/sci/ - Science & Math

Easy, because of the history of sterilizing and euthanizing people for being in the wrong race and a fear that any inquiry that is objective at face value will lead to similar transgressions and to generalizations about individuals from racial make-up

Now, why is this thread made multiple times a week in /sci/? Are you new here, or do you like dwelling on the same subject every day?

It is not.

>>12170910
Then why was James Watson removed of his titles?

>>12170908
Holy fuck, what a onions reason not to investigate something. Yes, science is disruptive. Make more captivating religion to cope.

>>12170915
This is politics. Nothing to do with science.

>>12170921
Most people who research on humans have a concern for ethics and the results of their research. We have entire systems in place to vet the ethics of institutionally funded research. If you think science occurs in a vacuum or "real scientists" don't care about what happens with their research then you've clearly little or no experience working in a field of human research. "Science is disruptive!" is the right-wing equivalent of "I fucking love science!"

>>12170943
Scientific institutions are political unfortunately

>>12170955
Science should be disruptive to a society that holds antiempirical views on race

>>12170965
Empty normative statement without support. Just a restatement of "sciencei is disruptive!"

>>12170899
and why are you faggots so obsessed with race? insecure about yourself?

>>12170979
I wouldn't care if race wasn't taboo and its research suppressed

>>12170955
Yeah, and ethics are gay. As is safety. If the science you're doing isn't putting your reputation and physical safety at risk, urdoingitwrong.

>>12170987
Literally this. I care only that I can't talk about it. If I could talk about it openly, I'd probably find some new thing to push against.
If we lived in a race-reductionist era (which we partially do, just in an anti-white way), I'd be the first to suggest the importance of upbringing and culture.

>>12171008
>anti-white
I’m glad /pol/-sjws leave proof they’ve infected a thread.

>>12171002
Again, an empty normative statement. "urdoingitwrong" is just how you feel about it.

>>12171008
>>12170987
Research on health effects of racial category is not suppressed (see:Bidil). If you want the pioneer fund to give you money to do research on white superiority, I'm sure you can persuade them. Most institutions which receive money from the taxpayer and/or donors who don't have a white supremacist bend don't want to give you money to prove whites are better

The real reason you care about it is you expect the results to validate your opinion about what we should do about all the poor non-white people. That you're no less guided by your ethical positions is transparent to everyone who isn't in your circle of opinions

>>12170915
He said racist and straight up incorrect/controversial things. It's not his area of expertise, nor is he honestly relevant in the modern world. Also, Rosalind Franklin deserves more credit than he got.

>>12170899
Say someone proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that niggers are on average intellectually inferior. Now think, what benefit could that possibly have for humanity? The answer is absolutely fucking nothing. You're basically guaranteeing future genocides or at the very least, bloodshed. How would you feel if it were proven that people of your race are dumb?
Certain areas of research are better left unexplored.

>>12171051
pretty much this. How does OP feel about scientific confirmation that religious people and creationists have a much lower avg intelligence than atheists? Guessing he’d be pretty triggered.

Why does nobody dig up bones about non-white scientists/politicians/artists in an attempt to purge them from history? Why is everyone so eager to disregard context and relevance and throw the baby out with the bath water soley around the topic of racism?

>>12171081
Because liberals run academia. The strong control the weak that's how the world works. Just because neo nazis voted cheeto hitler into office doesn't mean they have two brain cells to rub together and have any post in science.

What's going to happen is that all racists and their scientists will be purged from the history books. James Watson will be an unperson. Crick and Franklin get all the credit for DNA.

>>12170908
fpbp
>>12171100
>Franklin gets all the credit
as it should happen

>>12171051
>>12171071
It's useful to know because it can explain differences in life outcomes. Much better than just assuming disparity between groups is due to "systemic racism". Knowing what the actual cause is, is the best way to start working on policy that actually helps black people, without being detrimental to white people. And this is what we'd be doing if the academic institutions weren't filled with retards like this >>12171029
who think white supremacy is a legitimate threat and knowing facts about black people will suddenly lead to their genocide.

>>12171122
>t. has no idea how humans work
Knowing that any group of people is inferior will help us help them. You're totally right!

>>12171122
Evidence that blacks are inferior will cause a genocide or a repeat of slavery.

>>12171122
Because we treat addicts, homeless, the physically disabled, and the mentally ill so well already, don't we?

>>12171029
Taboo racial sciences aren't about proving that whites are the master race, the vast majority of hardcore racists will even admit that whites and asians are more or less on par, with the majority of rheir complaints being cultural. The research is taboo because it has a tendency to shit on africans, which is a huge problem in a modern society built on equity

>>12171027
Sell Apple stock.

>>12171146
>addicts
Addiction is a choice, fuck them.
>homeless
There are homeless shelters everywhere.
>the physically disabled
We spend huge amounts trying to make their lives more tolerable. Every modern public building has to be built with disabled people in mind.
>the mentally ill
Psychiatric hospitals exist to take care of them, usually at the taxpayer's dime.

>>12171122
The ironic truth is that asia is the future dominant ethnicity, and they don't give a FUCK about western concepts of equity. The second china has global dominance, every region they want is going to be slowly ethnically replaced with han chinese.

>>12171165
>>>/pol/
basically everything you just said is wrong or unscientific, you're not going to change your mind so please just go back.

>>12170899
Because blacks are supposed to be the new priest class at the head of society and it would be bad if people could see how dumb they are.

>>12170899
We need to pretend everyone is the same because globalists need people moving around as much as possible for profits.

>>12171133
>>12171143
Hard to take you guys seriously to be honest. A fucking repeat of slavery hahahahaha
>>12171146
Addicts, the homeless, and the mentally ill aren't all proven to be so because of their genetics. If they were, then it would be much easier to help them. Bringing up the physcially disabled is pure retardation and just proves my point. They get disability benefits literally just due to how they were born, rather than being genocided for being inferior. There's historical precedent for culling people with genetic defects and yet, look at how different things are today.

>>12171033
>genetics is not his area of expertise because he was mean to blacks. Also woman good
Holla reddit

>>12170899
because normies want to believe we are equal

>>12170899

No point discussing something that we can't change.

>>12171270
Why cant we change it? Is it against the laws of physics to discuss the science of race?

>>12171270

This isn't exactly it. Notice how they're using data that indicates inequalities in outcomes (like blacks being poorer) to justify their belief that a country is racist and oppressive weaponizing that to hammer through aggressive politics. If it was accepted that races generally perform differently and have different potential on a natural basis this wouldn't be a valid take.

