Paper show IQ being tied to epigenetic

[Anonymous No.10053634]

Title of the paper published in nature "Epigenetic variance in dopamine D2 receptor: a marker of IQ malleability?"

Why are we losing /sci/?

Was based Plomin wrong from the beginning?

[Anonymous No.10053641]

>>10053634
https://www.fabresearch.org/viewItem.php?id=12047
"In this study, we were able to observe how individual differences in IQ test results are linked to both epigenetic changes and differences in brain activity which underlie environmental influences." The researchers are hoping to conduct more in-depth studies to determine the extent of environmentally-induced neurobiological modifications, as well as the degree to which these modifications affect IQ test performance."

OH NO NO NO NO!!!

[Anonymous No.10053647]

>>10053634
What does neonatal circumcision do to neurological function?

[Anonymous No.10053649]

>>10053634
>Based paper that wont be reproducible
>lets draw a bunch of crack political conclusions about it guys
fuck off, Jew nigger.

[Anonymous No.10053651]

>>10053649
Read the paper you lying piece of shit

[Anonymous No.10053654]

>>10053651
I read it, it was nothing but filth lies and malice.

[Anonymous No.10053656]

>>10053649
Lmao. Most of race realism papers came from the pioneer fund, a movement which has ties with the third Reich and eugenics, your papers certainly has more grounds being politically motivated.
Anyway, I've read the paper, it was peer reviewed, so you're wrong

>>10053654
Weirdly, you debunk it nowhere, because you didn't read it

[Anonymous No.10053666]

>>10053656
Its such a goofy premise I dont have to draw out a point by point "demonking" You stupid shit.

[Anonymous No.10053671]

>>10053666
>SEETHING
you humiliated yourself

[Anonymous No.10053674]

>>10053671
>Seething
Keep imagining shit that isnt there, you sad little animal.

[Anonymous No.10053683]

>>10053674
I'm right though, you're unable to debunk the paper in any way

[Anonymous No.10053685]

>>10053634
>>10053641
>your IQ is influenced by the environment you live in
>the environment you live in is influenced by your race and the race of your neighbors
commies and minorities btfo

[Anonymous No.10053688]

>>10053634

yeah no shit, epigenetics is a thing.

does not imply that it's only environmental.

nothing new going on

[Anonymous No.10053690]

>>10053683
>you cant bebunk
Settle down chaim.

[Anonymous No.10053697]

>>10053685
Making unproved claims doesn't mean that you're free of debunking the paper, which actually disprove your very claim

>>10053688
It show that environment has a much greater factor than a lot thought

>>10053690
https://www.fabresearch.org/viewItem.php?id=12047

[Anonymous No.10053701]

>>10053697
>https://www.fabresearch.org/viewItem.php?id=12047
>according to academic research from Berlin

That cant be trusted.

[Anonymous No.10053702]

>>10053701
Germans are based though

[Anonymous No.10053703]

>>10053697

only retards believed that the environment wasn't important.

[Anonymous No.10053707]

>>10053701
doing yourself a disservice by being a paranoid retarded beligerent. You didn’t read the study its not that interesting

[Anonymous No.10053711]

>>10053707
>Feigning intellectual retardation
You know the Germans are so indoctrinated that they would never, under any circumstance, suggest genetics had to do with anything.

Rerunking is not required.

[Anonymous No.10053713]

does this mean a squirrel will attain human level intelligence if it is in the correct environment? no? then intelligence is still overwhelmingly genetic

[Anonymous No.10053714]

>>10053713
You're comparing intelligence between species you utter retard

[Anonymous No.10053717]

>>10053714
>This only applies to humans
You stupid fuck. You're incapable of any form of critical thought.

[Anonymous No.10053719]

>>10053714
if intelligence differences between species is genetic then intelligence differences within species is genetic too

[Anonymous No.10053721]

>>10053717
>>10053719
Why is there people this retarded in this board?
Races has nothing to do with species you retarded mong

[Anonymous No.10053723]

>>10053721
HOLY SHIT. How stupid can you be?

[Anonymous No.10053728]

>>10053721
who said anything about races dumb dumb?

there is one race, the human race, but differences in intelligence levels between individual humans is almost wholly genetic

[Anonymous No.10053731]

>>10053721
This is true. In fact there are no human races: only different hominid species living side-by-side.

[Anonymous No.10053732]

>>10053723
Human beings have the same genes 100% of them. The differences in gene expression and small variation within can be due drift with no effect, environment, can be plastic, etc. Its not the same as differences in genes between species. Not even close.

[Anonymous No.10053733]

>>10053728
Nice dogmatic claim with many counter evidences to it, such as OP that you clearly ignore

[Anonymous No.10053736]

>>10053732
>Human beings have the same genes 100% of them.

[Anonymous No.10053739]

>>10053732

no neanderthal gene admixture in african populations, no denisova in caucasians.

stfu.

[Anonymous No.10053741]

>>10053739
OH O NO NO NO

[Anonymous No.10053742]

>>10053723
I know that you bait me but you just give me excuses to bump my thread

[Anonymous No.10053743]

>>10053732
genetic cluster studies show that to be false

species differentiate, and humanity is no exception

[Anonymous No.10053744]

>>10053736
>>10053739
OP here, stick to the topic, don't try to escape the debate with other anons since you're getting BTFO.
Study show that epigenetic has great effect in IQ, keep seething

[Anonymous No.10053745]

>>10053744
>since you're getting BTFO.
I dont think you understand what that word means, let alone, possess the situational awareness to apply it to this thread.

[Anonymous No.10053750]

>>10053743
looks like a map of Japan

[Anonymous No.10053754]

>>10053745
Not him but
"5500+ SNPs explain a mere 4% Of the variance"
"Epigenetic modification of one site alone is associated with 2,7% of variance"
OH NO NO NO NO

[Anonymous No.10053758]

>>10053745
but I was the same anon in both of these answers

>>10053688
>>10053703

I was simply pointing at the fact your claim about 0 gene difference, nothing more.

