/sci/ - Science & Math

Article, forgot to link
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/03/23/opinion/sunday/genetics-race.html

A movement is increasing in academia to stop lying about race, genetics, and other biological truths. This is because they are deathly afraid of being completely discredited by advancing genetic technology especially in Asia.

>Is it too late for them to come back from lying and dishonest fake scientific results back to reality? How will the dupes who had been misled and drank the falsehoods and lies going to feel when their thought leaders begin accepting race realism and /pol/ positions?
won't ever happen, there's simply too much money behind the idea that people are equal on all levels, are infinitely malleable and that democracy is always a good everywhere

>>9616021
They are entering on damage control mode now.

David "The Third" Reich

We all knew this was right. Amerindian higher civilization potential is a historical fact

Now go back to europe, subhumans, your pestilent inferior kind keeps poisoning this land. Disgusting creatures

>>9616671
lay off the booze

>>9615687
>Is it too late for them to come back from lying and dishonest fake scientific results back to reality?
Japan and China do not give a fuck about our race taboos. It doesn't matter what US academia does. People will know the truth eventually whatever it is.

>>9616671
>t. shiteating piglet kozoomer nom nom nom

>>9616719
>>9616735
Wrong twice.
>europeans
>from aurignacian proto-gravettian to solutrean:10000 years (30000BC-20000BC)
>from aurignacian-antelian to start of crop development: 9000 years(30000BC-21000BC)
>from start of crop development to neolithic revolution: 10500 years (21000BC-10500BC)
>from neolithic revolution to earliest use of copper: 5500 years (10500BC-5000BC)
>from neolithic revolution to earliest use of tin bronze: 6700 years (10500BC-3800BC)

>Amerindians:
>from aurignacian proto-gravettian to clovis: 5500 years (16000BC-10500BC)
>from aurignacian proto-gravettian to the start of crop development: 5000 years (16000BC-11000BC)
>from start of crop development to neolithic revolution: 7000 years (11000BC-4000BC)
>from neolithic revolution to copper: 3000 years (4000BC-1000BC)
>from neolithic revolution to earliest use of tin bronze: 4700 years (4000BC-700 AD)


-"2003a. Tiwanaku Period (Middle Horizon) bronze metallurgy in the lake Titicaca basin: A preliminary assessment. En Tiwanaku and its hinterland, T 2. A. Kolata, (Ed.), pp. 404-434. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D. C."
-"1997. El bronce arsenical y el Horizonte Medio. En Arqueología, antropología e historia en los Andes: Homenaje a María Rostworowski, R. Varón y J. Flores E. (Eds.), pp. 153-186. Instituto de Estudios Peruanos, Lima."
-"https://www.researchgate.net/publication/317346941_Ancient_metalworking_in_South_America_A_3000-year-old_copper_mask_from_the_Argentinian_Andes";
-"Historia de América Andina: Las sociedades aborígenes"
-"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF02859340";
-"http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0141923";
-"http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/1873/";
-"https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoamericano";
-"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluefish_Caves";

Amerindians had a higher development rate than europeans, therefore Amerindians have more civilization potential than europeans.

How is this hard to get?

>>9616740
Excellent point. Those time scales seem like ones we have amazing data from. I guess they just got unlucky enough to lose to a bunch of spaniards who had to sail across the ocean.

>>9616740
Amerindians and East Easians are the master races.
Whites are just OK.
Sandniggers are low-tier.
Niggers are shit-tier.

>>9616766
Wrong. Diseases destroyed Amerindian civilizations.
>1 bubonic nothing wipes out 40% europeans
>20+ diseases murder more than 90% for centuries yet imperial Incas still won most battles against any army with spaniard infuence
Amerindians have more civilization potential than europeans. Time to deal with the historical facts, subhuman.
>>9616778
America belongs to Amerindians the same as europe belongs to europeans.

Europe belongs to europeans the same as America belongs to Amerindians.

Time to go back or get replaced, monkeys.

>>9616794
Which amerindians had those superior genetics? Are these important genes continuing on in populations today?

>>9616794
I'm also from Amerindian descent, Pablo.

>>9616806
As both 3 craddles of cultural development and civilization in North-meso and South America had a higher development rate than europeans, and Amerindians diverged mainly after 12000BC approximately, a single Amerindian person is worth more than the entire subhuman european population plaguing Americas.

>are these
They are as present as the survivors of any eurangutan massacre made by indoeuropean, roman, sea peoples, mongols and arabs.

Amerindians have more civilization potential than europeans. How is this hard to get?

>>9616808
Ok.

do we really need 10 threads on this

You morons aren't even reading the whole thing.

Stop making these threads.

You will never be smart enough to understand human genetics and evolution. Brigading anime message boards is not going to make you any less retarded or worthless.

Racism is for people that no accomplishments or self esteem. The hard reality is that people do not have to tolerate or accept your stupidity and uselessness just because you are white.

>>9616794
>America belongs to Amerindians the same as europe belongs to europeans.
Why? Last time I checked Europe wasn't actually conquered and is just virtue signaling its genetic composition away. It seems you need a very complex moral system to derive statements like this. You are probably just being a little shit.

>>9616848
>Racism is for people that no accomplishments or self esteem.

i see that you are still struggling with english

>>9616848
Notice all the ad hominems and virtue signaling. This is liberalism. I recognize this guy too. This is the same guy that thought just because you can say genetic differences between groups are small, you can conclude, without any evidence, that they don't amount to significant differences in phenotypes. Sad.

>>9616848
>You morons aren't even reading the whole thing.
You mean Reich's moral opinion, not scientific, that we must fight racism and make sure race research does not promote racism? Because that wasn't a scientific thought.

>>9616863
>This is the same guy that thought just because
Yep I'm "the same guy."

I'm the only other person on this board. It's just you and me, and I'm being paid by evil conspiracy theory boogeyman to sit online and disagree with you and troll you

>>9616854
America belongs to Amerindians the same as europe belongs to europeans is an intuitive conclusion based on America being native to America the same as europeans are native to europe. Don't you agree?

>>9616863
The old religious creationists were bad, but liberal creationists are simply repulsive.

>>9616875
you are only trolling yourself

>>9616875
You are tho'. Sad.

>>9616877
Amerindians being native to America*

>>9616875
You are a rabid SJW creationist that keeps posting this pseudoscientific crap over and over. You are not going to convince anyone.

