/sci/ - Science & Math

>race

Opinion dismissed. >>>/pol/

>>6991352
We could possibly bring back individuals in your genetic past through human cloning, then, through generations of incest, produce a large number of people sharing those genetics. If that's what you want.

>>6991352
What does bring back mean in your mind? Selective breeding? Genocide of partial white natives and then segregation?
These are all things that could be done but that are obviously stupid. Also if you're a nationalist, do you live on reservation? What's your tribe?

>>6991352

>Is it possible to bring back a race of people once thought extinct?

What does it matter to your question whether they were 'once thought extinct'? Do you not know if they are still extinct?

Also, what does 'bring back' mean? A self-sustaining population? Depends on the genetic diversity that still exists, since you can't legally clone humans. Otherwise you risk too much inbreeding. But it's hard to say, since the definition of a race can encompass a relatively small or wide range of genetic diversity.

>>6991354
This.

I'm native american too but this is not a /sci/ topic.

How can you even be a nationalist for native americans? I don't get it. Your race has literally nothing going for it other than some art theory. I get white nationalism; white countries are highly successful. I get jewish nationalism; jewish people have been highly successful. I get black nationalism; blacks have been highly successful. I can't even think of any successful or important native americans (not counting chiefs)

>>6991516
why not? Race is just shorthand for a genetically distinct population group. Even anthropologists believe these exist.

>>6991531
/sci/, like most of academia, are highly skilled at the art of doublethink. They're happy to accept anthropological groups of humanity for things like diabetes chances or cycle cell disease, but the second somebody tries to point out the reality of the fact that these genetic groups line up perfectly with what laymen identify as different human races they cover their ears and go "lalala i can't hear you race is a myth lalala" like gradeschoolers

>>6991531
No it's not. There exist genetically distinct population groups that are not races and there exist races that aren't really genetically distinct. Worse genetically distinct population group is extremely vague in the context of 1950s "race science". Modern science studies population genetics but this is a fundamentally different context from race (though it often helps to redefine "race" within the context of population genetics into a much more general term that doesn't really mean the same thing people are used to but helps give a kind of main idea).

Anthropologists are social scientists and thus pseudoscientists. No one takes them seriously outside of the social sciences.

>>6991538
>implying /sci/ accepts anthropology.

>>6991542
If race is a myth, why are africans vastly more likely to get sickle cell disease and diabetes? Why do native americans not have the alcohol dehydrogenase that most other human groups do?

>>6991522
>blacks have been highly successful

Umm...

>>6991546
In sports, for example. There have also been some big name black scientists and a lot of major black political and philosophical figures. There are several sports that are COMPLETELY dominated by africans. The same can not be said of native americans.

>>6991542
Ok, Even biologists believe they exist: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FST..

Forensic Athropologist identify race by bones, like on the show of the same name, if sci doesn't accept Forensic Anthropology, it literally doesn't accept science. They have a model, that they use, that is accurate and consistent within >95%.

>distinct population groups that are not races and there exist races that aren't really genetically distinct.
See you're reading into his categories. Just because most people are retarded and don't know Caucasoid Africans are Caucasians doesn't mean racial categories can't be accurate.

>>6991543
>scientist discovers that mutations in a gene produces proteins linked to thing
>doctors warn patients carrying the gene about thing
>meanwhile retards dumb it down to just "brown people have thing".

Being a certain race doesn't guarantee you will carry a certain mutation of a gene and vice versa. Often it doesn't even suggest a significantly high probability of it, only a slightly higher probability than other groups.

tl;dr: Race is pseudoscience used only by laymen because it's easier to digest than real science.

>>>/pol/

>>6991554
Oh I was thinking science

>>6991560
Forensic Anthropology is psuedoscience?

>>6991559
FST isn't the same thing as race. It's used to measure genetic variation between human populations.

>Forensic Athropologist identify race by bones, like on the show of the same name, if sci doesn't accept Forensic Anthropology, it literally doesn't accept science. They have a model, that they use, that is accurate and consistent within >95%.
>Forensic Anthropology
>Science

Fucking lol. That shit is technician tier incredibly shoddy science that's only meant to be used alongside a bunch of other methods of evidence gathering. Lets not forget that forensic scientist who recently tried to publish a paper claiming that she'd found evidence of big foot.

>Caucasoid
This is a really antiquated term that has largely gone into disuse since the development of modern genetics. Seriously, this is from back when people couldn't study DNA so all they could do was speculate about genetic distance based on appearances. Of course, this notion is now hilariously mistaken given what we know about convergent evolution (things can look almost identical and have evolved from completely different and very different looking common ancestors AND things can look very different but have very similar genetics).

>>6991522
Native Americans typically doesn't refer to just a few plains indians in the US, it's all the hundreds of civilizations that lived throughout the Americas (with the possible exception, depending on context, of far northern tribes since they arrived through a separate wave of migration).

>>6991571
All social sciences are. They can't run controlled reproducible experiments and the statistical correlations that they take seriously are laughably bad.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaO69CF5mbY

>>6991576
>FST isn't the same thing as race. It's used to measure genetic variation between human populations.
Why can't you define race by FST values?
I.e. populations that are more genetically distinct are considered 'racially' different? Some FST values are as high as those between breeds of dogs.

>technician tier shit
Do you have any idea how accurate the system is? Just because it's not underwater nuclear basket weaving (your degree) doesn't make it not science. The model is accurate and consistent.

>antiquated term
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003996914002337
THIS FUCKING YEAR caucasoid.

Caucasoid Africans are more closely related to other Caucasians than African groupd, this was predicted by 'pseudoscientific' racial categories. They are 'black' because of convergent evolution.

>>6991592
But Forensic Anthropology isn't a social science. Look at it's methodology

>>6991592
>forensic anthropology
>a social science

is this satire?

>>6991610
>Do you have any idea how accurate the system is? Just because it's not underwater nuclear basket weaving (your degree) doesn't make it not science. The model is accurate and consistent.
That's a very lenient definition of accurate and consistent you're using there.

>>6991617
>>6991624
>implying it's science

>>6991559
You keep repeating this bullshit and it gets refuted every time. FST has nothing to do with races. Forensic Anthropology has nothing to do with races.

There exist no races, 85% of genetic variation is present between peers. Humans are too young as a species and way too mobile for a speciation process to ocurr.

>>6991610
>http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0003996914002337
>Dentistry research.
Are you serious, anon?

>Just because it's not rigorous doesn't make it not science
Fixed.

>Caucasoid Africans are more closely related to other Caucasians than African groupd, this was predicted by 'pseudoscientific' racial categories. They are 'black' because of convergent evolution.
You've still yet to define "caucasoid african", "caucasian", and "african". Technically it's impossible to do so in a rigorous, consistent, and objective (not arbitrary) way. The usual method is to use a clustering algorithm on genetic data and feed it "the right answers" so that it produces the groups you already expect. In this case the result relies on circular reasoning. It's impossible to do this any other way with a clustering algorithm because clustering algorithms are not convergent.

>>6991352
Why would you want to bring back native-americans? There's no reason why. However, I use to fantasized about history and when European came. I'm still baffled today how some group of people came and replaced an entire group of people. I checked the demographics for some countries and a lot of them are Europeans. Virtually an entire clans located throughout the pockets of the continents... poof all dead. You can probably dig up their remains if you dig deep enough. You might even get an invite to join them.

>>6991649
These are different anons. No one will explain why you can use FST to compare dog breeds, Chimps v.s Bonobos, Deer populations, Cow breeds, Sheep breeds, Horse breeds, but not humans. All anyone says is "FST is not race, FST is not race."
>>6991634
What is the error rate for a forensic anthropologist to identify white/black/asian? Slavic/Germanic? Show me how familiar you are with the field.

Incest... Lots of incest...

>>6991693
>What is the error rate for a forensic anthropologist to identify white/black/asian? Slavic/Germanic? Show me how familiar you are with the field.
100%, because they don't exist.
BTFO
T
F
O

Also, you can use FST to compare humans. The problem is that it doesn't have anything to do with antiquated notions of race.

>>6991352
nationalist would mean you have a nation.
What you mean is that you are a native american racist.

>>6991724
Given that many tribes now identify as "nations" it is still possible for one to be a nationalist. However, OP does not identify as a specific tribe, so yes, you are correct even if not for the right reasons.

>>6991664
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2370.2000.00227.x/abstract?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false
from 2000
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/tan.12400/abstract?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false
from 2014
yes I'm serious.

>rigorous
jokes

define:
http://cajgh.pitt.edu/ojs/index.php/cajgh/article/view/83.. This article is using these terms. I don't need to define them. They exist, you can google them.

>>6991749
>I don't need to define them. They exist, you can google them.
If you don't have a definition then how do you know what they are? inb4 I just look at them and use my feelings.

>>6991720
>antiquated notions of race
Sure the concept of race would need to be updated. But you're not seriously suggesting that Africans are not genetically dissimilar from Europeans, are you?

http://cajgh.pitt.edu/ojs/index.php/cajgh/article/view/83.. \
http://openpsych.net/OBG/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/OBG_PolSelIntel_final.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FST

People say 85% of the genetic difference between all humans is between the individual, but like 85% of genetic difference between asian dog breeds is in the dog. Dog breeds are still different.

>>6991757
Just so we can get this out of the way. What are your requirements for a racial category?

>>6991766
>Africans are not genetically dissimilar from Europeans, are you?
The thing is that in modern genetics everything is generalized. Tons of different populations are genetically dissimilar. What's important now is in how you classify your populations and with respect to which other populations are they dissimilar. Individuals may be classified under many different populations at the same time and anyone can make up new populations to study. There is nothing special about the old list of races people used to use and more importantly, populations are not races.

Again, as everyone else has been telling you, FST has nothing to do with race.

The genetic distance between dog breeds is much larger than that between any two humans. You've really got to cherry pick your data to even suggest it is a valid comparison and even then anyone who knows.

