I wrote a detailed explanation

How could you possibly do that for a subject about which you said that "most of this goes over my head"?

Your response was to twist my words into a claim that you are "statistically incompetent", where in fact I emphasized that Shalizi's critique was on a deep technical level, and that I myself lacked knowledge to assess it.

Short memory, too. Your words: "I doubt, however, that your dismissal of Shalizi's honesty is based on a solid understanding of the arguments in this debate about statistical foundations of IQ research."

I'm sure you'll understand if I neglect to address further responses of that kind.

Oh, I'm the understanding kind :-P