>>9615687
do you ever wonder why youre on 4chan instead of being an accomplished, functional being? Because you cant even honestly interpret a nytimes article

>>9616863
>just because you can say genetic differences between groups are small, you can conclude, without any evidence, that they don't amount to significant differences in phenotypes.
I suppose we should assume the opposite just because you say so, based on your great acumen and understanding of science?

>>9616848
>Racism is for people that no accomplishments or self esteem

Counterexample:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Shockley

>>9616892
I'm not a "rabidd SJW."

You're just a bunch of retards that think spamming 4chan is going to change anything.

>>9616902
I don't believe it... that page says this man died in 1989, but here you are posting on 4chan. Nice to meet you, Shockley.

>>9616894
Yes, and pinker's statement SES matters more than genetics is also discarded by actual familiarity with the research. There is a lot of doublethink and outright lies in the article. You can't read it at face value and trust the author.

>>9616903

>>9616896
Again, you can't logic, and you shouldn't post here until you learn to.

>>9616903

>>9616913
>There is a lot of doublethink and outright lies in the article.
There is zero doublethink. You just have zero reading comprehension or understanding of genetics and you refuse to learn because any sort of education is "liberal brainwashing."

>>9616916
You don't realize that a bunch of assumptions made by conspiracy theorists online does not equate to rigorous scientific study.

>>9616921
You're the one with assumptions and any non-SJW can see that. You make sweeping empirical claims again and again; and when you are called out on it, you simply project. Sad.

>>9616926
What claims are you even talking about? I've made zero claims other than that you're a bunch of morons that can't read.

>>9616919
>>9616919
Did you read the article? He explains in the article that scientists should not be truthful and instead manipulate things. The key words you are looking for is "irresponsibility".

Compared with the enormous differences that exist among individuals, differences among populations are on average many times smaller

So the average white person is more different from other white people than from african pygmies or aboriginals in Australia?

He outright lies about these differences with the same tropes of more difference in groups than between groups.

>>9616941
You're only thinking in terms of visual appearance, not genetics. Like most /pol/tards you are unable to think in abstract ways or reason beyond what you can immediately see with your eyes.

>>9616947
Arguing that no substantial differences among human populations are possible will only invite the racist misuse of genetics that we wish to avoid.

He uses the word substantial later on. Seems interesting to go from small to substantial when those seem to be different magnitudes.

>>9616941
>He outright lies about these differences with the same tropes of more difference in groups than between groups.
This is literally a statistical fallacy that biologists have been peddling for a couple decades because of "much racism". Now that it is obviously that you have to look at how genes correlate together, instead of individual genes, this bullshit is slowly going away, but it actually isn't even valid on its own. Small genetic differences can cause very large phenotype differences. Larger genetic differences can cause smaller phenotype differences. The whole thing is a confused lie propagated by virtue signaling idiots that can neither math nor logic.

"You will sometimes hear that any biological differences among populations are likely to be small, because humans have diverged too recently from common ancestors for substantial differences to have arisen under the pressure of natural selection. This is not true. "

>small
>says not small in the same article

>>9616948
Yes, but as the article says we can measure exactly what those differences are. Just because those differences aren't what you want them to be doesn't mean it's a conspiracy.

Like all racist ideology you assume that because two people look different they must be fundamentally different. You also think you can assume those differences translate into anything you want.

I can tell you right now that the majority of genetic differentiation is found in the immune system. The largest thing humans would have to adapt to in any environment is the other animals and diseases they carry.

>>9616959
Learn what context is.

>>9616967
>substantial differences
>not small differences

hmmmm

>>9616971
Use context clues. Maybe there are other words in those sentences, or sentences around those that can help you. You can do it. I believe in you.

>>9616974
No, he pretty much explains in multiple sections that we differ a lot. He uses the word substantial in the closing. The "small differences' was a SJW appeasing paragraph about not being racist. He almost immediately discredits in the more substantive paragraphs.

Leftypol sci mods BTFO. Delete this thread fast, or no shekels this month.

>>9616894
Wow, leftsist use shaming as arguments, color me surprise.

>>9616947
>>9616963
The irony and misrepresentation here is astounding. *Racists* are usually the ones who are constantly correcting their critics regarding this intentional misrepresentation of their argument. Racists care little what color other races are, it has always been about what they believe is a difference in genetics.

>>9617020
What will be left? The puppetmasters who programmed these leftists drones are now speaking things closer to reality. Their programmers are even beginning to agree with genetics and race realism. They can't even use the regurgitated arguments they swallowed. Nothing is left but childish and helpless screeching.

>>9617026
They will represent the "racists" as 85 IQ rednecks screaming fuck blacks. Then try to occupy the genetics argument for themselves while ignoring people like murray

>>9617028
There is going to be a backlash. We might see white and asian males in academia go full fash in a very short period of time.

>>9617030
>>9617026
All you have to do is go to /pol/ and see for yourself.

>>9616921
Leftist logic

>>9617033
I wonder how many white males in academia are actually white and not (((white))). We also know who controls the funding so humanity is pretty much over at this point. Even if there will be an active group of scientists, I bet they all will be beaten by antifa or other shit.

>>9617033
Your fantasies are childish and laughable.

>>9617034
t. Genelet

>>9617033

The future belongs to the high-IQ races.

>>9617049
Nah, the most optimal outcome would be America belonging to Amerindians the same as europe belongs to europeans.

I believe this is pretty much intuitive, though.

>>9615687
Meanwhile, rigorous population genetic methods show that humans differ most in genes relating to pigmentation, lactose tolerance etc.
The idea of Europeans being genetically "superior" superior to the savage negroes is romantic and attractive, but sadly not very supported by scientific research.

>>9617081
It is supported by real life observations. If scientific theories fail to explain reality, there is a problem with science, or better say, (((science))).

>>9617081
>scientific research

They are just inching their way from lysenkoism my pal.

>>9617081
>>9617088
The subject of "genetic superiority" is not a scientific subject and should have no bearing in race research.

"Superiority" is not something you measure (what science is interested in), it's something you interpret. Is having a hard shell "superior" to having wings? Is an electron "superior" to a positron? Is methane "superior" to hydrochloric acid?

Imagine if in a thousand years all Europeans are extinct and there are only negroes left. Who would really the "genetically superior" one here?

>>9617106
You argued against yourself in the same post. I hope you can realize this.

>>9617106
You can measure violent behavior tendency and analytical skills.

