/sci/ - Science & Math

2/10 for effort. Thanks again for playing!

because blacks are less evolved

>>5065316
>less evolved

Retard detected. Nothing is 'less evolved', just 'differently evolved'.

>>5065326
>Nothing is 'less evolved', just 'differently evolved'.
1 apple is not less than 2 apples, they are just different numbers of apples.

Because you need something in your life to feel superior about. And since you aren't good at sports, suck academically, have no money and are not very good looking, you're forced to ride on the achievements of your "race" to secure your false sense of superiority.

That or you're 13 and think racism is cool.

I think it comes from Neanderthals. I have no knowledge of this field but the Neanderthals were a more advanced species in terms of intelligence. But Neanderthals couldn't reproduce as quickly as quickly as other homo sapiens and eventually died out with a lot of them mixing with other primitive humans , and Neanderthals occupied most of Europe and parts of the middle east which is where white people are from

Tldr not my field of study but probably because we're genetically different

I welcome a major of this field to enlighten us

>>5065332

Granted, black people have smaller frontal cortexes which make them have lower IQs on average and more aggressive.

Evolution is not a quantifier, unlike the amount of apples.

>>5065335
edgy libturd detected
go back to your toilet bowl

>>5065336
Two years ago, researchers made the startling announcement that genetic similarities between modern humans and Neanderthals suggest the two species interbred. But common ancestry could also account for the shared DNA, according to new research

>>5065332
>implying that evolution has a total ordering

>>5065328
Nigger fact #2! The Songhai empire, one of the largest Muslim empires in history, was located in the heart of Africa, with its capital at Timbuktu, and was one of the most important trade centers of its day. It existed for about 500 years, from c. 1000 AD to 1550 AD or so. It's successor states, the Dendi Kingdoms, survived until the late 19th century.

The Mali Empire, located in a similar area to the Songhai empire, was also a vast Muslim kingdom. Particularly well-known for its immense adobe mosques, including the Great Mosque of Djenne, the largest adobe mosque in the world, the Mali empire existed from c. 1230 to c. 1600. Its most famed ruler, Mansa Musa I, was one of the richest men in the world in his lifetime, and is still ranked as one of the richest individuals in history. During his pilgrimage to Mecca, he provided so much charity to the poor that his pilgrimage was told in tales for generates.

>>5065351

>>5065351

The other anon here. Although I agree that one cannot quanify the amount of 'evolution' something has gone through, your defence of black civilisation has no place here. Their brains are less capable on average.

Why can't you just take your butthurt to /pol/?

>>5065344

See what you did there, was change 'Libtard' into 'Libturd' .. and then...

It's a safe bet that you won't be getting into an Ivy League Grad program, isn't it?

>>5065367

and by 'The other' ..... you mean 'Samefag'....

>>5065344
It hurts, doesn't it? Knowing that you're absolutely mediocre. That you've done nothing with your life. That your only call to fame is having a similar amount of melanin in your skin to some people that have actually achieved something. How does it feel knowing that the highlight of your day is trolling a low population board on 4chan? That you'll never achieve anything in life because you're stuck in a rut while someone you consider inferior is running one of the most powerful nations on the earth? Bet that's something to sleep on.

>>5065335

He said primitive you racist fuck, to say that AFRICAN TRIBES aren't primitive is just fucking wrong. And it's a complete valid question, these tribes have been forgotten by time and deserve study

Do you just have a vendetta or are you just ignorant

>>5065368

>>5065374

I'm >>5065326 and >>5065341

Please just leave.

