/sci/ - Science & Math

>>5467716
No they are not.
No racism on /sci/

>>5467722
Do you have any arguments to back your answer up?

How would having a big dick mean being genetically inferior? You are making no sense.

Define "inferior".

>>5467748
>implying wanting a big-dicked male is genetic and not socially reinforced

>>5467750
For the purpose of this question "less intelligent" is sufficient.

>>5467727
actually i believe the burden of evidence is on you.

not only do you need to fully explain what specifically is meant by "inferior" but must back it up with evidence or at least some sort of well thought out theory and explain how recent the African heritage is (it could be said we are all of African decent). Otherwise you're an ignorant twat with nothing to say.

>>5467758
Craving big dick is very genetic. Do you even into vagina?

>>5467759
On average, yes.

Now what, what do you want to do?

Ship them to a different continent?

Or make more threads on 4chan?

>>5467759
Well, the relation of genes and intelligence is only being researched on right now, so as of yet we can't make accurate statments about that.

>>5467767
u wot mate?

>>5467758
>has a small dick and believes this to feel less inferior.
Black or white doesn't matter. It's you small dicks that are inferior to.

your mom is inferior

>>5467775
what is the y axis supposed to be?

>>5467750
It usually reffers to reproductive success when we are talking about organisms.

So no, they are actually superior.

>>5467783
% of population

its a bell curve chart

>>5467778

>>5467783
Percentage of the selected population.

>>5467768
First we can simply discuss it. I'm not sure everyone would agree with you, so there are usually a few insights to be had.

>>5467775
>>5467775
that's such a drastic difference and has no cultural, social, or historical factors impacting it. It must be a genetic thing.

>>5467775
Well OP you got me. I guess we should all kill ourselves and let the master asian race take over right?

As a black male from the ghetto I can tell you this. No race is genetically inferior our superior to another. We are all simply products of our environments. The mindset of my friends back home is a backwards one, but its one that i understand. When you live your entire life struggling, being exposed to only negatives and having the world tell you day in and day out that you ARE going to fail in life, there's almost a 100% chance that you'll adapt a mindset like that.

We're all products of our environments, and not every nigga can make it out the hood. Its sad but true.

>>5467801
Woah there, space cowboy. Nobody's talking about killing anyone.

>>5467716
You are too edgy for 4chan. Go back to reddit.

I wonder if there are any of those IQ charts that weren't made in the US. Britain, France and Germany have a sizeable black population too, why not make some idnependent research?

>>5467716
No they are not OP. But since it's more on you to present a reason for the hypothesis that they are then I'll wait before explaining how fucking stupid the question is.

>>5467775
This is just a random fucking graph, are you really putting this forth add evidence or are you trolling?

>>5467803
You seem like a smart dude, so riddle me this- if environment is the sole factor than why do blacks have higher crime rates/lower IQs regardless of economic strata?

That's right, even well off blacks score lower on every conceivable metric than their white and asian counterparts.

So what explains this?

>>5467818
because that would make sense! And there are similar historical and cultural factors creating similar social statuses in those countries so it still wouldn't be an accurate way of measuring intelligence by terms of race.

>>5467821
OP asks a question on /sci/ and people answers with opinionz.

Shouldn't we already have some statistics proving OP's statement is false?

I can't imagine any controlled study that could be done on this that would be ethical

>>5467825
he's from /pol/. That's all they have. Shitty graphs with nonsense numbers, half of them from biased sources and the other half with no sources. Then there's the charts and graphs that are scanned ones from over 50 years ago explaining why black people are scary and dangerous.

They're full of shit and post them on every board to troll. They have no interest in an actual discussion and mostly perpetuate the shit to be edgy.

>>5467829
>ethical

You mean moral. Ethics is the study of morality.

By the way, why do you say such statement? I don't see it wrong to show the truth to the people. The only difficulties i perceive is that such study would be hardly objective.

>>5467834
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence

>>5467828

If OP's question was meaningful we may have bothered. As is, he didn't even care to explain what "African descent" means. Africa has more genetic variation than any continent on Earth.

They are intelligent enough to make it past their basement hatch. Are you, OP?

>>5467828
No, why would we? Do you have statistics stating that pigs can fly? Why should we disprove that pigs can fly without any reason to assume that either they can or cannot fly?

