it was, that Germanic tribes began dominating Europe. The first Caucasian empire emerged with the discovery of the Americas through the Spaniards in the 14th century, which is just 600 years ago. Caucasians had world dominance for the first time in the 18th century, which is just 200 years ago. Before that, the world was dominated by everybody but Caucasians. How does that fit with the supposed genetic superiority of Caucasians and the idea that the powerful are genetically gifted in general?,(reply>), @William Parker the evolutionary pressure on different populations was obviously not the same… and different evolutionary pressures lead to different outcomes. How is that not obvious?,(reply>), It takes seven generations to create a new breed of dog, cat, or thoroughbred horse which can be done within twenty or fifty so years. <br>Human females can have children around the age of 13 give or take a few years. So within one or two hundred years you can have seven to fifth teen generations of humans. <br>If all you need is seven generations to pass down a given hair tone trait or hip displacement or to change the social mental temperament in dogs or horses is more than enough time for humans. <br><br>I am from a few centuries old traditional German military family of petty/minor nobles who only breed within a given social circles. Like my mom and extended family of bipolar narcists that have anger issues and adrenaline surges  which makes good athletes and soldiers, we all have some form of hyper fight or flight response, panic attacks, manic depression, and have heart attacks in our early forties from those adrenaline surges. They were attack dogs during WW II. <br><br>As for my Dutch/Irish Sicilian side, we are the crazy ones. <br>Well all sides of my family is a bit nuts ... after a couple generations of concussion from cannon fire does that. <br>The shock wave just doesn't damage the brain and heart but the whole-body genetic makeup. <br>Some people are just gun shy and can't stand being around load booms without going into emotional fits and other crave the sound of air bursts.,(reply>), @William Parker agreed, the social aspect is obviously the major factor and implying otherwise is not at all based in science, it is blatant racism, the same narrative that Europeans used as an excuse for slavery and the holocaust.,(reply>), Yes, this whole IQ concept is too Murican-centric to me. And I doubt that a timespan of a few generations would commit enough significance to the genes to degrade intelligence. Since intelligence evolved from a long time ago that is shared across human ethnicities, it must be a core component densely rooted in our DNA. I presume it would be hard to change this, just like cutting off a limb for each generation won't make  the genes stop expressing that limb in a future generation.