/sci/ - Science & Math

>>7495405
>Dat pic

So basically if you think anything other than blacks have lower IQ because genetics, then you're wrong a priori? That's not how it works. Also intelligence has a heritable component but it also has a non-negligible environmental component. The difference between IQ's could easily be explained by difference in environment.

>>7495405
>how will they be denied this time?
Probably by turning it into a hate crime or something.

>>7495424
>The difference between IQ's could easily be explained by difference in environment.
Not according to every study done on the matter. It does have some effect, but not enough to cover the entire gap.

>>7495424
no they cant.
Twin studies put it at 60% (conservatively) to 80% (commonly accepted by experts) for genetics.
Do you really think evolution would make us all the same from the neck up, despite different skulls among all the other variations present in humans?

So why do whites not suceed to the extent asians do?

>>7495405
They can't, this is irrefutable. Now those low IQ races won't have anywhere to hide on 4chan. You've done it anon. Finally the superiority of the hwhite race has been established.

The incredible ability of the hwhite man to outthink and outsmart the other savage races by scoring higher on such mind bending questions as picrelated will now usher in a great new era, free from all the problems society face!

>IQ doesn't matter
>except when I autofellate thinking about my melanin pigments

>>7495433
Likely because of schooling and education in the past fifty years.

>>7495433
>>7495431

>Twin studies put it at 60% (conservatively)

That's not conservative, that's the commonly accepted value, which leaves 40% to environmental factors. Provided we accept that there's a clear demarcation between genetics and environment, which need not be true.

Why people spend resources researching this?
Can't these "super smart white men" work in some real science like physicist, chemistry and mathematics?
What are the applications of such research besides generate tension among humans, slowing the progress for all?

>>7495433
I never understood thus either.
Given the vast amount of differences between people, why would anyone assume there to be a standard deviation of zero between ANY arbitrary group of people and another?

It would almost require a belief in some kind of "fairness god" that exists to make sure all groups are somehow the same, no matter your methodology of dividing them up.

>>7495459
race social constructions are worse than creationists in this respect.

>>7495455
>Can't these "super smart white men" work in some real science like physicist, chemistry and mathematics?
Believe me, they already do

>What are the applications of such research besides generate tension among humans, slowing the progress for all?
You're right on this one; prejudice is rarely justified. However, a lot of public policy (university admissions, for example) run on the false assumption that all races are equal in intelligence, and provide affirmative action to compensate, leading to reverse racism.

>>7495459
>It would almost require a belief in some kind of "fairness god" that exists to make sure all groups are somehow the same
Exactly.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

>>7495455

Honestly it's mostly an ego thing from what I see.

I mean I can see the applications for genetic engineering for isolating particular traits. But the way how anons on this board talk about IQ is nearly identical to the way how religious zealots talk about muh one true god.

It gets old, it's become the butt of jokes and to be quite frankly honest no one really cares about it at this point because the general public is to busy trying to make a living wage right now.

Seriously just ignore the thread and do something constrctive like make money or work on a axiom or whatever.

>>7495438
which one is it

>>7495475
subsaharan detected

Funposting in a race thread!

>>7495479
yes i am a dumb low iq anon
but which one is it

>>7495483
F
c'mon I'm sure Koko could have gotten that one

>>7495487
Why isn't it D? I dont get the pattern with their position within the box

if you look at diagonals, they are rotating counter clock wise as you move towards the top right... I dont see any other pattern though

>>7495487
Eh, to be fair to the retard, it took me a good 60 seconds to decide between D and F.
>or maybe I'm retarded too

>>7495490
Each shape has two instances on the bottom row, one on the top row.

>>7495492
oh yeah
thanks anon

>>7495469
equality under law=/= equality of trait distribution

>>7495455
>What are the applications of such research besides generate tension among humans, slowing the progress for all?
Realistic, fair, and productive policy?

