/sci/ - Science & Math

i propose that ugly people shouldn't reproduce

>>11322785
>>11322788

>>11322785
What will that achieve exactly?

>>11322785
How many geniuses can you name? How many sons of geniuses can you name?

long term culling the lowest 25% could be more effective

>>11322785
Humanity doesn't need lots of autistic 140+IQ tards, it just needs one or two really great people here or there. Just look at the state of science. Too many retarded autists shitting it all up

>>11322842
cope

raising average IQ would be hugely beneficial

what about 135 IQ retards like me? how many wives do I get?

>>11322842
high iq
>>11322835
far too conservative, and targeting the wrong demographic (not that they also don't need to be sorted out). the entire european gene pool needs to be filtered hard

>>11322848
Beneficial for who?

>>11322849
135 IQ midwits must be the dark underbelly of trades and services supporting the true human race. You know, mopping floors and stuff

>>11322854
everyone who lives

>>11322857
Explain

>>11322857
you'd be more likely to cause the mass accumulation of deleterious mutations and overall reduction in robustness of the selectively bred lineages than you would improve the fitness of your pure breds. Look up even one study on long term selection experiments, we know next to nothing about how to select for robustness in animals. Stock breeding programs do not count and are not at all selecting for what you are suggesting.

>>11322853
>the entire european gene pool needs to be filtered hard
Care to explain a little more what you're selecting against?

>>11322865
What about line 1 herefords?

>>11322855
mother fucker you better appreciate the clean floors i make LOL

>>11322867
mutational load and the suite of traits associated with self-domestication
>>11322871
Interesting. I'd need to spend some time looking into this, the first thing that jumps out is the number of generations. The research started in the 30's right? The number of generations before bizarre downstream effects of selective breeding tend to show up seems to be >50 and >100 generations seems to manifest the most unpredictable effects per Bell's discussion of the topic.

This was one of the first studies that showed up but other sources say that they've been carefully monitoring inbreeding depression.

https://academic.oup.com/jas/article-abstract/97/1/1/5125678?redirectedFrom=fulltext

>>11322785
Who will educate that offspring? 16 is too much for one couple. Also cross couple children for diversity should be considered.

Taking care of offspring together, with highest education possible applied.

>>11322882
>per Bell's discussion of the topic
would you happen to have something readable about this

I found out about line one because of a private traditional aberdeen angus breeder in new zealand, the pinebank herd, I read the old guy's blog where he was talking about some important kiwi genetics researcher another thing he mentioned was something he called the I think it was the barnhoff effect but I can't find reference to it anywhere, he said that it took around 15-20 generations to purge out most of the deleterious recessives that accumulated.

>>11322873
hey man I will be right there with you

>>11322860
I mean life will be better for the ones not culled because the average intelligence of humans will be higher, it will be a better world because everyone act in their self-interest in a more enlightened way (not committing crimes to get what they want unless it's rational, but appropriate penalties by other long-seeing bigbrains will prevent that) and be able to accomplish more

>>11322865
Ok. .I guess. What instead could be done is a hybrid program, which prioritizes more highly than currently is done, to introduce high IQ poeple of opposite sexes to each other and encourage but not mandate them to mate. Lik, ,tax breaks, free high quality childcare for intelligent gradstudents so they don't put off having children til later, socialization classes or some shit that would actually work for that purpose, high-IQ only tinder-type thing (this actually exists, I've seen a flyer for it). That retains the indivivudal's natural abiblity to pick out someone who's a poor genetic match (via pheromones or w/e else) while still increasing genetic quality compared to leaving it to random chance (or worse) as we have now

>>11322889
adopt them out, intelligence is highly genetic according to the Minnesota Twins Study, and people interested in adopting should be happy to get superbabies

>>11322889
starting at 18 a woman can have only 5 kids before she expires (28 yo)
also statistically there is a lot less 145+ women compared to men, I think OP is retarded.

>>11322910
it doesn't take much to extrapolate that we'd just skim the top of them women's bell curve even if not taking the exact same IQ cutoff on both, don't be a fool

>>11322891
Yes Graham Bell's Book, 'Selection the Mechanism of Evolution' has an excellent chapter on artificial selection as well as a general overview of evolutionary theory from the viewpoint of someone familiar with selection specifically as a driving force for change in wild and captive populations. I think it is one of the best introductions to evolutionary theory and probably not well known considering it was a recommendation I had to dig very hard for in the depths of old stackexchange threads. His thinking is very clear and lucid, and he does not hesitate to include some of the mathematics associated with evolutionary genetics, there is ample reference to some of the best research on artificial selection and early genetics studies, I think that alone makes the book worth skimming.

>>11322785
>a breeding program for individuals with high 145+ iqs where each couple produces 16 offspring
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regression_toward_the_mean

>>11322827
beats me to it

>>11322920
Have you looked over my Mediogamy thread talking about Robin Fox's anthropology work and optimal in/out breeding levels?

>>11322901
The problem with human breeding programs aimed at selecting for intelligence in my mind starts and ends with the extremely high mutational load in European and Eurasian populations compared to African (and of course the obvious implication there for why we don't select from the latter gene pool makes this even more difficult). This is really ignoring things like regression to the mean, not even dealing with whether this actually holds in biological populations and is not a statistical construct, and also the looming issue of hard limits to improvement in a trait which we may already be approaching (see: reverse flynn effect). The best form of eugenics that could be practiced would be the widespread encouragement of abortion among low iq populations, the screening of middle class populations for indications of high mutational load and the encouragement of overall healthy individuals to breed irrespective of intelligence. I think that given the replacement of fitness for the selected trait in an artificial breeding program, natural selection tends to take its pound of flesh one way or another, you select for increased physical robustness at the cost of proliferating genes associated with aggression and low intelligence, you select for heightened immune function and digestive health at the cost of some unforseen proliferation of alleles associated with clannishness or passivity. You cannot know how these complex behavioral traits and these ill defined measures of robustness will react to this kind of breeding until you have carried out selection experiments for many generations which can take over a century in slow life history animals like humans. I would say that if you could demonstrate the ability to mitigate these kinds of negative outcomes with careful research on test populations over the requisite number of generations of selectively bred individuals that it would be a better idea

>>11322891
actually some livestock breeders like the kiwis have quite a hands on approach to breeding, for example putting notches in the ear of a sheep every time they have a problem with it, if it gets too many the just cull it and any offspring.

