'It’s the fault of a certain neoliberal cult';

'>>16137285
Race isnt a scientific categorization of humans.
Its controversial because we have no reason to believe such. The burden of proof is on you to substantiate such a claim. You dont seem to understand that unless you can provide empirical evidence that skin colour is linked to intelligence, everyone will ignore your nonsense as usual.';

'>>16137373
Why would there be no reason to assume there isn't a mental difference between races when there are physical differences between races? Its not just skin deep because it a person's race also affects their medical treatment or how prone they are to certain diseases.';

'>>16137380
Do you understand the meaning of empirical evidence you moron?

The difference is that you can actually determine a scientific cause for all of those physical/medical differences you listed. Black people have black skin because black skin better for hot climate. People who live in mountain have more lung capacity because less oxygen available in mountain. They dont just have these differences for no reason. Risk for certain medical conditions is affected not only by genetics, but also by differences in lifestyle choices, environment, culture, etc. Maybe the reason x race has a higher prevalence of y disease is because most of they people in x race have a culture of eating like shit. You would still be correct in saying people of x race are at higher risk for that disease even though it might literally have nothing to do with their genetics.

The fuck do you mean "why would there be no reason to assume there arent mental differences between races" Say what the fucking reason for these differences might plausibly be then, and provide evidence for these differences actually existing and being caused by genetics
"Because there are physical differences there must also be mental differences" is not an argument';

'>>16137459
>Say what the fucking reason for pattern recognition and long term planning could possibly be for humans you fucking bigot!?!?!?!

Moron. As proving these differences, they’ve already been proven to be real. But you’re gonna purity wank and denounce any evidence with less than perfect purity (you can denounce 100% of science when you feel like it this way btw)';

'>>16137468
>>Say what the fucking reason for pattern recognition and long term planning could possibly be for humans you fucking bigot!?!?!?!
I did not say this. I said what would be the reason for differences in intelligence between races. And you said "Because there are physical differences and differences in how prone they are to certain diseases" which is a non-sequitur
>As proving these differences, they’ve already been proven to be real.
They haven't, but feel free to keep being delusional';

'>>16137373
>Race isnt a scientific categorization of humans.

Next you'll probably trot out Lewontin's fallacy';

'>>16137479
Having to plan ahead for winter/plan for survival in the deserts of the middle east is the reason for this selection pressure. Africa was a freakin garden of Eden in comparison.';

'>>16137373
skin colour is a trait like intelligence, neither defines the other, both are defined by a completely different thing';

'Back when I was growing up, this was in the 1900s btw, even back then they would say that only a small percentage of a person's behavior was caused by nature rather than nurture. You have never met a person who didn't grow up in the world around them. We are formed by the world around us. Children will try and live up to the expectations of adults, no matter what those expectations are. If you expect a child to fail, and let them know that, they probably will. Same with success. This is what you should be focusing on, because 97% of that child's potential can be nurtured. Middle eastern people raised in an un-rapey society won't be rapey. If a white person is hateful, if a jew is greedy, if a black person is violent, 97% of that is because they were made that way because the people around them expected them to be that way. Yes there are differences between races, but when you can form such a high percentage of a person not to be whatever negative aspect you're thinking of, you have a responsibility to do right by that person and pretend the 3% doesn't exist, or the child will infer that their nature is the reason they fail at a given thing, and they'll stop trying. Worse, they might decide that their natural behavioral differences are a strength, a uniqueness, a weapon.
Humans were born with weapons in hand, we are very good at using them. Our species never existed in a time without sharpened sticks and rocks and fire, the previous human species got all that shit up and running and then we killed them off.

I understand your commitment to the truth, but you have to avoid using the truth in ways that weaken society. The truth is the different subspecies of humans don't really get along with each other, because humans that look different have always presented a threat to our tribes, whichever tribe that may be. Diversity isn't a strength, it's a weakness. If you have to split a diamond in half, you split it along a natural flaw. That flaw in our diamond is race.';

'>>16137511
The idea of tabula rasa (or ”blank slate”) is an ideological dogma from the French revolution and the elightenment era. It is not scientific. Every single macro-scale data set we have on the topic says niggers are retarded on average, and twin studies proves it is in large part due to genes.

Your favorite holy cow is stupid on average, boohoo.';

'>>16137511
And where did you get that number? Because it's obviously bullshit. You CANNOT turn every Togo African into 97% rocket scientist by sending them to school.';

'>>16137518
You're missing the thrust of my argument, I didn't have enough space to finish it though. There's already natural momentum dividing people along racial lines, and the end result will be measurably worse for you and your people, so when you focus on these differences, you help your enemies. You help Wall Street keep another Occupy from happening. You help people on the other side of the planet break down the world you live in.';

'>>16137533
Your argument is to keep a beautiful lie alive to get some societal unity from it? Better to just genetically engineer retards up or sterilize them and be done in 1 generation.';

'>>16137533
I just don't want to live around people who are, on average, more prone to violence and disorderly, low-trust behavior. I don't want to live next to people who don't take care of their homes and drive my neighbourhood's property value down, costing me money. I don't want to live next to people who steal more and drive businesses to increase prices. I don't want to live in a country where more people depend on welfare that makes me pay more taxes. I don't want my wife and daughters to be less safe when they're walking alone at night. I just don't want to live next to brown people and niggers.';

'>>16137539
Look dude, I don't disagree with you, but there are logistical problems with your logic here. Be truthful, who would get to decide who lives and dies, who breeds and who gets cut? The rich. You don't want that. It's not a viable course of action, so any steps you take that make you want to go that way are harmful to you.

What makes humans successful as a species is our ability to cooperate. When you take actions that make us less likely, less willing to even try to cooperate, you weaken our species.';

'Intelligence literally doesnt even matter. Look how successful niggers are as a species, they reproduce like crazy and breed whites out of existence anywhere they go. Meanshile whites bend over backwards to worship them and promote racemixing en masse. Any race that promotes its own destruction like that deserves to be wiped out, its just natural selection.';

'>>16137551
It would a chaotic episode in human history for sure, but the long term results have great potential.

If low IQ retards breeding isn’t dealt with soon, coupled with democracy… Humanity is going to be set back for a looooong time until intelligence is selected for again.';

'>>16137285
Im going to skip ahead, the world of the future will be black, specifically bantu. All of the earth. This is the long term trend will intensifies exponentially. Think about how little your pondering matters.';

'>>16137481
Can you explain what the axes in that graph mean> PC 1? PC 2?';

'>>16137285
I think the problem is that it's currently impossible to actually empirically prove mental differences between each race. The IQ race difference thing kind of gets you half way there, but IQ itself a murky concept.
There's some ideas that certain genes may influence certain emotional states or moods, and certain races will have higher or lower prevalence of those genes. These factors however are a very small part of things and so deep in the background that it's hard to make strong conclusions from

Another one is that certain races have different makeups in areas which could appear to be mental, but are more to do with physical makeup. Like if your hearing was 5x more sensitive then you would act differently, even if your brain was exactly the same. Black people have more fast twitch muscle fibers which could potentially make them more likely to punch or hit back under stress - so they may appear more aggressive but that case is more to do with muscles

Any reasonable person accepts that genetic differences will result in mental differences though, it's just that right now we can't quantify it and society is extremely sensitive about this topic

in my opinion cultures are a good reflection of genetic makeup with reference to mental states, I think that asian people have a predisposition to a certain cultural/societal style, white people do, black people, etc, with a huge amount of overlap but with certain differences in preferences for thinking styles and different priorities. Like I think whites may prioritise hierarchies more than other races - just a random example';

'>>16137574
IQ and G-factor are perfectly fine metrics for intelligence. Intelligence is pattern recognition that functionally allows you to predict the future to get the outcomes you want, nothing else.';

'>black people are more likely to punch people due to having more explosive muscle fibers
>nothing to do with them choosing to do so
New level of reddit bugman cultist holy shiiiiit';

'>>16137584
fair enough yes on a theoretical level, my point was mainly that the IQ tests themselves aren't great tools at measuring this';

'>>16137588
I'm not denying that they choose to do so, what I was saying was that these physical aspects add to the mixture of every factor which goes on to produce the end effect we see, in this case 'aggression'. Even if they choose to attack someone, the faster twitch muscle fibers could easily be seen as more aggressive. E.g. hypothetically 2 people with the same intent, the one with more fast twitch fibers will be seen to punch harder and faster, and be therefore seen as more aggressive, but mentally speaking the aggression level is the same';

'>>16137285
that image doesn't contain americoid for native ameircans
also, what race are indians?';

'>>16137285
>Why is it controversial to say that human races have mental differences between them?

Because it's not clear what the exact nature of those differences are. We assume that because there is a discrepancy in behavior patterns between the different races that it automatically denotes mental differences. But that view point can be misconstrued. For instance there seems to be no race of humans that is unable to learn another race's family of languages eventually despite being ancestrally different and regionally separated for hundred/thousands of years. Somehow Aboriginal Australians can average an IQ of around 65 but still have the capacity to learn, speak and write in English thus effectively communicate with Europeans? How do you explain that?

Also even with your own example of physical differences, for instance with black people being at higher risk of high blood pressure and diabetes. That is actually specific to African Americans not Blacks in general. Thus it is not a race specific issue. As a matter of fact the highest rates of diabetes is in Pakistan which is neither a African country nor African ancestral country.';

'>>16137481
>if I call it a fallacy it goes away
This isn't reddit
>>16137572
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principal_component_analysis
The study this image is from is https://web.archive.org/web/20220307205301/https://bmcbioinformatics.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12859-019-2680-1
Anon doesn't understand what any of this means, but it appears to separate groups of people into races so it's good enough for him';

'>>16137617
After skimming through that paper it appears to be pretty much exactly what that Anon was saying - unless I'm missing something here? There are clearly clusters of super populations, and those clusters mirror neatly into the informal concept of race. If i'm missing something here then please elaborate';

'>>16137572
Principle component analysis is a form of dimensionality reduction, where the top eigenvectors are computed from the covariance matrix of different variables. This essentially calculates the directions (principle components) in a high dimensional space that explain most of the variance in the data. In this case the data are sets of Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms (SNPs) for individuals from a Genome Wide Association Study (GWAS). This is basically measuring whether individuals have certain alleles, such as the variant rs4962322 which is on chromosome 10, position 126244196.

