/sci/ - Science & Math

>>7542299
whos this semen demon

> Intelligence
> IQ
> Biology
> Genetics
> Phenotypes
> Science
When will /pol/ stop this white evil racist Hitler propaganda ?

>>7542305
Ironic shitposting is still shitposting, my sweet supple child.

>>7542310
Any discussion involving pheotypes, intelligence, race or racial differences relating to anything above is secretly racist and belongs to /pol/
End of story.

>>7542314
Science is still science, even when it disturbs your dogma.

>>7542305
>>7542314
I don't know man. It wasn't about race until you made it, now niggas are gonna emphasize the racial debate in this thread.

We should all sage our replies and let this thread slowly seep to the bottom of the board.

for those that don't know

Once intelligence genes (if they exist as some argue) are identified, it becomes trivial to massively boost a societies IQ using the simplest of genetic selection methods.

aka IVF + PGD.

When you add possible gene editing it becomes even more ludicrous. The identification of smart genes is one of the biggest fundamental changes for humanity ever.

It also happens to be very controversial.

>This is a massive step forward for the evolution of humanity

Its a step closer to its destruction. Higher IQ does not make a better society, culture does. There has always been enough intelligent people, and there always will be. But even intelligent people are prone to stupidity outside of their given fields. For example, see people like Laurance Krauss or Sam Harris when it comes to issues regarding society.

I think this should be known, but I cannot see what possible benefit manipulating intelligence could have. I think it create the arrogant cargo cult mindset MENSA have, where people make themselves artificially intelligent and then do nothing with it except boast. Not to mention it create people who "always think they're right", because how can they not be? They've got a higher IQ than you! That will just lead to the constant breakdown of relationships.

At worst, it make bad people who formerly to dumb to anything bad on a large scale very dangerous.

Anyway, I don't advocate the govenrment banning the manipulation of genes, but it is something I don't think is a good idea.

>>7542318
Its only controversial for dumbfucks who will see their kind perish in the coming years. Its happening, friends.

why artificially select IQ when we're developing robots that'll be smarter than any highest IQ human?

>>7542372
>Higher IQ does not make a better society

Low crime levels
Higher quilaty of life
Less corruption
Economic freedom

And much more. Do do some research

>>7542385
>tfw /sci/ now trusts sociology conlusions

>>7542395
>statistical information
> "it's sociology!"

>>7542372
It was too late to help you, but maybe it will make your children intelligent.

>>7542380
Why develop anything else aside from working on the singularity?

If there is a singularity in 30 years it would be a good thing to have a very intelligent generation doing the work and design.

>>7542385

How so? High IQ populations are correlated with these factors, but there's no proof high IQ actually causes these things. Crime levels and corruption are arbitrary anyway. A herd of cows rarely ever kill other cows, are we to say they have a lower crime rate? Paying someone less than minimum wage is condisdered a crime, but is that actually right? Is not the governemnt the criminal for forcing someone to pay minumum wage? No, because what is a "crime" is decided by the govenrment.

Feudal Japan was an increadibly violent place, so much so that it shocked Westerners to see people comitting seppuku and such. But the Japanese have always had a high IQ. I'd say all those things are down to culture, but that's just what I'd say. There's no conculsive proof for what causes those things, and if our ways of mesuring them are even valid.

>>7542400

I don't dispute it will make children intelligent, I dispute that its a good idea.

>>7542401
>>7542401
Damn, that some really social science tier stuff. I draw this conclusion by having real expirence with with people with low IQ. Like or not people with low IQ are not very bright, and have some problems with abstraction, so i belive a society with huge number of people with very low IQ is not vary advanced one.

>>7542399
>"conclusions"
>it's the data!

>>>/pol/

>>7542401
>>7542403
oh yes, the oh wise liberal thoughts. "Intelligence isn't a good thing. Technology is bad. Let's not progress."

Then their defense for these positions is "Well, there's no proof! Look at one exception to the rule!"

Just fucking stop, everyone above average intelligence finds your arguments retarded.

>>7542401
>Feudal Japan
>But the Japanese have always had a high IQ
This is comical, are you implying they took IQ tests during feudal period?

Or are you implying europe was any less violent when medieval?

They may have high IQ now that they have been nuked to oblivion and financed by the white man to develop into a dying nation of capitalistic overachievers. They were not much more than barbars in the past.

>>7542407
>"Look! I don't like the data! So not worth for me!"

Fucking cherrypick

>>7542411
Normal low IQ argument

- look at these statistics that support my argument!
- Those statistics don't count because of cultural factors, also statistics are bias!

