Category Archives: Northeast Asians

What Is the Evidence for Genetic Effects on IQ?

and guessing a combination of genes and environment is weird when there’s only actual evidence of one and not the other.

In response to the Bell Curve controversy, a large number of intelligence researchers, the best in their field, authored a letter to the New York Times on the state of the scientific consensus about intelligence, genes and environment. The conclusion of over 100 top experts in the field was that intelligence was caused by a combination of genes and environment. So that was the consensus of the top experts in the field ~15-20 years ago. So my conclusion is not weird at all. In fact, it is consensus in the field and in the 18 years since, the consensus has only gotten stronger.

And I believe the twin studies are excellent evidence for a genetic role in IQ. Identical twins raised apart were very close in IQ.

Monozygotic twins correlate very highly on IQ. I believe it is .7

Dizygotic twins correlate quite a bit lower and siblings have an even lower correlation.

In families where you have one or more of the types – MZ twins, DZ twins and siblings, they are obviously all being raised in the same environment.

There are other things too. Black kids adopted away into upper middle class White homes crash back down to 89 IQ by adulthood.

Korean kids adopted into White homes end up with 109 IQ’s, higher than their adopted family and much closer to their birth families. The IQ’s of the Korean adoptees were also higher than for their siblings in the adopted family. The children of the adoptee family had IQ’s that looked like their parents. The Korean kids had IQ’s that looked like their birth parents and the Korean kids were smarter than the White nonadoptee siblings even though they were all raised together.

Kids adopted away have IQ’s that are a lot closer to their birth parents than to the adopted family in which they were raised.

Black people’s IQ scores go up as they get lighter. The more White they have in them, the higher the IQ.

African immigrants to the US have IQ’s of 108. However, their children born in the US have IQ’s of only 89. What is going on here is that the children’s IQ’s are regressing down towards the African genetic mean.

All of that looks excellent evidence for genetic effects on IQ to me.


Filed under Asians, Blacks, Culture, Genetics, Immigration, Intelligence, Koreans, Northeast Asians, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Whites

Do Schoolteachers Believe in HBD?

Anti-Hereditarian writes:

Stupidity is rarely a cause of school failure, poor achievement deals more with deficient executive functions, one’s hardships with focusing and persevering with their schoolwork. If teachers are not really fond of HBD, it’s not because they are blind leftists but because they see students that have attitudes that are not compatible with academic excellence.

I do not know. I taught school in the Los Angeles area for 6 years. I started out as a somewhat blind environmentalist with some HBD leanings.

After 6 years teaching all sorts of different ethnic groups, I could practically predict the behavior and the intelligence of a classroom as it filed in the door merely by observing the ethnic makeup of the group. Interestingly, the intelligence of the groups lined up almost perfectly with IQ scores. Further, behavior conformed to stereotypes.

The Japanese and Jews were smartest and best behaved, then the Whites, then the Filipinos, then the Hispanics, then maybe the Polynesians (close call) and then the Blacks. Perfect lineup. As as the intelligence of a group went down, the group become more disorderly, loud, confrontational, lazy, combative, destructive, menacing and even violent. As the intelligence of a group rose, they became a lot more calmed down and sedated. You would think a classroom full of Japanese kids has been sedated with Valium.

Now apparently my observations are not scientifically proven. That’s fine. Science has hardly proven anything we believe in in our day to day lives. If we had to operate our day to day lives only on things proven by science, we wouldn’t even be able to get out of bed. I assure you that 95% of the things I believe are not proven by science, and I could care less about that.

I simply make observations. Where I see the same pattern repeating over and over, which I do all the time, I make a generalization type of opinion about what is “basically” going on here. Now 98% of the time, that generalization is not proven by science, but so what?

Personally, I did feel that stupidity was a cause of school failure. Of course it gets complicated because as the group gets dumber, they try less in school, and you end up with whole classes full of kids who do nothing but screw off all class.

I did have some Black male students who I felt very sorry for though. We were studying Shakespeare once with some Black sophomores in Compton, and some Black girls were really getting into it. I forget what we were discussing, but this 15 year old Black boy was getting involved, and he really wanted to learn whatever we were learning. But it was painfully obvious that he simply was not very intelligent at all. I even think he realized it on some level and was depressed about it. Seeing that boy like that almost broke my heart, it was so sad. I felt so sorry for him.


