>>69262
Your shit book lacks validity and its methodological structure is pseudoscientific, it contains no new information and produces a "correlation equals causation" fallacy, and had no peer review at the time of publishing.
Also Murray claims that poor IQ scores leads to poverty rather than the other way around; academic IQ tests don't measure the quality of life outside schooling, so even if someone does poorly on an IQ test it doesn't translate to them having a bad job outside or being stupid day-to-day, for example. It also predicts no long term effects, so even if one scores poorly it doesn't reflect a lifetime of failure. In conclusion there is no evidence that this so-called IQ gap is racial, and more likely points to differences of economic status.
http://www.unc.edu/~nielsen/soci850/odocs/apa_01.htm
The writers were unqualified to write anything on the topic of race and IQ. To make matters worse, the test they administered
WASN'T EVEN A FUCKING IQ TEST
It was an armed forces admissions test
>hey mistook an armed forces qualifying test that measures vocabulary and verbal reasoning for IQ tests, Fairchild said. "This is an achievement test. It shows the extent to which you've benefited from school. To assert it's a proxy for IQ is a big lie."
http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/L-bellcurvescience.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve#Criticism_by_Stephen_Jay_Gould
Stephen Jay Gould raised 4 counterclaims that the book didn't support:
Intelligence must be reducible to a single number.
Intelligence must be capable of rank ordering people in a linear order.
Intelligence must be primarily genetically based.
Intelligence must be essentially immutable.
when faced with this Murray was forced to admit that IQ wasn't an inherently genetic factor, and then went on to support multiple intelligences:
Interviewer: Let me go back to Gould's four points. Is there any one of those that you think is not a fair and accurate statement of what you said?
Murray: All four of them.[21]
Interviewer: You are not a determinist. You are not saying everything is in the genes. You think free will is a meaningful concept.
Murray: Yes, and so did Dick Herrnstein ...[21]
Murray said he does not reduce intelligence to a single number but is sympathetic to Howard Gardner's idea of multiple intelligences.
Interviewer: So you are not saying intelligence is a single number?
Murray: No.
https://web.archive.org/web/20050205010706/http://www.skeptic.com/archives24.html
------------------
Attached you will find a refutation of muh bell curve and a refutation of the pseudoscientific methods in general nazifags use to justify their bullshit. Bad methods = bad science.
Have a nice day.