/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9381482
It depends, do you believe in evolution?

>>9381482
Depends on your arbitrary definition of race
Black people and white people have different skin colors, so there's at least one difference in both groups.
How you define a function that maps some kind of 'value' to a person is up to you, there is nothing scientific about it

>>9381488
>How you define a function that maps some kind of 'value' to a person is up to you, there is nothing scientific about it
So the function which maps an equal value is as arbitrary as one which maps different values, right?

>>9381482
>myths
>facts
This is how you signal to the world that you are a brainlet.

>>9381482
The only thing we know about races is that Amerindians had a higher development rate compared to europeans. In other words Amerindians have more civilization potential than europeans.

According to commom sense: Amerindians are superior to europeans.

>>9381490
Yes. That was obvious. Classification and nomenclature are human constructs.

>>9381490
Well you could make some philosophical arguments for and against it, so I'm not going to bother

>>9381520
Yet wouldn't a function which maps different values be more logical (even if still arbitrary) since human groups(races) do differ in certain ways? Attributing the same value would seem almost unnatural.

>>9381523
>>>/lit/

Unfortunately, IQ is not as accurate as other sciences and lacks a scientific basis. That would put IQ in the pseudoscientific category.

The use of "race" is outdated. Also, it's not based on science and the new taxonomy classification methods. That would put "race" in the pseudoscience category too.

No wonder there are people trying to shill for this kind of "knowledge", for political or ideological reasons. First they try to convince you about "harmless" """"science"""", then the "conclusion" would be killing the "inferior" or just discrimination of the less "favoured". To be fair, this is not the case either. As these topics are pseudoscience, they will only convince people who lack scientific knowledge or people who share a similar political or ideological stance.

>>9381514
>empires crumbled to dust and the people scattered
There's more aspects to this than just that one

>>9381488
>>9381520
if you argue that there is no such thing as dog races then I think this is a respectable position
>>9381607
This position shows resentment and evil, just because you would want to holocaust inferior races doesn't mean everyone else would. See a therapist, you disgust me.

>>9381618
>1 bubonic plague kills 40% europeans and get invaded by nomads
>20+ european diseases kill 90% Amerindians yet they survive but the civilizations collapse
Amerindians had demonstrated even better behavior against such not-immunized diseases.

Amerindian higher development rate is also historical.

>>9381624
>you show resentment not me
Ok, bud. Race and IQ are still pseudoscience. Deal with it.

>>9381628
>nu-uh!

>>9381482
if I can't see them they don't exist

>>9381514
and still the white man achieved nearly everything worth mentioning.

>>9381628
why are they? is biology a pseudo science than? if u would look at humans as another animal u would certainly group them in races. there are even subspecies in other animial species that are more related than the human races.

>>9381482
go to pol fuckface

>>9381607
>shill for this kind of "knowledge", for political or ideological reasons.
The insistence that there is no such thing as race, which flies in the face of common sense and understanding, is itself a political and ideological stance and one which is without scientific basis or merit in my opinion. The divisions of race are clear to anyone who is intellectually honest and is routinely referred to in genetics. The only reason that genetics shills for the 'no race' interpretation is because our current political climate has been hijacked by the following political ideologies;
cultural marxism
relativism
multiculturalism
and political correctness

>>9381482

The only thing worse than /pol/tards is people who scream "go back to /pol/" when a conversation they find offensive is started.

>>9382638
go back

>>9382643
no u

Wow I sure showed you. Faggot.

>>9382614
>cultural marxism
You are deluded.

>>9382614
Already refuted.

IQ and race aren't science. Why do you keep denying reality?

IQ and race are pseudoscience.

>>9382404
>europeans:
>from aurignacian proto-gravettian to solutrean:10000 years (30000BC-20000BC)
>from aurignacian-antelian to neolithic: 15000 years(30000BC-15000BC)
>from neolithic proto-agriculture societies to neolithic revolution: 6000 years (15000BC-9000BC)
>from neolithic revolution to copper and arsenical bronze: 4000 years (9000BC-5000BC)
>from neolithic revolution to bronze age and tin bronze: 5200 years (9000BC-3800BC)

>Amerindians:
>from aurignacian proto-gravettian to clovis: 4000 years (15000BC-11000BC)
>from aurignacian proto-gravettian to the start of crop development: 7000 years (15000BC-8000BC)
>from neolithic proto-agriculture societies to neolithic revolution: 5000 years (8000BC-3000BC)
>from neolithic revolution to copper and arsenical bronze independently: 2000 years (3000BC-1000BC)
>from neolithic revolution to bronze age and tin bronze: 4000 years (3000BC-1000 AD)
Amerindians had a higher development rate compared to europeans. In other words, Amerindians had more civilization potential than europeans.

How is this hard to get?

>>9382420
See>>9381607

Race and IQ aren't science. They are pseudoscience.

>>9383983
So they developed faster and yet lost and got colonized and nearly lost their entire people?

>>9382619
Remove “again”

>>9384001
That's what not-immunized diseases do to dense populations. Even then:
>1 bubonic something wipes out 40% europeans and they get invaded by nomads
>20+ european diseases kill 90% Amerindians and destroy their civilization

>>9383982
Give me more detail no one wants blank statements.

>>9384044
>give
The burden of proof is on IQ and race supporters who claim that IQ and race are science. Which they aren't. They are pseudoscience.

>>9384054
And the proof exists, even if you refuse to admit it, you dumb shitskin

>>9381674
this is because you keep replying to it instead of reporting it

>>9384054
But they are. The evidence is undeniable. Scientists say there isn't such a thing as sub-species of humans because of politics, they're too scared to give racists any ammunition. The actual science is quite clear, even considering the fact that the topic is verboten and understudied. There are SIGNIFICANT intelligence differences in various populations around the world, and those differences remain even if the people are removed from their home countries and raised in wealthy ones (eliminating possible socio-economic factors).

>>9384069
>>9384056
Show the evidence.

>>9384097
>>9381482
you're welcome

>>9384054
General intelligence is one of the most solid and consensus positions in cognitive science.

>>9384054
IQ is actually a reliable measure of an individuals mental ability. The reason it has been thrown to the wayside is because it was giving results that made people uncomfortable. IQ being "unreliable" is a deliberate attempt to reduce the credibility of it because it was showing there are heritable intelligence differences between races and that was problematic.

>>9384063
Not that guy but I report every time and they do eventually get pruned. But they always come back...

>>9384131
The politicization of science is a big concern for everyone. Aren't you a bit worried that an obvious scientific fact like heritable intelligence is being swept under the rug because it makes people uncomfortable? It's like pretending your German Shepard is the same breed of dog as a Chihuahua because recognizing any biological differences between them would be not politically correct.

Real world has uncomfortable truths. Science should be completely unbiased and address them properly instead of just going "Oh no this data will offend black people, better pretend it doesn't exist"

>>9384140
I'm well aware of the science.
>>>/pol/

>>9384144
And yet you haven't addressed ANY of the data in the OP and just pretend it doesn't exist?

>>9381607
This anon is right when he says it's a pretense for wanting to exterminate people, that's literally the position of the alt-right and after you get pass the political point scoring of "race realism" thats what it turns into.

Honestly you just need to expose them on, that's why they keep screeching "address the data" because they to give the impression that's what they care about.

They also employ emotional manipulative language such as "caring for ones own children", don't you think kind ol' grandpa Jared should care for his children more? You wouldn't want to be an evil anti-white cultural marxist sjw when we decide to kill all the filthy subhumans in America, right?

>>9384020
Actually there where several diseases (wiki): Numerous other diseases were brought to North America, including bubonic plague, chickenpox, cholera, the common cold, diphtheria, influenza, malaria, measles, scarlet fever, sexually transmitted diseases, typhoid, typhus, tuberculosis, and pertussis (whooping cough)

Plus if they had higher potential to create a civilization, why didn’t they? (Pic)
They created 5 all to gather. Plus creating a civilization isn’t the same thing as creating a civilization that works.

>these are different races. This is what poltards actually believe.

/pol/-tards are not scientists, and their campaign is doing more harm that good to the chances of any substantive research being carried out on this subject. They do not care about science.

>>9384102
>correlations
Not science. Try again, brainlet.

>>9384113
Already refuted. Not science.
>>9384124
IQ is still not science.
>>9384415
IQ is still pseudoscience.

Try again, brainlet.

>>9384889
Did you even read my post? I said nothing about the legitimacy of IQ I'm just saying that it's just context for abusing people deemed inferior.

>>9381482
Quit trying to justify your racism with science, cuck.

Let's see your ancestors be enslaved for generations, drink lead-laden water, be systemically oppressed and see how much they care about getting high SAT scores, you sack of shit.

g (to the extent that it even exists) is incredibly polygenic. While skin color is still kind of polygenic, most of the genes determining it have been discovered and they aren't linked to g.

>>9384147
I'm not addressing the OP, seeing as it is a classic case of gish galloping, /pol/'s favorite tactic. I have been very willing in the past to go through studies, one at a time, debunking the info /pol/ cherrypicks from it. I take the time to do this and these threads STILL get made. I'm fucking done man.

>>9383982
>>9383986
>>9384054
>>9384097
>>9384889
>if i keep repeating myself it will eventually become true
>if i keep repeating myself it will eventually become true
>if i keep repeating myself it will eventually become true
>if i keep repeating myself it will eventually become true
>if i keep repeating myself it will eventually become true

>>9385022
Ok so what is your arguement against the kansas city experiment.
They donated and gave a majority black school more educational facilities but the gap only grew.

