Classic /sci/ humor

[Anonymous No.10320500]

[Anonymous No.10320510]

[Anonymous No.10320517]

>>10320500

[Anonymous No.10320518]

>>10320500
>>10320517
>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.10320523]

>>10320518

[Anonymous No.10320539]

>>10320518
>Everytime I see something I don't like it's /pol/
Also:
>Evolution stops at the neck

[Anonymous No.10320540]

>>10320523
>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.10320548]

>>10320540
sneed

[Anonymous No.10320569]

>>10320540

[Anonymous No.10320720]

>>10320569
>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.10320733]

>>10320720
cry some more

[Anonymous No.10320742]

>>10320733
lurk some moar

[Anonymous No.10320754]

>>10320742
>triggered by evolution

the state of /sci/

[Anonymous No.10320761]

>>10320720
You left leaning parasites will never tire out do you? Too bad i will never tire too.

[Anonymous No.10320776]

best girl

[Anonymous No.10320840]

[Anonymous No.10321032]

>>10320500
>>10320510
>>10320517
>>10320523
>>10320539
>>10320548
>>10320569
>>10320733
>>10320754
>>10320761
>>>/pol/
Fuck off and stay fucked off

[Anonymous No.10321043]

>posts race based memes 3 in a row
>"It's not a /pol thread"

[Anonymous No.10321096]

>>10320500
>>10320517
If your IQ is so high, then why are you so stupid?

[Anonymous No.10321107]

>>10320500
fixed

[Anonymous No.10321180]

Reminder that Ashkenazim jews have a higher avg iq than /pol/tards

[Anonymous No.10321224]

>>10321032
>Why aren't the goyim listening anymore

U mad Shlomo?

[Anonymous No.10321235]

>>10321180
Even rocks have a higher average IQ than poltards

[Anonymous No.10321263]

I have never seen so many anti-science cry babies in a thread ever in my life; what a great shame that this is a so-called "science" forum.

[Anonymous No.10321265]

>>10320517
dog breeds are a social construct, like race and gender are

[Anonymous No.10321269]

>>10321224
Oh I don't know, /pol/tard. I can't even begin to understand why people don't listen to you stormchads

[Anonymous No.10321275]

>>10321269
Are you feeling the heat?

[Anonymous No.10321284]

>>10320518
>>10321032
>>10320540
>>10320720
>>10320742

[Anonymous No.10321289]

>>10321263
>/pol/ memes are science
Lol what a fucking moron

Back to your containment board
>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.10321290]

>>10320523
>>10320569
>Everyone who disagrees with me is Jewish!

[Anonymous No.10321292]

>>10321275
>Le troll ebin stile
I gibbe you upboat wit teh meme arroz

[Anonymous No.10321294]

OP, were you dropped as a child?

[Anonymous No.10321298]

>>10320500
For every one of these shit threads on /sci/, I post ten blacked threads on /pol/.

[Anonymous No.10321301]

>>10321289
LMAOing @ ur life desu

[Anonymous No.10321303]

>>10321301
>He said, shitposting politics on a math and science board

[Anonymous No.10321334]

>>10321298
Just report them to tip lines whenever they post violent threats, which they do very often. That way you do the right thing keeping people safe and as a pleasant side effect you give them exactly what they deserve.

[Anonymous No.10321345]

Imagine arriving to /sci/ with a purpose to discuss race, anthropology, DNA, IQ and other scientific facts, only to find yourself attacked and swarmed by a mob of crazy unscientific animals. This is utterly unacceptable. Either clean this place up, or I am not coming back. Get it in your head: /sci/ is for facts, not for feelings. Go to Reddit if you want to bathe in filth. Here, we talk one dialect: The Dialect of Truth® .

[Anonymous No.10321350]

>>10321345
>Imagine arriving to /sci/ with a purpose to reinforce and spread my bias by shitposting about race, anthropology, DNA, IQ and other scientific facts that I have misunderstood and care about only for political reasons
This is utterly unacceptable
>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.10321352]

>>10321345
Then why do you deny that the IQ difference betweens jews and whites is bigger than the IQ difference between whites and blacks? And that Asians have a higher IQ than whites, making whites the second dumbest race overall?

[Anonymous No.10321357]

>>10321352
Don't endulge him, just tell him to fuck off

[Anonymous No.10321363]

We need to completely purge these fools, for they are polluting our board. Science and Mathematics should be about fact. True. Not true. 1. 0. There is no room for "interpretation" when it comes to important scientific fields of study like race, IQ, biology, DNA, so on and so forth. Just look at what is happening all around society when us men of honor let our guards down and let these sick egalitarians take control: Decay occurs. Decay at every corner. That is what happens when you lie to yourself. Everything decays like a rotting corpse. We can not let /sci/ decay.

[Anonymous No.10321365]

>>10321363
>our board
>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.10321366]

Q IS REAL, HILLARY EATS BABIES, KIKES DID 911, NOFAP CHADS GO THEIR OWN WAY DIE ROASTIES, BUY MY WATERFILTER, MAGA AWOO, GLOBAL WARMING IS A HOAX BY THE CHINESE, MEXICAN TRANNIES ARE KEKING MUH ETHNOSTATE, SANDY HOOK WAS A CIA FALSE FLAG, MAYMAY MAGIK IS REEL PRAISE KEK, T BOOMER

[Anonymous No.10321367]

>>10321363
If I get gauges will I become another race?

[Anonymous No.10321369]

>>10321352
Because it's not and they don't.
Blacks are barely above animals and Chinese cheat on ALL their tests.

[Anonymous No.10321370]

>>10321366
>BUY MY WATERFILTER
I died. Excellent use of dubs

[Anonymous No.10321374]

>>10321369
That doesn't sound like science. I thought we only spoke the language of truth, why does that only apply when you're jerking yourself off?

[Anonymous No.10321375]

>>10321369
Wow, nice science denial.

[Anonymous No.10321378]

>>10321374
>>10321375
>everyone I disagree with is one person
Oy vey

[Anonymous No.10321383]

>>10321378
>post muh feels on a science board
>"This one person keeps disagreeing with me!"
>Poster count: 26
Take the hint and fuck off

[Anonymous No.10321384]

>>10321378
Why do you think I am jewish? I know your answer, but I want you to post it for the screencap lmao

[Anonymous No.10321401]

>>10321352
The difference isn't as big. Also jews technicaly aren't a race. And pic related white vs asian is also pretty close and you can't say the same for hispanics and blacks.

[Anonymous No.10321406]

>>10321383
It was 25 until I posted >>10321369 :^)

>>10321384
Because you argue like one, Shekelburg.

[Anonymous No.10321412]

>>10321290
>I've been found out

[Anonymous No.10321423]

>>10321384
>I'm not jewish, I'm just a good goy

That's not an improvement

[Anonymous No.10321432]

>>10321406
oy gevalt, another meshugana /pol/ schmuck! these goyim’s shtick is fakakte!!!!

[Anonymous No.10321438]

Every fucking time

[Anonymous No.10321554]

>>10321438
>not realizing that denying /pol/ as satire is part of the satire

[Anonymous No.10321599]

>>10321554
>not realizing Jews are a meme that never existed in the 1st place
>they were invented specifically just to make /pol/ angry
>/pol/ fell for it so hard they started blaming them for everything and see them in places where they don't exist
>now they've become so dependent on blaming their failings on them that they'd have a psychological breakdown if they were forced to accept the truth

[Anonymous No.10321604]

>>10321554
this desu

[Anonymous No.10321609]

>>10321599
>denying the holocaust
Oy vey

[Anonymous No.10321610]

>>10321345
>Imagine arriving to /sci/ with a purpose to discuss race, anthropology, DNA, IQ and other scientific facts
>Turns out it's just a guy with a racist agenda ready to throw a tantrum when faced with disagreement
I wonder how many more million times we'll do this
I wonder how comfy their echo chamber is

[Anonymous No.10321612]

>>10321554
>not realizing that “denying /pol/ as satire is part of the satire” is part of the satire

[Anonymous No.10321623]

>This thread violates a rule.
>Racism outside of /b/

get off your asses you lazy janitors

[Anonymous No.10321651]

>>10321612
It's satire all the way down.

