Wikipedia Racism Calculus

[Anonymous No.11033959]

I just looked up calculus on wikipedia and the first image of a person is an arab and it even so says in the underlying image description;
>"Alhazen, 11th century Arab mathematician and physicist"
When continued to scroll down the page you encounter the next person;
>"Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz was the first to state clearly the rules of calculus."
When continued to scroll down the page you encounter the next person;
>"Isaac Newton developed the use of calculus in his laws of motion and gravitation."
When continued to scroll down the page you encounter the next person;
>"Maria Gaetana Agnesi"

Why doesn't the underlying image description of white males and females declare their race and/or national origin?
Why doesn't the female have any underlying image description at all?

Is wikipedia' mathematical department racist?

[Anonymous No.11033961]

Take your meds.

[Anonymous No.11033995]

Have sex

[Anonymous No.11034006]

>>11033959
European is the default assumption, so it need not be said.
Although I suppose this could be used as a starting point for historical revisionism downplaying and removing white people, I find it extremely unlikely that's the writers' motivation.

[Anonymous No.11034017]

>>11034006
This, you're reading it in English so they assume you have an English point of view. If someone wrote it in some other language (assuming it wasn't a direct translation) They would probably include the blurbs for the other people.

[Anonymous No.11034019]

>>11033959
they're subtly suggesting white genocide, of course. good catch. we should blow this up to the conservative media and get wikipedia cancelled.

[Anonymous No.11034023]

>>11034019
What was his name again? Does he still post on /v/?

[Anonymous No.11034024]

>>11034006
It's called unconscious bias, and for your information someone doesn't need to be an anti-White racist pos.

[Anonymous No.11034027]

>>11034019
>intelligence is chiefly influenced by socio-economic status

But that's wrong.

Socio-economic status is chiefly influenced by intelligence.

[Anonymous No.11034035]

>>11034027
No, he's right. You're mistaking cause for effect.

[Anonymous No.11034050]

>>11034035
no
>IQ is a better predictor of someone's future socio-economic status than their parents socio-economic status
https://emilkirkegaard.dk/en/wp-content/uploads/Intelligence-and-socioeconomic-success-A-meta-analytic-review-of-longitudinal-research.pdf
>IQ differences between siblings predict future differences in socio-economic status
https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/10/20040302_book443.pdf
>IQ predicts job performance
http://maamodt.asp.radford.edu/PSYC%20651/Huffcutt%20&%20Arthur%20(1994)%20Interview.pdf

[Anonymous No.11034074]

>>11034050
>Education appears to be the most consistent, robust, and durable method yet to be identified for raising intelligence.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797618774253

[Anonymous No.11034084]

>>11034074

Most Americans who start college end up dropping out. If they complete college, then they likely have a higher iq than those who don't

[Anonymous No.11034087]

>>11033959
fuck niggers

[Anonymous No.11034088]

>>11033959
Since 99% of scientific progress was made by white males, it is the default assumption.

[Anonymous No.11034090]

>>11034084
>If they complete college, then they likely have a higher iq than those who don't
no, they're more likely to be richer because money is the reason why people drop out.

[Anonymous No.11034097]

>>11034088
lol, what a moron

[Anonymous No.11034106]

>>11034097
Not trolling, but is that actually wrong? I thought science was a white man's game.

[Anonymous No.11034114]

>>11034074
"The most consistent, robust, and durable method" for raising intelligence isn't saying much, since intelligence hardly ever changes at all. Even that very meta analysis concludes a 1 to 5 point change. That's barely anything.
Meanwhile, racial differences in IQ hold across all education levels.
https://nces.ed.gov/pubs93/93275.pdf

[Anonymous No.11034120]

>>11034106
Many cultures had eras when science and scientific thought flourished, none just kept expanding like European science though. Partly because the ability to admit ignorance and relegation of god was unique to Europe.

[Anonymous No.11034123]

>>11034120
That may be the cause, or maybe not.
Regardless this>>11034088 guy's statement remains approximately correct.

[Anonymous No.11034137]

>>11034035
>You're mistaking cause for effect.

Projecting so hard.

