GSS analysis is something i've wanted to do myself for a while now, but I have an overambitious design that would take a lot of work so I haven't done it. I basically want to do the best possible measure of political ideology that can be done in the GSS and see if white zoomers are more conservative on it than white millenials. It isn't simply "introducing personal biases" to not do simple averaging.
True. It's definitely possible to do better. Originally I intended to use linear regression to create the best classifier for self-ID ideology for those born in a reference decade (probably 1960-1969), then use that instead, but the process of cleaning up the data to do it was too much of a PITA. So I just went with the simplest option, since the point wasn't to get a super-precise estimate, just a ballpark.
I don't know if this is a whitepill or blackpill, that there has been for over 100 years a clear pro-conservative selection effect, but a huge leftward-shift at the same time. Do the selection effects ever overcome the, I assume, memetic and racial demographic effects?
I don't see how the lack of a relationship between intelligence and mutational load refutes the MLH. Isn't the whole point that mutational load changes certain traits but not intelligence, which we know to be correlated with leftism? If mutational load made one less intelligent then the hypothesis would be dead in the water from the start. Might be misunderstanding here, it just seems that you've said we need to find a trait which we know is affected by mutational load, and then concluded that intelligence isn't affected by mutational load.
Mutational load does make one less intelligent. I provide a link in the previous post, but it's easy to miss. This has been shown with direct genetic evidence.
The point of the intelligence comparison is that load is increasing and causally reduces intelligence, but there is no detectable signal of load accumulation on intelligence at a population level, implying the effect size is too small to matter. If this can be true for intelligence, it can also be true for politics, meaning even if both premises are accurate, the conclusion (increasing load is primarily responsible for increasing leftism) does not follow.
Mutation absolutely negatively affects intelligence, it's just that causation doesn't imply correlation, and the wealthier stratums of society experienced dysgenic mutation first. This said, I don't exactly like the idea of assessing the question of politics by testing mutation against intelligence. Intelligence is a special case with other known factors going on.
GSS analysis is something i've wanted to do myself for a while now, but I have an overambitious design that would take a lot of work so I haven't done it. I basically want to do the best possible measure of political ideology that can be done in the GSS and see if white zoomers are more conservative on it than white millenials. It isn't simply "introducing personal biases" to not do simple averaging.
True. It's definitely possible to do better. Originally I intended to use linear regression to create the best classifier for self-ID ideology for those born in a reference decade (probably 1960-1969), then use that instead, but the process of cleaning up the data to do it was too much of a PITA. So I just went with the simplest option, since the point wasn't to get a super-precise estimate, just a ballpark.
If IQ declines are mostly not on g, this might support that the Flynn effect is caused by mercury air pollution.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273789709_Rising-falling_mercury_pollution_causing_the_rising-falling_IQ_of_the_Lynn-Flynn_effect_as_predicted_by_the_antiinnatia_theory_of_autism_and_IQ
I don't know if this is a whitepill or blackpill, that there has been for over 100 years a clear pro-conservative selection effect, but a huge leftward-shift at the same time. Do the selection effects ever overcome the, I assume, memetic and racial demographic effects?
Very based sir. What is your explanation for leftism with mutational load not being explanatory?
I don't see how the lack of a relationship between intelligence and mutational load refutes the MLH. Isn't the whole point that mutational load changes certain traits but not intelligence, which we know to be correlated with leftism? If mutational load made one less intelligent then the hypothesis would be dead in the water from the start. Might be misunderstanding here, it just seems that you've said we need to find a trait which we know is affected by mutational load, and then concluded that intelligence isn't affected by mutational load.
Mutational load does make one less intelligent. I provide a link in the previous post, but it's easy to miss. This has been shown with direct genetic evidence.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41588-023-01398-8
The MLH has two premises:
1) Load is increasing (true)
2) Leftism affects load (maybe)
The point of the intelligence comparison is that load is increasing and causally reduces intelligence, but there is no detectable signal of load accumulation on intelligence at a population level, implying the effect size is too small to matter. If this can be true for intelligence, it can also be true for politics, meaning even if both premises are accurate, the conclusion (increasing load is primarily responsible for increasing leftism) does not follow.
Mutation absolutely negatively affects intelligence, it's just that causation doesn't imply correlation, and the wealthier stratums of society experienced dysgenic mutation first. This said, I don't exactly like the idea of assessing the question of politics by testing mutation against intelligence. Intelligence is a special case with other known factors going on.