>>16137617
It's pretty obvious you are emotionally resistant to the idea there are genetic differences between populations.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixation_index#Autosomal_genetic_distances_based_on_classical_markers';

'>>16137285
Same reason as anything.

The Holocaust.';

'>>16137617
>PCA can be thought of as fitting a p-dimensional ellipsoid to the data, where each axis of the ellipsoid represents a principal component. If some axis of the ellipsoid is small, then the variance along that axis is also small.

I dont know what any of this means, can i get an intuitive view that isnt just blindly plugging vectors into a program?';

'>>16137690
>Principle component analysis is a form of dimensionality reduction
I figured it was some kind of projection of data to a plane, like a shadow. I just dont know how this plane gets selected for. Somehow the plane visualization that is a better fit for the original data?';

'>>16137711
Here's a good introduction to PCA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMOI_lkzW08

Yes, we are essentially projecting the data into a new coordinate system, using the top 2 eigenvectors computed from the correlation matrix. We typically choose the top 2 vectors for visualization purposes, since the original data can be stupendously high dimensional.

For example, with single cell RNA data there can be around 100k cells which each have expression values for about 20k genes. With GWAS there are more than 600 million known SNPs for humans, but many are very rare, so often times you only need the most common ones to perform genotyping. 23andMe uses a "SNP chip" where they only look at about 650,000 variants to determine ancestry. This older technology is still capable of reliably determining ancestry and ethnicity.';

'>>16137613
>How do you explain that?

There are differences on average, but still some overlap. As genetic distance grows between groups there is more potential for certain populations to have a significantly shifted distribution of alleles responsible for various phenotypic traits like spatial or verbal reasoning.';

'>>16137552
hi kike. Forgoing intelligence in favor of deluging white people in a sea of brown shit doesn't make you superior, it just makes you a scumbag.';

'>>16137617
>but it appears to separate groups of people into races
How is such a thing possible, given the fact that races aren't real?';

'>>16138940
Those bell curves are actually all exactly the same. See how there is more variance within the individual bell curves than between them? Read Lewontin.';

'>>16137285
Because it's hard. IQ test are already not perfect now you want to try and quantify how each race or ethnicity difference mentally? That's impossible today.';

'>>16139665
There are many culturally unbiased IQ tests like Raven progressive matrices, which still show that those of African ancestry tend to score among the lowest, Hispanics slightly higher, while Asians and Jews higher than Whites on average. Interestingly, the Igbo of Nigeria tend to do very well in the West, and Africa has a large amount of genetic variation, so people should still be treated as individuals and given the opportunity to prove their merit.

IQ is one of the most robust psychometric findings in psychology. It is strongly correlated with many measures of success like academic performance and lifetime earnings. Emerging GWAS data will find even more alleles associated with cognition and behavior, and Polygenic Scores will become more refined for the traits people care about.';

'>>16137591
IQ tests are a perfectly fine tool for measuring this. IQ as a single variable has incredible explanatory value for all kinds of different life outcomes, in fact it's one of the best single variables for that outside of hyper-specific ones (e.g., predicting income in year t by using income in year t-1).';

'>>16137285
It isn't provable scientifically and can lead to unjust actions.';

'>>16139856
lmao, we know which parts of brain are responsible for certain things';

'>>16139707
IQ tests are quite useful for the lower end at what you describe with income prediction and such, but beyond 100 the correlations become very noisy. There's also an important caveat here where people who score higher in IQ tests are likely to be individuals who had less stress in childhood (e.g. higher income households), and the income predictions can line up with IQ as the underlying factors behind both are the same. IQ tests therefore put the cart before the horse as it's obvious that people with easier/less stressful lives will be more likely to achieve higher incomes and will be more likely to perform better on IQ tests - but this has absolutely nothing to do with inherent ability, which IQ purports to explain. When you get onto the population average level of IQ as well these factors all heavily compound. IQ is an interesting novelty but it should never be taken as anything deeper than that';

'>>16137285
It's very slight';

'>>16140253
>high IQ people are good at planning for the future
>they decided they want to have babies, so they plan ahead for it
>they take actions according to the plan
>their actions result in the creation of a safe and low stress environment for the raising of babies
>they then have babies in this environment
>the babies genetically inherit the intelligence of their parents
>the babies then proceed to grow up in the safe and low stress enviroment that their high IQ parents created
>when the babies are adults they take an IQ test and lo and behold they score high on it
>the high IQ adults then repeat what their parents did and the cycle continues';

'>>16140281
and that's why birthrates are declining everywhere except in nigeria, since all nigerians are 300IQ';

'>>16137373
But race is more than skin color. Race is bassically ancestry. We simply organzie people by phenotype bc people who look similar are obviously going to be. People who look different are obviously going to have different ancestry.';

'>>16137459
But that's kind of a cop out. If hair texture is different. Smell. Chemicals like testosterone and estrogen levels are different. Why wouldn't the brains be different? In other words. If nature or evolution has mad eus look very different why wouldn't it also change our fucking brains? Well the obvious answer is that it did.';

'>>16137285
>>16137342
It all started with a jew.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_Boas';

'>>16137529
Which is why I hate the idea that nurture is more important than nature. It's the genes that matter. Otherwise we could all be athletic or smart. Which we can't. There is a natural bell curve to everything. Every person is unequal to each other. Of coarse nature affects it but genetics is easily the most important thing.';

'>he hates this site
>he comes here only to suppress free speech';

'>>16140281
And now imagine a scenario where the family loses their money for whatever reason, such as their business being outcompeted or changing market dynamics. The descendants will have a more stressful childhood environment, which will reflect in lower IQ scores showing up, despite these genetic feedback loops you describe. Hence this is why IQ can never be a true reflection of intelligence, and the way people relate to the concept of IQ is faulty - it's nothing beyond novelty.
Also you might say that my example may not happen, but the point is that there's so many factors in life which can impact the IQ score and have nothing to do with genetics';

'>>16140325
>Gets born
>Never nurtured
>Dies forthwith';

'>>16140317
>It all started with a jew.
Like all bad things. Isn't it also funny that the head of the department of defense during bush/911 attacks happened to be a jew?';

'Let’s take the politics out of it and go back to the basics of biology.

Take two populations of the same species. Not humans- let’s say rabbits.

Isolate them genetically for a significant period (usually such isolation is caused by geography but it doesn’t matter why so long as interbreeding is minimal and is over enough generations for natural selection and genetic drift to occur).

Will there be a divergence of traits between the two populations?

The answer is yes, of course. Some traits will diverge becasue of natural selection, some because of sexual selection and some just becasue of genetic drift.

After all that is how evolution works - it simply must be the case.

Evolution isn’t just about when two populations diverge so greatly that a new species or sub-species forms - it’ happening daily for all sorts of traits and characteristics of an animal.

And the traits that most directly impact on fitness will tend to be subject to strong selection.

So wind it back to humans.

Have certain populations of humans being genetically isolated from each other for many generations?

Yes. We tend to call them ethnicities.

Will their traits vary as between population groups?

Yes. Hair type, blood group, eye colour, facial features, ability to digest certain foods, average height, body shape etc. All these traits demonstrably differ between ethnic groups.

Is intelligence a trait of humans that will likewise vary?

You can logically only choose one answer:

A) Yes - and as intelligence is one of a human’s key traits it is likely to be selected for quite strongly in different environments and communities,

B) No - intelligence is a special trait - alone amongst all traits it’s not possible for it to vary between groups at all - all groups of human beings have the same average intelligence.

If you pick B fine, but don’t expect to pass a biology class any time soon.';

'>>16137574
>I think the problem is that it's currently impossible to actually empirically prove mental differences between each race
You’re a fucking idiot';

'>>16140325
You are speaking sacrilege anon. Heresy.

“We are all the same :)”';

'>>16140403
Without nature, you don't even reach that first step.';

'I dont find blacks to be stupid, i think they are just too pressured by media and their own self-reinforcing culture to act like thugs. In the days of slavery they had a reputation of being meek and docile, the yes massa kind of thing.
Violence isnt really an argument against intelligence, either way.
The worst is when blacks bully their own nerd class, the Urkel blacks. In Africa they are not allowed to start businesses and prosper as their families will loot the business.';

'>>16140253
>There's also an important caveat here where people who score higher in IQ tests are likely to be individuals who had less stress in childhood
How do you know that lower IQ is caused by stress, and not the other way around? After all if you're dumb as rocks your parents likely are as well, then they're be more likely to inflict abuse (either intentionally or not).';

'>>16137285
Mental and IQ differences are obvious. You’re just not allowed to say it.';

'>>16140473
What's wrong with my statement?
>>16140522
I mean on the discrete IQ test itself, people who had more stress are less likely to have spent time engaging in activities which would have prepared them better for the questions posed in IQ tests. Yes I agree on the negative feedback loop you say there of course, I'm just saying that the idea of an IQ score reflecting something innate about you is quite a strange notion when you think about it';

'>>16140534
IQ tests were originally proposed by progressives and socialists in the 1800s so as to identify struggling proletarians of merit, and elevate them through education. It's true there is some noise in IQ as a measurement, but it's still quite effective at predicting many outcomes in life.