>>6991790
This type of partitioning is now considered impossible. The last proponents abandoned it around 2004.

>>6991352
>nationalist
For a country you couldn't protect, and didn't even initially enhabit?

>>6991841
>didn't even initially enhabit?
1/10 made me respond

>>6991851
Historical ignorance, golden.

>>6991851

The "native" indians didn't arrived in America until 10000 years ago or so, m8
They're basically asian invaders

>>6991543
>sickle cell
because being a carrier for sickle cell without expressing it increases your chances of surviving malaria, black people come from a continent favorable to malaria, thus genetics says they are more likely to carry the recessive trait even if they aren't expressing it.

That just shows a pedigree, not a distinct race

>>6991834
Pic is from
http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/12/5/914.short
This is from 1995. It outlines DSW a measure of genetic distance. Which is later used in these articles: http://aob.oxfordjournals.org/content/112/9/1759.abstract
http://bloodjournal.hematologylibrary.org/cgi/content/abstract/120/3/603

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/tan.12400/abstract?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false
This is from 2014. A cancer journal.

What is this 'partition' you're talking about? This is why I want you to define what you think a race is. What do you require?

>>6991858
>I read a poorly researched pop-sci article on a news site that said a couple vikings may have landed on the Americas somewhere between 15k to 20k years ago.

>>6991859
>10000
Are you retarded? The most recent they could've possibly arrived was 20k years ago via the land sea bridge. However there have been other paths they could've taken and there's evidence that there were at least two separate large major migrations (due to completely different Y-DNA haplogroups). Furthermore none of them share Y-DNA haplogroups with any Asian groups suggesting that they only traveled through asia but weren't asian themselves.

pic related, the Q Haplogroup split from P just like the R haplogroup (associated with Europeans) did.

>>6991868
To bad 1995 is still in the very early years of diapers and none of those ridiculous hypothesis hold any water anymore. You should quote the relevant section of the paper, it seems like a big waste of time to access each one only to realize you're misinterpreting population for race.

>What is this 'partition' you're talking about? This is why I want you to define what you think a race is. What do you require?
Well a partition definition would be nice but not necessary. A partition requires a set with an equivalence relation. For example: Given the set of all the humans in the united states, define an equivalence relation R: "Is in the same state as". Now given any two humans you can tell that:
1) Every human is in the same state as themselves, xRx for all x.
2) Given any two humans, if the first is in the same state as the second, then the second is in the same state as the first. xRy<span class="math">\rightarrow[/spoiler]yRx for all x,y.
3) Given any three humans, if the first is in the same state as the second, and the second is in the same state as the third, then the first is in the same state as the third. xRy and yRz <span class="math">\rightarrow[/spoiler] xRz for all x,y,z.
These three properties partition the set of humans into sets (equivalence classes) of states. It just so happens that there are 50 of them and we have names for them.

If you could define a similar equivalence relation that says "x is the same race as y" in a rigorous non-arbitrary and consistent way then you would be able to partition everyone into a specific race (like in the picture). Of course, there are also less strict ways to define race but they all prove to be problematic in different ways. What matters is that you provide one. As far as I can tell you're just trying to call populations "races" only when convenient and saying "other people have used muh terms so they exist".

>>6991531
It is possible to define different neighborhoods as different populations and study how they differ genetically. This however does not imply that each neighborhood is a separate race by any traditional notion of race.

Races are not populations.

>>6991352
No.

We can find the most common ancestor and mix that with the few which remain (that have pure blood).

>>6991908
>DSW is silly
DSW was introduced as a novel measure and shown to be effective by 'calibration' on human populations. You're denying the validity of an entire measure of genetic distance.

>races have to have the communicative property and exclusive
So your concept of racial categories is destroyed by mixed race people.

>consistently defined, Not arbitrary.
Species isn't even consistently defined. Species is arbitrary.
>In biology, a species is one of the basic units of biological classification and a taxonomic rank. A species is often defined as the largest group of organisms capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring. While in many cases this definition is adequate, the difficulty of defining species is known as the species problem

This is circular, it's already been established that species is 'fuzzy.'

Why is species allowed to be fuzzy, but race is not?

Race is secondary to my argument; but if we're talking about genetic differences between Germanics and Mediterraneans, we're talking about race. East Asians vs. Europeans we're talking about race. Race is just the word that we use to talk about the fact that some groups of people are more like each other than other groups. So long as that is true; race is real. At smaller distances it's ethnicity. It's like you're saying there aren't ethnic groups.

http://openpsych.net/OBG/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/OBG_PolSelIntel_final.pdf
>1) rs324650, This SNP islocated in the gene CHRM2 (cholinergic receptor, muscarinic #2), which is involved in neuronal excitability, synaptic plasticity and feedback regulation of acetylcholine release; whose association with IQ has been replicated in four association studies (Comings et al, 2003; Dick et al, 2007; Gosso et al, 2006, 2007).
>Table 2c:(gene frequency)
>African Hunter Gatherer 0.32
>African Farmer 0.397
>European 0.549
>East Asia 0.957

IQ, correlated with a gene that affects plasticity correlated with populations.

>>6991911
it's possible to genetically define neighborhoods?

>>6992005
>So your concept of racial categories is destroyed by mixed race people.
Any concept of racial categories would find that problematic. That's why I'm asking you to provide one. All I've been saying is that race doesn't exist.

>Why is species allowed to be fuzzy, but race is not?
Species isn't really that fuzzy when you think about it. It's only the corner cases. If you could find a general definition for race that's at least as rigorous as this one then go ahead and provide one.
>A species is often defined as the largest group of organisms capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring.

>we're talking about race
No, in those cases we would be talking about populations. For example, suppose we have two neighboring tribes in southeast asia that are genetically very similar (moreso than any two "races"). Someone could study each tribe as a separate population using the methods of population genetics. That doesn't imply that each tribe is a separate "race".
>At smaller distances it's ethnicity. It's like you're saying there aren't ethnic groups.
Ethnic groups are based on the cultural/social aspect of individuals. They don't inherently have anything to do with race or genetics.

>6992007
You could do it with the same level of rigor that you do it for races since the standard way is to use a clustering algorithm on genetic data and feed it the right answer (i.e. tell it which individuals are in which neighborhood).

Of course, this isn't the intention. You wouldn't attempt to define a neighborhood through genetics, instead you would define a bunch of populations through neighborhoods and then study the corresponding genetics.

>>6992031
>No, in those cases we would be talking about populations. For example, suppose we have two neighboring tribes in southeast asia that are genetically very similar (moreso than any two "races").
We are literally arguing semantics and using this to deflect from the fact Africa is poor because:

http://openpsych.net/OBG/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/OBG_PolSelIntel_final.pdf

>1) rs324650, This SNP islocated in the gene CHRM2 (cholinergic receptor, muscarinic #2), which is involved in neuronal excitability, synaptic plasticity and feedback regulation of acetylcholine release; whose association with IQ has been replicated in four association studies (Comings et al, 2003; Dick et al, 2007; Gosso et al, 2006, 2007).
>Table 2c:(gene frequency)
>African Hunter Gatherer 0.32
>African Farmer 0.397
>European 0.549
>East Asia 0.957

IQ, correlated with a gene that affects plasticity correlated with races/populations.

>>6992042
>semantics
Seriously just take the tree of human populations splitting draw a line somewhere relatively far up and be done with it.

>>6992042
>We are literally arguing semantics
Did you forget that you are on the most pedantic board on 4chan? Besides, it's not semantics. Population is more general than race and has entirely replaced antiquated notions of race because race is too crappy an idea to properly formalize.

>using this to deflect from
No, I'm not even interested. I just wanted to point out that you were wrong.

>the fact Africa is poor because:
This isn't even a proper hypothesis in the context of the scientific method anon. A hypothesis at the very least requires rigorous reproducible controlled experiments, do you have any to propose? If not then your argument is nothing but pop-sci tier crackpottery. Just a fool trying to draw crystal ball inferences from scientific data.

>>6992063
Population has not replaced antiquated notions of race, we're just using a different word so people can say "race isn't real." Because couched in that statement is the idea that everyone is equal and everything could be sunshine and rainbows but for all these racial differences in education and achievement due to that damn racism and white privilege. This is a narrative.

As Watson points out this is an, unfortunately, false narrative; as shown by:
>1) rs324650, This SNP islocated in the gene CHRM2 (cholinergic receptor, muscarinic #2), which is involved in neuronal excitability, synaptic plasticity and feedback regulation of acetylcholine release; whose association with IQ has been replicated in four association studies (Comings et al, 2003; Dick et al, 2007; Gosso et al, 2006, 2007).
>Table 2c:(gene frequency)
>African Hunter Gatherer 0.32
>African Farmer 0.397
>European 0.549
>East Asia 0.957

So no, these 'unscientific theories' of racial differences are not false. Yeah, I get that race is difficult to define, but it's just a higher level differentiation. Racial theory has been refined.

>>6991354
Are you a complete fucking retard troll neanderthal or what?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence#United_States_test_scores
Rushton & Jensen (2005) write that, in the United States, self-identified blacks and whites have been the subjects of the greatest number of studies. They state that the black-white IQ difference is about 15 to 18 points or 1 to 1.1 standard deviations (SDs), which implies that between 11 and 16 percent of the black population have an IQ above 100 (the general population median). According to Arthur Jensen and J. Philippe Rushton the black-white IQ difference is largest on those components of IQ tests that are claimed best to represent the general intelligence factor g.[43] The 1996 APA report "Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns" and the 1994 editorial statement "Mainstream Science on Intelligence" gave more or less similar estimates.[44][45] Roth et al. (2001), in a review of the results of a total of 6,246,729 participants on other tests of cognitive ability or aptitude, found a difference in mean IQ scores between blacks and whites of 1.1 SD. Consistent results were found for college and university application tests such as the Scholastic Aptitude Test (N = 2.4 million) and Graduate Record Examination (N = 2.3 million), as well as for tests of job applicants in corporate sections (N = 0.5 million) and in the military (N = 0.4 million).[46]

North East Asians have tended to score relatively higher on visuospatial subtests with lower scores in verbal subtests while Ashkenazi Jews score higher in verbal and reasoning subtests with lower scores in visuospatial subtests. The few Amerindian populations who have been systematically tested, including Arctic Natives, tend to score worse on average than white populations but better on average than black populations.[46]

>>6992100
There you go. Superlative evidence of difference in intelligence between very real, races.