[Anonymous No.10321669]

>>10321610
>>10321623

Thank you for your support. Diversity is our strength.

[Anonymous No.10321685]

>>10321651
close, but actually there are autists at each layer who don’t get the satire

[Anonymous No.10321742]

>>10320500
cringe

[Anonymous No.10321745]

>>10320523
>>10320569
>le angry merchant jpegs, ready at the trigger
Hmmm, really makes me think what board you crosspost from.

[Anonymous No.10321759]

>>10321363
This man speaks the truth

[Anonymous No.10321763]

>>10321669
you realize these threads are an attempt to normalize racial divisiveness, right?

when you normalize this shit it cuts both ways. It will harms yourself just as much.
You may preach "muh superior white race" even if it's just (((satire))), but by normalizing this it becomes just as easy or easier to say "muh inferior white trash" or lay down the white guilt trip. Your own actions are creating your own enemy, which spurs more reaction from you. This is called a chain reaction, and is unsustainable. When it ends, it will end loudly, maybe even violently. And you, you specifically, will have had a hand in this to happen.


Lol, I'm just kidding bro. You can ignore this post entirely. It's all just a big joke. This post is entirely satirical. Can't believe you fell for it.

[Anonymous No.10321766]

>>10321763
>implying /pol/ doesn't want a racewar

[Anonymous No.10321769]

>>10321759
You're right. It's very evident he has proficient knowledge in math or science or both.

[Anonymous No.10321773]

>>10321769
>the Earth is 6000 years old

[Anonymous No.10321778]

>>10321763
>When it ends, it will end loudly, maybe even violently.

We can't let this happen!

[Anonymous No.10321808]

>>10321778
>>10321766
>implying /putin/ doesn't want a racewar

You guys got trolled by dictator with a literal army of internet trolls. Just admit you lost to him and wash your hands of it.

[Anonymous No.10321814]

>>10321808
He got us good too. He knows how to exploit the weaknesses of a democracy.

[Anonymous No.10321818]

[Anonymous No.10321827]

>>10321814
>He knows how to exploit the weaknesses of the electoral college.
fix'd

[Anonymous No.10321831]

>>10320500
Professor James Watson
Greatest Biologist in history after Darwin.
Nobel in Medicine for discovering DNA shape.
Race realist & anti-SJW.

James Watson quotes:
https://liorpachter.wordpress.com/2018/05/18/james-watson-in-his-own-words

>Some anti-Semitism is justified

>All our social policies are based on the fact that [Africans] intelligence is the same as ours – whereas all the testing says not really
>And there’s a difference on the average between blacks and whites on IQ tests. I would say the difference is, it’s genetic
>People who have to deal with black employees find [that they are equal] not true

>I think having all these women around makes it more fun for the men but they’re probably less effective
>People say it would be terrible if we made all girls pretty. I think [doing so by genetic selection] would be great
>Women at Oxford and Cambridge are better than Harvard and Yale because they know their job is to look pretty and get a rich husband

>There is a biochemical link between exposure to sunlight and sexual urges...that’s why you have Latin lovers
>[The] historic curse of the Irish.. is not alcohol, it’s not stupidity...it’s ignorance
>Indians in [my] experience [are] servile.. because of selection under the caste system
>East Asian students [tend] to be conformist, because of selection for conformity in ancient Chinese society

>The one aspect of the Jewish brain that is not 1st class is that Jews are said to be bad in thinking in 3 dimensions...it is true
>Women are supposedly bad at 3 dimensions

>People ask about [Rosalind Franklin] and I always say ‘autism'
>[Rosalind Franklin] was a loser
>[Francis Crick] may have been a bit autistic
>[Linus Pauling] was probably always half-insane

>Whenever you interview fat people, you feel bad, because you know you’re not going to hire them
>Disabled individuals are genetic losers
>Anyone who would hire an ecologist is out of his mind
>My former colleagues are pinkos and shits

[Anonymous No.10321834]

>>10320500

James Watson quotes:
https://liorpachter.wordpress.com/2018/05/18/james-watson-in-his-own-words

>Some anti-Semitism is justified

>All our social policies are based on the fact that [Africans] intelligence is the same as ours – whereas all the testing says not really
>And there’s a difference on the average between blacks and whites on IQ tests. I would say the difference is, it’s genetic
>People who have to deal with black employees find [that they are equal] not true

>I think having all these women around makes it more fun for the men but they’re probably less effective
>People say it would be terrible if we made all girls pretty. I think [doing so by genetic selection] would be great
>Women at Oxford and Cambridge are better than Harvard and Yale because they know their job is to look pretty and get a rich husband

>There is a biochemical link between exposure to sunlight and sexual urges...that’s why you have Latin lovers
>[The] historic curse of the Irish.. is not alcohol, it’s not stupidity...it’s ignorance
>Indians in [my] experience [are] servile.. because of selection under the caste system
>East Asian students [tend] to be conformist, because of selection for conformity in ancient Chinese society

>The one aspect of the Jewish brain that is not 1st class is that Jews are said to be bad in thinking in 3 dimensions...it is true
>Women are supposedly bad at 3 dimensions

>People ask about [Rosalind Franklin] and I always say ‘autism'
>[Rosalind Franklin] was a loser
>[Francis Crick] may have been a bit autistic
>[Linus Pauling] was probably always half-insane

>Whenever you interview fat people, you feel bad, because you know you’re not going to hire them
>Disabled individuals are genetic losers
>Anyone who would hire an ecologist is out of his mind
>My former colleagues are pinkos and shits

[Anonymous No.10321837]

>>10320500
Professor James Watson
Greatest Biologist in history after Darwin.
Nobel in Medicine for discovering DNA shape.
Race realist & anti-SJW.

[Anonymous No.10321901]

>>10321827
lol

[Anonymous No.10322091]

>>10321345
Please do leave. And never come back.

[Anonymous No.10322097]

>>10322091
>if you disagree with my unjustified opinions i dont want you on an unrelated board
authoritarian prick

[Anonymous No.10322102]

>/sci/ humor
>nothing but bad /pol/ memes

This raids are getting worse every day

[Anonymous No.10322113]

>>10322102
It's because of the James Watson shitshow, what did you expect?

[Anonymous No.10322116]

>>10322113
That happened years ago. They just are posting it more.

[Anonymous No.10322125]

>>10320500
Begone racist

[Anonymous No.10322131]

>>10322116
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/13/james-watson-scientist-honors-stripped-reprehensible-race-comments

[Anonymous No.10322135]

>>10322102
Its not a raid, just autism.

The pathology of /pol/ on this board, and all boards as a whole, draws marked similarities to the activity of the original bronies who totally fucked this site with their uncontrolled autism. /pol/tards are the new bronies

[Anonymous No.10322136]

>>10322131
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2014/12/01/nows-your-chance-to-buy-james-watsons-nobel-prize-because-racism/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.f1445f4e72aa

[Anonymous No.10322165]

>>10322136
On 4 December 2014, Usmanov paid $4.8m for Dr James Watson's Nobel Prize Medal in Physiology or Medicine, which was auctioned at Christie's in Jew York City. Watson was selling his prize to raise money to support scientific research. After auctions fees, Watson received $4.1m. Usmanov subsequently returned the medal to Watson, stating "in my opinion, a situation in which an outstanding scientist sells a medal recognizing his achievements is unacceptable. Watson's work contributed to cancer research, the illness from which my father died. It is important for me that the money that I spent on this medal will go to supporting scientific research, and the medal will stay with the person who deserved it."

