From The Economist:

The looming crisis in human genetics:
Some awkward news ahead
by Geoffrey Miller
Author of Spent

Human geneticists have reached a private crisis of conscience, and it will become public knowledge in 2010. The crisis has depressing health implications and alarming political ones. In a nutshell: the new genetics will reveal much less than hoped about how to cure disease, and much more than feared about human evolution and inequality, including genetic differences between classes, ethnicities and races.

About five years ago, genetics researchers became excited about new methods for “genome-wide association studies” (GWAS). We already knew from twin, family and adoption studies that all human traits are heritable: genetic differences explain much of the variation between individuals. We knew the genes were there; we just had to find them….

In 2010, GWAS fever will reach its peak. Dozens of papers will report specific genes associated with almost every imaginable trait—intelligence, personality, religiosity, sexuality, longevity, economic risk-taking, consumer preferences, leisure interests and political attitudes. The data are already collected, with DNA samples from large populations already measured for these traits. It’s just a matter of doing the statistics and writing up the papers for Nature Genetics. …

GWAS researchers will, in public, continue trumpeting their successes to science journalists and Science magazine. They will reassure Big Pharma and the grant agencies that GWAS will identify the genes that explain most of the variation in heart disease, cancer, obesity, depression, schizophrenia, Alzheimer’s and ageing itself. …

In private, though, the more thoughtful GWAS researchers are troubled. They hold small, discreet conferences on the “missing heritability” problem: if all these human traits are heritable, why are GWAS studies failing so often? …But the genes typically do not replicate across studies. Even when they do replicate, they never explain more than a tiny fraction of any interesting trait. In fact, classical Mendelian genetics based on family studies has identified far more disease-risk genes with larger effects than GWAS research has so far.

Why the failure? The missing heritability may reflect limitations of DNA-chip design: GWAS methods so far focus on relatively common genetic variants in regions of DNA that code for proteins. They under-sample rare variants and DNA regions translated into non-coding RNA, which seems to orchestrate most organic development in vertebrates. Or it may be that thousands of small mutations disrupt body and brain in different ways in different populations. At worst, each human trait may depend on hundreds of thousands of genetic variants that add up through gene-expression patterns of mind-numbing complexity.

Political science

We will know much more when it becomes possible to do cheap “resequencing”—which is really just “sequencing” a wider variety of individuals beyond the handful analysed for the Human Genome Project. Full sequencing means analysing all 3 billion base pairs of an individual’s DNA rather than just a sample of 1m genetic variants as the DNA chips do. When sequencing costs drop within a few years below $1,000 per genome, researchers in Europe, China and India will start huge projects with vast sample sizes, sophisticated bioinformatics, diverse trait measures and detailed family structures. (American bioscience will prove too politically squeamish to fund such studies.) The missing heritability problem will surely be solved sooner or later.

Or will it? At present, we understand the genetics of lactose tolerance fairly well because they are simple. We don’t understand the genetics of IQ at all well, presumably because they are complicated. It would be interesting to know what are traits are the most promising targets intermediate in complexity between lactose tolerance and IQ.

The trouble is, the resequencing data will reveal much more about human evolutionary history and ethnic differences than they will about disease genes.

As Matt Ridley once said, your genes didn’t evolve to kill you.

Once enough DNA is analysed around the world, science will have a panoramic view of human genetic variation across races, ethnicities and regions. We will start reconstructing a detailed family tree that links all living humans, discovering many surprises about mis-attributed paternity and covert mating between classes, castes, regions and ethnicities.

We will also identify the many genes that create physical and mental differences across populations, and we will be able to estimate when those genes arose. Some of those differences probably occurred very recently, within recorded history. Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending argued in “The 10,000 Year Explosion” that some human groups experienced a vastly accelerated rate of evolutionary change within the past few thousand years, benefiting from the new genetic diversity created within far larger populations, and in response to the new survival, social and reproductive challenges of agriculture, cities, divisions of labour and social classes. Others did not experience these changes until the past few hundred years when they were subject to contact, colonisation and, all too often, extermination.

If the shift from GWAS to sequencing studies finds evidence of such politically awkward and morally perplexing facts, we can expect the usual range of ideological reactions, including nationalistic retro-racism from conservatives and outraged denial from blank-slate liberals. The few who really understand the genetics will gain a more enlightened, live-and-let-live recognition of the biodiversity within our extraordinary species—including a clearer view of likely comparative advantages between the world’s different economies.

