Nothing you said has any relation to the claim that lead paint resulted in IQ scores being lower because as I said before. That is literally impossible when the mean of a test result is equal to 100
Did you think you wouldn’t be called out on a lie or were you just ignorant of the claim you were making?
Maybe you were ignorant of time and thought that a 100 year old test would somehow have a ton of historical data from people not exposed to led
Or you were ignorant of age and test bias thinking it fair to compare a 70 year old high school graduate with someone in college
I was using IQ as a comparative device because most people know what that is and thus would be able to understand what I meant.
On average, according to some online sources most people will have an IQ somewhere between 85 and 115 that's a difference of 30 points, or as I called it tens of points.
If humanity would have used less lead it is possible that average could have been substantially higher by tens of points which is a perfectly valid statement considering the 30 point difference in the average.