[Anonymous No.11034141]

>>11034123
Well, science is a human endeavour, the modern world clearly shows that where Indians and Chinese excel at stem.

Europeans did indeed discover most of what we know though, but not because of what pol wants you to believe. It was actually the sum of many complicated factors

[Anonymous No.11034147]

>>11034097
Most certainly, affermative action has resulted in many great scientific discoveries! We wuz in all actuality kangz and sheeit.

[Anonymous No.11034149]

>>11034114
1 to 5 points... per year of additional education. Why did you leave that part out?

[Anonymous No.11034161]

>>11034147
Yeah, nowadays it's literally impossible for white males to go to school, and that's why there have been no scientific discoveries for decades. Race war when.

[Anonymous No.11034164]

>>11034161
>Yeah, nowadays it's literally impossible for white males to go to school
False, it's not impossible at all. Just a little bit harder than before, but who am I to complain about that, I'm a white male after all the world, civilization is on my shoulders. Allow me to use a jewish proverb; I ask not for a lighter burden, but for broader shoulders.
>and that's why there have been no scientific discoveries for decades
there have been, perhaps not the greatest but still, give the white man some slack eh

[Anonymous No.11034172]

>>11034141
What does pol want me to believe? That it's all about colours?
What do you want me to believe? That the factor of colour/race/nationality is of zero importance? That I am wrong to assume rapes are commited by non-europeans/non-whites and scientific discoveries are accomplished by europeans/whites?

[Anonymous No.11034176]

>>11034164
Jewish lies

[Anonymous No.11034182]

>>11034172
No, all you need to believe is that scientific achievement requires a combination of precise and complex social, political, religious values and social structures. Not genetic differences. So instead of bickering about superiority we can figure out how to have an intellectual revolution in non European societies, like we had, for the good of our species.

[Anonymous No.11034186]

>>11034182
>figure out how to have an intellectual revolution in non Europe
I know how, colonialism.

[Anonymous No.11034191]

>>11034182
>bickering about superiority
there's no bickering, there's no competition, there's no question - the white man is superior, nobody denies this, only completely brainwashed retards and you kinda sound like one of them

[Anonymous No.11034192]

>>11034182
>scientific achievement requires a combination of precise and complex social, political, religious values and social structures. Not genetic differences.

You don't think genetics influence social structures?

You don't think the history of social structures has influenced genetics?

[Anonymous No.11034195]

>>11034149
Not him but Motivated Numeracy.

[Anonymous No.11034198]

>>11034186
Colonialism was never an altruistic enterprise, I think they will have to change themselves, we can only help and guide them. It will happen though, sooner or later. East Asia is progressing remarkably. Their political thought is still ancient but that can change too.

[Anonymous No.11034202]

>>11033959
White fragility ladies and gentlemen

[Anonymous No.11034207]

>>11034191
Why do you think so? I study at Cambridge, there are talented and intelligent people from all over the world who are just as bright as anyone. Genetic fatalism like this is insufficient, it ignores the complexity of studying science.

[Anonymous No.11034209]

>>11034192
Social structures change way faster than genetics can, so no, not really.

[Anonymous No.11034213]

>>11034114
If we assume that that affect is linear and the average gain per year is 3.
Elementary school grade k thru 5 = 6 years = 18 IQ points on average.
Middle school grade 6 thru 8 = 3 years = 9 IQ points on average.
High school grade 9 thru 12 = 4 years = 12 IQ points on average.

[Anonymous No.11034225]

>>11034198
>I think they will have to change themselves, we can only help and guide them.
Why not? Because if we took command they'd chimpout and try to bash da evil whyte maynes skull with a stick (not a brick because they build houses with literal feces)
Is it hard to accept and come to terms with their fundamental inferiority? It hurts their feelings? So we have to be careful not to promote the use of condoms too aggresively because it hurts their feeligns? So we better let millions of babies be born with aids and suffering and death and shit because why? Lmao

[Anonymous No.11034229]

>>11034225
You seem to not care about their lives, just feeling secure that you are superior. That is why that's a bad idea, your motives will never be completely selfless.

