/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12048382
It's a slippery slope situation where everyone in the Anthro world knows deep down that Abbos aren't really the same species as us but they're terrified of the implications of coming out and saying it explicitly because then the next logical step would be to classify Bantus and other sub-saharan Africans as a different species and that would touch off the shitstorm to end all shitstorms.

>>12048382
at best they're still homo sapiens but not homo sapiens sapiens.
especially since we can reproduce with them.
also do any aussies know their crime data in comparison to the native/dominant populous (whites/asians)?
>>12048412
why is that bad though?
just because they're categorized as a subspecies of sapiens doesn't change much.
they're still human, we've considered a lot worse human.
and depending on who you are you might consider gorillas human (I mean it's wrong, but whatever).
Homo Sapiens Bantu
Homo Sapiens Aborigini
It wouldn't affect the law, due to the equal protection clause

>>12048412
Why would Bantus be considered as a separate group? Wasn't there genetic flow with other groups in Africa to make this a very different scenario than that of the Australian Aboriginals?

>>12048457
>why is that bad though?
Not him but come on, you know why.
There's massive amounts of political pressure on scientists to deny that human subspecies exist, to declare otherwise would be to nuke your carreer and social life entirely.

>>12048382

Language.

Prove me wrong.

If you take a non-disabled baby of any race, place it in any culture and it grows up speaking the language of that culture --> homo sapiens sapiens

>>12048521
Evidence suggests that neanderthals could most likely speak so i kinda doubt your hypothesis.
It's a weak claim anyway, you're attributing too much meaning to an ability that has no reason to inherently be tied to only homo sapiens sapiens, why should a closely related species not be able to learn our languages?

>>12048549
>why should a closely related species not be able to learn our languages?

I don't know? Why did you never hear even a chimp or a bonobo utter a sentence in english or mandarin?

>>12048560
Because they lack that soundy thing in their throats

>>12048560
Because they're not evolved to do that.

>>12048515
>Not him but come on, you know why.
I don't know why.
I don't see how a simple, trivial fact or categorization is at all very meaningful to anything else than itself.
Humans are bound to turn into different species eventually, we're a subspecies to the early sapiens.

>>12048560
You do realize that this ties into physiological hindrances of the species, and is not solely because of their mental limitations, right?

>>12048587
I agree obviously, but as i mentioned, that simple fact is currently considered verboten.
Nobody wants to end their carreer just to acknowledge this and even if they did, they wouldn't be taken seriously and their work would be memoryholed.

>>12048560
We can deduce parts of chimps and dolphins communications.
in general chimps just don't speak like us.
also chimps are more than just a different species.
It's a poor assumption based off even shittier assumptions.
how are you retarded enough to even think of that?
different human sub species would still be humans and thus extremely similar especially in thier biological functions.

>>12048598
why would it end their careers there's nothing wrong or bad about it.
also ethics and morals aren't real especially in science.

>>12048466
Yes, there was gene flow between populations IN Africa, but collectively they're even farther from the rest of the Eurasian human populations than the aborigines are.

>>12048521
And coyotes and wolves can communicate enough to fuck and produce viable offspring, but does that stop us from classifying them as different species?

>>12048629
Then it's the Europeans and others who aren't Homo Sapiens Sapiens since they don't live in Africa plus the Africans have more genetic diversity between themselves. Do you realize how stupid your argument is?

>>12048667
Pygmy africans are a different subspecies.
yes there are FAR more sub species than we acknowledge
Using sapiens sapiens would be outdated then, so there would be no sapiens, they'd probably just be labeled by their genetic clusters.

>>12048679
So are the north Koreans who have stopped growing tall, they are not a subspecies you idiot, they're just isolated within the jungle and have been reproducing within themselves. Plus they're a very tiny population within the vast central African rainforest region. That's why Africans are so diverse, the people that settled there never moved, either because they got everything they need or because of wars of territories. Only in the modern world can we move and intermarry with anybody.

>>12048697
You didn't say anything that argues against what I said.

species/subspecies are all retarded subjective classifications in the first place, who gives a fuck
yeah we use totally different standards for classifying organisms in different areas, but taxonomy is always a messy clusterfuck and always has been and always will be

>>12048704
What you're trying to prove is that they have inferior iq. I could argue the same about north Koreans and make them as different from the south Koreans. If you don't see a problem there, then you're a brainlet.