>>9385551
the only logical conclusion is racism

>>9385551
It was a study? Link me to it.

Be forewarned, it's already well-known that throwing money at a problem won't fix it. But I'll see what was involved exactly.

>>9385582
See the problem is when faced with evidence of racial intelligence disparities you squirm like a worm and try to blame any other factor instead. It's not blacks fault they perform poorly in education in the US, it's "institutionalized racism". It's not their fault they perform badly in the EU, it's prejudiced testing that doesn't take into account cultural differences (the left never explains why 'cultural differences' can influence basic pattern recognition, funny that). It's not their fault all their countries are 3rd world shitholes, it was colonialism.

We could use occams razor and answer all of these at once by saying that race does influence intelligence, or we can desperately try to deflect blame onto the west despite the fact that blacks have the same educational outcomes whether they're living in Zimbabwe or Detroit.

>>9384999
>Let's see your ancestors be enslaved for generations, drink lead-laden water, be systemically oppressed and see how much they care about getting high SAT scores
The Irish are doing just fine though

>>9384415
What matters is the truth anon. If you become afraid of using reliable metrics like IQ because you think the evidence might be used for an agenda you disagree with it's time to take a step back. Pretending all people are equal has done more damage to western civilization than any other idea. Asia doesn't pretend it is true. Africa doesn't pretend it is true. Lets unshackle ourselves from the dogma that says we can't investigate racial differences because mean racists might get ammunition. If they do, so what? The truth is more important than what it is used for.

>>9385698
>Still doesn't address the fact that the position of many race realists/alt-right is simply to wipe the United States of all non-whites.
>Keep claiming this is about truth even though this is clearly a political movement

>>9385713
>saving low iq niggers is more important than the truth
How is that rational?

>>9385715
>it's about finding the truth! Just pure academic interests!
>"kill all those filthy low IQ non-human niggers"

>>9385724
You haven't answered the question. Why do you support niggers over the benefits of a nigger free environment, to the extent that you want to suppress scientific findings which might tangentially motivate anti nigger sentiment? You're not a nigger yourself, are you?

>>9381514
Perhaps. Whatever the case, the difference exists.

>>9385713
So what? You think we need to deliberately block all scientific inquiry on a subject because you're afraid what might happen if we get results on it? Harden up you massive softcock. Science is about objective fact, learning the truth supersedes all other concerns. An attitude of "b-but what if it proves the racists right" is absolutely disgusting. You're so invested in a lie that you're terrified of it being revealed, get a grip.

>>9385729
>If I keep talking about truth and science hard enough he'll accept me as someone who only interest is truth and science even though the backdrop of this is literally >>9385725
That's the whole point of "race realism" it's not about understanding the differences between people, it's all about wanting to kill subhumans.

The fact that you're still attempting this emotional manipulation in order side-step the more important issue in the context of "race realism" is pathetic.

>>9384444
>niggers and Europids are the same breed
Fucking retard.

>>9385731
Yes or no question. Do you believe the motive of a person seeking the truth can be a reason to deliberately obfuscate the truth? Do you think it's better to live under false assumptions than know the truth if you think the truth will be used to push an agenda you disagree with?

>>9384444
>These are different races. This is what poltards actually believe. There is only one race the DOG race and anyone who says otherwise is a bigoted nazi

>>9385735
The problem with your argument is that your implying race realists are researchers when they aren't, AltHypothesis, JF-Gariepy, Millenial Woes, Richard Spencer, Jared Taylor, etc, etc, the entirety of /pol/ is political charged on this, the topic race realism isn't a scientific one but a political one.

I don't care whether or not they're right on this, you don't care if they're right on this because this isn't about "I want to learn the differences in how people work" because you wouldn't say shit like "This is the greatest lie the 'west' has dealt with".

>>9385741
You didn't answer yes or no anon, please just give a yes or no response. Do you believe that the agenda of someone pursuing the truth is more important than knowing the truth itself. Simple question, answer honestly.

>>9385745
>Keeps trying to deflect the core reasons of this entire discussion into "you don't want to be stupid, right?" so he can eke a political score point against someone else

Yes, the agenda of person is more important than the truth, race realism devoid of ideology is just biology, there is a reason why nearly everyone who talks about the topic is discussing in a sociopolitical context. You said yourself "Pretending all people are equal has done more damage to western civilization" whether you'll admit or not this is a political statement.

You cannot do this "it's just about facts bro" bullshit when it's clear it isn't.

>>9385759
and also continue you repeatedly dodge the fact that this is a political movement given how many people who support this are politically active in one way or another.

>>9385759
>Yes, the agenda of person is more important than the truth
Well I'm sorry but that's not how science works. You can't be afraid to discover the truth because you're afraid of the implications. You're putting your personal politics first and claiming that anything that might conflict with them should not be pursued.

I'm different, I base my political opinions on facts. I don't start with dogma then declare subjects off limits because it might conflict with my carefully crafted worldview. I want the facts and then base my opinions off those, as should any adult. To this end I am interested in any quantifiable intellectual differences between races because that information can be used to guide policy.

Sorry if the fact that I don't bow down to your ideological alter upsets you, I choose what I believe based on what I know to be factually correct, not vice versa. You should too.

>>9385759
Can't politics and science interact? Do you think governments should not be implementing policies to stop climate change because it's infringing on science? I'm confused about the opinion that politics can't use science to inform policy. As long as the science is sound then surely we should be able to act on that knowledge. It IS just about facts. Then we use those facts to better our society. Whats the issue with that?

>>9385776
>To this end I am interested in any quantifiable intellectual differences between races because that information can be used to guide policy.

You realize you legitimized entire argument which is "race realism is a polticial movement" I do not care if someone wants to research genetics or even if it's uncomfortable but this entire topic is a political topic, I don't know what was the point of doing this dancing around "do you care about scientific inquiry" if you yourself just basically proved my point by the inquiry being entirely political.

Like I said the entire discussion on race realism is "Gas all the subhumans"

>>9385788
>You realize you legitimized entire argument which is "race realism is a polticial movement"
So is climate change...Or are we conveniently ignoring the politicization of that area of science because you agree with it

>>9385793
I disagree with your politics because it's basically "kill all the subhumans".

>>9385801
Ok? I never said you needed to agree with me. All I said is that we use scientific inquiry to find out if there are quantifiable intelligence differences between races and then we can discuss the political implications afterwards. The difference here being that you seem to be deathly afraid of allowing that to happen, I wonder why? If you're right and all races are the same in terms of intellectual capacity then you have nothing to fear, in fact hard evidence will put the argument to bed for good. I wonder why a person who knows that would still argue to disallow the research. Hmmm.

>>9385806
Why are you being dishonest for?
>>9385788
>I do not care if someone wants to research genetics or even if it's uncomfortable but this entire topic is a political topic

>>9385813
So in what way would you like to discuss racial intelligence without immediately REEEing your head off about nazis. Cause there is research, and this is a science board, surely we can discuss the science?

>>9385828
>REEEing your head off about nazis
>I'm not a nazi you stupid sjw I just want to kill/oppress all the subhumans

>>9385828
The only reason why you're trying to avoid politics is because you don't want people associate your position with anything extreme, you can do your research and not act on it but you literally said yourself that you want to use it to guide policy.

>>9385840
Why wouldn't you want evidence based policy? I'm confused are you saying we shouldn't take scientific facts into account when devising policy or what?

>>9385857
Well science climate change is thing I think we should destroy all cars, trucks, trains and planes, destroy all farms, destroy all gas and coal fire plants and kill off every single living producer of carbon.


and that's just me being extreme with race realism there is only extremes.

>>9385870
fwiw I have not advocated anything even approaching genocide or concentration camps in this thread. That has you been projecting your own prejudices on me, ironically enough. All I want is proper evidence based policy that works around facts rather than fictions like the reason there are so many blacks in prison is because they're deliberately targeted by law enforcement and victims of racism rather than the simple fact they commit more crime. You don't need to go full Hitler to understand that working from the correct assumptions makes policy more effective. You're never going to fix the issues African-Americans face if you continually pretend that they're an oppressed underclass and not just the fact that by and large they're simply dumber than whites.

>>9385880
>Projecting a political stance unto me that I don't have because you don't want to admit the things you want to happen isn't extreme

>>9382614
>The insistence that there is no such thing as race, which flies in the face of common sense and understanding
Aeronautics flew in the face of common sense and understanding as well, quite literally in fact. "common sense and understanding" has no affect on whether or not something is scientifically valid - only its scientific validity can determine that.

>>9385582
Here
https://www.cato.org/publications/policy-analysis/money-school-performance-lessons-kansas-city-desegregation-experiment

>>9385880
So, if blacks are actually dumber than whites, I say we need to go much, much further on racially-based affirmative action and welfare to remedy this. America is supposed to be a meritocracy, and the genes you get nor if the public school nearby is good shouldn't determine your success, how hard you work should. Colleges need to start over-representing blacks more, and states need to start diverting funds from the public schools in white neighborhoods to those in black ones a lot more. White people can pay for private schooling anyways, (and if they can't, that's because they're lazy, not since they're stupid since they have higher IQs).

>>9385990
>America is supposed to be a meritocracy,
Right. How does that equal boosting people who don't deserve it because they are genetically inferior?

These statistics are horseshit, IQ and SAT scores are such a brainlet tier measure of intelligence.

>>9385990
merit doesn't mean how "hard" you work asshole, it's how much you achieve

>>9386002
>who don't deserve it because they are genetically inferior
People who work harder should get rewarded more than people who don't, intelligence aside, unless you value laziness. Intelligence and genes are just luck; giving out rewards based on that is just a lottery, we might as well give it out based on height, or how much hair is on your head.