>>7542411
>you don't like the data!
>but muh conclusions!
>>>/pol/

>>7542406

>real experience

What, so every single person who's ever wronged you, you've sat with them and done an IQ test? What about drug lords, or human traffikers? I don't know about IQ sizes among them, but you can't say they're stupid when they oversee complex systems with significant risk.

>>7542408

See what I mean about high IQ people (assuming you are) being retarded? You're calling me a Liberal, which is completely irrelevant, and the worst thing is you're using it wrong. Liberals in all sense of the word, both classical Liberals and modern Liberals are for "intelligence, technology and progress", where "progress" is defined by cultural marxism and retarded sci-fi ideas.

>look at this one exeption to the rule!

What? Basically everywhere prior to the late 1700's and the advent of open markets was violent. Look at Europe in the middle ages. And I doubt enough time had passed between 1000AD and 1849AD for humans to "evolve" higher IQ.

>>7542410

>are you implying they took IQ tests during feudal period?

No, but if IQ is genetic, which this study suggests, then its logical to assume that not 400 years ago they would have had comparable intelligence.

>now that they have been nuked to oblivion and financed by the white man to develop into a dying nation of capitalistic overachievers

Which is exactly what I think - culture is the major factor in how well a society works, not IQ.

>>7542424
You fail to gasp the link between IQ and culture. As though an 85 average IQ country could ever develop the personal computer.

What developmental stage would Africa be at now with no intervention from Europe?

>>7542424
It's time for the ad hominem opinions.

Why is /pol/ obsessed with IQ?

Is it because they need it to complete their believes?

>>7542426
>As though an 85 average IQ country could ever develop the personal computer.
>What developmental stage would Africa be at now with no intervention from Europe?
What's your point?

>>7542427
Because eugenics. Believing in human genetic inequality between any two people allows you to justify reproductive optimization.

>>7542431
I agree with eugenics, but i think IQ is completely correlated to culture.>>7542426

So believing in eugenics =/= caring on IQ

>>7542433
i don't think*

>>7542426

It doesn't matter, it only takes a few high IQ people to develop one. Its not like everyone in Britain worked together to invent the flying shuttle or trains. I don't know what stage Africa would be at if that's even a valid description. Africa might have buildings now, but its far, far more violant than it was before, mostly because technology has allowed previously isolated ethnic groups to clash. Somalia had no form of governemnt for 100's of years yet still managed to have a law system and extensive trade with Rome and the Levant, something Britain never has done without a government or monarch, though Ireland did.

>>7542427

Oh please, don't try to cry ad hominem when you called me a Liberal and I called you intelligent.

>>7542429
Clearly that black man is less intelligent than white man.

>>7542438
bell curve

the higher avg IQ creates a far more likely scenario and environment for such a thing to happen.

It's all inter connected. The more violent african humans (due to MAOA2R) along with many other negative gene prevelances make it impossible for them to compete with Europe.

>>7542438
>Oh please, don't try to cry ad hominem when you called me a Liberal and I called you intelligent.

What

>>7542426
>>7542426
>What developmental stage would Africa be at now with no intervention from Europe?
>With no intervention from Europe

Europe pretty much fucked Sub-Saharan Africa over and in no way benefited the people of Africa. Colonization, at the time, didn't benefit African people, for they were basically treated like slaves in their own land. They pretty much pushed them out their homes and destroyed every bit of political structure as well as trade they had going on. It wasn't up until recently that Europeans sympathized with them and tried to help with foreign aid.

Without intervention from Europe, I don't think they'd be some sort or massive world dominating civilization, but I can't help but wonder how different the continent's fate would've been before European colonization.

A lot of what people know about Sub-Saharan Africans are post-imperialism, because Europeans did all in their power to make sure Africans didn't know as well as the world.

James J Lee
Yup, definitely a mongrel

>>7542442
boohoo

Still don't see what type of argument you have besides stupidity

>intelligence is a bad thing! It's some stupid relativism argument which can be twisted any way you want.

>>7542440

You're putting violence down to IQ. That's just silly. Intelligent people are just as capable of violence, the only difference is in most cases they make sure to disguise it with a "legitimate" reason. Stalin wasn't stupid, and look what he did. British people aren't stupid, and look what they did (or rather, their govenrment did) to Libya, Syria and Afghanistan. I agree IQ correlates with violence, but there's something else that correlates far, far more - ethnic diversity.

>>7542441

What ad-hominem was it you were refering to? In the post you responded too, me calling that other guy a retard was the only one I could find.

>>7542461
Nice sources.

We also know genes responsible for violence, ala MAOA.

Also you didn't even specifiy if ethnic diversity increased or decreased violence.

>>7542458
You seem to be caught up in your feelings. I in no way hinted at that in my post and my post wasn't some sort of sob story, if you got that out of my post, then you'll do well to reapproach this argument.