>>12048723
>What you're trying to prove is that they have inferior iq.
When did I say that? never. It's nothing more than an interest in a proper categorization. Using genetic clusters IMO is better than bone shape, height, and other phenotypical shit.
>>12048715
An accurate genetic record would be very valuable.

>>12048723
>What you're trying to prove is that they have inferior iq.
Not him but, yeah?
That's not even debatable, IQ distribution is objectively different among ethnic groups.

>>12048734
yeah genetics are valuable and useful, but going from genetics to taxonomy it's always going to be a big subjective judgement about which things should be classified together and which shouldn't and the resulting classifications don't provide any value other than giving you a convenient name to refer to them with
it's just stupid shit to be wasting energy on, you can sperg out about the actual underlying differences and population genetics all day but throwing shitfits about pointless taxonomic issues is botanist tier autism

>>12048607
Are you autistic or stupid. Its CONSIDERED bad because modern society values feelings over truth, even in science.

>>12048382
>How come we classify homo neanderthalensis as a different species but not australian aboriginals?
Ok. So you might have a case scientifically (I dunno enough to say), but there's no way this can be good in terms of politics or ethics. The social sciences and biology are political in nature, and politics must be taken into account in these fields. If you want objective truth, study math, physics, or chemistry.

>>12048382
>>Jews take over
>>common sense because hate speech

>>12048382
>How come we classify homo neanderthalensis as a different species but not australian aboriginals?
Homo neanderthalensis had the brain volume of up to 1600cm^3 while Homo sapiens has 1400cm^3.
This is a good enough trait for a separate "species" (the definition of species is retarded).
We can all breed, so we're one species, that's all.
Modern human at all cost tries not to be an ape, even though it means bending the definition of species and denying humanity to our ancestors.

>>12048883
>Homo neanderthalensis had the brain volume of up to 1600cm^3 while Homo sapiens has 1400cm^3.
>This is a good enough trait for a separate "species" (the definition of species is retarded).
That's funny you should say that because abos happen to have a brain volume of 1200cm^3.

>>12048782
>don't provide any value other than giving you a convenient name to refer to them with
I have the sense you know nothing about data.
what's your major?
>>12048814
>Are you autistic or stupid
yes
>Its CONSIDERED bad because modern society values feelings over truth
and how would that affect science?
things are true regardless.
if you measure IQ difference between different distinct genetic cluster groups of people and they varied it's simply factual data that they varied.
the same way IQ doesn't really imply anything other than an ability to solve shitty puzzles, and anything else is simply conjecture.

>>12048955
>how would that affect science

im glad you asked! you see in the early half of the twentieth century a jewish activist masquerading as a scientist had one of his gentile students write book, her name was margaret mead and her book was titled "Coming of Age in Samoa" it was filled with half truths and outright lies, but gained popularity because every board worth owning was stacked with fellow tribesmen. Boas was an activist not a scientist and was openly hostile towards the scientific method, he and his fellow tribesmen hated "scientific racism" and enacted a plan to get rid of it by lying and supporting each others lies. Freud was a similar character (from the same tribe) and since then the social sciences have been waging war on actual sciences for a hundred years! pushing nonsensical "cultural" explanations where evolution more than sufficiently explains phenomena.

>>12048382
even africans aren't really the same species as us. there's like four major groups: homo sapiens caucasoid, homo sapiens mongoloid, homo sapiens negroid, and homo sapiens australoid. there is a ton of admixture between caucasoids and mongoloids where their borders meet, and there is Australoid admixture in the indian population. africans didn't really mix with other ethnic groups until the slave trades.

>>12048457
https://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/law/aboriginal-prison-rates

"Aboriginal people are massively overrepresented in the criminal justice system of Australia. They represent only 3% of the total population, yet more than 29% of Australia's prison population are Aboriginal."

>>12048457
>It wouldn't affect the law, due to the equal protection clause

>Implying equal protection stands a chance at surviving in an era when the races are acknowledged as different subspecies.

