Race and IQs

[FatAndFaithless]

The null hypothesis simply states that whatever you are seeking to demonstrate is really not there, despite what you think are the evidence for it being there.

The null hypothesis could either be 1.  there is a difference between average intelligence between to groups, or 2. there is not a difference between the average intelligence between two groups.

Null hypothesis 1 is applicable if the hypothesis being tested is average intelligence is essentially the same between groups.  Null hypothesis 2 is applicable if the hypothesis being tested is average intelligence is essentially different between groups.

This doesn't seem right to me.  Maybe i'm totally wrong in my whole thought process.  Shouldn't the null be that there is no difference in IQ between races.  You either find statistically significant data and void the null or find nothing.

No, Anom has it right.  The null hypothesis is just the default counterpoint to any assertion/hypothesis being tested.  To prove an assertion/hypothesis you would have to show the null hypothesis to be incorrect.  

"Smoking causes cancer" ->  a claim.  The null hypothesis would be "Smoking does NOT cause cancer."  Through all the medical and scientific testing we've done, the null hypothesis was proven incorrect, and we know that smoking is a cause of cancer.