[Anonymous No.10053768]

>>10053758
Nice falseflagging retard

[Anonymous No.10053775]

>>10053768

what am I supposed to do, use a name and be a namefag?

I was simply stating that there are differences in genes between "groups", not their meaning or superiority.

[Anonymous No.10053777]

>>10053743
>>10053739
>>10053736
those are not "gene groupings", its a bunch of SNPs that differ in frequency. IE small variations in the same genes.
Thanks for proving that you're all brainlets

[Anonymous No.10053784]

>>10053743
>>10053739
Those are genetic frequencies retards. Which leads into population level frequencies which happen to average out into what we consider ethnic profiles, which depict a differential frequency.

>>10053777
/pol/ ruined this board like they ruin everything else

[Anonymous No.10053785]

>>10053758
As usual its the same, NPC esque dialogue. A repeated regurgitation of these false facts, as if theyre true.

What are you going to do when designer babies start crushing your unmodified kids in every aspect of their lives? Are you still going to make these irrational claims?

[Anonymous No.10053789]

>>10053785
>>10053758
Nice samefagging

Friendly reminder that no one was able to debunk OP's paper

[Anonymous No.10053792]

>>10053789
>You haven brebrunked anything
Just kys.

[Anonymous No.10053795]

>>10053792
Circumcise yourself. Imitate the obelisk and embrace the mark of servitude.

[Anonymous No.10053797]

>>10053792
>SEETHING

[Anonymous No.10053800]

>>10053797
>repeats the same stale line
Why do NPC's always do this?

[Anonymous No.10053803]

>>10053777
>>10053784

and don't SNP differences, which cluster, mean something?
Doesn't look random

[Anonymous No.10053807]

>>10053800
HI anon, can you respond to my post >>10053754 let's see how far your knowledge goes6

[Anonymous No.10053808]

>>10053800
Following a suitable detection system, NPCs need to be put into forced labor camps.

[Anonymous No.10053812]

>>10053800
>>10053808
>samefagging this hard

[Anonymous No.10053816]

>>10053812
No.

[Anonymous No.10053817]

>>10053812
AND ANOTHER REPEAT.

You're fucking pathetic, you little slimeball.

[Anonymous No.10053818]

>>10053817
Another diet fed by crippling defeat. And I am waiting for that sense of relief, I am waiting for you to flee the scene.

[Anonymous No.10053819]

This thread unironically display how ignorant /pol/ is, everytime they get BTFO, they resort to buzzwords and shitposting to avoid studies.
Being so politically motivated isn't healthy, I say this as a right winger, maybe being a civic nationalist help me to look at science more objectively

>>10053817
>>10053816
Ignoring OP's study while using proxy or different device to claim that you don't samefag is worst

[Anonymous No.10053824]

>>10053817
Shut the fuck up retard. You proved that you don't know how genes work in this very thread

[Anonymous No.10053825]

>>10053819
No.

[Anonymous No.10053830]

>>10053825
Saying no isn't a answer anon

[Anonymous No.10053833]

>>10053830
athere are problems listed in the fucking discussion stop arguing with 16 year old sociopaths you massive faggot

[Anonymous No.10053834]

>>10053824
>all humans share 100 percent gene, it is true
>You dont know how genes work

Sure bud, just like theres only one guy in this thread that doesnt agree with your insane drivel.

[Anonymous No.10053836]

>>10053830
No!

[Anonymous No.10053839]

>>10053834
Take a course about genes expression you utter retard

[Anonymous No.10053843]

>>10053833
Write in English next time

[Anonymous No.10053849]

>>10053833
>recognizes genetic differences
>Is sociopath because of this
I know it pains your frail little ego to admit you're genetically inferior, but its an unavoidable truth, ok sweetie. Theres people out there that are better then you, and you will never be equal to them.

[Anonymous No.10053853]

>>10053849
Start by debunking OP's pap...
Oh wait you can't

[Anonymous No.10053854]

I've never been wrong, I'll never be wrong.

[Anonymous No.10053861]

>>10053854
Hereditarians are getting BTFO

[Anonymous No.10053862]

>>10053843
You either didn’t read the study or don’t understand the research literature and why those problems are important
>>10053849
Fucking subhuman /pol/nigger animal, I wasn’t talking to you, go be a drain on your conspecifics elsewhere

[Anonymous No.10053865]

>>10053853
Oh, you mean the paper written IN BERLIN. Sure. Ill get right on that.

[Anonymous No.10053874]

>>10053862
Not him but this paper has more implications than most of GWAS
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2018/06/25/354951
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/early/2018/06/25/355057

[Anonymous No.10053880]

>>10053862
If you check the other research in the same field, many papers already displayed epigenetic effects of elements that could affect IQ like lead.
Here, we have a much more direct link to bio marker, with a great replication, DESPITE the listed problems, which also make previous studies much stronger

[Anonymous No.10053881]

>>10053874
Taking a look outside has more implications then any of these shitty papers. Genetics matter, you fucking dolts, and it doesnt magically stop at humans.

[Anonymous No.10053882]

>>10053880
>DESPITE
dispite*

[Anonymous No.10053884]

>>10053874

thanks, so the basic jist of if all is "SNP differences must be treated with extreme caution to avoid pitfalls"

you answered (somewhat) to my >>10053803
question here, thanks

[Anonymous No.10053888]

Genes are less then 2% of the genetic makeup of Human DNA, and they dont control things like morphology. You're not going to make any substantial claims about the differences inherent in the races until you understand the other 98%.

You can write all the blowhard papers and crunch all the numbers you want.

fucking retards.

[Anonymous No.10053891]

>>10053888
Who're you siding with exactly? Are you 1 SJW?

[Anonymous No.10053896]

>>10053891
Im the guy arguing for the annihilation of all niggers.

