In a previous article, we (Naglieri & Ford, 2003) provided evidence from a large-scale study that similar proportions of White, Black, and Hispanic children would be identified as gifted using the Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test (NNAT; Naglieri, 1997). Lohman (2005) has taken issue with our conclusions and our methods. We provide several responses to his arguments and make five important points. First, we take the position that underrepresentation of minority children in classes for the gifted is a serious problem that must be remedied. Second, traditional measures of ability that include verbal and quantitative tests pose particular problems to less-advantaged children who may be intelligent, but lack verbal and math knowledge. Third, we argue that the CogAT verbal and quantitative tests of "ability" correlate higher with the ITBS "achievement" tests than the CogAT nonverbal tests of ability because of the similarity of skills needed to answer the items on both the ITBS and the CogAT. Fourth, we reject an emphasis on "academically gifted" children that excludes the identification of "intellectually gifted" children who happen to have poor academic skills. Fifth, we request that critics of the NNAT provide evidence of the magnitude of race and ethnic differences, as well as the likely effect on representation of minorities using whatever alternatives they propose.