vote Donald trump!?

[Thumpalumpacus]

No I do take into account other possibilities, what I'm saying is simply that the things I mentioned are signs of higher intelligence.  When people judge the intelligence of other animals it's the same things they look for, how well they use tools, forward planning, use of resources.

They're also the result of other factors, is my point. Until you actually demonstrate that the results are coming from intelligence or its lack, you're simply engaged in the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy, because tool use can also be a function of exposure to tools, training, ability to afford tools, sufficient need for tools -- there are many reasons why a person may or may not know how to use tools.

Until you have demonstrated your opinion, the only thing you are illuminating is your own bias. You clearly aren't addressing any of the points I'm making about the different causes; you are simply repeating your point, and as I said earlier, repeating your point is not supporting it. You have an opinion? Great. I find it terribly unconvincing, limited and incomplete as it is.

So you could say maybe the countries in Africa don't mine their own resources and sell the land to investors for immediate gratification because they are desperate, they don't score well on IQ tests because the tests are bias towards Asians and against Africans for some reason, countries in Asia have something in the land that helped the inhabitants in terms of agriculture, literacy, inventions and technology, the education system in their own country and in America is bias towards them, and the jobs market is also bias towards them.  

No, I didn't say anything about bias in the educational system in America affecting Africans, who obviously don't attend American schools, nor did I say Asian countries "had something in the land that helped inhabitants", nor any of that other claptrap.

You seem incapable of recognizing a strawman when it is your own.

And in terms of crime rates it might just be Asian privilege as to why their reported crime rates are so low in America.

Again, I never said this, but I wanted to isolate this to give you one more example of multivariate thinking. It is possible, I suppose, that your misreading of my point is actually true, that "Asian privilege" is why they have low crime rates. It is entirely possible, too, that it is simply the fact that households with higher incomes tend to produce less criminal behavior. It is also a fact that Asian cultures tend to place higher emphasis on group unity and respect for sociocultural norms, both attitudes which would tend to militate against criminal activity.

You see, when you're talking about the cultural behaviors of animals as complicated as humans, reaching for one reason to explain differences is absurdly simplistic. Of course, it takes more work to see past your own biases. The problem in this conversation is that you're giving entirely too much weight to innate intelligence as an explanation, without justification. And when I ask you about it, you point to results that can be explained a number of ways, but cite them only as evidence for your own view, without demonstrating the causality you claim links them.