>>9386011
Fair enough. In that case, how do you determine who contributes to society the most? It definitely isn't determined by intelligence.
You should also be notified that you're rejecting the principle that a person's value is based on their work ethic, and that even the most lazy people (e.g. whites), if they're able to contribute to society more than the most hard-working common people, should be rewarded more.

>>9386012
>People who work harder should get rewarded more than people who don't, intelligence aside,
No, the value of the work is what counts. Digging a hole in the ground takes a lot of work but if it's absolutely worthless it shouldn't be rewarded.

>giving out rewards based on that
You're not giving out any rewards, wtf are you talking about. I'm not for instating affirmative action for the intelligent. I'm for abolishing all forms of reward.

Stupid nigger.

>>9386012
Worker ants do not make a society prosper.

All arguments against it just seems to be weak attempts at deflection.
>race/IQ aren't accurate enough.

>>9385990
God I love these arguments the left loves to throw out. They're so easy to poke holes in.

No-one ever said meritocracy = pure hard work. A lot of factors are involved including innate talent. Your argument is akin to saying 99% of people aren't as genetically gifted at sprinting as Usain Bolt so they should be allowed to dope. A meritocracy simply allows the most meritorious to rise to the top. Hard work is one way to get there, being innately gifted is another.

Only the left care about bullshit like "equality of outcome". It's garbage.

Race is real but race/IQ Is based on falsified genetic assumption:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wcs.1400/full

>>9386088
Btw, please read more than the abstract.

>>9386088
ctr+f GCTA
ctrl+f GWAS
no results found
aaaaaand it's shit.
I mean, not just because of that, it's also shit because it repeats decades old "arguments" against heritability that have been shown time after time to be fallacious and/or misleading.

>>9386012

meritocracy does not mean hard work is rewarded you moran

it means results are rewarded

>>9384893
>did you even read my post?
Already mentioned that it's not science. If your claims have nothing to do with scientific rigor, why do you reply me?
>>9385030
>if i keep posting correlations without causation evidence IQ will eventually become true
Not even a chance, brainlet. IQ is still pseudoscience. Try again.
>>9385728
That's literally toddler-tier knowledge, brainlet.

>>9385954
>The Kansas City experiment suggests that, indeed, educational problems can’t be solved by throwing money at them

See pic as to why.

>>9381674
who is forcing you to participate?

>>9384999
>g (to the extent that it even exists) is incredibly polygenic
we suddenly know this after so much denial that intelligence is genetic? we know the genes?
but even assuming it's polygenic - which it should be - why does that mean its distribution cannot vary between races? it's not like polygenic precludes different allele frequencies between populations, or implies that the effects of genes will just plainly add up.

>>9386015
>In that case, how do you determine who contributes to society the most?
nobody has to determine who contributes to society the most. it does not need to be determined. it's humbug.
what matters is whether someone gets the same chances as everyone else with similar abilities and skills. as long as this happens, it does not matter what the racial or gender or whatever composition of the successful demographics actually is.
>You should also be notified that you're rejecting the principle that a person's value is based on their work ethic, and that even the most lazy people (e.g. whites), if they're able to contribute to society more than the most hard-working common people, should be rewarded more.
there's no such thing as a person's value, either. there's the results a person can achieve for themselves, and that's the end of it. this entire idea of a society separate from the mere sum of its constituents and judging people's values based on how much they contribute to society reeks of leftist totalitarianism.

>>9385679
>Comparing immigrants who suffered from xenophobia in the late 1800's/early 1900's to freshly emancipated slaves.

The Irish actually leveraged America's racism toward black people and used it as a way to elevate themselves to a higher social standing.

>>9386771
>>9385679
Son, several drafters of the US Constitution were fuckin Irish. It's ridiculous how people overplay the Irish thing.

>>9386681
We know some of the genes, and their relationship to IQ is sometimes less than obvious. For instance, there's a gene that codes for bigger hips that's associated with higher IQ because their offsprings' skulls aren't as compressed during birth if the person carrying that gene happens to be a mother.

It's a big fallacy to post a bunch of correlations and jump to causation when most of the correlations can be easily explained by stereotype threat, environmental factors, and epigenetics.

... that being said, there probably was a lot of artificial selection during slavery that punished intelligence and rewarded physical ability in place of it, and it would be ignorant to say that that didn't have some effect on the genetics of the black population in America.

Even assuming that's true, to argue that black people are "genetically inferior" and thus less deserving of a place in our society because slave owners tried to breed intelligence out of them is kind of fucked up though, don't ya think? Perhaps incentivizing education and selecting for intelligence by providing more opportunities for smart black people who test well might undo some of the damage we did?

Oh wait, we already do that... I mean... until selfish people like you undo it.

>>9386788
>there probably was a lot of artificial selection during slavery that punished intelligence and rewarded physical ability in place of it, and it would be ignorant to say that that didn't have some effect on the genetics of the black population in America.
two hundred years, with constant additions to the gene pool both from african import and from masterrape? absolutely not enough for anything. also, african countries have a tendency to resemble parts of baltimore, most blacks in the world fall into the one-standard-deviation-lower category, not just the ones who descend from american slaves.
>Even assuming that's true, to argue that black people are "genetically inferior" and thus less deserving of a place in our society because slave owners tried to breed intelligence out of them is kind of fucked up though, don't ya think?
slave owners did not try to breed intelligence out of them, and I've said nothing about deserving whatever place. I just would like to see all explicit and implicit quotas adjusted to reality. if a job requires an IQ of 135 - or a whatever of whatever - and that level is half as frequent between blacks than between whites, then "progressives" should shut the fuck up about discrimination. discrimination is strongly suspected to happen when the proportions deviate from expected values, but the expected values aren't the relative proportions of races in the general population. same with genders.

>>9385788
>Gas all the subhumans
Reading your replies has brought me round to this position

>>9385788
>Like I said the entire discussion on race realism is "Gas all the subhumans"
and this abhorrent level of hysterics from your own part does not ring your alarm bells? that this is such a clear case of total paranoia that the mere possibility of communication with you should be considered precluded by it? that the most benevolent interpretation is that you wish to see yourself as the white knight protecting brown people and this necessitates that whoever, unlike you, is right about race must be a monster or you have no leg to stand on?
besides, truth would matter even if it did lead to the need for mass extermination of humans. but it absolutely doesn't.

>>9386810
>slave owners did not try to breed intelligence out of them

Oh okay, so that's why it was illegal for black people to learn how to read and those who did were frequently killed and thusly removed from the gene pool?

Oh okay, so that's why docile, physically strong slaves were auctioned off for higher prices while the rest were made to slowly wither away and thusly removed from the gene pool?

Oh okay, so that's why the slaves who wised up and tried to run away were killed and thusly removed from the gene pool?

Do you see a pattern?

>progressives should shut the fuck up about discrimination
Eventually there will come a time when affirmative action and pathways to advantage for African Americans aren't needed. We're not there yet.

>>9381607
>are describable demographic trends not real if my feelings are real?

>>9384097
t. Kraut and Tea

I heard that there's more genetic difference between Africans and Europeans than there is between horses and zebras. If that's true, then Europeans and Africans should be considered different species, since zebras and horses are considered different species.

>>9387082
I_heard_it_through_the_grapevine.wav

>>9387082
Nice source, thanks for your contribution

A species is defined by whether or not individuals can produce viable offspring. Since Africans and Europeans can produce viable offspring, they are not different species.

>>9386845
>Still forcing the discussion away from your politics because it's not tactically sound from doing so

It isn't hysterics when the entirety of the alt-right, even the known and supported members of it talk about ethnic cleansings all the fucking time.

>>9386275
>some field I don't like is still """pseudoscience"""
I bet you don't even know what the demarcation problem is, much less a research program. Stop using big words you don't know how to use just to sound smart.

>>9385889

I've got to be honest, I haven't seen anyone seriously advocate for the extermination of anyone. You're the only person that's brought it up again and again.

In your example with global warming, you took that to the extreme and said well we should destroy all cars. Well the reality is that research has been done and it's being actively used to make new policy around CO2 production and limitation. You design newer, more efficient cars that don't emit as much CO2, refine processes.

Why on earth would you think that a similar approach wouldn't be taken with this?

>>9386944

If they are genetically inferior, they will always perform worse so it becomes a self perpetuating policy.

>>9386275
Science is the study of correlation you braindead retard.

No surprise to me all threads related to Race and IQ in this board are filled with shit flinging and people calling each other "brainlet" "low iq".

>>9382614
>he thinks common sense and understanding = science
Fuck me, being a brainlet /pol/tard must be such an easy way to live your life

>>9388342
>I haven't seen anyone seriously advocate for the extermination of anyone
The entirety of /pol/ and other groups call for it all the time.

>Why on earth would you think that a similar approach wouldn't be taken with this?
Because everyone who pushes race realism is an extremist and there are only extreme options in this situation, you are talking about people not cars.

>>9389070

What ever the logical conclusion is, it is in fact the logical conclusion.

>>9384444
>implying their differences are only skin-deep

Mouth-breathing brainlets are not welcome here, btw.

>>9381607
No.
You people are the fucking pseudoscientists.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G_factor_(psychometrics)

>>9381607
lmao do you actually believe evolution didn't effect the human brain

Are you people this fucking insane?

>>9384063
>>9384131
They keep coming back because /sci/ is constantly wrong about it and they constantly get btfo.

>>9386681
>we know the genes?


>FIND THE GENES

Holy fuck don't tell me you're one of those pseudoscientist faggots.