Which race is Barack Obama?
Which race are his kids?

>>6992104
That's like asking what breed a mutt is. It (obama) is a mix obviously.

>>6992100
Yeah, Rushton is the god of racists but was increasingly not taken seriously because of sweeping conclusions based on dodgy data. He knew plenty about psychometry and used it to write racist rants under scientific cover.

>>6992100

>Ashkenazi Jews score higher in verbal and reasoning subtests.

Those crafty fuckers.

>>6992106
Who is not a mix?
Is Snoop Dogg a mix? He has Native American ancestors and some European ancestors.
Is Heather Locklear a mix? She has some African ancestors.

>>6992100
>>6992107

http://openpsych.net/OBG/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/OBG_PolSelIntel_final.pdf

>1) rs324650, This SNP islocated in the gene CHRM2 (cholinergic receptor, muscarinic #2), which is involved in neuronal excitability, synaptic plasticity and feedback regulation of acetylcholine release; whose association with IQ has been replicated in four association studies (Comings et al, 2003; Dick et al, 2007; Gosso et al, 2006, 2007).
>Table 2c:(gene frequency)
>African Hunter Gatherer 0.32
>African Farmer 0.397
>European 0.549
>East Asia 0.957

IQ, correlated with a gene that affects plasticity correlated with races/populations.
This paper isn't just one gene correlates with 'race' and neural function; it's 10+ It's 13 pages of genes replicated in study after study.

>>6992131
So a gene that has something to do with the brain predominates in a population that always scores high on IQ tests.
Congratulations, you have now grasped the concept "correlation is not causation".
Or maybe you haven't.

>>6992136
Nobody said IQ caused RACE LOL

>>6992127
Ok. You are right.
What is not a heterogeneous solution?
Is Water a homogeneous solution? Water has some contaminants.

>>6992136
>>6992136

If you are implying there is only one gene; there are 10+ genes that correlate both with intelligence and "race." cited in this article.

Now if you are implying that feedback regulation of acetylcholine release would not affect cognition I'd love to hear your explanations on cholinergic drugs.

>correlation
I have a mechanism. Neuroplasticity is neuroscience for learning. This gene affects Neuroplasticity. Populations with this gene would have different typical neuroplasticity..

>>6992131
>implying an IQ test isn't culturally biased.

>>6992231
No you misunderstand.
The gene itself was shown to be associated with IQ, neuroplasticity, education, etc etc in like America. So IQ is not culturally relevant is itself not relevant.
Then when they tested world populations for it they found
>African Hunter Gatherer 0.32
>African Farmer 0.397
>European 0.549
>East Asia 0.957

>>6992231
How exactly is picking out shapes culturally biased?..

induring /sci/ abandoned this thread and now it's just /pol/esmokers arguing.

>>6992100
>>6992131

>What is epigenetics?

If you can't account for epigenetics, such as levels of gene transcription between groups of individuals, you can't say you have a complete model.

Epigenetics traits are heritable and don't involve DNA base sequence.

Studies show disease burden predicts IQ by country, and within areas in the US. Disease burden can also influence epigenetic modifications, which can take several generations to reverse.

Therefore, "blacks" probably have lower IQs due to disease burden/ environmental conditions affecting epigenetics. Read about the Flynn effect and better health care.

I gotta go to a lecture, I can't type this up properly

>>>/pol/ for all your retard needs

>>6991352
>Is it possible to bring back a race of people once thought extinct?

No. Didn't work for Hitler trying to breed back the Aryan race and it won't work for you.

>>6991538
>/sci/, like most of academia, are highly skilled at the art of doublethink. They're happy to accept anthropological groups of humanity for things like diabetes chances or cycle cell disease, but the second somebody tries to point out the reality of the fact that these genetic groups line up perfectly with what laymen identify as different human races they cover their ears and go "lalala i can't hear you race is a myth lalala" like gradeschoolers

This is WHY we don't want racial discussions on /sci/: Because as soon as we get them, retards start thinking Haplogroups correspond to Race.

They do not you densest of faggots. "Black People" is not a fundamental category in biology and no matter how much you shout it, it's still a /pol/ position rather than a /sci/ position.

>>6992086
>So no, these 'unscientific theories' of racial differences are not false. Yeah, I get that race is difficult to define, but it's just a higher level differentiation. Racial theory has been refined.

Listen you dumb nigger: If I split this office in two groups and do an IQ test, the Left Siders might be smarter than the Right Siders but that does not mean that "Sidial Science" works or that Sidism makes sense.

Do genes affect IQ? Sure.

Does population affect genes? Sure

Does race affect Population? >>>/out/

I mean for God's sake son, there was even "Caucasoid Africans" up top, do you think any racist is going to class them as "white people" just because they've got "caucasoid" in the name?

>>6992248
>How exactly is picking out shapes culturally biased?..

Do you know that one visual test with the two lines that are equally long but one looks longer than the other because of the arrows drawn on them?

Mongolians think the other one looks bigger. The prevailing hypothesis (untestable, unfortunately, until we find some way to divide them) is that Mongolians don't live in houses with hard edges, so they don't see two walls coming together in a corner like pic related all the time.

> american nationalist

my sides

>>6992352
>>6992367
Lol, this nigger thinks modern racial theory is about white people and black people. Talking about population differences is just politically correct talking about races.

Two recently published studies have discovered new genetic variants significantly
associated with increased intelligence (g). Desrivières et al. (2014) have found evidence
for an effect of a mutation within the NPTN gene on cortical thickness and intelligence,
using a relatively large sample of adolescents (N=1584). NPTN is involved in neurite
outgrowth and synaptic plasticity, and the minor allele (A) of rs7171755 is associated
with lower expression of NPTN in the human prefrontal cortex, an area responsible for
higher cognition (Passingham and Wise, 2012). The number of minor alleles at
rs7171755 was inversely correlated with average cortical thickness.
Rs7171755 A is associated with verbal IQ (β=−1.5048; p= 0.0076), a correlation that
was not mediated by indirect effects on mean or temporal thickness. An association with
nonverbal IQ was also found, although this was mediated by indirect effects of this
allele on cortical thickness.
rs7171755 G
Afr.H-G 0.277
Afr. Farmers 0.448
Middle East 0.582
European 0.611
Central Asia 0.6
East Asia 0.519
Southeast Asia 0.68
Oceania 0.465
Native American 0.318

Learn 2 Neuroscience brah.

>hurr durr races are not neat and exact categories so they do not exist durrr

nice continuum fallacy over there

evolutionary tree of life exists at the species level and up, family trees exist at individual levels, and genetic clusters tree-like structure exists at the level of humanity, in between

Main branches of this structure are human races, clusters or subspecies. Nobody calls it "races" anymore for political reasons and because the correspondence to races of the past is not exact but it is pretty similar to what races of the past used to be.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_genetic_clustering

>>6992376
So.... they aren't smart enough to measure, like everyone else when they get that problem?

>>6992381
>Lol, this nigger thinks modern racial theory is about white people and black people. Talking about population differences is just politically correct talking about races.

No, I think "Race" is a toxic word that has no use except to mark the utterer as /pol/-tier.

Haplogroup is not the PC term for "Race" because Haplogroup doesn't mean "black people" and race does.

>>6992387
>So.... they aren't smart enough to measure, like everyone else when they get that problem?

Nobody is allowed rulers you dense retard. When you group people without a measuring device, they typically pick one of them as the longer. Mongolians pick the other one.

>>6992381
>racial theory
>modern
kek'd

>>6992382
>and because the correspondence to races of the past is not exact but it is pretty similar to what races of the past used to be.

No, it isn't.

If you didn't know fuck-all about races and just got all the haplogroups and were told to put them in six groups, you do not end up with six groups that correspond to white/black/etc.

Which is why this kind of thread is /pol/-tier.

Daily reminder: Spanish people are White when in Europe and "Hispanic" when in America. "Race" is a cultural concept. Scientists use haplogroups.

>>6992406
http://openpsych.net/OBG/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/OBG_PolSelIntel_final.pdf
>The alleles associated with a phenotype reflecting adult brain size, namely intracranial volume, were positively correlated to the IQ and Educational Attainment PCs. This suggests that brain size increases following the out of Africa migration, partially account for cognitive differences between human groups.

B T F O
T
F
O

>>6992426
>Says nothing about "race".
LOL
O
L

Race isn't a valid scientific concept.
sageru!

>>6992406
This, but it's also more complicated than that. There's Y-DNA and MT-DNA haplogroups and they are completely different. Furthermore just because an individual is in a specific haplogroup it doesn't really tell you a whole lot about their ancestors (since they have a fuckload of different ancestors but only one haplogroup of each type). Not to mention that haplogroup isn't used to classify populations as there are more sophisticated tools for that.

Seriously, the only reason people appeal to antiquated notions like "race" is because of feelings. Unfortunately there aren't any feelings in science. Why is /pol/ so anti-science?

>>6992412
>Nobody is allowed rulers you dense retard.
they have fingers? That's what I used.
>>6992422
>implying pic related doesn't demonstrate Aryans
>implying pic related doesn't demonstrate Semites

>>6992431
>Since the second half of the 20th century, the associations of race with the ideologies and theories that grew out of the work of 19th-century anthropologists and physiologists has led to the use of the word race itself becoming problematic. Although still used in general contexts, race has often been replaced by other words which are less ambiguous and emotionally charged, such as populations, people(s), ethnic groups, or communities, depending on context
>implying populations isn't P.C. for races.

