/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15197122]

Finished reading this today. Aside from the fact that Lynn never even measured the IQ of Somalis directly, do you guys really think I have an IQ of 68? According to this book I'm mentally retarded and basically not even a human. How is that possible? I'm capable of problem solving, abstract thought, critical thinking, self-image and self-reflection.

[Anonymous No.15197132]

Shut up retard

[Anonymous No.15197138]

>>15197132
no, I don't think I will

[Remember to sage No.15197140]

>>15197122
And yet you’re somehow unable to grasp the concept of population average vs individual data points. Go /pol/ bait somewhere else

[Anonymous No.15197145]

>>15197140
he's right that 68 is ludicrously low though. maybe 80 or something

[Anonymous No.15197170]

>>15197140
Learn how to read, anon
I was referring to population average here. You cannot be a functional human and have an IQ of 68.

[Anonymous No.15197261]

>reducing the sum of human cognition to a single number

Iq is the most retarded concept of all time

[Anonymous No.15197280]

>>15197122
The results of that book were pretty hotly contested, I don't think it would be fair to write off an entire race of people because of a few studies.

[Anonymous No.15197295]

>>15197122
>>15197170
>Duude, I'm totally not mentally retarded
>No, I don't understand the concept of statistical averages, but I'm gonna say I do when its brought up when I'm clearly bullshitting anyway
>That'll prove me right

>>15197261
>reducing the sum of human cognition to a single number

People who do this generally are those who lack a high enough IQ to understand what IQ even measures and so project their own reductionistic concepts onto it.

[Anonymous No.15197299]

>>15197170
>I was referring to population average here.
>do you guys really think I have an IQ of 68?
>I'm capable of problem solving, abstract thought, critical thinking, self-image and self-reflection.
shut the fuck up retard. you most likely have an IQ below 85.

[Anonymous No.15197398]

>>15197122
I CAN FUCKING TELL EVERYONE HERE HAS AN IQ BELOW ROOM TEMPRETURE BECAUSE YOU HAVENT READ THE FUCKING BOOK!!

He talks about the envibility of Iq people, by race as they tend to stick together, to create a new under and over class who are seperated by their ability to achieve.

And was he fucking wrong?

Go to Indonesia and you can walk though a fucking slum and then past a gated community.

Blacks, Jews, Whites and every other race in America self segregated anyway.

Please actually read the book and dont larp like you read it.

Anon, where the fuck are your notes you fucking hack.

[Anonymous No.15197412]

>>15197122
Unironically neck yourself my man

[Anonymous No.15197426]

>>15197412
How is this a credible source?

[Anonymous No.15197523]

Most blacks in America, and also many other western countries have a significant European admixture, which makes it inaccurate to say that they have an average IQ of 68.

[Anonymous No.15197544]

Somalis probably do not have an average IQ of 68. Not all of the data is good.

Also, immigrants may have a higher average than their home country. Somehow I doubt you are posting on /lit/ from Mogadishu.

[Anonymous No.15197588]

>>15197523
who are you trying to trick?
because of that admixture their average iq is about 84

[Anonymous No.15197641]

>>15197588
He didn't say it brings them up to 100.

[Anonymous No.15197753]

>>15197295
well, what does it measure, in your own words?

[Anonymous No.15197773]

>>15197122
Not literature or philosophy post it on /sci/. But oh wait it iq isn't science or math either; post it on /x/.

[Anonymous No.15197774]

>>15197773
your cope is pathetic

[Anonymous No.15198199]

>>15197412
This is actually IQ correlation to nation states and uses nationality as an analogue to skin tone. It would still be very dubious to compare IQ and skin tone within a population rather than between populations but this says far more about the history and development of states than race and/or IQ.

Barely trying to appear scientific or objective.

[Anonymous No.15198241]

>>15198199
muh guns germs and steel

[Anonymous No.15198290]

IQ is fine as a measure of potential for academic success or white-collar professional success in Western countries. But to treat it as a proxy for intelligence in general is ridiculous.

[Anonymous No.15198311]

>>15198290
can a person with a 68 iq split the atom or work in air traffic control? or, whats the likelyhood?

[Anonymous No.15198313]

>>15198241
>guns germs and steel
never read it but okay

[Anonymous No.15198329]

>>15197398
>>15197280
All chapters except one or two are about white people. I don't understand why people obsess over the one chapter in which he discusses race, when the other chapters are far more significant.

I also don't understand why most people ignore his recommendations in the final chapter. The whole point of the book is that the elimination of the social guardrails that put even the least intelligent individual on the path towards marriage and a stable life in the 1950s has left us in a situation in which only the most intelligent members of society are capable of grasping the importance of those practices and striving to emulate them, while the less intelligent members of society are left in a cycle of destructive behavior. Murray was basically saying that these correlations exist now, but they should not exist, and there are things we can do to ensure they cease to exist.

[Anonymous No.15198334]

>>15198313
have you heard of it? popular book on the things you just talked about. frequently posted on this site whenever the topic is bought up.

[Anonymous No.15198344]

>>15197122
You probably have retard IQ because
>I'm from X region and average IQ is Z. My IQ is Y! Therefore wrong!

[Anonymous No.15198351]

>>15198334
I vaguely remember someone at uni talking about it. Good book?

[Anonymous No.15198373]

>>15198351
no its been disproved long ago

[Anonymous No.15198396]

>>15198373
okay so want to address what I said or nah?

[Anonymous No.15198414]

>>15198396
honestly what you said was nonsense

>It would still be very dubious to compare IQ and skin tone within a population rather than between populations
what did you even mean by this

>This is actually IQ correlation to nation states and uses nationality as an analogue to skin tone.
practially every non western country is racially homogeneous.

[Anonymous No.15198419]

>>15198414
>practially every non western country is racially homogeneous.
Not him, but how did you draw that conclusion?

[Anonymous No.15198428]

>>15197122
But you’re not capable of understanding averages.

[Anonymous No.15198433]

>>15198419
statistics and videos which you can look at in wikipedia and look up in youtube. walk-around tours for example. theres hundreds of them for even the worst 3rd world hellhole. mainly capitals if its particularly bad. like honduras or somalia.

[Anonymous No.15198445]

>>15198433
Has it ever occurred to you that someone who is not from a particular region is likely incapable of noticing the subtle differences in physiognomy that are immediately clear to locals?

Take a look at the demographics and ethnic composition of Kenya, Tanzania, Indonesia, or Malaysia, for instance, and you will see what I mean.

[Anonymous No.15198451]

One above average somali is not refutation to anti-immigration. You are a speckle in a bucket of browner, slower, and more coarse grains.

[Anonymous No.15198462]

>>15198445
>physiognomy
facial features and expressions

what the fuck does that have to do with anything?

[Anonymous No.15198475]

>>15198414
you aren't addressing the main point which is that they arent comparing skin tone and IQ rather nationality and IQ.

>practially every non western country is racially homogeneous.
but go ahead and continue using western countries as analogies for white populations

>It would still be very dubious to compare IQ and skin tone within a population rather than between populations
>what did you even mean by this
Suppose you actually go out, measure IQ within a country and arrange that data by skin tone rather than comparing the average IQs of various countries. There are still a significant amount of other relationships that are being measured that could potentially be responsible for an apparent (hypothetical) correlation...

[Anonymous No.15198495]

>>15198462
I'm saying that these countries are not actually homogeneous. You simply don't know enough about them to be able to tell whether or not they're homogeneous.

[Anonymous No.15198499]

>>15198475
and like i said. non western countries are racially homogeneous with the exceptions of central/south american slave countries. to which each of them are predominantly latino/mestizo/MEXICAN and minority black.
so what does nationality have to do with your argument?

im not using western countries as analogies for white populations because they are all diverse since the 60s and fading rapidly. dragging down average iqs. i jumped in to this convo you were having with that comment.

[Anonymous No.15198501]

>>15197122

I interact with Somalis on a daily basis and yes, you do so have an average IQ around room temperature.

[Anonymous No.15198504]

>>15198495
>I'm saying that these countries are not actually homogeneous.
go on
elaborate on that claim without a cherry pick

[Anonymous No.15198508]

>>15198501
yeah i doubt a somali is on /lit/. this is a larp.

[Anonymous No.15198513]

>>15197122
>do you guys think i
>statistics apply to each individual person
desu it is very possible from this inference that you have an iq of 68.

[Anonymous No.15198522]

>>15197170
>you cannot be a functional human and have an iq of 68
polynesians have societies with avg iq of <60

[Anonymous No.15198540]

>>15198499
so all of the countries of the Americas, Europe, Australia and New Zealand are not racially homogenous but we can still use them as stand-ins for race when evaluating racial qualities?

Do I really need to explain how nationality could have a significant impact on IQ scores? Obviously my argument depends on my rejection of all these states being racially homogenous.

[Anonymous No.15198549]

>>15198522
they were heavily colonized and were apart of empires up until like 50 years ago. many military bases still there.

when they were discovered by the spanish...well, just look at their depictions. you tell me if thats a society.

[Anonymous No.15198550]

>>15198508

No, it isn't. I'm a white retail employee who interacts with Somalis on a daily basis. I know whereof I speak.

[Anonymous No.15198552]

>>15198508
>somalians
>only in somalia
God I fucking wish.

[Anonymous No.15198554]

>>15198373
more so than the bell curve?

[Anonymous No.15198562]

>>15198540
yeah buddy their iq scores arent high because of the minority populations but go ahead

[Anonymous No.15198568]

>>15197412
>skin tone map circa 1900 and IQ map circa 2000
hmm

[Anonymous No.15198578]

>>15198552
and a second gen somali living in a slum in britain found its way onto 4chan and is debating bell curve on /lit/?

i mean, within the realms of possibility but as likely as a 68 iq somali being a chemist or a doctor or a lawyer

[Anonymous No.15198581]

>>15198568
huge think. massive.

big.

[Anonymous No.15198594]

What's the average black IQ? Like 54?

[Anonymous No.15198603]

>>15198562
>yeah buddy their iq scores arent high because of the minority populations but go ahead
If minority populations were influencing the data then why not try to account for it? Supposing you are true and minority populations are depressing the average then wouldn't it better demonstrate your racial inferiority hypothesis to attempt to compare racial categories rather than national ones

[Anonymous No.15198609]

>>15198581
heh epic

[Anonymous No.15198615]

[Anonymous No.15198616]

>>15197122
Why do IQ facts trigger so many people?
So what if some individuals or populations score higher? Do you really have to take it personally and get offended? It is what it is, life just be that way. Just move on already.

[Anonymous No.15198622]

>>15198603
if we have a iq study in 2020 be sure to ask the goldberg that conducts it. millions of nonwhites have been flooding in since the 2000 study in the pic related.
>>15198568

[Anonymous No.15198630]

>>15198616
it ruins their worldview that was injected into them in elementary school or uni. we are all equal. diversity is our strength. absolutely no differences whatsoever and we are interchangeable. no better than our viking ancestors.

[Anonymous No.15198642]

>>15198622
Do you want to change the point a few more times? Maybe to something even more explicitly racist. It's worked pretty well the last couple of times.

[Anonymous No.15198667]

>>15198630
>worldview that was injected into them in elementary school or uni.
Was it really? Maybe I'm too old (and not from the US), but I don't remember anything like that.
Sure, they taught us to "not be racist" or whatever, but they never suggested we're all the same.

[Anonymous No.15198677]

>>15197122
>According to this book I'm mentally retarded
If you don't understand the difference between mean IQ and the IQ of an individual who might be on the far end of the bell, yes, you're retarded.

>ooga boga my country's mean IQ is 68 so my IQ is also exactly 68
Yes. Yes it is.

[Anonymous No.15198687]

>>15198549
>hurr durr they were colonized and suffered
Every culture on the planet suffered some great atrocity at one point or another. That doesn't explain subhuman IQ levels.

