{"id":87425,"date":"2016-02-07T13:59:44","date_gmt":"2016-02-07T21:59:44","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=87425"},"modified":"2023-09-06T04:01:08","modified_gmt":"2023-09-06T12:01:08","slug":"rebutting-chanda-chisala","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=87425","title":{"rendered":"Rebutting Chanda Chisala"},"content":{"rendered":"

Jayman, a Jamaican-America blogger<\/a>, writes:<\/p>\n

Chanda Chisala has been producing pile after pile of nonsense for quite some time. At first, I was content with simply leaving comments at his posts refuting his rubbish because it was rather easy to point out where he was full of baloney. Since then, I’ve been banned by him, mostly for my signature flair. \":)\" <\/p>\n

I intended to continue to ignore his nonsense since it was such obvious rubbish that it didn’t seem to be worth my (now very precious) time. But then I realized the value of having nonsense essays picked apart for the nonsense they are. Rebuttals are highly valuable to skeptical readers who doubt nonsense but can’t quite put their finger on the problems themselves. So, in that service, I write this rebuttal to Chisala’s latest piece.<\/p>\n

Towards a Theory of Everyone<\/a><\/p>\n

Chisala’s theory is that different human groups differ in the degree of genetic canalization, <\/em>and that explains the differences in average IQ between groups. It seems he lifted the concept of genetic canalization from Greg Cochran, who I’ll let describe the phenomenon. From Survival of the Flattest | West Hunter <\/a>:<\/p>\n

\n

Genetic canalization is the extent to which an organism is buffered against the effects of mutations. Waddington said \u201cdevelopmental reactions, as they occur in organisms submitted to natural selection\u2026are adjusted so as to bring about one definite end-result regardless of minor variations in conditions during the course of the reaction\u201d. Canalization can act to buffer against environmental perturbations, and selection for resistance to such environmental noise may also produce resistance to genetic noise. But right now I\u2019m thinking about genetic canalization.<\/p>\n

Up to some point, the effects of not too many, not too serious mutations would be buffered: those mutations wouldn\u2019t change the phenotype. In the same way, your typical tractor is not designed to nanometer tolerances: parts can be somewhat out of spec \u2013 up to some limit \u2013 without messing up performance.<\/p>\n

…<\/p>\n

Canalization is a product of natural selection. There would be stronger selection for efficient canalization in a species with more genetic load<\/p>\n

…<\/p>\n

It might explain why load doesn\u2019t seem to have much effect on IQ over most of the range, why we haven\u2019t seen general IQ depression in the children of old men.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

There are global differences in brain size. <\/em>Brain size is certainly related to intelligence, both on the individual level (Pietschnig et al 2015<\/a>) and (even more so) on the group level (though the both the group level and individual level correlations are less than 1.0). In order for Chisala’s idea to work, these environmental insults must also cause certain racial group differences in brain size.<\/p>\n

\"\"But, as we know, it’s not outside the realm of possibility that environmental insults can affect brain size (see the Zika<\/a> virus). And sure, sub-Saharan Africa is loaded with pathogens and other environmental insults. But racial differences in brain size are seen between people of European, African, and Asian ancestry in the United States<\/em><\/strong> (from Rushton & Jensen, 2010<\/a>):<\/p>\n

(At this point, of course, we cue the sociologist’s fallacy invoking the poorer environments of Blacks even in the U.S.) But, Chisala is claiming Blacks are more susceptable to environmental insults that supposedly affect IQ \u2013 insults that (save perhaps iodine deficiency) have not been shown to actually impact IQ in any way<\/strong>. <\/em>I’ll go into more detail in a future post, but there is little solid evidence for a negative impact of most supposed environmental insults on IQ.<\/strong><\/p>\n

For now, I’ll give you Greg Cochran on this (from The Great IQ Depression | West Hunter<\/a>):<\/p>\n

\n

We hear that poverty can sap brainpower, reduce frontal lobe function, induce the fantods, etc. But exactly what do we mean by \u2018poverty\u2019? If we\u2019re talking about an absolute, rather than relative, standard of living, most of the world today must be in poverty, as well as almost everyone who lived much before the present. Most Chinese are poorer than the official US poverty level, right? The US had fairly rapid economic growth until the last generation or so, so if you go very far back in time, almost everyone was poor, by modern standards. Even those who were considered rich at the time suffered from zero prenatal care, largely useless medicine, tabletless high schools, and slow Internet connections. They had to ride horses that had lousy acceleration and pooped all over the place.<\/p>\n

In particular, if all this poverty-gives-you-emerods stuff is true, scholastic achievement should have collapsed in the Great Depression \u2013 and with the miracle of epigenetics, most of us should still<\/em> be suffering those bad effects.<\/p>\n

But somehow none of this seems to have gone through the formality of actually happening.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Of course, it’s also worth mentioning that brain structure <\/em>differs detectably by race, as previously discussed<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\n

a new paper, Fan et al 2015<\/a>, that the details of cortical surface structure of the brain is highly predictive of genetic ancestry. Indeed, as Fan et al put it:
\n<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

Here, we demonstrate that the three-dimensional geometry of cortical surface is highly predictive of individuals\u2019 genetic ancestry in West Africa, Europe, East Asia, and America, even though their genetic background has been shaped by multiple waves of migratory and admixture events. The geometry of the cortical surface contains richer information about ancestry than the areal variability of the cortical surface, independent of total brain volumes. Besides explaining more ancestry variance than other brain imaging measurements, the 3D geometry of the cortical surface further characterizes distinct regional patterns in the folding and gyrification.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Indeed, an earlier paper from this team (Bakken, Dale, and Schork, 2011<\/a>) found that this works within<\/em> racial groups as well, as the case with Europeans (see also the section Intraracial Group Variation below):<\/strong><\/p>\n

