Ashkenazi Jews 110 (small sample size, but the hard science Nobels bear it out)
East Asians 105
Whites 100
South Asians 90
African-Americans 80
Sub-Saharan Africans 70ish (data sparse)
Aboriginal Australians 65ish (data sparse)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:National_IQ_Lynn_Vanhanen_2006_IQ_and_Global_Inequality.png (current estimate)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AverageIQ-Map-World.png (native estimate)

Japanese have an average of something like 40 IQ points on Australian Aborigines, and I use them as an example because those two groups are both nonwhites fairly distant from Europe and in relative proximity of one another, which further undermines a lot of excuses about how it’s because IQ tests are made by whites (sometimes in emphatic form: made by dead white male heterosexual Christian Europeans) and test white culture or something rather than intelligence.

More locally to America, the white population averages 100 and the african-american population 85 (the difference, about one standard deviation, has been dubbed the “fundamental constant of sociology”). People who deny this can quickly twist themselves into angry knots about the institutionally oppressive subliminal racism that must be to blame for different outcomes of whites and blacks in America.

That race, as the etymology of the term should suggest, is defined in terms of ancestry.

Darwin: “Grant all races of man descended from one race; grant that all structure [i.e., physical features] of each race of man were perfectly known—grant that a perfect table of descent of each race was perfectly known— grant all this, & then do you not think that most would prefer as the best classification, a genealogical one. Generally, we may safely presume, that the resemblance of races & their pedigrees would go together.”

Biological race, like any other natural biological division (e.g., species), isn’t defined by phenotypic resemblance, but rather by genetic relationship; phenotypic resemblance is just used as evidence of this. Similarly, one uses twin phenetic similarity to evidence whether they are MZ or DZ, but twins classes are not defined in terms of appearance.

Whatever the case, I don’t see how it would necessarily matter if races were defined morophologically — in which case they would be biological morphs not races. For example, the light and dark human pigment morphs (roughly: historic North versus South Hemispherians) were subject to an array different selection pressures, which would have acted on multiple traits — plausibly, via cold winter selection, including behavioral ones.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2013/05/why-race-as-a-biological-construct-matters/#.VBG-lmSSxZI

Can you direct me to any sources which compare intelligence between Japanese and Aboriginal Australians or the like?

http://jaymans.wordpress.com/jaymans-race-inheritance-and-iq-f-a-q-f-r-b/#racesocialconstruct

This relates to race because there’s massive evidence that there are large racial differences in average intelligence (compare e.g. japanese to australian aborigines) that the progs have been blaming on environment/oppression/racism/nonprogs/etc.

(Epigenics can’t alter GACT sequences.)