There's a lot of social justice rhetoric flying around about how a difference of outcomes is proof of unfairness. For instance, if black people or women in the USA earn less on average than white and asian men, that's taken as evidence that people in important positions are deliberately choosing to make it that way, that if they were hiring, promoting, and paying by actual merit, black people and women would be earning as much as white and asian men. Since such discrimination has been made unlawful, this is held up as evidence of widespread crime.

Companies like Intel are now putting all of their employees through mandatory "unconscious bias training", indoctrinating them in the idea that whenever they evaluate white and asian men as better performers than women and black men, even if they think they're basing this on the evidence in front of them, they're actually being horrible sexists and racists. And Intel is almost strictly refusing to hire white men at all, until they can get their "diversity" numbers up.

Similarly, when African countries develop less and have more misery, poverty, disorder, and violence than countries elsewhere in the world, this is held up as proof of mistreatment by the international community. Surely, if the people are born the same there as anywhere else, then the difference in outcome can only be explained by the malice of outside actors. Therefore, we must identify and punish these malicious people, and compensate their victims.

These are major, major policy issues, which hinge on the question of whether or not there are innate differences of ability between sexes and races. Refusing to look at the evidence is handing enormous power to idealogues.

>>7495467
"They" no, just some of them, the others are spending money to inflate their egos.

And why care about the admissions? Affirmative actions only affects the least smart white people, that group of people that enter in university at the last call, and will most likely not achieve much in an academic career.
I have no difficult in think about affirmative actions as that candy that you give to a child so they stop crying and you can go back to work.

>>7495516
Affirmative action hurts asians too.
It is anti-meritocrat and they discriminate in favor of blacks and hispanics which by attending a school they did not meet traditional qualifications for, have painful dropout/non-completion rates.

>>7495516
>Affirmative actions only affects the least smart white people
Actually, it affects Asian men and women the most.
I'm not sure how you can justify discriminating against a largely smart minority to give completely undeserved preference to a dumber minority.
This is like (actually, exactly is) having points taken off of your test scores for being of a certain race.

>>7495492
I got it in 5 seconds, the circle is in the same position as the square

>>7495424
even if a lowe iq individiual's intelligence caught up to that of a smarter person's, the geneticcs would still be the same in the first person and he would leave the same shitty genes to his offspring. Lower iq races need a shit ton of natural and artificial selection to actually start on the same iq basis.

>>7495532
But the triangle's not, so that's not a pattern for all three, even if you get the right answer by bad logic.

>>7495445
>That's not conservative

Oh really? http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/v20/n1/full/mp2014105a.html

>IQ

lel

>>7496110
http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/1997whygmatters.pdf

>>7496115
>tests claiming to measure "intelligence"

lel

>>7496124
you are not really good at this.

>>7496131
You're way better.

An "innate hereditary difference"?
What's that?
Does innate mean genetic? All hereditary differences are genetic; the very definition of hereditary is variation in phenotype corresponding to variation in genes.

Long necks are hereditary among burmese because women in some cultures wear neck rings. That's an observed trait in appearance / behavior, which corresponds to a genetic difference (2 X chromosomes) and is thus hereditary.

It's another matter entirely to argue it's "caused" by genes. Lots of traits are hereditary, but their presence is not expressly because of the genes that vary with respect to the presence of the trait.

If tomorrow burmese men started wearing neck rings, the trait would stop being hereditary, but this change would not indicate microevolution.

The behaviors associated with the range of human intelligence are extremely polygenic; and there is no convincing evidence that genes must be the cause of the difference in the distribution observed between races. We've not yet worked out the noise between transcription of individual genes and IQ testing to conclude such a thing. The best we can do otherwise is process of elimination; of which the best evidence that exists are transracial adoption studies, for whoch the results are inconclusive, given that the performance gap does appear to shrink, but not dissapear, which is not surprising, given that environmental influences can not feasibly be fully controlled for, nor can it be ensured that the sample of babies put up for adoption must be representative of the race as a whole, nor that results of IQ tests truly reflect cognitive skills like intelligence over motivation.