>>6992381
>Thinks that paper has anything to do with "racial theory".

>>6992131
>open journal
>races/populations
>thinks 10+ genes is a lot or significantly more than 1 gene. Obviously doesn't understand genes, proteins, or genetics.

>>6992100
>self-identified testing where random people are asked to check a box from a short list of races
>expects to be taken seriously
The study may as well have asked the applicants to self-identify their own IQ and it would be equally as legit.

>>6992086
>they're trying to control the narrative!!
tinfoil hat conspiracy theory

>>6992453
>20th century.
>As in the era pre-dating modern genetics.
Are you retarded?

Also,
>2014
>taking 19th century social science seriously
inb4 freud

>>6992443
Now pull up an MT-DNA haplogroup migration map and compare the too so that we can all laugh at how retarded you are.

>>6992472

>2014
>not taking 19th century social science seriously

Sounds like someone's a dirty brachiocephalic who's just jealous of my superior dolicocephalic skull. Why don't you just embrace scientific truth, you jewish luddite saboteur?

Now excuse me while I go put cocaine in my tea, and then beat the orphans at my factory for not working hard enough. God Save the Queen!

>>6992509

Fuck I forgot to sage this gay shit. How did that happen?

>>6992406

"Hispanic" is not a race nor was it ever considered one except in modern times

There was white race which includes Spanish people and then there was indigenous american race ("red"), and people with various admixtures of those two

this shows up in genetic clustering analysis pretty well so it had a good biological basis

>>6992465
>implying populations isn't P.C. for race
see >>6992453

>implying if there are 10+ there aren't more.

>open journal
>implying the article doesn't consist mostly of links to meta-analysis, and that I'm not using this article for the sources.

From peer reviewed
http://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/Factor-Analysis-of-Population-Allele-Frequencies-as-a-Simple-Novel-Method-of-Detecting-Signals-of-Recent-Polygenic-Selection-The-Example-of-Educational-Attainment-and-IQ.pdf

>>6992422

>If you didn't know fuck-all about races and just got all the haplogroups and were told to put them in six groups, you do not end up with six groups that correspond to white/black/etc.

Oh yes you will, if you take into account many genes and not just a few.

>>6992443
>they have fingers? That's what I used.

So, what, you couldn't answer the simple question "Which one do you think looks longer" before measuring? Do you not have a visual cortex? Did you lie after measuring?

>>6992443
>implying pic related doesn't demonstrate Aryans

>In the middle of Africa

I'm sorry, your buddy Hitler would have you off to the camps before noon.

>>6992453
>Although still used in general contexts, race has often been replaced by other words which are less ambiguous and emotionally charged, such as populations, people(s), ethnic groups, or communities, depending on context
>implying populations isn't P.C. for races.

>less ambiguous
>the same except PC

No, nigger, I am not
>implying
it isn't just PC for race.

I am straight up stating it in the text.

Congratulations on being able to read the specific text of my messages. No congratulations for thinking you've found out what I'm implying by it.

>>6992513
>"Hispanic" is not a race nor was it ever considered one except in modern times

But these ARE the modern times! With that oh-so-refined modern racial theory. Clearly Hispanic must be a race!

Or you could just fucking LOOK AT HAPLOGROUPS IT'S WHAT WE HAVE THEM FOR.

Mad/10

>>6992583

to be fair, being able to read anything that isn't a neo-nazi slogan or an a. wyatt mann comic is a huge accomplishment for a /pol/tard.

Sorry to interrupt this thread but I'm kinda curious since this is my first time on /sci/. How often do you get /pol/ coming over and making threads like this?

>>6992636
All the time
It's their hobby of sorts, plus /pol/ is about 100 times bigger than us, so even if it's very rare for individual to get the idea to
>Le ebin trollers /sci/ XD XD
It's very common thanks to volume.

>>6992648
Damn /pol/ really does get everywhere doesn't it? Other then that it seems like a nice little board you guys have here. I think I'll lurk for awhile and see how I like it.

>>6992609
>to be fair, being able to read anything that isn't a neo-nazi slogan or an a. wyatt mann comic is a huge accomplishment for a /pol/tard.

What most infuriates me is not the racism, it is the intellectual laziness. I am sure you could do IQ-by-haplogroup and find some group out of Africa that is, on average, worse performing than some test on R1b, but then they'd have to admit that Jews are intelligent so that probably won't happen either.

>>6992704
Most race realists admit that jews and asians have a higher average IQ than whites.

Have you ever been to /pol/, or are you just basing your opinions on what people said about them on reddit?

>>6992587

modern refined racist theory recognizes that hispanics are just various mixes of white and red races

genetic analyses confirm this

whether hispanics are called "race" or not in colloquial speech is just unimportant semantics, not science

>>6992716
>>6992587
hispanic - from hispania
Spaniards in Spain are hispanics. The term only became associated with native american/hispanic mixes because old timey united states thought it was important to distinguish between non-latin europeans and latin-europeans. Later the term swallowed up all the mixed brown people south of the united states because people are dumb.

>>6992716
"Hispanic" isn't a race at all.
There are Asian Hispanics (Filipinos), European Hispanics (Spanish) and American Hispanics (anyone with Native American ancestry that doesn't speak English well).

>>6992722
"Negro" isn't a racial term either, it just means "black" in spanish. Yet, it has become a racial term to designate americans of african origin, just like "hispanic" has become a racial term to designate mestizos.

I mean, I don't know where you live but I've literally never heard of someone calling a Filipino an "asian hispanic"

>>6992712
>Have you ever been to /pol/, or are you just basing your opinions on what people said about them on reddit?

I have been to /pol/, and then I have left because fuck that noise. On to your point:

>Most race realists admit that jews and asians have a higher average IQ than whites.

1: "Asians" is more race bullshit. The group doesn't exist.
2: They only admit Jews are smart when it is necessary, e.g. when talking about IQ tests. At all other times, Jews are entirely subhuman.

>>6992730
>I have been to /pol/, and then I have left because fuck that noise. On to your point:
Yeah, fuck opinions I disagree with

>1: "Asians" is more race bullshit. The group doesn't exist.
Jesus, I meant North East Asians you big baby

>2: They only admit Jews are smart when it is necessary, e.g. when talking about IQ tests. At all other times, Jews are entirely subhuman.
They're called subhuman because some claim they're social parasites. Nobody denies their natural intelligence (which is the reason why they are so successful)

>>6991724
All the keks

>>6992520
1900s "racial science" is pretty much alchemy tier compared to modern genetic science. Most of the big breakthroughs are turn of the millennium breakthroughs. The reason the term "race" stopped being used isn't because it became unpopular but because every major proponent of the hypothesis that humans could be classified into races rigorously pretty much gave up by 2004. Ever since then it's all been superseded by more general and overall better techniques.

The problem is that you /pol/ halfwits hear
>race doesn't exist
and you think it means
>humans are all exactly the same
when really what /sci/ is saying is
>that's 1950s science, we've found more rigorous and precise ways to discriminate against people that work even when "racial science" doesn't. Traditional "race wisdom" is now literally on the tier of alchemy and astrology when compared to our methods.

>>6992513
Genetic clustering analysis is still really flimsy since machine learning clustering algorithms are inherently non-convergent meaning that every time you train them (using the same data under the same conditions) you can get entirely different clusters. In order to "fix" this, researchers cheat. They tell the algorithm what the right answers should be by giving them the number of clusters they want and a bunch of "right answers". This is circular logic since it assumes what you're trying to prove.

>>6992733
lol are you for real?

I bet if we studied the genetics of the population of /pol/ users (or the "/pol/ race", as they would prefer to call it) and tested their IQ we would discover all sorts of genes and proteins associated with cognitive deficiencies.

>>6991892

> The most recent they could've possibly arrived was 20k years ago

Yeah, that's what i said

>>6992748
0/10

genetic clustering analysis based on genetic differences among many genes

clusters roughly corresponding to classical races are evident

I could post such charts all day, there are many studies all with this outcome

whether this validates the existence of races or not is more of a philosophical question, but it certainly does not rule them out

>>6992752
refer to
>>6992738

and take a proper machine learning course so you can stop embarrassing yourself. There are very obvious inherent problems with trying to use clustering algorithms to prove the existence of something.

>>6992752
>Look, these data points colored with arbitrary borders proves that the borders aren't arbitrary!

>colors are a social construct

>>6992738

>They tell the algorithm what the right answers should be by giving them the number of clusters they want and a bunch of "right answers".

No they dont, only some clustering algorithms input the number by hand

>>6992758

>Look, these data points colored with arbitrary borders proves that the borders aren't arbitrary!

the clusters are evident without colors, idiot

colors were added later to show whether the clusters actually correspond to geographical origins, which they do pretty strongly in a similar way as classical races

>>6992751

>>6992771
Only retards think this analogy makes any sense.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_vision

>people are still getting baited by pseudo-liberal trolls in 2015

>>6992775
>No they dont, only some clustering algorithms input the number by hand
Are you talking about the number of clusters? That is not what I meant, well not all of it. The algorithm is given user hints. This is the case in every paper I've seen on the topic (it also used to be common for dumb /pol/ users to link some "super legit" blog posts describing the method). The important things to keep in mind are:
1) No clustering algorithm converges to the global maxima.
2) In order to get the algorithm to consistently detect the "correct" racial clusters when trained on the data multiple times the algorithm had to be tweaked by manually giving it the right answers (at least in every example I've seen).

Furthermore, to respond to the rest of your post, a clustering algorithm typically trains on data pertaining of thousands of dimensions. An actual implementation that uses genetic data would be far too complex to produce a simple graph. Your two dimensional graph there is just a toy meant to express a general idea and has little relation to reality. All that said one could still argue that the data could be clustered differently, for example one could suggest that all that shit on the top left is one big cluster. This is because clustering algorithms are inherently not convergent.