[Anonymous No.10053897]

>>10053896
Wireless devices and vaccinations are sterilizing them already, so don't worry. It's being taken care of. Along with you too.

[Anonymous No.10053903]

>>10053897
powerful stuff NPC. Im sure you'll be spared for your kosher beliefs.

[Anonymous No.10053916]

>>10053896
>>10053897
>>10053903
Replying to yourself isn't a argument

[Anonymous No.10053925]

>>10053916
look nigger, I know it says anonymous in the header, but that doesnt mean its the same person.

[Anonymous No.10053926]

>>10053903
I have distant Jewish heritage, but no cultural affiliation or artifacts and my phallus is not circumcised. I therefore have not fufilled the covenant as demanded by El Siddai and will most likely be exterminated with the rest.

[Anonymous No.10053929]

>>10053925
>get caught
>y-y-y-you didn't caught me

[Anonymous No.10053931]

I'll come back in 5 hours to see if anyone debunked the paper.
Because so far, /pol/ is getting more and more BTFO.
I'll be back.

[Anonymous No.10054519]

>>10053874
height isn’t iq at all and these were published in a trash journal, this isn’t at all evidence that nogs are dumb because of epigenetic vertical transfer of traits. there is no observed transfer of any epigenetic adaptation past the third generation in mice and africans already had remarkably lower iq before europeans even arrived. there is no way out of this, it doesn’t even say how much iq can be raised or lowered by these processes.
>>10053880
except everyone was fucking exposed to lead last century and iq still went up even among the poorest classes of whites and this doesn’t show that niggers have an a full standard deviation below whites because of their environment. You don’t even understand that epigenetics doesn’t fucking mean anything past one or two generations. blacks being enslaved cannot effect blacks three or four generations later and african americans have a better diet and lifestyle than africans yet still lag behind other nations with lower living standards in iq. Blacks have on avg 85-90 iq which is the exact same as Syrians and worse than vietnamese who experienced a genocidal absolutely brutal civil war where neurotoxic chemicals were introduced into the food supply en masse. There is no way this explains most of the gap, it has to be genetic. South african whites are not significantly dumber than native Dutch or Germans or Anglos so why are native africans so fucking stupid? Is it because of the stress of their home environment? Nigger the fucking steppe and european forests are stressful yet whites had significantly higher iq by antiquity than blacks have ever had.

[Anonymous No.10054534]

>Be nigger
>White man has been trying to clean me up, educate me, provides me with infrastructure, food and clean water
>For literally hundreds of fucking years in many, many places
>Still overwhelmingly violent, unintelligent criminals

Yeah definitely those epigenetics LOL

[Anonymous No.10054606]

>>10053634
>psychology

Not math or science.

[Anonymous No.10054681]

>>10054519
>height isn’t iq
You're right, it's considered as the MOST heritable trait, meaning that if it was overestimate; the same very likely apply to IQ, given all the evidences, see: https://pastebin.com/Z87Na1u0 epigenetics effects on IQ recently found.

>>10054534
https://pastebin.com/Z87Na1u0

>>10054606
Then why are IQ and heritability constantly discussed in this board?

[Anonymous No.10054685]

>>10054534
>White man has been trying to clean me up, educate me, provides me with infrastructure, food and clean water
Pic related, maybe you need to check actual history because those who preceded us weren't as nice as you think.

[Anonymous No.10054691]

>>10054519
> You don’t even understand that epigenetics doesn’t fucking mean anything past one or two generations
What are your proofs of that?

>Blacks have on avg 85-90 iq which is the exact same as Syrians and worse than vietnamese who experienced a genocidal absolutely brutal civil war where neurotoxic chemicals were introduced into the food supply en masse
None of them suffered as much and AS LONG as negroes you utter retard, literally for centuries.

>South african whites are not significantly dumber than native Dutch or Germans or Anglos so why are native africans so fucking stupid?
Because you're retarded, our ancestors who arrived in africa were ALREADY HEALTHY you dipshit.
Why is this board so much full of retards?
Jesus christ

[Anonymous No.10054705]

>>10054519
>Nigger the fucking steppe and european forests are stressful
Utterly false.

Europe received neolithic technologies from the near east (complex societies first developed in the southern peninsulas of Greece and Italy where the terrain and the Mediterranean climate quickly allowed high population densities) Mediterranean technologies were established in the northern areas and the large scale movement of deforestation cleared vast agricultural areas with fertile soils under an excellent temperate low-disease climate that led to a population boom that quickly allowed Europe to rise to global prominence.

Compared to africa which has Short growing seasons, population dispersal (slave trade included), high disease burden...etc making it hard to develop a civilization.

Literally learn history because you know jackshit about Europe and his civilization.

[Anonymous No.10054716]

>/pol/ consistently BTFO
It's like poetry, it has rhymes

[Anonymous No.10054722]

>>10054685
You don't even have to look that far back into history to see whites fucking up the Congo. Eisenhower literally ordered the CIA to assassinate the Congo prime minister because he didn't like that the guy blamed whites for fucking the Congo.

[Anonymous No.10054727]

Jesus christ this thread is beyond salvation.
both sides have engaged in widespread generalization and the discourse has become too political.
chill the fuck out

[Anonymous No.10054732]

>>10054727
Not really, the anti hereditarian at least still post source, no hereditarian debunked his claims.
Personally, I'm not fond of epigenetics but heritability estimates from twins and other kind of studies were already crap me to me.
the paper "Narrow-sense heritability estimation of complex traits using
identity-by-descent information" show it, it's overestimate because we still lack of knowledge and power to get accurate numbers, so researcher often overestimate to get what they want

[Anonymous No.10054740]

>>10054727
The centrist stuff doesn't work on me, i'm not even a leftist, I actually stick to what happened.
Everything I said came from papers from science/psychology and writings about history.
The one making generalization and lies are /pol/tards.

