Scott examines a new genetic study on missing heritability that both hereditarians and nurturists claim vindicates their position, concluding that despite the study's advances, the fundamental debate over how heritable traits like IQ actually are remains unresolved. Longer summary

This post discusses a new genetic study that attempted to resolve the "missing heritability" debate - the gap between high heritability estimates from twin studies (50-80%) and low estimates from molecular genetic studies (10-20%). The study used whole-genome sequencing to include rare genetic variants and found they could account for about 88% of expected heritability, but the actual heritability estimates themselves were only medium (30-40%). Both hereditarians and nurturists claimed victory: hereditarians because the gap was closed (proving the genes exist), nurturists because the total heritability found was still lower than twin studies suggested. Scott examines both sides' arguments, including measurement error corrections and various confounders, and concludes that despite everyone's claims, the debate remains fundamentally unresolved as different methods continue producing different estimates with no clear explanation why. Shorter summary