>>12171143
>or a repeat of slavery.

How can you even think that?

>>12170899
Very antisemitic question.

>>12171437
Jews have higher incidence of genetic diseases. Is that just a social construct?

>>12170915
Talk shit, get hit. Why do americans pretend everything is fair and just?

>>12171143
Everyone know niggers are a detriment to society, anyone in the west isn't allowed to talk about it though.

Chinese are allowed to say whatever they want about niggers, and is part of the reason for their success.

>>12170908
You're close but the real fear is about "similar transgressions", it is fear the oneself will be on the wrong side of the cutoff line.
Even though we've reduced the amount of suffering in low IQ groups on a per capita basis over the last century, we've increased overall suffering in absolute terms by creating the conditions for them to breed out of control.
When you get your glorious world of 10 billion double digit IQ third worlders and society collapses, it will be you and your kind that created a famine that kills 10 billion instead of simply giving a couple million of them a modest but comfortable life in exchange for being sterilized starting a century ago.

>>12170908
What will you do when 95% of the 11 bilion population+ is low double digit iq people and we've nearly run out of food and clean water?

You've just created a problem rather than prevented one.

>says skin color makes hornier and stupider
>literally zero proof that melanin decreases IQ or increases your libido
>multiple instances where countries close to the equator had higher IQ than countries far from equator
if he had done a legitimate study then maybe but he is just pulling shit out of his ass. he is right about everything being founded in genetics but it's not that simple

>>12171033
>RACE DOESN'T EXIST GOYM

>>12170899
because retards take it too far
sage

>>12170899
global Lysenkoism

>>12170899
most western democracies are multiracial. Significant differences in race based groups can be destabilizing to forming a cohesive ingroup, depending on the presentation

>>12170908
There is nothing wrong with eugenics, we already practice abortion, what's wrong with having low IQ or defective people not reproducing? Nobody is advocating of actively killing them.

>>12170908
>Now, why is this thread made multiple times a week in /sci/? Are you new here, or do you like dwelling on the same subject every day?
The science is settled goy, stop asking questions

>>12171051
>uture genocides or at the very least, bloodshed.
Hysterical Strawman. Why can't you people be around people different than you without wanting to kill them. You accept that people are different in many different ways, why does IQ research specifically make you want to murder people?

> what benefit could that possibly have for humanity
the seemingly inability for multi-ethic democracies to accept that humans are each born with different genetic potential leads to an inability to deal with the dysgenics of our species. You cannot address a problem if you deny the existence of it's underlying premise. Having what would today be classified as 70IQ humans in charge of a nuclear payload that could extinguish the human race is an existential threat to our species.

>>12171652
who can be trusted to implement such a system fairly, and for what traits do we select for. Is an IQ test of you understanding a geometry puzzle really indicative to all that a human can offer a human society?

>>12171637
Only anglo democracies are multiracial. Ok, maybe France too. But the rest is 95%+ white.

>>12171684
The system does not need to include IQ tests or case specific human oversight at all. We can engineer circumstances in such a way that selection will counter dysgenics for us.

>>12171187
Legit. We are mislead about race to further the ends of an international cabal

>>12171684
Standardized tests, let's say there are various forms of intelligence (lol) we'll make people take various tests and assign them to their best score, people who fail at everything will be sterilized.

Though if we're honest true intelligence is measured by the capacity of learning, doesn't matter the subject, as long as you can learn very fast (far above what public school teaches right now from kindergarten to universities) means you actually have an ounce of brain at least.

>>12170899
define it in a scientific way.

>>12171685
>But the rest is 95%+ white.
for now.
>>12171693
>dysgenics
but who defines what is good for humanity so as to engineer the circumstances to get that out come. What is a good human like, can we all agree on it?

>>12170899

>>12171730
>for now.
If only there were people who could take an openminded, honest look at the effects of mixing races together in one state.

>but who defines what is good for humanity so as to engineer the circumstances to get that out come. What is a good human like, can we all agree on it?
We don't need to agree on specifics. It's easier and more effective to define what type of society we want to have. Low crime, low resource usage, high trust, high cohesion, low rates of STDs, etc.
All of these things are affected by IQ. Then we only need to find out what conditions are beneficial to passing on high IQs and how to avoid passing on low IQs.

A possible measure could be to don't pay people to breed, for example.

>>12171702
IQ scores don't show behavioral traits. What if someone is intelligence but a borderline sociopath with no love for humanity? do they continue to be allowed to pass on those genes? Perhaps because they don't care for the systems unbiased selection, and they try to give their children an unfair advantage on the test that makes them more likely to get a higher score and pass on their genes.

We may be selecting for a humanity that would destroy itself, in a very intelligent way.

>>12171051
>if we just ignore a problem it is better than accurately finding all we can about it

>>12171753
>to define what type of society we want to have
be careful posing that question in a western democracy today, you may not like the response you get. We could take steps to get those things you listed with policies that doesn't involve eugenics today. But are we? Which of the things that you listed matched up with European governments decision to import of hundreds of thousands of low skill ME and African immigrants over the last decade.

Am I supposed to believe that if given the keys to eugenics they will choose those listed things over some other aim? In practice people disagree what good is for a human society.

>>12171759
Math grades don't show behavioral traits. What if someone is good at math but a borderline sociopath with no love for humanity? do they continue to be allowed to pass on to university? Perhaps because they don't care for the systems unbiased selection, and they try to give their children an unfair advantage on the test that makes them more likely to get a higher score and pass on their degrees.

We may be selecting for an academia that would destroy itself, in a very intelligent way.

>>12171051
>what benefit could that possibly have for humanity?
That environmental remediation is an expensive waste? That negroes are cross-generationally oppressed by their genetic potential and not by society? That they will be the same today as they were 10,000 years ago, and again 10,000 years in the future?

Nothing to do with science. A purely political and socio-economic subject.

>>12171814
>Which of the things that you listed matched up with European governments decision to import of hundreds of thousands of low skill ME and African immigrants over the last decade.
Because any honest research into race and biological differences between those is actively supressed in the West. The politicians would never have allowed hundreds of thousands of foreigners to come into the EU if the populace had remained aware of race issues and hadn't been actively lied to by a corrupt, ideological academic class.

>>12171817
The analogy doesn't touch the issue. Higher education correlates with lower birth rates, infact lower than replacement. In such a scenario the sociopath genes would be extinguished within a few generations. In the IQ test for birthrates scenario they would increase ever year as they are being selected to have more children.

