Based on things I've read on the internet (Cochrane) (not to be confused with the Cochrane Library that actually produces meta-analyses, just some guy named Cochrane who can't land a tenure track job teaching physics) regarding brain size and IQ test results, I believe that it is more probable than not that Black People are less intelligent than White People, that the jury's still out on Asian People, and that this is due in no small part to genetics.

You're much confused in the beginning, but it will take too long to sort you our, so I'll cut to the chase.

I believe that blacks (the Sub-Saharan genetic pool) have a lower average IQ than whites (European genetic pool), by about one standard deviation (15 points). The jury is not out on Asians -- East Asians, specifically Chinese Han, have an average IQ higher than whites, by about 10 points, if I remember correctly. Moreover, Ashkenazi Jews also have a higher average IQ than whites.

That is the very definition of race.

You seem to be... limited in your understanding of how people use words.

Christian Identity White Supremacists

Woot! I think it's the first time I've been called that. It's so new and exciting! Tell me about myself, I'm all ears.

That is the very definition of race. That is what the term means.

If you look at genetics the difference between different parts of Africa is higher than the different between different non-African groups.

If you think that Whites and Asians have a different race but all Blacks have the same race than your concept of race is cultural and not based on biology.

That is the very definition of race. That is what the term means.

I think there are a number of people on LW who will dispute that; who will say something like this. "Yes, there are fuzzy popular uses of the word and if you take them too seriously you will say silly things. But it is also the case that there are important genetic differences between human subpopulations, and that these correlate to some extent with those fuzzy popular ideas about race."

That seems to me to be a position that is not at all refuted by saying that popular use of "race" is fuzzy and that the things commonly called "races" don't correspond to well defined biological groupings. (It might be refuted by other means, but that would be more work.)