>>12048457
the secret is that governments actively want to cultivate the less intelligent subspecies of humans because they are easier to control and subjugate

>>12048457
Abbo caucasoid hybrids are also proof positive that Indians and other South Asians are the result of caucasoid/australoid hybridization.

>>12048382
Because neandethels were "Whites", while aboriginals were "Blacks". And you're asking us why leftist academics are favoring one over the other?

>>12048990
TL;DR
>>12049004
impressive
>>12049012
it would
and the supreme court could easily make it that way even if it was questioned.
>>12049017
but stupid people never listen.
>>12049028
what's the genetic data on that?

>>12049017
You're joking, but you don't even realize how real this strategy is.
The reason why leftists have a fetish for blacks over whites is because they realize whites are their biggest competitor.
Think of it this way:
imagine if we started saying that cats are people and should be treated equally to us. Is that going to displace you? No! No matter how "inclusive" a workplace is for cats, a person will always have an advantage over a cat.
Similarly, no matter how inclusive a workplace is for niggers, a white man will always have the upper hand in that workplace.
Well not always, the bottom 25% of whites, for ex. But using blacks to take out other competing whites is a profitable strategy for whites who won't be displaced.

>>12048883
>We can all breed, so we're one species, that's all.
we could breed with neanderthals too brainlet.

>>12048607
Because there is a current taboo on the matter. Do you understand the meaning of the word "taboo"? Acknowledging the existence of races/subspecies within humans is culturally forbidden due to fear of supremacist ideologies and asymmetrical power relationships.

>>12049059
This is actually smart.

Because genetics is nuanced and 50,000 years isn't exactly a long time on an evolutionary timescale.

>>12049236
It is a very long period of time brainlet speciation in animals can happen in 10,000 years or less. Genetic clusters are evidence for subspecies of homo sapiens

define species

>>12049250
>It is a very long period of time
This is how I know your knowledge of evolutionary biology doesn't go past high school biology.

>>12049250
>Genetic clusters are evidence for subspecies of homo sapiens
This is correct. But like I said, genetics is a nuanced science. Human taxonomy has a complicated/controversial past.

Either way, I highly recommend you read or rent some books on the subjects of evolution and the human genome. They're really interesting topics and then you'd be able to contribute something more substantial to the conversation.

>>12049057
the short version is boas, freud and other jews infested the social sciences and fucked em all up.

>>12049170
women exposing thier bodies for money is no longer taboo right now but saying there is identifiable genetic differences between different genetic groups exists is bad?
>>12049620
>social science
>science

>>12049632
Why the fuck do you keep asking people this as if they're defending that position you nigger?
Nobody here was saying it's "bad", they're saying society at large considers it bad and people would risk destroying their lives by going against that publicly.
This has been explained to you like half a dozen times by different people in this thread now.

>>12049644
You're overvaluing yourself.

>>12049632
have you ever been diagnosed with an autism spectrum disorder?

>>12049057
>it would
>and the supreme court could easily make it that way even if it was questioned.

Jesus Chrsit you are stupid. People will flaunt the laws with incredible ease on top making life harder for groups hat are inferior. My roommate faces a lot of shit at his white collar job for being black and this would just make it spread or amplify it.

>>12049658
No. My mother got me tested for autism at a young age, I am not autistic.

>>12049666
how can something that is true be insulting?
It's not science's problem if pussy ass niggas exists, we can just define them is all.

>>12048412

If the anthro thinks that then they failed at investigation. If native Americans are atleast 13000 years separated from Asia and Europe is 3000 years separated from Asia. Then what is aboriginal? If we know that South Asia has only until recently had influx of African genes. It was always the other way around. What does that say about East Africans? There was a report of a specific Hindu tribe wiped by entirety they weren’t even Hindus. They were from a tribe in east Africa. Targeted as Hindu. I find myself having this conversation with people and Ubermensching. How does it feel to take care of 100,000 children whom solely belong to 3,000 men or so. Why should you pay for that project? What’s the rush to do something like that? What do you weight it against in a futures market?

Aboriginal solely means phenotypr concentrating or enforcing population. By technicality. I don’t think any bone lasts past 4000 years. It disintegrates.