>>9386944
>Eventually there will come a time when affirmative action and pathways to advantage for African Americans aren't needed.
These things aren't needed at all period.

It's just discrimination against whites.
People who support these things are fucking evil.
Fuck off pseud.

>>9389296
Keep following the response trail, idiot. I was literally right.

>>9381482
I don't know what's more irritating. Listening to a bunch of people who have never taken a genetics nor zoology class try and debate the biological definition of race or the fact that they constantly conflate it with species.

>>9389336
You're right because you believe all races have the exact same cognitive ability, rates of aggression and personality types despite being separated for thousands of years?

That's quite the fucking proposition you are making.

>>9389354
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVrw-IiGgLY
Please watch this.

Like 90% of Chinese and Japanese academics are strong racial realists.

It's soon going to be an overwhelming majority in USA and europe too.

There's NOTHING you can do to stop the facts egalitarians.

>>9389371
I was right because they linked a study they thought proved their point, while I pointed out how it supports the opposite. Why are you so dumb?

>>9386314
>Muh whitey just keepin' a brotha down meme

Get a grip.

>>9389447
That adoption study is a weak argument anyway.
There are much stronger arguments in favor of racial realism.

If you haven't seen the kraut vs althype youtube debates the past few months you wouldn't know that the racial egalitarian side got so royally btfo that kraut literally went into hiding.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVrw-IiGgLY

>>9381624
Categorise the human race with pseudoscientific arguments into different races and distinguishing in "inferior" and superior races ist the first step into a holocaust

>>9389463
It wasn't the adoption study. It was a different study that also falls apart when you actually read it.

Althype recognizes race as a social construct btw.

>>9389495
>It was a different study that also falls apart when you actually read it.
Wow? Who cares? There are countless other studies that prove race exists and race and IQ/behavior are strongly correlated.
The science is settled.

>Althype recognizes race as a social construct btw.
He has always said it's a biological construct. That's what almost all of his videos are.
Human instincts are the reason we recognize race so strongly in the first place.
He was saying SCIENCE is a social construct but it's still a useful tool to predict and explain things like RACE and how it's an obvious biological construct.

Holy shit why are you people so intellectually dishonest?
Why do you strawman so fucking hard?
Everyone can see you're full of shit.
You want your position to be true so fucking bad but the evidence is overwhelmingly not in your favor and what you are saying makes absolutely no sense if you just believe in evolution.
You're a creationist.

>>9389495
watch this as well
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9yskAcICx4

>>9389382
90% of the 4chan "statistics" are bullshit

>>9389501
You're totally incoherent now. Sorry dude.

>>9389502
Nah. Put up a study, let's analyze it.

>>9389504
<----------------------Literally you right now.

>>9389507
AltHype puts up many sources

http://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2017/01/07/the-impossibility-of-equality/

>In fact, the brain is a more likely site for genetic differences between races than most other parts of the body are. Why? Because researchers have shown that genes involved in the brain are the ones that differ most between the races (Wu and Zhang, 2011) .
https://bmcevolbiol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2148-11-16


The idea that all races have the same level of intelligence and personality traits is absolutely insane and implausible if you actually believe in evolution.

>>9389501
Well maybe there are different educational level between different ethnicities in the US but most of the reputable scientific explanatory approaches reason it with the socio-economic disparity between "black and white". Your cute graphs(where ever you have them from) won't change that fact

>>9389495
>Althype recognizes race as a social construct btw.

>>9389511
It seems that you're really obsessed with your views and get personal when people criticise them

>>9389503
But there were actually many studies done that prove this.
http://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/07/18/what-the-experts-really-think-about-race-realism-and-white-nationalism-or-at-least-ideas-pertaining-to-it/

Try to disprove the countless arguments and sources in this article.
You literally cannot.

I predict in 20-40 years ago racial realism will be the majority accepted view by academics.

>>9389524
No, I'm just laughing at the fact you can't refute anything I'm saying.

inb4 "hurr you had no arguments"
I bet that's what's coming

>>9389515
>Well maybe there are different educational level between different ethnicities in the US but most of the reputable scientific explanatory approaches reason it with the socio-economic disparity between "black and white". Your cute graphs(where ever you have them from) won't change that fact
Holy shit LMAO

You don't even know that these studies and graphs control for environmental factors when necessary.

It's their GENETICS causing these issues, not muh "white privilege" just so stories

Watching Kraut get royally BTFO was so beautiful.

>>9389524
anon, you're being fucking retarded rn

gif related

>>9389525
Just the name of the website "thealternativehypothesis" seems very dubious I guess you blind out such thoughts in your delusion to valorize yourself towards other human beigns

>>9389539
Dude, you can't try to win an argument using his name. Fuck off brainlet.

>>9389539
>Just the name of the website "thealternativehypothesis" seems very dubious
Wow I guess this magically disproves the countless arguments, sources, studies and graphs on the website.

What's it like to be this fucking stupid?
Can't you just question your religion for one moment to read some of these articles.
It's like you people hate facts.

You guys are going to see Thunderf00t get so fucking destroyed over the next few months by AltHype, it will change everything.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGatnTixNW0

More and more people will learn about and accept race realism.
Mister Metokur's video series is already reaching a wide audience.

>>9389529
You really think that there arent any economic disparities between different ethnicities (in the Us) than youre living in an illusion . The question why there is a wage gap is irrelevant in that context even if you say "those damn niggers are too lazy to work and just want welfare". But fact is that there is a wage gap between white people and black people. And also fact is that the familial encouragement of the children affects their course of education. A family that is under financial pressure can't nurture the children in the same dimension as a family that is well-off. Additionally the schools in quarters where the underclass is segregated are underfunded (at least in the US) espacially compared to the quarters of the upper classes.

>>9389529
And I know that the graphs claim to involve these factors but I suspect it generally since there are many "statistics" to find on the Internet but not all of them are trustworthy

>>9389514
You're gonna have to link those top differentiators to intelligence, because the researchers seem to think those factors effect hair follicles and sexual stuff. You can't see pituitary gland and say "that's the brain!" because it's not intelligence-related, nor is hindbrain. Saying those indicate intelligence differences would be dishonest.

>>9389515
>Well maybe there are different educational level between different ethnicities in the US but most of the reputable scientific explanatory approaches reason it with the socio-economic disparity between "black and white". Your cute graphs(where ever you have them from) won't change that fact

You realize Alt Hype has already looked into all of these noob tier talking points. Blacks that have the same level of education as Whites have been shown to not be as intelligent.

And the environmental factors in the ARE negligible, you're just too fucking stupid to realize what that means

>>9389543
Wtf are you talking about "his name" IT'S a website not a person. Are you drunk

>>9389559
>You really think that there arent any economic disparities between different ethnicities
No I don't think that and I never ONCE said that.
Stop putting words in my mouth.

I said that these IQ tests, economic success rates, aggression studies/violence rates etc have been CONTROLLED FOR environmental factors.
Do you know what this means?
It means even if these environmental factors didn't exist there would still be a huge gap.

You people truly are brainlets.

Environmental factors that have been controlled for in these studies(with sources obviously):

http://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/04/15/iq-and-socio-economic-status/
http://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/04/15/race-iq-and-poverty/
http://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/04/15/stereotype-threat/
http://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2017/01/07/race-intelligence-and-nutrition/
http://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/12/23/race-iq-and-lead/
http://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/09/10/the-flynn-effect-race-and-iq/
http://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/09/25/child-abuse-and-racial-differences-in-crime-and-iq/

>>9389564
You can literally click on all of the links on the page I sent you, it will send you to actual peer reviewed studies done by academics showing what I am saying to be true.

>>9389546
I can see into the future and know that it's bullshit without wasting my time to read it. This efficient trick saved me a lot of valuable time.

>>9389573
I'm not the guy you're replying to, but you can't just link from this guy's blog. Link to the study and analyze it yourself. Because the claim over here is the althype uses legit sources, but is dishonest with the info.

>>9389569
But it was more than just pituitary gland development.
Many other brain related factors strongly different among the races.
See highlighted ones.

The point of showing this is to point out that the idea that all races have the identical brain structure is extremely implausible.

This doesn't even matter though because the quantitative genetics studies prove race and IQ/poverty/aggression is strongly correlated. That's all that's needed, the molecular genetic studies are just a cherry on top.

Now that we know thanks to the quantitative genetics studies that this is true, the more molecular genetics studies that come out in the next few years will compliment them and agree with them.

>>9389579
>I can see into the future and know that it's bullshit without wasting my time to read it. This efficient trick saved me a lot of valuable time.
These are the words of an angry religious fundie, asspained that his entire worldview is being challenged and that he's objectively wrong.

Enjoy being a cultist and never questioning your ideology.
We've been proven correct time and time again and the rest of the world is gradually coming around to our side.

It's like you hate science.

>>9389573
>I NEVER Said it
You mocked "muh white privilege" which I interpreted as there wouldnt be a sort of economical disparity between white/black that it wouldn't exist

>>9389589
>Here's my proof
>It doesn't matter though
Nah dude. You need proof that matters. I already said hindbrain is not intelligence related. I'm not sure of the others. You also have to define a threshold for "strongly differentiate." It's possible the unit of "20" is a very small difference, and these are simply the "most different" features.

>>9389588
>but you can't just link from this guy's blog
The guy does absolutely amazing work and btfo's racial egalitarians all of the time. It's pretty incredible how he rekt kraut and thunderf00t on youtube too.

Why would I NOT use this guy's work?
I've typed out my own arguments as well, what are you complaining about?