[Anonymous No.10054751]

>>10054732

the last thing the "hereditarians" have posted has been
https://www.fabresearch.org/viewItem.php?id=12047, correct?

>>10054740
ok maybe I've lost the links, can you repost them please?

having said that, I'm not a centrist, I simply don't give a fuck and I dunno shit about those topics but they look interesting and I'd like to know more.
but it's hard to see something in the middle of shit being flung around.

[Anonymous No.10054764]

>>10053641
Very poor quality study OP.

[Anonymous No.10054770]

>>10054751
OP here, lol no, this paper is clearly not from a hereditarian, I posted it.

I only posted this link because this site is a bitch with links that I want to post, if you want to, I can make a quick pastebin for you.

>>10054764
Just because you don't like something doesn't mean that you're free of explaining why, because anyone can assume that you're just triggered

[Anonymous No.10054782]

>>10054681
again absolutely no proof at all that epigenetics is transferrable over multiple generations
>>10054691
There are no demonstrations of it in mammals to date, ergo it doesn’t exist.
>none of them suffered as long as subhuman africans
Africans were already significantly lower intelligence than europeans even before medieval contact that’s why the europeans had Hagia Sophia and Venice while they had copies of Egyptian civilization and horribly underwhelming military might to ward of superior Semite hordes
>why is this board full of retards
the Whites living there for hundreds of years never experienced a significant loss of iq, in fact they were there almost as long as blacks had been enslaved in large numbers yet no environmental depression of iq occurred. Blacks iq goes up whenever they’re near whites for two reasons: europeans rape them into higher intelligence; european extended phenotype boosts iq
>>10054705
No you are repeating Jared Dimon’s retarded and debunked thesis. Agricultural civilization was just as possible in the Niger river delta, the Congo and Horn of Africa; it did not appear in Ethiopia either, why? There is no explanation, we find it in the Yellow River valley, the Yangtze river valley, in Central and South america, in Anatolia, in Greece, in Middle East and in the Indus Valley, India has an enormously high disease burden, foreshortened growing seasons and absolutely ghasty monsoons and all manner of apex predators yet you don’t see them complaining about low iq because they have a high civilization and always have. You’re an idiot, you didn’t think about anything you posted and you are unfamiliar with every field you’re pretending to understand. 10:1 you and the other retard are psyche majors and don’t belong here

Learn to do research on both sides before you ever make a single post on this board and do not overlook the authors’ acknowledged problems

[Anonymous No.10054797]

>>10054770

well yeah, if you have more interesting stuff, sure

>>10054764

why do you consider it a poor study?

>>10054782

where can I read more in detail about the linkage between geographic locations and societies from a more quantitative point of view?

[Anonymous No.10054799]

>>10054691
'Transgenerational Epigenetic Inheritance: Myths and Mechanisms' (Heard, Martienssen)

'A critical view on transgenerational epigenetic inheritance in humans' (Horsthemke)

you know basically nothing about what you're talking about.

[Anonymous No.10054803]

fuck iq LAMO

[Anonymous No.10054813]

>>10054782
>again absolutely no proof at all that epigenetics is transferrable over multiple generations
And you've no proof that it's impossible beyond
https://www.nature.com/articles/srep14466

>There are no demonstrations of it in mammals to date, ergo it doesn’t exist
There is already evidences, more meaningful that your twin studies and GWAS which are deeply flawed, see >>10053874
>>10054681

>Africans were already significantly lower intelligence than europeans
Evidences can explain that it's due to environment, read my post again

>in fact they were there almost as long as blacks had been enslaved in large numbers yet no environmental depression of iq occurred
Literally no proofs of this claim

>Blacks iq goes up whenever they’re near whites for two reasons: europeans rape them into higher intelligence; european extended phenotype boosts iq
Again, you can't prove that:
https://www.mdpi.com/2079-3200/5/1/1

>No you are repeating Jared Dimon’s retarded and debunked thesis
Not at all, you're just avoiding actuals arguments.

>No you are repeating Jared Dimon’s retarded and debunked thesis. Agricultural civilization was just as possible in the Niger river delta, the Congo and Horn of Africa; it did not appear in Ethiopia either, why?
Lying isn't a argument, rudimentary agriculture and metallurgy was already there but it likely didn't go beyond due to their environment, see what I said about it.

>Central and South america, in Anatolia, in Greece, in Middle East and in the Indus Valley, India has an enormously high disease burden, foreshortened growing seasons and absolutely ghasty monsoons
Not as much as Africa, you're lying about their proportion, it doesn't work on me, start by posting sources, but you can't because you say crap.

>You’re an idiot, you didn’t think about anything you posted and you are unfamiliar with every field you’re pretending to understand.
Nice projection

[Anonymous No.10054816]

>>10054799
ROFL
Scientits only started looking recently lol, they're literally criticize a field which just started. Also there is not just transgen epigenetics, you have to include all other environmental effects since the genetic + environment model used by heritability studies is falsified. see >>10053874
>>10054732

[Anonymous No.10054817]

>>10053634
What the fuck is wrong with this board these days? Why does anyone “have a side”? I thought this was a meme, but I guess not. You don’t want people to be able to improve their IQ? Why?

[Anonymous No.10054823]

>>10054813
>arguing online about intelligence
>repeatedly says "actuals", "evidences" and "a argument"
Give it a rest, Mbumbwo, nobody is fooled.

[Anonymous No.10054824]

>>10054782
>South america
Narrow temperate highlands and warm lowlands of the Mesoamerican isthmus enabled highly productive yearlong agriculture and prevented population dispersal thus leading to very high population density and civilization in isolation from the Old World, the northern areas remained underpopulated due to a vast, flat continental landmass.
South america was technologically below north america because of colder climate and a shorter growing season preventing Andine societies to achieve population densities that equaled that of Mesoamerica and for this reason, they couldn’t develop complex technologies to the same level.