\n

In our group\u2019s previous study, we found that area measures of cortical surface and total
\nbrain volumes of individuals of European descent in the United States correlate significantly with their ancestral geographic locations in Europe…See also Brain Topography | West Hunter<\/a> and Psychological comments: Racial brain differences<\/a> <\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Then there is the work David Piffer on polygenetic score<\/a>. Basically, the known genomic hits to IQ vary in frequency between the different populations highly according to average IQ. From Piffer 2015<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\n

Published Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS), reporting the presence of alleles exhibiting significant and replicable associations with IQ, are reviewed. The average between-population frequency (polygenic score) of nine alleles positively and significantly associated with intelligence is strongly correlated to country-level IQ (r = .91). Factor analysis of allele frequencies furthermore identified a metagene with a similar correlation to country IQ (r = .86). The majority of the alleles (seven out of nine) loaded positively on this metagene. Allele frequencies varied by continent in a way that corresponds with observed population differences in average phenotypic intelligence.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

…Going even beyond this, if we follow Chisala’s logic and assume that somehow adverse reactions to the environment are responsible for the size, structural, and performance differences of African brains relative to other groups, then we have another problem: the performance difference between different human groups isn’t a 20th and 21st century phenomenon only \u2013 it goes back for the entirety of recorded history.<\/p>\n

As we’ve seen before<\/a>, and as Bryan Caplan recounts<\/a>, the differences between human groups in development goes back thousands of years \u2013 such that level of development as far back as 1000 B.C. is predictive of development today. Indeed, as Easterly, Coming, and Gong (2007)<\/a> recount:<\/p>\n

\n

We assemble a dataset on technology adoption in 1000 B.C., 0 A.D., and 1500 A.D. for the predecessors of today\u2019s nation states. We find that this very old history of technology adoption is surprisingly significant for today\u2019s national development outcomes. Although our strongest results are for 1500 A.D., we find that even technology as old as 1000 B.C. is associated with today\u2019s outcomes in some plausible specifications.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

It’s not like the poor performers and the strong performers of today are a new thing. They’ve been poor performers and strong performers throughout history (by and large). Indeed, in sub-Saharan Africa<\/a> (emphasis mine):<\/p>\n

\n

Why this meandering reminiscence of mine about a random ruin in Turkey? Because sub-Saharan Africa has remarkably few ruins for its immense size.<\/strong><\/p>\n

This fact is not well known. It is so hazy in the contemporary mind that Henry Louis Gates managed to sell PBS on a six episode miniseries about African ruins called The Wonders of Africa<\/em><\/a> without, apparently, anybody in PBS management calling his bluff about the lack of wonders that his camera crew would wind up documenting in one of the most boring documentary series of the 21st Century.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

By contrast, as we know, there was plenty of development in East Asia and Europe, especially Northwestern Europe<\/a>:<\/p>\n

As Staffan put it<\/a>, “we can\u2019t adjust for their entire history.”<\/p>\n

In any case, this recent nonsense idea of Chisala, aside from running afoul Occam’s Razor, is his attempt to undercut the rebuttal to the deprivation argument. That is, it is a common argument of blank slatists that poverty and other forms of deprivation are responsible for differences in average IQ and national performance. Aside from emptiness of the whole deprivation argument, as noted above, there is the fact (as pointed out by me in Welcome Readers from Portugal!<\/a>) that outliers to this pattern of deprivation and IQ all perform in accordance to their measured IQ, not according to their level of deprivation. Poor rural Chinese perform nearly as well in IQ and scholastically as the other East Asian societies do. Citizens in wealthy Arab oil states perform as badly as those in poorer ones which lack oil. I’m sure Chisala doesn’t like this particular uncomfortable fact, so I suspect he concocted his feeble theory in part to try to nullify this unwelcome reality.<\/p>\n

And finally, there is the fundamental problem that Chisala doesn’t understand either evolution or the formula that guides it, the breeder’<\/a> s equation<\/a>. There is no reason to suspect that human groups that have been separated for tens of thousands of years in vastly different environments would be the same in all their cognitive and behavioral qualities. In fact, a priori<\/em> we should expect them not to be, since such equivalence after so many generations of separate evolution is nigh impossible<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

I expected most of this to be obvious, which is why I haven’t paid too much attention to Chisala’s posts. But, I may have overestimated both his impact and people’s ability to spot the obvious, hence, this writing.<\/p>\n

COMMENTS:<\/p>\n

* Thank you for dealing with this person\u2019s drivel. I waded through his first two efforts and felt afterwards that it had been an exceptional waste of my time. He really did not seem to understand, among other things, that there are obvious filters operating when migrations occur. I appreciate that you\u2019ve been willing to sacrifice your time to save that of the rest of us. Also your prose is like crystal spring water compared with Chisala\u2019s muck.<\/p>\n

* I think a basic understanding of biology would lead one to think that, a priori, populations separated for thousands of generations in widely different environments would develop significant genetic differences in cognition and behavior between the populations. Real world experience would appear to corroborate this to a great extent. If anything I think the differences between races are greater than a dry mathematical model would probably predict.<\/p>\n

* Genes matter, as does culture, as does history, as does free will. They all interplay in a manner that makes it very difficult to give the proper diagnosis and prescription to any given social problem. We all have agency but some of us have more agency due to genetic and cultural factors.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Jayman, a Jamaican-America blogger, writes: Chanda Chisala has been producing pile after pile of nonsense for quite some time. At first, I was content with simply leaving comments at his posts refuting his rubbish because it was rather easy to … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[36],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-87425","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-race"],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/87425","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=87425"}],"version-history":[{"count":6,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/87425\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":151155,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/87425\/revisions\/151155"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=87425"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=87425"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=87425"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}