Part 3 of our journey through the mountain of interlocking falsities Salad Fingers as thrown into the limelight
Bit Chute:
https://www.bitchute.com/channel/thealthype/
D'nate:
https://www.patreon.com/CoolTapes
https://www.subscribestar.com/ryan-faulk
Sources:
To get past paywalls, go to sci-hub.se , and then type in the DOI for the article you're looking for.
Relation between ASVAB and Soldiering Performance:
https://sci-hub.se/10.1037/0021-9010.89.2.220
SAT actually OVERPREDICTS performance of NAMs:
https://research.collegeboard.org/pdf/differential-validity-and-prediction-sat.pdf
- i.e. SAT is actually racially biased against Whites and E. Asians
IQ tests OVERPREDICT school performance of NAMs:
https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/j.intell.2015.11.007
- Evidence of IQ tests having anti-white & anti-east asian bias
Article on black-white variance in relative subtest performance:
https://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/09/21/blacks-and-whites-with-the-same-iq-still-differ-a-lot/
Snyderman and Rothman 1987:
http://lepo.it.da.ut.ee/~spihlap/snyderman@rothman.pdf
Rindermann, Coyle and Becker 2013:
http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/2013-survey-of-expert-opinion-on-intelligence.pdf
Same people from 2020:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289619301886
Friedrichs 1973:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/2966555?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
Sherwood and Nataupsky 1968:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/5638024
(Forgot to show this one, evidence of greater popularity of opposing divergent evolution in 1968 than today).
Survey of Experts on Cultural Bias of IQ tests:
http://sci-hub.tw/10.1016/j.intell.2008.03.007
Expert Judges picking "Culturally Biased" Questions:
http://arthurjensen.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Black-White-Bias-in-Cultural-and-Noncultural-Test-Items-1987-by-Arthur-Robert-Jensen-Frank-C.-J.-McGurk.pdf
Rank-order difficulty does not vary by race:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/9781118133880.hop210004
https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/0160-2896(79)90013-8
Studies that show Psychology is actually a fairly rigorous field overall compared to the general shitshow that is "science":
https://ideasanddata.wordpress.com/2019/01/08/nassim-taleb-on-iq/
https://www.nature.com/news/1-500-scientists-lift-the-lid-on-reproducibility-1.19970
http://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2016/03/02/science.aaf0918/tab-pdf
https://www.nature.com/articles/483531a
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/neuroskeptic/2014/11/19/reality-check-neuroscience/#.XDEv4VxKg2w
https://www.nature.com/news/1-500-scientists-lift-the-lid-on-reproducibility-1.19970
https://www.nature.com/articles/nrn3475.pdf
http://rsos.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/royopensci/3/9/160384.full.pdf
http://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.2000797&type=printable
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5367316/pdf/rsos160254.pdf
https://psyarxiv.com/ytsvw