>>12170899
academics are cowards who fear blacks

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kmJE0tqFBTw

>>12171826
>Because any honest research into race and biological differences between those is actively supressed in the West.
that is the question though. Do you think the average citizen really believes that their aren't genetic difference in IQ. Or is it that they know they must not speak of it or make policy with it. Or that good has been redefined that IQ should matter and even if it is decreasing it is better than discriminating against people.

Thus even if they got hard data of the facts, would they change policy?

>>12170899
it isn't, there's plenty of info about race to find within sociology

>>12171823
>evolution is real
>but it had no effect on human cognition

>>12170955
>Science is disruptive!
Sounds an awful lot like "change happens, deal with it!" desu.

>>12171100
Liberals run academia, conservatives run finance, liars run nations, now let's look on as they fuck everything up trying to sandbag one another.

Why does everyone presume that acknowledging racial differences will lead to a rehash of the past 300 years of slavery, eugenics, and genocide?

Do you all have so little faith in humanity’s cultural and social progression of the last half a century that you think acknowledging that ‘hey, maybe some groups have a better aptitude for some things’ will undo all that progress?

>>12171869
>Higher education correlates with
high IQ and high IQ correlates with lower birth rates as well. But sure, see nothing wrong with the world becoming dumber every year. Our hands are tied, because why exactly?

>>12171883
>Thus even if they got hard data of the facts, would they change policy?
People being honest about race issues lose their job and face social death. Of course policy would change if they could talk openly. Because as you stated yourself, the average citizen already believes in race differences. They're apparent to anyone who isn't blind or too heavily indoctrinated. Yet instead of finding solutions with which every side could live, we're forced to continue pretending soap is a vitamin.

>>12170899
>>12171029
>The real reason you care
whether or not humans open their eyes or keep them closed, they are performing natural selection.

Is it better to trust an imperfect system to make policy for natural selection based on available research, or to go with the natural selection of a system that ignores such data and policy in regards to it? I don't know, but it's an important question to ask, as a decision is being made whether or not we ignore it.

>>12171950
Because the envinronmentalist and egalitarian side has lost the discussion so hard they can only argue emotionally.

It's /pol/s fault. No meme. Racists want to confirm their ideology and so jump to conclusions, so even if scientists are open minded and abstain judgement their work will be abused and their reputions will be smeared in monkey shit.

>>12171936
it's Communist Jews in all 3 categories. should have listened to Hitler desu

>>12171969
>high IQ and high IQ correlates with lower birth rates as well. But sure, see nothing wrong with the world becoming dumber every year. Our hands are tied, because why exactly?
There's an interesting (perhaps unknowable) question of if an advanced technological society needs to have a certain percentage of high intelligent people or if it only needs a certain absolute number of intelligent people to keep it going while the percentage doesn't matter much.

>>12171981
Bitch about listening to hitler all the way to your extinction.

>>12171981
Naw, he was a fucking retard.

Toss the trash, keep the useful people, make use of them and don't hold on to stupid ideas just because you committed to them.

>>12170899
in order for the Jews to subvert western nations with low IQ retards they import by the millions they have to keep the normies under the impression all races are equal

>>12171995
A society with a higher percentage of high IQ people would do better, therefore increasing that percentage should be the aim.
'Keep society going' isn't a worthwhile goal. The high IQ people might even do better if they let society crumble to force a favourable reset.
If democracy becomes dominated by <90 IQ people, the intelligent ones will refuse to participate.

>>12171997
It's interesting how leaders in society can keep such things canned up until suddenly a tipping point is crossed and everything blows up seemingly out of nowhere. The more things are kept pent up, the bigger the explosion. Humanity possess the ability to explode many orders of magnitude larger than it did in WWII.
But keep holding that lid down. Surely you can keep the steam in the boiling pot forever while continuously turning up the heat.

>>12171997
>Leftists can openly talk about their plans for white extinction
>but talking about blacks being low iq is forbidden

>>12170899
old white people think they can eradicate other races if they pretend to care about them. so blacks are number 1 on the list and have to die. they keep chimping so they know something is a amiss. act like you care and make a example out of some one just to make it clear you pretend to care

mean while africa is given contaminated foreign aid and operations to remove blacks from white cities unfold. hell even the whole they can protest and ignore social distancing shit was just to thin the heard

>>12172030
>If democracy becomes dominated by <90 IQ people, the intelligent ones will refuse to participate.
Which brings up the question of if other forms of governance can run society with a smaller group of highly intelligent people. In Democracy, having too many low intelligence people creates government policies that make poor use of the highly intelligent members of that society.

>>12172034
Feel free to destroy your own country with civil wars. I'll watch from my country. It has nukes so you won't touch us.

>>12171176
How exactly is what I said wrong? Sounds like you need to go back to plebbit.

>>12172053
Cute that you think you're going to be able to maintain control over nukes. Probably won't matter anyway as knowledge of how to maintain warheads and ICBMs decays and is lost. Not sure why you think you're going to be able to avoid civil conflict while continuing to heat up demographic tensions while also restricting the ability for any of it to bleed off.

>>12171997
ok joomer, post nose

>>12172068
I don't care I'm not a collectivist

>>12172081
can't wait to hear you screaming that when roving gangs of niggers are gang raping your gf and smashing bricks into your face. At least you werent racist!

Everyone under 100-105 IQ needs to be sterilized. Do this for a measly 2-4 generations and you'll have put humanity on a much more prosperous path.

Eugenics is the most humane path, it's a hard pill to swallow for some, I'm sure

>>12171977
>our research of this topic might get misinterpreted by some people
>better to play it safe and bar all research of this topic
>and if anyone disagrees will just threaten to destroy their reputation and livelihood

>>12172081
What you are only matters if you are in some form of collective. Otherwise you're getting fucked over.

>>12170899
Because genetics undermines abrahamic narrative. The same reason genetics was prohibited in Soviet Russia.

>>12172134
similar to how nazi germany banned IQ testing

>https://archive.vn/Ie2Tv

>>12172072
take your meds schizo

>>12172093
IQ is just one aspect, complete stop to the spread of genetic disorders should be step 1, along with th edisposal of children that can as best act as pets, even a grunt can still stack boxes and pay taxes, a non-verbal drooler will only ever expend resources.

Utilitarianism, the most useful political direction.

>>12171821
>That they will be the same today as they were 10,000 years ago, and again 10,000 years in the future?
Explain how just 60 years ago African Americans were much more civilized and valued education more than they do now.