>but is dishonest with the info.
He's been intellectually honest since he came on youtube in 2010.
If you think he's lying point it out. So far NOBODY ELSE HAS and the entire "skeptic" community is collectively shitting their pants.

>>9389596
>You mocked "muh white privilege"
Exactly.
My point is it's really not an issue because the main reason blacks are poor and stupid is their genetics.
This has been scientifically proven already ITT. Scientists have shown the effects of "white privilege" to be a minor factor in the success of blacks.
I don't know what you're whining about now bro.

>>9389593
Nah I just don't want to waste my time by reading that "aricle" but I must admit I probably miss some high tier comedy maybe I will read it sometime when I need something too laugh. The funniest part is that some people actually call it "science"

>>9389597
>>Here's my proof
>>It doesn't matter though
Yes, both of these statements are accurate and you are a fucking idiot.

>You need proof that matters.
Which we did.
I already told you the quantitative genetics studies proved our point.
Proving them from the molecular genetics side can also be helpful but it's unnecessary.

Once they figure out all the molecular genetics, it's inevitably going to show our side is correct because we've already proven it's correct using quantitative genetics.

MG is just another tool that will show we're correct. We already accomplished the task using another tool.
The task is done, the science is settled.

>I'm not sure of the others.
Exactly.
They're major factors effecting the brain.

I mean one of them is literally the regulation of neuron differentiation and development.
This is huge.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_development
(differentiation is widely covered in this article)

Your position is unironically "absolutely NONE of these proven genetic differences effect personality/IQ/aggression/economic success among the races.
Embarrassing.

>>9389593
And btw I'm not angry at all au contraire I'm quite amused at the moment.

>>9389601
Holy fuck you can almost taste the angst and conflict going through this posters mind.
He's actually fucking scared his position might be the wrong one.

Don't worry kid, you're in for a rough few decades when the science becomes even more overwhelming and major academics begin accepting it even though it's taboo.

The science is not on your side.
You are the creationists.

>>9389573
If you like links so much you should try that one:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_categorization)

>>9389607
>I'M NOT MAD REEEEEEEEEEEE
Yeah we totally believe you.

>>9389611
May the science be with you young padawan

>>9389612
>extremely biased wikipedia article on one of the most widely debated topics of modern humanity
>and it's even LOCKED

Wow, this is just sad.

>>9389605
Neuron development is pretty low on the list my man. I don't have any quantification of the measurement (~7) and how it relates to IQ. I'm not saying everyone is exactly the same here dude, I'm saying these measurements are not indicative of major differences.

>>9389617
cringe

>>9389616
Well to be fair crying doesn't count as beeing angry

Do all threads on /sci/ end up like this?

The "evolution stops above the neck" crowd just gets angry and gives up because they lost?

>>9389626
For you it does.

>>9381482
why the fuck is this a gif

>>9389623
>Neuron development is pretty low on the list my man.
Neuron development is literally the development of the fucking BRAIN.
You're actually saying this has ZERO effect on personality traits/IQ/agression.
Absolutely nothing?

This is some batshit insanity and the burden of proof is clearly on your side.

>I'm saying these measurements are not indicative of major differences.
I never even said they measure major differences, only that they have and effect.

How are you this dumb you can't keep up with a conversation?

Either way, AGAIN, we already proved our side was correct using quantitative genetics. The molecular genetics is just another tool that is going to also prove us right.

It's funny you're not even debating this point anymore?

Given up?

>>9389633

Nope the it seems like the girl in the gif looks more like how you look at the moment

>>9389624
OK than the science should not be with you

>>9389643
>lose the debate
>start crying and getting pissed about it
>start projecting hard because it's all you have left

How long are you going to keep doing this?

>>9389639
So there's not necessarily major differences? And that differences in of itself doesn't translate to differences in IQ, let along quantify the differences stated being superior/inferior? We agree on this?

>>9389647
>racial egalitarian "skeptic" makes cringe-tier jokes after getting btfo

I'm almost positive you wear a fedora.

>>9389648
Untill I die

>>9389653
Did you hack my webcam

Anyone care to explain what's the point of all these discusions on race and intelligence?
Even if you were able to prove that intelligence is either entirely genetic or not, what would that change and why do you care?

>>9389659
I simply seek the truth

>>9389660
fool

>>9389649
>So there's not necessarily major differences?
No I just said that those specific areas of brain development listed might not account for the vast majority of IQ/aggression/economic success levels but to say they play no role whatsoever is absolute insanity.
The development of neurons though, that must be pretty major, it develops the entire brain.

>And that differences in of itself doesn't translate to differences in IQ
I never said this, no.

>let along quantify the differences stated being superior/inferior
It could though, especially if it's something as big as neuron development.

Do you actually believe these racial differences in brain development play ZERO role in IQ/agression/economic success?
If so then you people are creationist-tier flat earthers.

>>9389659
>what would that change
We would break apart major nation states like the USA and let different groups of people live among themselves as ethnostates. Blacks would have their own nation, whites would as well etc.
There would be peace and harmony and each nation would trade and cooperate with each other, but separately.

Basically world peace.
But Sam Hyde's World Peace.

>>9389668
>this is your brain on pol

>>9389665
>but to say they play no role whatsoever is absolute insanity.
You're literally going to have to prove this, while also proving that the differences manifest in superior/inferior ways. They can be completely benign genes that don't really affect anything.
>The development of neurons though, that must be pretty major, it develops the entire brain.
>i-it must be!
No dude.
>I never said this, no.
I don't know man, sounds like you're shifting the goalposts but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.
>It could though, especially if it's something as big as neuron development.
>i-it could be!
No dude.

>Do you actually believe these racial differences in brain development play ZERO role in IQ/agression/economic success?
I don't know, but no study has been able to make that connection. I'm not going to assume it does.

>>9381482
>bb...bbut race is problematic!
Get an heart transplant from an African and see if you live long enough to call me a bigot.
Human groups were separated for long periods of time over long distances, as a result, they developed different evolutionary characteristics to suit their environment.
Individuals have larger genetic variation when compared to individuals of other groups.
Anyone who refutes this in any way shape or form should be removed from the gene pool tbqh as their feelings over power the concept of what is true.

>>9389668
How about we found a nation just for poltards and let the normal people have the rest of the world?

>>9389665
>Do you actually believe these racial differences in brain development play ZERO role in IQ/agression/economic success?
If so then you people are creationist-tier flat earthers.

>If you believe this {} than you believe this {some stupid shit only trolls say which has no correlation to the thing mentioned abovr}

>>9389630
yes

>>9389633
>>9389648
>muh white race muh ethnostate
>is a fuckin incel weeb

lmao everytime

>>9389673
Not the guy you're responding to. Just so you know, any reasonable person is looking at your arguments and is probably realizing you're full of shit. Development of neurons doesn't affect the brain? Really? You could at least make a decent argument, like pointing out that it's not really clear what "neuron development" means. Is it repairing of neurons? Is it creation of neurons the first time? Instead you just say differences in neurons have no influence...

Also just cause it's low on the list doesn't mean anything. If you had read the article (I mean the article the chart comes from, not althype article), all of those values are statistically significant. They represent the proportion between what the writers call "higher Fst SNP's" in the particular category vs. in the genome at large (so it's a ratio of two proportions). They wouldn't have included them if it was just some spurious data point, unless you feel that the writers have some particular agenda you would like to point out.

That's really the main issue. The guy is actually providing scientific studies, you refuse to read them, so you appeal to common sense, but when someone else uses common sense and points out that neurons have something to do with the brain, and therefore probably intelligence, suddenly you need a scientific study. If you weren't genuinely curious, why even both responding to him? It baffles me.

What are some mainstream scientists that support race realism?

>>9389720
>You could at least make a decent argument, like pointing out that it's not really clear what "neuron development" means.
That's exactly what I was saying, sorry if it wasn't clear. I was saying you have to show that these differences manifest itself with IQ differences. I said that in previous posts.

The funny thing about this is that /pol/, stormfags and other alternative scientists can't actually decide what makes someone huwhite either. At first it's about "white" people, then it's about European white people, then it's about specifically Nordic white people, because having blond hair and blue eyes somehow makes you superior to everyone else (especially those meds and slavniggers!) And you would think they'd respect Asian people for having high IQs, but no, those dirty chinks all need to be gassed. Then there's the sublime irony of /pol/turds REJECTING those same IQ tests when it comes to Jews, because Jews also have really high IQs, but /pol/tards claim those are rigged and fake. What's hilarious is, they think that people don't want to debate them because they're right, and not because they're hypocritical clueless morons.

The egalitarians are better off attempting to argue their platform not using the basis that race doesn't exist or doesn't have an impact since that argument is quickly falling out from under them and will leave them naked in the arctic, so to speak.

It is a bit amusing that once it is acknowledged that race(and even more fundementally heritage) has a significant impact on intelligence which constrains human ability, pretty much the entire western world will implode. Western politics and policy have been built on the basis that success is byproduct of "hard work", not immutable genetic traits.

When this is shown as false, everything crumbles down.

>>9389739
First of all, the words mainstream and scientist should never be seriously used in a sentence together. Mainstream with who? It's nonsense.

Second of all, you won't find any scientists who say "I am a race realists" because it's unnecessary for them. If you do even a cursory search on google you can find plenty of scientists who support (have written articles supporting/supposing the existence of): genetic clustering of human populations, correspondence of genetic clusters to self-identified race, the validity of IQ as a measure of intelligence, IQ differences between races, physical differences between races, differences in brain characteristics between races, refutations of "more variance within than between," etc. You probably won't find any scientists who proclaims to the world "I am a race realist," just like the overwhelming majority of scientists don't say "I am a believer in human-caused climate change!" Instead, consensus surveys look at what the papers say, and use that to indicate the author's position.

