Emil O W Kirkegaard

But pinpoint accuracy less important when looking at averages. What this tech really good for is looking at GROUPS, describing GROUPS, or dividing people into GROUPS (say, by IQ)

To me, Reich seems to be indicating that this same emergent technology, of modelling traits using polygenic scores, may eventually VERIFY that one group has, on average, higher polygenic scores for intelligence than another group.

Luckily, such a comparison is NOT POSSIBLE to do right now. First reason, as Reich notes, all the genetics data is from Europeans. No one has similar scope of data on other races.

Second reason, while you can kinda predict IQ from DNA in Europeans, data won't translate reliably to other ancestry groups or people of mixed heritage. This is because the SNP "markers" associated w/ IQ can change positions relative to the causal genes depending on ancestry.

Here's a blog post which explains all this, using the "toy" example of a genetically predicted "tea consumption" ranking among British people when it is applied to French people. https://gcbias.org/2018/03/14/polygenic-scores-and-tea-drinking/ …

Thus, no one can effectively compare races by polygenic IQ score. I checked with scientists who I felt were likely to be interested in such a comparison, like @KirkegaardEmil , and they also explained it was not possible.

That's right, though Kirkegaard is not a scientist.

seems you are correct. a previously published, and sometimes retracted, "science person" per his own description