Absolutely.Fucking.Based.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2014/dec/09/russian-billionaire-usmanov-james-watson-nobel-prize-return-scientist

[Anonymous No.10322168]

>>10322135
Pony posting will actually get you banned though. /pol/ posting gets nothing.

[Anonymous No.10322172]

>>10322125
Begone SJW

[Anonymous No.10322178]

>>10322168
I'm tired of these racists. Please let's gather some data to disprove them. Truth is on our side.

[Anonymous No.10322193]

>>10322178
It won't make a difference. You can just check the archive. Any attempt to explain genetics to them will just lead to them acting like apes and/or claiming science is just a coverup and it's all part of the Jewish conspiracy, just like the climate change threads.

You see, the reason they hate /sci/ so much is because they hate the truth. They honestly think raiding a 4chan board every day will change reality.

[Anonymous No.10322201]

>>10322193
>Any attempt to explain genetics to them will just lead to them acting like apes and/or claiming science is just a coverup and it's all part of the Jewish conspiracy, just like the climate change threads.

No we must, it's our duty. If we don't do they will take over. Telling them to go back to /pol/ is playing their game.

[Anonymous No.10322202]

>>10322178
>>10322193

>>Classic /sci/ humor
>racist jokes
This isn't your typical inane /pol/ raid. This seems like a calculated attempt to normalize racism.
Normal /pol/ posters aren't intelligent enough to do mind tricks like this.

[Anonymous No.10322206]

>>10322202
>>10322201
There is nothing to be done if the mods don't prune the threads. These people are completely brainwashed zealots that only way to turn every board to shit, just like /pol/.

[Anonymous No.10322213]

>>10322202
>Normal /pol/ posters aren't intelligent enough to do mind tricks like this.

I've been out of the loop for a while. Is this a recent thing? When did the raids start?

[Anonymous No.10322233]

saving this thread, with no casualties!

[Anonymous No.10322237]

>>10322233

[Anonymous No.10322240]

[Anonymous No.10322243]

[Anonymous No.10322248]

[Anonymous No.10322250]

[Anonymous No.10322256]

[Anonymous No.10322259]

[Anonymous No.10322264]

[Anonymous No.10322268]

[Anonymous No.10322273]

[Anonymous No.10322278]

[Anonymous No.10322281]

[Anonymous No.10322285]

>>10321837
>>10321834
>>10322165
Face it he was to shit to do his own fucking research

[Anonymous No.10322286]

[Anonymous No.10322296]

>>10322286
Wtf make his head bigger cuz he's literally those aliens

[Anonymous No.10322302]

>>10322285
you dont know what youre talking about

[Anonymous No.10322516]

>>10322240
Good to see someone enjoyed my OC

[Anonymous No.10322805]

>>10321345
>Either clean this place up, or I am not coming back.
Fantastic, since you want to leave the board so badly I'll show you the exit.
>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.10322806]

>>10320500
https://youtu.be/MhanyR5Rfk0

[Anonymous No.10322811]

>>10320517
That comic is so wrong it hurts. Dogs didn't "evolve to adapt to different environments" or whatever the fuck, we humans genetically engineered them to have certain traits and temperaments. Wolves are what dogs are supposed look and act like naturally.

[Anonymous No.10322812]

>>10321401
Jews are a subrace distinct from Europeans, but they are not a race unto themselves. You’re right though the gap is like 6-9 pts max and is negligible considering how many white high iq’s there are

[Anonymous No.10322815]

>>10322811
>there are no selective pressures in humans

[Anonymous No.10322831]

>>10322815
>moving goalposts

[Anonymous No.10322837]

>>10322831
>I don't believe in evolution

[Anonymous No.10322855]

>>10322837
>spouting buzzwords

[Anonymous No.10322861]

>>10322855
>Evolution is a buzzword

[Anonymous No.10322869]

>>10322861
>throwing concepts you don't understand to sound smart is not using buzzwords

[Anonymous No.10322876]

>>10322869
>Evolution does not apply to humans, science says so, goy.

[Anonymous No.10322881]

>>10322869
>human brains evolved the same everywhere even though different subspecies of mammals display differential intelligence and behavioral patterns with even chimp troops showing vast differences in tool making culture and political sophistication and literal house cats differing in their understanding of human technology like door handles

[Anonymous No.10323203]

>>10322233
>>10322240
>>10322243
>>10322250
>>10322256
>>10322259
>>10322268
>>10322273
>>10322278

[Anonymous No.10323216]

>>10322881
>crows picking up nickels is proof of intelligence
>>10322815
>muh selective breeding is the same as """natural selective pressures"""
>muh infallible darwinism
>muh evolution=darwinism
Do tell us how the failure of common cold from evolving is just another one of those "pesky exceptions that literally don't matter".

[Anonymous No.10323221]

>>10322233
What picture did OP use there? Source pls

[Anonymous No.10323226]

>>10322876
>evolution is guided by nazi ideals and is divided by race because I said so

[Anonymous No.10323231]

>>10323216
Nigga selective pressure is selective pressure. Doesn't matter if it's "natural" or "artificial". The genes don't care.
Your arguments are the same as those of creationists.

This fucking timeline.

[Anonymous No.10323235]

>>10323226
There is only one race, the human race.
Thanks for pointing this out, fellow white man.

[Anonymous No.10323261]

>>10321032
triggered?

[Anonymous No.10323277]

how did this thread not get 404’d yet? seriously mods

[Anonymous No.10323345]

>>10322812
this is so dumb. go and learn what happens at the tails when you shift a normal distribution up by a std d

[Anonymous No.10323368]

>>10323231
>cannot into probability
>Doesn't understand speciation(much like his idol darwin)
>Doesn't understand how phosphate groups work and are bonded together, but spergs about "muh genes"
>cannot into math
Let me guess, you're also the type of autist that thinks laws of physics are tangible existing entities rather than abstract concepts used to understand how physical entities interact with each other.

[Anonymous No.10323376]

>>10323368
u mad?

[Anonymous No.10323388]

>>10322240
Toasty

[Anonymous No.10323390]

>>10323376
>Proceeds to post pics of a literal meme-tier autist that larps as a scientist
Congrats on proving that your mental state is(most probably, literally) on the level of a 12year old internet-celeb fangay.

[Anonymous No.10323398]

>>10323390
kek, what a dumbass. Here is a quote from a real scientist.

[Anonymous No.10323423]

>>10323398
>bill nye, followed by dawkins
If I didn't know any better, I'd say you were baiting. But it's more likely that you are indeed a cultist. I get it. Watching youtube videos or reading lite novels are more your forte. Actually rummaging through research papers is impossible for some people. Because then they don't have the time to shitpost on fagdit and 4chin about their iq.

[Anonymous No.10323424]

>>10323368
>>10323216

what about speciation are we not understanding? lol

Selective breeding is artificial selection. There is selection on those being bred. This creates a subsequent population with different allele frequencies when compared to the previous population.

Darwinism offers an explanation for the organisms we see today. It offers mechanisms that work together in logical ways that can be used to explain what plants and animals we see today.
>Do tell us how the failure of common cold from evolving is just another one of those "pesky exceptions that literally don't matter".
This sentence is written so poorly that I cannot gather what you are trying to say.

