A rather well researched and presented explanation and refutation of the Flynn effect by MrHerrIQ.

Permalink:
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=148BFA89998282DA

A few studies have purported to prove that with the right environmental stimuli Black children would develop IQs
similar to those of White and Asian children. The Milwaukee Project was the most famous of these, and inevitably it
attracted plentiful media coverage in its heyday. It was reported that through intensive early childhood intervention and
stimulation, underprivileged, slum-dwelling Black children had their IQs increased 30 points in comparison with the
control group.[101] The Washington Post wrote triumphantly that the project’s success “settled once and for all” the
question of whether kids of poor socioeconomic backgrounds are held back by environment or by heredity.

Unfortunately for the egalitarians, their euphoric media bubble burst when the Milwaukee Project’s director, Rick
Haber, was convicted and imprisoned for embezzling government money. While this is not directly relevant to the
results of the project, it does call into question the trustworthiness of its director. Howard L. Garber, longtime associate
of Haber, in 1988 issued a report on the project that revealed the IQ gains were artificial, having been achieved by
intensive practice on problems similar to those on the Stanford-Binet test, and that the kids’ IQs declined steadily after
leaving the program, with the gains never translating into academic success. Ultimately their abilities matched at the
same level as that of the control group, which, of course, had no intervention. [102] [103]

Herman Spitz, in his book The Raising of Intelligence, documents dozens of similar programs that failed miserably to
raise the IQ of Blacks. In their initial stages, the media gave them extensive coverage and rave reviews, but little
coverage of their ultimate failure. The pattern of publicity is identical to that under Lysenkoism in the Soviet Union.
Over the years there were many media blitzes proclaiming the remarkable success of various early intervention
programs. With embarrassing regularity the touted program was allowed to sink into quiet disrepute while the media
trumpeted the miraculous results of another new approach. [104] [105] [106]

Another example of media “proof” that Black-White differences are environmental is the coverage of the Chicago
Black teacher, Marva Collins. One of the most famous personalities in American education, Collins has gotten
extensive media coverage, including adulatory articles in The New York Times and sumptuous praise on the television
show 60 Minutes. She claimed that seemingly “unteachable” inner-city children between 5 and 10-years-old had soared
in standardized tests under her teaching methods and were reading and comprehending Tolstoy, Plato, and
Shakespeare. In spite of such incredible claims, the media never asked Collins for hard scientific evidence to
substantiate her assertions, nor has her “miracle” been successfully duplicated by any other psychologists and educators
in controlled studies. These kinds of miraculous stories, ever popular in the mass media, for good reason never find
their way into the scrutiny afforded by scientific journals.[107]

- From My Awakening by David Duke

1916 in Virginia, large groups of Black school children
were divided in groups determined by the number of White and Black grandparents. All the Black subjects, pure or
partially Black, were raised in the Black community’s environment. The Blacks with four Black grandparents scored
the lowest in IQ. Blacks with three Black grandparents and one White - a bit higher; Blacks with two White
grandparents - higher still; and Blacks with three White grandparents scored highest in IQ among the Black children.[87]

The most recent studies of the 1990s show precisely the same results.
One of the most powerful direct studies of race and environment was conducted by psychologists Sandra Scarr, Richard
Weinberg and I. D. Waldman. All three are quite well known for their environmentalist opinions. The study analyzed
White, Black and mixed-race adopted children in more than 100 White families in Minnesota. The study was an
egalitarian’s dream, because the children’s adoptive parents had prestigious levels of income and education and were
antiracist enough to adopt a Black child into their own family. Scarr is a strong defender of racial equality and
maintained that environment played an almost exclusive role in IQ differences between the races. Scarr supports the
importance of heredity in causing individual differences within a race, but she has argued that the between-race
differences are mostly environmental.

