>>90665461>James Watson resigning over that statement is a factIt is a fact that reflects the politics of the situation, not the science.
>the majority of the scientific community finding that race is a social construct and isn't causal of intelligence is a factSocial scientists defining “race” as a social construct and getting other people to use that neologism doesn't mean that there aren’t human population groups with genotypic and phenotypic differences.
>Because these outliers wouldn't exist.So you don’t understand population statistics. Gotcha. Short version: Many human attributes follow a bell curve, with most people being about average, and smaller numbers of people being significantly above or below average. Different populations can have different bell curves. Men and women, for example, have very different upper body strength on average. The curves aren’t entirely separate, however: some women are stronger than some men, but this overlap represents outliers from both groups.
Racial differences in intelligence are much smaller. Most groups are within a standard deviation of each other. An individual of any race being more or less intelligent than an individual of any other race is unremarkable since the overlapping areas of the curve are substantial. However, these individuals do not somehow negate the different bell curves for the different populations.
>For blacks to be dumber there'd have to be a gene responsible for it. That gene does not exist.Intelligence is apparently a polygenic trait. Think about this rephrasing:
>For anyone to be dumber than anyone else there’d have to be a gene responsible for it.Sounds silly, doesn’t it? Individual intelligence varies, so why can’t the average intelligence of a population? And it turns out that, when tested, different populations can indeed have different average intelligence.
https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country 