Look at the jews (you should always look at those slimy jews): enslaved and oppressed by babylonians, romans, egyptians, germans, russians, etc., and yet their IQ isn't <70.

IQ is mostly GENETIC. This is the truth people don't want to accept and the reason this book is vilified and hated.

[Anonymous No.15198692]

>>15197280
>contested
No. There's a difference between "contested" (meaning that there were contrasting results from other valid studies) and "hated and rejected without even addressing what it says because otherwise you're rayciss".

The results of this book were never contested.

[Anonymous No.15198696]

A lot of this is you all being sheltered middle class NEETs that don't have a lot of experience with white trash. I've lived in rural Texas and a good chunk of the white population there is indistinguishable from the niggers. Economic status is what matters not your race

[Anonymous No.15198702]

>>15197122
>do you guys really think I have an IQ of 68?
yes, because you actually wasted your time reading that garbage book

[Anonymous No.15198705]

>>15197753
*crickets*

[Anonymous No.15198706]

>>15198554
Considering that The Bell Curve was NEVER disproved, and I challenge you to disprove a single one of its findings, while Guns Germs and Steel was mostly about Jared Diamond's personal opinions (remember when he says that brown kids are smarter than white kids because that's the impression he got while watching them play?), yes, GGaS was disproved more than The Bell Curve.

[Anonymous No.15198717]

>>15198696
ty for pointing this out, they'll just go muh jews, muh minorities and ignore any other factors. If other factors are mentioned then to them race must explanatory for deviation and race remains ultimately responsible

[Anonymous No.15198734]

>>15197544
>Also, immigrants may have a higher average than their home country
it's almost as if intelligence is determined by access to resources, nutrition, social class and environment instead of some smart conveniently white gene

[Anonymous No.15198740]

>>15198734
it's pretty crazy

[Anonymous No.15198743]

>>15198696
You must be white trash yourself, if you can't understand the concept of averages.

[Anonymous No.15198750]

>>15198667
>I don't remember anything like that
The introduction of my biology textbook LITERALLY says "diversity is strength and we must keep in mind that everyone is equal etc." For no fucking reason. It doesn't even talk about IQ and races.

[Anonymous No.15198764]

>>15198696
>Economic status is what matters not your race
Bullshit. Poor whites score higher in IQ tests than rich blacks. Even adopted blacks who always lived in the best neighborhoods and went to the best schools etc.

Poor whites also commit way less crime than poor blacks. Or even normal blacks.

[Anonymous No.15198768]

>>15198743
I'm not arguing with the book it's already been disproved many times. What I'm pointing at is the motivation you all have to keep promoting it because in your personal lives you don't usually see how bad white trash can get.

[Anonymous No.15198783]

>>15198687
that wasnt what i was going for
the colonization was the root of their society because before spanish showed up they were africa-tier savages

[Anonymous No.15198790]

>>15198750
post a pic or you're lying

[Anonymous No.15198799]

>>15198706
https://www.dartmouth.edu/~chance/course/topics/curveball.html
https://www.nybooks.com/articles/1994/12/01/the-tainted-sources-of-the-bell-curve/
http://www.intelltheory.com/bellcurve.shtml
>Take a trait that is far more heritable than anyone has ever claimed IQ to be but is politically uncontroversial body height. Suppose that I measure the heights of adult males in a poor Indian village beset with nutritional deprivation, and suppose the average height of adult males is five feet six inches. Heritability within the village is high, which is to say that tall fathers (they may average five feet eight inches) tend to have tall sons, while short fathers (five feet four inches on average) tend to have short sons. But this high heritability within the village does not mean that better nutrition might not raise average height to five feet ten inches in a few generations. Similarly, the well-documented fifteen-point average difference in IQ between blacks and whites in America, with substantial heritability of IQ in family lines within each group, permits no automatic conclusion that truly equal opportunity might not raise the black average enough to equal or surpass the white mean. (p. 5)

[Anonymous No.15198822]

>>15198799
And to piggyback on this size differences are much easier to select for than intelligence. We've bred dogs to many multiples of difference in size but still haven't managed to get one to talk the intelligence difference among them is not that great. The size difference among humans is much smaller and by analogy so should any intelligence difference or it's hard to select for intelligence especially the type of intelligence tested for in IQ tests. It took several speciation events to separate us from our common ancestor with apes and contrary to what some people here would say whites and blacks are still the same species

[Anonymous No.15198823]

>>15198687
>Every culture on the planet suffered some great atrocity at one point or another
some didn't suffer "at one point" but for centuries, and still are, which is why they're still behind. It's not that hard to figure out, Mr. high IQ
>enslaved and oppressed by babylonians, romans, egyptians, germans, russians, etc., and yet their IQ isn't <70.
they were never enslaved by the egyptians, and roman slavery is not even remotely close to trans-atlantic slavery. Jew slaves were treated like pets, african slaves were treated like cattle.
The jews had the advantage of a culture that deeply encouraged literacy, documentation and the passing down of knowledge (it was the only way to keep Judaism alive), and later on, they lived in a predominantly Christian Europe that prohibited some of the most lucrative industries and business ventures to christians (so much for white intelligence), which is why the jews were pioneers of banking and mastered the craft of getting rich earlier than everyone else. Stop "looking" at the jews like a faggot and actually read their history, you fucking retard.

[Anonymous No.15198856]

>>15198799
blacks have equal education in america tho. and look at them. speak to one. speak to a hundred. attend public school.

[Anonymous No.15198867]

>>15198822
You chose a poor analogy. It's very easy to see that different dog breeds have different characters/temperaments.

[Anonymous No.15198874]

>>15198867
Not really. Pitbulls being vicious is a myth and what makes people choose certain breeds as working dogs is really just physical traits you can train any type of mutt

[Anonymous No.15198880]

>>15198290

Exactly what is it then? Is there a separate faculty that you use for academic success or difficult work and "intelligence in general"?

[Anonymous No.15198884]

>>15198880
I come off autistic as fuck in social situations and am in a Math PhD program. I wouldn't be successful at all outside academia

[Anonymous No.15198887]

Bait thread

[Anonymous No.15198890]

>>15198799
>a single conjecture and projection on a single point in a book

BELL CURVE DESTROYED LMAOOOOOO GET REKT

in all seriousness, >>15198856

[Anonymous No.15198891]

>>15198856
>blacks have equal education in america tho
are americans this uninformed about how their own people live their lives? holy shit. Have you ever been to a predominantly black school? They are in the poor sector, because obviously they come from poor families. They are ALWAYS underfunded, even more so in the south. They have the shittiest oldest school resources, a scarcity of human resources and underpaid teachers who have to deal with kids who don't even have any food at home. You are unbelievably ignorant. I know you don't give a fraction of a fuck about black people, but use some of that time you spend jacking off and pretending you read on /lit/, and make use of your time to actually read.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_racism#In_education
https://sci-hubDOTtw/https://www.jstor.org/stable/41065930?seq=1
https://www.ithaca.edu/wise/race_african_american/

[Anonymous No.15198897]

>>15198890
It was a selected quote from dozens of refutations. Did you actually read my links? of course you didn't you fucking spanlet, you won't read anything unless it's provided to you in a shitty /pol/ chart that confirms your bias

[Anonymous No.15198902]

>>15198856
>speak to a hundred. attend public school.
>t. sheltered white kid who attends a private school

[Anonymous No.15198904]

>>15198874
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/canine-corner/200907/canine-intelligence-breed-does-matter

I could probably post more, but I think arguing with someone like you is hopeless. No matter what someone says, you'll stick to your religous dogmas and demand some unattainable proof.

[Anonymous No.15198905]

>>15198884
social function /=/ intelligence

you have a disability. one that makes you awkward. sensitive to loud noises. weird.
but autists are usually really fucking smart because they dont focus on social function and instead learn everything they can on a random subject.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cblXdzH8OYM

[Anonymous No.15198910]

>>15198897
those charts have sources in the picture.

but no, i didnt read your links. the amount of butthurt bell curve caused, im not reading anything of it because people gave their life and blew blood vessels just to vaguely disagree with single points in the book.
similar to what they did to my boy james watson.

[Anonymous No.15198929]

>>15198902
lol no. i attended public school in Philadelphia.
i hung around them up until high school. i was a wigger. first run in with the cops because i was in a gang set me on the right (white) path. im grateful for a (white) police officer personally setting me straight.
most of my ex-friends are in prison, or drug dealers.

[Anonymous No.15198943]

>>15198905
So academic success is indicative of general intelligence. You're saying I essentially cannibalized my social ability to be better at school not that my general intelligence is so much greater than anyones.

[Anonymous No.15198946]

>>15198943
>*is not indicative

[Anonymous No.15198960]

>>15198929
>first run in with the cops because i was in a gang
what were you doing in a gang? why didn't your white superiority prevent you from being a massive retard?
>set me on the right (white) path. im grateful for a (white) police officer personally setting me straight
see, that's the kind of opportunity that blacks in America don't have.
>most of my ex-friends are in prison, or drug dealers.
I wonder why. Must be the IQ! Definitely not the (white) favoritism from the (white) officer

[Anonymous No.15198967]

>>15198943
i didnt project something specifically onto you. i generalized. you will find exactly what i said in any study of autists. you cannibalized nothing. your brain is fucked up and its the social abilities you just cant get. thats...autism.

what the fuck.

[Anonymous No.15198974]

>>15198929
also, your friends probably had much better reasons to be in a gang than you. Imagine having white parents who inherited hundreds of years of passed down culture and knowledge to raise you good, and you still join a gang. What a brainlet.

[Anonymous No.15198977]

>>15198967
Whatever the point is that my academic success is not at all indicative of general intelligence

[Anonymous No.15198983]

>>15198960
>what were you doing in a gang? why didn't your white superiority prevent you from being a massive retard?
i was twelve and my registered democrat teachers instilled in me the great values of diversity. and i went to public school in philly. i was a minority. i was petrified of being the loner at the loner table getting pelted with spitballs and food. i won some fights and gained respect of the negros. i was 12 and desperately wanted to fit in. i wasnt born reading bell curve as my green eggs and ham. i grew up listening to eminem and watching chappeles show.

your other two points, i lol at.

[Anonymous No.15198993]

>>15198974
meh. kids do stupid shit. im not the same impressionable 12 year old growing up in an infested major city.

[Anonymous No.15198999]

>>15198977
thats what you think.
you are autistic, after all.

[Anonymous No.15199015]

>>15198960
>>set me on the right (white) path. im grateful for a (white) police officer personally setting me straight
>see, that's the kind of opportunity that blacks in America don't have.

i'll give you hundreds of videos of police officers doing just that. they never listen.

[Anonymous No.15199017]

>>15198999
Sigh lets try this another way. So people in academia are the most intelligent people in society in your view. But academia has for decades spoken out against this type of racist IQ pandering. If the most intelligent people in society are saying it's wrong who are you to say it's right?

[Anonymous No.15199022]

>>15198983
>i was twelve and my registered democrat teachers
Wow you had that info on your teachers when you were 12?
>instilled in me the great values of diversity
>I joined a gang because muh diversity
no, you joined a gang because you were a fucking retard. I didn't join a gang when I was 12 and had friends in shcool AND the neighborhood who were in gangs.
>was petrified of being the loner at the loner table getting pelted with spitballs and food
poor you. Crazy that you went through this and still can't bother to put yourself in the others' shoes. That experience of being a minority is, you know.. what minorities have to go through. Except the (white) officer won't set them straight.
>i grew up listening to eminem and watching chappeles show.
that just says more about how absolutely tone-deaf and incapable you are of relating to others. You're either incredibly dumb or your story is completely fabricated.
>your other two points, i lol at.
you've got nothing, ok.