>>12049236
50k years ago neanderthals and other primitive humans still walked the earth and modern homo sapiens sapiens has only been around for 100k or so years.
Being isolated for 50k-75k years should certainly be enough to develop significant genetic deviation.
There is no european race with an average IQ in the 60s anywhere, not even close, that's below what we would generally consider severe mental disability.

>>12049674
>I am not autistic.
kek

>>12049689
what is funny?
it's true.

>>12049654
Talking to you is like playing chess with a pidgeon.

>>12048560
I knew parrots were human!
Gonna get my parrot gf soon enough.

>>12049706
I'm sorry you think of yourself as a pigeon, but there are some quite lovely pigeons out there.

>>12048955
>the same way IQ doesn't really imply anything other than an ability to solve shitty puzzles, and anything else is simply conjecture.
>pattern discerning and problem solving abilities are almost useless lmao

Is that why low iq is correlated with living in mudhuts and dying of starvations and high iq is correlated with the paradise on earth that is or was, Europe?

>>12048382
Until we can't produce fertile offspring with them, they will be part of our species. Your criterion for speciation sucks. Sorry!

>>12049724
>correlated
key term

>>12049755
Well, at this point it could be say that it's a conditio sine qua non since it's the ONLY FACTOR which correctly predicts success for a given race.

Pray tell, if IQ is not the real reason high IQ races became great superpowers and low IQ races haven't figured out boiling water to kill out pathogens yet, what is the real reason?

>>12048466
Because Bantu and West African blacks, ancestors mated with different archaic ape/humanoids multiple times most recently around 20 thousand years ago was the last mixing when Bantu tribes went on a massive genocide campaign of other genetically distinct African tribes and other humanoid species. Its even in their West African mythology of how their men kidnapped hairy tree dwellers and gang raped them. They are still trying to kill off the pygmy. This is also where we wuz kangz bullshit comes from because dumbass black supremacist couldn't comprehend their own mythology origin and thought the tree dwellers ape humanoids were "non-blacks" when blacks are rape babies of the tree dwellers. Genetic testing now backs this up.

West African Bantus are the worst thing ever to happen to Africa since they wiped out the more gentle humanoids.

>>12049736

Humans could breed with H. neanderthalensis, but they're considered to be a separate species

>>12048412
Pretty much this, there is more politics in human anthropology than climatology. Out of africa have fits if you point out abos look like neanderthals.

>>12048521
I have a hard time believing erectus was totally mute. Even chimps have calls that convey meanings.

Yes, niggers are evil

>>12049775
Likely multiple factors.

>>12049736
If your going by cross fertility, HSS, neanderthal, denisova, and a lot of late erectus would be homo sapiens. Abos are probably an admixture of archaic homo sapiens with a lot of Denisovan admixture. They are AHS at best, not HSS, in spite of being cross fertile.

>>12049885
Which are?

>>12049888
Many

>>12049889
Thanks for admitting defeat.

>>12049919
I didn't

>>12049888
purely economic factors

>>12049951
>yeah iq doesn't really mater
>>and what does then?
>uhh, like, many things, idk haha
>>12049968
Not relevant. We all started on the same terms since cavemen era, whites and asians had it rougher because of the climate, the enviroment selected for intelligence to manage resources to survive the winter, and this trait gave these people the edge required to slowly build their countries into superpowers.

Nothing you can mention: economics, socialwhateverbullshit, or anything is relevant since we all started on the same point.

>>12049708
yeah only a retard would try to play chess with a pigeon (retard being you, in case you didn't get it)

>>12049864
That's your takeaway from this thread?

>>12048382
They aren't even that bad you retard. Actual niggers are way worse than abos; even polynesians are more ape like than aboriginals. Aboriginals are quite introverted, Australians only hate them because we used to not have africans here; but that has since changed and a lot of aussies are waking up to just how much better it was when we only had aboriginals and not these ugly islanders and niggers roaming around in packs larping as african american gangsters.

>>12048521
When you let a sapiens grow up among neanderthals, it grows up autistic. Which is why there is such a denial that autism is almost exclusively a white mans disease. It only occurs among whites and nonwhites growing up among whites.

>>12049353
> 10 k years is not long enough
> thinking so, proves your ignorance

Dog breeds only diverged less than 10k years ago and differ dramatically in intelligence.

Askenazi Jews got their higher IQs within the last 2000 years.