More likely, we just won’t hear much about it. For years, I’ve been hearing that as the evidence piles up, the dominant ideology will have to adapt to it. Why? Why not just lie more and persecute more? A lot of people find covering up the truth to be more emotionally satisfying than learning it.

The Prospect (U.K.) has a long article, The Lion and the Tiger, by David Edmonds on the latest Armenian chess savant, Levon Aronian, who may follow in the footsteps of world champ Tigran Petrosian. (Levon means lion, Tigran tiger). Like the great Gary Kasparov, Aronian is half-Armenian, half-Jewish. Edmonds writes:

They offered me 64 different explanations for why Armenians are world-beaters at chess. Armenia’s heritage as a cog in the Soviet chess machine plays a part, although that alone can’t explain why it outstrips other former eastern bloc nations. Some of them emphasised education—Armenian literacy rates are higher than in the US or Britain. A few others pointed to Armenia’s tradition of creativity in many fields, including music and painting. Armenia is poor and chess is cheap, one man told me. Then—and this is a favourite rationalisation—there’s the individualistic nature of the game. Armenians take perverse gratification in their incompetence at team games. (Weight-lifting is the only other sport at which Armenia excels.) The British ambassador, whom I later met in Yerevan, pressed a more physical, less abstract explanation upon me. Armenia is so mountainous that there’s no room for football pitches and athletics fields—but chess needs only space for a small board.

Being poor and smart helps, along with having the government shove chess down your throats the way the Soviets did.

Reporters have a lot of leeway in how to spin a story by what quote they put at the end, unanswered. For example, the Washington Post’s article on white politician Mary Norwood’s bid to become the first non-black mayor of Atlanta in 36 years ends with an unanswered (and thus tacitly approved) expression of pure racial animus:

“Atlanta is a black city, a symbol to the world,” Houck said. “Putting Mary’s face on that picture would be hard for a lot of people to stomach.”

In other words, according to the Washington Post it’s A-OK for blacks to vote in Tuesday’s mayoral election purely on anti-white grounds.

One interesting point in the article:

Atlanta, with a population of about 500,000, saw its black population share decline from 61 percent to 57 percent between 2000 and 2007, according to the latest Census figures. During the same time period, the white population grew from 33 percent to 38 percent.

This reflects a trend I’ve noticed in competition to be the regional supercity, the acid test of which is attracting a larger white population. For example, Washington D.C. is increasingly white, with African-Americans driven out to loser cities like Baltimore. New York, the supercity of supercities, has had a declining population of American-born blacks since way back in 1979. In our increasingly winner-take-all world, you can expect certain cities in each part of the country to emerge as the winner with rising rents. They will use Section 8 rental vouchers to drive out African-Americans to surrounding loser cities, increasing the disparity between winners and losers.

This makes municipal politics particularly fraught, since victory in a mayoral race (e.g., Rudy Giuliani’s victory over David Dinkins in 1993, or Richie Daley’s over black candidates in 1989) is often seen as a symbol of whether the city will be friendlier to whites (and become a winner city) or blacks (and become a loser city). Much of intra-black politics consists of struggles between blacks who are willing to make deals with high rent whites versus low rent candidates (e.g., Washington D.C., where the federal government more or less staged a coup to regain control of the capital by arresting the very low-rent black Mayor Marion Barry).

Much MSM harrumphing has broken out about the Swiss anti-Minaret vote - such as this limp-wristed comment from The Wall Street Journal.

In America, the spectacle of the Peasants defending their culture is still more frightening than the Muslim onslaught.

A more astute comment has appeared on the U.K. Daily Telegraph website

Swiss voters lied to pollsters, banned minarets: soon the international peasants’ revolt could engulf immigration, climate change – and even Dave by Gerald Warner November 29th, 2009

Switzerland has voted overwhelmingly to ban triumphalist minarets on Muslim mosques. On a respectable turnout of 55 per cent, there was a landslide victory for banning minarets: nearly 58 per cent for a ban… This went completely contrary to pre-referendum opinion polls which had shown a 10 per cent lead for the pro-minaret camp; instead, the margin was 16 per cent in favour of a ban. People lied to opinion pollsters. Are they doing the same in Britain?

