The Indian/Chinese IQ puzzle

The case of Vietnam is more complicated. People from the North of Vietnam is very similar to the people from South of China (actually, they once belonged to a country Nam Viet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanyue) while people from the South is a kind of mixing with the native people (i.e. Cambodia, Malaysia, etc) during the process of southward expansion of the territory.
There are quite a few differences between the two groups. Some typical stereotypes are: The Northerner are taller and white while the Southerner are short and darker. The Northerner are more tough, thrifty, valued education and family tradition while the Southerner are more relax.
The North won the war and many South Vietnam people fledged to the US. They (the South) have not been very successful (academically and economically) there.  They create the image of Vietnamese people but clearly it’s not very exact. The Northerner seem closer to the North Asia than Southeast Asia people. The Vietnamese guy who just won the Fields Medal is from the North. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ngô_B?o_Châu
Children of former Vietnamese guest-workers are also among the highest performing pupils in German schools. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_achievement_among_different_groups_in_Germany

There is a lot of verbal bashing going on here. I read through, some of them, but lost it completely after the first few.

IQ, I believe, is not a sole derivative of inherent intelligence. I believe it to be a sum product of your inherent intelligence, your trained intellignence, the sustained effort you put into maintaining your level of active usage of brain, and the level of concentration that you are able to devote at any given point of time.

If I take a test when my kid is not well and is in hospital, I might not fare upto my true potential.
I remember having liked mathematics too much in my school/college days, but down the line I changed my career to Finance. If you give me a problem, in trigonometry, I will not be able to solve now.

Being an Indian, I will be able to critically speak about the problems in India. China, I am not sure. In India huge number of people are in villages which are very very backward. Education is not given too much importance there. The family wants the kid to be useful in the labour work that they do. So while they might send the kids to the school, the atmosphere is not condusive to learning. Compare that with a much more educated state/city. Majority of Indians are in the middle income category. They have big dreams, and are able to lead a good life, but might not end their life being a multi billionare. They realise that whatever they have earned for themselves and for their family is ONLY by education. And they try to impart the same education to their kids. They try to send their kids to better schools, better environment. The time the whole of India follows this pattern the productivity of Indians as a whole will go up. The current expolitation of the uneducated mass will come to an end. Unlike China, the government of India is very very slow, as it has to go through a “democratic” process for reforms. It has made the education FREE and a constitutional right to every child. Not giving education is a crime, but in practicality, the implementation is poor. No body comes and takes a parent to the court for not sending his kid to school. I am not sure what is the system in China, but am very sure that the decisions are actually Implemented at most sincerity (or say most strictly)

Having said all these, I do not believe educated Indians are second to any one. All of my friends are quite capable of undertaking any task with equal or better efficiency than any one else in this world.

the east asian iq is definitely higher than south asian. the south asians really have no achievements to be proud of, the east asian’s achievement beats south asians hands down, in both scientific breakthroughs and the quantity of them. secondly, of all well known international competitions, east asians consistently top south asians. south asians including indians can only brag about their awards no one else has really heard of. but at any competitions where east asians compete, indians simply have no chance… they so often use the excuse of “indians have to study for the college exam” or “they don’t really care about those competition”, the truth is, in any well known competitions, indians sent just as many people as east asians, yet they trail way behind the east asians in scores, during which time the east asians also have to study for college entrance exams. the point is, south asians are not creative, not smart and build their countries like a dung hole, comparable only by sub-sahara african countries. just for the record, singapore is 70% chinese(east asian) thank god it’s not 70% indian, otherwise it will just turn into another poverty striken sri lanka.

The main difference is that india was colonized by england and China was not despite the efforts of europeans to try that.
Despite the incredible mess in eraly 20th century China, the western powers did not succeed in conquering China, and that’s the main reson China has done well and india is a mess.
Democracy only works in Europe and North America, it’s not a suitable system in Asia.

Not one former colonized country has done well, especially those colonized by europeans, all of them are sorry countries. All of them.

To compare China to india is a big mistake: only western press does this.

Despite the shameless boasting of indians who problably live on another planet, they are sorry people,
seems some of them are actually incredibly stupid as well.

I mean they cannot even build a proper bridge or highway, so what stupid ass wants to compare india with China.

China has better engineers, sportsmen, military, scientists, economists, so what do you want to compare?!

All right let’s compare China with india:

infrastructure: China wins hands down, China is even ahead of western countries in high speed rail, we have better looking highways and they are even better than what you would encounter than in western countries,
We have much more taller towers, better quality housing, roads etc. etc. in transport and housing China is more like in west.