>>11322901
Long term Hybrids don't work, they break down within 2 or 3 generations and you have to hard cull to select for anything worthwhile.

>>11322946
perhaps I'm misunderstanding you here; when I said 'hybrid' I meant a cross between mandatory breeding and completely free individual choice breeding, which would cause higher probability of high IQ intermating without actually enforcing it

>>11322950
Yeah I think I got you wrong on that, there is another issue though that you kind of need a certain level of relatedness within your selected population for actual selection to mean anything. too large and genes can become antagonistic

>>11322901
But you will be just shifting the average, people with the new shifted iq can easily use the same argument of being more enlightened at making decision, should the breeding program go on forever?

>>11322785
Oh look, another IQ is genetic thread. We haven't seen one of these in, well, at least 8 hours.

"We" can't even get you /pol/turds to stop talking about IQ for 1 day. How are "we" going to stop 85% of the world from fucking?

>trusting breeding programs
>Merino Sheep bred for high volume wool to the point where it cannot survive on its own anymore
>American Turkey bred for big breast to the point where males can't even inseminate females on their own anymore
>Comercial Banana crop so low in genetic diversity that they are essentially clones now that need assistant programs just to keep the clones alive

>>11322785
Problems with the bell curve

They used IQ tests given to copper miners as an 'average' of African intelligence, despite the fact that 1. The copper miners were uneducated and 2. They had never seen a test before. In fact the same copper miners were given a second test 3 months after the first and scored 15 points higher. The authors of The Bell Curve simply took the first and as an added bonus called it 'the average African IQ score'. A test given to fucking copper miners.

They ignored IQ tests given to educated blacks in South Africa for no reason simply because it didn't fit their narrative. In South Africa prior to the fall of Apartheid blacks could not attend schools with whites and blacks were considered 'unfit' to educate so education for black children were only to prepare them for field and day laborers. Meanwhile a school for wealthy black children (yes, even in South Africa during apartheid there were wealthy blacks) scored HIGHER than the average for white school children of the same age, primarily because there was only 1 school for wealthy black children in Africa while the white scores were an aggregate of all white schoolchildren regardless of socioeconomic backgrounds. The authors simply chose to ignore the high test scores of these black children.

Seriously, the Bell Curve was written in part by research from the American Nazi party. Guess what narrative they're trying to push? Give you one guess.
https://www.pinkerite.com/2018/12/mankind-quarterly-pioneer-fund-and-bell.html

>>11322976
I don't see a reason why not, until we're able to gene-edit for intelligence at will, which would become exponentially more likely with each generation under this program

>>11322984
>Commercial Banana crop so low in genetic diversity that they are essentially clones
But they are clones? they're propagated from suckers

>>11322985
by your own logic educated blacks would be more likely the high IQ group and not representative of the average

>>11323011
No, by my own logic education plays a major roll in scoring well in IQ tests.

>>11322901
I think you are going by this implications

Intelligence -> Technology & Science -> Better life quality

So far technology makes life better for the wealthy not the whole population, I don't see the implication between high IQ and empathy or anything that relates to making decisions that optimize the life quality of the whole population. High IQ fags could easily only use the technology for their own benefit.

>>11323032
depends on which part of the IQ test we are looking at, it will do almost nothing for working memory.

>>11322985
Even BETTER, they used tests that weren't even IQ tests because there wasn't enough data for them to write the book so they took tests, that weren't IQ tests given to soldiers applying for the army and said 'well, these sure do look like IQ tests' and used them anyway, despite the fact that they were, in fact, NOT FUCKING IQ TESTS nor were they given by anyone remotely qualified to give people IQ tests.

There is so much wrong with the Bell Curve if it were a school assignment it would be given an F which is why nobody has ever tried giving any part of it for scholarly review and instead wrote a book. They knew it would never pass even the basic requirements for psychology science journals.

>>11323045
So, balls to the wall here faggots, have what Murray and Hernstein suggested the evidence they looked at was saying been proven correct or not?

>>11322901
Simply allowing grad students to not have to live in ghettos and forgo eating just for the privilege of paying tuition so they can do research for almost free on behalf of the uni would fix almost all problems associated with smart people putting having kids off for later.
The other part of the equation is helping them meet up as you mention. Extra tax breaks and subsidies aren't necessary beyond that. However, a stable job prospect is needed beyond the studies.

>>11323037
But people are living better thanks to technology, but have no way to appreciate it due to the almost perfect match of the hedonic treadmill to the read of societal progress and because they never experience the backdrop of how it could be without all the advances. Modern man has fridge and freezer as, in many places,a legal requirement to rent a house, where ice outside of the winter season was a luxury for kinds in the past. Many people are allive today thanks to advances in med tech, but they take it for granted because if we have the tech of course we will save them, we're not barbarians. No one looks at themselves and thinks, 'ah, thanks goodness I don't have polio', we just take it for granted. High tech is so abundant that toddlers play on devices capable of letting us talk to and see someone on another continent so cheaply it's free if you find wifi, and with 10,000 times the computing power than it took to land on the moon. Heat is legally guaranteed, power companies can't cut you off in the winter in my state and probably others if you don't pay your bill in the winter. Again, we take it for granted, but in the past people slaved away to make sure they had enough wood stocked up, I got a bit carried away with this I suppose, but the point of being rich is that you get more of stuff than everyone else, but the poorer people still benefit. It's not a outlandish dream for you to think that you'll rent or even own a home with a fridge, internet, heat, a lawn, and have various options for treatment if you ever get sick. A billlionaire may have more options on top of that for the same sickness (possibly) and maybe have a hundred rooms and 3 kitchens and stainless steel Smart fridges and lights that clap on and off, but whatever they have, there is just about always bleedover or 'trickle down'. It's just not always as much as we down here would like, but that's the nature of man: to always want more

>>11322785
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pno6Ir_nDAQ

>>11323883
>But people are living better thanks to technology
That's only true for very select few technologies, and for the overwhelming majority, it has made us live worse lives. Some, like the internet, have both positives and negatives, but has been abused so that the negatives greatly outweigh the positives. Others, like the microscope, are purely positive. But most are shit like TVs (that, by the way, spy on you 100% of the time nowadays, and only old TV don't have that shit embedded anymore, in a few years there will be exactly 0 non-spy TVs available. Telescreen is real already.), that really don't have anything good to them (news is better gotten from journals that would hopefully be funded in a way that they don't need to print tabloid bullshit all the time, entertainment is much better in person and doing so helps socializing which is healthy, etc.), and we tend to throw away perfectly useful tech in favor of unusable dogshit (see: yesteryear's phones and today's "smart"phones) just so the people can be better tracked and abused.
>because they never experience the backdrop of how it could be without all the advances.
Try going on vacation to a cabin in the woods and use 0 modern tech for at least a month. You might notice that everything is actually better, not worse as you are led to believe. I have done that many times, hence I know.