[Anonymous No.15199027]

>>15199017
So people in academia are the most intelligent people in society in your view

absolutely not. again, what the fuck. you projecting asshole trying to shove words into my mouth like chicken tendies

>But academia has for decades spoken out against this type of racist IQ pandering
leftists control academia. since 60s. this is known.

your spells have no effect on me, wizard

[Anonymous No.15199030]

>>15199015
>i'll give you hundreds of videos of police officers doing just that. they never listen.
go ahead. post the video of the white officer lecturing the black kid who has absolutely no opportunities and no food at home, or that other black kid who was born into a family of gangbangers and has no way to escape

[Anonymous No.15199037]

>>15199022
>your whole post
>"you got nothing"

interesting. ironic. fascinatingly ironic.

[Anonymous No.15199043]

>>15199027
>absolutely not. again, what the fuck. you projecting asshole trying to shove words into my mouth like chicken tendie

Alright so academic success is not the sole indicator of general intelligence. Black people not doing well in school doesn't automatically mean they're dumb

[Anonymous No.15199044]

>>15199037
wow, another empty non-reply.

[Anonymous No.15199045]

somewhat relevant: has anyone read this and what are your thoughts?

[Anonymous No.15199058]

>>15198960
Brown hands typed this

[Anonymous No.15199063]

>>15199030
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49b8EJFqqPQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1rBlWOCE3E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4h_2vBVwUA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qe0Ri8w9LbY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-UO2H652eg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_V9THFnDIc

[Anonymous No.15199071]

>>15199044
yeah, tell me about it

[Anonymous No.15199075]

>>15199058
fragile, weak beta white hands came up with this ad hominem
>>15199063
what? good cops EXIST? holy shit! thanks for the heads up I gotta go tell my dad who is literally a policeman.
where are the videos of these same kids "not listening" though?

[Anonymous No.15199078]

>>15199030
Why dont black americans stop selling drugs and stealing and get jobs instead? Otherwise this cycle of no opportunities will never end because they poison their communities

[Anonymous No.15199086]

>>15199043
>Black people not doing well in school doesn't automatically mean they're dumb

the underlying conditions of simply being african. for example. IQ.

[Anonymous No.15199085]

>>15199075
Im not white. Post your hands though.

[Anonymous No.15199093]

>>15199078
>Why dont black americans stop selling drugs
why dont white americans stop buying drugs? why don't white politicians stop taking money from drug dealers? why don't they stop this drug "war" that even narcos agree is useless?
>and get jobs instead
because it was only recently that they were able to get jobs, and the damage is already done: their parents were in gangs, there was no other job to have for them, they were born into poverty and to an established culture. Weekly reminder that the CIA introduced drugs to black neighobrhoods.
Your IQ really isn't helping you put two and two together. Are you mentally handicapped by any chance?

[Anonymous No.15199095]

>>15199075
illegal goal post move. im flagging you. go to the penalty box.

[Anonymous No.15199102]

>>15199085
I'll do when you post yours, whiteboy. With timestamp.
>>15199095
your quote, verbatim:
>>i'll give you hundreds of videos of police officers doing just that. they never listen. My reply is that your videos of policemen lecturing kids are useless. You still post the videos.
>UH UH I POSTED THE VIDEOS BRO MOVING THE GOALPOST MUCH?
I must be talking to the lowest IQ retard in this board

[Anonymous No.15199105]

>>15199093
yeah and the pharmaceutical companies introduced fucking meth to white children for ADHD which apparently everyone has nowadays.
whats your point faggot

[Anonymous No.15199116]

>>15199086
But this isn't the original argument. What started it was anon saying IQ was predictive of academic success so must also be predictive of general intelligence. You've agreed that academic success alone is not a good indicator of general intelligence from your contempt for modern academia. If you look at economic success for example the predictive ability of IQ drops even steeply compared to the economic conditions you were raised than in academia.

[Anonymous No.15199117]

Fellow black brothers, let's be real for a minute.
White people will never treat us fairly and therefore we'll always perform worse in IQ tests.
Let's take our destiny in our own hands. Let's just go back.

[Anonymous No.15199119]

>>15199105
>pharmaceutical companies introduced fucking meth to white children for ADHD
controlled amphetamines are not the same as fucking street meth lmao. Keep spewing bullshit. ADHD meds are among the few meds for mental disorders that are actually effective. Now take your meds, spanlet.

[Anonymous No.15199127]

>>15199093
But Asians have been discriminated in the US as well why are theu doing so well?

[Anonymous No.15199128]

>>15199117
go back where, larper? Your lazy grandparents brought their grandparents here. They were born here, idiot. Why don't you go back to your irish or italian shithole?

[Anonymous No.15199129]

>>15199102
you dont get it.

white police officers do wholesome things for the black community. this directly contradicts your shitty sjw view on MUH CORRUPT RACIST COOOOOPS

[Anonymous No.15199131]

>>15199117
Or give the South to black people. Would be hilarious for the reaction of all the white trash.

[Anonymous No.15199136]

>>15199102
Lol cope. Im not white retard now post hands

[Anonymous No.15199138]

>>15199117
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEmuhdickEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

[Anonymous No.15199142]

>>15199129
>hitty sjw view on MUH CORRUPT RACIST COOOOOPS
massive strawman. I can post a black president and MDs who are black, does this destroy your argument about MUH VIOLENT DUMB THUUUUGS?

[Anonymous No.15199144]

>>15199128
Let's just be free from oppression, is all I'm saying.

[Anonymous No.15199149]

>im not white retard now post hands

[Anonymous No.15199153]

>>15199102
Why does 6% of the population commit 50% of violent crime?

[Anonymous No.15199159]

>>15199131
We're already making Africa great again. We can achieve great things if crackas don't get in our way.

[Anonymous No.15199160]

>>15199142
>>15198960
massive personal attacks

>does this destroy your argument about MUH VIOLENT DUMB THUUUUGS?
nope. because i understand averages.
stay salty my guy

[Anonymous No.15199164]

>>15199159
The South is a real shining jewel lol

[Anonymous No.15199165]

>>15199153
uh, purely economic factors

[Anonymous No.15199172]

Where can I get a high IQ Nubian queen to impregnate?

[Anonymous No.15199181]

[Anonymous No.15199185]

>>15199165
I don't even know who he's talking about what population group is 6% of the population?

[Anonymous No.15199196]

>>15198880
What the fuck is "difficult work"? Like coal mining? Your post is unintelligible.

[Anonymous No.15199197]

>>15199185
In the US black people make up 13% of the population. 13% commits 50% of the murders but if you dont count chilsren and old people its more accurate to say 6% commits 50%

[Anonymous No.15199199]

>>15199185
black males

[Anonymous No.15199203]

>>15199181
What are those crows? They're the same species subspecies is a geographic thing

[Anonymous No.15199214]

>>15199197
So why don't you not count the black males that don't murder people? I would bet that murders make up less than 0.1% of the population

[Anonymous No.15199216]

>>15199203
>subspecies is a geographic thing
yeah, like whites-> europe
blacks -> sub saharan africa

[Anonymous No.15199224]

>>15199214
Im sure there are many good black men who dont murder and im sure they are the majority. But that doesnt change the fact that a minorities has such a large impact on crime

[Anonymous No.15199226]

>>15199214
lmaoooooooo just stop before someone breaks out more fbi crime and prison data

[Anonymous No.15199228]

>>15198905
>social function /=/ intelligence
Of course it is. Any cognitive ability that helps an organism adapt to its environment is part of intelligence. In a more rugged setting, the ability to prove mathematical theorems is worth jack shit.

[Anonymous No.15199238]

>>15199228
you would enjoy the video i linked

[Anonymous No.15199265]

>>15199238
half-baked blather

[Anonymous No.15199278]

>>15197122
It's a deeply flawed book, but also IQ is extraordinarily error prone and pretty much impossible to measure that far away from the mean.

[Anonymous No.15199281]

>>15199224
>>15199226
But you massaged the statistics to make it look worse.

[Anonymous No.15199289]

>>15199281
Not really but even still its 13% and 50%. Thats huge

[Anonymous No.15199307]

>>15199265
Don’t you dare bismirch his good name

[Anonymous No.15199310]

>>15199289
Yes really you halfed the percentage to make it look worse and when asked why you didn't eliminate the other murders from your population you try ignore what you did to begin with

[Anonymous No.15199313]

>>15199310
>*non-murderers

[Anonymous No.15199327]

>>15199310
Severe cope

[Anonymous No.15199337]

>>15199160
>I wasn't a retarded white gang banger because I understand averages
That's really fantastic. So long as a modest number of white people are on paper civilised enough to balance out your disgusting behaviour, you feel like you're in the good club and are deserving of respect. It is nonsense.

[Anonymous No.15199341]

>>15199310
Children, elderly do not comment murders. Males age 14-45 do. Women commit less crime than males and most certainly less murders. This makes it roughly 6%. Not 13%. Which would mean ALL blacks age 0-115

Also, >>15199327

[Anonymous No.15199345]

>>15199327
No, that's a well reasoned criticism. If you're not smart enough to respond that's fine, but try not to fall back on stereotyped behaviours.

[Anonymous No.15199346]

>>15199337
Oh shut the fuck up already I already explained myself to you

[Anonymous No.15199351]

>>15198522
Polynesians are in 80s on par with mexico.

[Anonymous No.15199352]

>>15199224
Men in general are disproportionately more of a problem than blacks. Clearly all men should be put on testosterone blockers from an early age.

[Anonymous No.15199360]

>>15199337
Why are you so hysterical?
He might be a retarded white gang banger, but that doesn't change the averages between populations.

[Anonymous No.15199361]

>>15199352
That’s why there’s impossible burgers and Onions and Nintendo switch

[Anonymous No.15199363]

>>15199341
Again if you eliminate women and children and seniors from the percent why not also eliminate the non-murderers as well. Then you would be left with less than 0.1% of the population committing 50% of the murders. And this is clearly meaningless. You fudged the statistics to support your argument and if this were in a social science paper you would have had professional repercussions from lack of rigor and bias

[Anonymous No.15199368]

>>15197122
I can actually believe you are below average in intelligence because you've failed to even understand the curve the book was titled after.

[Anonymous No.15199378]

>>15199360
>Why are you so hysterical?
Why are you projecting hysteria onto my comments? Are you often hysterical? Is everyone around you irl often hysterical? These are important questions for you.

>>15199346
No you haven't. You've said you were a little arsehole who deserves to have been locked up like his black friends but didn't because another white loser "saved" you. And that's all okay because there are white doctorinos out there doing good.

[Anonymous No.15199379]

>>15199368
Your post is incoherent and idiotic.

[Anonymous No.15199380]

>>15199360
Goddammit I’m not a white gang banger you are making me reee I WAS A STUPID 12 YEAR OLD KID I READ NOW AND LISTEN TO JARED TAYLOR AND PLAY PIANO I DONT STEAL AND VANDALIZE ANYMORE IM GOOD NOW. A GOOD BOY. GOING TO CHURCH EVERY SUNDAY GETTIN MAH LIFE BACK ON TRACK I WAS SMART ENOUGH TO CHANGE MY LIFESTYLE AT THE FIRST CHANCE WHEN I WAS TWEEEELVE I WAS A VICTIM OF BLACK CULTURE AND MARXIST SCHOOL SYSTEMS
I’m literally crying please stop being mean to me

[Anonymous No.15199384]

>>15197122
>, do you guys really think I have an IQ of 68? According to this book I'm mentally retarded and basically not even a human. How is that possible? I'm capable of problem solving, abstract thought, critical thinking, self-image and self-reflection.
Well you've just proven you don't understand what an "average" is supposed to be, so I'm thinking doubt.