Military: China military is bigger, yes of course, better trained, better educated, and more competent than indians, Chinese military equipment is much better than indian equipment who receives hand outs from russians, or useless stuff. there is no comparison in this field. Chinese military equipment surpasses anything that europeans produce, only the americans are more innovative than us at this moment, but since j-20 fighter China has closed the gap. india on the other hand is and will always be dependent of foreign aid, in designing weapons systems and producing weapons. They simply do not have the base to produce weapons. While China always had heavy industries (steel, machines etc.)

Scientists: China is so far ahead I don’t want to discuss this.

Sports: China wins 150 gold medals at Asian games while india wins 1 or 2 in totallly unknown sports that nobody plays or have heard of.

Economy: China is so much ahead I don’t want to compare this. Everybody knows.

Landscape: China has everything, beautiful mountains, steppes, lakes, rivers, beautiful nature, exceptional diverse flora and fauna (all plants and flowers from eurasia, exceptional fauna diversity, from deserts to ice, from artic weather to sub tropical weather.
All in one country, diversity wise only America can compare to China.

China is a so much better country.

And something else I am the expert!

I know more about race, haplogroups, genes etc. than anybody in this forum retards who quote from a rretarded website like wikipedia.

the upper class of indians called themselves “aryans” or in fact iranians who invaded india in 1200 b.c.
the area which we call the mddle east. So how did the “aryans” looked liked? They looked as iranians of today iran and they also looked as iraqi insurgents (americans are very creative in picking words, I had to laugh about insurgents instead of iraqi rebels or something like that)

Now we know the mutation taht caused paleness and colored eyes originated with mongoloids, yes, not from the people from the middle east.

So I can describe europeans as lightened up middle easterners with blend of mongoloid. So if I look purely at genes, all europeans are at least 50% middle easterners, depend of the area: spaniards and greeks maybe be 90% to 100% compatible with middle easteners like syrians and palestinians while the europeans of the north who have more mongoloid input are also paler and have coloured hair adn eyes thank to the ancient mongoloids who went to europe. How come you fail to recognize the link of mongoloid R1a and R1b are also the people who areblond and blue eyed, just like the finns who are over 60% N3 (North China haplotypes) are the most blond and blued eyed people of europe.

In fact more mongoloid input is more blond and coloured eyes, the more closer caucasians are to the original caucasians (middle easterners) the darker they are and the bigger nose they have!

So people are mixing up a lot of things, Europeans are just a mix of middle easterners and northern Chinese to speak of, the southern europeans are more closer to the original caucasians, the middle easterners, than let’s say the swedes who have more mongloid input put are blonder and more multi coloured eyed.
You fail to see the link that people with R1a and R1b are more blonder than the people of southern europe with their arab J2 and e3b genes?!
Don’t believe me?! just tell your prof about this and let them read it, yes.

What a fucking mistake it was for northern Chinese to walk to europe in paleolithic times, I rather prefer the mutation to have stayed in China, because then europeans of today would looked like middle easterners, without the paleness and multicoloured hair and eyes. I would have prefer that that all europeans would rather look like the arabs.

Europeans as lightened up arabs, maybe it was better that R1a, R1b and N3 stayed in China, what a fucking mistake it is. We would not have the whining assholes complaining about this and that, their useless colonies, maybe it would have been better that europe is just an extension of middle east.

So the peope who brought indo-european languages into europe came from the middle east, the area we now called northern iraq, northern syria and anatolia.
indo european languages is an ancient language from the middle east, introduced into europe by the ancient farmers who also introduced crops like wheat and animals like sheep and goats into Europe.

The haplogroup of the indo europeans is J2. oh yeah we can learn alot of genes. you see the most ancient groups like latin and greeks are people who are predominatly J2.
Aryans who looked like the iraqi “insurgents” narrow skull, dark brown hair, curly, lot of facial hair and body hair and a big noose with high noosebridge. ( bigger noosed people like greeks are more closer to the original caucasians of the middle east).

You see, the more body hair you have like on your chest or your back, the more male middle easterner ancestry you have. Just like the bigger your nose the more middle easterner descent you have. I mean something like Charles de Gaulle nose, I am sure he had an middle easterner haplotype like J2 or e3b or I1.

More original aryan or middle easter ancestry mean:

more body and facial hair (men)
curly hair
bigger noose bridge

for females it means

that they have bigger tits if they have more original middle easterners descent. Just look at it: soouthern european women have much bigger tits than northern european women and they cannot help it because our Chinese women have the same small breast as nordic women. The southern european women have the same large breasts as middle easterner women.

And middle easterner women as southern european women have bigger asses! A bit like black big momma. Big breasts and big tits. some of them have the body of black women.

It could be that middle easterner women have fairly amount of black genes and pass it on to southern european women.

It is possible to just look at people’s faces and body to tell where their ancestors came from.

Bigger asses and bigger tits, the body of black woman, sometimes some middle easterner and southern european women look like version of big momma.