I think what those Anons are trying to say is, IQ isn't fully understandable, we don't even completely understand it. A lot of variables come into play when talking about IQ.

>>7542439
>Africa is one culture
>A whole country developed the computer
>What if...

Omiting the quality of your arguments

You interpret the progress from an holistic point of view. That's propaganda.

Anyway, the black man could be less intelligent than the white man, but your argument is invalid.

>>7542461
I wanted to know why /pol/ is obsessed on IQ.

>>7542458
>Still don't see what type of argument you have besides stupidity

Also i'm not presenting an argument, nor am I the Anons above you, what I was doing is giving you a bit of perspective from another outlook.

>>7542469
Well, the OP study was linking genes to educational attainment and not IQ or some other criteria. Also of course it will be a very complex problem with multiple variables to optimize over to create or select for a better baby.

>>7542464

Nice sources from yourself. MAOA is not "responsible" for violence, its correlated with higher voilence levels. There is a difference. I don't think you can difinitely put violence in a society down to that gene, because we do not know the factors that inhibit violence and the question remains open as to why Whites, especially the British, have undergone levels of extreme none violence to extreme violence and then back down again, though the modern era is just as violent and again, we merely cover up the violence with "legitimacy".

>>7542467

Its not "/pol/", its nationalist socialists. They like IQ because they think it legitimizes nationalist socialism.

>>7542299
Is there an actual link directly to the paper?

>>7542424
Look, nobody's denying that culture is important for society to thrive, but it's completely retarded to think that IQ is CAUSED by culture.

It's the other way around really. Culture is a consequence of IQ. Peoples with low average IQs will have low cultural attainment and peoples with high average IQs will have high cultural attainment.

As for you ludicrous claim that low IQ people are somewhat noble and not crime-prone, that is delusion. Low IQ people tend to be sociopathic. Where would you want to live, an upper middle class neighborhood where the average IQ is probably in the 115s? Or a ghetto in Detroit where the average IQ is in the low 80s?

>>7542513
I believe an earlier version is published somewhere. Too late to look it up but just google GWAS cognitive or something like that.

>>7542299

That's very nice OP. I cannot even imagine which direction society will take with this amazing discovery.

Who is the semen demon?

Where's the fucking paper? All op has provide is a link to the conclusion and supposed author but no print, pdf or graphs of the study.

I even google search this shit and there's been no paper released yet. So why hasn't anyone called op out on this?

I'm not wasting time discussing shit until I can actually read the document detailing the experiement and testing methods done to produce results.

>>7542480
No, it's simply racists and /pol/ is pretty close to that.
Being a nationalist or a national socialist doesn't immediately mean you are racist, although both go well together.

>>7542531
What do you mean by "racist"? Is acknowledging racial differences in average intelligence racist?

Great, hopefully once we genetically engineer the subhumans to not be retarded anymore, they gain empathy, a sense of decency and they'll stop commiting so many fucking crimes.

Or maybe they'll keep the sociopathy and just slaughter the world minority that is already on its way to become minorities in their own countries, the europeans.

If you've ever looked at politics you know even smart people are retarded.

>>7542538
Compassion is something one has to learn, and even 'stupid' people can be compassionate. I don't think creating super-intelligent overmen is going to lead to a kinder society.

>>7542514
>Culture is a consequence of IQ. Peoples with low average IQs will have low cultural attainment and peoples with high average IQs will have high cultural attainment.

citation needed

have you ever been around high IQ nerds? there is no culture.

>>7542514
>Culture is a consequence of IQ
>Low IQ people tend to be sociopathic
>showing American results

Your conclusions keep being holistic.

Do even you know why sociology is not taken seriously in scientific research, right?

>>7542538
Better means of production will lead a better life to all.

>>7542318
>trivial
no nothing is trivial in science, especially chemistry. you just go repeat a published reaction procedure, you will get smth like a 30% yield. why? nobody knows... they will sneak in stuff like steric hindrance, solvent effects bla bla but that's horseshit.
selective functionalization of molecules is a more daunting task than you imagine, very very very little of it can be done with current tech so it doesn't matter that you identiy the genes you wanna change. there isn't actually a reliable method on how to change and implement them back into the human cell

>>7542524
I've tried briefly, but I can't find the paper. Since your whole thread is about this paper, if no one has a copy, then why is there so much off topic discussion?

>>7542316
>>7542310
This is how I know you people don't really know shit about science.

The human genom varies only in certain aries like skin color, lactose intolerance, etc. but essentially we're still all part of the same race; just like how there are many different dog types, but they're all part of the family of dogs.

I explain shit like this to elementary school children and they immediatley understand it.