>Many people are allive today thanks to advances in med tech
Not really true, it's hygiene more than anything.

>High tech is so abundant that toddlers play on devices capable of letting us talk to and see someone on another continent
And people are dumber and easier to manipulate than ever. They are also more socially isolated than in any prior time in history and more degenerate by all standard (i.e. non-4chan) metric.

>It's not a outlandish dream for you to think that you'll rent or even own a home [...] and have various options [...] sick
False. Yet beforehand it would be an outlandish dream to think you couldn't.

>>11323883
>but whatever they have, there is just about always bleedover or 'trickle down'.
Are you 12 years old?
>muh smart fridge muh clappy lamps
Guess so.

>>11323685
how do they need help meeting up? i can't think of a better place than college. women have shown their preference to not have many children when they have the opportunity for an education and career. no one has solved this problem aside from israel iirc, so unless you can get women to have some strong in group religious belief you're stuck with low birth rates for smarties

what right do YOU have to ne1$

>>11323909
>how do they need help meeting up?
If you have time to mingle while a grad student, you're in a social science field.
>i can't think of a better place than college
Sure, because everyone in colleges nowadays are socially conforming drones, but that shouldn't be the case. Moreover it's pretty obvious that people who go into academia almost always have weird aspects to them that prevent them from meeting people at a higher rate than the normal population.

>women have shown their preference to not have many children when they have the opportunity for an education and career
That, too. So most of the women that those grad students talk to are not available - if they're even single.

>so unless you can get women to have some strong in group religious belief you're stuck with low birth rates for smarties
Women who aren't into the muh career shit tend to want children and probably think of grad students as turnoffs precisely because they'll want to postpone since they can't reasonably afford children. If they could, most of them would instead do both. But a mixture of no job safety and no inflow of money doesn't help. These aspects also significantly negatively impact grad students when looking for mates in general.

>>11323909
I think it's a matter of timing. If they're in college, nowadays they have committed to completing the whole thing and are serious about it (as compared to the past when they'd go after an "MRS degree') and are much less likely to form serious relationships because they don't have time for it unless they're at a fuck-around shool, which the intelligent ones won't be.

>women have shown their preference to not have many children when they have the opportunity for an education and career.
this is a direct outflow of the promotion of feminism in the tightly-held privately owned MSM, not a natural trait of women. Unless the entire West collapses in the next 50 years, there will probably be a renaissance of valuation of traditional female roles as everybody realizes that that experiment was a mistake for everyone

>>11323903
You raise some good points, especially hitting directly on the main thing that I left out in my post, which is that social satisfaction is incredibly important to humans, and it is eroded and controlled as society 'advances', because if you don't have real friends and family then you'll spend on trying to recreate that all-important feeling, e.g. be a good consoomer.

>Try going on vacation to a cabin in the woods and use 0 modern tech for at least a month. You might notice that everything is actually better, not worse as you are led to believe. I have done that many times, hence I know.
This is a good point and I agree to the point of leaving out electronics can make things better, but if you really mean leaving behind all vestiges of society, including the supply chain that supplied: jerky or dried food if you won't have a fridge, a firearm (if need be) that cost less than a day's wage, clean water or a purification system, batteries for lights....if what you meant leaving all that behind and life is still better hunting and gathering and boiling and preparing everything I need, then I admit I have never tried it and should do so. If you just meant leaving behind the more modern conveniences and living more rustically, I believe you already

Your first point was interesting because I was thinking about how everyone who carried a cellphone to the Virginia capital rally was going to be marked as a participant via their GPS, but if they wanted to video/photo they'd pretty much need to bring it. Only people with old tech like handheld camcorders on tape, would be safe from that. I think old tech will become more valuable beyond its simple 'vintage' value because it was creatd before the global panopticon was instituted and all tech that comes out starting being backdoored

>>11323908
>Are you 12 years old?
im 12 years old and what is this?

>>11323934
>Unless the entire West collapses in the next 50 years

honestly I think it's more likely patriarchal muslims will end up conquering the west despite their low IQ (a la houellebecq's submission) than privileged white women will do the thing their best at and make kids instead of trying to compete in the workplace. it's hard to put that genie back in the bottle

>>11322785
this would work better if you bred the children of high IQ parents, because of meiosis

>>11323964
>if you really mean leaving behind all vestiges of society
Nah, of course. It goes with the rest of my post about how some technology clearly was objectively beneficial. It's still plenty comfortable given that you'll rely on OTHERS to use tech (farmers, shops, et al.), but candles are clearly worse than lightbulbs and cars are almost entirely better than horses (horses, though, don't need billions and decades of research to become self-driven), they have better carrying capacity and are much faster, as well as being less maintenance.

Although (on a completely different note) I think you don't realize just how much food you can still use without a fridge, what mostly changes is how often and what kind of things you buy, and condiments. Fresh food will mostly be used in a day or two, but most processed meats are good for weeks (sausages, bacon, smoked ham, etc.), and many ancient conservation methods are now just staple cooking recipes. If you did meal prep, you'd end up not seeing the difference more often than you'd think. I think dairy products are the hardest to conserve without a fridge, but you might be surprised, if you're American, to know that eggs are perfectly stable at room temperature, for example.

>>11324000
>Nah, of course. It goes with the rest of my post about how some technology clearly was objectively beneficial
Right, I didn't mean to misinterpret you; I lose track of stuff sometimes. Well said, and thanks for the thoughtful responses

LMAO I am the one who started this repeated thread several years ago, before I got dementia.

while I was posting on sci about eugenics to increase human intelligence. at the time I was still in college studying biology etc.

as a kid I always read science fiction novels etc and I always wondered about how humans could advance society and technology in the future, eventually I realized that eugenics could be used to increase the intelligence of an entire country and eventually the entire planet, humans would benefit from better decision making and would survive longer and prosper more.

so I spent years making these threads every day with dementia, all day in my college library in between studying.