50000 years is plenty of time. You need to understand that evolution works quite quickly in terms of selection i.e. change in the mix of a population. What is slower is the creation of novel and beneficial mutations.

>>12049017
>>12049059
It's becasue whites are wired to live in family units, not larger society.
The western society is basically held together by the rare few who are not like that, because a white feels zero obligation to the society and only cares about himself and nobody else.
Unlike almost everyone else, white brains are strictly serial in processing, which means that anything that involve combining several ideas or events together is virtually impossible for them. So no complex language, no morals, no higher emotions, no real empathy, not polyphonic music either.

>>12050143
>What is slower is the creation of novel and beneficial mutations.
This is the reason why every ethnicity is valuable, even if on average it seems worse off.

>>12050143
Dont forget that aboriginals (AHS) met and interbred with older Homo, including Denisova. A good dose of Kow Swamp/Mungo Man archaich DNA can make AHS look even older and more robust.

>>12050353
There was a recent genetic study (which I'm too lazy to link) that Khoisan people have up to 20% or more of DNA from an unknown archaic population.

>>12050360
Does this image have no digital changes? Does the woman REALLY look like that?

>>12049848
>I have a hard time believing erectus was totally mute. Even chimps have calls that convey meanings.
there is a difference between making simple sounds like animals and actual language, are you retarded?

>>12050393
UV is a hell of a drug

>>12050360
She's just old.

>>12048382
because humans can have fertile offspring with abos?

>>12050441
Different subspecies can do that. Some different species can too.

>>12049250
Animal reproduction tends to be a lot more frequent than human reproduction and humans migrate a lot more frequently and quickly than animals tend to.

Are there any comprehensive comparative anatomy and comparative genetic studies between say, for instance, native Amazonian tribes and aboriginal tribes?

>>12049059
Braindead post, anon. Proud of you.

>>12050148
Good to see our resident black schizo still posting, convince anyone of your Yamnaya hypothesis yet?

>>12048382
politics bro

>>12052194
>Animal reproduction tends to be a lot more frequent than human reproduction
True. But what they can do in less than 10000 years we sure can do in more than 50000. Just see how we evolved different phenotypes.
And if that wasn't enough, interbreeding with previously separated branches like Denisovans, Neanderthal and that unknown species for subsaharans, helped increase the timeframe of our differentiation.
>and humans migrate a lot more frequently and quickly than animals tend to.
That's not true.

>>12050406
>>12050419
Look at the midfacial flattening, muzzle like prognathism and small cranial volume. These are very archaic features. San people have very old DNA and a lot of archaic admixture according to recent studies.

>>12050402
The midpoint of that difference would be Erectus language which would have been very simple declarative present tense with words and phrases suitable to their violent and conflicted lifestyle. Along the lines of gimme that, that's mine, fuck you. Kind of like a slightly more basic version of ebonics.

(1/2) I could name a couple of arguments against it

1. Neanderthals' most recent common ancestor is much farther away than humans' most recent common ancestor. And even the status of neanderthals as a different species has been debated up to the present day due to not fitting the biological definition for different species. You'd have a much harder time arguing that is the case for populations of humans who are much more closely related and undoubtedly make fertile offspring.

2. IQ alone is insufficient to qualify for species differentiation. Any single parameter is. There are Europeans born as far as 2 standard deviations apart from each other, but you won't argue they're different species.

3. The figure 62 comes, to my knowledge, specifically from Richard Lynn, who takes a lot of methodological freedoms when coming up with IQ values. If https://www.human-intelligence.org/australian-aborigines/ are his sources, I invite you to look at each individual one. The first 4 precede the WAIS and many are in fact not IQ tests (Lynn has been called out before for extrapolating results from sources like test scores in Apartheid-era South Africa). Some are even coming to the conclusion that abos and low SES white children perform similarly ( https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/002202217100200409 ) A few more are done on aboriginals as remote as possible from civilization, and some are even studying people with nutritional deficiencies ( https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1985-27090-001 ), which are reasonably more likely to exist among people who don't live in urban areas at the grasp of the welfare state. It doesn't take a genius to imagine how such things may impact cognitive test results. This might be like comparing pre-industrialization Germans to modern Germans and concluding their height difference makes them different species.