>>7542458
>boohoo
People like you get a punch in the face where I study and I'm from Oxford.

>>7542713

> where I study
> and I'm from Oxford

Nice wording to try to trick people into thinking you study at Oxford m8 :^)

>>7542707
>but essentially we're still all part of the same race; just like how there are many different dog types
Just like dogs there are different breeds of humans, some more violent and less intelligent than others.

http://www.dogsbite.org/dog-bite-statistics-study-dog-attacks-and-maimings-merritt-clifton.php

See any crime statistic in US and compare to violent dog breeds. We're diverse and we're not equal.

>>7542314
yet another good example of science held back by hurt feelings

i just want to know the anthropmetric origins of the people I think are attractive. sometimes i wish you pol fags would just fuck off

>>7542707
>Lewontin's Fallacy

It is entirely possible to determine race to near 100% accuracy based on DNA. Allele location and frequency vary specifically by race. When you use cluster analysis of statistical data of gene loci and allele frequency human diversity increases and each group is focused in specific areas.

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.174.698&rep=rep1&type=pdf

>>7542480
If you're socialist and not nationalist, you can't do well without bringing the whole world with you.

Basically a person who provides for his family but doesn't want to let bums stay in his nice house or be taxed to support them, is like family socialist. A nation is just a larger in-group than a family.

Can you imagine someone that treated everyone equally - their family and strangers? Their family would leave because they were not being valued better than strangers, and the fool would be taken for all he was worth by hordes of homeless.

Nation is defined arbitrarily in all cases. But without such a delineation between inside and outside, there can be no homeostasis.

One can not afford to heat the great outdoors.

>>7542757
Of course, it makes sense.

Let us all become low melanin content socialists! Only Whites allowed. If you tan easily you are subhuman

>>7542729

>just like dogs there are different breeds of humans, some more violent and less intelligent than others.

Not that anon but every "breed" of humans have their own violent and intelligent tendencies within their own populations, not just between.

Hell a notable part of ancient roman culture was their recreation of pitting live beast against humans often prisoners, poor, people of different religious backgrounds etc. watching them get slaughtered.

The same goes for the Aztecs and Mayans who practice human sacrifice frequently because of muh gods and traditions.

Yet we still suck their fucking cock today because of ancient technology despite what they did is pretty much on the same level as the nazis and imperil japan who did get penalized very heavily.

The ancient populations were violent motherfuckers yet because they existed before modern crime satistics was establish they get a pass in being deemed violent races. But some anons on here want to call blacks and other races violent today because they steal shit and do gang/gun violence.

Bitch that shit is baby tier compared what we did in the past. Hell it's baby tier even now compared to the middle east suicide bombings that happen each fucking week.

>>7542299

nice dubs!

>>7542534
>study shows blacks have lower average IQ than whites

/pols/ reaction
>kill all niggers, race war now, reeeeeeeeee!!!!

Something like 1/5 - 1/4 blacks are going to be smarter than the average white.
Heck there are black communities out there that have better average scores in measures of intelligence than whites (e.g the Nigerian, or Kenyan diaspora in the UK and US), and some white communities do pretty shit.
Thinking all blacks are stupid is retarded racism, admittedly though that happens more on infinitychan, coontown, WN sites, etc than /pol/.
They also go into denial and get uppity if you mention Jewish or East Asian IQ because it doesn't mesh with their white supremacism.

>>7542764
>Bitch that shit is baby tier compared what we did in the past. Hell it's baby tier even now compared to the middle east suicide bombings that happen each fucking week.
Black criminality and islamic terrorism are current and very real problems, if you want to take a lesson from history then notice how all those cultures you mentioned are now long gone.
>Romans
>Aztecs
>Mayans
>Nazis
>Imperial Japan
The only surviving cultures are those that managed to adapt and reduce their antisocial tendencies to a sustainable level, see Christianity and Europe-descendant cultures becoming more tolerant as time goes on.

It will take a while for american dindus, aussie baby eaters, sand fanatics to become sufficiently intermixed with white people to adopt a more social way of life. The only other outcome for their cultures is self destruction and becoming dominated by other cultures, either way they have no future as they are now.

Who is this fluid druid

>all this false flagging

>>7542596
http://www.abstractsonline.com/Plan/ViewAbstract.aspx?sKey=e1b12fb9-5a2a-4182-bc29-5ee1ee522e48&cKey=dd39973c-e1db-4e8d-ab4d-6027659b6504&mKey={CABDEDDA-497C-457E-8481-34A866AB3681}

It's risen to 86 now. The last talk on the subject was at ESHG 2015 in Glasglow when the research was up to 70 hits.

>>7542303
She's 12.

When can I CRISPR this shit into my brain, faggots.

>>7543143
And?