Filed under Asians, Blacks, Education, Filipinos, Gender Studies, Hispanics, Intelligence, Japanese, Jews, Northeast Asians, Oceanians, Polynesians, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Science, SE Asians, Whites

Link Between Amazonian Indians and Australoids

From my Facebook page.

Will Hyres writes:

Did you see the recent DNA research that links Amazonian Amerindians to Australian Aboriginals? I wonder how extensive that link really is? I’m assuming the majority of Amerinds are mostly related to the Siberian migration.

It’s not as crazy as it sounds. The very first people to the Americas were Australoids. On skulls, they would resemble Aborigines, as Aborigines are Australoids. The early Amerind skulls look Australoid. Some look like Melanesians or Ainu. Melanesian and Ainu skulls are Australoid. As the early Amerinds came from the north, perhaps the early Amerinds were linked to the Ainuids. We know that skulls from NE Asia before 9,000 YBP look like Aborigines.

I am not sure what the link between Amazonian Indians and Aborigines is. Is it on genes or on skulls? Can someone link me to this stuff?


Filed under Aborigines, Ainu, Amerindians, Anthropology, Melanesians, Northeast Asians, Oceanians, Physical, Race/Ethnicity

A Division of the Asian Races

Found on the Internet:

My definition of the subgroup of mongoloid appearance due to their climatic origin. I am referring to the pure ethnic group before any mixing of ethnic groups.

  • 1. Northern Mongoloid: Tungusic, Mongol, Tibetan, Korean, Northern Chinese, Japanese, Nivki, Chukchi, Yakut, Tuva, Yukaghir, Samoyedic
  • Very cold climate – cold winter, cool summer
  • Small eyes, single eyelid
  • Very Pale skin
  • 2. Southern Mongoloid: Southern Chinese, Burmese, Thai, Lao, Hmong, Mien, Vietnamese, Chin, Shan, Kuki, Bai, Lahu
  • Temperate climate – cool winter, warm summer
  • Medium sized eyes, double eyelids
  • Fair skin
  • 3. Southeast Mongoloid: (Paleomongoloid or Australoid-Mongoloid transitionals) – Taiwan aborigine, Montagnard, Akha, Khmer, Filipino, Indonesian, Malay in Malaysia/Singapore, Karen, Karenni, Naga, Rohinga
  • Hot, tropical climate – no winter, hot summer
  • Large eyes, double or triple eyelids.
  • Brown skin


Filed under Anthropology, Asians, Burmese, Chinese (Ethnic), Filipinos, Hmong, Indonesians, Japanese, Khmer, Koreans, Lao, Malays, Mongolians, Northeast Asians, Physical, Race/Ethnicity, SE Asians, Taiwanese Aborigines, Thai, Vietnamese

Repost: Huge Flynn Gains Associated with Immigration to the West

This was posted earlier under another title, but it lines right up with what we are talking about on here lately.

We have remarked upon a number of cases in which movement from a Third World country to a 1st World country results in an IQ gain for the Third Worlders in the 2nd generation. The results will be listed below and the data can be found by searching the archives on the blog (I’m too weary to look them up and link them); anyway, regular readers have already read the original pieces.

              Pre-West  Post-West*  IQ Gain

Jamaica       71        86          15
US Blacks**   72.5      87          14.5
India         83        94          11
Mexicans      85        95          10
Philippines   86        93.5        7.5
Chinese       97.5      105         7.5
Japanese      97.5      105         7.5
Morocco       84        89          5

**Post-West refers to second generation.
The figure for US Blacks is their 
theorized genetic IQ based on 
African/Caribbean scores plus the White %
in US Blacks.

The Filipinos, Mexicans and US Blacks went to the US. The Indians and Jamaicans went to the UK. Moroccans went to the Netherlands. Gains ranged from 5-15 points in the second generation. This is above and beyond the Flynn gains already taking place, and probably ongoing in most of those countries.

The gains are where these ethnic groups actually closed the gap with Whites by the amount of the gain in the third column. Looked at in another way, these groups closed the gap with Whites by 5-15 IQ points in a single generation. In addition, there are ongoing Flynn gains occurring alongside these migration gains, but they are not showing up as IQ gains because the Whites are pacing and matching the others precisely.

