/sci/ - Science & Math

Slavery.

Slavery.

They're proud of their big digs and bigger asses.

Pottery
Fire
The wheel
language
spears
coppersmithing
agriculture

>>3570761

Confirmed for troll.

Well, they discover the world was round and how big it was long before those stupid europeans.

barbed stick on a vine; stab crocodile, reel in, eat, live to make another barbed stick on a vine

canoe

hut

>>3570769

[citation needed, motherfucker]

>>3570779
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes
Learn your facts, dumfuck.

>>3570779
And this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8cbIWMv0rI

>>3570793
Eratosthenes was greek, dumbfuck.

>>3570793
>pre-Colonial sub-Saharan Africa?

>cites a Greek

>>3570820
>>3570814
Eratosthenes was born in Cyrene (in modern-day Libya). Eratosthenes calculated the circumference of the Earth without leaving Egypt.

Oh you retard kids.

>>3570847
>sub-Saharan
>Libya
>Egypt

:|

>sub-Saharan
>Libya

inb4 jokes on you i was only pretending

>>3570766

Why is it that racists ask what sub-Saharan Africans invented, and then get mad when faced with the truth? They DID invent those things. Not every human is born knowing how to craft them, therefore they had to be created (except for perhaps language).

>>3570766
Please, you're dealing with Liberty here.
The dumbest tripfag on /sci/

If only they had guns, germs and steel.

Great Zimbabwe

>>3570883
Nice documentary, bro. It's really good.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science_and_technology_in_Africa

>>3570882
He does this on /k/ all the time too. Think I've even seen him on /co/ a couple times.

>>3570847
"Definition of "Sub-Saharan Africa" as used in the statistics of the UN institutions."
Protip: only the green part is sub-Saharan.

Also Eratosthenes was a Greek he may have been born and lived in Libya but he was racially and culturally Greek.

OP as to answer your questions while they were mostly primitive tribes and didn't have much in the way of advanced architecture they did have complex art in the form of pottery, masks, adornments, weapons, fabrics and carvings. Also there is evidence of cities the most famous example being Great Zimbabwe. As for inventions well there is the spear, stone tools, fire, rafts, huts, fishing, basic number theory, leather-working, hunting, dancing, singing and spoken language are some examples, there are probably more that I can't think of right now.

>>3570994
The making of Fire would have to rank among the Top Ten of scientific inventions.

Pretty good work for a bunch of darkies.

The throwing spear is also right up there. Multiplication of force, and all that.

>>3570769
>implying Egypt is south of the Sahara

>>3571030
they may be "backwards" technologically, but standing in a hollowed out log floating in crocodile infested waters with a stick tied to a vine is pretty bad ass.

>>3570994
in fact, we are all sub-saarian descendents according genetics and paleontology proofs, of course without divine intervention from "god" or what else you have with particular faith.......

>Implying northen europeans weren't eating and burning each other while the greeks and romans were laying down the foundations of western civilization

>>3571039
Here's some more badass, for ya.

>>3571064
Thats a theory. If you only discovered a small fraction of relicts and bones from tens of thousands of years, it's very likely your theory will reflect the patterns of discovery. But if you had all the necessary evidence you might see a much more complicated picture, perhaps with many branches coming out of Asia and Africa. There's so much left-wing politics in anthropology...

>>3571079
Yeah, that probably explains stonehenge.

>>3571106
>implying one simple structure is equivalent to the tremendous advancements made by the Romans and Greeks

>>3571098
yep, and theoretical fossils......

>>3571098
Reality has a well-known liberal bias.

We should fund more Conservative Science, researching things like Evolution is Just A Theory, Global Warming is a Conspiracy and, of course, God Did It.

stone axes.

cooking.

>>3571125
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celts

>>3571151
John Stuart-Mills once noted that 'Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives', it is no surprice that empirical evidence tends to have a 'bias' against some of their beliefs.

We get it. Sub-Saharan Africa is a shit-hole that has not produced a remarkable invention since prehistory. Their civilizations are utter garbage of ancient culture rooted in ignorance and corruption.

>>3571192

that's what i like to hear. now let's lynch some niggers

>>3571192
>not produced a remarkable invention since prehistory.
I personally thought the apatite was quite a remarkable invention

>>3571192
yea, ignorance and corruption aren't remotly pervasive in any other civilizations

South Africa Dr. Trevor Lloyd Wadley invented the Tellurometer the first successful microwave electronic distance measurement equipment, in 1959

>>3571205
That's a great argument for ignorance and corruption.

>Make excuses for africans because they are a naive, child-like race.
>But equal to all other races
>But not equal to evil white race

>>3571237

....aaaaaand he was white

>>3571192
WTF? did you forget the first ever heart transplant, performed by Dr Chris Barnard?

>>3571237
>pre-Colonial

>>3571192
was in reply to this. :p
>>3571251

also you can;t forget the CAT scan was invented in South Africa.

>>3571245
what are you babbling about?

>>3571247
what has colour and race got to do with country of origin?

>>3571271
because the crux of the issue for these people is to somehow either demean an entire group or feel apart of a larger (and totally amazing!) group.

>>3571267
Liberal apologist detected

>>3571287
what am i apologizing for?

>Africa
>scientific innovations

Sub-Saharan Africans in Uganda have been doing C-sections since before European contact. Probably before Europeans themselves could do it.

>>3571106

or the nebra sky disk

"the find reconfirms that the astronomical knowledge and abilities of the people of the European Bronze Age included close observation of the yearly course of the Sun, and the angle between its rising and setting points at summer and winter solstice. While Stonehenge and the Neolithic "circular ditches" such as the 5th millennium BC Goseck circle were used to mark the solstices, the disk is the oldest known "portable" instrument to allow such measurements"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nebra_sky_disk

>>3571293
Being part of the evil white race (the central ideal of all anti-racism arguments)

>>3571106
>inb4 tinfoil

>>3571302
why are white people evil?
Or are you getting white people and protestants mixed up?

>>3571308
cuz dey been oppresen the black masta race

>>3570739
well, well, OP, you win, nice troll bait thread.......

>>3571301
So they had knowledge of astronomy in ancient times, so what? lots of culture's keep track of the stars to keep track of the seasons for farming purposes

>>3571308

>protestants
>white

oops......wrong board nvm

SERBIA
YES
YES
YES
btw

>>3571295
>His land swarmed with powerful docile animals

Please show me an animal native to SSA that is domistacteable that hasn't benn domesticated before european contact

>>3571342

oh what's that? I'm sorry I couldn't hear you over how much of a nigger you are

>>3571302
>they want people to be treated like people and not be oppressed based on race
>how anti white

Dat massive retardation.

>>3571341
what's that about serbia?
i'm just saying most of history's dick moves have been made by protestants, or mongols.

>>3571324

>so what

well, its an indicator of culture and contradicts the clicheed depiction of cavemen-like european savages at that point in time of some poster above

>>3571350
To deny facts about the race and claim equality with them is very anti-white.

>>3571358
>what's that about serbia?

you wouldnt understand. its a jersey err /int/ thing

>>3571350see>>3571370
in their warped minds they consider themselves better than a variety of groups (depending on the day) therefore to claim equality is, somehow, racist against 'whites'.
Like i said before, i dont wanna be lumped in with these protestant cunts; i fail to see how you can consier europeans as one blanket group anyway (same applies to any 'race')

>>3571375
i stopped going to the board since the /new/ disporia infected
although they appear to be in here too...