OP needs to support his fairly radical claim that not only is lack of intelligence 'genetic inferiority' but also that there is reason to think that people of African decent lack intelligence by anything relating to their genes rather than social and cultural factors, and the historical reasons for them.

OP must tell us why:
>the genetic differences between these races attributes to higher or lower intelligence.
>genetic superiority is determined by intelligence.

until then there's not much more we can say that hasn't been said here.

>>5467836
I mean you would need to control meme transfer from the moment of birth and monitor people develop intellectually. I don't think that would get past an ethics board

>>5467716
No, you'd only WANT to think so to justify yourself. Skin color is not correlated with intelligence. Neither is hair color. Or eye color. Or ear size. Or a million other genetic traits that have physical manifestation.

op is jerkfag

>talk about race and IQ
>muh racism
never change /sci/

Is this some sort of PMS gathering?

>>5467852
I didn't make a claim, I asked a question. Your flying pig analogy is lacking since it's by no means farfetched to suppose that the obvious physical differences between ethnicities manifest themselves psychologically and mentally.

>>5467716
>Pic more related than should be

>>5467827
This info is more than likely false, I'll need a citation, but I'll bite.

Environment isn't the sole factor. Blacks are expected to amount to nothing, that idea transcends asp social/economical standings. If you grow up thinking everyone is better than you because your skin is darker than theirs, you are destined to fail.

Nothing I'm saying is conclusive however, anything can influence a person's mindset.

> using wikipedia as a reliable and credible source.

Back to /pol/ with you.

don't mind me

>Are people of African descent genetically inferior?
inferior to what? all humans come from african descent, so your question is invalid

Current science says that a lot of intelligence differences are environmental. In addition to this, there may or may not be a significant genetic factor that varies along racial lines, we dont know nealry enough to conclusively prove or disprove such notion.

that's racist

>>5467938
>>5467941
>>5467934
>>5467933
not a single controlled study

So many oh-so-impressive charts, but not one definition of "black".

Typical /pol/.

>>5467962
you can't control niggers lel

What does proving/disproving blacks have a lower IQ do for the world? Besides showing how backwards we are a species?

>>5467973
OOOH, i see. It is progressive to ignore inter-group differences is it?

Fuck you are a moronic idiot. Politically correct morons should be put down.

>>5467973
"Some knowledge might not be worth having."
--You

>>5467981
Lol okay.

>>5467984
This is true however is it not?

Regardless, neither of you answered my question. Which leads me to believe the real reason behind it is to put people down to make you feel better about yourselves. That's the only logical reason.

>>5467994

Most racism on 4chan stems from experience in high school. These kids were either bullied by black kids, or believed themselves to be such, so they like to pretend they have had the last laugh. However, as they do not actually have any personal achievements to vaunt, they turn to race.

>64 posts and 17 image replies omitted.
WHY ARE YOU FEEDING THE OBVIOUS /POL/ TROLL HOLY FUCK YOU'RE STUPID

>>5468001

All humans are of African descent

>>5468015

It's okay, buddy. Tyrone can't hurt you anymore.

You still can't change the fact that he dated Sally and you did not, though.

>>5468019
All humans are of African descent =! all humans are African

>>5468001
That's a pretty hasty assumption for someone who visits a science board. If you had ever been to /int/ you would know that Europeans on 4chan deem 3rd worlders inferior too, without having ever been bullied by them in school, but because of judging their achievements and observing their behavior as immigrants.

>>5468031
But OP wasn't asking about Africans.

>>5468031

Nice reading comprehension, there. Your master race is showing.

The problem with using intelligence as an indicator of superiority/inferiority of an entire race is IQ testing is notably faulty.

IQs are going up. We keep the average IQ at 100 but since testing began IQs have been rising, significantly. This is well known and is called the Flynn Effect
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect
One of the probable causes is better education, which means education is a factor in determining IQ?!?!?!?!?! You bet.

Health is another factor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_of_health_on_intelligence

Which is leading researchers to believe that better diets can account for differences in IQ in other nations.

So claiming that people of African decent are less intelligent, while somewhat accurate, is painting a lousy picture because there's far more going on than simply genetics such as access to health care and education.