[Anonymous No.10323431]

I don't know which ones are YLYL or which ones are cringe, just selected a few whose thumbnails look alright

[Anonymous No.10323435]

[Anonymous No.10323438]

[Anonymous No.10323443]

[Anonymous No.10323446]

[Anonymous No.10323449]

>>10323438
>gym topologist
The dream job...

[Anonymous No.10323451]

[Anonymous No.10323455]

>>10323435
you know, i love this meme, but actually the commands that are transcribed on the left bottom don't match karlie's actual screen, it's
>cd code
>cd..
>pwd
>cd..
>cd ..
>ls
>cd code
>cd ..
>cd ..
it gets the "pwd" wrong, and replaces it with another cd.. nonsense command, arguably making it look like she's more dumb than she is

also, nobody ever asks this, but how the hell did she take that picture with both hands on the keyboard? gopro or something?

[Anonymous No.10323459]

[Anonymous No.10323460]

[Anonymous No.10323471]

[Anonymous No.10323476]

[Anonymous No.10323481]

[Anonymous No.10323484]

[Anonymous No.10323487]

[Anonymous No.10323495]

>>10323435
>>10323455
Do you even have to ask at this point?

[Anonymous No.10323512]

>>10322805
*ahem*
NIGGERS AND COONS

[Anonymous No.10323608]

>>10323435
>>10323438
>>10323443
>>10323446
>>10323451
>>10323459
>>10323460
>>10323471
>>10323476
>>10323481
>>10323484
>>10323487
Brilliant stuff anons

[Anonymous No.10323649]

>>10323608
>s

[Anonymous No.10323670]

>>10320500

[Anonymous No.10323676]

>>10323216
you’re a brainlet and need to go back faggot

[Anonymous No.10323679]

[Anonymous No.10323720]

>>10321352
>why do you deny
Nobody has ever denied that. Cope more, subhuman.

[Anonymous No.10323725]

[Anonymous No.10323732]

>>10323495
>>>/hc/

[Anonymous No.10323733]

[Anonymous No.10323737]

>>10323345
you’re retarded, Jews are more frequently geniuses than other races, there are a larger number of asiatic and white geniuses than there are Jewish because there are 16:750 m jews:whites you fucking nigger.

[Anonymous No.10323817]

>>10321032

[Anonymous No.10323892]

>>10322237
lmao

[Anonymous No.10323904]

>>10322285
Accurate

[Anonymous No.10324001]

[Anonymous No.10324052]

>>10321438
>intelligence is chiefly influenced by socio-economic status
Cheeky of you to sneak that in with those facts.

[Anonymous No.10324084]

>>10321269
>overrun
Imagine being this sensitive because of two memes

[Anonymous No.10324087]

>>10321763
I’m too autistic to care. All I care about is the truth. Fuck the /pol/tards, fuck the SJWs.

[Anonymous No.10324096]

>>10321808
>You guys got trolled by dictator
How? Because he elected Trump? kek I hope he will do it again in 2020.

[Anonymous No.10324100]

>>10324087
>Fuck the /pol/tards, fuck the SJWs.

[Anonymous No.10324107]

>>10324100
They’re both more focused on manifesting their insecurities and emotionality onto the world than they are about the propagation of truth and the flourishing of community. I’ll pick a side if I have to, but I’m not going to be happy about it.

[Anonymous No.10324110]

>>10321438
>>10324052
>intelligence is chiefly influenced by socio-economic status
the absolute state of /sci/

https://thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/04/15/iq-and-socio-economic-status/

[Anonymous No.10324113]

>>10324052
>He thinks success in America isn't decided by your zip code

[Anonymous No.10324119]

>>10324113
>He thinks that zip code is the most correlated factor with success, rather than a proxy for something else

[Anonymous No.10324120]

>>10322178
>Please let's gather some data to disprove them. Truth is on our side.
Kraut already tried this and he got ass blasted.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0tp8Dq5Th8

[Anonymous No.10324124]

>>10324119
>He doesn't know how to use Google
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=zip+code+predictor+of+success

[Anonymous No.10324133]

>>10324124
What he's trying to say is that the zip codes show what races live where, and it's not the zip code that leads to the success but rather the race of the person living there.

[Anonymous No.10324137]

>>10324133
That's retarded and baseless. The US isn't segregated by skin colors, it's segregated by income

[Anonymous No.10324140]

>>10324124
I don’t really think you understand what I said, tolerant friend. It’s not the strongest correlation. In fact, there was an AI used to determine who would pay back bank loans, and it preferred to pick by race. Once they prohibited it from doing so, it started to use zip code of birth, because it’s such a good proxy.

[Anonymous No.10324145]

>>10324140
>Failure to refute the central point
>No citations
>"You clearly just do not understand my advanced soliloquy..."
Are you aware that this is /sci/? At least make an effort

[Anonymous No.10324208]

>>10324110
>thealternativehypothesis.org

[Anonymous No.10324227]

>>10324145
I obviously refuted the central point, of you understand anything about statistics. But it’s true that I didn’t provide a source. I can find a million sources validating the statistical link between both IQ and zip code, and success in the US, but not one comparing the two. Maybe would be easier if I wasn’t phoneposting.

Notice that you didn’t provide a source either.

[Anonymous No.10324234]

>>10324208
>I don't like the name of that website so I'll pretend the studies he cites don't exist.

[Anonymous No.10324239]

>>10324227
>I obviously refuted the central point
You have not, or you would be able to demonstrate that race is a more significant predictor of success than zip code. Furthermore I provided a link to Google so that you could pick from the thousands of sources supporting my claims. Let me ask you this, where do all the poor white people live, and why is their prediction of success similar to all the poor black people?

[Anonymous No.10324246]

>>10324234
I like the name. Very clever. I don't like his faulty logic and bias in interpreting studies. He's an ethno-statist with an agenda, and also wrong.

[Anonymous No.10324253]

>>10324246
>bias in interpreting studies
So show us how incorrectly he ineterpreted those studies

>He's an ethno-statist with an agenda
And you are SJW with an agenda. duh
See how easy it is?

>and also wrong.
We would like to believe you senpai, but we need something more than your good word.

[Anonymous No.10324263]

>>10324239
Stop moving the posts around m8. IQ is what I’m saying is the strong predictor. Zip code would be stronger than race, but I’m suggesting not higher than IQ, and IQ is 75% heritable according to the APA.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/03/120329142035.html

[Anonymous No.10324267]

>>10324253
Unfortunately his whole schtick is to be a giant gish gallop.

He actually doesn't say much controversial at all. IQ correlates with race, blah blah blah. We all know this.

It's when he starts talking about the impossibility of black people to ever be civilized, is where he starts to be disingenuous. He just properly cited a million closely (but not causal) related things, so he MUST be right about that too, right? But he can't back that up, it's all speculation from an "expert opinion." Where the "expert" part is totally manufactured.

[Anonymous No.10324270]

>>10324263
>Zip code would be stronger than race
Then your argument is invalid. Zip code is a more significant predictor of success than race and therefore success is determined by socioeconomic factors and not "muh evolution above the neck"

No goalposts have been moved, you just backed a poor argument

[Anonymous No.10324282]

>>10324267
>It's when he starts talking about the impossibility of black people to ever be civilized, is where he starts to be disingenuous. He just properly cited a million closely (but not causal) related things, so he MUST be right about that too, right?

I don't know where he did that if you gave specific example it would be nice.

>But he can't back that up, it's all speculation from an "expert opinion." Where the "expert" part is totally manufactured.