Can only name white scientists.
Thinks all browns can't even.
Constantly says IQ.
Unaware of criticisms/limitations of model
Mentions Africa
Has never been.

/pol/ litmus

>>7542427
Because they are desperate to gain legitimacy through social science, because they are too dumb to science.

>>7543180
Why do you bring up /pol/ shit?

You don't believe intelligence is inheritable?

Dumb people are extremely important for our society. Who is gonna dig our ditches, clean our sewers or do all of the jobs that smart people don't want to do?

>>7543297
There would still be a bell curve.

>>7543297
there's hard working dumb people (good) and lazy welfare-bound dumb people (bad)

>>7543297
robots could do all that for us.

most of humanity will become completely unnecessary economically.

>>7543295

>IQ is brought up and is mentioned as being heritable and generally a good predictor of several positive life outcomes.

>"It's a secret nigger-hating neo-Nazi from /pol/!"

People from /pol/ are about as smart as the people from /sci/ tbh.

>>7542299
Who the fuck cares, find whatever gene made her look like that.

>>7543672
I don't understand why people think everything physical being genetically determined is a natural and logical conclusion, but that the brain is somehow not linked to genes.

>>7543705
Cognitive dissonance.

Can I find these genes on my 23andme profile?

>>7542972
thanks breh

>>7542310
why is voltaire on the pic

>>7543782

>>7543143
Nobody asked for her age, bub

>>7543151
>>7542299
Well, this is a 12 year old I wouldn't mind going to jail for.

>>7542401
This is why everyone hates talking about intelligence. The people the discussion draws are absolutely mind fuckingly retarded, and simply chatterbox the same few keywords over and over again.

I mean look at this aspegers
>>7542318
>simple controversial IVF PGD trivial
Fucking ape no one cares
>>7542424
> iq
No one cares about that anymore look at their new measure of socioeconomic development for a sample size of 79 where there are no controls! Fuck you
>>7542461
>violence
Jesus just stop before more libtards flood in decrying the violence of a governments acts as the root of all evil and the only reason we don.t live in a capitalist utopia

Seriously guys stfu

>>7543295
>>7544134
That's because they tend to have a holistic point of view.

>>>/pol/52190927

>>7543705
probably because it means that the blacks are utterly hopeless. then what? actually ship them back to africa? most people think it's better to operate under the assumption that they're as smart as us and figure out other solutions

>>7544229
although for the record i'd endorse some sort of apartheid state in the US in lieu of actually sending them back

>>7544215
>they tend to have a holistic point of view.

And the relevance of this is?

Ironically the ones who deny the genetic basis for intelligence, and by extension the differences between distinct genetic groups (races) in economic and civil achievement, are the ones who will hold groups like africans back from achieving a higher standing in the world. They will continue to mindlessly throw tax money at improving environmental factors thinking it will make any significant difference, all the while getting absolutely nowhere. Improvement of environmental factors cannot scale the wall of genotypic determinism.

This also applies to social classes. If you want to equalize the social classes, the only real way to do it would be to equalize cognitive abilities. The higher your cognitive abilities the more earning potential you have in a market economy.

>>7542299
>INTELLIGENCE GENES DISCOVERED!!! HUGE
What is this clickbait doing on my /sc-
>100 replies
Fucking hell.

>>7544502
Just pointing out something. The end.

Will people still deny the intelligence differences between the races once it's all there in black and white?

>>7545260
Yes.

>>7542592
>Implying chemical mutagenesis is even considered in modern genetic engineering
>Being this ignorant of CRISPR and TALEN nucleases
Cmon, dude. Do you even /molecularbiology/?

>>7542592
Except it's already possible. Do the mathematical analysis on a selection function picking genes with every generation.

First generation, 20 embryos each sequenced with one implanted

2nd generation, both genetically selected, 20 embryos each sequenced with one implanted

etc

Even with no advancements at all in method, right now we can arbitrarily engineer genetics of humans. It just takes many generations to get all the best genes selected. Each successive generations has less bad genes and more good genes which makes the process exponential.

Now, the reality is we will quickly advance towards arbitrary number of embryos to test. So one generation will be the overall best guess out of 1000 genetic combinations.

That rapidly approaches the exact same result as manual editing of genes. The only limit is parents having the gene(s) you want, which becomes less and less of a problem each generation.

There is absolutely no question of "if" we can engineer super humans. The only true important competition to genetically superior biological organisms past humans on evolutionary tree is Artificial intelligence.

>>7545648
The only obstacle is that no one started.
Once a country do it, all others will be forced to follow suit.

>>7545701
I bet we'll have small unethical cells of super geniuses doing a lot of work.

>>7542318
apart from the fact that it's expensive as fuck...