>>3571378
Equality of races or groups of people is an unscientific notion. Survival of the fittest is how nature evolves.

>>3571385

you dont miss much. its probably the biggest trolling board after /b/ + massive polish butthurt and stormfags

>>3571385
Should've kept /new/ around so they could at least have a place to congregate on their own rather than spread across 4chan. I'm still completely against how the site responds to it all. 4chan's stance on racism is obvious censorship that shouldn't happen.

>>3571389
im not sure you know what survival of the fittest means.
Put it one way; if civilization died out tomorrow you and i would be dead. Tribes in the Kalahari would still survive.
Survival of the fittest has nothing to with being the smartest, strongest or literally fittest but, rather, the most adaptive to survival.
It certainly doesn't mean social darwinism.
Geniune sciencific theory should also focus on falsification; in which case Neil Tyson DeGrasse would go against your stupidity for one.
>>3571392
we still get stormfags here apparently, and less poland jokes sadly.

Sub-Saharan Africa probably has the least arable land of any subcontinent that has historically been populated by humans.

Arable land is necessary for the development of civilization.
Arable land allows society to afford professions that don't feed only the most basic needs.
If you have arable land, you can have intellectuals.

If you don't have a place for intellectuals in your society, you don't have any way to increase the intellectual climate of your population to that necessary for more advanced civilizations.
Allowing the survival of a larger number of individuals who cannot otherwise support themselves or their families will naturally increase the number of intellectuals which survive. If you have a higher ratio of intellectuals reproducing, you will, on average, have a higher number of individuals with hereditary factors that contribute to higher intelligence reproducing, and subsequently the intellectual climate of your civilization increases as the ratio of intellectuals to others increases as technology improves to support more individuals who would otherwise have to fend for their own basic needs. It's a cyclical process that improves civilization constantly until humans reach a biological plateu.

But you need the catalyst of arable land. It doesn't matter what other resources you have. People who reprimand Africans and others who did not develop even with abundant resources are ignorant. You cannot make use of mineral resources for civilization before you have arable land which, other than humans and language, are the most basic requirements for any civilization to exist in the first place.

(continued)

While IQ may not be the perfect indicator of intellectual capacity, it's really the best thing we have available which has been tested across a wide variety of ancestral groups and nationalities. So using IQ, we estimate that the average IQ of the US around the 1920s was just over 80 in comparison with 98 today.
This may be for a number of reasons, including improved public education, healthcare, and nutrition on average. But there's no reason to believe that selection factors for hereditary factors that contribute to higher intelligence are not also dynamic over history. In fact, most of the gains in the average IQ of society tend to come from a "compression" effect, where on a bell curve of IQ scores, the lower IQ groups experience the greatest gains in IQ scores. It is not a result of the frequencies of the highest IQ groups expanding forward. In other words, the most intelligent humans today aren't that much more intelligent than the most intelligent humans 100 years ago or perhaps even in 10000BC.

Indeed, this theory is corroborated by testing in the US, which shows that the white-black gap is closing, due more to the black average tending to increase at a faster rate. The black population also contains the hereditary traits necessary for intellectuals, considering Africans have the greatest genetic variation of any race, as a result of the human diaspora having its ancestral roots in Africans. But at the moment these traits are prevalent at lower frequency that, as living standards improve, will lower over generations.

>Exist since the dawn of humanity
>Inferior
>Create an unsustainable society for a few hundred years
>Superior

I wonder what it'll be like when everyone in the developed world dies off and humanity re-evolves whites from the remaining humans in undeveloped areas.

>>3571403

id do agree with you that the censorship is pretty lame here ( eg getting banned simply for typing the correct name of a follower of a certain abrahamic religion).

on the other hand you have to admit that some stuff posted on these boards is pretty much over the top ( i still think most are trolls but you never know)

>>3571422
>will lower over generations

*will increase (the ratio) over generations

>>3571417
Neil Tyson DeGrasse ... he discovered what now? Oh that's right, he's a media popularizer .. the equivalant of a newscaster reading the news. gtfo.

>>3571151
I'm not from the US, so you can shut your dichotomic thinking schemata off this time, although the patterns tell you to think the same way when you see them.

>>3571150
What if there is a similar fossil buried in some South-Asian forest, but it wasn't found yet?

A summary of the political wars in paleoanthropology to either promote the out-of-Africa hypothesis or an alternative:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2007/02/the-origin-of-humans/

The multiregional hypothesis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiregional_hypothesis)) seems to gather more support lately, since it allows for more diverse branches between which there was interbreeding going on.

The mudd hut.

Lol serious sub Saharan African have never done anything. For thousands of years they ddnt invent anything or improve anything.

the first languages came into existence in africa.
so they can do that, arguably the most important human invention ever.

>>3571417

>Survival of the fittest has nothing to with being the smartest, strongest or literally fittest but, rather, the most adaptive to survival.
It certainly doesn't mean social darwinism.

this.
im bored of all those 14 years olds misinterpreting it.

>>3571447
Fun fact: no sub-Saharan country ever developed a written language

>>3571447
also our ability to swim (alone amongst all the primates) i saw a study that also argued that a period of eating fish helped our brain development.
Not that it's an invention but the human (as we know it) was shaped by the African plains.

>>3571452 most adaptive to survival
I can plow a field all day long, I can catch catfish from dusk til dawn.
I got a shotgun, rifle and a four wheel drive and a country boy can survive.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Science_and_Technology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Science_and_Technology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Science_and_Technology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Science_and_Technology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Science_and_Technology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Science_and_Technology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Science_and_Technology

That reminds me, anyone have that graph of industrial output, population, living standards, &c. that predicts modern civilization is unsustainable and doomed?

>>3571452
>believes humans are animals
>but evolution doesn't apply to humans

Egyptians were mostly Arab according to genetic studies. So I assume we're talking about sub-Saharan black Africans.

But sub-Saharans had iron and land empires, I believe. They also had pots, pans, cooking, and almost all the trappings of a tribal society you would find anywhere on the globe. Tribal violence, widespread hunger, predators, and disease definitely hindered progress. One can make the case that their IQs were too low, but that argument breaks down when you look at other low-IQ groups (such as the Meso-Americans, among others) who did manage to build lasting civilization.

>>3571484
Well i think its been obvious for awhile that it's unsustainable; whether due to overpopulation, pollution, nuclear war etc
>>3571491
again you are twisted evolution to fit your ignorant beliefs; evolution takes millions of years- our culture and society has moved far quicker than our biology can adapt to.
'Races' are not different evolutionary branches or seperate species. Skin colour is merely a switch in ones genetic code that effects the colour of skin pigments to be better suited to a certain environment.
Just like Northern Europeans are pale to get more vitamin D from less sunlight

>>3571495 did manage to build lasting civilization
And temples, and pyramids, and a written language and...

>>3571420
Then why the fuck some early humans migrated out of Africa and some stayed behind? Because the smartest ones left Africa and went on to discover agriculture, while the dumb gorrilla types thought they reached the peak of technological advancement with the great discovery of using the chopped rock.

>>3571505
>"evolution takes millions of years"

10,000 years to change skin pigmentation

Genetic studies have found that Neanderthal (who had larger brains than Cro-Magnon) DNA is found in all races EXCEPT sub-Saharan Africans.

Does this have /anything/ at all to do with their lack of technology, or is it racist to point out that there really is a genetic difference between blacks and the rest of the world?