>>9617106
The fact that Amerindians had a higher development rate than europeans making them have more civilization potential than europeans, is a racial subject. The conclusion of this would be Amerindians being superior to europeans, as civilization has been praised in all history.

>>9617120
Perhaps, but equating violent behavior or analytical skills to "superiority" is not science.

>>9617124
An interesting question for sociology or history, but not science.

>>9617133
>question
There is not a single question over there. Consequential hypothesis made from the fact that Amerindians are superior to europeans, can be questions though.

Amerindian superiority is an important scientific matter, are you denying it?

>>9617133
Abstractly and hypothetically.

If we set up say 1000 controlled environments and then used synthetic biology to create some genetic variants of any organism. We populate the controlled environment with said genetics and observe propagation, competition, and what equilibrium or end states are arrived at.

In this case we could measure the genetic superiority of each organism with respect to the competitors in each environment.

We could measure the magnitude of each "superiority" relative to one another. Since we have controlled for everything besides genetic differences.

Such things as intelligence, strength, or whatever would not need to be measured directly in the organism. In the case where it is say yeast such things wouldn't even exist.

Yet, at the end of such an experiment we could scientifically analyze the genetic superiority ranking of each modification in this isolated controlled experiment.

>>9617068
The top countries by iq are all Asian:

Hong Kong (108), Singapore (108), South Korea(105), Japan(105), China (105). Italy is at the top of Europe at 102 and a lot of people say Italians are not white.

Take the average in Latin America (86) and compare it with the US (96) or countries like France (98), it's not even average, that's the same difference, around a 10 point gap.

Now take the average Latin person, see how retarded he/she is? that's how white people look to the REAL master race, Asians, you need to learn your place subhuman trash.

>>9617133
Its only up to definition of superiority.

>>9617160
Not really. It's just the person is mistaking the high complexity for impossibility. We should be skeptical of any superiority proclamation simply because the variables involved are complex relative to our brains and our ability to set up such experiments.

Not that the idea of genetic superiority is something stupid.

>>9617158
>how white people look to the REAL master race
Let me talk about the REAL master race.
The Elite of Western World.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi_Jewish_intelligence
>The average IQ score of Ashkenazi Jews has
been calculated to be from a range of 110–115,
higher than any other ethnic group in the world.

>how white people look to the REAL master race
Let me talk to you about the
REAL master race.
The Elite of Western World.
aka the Chosen People

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi_Jewish_intelligence
>The average IQ score of Ashkenazi Jews has
>been calculated to be from a range of 110–115,
>higher than any other ethnic group in the world.

>>9617158 >>9617173
*Blocks your path integral*

>>9617173
> we are tired of this black violence and stupidity
> SHUT UP race is not real, it is just capitalism and white supremacy
> but we have some facts, for example iq...
> hehe, you said IQ, but don't you know that jews have the highest IQ. Now you sound really stupid, right.

>>9615687
- Harvard Geneticist, David Reich in NY times.

>>9616027
- David Reich
- 3rd Reich

Sieg Heil!

>>9617184
What's the purpose of this post?
America belongs to Amerindians the same as europe belongs to europeans.

Go whine about black people there.

>>9616021
>idea that people are equal on all level
[citation needed]

I'm pretty sure it's /pol/ spreading the "knowledge" that "all X are adjective1, adjective2 and adjective3"

>>9617068
>>9617158
Yet asians have much less science and math accomplishments than one would expect given their IQ, even if you look at recent history. Japan seems to be catching up, but it hasn't. So we are left with a quandary.

>>9617207
Genetics are a piece of the pie and are still mysterious. North Korea vs South Korea for instance. The macro societal system still is very important.

also scientific advancements are historically reliant on a very small slice of society and those IQ studies are across the entire population.

>>9617158
>Now take the average Latin person, see how retarded he/she is? that's how white people look to the REAL master race, Asians, you need to learn your place subhuman trash.
1. No one here talks like that. Very few people on /pol do. If you actually have a point, why do you need to absurdly exaggerate?
2. Go to /pol. Most on /pol will tell you Asians have a higher average math IQ.
3. This is an example where the mean tells you little and the distribution tells you a lot. Despite their high IQs, asians produce much less top notch scholarship than whites. This implies that whites have a higher standard deviation or fatter distributional tails.

>>9617189
>America belongs to Amerindians the same as europe belongs to europeans.
Why? Last I checked, white people have lived in the Americas on mass for hundreds of years. Three generation rule. If your grandfather was born here you belong here.

>>9617221
>North Korea vs South Korea for instance.
Last I checked North Korea has a hydrogen bomb which few countries have been able to produce. South Korea certainly has more money, but North Korea is not full of idiots.

>>9617229
So you agree with european replacement?

>>9617235
Sure north korea compared to other similar structured countries is amazingly competent. Compared to south korea though they are not flourishing.

>>9617237
Where do you get that from? I am against immigration from non white countries into Europe. I am for repatriation of recent immigrants. The grandfather rule is very simple.

>>9617221
>North Korea vs South Korea

This

North Korea vs South Korea have the same high average IQ (105)

but while South Korea is now a Rich country
North Korea is a Miserable Shithole Dictatorship.

East Asians dominated the hardware industry.
>>9617158
South Korea's Samsung dominates the Android Smartphones Industry.
Japan has the best Electronic Components (such as batteries & capacitors), PlayStation Console, & the best Cameras.
China & Taiwan dominates Computer hardware.


North Korea is a poor shithole, but they can build Nuclear Missiles. Although dirty Indian pajeets can do the same.

>>9617240
Simple. Amerindians are native to America the same as europeans are native to europe.

If native origin of early populations is the direct cause of owning a land, therefore America belongs to Amerindians the same as europe belongs to europeans. Don't you agree?

>>9617235 >>9617245
North Korea can make hydrogen Bombs and Nuclear Missiles.

North Korea is poor only because the USA sanctions.

North Koreans have high 105 IQ.

>>9617250
The history of north korea is a little more complex. They lost all infrastructure in the korean war and many other hindrances. That being said the governmental system is inferior to free market.

>North Korea vs South Korea

This

North Korea vs South Korea have the same high average IQ (105)

but while South Korea is now a Rich country
North Korea is a Miserable Shithole Dictatorship.

