Quoted By:
This paragraph is just plain dishonest.
>It may be instructive to consider the pattern of findings that would be expected if genetic background but not social environment contributed to the average follow-up IQ of black/interracial adoptees. First, we would expect them to show greater IQ decline than biological offspring, because their Time 2 IQ would
regress back to their biological, but not their adoptive, parents' IQ levels. Second, we would expect their Time 2 IQ to be correlated with their biological parents' education but not their adoptive parents' education or IQ. Third, we
would not expect their Time 2 IQ to be correlated with adoptive experiences such as age at placement and time in adoptive home. The data did not support these hypotheses, thus suggesting the important role of social environment in adoptees' follow-up IQ.
^^^^^
Yes, that is what you would expect if genetics controlled 100% of your IQ, but that's a strawman. What the authors fail to address is that, if genetics play a role, then you'd expect for equal status adoptive parents, a black IQs will be lower than white IQs on average, which is indeed reflected by their study. They constructed a strawman that not even white supremacists believe, and knock it down to claim, tacitly, that IQ differences among races are purely environmental. While it plays some role, it's not the only role.
