What are the implications of the Flynn effect for the relation between genetics and IQ...

The flynn effect is pretty mysterious and no one is really sure whats going on, so its too early to say environmental factors are making everyone smarter. In the Bell Curve, Charles Murray pins it on measurement error, and says that when you correct for that, people are getting dumber at a rate of 3 IQ points per century. Greg Cochran and Henry Harpending say the same thing.

Nice arguments. You're talking to a guy above 3 sigma, in IQ.

Let non-brainlets have their serious discussion, okay?

This is the correct answer.

Lynn explains this in Dysgenics..

Then post your sources then. Or does your 99th percentile IQ give you the privilege of dismissing contrary evidence with ad hominems?

Correct.
EVEN taking the correlation of 0.5 AT FACE VALUE - it's still not very high.
Since that means it explains 25% of the variance in job performance.

From what I've gathered, IQ can be largely improved through education, though temporarily. My theory is that, for the general population, which has no contact with academia (either because they have never studied at all or because they have already got their degrees), IQ is a good measure of intelligence. In students and professors, however, it is inflated.
By educating oneself, a person is indirectly praticing for IQ tests, specially in STEM. I've seen people report a dramatic increase in their IQ after a few years in college. And I think that once they are done and not studying anymore, their IQ will decrease (not as down as before though. Education can actually make us more intelligent), but not because they became dumber, but because they aren't training anymore. They are still very much able to use logic to solve real life problems, but since they aren't used to use the symbolic and spatial reasoning that IQ evaluates, their score will get lower as time goes by.
You can see that with physics students: they have the highest average IQ, because their major trains them to solve IQ tests better than any other. It's either that or it magically attracts only very above average people.
>inb4 the non-geniuses flunk halfway in
That is true for a lot of people, but I don't think that's the case for the majority of physics undergraduates. I mean, it's physics, not mechanical engineering. It is a very niche course, that only the passionate will even regard as an option. Most physics undergrads start with average IQs, have their score increased throughout the years, and maintained, as most choose the academic path.

TL;DR I don't think people in academia are truly way above the rest of the population in raw intelligence, it's just that for them IQ is meaningless, as they are indirectly training for it all the time

>From what I've gathered, IQ can be largely improved through education
You've gathered wrong.

/thread

I don't care what your IQ is. You're spreading misinformation.

Reversing or flattening out?

>I don't know what IQ is