Culture is also a major component that can maximize the natural range of someone's intelligence. For example, poor Asians do better than rich Blacks on the SAT. That's clearly in large part due to their culture's heavy emphasis on education, and possibly also due to genetics.';

'>>16140534
>What's wrong with my statement?
Look at Australian abiriboos sleeping on the road and getting hit by cars because they’re so black
Look at African pygmies';

'>>16137601
American natives are the same race as north asians, and indians are the same race as europeans.';

'>>16137613
>Somehow Aboriginal Australians can average an IQ of around 65 but still have the capacity to learn, speak and write in English thus effectively communicate with Europeans?
Hm... by effectively you mean this ? >>>/wsg/5517335
https://i.4cdn.org/wsg/1713434997703965.webm

>How do you explain that?
Why would I need to ? They have brains and vocal chords, that's the explanation.
Even dogs can communicate with humans, and apes can learn sign language and parakeets a limited vocabulary.
Do you think language is some sort of magical secret ability ?';

'>>16140548
No doubt that people who are less well off will do well on IQ tests in some circumstances, even those with higher stress in childhood. My point mainly is to show that there are so many factors in your life which play towards the actual IQ score itself on a paper test, how much of that is actually innate at a genetic level? That's very hard to tell. Culture as you say plays a large part too

So on the topic of this thread if we are to compare races by IQ then what is actually truly being compared here - because it must involve cultural differences, differences in upbringing, social tendencies, luck factors, etc, and all of that eschews away from useful comparison on a racial/genetic intelligence level. At that point IQ is just a superficial number with no real comparative value';

'>>16137285
>human race
>not human species
Why are retards like this?';

'>>16140566
Well okay I don't know much about aboriginals, it could be the case that they just lack some cognitive components in their brain. You mention some getting hit by cars on the road though, it's safe to assume that those ones would be alcoholics or hobos or whatever, like I bet that was a common sight with Irish people in the 1800's but isn't as much now lol';

'>>16140581
>>16140534
Regarding this bullshit about IQ tests results being directly influenced by culture, education, environment, nutrition, etc, I have the anecdotal story of Jean Frene.

Born in 1942 in a farmer's family, one of 11 children, and he grew up during a time of food rationing that lasted until 1949.
He left school at 14 to go work on the family farm, but had to go for military service at 19. There he had to pass some intelligence tests, and he did so well that the army sent him back to school instead. He completed high school in 4 months and went to university, where he ultimately got a PhD in physics.
Later he became a renowned in the field of tribology.

Intelligence is mostly nature, not nurture. IQ tests can reveal that natural intelligence when it has not been nurtured.';

'>>16140592
>it's safe to assume that those ones would be alcoholics or hobos or whatever
Anon they literally go to sleep ON THE ROAD, not IN a car. They don’t drive. They had to put up signs that say “please don’t sleep on the road”, it got that bad.

Here’s the commercial.
> https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qClBRaretEk&pp=ygUiYXVzdHJhbGlhIGRvbid0IHNsZWVwIG9uIHRoZSByb2FkIA%3D%3D';

'>>16140497
I find it scary though, how I can find white people dumber than black people. White people have a breeding problem right now.';

'>>16140612
This is cool and everything but it doesn't exactly disprove the concept of nurture here. He received a full education by the standards at that time. Also those 5 years spent working on the family farm could have been spent developing how he thinks in a way that gave him an upper hand, I mean there's some periods of large downtime with farms. I'm just speculating on how, but it's certainly possible that nurture played a crucial part there, we'd need to know exactly how he spent his time and what he did though, especially whatever he did that was different than the norm';

'>>16140624
It doesn’t disprove nurture it just paints a picture that nature comes before nurture, which is a no brainer. There has to first be a background to the foreground, and I don’t care how malleable that background/foreground is.';

'>>16140619
well I'm sure you know more about this stuff than me but are aboriginals as integrated into schooling as such as the rest of people in Australia? Are they more heavily segregated? I can see ways in which they just never learn certain things circumstantially, and never pass it onto each other as a result. Anyway, that video was pretty funny as was the covid translation one';

'>>16137481
It’s amazing how close us jeets are to latrinos desu
What would the interpretation of the principal components be';

'>>16140629
I agree that nature comes before nurture. Nurture however plays such a crucial part in how we think, such that it'd be foolhardy to act like an applied IQ test is actually an accurate reflection of innate intelligence (nature)';

'>>16140624
>He received a full education by the standards at that time.
No he didn't, didn't you read ? He only went to school for the mandatory years and then worked on the farm instead of continuing his education.
>5 years spent working on the family farm could have been spent developing how he thinks
If you can do as well working on a farm as in high school, that means that environment and education doesn't matter much.';

'>>16140641
Everything in nature nurtures you in some way. This is why I hate the ‘correlation not causation’ argument. Your surroundings will never not dictate your biology in some way. Evolutionary adaption is always at work, it’s just smooth as sin. It can be argued that evolution IS adaption.';

'>>16140642
>No he didn't, didn't you read ? He only went to school for the mandatory years and then worked on the farm instead of continuing his education.
I meant that he attended all mandatory years, e.g. he received a full standard education. I didn't mean higher education. Basically - he never dropped out of school early
>If you can do as well working on a farm as in high school, that means that environment and education doesn't matter much.
Education is important in broad systematic terms but I'm sure that a more individualized education routine would have superior results. Like if he spent his downtime reading books on various subjects, practicing puzzles and stuff, before switching back to farming again which would have taught him discipline and given him exercise. I could easily see that resulting in preparing his mind for good thinking practises. As long as he was luckily reading the right books and such

>>16140645
yeah absolutely. It's all deeply linked and feeds forwards and backwards, like your nature may predispose someone to being more introverted, which enables some nurture factors to kick in e.g. more time alone practising things, less time spent being bullied and more time spent playing the piano as a kid. Or someone is well built so they end up playing college football and don't have as much time to develop some random thinking patterns which an IQ test may be weighted towards, even though that person is using the same pattern recognition potential in more kinaesthetic ways. It's ridiculously complicated and IQ tests are blind to all of these complications';

'>>16140683
>It's ridiculously complicated and IQ tests are blind to all of these complications
As Peterson or Weinstein put it, they’re more like proxies or placeholders, or “the most easily assessable kind of intelligence”, which doesn’t really include, say, artistic intelligence, or divergent intelligence. Reaction times are correlated with intelligence, but there are still intelligent people out there who are slow thinkers, or ponderers. Or what of social intelligence? You have autistic people incapable of speech who can take a helicopter ride around New York and somehow memorize *to a fucking point* their view and draw it down three dimensionally, what the hell. You also have socially retarded but brilliant Chinese mathematicians who worship Mao and have shrines to him. The “man with the highest IQ in America” is a racist (if based) son of a bitch who believes he can prove the existence of God using math. Some mathematicians become so schizo they literally end up believing math is too overly convenient and the universe is a mathematical simulation of some kind, the same way Isaac Newton thought the universe was too retarded (if overwhelmingly glorious) to run without someone to hold its hand (yes, God).

There’s also a vital element of Do that a lot of smart people have lost in the last century (compare Victorian intellectuals who went out and actually Did shit), and the common saying is “the dumb are cocksure and confident while the smart are filled with paralyzingly doubt”. The ability to Do is important here, and often dumb people Do more than smart people, who just sit there and think unproductively. It is actually infuriating how dumb people get more done, while smart people can only make massive changes if they’re in the right place and right time. Intellectuals today would rather stay hushed and agree rather than disagree. Because otherwise they lose their jobs.';

'>>16140488
Chicken and egg
Nice try.
Let me guess stuff just poofed out of nowhere?
Don't you tire of yourself?';

'>>16140707
Retard. The egg has always came before the chicken, even if the chicken lays the egg.';

'>>16137285
>Why is it controversial to say that human races have mental differences between them?
because there's just as much variation within each "race"';

'>>16140696
One intuition I have, which seems to always apply, is that there's a positive and negative aspect to a lot of buckets that can be classified as 'intelligence', each with their own application ability. Like your example of autistic people there - they usually are quite detailed oriented and typically seem to have good memories, so in conversations they will bring up interesting bits of information or notice minute details which can invoke this colloquial feel of 'intelligence', but the flip side of this is that they aren't as good at understanding the underlying meaning of things or the broader whole, which some could say is 'unintelligent'. This same multi-facet approach works in pretty much every case I find. Like the mathematician example you gave, perhaps there's some form of schizophrenia there? or some mania which grips that person and allows them to devote surplus time into studying mathematics, resulting in discoveries or understanding which would be seen as intelligent, yet the mania also results in making delusional connections. Same I find with the whole verbal intelligence idea where people who are the quickest and wittiest are often working on a shallow level and aren't actually considering much

I just think that most people have the same cognitive potential (barring those with brain damage of course), and it's really just a matter of how much time you spend on certain things.
IQ tests are indeed easily assessable, but what exactly they assess is a mystery to me, we like to believe that it's a form of intelligence on a pattern recognition platform, but again in my opinion all it truly tests is how much time one has spent thinking in a very specific way. You can train at it, you can lose that thinking style, it will fluctuate day per day. To attach a single number to something like that and then to act like it's a reflection of some kind of 'innate' intelligence just seems goofy to me';

'>>16140757
>I just think that most people have the same cognitive potential
Doesn’t pass the smell test.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rcr5tkN02eg
But it may not actually matter.';

'>>16140253
The predictive validity of IQ is strong for basically the entire bell curve, the whole "useful only for below 100" thing is a pure meme and not true.
What you are saying is that there can be confounding variables, and of course, any statistical analysis / basic OLS estimate will have those. One huge reason why the causal pathways are likely the other way round than what you suggest are twin studies / general adoption studies, where systematical differences in environment seem to have only very little explanatory power. Twins growing up in separate environments are very, very similar to each other in most aspects. Adopted siblings growing up together are about as similar to each other as two random people off the street.';

'>>16137285
The concept of race has no biological basis in humans.

DNA studies do not indicate that separate classifiable subspecies (races) exist within modern humans. While different genes for physical traits such as skin and hair color can be identified between individuals, no consistent patterns of genes across the human genome exist to distinguish one race from another. There also is no genetic basis for divisions of human ethnicity.
—Human Genome Project

Time for the racists to update their outdated beliefs and embrace the 21st century's cutting edge scientific progress.';

'It underminds the idea of all men being created equal. Its unture.

But it's a fantastic ethos to unite a varity of people under a single banner. We all want to think that if we just try hard enough, we are gunna make it...';

'>>16140899
>The concept of race has no biological basis in humans
And yet some people are black and some people are not. Hmm. Clearly there are clusters of biological groups.';

'>>16140908
That's addressed by my post, imbecile. To quote it:

"DNA studies do not indicate that separate classifiable subspecies (races) exist within modern humans. While different genes for physical traits such as skin and hair color can be identified between individuals, no consistent patterns of genes across the human genome exist to distinguish one race from another. There also is no genetic basis for divisions of human ethnicity."
—Human Genome Project';

'>>16140929
Nope. They look different. Clearly you can group them into different groups. Race isn’t anything but a term for a given cluster. A description not a definition.