The Filipinos’ IQ’s are 13 points below the 106.5 for Chinese, Japanese and Koreans, giving them an IQ of 93.5. This is a full 7.5 point Flynn rise over the 86 IQ in the Philippines just from moving to the US.

However, Filipinos are starting to come close to US Whites in occupational success due to extra-IQ factors. This is the part that is very interesting. In other words, despite IQ’s that are a full 6.5 points below that of US Whites, Filipinos are beginning to match Whites in occupational success. This is because Filipinos have extra-IQ factors above and beyond the extra-IQ factors that the Whites have.

The extra-IQ factors are simply postulated, but they may have to do with “introversion.” Along with that, we may find self-discipline, orderliness, a strong work ethic, punctuality, ability to follow orders, putting in extra time on the job, cautiousness, ability to self-train and self-teach, etc. All of these things will tend to increase with introversion and probably decrease with extroversion.

As Whites are considerably more extroverted than Filipinos (Asians), Filipinos will probably score better on many extra-IQ factors than Whites, with the end result being that the extra-IQ factors allow the Filipinos to overcome an IQ deficit and nearly reach parity with Whites on the job.

The Filipino figures come from James Flynn’s book, Asian Americans: Achievement Beyond IQ. In the book, Flynn shows that the second generation of Chinese and Japanese made not only remarkable IQ gains against US Whites, going from the 97.5 IQ of their parents to the 105 IQ of the second generation (and passing Whites at the same time) but they were on average working at positions that were 10-20 points above where they should have been working based on their IQ’s.

The question arises, What about US Blacks? The fascinating thing about African-Americans is that they have an unexplained 14.5 IQ rise above and beyond what ought to be their genetic IQ.

The hereditarians have never been able to explain this well. On of their feints is to say that IQ in Africa (= 67) is artificially lowered by malnutrition. Well, possibly, but then why is Black IQ about the same in the Caribbean (= 71)? Keep in mind that Caribbean Blacks often have a small amount of White in them (Jamaicans have 9%). So it does look like genetic Black IQ is indeed around 70.

That means they are mentally retarded, but we have already had the discussion about this on the blog. The commenters and I agree that Blacks in Africa and the Caribbean with 70 IQ’s are not retarded in the sense that a White person with a 70 IQ is. In this sense, the tests don’t seem to measure Black intelligence properly. On the other hand, while they are not retarded, I don’t think that your average 70 IQ African is all that intelligent.

I’m getting at a couple of things here. First of all, can Blacks make use of these extra-IQ factors to at least overcome their 13.2 point IQ deficit with Whites in the sense of at least performing above their predicted IQ level on the job? Keep in mind that in order to do that, Blacks would have to display these extra-IQ factors above and beyond the level of the Whites. Since Blacks are the most extroverted race of all, this seems dubious.

On the other hand, we have a large up and coming Black middle class that is itching for success. By dutifully emphasizing the extra-IQ factors listed above, upwardly mobile Blacks will at least be able to perform above their IQ level on the job.

On curious area that no one considers is personal skills. There seems to be a lot of evidence that Blacks are more socially adept than Whites. In jobs where social intelligence and skills are highly valued, conscientious Blacks may be able to outperform their White co-workers and at least partially close the occupational success gap with them.

Second of all, it seems possible that Africans moving to the West may experience ~15 point IQ rise in the second generation. It hasn’t showed up yet, but no one has looked for it. So the 67 IQ Africans by the second generation should be at IQ 83. It’s not that great, but there are more or less functional countries with 83 IQ’s. There aren’t that many with ~70 IQ’s. To the extent that Africa can mirror the environment of the West in Africa itself, they won’t even have to come here.

This is groundbreaking work that is receiving very little ink, less than it deserves. At the very least, rising IQ with migration and extra-IQ factors show that neither is IQ set in stone, nor is it destiny.


Flynn, James R. 1991. Asian Americans: Achievement Beyond IQ. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.


Filed under Americas, Asians, Blacks, Britain, Caribbean, Chinese (Ethnic), Culture, East Indians, Europe, Filipinos, Flynn Effect, Immigration, Intelligence, Jamaicans, Japanese, Latin America, Moroccans, Netherlands, North Africans, Northeast Asians, Personality, Psychology, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, SE Asians, Sociology, South Asians, USA, Whites

What Is the Difference Between a Neomongoloid and a Paleomongoloid?