>>12170899
It's people misinterpreting a complicated situation to fit their simplistic agendas.
There are genetic components to intelligence - (almost) no one denies that.
But at best genes only give someone potential to be 'smart' - after that you need an education.
IQ is not a perfect measure of intelligence - modern theories on intelligence break it down into subgroups (so you can be good at logical reasoning, but crap at visual/spacial awareness). However, IQ can be easily tested, so it gets used a lot as an indicator of intelligence.
Black IQ Vs White IQ scores (In America) - not just IQ, but for academic achievement across the board blacks tend to trail behind whites.
The question is: why?
The answer: Lots of of reasons - could be shittier schools, could be that education is not embraced by black society ("You study? you so white, man"), worse nutrition etc.
And yes, it's possible that genetics may have a role to play - that on average, blacks have fewer 'smart genes' than whites. But given that it's bundled in with a bunch of other factors - some of nearly impossible to filter out - it's incredibly hard to say how much of an impact race has on intelligence.
The way we measure it isn't perfect (IQ, academic scores).
Races are not completely separate (a lot of black americans have 1 or more white ancestors).
Social attitudes towards education do impact academic performance but the impact varies by area/economic group.
etc.
But what people grab hold of is:
"Haha blacks r dumb."
"IQ tests is racist!"
Complex situation, simplistic understanding.

I don`t get all the fuzz around it, we could simply use CRISPR to ensure that everyone will be born with a IQ 200 or more.

>>12171483
This is the attitude i would expect of someone with a 95 IQ

>>12172199
We've been seeing the same kind of gap for a century by now. No matter what we do, be it twin study or testing only university students from different countries or comparing only those of equal income level, that gap remains.

We can also see the gap diminish according to genetic components in mixed people. It's largely genetic, we can be certain of that. The effects of scowling at black toddlers are negligible.

>>12170899
it makes the niggers mad

>>12172204
No one can even define what intelligence even is, much less what specific genes affect it. It'll be hundreds of years before we can fuck around with human intelligence.

>>12172226
We've already identified several hundred genes involved in intelligence and brain function.

We've got several working definitions of intelligence already, so idk what you're on about.

>>12172212
You can only have a "real test" by removing the nurture and culture elements entirely, so you'd have to take thousands of babies (for sufficient sample size) of several ethnic groups and raise them by staff that extensively tested for bias and watch development over decades without any outside influence.

>>12172226
Depends, we have already identified several thousand possible DNA alleles that we can modify to our benefit. We could modify the GRIN2B (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19838302)), the PDE4B (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=26272049)), https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25225386 and the FOXP2 strain (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19838302)) to help our children to have more potential. Add modifications with TP53, CDKN2A, CTNNB1, NGF, MSTN, EPOR and APOE genes, and you got the basis for a healthy, fit and smart child. But it is true, that we need some 10 - 20 years to test it out, but as CRISPR is progressing and computer can simulate biological process ever better, I could imagine that in 20-30 years, genetic modifications might be viable to support your child to not to have to worry about many issues we have to carry around.
Accurate prediction of height from genome has already been accomplished, identifying 10k positively associated loci (https://www.biorxiv.org/content/biorxiv/early/2017/09/18/190124.full.pdf).). The genetic architecture of intelligence is similar to that of height (https://arxiv.org/pdf/1408.3421.pdf).). It is only a matter of time before enough genotype-phenotype pairs are collected to perform a similar analysis on cognitive ability, and identify the estimated 10k SNPs that explain the variance in IQ. After these are identified, an optimized genotype could be discovered and implemented in human embryos via genetic engineering, although the technology here will also have to advance to be able to edit 10k loci reliably.

>>12172242
We don't need to remove nurture entirely to get a close estimate. Why would that ever be the standard? If that's the level of purity you're demanding, then we don't know whether height is heritable either.
We have dozens of different test scenarios, used in hundreds of countries, over a span of a century, with a sample size sometimes in the dozens of millions. And all of it supports the existence of a genetic IQ gap.
A gap that is reasonable to assume, since there is zero reason for why the evolution of the human brain should have stopped at any time. In fact, we know that it didn't.

You aren't arguing the results, you're trying to discredit them. That's disingenious as fuck and it's all what the environmentalists have left.

>>12170899
Because a lot of people want people's rights and worth to be defined by their race and IQ. If you are not the "right" race, or not smart enough, somehow you're of less of a value as a human being and should just be gassed.

Some people are rightly concerned that some people might buy into this kind of naturalistic fallacy.

People get the idea that researching race and sex/gender differences results in "bad science" where researchers end up cherrypicking results that support differences. I'm not really sure how I feel about this, but it seems like there's a misunderstanding somewhere.

>>12172226
There are plenty of working definitions for intelligence you retard

>>12172282
>We don't need to remove nurture entirely to get a close estimate. Why would that ever be the standard? If that's the level of purity you're demanding, then we don't know whether height is heritable either.
Height isn't influenced by teachers attitude or cultural stereotypes, just genes, nutrition and physical activity.

>We have dozens of different test scenarios, used in hundreds of countries, over a span of a century, with a sample size sometimes in the dozens of millions. And all of it supports the existence of a genetic IQ gap.
It's not a "genetic" IQ gap unless they can show genes that reliable and invariably result in higher IQ and subsequently lower IQ if missing.

>A gap that is reasonable to assume, since there is zero reason for why the evolution of the human brain should have stopped at any time. In fact, we know that it didn't.
Except apparently it stopped in Africa when first proto-whites left?

I don't care about the results, just the methodology, framing and phrasing.
And I know i sound like a shrill leftist, but you can't get unbiased (soft) science in a biased world.
Maybe once we finish rendering the complete genome, map every function, cross function, synergy and conflict it'll be a clean science.

>>12172324
Love that carl jung quote

>>12171557
>>12171541
Pretty sure people are afraid of the American-pioneered 20th century eugenics movement that sterilized a bunch of people. That's very much the standard opinion you will find anywhere people comment on this.
When your justification for conducting this research is that you want an empirical basis by which to choose how many billions of third worlders get sterilized on some self-contrived paternalistic explanation of what will decrease their suffering (as we all know, having an IQ below 100 means you have no agency) you prove my point about other peoples' fears of the plans of would-be world controllers like you would justify with their research.


