Sorry bros. LOL. Dry sense of humor here. That comment was actually meant to be funny, but in retrospect I can see how it comes off a bit too serious. Joke intended. For real.
But in a way, it also speaks to Chip's original question, and why studies like the one he's asking about aren't being done nowadays. The whole f*cking world is all about image, marketing, and money these days. For such a study to be representative enough to draw solid conclusions or establish new theory about ethnicity and ability it would have to be BIG, and it would require a lot of funding.
Most so-called studies are funded by foundations or corporations that have a financial or political interest in the outcome of the study. In other words, they either know beforehand what the findings will be, or they tell the researchers beforehand what they want the findings to be as a condition of getting the funding. And the findings are usually pegged to something that they're trying to sell or some other political agenda. [And in some cases it works because researchers can tweak statistical data so that it seems to support whatever viewpoint they're trying to present]. However, corporations are also very protective of their public image and most of them wouldn't want to be associated with the negative publicity that the findings from a study like this would generate.
The exception might be if the study were to be funded by a private donor, on condition that the donor not be publicly identified. But as I've already said, I can see that there would be many problems with trying to do a study like this. Additionally, the PhD brains who review this kind of stuff after it is published thrive on competition and criticizing their colleagues' work. They will look deep and wide for everything that they can find that is wrong with the study and then try to rip it to pieces. No matter what type of evidence the researchers come up with to substantiate a theory that any one race is superior in any way to another there will be a group of PhD ethnologists waiting in the wings to discredit it. Research scientists know this, and I'm sure thats why they don't bother.
???