The children in the study included adopted Whites, Blacks, and Mulattos as well as the biological children of the White
adoptive couples. At the age of 7, the children were tested for IQ, and all of the groups, including the Blacks and
Mulattos, scored above average in IQ. Scarr and Weinberg published a paper claiming to have proven the almost
exclusive power of environment over race in IQ, even though they had to admit that the White children, whether
adopted or not, scored well above the Black and Mulatto children and that the Mulatto children scored above the
Blacks.[88]

A decade later, when the children reached the average age 17, a follow-up study was conducted that again included IQ
measurements. As they matured, Black children had dropped back to an average of 89 in IQ, which is the average IQ
for Blacks in the region of the United States where the study was done. The White adopted children scored an average
of 106 in IQ, 17 points higher than the Black children, which is consistent with traditional studies of Black and White
IQ differences. In line with genetic theory, the half-White, half-Black Mulatto adopted children scored almost exactly
between the adopted Whites and Blacks.[89]

Scarr and Weinberg reluctantly published their data from the follow-up survey, but they waited close to four years to do
so, almost as if they were embarrassed by what they had found. Through a tortured reasoning process, they still argued
that environment played a dominant role in IQ. But in their follow-up survey, unlike their first paper, they also
admitted that genes had an important impact as well. Both Richard Lynn and Michael Levin effectively showed in their
reanalyses of Scarr’s own data, that genes clearly comprise the dominant role in intelligence levels of those adopted
children.[90] [91]

My Awakening - David Duke

…Many studies of Blacks and Whites take socioeconomic factors into account. They consistently find that even
those Blacks who come from high income and well-educated families still have markedly lower IQs than Whites.

SAT scores correlate very highly with IQ and the testing service has gathered information on the parental income,
education, and race of its test-takers. It finds that Black students with a household income of more than $70,000 a year and who have at least one parent who is a college graduate - score lower on the SAT than Whites from households that
make less than $20,000 annually and in which both parents are high-school dropouts. [79] [80] The most environmentally
disadvantaged group of Whites who take the SAT - score higher than the most environmentally advantaged group of
Blacks.

The psychological data for genetic explanations for poor Black performance in IQ are extensive and powerful. IQ
studies including Blacks, Whites, and Asians have extensively correlated many socioeconomic factors, including
family income, parental education level and occupation status, and school quality. Groups of low-income Whites with
low parental education levels and low parental occupation statuses consistently score higher in IQ than Blacks from
families of high income, high education levels and high occupation status. [81] [82]

- from My Awakening by David Duke

Also, contradicting the cultural bias or chitterlings explanation for low Black IQ are studies showing that Hispanics
(who on average are poorer than Blacks) and who have obvious language and cultural handicaps (many being new
arrivals to our culture), score significantly higher than Blacks in the abstract sections of IQ tests. They consistently
score higher in the verbal sections as well. American Indians, who in comparison with Blacks are poorer and generally
more isolated from mainstream American culture and education centers, also do better than Blacks on IQ tests. Arthur
Jensen in Bias in Mental Testing wrote:

On a composite of twelve SES [Socio-Economic Status] and other environmental indices, the American
Indian population ranks about as far below black standards as blacks rank below that of Whites … but it
turns out that Indians score higher than blacks on tests of intelligence…. On a nonverbal reasoning test
given in the first grade, before schooling could have had much impact, Indian children exceeded the mean
score of blacks by the equivalent of 14 IQ points … opposite from what one would predict from the theory
that ethnic group differences in IQ merely reflect SES differences.[73]

Blacks consistently do better on the parts of the IQ tests that have the largest cultural component and poorest on the parts that were the most culture-free. Blacks do far better on the verbal parts of IQ tests than they do on the parts with
symbols measuring abstract mental abilities. If cultural bias is responsible for differences in Black and White IQ scores,
then the biggest gap should be in the more culturally-loaded verbal tests. But the opposite is true.

My Awakening - David Duke

There are many studies of twins, including a comprehensive study at the University of Minnesota by Dr. Thomas J. Bouchard Jr. that received worldwide attention. The study showed that the IQs of identical twins raised apart were
much closer than random adopted children, and that they were even closer than for fraternal twins who were raised in
the same home, and who attended the same schools. Not a single twin study has ever contradicted these results. [46] [47]
Let me emphasize this important point - identical twins growing up in completely different environments - with
different parents, different schools, different diets, different political and religious persuasions - have IQs closer
together than those of fraternal twins raised in the same family. If intelligence is primarily created by environmental
factors, certainly the fraternal twins raised together in the same familial, social, and educational environment should
obviously have much closer IQs than twins who were raised apart.

My Awakening - David Duke