Seriously just look up any of the topics I listed on google scholar and you will find articles for (and against) race realism. Most of those guys on either side you probably will have never heard of, and they're all mainstream until they do something controversial and get shunned by the scientific community.

>all the scientists are lying about race because the jews/liberals are hiding the truth! If a scientists says the truth they lose their funding and career!

>oh except for these links I didn't read and don't understand, this proves sciences supports me, except for the coverup thing!

>It's not these infographs rely on morons that misread and misinterpret papers just to make some propaganda!

>>9381482
These infographs rely primarily on two things to fool the readers:

1. The hope the reader will not read through the citations, or will not have the intelligence to understand the papers

2. Ad hoc assumptions. None of the papers make the claims the infograph says, and none of the papers are connected in any logical way. It tries to make the reader assume the papers all support racist beliefs and that together they are all somehow connected as a body of evidence when they are not.

>>9389773
Ahh yes... the default fallback of all race realistics: "It's a conspiracy!"

>>9389785

Question:

Independent of the truth of the claim, would or wouldn't there be significant negative impacts on the career of someone who claimed 1. racist exists, 2. it has an impact on behavior.

?

The arguments against racism are largely moral in nature, it's what public debate always centers around. I have yet to see any honest public debate based upon evidence.

>>9389788
The problem is that science is about the truth. If you claim you support race realism, you and supporting something unscientific, which is why your reputation would be in jeopardy, just as if a physics professor would probably lose his job if he claimed he believed in the luminous eather. Racism is pseudoscience.

There is no "regardless of the truth" in science.

>>9389785
Have you fucking heard of Gould and Morton, how about Watson. Wanna admit there's a ton of fucking bias yet you brainlet cunt?

>>9389791
If you claim that you don't support race realism you are supporting saying that evolution doesn't exist. You're the only one supporting pseudoscience.

>>9389791

So something is unscientific because you don't like it, demonstrating my point.

>>9389793
And Isaac Newton believed god was speaking direction to him via a number code through the bible. What's your point? You can be smart in some aspects and backwards in others. The truth does not rely on status symbols or ideology.

>>9389765
It wasn't clear because it's not what you said; you're saying neuron development doesn't necessarily translate to IQ. This is different than saying neuron development is an unclear concept. And you actually don't have to show how these manifest with IQ differences. It would be nice to have a mechanistic explanation, but it's not necessary.

Isaac Newton didn't need to develop measure theory to use calculus. Mendel didn't need to know the exact mechanistic processes by which genes worked to figure out that there was a dominant/recessive dichotomy involved. We already have a considerable body of evidence which suggests that there are differences between human populations not just in skin tone but also in IQ levels, and that these differences are heritable to a certain degree (and I should note, Caucasians are not the group with the highest IQ). That in and of itself is enough to state fairly definitively that these differences are real. The fact that there are racial differences in the structure of our brains and the processes by which our brains function is simply supplementary evidence which supports the data already found.

The debate on whether there's a difference is already over, to be quite frank. Copernicus has already figured out the Earth revolves around the Sun. Now it's just a question of when everyone's going to stop pretending this research never happened, accept it as true, and actually try to do something productive for everyone involved with this new knowledge.

>>9389797
You just don't understand how evolution works, and have made up an unfounded fairy tale about human evolution to support you emotional or political goals.

I realize we are living in a world where the truth matters less and less but at some point you're going to have to realize you're an idiot.

>>9389785
Conspiracy? I pointed out that the way you tell if something is mainstream is by looking to see what people wrote...are you going to say that Climate Change is a conspiracy because the surveys looked at what was written instead of just polling scientists? Absurd.

>>9389798
Stay delusional my friend

>>9389814

>claim something. posturing the conversation in a way which attempts to prevent discussion.

>provide absolutely no support of the claim.

Yea, I don't think the race realists are the bullshitters here, they aren't the ones falling back on moral arguments and refusing debate.

>>9382643
pay taxes nao, commifornia

>>9389819
>shitposting on 4chan is going to change the physical world and reality of nature!

>>9389827

I don't know man, given your dedication maybe it's possible. If you can get Africans to breed into Europeans before the Chinese call you on our bullshit maybe you still have a chance.

>>9389804
Race Realism is the claim that human biodiversity exists as a result of evolution, and that this biodiversity manifests itself in the classic races we commonly use (Amerindian, Caucasian, Oceanic, East Asian, African, Aboriginal, and Middle Easter). It's a perfectly valid claim to make.

The sad thing about this whole debacle is that when it started race realism was definitely the losing argument. The "more variation within than without" argument was especially convincing to me personally. Once it became clear that this was not actually the case when multiple loci were considered, I switched my position to "neutral". When I heard that genetic clusters match up with self-identified race like 98% of the time, I switched my position again. I wish that egalitarians (anti-race realists? I don't know what to call them) would at least try to come up with an argument like they did in the past. Now they've been reduced to a sort of wild skepticism which never puts forth its own ideas and only seeks to criticize in order to invalidate the entirety of an argument, without earnestly searching for the elements of truth within said arguments. I legitimately respect those scientists who have posited ideas like stereotype threat, because at least it attempts to make an argument, even if I ultimately disagree. All we see now is this flailing around and claims of pseudoscience, born from an obvious fear that somehow if race realism is right then we are OBLIGATED to genocide minorities or some bullshit. It's ridiculous.

>>9389839
>an obvious fear that somehow if race realism is right then we are OBLIGATED to genocide minorities or some bullshit. It's ridiculous.

This. There is nothing wrong with being different from each other. Every race has their own specialization, inline with the theory of evolution.

There is also nothing wrong with hating different group of people and wanting to genocide them. It is perfectly natural.

>>9389847

Back to the arguments revolving around morality because you got nothing else.

I think it's pretty which side is the winner here.

>>9389858
>tfw another argumentless brainlet in /sci/

looks like brainlets are trying to blend in but failed

>>9387225
>no intelligence definition
>no intelligence observed nor its mechanisms
>not known influences that determines it
IQ is psedoscience.
>>9388426
Science is the study of fenomena and its "direct correlation" AKA causation to other fenomena. IQ lacks both "causation" facts and basis.

IQ is not science.

>>9389371
Jesus Christ that video is a train wreck.

There are phenotypes common to certain groups that came from similar common ancestors, ie. alcohol dehydrogenase deficiency, lactase. This is what the people in this thread arguing about genetic basis for race seem to want to be referencing.

The issue comes when these type of traits are conflated onto traits used for measuring differences in what we currently define separate races, in anthropology at least, as "Caucasoid, Mongoloid and Negroid" or perhaps even more specifically as the different unique ethnic groups identified using genetic testing from places like 23 and me. These tests are based off of genetic loci that are unlikely to change naturally and are therefore good at tracking human interbreeding due to their variability and unlikeliness to change.

These tests are also very, very, very hard to correctly pin down which I will explain why now. These traits can mutate naturally, although infrequent this does occur and alters what might be a profile for an eastern European to a southern European. What is more common is that interbreeding exists and has existed for millennia, beyond that genetic drift has existed since the dawn of life. Therefore a woman with both parents being 200th generation Egyptian may display markers placing her in central Africa or even Asia based on at what point her family interbred. Genetic drift may have made the entire population appear as such.

The traits discussed for tracing lineage are also all static, only being affected by random chance. The traits that are being touted as being important for identifying Black, White, Asian, etc. as unique are all heavily acted upon by natural selection. Humans are evolving now faster then ever, despite what popular opinion might say. They are not able to be pinned down into the same categories as the unique non-drifting genetic loci, which themselves are flawed.

Not even mentioning how hard defining a species let alone a race is.

>>9389669
Not an argument lol
>>9389684
Great that's literally all we wanted
Then our white nation would be superior and advance further

>>9390235

You know that a black skin is a small adaption to the environment.In regions where the sun strain is high the body creates more melanin to protect the skin from UV Light . This adaption get selected by the nature because it highers their surviving rate in those regions. If you would live in those regions (naturally) this evolutionary process would also affect you and your genes respectively your descendants genes. Briefly: your descendants would adapt(in a long evolutionary process) to their environment (create a darker skin) and their white genetic traits woulddie out in those regions. (Assuming you wouldn't live in an modern and urban area with tools like sun cream that would stop that evolutionary process. )

You still think a higher melanin production can somehow affect your brain? Than keep in mind that there are almost no pure white genes in this world since societies(and genes) are so strongly mixed that you may have black or jew genes in you

>>9390235
So you will go back to europe then?
America belongs to Amerindians the same as europe belongs to europeans. How is this hard to get?

>>9381482
Yes, they do. They also sufficiently explain a lot of things about demographics.

Individual variance, however, makes it so anyone wanting to enshrine racial differences in law is putting the cart before the horse.

>>9381624
>if you argue that there is no such thing as dog races then I think this is a respectable position
It's not that there are no "dog races". It's just that the basis of those classifications can be altered to one's own convenience, if required.

>>9381482
Congratulations troll your bait made it to the main page

>>9390280
It has been on the main page now for 4 fucking days, retard

>>9384097
They may give bullshit studies to confirm their views. Like argument for great replacement that doesn't stand any fact checking. "Science based" have not been banned from public debate and you need serious sources for this.