>>7496150
innate was meant to indicate that it is not something that can be greatly malleable by environmental factors.

Something like say brain size, which correlates to IQ to the tune of ~.7.

IQ is hereditary, and that is the most influential factor. No serious psychometrician doubts this.

> there is no convincing evidence that genes must be the cause of the difference in the distribution observed between races
http://newobserveronline.com/leftist-lies-destroyed-as-scientists-discover-the-gene-which-causes-brain-size-and-intelligence/
the genes which code for big brains are more sparsely distributed in africans relative to europeans and in europeans relative to asians.

you cannot reasonably expect non-identical structures to function identically

>>7496170
it's actually .4.
but regardless, there are physical differences which can very well explain these differences

>>7496170
>Something like say brain size, which correlates to IQ to the tune of ~.7.
really? http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2512128

>>7495455
Oogo booga gib mony 4 dem programz

>>7496170
>http://newobserveronline.com
dat source
>you cannot reasonably expect non-identical structures to function identically
dat reasoning

>>7496150
well-put

>>7495405
An observation can only be as good as it's observer in collecting his evidence. In this situation I call to question that of Psychology and it's history of unscientific practices. How repudable are the people who administered theses tests. How reputable those who created this current version of tests?

If I test a man on English then I'd expect to find out how much he has retained from his prior schooling in English. Let's give this man a 100 IQ for the sake of this argument. All this man now needs to do to get a high score is add some English studies to his lesiure activities and his score will improve. Same for mathematics.

tl;dr
>the results don't show what they say it does because the tests administored that exist right now do not measure intelligence
>the definition of intelligence must be examined

>>7496150
hear hear!

>>7496196
it has a link to a UCLA study within the article.

Black do have smaller brains as a group, that does not have implications for intelligence?

Or are we all da same except for skin color, especially from the neck up?

>>7496199
Such pomo mental gymnastics.
Go back to /lit/

>>7496243
I don't see any mental gymnastics needed to understand that.

>>7496209
>>7496170

Not that anon but your link and the UCLA link along with it leaves out a interesting detail.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21705-best-evidence-yet-that-a-single-gene-can-affect-iq/

>Following a brain study on an unprecedented scale, an international collaboration has now managed to tease out a single gene that does have a measurable effect on intelligence. But the effect – although measurable – is small: the gene alters IQ by just 1.29 points. According to some researchers, that essentially proves that intelligence relies on the action of a multitude of genes after all.

>After the researchers had established that HMGA2 affected overall brain size, they looked in more detail at a subset of 1642 volunteers from a twin study in Brisbane, Australia, who had all taken standard IQ tests. From that analysis, they were then able to measure the effect of the C on IQ. When people inherit C-variants from both parents they enjoy double the effect: a rise in IQ of about 2.6.

>“It’s important they’ve found this gene, but it took a sample of 20,000 people to find it, precisely because the effect is so small,” says Robert Plomin at the Institute of Psychiatry in London, and lead author of a groundbreaking study in 2007 which failed to find any single genes of disproportionate importance in intelligence. “If it’s this hard to find an effect of just 1 per cent, what you’re really showing is that the ‘cup’ is 99-per-cent empty,” he says.

>Steven Pinker, an author and professor of neuropsychology at Harvard University, agrees. “It’s an important finding, assuming it holds up,” he says. Pinker says that the findings are a first step in demonstrating that intelligence relies on large numbers of genes, each with a tiny effect, rather than on single genes that have moderate or large effects, but which are so rare that none has yet been identified.

Why did your links not talk about this?

bump

>>7496175
"Cultural achievements"

>>7496062
>Ranges from 20% in childhood to 80% in adulthood

So basically genetic effects are smaller when they're younger and environment is the largest determiner of intelligence.

When will /pol/ stop posting on our board?

Pretty sure the average level of educational attainment on /pol/ is a high-school diploma, if that.

in b4 complaints about credentialism.