LMAO I cant believe people are still posting about my ideas it might continue after I die! :)

I have a neurodegenerative disease

>>11323969
short of drastic measures the islam problem is a massive threat that needed dealing with decades ago the future isn't pretty those guys truly believe in their religious indoctrination.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLZeZT1c87w
>>11323934
>that experiment was a mistake for everyone
As far as certain people are concerned it worked perfectly

>>11323006
Yes, that's natural cloning. Please attend a high school biology class before making another post.

>>11324101

How can you deceive yourself so completely?

Most of your perceived enemies live in ruins of cities and countries of rubble.

They have no idea how to fight or play "the one" game..

It's like some caricature of dune or something.

I suppose we all live our delusions.

>>11324112
>Most of your perceived enemies live in ruins of cities and countries of rubble.
anon they are not my perceived enemies I was happier when Libya and Syria weren't smouldering rubble the globalists did that, but look at what happened to dearborn.
or why england is now one of the big exporters of Islamic terrorists

>>11324000
I had some a young student from Israel visit once, and the subject of the Sabbath came up while I was talking to one. I, with my previous experience only in American teen culture, wondered if it was inconvenient or she wished they didn't have to do give up electronics and conveniences and driving, but she said that she actually liked it because it was time to spend together with the family without work and without distractions, in a regularly scheduled way that no one can mess with except in cases of life-threatening emergency. I have since thought that I'd really like for my own children to have that experience, when I have a family, though I myself have no association to any religion that keeps a day of rest like that. I haven't decided if I'll start associating with one just to give validity and social credence to my day of rest (deceiving children usually backfires) or just declare it myself and see how that works

>>11324124

Well to be fair america has it's own history of civil warfare and human rights violations.. within it's own boarders. Some would say genocide at points in time..

As for england, the colonial empire within its history may be regarded as a high point by some.

I'm not using my examples as justification for diversity or diversity privilege..

I am simply stating that the fear of diversity has to be justified, in most cases it is based on a false premise or an inability to solve problems..

Either for you or the people you dont like.

>>11324140
You type like reddit scum multi culturalism is a lie that causes little but strife because they aren't interested in integrating why do you think the mass rapes happened? and you don't seem aware of shitty things like the Kalergi plan or just how degenerate some of our leaders are

>>11322785
How a about a high iq dating website

What about only breeding mentally stable 145+ iq you might create a fucked breeding program.

>>11322785
The bell curve is a crock of shit that wasn't even worth putting up for peer review.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29911926

>>11324112
>Most of your perceived enemies live in ruins of cities and countries of rubble.
>I suppose we all live our delusions.
Do you know what yours are?
They are in Rotherham, where the child 'grooming' gangs went on for decades covered for by the police in the name of political correctness
They are in Malmo and Stockholm, where there are now 100 bombings a year....in Sweden.
They are in Paris, where they shot publishers and policeman over a cartoon of their prophet
They are in Texas, where more of them tried to do the above again
They are in Cologne, where they planned a mass sex assault against women
They are in all these places, they have full citizenship and cannot be deported, are politically protected above gays even, they have children at several times the rate of the original people, shamelessly raise them on the public dole, then try to shittify the place to like where they came from by instituting their bullshit

>They have no idea how to fight or play "the one" game.
They don't have to, that's the wonder of a religion which has all that baked in. All they have to do is follow it and they will end up the masters of the world: Breed as much as possible, you'll get highly rewarded if you die in the advancement of the cause, there's no shame in abusing the systems of your host country such as welfare or committing violence to advance your cause because nonbelievers aren't full humans
People who are not afraid to die to advance their oppressive belief system, having kids at a rate unlimited by their earning power, who teach their kids not to be afraid to die to advance the cause and that the host country is degenerate and evil, inside the borders of your country and with special political protection. If you consider that self-deception,it's probably because you haven't personally been negatively affected by these things yet, and won't care til they do. I don't think that's a good way of making decisions though, it's unkind to all the people who have been.

>>11324169
but was their analysis proved right or not long term are certain racial groups smarter?

>>11324180
>was their analysis proved right
no

>>11324185
so all racial groups are equally as intelligent on average?

>>11324145

Ok so you have 2 things here..

1.. people of different ethnicity dont mix.

2.. the conspiracy to make different ethnicities mix.

Ironically, diversity works if people need it to.

And the actual conspiracy is always the media, the promotion of pop culture leads to a false representation of what is acceptable..

You might find a muslim rape gang but prince Philip's high IQ saved him?

How about priests literally making front page of sky news and nowhere else.


These examples are not justifications for behaviour.. rather the selective use of information people use to further the views they hold.

It's not what you know that counts, but rather how you use it.

>>11324190
Yes, when given the same conditions. No, when some groups have way less access to education and nutrition.

>>11324194
Tell me your excuse for Rotherham and any other rape centres? tell me what happened to sweden tell me what happened to the Yazidis?

>>11324199
>>11324185
god you are one self deceiving little fuck aren't you
I thought it was just larp but seems you really are that deluded.

>>11324206
Tell me your excuse for catholic priests.

>>11324212
So what you're saying is that every nation in the world has the same access to education nutrition.

>>11324221
please explain interracial adoption studies or why the kids of chinese janitors are so smart.

>>11324226
Those kids were 12 years old. There's no magic that can fix 12 years of low education and nutrition.

>>11324217
Why would I want to excuse paedos and catholic priests?
why don't you want acknowledge all of the rapes and crime carried out by these invasive groups?

>>11324175

Look, that's not what my religion is about.

Lol I know you wont believe it but let's take the word jihad.

You just think to yourself what it implied to you.

Now to me, jihad means struggle.. it is primarily used in the sense of struggle against self.

Basically imo my enemy is my "self".. while many people are comfortable with the things they put forward into the world.. I am more wary.. the following of desire or ignorance of sin is the problem.

It becomes a little all consuming in the end..

You are just a reflection of me.

As long as I keep myself from gods wrath..

Your transgressions are truly your own.

>>11324228
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lev8dGnxvdw

>>11324230
explain all the rapes, crime and terror?

>>11324199
It is pretty astounding that you're claiming that selection pressure for the intelligence which IQ tests for was exactly the same in all regions of all continents. Do you also think that all people will be the same height given the same conditions? The same ability to function at high altitudes? The same reaction times? Do you believe that the mind is separate from the body, is that it?