>greece
Europe case was already described

>Middle East
Often called the cradle of civilization, the Middle East and North Africa reunite the optimal conditions for the emergence of complex societies. A warm, temperate climate with balanced rainfall combined with fertile valleys (Nile and Mesopotamia) allowing year-long irrigation, all enclosed by inhospitable deserts preventing population dispersal. They also got technologies because the region finds itself at the crossroads of the Old World and has dispersed then received technologies and commodities from neighboring eras.

Conlusion: You sir are retarded

[Anonymous No.10054828]

>>10054823
not him but give sauce for your claims, I want to compare them to OP paper.
Don't give me GWAS, twin study, pedigree study and family study though, according to what was posted here, they're too biased by environment.
I want to look at both sides honestly

[Anonymous No.10054836]

>>10054823
>Implying that most negroes learn english
I'm from Europe but gramatical errors do not free you from arguing.

>>10054828
They never post sources here

[Anonymous No.10054843]

>>10054799
Not OP but are all hereditarians as dumb as you?
The main point here isn't transgen epigenetic, it's that epigenetic effects show as genetic variation in studies that are used to estimate heritability.
That alone would falsify most papers about it.

>>10054813
Jesus, I agree with you but ffs learn more about English, yuropoor make this site worst

[Anonymous No.10054846]

>>10054836
I've already posted two studies that challenge the idea of transgenerational epigenetic inheritance of polygenic traits in humans you didn't read either of them because you aren't qualified to interpret them, I read your entire study its unimpressive and actually cites outdated literature from the early 00's regarding the epigenome and mammalian transgenerational inheritance, you don't know what you're talking about. If environment is important and environmental factors drive selection in the genome then obviously hundreds of thousands of years of being in sub-saharan africa are going to have serious consequences for the genetic makeup of the black race. You are not thinking causally at all about any aspect of this because you have an agenda to push.
>>10054824
Africa is no less suited to the domestication of staple crops, of useful livestock or for the development of metallurgy. There are rich mineral and ore reserves throughout the continent, multiple nutritious staple crops, and absolutely ideal conditions for farming in the Cape, you are ignoring the influence of selection over the polygenic traits that would go with not being capable of overcoming environmental factors and not migrating to more stable climates like MENA. Think about why it is that Berbers who persist literally a few hundred miles away from black populations have a higher iq and developed the civilization found in Libya. Think about why there was a vast gap in intelligence and civilization in Egypt and Ethiopia and the Sudan. Humans migrate to more habitable environments constantly, its a huge part of the reason why the Americas were colonized because that's where the herd animals hunted by the Sibero-ANE's migrated. The fact that africans remained where they did and failed at every turn to develop civilization shows something, and the fact that they remained there for so long would have an effect on their genetics especially sensitive polygenic traits like iq and culture.

[Anonymous No.10054847]

>>10054823
>>10054828
Provide me something dammit.
Why most of you here don't post sauces?
How are we supposed to take your statements seriously?

[Anonymous No.10054855]

>>10053634
blablalba

How can I increase my current IQ, where are the studies for this? It's literally all I care about, why isn't anyone funding this, provided you start at a level (say 115) where you have some more intellectual agency vs someone who is at 85, how can I raise? LSD? Exercise? Following the bredesen protocol that reverses alhzeimers and adding some more nootropics?

Cmon guys let's go to work champ let's Khabib this shit AHAHHHHHHHHHHHHH

[Anonymous No.10054856]

>>10054843
> it's that epigenetic effects show as genetic variation in studies that are used to estimate heritability
You're missing the point where is the rest of the fucking heritability coming from? the Environment? If so then what happens if a people persists in a bad environment for many generations? There's no effect on genetics? Are you saying that we can change all traits dramatically in a few hundred years of selection? Really? Europeans went from Bronze age intelligence to 103 iq on average in just the time since the industrial revolution or that took thousands of years of environmental advantages? I'm using your own logic here idiot, think before you fucking speak. And no it absolutely does not disprove polygenic heritability in fact the authors even acknowledge this in the limitations of their own study. Read the end of the discussion section, ponder the possible confounding factors and difficulties with this study and then come back and make your post. Every single person responding to me has failed to demonstrate basic scientific and evolutionary reasoning regarding the causes for these differences. Why on Earth did the Eurafricans form Ethiopia migrate into the Middle East, what is the effect of their doing that for thousands of years versus the Ethiopians and Somalids who did not, further still why is it that the Ethiopians have one of the most stable and high civilizations in Africa despite not having significantly better environmental conditions to live in, why are Berbers so much more accomplished culturally than Sub-saharans neighboring them and why do African-American blacks have an average iq of 85-90 while African blacks including in places like Ethiopia have significantly lower iq? Is it because of white environments? Is it because of european admixture? You have to rule out other factors you cannot spam a study over and over and you have to demonstrate actual ability to reason correctly.

[Anonymous No.10054862]

>>10054856
further problem, how much do these epigenetic effects alter iq? Its not clear from the study? By 1/3 of an SD? By a full standard deviation? By more or less than either? You have to demonstrate this, and then we would have to ask, ok if 'x' is the limit to this reduction in iq where does the rest of the difference come from? If your answer is transgenerational inheritance then its clear that you're not engaging with the papers I posted, if its not then it has to be polygenic heritability but then we're back to the hereditarian argument. If humans experience accelerated evolution for these traits due to technology then we're left with a modified version of the hereditarian and long-term environmental exposure argument which is not in favor of blacks and other populations being victims of some massive reduction of iq. No one believes slavery does not probably reduce fitness in populations subjected to it, that's not the point, the point is how much? Why is there such a massive difference in these populations and how long does it take to overcome them? You don't ask any questions and you display almost no curiosity but you do seem to be samefagging like a retard in this thread and flooding it with stupid posts

[Anonymous No.10054867]

>>10054862
another link to prove how stupid this argument is, look at Africa, that could only have gotten worse in the last 100 years since monocultures and mechanized agriculture destroy the viability of topsoil

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

[Anonymous No.10054871]

>>10054846
>I've already posted two studies that challenge the idea of transgenerational epigenetic inheritance of polygenic traits in humans you didn't read either of them because you aren't qualified to interpret them
I did, they provided no evidence that it CAN't be inherited for more than 3 generation, literally see >>10054816

>actually cites outdated literature from the early 00's regarding the epigenome and mammalian transgenerational inheritance
Funny that you talk about "outdated" because most of the hereditarian model hasn't made great progress since his beginning. You're clearly not getting the point of this paper, the possibility of it is what i'm talking about.