>>6992771

>colors are a social construct

of course

there are only continuous transitions between colors, no neat categories

different cultures have different names for certain parts of the spectrum, or divide it a bit differently

clearly, "colors" do not exist, there is only one color, the white color

>this is what anti-racists actually believe

>>6992747
>IQ
>relevant
As excepted from a /pol/ hater.

>>6992800
2/10, on the off-chance you're just brain damaged.

Cone cells have a peak wavelength, that wavelength defines a basis for a vector space, that vector space gives us the colors we see. Different animals have different cone cells/peak wavelengths so they see different arrangements of colors and shit (RGB monitors and shit look retarded nonsense to them). Of course the phenomenon is more complex since the brain does all sorts of hacky shit while processing vision so you get all sorts of bizarre shit like optical illusions.

The frequencies themselves don't inherently have anything to do with color unless you're talking in a strictly human context but even then it's flaky (mixing R + G + B isn't physically the same as a real light that looks the same color). It's kind of like tone vs note in music.

On the other hand, if you're just talking about 'naming' the colors then it absolutely is a social construct unless you're dealing specifically with the peak wavelength colors (not the frequencies as everyone varies a little bit). It's even more of a social construct if you're talking about associating "moods" or other retarded superstitions to colors (now THIS is analogous to race) like saying red rooms make people mean.

>>6992771
>I have no idea what I'm talking about

how do you know you're pure blooded?

>>6991352

Look it's really terrible what happened to your ancestors, but this is a bad thread.

>>6992807
So since dogs can't see colors, that means colors aren't real?

Checkmate

>>6992577
That's an optical illusion. If you were not aware of the optical illusion you will get this problem wrong, unless you measure.

>>6992704
>>6992100
>>6992712
>>6992730
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAH. Nigger you can't even read the thread
The sources even provides evidence for genetic selection in Jews. No one cares about Jews, if anything they're an amazing case study.

>>6992738
>race a way of categorizing humans
>haplogroups a way of categorizing humans
>>6992443
Literally puts Indians (Aryan), with Persians (Aryan) with Germans (Aryan), with Nordics (Aryan).
>>6992578
>implying I think Hitler was right
try again. There was simply an Aryan expansion into African.
>alchemy tier.
>implying "psuedoscientific" racial groups don't match up with 'scientific' haplo groups.
Bro, racial science said horn of Africa niggers are Semetic not African. HAPLO GROUPS CONFIRM. >>6992752

>>6992797
>in my personal experience
Shut the fuck up and source.
>inb4 muh species can be fuzzy but muh racial categories can't
Even if you do, it doesn't change the evidence for Africans not having been selected to be smart because of no civilization. African H.G. are provably more dumb than African Farmers who are provably more dumb than everyone else.
http://openpsych.net/OBG/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/OBG_PolSelIntel_final.pdf
>inb4 implying I'm not using this source because of it's sources as well as the data

>>6993548
Heritability of Skin tone is ~.55-.88
http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/37604/1330550207_ftp.pdf?sequence=1
http://www.nature.com/jid/journal/v125/n6/full/5603650a.html

Heritability of intelligence is .~5-.8
Devlin, B.; Daniels, Michael; Roeder, Kathryn (1997). "The heritability of IQ". Nature 388 (6641): 468–71.
Plomin, R.; Pedersen, N. L.; Lichtenstein, P.; McClearn, G. E. (1994). "Variability and stability in cognitive abilities are largely genetic later in life". Behavior Genetics 24 (3): 207–15

>We evolved skin tone but not intelligence.
>Lies we tell to children
pick both.

Do /pol/tards really think that they have the biology right but that biologists don't because of some global liberal conspiracy?

>>6993718
>File: tumblr_n4zazrDaZD1qi524ao(...)

For some reason I'm not surprised.

>>6993718

Yes and it's pretty hilarious.

My favorite part is how they cherry-pick data from the social sciences, and then come to their own conclusion from their own prejudices and then say the social sciences are just one big hugbox - when the reason the social sciences don't come to their shitty conclusion is because they are actually under real academic scrutiny.

>>6993718
>>6993792
Heritability of Skin tone is ~.55-.88 [1][2]
Heritability of intelligence is .~5-.8[3][4]

For highly heritable traits where h2 exceeds 0.40, the animal's phenotype is a good indicator of genetic merit or breeding value. For lowly heritable traits, where h2 is below 0.15, an animal's performance is much less useful in identifying the individuals with the best genes for the trait. [5]

>1) rs324650, This SNP islocated in the gene CHRM2 (cholinergic receptor, muscarinic #2), which is involved in neuronal excitability, synaptic plasticity and feedback regulation of acetylcholine release; whose association with IQ has been replicated in four association studies
>Table 2c:(gene frequency)
>African Hunter Gatherer 0.32
>African Farmer 0.397
>European 0.549
>East Asia 0.957
[6]

>We evolved skin tone but not intelligence.
>There wasn't enough time for us to differentiate like that

Lies we tell to children for 500 Alex


[1]http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/37604/1330550207_ftp.pdf?sequence=1
[2]http://www.nature.com/jid/journal/v125/n6/full/5603650a.html
[3]Devlin, B.; Daniels, Michael; Roeder, Kathryn (1997). "The heritability of IQ". Nature 388 (6641): 468–71.
[4]Plomin, R.; Pedersen, N. L.; Lichtenstein, P.; McClearn, G. E. (1994). "Variability and stability in cognitive abilities are largely genetic later in life". Behavior Genetics 24 (3): 207–15
[5]https://pubs.ext.vt.edu/404/404-084/404-084.html
[6]http://openpsych.net/OBG/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/OBG_PolSelIntel_final.pdf

>>6993792
>>6993718
Tired of you people. Perfectly content in your brainwashed state.

>>6993910
http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/philo/faculty/block/papers/Heritability.html
Educate yourself, son.

>>6993630
Research finds that specific genes produce proteins that make people retarded.
/sci/: We should round up all the carriers of that gene and make sure they don't pass it on.
/pol/ user 1: No!! What if we're carriers! I don't want to be rounded up by the gub'ment!! Instead we should find out which "race" has the most carriers and get rid of them, even if every race has between 5% and 10% carriers! This way I'm less likely to get selected against!
/pol/ user 2: It's a conspiracy!! I bet the jews did this to us through our water!
/pol/ user 3: It's a conspiracy! We've known this all along!! The reptilians have been hiding this from us!
/v/: I bet women and non-gamers are the most likely carriers!!
/r9k/: I bet the carriers are the ones who get laid the most. I know this because I believe I'm smarter than most people and I never get laid.

>>6993548
>Shut the fuck up and source.
I don't bookmark blog posts or other retarded shit. If you have any sources that use clustering analysis then I'll gladly tell you why their method is bullshit. It simply is not possible to use clustering analysis to rigorously and consistently prove something exists unless you use some sort of circular logic.

>HAPLO GROUPS CONFIRM
No they don't.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_mitochondrial_DNA_haplogroup
also, refer to >>6992438

>haplogroups a way of categorizing humans
You could categorize humans into down syndrome gene carriers and non-carriers. Does that mean that there only exist two different races according to genetics? Down syndrome race and non-down syndrome race?

>Even if you do, it doesn't change the evidence for Africans not having been selected to be smart because of no civilization. African H.G. are provably more dumb than African Farmers who are provably more dumb than everyone else.
That only talks about specific populations, not about all Africans (are you not aware how large the region is). It also isn't sufficient to establish the existence of an "african race". Of course, it's no surprise that IQ differs between populations. An obvious example of the phenomenon is how dumb the /pol/ population is in comparison to the rest of 4chan.

>>6993950
being a leftie does not make you more intelligent. just a heads up, faggot

>>6993954
No one said /pol/ was dumb for not being lefties. Also, no one said that "not being from /pol/ meant you were smart. It's clearly evident that /pol/ is dumb because they believe retarded anti-science shit and rely on feelings instead of rigorous objective observation. Obviously you must be from /pol/ if you can't into basic logical inferences.

>>6993918
>Is actively trying to brainwash people with pseudoscience.
>Calls other people brainwashed.

>>6993918

>Holding yourself to consistent standards of logic and methodology is brainwashing
>Not cherry-picking facts to confirm your prejudices is brainwashing
>Holding peer-reviewed journals above internet racists is brainwashing

White supremacists are so CUTE!

>>6993942

A normal, well-rounded human being: Interesting, I hope this leads to further research that can help people *continues on with every-day life*

>>6993981
>white supremacists
you're as clueless as the average tumblrite

>>6993988

That or I wasn't born yesterday.

Protip: if you think whites are superior, you're a white supremacist.

>>6993942
epic reddit humor. one step away from an asterisk joke. fuckin /sci/dweebs.

>>6993994
not all poltards think whites are superior. some of us are just concerned with the survival of our race, newfig

>>6993999
>some of us are just concerned with the survival of our race

Which is fucking hilarious.

>>6991655
Dogs are way younger

>>6994003
you're a joke. why don't you choke on that self-loathing of yours already

>>6994004
>Dogs are way younger

Dogs have Slippery Genomes, we do not.

>>6993988
>be /pol/
>Believe that the users of /pol/ are the most oppressed members of modern society.
>Invest a huge amount of time into spreading internet justice against those that would contradict my feelings.

This is a /pol/ thread and /pol/ are the SJW (they just deliver a different flavor of social justice from tumblr).

>>6993999
>/pol/ thinks race exist.
Kawaii desu ne!~

>>6994005

>>6994014
I can smell your brand of snark a mile away. You're not that special.

>>6994005
>/pol/ trying to sound cool.

>>6994006
This, their rate of speciation is way higher than humans. If you think that's crazy you should check out cichlids, those fucks speciate like it's what they were meant to do.

>>6993718

>Do /pol/tards really think that they have the biology right but that biologists don't because of some global liberal conspiracy?

Yup, though the real problem is even if they were hypothetically right about the biology, they seemed to be completely oblivious to the fact that the definition of "race" is flawed.