>>7543297
what? Already today, uneducated people have difficulty making a living because of mechanization.

In Burma, among certain tribes, females have much longer necks than men.

It's a phenotype that correlates with 2 X chromosomes.

THEY FOUND THE GENES THAT CAUSE LONG NECKS!!

>>7545749
Actually, their necks are the same size as other women necks they just just have broken down and shrunken collar bones and shoulders. Is that your point? People who are education are more educated?

>>7545753
Either you can't read or you for realsies have autism

>>7545766
What does autism have to do with reading?

>>7542972
This is definitely not the same article explain in the OP or the blogspot. Similar, but not the same. Unless I'm missing something here.

>>7542305
>how to troll /sci/

>>7542318
yeah and this goes completely out the window once you take into account that intelligence correlates with low birth rates pretty heavily.

alright since this is a genetics thread im just gonna toss in an unrelated genetics question that's been bothering me. is somatic recombination of gene segments the same thing as alternative splicing? i was talking to someone who says VDJ rearrangement isn't the same thing as alternative splicing and i just did not understand. someone with extra IQ SNPs pls respond

Where the fuck can I find the SNPs?

>>7547005
Well no. Alternative splicing occurs in pre-mRNA while VDJ occurs in DNA segments. So that's the major difference. Given the structural differences between DNA and RNA the mechanism is also quite different.

>>7547020
That helps quite a bit, thanks bruh

>>7542385
>>>/pol/ is the place for smart comments such as these, my friend

>>7542707
You're gonna have to grow up and face reality some day. Genes are everything. From how we look and sound to how we think and feel. They decide if you are smart of stupid, ugly or good looking. We all may have been part of the same race at some point, but that is no longer true. The only thing that really connects us anymore is the fact that we can cross-breed.

>>7545841
You missed the joke, nigger

>>7542707
amazing bait

>>7542707
>but essentially we're still all part of the same race
lol

Also, stop confusing species and sub-species. It is incredibly annoying to people with backgrounds in genetics. The human races were well on their way to speciating before civilisation occurred and threw a wrench in that.

Jews and Asians rule the world for a reason.

>>7547540

>>7542575
>citation needed
Compare the scientific output of ashkenazi jews, whites, and sub saharan africans.

>have you ever been around high IQ nerds? there is no culture.
Yeah, those high IQ nerds like Einstein, Tesla, and Newton. Lmao Newton was even a virgin.

Clearly me and my niggas spitting rhymes in the alley behind the liquor store contribute more to civilization than those nerds.

Does anyone have the published article? An abstract? Anything?

Or do we just have some blog post and a guy's University homepage...?

>>7548218
Nope, this is just a shit flinging thread, with no actual science, with retarded lefties vs retarded righties.

No one in this thread studies neuroscience at a high level. No one in this thread studies genetics at a high level. No one in this thread is a graduate from an anthropology programme.

I can tell you this because there is not a single mention of epigenetics in the entire thread. Only retards neglect epigenetics; thus everyone in this thread is retarded

>>7548315
epigenetics has minimal impact

Full article is free through pnas

http://www.pnas.org/content/111/38/13790.full

Why not link to that instead?

>>7548403

Not him but fuck you, epigenetics can have a major impact especially when it involves the health of a pregnant woman or a young child.

Malnutrition and stress can basically fuck over a kid before they even get a real chance at life.

Fetal malnutrition,
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrifty_phenotype

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19642498

IQ/Behavior,
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23484464

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1570126/

>>7548427
From the article

>Three SNPs (rs1487441, rs7923609, and rs2721173) are significantly associated with cognitive performance after correction for multiple hypothesis testing.

Where did you get the 86?

>>7548462
It's the moms fault for being a retard.

This means it's still genetic, sorry bud.

>>7548427
Thanks to 23 and Me, I have the rs7923609 effective polymorphism (other two aren't tracked)

>>7548478

Except it's not you retard, the genetic information is already there. Fetal malnutrition basically triggers the child's gene expression to act differently than it would if the mother's nutrition was good.

The mother's body is essentially trying to fine tune the fetus's genetic code on the spot as a last ditch effort to make it suitable for the environment.

>>7548403
> epigenetics has minimal impact
Like I said, retardation.

Just look at the 1944 Dutch Famine.
> pic related


>>7548478
> It's the moms fault for being a retard.

Even more retardation.

All that needs to happen is a wide spread case of some disease, for example, such as the 1918 Spanish Influenza, or Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy, affecting peoples life styles and diets, restricting their behaviours and nutrition, affecting prenatal developmental of a significant proportion of the population.

If you look at the Flynn effect, there is data to support the idea that advances in health care are the major contributing factor to the increase in average IQs of countries. Furthermore, infectious and parasitic disease burden in a country has the strongest correlation with average IQ.