>>7497623
> talking about race or IQ makse you a nazi
you are killing this board. please leave and never come back

>>7497627
discussion of 'race' belongs on >>>/pol/

>>7497635
No. Discussion of politics belong to /pol/
We used to discuss genetics and race long before /pol/ existed.
Please stop spamming the same garbage over and over again and leave.

>>7497627
>pretending to be interested in math/science to misdirect from your /pol/ shilling/psyops campaign
We have this thread like every week if not more. How often does race actually come up in your day-to-day life that it warrants this much discussion? Very little if you're not a loser who scapegoats his own personal failings on some nebulous out-group. The threads are very thinly-veiled /pol/ threads, and /pol/ really is a containment cesspit.

Also, nobody said you were a member of any national socialist parties.

sage goes in every field

>>7495487
yeah, nice try Koko

>>7497647
> How often does race actually come up in your day-to-day life that it warrants this much discussion?
It doesn't concern you. I'll talk about it as much as I like. I don't see you going in the shitty frogspam threads and saying the same thing about actual irrelevant threads.

> The threads are very thinly-veiled /pol/ threads, and /pol/ really is a containment cesspit.
Dropped your tinfoil hat there. Fucking leave already.

>>7497654
>Dropped your tinfoil hat there. Fucking leave already.
Cry more faggot. The more you post garbage /pol/-tier threads, the more I'm going to call them out for being garbage.

Yes, we get it, all your problems exist because of SJWs and leftists. Can't you go see a therapist about this shit instead?

>>7497657
>Yes, we get it, all your problems exist because of SJWs and leftists.
Oh, and we can't forget niggers and jews right?

>>7497641
>No. Discussion of politics belong to /pol/

exactly, so why won't you do it?

>We used to discuss genetics and race long before /pol/ existed.

and back then it belonged on /new/, and when you posted it on /sci/ it was banned for inane trolling garbage

fuck off /pol/tard

>>7497657
>>7497658
>>7497662

> Cry more faggot. The more you post garbage /pol/-tier threads, the more I'm going to call them out for being garbage.

This is exactly what the problem is. You are the new cancer of /sci/. You and /pol/ are at the opposite ends of the autism spectrum, one more retarded than the other.
Everytime you see a thread that you don't like, you call them nazis or racists and refer it to /pol/ for some reason. Even though obviously nobody is talking about politics.

> Yes, we get it, all your problems exist because of SJWs and leftists. Can't you go see a therapist about this shit instead?
I don't even know what SJW is or leftists got to do with anything. You simply dropped into the thread and started inserting these political terms on your own. Seems like you are the one who shouldn't have left /pol/ if you want to talk about politics so much.

Stop shitposting and go back to your beloved /pol/.

>>7497662

>hereditary isn't science

You believe in evolution and deny race. That's more retarded than creationism

>>7497666
Go away, /pol/tard. We are sick of your spam.

>>7497672
keep /pol/ on /pol/

>>7497675
>>7497676
> Redditors trying to act like they run shit on 4chan.
sad...

>>7497684
Fuck these upboat niggers.

>>7497685
Don't worry. Their /b/ tier insults and gb2/pol/ spams have no influence on factual science.

Although you are a racist for using that word.

>>>/global/rules/3

>You will not post any of the following outside of /b/: Trolls, flames, racism, off-topic replies, uncalled for catchphrases, macro image replies, indecipherable text (example: "lol u tk him 2da bar|?"), anthropomorphic ("furry") or grotesque ("guro") images, post number GETs ("dubs"), or loli/shota pornography.

>racism

>>7497691
It's a reference to the Reddit exodus.

They're the migrants of 4chan.

>>7497684
>le reddit is invading 4chan meme
you're projecting. i've been on 4chan since 2006, /pol/ is a confirmed containment board

Just go back to /pol/ already.

Nobody wants you here and if you're hoping for a civil discussion about >muh human biodiversity and >muh superior genes, it's just not going to happen; people are going to call you out because we perceive you as shitting up the quality of the board.

pic extremely related

>>7497693
There is no white supremacy here.
There is no ones advocating for mistreatment of any kind based on origin.