Fucking deal with it. If you have differences on the surface you’re going to have differences below the surface. It’s the same with cognitive function.

Humans aren’t magical creatures exempt from biological variance.

Everything in >>16140471 isn’t wrong. Stop over complicating something even cavemen understood.';

'>>16140929
>different genes for physical traits such as skin and hair color can be identified between individuals
Thats race lol';

'>>16140963
>Clearly you can group them into different groups
Yet when you decode the full human genome you can't find any clear delineations amounting to races in humans. You're mistake is confusing genotype differences with phenotype differences, imbecile. Also you don't know that you can have phenotypic differences in a single species that don't amount to racial differences.';

'>>16137285
It goes against the modern religion given to us from the top down. It's interesting to see regligion's evolution through time. At first you have local ethnoreligions. Then eventually you get Christianity which did away with ethnos and borders and claimed there was only a single god. Now we have no singular named god, no name for the religion, just dogma.';

'>>16140776
I watched the whole video but it doesn't really disagree with what I said, he even had some pretty big doubts on the usefulness of IQ which is my stance. Also as he was mentioning on people with tiny heads, that would lead to physical brain differences and of course I agree that brain damage will have a pretty big difference. I just mean a normal person with a normal brain running at 15 Watts

>>16140839
Useful only for below 100 is what current research suggests, at least if we are talking about income levels. Regression analysis lines fall off above 100, statistical modelling has far higher accuracy for less than 100 IQ, but the accuracy decreases sharpy above 100

I'd have to read up more on the twin studies, but from some googling it does appear that they grew up in very similar environmental conditions. I don't consider having something like a different wallpaper as an important environmental impact, as long as they adhere to the same developmental goals with education and such as we've laid out as a society, then you'd expect to find similarities. Anything beyond normal correlation would highly likely be genetic, but again this can be down to some factors such as physical similarities and that 'life' treated them both similarly due to that, or their thinking styles being similar. These would be seen as gene-environment interaction effects.

Also some studies do appear to show some correlation between adopted siblings, suggesting some environmental impact here, and that would be without the gene-environment catalytic effects.

The factor of environment is incredibly hard to control for in these circumstances it seems, especially with adopted siblings in the same household as their parents will likely have different approaches to each child';

'>>16140965
Nope, imbecile. Here's some basic reading for you:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cline_(biology)';

'>>16140967
>Yet when you decode the full human genome you can't find any clear delineations amounting to races in humans.
Because race is a descriptive collection of variables you enormous fucking potato. It isn’t just one thing. Are you looking for God, or what? Why is this like a religion to you? You’re still ignoring that humans have varying skin tones and bone-facial structures, as well as cognitive capacities, to the point where such clusters of biological variance lead into “yep, they’re different from us”.

Fucking deal with it.';

'>>16140972
>I watched the whole video but it doesn't really disagree with what I said
Except the part where you said we all have the same cognitive capacities. It’s like saying a black man can turn white like a chameleon if he tries hard enough. A man can’t get pregnant no matter how hard they try.';

'>>16137373
This is just a semantic argument tho. Whether you use the word race, ethnicity, heritage, ancestry or flibflorbz, everything he said is accurate regardless of what word you wish to use to describe the phenomena';

'>>16140979
>Except the part where you said we all have the same cognitive capacities
He never disagreed with that in the video, he merely stated that there are preferences in thinking styles which I agree with. I think of it like a taste preference. With enough willpower you can think however you want';

'>>16140973
Yep, you’re an idiot.

>>16140972
Weinstein calls IQ a proxy as another put it, but he still doesn’t believe we all have the same sort of brain. Again, as he put it, it doesn’t pass the smell test.

Do you expect all school generations to be equivalently capable? No. Smarts move. There was even an Islamic golden age.';

'>>16140985
>He never disagreed with that in the video
Then you’re willingly not hearing what he said. It doesn’t pass the smell test. Some are going to be smarter than others.
Some breed better than others. IQ doesn’t assess all of this, is what he is saying.';

'>>16140985
>With enough willpower you can think however you want
You can’t. Some are going to have higher brain power than others.

Oh well. If you can’t be smarter, be wiser.';

'>>16140987
I took the 'proxy' comment as him stating that it represents something other than intelligence, it's a metaphysical abstract and largely meaningless, he was very dismissive of the weight/usefulness of IQ in that video.

And yes I expect all school generations - as long as we control for brain defects - to be equivalently capable in potential';

'>>16140992
>And yes I expect all school generations - as long as we control for brain defects - to be equivalently capable in potential
Then you’re an insane person. Equity of outcome is a disastrous concept. Equity of opportunity is something else.';

'>>16140990
I may be subconsciously hearing something different (you may too), I'll go watch it again

>>16140991
>Some are going to have higher brain power than others.
Unverifiable mystical nonsense

Someone who spent time memorising every Pokemon doesn't have "more brain power" than me - I'm not concerned about randomly selected end effects, I'm talking about 'innate' intelligence';

'>>16140974
To prove that humans have varying races you'd need to decode the entire human genome, you can't just "look" and "notice" different phenotypes, since they don't necessarily imply different genotypes to the degree of different races.

Those who did the actual hard job of decoding the entire human genome (unlike you) came to the conclusion that: While different genes for physical traits such as skin and hair color can be identified between individuals, no consistent patterns of genes across the human genome exist to distinguish one race from another.

Fucking deal with it.';

'>>16140990
Okay what he says is that it doesn't pass the 'smell test' for different races to have:
"Absolutely no variation in groups in any kind of cognitive endowment"

Which admittedly is quite a vague statement in the context of specifics of this thread. I'd probably agree that it doesn't pass the smell test, as I see differences in thinking styles as something which can manifest through race. Getting back to 'brain power' or IQ is almost a tangential point to the one he brought up there, where he was basically just saying that variations will exist in SOME thing, what exactly that thing is, is hard to define

>>16140996
>Equity of outcome is a disastrous concept. Equity of opportunity is something else.
Yeah of course equity of outcome is crude and barbaric. That wasn't really what I meant though, I'm just speaking to the cognitive potential of each person. The real world material products of those classes, like assignments produced, grades achieved, music created - whatever - will be different for sure, but the cognitive potential can easily remain constant as environmental factors produce those variations';

'>>16140972
"Current research" suggests nothing of that kind, higher IQ consistently correlates with "better" life outcomes. I know it's a big talking point in the "IQ-critical" blogosphere, probably originating by the retard Taleb, but it's simply not true. Just as an example, IQ correlates with scientists "success", and you won't find many scientists below 100 IQ, even nowadays. But you can do any old estimate yourself and you will find that the correlations continue to hold at higher IQ values than 100.
Regarding twin studies, well, they grow up in similar environments in the same way you and your neighbor grow up in similar environments. And yet, unless you and your neighbor are related, you will be about as similar to him as to some guy living in the next city. Twins, though, if they are identical that is, are about as similar to each other as you are to yourself on many metrics, regardless of whether they grew up together or apart.
Now, obviously EVERYTHING is a gene-environment interaction. There is no "nature" or "nurture". What these studies do is not show "IQ is x% genetic", they show that, within the societies studied (i.e., the west), "differences in IQ can mostly be explained by differences in genetics + differences in random environmental factors, whereas systematic environmental factors, that is, factors that were specifically looked at, seemed to play a very minor role". To get back to OP's original question / point, all our research at this point overwhelmingly suggests that people differ from each other (duh), that most of those differences can be explained via differences in genetics, and that environmental changes, unless extreme (shooting someone would be an extreme environmental intervention), have little impact.';

'>>16141007
>race doesn't exist argument
wew';

'>all anti cognitive difference arguments so far amount to semantics
I think we are done here.';

'>>16141007
>Those who did the actual hard job of decoding the entire human genome (unlike you) came to the conclusion that: While different genes for physical traits such as skin and hair color can be identified between individuals, no consistent patterns of genes across the human genome exist to distinguish one race from another.
But that's wrong. That's Lewtonin's Fallacy. You just need to compare genes or SNP at various locations on the genome and you can predict race with high accuracy.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1872497323000455';

'>>16140471
This is the perfect answer. Intelligence is under selection the same as any other trait. If other traits are different and every test ever conducted shows there are racial differences on intelligence. Well obviously there are intelligence differences amongst races. You can break it down by nationality too. Just don't expect the Congolese students to average like Japanese students in Japan. And definately don't call the teachers and school system racists bc the Congolese students can't pass basic tests. Funny how liberals believe in science up until it goes against their propaganda. I mean world view.';

'>>16140972
>Also some studies do appear to show some correlation between adopted siblings, suggesting some environmental impact here, and that would be without the gene-environment catalytic effects.
None of them show effects anywhere near as strong as genetics.';

'>>16140481
Yeah well biology is anything but equal and fair. And there's always a bell curve. Whether it's between races or people of the same race. We all differ in intelligence obviously. Well if individual humans can can have different iq and or intelligence. Logic dictates that those differences exists between races too.';

'>>16141018
I'm not going to dispute that a higher IQ will correlate with better general life outcomes, as factors leading to a higher IQ such as a safer & less stressful upbringing, with a wealthier family, would be expected to produce those correlations. I was trying to fixate on income alone, as the lessened relationship >100 IQ was interesting
I also think that the higher scientist IQ-'success' relationship could be fully answered environmentally. E.g. a wealthy family is more likely to provide better education, better learning tools early, opens up more networking opportunities, even subconsciously drilling expectations into that person

Also yes I read Taleb's blog post about this a year or 2 ago, if there are good faith criticisms of it then I'd be quite curious to hear them. I've had my own deeply felt doubts about IQ as a concept for a long time before reading his blog though

On the twin study, yes gene-environment interaction is a concept applicable to everything, but with twins specifically this opens up a much higher level of that concept. Where they look the same and have physical similarities which may manifest in thinking preference similarities';

'>>16140998
>Unverifiable mystical nonsense
Lol
Some people can’t do math at all';

'>>16140471
10/10 post. Reasonable, polite, correct.
https://youtu.be/SKihbhYnVBA?si
The tabula rasa cultists will ignore your post because it is unassailable.';

