You seem to be under the impression that blacks were oppressed for eternity, which I know is the politically correct narrative, but it holds no water. No, I'm not under that impression. You totally ignored my point about the Ashkenazim, who weren't oppressed for eternity either, but made no contributions to science till about 200 years ago. He was a scientist actually, not that scientists are the final say in anything, and he showed quite well how beauty is eternal and objective. Your words seem to indicate the opposite of what you say; that you don't know anything about philosophy. Why do you feel the need to resort to ad hominem attacks? Philosophy happened to be my second major, although I was never awarded a certificate for it because I wasn't able to pay for the last couple of courses...but that's neither here nor there. Plato was most definitely not a scientist in the modern sense of the word. In fact, that's one of the main differences between him and Aristotle. And you're right, scientists are not the final say in anything. Neither are philosophers. Only according to cultural marxist anthropologists who have a vested interest in denying the biological reality of race. There was a study done on medical students in some african country, whose name I don't remember, and they scored around the expected 80 point range. Why is that? They can't blame it on oppression or anything other factors. Chinese peasants still score around 100, despite having no education. So your argument doesn't seem to work. As for arabs, they aren't really a race. Egyptians, syrians etc, are all arabised, not arabs as such. It wasn't the arabian tribemen from the arabian peninsula who made all the advancements; they themselves went back to their simple lives not long after the openings of the middle east. The islamic intellectual tradtion, specifically ashari theology, is essentially Persian, the whole line of philosophical argumentation that came via the mutazila into asharism came by the persian and christian converts to islam. Even in grammar, the one to formalise grammar, sibawayh, was not even an arab, he was persian. As for blacks, they never progressed to a stage from which they could stagnate. lolno. Stupid, yes, in lacking education. But there is still the IQ gap. I haven't had time to read this IQ book, so I can't comment on this. I did look it up on Wikipedia, and it seems people have pointed out flaws in the methodology. Never mind the fact that IQ is by no means an absolute measure of intelligence, just like the SAT or MCAT aren't. Were all the same IQ tests administered in the countries being compared? Was the sample size and composition always the same? Were IQ tests administered in the vernacular? Apparently, about two-thirds of the nations that were compared were not even tested, but simply assigned an IQ by averaging that of other countries. This kind of statistical "research" is sketchy. The numbers can always be manipulated to fit a thesis. No excuse, they've had since the beginning of time, and only 'progressed' once they were given european technology. And I can only scoff at your 'list.' Why? Have you accomplished anything near any one of those on the list in your life?