You may like this one.
Some kind of white privilege anyway

http://web.archive.org/web/20100118182514/http://www.sphere.com:80/article/revealing-the-mysteries-of-online-dating-even-the-politically-i/19261774

>>9390261
Unique jew people as a whole since biblical times is a real fiction, many people converted to judaism up to the start of middle age, so ashkenazi jews have really few ancestors from actual istrael. Black in America are mainly from subsaharian africa and aren't related to many dark skinned people like aboriginals and people from some Pacific's islands
Even for africans just consider diversity, tall massai tiny pygmees and huge assed zulus women

>>9386012
>we might as well give it out based on height
Actually, the reward for this is higher value in the sexual marketplace. Intelligence gets reward where it matter, i.e., being (financially) successful etc.

So yes, genetic lottery is a truth of life and you can't just ignore it just because it hurts your feels.

>>9384444
Nobody is saying hair color is a different race, lol.

>>9381482
>Does human races/populations exist?
These studies need far bigger samples sizes to take into account regional continuity. Here's a kmean graph of genetic differences with different number of groups, it may be a little bit more serious even if it comes from Wikipedia
PCA analysis are prone to biases and you need really more and more diverse samples

>>9389371
>despite being separated for thousands of years?
Thousand of years are not enough to make an evolutionary difference. Scientists even argue there is barely any difference between early humans and modern humans. And that is a gap of ten thousands of years.
Also lol at
>same rate of aggression
Oh boy, I wonder where this is hinting at? Would you like to spend some time reading a European history book or look at the involvement of Western countries in current wars, mate? You should.

>>9390355
These genetic clustering studies show far less isolation of africans
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_genetic_clustering?wprov=sfla1
But some may dismiss it because of Rosenberg name

>>9383982
Leftist creationism is pseudoscience.

>>9381482
Yes, ignore the libtards going "define race" this is a typical way to avoid discussing race by trivializing it like a "social construct".

If race is not real why the FUCK DO HUMANS HAVE GENETIC DIFFERENCES BASED ON GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION?

Blacks have denser bones explain this
Asians have straight hair follicles explain this
Native Americans have a different skin coloring chemical than us explain this
Asians are more neotonic explain this
Caucasoids are stronger than all other races explain this
Caucasoids from Europe and Asians from East Asia are the smartest human groups explain this

OH WAIT YOU CANT WITHOUT RACE.

>>9390015

You're an idiot.

>>9390267

The problem is immigration, these effects need to be considered when examining if immigration is acceptable or not. Essentially ignoring facts when making policy is not acceptable.

>>9390522

>If race is not real why the FUCK DO HUMANS HAVE GENETIC DIFFERENCES BASED ON GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION?

Race is a simplistic attempt to classify groups, this attempt has proven to be inaccurate by a number of examples, one of the most notable is the Khoisan and Austronesian Negritos were originally classified as Black Negros when later evidence proved this factually wrong. This is because race based science utilized simplistic methods of genetic visual cues such as appearance and skull shape. Modern biology/ genetics has proven race classification is an inaccurate and incorrect method as their is a proven gradient/ continuum in the human genome across continents and the best way to signify differences is based on distance. And within these distances exist a various differences that cannot be neatly partition into groups without frequent inaccuracies.

This is why race is being deemphasized in the science community. It's been objectively proven to be inaccurate and in a time where even classic "Newtonian" mechanics and Euclidean Geometry are being scrutinized because they cannot fully explain or provide accurate results for the mechanics of the natural world on minute/ finer scale than what the naked eye can see, race has no chance of being deemed worthy of importance in science unless it fundamentally changes it's approach in how it categorizes.

>>9390590
>immigration
You are already implying the government has certain interests that are the same as you. And this is not science. IQ is still pseudoscience.

Try again, brainlet.

, >>9390610

Science is based on utility, something doesn't have to work 100% of the time to be useful and in fact the world built on ideal approximations.

It's like arguing nobody should use classical physics because it's not accurate.

>>9390619
>IQ is still pseudoscience.
If you want to fight the entire field of Psychology go right fucking ahead. But let me tell you, you're going to lose.

>>9390653
>science is based on utility
absolutely abhorrent

>>9390371
>>9390355
The full paper

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/298/5602/2381.full

It clearly says what we can measure about human genetic diversity and how it it's distributed geographically does not produce what most morons call race.

I see lots of the /pol/ tards saying stuff like "debate me" and "stop using morality." The truth is this a scientific debate for which they are not equipped. They believe the science already supports them because they've fooled themselves with their fake infographs.

>>9390772
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1196372/

No, self identified race and best fit genetic cluster analysis only contradict in about .14% of cases.

Maybe stop being dishonest and admit that Red delicious apples are different from Golden delicious apples.

>>9389371
>calls SNP snips, doesn't know what snips even are.

>Thinks SNP stands for single nucleotide protein.

>"a gene is just a series of snips."

>thinks SNPs are only on genes

>believes in punctuated equilibrium

>believes that Fst values are just relative and based on "divided subspecies"

>"cluster analysis is when scientists get a bunch of data and tell the computer to sort it into clusters"
kek

This main is a complete /pol/tarded brainlet

>>9390775
It has nothing to do with "honesty" you moron, it's about facts and what we can observe.

Maybe you should read your own links before you post them, thinking they support your pseudoscience beliefs

In summary, from a very large study of four major racial/ethnic groups within the United States and Taiwan, we found extraordinary correspondence between SIRE and genetic cluster categories but only modest geographic differentiation within each race/ethnicity group. This result indicates that studies using genetic clusters instead of racial/ethnic labels are likely to simply reproduce racial/ethnic differences, which may or may not be genetic. On the other hand, in the absence of racial/ethnic information, it is tempting to attribute any observed difference between derived genetic clusters to a genetic etiology. Therefore, researchers performing studies without racial/ethnic labels should be wary of characterizing difference between genetically defined clusters as genetic in origin, since social, cultural, economic, behavioral, and other environmental factors may result in extreme confounding (Risch et al. 2002).

>>9390825
do you think any of what you quoted there refutes >>9390775

>using genetic clusters instead of racial/ethnic labels are likely to simply reproduce racial/ethnic differences, which may or may not be genetic.

the conclusion is malformed, its saying shit that correlates with genetics might not be genetic. its ridiculous on its face, the study itself disproves conclusion they reach

but that doesnt mean the study is wrong

>>9390847
No, it is you that is wrong. The paper does not say anything like "race is real." You are too stupid to even understand what is going in the paper, and made up your own idea of what you think the paper means. It's your stupidity that is wrong.

Race does not rely on science, and it acts as a way to place value on a person or just simply classify certain ethnicities and cultures. Really “race” is pseudoscientific, and should not be used to classify groups of people. Race tends to leak into discrimination, and it’s presence is constantly a social and political problem. Everyone has an arbitrary definition of race, their own informed opinions are allowed to exist.

>>9390856
The study says self identified race is an accurate way to group people. What the fuck else do we need to show to prove to you that race is real you fucking insufferable cunt.

>>9390878
Where in the paper does it say that?

>>9390885
With the 99% accuracy of genetic clusters and Self Identified Race you waste of space.

>>9390890
It says nothing about "99% accuracy" in that paper.

Also, what do you mean by accuracy in this case?

>>9390757

No, it's factually true. The value in science is its ability to be used to accomplish some form of goal. Without it nobody would care except for a very few people.

Thus anything that can yield usefull results in most cases is sufficently "scientific", theories don't have to be perfect in order to be used to be used, they only need to be succesfull at modeling in the majority of cases.

>>9390894
>It says nothing about "99% accuracy" in that paper.
I can't imagine being as fucking ignorant of genetic science as you are. And sadder still, you think it's a virtue.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929707625786

>>9390610
>Race is a simplistic attempt to classify groups, this attempt has proven to be inaccurate by a number of examples
Oh shut the fuck up you are doing exactly what I just said.

Oh btw smart guy you never explained why these differences exist without race.
>skull shape
Dude you can really be a scientist and think cranial differences between humans doesnt constitute a genetic distance worth looking at, I mean skeletal differences are how we determine permian phylogeny for fuck sake just go away with your ITS NOT REAL I SWEAR YOU RACIST!

>>9390999
brainlet

>>9390999

How's Engineering school?

>tfw even if race and IQ is true it doesn't matter because /pol/ literally can't win because the optics are not in their favor because everyone ( except racists, I guess lol ) knows one of the intelligent black people and what /pol/ advocates is anti-meritocracy and pro-discrimination which appeals to no one except bitter cunts with no better value than than things beyond their control
Go ahead /pol/, convince your boss to fire all niggers because on average blacks have lower IQs than whites despite some individual blacks doing their job properly. We'll see who gets fired.

>>9391059

>Oh btw smart guy you never explained why these differences exist without race.

Race is a classification tool, it does not explain why physiological differences come about in the first place. Race merely groups those physiological differences into categorical "sets" and then attempts to analyze those differences between said sets via various subject matter. You would never ask to explain why the physiological differences between plants exist without using clads. Because clads like race is a classification tool to categorize. Clads were never meant to explain why differences in organisms came about in the first place. It's meant to just make a chaotic system less chaotic by bringing structure but said structure does not provide reason for the differences either.

The very fact you ask such a question highlights the lack of understanding in the very subject matter you try to champion. Because honestly the question you're trying to pose here in it's most simplistic form is akin to asking for an explanation in why differences exist in objects in general without using "grouping" labels. The answer would be because various chemical and physical phenomenon stratified objects to the point where observable and non-observable traits appeared. Which would happen independently or in context to the question, happen before the grouping label for said object was applied by a human.

An object or organism does not magically gain traits or a defined explaination in purpose of being because it received a grouping/ classification label. This isn't fucking number theory were you can apply grouping characteristics to a numerically interpreted object because it's abstract.