'>>16140998
>I'm talking about 'innate' intelligence
Some people have higher innate intelligence than others.';

'>>16141009
>Which admittedly is quite a vague statement
Lol
It’s not vague in the slightest
If you have major differences on the surface, you’re going to have major differences below the surface
The brain is no exception to this blatantly obvious rule';

'>>16141009
>That wasn't really what I meant though, I'm just speaking to the cognitive potential of each person.
You’re assuming everyone has the same theoretical cognitive limit, or potential.
That’s equity of outcome in a sense.';

'>>16141029
Go away chud, take your facts elsewhere';

'>>16141026
It’s the same sort of “my god is a true god, a performer of miracles, while your god is a demon, a performer of sorcery!” semantic autism you see in history

I think these people are religiously demented to the point where irony is invisible to them';

'>>16140471
It's so obvious this is right. And people know this intuitively. But you are just not allowed to say the obvious publicly so people twist themselves into knots trying to find worse answers to the obvious around them.';

'>>16141056
They’re also just very, very fucking unhappy people. They hate biology more than they hate history, although it’s close. You see this in all areas of life, especially with trans persons.';

'>>16140471
Good post';

'>>16141038
The problem is that you are assuming things which have no evidential basis to them, i.e. that these factors increase IQ. The reason those twin studies are so important is that they highlight how little impact any of the environmental effects studied actually have on IQ differences (again, outside of hardcore environmental interventions like killing someone or decade long abuse). Parents with high socioeconomic status have higher IQs, on average, and that intelligence will be passed on (fuzzily, admittedly, as all biological processes are fuzzy), to their kids. Adopted kids are far more similar to their biological parents than their adopted parents, so if your parents were geniuses and managed to pass part of than onto you, even if you grew up in a poor neighborhood with little access to intellectual pursuits as a kid, you would eventually (most likely) be drawn to those intellectual pursuits, especially as you get older and are able to chose your own environment to some extent. Obviously, this is just a story and for individuals predictions are murky and random factors like accidents or whatever can have life-changing impacts, but on a societal level, this is what mostly what happens.';

'>>16140581
IQ between identical twins raised separately has a correlation of about 0.8';

'>>16137285
Race is geographical.
Race is an earth plot.
Because its geo-graph-y.
Consciousness measuring the Earth.
The non-local measures and computes the local.';

'>>16140548
But if blacks do poorly everywhere. Whether it's in the 20 plus countries in Africa or Europe or America or Canada or Brazil. Maybe it's time to admit they aren't that smart?';

'>>16137285
Because
1) Faggots will use it as scientific means to subjugate people
2) Chinese and Jews have nominally higher IQ

It's a recipe for disaster. And what's worse, is that it would give opportunity for unironically dysgenic people get pushed to the top.';

'>>16141155
Oh, and third point.
I don't remember how it's called, but there used to be a belief that pretty people actually are incapable of doing anything degenerate or evil, because they are beautiful or rich or both.

Think like halo effect, only on the scale of morality values.
Accepting that shit again would open a hell of a Pandora box that would quickly devolve the whole society into a shithole like South Korea, wtih plastic "people", plastic morals, plastic fake society.';

'>>16141155
>And what's worse, is that it would give opportunity for unironically dysgenic people get pushed to the top.

Denying the genetic basis of intelligence leads to current ideologies like Wokeism which asserts any form of inequality is due to oppression. This justifies affirmative action and quotas, which directly leads to more dysgenic and unqualified people to be promoted in various hierarchies.';

'>>16141155
It also proves that white people have gotten dumber over time.

Modern day people:

— ‘College students once stood out from the pack on IQ tests. Today, they're about average. A recent meta-analysis found that undergraduates' IQs have steadily fallen from roughly 119 in 1939 to a mean of 102 in 2022, just slightly above the population average of 100.’

Victorians as they were:

— ‘The Victorian era was marked by an explosion of innovation and genius, per capita rates of which appear to have declined subsequently. The presence of dysgenic fertility for IQ amongst Western nations, starting in the 19th century, suggests that these trends might be related to declining IQ. This is because high-IQ people are more productive and more creative. We tested the hypothesis that the Victorians were cleverer than modern populations, using high-quality instruments, namely measures of simple visual reaction time in a meta-analytic study. Simple reaction time measures correlate substantially with measures of general intelligence (g) and are considered elementary measures of cognition. In this study we used the data on the secular slowing of simple reaction time described in a meta-analysis of 14 age-matched studies from Western countries conducted between 1889 and 2004 to estimate the decline in g that may have resulted from the presence of dysgenic fertility. Using psychometric meta-analysis we computed the true correlation between simple reaction time and g, yielding a decline of − 1.16 IQ points per decade or − 13.35 IQ points since Victorian times. These findings strongly indicate that with respect to g the Victorians were substantially cleverer than modern Western populations.’

White people suck at breeding properly.';

'>>16141199
>‘College students once stood out from the pack on IQ tests. Today, they're about average. A recent meta-analysis found that undergraduates' IQs have steadily fallen from roughly 119 in 1939 to a mean of 102 in 2022, just slightly above the population average of 100.’
This doesn't really say anything about race. Just that so many people are going to college that the average IQ mirrors society at large and that college is just another day care now.

I do agree with the thrust of your post that whites are dumber than they used to be and it's not just brown people migrating to white countries to lower the average IQ. Whether white people are just genetically dumber, or they are just so brain damaged by modernity that they fail to reach a fraction of their cognitive potential, I can't really say.';

'>>16141199
Lmfao…….
Race memes have become reality';

'>>16141029
>https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1872497323000455
None of it contradicts that:

"DNA studies do not indicate that separate classifiable subspecies (races) exist within modern humans. While different genes for physical traits such as skin and hair color can be identified between individuals, no consistent patterns of genes across the human genome exist to distinguish one race from another. There also is no genetic basis for divisions of human ethnicity."
—Human Genome Project';

'>>16137285
Evolution doesn't apply to brain. Thats racist.
It only applies to other physical body parts.';

'>>16140577
>webm
lol';

'>>16140622
It's called welfare. The really dumb white people are outbreeding the average and smart ones. It's been happening since the 50s lol. Many white countries are losing iq over time. Funny. Almost like if life is too easy then the bad genes make it through. Dumbing down society. Throw in immigration of low iq mexicans for america or arabs and africans for europe and you have a crisis.';

'>>16140471
This stupid looking cat is correct';

'>>16140471
>They hated him because he spoke the truth';

'>>16141303
>no consistent patterns of genes across the human genome exist to distinguish one race from another.
This is incompatible with forensic DNA phenotyping.';

'>>16137617
anon...';

'>>16140331
>The descendants will have a more stressful childhood environment, which will reflect in lower IQ scores showing up, despite these genetic feedback loops you describe.
Does stress actually effect IQ though?';

'>>16141032
They dont believe in science. They believe in the absolute authority of whatever approved expert their wranglers put on screen for them.';

'>>16141803
probably the same reason you're obsessed with cocks';

'>>16141026
It's done because you can only win in the shadows while race-denialists can lie and say you lost to maddening applause.';

'>>16141032
>Just don't expect the Congolese students to average like Japanese students in Japan.
This made me remember that portuguese slavers considered their Japanese slaves to be more intelligent than their Congolese slaves.';

'>>16141803
Why are people like you going extinct?';

'>>16137285
I’ve noticed that I always end up politically in line with other sane white people. Liberals are mentally ill so they do not apply.
Whenever there’s some slight disagreement with another sane white person, I end up finding out that they are part jewish, or part gypsy, or something. For example, there’s one guy who I agree with his stances about 90% of the time, but he is a vehement Israel defender, and I found out that he is actually part Gypsy.';

'>>16141945
Israel is a bastion of western civilization and you don’t support it? Really? You’d rather support anti-civilization Muslims who breed like rabbits, leech off of Jewish success, than have the absolute gall to claim a once-barren land as their own? Really?

Muslims make everything worse. Look at what happened to Lebanon. They are not an intellectual people.';

'>>16141945
Israel is worthy of defense to a point, and can be seen as most pro-palestinian criticisms are batshit insane and dishonest. If he's a vehement defender i.e. he defends the west bank settlement shit though then he's a moron';

'>>16142040
>>16142049
I don’t support either because I do not care. As any other pure white person shouldn’t. The problem is him being too into it.';

'>>16141945
>muh palestine
>muh indigenous palestinians

Records show that it was 19th and 20th century Jewish settlement and the resulting employment opportunities that drew successive waves of Arab immigrants to Palestine to begin with.

—“The Arab population shows a remarkable increase ….. partly due to the import of Jewish capital into Palestine and other factors associated with the growth of the [Jewish] National Home..”
(The Peel Commission Report - 1937)

—“..in the Jewish settlement Rishon l’Tsion founded in 1882, by the year 1889, the forty Jewish families settled there, had attracted more than four hundred Arab families.... Many other Arab villages had sprouted in the same fashion.”
(Joan Peters - From Time Immemorial p. 252 - referenced further as: FTI)

British PM Winston Churchill said in 1939:
—“.. far from being persecuted, the Arabs have crowded into the country [Palestine]..”

Before the Six Day War in 1967, when Jordan controlled the West Bank and Egypt ruled in Gaza, there was never any suggestion on the part of the "Palestinians" that they wanted independence in their ancestral homeland. The reason was that the "Palestinian" nation hadn't been invented yet.

Before the state of Israel was born, the term "Palestinians" was used by the Jews to refer to themselves and their organizations. “The Palestine Post”, the Palestine Foundation Fund, Palestine Airways, and the Palestine Symphony Orchestra were all purely Jewish enterprises.

We first hear of Arabs referred to as "Palestinians" when Egypt’s President Nasser, with help from the Russian KGB, established the "Palestine Liberation Organization" in 1964. It was only during the 1970s that the newly minted “Palestinians” began to promote their narrative through murder and assassination. The Arabs have justified their attacks as acts of the indigenous people struggling for national liberation.