>If environment is important and environmental factors drive selection in the genome then obviously hundreds of thousands of years of being in sub-saharan africa are going to have serious consequences for the genetic makeup of the black race
You clearly don't know what you're talking about, you're only making huge assumption.

>Africa is no less suited to the domestication of staple crops, of useful livestock or for the development of metallurgy
Nice baseless claim, they had rudimentary metallurgy but it likely didn't got beyond because of what was said previously.

>There are rich mineral and ore reserves throughout the continent, multiple nutritious staple crops, and absolutely ideal conditions for farming in the Cape
Provide source + you forgot the other elements such as disease burden, population dispersal...etc

>you are ignoring the influence of selection over the polygenic traits that would go with not being capable of overcoming environmental factors and not migrating to more stable climates like MENA
Literally "it's like that just because"

>Think about why it is that Berbers who persist literally a few hundred miles away from black populations have a higher iq and developed the civilization found in Libya
Literally different environment brainlet. Post sources beside projections

[Anonymous No.10054877]

What a shit thread

[Anonymous No.10054889]

>>10054856
First, why did you reply to me as if I was OP?

>There's no effect on genetics?
You're a fucking retard if you think that evolution can happen fast, it take time, especially for our species.

>Europeans went from Bronze age intelligence to 103 iq on average in just the time since the industrial revolution or that took thousands of years of environmental advantages?
What are you talking? Why are you projecting this much?

>And no it absolutely does not disprove polygenic heritability in fact the authors even acknowledge this in the limitations of their own study
But you ignored these papers >>10053874 >>10054828
saying that a journal is trash isn't a argument

>why are Berbers so much more accomplished culturally than Sub-saharans neighboring them and why do African-American blacks have an average iq of 85-90 while African blacks including in places like Ethiopia have significantly lower iq?
You think that afro americans live in great environments? Just because it's less worst than Africa doesn't mean that it's great.
Stop projecting and start arguing honestly, you seems mad.

[Anonymous No.10054891]

Neuroscience PhD here, can someone explain to me why this is controversial? I read the paper, every reasonable person already agrees that IQ is determined by a mixture of genetic and environmental factors (although the percentage to which each contributes is debatable). Showing a role for epigenetic regulation doesn't really change any of that (especially because the major thing people focus on for determining the genetic contribution to intelligence, SNPs, aren't subject to epigenetic regulation). And I didn't see anything in it about the even-more controversial idea of epigenetic inheritance, so not sure why anyone would really care unless you were an anti-dopamine fanboy.

[Anonymous No.10054897]

>>10054856
Shitty long post is too long. Altering gene expression (explaining different physical traits for races) take more time for our species than any other, while environmental effects can persist in many and act fast.

>>10054846
>cape
Societies don't invent farming, they domesticate plants, your mistake is here

[Anonymous No.10054899]

>>10054891
What people are focused on, like you said, are contested, see >>10053874
>>10054732

[Anonymous No.10054902]

>>10054891
If you're not lying, thank god, maybe someone with a degree can answer to my response.
Who might be right here?
One side is saying that twin studies and his display of polygenic score already settled the debate but the other side (ignoring all talks about epigenetic) think that these kind of studies overestimate heritability, see >>10053874
>>10054732
Who's likely right?

[Anonymous No.10054911]

>>10054871
Stop samefagging you scatter brained retard; I will explain one last time why you aren't thinking clearly:

Environment sets the parameters for what genes are selected for, if the environment changes then selection pressures change. If eurafricans move into the fertile crescent and the steppe then their genetics should be different and this should be accelerated by technological development.

The next issue is that blacks were exposed to Semitic and European civilization multiple times for thousands of years, and American blacks have for 150 years been allowed to live among Europeans with European level technology and culture all around them yet still lag behind whites in iq and educational attainment (and black test scores in america are continuing to fall behind whites, they are not catching up by any means, this despite black living conditions being comparable to white americans' living conditions).

The next issue is that Asians have significantly higher iq and higher iq gains than blacks, again despite both being sold white technology and offered white culture.

The next issue is that African-Americans have higher iq than African Blacks, this despite African Blacks having their own countries as well as access to mechanized transportation, and farming tech.

Finally, one would expect some kind of explanation for how much environment raises iq and further exactly how long it takes, if its transgenerationally heritable, and if so what is the mechanism. Since there is none, and since its probably not just a modulation but an actual act of selection upon the genetics of the european population and it happened over ten thousand years then blacks being in Sub-Saharan africa for hundreds of thousands of years would have a serious effect on their intelligence. Those are my points, you are a fucking moron and as >>10054891 has pointed out this doesn't even begin to rule out polygenic factors at all, you didn't read the fucking discussion

[Anonymous No.10054917]

>>10054911
But anon, why do you keep ignoring papers about problems with heritability estimates?
Why do you keep going with OP about epigenetic?

[Anonymous No.10054934]

>>10054911
>Environment sets the parameters for what genes are selected for, if the environment changes then selection pressures change
natural selection is not the only nor even the main driver of evolution. Random drift and sexual selection lead to evolution without an adaptive purpose.