“Dave” is the UK Conservative’s utterly PC and completely useless leader David Cameron.

Warner suggests

People lied to opinion pollsters. Are they doing the same in Britain? Are they saying they will back Dave when they have rather more robust intentions in mind?

He means of course voting for Nick Griffin’s BNP.

He concludes:

It is no coincidence that the people most loudly bemoaning the ban on minarets in Switzerland are those who most vociferously applauded the prohibition on crucifixes in Italian classrooms. The consistent principle is an attack on European Christian civilisation, complemented by subservience to all the enemies of that civilisation, secular or Islamic…

The Swiss voters have not forbidden the practice of the Muslim religion: they have simply insisted that it should not indulge in triumphalism by towering over Christian churches. If they had really wanted to play hardball they would have insisted that the first mosque in Switzerland could only be built the day after the first Christian cathedral opened for worship in Riyadh

When will we see similar essays in the US MSM?

In Switzerland, voters in local elections get a chance to approve or disapprove of individual immigrants, and I remember how this horrified Raoul Lowery Contreras–Steve Sailer wrote in 2000–

Immigration: If novelist Vladimir Nabokov wanted to live for decades in a hotel in Montreux, he was more than welcome. If the hotel wanted to hire Maltese “guest workers” to deliver the great man’s room service, it could (within limits). But neither Nabokov nor the bellhops could realistically expect to ever participate in Swiss political life.

A fascinating feature of Swiss naturalization policy is that localities can veto applicants for citizenship. For example, the voters of Emmen recently approved the naturalization of eight Italian immigrants, while rejecting 48 other applicants, almost all of them Bosnians. This exercise in democracy caused syndicated columnist Raoul Lowery Contreras to cry out in anguish, “What kind of society would we have in the United States if each individual city in it could decide who was an American citizen? We would have a society like Switzerland.” [The Rise Of Unamerican Know-Nothings By Raoul Lowery Contreras, CalNews.com, March 23, 2000]

The Horror! The Horror!

[Multilingualism and Democracy: The Swiss Exception, 08/14/00]

Aren’t we constantly lectured that illegal aliens do the work Americans don’t do? And aren’t illegal aliens often hired to do lawn work for Americans?

Here’s a horrific story about a trusting lady who hired illegal aliens to do her lawn work. She provided them work and was kind to them. The illegals (from El Salvador in this case) returned her kindness by killing her.

You can read about it, and see photos of the victim and the perpetrators in a World Net Daily article entitled Illegal Alien Burns Elderly Woman Alive, Now Gets Life , Chelsea Schilling, Nov. 24th, 2009

The article begins with the grisly details:

An illegal alien has been sentenced to life in prison for breaking into an 83-year-old woman’s home, grabbing her by the throat, smashing her head into furniture, saturating her with gasoline and setting her body on fire while she was still alive – all to cover up his check-fraud scam after she hired him to cut her lawn.

The victim had hired the murderers, a pair of cousins, to do her lawn:

Ramon Alvarado, 33, and his cousin, Jose Alvarado, 37, were hired to do yard work for Lila Meizel at her home in Wheaton, Md. They worked for the woman for two years, and Meizel often gave the men soda, food and extra tips.

Why was she murdered?

According to prosecutors, Meizel gave the men a $75 check for landscaping work. Jose added two zeros to the number, agreeing to give his cousin $1,200 and [Jose's wife] Rodas $1,000. They used the $7,500 to buy a car, computer and clothes. Ramon and Jose preemptively conspired to kill Meizel when the two believed they might be caught.

So Ramon broke into the house of a lady who had always treated him kindly, grabbed her by the throat, smashed her head into furniture, dowsed her body with gasoline and set her afire while she was still alive. After that,

Firefighters found Meizel in her burning home and pulled her outside, but they were unable to resuscitate her. A firefighter and two police officers sustained injuries in the blaze.

…

An autopsy revealed Ramon caused Meizel to suffer a brain hemorrhage and fractured seven of her ribs. She had soot in her lungs and burned tissue in the back of her throat, indicators that she was alive when he set her on fire. Most of her body was charred and her face was unrecognizable.

According to Montgomery County’s top prosecutor, it was the most horrific murder he’d seen since assuming office.

