So your response is to post insults

If you come in here firing ad hominem shots across the bow about "genocide" don't be surprised if you get hit back

and links to obviously racist assholes?

Someone says or researches something the system doesn't like -> they are branded a "racist" -> they are now wrong because they are "racist"

Does it ever occur to you how convenient that is? Just call them a "heretic" or a "witch" and burn them at the stake at this point

And anyone who thinks 'anyways' is a word

It is

Moreover, IQ is only one measurement of intelligence

IQ tests can measure a variety of things including verbal, visual-spatial, and other kinds of intelligence. "g", or the general intelligence factor, is really what we care about because it has most all of the predictive power of IQ tests (for things like income, educational attainment, etc.) Most IQ tests report the aggregate IQ score of these different batteries of tests, and for most practical purposes IQ ≈ g

of which there are other measures.

Not really. At least, not tests that are useful in predicting anything we care about. There is just one g (and still just one g)

And regarding the scientific literature on miscegenation and consanguinity, one merely has to search for it, or check PubMed.

You should present the evidence for the claims you make, as we do. Miscegenation usually just results in an average of traits for both races. (1000.5) + (850.5) = 92.5 IQ for black/white offspring. Same goes for other traits. If you have something else then find it and actually present it in context

Watson, that colonialist asshole is known by scientists to be wrong about his claims about race; which is why the fucker had to apologize:

No - he had to apologize because people didn't like what he said, not because he was "wrong."

It's mystifying how people like you will turn a blind eye to this. Every society has its taboos. Globohomo-judeo neoliberalism requires that race not exist (if your white and on the defensive, at least) and white people be exploited. If you have evidence to the contrary and speak out about it you get ostracized, demonized, and attacked. It's like criticizing communism in the Soviet Union.

Moreover, Watson refers to Africans, not necessarily mixed race people

It is obviously implied that since Watson believes Africans have a lower level of intelligence due to genes, then he would also believe that mix-raced black/white people would have lower IQs than full-white people

who do tend to be smarter, more attractive, more physically capable, and more interesting, taller, and with bigger dicks

Lol - "MUH DICK!!!" [citation needed] for every one of these outlandish claims.

Intelligence is not the only value of a human being

No one said it was. It's just a trait that matters a lot for socioeconomic outcomes

and if it were, mixed race people are not dumber than others, by any standard of research.

Wrong. How many times do we have to do this?. Of course, it depends on the races involved and what parent race you are comparing to

Those who argue against this tend to favor abuses of all kinds against non-white people

Ignoring your appeal to a motive, it is true that any differences in racial socioeconomic outcomes are already used as by leftists and other anti-whites as an excuse to exploit whites. "White supremacy" is to blame for why blacks do bad in schools, commit more crimes, and have less money - and no evidence ever has to be presented for this magical force. So now we need affirmative action, welfare, anti-white propaganda everywhere, etc.

So whatever you fallaciously accuse us of presenting this evidence for, the current system is already using no evidence at all to justify exploiting us right now in the present

It's stupid, backward, and hateful.

Emotional reasoning. The system obviously hates white people, so why don't you go to the media and tell them to stop all their hateful bigotry? Maybe we'd be more interested in not talking about race and IQ if we weren't already demonized by every institution in this society

Look also at the centuries of poorer economic conditions

Why are places like Africa almost universally shitty, but nations like China or South Korea (who were just as poor or poorer at the start of the 20th century) doing so well? What about Haiti? Why are the correlations between racial economic outcomes and racial IQs so consistent across countries and time? Maybe you have causality reversed?

of the people who are being criticized as having lower IQ.

Your choice of the word "criticized" belies your foundation of emotional reasoning. It is just a statement of fact that certain groups are more or less intelligent than others, and this has important implications in a multiracial society (esp. one where we share public resources and institutions).

There are so many factors to consider, other than DNA.

These have been considered. For decades. That's why heritability (genetic portion) is estimated at 80% in western countries (yes, for all races)

you won't see a significant gap in intelligence in mixed-race children:

Racial gaps are smaller in childhood and heritability is lower. This is the Wilson effect, which has been known for 50 years

It's extremely low-effort to conduct a google search and rage post a bunch of shitty left-leaning links that you've never read and give no context to. Foxy already took a shot at some of these and some are duplicates so I'll only respond to a few (or you can actually put these in context)

Eyferth_study

Ahh a classic study and one of my favorite egalitarian copes. Lots of problems with it

First, the US Army (and almost certainly the french army, don't know for sure) employed IQ tests in WWI. 90 was the minimum for the US, so already with blacks at mean 85 we are getting an "elite" sample of blacks as fathers. So, offspring IQ will be higher than what we would typically assume. Second, the mean age of the children in this study is 10, and we already discussed the Wilson effect, so this is inappropriate to extrapolate onto the adult population. Third, the most strikingly anomalous thing about this study is the inexplicably low IQ of the white girls in the study (93?) which of course, is the singular category where mixed-race children did better. Also, the mixed race children all score below 100, so the eyferth results don't even deviate significantly from the hereditarian hypothesis.

Actually, I think I'm done here. Google searches? Qoura? DailyMail? Come on.

You strike me as a "true believer" - someone who literally takes anything the system has presented to them - whether its a "fact" or a moral foundation - as "true", and everything else is like heresy, or a sin. Therefore, it must be wrong.

It's obvious you don't know a lot about intelligence testing, and we have seen copes on this topic hundreds of times. Here's a post I made that you can check out to start

If you really want to discuss these links, then actually read them and present them in a post in context (notice how I do that with all of my links)