Intelligence - Nature vs Nurture

Environment is more important than genes when it comes to intelligence, politically-corrected scientists keep telling us.

If this is true, however, then it would follow that the Homo Sapiens of 20,000 years ago was not as intelligent as we are today. 

However, these very same 'scientists' keep telling us that we are no more intelligent than the very first human beings.

But they simply cannot be right on both counts - unless they also argued that 20,000 years of 'environmental progress' and change achieved absolutely nothing in the way of developing our intellect. 

But if they argued this, they would then scupper their own notion that the environment was important. 

 If such enormous changes haven't altered intelligence levels, then what environmental changes will?

After all, the environment that surrounds, let's say, city-dwellers, right now, is VASTLY different from the environments and conditions of 20,000 years ago. If such enormous changes haven't altered intelligence levels, then what environmental changes will?

Also, if environment is extremely important when it comes to intelligence, then it follows that those brought up in more primitive environments are less intelligent than those brought up in more 'enriched' environments. 

And this must mean that simple, primitive, isolated 'tribalfolk' are less intelligent than 'civilised' folk who live in places that are 'enriched', and where experts provide a mountain of education to those who study and learn from them..

But politically-corrected 'scientists' would also deny this! 

And by doing so, they again scupper their own notion that the environment is important.

 women throughout the ages   ... were less intelligent than their men

If the environment is of greater significance than heredity when it comes to intelligence - as politically-corrected 'scientists' would have you believe - then it also follows that poorer folk should be less intelligent than richer folk, that those doing dull boring jobs should be less intelligent than those doing stimulating ones, and that women throughout the ages (who were, apparently, oppressed into domestic servitude for most of their lives) were less intelligent than their men - throughout the whole of History!

But, of course, politically-corrected 'scientists' would hotly deny this too!

But they cannot have it both ways.

I'm sooooo stupid.

In other words, the ubiquitous feminist clamour that "women were oppressed throughout history" must suggest to politically-corrected 'scientists' that women were not very bright throughout history.