They also seem to be ignorant or unaware that the current logistical state of each "race" is incredibly fragile because it's based entirely on population statistics.

Every migration, war, pandemic and social movement we have had has affected us. For example it is entirely possible that European populations had lower IQ's than Middle eastern and Asian populations early in history and when something like the black death came and wiped out roughly 50% of them European IQ's started to rise. And then when World War 1 and 2 came and past killing tens of millions the average IQ of European populations stagnated or lowered just enough for East Asians to now be ahead.

And it's not as if these were events that took the course of over a thousand years, these were events that lasted around several decades (for the wars) and a century and a half (for black death). That's really scary when you think about it because these two events alone could have made or break Europeans along with several other populations.

>>6993921
HOLY MENTAL GYMNASTICS BATMAN!

>Apparently accepting The Bell Curve's way of conceiving the issue, he complains that Herrnstein and Murray wrongly minimize the large environmental malleability of IQ...As Herrnstein and Murray concede, children from very low socio-economic status backgrounds who are adopted into high socio-economic status backgrounds have IQs dramatically higher than their parents.
>muh high fructose corn syrup
High SES Blacks do worse than low SES whites SAT. College Board 2008. Better environment worse results.Wanted to do a snarky side by side with the corn example but no room.

>If we have no real grip on the kinds of causal mechanisms that produce the 60 percent heritability within Whites, we can have no confidence in any extrapolation to Blacks.
I've cited several causal mechanisms. Changes in synaptic plasticity will affect cognition. Changes in cortex size will affect cognition. Changes in lobe sizes will affect cognition.

The only thing in here is Ogbu's 'Ghetto Culture' theory. Brief Case Study
>The first people of Nigerian ancestry in what is now the modern United States came as slaves or indentured servants from the 17th century onwards. Nigerians in the Diaspora, including in Britain and the United States, have become well known for their educational prowess, as exemplified by the academic accomplishments.
compare that to
>Like other African groups in the United States, the first Congolese arrivals to the modern United States arrived as slaves to this place in the colonial period. However, it has been more difficult for recent immigrants to adapt to life in the United States.
compare to
pic related and the theory of civilization being an evolutionary force.

Why aren't Nigerians a caste like authority? Blacks are treated like red headed step children in American society. Nigerian Americans against all odds became successful.

>/dept/philo
>philosophy
kek

>>6994031
yup

>>6993966
Objective observations:
>Africa does poorly on IQ tests
>Africa does poorly on civilization tests
>Africans have a lower prevalence of many genes linked to synaptic plasticity (learning)
>Probably related.

>>6994065
>rigorous
>africa
>probably

lol'd

racism goes to >>>/pol/

>>6994031
>>6994040
>They also seem to be ignorant or unaware that the current logistical state of each "race" is incredibly fragile because it's based entirely on population statistics.

>Every migration, war, pandemic and social movement we have had has affected us. For example it is entirely possible that European populations had lower IQ's than Middle eastern and Asian populations early in history and when something like the black death came and wiped out roughly 50% of them European IQ's started to rise. And then when World War 1 and 2 came and past killing tens of millions the average IQ of European populations stagnated or lowered just enough for East Asians to now be ahead.

>And it's not as if these were events that took the course of over a thousand years, these were events that lasted around several decades (for the wars) and a century and a half (for black death). That's really scary when you think about it because these two events alone could have made or break Europeans along with several other populations.

which is why we need to have a serious discussion about a lot of topics i this is true instead of going "LALALALALALA I CAN"T HEAR YOU WE"RE ALL EQUAL"

>>6994071
If this guy >>6994037is racist why is he arguing Nigerians are smart?
If this is racist why are people saying Asians are smarter?
If this is racist why are Jews being used as the primary case study for human self selection?

>>6994037
*sigh* spell check made minority, authority

>>6994031
One could argue a race is something that evolves through time, it would make sense.
Then it's a good question what a race exactly is if it's not something that gets carried through time over more than a few centuries, but there are plenty of culturally significant things that get carried merely over a few centuries.
I strongly believe that culture is tied to biology and thus defending one's biology and the people with similar biology is a way to defend your culture.

Isn't it logical for a city-dweller adapted to high-density urban life since hundreds of years to be reluctant around a tribesman and their violent mores, equality adapted to their evolutionary cultural history?

>>6994016

The amazing thing about slippery genomes is that it's not speciation. They allow certain parts of their code to mutate quite freely while the code around bodily function and replication remains rigid.

>>6994073
>which is why we need to have a serious discussion about a lot of topics

What /pol/tards on /sci/ don't realize is that we do - there is no carebear censorship going on in the sciences. They're just in denial about how their arguments don't stand up to scrutiny to the point of modern biology not taking any of it seriously.

Hell, the STARTING point that these white supremacists use, their definition of race, isn't even the same that's used in biology anymore.

>>6994073
>Thinks /sci/ is saying humans are all equal when they say that race is an antiquated notion from before genetics.
How are you this retarded?

What /sci/ is saying is to forget everything you thought you knew about races and start over from the beginning with populations. Specific genes produce specific proteins that then affect the body in a variety of ways. Even basic things have all sorts of complex side effects. A mutation in a specific gene could affect how strong cells are and as a side effect cause deafness due to how fragile the mechanism is. That's just one gene and it's looking at a very specific physical side effect now take into consideration that you want to look at groups of genes and study psychological behavior. That is HARD to do rigorously because genes are just NOT THAT SIMPLE. Back in the day people believed that there was a gene for hearing and a gene for having good taste in music and a gene for moral character and so on, now we know that that such notions are retarded. Worse than that we have to study things from the ground up by studying the genes and seeing what sort of patterns they produce instead of studying from the top down (starting with races) because there's all sorts of crazy phenomenon that could cause all sorts of ridiculous false positives if we use races. We begin with genes and define some vauge metrics for genetic distance so that we can start getting a big picture, we then use these metrics to try and distinguish "populations" of humans and study them. Then by studying them we hope to isolate groups of genes that are responsible certain effects and then by studying those genes we hope to understand WHY they cause those effects (more than likely the gene will also have a bunch of other invisible effects). I can't stress enough how complex this all is, you can't simply dumb it down to "brown people = bad, white people = good" and you can only rely on ancestry to a fairly limited extent.

>>6994102

To add to this, you can tell when people have their ulterior motive when they focus on race instead of isolated genetic groups.

/pol/ has a really hard time grasping that if you are a white American, there are two black neighbors in Africa where one of them is more closely related to you than they are to each other.

>>6994102
There's nothing wrong with top-down analysis tho.

For example this summer 80 risk factors for schizophrenia were identified.
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v511/n7510/full/nature13595.html

Schizophrenia is a complex disease but we know it is inheritable, and so we study it to understand which genes are involved.
Then we build cellular and animal models using these genes and hypothetically we develop treatments using these models that we finally test in patients.

>>6994090
>Isn't it logical for a city-dweller adapted to high-density urban life since hundreds of years to be reluctant around a tribesman and their violent mores, equality adapted to their evolutionary cultural history?
Yes, Ogbu's caste minority, Ghetto Culture theory, xenophobia, etc etc would all play a role in someone's IQ. No one is denying effects.

However when we have studies which show that people with certain genes have:
>different acetylcholine feedback response
>Changes in hippocampal neurons
>Differences in dopamine reuptake

you say

>o wow how interesting

When we have studies which show that certain population groups have certain genes resulting in things like:
>Height
>Skin tone
>Hemoglobin
>Eyesight

you say

>o wow how interesting

But when we have data, and a lot of data, that links particular those genes associated with intelligence, with populations associated with a lack thereof; you say:

>it's nurture not nature, go back to /pol/

You're arguing that synaptic plasticity has nothing to do with learning. This isn't "o... maybe it'll be expressed or not" This is it being expressed.

>>6994090
>>6994090
>Isn't it logical for a city-dweller adapted to high-density urban life since hundreds of years to be reluctant around a tribesman and their violent mores, equality adapted to their evolutionary cultural history?
Yes, Ogbu's caste minority, Ghetto Culture theory, xenophobia, etc etc would all play a role in someone's IQ. No one is denying effects.

However when we have studies which show that people with certain genes have:
>different acetylcholine feedback response
>Changes in hippocampal neurons
>Differences in dopamine reuptake

you say

>o wow how interesting

When we have studies which show that certain population groups have certain genes resulting in things like:
>Height
>Skin tone
>Hemoglobin
>Eyesight

you say

>o wow how interesting

But when we have data, and a lot of data, that links particular those genes associated with intelligence being expressed, with populations associated with a lack thereof; you say:

>it's nurture not nature, go back to /pol/

You're arguing that synaptic plasticity has nothing to do with learning. This isn't "o... maybe it'll be expressed or not" This is it being expressed.

>>6994109
Schizophrenia is a symptomatic disease which makes it as difficult to study as other symptomatic diseases like autism, aspergers, and ADD. In cases like that people do fall back to top-down analysis but it's really only out of desperation and necessity because the alternative would be to say that we can't prove that such diseases even really exist.

>>6994116
>>6994120
You have it wrong,
When research shows that some people with certain genes have X effects /sci/ says
>o wow how interesting

However, then /pol/ shows up and misinterprets the data to support their feelings (because /pol/ can't into science) and says, well I bet everyone with black skin carries those genes and therefore black people have that effect. To which /sci/ responds with
>lrn2science you retard and go back to /pol/
and
>One paper is not enough to draw the conclusions you have drawn. It's not even sufficient to say that this gene has this effect in all people. One would have to repeat the experiment a whole lot more all over the planet. That said that is not the intention of the research which you have obviously failed to grasp, gb2/pol/.

>>6994102
>you can't simply dumb it down to "brown people = bad, white people = good" and you can only rely on ancestry to a fairly limited extent.
no one is doing that.
When you look in the population areas that have been historically civilized you find these genes. There are populations with overwhelmingly different CHRM2 receptors. You think neuroscientists don't talk about how different receptors effect brain function?