>>11324231
Nobody denied that there is a genetic component to intelligence. It has nothing to do with race, and your video doesn't prove otherwise.

>>11324233
It's possible. But you would have to deny all environmental factors to IQ to assume it happened by race the way you want it to.

>>11324235
are you larping here? your convictions seem oddly shallow

>>11324231
Did you not watch your own video? 11:00

>>11324240
Just appealing to the consensus. Even Herrnstein and Murray say "the high heritability of IQ within races does not necessarily mean that the cause of differences between races is genetic."

>>11324232

No, I'm not writing a bloomin book.

Let's just go to the end..

You have the problems.. rape, crime, terror.

Its your solution and its application that defines who you are..

I'm a brown guy sitting in a room of 10 to 20 high energy white guys.

I dont think we are in the same level anon.

>>11324251
yes he's saying that the starkness of genetic difference becomes more even pronounced the more you equalise environmental factors
which is consistent with what we've been saying.
I'm not sure what you're trying to make?

>>11324262

No I will not fkin blow up..

I actually have a life.

>>11324264
Environmental factors aren't currently equal for all races right now bud.

>>11324262
then educate yourself on what your co religionists do, and stop playing the victim

>>11324272
What about you?

>>11324271
Are you doing this deliberately? they are more equal now in some places than ever and yet we see stark differences between racial performance in the more equal places.

>>11324278
What about me?

>>11322821
Ensure a genius gene pool. Although I question op's methods, as the genetic product is only a small part of the formula for these super humans.

>>11324230
Thanks for chiming in. I would appreciate your opinion on some more things, if you please:
How do you feel about the 9/11 attacks, were they justified? The U.S was meddling in Muslim countries a lot (among others), wasn't it good that they got hit back just once?
How do you feel about Israel? Do you think it deserves to exist or if i you could push a button would you teleport all those Jews somewhere else to live?
Do you support death for apostates? If not, do you support death for those who kill apostates?
Do you support honor killings of daughters found to be doing stuff the dad didn't want them to do? If not, do you support death for the dads who do that?

>>11324279
>yet we see stark differences between racial performance in the more equal places.
On the rare occasions you do get a black and white kid in the same schools with similar family history, the changes are quite small.

>>11322785
Just make it so only people with an IQ of 100 are allowed to reproduce.

>>11324279
>they are more equal now in some places than ever
>they are more equal now
>in some places
>than ever
More equal is not equal and also prove that the gap hasn't narrowed with equality.

>>11324284
Nobody that shares an identity or ideology with you ever does bad things?

>>11324297
What about over 100?

>>11324199
>Yes when given the same conditions
False. There is no evidence of this at all and it is well known that IQ is mostly genetic.

>>11324300
It is hard to miss it, it's rammed down our throats by others at every opportunity.

>>11324296
And I'm not implying that those two factors account for the entirety of race-based environmental factors, not even close.

>>11324302
No. Exactly 100. Can't have them be too smart

>>11324304
>There is no evidence of this at all
There's no evidence against it being the case.
>it is well known that IQ is mostly genetic.
Prove it.

>>11324310
read any reputable book on the subject.

Genes set the potential the environment sets the limits.

>>11324306
So why aren't you doing anything to stop them?

>>11324313
Do you think the bell curve is reputable? What's your criteria for reputable books?

>>11324313
Lol. Gene-environment interactions are much more complex than that.

>>11324316
I think the Bell curve is out dated but vindicated

>>11324325
OK,
>If the reader is now convinced that either the genetic or environmental explanation has won out to the exclusion of the other, we have not done a sufficiently good job of presenting one side or the other. It seems highly likely to us that both genes and environment have something to do with racial differences. What might the mix be? We are resolutely agnostic on that issue; as far as we can determine, the evidence does not yet justify an estimate.

>>11324317
....explain height to me

>>11324329
Broad racial differences in success are likely genetically influenced, later genetic and psychometric research has strengthened that position.

>>11324338
No it hasn't. Later research has strengthened the position that within groups of people with similar levels of education and nutrition the genetic component increases.

>>11324330
Height is monumentally simpler than intelligence, but still decently complex. People's genes can respond differently to diets, exercises, and general lifestyles. There's no optimal gene or optimal environment.

>>11324310
>There is no evidence against
That's not how science works. You made the claim. There is no reason to think they would be the same.

>>11324291

9/11 may have been anything.. by that I mean whatever the reason for it..

It was a bad move.

Imagine the world as a machine, at the very surface is a layer of cogs.. all different shapes and sizes.

The role you play may be beyond your comprehension.. for all intents and purposes it is reality..

The goals we persue may have any cost, which is worth thinking about.

Your presumption of me being anti american is one that I dont agree with..

The explanation is that religion is what you make it, pick up the book and you can justify any way of living.

What I remember is that you should not be unjust to a people simply because you dislike them.. or part of them..

Loosely paraphrased.

The religion says that only the god fearing people are successful.. those that understand humility and patience.

If america was in the middle east then the middle east should have thought about something better for themselves.. for tomorrow.

The irony of isreal is that it has created a people almost as persecuted as they were.. they can justify the actions they take but who's to say it should be any different?

Personally, the place has seen bloodshed throughout history.

My button is even more far fetched than yours..

One state with a new ruler.

All the people can stay though.

All the other questions boil down to this, we live our lives staring into the void..

Life truly starts when it starts staring back..

We should all hope not to have already ruined things before that day.

Hope that helps.

That took ages.

>>11324345
But similar to intelligence there is a sub-optimal environment which would be one with lots of malnutrition and disease.

>>11324346
It can't be tested until full equality of opportunity is reached. Get to work.

>>11324353
False. Simple adoption studies could and have shown otherwise.

>>11323032
What do you mean general knowledge? I doubt we're talking about that kind

>>11324356
Full circle yay let's have another 50 posts about the same thing

>>11324359
only because you refuse to see that you're wrong

>>11324348
Yeah for sure

>>11324356
But they didn't show otherwise, they showed that black or biracial children raised in a better environment do better.

>>11324310
Summary of Minnesota Twins Study results (twins raised separately from an early age), showing IQ is 70% genetic, 30% environmental
>https://www.livescience.com/47288-twin-study-importance-of-genetics.html
it was controversial, as demonstrated by you among others, so an updated study was done which found the same thing

>https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052702304898704577478482432277706
>"In other words, hygienic, well-fed life enables people to maximize their genetic potential so that the only variation left is innate. Intelligence becomes significantly more heritable when environmental hurdles to a child's development have been dismantled."