[Anonymous No.11034231]

>>11034209
So the lack of dairy in Chinese cuisine isn't due to their lack of an allele for retained production of lactase into adulthood?

[Anonymous No.11034236]

>>11034149
Honestly I just skimmed the abstract to reply faster.
Anyway I've already shown the racial gaps exist on every education level and socio-economic status, so it's hardly relevant.

[Anonymous No.11034239]

>>11034229
It's not about feelings, it's about mathematics. To reduce suffering on a larger scale the current niggers in charge need to step the fuck down and let whitey control the situation.
Are you really going to sit next to a mad man dictator warlord blood drinking stone age savage and try to whisper in his ear to not eat babies and that aids is a pretty bad thing that causes pretty much suffering and pain and stuff and that you have some ideas on how to go about changing a couple things, good luck buddy keep hittin' that pipe world peace and all that my man

[Anonymous No.11034241]

>>11034236
>I don't read.
>I don't think.
>I don't care.
WE KNOW.

[Anonymous No.11034245]

>>11034239
>To reduce suffering
>let whitey control the situation.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Whitey created the situation.

[Anonymous No.11034251]

>>11034245
whiteoids eternally btfo

[Anonymous No.11034252]

>>11034213
>arbitrarily assume something false
>reach foregone, false conclusions
Wow, really groundbreaking stuff here. You have a future in a high-IQ profession, I can tell.

[Anonymous No.11034255]

>>11034252
>arbitrarily assume something false
prove it.
>reach foregone, false conclusions
again prove it.

[Anonymous No.11034265]

>>11034255
>I get to dictate the null hypothesis
Nigger, you don't even know the difference between the English words "affect" and "effect"

[Anonymous No.11034279]

>>11034265
Prove it.

[Anonymous No.11034286]

>>11034265
>I'm also a racist.
Thanks for informing us.

[Anonymous No.11034300]

>>11034097
Am I missing something here?
What is wrong in >>11034088?

[Anonymous No.11034306]

>>11034209
This is pathetic.

Something changes faster than another thing, therefore it cannot be influenced by the other thing.

The Earth changes way faster than the Sun, therefore the Earth cannot be influenced by the Sun.

The weather changes way more rapidly than the climate, therefore weather is not influenced by climate.

Realize you are trapped in confirmation bias.

[Anonymous No.11034312]

>>11034123
Now add Grece and Rome. And remember that most Persians and Indian Brahmins were white (indo-aryans).
The fact is: 99% of scientific progress in the last 2500 years was made by white males.

[Anonymous No.11034323]

>>11034213
Upon closer inspection, the paper only concerns itself with higher education, not basic. So this is pretty baseless. Not to mention irrelevant to racial gaps, which is what's being discussed.

[Anonymous No.11034333]

>>11033959

Awwww Poor whieety personz sadddd....

Jesus, you racists are worse than the SJWs with your self pity PC protections.

I went to the wiki article. It seems a valid history of the progression of the idea of calculus.

In fact, it is the constant revision when new facts emerge that allows us to see that history is not made by individuals, but only credited to individuals who write them down, and to their posterity that continues to give credit to individuals.

Even the egoist Newton reflected that he was standing on the shoulders of giants.
And if you had actually tried to read the Principia you would understand that the calculus you learn in school bears little to no resemblance to the shit both Leibniz and Newton wrote down. They did not develop the idea of the epsilon definition of the derivative.

Historians have a duty to not only to add that information but to dispel the lies of those who use history (as you do) as a persuasion or propaganda of ulterior controlling narratives.

tl;dr: >>>/pol is that way.

[Anonymous No.11034353]

>>11034306
The modern family is immensely different from past family social structures. You aren't expected to have a close knit family with reactions with extended family members, you are supposed to move out when you are adult, marry according to your choice, be an individualist. This is all western society, vastly different from the rest of the world where family is still very close. Would you say this change happened in the last 100 years because of genetics? Was there something in white genes which just caused something like family, one of the most basic social structures for so many thousand years to be weakened? It's evident that social structures are much more dynamic and are hugely influenced by culture and belief, much more than genetics. People like you try to explain literally everything with genes, the world is not that simple.