>and American blacks have for 150 years been allowed to live among Europeans with European level technology and culture all around them yet still lag behind whites in iq and educational attainment (and black test scores in america are continuing to fall behind whites, they are not catching up by any means, this despite black living conditions being comparable to white americans' living conditions).
Slavery, segregation...etc
See: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/us/milwaukee-segregation-wealthy-black-families.html rich blacks live in poor neighborhoods

>The next issue is that Asians have significantly higher iq and higher iq gains than blacks, again despite both being sold white technology and offered white culture.
Not slavery/segregation/harsh environment against them on the level of africans in the long term.

>The next issue is that African-Americans have higher iq than African Blacks, this despite African Blacks having their own countries as well as access to mechanized transportation, and farming tech.
Probably because the parasite/disease burden isn't as high for them, there is a study showing high correlation between parasite/disease and IQ from different countries for example.

>you didn't read the fucking discussion
I did but you're the one who ignored my point from it.

[Anonymous No.10054944]

>>10054934
>>10054911
Fucking stop with your shitty old crap political debate and talk about recent stuff: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29588506
Why do you all ignore it?
It pretty much shit on heritability estimates

[Anonymous No.10054961]

>>10054891
Samefag here, reading the thread now and seeing the shitfest seems to be focused on old school nature v. nurture rather than something juicy like transgenerational epigenetic inheritance. I'll just offer my personal opinion based on what I've read in the literature/conferences I've been to: I think there probably are genetic contributors to intelligence that vary between races and are not subject to significant environmental/epigenetic regulation (e.g., SNPs). However, I also think that by the time we fully identify what these variants actually are that genetic engineering (either CRISPR or improved versions of it) will have improved to the point that modifying people to have the ubermensch variants will be a piece of cake.

[Anonymous No.10054969]

>>10054961
>I'll just offer my personal opinion based on what I've read in the literature/conferences I've been to
Then talk about this paper: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29588506
Don't evade it, talk about the problems with heritability estimate.
OP and others barely talk about it, then do

[Anonymous No.10054989]

Fuck it, I'll make my own thread about heritability estimates.
This one is just pure crap. Retarded OP and his shit english, retarded hereditarians ignoring sources...etc

[Anonymous No.10055012]

So... what's so specifically bad about the African environment, and why does African environment follow africans around the globe?

[Anonymous No.10055032]

>>10055012
After a shitty OP, ignorant hereditarians, now we have people like you who can't read a thread.
>short growing seasons
>population dispersal
>disease burden
From this thread.

>why does African environment follow africans around the globe
Using per capita, it doesn't, latinos are also terrible against africans, more racist than us, even more than you. There is data about it.

But honestly, I'll suggest you to give up on this thread, it's shit at his core. Check catalog, I suggest you to go to the thread about heritability estimates

[Anonymous No.10055086]

>>10055032

>short growing seasons
>population dispersal
>disease burden

In the US and Europe? We have blacks here as well, you know, and they don't have a higher IQ over here.

[Anonymous No.10055111]

>>10055086
>In the US
There is data about black environment not being that great in the US, a sauce was posted in this thread about rich blacks living in shit poor communities.
For europe I don't know, never saw clear data about IQ and races in europe.
I suggest you to continue this debate in the other thread about heritability estimates, this one is too shit.

[Anonymous No.10055193]

>>10054911
Epigenetics do not produce heritable genetic changes. This is established dogma in biology.

You have no idea what you're talking about. Blacks suck because theyre black.

[Anonymous No.10055200]

>>10055193
Brilliant

[Anonymous No.10055209]

>>10055032

[Anonymous No.10055216]

>>10055111
>There is data about black environment not being that great in the US, a sauce was posted in this thread about rich blacks living in shit poor communities.
its significantly better than it is anywhere else on Earth and Blacks in the UK have similar living conditions to whites there yet still have lower iq than white chavs. Why? How long do these environmental modulations of the epigenome take to boost iq? Do they explain the entire gap? If not then what does? It would seem polygenic heritability of these complex traits, anon. That's my point and always has been my point as epigenetic adaptations do not get inherited past one or two generations.
>>10055200
>>10055209
you're both retarded faggots, fuck off if you don't have anything to add. You make the heritability argument look bad by spamming gay fucking memes. Go to >>>/pol/ if this isn't interesting to you. Or help out and actually interpret these studies and give your understanding of the literature.

[Anonymous No.10055222]

>>10055216
My understanding of the literature is that theyre nigger subhumans and theyre that way because of genetic traits shared across their populations.

[Anonymous No.10055248]

>>10053634
Hey OP did you know opioid receptors are closely tied to IQ? If you activate them with morphine then you can affect IQ scores by up to 100 per cent! IQ is thus entirely environmentally determined.

[Anonymous No.10055275]

>>10055193
>This is established dogma in biology.
>dogma

Interesting word you have there, it has a very interesting meaning...

[Anonymous No.10055279]

>>10055275
And its widely used in biology...interdasting eh.

[Anonymous No.10055755]

Why are black people and leftist so prone to denying genetics? It is low IQ and lower level of self-awareness. I see the IQ nigger is now trying to target Plomin instead of his tired old Lynn routine.

[Anonymous No.10056787]

>>10054944
Forgive my ignorance, but isn't this study saying that heritability estimates are actually being underestimated?

[Anonymous No.10057722]

>>10053666
>Its such a goofy premise I dont have to draw out a point by point "demonking"
>you're wrong because I think your idea is stupid, NO I WON'T SAY WHY
m8, leave.

[Anonymous No.10057738]

>>10057722
A study coming out of BERLIN is not going to support the notion of genetic differences between racial groups.

This is not a difficult thing to ascertain.

[Anonymous No.10057751]

>>10055755
Because their ideology (marxism) is shaped by the belief that all inequality in outcome is due to socio economic factors, and that therefore by regulating these socio economic factors they could bring about true equality.

The fact that individuals and populations have inherent, immutable genetic differences which cause these unequal outcomes would destroy any possibility of fixing that inequality through regulations and therefore invalidate their entire ideology.