[Anonymous No.15199391]

>>15197170
Quite the opposite. 68 IQ would implicate that they are unable to maintain social cohesion beyond tribal level, farm efficiently etc. which would inevitably end with their countries being in a state of perpetual civil war and famine. Now let's look at Somalia...

Now Lynn did a lot of sloppy things in his studies and book, but there was German guy who fact-checked him and found that the data Lynn provides correlates with "non-sloppy" data he got in a process of fact-checking with factor of 0,85. That being said I remember hearing Edward Dutton, who knew Lynn personally saying that his reputation for sloppiness was well-earned and everyone who knew him would know that if you want to poke holes in anything he wrote you can do it endlessly, but he was always getting the bigger picture more or less properly.

[Anonymous No.15199392]

>>15199380
>GETTIN MAH LIFE BACK ON TRACK
From when you were 12?

[Anonymous No.15199394]

>>15198734
If you take a newborn dog and a newborn child and treat both of them equally, the child will always turn out to be more intelligent. There must be a genetic influence on intelligence.
Since there is genetic variation between human populations, chances are good that this also affects intelligence.

Let me ask you this. If human intelligence is not in part caused by genes, how did human intelligence then evolve? When did it stop evolving so that every human population has the same average intelligence?

[Anonymous No.15199400]

>>15199384
I'm confused. Are you saying he has a below average IQ or an above average IQ?

[Anonymous No.15199402]

>>15199363
You don’t know the real stat. You are projecting the 0.1 because you want to believe. You want to cope. You don’t want to turn on the 6oclock news in Chicago and see the 10+ black men shot dead every week. Sometimes in a single weekend.

[Anonymous No.15199403]

>>15198199
> It would still be very dubious to compare IQ and skin tone within a population rather than between populations but this says far more about the history and development of states than race and/or IQ.
US blacks have IQ one standard deviation lower than US whites. I'm gonna propose one detail - perhaps low IQ-skin tone correlation is little bit coincidental, but the fact that low-IQ countries are poorly developed is not.

[Anonymous No.15199406]

>>15199391
>but he was always getting the bigger picture more or less properly.
Not plausible.

>which would inevitably end with their countries being in a state of perpetual civil war and famine.
Maybe famine, but civil war would not be implied at all, such a population wouldn't be able to form cohesive enough responses to anything to have a war at all.

There are significant external factors that explains issues with food security (and the US is being significantly affected here).

[Anonymous No.15199411]

>>15199392
Nah I immediately 180’d in the 8th grade.

Got myself some white stoner friends in highschool and opened my mind man.
Then Trayvon martin happened and that redpilled me.

[Anonymous No.15199415]

>>15199394
>If you take a newborn dog and a newborn child and treat both of them equally, the child will always turn out to be more intelligent
Actually, not at every time point, same with many other animals. Dogs can reach a similar level of intelligence to a 2 year old in a few months. Cephalopods are intelligent and they live for a year or two at most.

[Anonymous No.15199418]

>>15199411
What do you mean you're getting your life back on track? It seems like you're blaming everyone else for not being who you wish you were.

[Anonymous No.15199420]

>>15199406
>Not plausible
Yet it's true. Correlation factor between his data and more rigorously repeated of the studies he used was about 0,85 as I've mentioned which means that the big picture was something he very obviously did get right.

[Anonymous No.15199424]

>>15197122
Good for you if you can think on your feet, but average doesn't mean everyone is identical. The very cover shows there is a wide array of profiles within any given group.

[Anonymous No.15199430]

>>15199406
>Maybe famine, but civil war would not be implied at all, such a population wouldn't be able to form cohesive enough responses to anything to have a war at all.
What you don't understand is that "civil war" is just our external understanding of what's happening in Somalia. For them it's basic tribal warfare.

[Anonymous No.15199442]

>>15199403
I don't know the real stat but it seems reasonable it's certainly less than 1 in 100 people are murderers. Otherwise if every murderer murdered one person that would 1% of the population of the killed every year or 3 million murders.

[Anonymous No.15199448]

>>15199420
>which means that the big picture was something he very obviously did get right.
No it means there's some sort of "correlation", which I very much doubt you could explain the (in)significance of. Even purely random data can have perfect correlation and can always improve r^2 in modelling. If you build a bad as hell model, you know the fundamentals are wrong, the conclusions you draw don't follow, yeah you can look for things that seem to have turned out to be right but it will purely have been by happenstance.

[Anonymous No.15199449]

>>15199442
Meant >>15199402

[Anonymous No.15199452]

>>15199418
I did it all myself. Changing from a dead end to who I am today.
Who I wished I was at twelve after that police officer saved me I am now. A walking example of a good ending.
Unless I get drive by’d ironically because I like the color blue

[Anonymous No.15199459]

>>15199430
I have a good understanding of the conflict in Somalia and there's some extremely sophisticated war related structures/organisations there. You have no knowledge and that's why it seems plausible it might be village warfare.

[Anonymous No.15199464]

>>15199452
Are you old enough to be posting on this site? Because you sound like you might be 13.

[Anonymous No.15199473]

>>15199464
I used some big words somewhere in here I think.

[Anonymous No.15199513]

>>15199415
Come on, that's such an inane point. I obviously meant once both are developed.

[Anonymous No.15199523]

>>15199513
>Come on, that's such an inane point
And comparing dogs and children isn't? To try to show that genetics affects intelligence?

We're an animal that needs a lot of input when developing, that's an amazing part of our intelligence and can't be overlooked. However, equally amazing is that some other animals are extremely intelligent without any similar thing going on.

[Anonymous No.15199556]

>>15197122
no OP, I don't think every Somali has an IQ of 68, this book does not think you're mentally retarded.

[Anonymous No.15199726]

Anyone have the megalink of this one?

[Anonymous No.15199763]

>>15197122
A low IQ doesn't mean you'll "act slow" if that makes sense. An 85 IQ black person will act "normal" but will have the abstract problem solving ability of a "slow" white person. But a 70 IQ black will come off similarly "slow". The average IQ there is probably closer to 80 or so if you got people semi-competent schooling.

[Anonymous No.15199773]

>>15198578
>Britain
Try Sweden or Minnesota, the Lutheran Church arranges for a lot of them to immigrate as part of refugee resettlement programs

[Anonymous No.15199820]

>>15198891
kids from rural China, which is even poorer than Black areas in the US, will likely outperform Black Americans by like 2SD on an IQ test in spite of lack of resources.

[Anonymous No.15199829]

>>15199820
That's because kids from rural China aren't oppressed by white people.

[Anonymous No.15199844]

>>15199829
If you transplanted those blacks to Africa they'd get the same scores on average. No amount of transfer payments is going to make blacks more genotypically intelligent, neither will deprivations have the analogous effect on the Chinese beyond basic nutrition.

[Anonymous No.15199865]

>>15197170
Somalia is not a functioning society

[Anonymous No.15199889]

>>15197753
>>15198705
general intelligence

[Anonymous No.15199971]

>>15199829
Yeah because the Chinese are already doing it

[Anonymous No.15199992]

>>15199523
Yes, comparing humans to other animals is not an inane point, as it proves that intelligence is partially genetic.
So while we do require input in our development, differences in IQ between humans are also partially genetic.

So >>15199394
>intelligence is determined by access to resources, nutrition, social class and environment instead of some smart conveniently white gene
is fucking wrong.

[Anonymous No.15200001]

>>15199992
Meant to quote this post.
>>15198734

[Anonymous No.15200039]

>>15198856
>blacks have equal education in america
Do you not live in America or are you just sheltered?

[Anonymous No.15200072]

>>15200039
What's stopping them from staying in school and not disturb lessons as much as they do?

[Anonymous No.15200148]

>>15198311
>split the atom or work in air traffic control
Who the fuck cares?

[Anonymous No.15200251]

>>15198428
>>15198344
Can you retards read? I was obviously implying that the average isn't congruent with my life experiences. I'm not the exception, all the Somalis I've encountered in my life are far from mentally challenged drooling morons, they do well academically and can function like any normal human.

[Anonymous No.15200272]

>>15200251
>all the Somalis I've encountered in my life are far from mentally challenged drooling morons, they do well academically and can function like any normal human

But you've already established yourself to be a fucking retard, so your perspective is that of a retard. How can we trust that you have a proper idea of how a human being should function?

[Anonymous No.15200275]

>>15198578
>>15198508
>>15198501
I'm real you dummies. I also interact with Somalis and I can confirm that they have three digit IQs

[Anonymous No.15200366]

>>15199384
>>15198677
>>15199368
Jesus you're all making the same inane point. Do you guys really think you need a high IQ to grasp the basic concept of averages? You're aware that Lynn didn't measure Somalis, right? He just used the mean IQ of Kenya and Ethiopia for Somalia. So stop being pedantic fucks and actually answer my question.

[Anonymous No.15200392]

>>15200272
I've only established myself as a retard in that I'm wasting my time on 4chan

[Anonymous No.15200401]

>>15200366
>So stop being pedantic fucks and actually answer my question.
I don't draw conclusions on individuals based on population data. However, after reading this thread yes, I really do think you have an IQ of 68.

[Anonymous No.15200414]

>>15200251
>All the Somalis I've encountered in my life are far from mentally challenged drooling morons, they do well academically and can function like any normal human.
Are those Somalis in Somalia or migrants to other nations? If the latter, you have only met Somalis that have been selected for their ability to function good enough to escape from Somalia.
If the former, then you need some perspective on other nations.

[Anonymous No.15200438]

>>15200401
lol neck yourself, faggot

[Anonymous No.15200460]

>>15200275
> I can confirm that they have three digit IQs

This is true, but it involves one decimal place.

[Anonymous No.15200486]

Lol you must be an outlier in the 95th percentile on the scale of Somali IQ. But that probably only puts you at the 50th percentile among whites so you're still a faggot

[Anonymous No.15200517]

>>15200486
I'm in the 95th percentile even among whites
Also, I don't view myself as an outlier at all. My somali immediate family, relatives and friends also excel at academia.

[Anonymous No.15200529]

>>15199992
>differences in IQ between humans are also partially genetic.
>So >>15199394
>>intelligence is determined by access to resources, nutrition, social class and environment instead of some smart conveniently white gene
>is fucking wrong.
How is it wrong? It can be partially genetic, and it isn't anything to do with how much melanin you pump into your skin dude.

[Anonymous No.15200530]

>>15200517
>My somali immediate family, relatives and friends also excel at academia.
Almost like there was some factor all your relatives share. What could it be? Maybe you all like to visit the same diner?

[Anonymous No.15200536]

>>15200517
Whay do you think is the problem with Somalia then?

[Anonymous No.15200557]

>>15200486
He's not a Somali and the entire thing is a bait thread.

[Anonymous No.15200567]

>>15199829
As yes, that dastardly brood of Yakub, building their retardation rays

[Anonymous No.15200569]

>>15197122
He is talking about GROUPS, not individual outliers. Also you are not a Somali. Anyway, if Somalis are so smart why is Somali such a shithole?

[Anonymous No.15200576]

>>15200569
>if Somalis are so smart why is Somali such a shithole?
Same could be said of the USA.

[Anonymous No.15200587]

>>15200576
True, the US is such a shithole that millions of people would refuse to be paid to leave.

[Anonymous No.15200636]

>>15200529
Because your quote directly denies genetic reasons for differences in human IQ.

Besides, if you agree that differences are partially genetic, what is the point of you arguing it? Nobody claims that skin colour is what affects IQ. It's just that populations with brown skin colours also have genetics that lend themselves to worse IQs.

[Anonymous No.15200652]

>>15200576
strongest econony in the world
>shithole

Idiot

[Anonymous No.15200705]

>>15200652
>line goes brrrrrrrrrr

[Anonymous No.15200708]

>Certain races have higher IQs than other races
How do christcucks cope with this fact?

