I got the impression that the conclusions did not come from Richard Lynn, just the IQ data. The religiosity data come from a different source. Were Richard Lynn’s methodology panned in terms of his reasoning and conclusions or his data gathering?
Besides, I don’t really need either Richard Lynn’s or that website’s conclusions, I’d rather argue the case myself. And the only thing I was pointing out was that there was evidence for a connection, which is all correlation shows. It does leave us with one of three conclusions, religion causes a lack of IQ, a lack of IQ causes people to be religious, or some third thing causes people to both be religious and to not have high IQ. I don’t think this really bodes well for religion either way but I will admit it is not terribly meaningful.