Unless of course your question in actuality is alluding to talking about if model theory (the study of groups, graphs etc. in logic) is universally true and philosophically defines our interpretation of reality itself. Then I would tell you to kindly fuck off because I have no time that shit.

>>9386944
If they've been bred to be retards no amount of affirmative action is going to fix that...

>>9389598
>"Faggot with a blog BTFO two of my irrelevant eclebs!!!"
>ecelebs
A faggot with a blog will always lend less credibility than a respected scientific journal for good reason.
Consider reading the studies themselves.

>>9390261
>The only difference between a Black man and a White man is the amount of melanin in their skin

How can anyone have this delusion? It's just dishonest.

>>9386944
with your logic, you should stop denying race realism and promote meritocracy so that high iq blacks can outbreed retarded blacks, rather than giving them all handouts.

>>9392188
There is a strong level of physical diversity inside affrica. You cannot speak of only one group

>>9392753
>The only difference between a Black man and a White man is the amount of melanin in their skin
A couple of hours later...
>There is a strong level of physical diversity inside affrica.

>>9384069
Please cite the undeniable scientific articles you're referring to.

>>9391886
Diversity levels make that traditional number of races is bullshit level too low. Genetic clustering show that you may need to add more category and even those are questionable due to the nesesarily low numbers of samples.
You still have strong physical variations between population. There not only west africa into africa.

>>9392756
Just that if you want to classify humans biologically you'll need a far larger amount of categories not just the actual handful of races and that not counting the great level of mixing throughout history, for example many african american are of significative white ancestry

>>9392799
>many african american are of significative white ancestry
nice numbers

>>9391886
>Race is a classification tool, it does not explain why physiological differences come about in the first place.
Yeah, classifications aren't meant to explain physiological differences. Thats what the genetics is for.

>An object or organism does not magically gain traits or a defined explanation in purpose of being because it received a grouping/ classification label.
Yeah, we don't fucking work in reverse. We group them BECAUSE they share traits not "they gain traits when we classify them."

>>9393080
>nice numbers
This is common knowledge dude. A huge majority of American blacks of slave ancestry have some European mixture.

>>9393088
>many african american are of significative white ancestry
>have some European mixture.

significant means significant
some means some
they are different
which is it

>>9385713
i randomly clicked on /sci/ for the fuck of it
holy shit is this retard serious?
>racists might use this science to kill all non-whites so we better ignore it
the absolute state of """science""" in the west

>>9393206
>Look I made a funny mspaint image this is your argument!
None of you are arguing for research, why do you keep doing this?

---------------------------------------------------
http://thealternativehypothesis.org/
---------------------------------------------------

>Click on "Core Issues"
>Click on the state of denial you are in
>Welcome to /pol/

>>9393377
>race realism means that pol is right about anything else.

>>9381488
Cats and humans are different colors, therefore species don't exist it's arbitrary.

We're antiscience when our ideology comes up.

>>9381488
>1488
heil hitler
also, you were the one that brought 'value' into the conversation. that wasn't the point of the post, but you just couldn't wait to go from objective to subjective

>>9381482
Yes, just look at the dominance of Jews in almost all intellectual human endeavors.

>>9393387
You'd be surprised.

>>9393377
damn, these articles are ridiculously low quality
third of the cited studies don't exist, half cited studies is extremely bad quality done on very small sample of people or only men/women, some refer to groups of people irrelevant to the topic, like studies done on elderly people somehow translate to healthy adults

>>9393377
Read each of the studies yourself and read the researchers' findings. Please. Please do it. Realize that althyp cherrypicks and dances around concepts (like race being a social construct, see pic). Realize that althyp is politically driven by the desire for ethnostates (check "about this site"):
>We also defend the prescriptive statement that White nations have just as much of a right as Asian or African nations to defend themselves from demographic displacement.
Ethnostates, thus genocide and violence.

These people are full of bad intentions, don't simply take their word for it.

>>9393409
Forgot posted pic already
>>9389495

>>9393409
>dances around concepts (like race being a social construct, see pic)
first, theres no pic
second, if you think race is a social construct you should genuinely off yourself

>These people are full of bad intentions, don't simply take their word for it.
You think everyone except your own side has bad intentions, that you're so fucking righteous bc you believe in equality. Follow your own damn advice, be a little consistent and don't simply believe that two groups are equal when that contradicts evolution.

>Ethnostates, thus genocide and violence.
Oh, you just don't know what the fuck you're talking about you anti-white bigot.

>>9393414
The quality of this post, jeez

>>9393414
Actually race is a social construct but that doesn't say anything about the usefulness of it as a concept. Literally everything is a social construct. It is essentially a useless meaningless term that can be applied to anything. Alt hyp recognizes this.

Lets not be hasty with posting here.

>>9393408
Really? Pls link nonexistant studies.

>>9393409
>race being a social construct

How is this not either full retard or trolling

>>9393425
>>9393414
Keep owning yourselves, this is great.

>>9393409
>Ethnostates, thus genocide and violence.

These two posts agree...

>>9393424
the article:
http://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/04/15/race-and-stress/

dead link no 1:
https://psychology.uchicago.edu/people/faculty/cacioppo/jtcreprints/mrhc04.pdf

dead link no 2:
http://www.sciencedirect.com.sci-hub.io/science/article/pii/S1054139X07001371

and that's just 4 sentences into the article, not sure if the second one is caused by scihub thing since it looks like a different domain
there's a ton of bullshit and retarded conclusions in these articles, the person writing them is entirely incompetent for that type of work

>>9393428
10 int is average in d20

>>9393468
That's unfortunate on that article. I imagine that he's probably not checking on the links to make sure they stay non-dead.

That being said, it's not incompetent work. The article in particular you linked (which honestly not the first article I would have looked at from the site link you were given, but whatever) is, like the he says at the end of the article, a bit of a tangent.

Even in that article, he doesn't make any particularly controversial conclusions from the data presented. The data shows that black and Hispanic people have lower cortisol levels than white people in genera, but higher levels of epinephrene and norepinephrine; he notes that the differences in levels are not really that great. From this he concludes that chronic stress is not that different between the races.

Why not just engage with what he says instead of dismissing the article because the links put in it more than a year ago have died? If you were really curious, you could have found them yourself:
First link - http://www.physiology.org/doi/pdf/10.1152/japplphysiol.00256.2004

Second link-
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1054139X07001371

>>9381482
Look at "fact" 8. Africa is ethnically the most diverse continent. Yet, somehow the graph presented does not reflect this. And how could it? With a sample size of only 850 split into 10 ethnicities...

>>9393849
Yeah, their samples sizes are "niggardly" small.

>>9393795
>From this he concludes that chronic stress is not that different between the races.
And this is where he makes a wrong conclusions. By looking at only 2 hormones he concludes that there is no difference in chronic stress between the races. In reality stress is a pretty complex mechanism and involves at least 7 different hormones.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stress_(biology)#Biology_of_stress
I'm not trying to debate whether there is or isn't difference in chronic stress between races, but it can't be concluded just based on 1 study and measuring 2 hormones. Also, stress is not the only thing that has a major influence on hormones, especially cortisol and norepinephrine. That's why I think this person is incompetent, lacks necessary deep understanding and tends to oversimplify things.

>>9391759
>tfw even if race and IQ is true it doesn't matter because /pol/ literally can't win because the optics are not in their favor because everyone ( except racists, I guess lol ) knows one of the intelligent black people and what /pol/ advocates is anti-meritocracy and pro-discrimination which appeals to no one except bitter cunts with no better value than than things beyond their control

if race realism is proven to be conclusively true that can easily change

>>9394057
First of all, 3 hormones. Epinephrine and Norepinephrine are two different hormones.

Second of all, the article is in response to a claim by people seeking to negate the difference between races in IQ tests. The claim is that some races have more chronic stress, so they do poorly on those tests. His basic point in the first section of the article is that from the data presented, we can't draw any substantial conclusions about racial differences in stress levels.

But you're right, one study is not enough to say whether, without a doubt, there is or isn't a difference in chronic stress levels. That's why whenever he says anything about chronic stress differences, he puts the word "probably" or something similar before it. You can say, given one study, that the differences will "probably" look this way, but given another study you might change your estimation. He never puts forth a definitive, positive position on this matter. His entire article, like he says at the end, is a tangent, and designed to give context.

He doesn't lack necessary deep understanding, you just went in with a bias and plucked out things you didn't like. His language actually betrays his carefulness in making positive claims (carefulness I don't personally have, since your quote is from my comment and not his article). He doesn't oversimplify things, you're expecting a complex analysis from an article he personally calls a tangent. I may be willing to grant you "incompetence," if only for the dead links and a couple of misspellings; but since he is his own editor and site manager it's difficult to get too annoyed at him.

Again, I would challenge you to actually engage with the data instead of dismissing his analysis out of hand based on your own preconceived notions of what he's trying to accomplish.

>>9394782
Norepinephrine is not really an hormone in fact, it's used for communication between neurons in brain and other parts of the body, a neuromediator, the same thing as dopamin and serotonin. All psychotropic drugs act on the mechanisms managing these kind of substance between neurons, from illegal drugs to antidepressants and other psychiatric drugs

>>9381482
Not-a-myth #1: Unless you really want to either degrade yourself by treating other human beings like less-than-human beings, or you want to lock your entire civilization into an endless cycle of war and violence, you should just fucking get over this whole 'race' thing and get on with evolving AS A SPECIES. Or maybe we should just start rounding up racists and shooting THEM in the head and solve the problem that way.