/sci/ - Science & Math

So many preventable diseases, so many people that could have had their lives improved in almost every metric and yet here we are.
>but muh right to create another person recklessly
FUCK YOU AND YOUR STUPID FUCKING "RIGHTS"

>>15059979
Nuclear fusion isn't going to stop dysgenics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYWIyga245g

>>14779741
>within the decade
Why so soon? If IQs decline fast enough and society collapses into idiocracy, further technological advancement will grind to a halt. It could be thousands of years before civilization advances again and the singularity happens.

>>14763617
Civilization will unironically collapse due to falling IQs and increasing mutational load.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmhEOQuUahU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ygn9s0xSw8Y

>>14727071
>Step 2 - watch the population slowly decrease and level off due to being more educated.
This sounds like a recipe for dysgenics.

https://www.unz.com/akarlin/nor-breeding-their-best/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOqGXhn7YBA

What does this mean for the future of science?

Why are humans suddenly devolving into primitive beings? Until now throughout history, homonids have been evolving to become more and more intelligent. Homo erectus and the Neanderthals were replaced by more intelligent Homo sapiens. Survival of the fittest was supposed to ensure that more intelligent people have better chances of surviving. But today for the first time, the reverse is happening. Birth rates are going down among high IQ races (East Asians, Whites), and birth rates are soaring among low IQ races (Blacks, Indians etc.). If there are no White people left in the world, which will be a reality in a few centuries' time, will humanity plummet into a primitive state like how early homonids lived? Is intelligence necessarily a positive evolutionary trait? If so, why does low intelligence seem like a more favourable trait for survival and expansion in the modern world among humans?

Why are we getting dumber?

How many geniuses are needed to maintain progress in the sciences? Should we be preparing for a slowdown in global industrial capacity and the (at least temporary) end of progress?

>>10411913
No. The nigger apocalypse is nigh.

>>9817401
>And homo species wouldn't slowly get smarter.
Hmm

>>9571396

Is this true?

>>9346231

Had this theory that the reduction in IQ over the past 100 years could have been engineered with a variety of factors, that caused a cumulative effect. Was trying to compile a possible list:

2 parent families: strong evidence that children from two parent, nuclear families, will be smarter, and have less mental/behavioral issues than those raised by a single parent.

Breastfeeding: strong evidence that children who are breastfed will be smarter than those who arent.

Spanking: strong evidence that children who get spanked have reduced IQ's.


Lead exposure in soil: strong link to reduced IQ.


Fluoride in water: strong link to reduced IQ.

Toxoplasmosis: possible link to reduced IQ.


algae virus, ATCV-1, possible link, debated, to reduced IQ.

birth control in women: possible link to reduced IQ


If you just had one of these the effect would be negligible, but if you are a child of a single parent, who wasn't breast fed, were regularly spanked, regularly played in lead contaminated dirt/sand, who only drank fluoridated water, had a cat or multiple cats, and infected with this algae virus. The odds are your IQ would of been significantly reduced. From lower genius level you would of been reduced to a brainlet. And from brainlet you would of been reduced to mentally handicapped.

>be me
>have IQ of ~125
>realize that the global average IQ is around 85 and has fallen significantly since the collapse of the USSR because of shitty education and African population growth
>realize that over 90% of humanity is dumber than me
>realize that I have friends who are smarter than me who still don't produce any novel scientific or mathematical concepts
>realize just how stupid I am, but marvel at how unfathomably stupid humanity is
>progress rests on the shoulders of maybe 500 million people
>progress was slow in human history because there were fewer than 30 million smart people alive in pre-industrial times at the same time and they hand no universal lingua franca to conduct science and math in

Our hold on the universe is so tenuous. Math and science is so precious, and we could lose it all if we aren't careful.