[Anonymous No.11034373]

>>11034353
>People like you try to explain literally everything with genes, the world is not that simple.

Your reading comprehension is sorely lacking.

Nowhere did I ever imply that genetics is the sole factor in social structure. Indeed, to do so would be obviously false and ignoring memetics.

All I did was argue that genetics plays a role in social structure, which it clearly does. Kin selection, sexual selection, etc., are all parts of social structure based in genetics.

You are fighting phantoms. You read someone point out that genetics has a role, and read "genetics is the sole determinant". You have some problem.

[Anonymous No.11034386]

>>11033959
>Why doesn't the underlying image description of white males and females declare their race and/or national origin?
Because 'white' is the norm, if no ethnicity is mentioned, this is the default.

[Anonymous No.11034389]

>>11034373
No, I definitely agree that genetics does play some sort of role in determining social structures. It's just that there are many other factors, which the poster above seemed to ignore, not you.

[Anonymous No.11034404]

>>11034286
>is a nigger
At least you don't deny it.

[Anonymous No.11034417]

>>11034323
>the paper only concerns itself with higher education
It concerns itself with compulsory education which is not higher education.

[Anonymous No.11034422]

>>11034404
>I use racial slurs when talking to people I disagree with regardless of their race.
Thanks for elucidating your brand of racism for us.

[Anonymous No.11034427]

>>11034084
iq measures your ability to solve problems, not long term motivation, funding, and focus

[Anonymous No.11034430]

>>11034312
Ancient societies had a negligible number of scientific discoveries, which is why the picture can measure from the 14th century without being completely illegitimate. But what the hell, let's look at the white proportion in the past too.

I'll look at Wikipedia's list of inventions from 2000 bce to 500 ce, and see how many of the inventors are white. You may notice this isn't the most reliable methodology in the world, so salt to taste.
>white: 15
>Asian: 14
>middle eastern/north African: 13
>???: 4
The numbers are astonishingly similar.

[Anonymous No.11034437]

>>11034430
>>middle eastern/north African: 13

These are white, too.

[Anonymous No.11034439]

>>11034427
>iq measures your ability to solve problems
Actually IQ measures your ability to solve the limited type of problems that can be found on IQ tests.

[Anonymous No.11034460]

>>11034427
>>11034439

it correlates with all that and then some

reminder that IQ is among the best correlates in all of social sciences

[Anonymous No.11034463]

>>11034439
All problems are more or less like that, theory of multimple intelligences is obsolete.

[Anonymous No.11034825]

>>11034430
>Asian and Middle Eastern

How many of these are Persians or Brahmins?

[Anonymous No.11034840]

>>11033959
Because the information that he was an Arab mathematican is actually a crucial information. Modern mathematics is has its origin in Greek, Arab, Chinese and Indian schools of mathematics.

[Anonymous No.11034855]

>>11033959
because white people are cringe. fuck liberals.

[Anonymous No.11034870]

>>11034840
Most mathematicians during Antiquity and Middle Ages were Greek (white), Persians (white), Indian (white) and Chinese.

[Anonymous No.11034904]

>>11034870
I like how you can't fathom anyone outside of Europe making scientific or other remarkable achievements so you say Indians were white lol. Pathetic. This guy look white to you?

In the middle ages Persian golden age was under Muslim rule when they were muslims. I cant see how you can say ferdowsi, rumi and hafez were anything other than the ancestors of modern Iranians both ethnically and spiritually. Stop getting information from pol, if you cant tell, it's always heavily biased and flat out lies to promote agendas. It's basic politics and you fall for it.

[Anonymous No.11034912]

>>11034191
But east asians have higher IQ and China never had a dark age.

[Anonymous No.11034918]

>>11034904
>Indians were white

The high caste Indians, viz. Brahmins and Kshatryas, in north India, before the Umayyd genocide, were indo-aryans.

>In the middle ages Persian golden age was under Muslim rule when they were muslims.

Yes, Persians were Muslims. So what? Since when Muslim is a race?

>I like how you can't fathom anyone outside of Europe making scientific or other remarkable achievements

China made a lot of scientific and other remarkable achievements. India (before the Islamic invasion) made a lot scientific and other remarkable achievements.