Anyone who supports this horseshit has Arab friends they’re afraid of.';

'>>16142054
So you’re just a biased lunatic centrist, incapable of weighing mattress. The most dangerous kind of centrist. No one is ever equally in the bad or good.';

'>>16142057
>nd the resulting employment opportunities
Literally fake. Jewish settlements did not hire arabs. They literally bought lands from rich arab feudal lords and fired all the arab peasants. Thats how jew-only farms got started.
The more jews moved in, the less work was there for arabs. You are doing a classical jew "truth inversion"';

'>>16142061
Lol, you are fucking mind broken.';

'>>16142058
Centrist =/= Not being on the spectrum
You sure are low IQ, are you even white?';

'>>16142104
There's no God down here or waiting for you.';

'>>16142107
Great now you started with the schizophrenic ramblings.';

'>>16142054
It is the current thing so it's expected that people will be into current affairs topics, especially this one with a clear divide between common sense and ideological insanity, in which we can see marches taking place across western society. If you don't care that's fine but you are basically bragging about your ignorance';

'>>16142129
Okay jew';

'>>16137570
Blacks will starve to death once european gibs dry up';

'>Anyone who supports this horseshit has Arab friends they’re afraid of.

This is honestly it. Peer pressure is the bane, or rot, of white people.';

'>>16140331
This argument is literally like saying "an apple can roll further away from a tree if the tree is on a slope, therefore how closely the apple falls near the tree is just a novelty"

Statistically they are correlated via causation, and yes, your right, just like nearly any other genetic trait, environmental circumstances may exist which can shift that distribution one way or another, but it's still inherently tied to genetics and inheritance';

'>>16142149
>Peer pressure is the bane, or rot, of white people.
It's probably why have historically worked so well together in society and civilization. Same with Asian cultures, peer pressure and social acceptance are a real thing';

'>>16142150
Haha you are so unaware';

'>>16142150
If every tree had a slope and our tests only measure that final resting position, then it's intrinsic to the test that the final position, or score, is a function of the effects of the slope & initial fall location. The exact position where the apple fell is unknowable to us right now, so yes while there is an inherent genetic piece of the function, IQ tests are unable to distinguish those';

'>>16142078
I see you dont have an argument.';

'>>16137285
Because some people decided that we don't need truth and comfort is more important. This decision will destroy our civilization.';

'>>16142167
>IQ tests are unable to distinguish those
But you'd agree there's simply a shift in one direction or another based upon environmental conditions, yes?';

'>>16137285
>Why is it controversial to say that human races have mental differences between them?
Leftism';

'>>16140331
Maybe it isn't the ideal metric but op's point about mental differences amongst racial/ethnic/ancestral/genetic (whatever word you want to use) still stands regardless';

'There’s denial on both sides';

'>>16142284
Climate change is fucked. It’s either over exaggerated or under exaggerated. There is no middle. You have to first solve the social crisis before you can get anywhere with the climate, and that’s just not happening ever.';

'>>16142284
Why should a rightist give a shit about climate change? We are going extinct via policies that seek that destroy our birth rates and replace us with immigrants far faster than any kind of climate change could achieve. Just about the only thing nature could do to trump modern western culture is an asteroid impact.';

'>>16142451
So what >>16142306 said is true then. We can’t solve the climate if we’re still stuck in social cancer hell.';

'>>16137459
>Say what the fucking reason for these differences might plausibly be then
Just as you stated with physical differences, the mental similarities cross the same lines.
>black skin better for hot climate
Hot climates also do not require foresight, something which harbors intelligence. There is a reason blacks "live in the moment", and not in a good way.
>less oxygen available in mountain
And mountain survival is far more difficult than Africa, due to weather cycles, climate variance, and again: Foresight
To add, the closer to the equator the dumber the people. This is due to a lack of necessary foresight. One could argue India, Nepal. Burma, Nepal, Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, etc. Not a paradise like the equator, but the people there that live in the mountains certainly have a more developed sense of survival and intellect(Been to both).

South of the equator still lacks a lot of inhabitable land, and can be compared to close to the equator where it is inhabitable. Nothing good has ever come from south of the equator. Especially Australians.
tl;dr
Blacks are the missing link';

'>>16142455
We can't solve the climate until India and China either fix their shit or get wiped off the face of the Earth. Too many people, fuck those who say Earth isn't "overpopulated."';

'>>16142480
The earth is relatively “overpopulated” precisely because humans are too divided and unsustainable as a race/whole. In this timeline of ours, we are definitely “overpopulated”. In better ones, we should be able to sustain a lot more.';

'>>16142491
In order to keep sustaining the level of consumption(Without renewing), we would need to finish our findings in fusion reactors, and fanangle a way to remove waste efficiently. Unfortunately with billions of Poos and billions of Chinamen such a feat is impossible.';

'>>16137285
Because there are more differences between individuals within a race than the races.

>20 percent of black men are more intelligent than 50 percent of white men.
Even if less likely, an intelligent black man would top a class.';

'>>16137285
Because the discipline of psychology is highly questionable and so people are reluctant to trust their "diagnoses".';

'>>16137459';

'>>16137459
.';

'>>16142685
How did they actually get this data from places like North Korea? Did the North Korean gvmt just agree to let probably Western psychologist into its country?';

'Cancel Biology';

'>>16142678
>an intelligent black
Never met one, and doubt that statistic is global.
>>16142736
72% of statistics are made up.';

'>>16143676
Never met a faggot.';

'>>16143678
Never looked in the mirror?';

'>>16137285
>Why is it controversial to say that human races have mental differences between them?
Because there are mental differences between every single person on earth';

'>>16143682
There are mental differences between every single animal on earth too. Where things change are the differences in race. "Asians are good at math" is not just a meme, it is true. Break down whites into their European heritage and there are differences in intelligence. Break down blacks into their countries of origin. People love to cite culture, but the smarter ones create a culture of progression and a culture of success.

You can try to virtue signal this equality nonsense all you want, but doing so is being dishonest.';

'>>16143685
>There are mental differences between every single animal on earth too. Where things change are the differences in race.
This statement means nothing, are you a bot?';

'>>16143687
I was mocking the post about the difference between every single person on earth, because it is just as meaningless. Are you retarded?';

'>>16143691
Mocking things doesn't work when you fail at language';

'the entire social and political fabric of western liberal democracy depends on the blank slate';

'>>16143694
There was no failure at language. Seems to me you are deflecting since you have no argument for the rest of my statement. You are incapable of understanding how humans are animals just like all the rest. Race = breed.';

'>>16137285
>Atheist' tofu intellectuals: consciousness = physiology = deterministic
>Also atheist' tofu intellectuals: thoughts, feels & actions = social construction you can fo otherwise
When your worldview is whatever benefits you right now.';

'>>16137373
Fuck off, you vermin.';

'>>16137459
brains cost food to grow.
being 85 iq is enough to survive and thrive in certain environments, but not in others.
past a certain point high IQ is deleterious to your breeding chances due to tism/ ocd/ lack of commonality with mates.
There is a reason we aren't all 7 feet gigachads with 200 iq.';

'>>16143696
Sure, certain forms of liberal democracy trend in that direction. America's civic religion posits things like "You can be anything you want if you work hard enough." This is meant to inspire hard work and dynamism, but also deflect blame back to the individual when there's failure and inequality. It's the kind of myth that has a certain amount of self-fulfilling prophecy, like being optimistic. Conversely if you were too fatalist or genetically determinist, you would not bother trying at many things that you might've been good at.

A healthier ideology would recognize that there are obvious differences between people, some have natural talents that when combined with hard work will result in exceptional performance. There are also average differences between demographics, so we should not expect completely proportional representation in all fields. The balance is minimizing unfair discrimination, like not giving a smart black nerd a chance simply because he's black, while also not stupidly enforcing quotas.

Culture is also another major factor that holds back lower performing groups. In the 1950s Blacks had fairly low crime rates, stable family structure, and were generally improving quite rapidly. Things changed in the 1960s, partly due to Marxist ideologues supporting crime as a means of fighting against the system, the Great Society which incentivized single motherhood through welfare, and the Sexual Revolution which normalized promiscuous sex and led to the proliferation of 'babydaddies.'';

'>>16137373
>race = skin colour';

'>>16143906
race=hair color
unfortunately many europeans aren't white, they're brown haired arabs with european passports and european ancestry, but they are not white.';

'>>16140471
stupid sexy cat';

'>>16143849
>There is a reason we aren't all 7 feet gigachads with 200 iq.
People are still too pussy to genegineer humans out of mediocrity';

'>skin color is different
>bone structure is different
>anything is different really
but not the brain, no, never the brain, that always the same
hmmmm';

'>>16145436
>Spanish look like Arabs but they're white
I think you're the faggot';

'>>16139706
>while Asians and Jews higher than Whites on average
Jewish and Asian IQ is a meme. Notice how all of these studies conveniently discern between ashkenazi and other jews, and east asians from southeast asians, yet all gentile whites are lumped together; English with Irish, north Italian with southern, and everyone else. You'll also notice no metric of variance is ever reported in these studies.
>culturally unbiased IQ tests like Raven progressive matrices
While it is true the test itself is unbiased, I would argue their sampling and interpretation definitely are. Often these high east Asian scores are extrapolated from PISA scores, and only from affluent areas like Hong Kong and Singapore. It would be like sampling only from Gottingen or some rich white neighborhood.';

'>>16145456
>Spanish look like Arabs
The Morrish conquest of Spain would like to have a word with you, retard.';

'>>16145546
>yet all gentile whites are lumped together
Hopefully they do a better job than the DoJ';

'>>16137485
/thread';

'Somehow it's always the speaker's race that's the most intelligent though. Plus it sucks to have assumptions made about you just from first glance';

'>>16137285
Is there evidence of significant physical differences in brain structure? This is all that matters.';

'>>16145770
what about arabs like spanish/italians?
Where's the evolutionary pressure in spain for those arabs who picked fruits from those trees there?
What about Carthage, they were rich and yet they lived in deserts for centuries.';