>>9617246
No. Amerindians were conquered. That is the rule of the jungle. I think they deserve autonomy because of my Western values. However, I am just as native to the US as any Indian at this point because my family has lived here for generations. That is where the grandfather rule comes in. We have long found that people don't truly start integrating until the third generation. So if your grandfather was born here, you are native.

Your logic is time frame dependent too; you just don't know it. Amerindians are the result of several migrations, including migrations of proto-European peoples. You have a cut off date, but you just don't define it, probably because you didn't bother to think and are just looking for "gotchas".

East Asians dominated the hardware industry.
>>9617158
South Korea's Samsung dominates the Android Smartphones Industry.
Japan has the best Electronic Components (such as batteries & capacitors), PlayStation Console, & the best Cameras.
China & Taiwan dominates Computer hardware.

>>9616027
David, Shlomo wants to see you RIGHT NOW!

>>9617255
>rule of the jungle
Then you agree with european replacement, then.
>time frame dependent
The earliest populations in Americas were Q haplogroup populations who came in 26000BC approximately and occupied North western Canada and Alaska. The occupation of the rest of the continent didn't happen until 16000BC. from these peoples. R haplogroup populations invasion happened circa 8000BC. More Q haplogroup divergent populations came in the middle ages called Inuits.

Europe earliest populations came in 40000BC, subsequent migrations of other haplogroups happened since 30000BC, neolithic farmers migrated to europe since 10000BC. Invaders from siberia, eastern europe steppe and anatolia occupied central and northern europe mainly since the mesolithic to the bronze age (3800BC).

The parallelism is pretty much intuitive. America belongs to Amerindians the same as europe belongs to europeans. If you agree why are you still whining over here?

>>9617268
>The parallelism is pretty much intuitive. America belongs to Amerindians the same as europe belongs to europeans. If you agree why are you still whining over here?
No, what I said still stands, quoting wikipedia does not help your shitty argument. Why should I continue wasting time on you?

>>9617267 >>9615687
- Harvard Geneticist, David Reich in NY times.

The (((Dean))) of Harvard and
the (((Editor))) of NY Times
are very concerned.

>>9617268
When do people become native? You didn't respond at all.

>>9617253
Yet both have low crime levels.

>>9617272
>>9617270
He is a shitty troll and you two are idiots for responding to him.

>>9617268
Modern Mexicans are half Amerindian & half Mediterranean White.

There are some pretty based and smart Cubans out there. However the average IQ of Latinos is Low.

Ancient Amerindians were advanced (Mayans, Aztecs and incans)

But today Latin American nations are far from Advanced.

>>9617158
italians are not white and never will be. fuck off u piece of trash

>>9617270
>no
>help
Except Amerindians are native to America the same as europeans are native to europe, which is demonstrated in this post.>>9617268

As this post explained >>9617246
America belongs to Amerindians the same as europe belongs to europeans.

>>9617272
See>>9617268
Early population development.
>>9617286
Except Amerindians had a higher development rate than europeans.
>>9617285
Denying historical facts will get you a truthpill from me, instead of answering with the typical eurangutan buzzword/goalshifting/lie.

Time to face the facts, chimps.

>>9617295
>Except Amerindians had a higher development rate than europeans.

Today Amerindians are either poor or Casino owners in Las Vegas.

Comparing Ancient Amerindians with Today's
is the same thing as comparing
Today Egyptian Muslims with the Ancient Egypt.

Europeans are more developed now.

Regardless if the Egyptians were Blacks, Whites or Arabs, The Europeans dominate today. This is what matters.

>>9617309
Wrong. Comparing Amerindians from 500 years ago is the same as comparing europeans from 500 years ago.

See:>>9616740
>>9616819
How is this hard to get?

>>9617311
The main difference is that
Europeans today are much more advanced than Europeans from 500 years ago.

The Greeks and Roman Empire from 2000 years ago were glorious.

But their science and are joke level when compared to modern Western Science.

Present Glory > Past Glory

>>9617321
What's the difference of civilization potential between the 500 years ago europeans and the present europeans?

>>9617253
How libtards explain this?

>>9617362
>libtards explaining anything

>>9615687
Harvard Geneticist,
David 3rd Reich

>>9615687
how this will end
>whites are more intelligent and should therefore pay more taxes than blacks
>jews are the most intelligent and should rule over everybody
>to create real equality everybody has to racemix

>>9617412
Liberals push all three of those views. Things don't have to make sense together.

>>9617362
>How libtards explain this?
I would have to see the source for these nation-wide estimates.

>>9617417

Where do liberals push for anyone paying more in taxes because they're more intelligent?

As far as race mixing goes, only the political right has ever tried to tell anyone whom they are allowed to have sex with. We've always been socially liberal to the extent that people should make their own choices and judge others by their individual worth.

celebrate with some kino citypop that /pol/ was right

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pGHhBlgOWV4

>>9615687

>>9617449

>>9617446
>Where do liberals push for anyone paying more in taxes because they're more intelligent?
They leave out the more intelligent part but they call it equity.

>As far as race mixing goes, only the political right has ever tried to tell anyone whom they are allowed to have sex with. We've always been socially liberal to the extent that people should make their own choices and judge others by their individual worth.
Go to any normal liberal group like Young Democrats and say you don't find black women attractive and don't want to have sex with them. L

>>9617446
>left-wing
>using anime girl pic (alt-right dog whistle)

>>9617362
You can't use national estimates made on the assumption that IQ should be consistent across populations with the same genetics as evidence that physical and intellectual environment aren't important.


>Ancient Amerindians were advanced (Mayans, Aztecs and incans)
If you want to say that, then Egypt and India had the oldest urban civilizations.

>>9617455
when leftypol try to create an anime girl mascot

>>9617453
>They leave out the more intelligent part but they call it equity.
Liberals opine for progressive taxation because a baseline standard of living is essential in a meritocratic society and because money loses value the more of it one has. An extra 5 bucks can be critical to someone starving but a rich guy probably won't miss it.

>Go to any normal liberal group like Young Democrats and say you don't find black women attractive and don't want to have sex with them.
I'd need to know the context of that conversation. Generally it's rude to tell someone you don't think they're attractive, perhaps for good reason.

>>9617469
>>9617455
>>9617446

>>9617462
But Indians are very intelligent. Nobody denies that. Look at how many famous indian physicists and mathematicians we had just in this century.

>Guys I care about science and research
>But only if it allows me to take away rights and oppress people

IQ threads need to be banned.