I just want to research into this deeper, I think it seems that a fairly amount of white women have black bodies, it would be interesting to see if I am right and see if they have african haplotype. I think the amount of middle easterners haplotypes are underreported in countries like spain and portugal ( I think they lie about it, I don’t believe that R1b could be bigger than J2 and E3b, in reality the amount of J2 and E3b is substantally larger than R1b in spain, just look at spaniards, it should be very compatible with north africans and lebanese) Could’t be true of course the coalescence age of R1b in Europe is the youngest, 3000 years compared to 15000 years in China. So R1b arrived as one of the latest in spain so it cannot be bigger than the haplotypes who were already there like those middle eastern haplotypes J2 and e3b.

I think a lot is underreported or false in genetic reports about europeans, the wikipedia website is written by retards.

but going back to the big butted and big boobed women, I am sure genetics has its part, you can argue that they eat too much and dine too often at mac.
I think their body is something genetic just like the size of breasts is genetic: more middle easterner genes is bigger boobs for the women, just like all arab women seem to have big boobs like african women, I think there is a link here.

The nordic women have smaller breasts due to their bigger mongoloid heritage, but are blonder and blue eyed, comapred to southern european women. So dark haired big boobies or blond small tits.
It’s a trade off I think. Big breasted blonds are probably not real blonds.

If the west wants to find a counter balance to China, they must find another contender as india is no match in the first place, it never was.

I tell you what we do with competitors! Do not try to compete with China for resources, land because we still remember the days that the west tried to wreck China, those countries should be very careful now for nothing is forgiven nor forgotten.

In my opinion people in west are foolish people because they think that everything is about money and bribes and cheating to get more money. That’s why sollicitors or lawyers are amking big money in western societies. Lawyers are also overrepresented in western governments. If you look at the american congress, or house, the amount of lawyers is staggering. I hold lawyers in very low esteem but of course in west, it is different. Maybe lawyers are better liars when they address their own people when they are holding office, so maybe that’s why so many western politicans were lawyers.

The western countries also have an entrenched class of certain group of people who hold power behind the scene, and it always have been that way.

Now how should we regard western countries with their fake democracies? Do you really think that being on good terms with people in Chinese government will help you? What kind of government do you think will follow after the communists? Are you really so stupid to think that the people whom you bribed can help you? Do you think that it will be allowed that the revolution of chairman Mao would be betrayed?! Of course not, there may be greedy corrupt officials but they will not be able to change anything in your favour.

We Chinese are proud to be Chinese and we will take care of those who think that they can change China.

@Tao is a Legend, actually not Manjul Bhargava’s IQ is likely higher than the lame slave Terence Tao. Manjul Bhargava is nearly the same age as Terence Tao (1 year apart) and Bhargava performed FLAWLESSLY with Princeton Generals, where as the robotic Chinese Tao stumbled and nearly failed with Princeton Generals.

Bhargava is the 2nd youngest full Professor at Princeton where as Tao had to go to UCLA (LOL).

Princeton generals are known for being very very tough and Bhargava handled all of them flawlessly and even challenged them to ask him any question. Facing Princeton generals is much much harder than winning an IMO Gold medal, so Princeton general are a good test of intelligence. Most mind’s cannot handle Princeton generals and often get lost and confused in the process where as Bhargava’s performance was flawless.

So Bhargava’s IQ is likely much higher than Tao’s, probably around 200 or higher, but neither Tao nor Bhargava’s adult IQ have ever been measured. Childhood IQs are always inaccurate and inflated.

Bhargava’s contributions are nearly all things he did independently and display high originality where as nearly all of Tao’s contributions are things done with whites. This is because the Chinese cannot contribute anything without the help of whites.

As usual WHENEVER the Chinese contribute it’s always something requiring little to no originality and it’s always with the help of whites, LOL.

Tao’s is not a legend by far, his contributions are not as significant as Bhargava’s. All of Tao’s contributions are simply improvements of things people were already working on very recently.

Bhargava’s contributions on the other hand are very original and display higher intellect than Tao’s contributions. Like Bhargava’s 14 new Gauss composition laws, that was very original because no one had ever touched Gauss composition laws since Gauss published his book in 1801. Even understanding Gauss composition laws by themselves is difficult for most.

Bhargava’s contributions are more significant and find deeper applications.

Chinese should just step back and realize that they’re just less intelligent than Indians, and have no intuition or originality like a robot.

East Asians and Whites obviously have less geniuses than Indians despite having higher literate populations, are obviously less intelligent on average and on a whole than Indians. This is shown by the 2009 Richwine immigration IQ study with Indian IQ at 112, higher than the Jew, European, and East Asian.

The majority of immigrants in the US are dark-skinnned, non-brahmin, and non-selected. Richwine’s study is the most extensive done and the most accurate.