The only time he mentioned expert opinion was on the existence of race i.e. usage of race in biology textbooks, how many biologists recognize race and what % of black-white IQ gap is genetical. I don't see how any of this is related to your previous statement.

[Anonymous No.10324289]

>>10324270
You’re such a disingenuous actor. You said that zip code determines success, while I’m saying it’s IQ. Race and IQ are linked, but that doesn’t mean everyone of one race has the same IQ or something silly. ALL of these things are correlated with each other, but you made a claim that one (zip code) is the “deciding” factor. Your own words.

It might be true. I’m willing to admit something like that, but if we know IQ is a better predictor of success than socioeconomic upbringing, I’m confused as to why zip code would be a stronger correlary to success than IQ. It seems like conflicting information.

[Anonymous No.10324301]

>>10324289
>You said that zip code determines success, while I’m saying it’s IQ
Oh, no. It's retarded. IQ is also not as good of a predictor of success as zip code. Millions of geniuses have died toiling in obscurity for exactly this reason

[Anonymous No.10324303]

>>10322811
And there are different breeds of wolves too. btfo

[Anonymous No.10324305]

>>10324282
A sample of revisionist history:
>While you can describe “Third World Traits” as well, it’s more appropriate to describe First World Traits, as these traits are abnormal compared to the rest of humanity. It could be called “Old World” and “New World” traits, with European traits being “new world” and asiatic, amerindian and african traits being “old world”. Though that may confuse people into thinking it has something to do with the Americas.

>The way to think of it is that these traits, in conjunction, evolved in Europe, with only East Asians and some Indian groups being more “first world” on SOME, not all, of these traits. And it was the evolution of these traits that allowed for the European Revolution – the European conquest of most of the world, the outlawing of slavery and feudalism worldwide, and the industrial revolution and the popularization of the notions of “individual rights” and “self-determination”.

He's saying Africans will never form a civilized country because they lack first world traits. You may agree with that, but you asked for an example where he speculates unscientifically. And he does.

[Anonymous No.10324312]

>>10324301
In history maybe, but in the modern US (and Europe and Asia to an extent) is a highly mobile society, and thus IQ has much more to do with success than it does in less developed or more oppressive societies. And you have to remember that smart people tend to group together in class and "zip code". Not the guy you're replying to btw

[Anonymous No.10324315]

>>10321363
>>10321345
>>10321263
>>10321180
>>10320754
>>10320569
>>10320523
>>10321759
>>10321834
>>10321837
>>10322165
>>10323495

How about you idiots stop spamming every thread on this board with your race bullshit?

[Anonymous No.10324323]

>>10324315
Name of this board - Science & Math
Biology is science. If you don't like it then fuck off.

[Anonymous No.10324326]

>>10324312
Nope. Even attitude is a more indicative than IQ. Zip code is the most powerful predictor of success in the US and that is because there is more difference between the rich and the poor then there is between the white and the black

[Anonymous No.10324329]

>>10323216
Your argument is either (a) natural selection can't influence the intelligence of animals but selective breeding can for some reason (I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on this one) or (b) that even though it is theoretically possible that humans have diverged intellectually, it hasn't actually happened. (b) is basically disproven by what we know about genetics and heredity.

[Anonymous No.10324330]

>>10324301
Okay so give me that source, please. And don’t just tell me to google it, because that didn’t give me something definitive, just a bunch of popsci vaguery.

Important to point out that none of this is a refutation to the point that IQ literally correlates more strongly to success than socio-economic status, which is the exact thing I pointed out wasn’t true. You brought in the zip code thing as a counter-argument, which, even if you’re right, is a different metric than socio-economic status.

A continued revising and fixing of the education system will only relatively elevate the primacy of IQ as a success metric. Source for image: https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/medicine-and-dentistry/socioeconomic-status

[Anonymous No.10324332]

>>10324315
lol

[Anonymous No.10324334]

>>10324323
>race is biology
>>>/x/

[Anonymous No.10324337]

>>10324305
Okay, but i fail to see how this is related to his article on IQ and SES.
Are you saying that because he wrote some his theories that you disagree with all his articles with linked studies are therefore also wrong?

[Anonymous No.10324343]

>>10324334
>colors don't exist man, it's just a fuzzily defined social construct
>therefore red = green

[Anonymous No.10324344]

>>10324334
And what is it Sherlock? Even if you claim race is social construct, it is still science.
Even if sociology.

[Anonymous No.10324347]

>>10320500
>race debates
ah, yes, classic /sci/ humor

[Anonymous No.10324348]

>>10324323
This is not biology you dumb fuck. Half of the posts here are about psychometric nonsense. Come back when you figure out the neuroscintific + genetic basis for psychological phenomena. Then you'll have someone listen to what you have to say

[Anonymous No.10324349]

>>10324343
What even IS blue?
t. Sargon

[Anonymous No.10324354]

>>10324282
>>10324337
It takes a long time to pick apart his data. I chose one section at random. Read the section on how lead affects IQ.

He shows a graph for lead levels over time. I'm not sure how he populated it. He probably also used Hispanic whites to make the gap look smaller to be honest. But he claims that modern-day lead levels are similar among blacks and whites, so that lead levels can't account for SES and IQ differences.

This is misleading. The modern-day levels aren't important when the levels just 20 years ago are way higher. Which they are. See pic for the study he provides. The data starts at 1999. The levels do get closer, but they started very far.

He somehow fails to mention this.

Faulty logic, not good.

[Anonymous No.10324355]

>>10324348
>Then you'll have someone listen to what you have to say
And yet, this thread has over 200 posts and is on 1st page.

[Anonymous No.10324358]

>>10324347
>Sociology is science
You fuckers must really be lost.
>>>/his/

[Anonymous No.10324363]

>>10324343
There's a very clear difference between the light blue and dark blue, so why are they both blue???

[Anonymous No.10324366]

>>10324330
>zip code is a different metric than socio-economic status.
Wew, lad. Do you know what socioeconomic means? Are you aware that everything in that image is a socioeconomic factor?

As for a source backing IQ as a garbage predictor of success:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-a-elgart/too-often-student-success_b_10132886.html

https://dornsife.usc.edu/news/stories/2335/families-with-kids-increasingly-live-near-families-like-them/

https://www.forbes.com/sites/quora/2015/09/16/is-iq-a-predictor-of-success/

https://business.financialpost.com/executive/careers/the-biggest-predictor-of-career-success-not-skills-or-education-but-emotional-intelligence

https://mobile.edweek.org/c.jsp?cid=25919761&bcid=25919761&rssid=25919751&item=http%3A%2F%2Fapi.edweek.org%2Fv1%2Few%2F%3Fuuid%3D59C06D50-4B02-11E3-836F-03A9B3743667

[Anonymous No.10324374]

>>10324355
Yes that was your goal obviously. Not to figure out the truth about anything but to create some commotion for your entertainment.

[Anonymous No.10324380]

>>10324344
>Even if you claim race is social construct, it is still science.
Then so is gender politics and we exist on a spectrum

[Anonymous No.10324385]

>>10324366
So you think that postal code is the same as a holistic evaluation of one’s socioeconomic status? Seems dishonest.

>click the Forbes one
It literally says “yes”

[Anonymous No.10324387]

>>10324380
Yes, its sociology. Still a science whether you like it or not.

[Anonymous No.10324397]

>>10324385
You're going to need to read buddy. I know it's hard but I believe in you.