Both of these cousins had criminal records:

Both Ramon and Jose Alvarado had previous criminal records in Montgomery County. Jose had a history of check fraud, according to the Washington Examiner. Ramon had a warrant out for his arrest for driving a car without a license or registration.

And both were illegal aliens, who shouldn’t even have been in the country:

A Montgomery County jail official confirmed that all three were illegal aliens. According to reports, they are from El Salvador and have lived in the United States for more than 10 years. The Gaithersburg Gazette reported Immigration and Customs Enforcement had detainers on all three defendants, flagging them for possible federal charges and deportation proceedings.

They should have deported them much sooner.

The murder took place the day before Thanksgiving of 2008. Ramon was convicted last month and sentenced this month.

Ramon was convicted of murder, arson and conspiracy in October. On Monday [Nov.23rd], he was sentenced to two consecutive life terms – one without parole – plus an additional 30 years for arson.

The judge seemed horrified:

During Ramon’s trial, Judge McGann said he could not look at the autopsy photos “very long without gagging.” “I’m going to put these in the envelope so they don’t turn anyone else’s stomach,” he said.

The judge had some things to say to the murderer:

“The inhumane manner you chose to exterminate a lady well into the autumn years of her life strongly suggests that you are sadistic,” Montgomery County Circuit Court Judge Terrence J. McGann told Ramon Alvarado. “A civilized society demands that you be in prison for the remainder of your life.”

Wait a minute! According to the judge this murder “strongly suggests” that the murderer is sadistic? I’d say it more than strongly suggests it. I’d say there is no doubt, and I think a case like this deserves the death penalty.

Convicted of murder, arson and conspiracy, Ramon was given two consecutive life terms (one without parole) and an additional 30 years for arson. Cousin and partner in crime Jose got life in prison for murder, and Jose’s wife could get up to five years in prison for being an accessory after the fact.

Who wants to bet that Jose and possibly even Ramon might be out again someday?

As for the victim’s daughter, she said that her mother was “a very trusting woman” and that “When it came to hiring people for her lawn, she was happy with this man.” The man who eventually killed her, that is.

Was there nobody else available who could have done yard work for Lila Weizel? A neighbor, a grandson, a local high school student? Might she have looked a little harder rather than hire an illegal alien?

And what does it say about our own government who allows illegal aliens to do just about anything they want to do until it’s too late?

It’s great news that the Swiss have voted to ban minarets, despite the propaganda blitz from business and government elites that characterized the defense of western values as xenophobic and unwelcoming. Business fears the sort of boycott that Denmark faced from the Muslim world over the cartoon controversy a few years back.

Interestingly, one group — women — saw the issue more personally, and the pro-ban group wisely emphasized women’s concerns by featuring a burqa on its posters.

Using the burqa image in combination with the minarets was brilliant; connecting the construction of mosques with the oppression of women captured the big picture of cultural threat from Muslim immigration.

The London Times noted the concern of women voters about burqazation: Women lead Swiss in vote to ban minarets (November 29, 2009).

Forget about tranquil Alpine scenery and cowbells: one of the most startling features of the referendum campaign has been a poster showing a menacing woman in a burqa beside minarets rising from the Swiss flag.

It seems to have struck a nerve in Langenthal, a small town near Bern where Muslims plan to put up a minaret next to their prayer room in a bleak former paint factory.

“If we give them a minaret, they’ll have us all wearing burqas,” said Julia Werner, a local housewife. “Before you know it, we’ll have sharia law and women being stoned to death in our streets. We won’t be Swiss any more.” [...]

Tatiana, a teacher who had previously voted for the left, was quoted in a newspaper as saying she would vote for the minaret ban as she could “no longer bear being mistreated and terrorised by boys who believe women are worthless”.

So true. The people — and particularly women — understand what is at stake.

Hopefully this vote will encourage other rejections of Islamic values and immigration throughout Europe.

With commendable indifference to Political Correctness and the orders issued by their own political elite, the Swiss appear to have voted to ban the construction of Minarets in their country.
Minaret ban approved by 57 per cent of voters Swissinfo.ch November 29, 2009

“A majority of the Swiss people and the cantons have adopted the popular initiative against the construction of minarets. The Federal Council respects this decision,” a government statement said.

“Consequently the construction of new minarets in Switzerland is no longer permitted. The four existing minarets will remain. It will also be possible to continue to construct mosques.”

