Jump to content

thun

Member
  • Posts

    4
  • Joined

Everything posted by thun

  1. This is excactly the point of the picture I posted. Heritability in both those populations is 100% yet plant height is very much dependant on the nutritional value of the soil, which is obviously a non-genetic factor. So even if heritability is 100% you cannot say that shows something is due to genetic factors and not the environment.
  2. "Winick, Meyer, and Harris (1975) found 141 Korean children adopted as infants by American families exceeded the national average in both IQ and achievement scores when they reached 10 years of age. The principal interest of the investigators was on the possible effects of severe malnutrition on later intelligence, and many of these Korean children had been malnourished in infancy. When tested, those who had been severely malnourished as infants obtained a mean IQ of 102; a moderately well-nourished group obtained a mean IQ of 106; and an adequately nourished group obtained a mean IQ of 110....Neither the social class of the adopting parents nor the number of years the child spent in the adopted family had any effect on the child's IQ." http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf(P.250) Even the severely malnourished Korean children went on to have an IQ above the national average in America. I'm not making a point about nutrition, I'm making a point about what can and cannot be infered from the heritability statistic.
  3. The heritability statistic can not be used to claim something is genetic or not.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.