Note that they do not say the difference disappears, but it then comes down to the majority influence of genetics. That's the normal state of things when environmental factors are removed:variations become mostly due to genetics.

https://www.livescience.com/19692-genes-brain-size-intelligence.html
brain size and intelligence linked to certain genes

>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Transracial_Adoption_Study
speaks for itself

Humans have different skin color because after the genetic bottleneck, at which point it would be fair to say that people were all about equally intelligent, they fucked off to different places and made their homes there. In the north, people survived and thrived who had lighter skin bc it helped absorb Vit D, where harsh winters meant that cooperation, planning, and discipline were rewarded. In the mountains people survived and thrived who had excellent cardio mutations. In the sunny places, people survived and thrive whose skin was more resistant to sun damage, food was often easier to come by.

But if you test all these groups, they will all land smack dab on the middle 100.00 of the IQ scale because despite all the other gene changes, despite the fact that studies show that IQ is highly linked to genes,and *more so* when environmental factors are removed than when present...

>>11324366
You say parental quality (even when adopted at a later age) is the end all be all of a good environment, while adoption studies say simply having good parents is only a small but helpful part.

Time to fuck off

...it would hurt someone's fee fees if it turns out that we're not all born exactly the same in precisely one aspect out of all the countless thousands of things that might characterize a human being

>>11324386
yet they're perfectly happy to blame straight white men as racist, and sexist perpetuators of oppression against minorities and women

>>11324379
>Transracial adoption study.
>It is essential to note, however, that the groups also differed significantly (p < .05) in their placement histories and natural mother's education. Children with two black parents were significantly older at adoption, had been in the adoptive home a shorter time, and had experienced a greater number of preadoption placements. The natural parents of the black/black group also averaged a year less of education than those of the black/white group, which suggests an average difference between the groups in intellectual ability. There were also significant differences between the adoptive families of black/black and black/white children in father's education and mother's IQ.

>>11324383
hang on anon did we get crossed somewhere I was arguing that adoption studies show the racial difference in IQ as genetic

>>11324387
Well genetically whites are more racist and sexist than other races.

>>11324392
Isn't that the opposite of the truth?

>>11324390
You say slapping an abused black kid into a smart white family should mean his environment has been instantly optimized and now only his genes hold him back. That's fucking dumb, and thankfully the adoption studies would agree.

>>11324394
I lied about the sexist part.

>>11324379
Learn more about heritability. It describes variation in a specific environment for a specific population. Heritability can change and observed outcomes can change with environmental changes.

>>11324347
Thanks for your response, you speak in what looks to me like riddles though so I only understood a small part of your intentions. That's alright.
>Your presumption of me being anti american is one that I dont agree with..
I didn't necessarily think you're that (ok I presumed it with my questions but I don't assume it of Muslims in general) but what I think is that you're more pro-Islam than pro-American. I'd guess at 97%+ of American Muslims would choose ideological loyalty to Islam over America. As Islam grows more powerful over time, that distinction will become more and more important. America was founded as a Christian nation, ostensibly with religious freedom for all (though at the time that was mostly understood to be various wacky offshoots of Christianity). Life liberty and the pursuit of happiness are considered sacred. What of someone who does not value their life because they are promised paradise if they give it up for the cause? That's not an American ideal, it's anti-American. What if someone else's right to draw a cartoon infringes on your beliefs, will you accept violence against them to stop it? It's a sacred duty not to let Him be profaned. Are you more Pro-Islam or pro-American then? You don't need to answer unless you want to, it's irrelevant. I know the answer for the majority of Muslims. If a daughter's pursuit of happiness causes her to elope and marry someone who is forbidden and leave the religion, would you believe in the American ideal or the Islamic Ideal?

>The irony of isreal is that it has created a people almost as persecuted as they were.. they can justify the actions they take but who's to say it should be any different?
Yeah they're morally hypocritical in that, among other things

In America your environment growing up does not matter. Your success depends entirely on your IQ.

>>11324418
>you speak in what looks to me like riddles though so I only understood a small part of your intentions. That's alright.
I didn't intend this sarcastically although that's what it looks like now on reread, sorry about that

>>11324148
>How a about a high iq dating website
check out the Sapio app

Also of interest to this thread: 23andMe crossed with Okcupid: https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/dec/16/dating-app-genetic-matching-not-eugenics-scientist-says

>>11324418
>America was founded as a Christian nation, ostensibly with religious freedom for all (though at the time that was mostly understood to be various wacky offshoots of Christianity)
The founding fathers were well aware of Islam, which was a dominant world religion at the time. They were fine with it.

>>11324226

Not him but I'm pretty sure interracial adoption studies bypass one step that wasn't fully understood until recently. The health of the birth mother during prenatal period for the adopted child in question is critical. In other words the IQ potential of the child could have easily been suppressed (by sub-optimal nutrition and/or exposure to moderate-high levels of cortisol stress hormones) before they were adopted thus even in a optimal raising environment they wouldn't reach the potential they should have gotten. The studies already prove that early adoption vs late adoption yielded different IQ results (early adoptions got higher IQ). The quality of the prenatal stage for adopted kids can easily have further ramifications involving IQ.

As far as the kids of Chinese janitors from Shanghai it should be notated that those kids attend a school system that demands +14 hour days. It would make sense they would do better compared to kids in Canada who have less hours in the school day.

>>11324233

Given the same exact conditions, yeah all populations would be the same or if differed previously in the past will converge given enough time. Population dynamics basically agrees with this view point.

The issue is when the populations experience different environments for generations or deal with a bottleneck their genome changes. Bringing said populations back to a general parity may require inducing similar experiences. So on top of better nutrition, education and hygiene infrastructure experiences such as losing roughly 30% of your population to a major disease maybe necessary to achieve parity. This is ofcourse strictly focusing on comparing and matching current and previous experiences between populations.

>>11324436
>fine with it
america's first war was with them, it's the origin of the USMC

>>11324392
>>11324404
but blacks are statistically the most racist?