[Anonymous No.10324402]

>>10324343
>Tfw you have to resort to infantile analogies to rainbows because your brain is incapable of understanding the concept of race as it is.
I bet you watch interracial gay open too faggot

[Anonymous No.10324406]

>>10324385
Zip code is strongly correlated with and causally related to socioeconomic status. Denying this is like saying that poor people choose to live in the ghetto

[Anonymous No.10324414]

>>10324366
Students in certain zip codes being successful does not imply that zip codes cause success. Believe it or not, average IQ differs by location. High SES people are usually so because they are high IQ and were thus able to climb the ladder or because they had a high IQ relative.

[Anonymous No.10324416]

>>10324387
Great, can you explain why my dogs haven't been breeding then? They were both born with penises but one of them discovered that it was actually female and I can't figure out why they won't produce. It's not for lack of trying, I can tell you that

[Anonymous No.10324417]

>>10324402
So go ahead and explain to us brainlets what race really is.
But use simple words, we're not as smart as you.

[Anonymous No.10324422]

>>10324387
>>10324344
See >>10324358

[Anonymous No.10324425]

>>10324358
when did I ever say that sociology belonged on /sci/? I was sarcastically pointing out how the thread got derailed.

[Anonymous No.10324426]

>>10324414
That doesn't explain away zip code being a more powerful predictor than IQ

[Anonymous No.10324428]

>>10324397
In the middle of upper div bio lecture, so that would be ill-advised at the moment. Will later.

[Anonymous No.10324431]

>>10324402
interracial gay porn doesn't exist because race isn't real

[Anonymous No.10324435]

>>10324425
I replied to the wrong post. Calm down

[Anonymous No.10324438]

>>10324416
Science will fix it eventually
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2018/10/news-gene-editing-crispr-mice-stem-cells/

[Anonymous No.10324441]

>>10324438
So then social constructs=/=biology? Damn I really thought race and gender politics belonged on this board

[Anonymous No.10324443]

>>10324426
Where do those links you posted suggest that? From the Forbes article:
>More in the abstract, what we know about IQ correlations pertains to groups of people. These are statistical measures. Their relevance for an individual is difficult to evaluate, at best. Another way of saying this, is that whereas for a large group of people, IQ is one of the strongest predictors of future “success” that we know of, for an individual, it is a weak indication. For example, in one large study correlating IQ and SES (social economic status of parents) with future income, IQ had a three times higher “beta” than SES. That means how “smart” you are is much more important than who your parents are (the US economy, in other words, is a relatively level playing field).

This is literally the opposite of what you suggested. Are you illiterate?

[Anonymous No.10324450]

>>10324417
An arbitrary social distinction based on the most overt visual features. Genetically there's more variation within a race then between races which indicates that the distinction is not biological

[Anonymous No.10324451]

Can we get back to humour lmao

[Anonymous No.10324453]

>>10324441
Science will soon change your race. You're race is done for white boy. Cherish it while you can.

[Anonymous No.10324454]

>>10321345
I like those tits

[Anonymous No.10324459]

>>10324443
>whereas for a large group of people, IQ is one of the strongest predictors of future “success” that we know of, for an individual, it is a weak indication
It's like you're illiterate

[Anonymous No.10324461]

>>10324426
The fact that zip code is a stronger predictor illustrates the serious problem of inequality we have in the US’s unequally-funded school districts, but none of that explains away the highly-heritable nature of IQ, and its ability to predict plenty of things concerning the ability of an individual.

[Anonymous No.10324462]

>>10324431
>>10324417
Socially, sure.Black white Asian Arab etc are a thing. Society acknowledges it and everyone has their own clan, mostly because we're biased towards appearances. Biologically, that wouldn't be true

[Anonymous No.10324465]

>>10324450
>Genetically there's more variation within a race then between races
Fucking hell, Levontin must be proud.

Tell me, do you have this from Contrapoints or Concordance?

[Anonymous No.10324466]

>>10324453
I think you missed the point of my post. Race isn't real, did you mean skin color?

[Anonymous No.10324471]

>>10324453
If science could make all the ugly, stupid, ill-mannered people beautiful, smart, and polite, I don’t have as much reason to care about my race, do I?

[Anonymous No.10324474]

>>10324459
It's weak but better than SES/zip code. You were arguing that zip code > IQ as a predictor of success.

[Anonymous No.10324478]

>>10324462
How are there no "biological" differences between whites and blacks? They differ widely in appearance and genetic makeup. They're obviously different.

[Anonymous No.10324479]

>>10324461
>IQ, and its ability to predict plenty of things concerning the ability of an individual.
No, IQ can make predictions about a group of people. Individually IQ is a weak predictor of success.

>serious problem of inequality we have in the US
Weird, it's almost like anyone can succeed when they aren't subject to poor living conditions

[Anonymous No.10324484]

>>10324465
If you have some evidence to the contrary then you can refute this

[Anonymous No.10324487]

>>10324354
Just wanna bump my own post because nobody will reply after I show the truth about thealternativehypothesis. Everybody keep it in mind though. The dude is a liar.

[Anonymous No.10324490]

>>10324474
No, individually and as a group zip code is a more powerful predictor of success than IQ and both are a better predictor of success than race. This has been my point since the start of this argument and I'm sorry the schools on your zip code didn't put much emphasis on reading comprehension

[Anonymous No.10324493]

>>10324484
It’s a point that shows you have zero understanding of molecular genetics. I don’t even want to begin desu

[Anonymous No.10324494]

>>10324484
The best summary is this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=143PJEcScbQ

But since i know your response will be
>muh video
here is Wiki article on it. Although it isn't as good.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Genetic_Diversity:_Lewontin's_Fallacy

[Anonymous No.10324497]

>>10324493
>"I'm right because I said you're wrong and I don't even have to prove it"
Quality post

[Anonymous No.10324500]

>>10324490
Okay but so what I’m asking for is a source that says zip code is a better predictor for success than IQ, for either but preferably both. I had a chance to read a couple of the articles you provided and neither were actually about that.

[Anonymous No.10324505]

>>10324494
>muh video
I don't mind videos. It's about who makes the video. It's been pointed out that he is not credible and is a liar.

[Anonymous No.10324515]

>>10324494
Similarly, biological anthropologist Jonathan Marks agrees with Edwards that correlations between geographical areas and genetics obviously exist in human populations, but goes on to note that "What is unclear is what this has to do with 'race' as that term has been used through much in the twentieth century—the mere fact that we can find groups to be different and can reliably allot people to them is trivial. Again, the point of the theory of race was to discover large clusters of people that are principally homogeneous within and heterogeneous between, contrasting groups.

>the mere fact that we can find groups to be different and can reliably allot people to them is trivial
>the point of the theory of race was to discover large clusters of people that are principally homogeneous within and heterogeneous between, contrasting groups.

[Anonymous No.10324516]

>>10324505
So your argument isn't muh video it is muh poisoning the well.
Even better.

You know what buddy, if what he says is wrong than prove that. Don't come to me with "He said something what i think is wrong about some different topic therefore everything he says from now on is wrong too."
Don't degrade this board even more.

[Anonymous No.10324529]

>>10324516
>if what he says is wrong than prove that.
I've done so, many times. It takes so long, especially if I have to watch a video.

Give me something from his bullshit website and I can crack it in like 30 mins. I will have to be leaving work soon though, so I won't get a chance.

But this dude misrepresents studies constantly.

[Anonymous No.10324530]

>>10322811
>humans genetically engineered them to have certain traits and temperaments
That's an environment.

[Anonymous No.10324537]

>>10324529
You can start with this>>10324110
We are looking forward for your rebuttal.

[Anonymous No.10324545]

>>10324500
Here's one for a college admissions. Google is full of IQ autism which makes searching difficult.