>>5065380

I'm Jewish. Checkmate Bubba.

necessity is the mother of invention. it is similar to why the great plains native Americans had such simple structures. our environment greatly shapes our cultural and technical development. some of it is luck of the draw as well, in regards to the emphasis placed on mysticism and the type of religion generated. the Europeans didn't develop too much during the dark ages, the US is falling behind now as religion is taking a more predominant role in its education and politics.

also don't forget that the Egyptians are African. their religion was obsessed with the afterlife, for which they built gigantic monuments that were over-engineered. they had fertile soil which allowed them to further divide their labor since less time was required to be dedicated to survival.

many cultures in Africa revere the hunt, and nature, similar to the native Americans. I haven't read this, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if there was a high correlation between animism and stunted technological development. I believe it is far more cultural and environmentally influenced. African children are just as capable of learning anything as a European child.

as far as neanderthals being advanced, not all of Europe has neanderthal DNA; it is mostly limited to a certain region and those with specific phenotypes (i.e. red hair). this also doesn't take into account Asian cultures and their advancement.

>>5065367
you actually can quantify evolution, in a sense.

It's called relative fitness.

http://www.niggermania.com/tom/gallery/gallery.html
This is Shelly publishing. Totally legit source.

>>5065379
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race,_Evolution,_and_Behavior
Criticized for its methodology.

>>5065356
"Noted scientist" died in 1935. Cited paper was written in 1926, prior to IQ tests, which this graphic implies are used.

>>5065328
Charles A. Weisman, also known for other publications such as "An analysis of the facts and arguments surrounding the Flood of Genesis showing its true nature and meaning"

Good sources. I would like to hear your citations from the bible as they are just as reliable.

>>5065409
those who tout their race as superior or take excessive pride in their nationality or heritage typically have few accomplishments of their own worth touting.

next he'll use phrenology.

>>5065375
You seem not to understand the concept of an "average"
Lets grant your argument. Lets say the poster is a low-life loser with nothing doing for him. How does that change his arguments?

Imagine two planets for a second.
Planet One is prosperous and innovative.
The other planet, Planet Two, is tribal and not innovative.

Does the presence of a few unintelligent people on Planet one mean that there is no difference between Planet One and Two?

>>5065400
>many cultures in Africa revere the hunt, and nature, similar to the native Americans. I haven't read this, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if there was a high correlation between animism and stunted technological development. I believe it is far more cultural and environmentally influenced. African children are just as capable of learning anything as a European child.

I am sorry, but that flat out ignores evolution. When this group of people breed for generation, there is no evolutionary pressure for higher intelligence and thus regression to the mean happens.

I am no racist, but people who tout that black people are "100% equal" in biological terms with other races and that evolution stops at the brain are wilfully ignorant.

There is no significant genetic differences between anyone of different 'races'. There is in fact more genetic diversity within ones own 'race' than there is between 'races'.

>>5065427
the time scale is minimal. the native Americans crossed the Bearing Straight some 15-20k years ago, and in many regions were on par with the Africans. 15-20k years is absolutely nothing when looking at evolution.

>>5065427
There's no evolutionary pressure for your vestigial organs, yet they will be present until it is a disadvantage to have them. Your argument is flawed.

>>5065431
>There is in fact more genetic diversity within ones own 'race' than there is between 'races'.

You mean there is more genetic diversity between individuals at extremes than there is for the average of every race compared to each other.

Of fucking course it does. Do you even into statistics?

>>5065356
Man, whenever I see this image posted, I have to laugh.

Does no one else see that the area of the white iq distribution is about 5 or 6 times larger than the black iq?

That isn't how a probability distribution works.

>>5065427
Genetic differences would be expected, but the first migration out of Africa only happened 60,000 years ago. That is not enough time for anything but small phenotypical features to alter between various populations, such as height, weight, and skin variations. Cognitive differences like what're suggested would take much longer. Likely longer than 200,000 years (as 200,000 years ago is when anatomically modern humans first appeared).

Pretending they don't exist is stupid, yes, but no one does that.

>>5065427
>I am no racist, but people who tout that black people are "100% equal" in biological terms with other races and that evolution stops at the brain are wilfully ignorant.