>>11324446
>losing roughly 30% of your population to a major disease maybe necessary to achieve parity.
you're insane

>>11324392
anyone who thinks that either only speaks English and not a second language, or is being disingenuous. Everybody is racist af, some whites curb it, a higher percentage than in any other race IMO. I'm not 100% sure on that last part, but they are definitely not the most racist

>>11324459
America's first war was the revolution, against the Christian British. The Barbary wars were equally as religion-motivated, ie not at all. They were fine with Islam.

>>11324468

I notated this is strictly focusing on comparing and matching current and previous experiences. Obviously there are better and more humane ways to reach parity. But a major disease wiping out 30% of Europe was a real condition that did occurr. And said condition if experienced in another population can put said population on track to parity.

>>11324446
That's a point I forgot about. There is 100% certainty of genetic drift from different fatal epidemics in different regions. To maintain that these had no effect on regional intelligence compared to other regions is just simply wishful thinking. It's extremely improbable that things would have worked out that way

>>11324471
Americas first war was against the white invaders, they lost.

>>11322827
Henri Cartan and his father Élie Cartan
Grothendieck and his son
Adrien Douady and his son Raphaël
And that's just naming recent french mathematicians because that's what I know, I'm sure there are similar cases in every discipline and every country

>>11324374
But no where near the level of whites. Even the best black environment doesn't match whites. Considering IQ is 80 to 90% genetic and given that races differ genetically (both physically and mentally) there is no reason to believe that all races would have the same IQ.

>>11322854
For society at large.

>>11322982
>people with an IQ higher than 145 are in the 85th percentile of IQ

>>11324816
it's 99%,right?

>>11324818
99.86%

>>11324827
Yeah,no thanks,there's no need to deny reproduction to 99.86% of all the humans. Just refuse to allow the subhumans from reproducing

>>11322785
That's only like a quarter of a percent of the population, isn't it? We could probably give them four wives, and pay them $250k to have children. A eugenics program that boosts birthrates by the top 1% and sterilizes the bottom 1% is probably the most socially feasible. Most people don't care what you do as long as it doesn't effect them personally.

>>11324839
sounds good,what about the top 3%?

>>11324841
Polygamy is super dangerous sociologically, so I wouldn't expand it beyond the 145's. Then again, we could use surrogates to bypass this; though, I don't know how many women would be willing to act as surrogates, so it may not work. But definitely give monetary stipends to 130+'s who have children. And of course guarantee them an all expenses paid university education, guarantee them a good job in their field upon graduation, and make it super easy for them to become officers in the military.

>>11324256
>Even Herrnstein and Murray say "the high heritability of IQ within races does not necessarily mean that the cause of differences between races is genetic."

Yes, and that's why they are worth taking seriously. But there is evidence that there are meaningful genetic factors to IQ and not much particular reason to not believe this.

>>11324855
>and that's why they are worth taking seriously.

Would they not be worth taking seriously if they believed that the differences in IQ between ethnic groups is heritable?

>>11324234
>It has nothing to do with race
You literally have 0 evidence to support this

>>11324418

Hey anon,
>but what I think is that you're more pro-Islam than pro-American.
This is everything wrong with the world today.

Pro-Islam.

What is that even? Wants to get so big it rules the world?

Pro-America? What is that even? Is inadvertently and by accident big enough to rule the world?

Your understanding of what sht is and what it says it is..and what people say it is..

Is beyond arguing with.

>>11322785
Sounds like a fresh pastime.
Is there anything on the (convex?) face of the earth that isn't a pastime?

>>11324854
tfw you're too low iq to have 4 wives but smart enough to have your studies subsidized.

>>11322785
IQ threads should be banned.

>>11324888
you are gay

>>11322785
>16 offspring
too many. 3 to replenish & grow the number of kids the parents had and then only a few more more to start mixing outside the program
plus studies show that intelligence is mostly just normal people with highly specialized skills and IQ correlated only very loosely to success

>>11322984
It always confused me that ants, bees, and termites specialize so carefully but few species cared about that kind of thing
maybe this is our chance? We have the ability to segregate genetics along with particular jobs. Why not start breeding a select lineage of humans for high intellect in order to create superhuman intelligence?
We did it with dogs for great effect, so we should do it with humans.

>>11324881

not many people can get away with having 4 wives or juggling 4 wives or maintaining 4 wives.

..i cant even jerk of without people getting upset.

>>11324903
But I want 4 wives REEEEE

Joking. I actually want one woman who'd love me from the bottom of her heart. Kinda hard to find

>>11324879

sorry anon i dont think you will grasp the concept of what i am trying to say so i will try again.

imagine you and i..we are scientists living in a world of scientists.

a lot of people have worked hard to establish the society we live in based on science.

but within it are voices that see something else, they pursue other understandings.

putting forward things that may change the world in any number of ways, for better or worse.

but the fundamental principles and laws of the universe.. the way sht works..

would be the same right?

for those to change.. requires something else.

it requires voices of descent, that skew the world view they have.. as a cost.

but this is neither here nor there because its not what you know that will put people off but rather how you explain it.

back to me.. some of the most profound and enlightening things i have read have been from the bible.. world changers.

reinforcing my "Islamic" views.. if anytime you want to mention ANY specific religion, you just put.. THE RELIGION instead, then you may take a step towards understanding where i stand.

1.other perspectives are that over time and with government, the bible was corrupted.

2.the quran supersedes the bible and so has everything we need to know, you dont have to study backwards compatibility.

and maybe a few other understandings also.

if my understanding or any of the ones above have any bearing on anything i do not know.

>>11324953
Explain to me why I should care about any abrahamic death cult especially one that views a 7th century warlord as the "perfect muslim" and guide to live by?

>>11324973
>Explain to me why I should care

?

only you know what you care about.

>>11324130
There's no reason to associate with a religion just to install sabbath as part of your personal tradition, just like there's no need to be religious to have strong morals. Also, regardless of the source, routines like these tend to quickly become tradition.

stop trying to interfere with natural selection and evolution because you can't

>>11325082
????

Why not?

>>11325082
look anon they're already interfering with natural selection by inadvertently supporting dysgenic policies
those where both parents are on welfare are the only group with above replacement birth rates

>>11325082
Because OP is stupid, he believes that with science alone the society will eventually reach the ultimate economic system where there will be enough resources for everyone

>>11322848
>raising the average IQ
So this is the power of the /pol/yp brain....

>>11323054
if they haven't that begs the question of why even bother publishing your research if nothing can be concluded from it

>>11322785
sounds like a good idea, however, only if you kill yourself first with how retarded your sentence structuring is.