If you're going to spout any more idealistic bullshit about epigenetics then back it up with sources or continue to be BTFO like a popsci plebeian

>>7542299
>S of educational attainment (EA), an outcome that shows phenotypic and genetic correlations with cognitive performance,
>correlations

Wow it's fucking nothing

>>7548403
>>7548478
>>7548516

Additionally. A quick literature search shows low IGF2 methylation is associated with high IQ.

Using these two bits of information.

Malnutrition can affects IGF2 methylation.
IGF2 methylation is associated with intelligence.

Suddenly a possible mechanism for how malnutrition can affect intelligence through epigenetic mechanisms.

I would say that the reduced methylation of IGF2 was a compensatory mechanism due to a lack of nutrition so as to make sure the child reaches a certain threshold of brain development.

IGF2 is a key fetal growth factor; and promotes survival of newborn hippocampal neurons.

>>7548535
Does this mean vegans are retarded?

>>7548535
>>7548516
Being fatally shot in the head reduces IQ by 100%. Therefore genetics doesn't matter.

Great logical thinking faggot.

>it's all because of wealth
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-east-asian-exception-to-socio-economic-iq-influences/

>>7548552

Wow, great counterpoint retard. If you shot yourself fatally in the head, your IQ would increase, so that's not true. LELELEL :^)

You have no legitimate answer, so you're going to be a salty fucking faggot.

Go jerk off to cuckold porn to make yourself feel better you stormfaggot. Is habbeding! You coulda stopped disss

>>7548559
Starvation and being wracked with disease might lower IQ. Not having access to breast milk lowers IQ etc. Of fucking course.

The point was, saying there are also environmental effects is similar to claiming death effects IQ more than genetics.

Yet when you look at adoption and transracial adoption studies, guess what? Their original genetics matter far more than how they are raised.

There is also the other factor that better genetics leads to better environments over time.

We can improve functioning by:

Changing the original design to be more efficient.
Changing the roads to be smoother.

Let's only worry about changing the roads because it is mean to mention if a car design is bad due to our misguided morality.

>>7548569
How do you know that it was based on purely genetic factors. Since epigenetic modifications are heritable?

I agree that genetics is important. But you cannot discount epigenetics, and we don't have the techniques to determine epigenetic effect sizes.

A simple SNP can induce an effect in intelligence by virtue of that nuleotides affect on epigenetic regulation. If the codon GCA is mutated to GCG, suddenly you have a site of CpG methylation, without changing the amino acid sequence.

A simple operon which can produce a methyltransferase which modifies methylation profiles can be induced (in theory) by something as minute as transient as lactose levels.

The sensitivity of an operon and its effects are genetic and epigenetic, but an East Asian who was adopted by a caucasian from a family that has a long lineage of ancestors who lived in China will have a different methylation profile in response to diet compared to a caucasian or 5th generation immigrant

>>7548585
The same way all gene-association results are done? It's not exactly new.

Height studies, heart disease studies, schizophrenia studies, etc. It's not like anyone is starting to use the results for anything practical yet. It will just continue with Big Data analysis and associations until it reaches a more mature point.

The whole point though is to reiterate that cognitive ability is heavily (50%+ in adult) genetically influenced.

I think people denying genetics are people that have family that practice, or practice themselves misgeneation.
It is probably more confortable to maintain the illusion the environmental factors are more important, no matter how much cognitive dissonance it creates.
Admitting you flushed the legacy of your ancestors and your potential descendants down the toilet is probably distressing, this is understandable.

>>7548592

No, it is exactly new. Genetic associations are not anywhere near epigenetic associations. You can't get epigenetic profiles from a skin cell, but you can for a genetic profiles.

For an accurate brain epigenetic profiles, you need to sample the brain while a person is alive (unlikely) or post mortem (which means you can't test transient epigenetic mechanisms and profiles).

If you knew genetics, neuroscience or biomedical science to a reasonable level you would know this.

Secondly. What is your source on 50%+, you can't just make up shit like OP does with some imaginary paper no one can find.

Secondly, how do you know 50%+ is purely genetic, when no one has a good way to test epigenetics?

All you can claim is 50%+ is heritable. And then you have to find how much of that 50%+ is epigenetics and how much of that 50%+ is genetics.

It's no use just parroting memespeak without critically analysing it. That's why people have to spend years studying to reach a level of competence.

The whole point though is to reiterate that cognitive ability is genetic, epigenetic and environmentally influenced. And there are no good techniques or studies to show how much each of these three affects it.