Switzerland is a fascinating case. With a population of only 7.5 million, great prosperity, and a location right on a key European trade route, it would be very easy for the country to be swamped by culture-eradicating immigration.

But as I noted three years ago, even though Switzerland has an immigrant population proportion higher than the US, the Swiss can defend themselves. This is because they do not grant citizenship easily.

Yet again, the Swiss People’s Party, led by millionaire Christoph Blocher, has defended the Swiss nation. Where are America’s patriotic millionaires?

Wow, I would have thought that Britain already has plenty of resident hostiles, like the Islam4UK bunch that demands sharia law in the country. Plus a poll taken in 2006 found that 40 percent of Muslims living in the UK want sharia to replace British law. And several “home-grown” terrorists who were born in the UK blew up themselves and hundreds of others in London on July 7, 2005, killing 56.

Yet the big cheese terrorists apparently think that Britain needs still more imported killer Islamics. Who knew?

Seriously, the presence of gazillions more questionable Muslims makes the job of national security that much harder for police.

Counter-terrorism police and Whitehall officials believe dozens of extremists could have arrived here by posing as students or legitimate visitors.

They are concerned both by the relatively lax checks that are made on the visitors before they arrive and by the ease with which they can outstay their visas without anyone noticing.

As many as 13,000 visa applicants may have entered the country from Pakistan in a seven month period since October last year without any checks on their supporting documentation.

The security services fear that because most do not mix with home grown terrorists, they are able to operate under the intelligence radar, acting as sleeper cells until ready to launch attacks in Britain.

Every year around 100,000 visitors arrive in Britain from Pakistan alone, which has been described by the Prime Minister as being part of a “crucible of terror” along with Afghanistan.

They are supposed to be checked by Home Office visa staff working in Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates.

But according to an official watchdog, the Independent Monitor for Entry Clearance, many visa officers do not have “enough time to go through applications carefully”.

The security services are also worried about arrivals from Somalia, Yemen and North Africa. [Hidden threat from al-Qaeda sleeper cells, By Duncan Gardham, Daily Telegraph, November 28, 2009 ]

Too much diversity for police to track? Sounds like it.

I often complain that the America’s foreign policy would be better off if there were hotshot college football teams in New York City and Washington D.C. to absorb more of the competitive energies of NYC / DC elites into bribing high school cornerbacks rather than into waging war for sheep grazing rights in the Karakorum.

Today, the Washington Post has articles about how the coaches of two of the nearest big time college football teams, U. of Virginia and U. of Maryland, have their heads on the chopping blocks because alumni are sore about losing seasons.

The Virginia story at least mentions talent issues:

On the morning of Jan. 5, 2001, University of Virginia President John Casteen uttered two words — national championship — that established a lofty goal for Al Groh, even before Groh could provide his first comments as Virginia’s newly named head coach. …

“As long as it takes us to get players like I saw on television the other night,” Groh said that day, when asked how quickly Virginia can become a national power. “We saw the other night that Florida State can be beat if you get the players Oklahoma got.” …

“I think everyone was excited nine years ago,” said Shawn Moore, a former all-American quarterback at Virginia. “But if you ask any alum today, they will tell you that they are extremely disappointed that the program has not gone to that next level, has not taken that next step.”… “There’s no way that we should not be competing for an ACC title,” Moore said. “There’s a ton of athletes playing in the NFL right now with University of Virginia degrees. I truly believe that with all the things we have in place now — the facilities, the new stadium, the new locker room, all the things we’ve added in the last 10 years, we should be competing with Texas, Oklahoma, Virginia Tech, Alabama. We should be competing on that level.” If Saturday is Groh’s final game as head coach, he will not need to look far to realize what went wrong. When asked why his program has trouble winning at home in recent seasons, Groh answered bluntly: “talent.” The answer was not much different when discussing the difference between winning and losing seasons.

There’s so many components that go into winning, but certainly the key one that you start with is talent,” Groh said. “And the more top-end talent — that is playmaking talent, guys who can just make the play — that makes the difference.”

…The slide started after the 2005 season. Virginia had been to four consecutive bowl games and won three of them. Groh lost four members of his coaching staff before the offseason: offensive coordinator Ron Prince to Kansas State, defensive coordinator Al Golden to Temple, associate head coach/outside linebackers coach Danny Rocco to Liberty and inside linebackers/special teams coach Mark D’Onofrio, who followed Golden to Temple. The problems were exacerbated when the Cavaliers’ 2006 recruiting class included eight players, out of 24, who were not admitted into school that year. Only two of those eight ended up attending Virginia, creating a gap on the roster.