>>9617477
Read the OP article. Can't shy away from this reality anymore. The technological advancement in the field of genomics is outpacing moore's law.

>>9617481
>Academia is now the good guys because they adopt and support my racism
okay

>>9617486
Genetics is real.
Genetic differences in gene pools exist.
Behavior and intelligence is highly heritable.

For some deeper understanding: Herrit is a sign from the God of thunder. Heritable as a word is a sign from this God. Everything is linked.

>>9617472
You really have to start talking to some actual liberals, friend. Trans people say it is transphobic to not date them. Liberals are all lock step in agreement that not race mixing is racism.

>>9617486
Is there a more meaningless word than "racism" nowadays? Like who even cares when it is brought up?

>>9617486
This is why I love science. In the end truth always prevail.

An interesting note of "memes"

Did you know that the current muslim-adopted symbol of moon cescent and star originates from the ubiquitous God of thunder throughout most cultures.

The turkish flag for instance has a symbol of baal'Hadad.

The same meme that existed since ancient times is now found on flags of current muslim countries.

>>9617476
Indian diaspora communities are intelligent, partly because they're selected on the basis of their employability.
Indians in India have relatively low intelligence, partly because some parts of the country are still almost in the middle ages. The point is it's difficult to establish what a entire race's intelligence is when there are so many inputs to control for. I don't see why it's important, parts of the world that are "dumb" today were relatively advanced in the past, and as we continue to develop our understanding of biology and we engineer our physical and intellectual environments further, we'll come out with tools that make any remarkable differences in genetics less important. Just like the invention of glasses corrected for short-sightedness. Human genetic engineering will one day do away with differences that couples don't want their children to inherit.

>>9617489
>>9617495
>>9617496
Doesn't change the fact that all you really want to exterminate and already marginalized group of people.

>>9617514
you really want to exterminate them. We want to understand so that the functions executed actually have positive impact.

>>9617517
Why do /pol/tards always insist they're trying to do perform some greater good? Do you really think everyone is going to believe your garbage?

>>9617514
>I know what you REALLY want to do even though you never said that you do so you should stop taking a particular stance on a purely empirical issue

>>9617525
Clearly seeing reality leads to better predictions. Over the course of time this means less mal-investment of human resources. For instance in believing the problem is entirely environmental led to programs like head start.

>Since 1965, taxpayers have spent more than $180 billion on Head Start.[1] Yet, over the decades, this Great Society relic has failed to improve academic outcomes for the children it was designed to help. The third-grade follow-up evaluation is the latest in a growing body of evidence that should urge policymakers to seriously consider Head Start’s future.

That 180 billion dollars could have been spent in an actual way that would have helped those communities.

>>9617531
>>9617535
Continuing

For example an analysis on jobs and how which careers create the most social upward mobility in low IQ peoples (police officer) and using that to create vocational pathways would have been more effective.

Wishy-washy illusional beliefs based on "I wish this was how things worked" are ineffective, wasteful, and therefore harmful.

>>9617531
Do you really think everyone is as stupid to believe that this is just an empirical issue for you? This is clearly political and is only used to harm people.

The year 2100, most people are mutts and the only relatively pure race left are the Jewish people.

>Huh, turns out there are races after all, we must protect the Jewish people from extinction

>>9617505
This the Indian diaspora living in USA & UK are the best of them.

India is a Shithole. And Pajeets are shitty on average.

But of course in each population there are based and qualified exceptions with higher IQs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBt84HNAGwU

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

>>9617540
With the advent of genomic advancements the answer becomes increasing genetic equality to actually get better outcomes. Ignoring this factor which has the greatest impact on outcome makes no sense.

Even then what about instead of 6 children having incentives to have less in poor populations? We have done an awful job of actually preventing poverty.

>>9617514
This is a troll, but tons of liberals actually say this. The drama is intense. Many liberals actually think they and their keyboards are protecting all the world's brown children (and jews).

>>9617542
You are such a fucking retard. Yes, everyone is a nazi but for the fact social sciences publishes retarded shit.

Get over yourselves.

>>9617545
What? Jews are by far the most mixed of anyone. How hard are you shilling right now?

http://www.pewforum.org/files/2013/10/jewish-american-survey-full-report.pdf

>intermarriage rate of 58%, 71% outside of orthodox

>>9617324
More than 3 hours and no answer.

Amerindians have more civilization potential than europeans, that's what history demonstrates.

Time to deal with the facts.

>>9617542
Politics should follow after empirical observations, and you should not confuse the two.
Besides, even if races are real, that does not mean different races are more/less intelligent. Plus it doesn't even necessarily preclude any political conclusions, you could say for instance "races are real genetic categories but they aren't worth preserving" or "races are real but multicultural societies are still superior"

>>9617576
>Politics should follow after empirical observations
Politics is experimental too.

The social experiments conducted by the government are called:

PSY OPS

>>9617585
>PSY OPS
O FUGGGG

>>9617576
>multicultural societies are still superior

Sure. Compare Japan to Brazil. Brazil is much better in all aspects.

>>9615687
>David Reich
>Jewish surname and given name

A Jew defending Race Realism

I don't know who's jewing anymore

>>9617600
>Brazil is much better in all aspects.

>>9617600
At least Brazil has more ... crop land ... forests ... minerals ... oil ... natural gas ... Natural Resources ... a better nature

the culture and people by other hand .... .... ....

>>9617622
Cara, eu sou brasileiro e posso dizer com toda certeza: o Brasil é uma merda.

>>9617643
>the culture and people by other hand .... .... ....

We are low-IQ shitskins.

>>9617651
Solution: Kill all eurangutans.

Populate Americas with Amerindians.

>>9617600
I wasn't actually claiming that I was just giving an example of a liberal position that wasn't incomparable with race realism. I'm actually personally in favor of barring nonwhites from buying property in a state like Maine in order to create a mini ethno-state within the US for which there is a constitutional precedent

>>9617643
Would the amazon rainforest be more deforested if they had?

>>9617643
Imagine what would happen if we switched the populations (numbers disparity aside) and allowed the Japanese a crack at that resource-rich bitch.

>>9617124
>implying featherniggers spontaneously appeared 50,000 years after Europeans
Lay off the firewater

>>9617655
you have been shitposting about Amerindians for hours now sir I'm gonna have to pull you over and ask why you have such a big boner for the red man

>>9617678
The Japanese are extremely destructive with the environment of their Island so most likely they would destroy the Amazon and fuck up ecosystems on a global scale.
The crime would drop like hell though

>>9617678
So what happens to the world balance if we all enter genetics arms race for intelligence. At the same time people are developing AI.