(2/2)
More recent research on aboriginals going through the education system in recent times (see: this literature review http://www.andrewleigh.org/pdf/CognitiveGaps.pdf ) shows them mostly within a standard deviation in school performance tests, albeit indeed lower.These results are also confounded by the fact many abos today have some European admixture.

>>12053101
i knew a half abbo guy who was smart and talented but an alcoholic with big emotional problems. seems pretty typical for mixing with lesser evolved populations, whether black, indigenous american or austraian abbo. your entire genome just doesn't come from people who had to survive in harsh terrain, with low polygyny, etc

>>12048382
Taxonomy is semantics

We're all homo sapiens, but we're also a multitude of different subspecies on different degreees of divergence. Divergence leads to speciation. We're not there yet.

Neanderthals, Denisovans were more diverged than any modern human is to another, but we could still technically call them homo sapiens.

>>12053101
>many abos
The last full blooded tasmanian died in the 1930s. All Tasman aborigines alive today are biracial in spite of apperances. Biracial American blacks outperform dark chocolate full blacks on most academic tests.

>>12053225
>The last full blooded tasmanian died in the 1930s
And yet Tasmanians are just a fraction of aborigines, aren't they? I can't find any estimates on percent with European admixture overall, but if you do find it please share.

Is /sci/ finally accepting race realism now?

Took you long enough, god damn.
I knew you guys would come around though.

>>12052863
show me the studies

>>12053126
they're not used to alcohol

This thread truly proves that high IQ doesn't mean intelligent, because all of you (supposedly high IQ, compared to the aboriginals) can't understand the simple definition of species, which is in terms of reproduction. Look at these retards:

>>12048412
>Anthro world knows deep down that Abbos aren't really the same species
Defines species in terms of opinion

>>12048715
>species/subspecies are all retarded subjective classifications in the first place
Doesn't understand species has a clear definition

>>12048883
>Homo neanderthalensis had the brain volume of up to 1600cm^3 while Homo sapiens has 1400cm^3.
Defined species in terms of brain volume

>>12049001
>even africans aren't really the same species as us.
Defined species in terms of race

>>12049257
>define species
Uh

>>12049736
Took 200 replies for someone to say this

>>12053972
Who cares about the semantics around using the term species. Science doesn't work that way. See:

>>12048715

>>12053225
They don't outperform Nigerians do they?

>>12054000
>>12054000
I know Nigerian computer scientists.

>>12053979
Incorrect. Species has a precise definition.

>>12054006
Blacks in the US and South Africa underperform, it seems being elsewhere not under white man's thumb does them some good. Especially in English speaking Africa in Kenya Ghana and Nigeria. There are some very smart people coming from there.

>>12053101
>some European admixture.
Indeed. Pic related.

>>12049681
nice redditspacing, tourist

>>12053972
>>12054012
>Species has a precise definition.
Nope, that's a bald faced lie. Many species can have fertile offspring, and naturally do where they meet : wolves and coyotes, grizzlies and polar bears, hooded crows and carrion crows...

>>12053963
go back

>>12048382
White moral mental illness, in a case of irony Abos would even classify whites as people they would dehumanize them to their heart's content.

>>12053963
No. Polfags being obnoxious, obsessed retards is nothing new.

>>12048990
You are weak and your brain is full of tinfoil.

>>12048560
they can utter sentences in sign language...

>>12054094
Friendly reminder that those "aboriginal" med students would have graduated with 0 debt and offered top placements because of their 1/25th aboriginal heritage.

>>12054462
Where? To reality?
>>12055623
>/pol/tards
You mean actual scientists who actually believe in human evolution?
Imagine thinking all human groups have the same innate level of intelligence after being separated for tens of thousands of years. Dumb secular creationists.

>>12055837
>>12054094
non-white privilege is real

>>12048382
It is an inconvenient truth to the political zeitgeist of our time.

>>12055837
A large percentage of Australians that have been here 7 generations have aboriginal genetics. The majority don't get tested

>>12048412
in a nutshell, the same argument can be made for SE asians who have a distinctive skull shape and facial structure, also splayed feet and hips which is why you almost never see them compete at Olympic level track events

>>12053966
There are articles and papers if you Google ghost DNA in sub Saharan populations but this wiki provides a brief summary. San people have up to 19% archaic DNA including from a pre hidelbergensis population.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interbreeding_between_archaic_and_modern_humans

>>12050419
Yeah, old granny, look at that grey hair.