>>3571523
a superficial change, we all share the same cognitive and social functions; thing of the little things that most cultures share, but other primates don't, such as the smile, handshake or bowing for the simplist examples.

>>3571510
Plus mathematic and discoveries in astronomy that were even superior to the Arabians.

>>3571525
No because Neanderthals were still dumb as shit, they lacked reflexivity and thus were terrible hunters and got out hunted by homo sapiens.
Whilst we set traps and crafted art from our prey's bones they rushed (and mostly died doing so.) their prey.

>>3571525
Wrong. First off, though, I do agree that the intelligence of sub-Saharans is lower--but your "explanation" is pseudoscientific.

1. First you have to establish that Neanderthals were more intelligent than H. sapiens, simply because their skulls were larger.

2. Neanderthals lived between 200,000 and 300,000 years without creating any technology besides the spear.

3. Using admixture with Neanderthals, who never left remnants of anything resembling civilization, as explanation of technological superiority, is a clearly contradictory argument.

>>3571541
the arab astronomers accuratly calculated the circumference of the Earth whilst Europeans were being arrested for saying the sun is the centre of the universe

>>3571541
lol, algebra and spherical trigonometry?
o rly?

>>3571559
*solar system
although back then the solar system was seen as the universe in the geocentric model

fire and the wheel

>>3571567
>implying early Arabs and Israelis didn't first discover fire

>>3571568
i hope you realise we need fire to eat meat, and were eating meat before there were arabs or israelis

>>3571563
those were persian inventions.

>>3571559
if this was facebook i'd like your post

>>3571559

>whilst Europeans were being arrested for saying the sun is the centre of the universe

if youre referring to galileo thats simply wrong.
he wasnt arrested because of publishing his works about a heliocentric solar system - the pope even encouraged him before.
he was arrested because he insulted the pope -his biggest supporter until that point - in his book

>>3571563 implying algebra wasn't invented by the Indians (dot, not feather)

>>3571581
Galileo believed the tides were proof of heliocentrism. The Church thought he was an idiot. Wouldn't you?

Might I note that according to those racial IQ studies (source: Richard Lynn's books), Arabs have an IQ between 80-90. Yet they are responsible for a great deal of science. East Indians have an IQ around 81, yet they are also responsible for some scientific/mathematical progress. As much as I used to agree with them, I am finding myself increasingly skeptical.

>>3571578
Technically you don't need fire to eat meat, its just much more safe. Its more than likely that Africans were breeding enough to make up for their loss of population from disease. And yes, the earliest record of fire actually was in Israel.

Unrelated, I read an interesting conspiracy theory report a while ago linking the discovery of fire to the control of humans through the ages actually, with the Israelis being the initial discoverers thinking that fire was God speaking to them through the flames, making them the chosen people of the world.

>>3571592
>>3571581

reminds me of the people arguing that the clergy opposed columbus expedition to india because they believed in a flat earth.
nobody believed this at that point in time. they opposed the idea because they (correctly) estimated the distance to india via the western route being MUCH bigger than columbus claimed.

Hadnt there been America in between ( which nobody knew about) the members of the expedition would have starved

>>3571552

Neanderthals had fucked up mouth shapes that limited the sounds they could make. Lots if scientists believe that they were probably smarter but lacked effective oral comma ovation which hindered their development.

>>3571634
That's why they inventedd the flute.

>>3571634
>Lots if scientists believe that they were probably smarter but lacked effective oral comma ovation which hindered their development.

Yeah, I'm gonna have to need a citation on that.

>>3571610
Colombus was pretty well laughable all around. He just struck dumb luck and is now glorified in history.

>>3571657

Duh

>>3571634

They were simply unintelligent. Even isolated hunter-gatherer groups in the middle of nowhere who haven't traded with other people in thousands of years have much more advanced tools than neanderthals ever possessed.

>>3571634
Well, my theory is that Neanderthals invented many technologies but they were stolen by other greedy Homo fucks. And then archeologists found most of the tech in Sapiens caves and tombs and thought, yeah we were most advanced and shit. But Neanderthals were more like aspies today, they were less social and more inventive probably.
What kind of a mind you need to have to invent the flute, instead of dancing like tribal Africans hitting your chest like a gorrila.

>>3571634
Just because they didn't sound like us doesn't mean they lacked effective oral communication. They had a hyoid bone -- they could talk. They had far larger nerve bundles going to the face and mouth. They could probably communicate better than us in facial expression, and possibly orally as well.

>>3571597

errm, theres archeological that even the australopithecina already used fire.....that was 1.5 - 4 million years ago

i really doubt that collective israeli memory dates back that far

>>3571695

*archeological evidence

>>3571634
The Neanderthal brain was 8% larger than the Sapiens brain (note the spelling error in the pic; not mine). The frontal part of their brains were smaller, and the larger volume is restricted to the back, the "occupital bun." This would suggest that the Neanderthal brain was geared toward running and dexterity, which would make sense given that Neanderthals were hunters with very little to no agriculture.

>>3571692

>mfw aspies are just the Neanderthal genes taking over

Making fire is so easy a caveman can do it.

>>3571597
>Technically you don't need fire to eat meat

go kill a cow and eat it raw please.
Cooking food is part of adaptation and we have used fire well before migration to the middle east

>>3571713
The revenge of the Neanderthal.

We fucked with them, their genes fuck with us.

>>3571692
Half baked theory is half baked.

>>3571420
Thats no excuse by your own map south and central America have even less but that didn't stop them from building great cities and civilizations.

This is probably relevant:

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/08/15/110815fa_fact_kolbert

>>3571713
makes sense since they showed no signs of reflexivity so were introverts

>>3571706

That makes sense then. The frontal lobe is where all of the great deep thinking happens isn't it.

>>3571709
I would, if years of evolution from eating cooked meat didn't prevent from doing so. Guess what, there was a period in human history where we didn't have fire yet.

>>3571718
Yes, it's half baked but it's possible. The fact that Neanderthals were the first to bury their dead shows they had some spiritual beliefs, which was the most advanced shit you could invent back then (even though today is proved to be erroneous).
They must have been a trippy type of humans.

>>3570769
only laymen though the world was flat, even in ancient times.

>>3571706
>The frontal part of their brains were smaller, and the larger volume is restricted to the back, the "occupital bun." This would suggest that the Neanderthal brain was geared toward running and dexterity, which would make sense given that Neanderthals were hunters with very little to no agriculture.

What makes you think that? Isnt' the occipital lobe where visual information is mostly processed? It might show that they were very good at observing patterns, but not so good at planning and thinking.

>>3571796
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occipital_bun

Also, the occipital lobe isn't involved in finding patterns. That's the parietal lobe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occipital_lobe

>>3571755
Eeven elephants mourn their dead, neanderthals weren't smart- hence being out hunted by their weaker cousins (us).

>>3571821
If you were to go toe to toe with a gorilla (or pretty much any primate), who would win? Obviously the primate. Obviously that doesn't make him smarter than you, just that the primate is fighting solely based off strength and instinct while you're forced to rely only on prior knowledge of fighting.

>>3571814
Yeha, well pattern-observation involves many areas. So the occipital bun might be explained by enlarged cerebellum.

Recently the cerebellum was found to be involved in abstract thinking (google also motor cognition), especially in mental rotation tasks (but also in memory tasks). The fact that they had smaller frontal lobes says a lot though.

