One of the pleasures of taking a break in France is that when you “French Google” (an enquiry after meaning, not a sexual position) the case of Jason Richwine, currently subject to a public hate session, you get a reassuring collection of articles on fine wines. But, away from la belle France, in the land of Coca Cola the name of Richwine is now up in the spotlight of the haters, being Watson’d (see James Watson, Nobel Laureate and UnPerson on this blog) for repeating out loud the well-known data on intelligence, scholastic achievement and employability which is normally published in discrete tables in obscure papers, where it will not frighten the horses.
Although our genetics we will always have with us, the code of our ancestry written in every cell of our bodies, the labels we attach to racial groups, generally accurately, vary from country to country. The US census lumps together Mexicans, Puerto Ricans and other Spanish speakers, usually calling them Hispanics or Latinos. I can qualify linguistically, if not genetically. Facts on this group can be found from the Census, the National Assessment of Educational Progress, and other official sources. As ever, Steve Sailer has a good set of meta-analyses:
He identifies one of the largest studies:
Heiner Rindermann at the University of Chemnitz, Germany, is working on the latest NAEP results, in a paper which may be coming out soon in Intelligence, and which is with reviewers at the moment.
I have had a look at what Jason Richwine has said, and his comments are in line with the current data. So here is the challenge: a bottle of fine French wine sent to the first person who can show that Hispanic/Latino American intelligence and scholastic ability is on the same level as European American intelligence and scholastic ability.