>>12171652
It is the opinion of most people involved in human research and indeed most people out there that the choice of whether one should have children rests primarily on the people having children and that the government should not force normative ideas about whose genes are worth keeping in the pool on individuals. I am aware your views along with the views of most of the people in this thread asking themselves why researchers won't procure the evidence they need to justify eugenics don't share this notion. That is PRECISELY why they won't dedicate themselves to your topic of interest

>>12171664
There are too many topics in psychology, biometrics, biology, neurology, biochemistry, pharmacology, physics, etc. etc. etc. for which the science is not settled. This one seems to be one posted on a daily basis

>>12172333
There exists a study on adopted children that showed that the child's adult IQ correlated very strongly with their biological parents' IQ. There was also the transracial adoption study that also showed an IQ gap despite the black kids growing up in "white" conditions. As far a purity goes, that's pretty good. But I'm sure stereotypes created an IQ gap of 15 points, right?

>It's not a "genetic" IQ gap unless they can show genes that reliable and invariably result in higher IQ and subsequently lower IQ if missing.
These also exist, you ape

>>12170899
Its a taboo subject everywhere because the crazies will get you fired

>>12172409
At least you admit, in a ridiculously couched and roundabout way, that the only reason not to research any link between genetics and intelligence is political "opinions" held by researchers and a fear that the results will refute those opinions.

Sounds pretty fucking anti-science to me. Sounds dogmatic.

>>12171950
>Why does everyone presume that acknowledging racial differences will lead to a rehash of the past 300 years of slavery, eugenics, and genocide?
Because every time racial differences are at the forefront of social dialogue that's exactly what happens?

>>12172333
>Height isn't influenced by teachers attitude or cultural stereotypes, just genes, nutrition and physical activity.
You can't show any of that to the standard you demand for IQ. How much physical activity a kid is pushed into does depend on teacher attitude, for example. So yeah..

>It's not a "genetic" IQ gap unless they can show genes that reliable and invariably result in higher IQ and subsequently lower IQ if missing.
We can know it's heritable without knowing what genes are. Your point is simply invalid. We don't need to identify a single gene involved to prove it's genetic.
What is your actual reasoning against the validity of twinning studies?

>Except apparently it stopped in Africa when first proto-whites left?
There is no reason to assume it stopped in Africa. Their evolution can easily have taken a different path. It would be stranger if the end results of the brain were the same if all other organs differentiated in the same timespan.

> I know i sound like a shrill leftist
You deny reality by demanding standards that are either impossible to reach or absolutely unnecessary.

>>12170908
Not doing so also leads to the genocide of people though
English cities are now majority non whites
American children are now majority non whites
Whites are being destroyed right now

>>12172493
There is a strong negative correlation between IQ and violence. Use eugenics to stop low IQ people from reproducing and you end up with a non violent society.

>>12172508
>being a smaller proportion of the population in a given geographical area means you are being genocided

I quote Oxford dictionary


genocide
Pronunciation /ˈjenəˌsīd/ /ˈdʒɛnəˌsaJd/
noun
The deliberate killing of a large group of people, especially those of a particular ethnic group or nation.

Origin

1940s from Greek genos ‘race’+ -cide.

(-cide, as in insecticide, stands for killing).

What the last major group of supporters of research on racial inequalities did was genocide. What you're talking about is not.

>>12171051
Taking a counterfactual stance isn't an effective measure against that, it's a guarantee that you won't have any once the cat's out of the bag.
You don't cure coronary disease by spouting 'health at ever size'.

>>12172530
Then it's still ethnic cleansing and displacement if whole peoples get replaced in their own home countries.

Seriously, how would you call it if a bunch of white people moved to America to breed there and turn the nation slowly white?

>>12172522
That has fuck all to do with what I'm talking about nigger

>>12172489
You didn't read my post properly or just read what you wanted to read. I will clarify for you.

The reason the research of racial differences in factors like intelligence that human worth is ascribed to by certain people is avoided by most researchers on psychometrics is not that the results may disprove their opinions (I don't think most deny there is some difference between the averages of ethnic groups in intelligence and other factors, though they may differ strongly in how much is independent of environmental factors) but that the results may give fuel to people who, like many posters on this thread, want to use IQ as the measuring stick by which some authoritarian government will allow people to reproduce or sterilize them, and this is what most people find to be fundamentally wrong independent of whether there is or is not a difference in average IQ between ethnic groups.

>>12172545
It's not genocide. It's not cleansing either. Displacement by the very definition of the word involves moving, but white people aren't being relocated to white reservations. The only thing "moving" is the abstraction of gene frequencies. All of your words are incorrectly used for support of your political ideas. Once more, if you're curious about what ethnic cleansing and displacement look like, check out what the last racial hygienists in Europe did.

>>12172199
you should really read up on what g is before making your mind up about it and writing walls of text dismissing some phantom image of it

>>12172554
Indeed, no science should be conducted because others could appropriate it to become something harmful. You can shut down any science or the production of anything you want with that reasoning, truly an absurd stance to take.

>>12172333
>It's not a "genetic" IQ gap unless they can show genes
https://lmgtfy.app/?q=heritability

>>12172564
>white people aren't being relocated to white reservations
They're moving out of formerly white cities at record rates, Anon. Force doesn't have to march down the street in jackboots. You're dumb if you can't extrapolate clear trends into the future.

>>12172488
Why do we allow emotionally unstable "adults" to control the narrative?

>>12172199
cringe retard

>>12172554
>the reason research isn't done is because the results may give fuel to NAZIBOOGEYMAN
You're clearly justifying a position you hold from believes and emotion and not because you've looked at the data.

>>12172575
Except that for this field of study there is both a history of the field being used to partake in harm and there is a tendency among current proponents (see this thread) to either implicitly or explicitly support that harm. You pretend like this is the identical case with every piece of research but for THIS particular topic there is a history I'm certain you know about.


>>12172578
By this ridiculous notion the Guatemalans moving into California and Texas are also being genocied, or cleansed, or displaced. Again, you use words incorrectly because it adds an unreal gravity to the idea that whites may not be the majority in the future for mundane reasons that are not amenable to some racial conspiracy theory.

>>12172532
>Taking a counterfactual stance
I didn't say we should lie and claim that all races are equal. I said everyone should just shut the fuck up about it. That way the cat doesn't ever have to be out of the bag.

Loving how BTFO'd the /pol/tards are here.

>>12172601
Which is a great idea, like most everything else, as long as everyone plays along.

>>12172586
The ethical position of whether it is right to sterilize other humans and decide who ought to contribute to the gene pool doesn't need to be based on data, which you are oblivious to even when I state it in the most plain way. The "believes and emotion" in the "NAZIBOOGEYMAN" are only validated when most of the proponents in ramping up racial research in this thread are also proponents of eugenics, as are many of the major researchers who feel unfairly persecuted for being proponents of it.

>>12172599
Yes, Guatemalans in California will also lose their ethnic core identity to a grand admixture of diverse races. Unlike white California however, there will still be a Guatemala.