[Anonymous No.15200733]

>>15198764
Or even rich blacks lmao
The poorest white town in the US has less crime than the richest black town

[Anonymous No.15200740]

>>15200708
Why would that change anything?

[Anonymous No.15200746]

>>15200636
Why are you assuming that Brown people have genes for lower IQs when theres no actual evidence of this?

[Anonymous No.15200749]

>>15200576
LOLIRL!
You are right, we need to ship all Somalis back to Somalia so you can get away from our horrid country!

[Anonymous No.15200761]

>>15200740
We're all God's children. but for some reason, God made some of his children smarter than the otherx? and those smart ones can use their intellect to subjugate and even genocide the dumber children?
>inb4 it's alright, they'll go to heaven.

[Anonymous No.15200772]

>>15200636
>Because your quote directly denies genetic reasons for differences in human IQ.
No it denies that those differences are tied to being white.

>It's just that populations with brown skin colours also have genetics that lend themselves to worse IQs.
Aside from genetic IQ being polygenic, the only thing you can really say about dark skinned populations and genetics is that they're more diverse genetically. All else being equal, there are probably far more smart genes in Africa than elsewhere.

[Anonymous No.15200773]

>>15200746
You ever have to live around or work with brown people? You will find out fast enough.

[Anonymous No.15200778]

>>15200773
>You ever have to live around or work with brown people?
Yes, unlike you.

[Anonymous No.15200780]

>>15200587
>>15200749
>mutts can't accept their land is a shithole
the browner it gets the better, thats what you get for serving Mr.shekelstein

[Anonymous No.15200787]

>>15200773
Yes. They were no noticeably smarter or dumber than the white people I've interacted with.

[Anonymous No.15200788]

>>15197122
Averages and medians apply to groups, but do not represent an individual of that group, just like an individual's characteristics do not align with the average or median.
Your inability to understand this leads me to believe you have an IQ of 68.

[Anonymous No.15200796]

>>15200780
The US is in a much better place now than in the 70s though, despite "muh brown people".

[Anonymous No.15200800]

>>15200708
With collective denial and by making sure this topic is considered taboo/sinful.
It seems silly from a scientific/positivist point of view, but it's kinda how humans have evolved.
Certain stories, even if based on a lie, are more useful than cold hard facts.

>>15200740
Besides the fact that Christianity spawned a lot of egalitarian rhetoric, which is now common in secular circles, there's the fact that sub-Saharan Africa is the place with the largest (growing) population of Christians right now.

[Anonymous No.15200805]

>>15200796
like I said, the browner the better.

[Anonymous No.15200807]

>>15200761
Being realistic about demonrtrable, intrinsic race differences does not equal killing people. That is a Cultural Marxist strawman which is finally being exorcised from our national consciousness. Only idiots still accept it.

[Anonymous No.15200814]

>>15197426
lmao shut up, even if it was an 'uncredible source', that does not mean it can't convery statistical analysis accurately.

[Anonymous No.15200818]

>>15200761
To be equal before God or have equal dignity doesn't mean we have equal abilities. Do you think ancient didn't recognize that people are different? There's nothing requiring intelligent people to subjugate less intelligent people and there's nothing necessarily stopping dumber people from taking power. Do you think dumb people are incapable of genocide?

Christianity has never been an egalitarian religion. This is just pure ignorance of history. How do you think medieval societies were organized? Egalitarianism is a rebellion against Christian society.

[Anonymous No.15200828]

>>15200787
LOL as if you ever lived anywhere but with your parents!

[Anonymous No.15200831]

>>15200807
> intrinsic race differences does not equal killing people
really? it's happens in nature all the time, it's how humans evolved to where they're today, it was the driving ideology of the Germans in WW2, and it fully makes sense to me, so your cultural marxist argument doesn't really work, it's alright, keep coping, christcuck

[Anonymous No.15200837]

[Anonymous No.15200841]

>>15200828
>his experience doesn't confirm my prejudices
>he MUST be lying

[Anonymous No.15200848]

[Anonymous No.15200877]

>>15200848
No, just because you see it in white populations doesn't mean it transfers to other populations.

[Anonymous No.15200890]

>>15200746
IQs in brown countries are lower than in non-brown countries. The average IQs of brown people living in non-brown countries are also lower, in line with what can be expected from their countries of origin.
Every data set that can be linked to low IQ, like crime rates, income, etc. is lower for brown people globally. Again, in line with what you'd expect from their countries of origin IQ scores.

On top of that we've begun genetic testing and find genes linked to IQ. What we're finding so far links up perfectly with what can be expected from IQ testing.
You might not realise this, but we're living in one of the last decades before the human genome will be understood.

>>15200772
>No it denies that those differences are tied to being white.
It does not. It directly states that differences in IQ are due to social reasons. The white genes are brought up as something they're not caused by as a separate claim.

>Aside from genetic IQ being polygenic
That makes no difference to whether or not IQ differences are caused by genes. There are lots of polygenic differences in human populations that clearly fall along racial lines.

>the only thing you can really say about dark skinned populations and genetics is that they're more diverse genetically. All else being equal, there are probably far more smart genes in Africa than elsewhere.
Look up some actual data on that. Again, we're making huge strides in understanding the human genome. The results are so far in line with a genetic interpretation of IQ differences.

[Anonymous No.15200899]

>>15200890
IQ is unscientific.

[Anonymous No.15200905]

>>15200841
Dude he has no experience. I lived in a lower middle class, mixed race neighborhood: Whites, Asians, and Negroes. There were several crimes including an arson, a gang rape and some muggings. Black people did them all. I was a liberal before I moved there, after 3 years I realised that race is real. I did not want it to be. But just as a matter of survival I learned to never relax around the Blacks.

[Anonymous No.15200909]

>>15200890
>find genes linked to IQ
interesting, not the anon you're talking to and I don't mean to be spoon fed but can you link source?

[Anonymous No.15200910]

>>15200899
How so?

[Anonymous No.15200914]

>>15198734
It's as if phenotype results from an interaction between genetics and environment. Immigrants are a self-selected group. There's more than one variable. Very broadly, people who's ancestors lived in colder places have genetically higher IQs, so there is a relation to skin color.

You have to wonder, why would people look so radically different, but have almost identical brains? Isn't that a little hard to believe?

[Anonymous No.15200919]

>>15200899
You wish.

[Anonymous No.15200959]

>>15200899
"Scientific" refers to a process of thought and experiment. Saying IQ is unscientific is like saying height is unscientific, it depends on what you're doing with it.

[Anonymous No.15200999]

>>15200899
IQ is one of the most tested and used measures in social science. If it doesn't meet the standard of scientific utility, than nothing else in social science does, such as institutional racism, implicit bias or micro-aggressions.

So which is it? Is IQ proven or racism unproven?

[Anonymous No.15201034]

>>15200999
Social science is a pseudoscience. The only reason why psychology is sometimes credible is because of neuroscience (which is a biology and chemistry discipline). IQ is not based on neuroscience

[Anonymous No.15201038]

>>15200910
>>15200919
>>15200999

[Anonymous No.15201053]

>>15200909
There's this guy, for example. I think there's some newer stuff as well. But I don't have the links saved.
https://topseudoscience.wordpress.com/2016/01/10/the-forbidden-paper-on-the-population-genetics-of-iq/

[Anonymous No.15201063]

>>15201034
Brainlet.

[Anonymous No.15201064]

>>15201034
IQ research has far more statistical power and scientific validity than neuroscience, which is mostly nonsense and memes. You’re making the common reddit mistake of assuming that because something looks more “sciencey” (MRI scans, etc.) that it must be true.

[Anonymous No.15201067]

>>15201038
IQ doesn't have to map to "intelligence" to measure it, though.
You can still say some groups do better than others at IQ tests.

[Anonymous No.15201070]

>>15200914
There is literally more gentic difference between different black people or different white people than there are between black *and* white people.
Races don't exist.

[Anonymous No.15201081]

>>15201070
Wrong. You’ve been memed.

[Anonymous No.15201083]

>>15201038
>shittypedia
At least do what everybody else does and scroll down to the sources and pretend to use them.

You know that there are IQ tests that manage without any cultural knowledge at all? They're literally just pattern recognition.

[Anonymous No.15201085]

>>15201067
Yeah, but at that point what are you even saying? If IQ doesn't really mean intelligence what's the value of the measure? African nations scoring lower becomes meaningless then.

[Anonymous No.15201087]

>>15201053
>meme title
>search up guys name
>https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Davide_Piffer
uh yeah i think I will pass

[Anonymous No.15201092]

>>15201070
You mean there's more difference between two random white persons than between a random white and a random black person?

[Anonymous No.15201098]

>>15201087
good b8

[Anonymous No.15201100]

>>15201070
Colours don't exist, because there are an infinity number of shades of green and shades of yellow.

[Anonymous No.15201103]

>>15201053
>a fucking blog
>meme title
>search up guys name
>https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Davide_Piffer
uh yeah i think I will pass

[Anonymous No.15201107]

>>15201085
IQ was used to look for learning disabilities and severe cognitive impairment. It was literally made for that purpose. It’s not the proper measure of intelligent

[Anonymous No.15201115]

>>15201038
See >>15200959
Nothing in that article suggests IQ is unscientific. Nor does anyone that I know of suggest that IQ is a perfect measurement of innate intelligence or intelligence capacity. That's why we have IQ studies that included information like household income, the relationship status of parents, nationality, etc, so that we can account for other factors besides genetics.

[Anonymous No.15201126]

>>15201085
>If IQ doesn't really mean intelligence what's the value of the measure?
It seems some people find it interesting, that's reason enough to do it.
Anyway, if you want to go down that path, the concept of intelligence itself is a matter of debate. You could say intelligence doesn't exist, for example.

I'm not one of the previous posters and I try to be exact when I speak. So I generally won't say "this group is more intelligent", but I will say "this group does better at IQ tests" or "this group runs faster at 100m".

[Anonymous No.15201132]

>>15201070
Incorrect. There is more variation within than between but that is very different from genetic distance. The same thing could be said of chimpanzees and humans.

[Anonymous No.15201137]

>>15201081
Skin colour is one of the most easy to change human characteristics, because it is immediatly exposed to the outside world. Other factors take much longer to develop in different reactions.
If there are races they have nothing to do with skin colour.

[Anonymous No.15201143]

>>15201103
>blog written by the author of the paper himself
>??
>linking to the Stürmer of radical leftism

Fine, you brainlet. If you want academic decorum for credibilities sake, take this link.
https://www.mdpi.com/2624-8611/1/1/5

[Anonymous No.15201147]

>>15200890
Yeah but Brown countries are also far shittier than white countries and brown people live shittier in white countries. You can still plausibly explain the difference environmentally.

And yes IQ has high heritability but within group heritability isnt the same as between group. I can have a group of kids where the heritability of IQs is very high then split them into two groups who are exposed to different interventions that affect IQ meaning that one group ends up with a higher IQ than the other. The two groups will have different IQ scores for purely environmental reasons but the heritibility amongst the individuals will still be very high.

>>15200848
1) not IQ
2) only one gene
3) i think findings on the topic are more complicated than suggested here

there very well could be meaningful genetic differences but theres not really enough evidence so far.

[Anonymous No.15201148]

>>15201137
>If there are races they have nothing to do with skin colour
This is a little strong, but I agree that racial differences are much more than skin deep.

[Anonymous No.15201150]

>>15201092
Yes
>>15201100
>>15201092

[Anonymous No.15201151]

>>15200890
>There are lots of polygenic differences in human populations that clearly fall along racial lines.
Are there now?

[Anonymous No.15201155]

>>15199865
Here you go, retard>>15199865

[Anonymous No.15201159]

>>15201107
>IQ was used to look for learning disabilities and severe cognitive impairment
So we should take the fact that Africans score very low seriously.

