The Irish were portrayed in the media as monkeys. Morons. A disease. All of the Apollo astronauts were scotch-irish. Fine stock. average 100 IQ’s. The european immigrants and natives struggled, yes, but you’re talking good stock and good stock.
We breed animals to pass on certain desirable traits, but when it comes to humans, there is no such thing as good breeding and good breeding choices.
And yet there are. Mixing White folks with jungle savages or middle eastern moon-worshippers who still live as though they were i. the 12th century discuss good. We just go down and down and down.
If a person with an IQ of 100 breeds with a person of iQ 80, statistically, the offspring will have an iQ of 90. Down we go. If a person has an Iq of 80, they would have to breed with a person of IQ 120 in order for their offspring to get back up to average 100. What person with an IQ of 120 is going to want to breed with an 80IQ caveman. With Dirka-Dirka Mohamed ??
The English consistently from Cromwell until the 1950s portrayed Irish people as “bad stock” to use your language.
They were portrayed as sub human apes in comparison to Anglo Saxons
Oh and those middle eastern moon worshippers prove your nature over nurture statement wrong.
Those are descendants of the creators of civilisation: from Sumeruahs, Akkadiahs, Egyptians, Hebrews, Syruacs, Phoenicians etc.
What dumbed them down? Islam.
You can see the same thing among Punjabis: Punjabi Mohammedans have a lower IQ than Hindu, Sikh, Christian Punjabis despite sharing the same genes and language
And your claim “ If an individual with an IQ of 100 has a child with an individual with an IQ of 80, the child will statistically have an IQ of 90, creating a downward trend”
That is NOT how IQ works.
Because intelligence is heavily influenced by environmental factors and complex genetic combinations, children of parents with extreme traits (either exceptionally high or exceptionally low IQs) statistically tend to move back toward the population average (100), rather than splitting the difference precisely or continuing a downward trend.
Unlike simple physical traits in animals (like coat color), human intelligence is a highly complex polygenic trait influenced by thousands of genetic variants, each having a minuscule effect.
Also note that throughout the 20th and 21st centuries, average IQ scores rose worldwide by roughly 3 points per decade due to improvements in public health, better nutrition, and widespread formal education—proving that population intelligence is not a fixed, declining genetic pool.
It is just not as simple as you put it. Society and Culture matters as well as nutrition, rule of law, and genetics
As to “What person with an IQ of 120 is going to want to breed with an 80IQ caveman”
Well no one. The normal difference that make a couple work is about 10 to 20 IQ points with the mean being closer to 12.
A 49 IQ point difference cannot communicate even as acquaintances leave alone a couple.
The white average isq has been 105
And yet there are. Mixing White folks with jungle savages or middle eastern moon-worshippers who still live as though they were i. the 12th century discuss good. We just go down and down and down.
If a person with an IQ of 100 breeds with a person of iQ 80, statistically, the offspring will have an iQ of 90. Down we go. If a person has an Iq of 80, they would have to breed with a person of IQ 120 in order for their offspring to get back up to average 100. What person with an IQ of 120 is going to want to breed with an 80IQ caveman. With Dirka-Dirka Mohamed ??
So . . . I'm getting that you don't believe in Adam and Eve. And that humans are just animals like cattle and hogs.
Lots of wealthy men with IQs of 120+ wind up with airhead trophy wives whose IQ probably doesn't top 80. I think that explains why there are so many dull rich kids on elite college campuses.
The Irish were portrayed in the media as monkeys. Morons. A disease. All of the Apollo astronauts were scotch-irish. Fine stock. average 100 IQ’s. The european immigrants and natives struggled, yes, but you’re talking good stock and good stock. We breed animals to pass on certain desirable traits, but when it comes to humans, there is no such thing as good breeding and good breeding choices.
Not only is dysgenics taboo in today's politically correct world, but we have policies that are actually dysgenic, i.e. importing the worst dregs of the Third World, combined with welfare policies that reward both native and imported dregs to have more children.
And those who say that today's Hmong and Somalis are equivalent to yesterday's Irish, Poles, and Italians are either ignorant or dishonest - usually the latter. There's a reason why we talk about an Italian Renaissance but not a Somali or Laotian Renaissance.