Now, what is your actual argument against the validity of twin studies? Why don't they show a genetic gap in IQ scores?

>>12172608

>>12172615
That's news to me, last time I looked most twin studies find a >.8 heritability of IQ. Link?

>>12172615
>Yes, Guatemalans in California will also lose their ethnic core identity to a grand admixture of diverse races. Unlike white California however, there will still be a Guatemala.
There are still white Californians and their concomitant traditions. Culture will change just as it changed in white California from the 19th to the 20th century, which has nothing to do with genocide, ethnic cleansing, or displacement. Once more I tell you, you add gravity to mundane by using words in a blatantly dishonest way

>Now, what is your actual argument against the validity...
I am talking about the merits of researching this in light of the way it is used to support eugenics. Don't conflate every topic in this thread which you disagree with as being advanced by me or ask me to represent everything you disagree with on this thread. I'm sticking to my arguments.

What thr fuck do you mean?
https://www.biorxiv.org/collection/genomics

>>12172614
You are the only one who is fantasizing about mass sterilization of undesirables in this thread. That's not a danger that's likely to happen. White nationalists want to maintain white majorities in their home countries. This can be achieved with forceful means, but also with political ones. Like for example designing society in such a way that low IQ people are disadvantaged in having offspring the same way they're disadvantaged in amassing wealth.
A lot of racially conscious people also want to simply stop a situation from arising that would cause massive problems. Any race realist from Europe for example, whose country still is 90+ % his ethnicity.
Very, very few people want to go on the offensive and mass sterilize by force or invade other nations. Nobody wants to colonialize anymore.

>>12171051
>Certain areas of research are better left unexplored

>>12172637
>>12172644

>>12172609
It's enough for most people to play along. See James Watson for an example of what should happen when someone doesn't.

>>12172626
>most twin studies find a >.8 heritability of IQ
Exactly. .8 is massive and Twin studies show that the heritability of the IQ gap is somewhere in that ballpark of .7 - .8.

>There are still white Californians and their concomitant traditions.
Yes, as tax payers financing a massive welfare state that bankrolls other ethnicities having offspring.

>I am talking about the merits of researching this in light of the way it is used to support eugenics.
Hang on, are you saying no to eugenics a priori no matter what the data shows? Then you are disingenious and purely ideologically driven. Certainly not to be taken serious.
If the data shows that IQ is heritable to a large degree, why shouldn't we try to foster those traits? The higher the average IQ, the smoother a society runs, afterall.

>>12172651
If this is working out for you, then there goes the idea that it wouldn't be counterfactual. Tabula rasa is fundamental assumption for a lot of policy and legislation.

>>12172661
Yeah, so saying they don't show a genetic basis for differences in IQ is nonsense.
>Why don't they show a genetic gap in IQ scores?
They do.

The rest, what in the fuck are you going on about now?

>You are the only one who is fantasizing about mass
>>12171702
>>12171652
>>12171541
>>12172093
Am I the only one?

>White nationalists want to maintain white majorities in their home countries.
And do you think it is unreasonable for researchers not to want to validate the beliefs of white supremacists? It's not like they'd have any problems aiding the advocacy of those who have done most of the things I mentioned in the past and who, this time around, promise to do only the "reasonable" forms of eugenics!

>This can be achieved with forceful means, but also with political ones. Like for example designing society in such a way that low IQ people are disadvantaged in having offspring the same way they're disadvantaged in amassing wealth.
So eugenics! The goal by which sterilizations and euthanasia were justified in the last century. Again, do you think laws upholding the racial purity of a country are something most researchers would find to be morally and ethically sound? If you think so you're crassly wrong.

I'll paste what you responded to in the first place instead of repeating myself:
It is the opinion of most people involved in human research and indeed most people out there that the choice of whether one should have children rests primarily on the people having children and that the government should not force normative ideas about whose genes are worth keeping in the pool on individuals. I am aware your views along with the views of most of the people in this thread asking themselves why researchers won't procure the evidence they need to justify eugenics don't share this notion. That is PRECISELY why they won't dedicate themselves to your topic of interest

>A lot of racially conscious people also want to simply stop a situation from arising that would cause massive problems
Stopping the people you deem unfit for reproduction from making kids by government policy, be it abject poverty or sterilization, is a massive problem for those people.

>>12172699
I was responding to >>12172639
by the way

>>12172530
Webster's defines genocide as:
>the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group
Killing is not necessary to commit genocide, systematic destruction of a group could be arranged through any number of means.

>>12171051
>Certain areas of research are better left unexplored.
Not when narratives are constructed demonizing races are built around imaginary oppression and policies that actually oppresses people are enacted on those false narratives

>Certain areas of research are better left unexplored.
Not when narratives are constructed demonizing races are built around imaginary oppression and policies that actually oppresses people are enacted on those false narratives

>>12172726

In case you closed the tab, I invite you to look at the example sentences and alternative definitions provided by Merriam-Webster and let me know if they mean the same -cide as in homicide or insecticide or they mean the broad and intentionally abstract "genocide" by no longer being the majority in a geographic region.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/genocide

If you are unsatisfied with more dictionary definitions which may vary in wording, you can look at the UN's legal definition of genocide from the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide


Article II

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

Killing members of the group;
Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Tell me which of these applies to "white genocide"

>>12172747
>>12171051

>>12171122
>Much better than just assuming disparity between groups is due to "systemic racism".
This has been proven though. To think that the transgressions against minorities not even 50 years ago have no effect on their performance in modern day in incredibly naive. What IQ tells us is the proof of these damaging actions have had against those particular populations. Research can't happen in a vacuum and ignore historical facts.

>>12171950
Because it's happened in the past?

>12172627
>can only counter with shitty wojak

>>12172747
>imaginary oppression
Imagine being this stupid

>>12171033
facts are facts
they dont harm anyone
harm is what happens when someone chooses to act based on facts
Say its proven on the basis of hormones and sex organs that 2 genders means two different bases for being different
you can either
>acknowledge it and move on
in which case you're a reasonable and progressive individual or
>act on it or act on the people who discovered it
in which case you're a bigot for finding excuses to treat people worse or a deluded bigot for passing judgement onto someone merely for trying to establish facts
the latter is most certainly how most people will act because for some reason we can't have gray areas in modern society

>>12172824
nice argument darkie, try harder next time if you can muster it

>>12170899
Because what people think is about race due to correlation is not because of biological factors related to race, it is about oppression and social factors related to race. Allowing statements to be said "in the name of science" about racial differences just propagates the social difficulties. Yes, there are racial differences, but those are not the greatest factors in minor differences such as IQ, financial stability, etc.