India is not nearly as developed as China, and Indians haven’t won nearly as much contests as China right? So how can India produce more mathematical talent than China?

What someone personally considers to be original and intuitive is subjective, but contributions are completely objective.

Contributions are a completely objective way to measure what someone can do beyond learning and copying, so the only conclusion is that the Chinese brain is just like a robot, everything ends after learning and copying. This is why the Chinese contribute so very little despite having the highest literate population size.

India has even begun to unleash it’s potential and Indians already contribute more than the Chinese.

The Chinese should just face the undeniable fact that they’re nothing more than slave robots, all their intellect ends at learning and copying, just like a robot.

Further evidence that Chinese intelligence ends at learning and copying can be shown by the number of contests China has won vs. Chinese contributions.

Belgium IMO Medals: Gold medals: 1. Silver medals: 10. Bronze medals: 46. Honourable mentions: 40.
Belgium Fields Medals: 2

China’s IMO Medals: Gold medals: 113. Silver medals: 26. Bronze medals: 5. Honourable mentions: 0.
China’s Fields Medals: 0

So how can China win so many IMO medals yet not win any Fields Medals? Maybe it’s because Fields Medals are given for contributions, not for answering useless math contest questions. Answering useless math contest questions has to do with learning and copying where as Fields Medals is for contributions.

No one can give any valid explanation for China’s lack of contributions. It’s just like I said Chinese intelligence ends at learning and copying, just like a robot.

India’s Modern Mathematical Talents: Manjul Bhargava, Kannan Soundararajan, Akshay Venkatesh, Kiran Kedlaya

China’s Modern Mathematical Talent: Just Terence Tao

So how can India produce more mathematical talent, despite not winning nearly as many contests? Oh wait, mathematical talent is shown again by contributions not by contests alone.

India is only beginning to release it’s potential and Indians already contribute more than the stink robotic Chinese.

We can already see with 100% certainty that the Chinese are nothing more than robots possessing little to no originality or intuition, with only the ability to learn and copy, not contribute. This is clearly shown by all the evidence.

Indians contribute more, produce more mathematical talent, more talents in Computer Science, etc….despite not winning nearly as many book-style contests as the Chinese.

The type of contests China performs well in are robotic-type contests that have to do with answering book-style questions that hundreds of books cover, contests requiring little to no originality or intuition.

Multiple studies have shown that self-disciple predicts GPA not IQ, meaning self-discipline predicts math exam results, meaning you don’t need a high IQ to succeed in book-style contests results.

Hasn’t China won more robotic-type programming contests than India by far? So why has an Indian, Madhu Sudan won the Nevanlinna Prize (which is like the Nobel Prize in Computer Science) but not any Chinese?

Indians have already won the Nevanlinna Prize, Abel Prize, and will most likely win a Fields Medal in 2014, despite having a much much lower literate population than the Chinese.

Obviously India will FAR surpass China in terms of contributions once India becomes more developed, education improves and becomes more accessible, and the literacy rate rises.

The only way it’s possible for the Chinese to contribute anything is if they get lots of help from whites or if they contribute something that requires very little to no originality.

I found this link:

http://bhanuprasad.net/myblog/blogs/blog1.php/2010/04/07/my-take-on-india-s-low-iq

Check it out.  Interesting stuff.  Especially this link inside:

http://jinfo.org/

namastey to all chinese,at the present time may be u r better then us in the fields wat u discuss already but just think like a humanbeing do u hav any idea about wat will happen after all natural resources comletely lost ,i think ur all the achivements become useless, u said about our poverty suppose british and us army conqured ur country, and exploit ur people for next 100 years, do u hav still courage to fight like india did ,do u not fight with eachother if there is only one bread for u and ur bros. behind this condition of india britishers r totally responsible, give us time we will prove, any chinese who thought they r best in sports face any one indian in cricket…
i hav lot more things to tell u but u iq is not that much to know us, if really want to our capability go to rigveda…..
china

For the fun of it, here is a world map of national IQ scores vs average penis size.  Looks like China beats India, again. 

http://www.targetmap.com

http://shanghaiist.com

@TheAryanInsideOfMe, @ChinaHasLessGenius, @WhoCaresAboutTheIMO

The IBO, ICO, IGC, IMO, IPHO are all competitions for senior high school students.  Many countries have only sent teams to these competitions in recent years.  The medal winners show potential that won’t be realized for years to come.  Terence Tao, born to parents from Hong Kong, as a younster represented Australia more than once in the IMO and was a medal winner. But more of a sign of his level of attainment than his being awarded a Fields medal in 2006; or his professorship at UCLA; is that there are so many other mathematics researchers who want to tap his analytical skills today.  In the world of academia, that sort of recognition of your peers cannot be bought.