[Anonymous No.10324547]

>>10324505
The tl;dr is that aggregate percent of dissimilar DNA is non-predictor for phenotypical expression. Very small changes to a code that is ~3 billion total base pairs can have huge sweeping effects in terms of the conditions of expression for huge protein codes, while it is also possible for large areas of dormant or junk code to vary arbitrarily. You would almost expect more variance in junk code because there’s no selection pressure to keep it in its original form.

Aggregate dissimilarity of DNA can be useful for building phylogenetic trees, but even then a more precise tool is to trace the evolution of specific traits on a genetic level.

If the Lewiston fallacy were applied to bears, it would be taxonomically invalid to suggest that brown and polar bears are separate species.

[Anonymous No.10324551]

>>10324545
Can you give me the source from the image? It looks interesting.

[Anonymous No.10324560]

>>10324478
There are also biological differences between any two random white guys or two black guys. You just pick and choose those differences that help you push an agenda. Society certainly did. Sure youre genetically somewhat different from a black guy.But you can always find plenty of whites who are genetically more different to you on the whole than the black guy is to you. The same goes for him.

[Anonymous No.10324562]

>>10324500
>>10324545
Here's a company that uses zip code rather than IQ as a predictor, but they don't offer any real information

https://capturehighered.com/predictive-modeling/predicting-zip-code-level/

Pic related is demonstrates the important of income of educational success

[Anonymous No.10324564]

>>10324537
When referencing Trzaskowski et al 2014

His claim:
>This is direct evidence showing that a substantial amount, likely more than half, of the correlation between parental SES and IQ in adolescence is explained by the parents having smart genes and passing them on to their kids.

But the study says:
>However, if the difference is real, one possible explanation is that, although the phenotypic correlations between age-7 SES and IQ at ages 7 and 12 do not change, the lower genetic contribution to the SES-IQ correlation at age 12 might reflect increased environmental influence outside the family (e.g., peers, teachers).

This was real real quick because I have to get going. But his conclusion is misleading compared to the study.

[Anonymous No.10324571]

>>10324560
See
>>10324547
>>10324494

[Anonymous No.10324574]

>>10324551
Here you go

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304000810_Geography_of_College_Opportunity_The_Case_of_Education_Deserts

[Anonymous No.10324580]

>>10324564
There isn't contradiction in that. And what you quoted isn't even conclusion of that study. Are you baiting or something?

[Anonymous No.10324586]

>>10324580
Quoted wrong part.brb 20 mins

[Anonymous No.10324592]

>>10320517
>be pedigree dog breed
>suffer from severe genetic disorders due to inbreeding

what did /pol/ mean with that

[Anonymous No.10324606]

>>10324574
I guess I can request the full thing, but the abstract doesn’t mention IQ, nor does the image you posted. Again, I would never deny that zip code and life success correlate. It’s just a matter of identifying the strongest predictor.

[Anonymous No.10324613]

Are niggers are stupid and do jews run the world? Yes.
Should you post this information on every board on the site? No

[Anonymous No.10324626]

>>10324120
Kraut was an autist, yes, but just because he agreed with something doesn't make said thing wrong

[Anonymous No.10324693]

>>10324571
From the wiki
>He(Lewontin) found that the majority of the total genetic variation between humans (i.e., of the 0.1% of DNA that varies between individuals), 85.4%, is found within populations, 8.3% of the variation is found between populations within a "race", and only 6.3% was found to account for the racial classification. Numerous later studies have confirmed his findings.[6]
This is what I said earlier. You are 8.3% of 0.1% different from the average black. But up to 85.4% of 0.1% different from another random white person.
Edwards said
>Edwards argued that while Lewontin's statements on variability are correct when examining the frequency of different alleles (variants of a particular gene) at an individual locus (the location of a particular gene) between individuals, it is nonetheless possible to classify individuals into different racial groups with an accuracy that approaches 100 percent when one takes into account the frequency of the alleles at several loci at the same time.
This is about finding correlations between those genes in the 6.3% of .1% to say that if one gene is there then some other gene must be there too. Of course some genes can be correlated since they they were subject to the same environmental pressures. But I don't see how this contradicts the above. I dont think "Lewontins fallacy" is really a fallacy

[Anonymous No.10324722]

>>10324693
It’s a fallacy to say that the groups cannot be taxonomically identified when they literally can be via statistical grouping. That’s the fallacy. It is not a requirement that there be some arbitrary difference in junk DNA in order to be able to identify meaningful differences in groups which have been subject to recent and intense selective conditions.

[Anonymous No.10324736]

>>10324722 (cont’d)
Note too that there can even permissibly be very minor overlap with other groups in some of these ‘group-defining’ characteristics, because sub-species is a classification which allows that groups share genetic information occasionally, and does not imply that the groups be perfectly isolated. Race is an informal classification even below subspecies.

Different Galapagos finches, which biologists have no qualms about considering entirely different species, actually share genes on a continuum, as they occasionally breed with members of other like-species with whom habitats are shared.

[Anonymous No.10324737]

>>10324537
>>10324564
>>10324580
>>10324586
Okay, issues with Trzaskowski
1) the study only uses twins from England, and doesn't mention race.
2) this passage
>The phenotypic correlation between family SES at age 7 and children's IQ at age 7 is 0.31. The genetic contribution to this covariance is 0.29 (Table 2). In other words, 94% of the correlation between family SES and children's IQ is mediated genetically.

does not imply TAH's interpretation, that at least half is determined genetically.

Still real quick stuff. On my way home.

[Anonymous No.10324743]

>>10324693
Cont.
So even if the total differences between groups is very tiny, the genes that correspond to that small difference are surely correlated, and the degree of correlation tells you where that person's recent ancestors came from. So basically the taxonomical classes in this case will overlap with geographic classes of populations. But you dont genes to tell you that. Also remember that there's still more genetic variation within a randomly collected group of white people than there is bwtween the average white and the average black.

[Anonymous No.10324781]

>>10324743
>Also remember that there's still more genetic variation within a randomly collected group of white people than there is bwtween the average white and the average black.
I remember and have explained it
>So basically the taxonomical classes in this case will overlap with geographic classes of populations.
Is this a problem for something? Humans never differentiated enough (or in such a way as) to create an impermeable barrier to cross-breeding, meaning that if a population crossed into the domain of another population, you wouldn't have two taxonomically different populations living in the same geographic area for too many generations before the dam broke. Even the crazy-intense Indian caste system couldn't stop admixture over thousands of years, although it did keep the different castes' averages for ancestry markers differentiated.

[Anonymous No.10324815]

>>10324530

[Anonymous No.10324836]

>>10324722
Statistical grouping can only be used for taxonomical purposes if genes are correlated only along the lines that would give you the different races. I'm not sure if that's the case though. I would have to read up on it. However you can do a reliable classification like what you said after cherrypicking genes that would lead you to that kind of taxonomy. Also needless to say this doesn't work on mutts

[Anonymous No.10324841]

>>10322815
I understand what you're getting at, but your comic is actually fucking retarded. Like... I'm not even attacking your political agenda.

[Anonymous No.10324943]

[Anonymous No.10324953]

>>10324943
what, did she eat a Warhead or something?

[Anonymous No.10324954]

[Anonymous No.10324959]

>>10324836
The idea makes sense on paper, but it’s a double standard. It’s not how we treat animals that aren’t human, as I explained in the finch example. The idea of what genetic traits ‘are’ and ‘are not’ of a species is sometimes vague in and of itself. The first thing they taught me in population biology is that speciation is a weird, subjective thing. There are plenty of real world examples even, of entire species which sit on a spectrum with like-species.