You're a fucking idiot. Where is your scientific evidence that there is a difference in 'biological terms'? I'm sure you're referring to genetics, and guess what, there is a lot of scientific data suggesting you are wrong, and none suggesting you are right.

>>5065434

Plenty of time for changes in skin melanin production. Plenty of time for changes in facial and bodily bone structure. Plenty of time for sickle cell and cystic fibrosis. Plenty of time for lactose tolerance.

Genetic intelligence is much more dynamic than you realise.

>>5065437
Hey, you don't know that.

They could be removed via genetic drift

>>5065311

racism has no place on 4chan. black people have contributed as much or more to science advantage than any other race or creed.

before european colonialsism africa was peaceful and advanced with many libraries and colleges.

how would you survive if people invaded your contenent and kidnapped all the smartest people?

just get over it.

>>5065431
There is greater intrasexual height variation than intersexual heigh variation.

Are we to conclude that there is no average difference in height between the sexes?

>>5065441
You obviously don't have a very sound knowledge of genetics and the point of what you're criticizing has flown over your head.

>>5065445

It does if the sample groups differ in size.

The Worldwide Pattern of IQ Scores. East Asians average higher on IQ tests than Whites, both in the U. S. and in Asia, even though IQ tests were developed for use in the Euro-American culture. Around the world, the average IQ for East Asians centers around 106; for Whites, about 100; and for Blacks about 85 in the U.S. and 70 in sub-Saharan Africa.

"Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability," by J. Philippe Rushton of the University of Western Ontario and Arthur R. Jensen of the University of California at Berkeley, appeared with a positive commentary by Linda Gottfredson of the University of Delaware, three critical ones (by Robert Sternberg of Yale University, Richard Nisbett of the University of Michigan, and Lisa Suzuki & Joshua Aronson of New York University)

>>5065451
How is that specific to vestigial organs? Its not. Please report back to Biology 101.

>>5065459
then you have some flawed methodology

>>5065453
Height and 'race' are not interchangeable, you fucking idiot.

>>5065455

>>5065453 used a better example than me.

Now fuck off and stop acting like that proves anything

>>5065460
Not mention Ashkenazi Jews which ranked highest at 112. That's 27 points higher than Blacks in a highly developed country.

>>5065464

>implying I did that study

Perhaps the people were unable to find enough black people to join their study or whatever. I merely explained (the obvious reason) why the areas differed in size and you hatin on me.

Chill, brah.

>>5065460
But that prooves nothing. Where is the supporting evidence that there is something genetically different about blacks that is causing the low IQ? There is nothing.

>>5065437
>vestigial

Exactly.
Youre comparing an adaptation that has already taken place with one that has (According to a racist) yet to take place.
The disadvantage you propose would select against vestigial organs has already acted against the less intelligent Europeans, but not the less intelligent Africans, is what a racialist would argue.
Youve clearly misunderstood the point.

>>5065468
You're an idiot. Do a little research for yourself, try and back up your beliefs that there is an actual genetic difference between 'races'. You may find it quite enlightening.

>>5065471
No.
Race takes on MANY more variables than height.
If the height example works, then its incredibly unlikely that the same argument wont also work on race.

>>5065460
the IQ test doesn't measure evolutionary differences. there are a multitude of influences on test performance. education, culture, experience, some train for the test specifically, etc. etc. IQ tests are also poor indicators of success.

>>5065460
And those vary pretty well with both access to quality education and pressure to do well in school. There's no suggestion that this is anything but cultural, and therefore non-genetic.

>>5065478
The study suggests two methods of determination..

"The culture-only (0% genetic–100% environmental) and the hereditarian (50%
genetic–50% environmental) models of the causes of mean Black–White differences
in cognitive ability.."

>ITT: people mistaking cultural and socioeconomic influences for genetics.

>>5065492
psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/pppl1.pdf

>>5065482
A geneticist can tell from a small portion of the genome what race a person belongs to.
If he examines the entire genome, the geneticist, without fail, can tell you what race you belong to.