>>6994109
There is nothing wrong with top down analysis.

>>6994107
WE LITERALLY WENT OVER THIS. This was cited as evidence. We even posted the haplogroup map showing this.

>>6994122
Behavioral output of the CNS exists, retard. It's an objectively observable phenomenon. And why do you criticize methodology you don't understand? Proper top-down analysis is extremely rigorous, and certainly not used only as "last resort". Come back when you pass your high school science classes.

>>6994132
>However, then /pol/ shows up and misinterprets the data to support their feelings (because /pol/ can't into science) and says, well I bet everyone with black skin carries those genes and therefore black people have that effect.
Once again people are talking about how smart Nigerians are, and how that supports the theory. >>6994037 Everyone knows it's a complicated situation.

>one paper
ahahahahahahahahaahah
Many of the genes cited in the study have been independently associated with populations and neurofunction. You're not even understanding the argument, you're just knee jerk reacting.

>>6994142
>When you look in the population areas that have been historically civilized you find these genes. There are populations with overwhelmingly different CHRM2 receptors. You think neuroscientists don't talk about how different receptors effect brain function?
There's nothing wrong with this, of course one should point out that the individuals in either population are unlikely to be entirely of specific "races", skin colors, or creeds, and that not every individual in the population expresses the genes nor is it the case that the genes are only expressed by that population (they are probably expressed by genes in some "civilized" populations as well). More study is necessary to reach any useful conclusions.

What's wrong is when some /pol/ halfwit goes on to say "the black people in that population are representative of all black people everywhere and every black person carries those genes!"

>>6994161
>Once again people are talking about how smart Nigerians are, and how that supports the theory. >>6994037 Everyone knows it's a complicated situation.
Are you illiterate?

>Many of the genes cited in the study have been independently associated with populations and neurofunction. You're not even understanding the argument, you're just knee jerk reacting.
Not talking about a specific paper or thread, this is just the standard recurring theme with /pol/.

>>6994132

Fucking this.

/pol/ seriously needs to drop the persecution complex where they try to come across brave harbingers of truth against a global leftist censorship conspiracy, when really they are called out for arguing shitty data in bad faith.

>>6991352
>mfw we can't talk about human biology without /pol/ fucking things up and yelling MUHH Racism


This is why everyone hates you /pol/. Please BTFO to your shitty crippled dying board.

>>6994132
>/pol/ shows up and misinterprets the data to support their feelings (because /pol/ can't into science)

>>6991352
>Succesfully baiting /sci/
how the fuck did you do that

>>6994182
>>6994180
>>6994188
Standard recurring theme which is not happening in this thread?

>There's nothing wrong with this, of course one should point out that the individuals in either population are unlikely to be entirely of specific "races", skin colors, or creeds, and that not every individual in the population expresses the genes nor is it the case that the genes are only expressed by that population (they are probably expressed by genes in some "civilized" populations as well).
There has been cited data showing the percentages of many populations expressing these genes, not just 'black people and white people' as you assert. When you misrepresent their claims or focus only on the trolls, you make /pol/ look right. People are currently reading the sources because they say calm rational things, and you talk about board memes.

>>6994205
successfully baited the mod too, this thread is over a day old and still not deleted

>>6994205

Yeah because it's not easy as shit? There are plenty of circlejerks that every board loves to have. Anything about race, gender, or the soft sciences is 200+ replies.

>>6994209
inorite, and meanwhile I got warned for making a wildberger joke in another thread.

>>6994205
how this all started.

>>6994217
I remember that thread. Dude kept getting ridiculed but just kept posting walls of text and claiming he was winning. It was pretty hilarious to see someone that delusional.

>>6991352
Heritability of Skin tone is ~.55-.88 [1][2]
Heritability of intelligence is .~5-.8[3][4]

For highly heritable traits where h2 exceeds 0.40, the animal's phenotype is a good indicator of genetic merit or breeding value. [5]

>1) rs324650, This SNP islocated in the gene CHRM2 (cholinergic receptor, muscarinic #2), which is involved in neuronal excitability, synaptic plasticity and feedback regulation of acetylcholine release;
>Table 2c:(gene frequency)
>African Hunter Gatherer 0.32
>African Farmer 0.397
>European 0.549
>East Asia 0.957
[6]

>The first people of Nigerian ancestry in the United States came as slaves from the 17th century onwards. Nigerians in the Diaspora, have become well known for their educational prowess, as exemplified by the academic accomplishments.
compare that to
>Like other African groups in the United States, the first Congolese arrivals to the United States arrived as slaves to this place in the colonial period. However, it has been more difficult for recent immigrants to adapt to life in the United States.
[wikipedia.]
Why aren't Nigerians a caste like authority? Blacks are treated like red headed step children in American society. Nigerian Americans against all odds became successful. Nigerians had civilization.

>We evolved skin tone but not intelligence.
Lies we tell to children for 500 Alex


[1]http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/37604/1330550207_ftp.pdf?sequence=1
[2]http://www.nature.com/jid/journal/v125/n6/full/5603650a.html
[3]Devlin, B.; Daniels, Michael; Roeder, Kathryn (1997). "The heritability of IQ". Nature 388 (6641): 468–71.
[4]Plomin, R.; Pedersen, N. L.; Lichtenstein, P.; McClearn, G. E. (1994). "Variability and stability in cognitive abilities are largely genetic later in life". Behavior Genetics 24 (3): 207–15
[5]https://pubs.ext.vt.edu/404/404-084/404-084.html
[6]http://openpsych.net/OBG/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/OBG_PolSelIntel_final.pdf

>>6991352
Probably? But why the fuck would you want to?
No offense, but what is the point exactly? There really is no such think as "pure blooded". It is a stupid subjective term (like race).

You claim to be a pure blooded native American, yet you are a fucking mutt (aka not pure blooded). Native Americans are descended from the intermingling and mixing of other more ancient humans tribes/cultures. You are a fucking mutt, so is everyone else.

This pure blooded (racism) bullshit, just makes you looks ignorant and feeble minded.

>>6994225
This is the third time you've reposted this post only to be BTFO right afterwards.

>>6994225
>LOOK GUIZE! I DON'T' KNOW HOW TO DRAW PROPER CONCLUSIONS FROM DATA SETS

>I DON'T KNOW EVEN KNOW BASIC STAT ANALYSIS

You are embarrassing yourself /pol/. No one cares about your stupid shit. And it isn't even relevant to the OP.

>>6994225

Maybe if you post this enough, someone will give a shit and take you seriously.

>>6994223
His main point: was that selection on intelligence is possible, the whole thing was to show that /sci/ would deny this, and that the comment would be deleted for saying something that was obviously possible. We literally evolved via selection on intelligence.

>>6994225
>unrelated to OP
>childish racist garbage

>>6994238
>the whole thing was to show that /sci/ would deny this

And here is where /pol/ is retarded.

/pol/: It's possible, and therefore likely true

/sci/: it's possible, but there are too many confounding variables to accurately make assertions about the intelligence of different ethnic groups

/pol/: See how in denial they are! IQ! IQ!

>>6994230
what like this?
>>6993910
>>6993921
>>6994037
Line by line critique of article
>>NO FUCKING RESPONSE
>B T F O
>T
>F
>O

Why aren't Nigerians caste like minorities? You think the average american can tell the difference between a Nigerian and a regular African American? But some how Nigerian Americans are not affected by this effect when Ogbu's theory clearly states they should as people with black skin in America are "red headed step children."

>you: black people score lower on IQ tests because of ghetto culture and people's expectations
>me: well if you look at Nigerian Americans, who are considered 'black' you will find they actually do quite well in spite of cultural expectations and this 'ghetto culture'. This confirms the civilization causes some selection for intelligence
>you: lol this guy thinks blacks are a racial category.

>>6994236
>Look guise I'm not going to dispute his claim, I'm just going to laugh at him.

>>6994252
No see. He said it was possible and then everyone either denied it was possible or devolved into memes. See>>6994242

>>6991352

>>6994277
misspoke
not confirms, but it's certainly evidence in favor of selection theory over "muh ghetto culture." Which is accepted uncritically. If 'Ghetto culture" is an effect it should affect everyone with black skin in america, not only some immigrant populations. Ogbu's theory has serious holes in it.

>>6994277
or this time i got BTFO
>>6992131
>>6992136
>>6992157
>>6992208
>NO FUCKING RESPONSE
GJ /SCI/
B T F O
T
F
O
Didn't see these:
>>6992304
>disease by country
No sources!!! Notice how every time I examine a source there is no response?
>Flynn Effect
Could literally be dismissed as society as a whole getting better at taking IQ and other tests, but no let's go with the more convoluted answer of epigenetics
>Africa has rampant diseases
>Africa does poorly on IQ tests
>Disease burden correlates with IQ by country
>probably related
HOLY SOCIOLOGISTS FALLACY BATMAN
>MAYBE STUPID PEOPLE GET SICK MORE OFTEN BECAUSE THEY'RE DUMB
>NO IT'S BECAUSE OF EPIGENETICS!
>I CAN"T DISTINGUISH BETWEEN CORRELATION AND CAUSATION!
almost identical to this >>6994065 but this has a causal mechanism

Saying a variable predicts something is just a fancy way of saying the correlation holds up with new data; which it should, if you have a good sample.

You know just saying someone got BTFO isn't the same as actually blowing them the fuck out.

Still waiting for explanation on why Nigerians are not affected by Ogbu's' ghetto culture. As early as the 17th century Nigerians were noted for their intelligence at the height of of this 'caste like minority' phase. Why aren't Nigerians affected by their 'caste like minority' status?

