Some people ( like Amy Harmon, but not her alone) have been saying that we don’t have genetic evidence for average differences in intelligence between different human races. Harmon tries to imply that this means that there are no such genetic factors – but she is mistaken. It does not.
We know something ( info that explains 10-15% of the variance) about genetic factors that influence intelligence differences within Europeans. That knowledge was acquired very recently: we didn’t have it ten years ago. For technical reasons, those polygenic scores do not work very well on genetically distant populations. Probably we are, to a large extent, detecting SNPs that are linked to the true causal loci, and the linkage pattern is different in sub-Saharan Africans.
Ten years ago we couldn’t detect any of the many alleles that influence intelligence in Europeans, but that sure didn’t imply that there weren’t any: now we’ve found a fair number of them.
A relevant fact: we don’t know which alleles make humans smarter than chimpanzees. That does not imply that there are no such alleles.
Why does Amy Harmon push this false implication? It might be due to the fact that she doesn’t know very much about genetics ( or math).
She also suggests that you don’t have to be really smart to be a top-flight mathematician, but that’s just ludicrous. Math is hard.