The future is bizarre. If you are pumping out ever improving designer babies at the same time AI improves and we also happen to be developing IQ increasing technology for application on existing humans.

The predictability is near impossible.

>>9617685
Wrong. The earliest ancestor of Amerindians who reached Americas lived in 26000BC. Amerindians were living in polar forests for more than 10000 years meanwhile no european vanguard culture populations lived in any taiga/tundra environment for a prolonged time.
Still Amerindians shortened the time disadvantage interval so Amerindians managed to have a literal hydroengineered city bigger than Venice, and a system of irrigation imposed and extended all over the Inca empire. See >>9616740
>>9617687
Truth always seems weird for ignorant people. Amerindian truth will still be posted in this board. Don't worry.

>>9617645 >>9617651 >>9617678
But there are still some good high IQ people in Brazil right?

Latin America as a whole is backward due to corruption and poor education.

I know that South of Latin America has a sizable White and Japanese minority that are wealthier and more educated than the rest.

>>9617709
> know that South of Latin America has a sizable White and Japanese minority that are wealthier and more educated than the rest.

Yes, you are right.

>>9617709
Yes, there seems to be contagion of shit governments in South America. Maybe American and Russian meddling but I don't know enough to even guess.

Argentina has been on a decline relative to america for instance that is pretty steep.

STOP

>>9617709
>slavs, greeks, italians and spaniards
>white

lol

As someone who lives near a reservation, I know for a fact that Amerindians are backwards savages.

Ever see a middle-schooler in public with a bottle of whiskey? I have on the reservation. Ever meet anyone who is now blind and has tremors from drinking wood alcohol? I have on the reservation.
Ever see someone get zero punishment for hitting someone while driving drunk? I have; the driver was Indian and it happened on the res. His tribal court let him walk, cause he a good boy, he just didn't have that wompum growing up.

Let me know when Amerindians can do more than run gas stations and get drunk by 11AM.

>>9617722
This board was already colonized by /pol/. There is no turning back.

>>9617737
See >>9616740
Amerindian higher development rate compared to europeans will never ever be forgotten.

Amerindians have more civilization potential than europeans.

How is this hard to get?

>>9617723
Considering that even Irish and French people aren't considered White by /pol/

>>9617743
The only thing Amerindians can develop more of than Europeans is alcoholism.

>>9617740
On the plus side, it serves as a cautionary lesson to the rest of the internet that a lack of moderation doesn't lead to a place where ideas win according to their merit, but rather the exact opposite. This is because the dumbest segment of your population will also spend the most time spamming your website, believe most fervently in their "ideas," and have the most impact on discourse.

>>9617722
How to defeat /pol:
1. Don't debate unless you have a strong argument. Name calling and logical fallacies won't do. Don't repeat anything you read on Vox.
2. Don't meme unless you are very good at it.
In every thread that /pol has popped up these two rules have been broken.

>>9617569

Facts lol. Muh made up standards are facts. Right.

They did very well right up until they were BTFO to near extinction. No need to try to make more of it than it was.

>>9617755
Can you defeat a dog or a cat with a "strong argument"? No one on pol has human intelligence.

>>9617755
Nailed it.

>>9617774
And yet I guarantee most neutral observers who read this thread will side with the /pol users. They outsmarted you. The goal is to get more people to agree with them. They don't care if they convince you.

>>9617740
Why is Hitler Joe Biden-ing that Roma girl?

/pol/ will win because the bad guys always fight dirty

>>9617779
>and yet I guarantee

I don't care what you guarantee; you are one of those people without human level intelligence. "Neutral observers" on a site ruined and infested by the dumbest living segment of the human population don't matter even if you were correct on the point of that meaningless guess.

The amusing part about this whole thing is that pol inbreds are citing the "Jewish media" when the crux of their entire agenda is that everything in the media is a lie. It's almost like they're SJWs, but even less intelligent.

>>9617771
>facts lol
Amerindian higher development rate is a historical fact. See>>9616740
>extinction
Diseases destroyed Amerindian civilizations.
>1 bubonic nothing disease wipes out 40% europeans and get invaded by nomads
>20+ diesases murder more than 90% Amerindians yet Imperial Incas won most battles against any spaniard involvement before dying from epidemics
Amerindians have more civilization potential than europeans.

How is this hard to get?

>>9617786

>>9617692
67% of japan is covered with Forests
By comparison 56% of Brazil is forested
And only 33% of USA is forested.

Japan is green and friendly to environment.

You are mistaking Japan for China
Only 21% of China is forested.
China pollutes. Japan not.

>>9617801
>0.02 casinos have been erected in the reservation

>>9617753
>>9617786

It's people behaving like you that turns people to the alt right, anon.

>>9615687
>Do you think they will begin to shift positions enough to not be completely discredited by advancing genomic progress?
No. They will continue to do what they have been doing and they will do that until civilization as they know it burns, then they will do it some more. It's not a matter of simple ignorance. These people are stupid on purpose. Simply presenting them with more facts and evidence will never, ever, EVER change their minds, because they delude themselves willfully. Facts do not, never did, and never will matter to them. Distance yourself from this pack of lemmings before it's too late and let Darwin weed them out.

>>9617801
>Amerindian higher development rate is a historical fact.
yes look at their situation now (poverty)

>>9617831
Except Amerindians have demonstrated a higher development rate than europeans. Therefore, Amerindians have more civilization potential than europeans.

Isn't this intuitive, though?

>>9617825
It's monkey IQ that turned you to the "alt right." If you weren't the equivalent of a monkey to begin with, you'd be agreeing with me, not getting triggered.

>>9617852
It's funny to see people using intentional memes created by the people they detested. Low IQ monkey is such a good meme huh?

>>9617852
We are all monkeys from a cladistic viewpoint, ignoramus.

>>9617837
>Except Amerindians have demonstrated a higher development rate than europeans.

>>9617935
You missed the fine print.
>if we only look at one tribe, the Maya, out of hundreds, and only compare them to Northern European tribes living in a frozen tundra
SCIENCE!