[Anonymous No.11034944]

>>11034912
The dark ages are in large part a myth and hold little truth. I don'tknow how you define "dark age" but China was on its way exploring the East African coast in the early 15th century till about halfway, but then stopped doing this by an emperor with an more China centered policy prohibiting the building of junks.

[Anonymous No.11034956]

>>11034918
Oh OK bucko, tell me, a north indian Kshatriya, about Indian castes. People over here are still ethnically called Indo Aryans. I don't know what 'umayyad' genocide you are talking about. India was ruled by Turkic muslims. Some Indians became muslims, but we were never ethnically replaced. I know this topic much, much better than you. So then Persians and north indians are still white according to you?

[Anonymous No.11034962]

>>11034944
I don't know what you mean by calling the Dark ages a myth. After the fall of Rome, the barbarian kingdoms were far behind the developments in Andalus, Baghdad, ming china

[Anonymous No.11034975]

>>11034956
>Umayyad genocide
The Arab invasion on North India, moron.

>I know this topic much, much better than you.
No you don't you fake.

[Anonymous No.11034979]

>a north indian Kshatriya, about Indian castes. People over here are still ethnically called Indo Aryans.

You are just a shitskin subhuman larping as Aryan

[Anonymous No.11034985]

>>11034027
This, the former is what retarded middle-of-the-road-iq r*dditors think

[Anonymous No.11034994]

>>11034962
Dark ages is a term that was popularized in the 18th century, to refer to how there was was less recorded history between the fall of Rome and the Rennaisance. The claim that Europe lacked behind said regions is simply not true, you think you can build all those churches without any knowledge? You ignore all the thinkers of those times? And to call them barbarian kingdoms at the time of Al Andalus Baghdad and China is just plainly wrong on many levels.

[Anonymous No.11034999]

>>11034975
Oh, the Arab invasion of north India. You mean the small excursions in sindh and Punjab? The Arabs never got further than that, that's not even modern India it's Pakistan. They never got past Pakistan, moron. It was the turks who ruled. Ghori khan, iltumish, allaudin khilji? I'm sure you're familiar. Tell me how the ancient Indians were white again? You seem to think some Arab genocide changed the genetics of north India? When they never got past Punjab?

>>11034979
OK so now north Indians are Shitskin subhumans but aryabhata, who was a great mathematician, was a grand huwhite Indo Aryan. Gotcha

[Anonymous No.11035025]

>>11034999
I also never get this Indians are white thing, shure there is a linguistic connection between European and Indian languages, and most likely this is due to some influx of Indo-European people, but to claim that because 4000-5000 years ago there was a migration that Northern Indians were white is just beyond me.

[Anonymous No.11035029]

>>11034994
It was a dark age for scientific thought. What great scientists were born in the dark ages? From when Rome fell to about 1200-1300 AD? Great theologians, sure. But Aquinas and Co. came later, influenced by developments of Alfarabi, zahrawi, ghazali, Avicenna, averroes. There was the house of wisdom in Baghdad, what church matched that? An Andalus was the jewel of the world according to a Christian nun.

Some Benedictine monks kept the tradition of thought alive, but this was theology mostly, later philosophy, not science. Muslim medical books were studied in Europe until the late renaissance.

>The claim that Europe lacked behind said regions is simply not true

They did though.

[Anonymous No.11035049]

>>11034207
Have you ever considered the fact that being at Cambridge, you are only seeing the cream of the crop? Have you ever had to live around a large amount of blacks with an average IQ for their ethnic group?

[Anonymous No.11035050]

>>11035025
White and Indo-European mean the same afaik. I always used both interchangeably.

[Anonymous No.11035127]

>>11035050
No, it means euro and india

[Anonymous No.11035140]

>>11035029
So now suddenly the dark ages are from the fall of Rome till 12-13th century, while canonically they're considerd from 5th till 15th century. Byzanthium was in Europe and you like to see Al Andalus as not in Europe, but it clearly is. Or are you playing the cultural angle. Also you like to claim as if India was barely affected but all the Inventors in Al Andalus were not Europeans, kind of exposes your bias.