And I look forward to your 50%+ genetics source. Hopefully it addresses epigenetics and isn't too old, since it would have been published before epigenetics was recognised as important

>>7548612

>You can't get epigenetic profiles from a skin cell,

I mean, you can get a skin cell epigenetic profile, but it will differ from a brain cell epigenetic profile; especially since 30% of genes in the genome are ONLY expressed in the CNS.

>>7548592

No, it is exactly new. Genetic associations are not anywhere near epigenetic associations. You can't get epigenetic profiles from a skin cell that will represent brain cells, but you can for a genetic profiles.

I mean, you can get a skin cell epigenetic profile, but it will differ from a brain cell epigenetic profile; especially since 30% of genes in the genome are ONLY expressed in the CNS.

For an accurate brain epigenetic profiles, you need to sample the brain while a person is alive (unlikely) or post mortem (which means you can't test transient epigenetic mechanisms and profiles).

If you knew genetics, neuroscience or biomedical science to a reasonable level you would know this.

Secondly. What is your source on 50%+, you can't just make up shit like OP does with some imaginary paper no one can find.

Secondly, how do you know 50%+ is purely genetic, when no one has a good way to test epigenetics?

All you can claim is 50%+ is heritable. And then you have to find how much of that 50%+ is epigenetics and how much of that 50%+ is genetics.

It's no use just parroting memespeak without critically analysing it. That's why people have to spend years studying to reach a level of competence.

The whole point though is to reiterate that cognitive ability is genetic, epigenetic and environmentally influenced. And there are no good techniques or studies to show how much each of these three affects it.

And I look forward to your 50%+ genetics source. Hopefully it addresses epigenetics and isn't too old, since it would have been published before epigenetics was recognised as important

>>7548602
>implying this would mean smart non-whites and Asians don't exist
So is just being white a legacy even if you have an iq below 100?

>>7548648
Bringing up outliers when discussing populations is always poor form tbh fam

>>7548620
http://psycnet.apa.org/?&fa=main.doiLanding&doi=10.1037/0003-066X.51.2.77
http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/13/4/148
https://student.societyforscience.org/article/iq-genes

etc

>>7548602

> It is probably more confortable to maintain the illusion the environmental factors are more important, no matter how much cognitive dissonance it creates.

How are environmental factors not more important? Do you think our current genome just willed itself into existence? No, motherfucker it took hundreds of thousands if not millions of years for our genome to get this way. And you can bet your sweet ass environment played a big role in it.

If you believe in evolution why would you not think our genome isn't malleable enough to be influence by environment.

>>7548554

Funny how that article doesn't explore the fact that east asian populations have been doing national testing for over a thousand years through imperial exams. It also doesn't mention the fact that current western civil service test and education test (by proxy of the civil service test) took inspiration from those imperial exams.

People wonder why east asians do so well on international testing should probably do a quick history check. It also stands the reason that the high IQ average comes from the fact that the imperial exams filtered out parts of the older populations.

>>7548665

Yes, those sites and papers claim genetic influence, which I agree with. But they don't claim 50%+ heritability, so they are worthless for this discussion.

How can you claim 50%+ so confidently, and have nothing substantial?

>>7548661
>Geniuses and idiots are irrelevant in the discussion of genetics and intelligence

Well I guess we can ignore the white genius portion of the legacy as well

>>7548682
You really want to start talking about the frequency of outliers m80 ?
PROTIP : Most subhuman populations are inferior by more than half a standard deviation compared to europeans.
You really wanna do it bruh ?

>>7548685
You really want to start talking about the frequency of outliers m80 ?
PROTIP : Most subhuman populations are inferior by more than half a standard deviation compared to East Asians and Ashkenazi Jews.
You really wanna do it bruh ?

>>7548685
>brings up nothing that was denied previously
Um ok

>>7548689
You're the one claiming genetics are irrelevant in the face of allmighty environment, honeybuns.

>>7548732
I'm not the anon you were talking to in the first place, faggot.

I just wanted to cause some butthurt since the opportunity presented itself (like you present your anus for homosexuals)

>>7548737
Yaranaika ?

>>7548689
>inferior to ashkenazi jews
lulz
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_genetics_of_Jews#Ashkenazi_diseases

>>7548796

> inferior to whites
lulz
>pic related

>>7548689
Interesting. In his original research, and in an interview, Rushton claims the deficit between whites and East Asians is 3 points. Why the change in his book?

>>7548896
No idea.
I just use it because it is an accurate depiction of East Asian intellectual superiority over Whites.

> pic related

Does anyone know if this has any merit?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2323944/Were-Victorians-cleverer-Research-indicates-decline-brainpower-reflex-speed.html

>>7548953
Yes, there is an explosion of population today. The average genetics today are probably worse.

The thing is we are far more technologically developed so the average education is far more complete.