If you can determine the race of an individual by genetics alone, how can you argue that there is no genetic difference between the races?

>>5065497
SHEEEEIT

>>5065471

>the point
>your head

OK, I'll give you my time.

Take a group of men. The tallest man is 6'5" and the shortest man is 5'2". This averages out to 5'9".

Now look at a group of females. The tallest female is 6'2" and the shortest female is 4'9". This averages out to 5'6.

Because the difference between the average height of men compared to the average height of women is less than the difference between the tallest and shortest people in each group, we can confirm that the average height differs less between sexes than in any one sex.

>>5065499

>>5065488
>IQ tests are also poor indicators of success
IQ tests are the best inicators of success.

Find me a high-salary university professor with a low IQ. FInd me a doctor, a lwayer etc. with a low IQ.
You will undoubtedly bring up a few cases of bums/tramps with high IQs and demand that ALL people with high IQs be successful for IQ to mean anything. THis would be an error on your part, as IQ isnt a sufficient determinant of success (in99% of cases), but it is a necessary factor.

>>5065462
I never implied that it was specific to vestigial organs. I said that they could be removed via genetic drift.

Which is true.

>>5065504
"damn, dem niggaz iz rich oh'dair"

>>5065459
Not if it is a probability distribution, which that graph implies.

>>5065507
find me a Fortune 500 CEO with an IQ over 180

>>5065516
Find me anyone with an iq above 180

ITT: Shitty STAT students (triple alliteration points) trying to use a couple things they learned to refute obvious facts about race differentiation/race and intelligence.

>>5065498
And yet most of those are actually genetic markers that have little effect on the phenotype. There are certainly differences between populations. The fact that racial characteristics are inherited demonstrates that. But these differences are very minimal.

>>5065516

People with high IQs tend to be academics, not businessmen.

>>5065486
They're not interchangeable because height is controlled by a very precise genetic process. Race is not even genetically defined, because there is no significant genetic difference that can define a race.

inb4 mitochondrial DNA. Thats not the issue here.

>>5065507
there are diminishing returns with IQ. after a certain point, you are less likely to be super successful. obviously there's more at play, such as how well socialize, how well we relate to others, etc.

>>5065519
if IQ is such an excellent indicator of success, it would be quite easy to just look at the richest people... but that's obviously not the case. I'm sure you could find quite a few at CERN, but some of them end up as janitors as well.

>>5065498

Except. They can't.

>>5065516
Notice how youve had to go all the way up to 180 to try to argue your point? In other words your limiting yourself to incredibly rare cases.
Im all for accepting that at some point, a high IQ may actually be a hinderance on success in this world.
I dont think the fact that some people with such outstandingly high IQs are so intelligent that they no longer want to "play the game" with people of lower 130-150 IQs is proof of IQ failure to determine success in the vast majority of cases.

>>5065498
>If he examines the entire genome, the geneticist, without fail, can tell you what race you belong to.
But you're making that shit up. Just because you believe something doesn't make it real.

You can do that by looking at mitochondrial DNA, but that is completely irrelevant.

>>5065533

>>5065527
>Race is not even genetically defined

Are you this retarded?

>>5065542
>>5065547
The same genetics-ignorant fag.

>>5065538

If you think that geneticists do it simply by looking at the mitochondrial DNA, you are retarded.

Race is much more than mitochondrial DNA.

>>5065535
the thing I'm trying to argue is the scope of the IQ test is very narrow. this is very common knowledge in psychometrics. it doesn't even gauge how well you multitask or your creativity. people with ADD or ADHD are at an inherent disadvantage by the very nature of the test, though many would do very well if certain tweaks were made in the methodology. the IQ test is far from being the end-all be-all test for measuring intelligence.

>>5065542
>>5065547
>>5065558
Stop fucking talking about shit you don't understand.

