> GWAS uses additive linear no-interaction model, while we know that there are many regulatory sequences.

Are you suggesting the listed papers are incorrect? Do you have any published science to support your argument?

> Environmental variability clearly can't describe 100% of intelligence variability. Twin studies show that.

Sauce?

> And, please, be mindful of the difference between arguing discriminatory policies (racism) and finding the facts about the world we live in (science).

The papers I listed are about the science not supporting the racism, literally.