>>12172966
No matter how small the difference, it will make all the difference in competitive terms due to the growth monger obsession with taking advantage of every joule of carrying capacity. Growth mongers are the root cause of racism.

>>12171051
>How would you feel if it were proven that people of your race are dumb?
I would think the same way as i already do now, because no matter what the outcome is the solution stays the same: make it illegal (or at least restrictive) for people under an IQ of 100 to have more than one child irrespective of what race they belong to. In other words, you don't have to genocide entire races because of a lower average IQ, you just have to let the retards of every race peacefully fizzle out through low birthrates to gradually improve the average IQ of every race. Black population would perhaps shrink the hardest since they have the most retards, but that also means they'd also profit the most from this in the future.

>>12170943
Dilate

>>12171143
If it can be proven that they are inferior, should it then not lead to genocide or at least eugenics? If not, why not?

>>12172966
False.

>>12171601
idk or care about libido but:
????

.

>>12171557
>What will you do when 95% of the 11 bilion population+ is low double digit iq
That'd be literally impossible, 50% of the population will always have over 100 IQ, that's how IQ works since 100 IQ is defined as the average score.
It's honestly incredible how retarded the average race realist is, almost like he's projecting or something

>>12173305
Objectively wrong

>>12173350
Over half of the data on that map is literally pulled out of Lynn's ass, he admits to making shit up in "IQ and the Wealth of Nations"

>>12173068
This will just create a black market for fake iq scores.

>>12173387
ok this is someone else's iq map from 2018

>>12173406
fucking irish.
they're so stupid
whats up with that?

>>12173299
Many people enjoy keeping pets. Democrats have been doing it with people for centuries.

>>12173365
The 100 average is white americans. The world doesn't have an average of 100 iq

>>12173589
>the world doesn't have an average IQ
You're right, it's too many numbers to add up and divide by count to get an average

>>12170899
literally just look at the threads in /sci/ posted every day. It always devolves into a racist narrative instead of many other questions when it deals with race. Humans are not ready for a scientific conversation about race because it has and will be used to persecute other people.

If you want to find studies about race you have to look at anthropology. Unfortunately, it’s likely it won’t validate your confirmation bias. Anthropology talks about different human societies. Scientists thinly veil race so that people who are not ready for these discussions don’t understand it.

>>12173589
I wonder what happens if you gave white Americans an IQ test written in Navaho

>>12173612
This anon gets it.

>>12173612
>Scientists thinly veil race so that people who are not ready for these discussions don’t understand it.
They don't though. In Forensic Anthopolgy they do use race but only because it's easier to sum up stuff in 2 words instead of 9

>>12170899
James Watson said random bullshit that is not even scientific at all. I'm talking like
>The Irish are ill-suited for academic work because one of my pupils was struggling with course content
which was based off opinion and not anything rigorous. Peopel really need to stop dying on this hill bro. The "battle" was already done ages ago.
/thread

>>12173714
>The Irish are ill-suited for academic work
I mean, is that incorrect?

>>12173705
I like Hakan's hyperracism where you're racist to the point of knowing all the intricacies of the hundreds of European races.

>>12173350
>>12173406
not a proof that melanin decreases IQ and some countries on the/close to the equator have higher IQ than countries far from the equator even north of the equator, mainly china.
btw check the sources of the map you posted, it's still full of estimations and it uses HDI along other things to adjust data. yeah and the author has published in Mankind Quarterly, so go figure.
https://www.researchgate.net/project/Worlds-IQ

>>12173617
What would happen if you gave blacks an IQ test written in Navaho?
Or what would happen if you gave both American blacks and American whites IQ tests written in English, a language they've both been taught?
Pro-tip: you're mixing up the standard talking points against standardized testing (go ahead and mention "chesterfields") and IQ tests. Since you're mindlessly regurgitating these arguments without understanding them, you have misapplied them.

>>12170921
t. Person looking for any reason to genocide

>>12173589
100 means average IA

>>12170908
You're ignorance isn't welcome here.

>>12173365
Fucking autist, it’s obvious the other anon meant low double digit IQ relative to todays IQ scale. Do you have any reading comprehension?

>>12173815
who the fuck ever said that melanin decreases iq
I've never seen anyone unironically say that melanin and intelligence have a casual correlation

>>12173938
>a language they've both been taught?
Not all schools in the US are equal.

>>12171033

AYYYY

>>12174078
>who the fuck ever said that melanin decreases iq
he said it and that's literally the entire premise behind the IQ and skin color hypothesis pushed by every race "scientist"/"realist". he said that dark skin makes you dumber but more sexual. many others from that circle had similar views along side hypothesis about penis and brain size being inversely related and other nonsense. just take a dive down the race realist journals rabbit hole and you will see why no one takes them seriously. iirc one of the leading figures in mankind quarterly believes in yetis and there was another danish guy that believes he can bend a spoon with his brain.

if he had said that certain countries have lower intelligence due to lack of development and malnourishment along other factors (i.e. the general consensus) and moved on from it no one would have patted an eye. he made outrageous questionable claims, published in questionable journals, etc which are all basically career suicide.

>>12171051
Research into the biological differences between the different human races is critical because it allows for us to allocate our scarce resources (including time) towards those who will be best able to use them. People are slowly getting clued into the fact that niggers are an endless resource dump.

>>12173964
Yes, that's definitely it. It's not that I'm curious and love novelty and intellectual and cultural development.

>>12172333
>Except apparently it stopped in Africa when first proto-whites left?

Yes, because intelligence is driven by natural selection, which is driven by the environment. Without leaving Africa (and hence without a change in environment), what exactly would incentivize the development of higher-level cognitive abilities?

>>12174206
Race causes both low IQ and skin color. Albino niggers aren't smart, they are still niggers.

>>12171051
Maybe then we would think twice before putting them in position where they don't belong for muh diversity creds

>>12173365
50% of the European population has > 100 IQ.
16% of the African population has > 100 IQ.

This is being generous to Africans by assuming they have an average IQ of 85 (as supported by countless evidence). The numbers for them are worse if you instead use their average IQ to be 70-75 as measured in native African populations.

>>12174223
>Research into the biological differences between the different human races is critical because it allows for us to allocate our scarce resources (including time) towards those who will be best able to use them
That already happens retard.

>>12174461
There are huge redistributive efforts done by every institution in every first world nation in the world that drive us significantly away from the optimum.