Then the Cavaliers ran into disciplinary and academic issues, and saw players depart early for the NFL draft. Sewell and cornerback Chris Cook, both key players on this season’s team, missed the 2008 seasons because of academics. Standout defensive end Jeffrey Fitzgerald transferred to Kansas State because of an academic issue. Heralded recruits J’Courtney Williams and Mike Brown were dismissed for disciplinary reasons. Offensive lineman Branden Albert and wide receiver Kevin Ogletree both left Charlottesville early for the NFL.

However, no departure was more costly than Peter Lalich, who was the best pro-style quarterback recruited during Groh’s tenure. Lalich was dismissed from the team last season while facing legal issues [underage drinking], leaving the team without a long-term answer at quarterback. …

“There are a lot of alums who are extremely disappointed that we can’t even win the in-state recruiting battle right now,” Moore said. “And Virginia Tech has owned Virginia eight of the last nine years.”….

“Coaches with schemes but without talent,” Groh said that day, “quickly become unimportant coaches.” As Groh enters what is likely his final game as head coach, he could see his words come true.

One thing the article doesn’t mention is that U. of Virginia has a mean SAT score of 1326, one of the highest for any public university in the country. Maryland’s is about 50-60 points lower, but still pretty good for a state flagship university, and flagships are much harder to get into than a generation ago. To win a college football national championship, you need a whole lot of players who have no business being in college except to play football.

Similarly, Charlie Weis of Notre Dame has his job on the line, too, with talk of the college paying him $18 million to go away if they lose to Stanford on Saturday. (Nice work if you can get it.) The Fighting Irish, 6-5, have had a very entertaining season, with numerous thrilling victories and defeats, but alumni don’t want entertainment, they don’t want equality, they don’t want egalitarianism, they just want what Genghis Khan wanted from life.

But the University of Notre Dame has used its football reputation to build a strong academic institution. And that means it can’t recruit the kind of players it takes to win national championships. One insider said that if the ND coach brought the current admissions office the files of the stars of ND’s last national championship team in 1988, they would set them on fire.

Nowadays, ND can recruit a lot of good offensive players, but not too many top defensive players, so it plays a lot of 33-31 games. The over-under on ND-Stanford is 64.5 points.

On defense, “talent” pretty much is synonymous with “speed times weight.” Speed basically means blacks which means lower SAT scores. Notre Dame legend Paul Hornung pointed that simple truth out on the radio a half decade ago:

“We can’t stay as strict as we are as far as the academic structure is concerned because we’ve got to get the black athletes. We must get the black athletes if we’re going to compete.”

Hornung then got fired from his job broadcasting Notre Dame gams after the New York Times raised a stink.

They fired Paul Hornung for being honest with the public.

Football’s not like basketball, where Duke can compete for the national championship with a team of whites, mixed race kids like Shane Battier, and mostly upscale blacks like Grant Hill. College football teams are huge. Alabama, for example, has 109 players on its roster.

It costs a lot of money to keep a huge number of fast/huge kids eligible. And it helps if the school just isn’t that tough in the first place. Alabama’s mean SAT score is around 1100, a standard deviation lower than U. of Va.’s.

Florida’s SAT scores are quite high, but, presumably, they are willing to do what it takes to win at football.

You might think that secondary state schools with lower average SAT scores, like Florida State, Auburn, or Texas A&M, would be a better fit for football players than state flagship schools like Florida, Alabama, and Texas. But, it usually doesn’t work that way because flagship schools tend to have richer alumni.

It’s kind of like diversity crisis at the Coast Guard Academy. We aren’t supposed to talk about the Inevitable Logic of Diversity — if the Naval Academy takes in more maritime-oriented blacks in the name of Diversity, there will be fewer for the Coast Guard Academy — so nobody understands the Logic of Diversity.

It’s also like the two Academies in that one reason the Coast Guard Academy doesn’t have affirmative action in admissions is because it doesn’t play big time college football.

Basically, the battle for the national championship in college football comes down to who is willing to a tradeoff between the SAT score of the students versus the SAT score of the football team.