>>3571821
Yeah well even in this species the smart are outbreeded by the stupid. I suppose the same thing pay have happened to Neanderthals.

>>3571821
Yeah well, even in this species the smart are outbred by the stupid. I suppose the same thing may have happened to Neanderthals.

>>3571468
3-5 small paragraphs for each field of science for the WHOLE CONTINENT lol

>>3571836
Im not sure what you're getting at to be honest.
Firstly humans are primates too, secondly they are stronger but collectivly humans are smarter- the same applies in relation to neanderthals.
Whilst we we setting traps they hunted much like a lion would, resulting in very high mortality rates too.

I return, with my old trip. Mwahaha.

I also see an OP who should be banned.

>>3571855
>Yeah well even in this species the smart are outbreeded by the stupid. I suppose the same thing pay have happened to Neanderthals.

In such a primitive society, smart people would be mostly indistinguishable form dumb people, since there really was no way to channel their intelligence, other than perhaps hunting better (though that depends more on physicality than intelligence).

>>3571865
Tha'ts because they were fearless.

>>3571861
Thing is, the Neanderthals are still very much alive. Modern Jews at the top of the totem pole ARE Neanderthals using their intelligence to keep lowly homo sapiens controlled. I'm not even joking either.

>>3571892
>Modern Jews at the top of the totem pole ARE Neanderthals using their intelligence to keep lowly homo sapiens controlled. I'm not even joking either.

[citation needed]

Genetically speaking, Jews are extremely related to other Europeans.

>>3571861
This was before birthcontrol numbnuts, less breeding was most likely a sign of a lack of resources to maintain a larger population.
They were bad hunters, deal with it you weird neanderthal loving fuck.
>>3571884
worked well for them didn't it.

>>3571905
>conspiracy theory
>citation

>>3571892
Then you'll be sad to hear that we have neanderthal DNA, and jews are far less than 100% neanderthal.

>>3571892
Seriously. I want to know what makes you believe that Jews are more Neanderthal than the rest of non-Africans.

>>3571892
They had smaller frontal lobes dude. Maybe they weren't so smart after all. But they could have brought some new element to the Sapiens species, like a greater influence of the cerebellum on cognition. Aren't aspies good at mental rotation and stuff?

>>3571463

Actually, Afrikaans was developed in South Africa. But that's a technicality; Africans are pretty dumb.

>>3571931
They share nearly every physical indication of Neanderthals.

>>3571953
Such as...?

>>3571953
Occipital buns?

>>3571953
the ability to rip a mans arm out of its socket?

>>3571953
Neanderthals had strong muscles. Jews are pretty weak and nerdy.

>>3571706
Larger brain does'nt mean smarter brain. It means they needed more calories to feed that monster. They must have spent a lot of time feeding.

>>3571976
They are also not known for prominent brow ridges.

Dairy farming actually
which is even more impressive because the species of cow they were working with can not actually be domesticated in the traditional sense (they just penned them in and distracted them with food while they milked them.)
Also they invented language,oral and written history,spears,bows,boats,pottery,metalsmithing,and a various other things independently from the rest of the world (even though the rest of the world made those things too).

>>3571955
They share their larger than average nose, slanted back forehead, projecting jaw and developed frontal lobe. Also their short, but well built stature and projecting neck.

>>3571988

What engineering, technological or scientific innovations were invented on or near the equator? Or in a tropical place?

And while we're at it, you ever notice how cooler climates moved out of agriculture and into an industrial society faster than those in warmer climates? Plus why are so many tropical and arid climates still hunter-gatherer and failing to modernize?

Oh wait never mind. This is a racism-debate bait. Nobody actually cares about the topic.

>>3571988
The nose is the only thing remotely close, and I don't think we're even certain what neanderthal noses looked like. All the other traits don't seem to have anything to do with jews at all.

Also
>neaderthal
>developed frontal lobe
what?

Guys, the neanderthal-jew thing is pointless. DNA tests thoroughly debunk the recent troll ITT.

>>3571988
>larger than average nose
Arabs have this, too. So do Italians/Mediterraneans.

>projecting jaw
Blacks have this, and they have very little Neanderthal genes.

>developed frontal lobe
Do you mean "underdeveloped"?

>>3572000
I blame the ease of living in a tropical climate. When you have so much food so easily obtained, you can afford to not advance. People north had to work hard to farm enough grain to live, and always innovated to get more out of their effort, but Africans have always been able to more or less survive off of hunting and gathering

>>3571953
?

>>3572000
Meso-Americans had some pretty astounding discoveries. All I can think of.

>people look like an artist's interpretation of what our closest ancestors looked like
>they must be our closest ancestors and lesser because we all know evolution is linear and works from worst to greatest.

>>3572000
>Oh wait never mind. This is a racism-debate bait. Nobody actually cares about the topic.

I don't get it.

We have these topics every night, and every night someone rages about how others seem to prevent them from debating the topic.

Nobody's stopping you contrary to your victim complex. Go ahead, prove that it is genes that is behind the differences in civilizations.
Just drop the anger about being "shunned" and that's the only reason people might disagree vehemently. It's old and I don't buy it.

>>3572000
Dude, I asked earlier on: Why did only some early Homo Sapiens leave Africa if the climate was better elsewhere? Because they were smarter. The IQ evidence also shows that. It's not racism, it's true. Truth is not politically or morally correct.

>>3572023
All that the IQ evidence shows is that they have lower IQs. It doesn't demonstrate your pseudo-evolutionary theory that "those who left Africa were smarter," which doesn't even make sense (i.e., wouldn't it follow that they evolved greater intelligence AFTER leaving?).

>>3572023
>Why did only some early Homo Sapiens leave Africa if the climate was better elsewhere? Because they were smarter.
lolwhat

There are far more plausible arguments that would paint the people leaving as unfit outcasts. Basically, your argument isn't gonna fly because there are even better ones of the same kind going the other direction.

didnt aborigines sail to australia from sub saharan africa?

>>3572023
WHY DID THEY LEAVE?

>BECAUSE THEY WERE SMART!

WHY DID THEY LEAVE?

>BECAUSE THEY WERE SMART!

WHY DID THEY LEAVE, ANON?

>BECAUSE THEY WERE SMART!

>>3572010

i think these are related:
>>3571420
>>3571422
If it's the genetic angle you want to discuss, you need civilization to have social Darwinian selection of more intelligent individuals. And you can't catalyze civilization without arable land. Hunter-gatherers can't do it.

also , cool pic.

>>3572018
i think he is actually saying that there are environmental factors in social developments, which makes sense as this post points out >>3572010

>>3571988
Check this out:
>>3571706
Smaller frontal cranium than Homo Sapiens.

>>3572036
You can't have civilization without arable land, which is why there aren't many large civilizations in Sub-Saharan Africa. People up north came together and farmed and created civilizations, while Africans could subsist on hunting and gathering and didn't. That's what I'm saying.

>>3572023
that doesn't seem reasonable.
as hunter-gatherers, they might have followed their herds to where they grazed in more fertile pastures.
just being intelligent doesn't mean they somehow had some clairvoyance as to knowing that other continents were better than ancient africa at supporting human civilization.
The specialization to suitability for foreign lands, genetic and cultural, likely occurred after the human diaspora settled elsewhere, not before they left africa. This is corroborated by the fact that Africans have the greatest range of genetic differences of any race.

>>3572032
Like which. Show some evidence.