>>9615687
Wendy a cute

>>9617158
Actually, thats not quite true (for the European populations). The last real IQ study done on various populations was the Buj IQ study. And in that study, the IQ average across various European groups ranged from 98 to ~106 (after normalization). France was at 98, while Netherlands was at 106 iirc.

chrome-extension://oemmndcbldboiebfnladdacbdfmadadm/http://dienekes.awardspace.com/articles/greekiq/iq.pdf

>>9618010
>Netherlands 106 IQ

Was it before or after the legalization of marijuana?

>>9618026
after time travel was invented and they went back in time to give neanderthals IQ tests.

>>9617755
>how to defeat /pol
Defeat them at what? They've fabricated a strawman in which nobody in academia has ever admitted that different genetics can lead to different outcomes and then claimed people are finally coming over to their camp, which was right all along.

There's so much wrong with this it's hard to know where to start arguing.

>>9617158
Who cares about IQ? That increases with development. You can't know anything important about differences in frequency of genotypes by just looking at phenotypes that have complex environmental inputs. Also, where is your data coming from?

>>9618030
>playing a losing strategy
stupid cuck

>>9618030
>They've fabricated a strawman in which nobody in academia has ever admitted that different genetics can lead to different outcomes
Your quantifiers are cute. You aren't smart.

>>9617455
for /pol/, anime girls are escapism

they medicate their posts because they're afraid of finding ugliness upon introspection.

>>9618034
how to defeat me:
1. Don't debate unless you have a strong argument. Name calling and logical fallacies won't do.

>>9618030

>You can't know anything important about differences in frequency of genotypes by just looking at phenotypes that have complex environmental inputs. Also, where is your data coming from?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5501872/

Oh sweety...

People like Reich are only trying to lesson the backlash that is inevitable as these liberal truisms are scientifically debunked. Japan and China don't give a fuck about Political Correctness, so research on race will happen and will be widely known thanks to the internet. The liberals did a disservice to their pets by claiming race wasn't real, racial intelligence was a myth, and all other types of PC junk. You can't call everyone racist for decades for holding views you say are "scientifically wrong" and expect an easy transition when your lies are exposed. People are not going to care about being called racist anymore. This will happen within ten years.

Oh shit das raycis

>>9618044
Somethings need to be mocked. Phrases like "nobody in academia has ever admitted" are only written by trolls who care really deeply about always having an out in internet debates.

>>9618045
thanks for citing the source of a counter point, the existence of which you can allude to, but appear to be unable or for whatever reason unwilling to explain concisely in a post.

>>9618054
You don't make sense. Why would I waste time on trash?

>hurr of course we agree with this
>but of course GWAS and other techniques don't work because it's too complex

I would engage with you if I sniffed an iota of intelligence.

>>9618053
Go visit the_donald sometimes.
Generalizations like this are a dime a dozen and often pants on head retarded without the slightest hint of irony.

>>9618053
It's true though. People in academia who do speak out about this do so in a doublethink way. Anyone even interested in the reality of the situation is ostracized.

You can't say "we aren't practicing lysenkoism" while stopping huge areas of research, study, and inquiry and excommunicating anyone interested in the subject.

>>9617943
Wrong.
Amerindian selection pressure of arctic climates for more than 10000 years is shared by all Amerindians. Both 3 crades of culture and civilization in North-meso and South America had a higher development rate than europeans. Therefore Amerindians have more civilization potential than europeans.

How is this hard to get?

>>9618057
It's not enough to just point out that differences in phenotype correspond strongly to differences in genetics at some loci. You also have to demonstrate that corresponds in some meaningful way to modern race >>9618057

I think you and other /pol/tards are making the mistake of treating heritability of a phenotype as synonymous with degree to which it is caused by genetics. Let me give you an example. A few hundred years ago, wearing earrings was a highly heritable phenotype, because only women did it, thus it corresponded strongly with genetic difference (as all women differ in their sex chromosomes from men). Nowadays, it's more weakly inherited, because it's more common for men to wear earrings than it used to be. Does an explanation for the difference necessitate microevolution? Of course not. an environmental change to gender norms produced the difference in results, but the genetic change was maintained between the sexes.

My point is, we can correlate a given trait with differences in genetics at some particular loci in our chromosomes, and those can also differ between races. But that certainly by itself doesn't make differences between races inevitable. Intellectual environment and physical environment can change, even genetics can change as birthrates fall with development.

>>9618057

I think you and other /pol/tards are making the mistake of treating heritability of a phenotype as synonymous with degree to which it is caused by genetics. Let me give you an example. A few hundred years ago, wearing earrings was a highly heritable phenotype, because only women did it, thus it corresponded strongly with genetic difference (as all women differ in their sex chromosomes from men). Nowadays, it's more weakly inherited, because it's more common for men to wear earrings than it used to be. Does an explanation for the difference necessitate microevolution? Of course not. an environmental change to gender norms produced the difference in results, but the genetic change was maintained between the sexes.

My point is, we can correlate a given trait with differences in genetics at some particular loci in our chromosomes, and those can also differ between races. But that certainly by itself doesn't make differences between races inevitable. Intellectual environment and physical environment can change, even genetics can change as birthrates fall with development.

The stupidity is astounding in your post. Your initial point is to compare something easily modified like a hole in your ear with something like intelligence or a physical trait. The variability of earring usage is not comparable to the variability of intelligence and does not therefore show intelligence changes similarly.

You are using a horrible example to prove a point in your entire first paragraph.

Your 2nd paragraph, is entirely doublethink. Genetics changing over time is not a massive thing no one on /pol/ thought about you fucking retard. That's like half the posts in any such thread is about dysgenics and changes in genetics to the detriment of society.

>>9618097
>A few hundred years ago, wearing earrings was a highly heritable phenotype, because only women did it, thus it corresponded strongly with genetic difference (as all women differ in their sex chromosomes from men). Nowadays, it's more weakly inherited, because it's more common for men to wear earrings than it used to be

Imagine using such a silly and low IQ argument as this. I am going to point out a trait that no one would think is related strongly with genetic change and show how it changes over time.

A fucking choice of earring is not comparable to cognitive function.

>>9618097
GWAS uses large hopefully homogenous sample sizes of 500k+ people to determine through statistical methods.

A simple background http://publications.lib.chalmers.se/records/fulltext/164102.pdf

These are not bumbling results from idiots. Using an example such as earring usage to try to discredit such studies is infantile.

>>9618114

I'm not trying to discredit the study you posted, I'm just reading into it a different conclusion than what I think lots of people on /pol/ might take from it (the idea that because a trait corresponds strongly to a genetic difference, it's worth treating the trait as inevitable). There's a lot that happens in translation between gene and phenotype.