>>5065547

skin color has a genotyp

but race is a social construct with no phenotype

lrn2DNA

>>5065558
>If you think that geneticists do it
Want to know something geneticists do? They don't determine race by looking at genomes, because they can't.

>>5065563

>hurr if i tell him he knows nothing of what he's talking about, that ad-hominem may discredit his statements

And before you say it, the burden of proof is on you.

>>5065575
>And before you say it, the burden of proof is on you.
No actually you were the first to claim that you could determine race via DNA. So please, show me the proof.

>>5065557
Theoretically, a person with a higher IQ should be able to multi-task better just through speed of processing..

Creative intelligence is harder to quantify, and I don't know what areas of the test would demonstrate this.

I did a 6-7 hour neuropsychiatric testing to determine by my neurologist how bad my symptoms were affecting my intelligence and I still averaged 121. It actually made me a little pissed because he didn't believe I was having short-term memory issues.

>>5065580

I was the first to claim that, yes.

What is relevant here is that you were the first to claim that you couldn't.

>>5065565
>but race is a social construct with no phenotype

Firstly, literally everything is a social construct.

Secondly, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_classification)

>Race is a classification system used to categorize humans into large and distinct populations or groups by heritable phenotypic characteristics

Literally the first sentence.

>>5065588
>God exists!

>No he doesn't

>Well then proove he doesn't!

Guess which one is you

>>5065588

acually that was me who said it first in this thread

race is a sociel construct for poor people to feel good.

>>5065599

You got it wrong mate.

>God exists! >>5065533

>No he doesn't >>5065542

>Well then proove he doesn't! >>5065580

But anyway, take a gander here >>5065594

>>5065571
>>5065571
There was in fact a blind test done by scientists.

They were given a small section of the genome of people of many different backgrounds. In the vast majority of cases (99%) the prediction of the race of the test subject matched the self-identified race of the subject. i.e. when the usbject said for example "Im African" so did the geneticists (who hadnt seen the subject in person) 99% of the time.

Race is a genetic fact like a species or subspecies.

>>5065616
[citation needed]

>>5065612
So now that you realise your argument has no basis you're trying to weasel out of it by making me do work?

Well fuck you, here you go:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15508004

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15510170

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1446406/pdf/11076233.pdf

Now go enjoy being wrong. Fuck paraphrasing for you, you could actually learn something if you read these articles.

>>5065612
That makes no sense.

You claimed you could tell race from DNA.

I said you can't.

Now you think I have to proove it.

You're wrong.

>>5065623

You cannot into fucking basic logic? Just because I stated a positive and you stated a negative does not mean I have to prove it. YOU were the one who made the statement FIRST, no matter whether it was positive or negative.

Now fuck off while I read your sources.

>it (Race) is social with biological consequences

Oh shit buddy, I know what I'm in for.

>race is an inadequate and even harmful way to think about
human biological differences is based on the
history and theoretical underpinnings of the
idea of race

I read all the reasons and they all criticise the methodology and go on about how "everything is always changing dude so whats the point of measuring it". Reeks of social science.

>Race is real. Rather than being based on
biology, it is a social and political process that
provides insights into how we read deeper
meaning into phenotypes

Fuck this shit. Are the two other articles like this, with no hard statistics?

>>5065676

i'm pretty sure every article about race is devoid of hard statistics or facts of any nature.

Because I'm a Gentleman like that.

Races are a social construct.

>>5066727
Only a fool would see race as a "social construct".
The fact is, there are distinct differences between a black man, a white man, and an asian man. Ignoring them is ignorant and childish.

>>5066770
There's no such thing as a white man. That term was just a retcon when normal people found blacks. Also, Asian is a geographical reference and not a race. You might mean oriental, like Chinese, right?

>>5065521
Despite the condescension I feel towards stats students, I don't think anyone who actually studied statistics would try to refute the observed difference in IQ between races.