>>3572018

>your victim complex

You don't know who I am or what my background is. Try not filling in the blanks with your own preconceptions about who you argue with.

>Go ahead, prove that it is genes that is behind the differences in civilizations.

I didn't make any such claim. I think geography has played a huge roll in the way our species has grown. And unless every single person in this thread wants to write a thesis on the matter, you're in no position to demand such a high standard of proof in an internet debate.

>>3572023


>Why did only some early Homo Sapiens leave Africa if the climate was better elsewhere?

Because some people stay where they're comfortable. Because it's risky. Because "better" is qualitative. Maybe some people didn't want to risk moving away from established food and water sources to fight the cold and face a possibility of dying. And maybe they didn't know how much migration would play on the unfolding of human history.

>>3572046
Then why the fuck didn't they get out of Africa while there was still plenty of free land elsewhere? Becuase they didn't see a problem with just sitting in Africa and hunting, that's why. It didn't make sense to them that having agriculture can lead to better living conditions.

People need to be disabused of the idea that intelligence is strictly hereditary. Intelligence is how you perceive and adapt to the world - some ideas help you perceive the world better, some don't. Religion and superstition are intelligence lowering ideas, understanding the theory of evolution makes you smarter. You can't ignore the role of education.

>>3572065
Sorry, but that just isn't backed up by research. Intelligence is real and quite hereditary, all else being equal (i.e., nourishment).

>>3572063
Please. You paint the northerners as clairvoyants who magically knew that in the end, agriculture would be better. Do you really think that's true? The people who migrated from Africa probably did so for a variety of reasons. They could simply not like where they lived at the time, they could have been shunned by their community, there might have been overpopulation in their area. Whatever the case, there will always have remained some people in Africa.

>>3572072
I didn't say intelligence isn't real or hereditary. I said it isn't STRICTLY hereditary. There is a large environmental factor. You say "all else being equal" but its quite clear that all else is NOT equal in the real world when we're trying to compare intelligence between demographics.

>>3572046
There were no borders or states when agriculture was invented. They could have migrated then, but they didn't.

Some people used boats to migrate on islands in the Pacific.

I tell you what. Because Africans have more testosterone than the rest of the world, but also lower IQs. The two are related...
It appears that populations with higher testosterone are more primitive, they rely more on physical brute force than intelligence to procure food or to have reproductive success.

>>3572079
This post makes very little sense, and the nonsequitur doesn't help.

Not everybody likes to just get up and leave home, even today. The people who left Africa were probably desperate for some resource, or outcasts, or chased their prey out of their continent. Nobody said, "I'm going to go to where I can't hunt and gather, specifically so I can establish the agriculture that will one day become a civilization!" Maybe some early farmers even left seeking arable land, but that doesn't make the ones that stayed stupid for staying.

>>3572095
Assuming that's true, why is it true?

>>3572095
Citation needed, motherfucker. There's a lot of simplistic pseudoscience about testosterone.

>>3572095
http://jcem.endojournals.org/content/92/7/2519.full
Serum Estrogen, But Not Testosterone, Levels Differ between Black and White Men in a Nationally Representative Sample of Americans

>>3572095
A lot of Europeans have high testosterone, too. Probably more. Why are whites and Arabs hairier than everyone else?

>>3572107
Because a brain which relies more on aggression and domination as behavioural strategies to get resources and mates is not going to develop very subtle or soft technologies to get the same thing. Civilisations based on agriculture and technology rely more on intelligence than aggression to get resources and mates.

It's a sort of breeding domestication in the human species. The non-African types produced more neotenous types (with fair skin and some with blond hair), but with lower aggression.

>>3572130
I understand that. Why did Africans develop that way but non-Africans not? That's what I'm asking.

>>3572130
The only way you can possibly argue that non-Africans were less aggressive than Africans is through a complete ignorance of human history, notwithstanding the fact that the premise of your argument is false.

>>3572115
That's circuling T levels in the blood. I mean testosterone which influenced the development of bones and tissue, but also behavioural traits. Blacks are known to be among the best athletes because they have longer bones in the locomotive system. That's testosterone influence on bone formation.

>>3572075
A logical and extremely simple conclusion which the person you're arguing couldn't magic up on his own.

Why do you bother talking to idiots?

>>3572132
Because Africans are probably closer to the ancestors which separated from the big apes than non-Africans.

>>3572105
I vote outcast. I bet they were neandthal nerds, the same kind the skulk through /sci/ today. Couldn't get laid, couldn't get kissed. They probably were pedophiles too, and kidnapped little girls to father their ugly children.

>see, its fun making up fancy reasons for speciation.

Most of the shit ITT is pure speculation, conjecture, and unsourced pseudo/sci/ence. Sage for dumbfaggotry. It could have been a good thread.

>>3572161
Isn't it? I imagine paleontologists have a lot of fun.

The reasons for "speciation" (not really speciation, since different ethnicities are not different species) aren't important, I was just throwing those out there. The point is that, whatever the reasons really were, magic superintelligent agricultural civilization-founders did not cause the migration out of Africa.

>>3572156
You just keep saying that. I understand you, but this thread is asking WHY. Why, assuming that what you're saying is true and not just baseless racism, are Africans less distantly related from our ape ancestors than whites? Why did they evolve that way, if they did?

>>3572166
Conjecture and speculation is how scientific theories come about. Close-mindedness and refusal to accept a theory because it conflicts with your politics is how knowledge repression comes about.

>>3572173
There's a difference between scientific conjecture and pure psuedo-science trying to muddy the waters

>>3572166
You also pulled that off.

9/10

>your extrapolation of thread category is poor. Theres little chance this wouldn't devolved into a nigga hate love fest.

>>3572166
What did you expect from a thread where OP asks us to confirm his racism?

>>3572173
>Conjecture and speculation is how scientific theories come about.
No, that's how hypotheses come about. You engage in research or use research of others.

>Close-mindedness and refusal to accept a theory because it conflicts with your politics is how knowledge repression comes about.
You're doing it again, retard. You're assuming what my position is, and you actually guessed wrong (but that's besides the point).

Again, sage for dumbfuckery.

>>3572172
Because, I've been sayin this for some time, in a different environment, the selection pressure was for more neotenous-looking types. So non-African populations were exposed to more selection pressures towards less aggressive-looking human types. They changed faster the phenotype which showed physical attractiveness. And this correlates with lower aggression and greater neoteny/paedomorphic physical types. Also this paedomorphisation of non-Africans had a big impact on cognition, since childhood is the period when the human offspring is most susceptible to learning.

You guys realize Neanderthals lived through one of the roughest ice ages in history. They couldn't develop an agricultural society in those conditions. Their bodies allowed them to retain heat better than Humans. The warming Earth allowed Humans to encroach on their territory more than they could before.

It's like wondering why eskimos couldn't make pyramids in the middle of siberia

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbYtASAakAI

Living in a society based on farming requires division of labour and storing food. This is especially true in the north. Certain cognitive abilities favor survival and during thousands of years the process has left its mark.

No seasons = abundance of fruit, meat year round. No reason to organize society.

>>3571597
I'm not going to do a complete summary of the book, or provide Cliff Notes, but almost everything you folks have raised in this thread have been addressed, and quite convincingly by Jared Diamond, in his Pulitzer Prize winning book, Guns, Germs, and Steel. I happen to have a copy of that very book sitting on my desk at the moment.
African soil is very poor and mass agriculture is not possible and cannot support large populations. (people migrated out of Africa due to looking for food). Malaria is endemic in Africa, hence a huge mortality rate. The mosquito can only be avoided by moving to higher elevations, where again, large-scale agriculture is improbable. (Climate again, and germs).