They're absolutely a different subspecies (as are most human populations), but they're still part of the species of homo sapiens.

>>12048382
Institutions of authority will always select to empower the unworthy. In doing so, those who would threaten to challenge their authority are prevented from obtaining credibility.
It's not at all a stretch to say that the cause is biblical evil.
Taxonomy does not matter, but obviously anything that can be used to argue against egalitarianism is a direct threat against democracy and capitalism.
There has always been and always will be big money invested in the control of "scientific consensus."
It's verboten.

Dividing lines are always fuzzy. They're closer to us than those other species, and that's good enough.

In the right setting, for all we know aboriginals could be much more adept at certain cognitive tasks than other people. And they have language and culture and look pretty similar and we can reproduce with them, so they're our species. I bet if you took a baby and raised them in Western culture, they'd on average be able to get through school and get jobs just like anyone else. Similarly, if you took someone in Western culture and raised them in an aboriginal tribe, I bet they'd also score pretty low on IQ tests. The brain is very malleable and genetics probably don't determine more than half of cognitive ability.

>>12050143
>Dog breeds only diverged less than 10k years ago and differ dramatically in intelligence.
This is fallacious argument.
Dog breeds did not evolve and diverge naturally.
They were selectively bred by Humans to have specific traits.

The average Fst between Human races is 0.133, while the average Fst for the 28 most popular dog breeds was nearly twice that, at 0.26, with a high of 0.46.

>>12053972
You're unironically the stupidest person ITT.

>>12056344
Doesn't this right here disprove the "we are all the same" theory?

>>12056721
>it's capitalism's fault
extremely low IQ take

>>12056908
>Dog breeds did not evolve and diverge naturally.
>They were selectively bred by Humans to have specific traits.
So you're saying groups of beings separated for tens of thousands of years under different evolutionary pressures wouldn't cause any differences in mental traits?
Why not?
Do you think evolution takes millions of years and couldn't happen within a few generations?

>>12056908

>>12056796
>genetics probably don't determine more than half of cognitive ability.
But it determines some right?

fyi, genes that determine brain development differ most between the races
https://bmcevolbiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2148-11-16

>>12056908
>They were selectively bred by Humans to have specific traits.
>implying vastly different climates and requirements for living does not have the same effect in selecting for traits

You need to go back

>>12057165
That you can't tell the difference between what nature selects for and what humans like is proof you are a certified idiot.

>>12057195
Humans selecting the most friendly and useful dogs to survive and reproduce is exactly the same as a harsh northern European environment selecting the most empathetic, organised and forward thinking individuals to survive and reproduce. Now go back.

>>12056908
>the average Fst for the 28 most popular dog breeds was nearly twice that, at 0.26, with a high of 0.46
Average fst doesn't mean that much if the samples are not weighted. The range is more useful, and it goes up to 0.46 or so for humans too.

Some aboriginal tribes never connected sex with pregnancy.

>>12057224
Many abo tribes also forgot how to make fire and could only sustain it from naturally occurring sources. Fire is like civilisation 101, if you can't do that you are pretty much a fucking glorified ape.

Why aren't the mods banning 90% of this thread for breaking the "no racism" rule?

>>12057244
You need to go back.

>>12057213
>harsh northern European environment selecting the most empathetic, organised and forward thinking individuals to survive and reproduce.
Why are modern Europeans the opposite, then?

>>12057256
Because of social media and electronics fucking their brains, prior to 2000s these traits were everywhere in Europe. Stop moving goalposts.

>>12057256
They are not. Compare with any other people, you'll find the others less empathic organised and forward thinking.
With maybe one single exception for the japanese on these last two things.

>>12057252
Where?

>>12057256
>>12057279
https://www.bitchute.com/video/P78Zd8265_k/

>>12057288
Noooo you can't just post alt hype, despite everything being totally factual and impossible to debunk he is a racist Nazi reeeeeeee

>>12057295
It's funny because he actually hates nazis and is literally gay.