'>>16146034
>A review of the world literature on brain size and IQ by Rushton [Rushton, J. P. (1995). Race, evolution, and behavior: a life history perspective. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction] found that African-descended people (Blacks) average cranial capacities of 1267 cm3, European-descended people (Whites) 1347 cm3, and East Asian-descended people (East Asians) 1364 cm3. These brain size differences, containing millions of brain cells and hundreds of millions of synapses, were hypothesized to underlie the race differences on IQ tests, in which Blacks average an IQ of 85, Whites 100, and East Asians 106. The validity of the race differences in brain size, however, continues to be disputed. In the present study, the race differences in brain size are correlated with 37 musculoskeletal variables shown in standard evolutionary textbooks to change systematically with increments in brain size. The 37 variables include cranial traits (such as jaw size and shape, tooth size and shape, muscle attachment sites, and orbital bone indentations), and postcranial traits (such as pelvic width, thighbone curvature, and knee joint surface area). Across the three populations, the “ecological correlations” [Jensen, A. R. (1998). The g factor. Westport, CT: Praeger] between brain size and the 37 morphological traits averaged a remarkable r = .94; ρ = .94. If the races did not differ in brain size, these correlations could not have been found. It must be concluded that the race differences in average brain size are securely established. As such, brain size-related variables provide the most likely biological mediators of the race differences in intelligence.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222683780_Brain_size_IQ_and_racial-group_differences_Evidence_from_musculoskeletal_traits';

'>>16146034
Yes? And that's not relying on the overwhelming 'nonphysical' evidence';

'>>16146153
>Whites 100, and East Asians 106
That's funny, Murray and Hernstein claim it is only 0-3 points
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUdkzI5YMOk
and that is considering all whites as an aggregate, not distinguishing between various ethnicities as is commonly done for Asians and jews';

'>>16146153
>A review of the world literature on brain size and IQ by Rushton [Rushton, J. P. (1995). Race, evolution, and behavior: a life history perspective. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction] found that African-descended people (Blacks) average cranial capacities of 1267 cm3, European-descended people (Whites) 1347 cm3, and East Asian-descended people (East Asians) 1364 cm3.
These measurements aren't cranial volume, but volume to body mass, or something like that. If it were purely volume asians wouldn't have the largest (they are on average much smaller peoples than blacks or whites). Regardless it's not volume of the brain that is most important, but how "wrinkled" or contoured it is, coupled with the size and development of the frontal lobe?';

'>>16137485
>Africa was a freakin garden of Eden in comparison.
What part of africa are we talking about?
The deserts of north africa?
The deserts of south africa?
The central jungles with malaria and rains that strip away all soil nutrients?
The only good part of Africa is east africa. Think east south africa to Ethiopia.';

'>>16146153
Is brain size proven to affect any of the actual synaptic processes of the brain? Correlation doesn't mean causation. There's blacks with higher IQs than some whites and whites with higher IQs than some Asians. I'd be curious to see if those brains were ever measured and compared in size.

>>16146155
You need to share the scientific evidence, not just state it exists.';

'Since we're on this topic, I always have to remind people that homosexuality is a mental illness and the only reason it isn't classified as such is because of politics.';

'>>16137373
retard';

'>>16145705';

'>>16146515
>David REICH
This is too good.';

'>>16146570
he must be a nazi because of that name, you can't trust anything he says, he wants a race war.
his article is just hawkish war propaganda';

'>>16146570
I am doing rn.';

'>>16146512
Homosexuality isn’t mental illness it’s just a biological happenstance that doesn’t really contribute to anything, except perhaps population control, as seen in birds.';

'>>16147061
This would make more sense if they didn't also have higher rate of mental illness amongst the general population. Childhood sexual trauma is also known to result in homosexuality like many other mental illness. Though I guess you can call mental illness as a biological happenstance.';

'>>16137373
Frankly it's obvious that you're a nigger loving kike and should kys fag.';

'>>16147316
>higher rate of mental illness amongst the general population
The same way mental illness, depression and autism are far more pronounced in the male sex amongst the general population? The prevalence ratio is often cited as about 4 males for every 1 female diagnosed. Compared with autistic male individuals, autistic female individuals were more likely to receive diagnoses and be hospitalized.

Men are more mentally fucked than women in-general. Men are also represented more on both ends of the extremes of the IQ curve, simultaneously producing more retards and more geniuses than women, who are more consistently intelligent. Women often are better multitaskers and generalists, which is why they excel as librarians and receptionists.';

'>>16137285
Because humans hate themselves and others like/dislike them.';

'>>16137285
>You would never dare say "Negroid" in public.
>If you say "Mongoloid" normalfags will not be sophisticated enough to recognize this as a slur. It's often used as a synonym for "idiot."
see one of the Mr Plinkett reviews. I think Crystal Skull.';

'>>16147061
Homosexuality is a mental illness';

'>>16140731
You can say this about incomes too yet people have no issue saying blacks make less money.';

'The biggest genetic variation is between men and women. If you are a man of any race you have more in common genetically with any man of any race, than with your mother.
Male ethnostate when?';

'>>16148457
that's not true tho';

'>>16137373
kys';

'>>16148459
it's true through.
you have nothing in common with w*men';

'>>16148788
45 chromosomes among 46';

'>>16148906
they act like an alien species.
a chink male is more likely to act like you than a white woman if you're a white man.';

'>>16148321
It’s also a solution. If we turned all the Muslims gay they’d stop breeding like highly aggressive rabbits.';

'>>16137285
https://thewaywardaxolotl.blogspot.com/2017/06/its-probably-mostly-genetic.html

/thread';

'>>16148457
And yet the racial gap in crime is in some cases as large as the gender gap in crime. Genetic differences don't translate directly into phenotypic differences.';

'>>16140568
indians are mixed australoid and mongoloid with a tiny amount of caucasoid';

'>>16139466
look at the breakdown of people that have an IQ above 130 or below 70 instead of repeating the midwit anthem lmao';

'>>16142284
humans are destroying the enviroment but the popular climate change narrative is obviously a scam that isn't based on the scientific method';

'>>16142492
don't forget 10 billion africans by 2100';

'>>16149338
>phenotypic differences.
Women have different organs than men. Lack a few, have a few extra of their own. Big differences in everything else.
You say blacks have different brains, skeletal structures? So do women
Huge differences';

'>>16149443
I never said sex differences were small, retard.';

'There's simply a lot of cognitive dissonance around this topic. This is chiefly allowed because the general presumption is that our minds are separate from our bodies, and therefore genetics can't influence mind. This, of course, is also cognitively dissonant: nobody would deny or be uncomfortable with the idea that, say, hunger drives you to particular actions and moods, but people don't like the idea of genetics determining their qualities (or biology determining their qualities, for that matter).

If you can move past that point (and it's an easy point to move past because it's very trivial to show a connection between mind, genes, and biology), I would approach the argument by telling them what the suggestion "all races have the same attributes" actually means: that unlike literally every other set of genes in the body, that the ones that control the mind somehow special and are not subject to change whatsoever, and across billions of people in many different environments have stayed static. This is akin to claiming that it's reasonable to roll a million dice, and have them all land on the same number.

The reality is though, OP, is that western society is just many steps removed from being able to talk about this topic, and investigate it sincerely. Everyone with an opinion on it has some kind of agenda they're trying to push, that they rationalize with this group of ideas (whether it's racial nationalists, or brain-dead progressives). It's not a fight worth fighting atm.';

'>>16149443
IQ gap between blacks and whites is 15 points. IQ gap between men and women is 4 points.';

'>>16137373
>skin colour is linked to intelligence
This is the exact opposite of OP's premise. I agree that it isn't. It's why they say that race is more than just skin color, it also includes mental capacities and all that jazz.';

'>>16149495
> This is chiefly allowed because the general presumption is that our minds are separate from our bodies, and therefore genetics can't influence mind
And this is the problem. A lot of people think humans are magical unicorns totally separate from nature.';

'You what's more controversial than mental differences between races? Saying there's mental difference between woman and men.';

'>>16147316
>Childhood sexual trauma is also known to result in homosexuality
No it isn't, retard.';

'>>16149561
but you have more in common with a black male than with a white female as a white male.';

'>>16150465
Yes it does, retard.';

'>>16137574
Whites, Asians, Jews, etc. outscore blacks on virtually every aptitude test, not just the ones we call "IQ tests".
SAT, ACT, AP Exams, NAEP, GRE, ASVAB, PISA, MCAT, etc., etc.
Pick your poison.';

'>>16150199
Men produce more genius than women. Oh well. Men also suffer from mental shit more.';

'>>16150487
in what way';

'>>16151863
the woman won't like videogames and anime the same way';

'>>16151899
Are you some kind of MGTOW/red pill faggot that you prefer nogs over white women?';

'>>16140317
It was an understandable reaction to what happened in WWII.';

'>>16152008
the Smith-Mundt Act was an understandable reaction to what happened in WWII';

'>>16137373
You're retarded. There are genetic differences between races. For instance, ashkenazi jews are more prone to allergies than any other race. Hispanic males were hit harder than any other race/gender by covid 19. Black males are more prone to heart disease than other races/genders. These are just some of the most obvious differences, there is also iq differences.

Why can't black Africans figure out how to farm? After all the foreign aid workers going over there and teaching them, they still rely on white south Africans for food. Go back to red.dit now retard.';

'>>16152005
Only the men';

'Amazing thread';

'>>16152015
>Why can't black Africans figure out how to farm?
Africans do farm. You think in all of subsaharan africa there isnt a single farm run by a black person? You know there are.';

'>>16152015
>they still rely on white south Africans for food
You think all Black Africans are reliant on White South Africans for food?';

'>>16137285
Because in the relatively recent past, and indeed today in some areas, such claims ("race X have objectively inferior/simpler minds") have been used to justify such unimaginable levels of cruelty that we now consider it safer to shut down any such chains of thought entirely before they can take root.
It's unscientific in a sense, but consider that the long-term goal of science is hopefully to advance society, civilisation, and humanity as a whole and that the scientific benefits of race/IQ research ought to be balanced against the risk of abuse.

Anyway, let's say you produce conclusive proof that race X is (on aggregate) smarter than race Y for fundamental biological reasons. Let's say everyone agrees with you and the matter is settled. What then? What have you achieved, other than giving racists more ammo?';

'>>16152718
The truth for the sake of truth.';

'>>16137373
>Race isnt a scientific categorization of humans.
Eyeroll. Clearly groups of people interbreeding in certain contexts differentiated from each other.';

'>>16152718
>"race X have objectively inferior/simpler minds" have been used to justify such unimaginable levels of cruelty
That's a (willful?) misunderstanding. While such ideas have been present in the context of cruelties, most notably the use of black slaves, they have never been the cause of it (black slaves were used by whites not because of their inferiority but because they were conveniently enslaved and sold by other blacks, who didn't consider them inferior), nor has they ever been necessary for cruelty to exist (all recent cases of mass crimes have been committed against intellectual equals or superiors : nazi persecutions, Rwanda genocide, khmer genocide...) and hiding the truth is unlikely to avoid any new cases of violence.