>>5468034
You're fucking retarded. I'm a eurofag (western europe) and what the guy you were replying to said is more or less true. Most of the times the racism stems from the "natives" being bullied by foreigners in high school. Not only bullied in the sense of (verbal) fighting but also in the sense of interracial couples or just flirting for that matter. A friend of mine used to talk to me about how much he despised "dem foreigners" and he never really had a good reason to other then being a insecure little faggot as he watched how the girl he wanted was snatched away from him by a suave alfa faggot. He still is a racist to this date which is kind of sad because the only reason he's a racist is because of well.. a woman.

>if environment is the sole factor than why do blacks have higher crime rates/lower IQs regardless of economic strata?
Isn't the vast majority of psychopathic serial killers middle class white males?

>>5468068
So the story of your friend who probably doesn't visit 4chan trumps all the Europeans on 4chan and /int/ in particular concerning an explanation for 4chan's racism? You should call yourself retarded.

>>5468104

Nope. It's a pretty common observation.

That's pretty much how racists are stereotyped in most European countries and I assume also in modern U.S. since "MUH DICK" causes instant buttmad to /pol/.

>>5468104
Well you claimed that what /int/ thinks = what all of Europe thinks. That's why it's retarded. Seriously, shut down your computer and hang out with friends or something. You spend too much time online dude.

>>5468061
Several things impact IQ. Genetics heavily impacts IQ.

I believe the reason for this is the culture and behavior they bring with them. There was a study done with adopted children and it read that white adopted children that grew up in black families tended to have a lower IQ than even their own brothers/sisters that grew up with a white family.

If blacks have a lower IQ than whites it's definitely because of the families and communities they grow up in.

Perhaps they may also have a lower IQ than other people but it's miniscule at most; 1-2 IQ points different. Then again, perhaps. I could just be biased since I'm somewhat racist.

I believe the reason for this is the culture and behavior they bring with them. There was a study done with adopted children and it read that white adopted children that grew up in black families tended to have a lower IQ than even their own brothers/sisters that grew up with a white family.

If blacks have a lower IQ than whites it's definitely because of the families and communities they grow up in.

Perhaps they may also have a lower IQ than other people caused by genetic differences but it would be miniscule at most; 1-2 IQ point difference. Then again, perhaps. I could just be biased since I'm somewhat racist.

It's because of poverty and slavery
Simple as that

>>5468311
It's based far too much on environment to make that claim as applied to race. We can have brothers with differences in IQ of 20 points.

IQ is poorly understood and by the time it is we'll have genetic manipulation and the whole concept of 'race' will be superfluous

People are much more divided by their economic level than race

>>5468331
How'd the poverty get there? Was it all bad luck?
Negro apologists confirmed for O'Reilly level reasoning.

>>5468363
>How'd the poverty get there? Was it all bad luck?
No, it was the social systems and laws set in place after the slaves were set free

>>5468371
What about Africa? Remember they were primitive and poor before colonialism.

Insufficient data to conclude the extent of the heredity/environment interaction causing the inequality.

The fact that almost wholly heritable correlates to intelligence, like myopia and brain size. The fact that the gaps in test scores increase by the complexity and g-loading of the task seems to suggest that the differences have a substantial biological basis. Note that "biological" does not mean "innate". Merely that things like prenatal environment or perhaps early nutrition are going to almost solely account for any non-inherited differences.

Insufficient data to conclude the extent of the heredity/environment interaction causing the inequality.

Since almost wholly heritable correlates to intelligence, like myopia and brain size differ between groups, suggest at least a moderately relevant inherited division exists.

The fact that the gaps in test scores increase by the complexity and g-loading of the task seems to suggest that the differences have a substantial biological basis. Note that "biological" does not mean "innate". Merely that things like prenatal environment or perhaps early nutrition are going to almost solely account for any non-inherited differences.

Now that I've said that, the popularity of "hard egalitarianism" (usually in circles that are misinformed about the topic) is wholly unsubstantiated by the data in any related field. They really have no evidence to fulfill their own burden of proof.

they should make a /stat/ board so you can discuss this there

the evidence is layed out exactly the same every time, interpret it how you feel. this is not what this board is for

>science & math

>>5468399
It's impossible to compare the history of Africa to the history of Europe because the resources and landscape are entirely different.
It was near impossible to farm in Africa because the land isn't very fertile and there aren't many, if any, good farm animals.