Steven writes:

What’s the difference between Paleomongoloid and Neomongoloid? You got a post on this?

Paleomongoloids are more archaic Mongoloids. Amerindians, Filipinos, Nagas, most SE Asians, Ryukuyans, Indonesians, and Taiwanese aborigines are all probably Paleomongoloids.

The base Asian type is Australoid. 2,000-9.000 YBP, Asian base Australoid types began transitioning to Mongoloids.

The Australoid is the archaic Asian type, and the Mongoloid is the fully transitioned more progressive type.

Koreans, Nivkhis, Eskimos, Mongolians, many Siberians, Japanese, and Northern Chinese are all Northern Neomongoloids. The transition began 9,000 YBP in the north. The Ainu represent the base type that transitioned to Neomongoloid in the north.

In the South, Southern Chinese, most of the ethnics in Southern China especially Yunnan, Hmong, Mien, and Vietnamese at least are Southern Neomongoloids. The transition happened much later in the South, 2,000-5,000 YBP.

Because it happened so much later, a lot of people in the south are not fully transitioned, hence they are considered to be Paleomongoloids or Australoid-Mongoloid transitionals. In the South, the Paleos are Taiwanese aborigines, most SE Asians, Filipinos, Indonesians and Naga at the very least. Polynesians and Micronesians are also probably Paleomongoloids.

Paleomongoloids to the north include the Ryukuyans and the Ainu.

Amerinds are often considered to be Paleos because they seem to represent a more archaic Mongoloid type than say the Japanese, Koreans, Chinese or even the Eskimos.


Filed under Ainu, Amerindians, Anthropology, Asians, Chinese (Ethnic), Filipinos, Indonesians, Inuit, Japanese, Koreans, Micronesians, Mongolians, Northeast Asians, Oceanians, Physical, Polynesians, Race/Ethnicity, SE Asians, Taiwanese Aborigines

Our Common Australoid Past

Khan1983 writes:

I have read somewhere that Southeast Asian and North Eurasian split around 50,000 years ago while Caucasian and Northeast Asian split around 30,000 years ago. By genetic, would this mean that Mongoloid phenotype is just a convergent evolution of both Northeast Asian and some Southeast Asian (S. Chinese & Vietnamese)?

I doubt if the figure for Southeast Asian and North Eurasian splitting at 50,000 YBP is correct. The Asian race began in northern Vietnam 51,000 YBP. But who did they split off from? Was this the date of the SE Asian-North Eurasian split? I do not think anyone knows what those people looked like but skulls from 25,000 YBP in Thailand look like Aborigines and skulls from Vietnam 22,000 YBP look Melanesian. Also skulls from India 25,000 YBP look like Aborigines.

And about these elusive North Eurasian people, lost in the mists of time – could the very mysterious Caucasoid-like Chukchi and Ainu be all that remains?

Caucasian and Northeast Asian could not have split off that late. Cavalli-Sforza says that Caucasian split off in part from Northeast Asian 42,000 YBP. We do not know exactly what those people looked like, but a skull from 7,000 years after the creation of the Caucasian race from southern Russia has been characterized as Australoid.

So from 22,000-35,000 YBP in a belt from Caucasus – India – Thailand – Vietnam, all humans were apparently Australoids.

It is starting to look like Australoid types were the basic human type outside of Africa for a very long time, possibly until just recently.

Leave a comment

Filed under Aborigines, Ainu, Anthropology, Asians, Melanesians, Northeast Asians, Oceanians, Physical, Race/Ethnicity, SE Asians

Skin Color among the Mongoloid Races

Mike815 writes:

Are there Neomongoloids darker(almost as dark as Indians) than Southern Chinese and Vietnamese? And are there Paleomongoloids other than the Ainu that are very light skinned?

Yes, in the south of China, there are some pretty dark Neos. And some Koreans and Japanese look pretty dark. When Neomongoloids look dark, their prototypical “yellow” skin seems to look “orange” or “tanned.” The northern ones in Japan and Korea can look more “orange” = darkened yellow, and the ones in Southern China can look more “tanned.” Probably the ones in the South are more melaninized as it is a lot hotter down there.