In fact, spreading the idea that Africans are intellectually equals to Europeans is the cause of violence and injustice. Because the logical consequence of that premise is that all inequalities in social standing of racial groups is due, if not to inequality of ability, to unequal treatment, to "systemic racism". The Africans then feel victimized and lash out against their supposed oppressors, assaulting, rioting and murdering, demand privileges such as discrimination in their favor or handouts taken from white people's pockets, or try to dismantle existing, functional institutions.

The lies that evolution stops at the neck and that there's only one human race also have the consequence of giving ammo to antiwhite and suicidal groups in white societies, allowing them to push for unending immigration and diversity, which in the context of low birth rates is rapidly destroying white societies, people, and culture. Objectively this is bad because we end up with less diversity. But this is also bad for us, because brown people are in fact not the same as white people and bring with them a multitude of social problems, from unemployment to larcenies to rapes to islamic terrorism, and all of this ends up making lives worse and shorter.';

'>>16152718
>Let's say everyone agrees with you and the matter is settled. What then?
Here is a good a answer.
In short, we can stop blaming white people for racial inequality and create more harmonious society.';

'>>16137373
>Its controversial because we have no reason to believe such
Black guy + White girl = A human that is not either a black girl or white girl, can you explain why if race doesnt exist at a genetic level?';

'>>16153224
>can you explain why if race doesnt exist at a genetic level?
They had a son.';

'>>16152718
Science doesnt give a shit about morals only acquiring information about reality. Any real biologist should see humans a bunch of races not some special snowflake primate that is above genetic determinism';

'>>16153225
You dont understand why can mulattoes even exist if race is not real. What we call white people are also the mixture of 3 ancient races 40,000 years ago further discreditng your nonsense that race is not le real. What the fuck is Central Asia then? What the fuck is India then?';

'>>16140471
You are literally Hitler for saying this.';

'>>16153228
Mulatto isn't a race, it's an outdated offensive term for mixed race individuals, especially first (known) gen mixed race between Black and white parents. Beyond that, people like that are generally just called Black nowadays, which goes entirely against your fucking narrative.

>What the fuck is Central Asia then? What the fuck is India then?
Aryan?';

'>>16146146
kill yourself you fucking jew';

'>>16153935
Have you just considered that you're just angry because you're a disgusting mutt?';

'>>16154041
Have you just considered that you're just angry because you can't call people disgusting mutts in public and also you have a small, limp dick?';

'>>16137285
the short answer is jews and jew simps.

all anyone needs to briefly study is the wide variations of intelligence among different species of birds to see human intelligence is going to vary the same way.';

'everyone on earth is getting sick of jews';

'>>16154101
We could use more right-wing Jews desu';

'>>16154756
and then they'll stab you in the back once again? whites never learn do they..?';

'>>16153214
I don't think it would be more harmonious actually. I think it would be the opposite. I think black people would behave very badly if they were told they were genetically less intelligent. If equal intelligence is a lie, making everyone believe everyone has a chance is preferable.';

'>>16155068
Right now they are believing the only reason they are poorer and less successful than whites is because white people oppressed them. Does this sound preferable to you?';

'>>16154793
You mean like the Night of Long Knives?';

'>>16155068

I don't agree. That which can be destroyed by the truth, should be. I reject the notion of telling a convenient lie in order to keep peace.';

'>>16154756
right wing jews need to denounce the talmud and declare they are not jews anymore. Then convert to catholicism';

'>>16155107
It's not a lie. Individuals of every race can have great intelligence. Every child born has a chance until proven otherwise.';

'>>16155096
Yes, because it gives them hope that only discrimination can hold them back. Tell them the game is rigged from their own conception and there would be no reason for them to behave.
>>16155107
If black people are genetically a few IQ points below white people, that would serve no useful purpose broadcasting this. It would only cause strife.';

'>>16155121
If you just told them that no one would have a problem with it.
But they're told that they are all just as intelligent as whites. And they get angry when proven otherwise.';

'>>16155126
>it gives them hope that only discrimination can hold them back
It gives them a reason to hate whites and revolt against society. No reason to behave if you believe the whole system is unfair to you.

Besides they're already rioting and murdering and assaulting.

And the gap in America is 15 iq points.';

'Is this an another thread of some race denialists claiming that divergent evolution in humans has not occured because of x,y,w reasons?
Norwegians are just like the polynesians and if you dare to say otherwise you are ''ignorant''?';

'Post Soviet anthropologists remain the least politicaly biased.';

'>>16155140
>It gives them a reason to hate whites and revolt against society.
That reason itself isn't going away. It's a true one.
>No reason to behave if you believe the whole system is unfair to you.
We're talking about past discrimination, not present, which is much less pronounced.
>Besides they're already rioting and murdering and assaulting.
And it would get much worse if they believed their own bodies were rigged against them.
>And the gap in America is 15 iq points.
I said genetic gap, not total gap. There are many reasons their IQs could be lower. It's 13 points on the most recent numbers by the way (104 whites, 91 blacks).';

'>>16155126

I just made it clear that I value the truth above all other considerations, such as: social cohesion. You seem not to have understood this. Also, your premise is false. If one acknowledges that blacks are dumber, then we could actually make rational policy decisions accordingly, but no one likes to entertain such ideas because of emotional associations with slavery, jim crow, apartheid and so forth.';

'>>16155126
So the black crime rates we are currently seeing is them behaving?
Anyway, where is the logic in this? It makes more sense to chimp out now precisely because they believe that if they shake up the system maybe then they will reach equality. Telling them that equality is quite literally biologically impossible will give them zero incentive to try anything as it will be pointless. It would make no more sense than manlets burning down the country because they are short.';

'>>16155209
>That reason itself isn't going away. It's a true one.
If you tell them the reason they are poor is because of biology then it will go away. The reason they hate white people now is because they have been told white people keep them poor.';

'>>16155163
Why is this the case? Was the USSR just neutral on race realism?';

'>>16155209
>That reason
You're being obtuse on purpose, huh. "That reason" is your lie.
Telling blacks to blame whites leads to blacks blaming whites. Stop lying to get us killed.';

'>>16155295
No Jewish hold on academia and public discourse.';

'>>16137584
>>16140473
>>16150993
>>16137584
>>16139707
The problem with your metrics is a LLM; i.e., a statistical machine that answers only the question "given an incomplete sentence, what is the most likely next word of the sentence?", with ZERO reasoning capacity (pic related), scores very highly on all your IQ-adjacent tests. It didn't outscore me, but only barely, so I'll bet it outscored all you retards big time.

If you're wondering about real IQ tests, like Raven's matrices, you're also too late. CogSketch, a literal Lisp script from Northwestern University, already scored 80th percentile on that, and that was old tech, over half a decade ago.

You see, silly piggots, multiple guess tests like SAT are little more than a game, and can be trained for just like a game, which is why a mindless 0-IQ bot can smoke you on them, no matter which "race" you claim.

Conclusion: there is no direct correlation between test score and intelligence.
If a 0-IQ bot beat you on what you consider an IQ test, then you have two choices. Admit the test means fuck all, or neck yourself. whichever you choose, I recommend you follow through, immediately.';

'>>16153935
Mulatto is what we call an mixture of Congoid and European Caucasoid. Central Asia is a naturally racially mixed region of the world as far back as 10,000 years ago you ignorant leftist piece of shit.';

'>>16155126
>that would serve no useful purpose broadcasting this. It would only cause strife.
It would, we could finally kick them out of our societies and make them peaceful and decent again
>a few IQ points below white people
Fuck you, the african black is a god forsaken moron compared to the inbreds in North Africa which are in the low 80s of IQ. the highest african country IQ is only in the high 70s meaning most pure blacks are in the high 60s of IQ, thus calling african blacks subhuman animals is not racist hatred it is fact based on how simple their brain wiring is you fucking cuk.';

'>>16155252
You like all leftards cannot grasp just how stupid most blacks are. The black person will NEVER change their ways because their brain is basically a slot machine for simian impulses. Their brain is too simple to have what you I called INTROSPECTION meaning the black will never observe its own behavior deeply instead it will only do that for the sake of a instinct like egomania. A black person watching themselves commit a crime and bragging about it that is the only time you see a black person self analyze themselves however if you want to reflect on their actions then sorry that aint happening ever. Blacks are so incapable of basic introspection that they have a psychopath level of absence of accountability for their actions hence the dindu nuffin meme, a black can have video footage themselves killing another black for fun and will still go I dindu nuffin showing the black cannot reflect on their actions beyond their depraved instincts as blacks in court will giggle when the prosecutor goes into detail of the evil shit they did to their victims.';

'>>16153214
you are retarded and so is that image
>unsubstantiated assumption that racial groups are cognitively equal
the burden of proof is on those who say they aren't equal. the reason is that the so-called """races""" are the same on almost every other factor, to the point where they can even share blood, organs, and even reproduce.';

'>>16155799
>post exceeded the bump limit of 300, post count italicized, bump limit exceeded
>go back to work
>come back, find out the post is still being bumped and the post count is no longer italicized
>post this
>bump limit kicks back in
i saw that';

'>>16155827
IQ is very circumstantial. It doesn't just measure genetic capability of thought like you think. IQ can be increased just by going to a better school.';

'>>16155842
>their brain is basically a slot machine for simian impulses
Unverified.';

'>>16137373
>muh skeeeen colaaaaa
fucking kill yourself';

'>>16154053
>you have a small, limp dick
Small dicks are inferior huh?';

'>>16155851
>the burden of proof is on those who say they aren't equal.
Why?';

'>>16155851
>he reason is that the so-called """races""" are the same on almost every other factor, to the point where they can even share blood, organs,
They can't though';

'>>16156092
shitskin cope is so funny';

'kys';