[Anonymous No.15201164]

>>15201155
woops, intended to op

[Anonymous No.15201166]

>>15201147
>You can still plausibly explain the difference environmentally.
No, you can’t. People have been trying and failing for decades.

[Anonymous No.15201169]

>>15201034
fMRI is divination using pixels.
Also I guess that puts you on the racism is unproven side.

>>15201038
Doesn't addresses my point. Unless you also are on the racism is unproven side.

[Anonymous No.15201170]

>>15201085
Because IQ strongly correlates with what we typically associate with intelligence. It's the strongest predictive measurement we have for academic success, income, crime, etc. In these studies "intelligence" is defined as these collective attributes.

[Anonymous No.15201181]

>>15201132
>>15201100
>>15201092
>>15201083
>>15201081
https://www.americananthro.org/ConnectWithAAA/Content.aspx?ItemNumber=2583

[Anonymous No.15201190]

>>15197170
You can easily have a functional human with an IQ of 68. An IQ of less than 70 was considered 'borderline' mental retardation, emphasis on the borderline.
The issue I think you have is that in a high IQ society people conflate two different types of low IQ individuals: those who are otherwise perfectly normal and healthy but just had the bad luck to get a greater share of functional 'low IQ' genes, and those whose mental retardation is a consequence of some other pathology with a host of other mental and physical comorbidities, such as Down's syndrome or Angelman syndrome, where there has been a major chromosomal abnormality. These people behave oddly in addition to having a low intelligence.
A regular person with a low intelligence can perform routine tasks, care for themselves, hold a normal conversation. It's only when they are asked to go out of their everyday comfort zone that they have difficulty, by not understanding instructions etc.

For the record, comparing IQ scores between countries is difficult because of the yet to be explained flynn effect, and even harder in Africa where it's next to impossible to collect a representative sample. The average subsaharan IQ, if they had 1st world conditions, might be closer to 85 (i.e. African American IQs).

[Anonymous No.15201196]

>>15201137
It all comes down to environmental pressure. In this sense, "exposed" just means how expressed the genes are in an environment and intelligence is just as much exposed as skin.

[Anonymous No.15201211]

>>15201147
>Yeah but Brown countries are also far shittier than white countries and brown people live shittier in white countries. You can still plausibly explain the difference environmentally.
Of course those countries do worse if their populations do worse cognitively. Low IQ is linked to higher crime rates, for instance. If differences were truly only down to circumstances, then you'd expect to see some non-brown countries in which the brown migrants would do just as well. But that's not happening. Virtually everywhere they do worse. You'd also expect adopted brown kids to do just as well as white/asian kids. But they don't.

>>15201150
That's wrong. Genetic relation is closer between Europeans than between Europeans and Blacks. It simply is that way.

>>15201151
Yes? Colour is polygenic, as is height, as is how their bodies deal with heat and lots more.

[Anonymous No.15201240]

>>15201211
>That's wrong. Genetic relation is closer between Europeans than between Europeans and Blacks. It simply is that way.
Literally read >>15201181

[Anonymous No.15201250]

>>15201181
Again, same thing could be said of chimps and humans. More variation within than between.

[Anonymous No.15201265]

>>15201181
I read it. I don't think it's saying anything that I'd consider controversial. Which part do you think is relevant?

[Anonymous No.15201269]

>>15201181
>a public statement from the anthropology student body council
You’ve been memed.

[Anonymous No.15201278]

>>15201181
>Conventional geographic "racial" groupings differ from one another only in about 6% of their genes.


>http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics
>Geneticists have come up with a variety of ways of calculating the percentages, which give different impressions about how similar chimpanzees and humans are. The 1.2% chimp-human distinction, for example, involves a measurement of only substitutions in the base building blocks of those genes that chimpanzees and humans share. A comparison of the entire genome, however, indicates that segments of DNA have also been deleted, duplicated over and over, or inserted from one part of the genome into another. When these differences are counted, there is an additional 4 to 5% distinction between the human and chimpanzee genomes

It's cute that you think 6% genetic difference is tiny.

[Anonymous No.15201286]

>>15201269
>Actual scientist disagree with your pseudoscience
>Bro, don't look at it bro, I'm right

[Anonymous No.15201288]

>>15197122
Ok nigger

[Anonymous No.15201292]

>>15201286
>Actual scientist disagree with your pseudoscience
No, they don’t.

[Anonymous No.15201298]

>>15201250
>Again, same thing could be said of chimps and humans. More variation within than between.
What? No there isn't, there's more variation between than within with chimps and humans.

[Anonymous No.15201302]

>>15201298
>>15201278
This must be very embarrassing for you

[Anonymous No.15201305]

>>15201181
>>15201240
You're misinterpreting that data. How do you think people's ancestry and ethnicity are predicted with DNA tests?

[Anonymous No.15201308]

>>15201150
>Yes
Can I have a source for that claim?
That AAA link doesn't say anything about that.

[Anonymous No.15201318]

>>15201250
>>15201265
>>15201278
If there is greater variation within supposed races than between races, how does it make sense to class them as races?

[Anonymous No.15201336]

>>15201292
They literally do. The idea that "races" are exist in humans has been thoroughly rejected by science. Many times. If you were to ask any biologist or anthropologist, 99.9% of the time they'd tell you races aren't a thing.

[Anonymous No.15201343]

This Lewontin's fallacy shit is tiring.
>There is more variance in height within each sex than between the sexes. Sexes don't exist.

[Anonymous No.15201348]

>>15201308
>Evidence from the analysis of genetics (e.g., DNA) indicates that most physical variation, about 94%, lies within so-called racial groups. Conventional geographic "racial" groupings differ from one another only in about 6% of their genes. This means that there is greater variation within "racial" groups than between them.
From the AAA link.

[Anonymous No.15201364]

>>15201343
Sexes are defined by completely different criteria than "races", faggot. Your sentence makes no sense.

[Anonymous No.15201367]

>>15201318
Group A varies from 1-100.
Group B varies from 50-110.
Groups A and B are the same?

[Anonymous No.15201369]

>>15201240
If your family has 4 different hair colours and your neighbors family has only 1 hair colour, which your family does not have. Who is more closely related to each other? You and your dad or you and their son?

The answer is, your mom is a slut.

[Anonymous No.15201379]

>>15201318
Because the variation between races can still produce characteristics that don't appear in both races? And can therefore serve to classify both populations into discreet races?

[Anonymous No.15201381]

>>15201302
You're taking a percentage of difference, not knowing how it is calculated, and then comparing it to another percentage which isn't calculated in the same way. I know this isn't apples to apples because if you take into account absolutely everything you can, there's maybe 0.5% variation in genes across the entire human population. This is much less than the 1.2%.

[Anonymous No.15201386]

>>15201336
The reason most biologists will tell you race isn’t real is that Watson said the opposite and got blacklisted from the scientific community for it. Anthropologists mostly aren’t scientists so they’re irrelevant.

[Anonymous No.15201389]

>>15201318
If there is greater variation within supposed species than between species, how does it make sense to class them as species?

[Anonymous No.15201395]

>>15201336
Depends which anthropologists or biologists you ask. They're perfectly accepting of the concept in Russia and China.
If you throw out race for not being objective enough, you better throw out subspecies as a concept too, and species. And the whole of linnaean taxonomy as well really.

[Anonymous No.15201399]

>>15201381
>You're taking a percentage of difference, not knowing how it is calculated, and then comparing it to another percentage which isn't calculated in the same way
No, I’m not.

[Anonymous No.15201400]

>>15201367
>>15201369
What's your measure of race then? If it isn't how different one is from the other.

[Anonymous No.15201407]

>>15201348
I don't think that's what I asked:
>You mean there's more difference between two random white persons than between a random white and a random black person?

It seems the AAA link talks about something else. What exactly is the 94% value referring to?

[Anonymous No.15201412]

>>15201399
>No, I’m not.
No you are, talk through what you think is happening mathematically and I'll tell you where you're wrong.

[Anonymous No.15201415]

>>15201379
Then why not use any other factor than skin colour? Especially seeing how fragile it is, as it can change in only a few generations.

[Anonymous No.15201416]

>>15201412
>No you are
No, I’m not.

[Anonymous No.15201422]

>>15201407
Physical variation.

[Anonymous No.15201430]

>>15201336
Incorrect. I know the study you're referring to and it is highly flawed because it does not provide a definition of race. It's like asking people if god exists, without providing a definition of god. Someone who doesn't believe in the abrahamic god, but does believe that the universe as we know could have a creator of some kind, might answer no or maybe or even yes depending on how you define god.

If you asked any biologist or anthropologist if there were genetic clusters among humans, I'm sure 99.9% would say yes.

[Anonymous No.15201432]

>>15201166
Dont say statements like this without some evidence. And Im not saying environment causes the difference just that theres very little evidence for genetic difference at the moment. No studies have unambiguously shown that IQ differences between races have a genetic component.


>>15201211
>Of course those countries do worse if their populations do worse cognitively.

Yes its plausible that those races have less genes for iq and this would probably result in gene-environment interactions. However, thats assuming apriori that there is a genetic difference. Im saying the confound of shittier countries etc is ambiguous enough that you cant say for certain theres a genetic difference in the first place. The ambiguity means both options of no genetic differences or genetic differences is plausible.

>>15201143
Well this is the kind of evidence that would support the fact.

[Anonymous No.15201437]

>>15201400
Differences can fall into categories that are still grouped together, obviously related.
While a comparatively small number of different genes inbetween populations can produce a big divide, since virtually none of these genes are shared between populations.

[Anonymous No.15201441]

>>15201407
Physical variation, it literally says it right there.

[Anonymous No.15201453]

>>15201432
>theres very little evidence for genetic difference at the moment.
There’s a ton of evidence, including actual genes that we’re starting to be able to find
>No studies have unambiguously shown that IQ differences between races have a genetic component
Every IQ study unambiguously shows this. You can account for all the environmental variables you want and there are still race differences in IQ.

[Anonymous No.15201455]

>>15201416
>>15201399
https://youtu.be/A7nl-so8MU0

[Anonymous No.15201456]

>>15201415
Nobody ever just used skin color.

[Anonymous No.15201460]

>>15201400
Ancestral origin of group A is African and group B is Asian. Now the groups are easily distinguish, in the same way a buzzard isn't a vulture though they measure pretty similar.

[Anonymous No.15201465]

>>15199459
what the fuck you doing on 4chan dude? not specifically replying to this post

[Anonymous No.15201477]

>>15201364
My sentence is Lewontin's fallacy in a nutshell. Variance is greater within men on x criteria (height, weight, strength), than between men and women. Therefore there is no difference worth talking about except whatever your super duper scientific definition is. The fallacy is that as long as you look at more than a handful of traits you can easily separate men and women without having to look at their junk, just like you do everyday, just like some pleb can look at a photo of an individual and say with certainty they're african, when according to you africans don't exist.

[Anonymous No.15201479]

>>15200530
n-nani?

[Anonymous No.15201493]

>>15201432
>However, thats assuming apriori that there is a genetic difference
I'm going to ask you this. How did human IQ evolve and when did it stop? You would never be this careful about any other genetic effect like height or lung volume or efficiency of digestion. In fact you'd never assume that these things are perfectly equal between populations.

[Anonymous No.15201500]

>>15201456
There are populations in the world that look very similar to each other despite having been physically seperated for millions of years, while other populations are very different-looking while having been seperated for much shorter amounts of time.
These differences are a response to climate and environment and they take hold much faster than any subspecies would ever develop.

[Anonymous No.15201509]

>>15201477
I literally never said that Africans don't exist. Of Course they exist, but they aren't a "race".