>>12174467
Because life for anyone but the upper class would be utter shit. You want to lvii like that go to the poor nations where the rich gt everything and the middle/poor class get the scraps and have fun with that.

>>12171027
I like to think this is all collapsing in on itself but it keeps getting worse

>>12174473
This. Retard >>12174467 doesn't understand that he's basically advocating for feudalism.

>>12174473
No you idiot, life IS shit in America now because all of the wealth gets redistributed away and siphoned off by everyone besides those who actually create the wealth.

The situation RIGHT NOW is that young middle class white Americans can barely afford homes, let alone children. Our government picks our pocket in order to import our competition. Corporations waste resources appointing Diversity Czars and giving undeserved hirings to unqualified applicants of non-white background. I've seen it with my own eyes during the hiring process as we passed over 4 different highly qualified white guys in favor of the 5th best qualified person (who "happened" to be black). Then society has the audacity to belittle us and say that we should feel privileged for slowly being displaced from our own nations.

Go fuck yourself

>>12174499
I'm not advocating for feudalism. I'm happy to pay taxes if I feel that the services rendered are valuable. However, with the current state and trajectory of American demographics, it is seems nearly impossible to make these programs work in a non-dysgenic way. These social programs are doomed to fail, and during the process of failing will only serve to redistribute time and resources away to people who cannot be more effective stewards of those resources.

>>12173598
>>12173970
You are so retarded. Why are you on an science board.

>>12173617
Why do chinamen do well on a an IQ test if its biased against non westerners?

>>12174206
no one is saying melanin causes low iq. You are so retarded. You should not be discussing science. Go talk about about Chinese cartoons on /a/ or look at porn on /b/ brainlet

>>12174555
Wrong. skin color is directly influenced by melanin. the common theory among race realists is that darker people are dumber (which includes southern Europeans and arabs, other dark "caucasoids" etc) and that the nordic races and north asians are the smartest. you don't even know the bullshit you are shilling

>>12170899
>A racist man got honors. He also stole other scientists' ideas.
>Hey maybe we shouldn't give terrible people honors.
Maybe if you had more than one brain cell you'd understand basic human decency. Stop filling /sci/ with filth and go back to /pol/.

>>12174937
There is a correlation between melanin and IQ. But no one is saying the melanin causes the low IQ. Otherwise albino africans would have 100 IQs

>>12170899
Neoliberalism. A global market is more profitable than the market of one nation, therefore, "the customer is always right" applies to the entire planet, which makes racism the worst crime possible under neoliberalism, because it shrinks the global market. That and environmentalism are the only two things people really hate nowadays, because most humans are perfectly bred consumer cattle now and those are the only things that threaten global capitalism.

>>12170908
Wrong.

>>12170899
>jew gets jews
excellent

>>12170908
>Easy, because of the history of sterilizing and euthanizing people for being in the wrong race and a fear that any inquiry that is objective at face value will lead to similar transgressions and to generalizations about individuals from racial make-up
if you are so tolerant, better hire those nigs to fill the quota into all important branches of research and see how your planes will fly (or won't) and how bridges will hold strong (or won't)

>>12174937
>IQ enviromentalists are so retarded they only manage to argue against their own shitty strawmen
Can't make it up

>>12171684
>moving the goalpost
Every fucking time

>>12172749
So you are saying that white genocide i.e demoralizing a population to make them effectively sterile whilst importing foreigners that have numerous children, is not genocide, but sterilizing retards would be retard genocide?

>>12172599
>Don't produce knives, they can hurt people
>Don't mine metals, they can be made into weapons which can hurt people
>Don't produce cars, they can hurt people
>Don't research nuclear physics, it can lead to nuclear weapons
>Don't research microbiology, it can lead to bioweapons
>Don't research chemistry, it can lead to chemical weapons
Yea, I'm thinking you're some sort of fearmongering 21st centuary luddite.

>>12172599
>Don't produce knives, they can hurt people
>Don't mine metals, they can be made into weapons which can hurt people
>Don't produce cars, they can hurt people
>Don't research nuclear physics, it can lead to nuclear weapons
>Don't research microbiology, it can lead to bioweapons
>Don't research chemistry, it can lead to chemical weapons
Yea, I'm thinking you're some sort of fearmongering 21st century luddite.

>>12170899

I personally don’t really care for Watson being stripped of titles. It’s pretty anti-free speech.

>>12172599
>Don't produce knives, they can hurt people
>Don't mine metals, they can be made into weapons which can hurt people
>Don't produce cars, they can hurt people
>Don't research nuclear physics, it can lead to nuclear weapons
>Don't research microbiology, it can lead to bioweapons
>Don't research chemistry, it can lead to chemical weapons
Yea, I'm thinking you're some sort of fearmongering 21st century luddite.

>>12172161
Back into the oven you go, little kikester shekelstein

>>12172615
America isn't supposed to be white. Its supposed to be a place everyone can go to enjoy.

>>12174259
ignore persecution posters. I was telling someone of reasonable intellect and seemingly open mind that we should ensure free, year long pre-k for blacks specifically because they need more support due to genetic differences in IQ.
They still thought I was being racist and that any possible variation in IQ was purely a result of socio-economics.
Then they also conceded that bone maturity and muscle density matured more quickly in Africans and that East Asians are almost always several inches shorter than whites/blacks.
These people cannot be reasoned with even if you're a person with the best intentions nevermind being neutral.

>>12170908
((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((....

>>12175500
>the long history of inequality of education in black communities have no consequences today
ok anon

>>12171051
We could stop dumping money into trying to educate them, stop giving them welfare under the pretense that they're just down on their luck, stop having society-wide struggle sessions about how it's bad that black people are overrepresented in prison, stop giving them jobs that are better suited for intelligent whites, etc.

Going against the Authorities and their dogmas no matter how retarded and obviously bullshit they were always has had severe repercussions.

>>12175500
Leave that stuff to nonwhite immigrants like me. We won't look for a reason to genocide because we can't carry it out. And they won't call us racist.

>>12175630
My greatest ally

>>12175630
this is what they ended up telling me as well but genocide is not what I had in mind.
>>12175531
I never said that wasn't a factor but maybe it's a bit of both hmm?

>>12171051
Benevolent slavery is the only solution.

>>12175780
If your data comes from populations who have fundamentally different access to quality education over many decades then you really can't make comparisons outside of those circumstances based on that data. It's disingenuous.

>>12172508
do you have children? if not then you are contributing to the extinction of the white races as much as a white liberal with 10 black kids.

>>12170899
It is an inconvenient truth to the modern political zeitgeist of our time