People WANDERED out of Africa. The immigrations occurred over a period of several hundred thousand years. Lots of time to change skin color, forehead slope, etc. Australians and other Pacifica groups come via India, not Africa, and are more closely related to Mongols than Africans.) People FORGET and/or abandon technology, which is what happened to the Abos and New Guinea peoples.
lots more. Read the fucking book or watch the movie: http://thesituationist.wordpress.com/2008/11/27/the-situation-of-inequality-guns-germs-and-steel/

Middle East, temperate climate, shallow and easily damned rivers, more agriculture, more leisure time, more education. Steel and the push to the west.

>>3570739
The spear, fire, hands...

Is AIDS one?

>>3572494
>>3572494

You are an idiot if you believe that retarded book.

Blacks are fucking useless. They prove this over and over again. They ruin everything they touch. Africa is a MASSIVE and BOUNTIFUL continent. The farm land in many places (Zimbabwe for example) actually rivals some of the best farm land in the USA.

And let's talk about Zimbabwe. Until the new racist groid government of Zimbabwe stole the farms away from the Whites and let the groids loot and pillage them, Zimbabwe made TONS of food. They made so much food that they fed many other African countries. Now that the groids have kicked the Whites off of their own farms, they haven't done any farming (groids dont like work and agriculture is a lost concept on them).

Instead of taking over the farms (from the Whites) and making FOOD, they instead, did what groids do, and looted the farms. They sold and scapped the farm equipment. They let the crops die. They ripped up the irigation plumbing and sold it for scrap.

And now let's talk about Liberia. After the sympathetic Union government won the American Civil War, they created a new nation in Africa for any American slave who wanted to start a new life in their very own new country. They were given food, money, and assistance to get the country started. They went there by CHOICE.

And now look at liberia. It is the most crime and disease-ridden war-torn hellhole on earth.

The fact is that blacks are pretty much useless, and your stupid book is just the latest bunch of liberal excuses for these violent, tepid, proto-humans.

>>3572579

First the liberal excuses for why black suck was the fact that whites run the USA and Africa. Now blacks are in control of Africa - colonialism is gone, apartied is outlawed, and now it has been taken even further - the farms have been stolen from the whites and GIVEN to the blacks. Whites control amost nothing in africa anymore. And guess what? They still suck. So this is where your stupid book comes in. You need a new fresh round of excuses for the vile pseudo-human groids.

The fact remains that NO black 'civilization' (if you can even call it that) has EVER created ANY written language. NO numbering systems beyond the most basic. NO agriculture. NO architecture. NO tools beyond the most very basic wooden tools. They literally never made it out of the stone age!

Blacks have literally created nothing without the help of whites and other races.

Literally. Nothing.

Any idiot can see this. But, unfortunately, you are all politically-corrected idiots.

Good luck.

>>3572579
ever notice that the more bountiful an environment the less technology its inhabitants will produce?

yes?
anthropologists beat you by a century.

>>3572583

Oh I get it. It was TOO EASY to live in Africa.

So this is why they are all starving?

Pick one, moron.

>>3572583
you people and your utterly ridiculous simplifications of incredibly vast an complex issues...

>>3572595
They're starving because they breed faster than they can feed (which is partly the fault of western countries sending them aid)

>>3572595
They're starving because liberal munificence feeds them without giving them the tools to feed themselves... moron.

and by tools I don't mean tools.

>>3572600
They're starving because of failed crop harvests due to droughts (lol climate change) and empty seas because lol multinational fishing corporations.

>>3572599
>you people and your utterly ridiculous simplifications of incredibly vast an complex issues...
>simplifying complex issues
>ALL NIGGERS ARE SUBHUMAN NEGRO BEASTS WHO CANT DO ANYTHING UNLIKE THE CAUCASIAN MASTER RACE

Cute.

>>3572595
They're starving because of Jews. Because why the hell not?

>>3572599
>utterly ridiculous simplifications
>blacks are awesome its just too easy/hard to live in Africa or some shit, yo

>They're starving because they breed faster than they can feed
meanwhile everyone else feeds themselves pretty well

>(which is partly the fault of western countries sending them aid)
Oh now I understand entirely! It's actually WHITEY'S FAULT for sending them some FOOD!

HAHAHAH keep trying idiots.

Meanwhile, in reality land:
http://ni66er.com/race-evolution-and-behavior/preface/

>>3572606
gotta love some malthusian darwinism. reality may have a liberal bias but geology hates the black man

>>3572615
It is the white's fault you idiot. They were doing fine before Western involvement. Since the 80's when we began sending them all this money and food, their population has skyrocketed to over 300%.

>>3572615
they would be in poverty even with small societies.
They were in poverty even when their breeding could barely compensate for child mortality when they lived in tribal mode.
Overpopulation is a SYMPTOM of poverty in human civilization, not the cause of it.

>>3572613

Well you were trying to be a smartass, but guess what? What you wrote is actually exactly right, and is completely supported by a planet full of evidence.

Please show me the great negroid innovations and civilizations.

I'll be waiting ...

Meanwhile:
http://www.vbs.tv/watch/the-vice-guide-to-travel/the-vice-guide-to-liberia-1-of-8

>>3572617
Meh. Somalia had some of the richest fishing waters in the world, due to coastal upwelling.
Then the government collapsed and nobody was able to stop us from fishing it dead.
Then we started dumping industrial waste there.

NONE

>>3572606

not sure if... serious ...

Failed crops? The crops 'failed' a decade ago because the groids are not farming.

In fact the groids NEVER farmed. The whites came there and farmed. And there was food. Fuckpiles of it. Now that the farms have been stolen from the white farmers by the blacks, there are no crops.

This is pretty funny. You are using one piece of iffy-at-best lefty agenda (global warming) to back up another (blacks are awesome, no really).

Have you ever fished on the ocean? There is so much fucking fish in the ocean it would make you shit your face off, especially in the waters around Africa.

If you were just joking then lol.

>>3572648
great idea.
somalians should charge people to inundate their land with volatile chemicals and industrial waste.
then they can invite scientists over to manipulate the irradiation of the environment such as to provide them with super powers!

>>3572667
we tried that toxic waste thing in kentucky, all we got was creationists.

and stormfags.

>You are using one piece of iffy-at-best lefty agenda (global warming)

Oh boy, a global warming denialist is teaching us all about how we dont actually understand science.

>Have you ever fished on the ocean? There is so much fucking fish in the ocean it would make you shit your face off, especially in the waters around Africa.

http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=43514

>>3572582
>>3572579
Africa in the Zimbabwe- Kenya present day farmlands areas has historically experienced severe droughts, comparable to the droughts of the American Southwest

The Sahara was once a forest that extended from the Atlantic coast all the way to southern Libya.
Drought comes, no crops the cows die, people move.
Your rants about present day Africa have no bearing on prehistoric Africa as OP indicated this thread address.

You're comments are non sequiters, have no citations, you're a bigot, drop dead.

>>3572659
Wow, so much trolling in one post. I can't even convince myself that you're genuinely this ignorant.

>>3572636

Blah blah blah, you are constantly using weaker and less-relevant arguments to defend the the groid.