[Anonymous No.10057756]

>>10053641
>are hoping to conduct more in-depth studies

Translation: we didn't get enough evidence and it's mostly speculation

[Anonymous No.10057789]

>>10057756
yeah

>might

into the trash it goes

[Anonymous No.10058216]

>>10054519
>africans already had remarkably lower iq before europeans even arrived
How can you possibly know that? The first IQ test wasn't invented until well after contact was made with sub saharan Africa.

[Anonymous No.10058702]

>>10053634
Full paper: can't post because of spam detection

>Individual differences in intelligence have a substantial heritable background, while strong increases in test performance across the world in the last decades also point to strong environmental effects.
>Altogether, the winning model points to a rather independent contribution of variance of dopaminergic neurotransmission to variance in gIQ on the one hand and genetic differences on the other hand
>Taken together, our findings suggest that both functional activation of the reward system, epigenetic control of dopaminergic neurotransmission, and genetic markers contribute to gIQ.

gIQ = general IQ
They haven't disproven the influence of genetic heritability on IQ, but rather shown that epigenetics are an important factor as well.

[Anonymous No.10058710]

>>10053634
It has been known for a while already.
>http://www.cell.com/current-biology/abstract/S0960-9822%2811%2901267-X

>The posterior hippocampi of average-IQ adult subjects who passed the difficult Knowledge exam for London taxicab drivers showed significant enlargement as opposed to before they began studying for it. (The posterior hippocampus is associated with memory and spatial navigation, both of which are strongly correlated with g.)

>Similar effects not observed in the control group or in those who failed. Pic related.

>This was actually a repeat experiment with a larger sample size, i.e. the results are reproducible. And because all subjects are grown adults, normal brain development does not confound the study's results.

>We therefore have physically-observable, reproducible evidence that the brain PHYSICALLY restructures itself in response to focused training.

Intelligence (which is a manifestation of the brain's organization) is malleable. You become smart by doing math and science, not the other way around. You can physically alter you ability to grok proofs, perform experiments, recognize patterns, and write papers.

IQ BTFO

[Anonymous No.10058711]

>>10053731
Amerindian skull is the best.

[Anonymous No.10058760]

>>10058216
There was a preeixsting IQ test, it was called inventing the fucking wheel. They failed.

[Anonymous No.10058797]

>This suggests that environmentally induced epigenetic changes to our genetic material have a greater impact on intelligence than previously thought.
So basically Europeans who evolved in a different, harsher environment than Africans underwent genetic changes that increased their IQ?

[Anonymous No.10058801]

>>10058797
>doesn't know what is epigenetics
You have no point.

[Anonymous No.10058805]

>>10058801
>environmentally induced epigenetic changes to our genetic material
Here, I picked out the crucial part since a singled out sentence was too much for you.

[Anonymous No.10058810]

>>10058805
>epigenetic environmental changes=generational genetic selection changes
You have no point, brainlet.

[Anonymous No.10058812]

>>10058810
It doesn't say anything about "environmental changes", but about changes to our genetic material. Are you able to read English, Kaszimiercz?

[Anonymous No.10058813]

>>10058812
>"In this study, we were able to observe how individual differences in IQ test results are linked to both epigenetic changes and differences in brain activity which underlie environmental influences." The researchers are hoping to conduct more in-depth studies to determine the extent of environmentally-induced neurobiological modifications, as well as the degree to which these modifications affect IQ test performance."
You have no point, brainlet.

[Anonymous No.10058814]

>>10058813
Why are you posting a uselessly vague quote from the study in response to the quote I posted? Are you saying the study is contradictory?

[Anonymous No.10058817]

>>10054891
It's not controversial. Only /pol/niggers failing at science and getting BTFO.

[Anonymous No.10058820]

>>10058817
OP believes this article to say there is no hereditary influence, which is clearly wrong.

[Anonymous No.10058826]

>>10058814
>"why are you posting a quote from the study?"
You have no point, brainlet.

[Anonymous No.10058828]

>>10058820
>OP believes
No evidence of this.

IQ has always been pseudoscience, no matter how much you whine my little brainlet.

[Anonymous No.10058829]

>>10058826
Are you able to understand whole sentences? Does your quote contradict mine?

[Anonymous No.10058831]

>>10058828
The "evidence" are his posts in this thread, brainlet. Also nice attempt at deflecting once you realized your assumption is wrong.

[Anonymous No.10058838]

>>10058831
>everyone is OP
And that's how you identify a schizo.
>you are deflecting and you are also OP
Great.
>>10058829
No evidence of OP's beliefs manifested.

[Anonymous No.10058843]

>>10058838
No, not everyone is OP, but the polak repeating the same grammar and spelling errors clearly is. I hope so at least, it wouldn't be a good testimony of the academic prowess of anti-hereditarians otherwise.

[Anonymous No.10058846]

>>10058843
>the guy is a polak who commit the same grammar errors and also let me mock anti-hereditarians in this paragraph
Great insight, schizo.

[Anonymous No.10058853]

>>10058846
He could be any kind of non-white, and it doesn't even matter, but he said he was European in one of his posts. Good job reading the thread.

[Anonymous No.10058864]

>>10058853
>he also may be non-white
Anything else?

[Anonymous No.10058865]

>>10058864
Anything else that MAY be and doesn't matter? I leave it up to your imagination if personal details about OP are what you care about. Go wild!

[Anonymous No.10058868]

>>10058865
What I'm pretty sure of is that iq is not science. iq is pseudoscience.

[Anonymous No.10059451]

>>10053634
It's always environment and substrate.

Also...
They genes transferred with behavior, no separation, therefore not "proof"

[Anonymous No.10060243]

>>10053647
be quieד

[Anonymous No.10060277]

>>10053634
ITT how to bootstrap AI

[Anonymous No.10060910]

OP is dead and a faggot, go to the thread "are hereditarians wrong?"