[Anonymous No.10325201]

>>10324354
The MUH lead argument is always a classic

[Anonymous No.10325212]

>>10324562
>Pic related is demonstrates the important of income of educational success

And here is a table that disproves it

[Anonymous No.10325216]

>>10324592

https://www.jewishgeneticdiseases.org/jewish-genetic-diseases/

[Anonymous No.10325220]

>>10324613
What a good goy, he is the goodest goy around here. Get this guy a good goy award.

[Anonymous No.10325225]

>>10325201
TAH himself argues that lead is a big deal. He handwaves this fact by saying the levels these days are negligible anyway (which is intentionally misleading).

[Anonymous No.10325229]

>>10324841
>but your comic is actually fucking retarded

Just because you fail to understand its meaning doesn't mean it's retarded.

[Anonymous No.10325238]

>>10325212
>And here is a table that disproves it
Fucking brainlet. The image you posted clearly shows a positive correlation between income and higher test scores. It actually further supports what >>10324562 said.

[Anonymous No.10325239]

>>10325212
>Imagine being this retarded
That data in no way disproves that correlation

[Anonymous No.10325240]

>>10325201
And somehow lead only affects niggers.

[Anonymous No.10325244]

>>10325225
If that was the case black people who live far frome "leaded" areas would have normal IQs. Do black people live exclusively in leaded areas?
The ancient romans had a lead problem too, but they weren't a dysfunctional society.
This arguments flies like a lead balloon.

[Anonymous No.10325250]

>>10325238
It does not. The gap stop diminishing at $60000.

[Anonymous No.10325254]

>>10325250
*stops

[Anonymous No.10325265]

>>10325238
>positive correlation between income and higher test scores

Well DUH.

But income is not the reason for the IQ gap, moron. The MUH income argument goes like this: black score low because they are poor. Instead we see that poor whites still perform better than rich blacks. It must be oppression, of course.

[Anonymous No.10325270]

>>10325212
Why did you use retarded burger test data?

[Anonymous No.10325272]

>>10325244
Pretty much everywhere was a leaded area until recently. It was in paint and gasoline. What kind of place didn't have those? Just stop man.

[Anonymous No.10325274]

>>10325238
The racial gap does not close...

[Anonymous No.10325279]

>>10325272
But, according to your narrative, somehow the lead only affect niggers. East Asians and Whites are immune?

[Anonymous No.10325284]

>>10325272
>Pretty much everywhere was a leaded area until recently.

Well, shouldn't be everyone equally dumber then? Or are blacks more sensitive to lead?

It's becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish bait form race denialists' arguments.

Fucking Poe's law.

[Anonymous No.10325287]

>>10325270
>Why did you use retarded burger test data?

Show me your non retarded data, go on.

[Anonymous No.10325290]

>>10325250
>>10325274
I never said anything about the racial gap you inbreds. >>10325212 specifically claimed his image disproved "important of income of educational success" and if you look at his image you can clearly see a positive correlation between income and higher test scores

[Anonymous No.10325294]

>>10325284
As I said, they think lead only affects niggers.

[Anonymous No.10325297]

>>10325279
>>10325284
Look at the lead levels and kys. You're literally arguing reality right in front of you. Lead was everywhere, affected everyone, but was in higher levels in blacks. Don't ask me how.

[Anonymous No.10325300]

>>10325290
>inbreds

That is racist.

[Anonymous No.10325311]

>>10325300
Correct. What's your point?

[Anonymous No.10325313]

>>10325290
Context you moron.
We are talking if income matters MORE than IQ.
Nobody here denies that income matters.

[Anonymous No.10325319]

>>10325265
I was commenting on the IQ gap you fucking faggot.

[Anonymous No.10325320]

>>10325297
>but was in higher levels in blacks.

And that PROVES the IQ gap, right? Because some blacks in some places have higher lead levels than whites. Yes, that must be it.

[Anonymous No.10325324]

>>10325320
>And that PROVES the IQ gap, right?
Nope. But it would certainly contribute to it.

[Anonymous No.10325332]

>>10325324
Well it can, but is it significant?
If it can explain 0.2 IQ points, does it really matters?
These are really stupid and specious arguments.
"Can" != "does"

[Anonymous No.10325346]

>>10325332
Idk, you can look it up. What I'm seeing is low levels exposure is ~2-3 points. And higher levels can do like 7 points.

[Anonymous No.10325369]

>>10325346

>Idk, you can look it up.

Of course, you don't know. Yours is an argument from ignorance.

>What I'm seeing is low levels exposure is ~2-3 points. And higher levels can do like 7 points.

But why should all blacks suffer from high levels of high lead. Is this the "white people are keeping the black man with lead theory"?

Well, the burden of proof is on YOU, not ME.

[Anonymous No.10325386]

>>10325369
*"white people are keeping the black man down with lead" theory

[Anonymous No.10325443]

>>10323423
there's no chance he isn't baiting, dumbass

[Anonymous No.10325451]

>>10323460
>swallows his pride, wipes the semen off his lips and asks what the lecture was about

[Anonymous No.10325480]

>>10325451
why are you quoting that?

[Anonymous No.10325609]

[Anonymous No.10325623]

haha racist thread is over. leave /sci/ forever and never come back, you douchebags suck the big one

[Anonymous No.10325722]

>>10325623
Hello, fellow racist

[Anonymous No.10325726]

can this board stop devolving into iq and race arguments

these threads used to be funny

[Anonymous No.10325964]

based and redpilled thread

[Anonymous No.10326037]

>>10325726
No one will budge on any point. It's just a moral battle for everyone involved.

[Anonymous No.10326053]

>>10326037
It's basically jews + good goys vs everyone else at this point.

[Anonymous No.10326290]

>>10324959
So you're saying we classify animals like that only because it's a matter of convenience for population biologists to study geographically separated populations. They choose one way to classify humans among a multitide of different ways. However it's obviously not convenient to classify humans like that. Saying it's a double standard is being too much of a simpleton.

[Anonymous No.10326298]

>>10324943
There should be another one using differential forms:

dF =0
-d*F= *J

[Anonymous No.10326304]

>>10326053
Good thing the news are on our side then

[Anonymous No.10326306]

>>10326304
*joos

[Anonymous No.10326309]

>>10326290
I don't see where you're getting "convenience" from. Classifying subspecies isn't "convenient". It would be more convenient to just not do it, lol. Different subspecies are literally (usually) clusters on a spectrum. Identifying human groups by where they cluster is about classification in and of itself. The only reason we would skip out on doing it for humans IMO is to make a sociopolitical statement. And that seems less-than-scientific to me.

[Anonymous No.10326323]

>>10326290
>So you're saying we classify animals like that only because it's a matter of convenience for population biologists to study geographically separated populations.
Continuing, but I realise I should maybe clarify something about the finch example. Those birds in question can be on the same island as one another, have closely overlapping habitats, very occasionally interbreed, and still be considered different species because of their differing physiology and mating songs. The mating barrier is literally a learning behaviour: mating song.

[Anonymous No.10326324]

>>10326323
*learned behaviour

Pretty tired. Going to duck out tbqhwym8

[Anonymous No.10326350]

>>10326309
>Different subspecies are literally (usually) clusters on a spectrum.
>usually
What does this mean? What are the other "non-usual" cases.

[Anonymous No.10326370]

>>10326350
I don't know any, but considering how fucky this can get sometimes, I'm really just covering my bases.

[Anonymous No.10326495]

Really loving this scientific and mathematical humour

Sure is science and mathematics.

[Anonymous No.10327359]

>>10321401
Hispanic's not a race dipshit

Not all Hispanics are mexicans you retarded fuck