Groids are an inferior race of failures. They are violent by nature and are not problem solvers. They never created a culture, a civilization, a written language, a tool, or a farm, on their own, beyond the very most basic, despite being given every chance.

Whites and other races have been able to live in even the most difficult places, yet no groids anywhere can seem to get their shit together. And your explanation of this is that it is actually TOO EASY to live in Africa. Oh. Shit. Now EASY is actually ROUGH. BOUNTIFUL is actually BAD. Liberalism knows no boundries of twisting the facts to make obvious falsehoods seem real.

Your shitty lefty school did a real number on you.

Good luck to you in life. I mean it.

>>3572681
you're arguing with several different anons.

just thought maybe you're too stupid to understand that.

If I'm wrong, well 4/10 to you sir, and please die soon.

>Implying there is not an IQ gap of about 15 points
>Implying this gap foes not exist when environmental factors are controlled
>Implying that it makes any fucking sense to actually believe black people have the same average intelligence as other races

>>3572676

That's all you can say? Let's enumerate my statements then and see if we can't deal with them. I want you to prove that I really am stupid and that you aren't hiding behind insults:

not sure if... serious ...

TRUE OR FALSE:
Blacks in Africa, in general, do not run farms capable of feeding more people than those in the very near vicinity. (TRUE)

TRUE OR FALSE:
Before other races arrived, there was virtually NO agriculture in Africa. In other words, blacks never farmed. (TRUE)

TRUE OR FALSE: Global Warming is highly contraversial. (TRUE)

TRUE OR FALSE: Global Warming was dealt many hard blows within the last 1-2 years when many of its major backing 'experts' were caught falsifying data and lieing in emails and reports. (TRUE)

TRUE OR FALSE: NASA data continues to negate the 'generally accepted' global warming theories and models. In fact there was new NASA data just last week. (TRUE)

TRUE OR FALSE: You never fished in the ocean. (TRUE)

TRUE OR FALSE: There are fuckpiles of fish in the ocean, especially around Africa. There is no reason to think that a bunch of nignogs cant get together and catch some fish rather than trying to hijack people's ships. (TRUE)

Yea pretty much everything I wrote is true. Looks like you are pretty stupid afterall, maybe?

>>3572712
Oh man, this is some hilarious shit.
Can you post some more like this? I'm having a blast.

>>3572712

4/5 star post

>>3572687

Once again that's the best you've got - because I guessed that asshole B might have been asshole A.

Because of this I am a complete fucking idiot and everything I said is wrong, and you are completely right.

Ok I'm sorry. After careful consideration I have decided that negroids are awesome and you are completely right. In fact they are BETTER than white people.

Who seem to do the most amazing shit ever.

Somehow.

Every time.

All the time.

>>3572712
good work
now to whom are you addressing your post exactly?

>>3572718

Still waiting for you to respond.

I have a feeling you're out of ammo.

I win?

>>3572718
Looks like /sci/'s finally been reduced to underage libtards who can't even make counterarguments. It was bound to happen eventually...

>>3572735
>>3572737
Oh don't quit now, you were on a roll! Stop pretending you were actually arguing and troll me harder :3.

>>3572737
you've chased anyone with a brain out of the board. it had to happen eventually.

did you kill /new/ the same way? lolfaggot's gonna fag.

>>3572712

Damn dude...you are one massive racist.

>>3572712

I believe every single one of poster's posts, just because. Don't show me citations or peer-reviewed publication, don't need 'em, poster has TOLD us all.

Damn fine arguments, I.R.convinced.

>>3572698
different populations are bound to have varying frequencies on every given variable genotype.

This changes over time. As the average communal HDI of the black population in the US improves, at least relative to that of whites, the testable differences have been decreasing. The average IQ of a population along with different selection pressures and reproductive dynamics as society advances.

No population is "doomed" to a set prevalence of any given genotype, and indeed, throughout history the prevalence of various genotypes varied in any different country.

That, and sometimes, shit living conditions are sometimes a viscous cycle that require external forces to put an end to.

>>3572745
/new/ wasn't killed. In fact it was going stronger than ever. All that happened on /new/ was censorship that should never exist on an anonymous board.

>>3572766
then why aren't you there?

nobody want's you here... or is that your reason?

>>3572735
>you win?

No, actually, don't think so.

In fact, what's gonna happen is that the Neoplatonist Eugenics High Mucky Mucks have been monitoring your IP and your name has been placed on a list.

Eugenics isn't just about Bell curves; sometimes it's about getting pushed off the ice flow because you're an asshole.

>>3572773
The fuck are you talking about? We were trying to have a legitimate discussion about races until people butt in with meta bullshit.

>>3572749

Another damn fine red herring.

Almost nothing posted in any thread is backed up with a detailed map of sources.

You just don't like mine because its damning, methodical, and probably mostly correct (if not entirely).

And the only reason I was being methodical was because someone (you?) seemed to have a problem digesting a smaller post I made with very simple posts. I thought I would expand it into its elements.

So let's try a different direction. Let's make it shorter. These are the only two points I was really trying to make:

1) groids dont farm

2) global warming is not exactly 'solid ground' from which to defend negroids.


And, let's talk about the 'citation' problem.

I mean ... is global warming not contraversial? Do I really need a citation for this?

Don't you remember the GIANT news stories that were ALL OVER THE NEWS about a year ago when a bunch of global warming experts in england were totally busted lieing?

Do I really need a citation for the lack of agriculture by Africans in Africa before the arrival of other races?

Do I really need a citation for the fact that the blacks have taken over the white farms in african countries like Zimbabwe and South Africa?

I mean some of this shit is basic knowledge and the other half was BIG NEWS that I don't need to prove. Right?

And there is ONE new-ish claim there so here's the link:

http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-data-blow-gaping-hold-global-warming-alarmism-192334971.html

That was all over the science-related media a few weeks ago. I guess you didn't notice it?

>>3572791
you've been banned too many times to actually believe that.

dunning kruger? or just conservative racist christian redneck asswipe shittroll?

or worse, muslim?

either way, fuck off. this isn't science or math. every time I've tried to talk science with you you get b&. it's boring.

>>3572791
Discussions about race are not 'legitimate' unless back with peer-reviewed data and citations, lots and lots of citations.

Also, charts help. We like charts. In color.

>>3572810
>>3572815
I'm not even the one doing most the racist arguing (not to say I don't agree with everything said). To dismiss arguments without anything backing you up and then resort to namecalling is low for even /sci/.

This is a race fueled topic and you don't like it, then gtfo or even report it if you're really that offended.

>>3572815
Here, have a chart.
Warning: is big

source: http://www.hwdsb.on.ca/hillpark/departments/science/Watts/Evolution_Papers.html

first heart transplant

>>3572826
ad hominem is standard 4chan fare faggot, if you don't like it GTFO.

pussy.

and I don't argue because the thread usually 404's 4 seconds after I try to post something meaningful every fucking time.

I'm not reporting shit, this stuff is both funny and enlightening.

>>3572827
the berring ice bridge migration theory has been proven bullshit.

inb4 CITATION NEEDED, ill fucking find it soon enough

>>3572841
>ad hominem is standard 4chan fare faggot, if you don't like it GTFO.
>pussy
>and I don't argue because the thread usually 404's 4 seconds after I try to post something meaningful every fucking time.
>I'm not reporting shit, this stuff is both funny and enlightening.
Jesus could you possibly be any more of a /b/tard? At least try to show some class here please.