The Ainu are not really Paleos. They are Australoids. Paleos are Australoid-Mongoloid transitionals.

Some Ryuku Islanders may be quite light. Many Ryuku Islanders may be more properly classed as Paleomongoloids than as Neomongoloids.


Filed under Ainu, Anthropology, Asians, Chinese (Ethnic), Japanese, Koreans, Northeast Asians, Physical, Race/Ethnicity

What Does a Neomongoloid-Australoid Cross Look Like?

Anthropology1994 writes:

So if a person looks Neomongoloid but has more percent of Paleomongoloid genes, will he still be categorized as Neomongoloid? And will a half Neomongoloid half Australoid that looks Neomongoloid be categorized too as Neomongoloid?

Yes all of this is based on phenotype or appearance. None of it is based on genetics.

The Japanese are Neomongoloid-Australoid crosses, but they are 80% Neo and only 20% Australoid. That gives you some sort of an idea of what such a cross may look like.

Well, they might be classed as Paleos. From what I have seen, Japanese-Ainu crosses look rather Paleo. A lot of them look like Taiwanese Aborigines.

But honestly, Neos are not going to breed in with hardcore Australoids anywhere on Earth. How many Chinese people are going to breed with a Senoi, a Veddoid, a Naga, a Melanesian, a Negrito, a Papuan or an Aborigine.

Hell, how many Chinese even breed with a Tamil? Maybe in Singapore?

I do believe that you end up with a Paleo type when you breed these two together. And for some reason when you breed a Mongoloid with an Australoid, a lot of the time, you end up with something that looks rather Caucasoid. I have no idea why that is except that perhaps “Caucasoid” is one of a limited set of possible endpoints for a human phenotype. In other words, no matter how you mix up and interbreed humans, the ways in which we can end up looking are only going to fall into a fairly small subset of all possible appearances. And that subset probably looks like the races we have now. Look how many humans look like Negroids but are not Negroid at all.


Filed under Ainu, Anthropology, Asians, Chinese (Ethnic), Japanese, Northeast Asians, Physical, Race/Ethnicity

Asians and Caucasians: Archaics, Transitional, and Progressive Forms

Anthropology 1994 writes:

If Chinese are equivalent to Americans and Koreans to Nordics, which European or Caucasian type will the Japanese and Vietnamese be equivalent to?

Not sure, Japanese and Koreans are pretty much identical. I am not sure what to do with Vietnamese.

Those types of comparisons between Mongoloids and Caucasoids are very difficult and maybe impossible to do – the groups are just too different and they have very different histories.

If you are asking what an archaic protoform or paleo transition form of Caucasians may look like, maybe they are similar to South Indians.

Thing is, we can see a lot of the transition in Asia. There are still many Australoid proto-Asians (Melanesians, Papuans, Aborigines, Ainu, Senoi, Negritos, Tamils) and there are also many Neomongoloid Neoasians (Chinese, Japanese, Mongolians, Koreans, Vietnamese). In between we have the Paleomongoloid Paleoasians in transition (Polynesians, Micronesians, Thais, Lao, Khmer, Malays, Indonesians, Filipinos, Taiwan aborigines, Nagas).

For Caucasoids we simply have Caucasoids. Not many people make a distinction between Neocaucasians, Paleocaucasians and Protocaucasians because hardly anyone knows what the Paleos and Protos look like. We are probably not even sure what a Paleocaucasian looks like, but the South Indians and the Saami may be a good example. We are lost when it comes to Protocaucasians. In other words, for Caucasians, we mostly just have the fully transitioned form in Europeans, Near Easterners, Central Asians and even in Arabs and North Africans. All of these are pretty much fully transitioned Caucasians. But no one really knows that they transitioned from or what the transitioning forms looked like.

Asia looks a lot more in flux. The world of the Caucasians looks like a done deal.


Filed under Aborigines, Ainu, Anthropology, Arabs, Asians, Chinese (Ethnic), Europeans, Filipinos, Indonesians, Japanese, Khmer, Koreans, Lao, Malays, Melanesians, Micronesians, Mongolians, Near Easterners, Negritos, North Africans, Northeast Asians, Oceanians, Papuans, Physical, Polynesians, Race/Ethnicity, SE Asians, Taiwanese Aborigines, Thai, Vietnamese