>>11322848
do you not realise the possible consequences of what might occur in terms of genetics and the welfare of the offspring, if you kept on raising the average. Rethink this point of view because clearly you are just trying to push a solipstic agenda onto everyone. If this is bait, however, kindly please drink cyanide.

>>11324903
>women
>love you for you
Fictional speak should be punishable, as it only perpetuates the bluepill ideology.

>>11322985
If the black African IQ is 15 higher than what they recorded, then it's about the same as the African American IQ, 85. This means that improving nutrition and education (matching American standards) will not make them smarter, and they are stuck and their genetically retarded 85 IQ average unless they implement eugenics.

>>11326250
>Implying black Americans receive the same nutrition and education as whites on average.
Ok.

>>11326259
As long as they are genetically stupider, they will never close the gap on non-genetic factors because they are not smart enough to make equivalent choices or money. African Americans are as close to white standards as Africans will ever get with their current genetic quality.

You should take physically healthy and strong people with >120 IQ and physically not compromised people with >140 IQ and breed them instead

>>11322788
fpbp

based and took the wokepill

>>11326310
fxck these ugly academics

>>11326267
>African Americans are as close to white standards as Africans will ever get with their current genetic quality.
You're basically saying environmental factors don't exist in today's society. No scientist would agree with your assessment.

I would change your criteria to 120IQ+ creative people. High IQ autists without creativity is wagecuck tier.

Why won't we just raise every jewish kid with the optimal conditions and avoid mixing? Their originality is second to non.

>>11326259
that small increase based on flynn's effect still doesn't change IQ on a racial basis. >>11326250
Thank you anon for pointing this out, was going to post it

>>11322788
Brave and stunpilled

>>11326388
The head-start that whites had gave them the lead but it is rapidly decreasing.

>>11326407
Whole thread ignored the best post

Bunch a ugly fxckers thinking they can determine humanity's path

>>11326421
source: My ass

>47 posters

>>11326481
What are you talking about Flynn is slowing down or reversing in rich white communities. Whereas developing nations are continuing to rise.

>>11322785
>pro isreal
literally

>>11326323
No, I'm saying environmental factors are still influenced by genes, so cannot be completely resolved without fixing the genes. Environmental factors are also small enough that African Americans, who still have a radically improved environment over Africans, have not cognitively benefited much from it.

>muh IQ
Never been tested, probably average IQ, but i guarantee i'm more successful than fags on here trying to cope with their 140+ meme IQ. IQ doesnt make you better than anyone else if you dont work hard and post on /sci/ all day. Cringe thread.

>>11326620
>African Americans, who still have a radically improved environment over Africans, have not cognitively benefited much from it.
But that's not true.

>>11326620
>environmental factors are still influenced by genes
We live in a society. Your environment is shaped by others, but especially those in powerful positions. Those people have the power to create good environments for blacks if they wanted to.

>>11326638
How you respond to those environmental pressures is a genetic matter

>>11326638
>>11326850
we need to make a poll about this

>>11326638
That's what the people in power have been trying to do since the 60s, with fuckall to show for it. You cannot help people who can't hold up their end of the deal to help themselves. They are not smart enough to make good decisions (or execute on them) regarding nutrition, child raising, education, employment, etc.

>>11326627
If the African IQ is 70, then they are too far behind to ever approach whites. If it is significantly higher like some say, then African Americans are not much smarter, meaning environment doesn't help much. In either case, blacks are stupid and environment can't fix that.

>>11327255
Lol. Just as many, if not more people actively fight against that. It's been the focus of the Republican party since.... the 60's, starting with Nixon. The Southern Strategy has been a political success.

>>11322855
135 iq midwits would build a robot to mop the floors

>>11327315
As long as blacks behave poorly, which is genetic, other races will hate them and want to keep them away. The only way to solve racism is with eugenics.

>>11325835
kek

>>11322985
So why even poor Asian countries have higher IQ than African countries ?

>>11322785
You need a more thorough understand of the effects of Nature and Nurture to avoid accidental selection of maladaptive traits. If you ended up making people with poor physical conditions but high IQ breed, you might cause a total population collapse at some point down the line. You also have to more clearly understand Regression To The Mean, where children of bright parents "regress" to average IQ.

There are other problems. High IQ people tend to hate low skilled jobs and they get very disobedient if forced to do them. It is thus critical to maintain a relatively low IQ labor force if you want to build space ships (while having your high IQ guys design them.)

The safer choice for now would be to hold contests where excellence in mathematics and engineering is celebrated and rewarded. Let the breeders breed and the thinkers think.

>>11330625
the best option is to mimic nature and use the bottom up approach, where those least fit are eliminated, gradually improving the health of the gene pool.

>>11322985
So you won't have a problem with white people self segregating, right? Or is it your belief that white people are evil when in white communities but good when in mixed communities?

All the hysterical criticisms of research into IQ are desperate copes by people who are afraid of what will be proven in the future. You are not afraid of Murray per se. You are afraid that objective measures will be developed, if not already, and that you will be revealed to be on the lower half of the curve. I've seen Murray speak in person. He can think circles around the "How dare you attempt to measure human intelligence!?" crowd.

What are you afraid will be found out about human intelligence? Face that fear before you open your mouth.

>>11330681
Nobody cares about people's IQ except for race realists.

>>11322785
The bell curve is junk science. Their data wasn't even in a 'bell curve', they had to warp the test score axis to get it to appear as such.

>>11330540
You can roughly sort countries IQ by sorting GDP per capita.

>>11330885
North korea and russia don't fit that model. Neither does eastern europe.

>>11330869
lol

>>11330906
communism destabilized the nations with their concept of equity which were a disadvantage to individuals with high intelligence. With Cambodia being the extreme example with Pol Pot killing the most intelligent, and the opposite being DDR which favored intelligence by giving the intelligent benefits.

>>11322819
Is there a video of the rest of this?

>>11330906
Or Norway and Qatar.

>>11331416
Oil states or extraction economy states?

>>11322785
Please just do it so you can realise it somehow causes vampires with down syndrome or some shit and finally shut up about this eugenics retardation.

>>11331402
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ixyVNxUwoxw

it's all in romanian unfortunately

>>11332864
Romanians are pretty cool other than the gypsies.

>>11322985
Source on any of this?