[Anonymous No.15201523]

>>15201422
>>15201441
Ok, I found it. You should read it to see that it's basically a nonsense argument and no respectable scientist agrees with it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Genetic_Diversity:_Lewontin's_Fallacy

[Anonymous No.15201524]

>>15201500
>There are populations in the world that look very similar to each other despite having been physically seperated for millions of years
Populations of...?

[Anonymous No.15201533]

>>15201318
>>15201348
I just want to clear up what this retard is trying to say.

Take the genes for eye color, the gene for blue, green, and brown eyes(this is a gross simplification for the sake of example) exist in both black and white populations, so they cannot be considered a variance between those two groups but can be considered a difference within those groups despite being rarer or more common in the different groups. And that's the flaw in this line of thinking, it doesn't take into account how expressed the genetic variance is or how that variance i distributed among those populations. The idea of taking a random kenyan and a random german and them being closer genetically than a random member of their own ethnicity would require virtually all of the variance within their ethnicity to be expressed between those two individuals. It would required astronomical luck.

And the chimp anons are right, by that same idea a human and a chimp could be closer genetically to each other than another member of their species.

[Anonymous No.15201537]

>>15201453
You havent mentioned any of the evidence. stop doing that. the only one ill give you is the genetic thing from this one study that hasnt been published and hasnt been evaluated properly except for the scientists that rejected it. its plausible that theres genetic difference or even cold climate selected for intelligent genes and that study suggests it but theres not almost no evidence; and i guess the scientific community doesnt even want to discuss it.

No IQ study shows that racial differences are genetic. None at all. They show different races have different IQs but not why. Any suggestions at the fact are speculative and ambiguous.

[Anonymous No.15201551]

>>15201523
>In the 2007 paper "Genetic Similarities Within and Between Human Populations",[17] Witherspoon et al. attempt to answer the question, "How often is a pair of individuals from one population genetically more dissimilar than two individuals chosen from two different populations?". The answer depends on the number of polymorphisms used to define that dissimilarity, and the populations being compared. When they analysed three geographically distinct populations (European, African and East Asian) and measured genetic similarity over many thousands of loci, the answer to their question was "never".
Well that settles it, races exist

[Anonymous No.15201554]

>>15201523
>What is unclear is what this has to do with 'race' as that term has been used through much in the twentieth century—the mere fact that we can find groups to be different and can reliably allot people to them is trivial. Again, the point of the theory of race was to discover large clusters of people that are principally homogeneous within and heterogeneous between, contrasting groups. Lewontin's analysis shows that such groups do not exist in the human species, and Edwards' critique does not contradict that interpretation
From the same article

[Anonymous No.15201567]

>>15201551
>>15201554

[Anonymous No.15201568]

>>15201500
That's...wrong. The rate of change due to evolutionary pressure does not depend on what kind of selective pressure it is, but on its severity.
For example the low intensity light of northern climates, which produced white skin, might have been slower than the need to evolve better brains to deal with issues of say, winter climate which needed planning and brain power to deal with.

Also, suppose you're right. That these quick changes exist does not preclude slow changes from also existing.

[Anonymous No.15201578]

>>15201537
>No IQ study shows that racial differences are genetic. None at all. They show different races have different IQs but not why.
This is the root of the problem: you don’t understand how scientific research works. Every study in which IQ differences between races exist despite accounting for environmental factors (all of them) is proof that IQ variation is genetic.

[Anonymous No.15201586]

>>15201554

[Anonymous No.15201591]

>>15201554
>there are measurable genetic differences between human populations with geographically isolated origins
>b-b-b-but who knows what that has to do with race right guys?
lol

[Anonymous No.15201593]

>>15201554
So races exist but they aren't that different. Fine.

[Anonymous No.15201594]

>>15201554
This is just semantic bullshit. See >>15201430

[Anonymous No.15201616]

>>15201593
Then what's the point of the concept "race"?

[Anonymous No.15201620]

>>15201616
What's the point of the concept of species?

[Anonymous No.15201629]

>>15201493
>I'm going to ask you this. How did human IQ evolve and when did it stop? You would never be this careful about any other genetic effect like height or lung volume or efficiency of digestion. In fact you'd never assume that these things are perfectly equal between populations.

Evolution doesnt stop but you nees evidence for your assertions not just speculations. I dont think you can just compare things and assume one applies to another. Your brain is far more complicated to look at than your height. Because our speculations can be so easily wrong its good to be sensitive to what evidence there is and know the difference between a claim where you say theres evidence for this and this is probably the case versus I dont have evidence and Im speculating here.

[Anonymous No.15201639]

>>15201616
This is a very weird, politically motivated way of thinking that will prevent you from doing good science.

[Anonymous No.15201647]

>>15201578
There are no IQ studies between race accounting for environmental factors though so I have no idea what youre talking about.

[Anonymous No.15201655]

>>15201647
Yes there are. You really shouldn’t talk about these things if you don’t have even a basic level of background knowledge.

[Anonymous No.15201678]

>>15201629
>Your brain is far more complicated to look at than your height.
Exactly. The more genes are involved in a trait, the more likely it is to change.

>evidence
IQ scores vary according to genetic background. The variance can't be fully accounted for via environmental explanations. Those aren't controversial statements. But therefore genetic IQ variances exist.

[Anonymous No.15201681]

>>15201655
Post them then. There aren't. The only way to do that is heritability and there are no studies that measure between-group heritability

[Anonymous No.15201719]

>>15201681
There are IQ tests that work without any environmental or social factors.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raven%27s_Progressive_Matrices

[Anonymous No.15201737]

>>15201681
>There aren't. The only way to do that is heritability
Jesus, no, this is backwards.

[Anonymous No.15201738]

>>15201678
>Exactly. The more genes are involved in a trait, the more likely it is to change.

Is that something that comes with evidence or something you've speculated on? Either way youre still not providing any direct evidence for the case of IQ.

>IQ scores vary according to genetic background. The variance can't be fully accounted for via environmental explanations. Those aren't controversial statements. But therefore genetic IQ variances exist.

Between individuals but there isnt evidence for between racial groups. Two different things as I have said before. Two groups can plausibly have differences purely environmentally despite within person heritability being high.

[Anonymous No.15201812]

>>15201738
I hold these things to be self evident. It's not like ample evidence hasn't been posted in this thread. The existing IQ differences, which remain near constant no matter in which country or society these populations live, genes linked to IQ that are being found and which fall along racial lines and comparison of crime rates and IQ scores of whites and blacks at different income levels in the US.

>Between individuals but there isnt evidence for between racial groups.
You're just refusing to budge from your position at this point. Racial groups are made up of individuals. So when individuals have differences along genetic lines, so too have racial groups.

>Two groups can plausibly have differences purely environmentally despite within person heritability being high.
Yeah, but you'd have to show that the appropriate genes don't vary between groups to make such a claim. Because we do know that genetic differences exist between groups. Also that the social reasons for the differences are not caused by a variance in genes.

[Anonymous No.15201819]

>>15201719
I'm not following you. The environment can affect these tests.

>>15201737
What are you talking about. Studies of heritability are the only way to unambiguously looking at environmental impact for the simple reason that if you can account for heritability, you also now have a metric on the inverse, the environment. There are no methods for studying between-group heritability.

[Anonymous No.15201831]

Lewtonin's fallacy is bullshit by the way
>In the 70's, a geneticist named Lewontins noticed that the genetic variation between humans was very very small, which was some of the earliest evidence of a significant population bottleneck event which occurred approximately 75,000 years ago, known as the Toba Catastrophe Event. From this data on human genetic variability, Lewontins concluded a few things. Firstly, that more genetic variation exists due to randomness between any two random humans than exists as a result of racial groupings, and secondly, that because of this, we can conclude there is no such thing as race. To the first point, this has been corroborated recently using significantly more powerful tools, which you can read about here.
This data was collected by examining, loosely, large portions of the whole human genome amongst a bunch of different test subjects of multiple ethnicities. Edwards, another geneticist, correctly observed that by looking at specific places in the genome, similar markers could be identified along ethnic groupings, i.e., people from one area tended to have one marker, while people from another tended to have another marker. In 2003, Edwards published an opinions piece in a journal entitled "Human genetic diversity: Lewontin's fallacy" (I believe that is accessible, please let me know if it isn't), in which he correctly points out that genomic markers can be used to accurately track ethnic lineages in individuals. It is important to note that Edwards does not dispute Lewontins statistical analysis.
To clarify, Edwards is correct that genetic markers can be used to accurate track ethnic lineages, and Lewontin was wrong in claiming that doing such was impossible. But Lewontin is not incorrect, nor does Edwards claim otherwise, that more genetic diversity exists between two random individuals than exists as a function of race. 'Lewontins fallacy' is simply the title of the paper Edwards wrote - it is not a field wide rebuke of all of Lewontins work, and indeed, it is at most the reassessment of scientific knowledge when new/more/better data came to light.
Other population scientists, including the evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins, have agreed with Edwards insofar as the validity of using genetics to track human genetic lineages, and also agreed with Lewontin insofar as the repeated finding that human genetic variation between random individuals is greater than the variation found as a function of races.

[Anonymous No.15201850]

>>15201647
There are tons.

https://home.ubalt.edu/tmitch/645/articles/roth%20et%20al%20ethnic%20grp%20diff%20in%20cog%20abil%20ppsych%202001.pdf

[Anonymous No.15201859]

>>15201819
These tests are literally just pattern recognition. Cultural effects on that are minimal. I guess a civil war or something could affect test scores. But...those kinds of effects are kind of noticeable when making a study.

[Anonymous No.15201870]

>>15201819
>There are no methods for studying between-group heritability.
There are SAT scores and something like twin studies or transracial adoption studies.

[Anonymous No.15201878]

>>15201070
Wow, it must be impossible for sub-saharan Africans to differ dramatically from northern Europeans in any one trait. Oh wait a second, their skin is a completely different color. I guess it is possible. Surely nothing like that could happen with intelligence though! Because race doesn't exist so it's impossible.

[Anonymous No.15201936]

>>15201812
>>>15201738 (You)
>I hold these things to be self evident.
Thats jist stupid

>It's not like ample evidence hasn't been posted in this thread. The existing IQ differences, which remain near constant no matter in which country or society these populations live
and environmental differences can remain constant

>genes linked to IQ that are being found and which fall along racial lines

One single study that was rejected in peer review. Very little evidence. Its suggestive of something but its one study that hasnt been evaluated properly in the scientific community. It may be the beginning of looking at something but thats it. Its not enough yet and before it there was no evidence of those systematic genetic differences. You then have to loom at how much this accounts for in race difference if so.

and comparison of crime rates and IQ scores of whites and blacks at different income levels in the US.

can plausibly still be environmental plus this type of evidence is cherrypicking. "oh look in this specific circumstance things are not as you might expect though I cant be sure other environmental factors might be affecting this"

>You're just refusing to budge from your position at this point. Racial groups are made up of individuals. So when individuals have differences along genetic lines, so too have racial groups.

Only if the races are different along genetic lines which is something there has been almost no evidence on until this study.

>Yeah, but you'd have to show that the appropriate genes don't vary between groups to make such a claim. Because we do know that genetic differences exist between groups. Also that the social reasons for the differences are not caused by a variance in genes.

What do you mean. All I've said in this whole thing is that there is little evidence for the racial difference thing. Im not the one who should be showing anything. Genetic differences may occur between groups but you have to demonstrate this in this particular case.

[Anonymous No.15201968]

>>15201870
None of these have studies within group differences. Theres no method for this. There have been transracial adoption studies but its very difficult to interpet this. Adoption studies are generally not as good as twins at looking at the particular separation of genetic and environmental but even with twin studies theres no between group method.