What I provided was an example of a phenotypic difference that corresponded strongly to a genetic difference, but could be virtually wiped out just by making some changes to the environment (without changing the population's genetics).

One might argue that changing social mores seems generally easier and more within the control of humans than whatever differences in physical and intellectual environment load on intelligence or autoimmune function. While I wouldn't entirely disagree, I think science will eventually understand the inputs, but more importantly is how rickety the entire enterprise of categorizing people's genetic propensities by race is, or how we treat race as static identity, or that every time someone correlates race with some biological function that's immediately used to bolster these whole mythologies surrounding race and to sell them to laypeople.

>>9618112
But your choices influence your development

>>9618128
>earrings corresponded strongly to a genetic difference
No they don't. You are asserting something not proven. Of the women who have an earring piercing is there a genetic pattern that separated them from those don't?

Your assertion, that genetics could predict earring usage, is not proven. It is most likely wrong as well. With a complete GWAS study with a huge sample size on such women in the time period we would probably not develop good predictive power for whether they have a piercing or not.

You are completely full of shit. Also intelligence has a lot of information you should learn on it. Such as the relative conservation of intelligence-influencing genetics and that the identified genes have been shown to alter biological processes related to the brain.

"Our study identified a large number of genes linked to intelligence. Importantly, we were also able to identify some of the biological processes that genetic variation appears to influence to produce such differences in intelligence, and we were also able to predict intelligence in another group using only their DNA."
Dr David Hill
Centre for Cognitive Ageing and Cognitive Epidemiology

>>9618137
For instance in the earring case. 80% of white women in 1900 had an earring piercing. Would a genome-wide association study create a function that would predict a random sample's piercing to a higher accuracy than 80%?

That is what you look for if you are looking for genetic influences. The assertion that such a GWAS would result in a very accurate prediction function is what would be needed to say it is genetically linked.

The idea it suddenly went from highly genetically linked to not at all is not proven. Could there be some genetic predisposition in a population to getting piercings? Yes. You would need to post a GWAS on such a thing or provide evidence before asserting such a thing is so.

>>9618137
>No they don't. You are asserting something not proven. Of the women who have an earring piercing is there a genetic pattern that separated them from those don't?
You really shouldn't be nitpicking this argument, because it's not something that can be contested. In Europe in the Victorian era, it was very common for women to have their ears pierced, and extremely uncommon for men. There would have been a strong genetic difference. It's not difficult to find examples like this where heritability (degree to which a phenotypic difference corresponds to a genetic difference) diminishes with just a change in the environment; just look for traits where there's a lot of social bullshit that corresponds to some obvious genetic difference. For example, literacy rates and skin color in the US before and after emancipation

>>9618146
Except when looking for a predictive model that is looking for genetical causes you would not use a heterogenous sample.

Within the sample of females alive at the time would you be able to create a function that guesses yes/no on piercing better than chance.

If it is 100% then a function that incorporates genetic variation would perform equal to one that didn't.

>>9618144

Perhaps the current range of environments a human might find themselves in supply protein A, but one needs protein B along with A to demonstrate higher IQ. Only European people make protein B. Africans make protein C but that's no good for higher intelligence unless the environment supplies protein D. So the way irritability of IQ changes in this example is we give black people supplements for protein B or the environment changes and supplies protein D instead of A (in which case blacks would have higher IQ than Europeans thereafter).

It doesn't matter if the trait was 100% heritable. That was obviously an example to illustrate a principle of course, exaggerated for effect. In reality high IQ does not correspond nearly that strongly to race in the first place. Thus my point, it's silly to treat racial identity as static the way /pol/ does, let alone their readiness to read so much race mythology into any claims made in science of discovery of biological difference corresponding to race.

>>9618173
This is why GWAS control as much as possible for those factors. Hence GWAS using UK biobank only use white british genetics. This is why there is an increasing push to sequence genetics of all sorts of different people around the world in different environments and of different races.

>>9618173
Also just so you know one of the potential cataclysmic events.

African Americans have some variance of European ancestry, sometimes 10-60% but averaging in the 20s.

when you do a large-scale high powered GWAS on a huge sample size of african americans with respect to intelligence the results will be the ones academics don't want to see. Especially when they compare it to studies of European people.

The results I can only guess but we will probably see that the higher intelligence african americans tend to all follow a similar trend.

>>9618163
>Within the sample of females alive at the time would you be able to create a function that guesses yes/no on piercing better than chance.

You got it the wrong way around. You wouldn't start with a population exclusively of females. The difference in sex chromosomes just happens to reflect the loci that are more frequently read among the portion of the sample wearing earrings.

Hey guys what is going on here???

http://www.unz.com/isteve/reich-in-nyt-how-genetics-is-changing-our-understanding-of-race/
>Similarly, most of the genetic and phenotypic variations among members of an extended family are among individuals as well, but that doesn’t mean Extended Family Does Not Exist. Indeed, the genetic arithmetic is pretty similar for the relative size of similarities and differences by race and the relative size of similarities and differences by extended family such as nephew/niece and grandchild.

Race is a spook

>>9617412

>>9615687
>Reich
i should have guessed. For real though, it's about time people started to accept the reality we live in and try to change it for the better, instead of trying to bully people into accepting a falsehood like absolute equity

>>9618247
All negations of spooks are also spooks.

>>9618185
You obviously don't understand how GWAS works. GWAS is for finding genes, not allele frequencies between populations.

On a side note, if blacks really had different genetics for intelligence then GWAS study would have allowed us to find all the genes for intelligence instantly. We are able to find genes most easily when we know the traits are different between populations. The facts that it has been studied for so long and that our statistical power is so great with human genetics is evidence enough your ideas about race are garbage.

>>9618754
your post doesn't make any sense

>>9617585 >>9617595

4chan itself is a huge PSY OP

>>9617477
>ban the research
Looooooooooooooooool fuck you you galileo persecuting, lyshenkoist anti-Jewish physics fuck

>>9619518
>Persecuting Galileo

And killing Copernicus

>>9619497
You are either a button pusher or a coke machine in this life, friend.

>>9619565

>>9615687
The whole "don't investigate the difference between the races" came in response to the Nazis after they lost the war and the Jews took over. It is bullshit science, based on feelings and helps to flood white Western countries with shitskins and promote white genocide.