>>6991352

>>6994388
Dubs 2x in a row.

http://www.nyu.edu/gsas/dept/philo/faculty/block/papers/Heritability.html

>if you grow corn in a poorer environment it's shorter! IQ is due to environmental effects like Socioeconomic status
College Board Data 2008 Black High SES SAT < White Low SES SAT

>Muh Caste like minority status
>Muh Ghetto culture

Still waiting for explanation on why Nigerians are not affected by Ogbu's' ghetto culture. As early as the 17th century Nigerians were noted for their intelligence at the height of of this 'caste like minority' phase. Why aren't Nigerians affected by their 'caste like minority' status? Do you think the average racist 17th knew the difference between a Nigerian and any other black?
There is a whole Wikipedia page about how smart Nigerians are; is this true for any other African group?

>>6994238
well yes, it's obviously possible. This is the reason why retards browse /pol/ and geniuses browse /sci/.

>>6994388
>after the issue has been addressed by countless posts before hand my retarded posts are now being ignored! I'm winning!
get a load of this guy

>>6994484
>I believe that blacks in one environment represent blacks in every environment because I don't understand the basic principles of Darwinian evolution and natural selection.
Jesus /pol/, how anti-science can you get.

>>6991352

Natives have the highest birthrate of any ethnic group in Canada. You fuckers pop out kids like your hens laying eggs.

Then again, so many lazy Indians sitting on their ass doing fuck all with their lives on the Rez, hard to make a living unless you have 10 kids the government has to subsidize on your welfare.

>>6994504
Canada is way more racist towards their indigenous than Americans. Seriously you dudes are bible belt tier but what can you expect from a bunch of douchebags who think they're British.

>>6994511

imagine if you were living in Caledonia, Ontario.

Despite significant measures forward to ensure peaceable relations and cooperations with Firs Nations on behalf of the Gov. of Canada, FN Leaders encourage lawlessness and dissent from their people left-right-and-centre.

They ACTIVELY encourage Native people to be ethnocentric, financial and resource hoarders, and antagonistic towards non-Native society. Just look at the hubris displayed by Chief Theresa Spence, Chief Glen Hudson or Derek Nepinak from Manitoba.

You're one to talk, you fuckers almost killed every single fucking Indian in your country, we may have had Residential schools and unabided Treaties, but Aboriginal people nonetheless have a voice and noticeable political presence in Canada.

Native Americans have virtually no representation in American politics or culture. Your government has reduced them to almost nothing, and continually has little if any sympathy for their plight despite bending over backwards for African Americans.

Tell me again how racist we are, I was born and raised in Winnipeg, MB, and was born and raised around Natives, my girlfriend is Native, when the fuck have you ever even met a Native person?

>>6994519
There are many problems, not the least of which is the corruption with leaders. Of course, that's not representative of indigenous people as a whole since only a very small percentage of all indigenous people in Canada actually live on reservations and actually benefit from any of the indian treaties. Keep in mind that it's not possible to buy or sell land inside a reservation so it's not like you can just move in if you want to. Most of the population is entirely fucked out of the system entirely. However they are still fucked around by either side of the government.

In Canada the government sits around blaming natives for many of their problems, economic and otherwise. Their government made treaties with the tribes way back in the day and now they're refusing to honor them (because Canada's word is apparently worth shit). Most of the natives are forced into this fucked up ethical quandary where they either help the racist white folk kick the native man down or they help the corrupt native leaders fuck around their people some more. This is the entire premise of the idle no more movement.

In the US the government sits around blaming illegal immigrants for most of their problems, many times without justification for a specific problem but always with some level of legal justification against illegal immigrants. Sure the American natives don't have a loud voice in the grands scheme of things but it's a country with a population 10 times as large as Canada and more importantly the US doesn't sit around blaming the natives for all of their problems like Canada does.

I am a native, I've lived all over the continent (mexico is the worst).

>>6994503
>I believe that blacks in one environment represent blacks in every environment because I don't understand the basic principles of Darwinian evolution and natural selection.
That's not what that says. He's asking why Nigerians in America were successful in spite of the effects of "caste like minority status, " when Ogbu's theory was presented as the final refutation of "the Bell Curve" in the article the other anon cited.
Just answer the question and move on.

>>6994499
>implying you couldn't have just linked to those posts instead of just blanket claiming all his arguments were BTFO

>>6994497
/Sci/ denied that this was possible in the pic. Is this real life? Is this shilling? Are shills real?

Instead of reading the article and pointing out the contention on some of the genes like Rs324650 which are cited in the article. /Sci/ is instead posting memes and calling people racist. Some of these genes are extremely well established as correlating with IQ. If these population correlations hold true for some of the extremely well established genes, this would be a strong theory. If you can prove an established intelligence gene is not equally distributed among populations it would explain some of the variation among those populations. Top down analysis is a very real thing. If there are differences in the distribution of intelligence genes across world populations, that's a perfectly valid scientific topic.

Obviously, this study needs to be replicated before we can draw serious conclusions. But the nature of this thread is a perfect example of this "Watson Effect" where everyone who talks about this is treated as a pariah. How can this study be replicated with this environment?

I expected better /sci/.

>>6991352
We could probably dig up some long dead cells that happen to be well preserved and attempt to clone a couple thousand dead Native Americans. We could then interbreed them back to reasonable numbers.

>>6994545
>/Sci/ denied that this was possible in the pic. Is this real life? Is this shilling? Are shills real?
selection by populations (like the population of /pol/ posters vs the population of /sci/ posters) is real, selection by races is make belief fairy land for retards from /pol/.

>>6994499
>implying you couldn't have just linked to those posts instead of just blanket claiming all his arguments were BTFO
Doesn't change the fact that they were already BTFO and you were just reposting to get a different response.

>>6994545
>That's not what that says.
Yes it is.

>>6994548
Clone native-americans trained them to be dangerous and released them back to get revenge on those who had wrong them.

>>6994549
Kid is obviously talking about populations. Unless you think he thinks Bantu is a race distinct from Yoruba?
>>6994552
>implying there isn't more than 1 person in this thread.

>>6994553
This is insane. Am I reading the same thread?
>Why were/are Nigerians in America successful in spite of the effects of "caste like minority status, " which they should be susceptible to by Ogbu's theory ?
>hurr hurr black in every environment. hurr hur storm front hurr hurr muh genes
These are not the same thing.

I don't think people realize how obvious their ulterior motives are.

Why is this stormfag thread still allowed to exist?
Fuck off back to /pol/

>>6994583
Define nigerian and then define nigerian in america and then explain why a small number of nigerians in america involved in the study represent all nigerians in america. Then explain why anyone cares about a study that makes an inference about a very small percentage of americans by looking at an even smaller percentage of americans.

>>6994574
>>implying there isn't more than 1 person in this thread.
>implying you're the only person in this thread.

God damn it Moot. I hate /pol/ just as much as the next guy but it's existence and containment of its base was necessary. But you had to get all butthurt and fuck up /pol/ causing a mass exodus of it's user base. Now threads like these are more common on other boards.

cloning

>>6994236
shut up, newfig. you've never even visited /pol/, have you. your ilk is just as prejudiced as you believe them to be.

>>6994625
>>6994655
Who taught you react like this?

>>6994655
The funny thing is that the day before /pol/ began it's cuck party we had a thread here on /sci/ where an anon was posting a bunch of statistics he gathered through the 4chan API. One of the things he had studied was how much each board is mentioned in every other board. It was obvious from the images that the board most mentioned outside of it's board was /pol/ and everyone proceeded to hypothesize that this was because /pol/ is a huge piece of cancer that every board hates and complains about. Shortly after, the anon sent his data to moot and moot posted in the thread for a while. I like to think that this is what led to /pol/'s cuckparty.

>>6994659
I've been to /pol/. All the threads are speculation, crystal ball, tinfoil hat, and anti-science. It is the definition of cancer, which makes sense given that it was built as a containment board to capture all the stormniggers that came to 4chan during the Hal Turner raids.

>>6994625
JIDF getting triggered

>>6994680
/pol/washed detected

>/pol/ getting btfo as usual

>>6994629
>Define nigerian and then define nigerian in america ...percentage of americans by looking at an even smaller percentage of americans.
No study talked about Nigerians in this context. Are you illiterate?
Follow me on this:
>One study associates "IQ" genes with certain population groups (vaguely associated with old racial categories) More studies are needed; no shit.
>Implies this might explain some of the "Bell Curve" gap
>An article is cited which claims that Ogbu's Oppositional Culture Theory theory explains the remaining gap in the 'Bell Curve' between Blacks and Whites. Supposedly proving anon wrong.
>In Ogbu's theory certain minorities have a "caste like" status because they have been distanced from their own self determination. This is caused by the group having been enslaved, forcibly emigrated, being a scapegoat etc. These groups are treated like "red headed step children."
First of all, entirely irrelevant to the first study itself. The correlation of 'IQ' genes in population groups in Africa, Europe, Asia and other places has nothing to do with the 'Bell Curve' in America. Top down analysis is totally a thing. If alleles are associated via top down measures with 'IQ' it's just as valid to call these 'IQ' genes as it is to say certain genes carry a risk of schizophrenia; and further to make broader statements about 'risk factors' in the population, just like we do for schizophrenia, with similar data.
>Nigerians are then presented as a counter example to Ogbu's Oppositional Culture.
>Despite the fact that a study of 2010 employment data by the Economic Policy Institute showed that Black immigrants carried the highest unemployment rate of all foreign-born workers; Nigerian Immigrants have some of the best educational and SES outcomes of any immigrant group.
So why are Nigerians seemingly not discriminated against, when other black immigrants seemingly are?

>>6994682
inb4 what does IQ have to do with discrimination, education and socioeconomic status
Ogbu talks about how "caste like minority" status causes people to achieve these things less

http://www.epi.org/publication/blacks_have_highest_unemployment_among_foreign-born_workers/
it points to a problem that stems from race and not cultural background.
Statements like this are supported by Ogbu's theory.

meant to link >>6994693 to >>6994697

>>6994693
>other places has nothing to do with the 'Bell Curve' in America.should be
>other places has nothing to do with 'caste like minority" status in America.