[Anonymous No.15202020]

>>15201936
>can plausibly still be environmental

A very low plausibility. The thing about controlling for the environment is that you can only really control for hypothesized factors. For example, you can hypothesis that socioeconomic status has an effect on IQ. And in fact it does have a positive effect on IQ, though the racial gap actually increases at higher socioeconomic status. Even now as we've controlled for income, nationality, relationship status of parents, and what school you go to, all of which were hypothesized as possible explanations of the racial IQ gap, the gap remains. So before you say it could still be environmental, please suggest a factor you'd like to have controlled.

[Anonymous No.15202029]

>>15201859
Im convinced youve pulled this out your arse. you should cite something. I.know that people criticise IQ tests for being insensitive to cultures and people do study environmental influences on IQ. For instance its well known that poverty reduces the heritability of IQ.

>>15201850
they dont segregate environmental and genetic cause though.

[Anonymous No.15202059]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1893020/
>About one-third of the time (equation M54 = 0.31) an individual will be phenotypically more similar to someone from another population than to another member of the same population.

What is meant by this, exactly?
Doesn't phenotype usually mean evident bodily features?
If so, that doesn't make sense.

[Anonymous No.15202061]

>>15201936
>environmental differences can remain constant
That's an extraordinary claim. Please name me one example of an environmental effect that remains constant all across the globe in all income brackets, but only amongst one ethnicity.

>One single study that was rejected in peer review.
That was just what was posted in this thread. There's more if you look.

>Only if the races are different along genetic lines which is something there has been almost no evidence on until this study.
We can pinpoint a persons origin thanks to genetics. What do you mean races don't differ along genetic lines?

Please do show me one environmental effect that affects genetic Africans globally and reduces their IQ scores. Your assumption is very tenuous and has even less prove than the genetic explanation. You just seem to blindly take the environmental explanation on faith.

[Anonymous No.15202082]

>>15201647
http://www.amazon.com/Race-Differences-Intelligence-John-Loehlin/dp/0716707535/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1453624709&sr=8-2&keywords=race+differences+in+intelligence

http://arthurjensen.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Interaction-of-Level-I-and-Level-II-Abilities-with-Race-and-Socioeconomic-Status-1974-by-Arthur-Robert-Jensen.pdf

http://www.amazon.com/Bell-Curve-Intelligence-Structure-Paperbacks/dp/0684824299

http://humanvarieties.org/2013/10/20/race-ses-interaction-some-evidence-of-increasing-black-white-iq-differences-with-ses-levels-from-various-survey-data/

http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/studies/2009455.pdf

http://www.amazon.com/Race-Differences-Intelligence-John-Loehlin/dp/0716707535/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1453624709&sr=8-2&keywords=race+differences+in+intelligence

[Anonymous No.15202112]

>>15201968
>None of these have studies within group differences.
Aren't SAT scores posted for different ethnicities?

>there's no between group method.
You're lying. Difficult to interpret does not mean non existant. You know that very well.

>>15202029
Look at the tests. They're literally just lines and blocks. There is no cultural knowledge that can help doing these tests. Everything else is selecting comparable test subjects. Such as university students. Which, btw, gives the advantage to the less intelligent race, as it selects for those individuals that go to university.

[Anonymous No.15202152]

>>15202020
>A very low plausibility. The thing about controlling for the environment is that you can only really control for hypothesized factors. For example, you can hypothesis that socioeconomic status has an effect on IQ. And in fact it does have a positive effect on IQ, though the racial gap actually increases at higher socioeconomic status. Even now as we've controlled for income, nationality, relationship status of parents, and what school you go to, all of which were hypothesized as possible explanations of the racial IQ gap, the gap remains. So before you say it could still be environmental, please suggest a factor you'd like to have controlled.

There could be various cultural factors and values that could be implicated. Any environmental differences would be probably made up of many types of differences. Diet could even be one even if it accounts for just a small amount of the variance. They could then all add up. Just because the ones you hypothesized didnt close the gap doesnt mean there are others. Its also implausible that these factors by themselves can account for any kind if difference in anything. The reason your wage predicts things is because it mediates the causality of other very complex factors. Not wage in and of itself. Theres a very complex underbelly in environmental factors which could be a reason why generally, people studying heritability in psychology find that any single factor like marital status or socioeconomic status often accounts for very small proportions in the variance of a given trait. There are large swathes of environmental variance that are difficult to tap into. Its difficult to put a plausibility on these things until you actually have some kind of direct evidence.

[Anonymous No.15202183]

>>15202152
>could could would could could

>There are large swathes of environmental variance that are difficult to tap into. Its difficult to put a plausibility on these things until you actually have some kind of direct evidence.
So you have no evidence, but IQ is totally environmental?

[Anonymous No.15202231]

Why is this thread filled with unverified assumptions, guesses, theories, mathematical equations and circle-jerk of citations of more theories?

[Anonymous No.15202244]

>>15202112
Yeah but not HERITABILITY between groups.

Difficult to interpret means complicated and not segregating environmental and genetic effects and not being conclusive of anything either way.
Im not lying. There are no between group methods to estimate heritability.
Im not arguing for non-existent. Im arguing that your side has a lack of evidence.

Just because they are lines and blocks doesnt mean environmental or cultural factors cant affect the test or your brain in a way that affects the test. We know it does so I dont know why youre arguing. We know that theres environmental variability on IQ tests, we know the environment in development can affect cognition, we know that poverty suppresses heritability in IQ tests.


>>15202082
yes we know iq can be different between different races but no one has studied the genetic contribution to that.

[Anonymous No.15202267]

>>15202183
My argument was never that IQ differences between races was all environemental. It was that there ids very little direct evidence for genetic differences.

My main point in all this is differentiating when you are making an assertiom based on evidence versus speculation.

[Anonymous No.15202295]

>>15202152
>Theres a very complex underbelly in environmental factors which could be a reason why generally, people studying heritability in psychology find that any single factor like marital status or socioeconomic status often accounts for very small proportions in the variance of a given trait. There are large swathes of environmental variance that are difficult to tap into
Yes but the reason things like socioeconomic status are singled out to control for is that they differ between groups. Blacks in America are typically lower on this scale, which is why it's important to control for. There are probably billions of environmental factors at play in our intelligence, but by controlling for major identifiable ones we also inevitably control for many smaller ones. So the idea of yet unidentified environmental factors can explain the gap seems unlikely, especially when we know intelligence is genetic and these racial groups coincide with genetic clusters. Nutrition, by the way, has been taken into account, it had a small effect.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10328634
http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/91/1/115.full.pdf+html

Seems like you'll never be convinced though. First you denied the existence of race and the genetic variance in racial groups, then you said no studies had accounted for environmental factors, and each time you've been proven wrong you move the goalposts until we're where we are now. So I must concede, that we have not omnisciently controlled for every possible factor.

[Anonymous No.15202412]

>>15202295
I want to append this post. I think one of the big issues regarding this is why people are interested anyway. For me, it's because we live in a society with an equal outcome mindset and social policies. Like affirmative action and diversity quotas. These policies only make sense under the belief that certain groups under-perform because of systematic environmental factors like discrimination or a history or oppression. As such, since those are active policies, I think the burden of proof should be on them to prove that those are the causes and not genetics.

If it were the other way around, if our society had active policies based on a genetic belief, like that black people shouldn't be allow to breed or something, then I would demand they prove it first.

[Anonymous No.15202587]

>>15202267
>My argument was never that IQ differences between races was all environemental. It was that there ids very little direct evidence for genetic differences.
Well, you are wrong. We have a lot of evidence for genetic differences. We wouldn't even need to know what genes are to know that these differences are hereditary.

>>15202244
>Yeah but not HERITABILITY between groups.
We do. We know that IQ is partially hereditary. Which means that the differences between groups in IQ, accounted for environmental factors are also hereditary.

>Just because they are lines and blocks doesnt mean environmental or cultural factors cant affect the test or your brain in a way that affects the test.
Prove it. Name me one culture that affects these test results. What culture on earth can't deal with lines and shapes?

>>15202295
>Seems like you'll never be convinced though.
Yes, that Anon is really desperate.

[Anonymous No.15202750]

>>15202244
What exactly is your gripe with the Minnesota twin study?

Also, imagine we had the perfect methodology that satisfied you. Based on what we know, would you wager the average black IQ is higher, lower, or the same as the average white IQ? It seems like it would be a remarkable coincidence if they were identical. And it would surprise me if it were higher.

I would wager the average black IQ is lower based on the way the world looks and the studies that have been done so far.

[Anonymous No.15202776]

>>15202231
Because people love giving 400 autistic replies to obvious bait on this board.

[Anonymous No.15202787]

>>15202587
>Name me one culture that affects these test results. What culture on earth can't deal with lines and shapes?
I accept differences in intelligence. But just because you can't imagine the cultural bias doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Cultures with universal education probably produce people more accustomed to focusing on hours long paper-and-pencil tests. That ability is probably associated with intelligence but practice should also help.

[Anonymous No.15202850]

>>15202295
>Yes but the reason things like socioeconomic status are singled out to control for is that they differ between groups. Blacks in America are typically lower on this scale, which is why it's important to control for. There are probably billions of environmental factors at play in our intelligence, but by controlling for major identifiable ones we also inevitably control for many smaller ones. So the idea of yet unidentified environmental factors can explain the gap seems unlikely, especially when we know intelligence is genetic and these racial groups coincide with genetic clusters. Nutrition, by the way, has been taken into account, it had a small effect.

Look at this study on happiness.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1996.tb00355.x

Imagine If I had controlled for all the factors youd said for a study on happiness... well according to this they would only account for maybe like 20% of the variance or something like that which leaves about 60-70% environmental variance unexplained despite apparently controlling for the major factors.

Look at this talking about unexplained non-shared environmental variance

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10668351/

The point is that the environment is far more complex than just eliminating these major environmental variables. They are only the surface of a deep well of environmental difference, presumably from factors that we just havent looked at or are too difficult to look at. Its very plausible tha those major factors may not account for all the environmental variance and we aren't looking at factors of culture and microbehaviours which are unrelated to the major factors.

>Seems like you'll never be convinced though. First you denied the existence of race and the genetic variance in racial groups
No I didnt.

>then you said no studies had accounted for environmental factors,

No studies show between group heritability and studies controlling for environmental factors arent controlling for all of them if anywhere near all of them.

So I must concede, that we have not omnisciently controlled for every possible factor.

No you havent and by logic that means theres room for you to be wrong until you can fully account for heritability.

>>15202412
Its also of great interest to society to be sensitive with these issues in terms of race relations which requires people make assertions based on evidence and not speculation. I generally disagree with those policies generally more or less but I dont think this type of science is the reason to argue whether they should be implemented.
.

[Anonymous No.15202885]

>>15202587
>Well, you are wrong. We have a lot of evidence for genetic differences. We wouldn't even need to know what genes are to know that these differences are hereditary.

I guarantee you that you couldnt find one study showing the heritability of iq test scores in terms of between group differences. You have no direct evidence for differences. Just speculation and this one recent unpublished study. If you did then you would show them to me.

>We do. We know that IQ is partially hereditary. Which means that the differences between groups in IQ, accounted for environmental factors are also hereditary.

IQ is highly heritable at the individual level but we dont know at the group. Individual doesnt automatically apply and any scientist and wikipedia will agree with me.

>Prove it. Name me one culture that affects these test results. What culture on earth can't deal with lines and shapes?

Despite all the discussion that IQ may not be culturally sensitive and the studies on how cognitive perceptions differ widely in non western cultures, which both would argue against you, you are missing my point. Im not talking about needing culture to interpret to the shapes Im talking about culture having an effect on your development. For instance culture may lead you to engage less in school or even be taken out of school and lower your IQ or have less environmental enrichment outside of school. Like i said before poverty lowers heritability which is another example of environment affecting these tests.

>>15202750
Why would you think I had a gripe with that study?

White IQ is higher. I dont know what youre asking.