It's more the domain of people who get their stats knowledge second or third hand from some left wing ideologue

>>5066770
It's like saying that color is a social construct. Color is a complex phenomenon. It is influenced by lighting, texture, context and brightness. Different cultures perceive color differently and there is no universal definition of "red" or "green" among cultures. People should bear this in mind before posting unscientific nonsense like "don't eat purple mushrooms". Would you stop eating your meal just because someone switched on a purple light?

>>5065326

This, if you do not understand this then you do not understand evolution. To say that we evolved from chimps is incorrect. To say that chimps and ourselves have a common ancestor is correct.

Everything has undergone genetic mutation side by side.

If you really want to make the point then you could say that they are less developed from many perspectives including technological.

Hey guys, what's going on in this thr-

Never mind.

>>5065349

This, though unfortunately the issue has become somewhat politicized and a lot of bad science is being thrown around, especially from the social sciences. We're probably likely to see stuff switch back and forth.

>>5065336

>the Neanderthals were a more advanced species in terms of intelligence.
Back in the day the general consensus was that neanderthals were inherently less intelligent. This was way back though when multiple human species was still considered fringe. Some people used craniology (now arguably pseudoscience) to say that Neanderthals had comparable skull capacities to us and they shouldn't have any problem with intelligence. In modern times we've uncovered some neanderthal art, tools, clothes, but not nearly as much as ours.

>Neanderthals couldn't reproduce as quickly as quickly as other homo sapiens and eventually died out with a lot of them mixing with other primitive humans
The argument is that they were too well adapted to their environment because they were crazy strong, fast, agile, resistant to temperature, etc.. This meant that they didn't develop all of the tools and clothes that we did and couldn't survive climate change.
>Neanderthals occupied most of Europe and parts of the middle east
This is correct
>which is where white people are from
It is unknown if there is any connection. If you look at models and stuff over the years. We used to be depicted as white and the neanderthal as black with curly hair and later similar to amerindians.

OP is confirmed for knowing literally nothing about Africa. Brotip: almost all the hunter-gatherers and horticulturalists in the world are in the Amazon Basin and Papua New Guinea.

Also:
http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/Lieberman2001CA.pdf
http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/Suzuki-Aronson.pdf
http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/sloth/nisbett-on-rushton-and-jensen.pdf

Or, for stormfags who can't read above 4th grade level:
http://www.ronunz.org/2012/08/05/unz-on-raceiq-response-to-lynn-and-nyborg/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lynn#Criticism

Isn't most of Western Civilizations technology thanks to the weird "I have to kill everyone who's remotely NOT like me" drive that Europeans seemed to have for most of their histories? Are most of our current tech that we laud over "less advanced" (read: non-Eurocentric) cultures essentially descended from military tech? Specifically the military tech made by people of European decent to fight conflicts started by Europeans?

If anything, one could make the argument that our "technological progress" is nothing more than a means for Europeans to kill in fancier ways.

Not the best argument, but no better than the "Blacks are lesser humans because they don't have computers".

Does anyone know DT's opinion on the topic? I'm sure she would base her opinion solely on scientific facts.

>>5067092
Taking the von Daniken route, eh?
Hiding behind the question mark to make retard statements, I see.

Using africans in tribal africa as a basis or a comparison is a horrible idea. In their case, they grew up in a shit hole. nurture kills any chance of intelligence by nature. throw one of those kids into a modern civilization from birth and you start to get some results.

There are white people whose culture and way of life are primitive as fuck, too. the amish, for example.

>>5067092
Mudhuts are actually really good technology. This is why DIYers love them. Of course, there's also stuff like a Rocket Stove which is really simple, easy to make, and has only been around for a handful of years. You could call it Western Technology, but there are very few places using them because they are perceived as primitive.

>>5067092
Here fucking here.
I'm tired of do-nothing white college kids who barely know how to fix a car or make their own food talking about how advanced they are over Africans because they have a iPhone.