Racism is now a meaningless buzzword used by leftists to silence discussion about observable differences between largely geographically separate populations.

>>7497706
>b-but my /pol/esmoker shit totally doesn't violate the rules i'll redefine racism to mean whatever i want ;_;

Enjoy your ban, retard.

>>/sci/thread/S7403048
>>/sci/thread/S7388715
>>/sci/thread/S7379894
>>/sci/thread/S7337244
>>/sci/thread/S7260347
>>/sci/thread/S7243079
>>/sci/thread/S7019959
>>/sci/thread/S6917845
>>/sci/thread/S6917938
>>/sci/thread/S6202402
>>/sci/thread/S5983242
>>/sci/thread/S7129978
>>/sci/thread/S7086477
>>/sci/thread/S6942758
>>/sci/thread/S6903017
>>/sci/thread/S6888871
>>/sci/thread/S6867789
>>/sci/thread/S6848754
>>/sci/thread/S6590008
>>/sci/thread/S6303070

>>7497702
> /pol/ is a containment board
That relates to race and IQ how ?

> Nobody wants you here
You don't want me here is irrelevant. You don't belong to this board in the first place.

>muh human biodiversity and >muh superior genes
using "muh" meme is enough indicative of your lacking argumentative skills, which is yet another reason why you don't belong to any science board.

Your pic is related to /pol/. I don't share /pol/s opinions nor I see anyone superior or inferior. I'm just tired of seeing /pol/ and anti/pol/ posts here. Race exists but it doesn't rank anyone in any place.

>>7497720
What is racism?
And how is it not simply undue bias?

>>7497723
Just fuck off stormnigger, go start a HBD blog if you want an echo chamber of people to say YEP DEM BLACKS SURE ARE DUMZ RIGHT

>>7497735
Oh god...This is worse than /pol/ or /b/...

>>7497735
go back to tumblr if you are so keen on being shielded from uncomfortable truths.

>goes on 4chan
>expects it to be a safe space.

>>7497741
yes i agree wholeheartedly 100% /pol/ is better, that's why you should go back there

>>7497617
no it's because genotype overtakes and any gap-bridging made in youth does not withstand it.

>>7497735
> can't even form an argument and resorts to childish remarks.
now I know why you don't like IQ

>>7497743
>be le stormnigger
>goes on 4chan
>posts shitty /pol/trash racebaiting HBD thread on /sci/ for 1000th time
>gets rightfully called a faggot
>cries a lot
>"I D-DON'T EVEN GO ON /POL/ I CAME HERE TO DISCUSS A-ACTUAL R-RACIAL SCIENCE"
>no discussion of actual genotypes
>haplogroups with huge variations between them are discretely bucketized into stretched and overarching phenotypical categories of African, Asian or European
>not a single molecular biology B.Sc in sight
>not even a biology B.Sc
>the stormnigger gets told he's an idiot and to fuck off back to his containment board
>lectures other people on expected "safe-spaces" when he's painfully rump roasted about people not participating in his echo chamber and validating his half-baked scientific racism
am i about right?

sage

>>7497762
your rump appears rather roasted.

>>7497762
>>7497755
also there's very little science in this thread so you can just fuck right off and eat a dick for complaining that I'm not addressing any scientific arguments

>b-b-but muh ad hominems
>muh argumentative skills

i am not obligated to put any more effort into this dumpster of a website than you are

>>>/pol/

>>7497769

>>7495653
>the only possible logical framework is the one I assumed

How's that autism treating you?

>>7497775
> race is only skin deep
> DNA test shows exactly which race any individual belongs to

Stopped reading there. Nice paint skills though

>>7496175
>cultural achievemens

Into the trash it goes

>>7496253
>Steven Pinker
Ass

>>7497791
some measurements are going to be imprecise.
it's a reality of complex world.
that does not suddenly make it useless.

>>7497792
you can't have literature without a written language