Heritabilities are usually underestimated

When we read popular books by leading authors, we often find statements like this: Since the 1960s scientists conducting long-term studies on special relatives like twins and adoptees have built a mountain of evidence showing that genetics contributes importantly to psychological differences between us. The genetic contribution is not just statistically significant, it is massive….

Continue Reading

In favor of race science

What shall we call the study of human races? I mean, in a sense, this is part of anthropology, the study of man, which would include the varieties of man under the subfield of physical anthropology. However, in practice, that field has been more or less completely captured by left-wing activists as shown by survey…

Continue Reading

State of genetic predictions: an example

While we don’t take anecdotes too seriously on this blog, here I will present a small one. If you are one of those who have purchased genetic test results from consumer genomics companies such as 23andme or ancestry.com, you can download your ‘raw’ data and upload it elsewhere (or look at it yourself). I saw…

Continue Reading

p > .05 thus no effect thus familial confounding fallacies

Reading over some sibling control studies, BIG TOUGH GUY mentioned this quite wrong study: Meier, S. M., Mors, O., & Parner, E. (2017). Familial confounding of the association between maternal smoking during pregnancy and schizophrenia. American Journal of Psychiatry, 174(2), 187-187. The topic of the study need not interest us, the error is statistical. Results…

Continue Reading