>>3572854
>has been proven bullshit

you're being too technical, cut the jargon.
maybe try saying it in latin, we don't understand the vernacular here.

do you mean perhaps "debunked?"

>>3572841
>and I don't argue because the thread usually 404's 4 seconds after I try to post something meaningful every fucking time.
Confirmed for coming straight from /b/. Go back home.

>>3572857
I was trying to speak your language, since it's clear you have no background in science. If you did you'd be arguing science, not paleoanthropology and archeology.

rome 2000 years ago africa today.jpg

/thread

>>3572867
my favorite one, is the image of a birds nest being better constructed in comparison to an african hut

>>3572864
This is a paleoanthropological and archeological topic you halfwit. Good luck proving what scientific innovations Africas made using numbers.

>>3572872
this is a sociological topic, there's no sociology to be seen ITT though.

that leaves archeology, history, and paleoanthropology, which are almost as weak as sociology.

not science. come back when high school's over.

>>3572879
Love how "____ isn't real science" fags always muck up good threads. Can't wait till summers finally over.

>>3572867
I always figured Africa was comparable to 1500s U.S, and Rome 00 to today's west Asia.

>>3572886
I like racist threads, I'm a morphologist, an anatomist.

this is just crap though. too many variables to mean anything. If your definition of science includes not understanding at least half of the numerous causalities at work, or even being bright enough to be aware of them, then I suppose you're right.

or retarded.

or both.

>>3572879
Wait, let me get this straight. You're saying that the fields devoted to studying this topic are inappropriate for studying this topic? You're an idiot.

>>3572900
nope, I'm saying sociology systematically ignores complexity in systems and emergent properties, archeology is largely speculative basing behavioral interpretations on functional morphology, as is paleoanthropology.

history is subjective.

you should know these things if you're planning on claiming any expertise in any of those fields- if you don't recognize the limits you merely speak from authority, which no scientist will accept.

Well of course, the subjectivity is the major flaw of social sciences, but there is no way around it, and that's why an interdisciplinary approach is requisite. One thing that helps to take the large scale system complexity is Geography. Of course everyone in these fields will recognize this, but you seem to think that that invalidates them.

>>3572912
Scientific method:

1. Induction from data points
2. Develop theory about underlying law
3. Identify falsifiable claims of this theory
4. Find new data points and see if they fit your theory
5. Let your peers try to falsify your theory.

Which of these do not happen in sociology?
Freaking relativists have no clue how science works.

>>3572919
subjectivity invalidates an empirical paradigm by definition.

you can call it science all you like, but that doesn't make it science. Observations of sociology are (incomplete) science, conclusions based on those observations rarely are.

>>3572924
worst understanding of the method I've ever read.

are you american?

>>3572912
I'm the guy who cited Diamond.
Now I don't totally agree with some of his conclusions, and even while reading it I made several notes of objections. Overall though, I found it to be exhaustive and detailed, and a plausible alternative explanation to the standard narrative of how whites came to dominate the world.

However, when the bigots parachute into a thread and go hurr durr kenya farmers Mugabe Sambo etc as a response to a thread relating to PREHISTORIC INVENTIONS, I feel justified in reverting to /b/tard mode, which is what the bigot deserves, because he's obviously a brickhead.

If he were in my class, I would throw him out, but he's not, I can't, so let's just let this thread die.

>>3572938
confirmed troll.

>>3572933
No, subjectivity (along with reason) are part of interpreting raw data. You can't just crunch numbers and come up with facts about how groups of humans work, or any natural system for that matter. It's about interpretation and forming ideas. By your strict definition, Geology shouldn't be considered a science because the geologist can subjectively interpret different aspects of a landscape or landform in order to form an idea about how it was created.

>>3572946
fair enough, and agreed.

>>3572951
geologists can come up with thousands of possible interpretations, but almost all of them can be tested.

sociology doesn't allow for that kind of rigor in most cases.

historical sciences provide even fewer opportunities for testing hypotheses.

all trend towards conclusions that are reasonable, but entirely impossible to support.

>>3572938
nope, german and reader of philosophy of science.

get a trip so i can identify your bullshit.

>>3572968
Continental glacier principles can't be tested, yet ideas are formulated about them all the time.

Sociological principles are tested over and over again with different groups.

History isn't a science, it is one of the humanities.

The conclusions drawn are not impossible to support at all. When I, as a geographer makes a statement such as: "More perishable foodstuffs will be produced closer to metropolitan areas because of the shorter distance to it's destination prevents loss of product", that statement is perfectly supportable by empirical evidence. You are way more likely to find a tomato farm right outside of Chicago than in the middle of Kansas. Granted, a lot of that is carry-over from a time when transportation was more difficult, and things have changed, but the point still alludes to the principle of Distance Decay.

>>3572990
are you sad I dismissed you?
german... I've come to expect incompetence from my fellow americans.

why don't you know the difference between hypothesis and theory, oh educated one? or the processes employed in testing either?

>>3572968
when a person makes a claim about a causality he claims that this cause is either a necessary or sufficient condition of said event.
Now you can go out and see where the condition exists but the effect it is supposed to have is not, or where you have the effect but the condition is not present.

this applies to historical analysis or geology or any other science that makes falsifiable claims. And if it doesnt make any falsifiable claims, it is not a science.

>>3573000
by "historical sciences" I was referring to archeology and paleontology.

I agree scientific conclusions are possible in all those fields, just as unscientific speculation is possible in any field. I'm trying to word my responses to avoid absolutes, my only point being that some disciplines are far more prone to speculation from lack of data than others. Sociology covers much that's certainly science, but far more that isn't. Just a simple matter of being unable to control certain individual and societal variables.

feel free to continue arguing that it's always and only hard science if that's what you like, but we know different.

>>3573008
as the definition of theory breaks down to "generally accepted hypothesis" it is a meaningless distinction. The essential points are predictive quality and falsifiability.

Popper didn't need the distinction, so I won't.
Fine to see though that you are starting to argue semantics. Can't argue against the scientific method literature with your high school mind? Go away summer fag.

>>3573054
who attempts to disprove the hypothesis?

or theory if you prefer?

why don't we publish the unrejected null hypotheses... or theories if you prefer?

yeah, just semantics, but I expect precision from experts.

>>3573070
>who attempts to falsify a hypothesis/theory?
You and your peers.

Say you are in a lab and you are trying to falsify the theory of evolution with you data set. Does "the theory of evolution" suddenly become the "hypothesis of evolution" just because you are trying to falsify it?

Now if you publish your hypothesis and it gets generally accepted, does it suddenly change in any meaningful way, now that it is a theory?

>publish null hypothesis
If you start afresh, as in "this has no causal relationship", this "has no causal relationship" is the generally accepted theory. You do not publish that, because you would be captain obvious of the sciences or you would get people to try and falsify the null hypothesis while that is exactly what you intend to do anyway.

>>3573104
>You and your peers.
>You
that was the part I felt you left out when you shouldn't have.

my criticism of your description arose from a percieved concentration on the constructive individual processes to the near exclusion of destructive critical processes that yield far greater results for both individual and group.

Well, well, thread back on track, sort of.

To sum up, so far we have black hurr durr Sambos inventing fire-making, spears, spear throwers, the bow & arrow and the amazing boomarang.

Anything else, hmm?

>>3573354
*OK, technically the boomerang was invented by Austoaboriginies, but close enough for government work.