/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.11085978]

Hey guys, they made a Francis Crick Institute, so I say we make a James Watson Institute. Who's with me?

[Anonymous No.11086030]

>>11085978
I already was with you James.

[Anonymous No.11086039]

>>11085978
I don't get how what he said was controversial. He literally asserted that IQ is only 50% genetic for fuck's sake. Which is WAYYY lower than what the /pol/tards assert (80% or higher).

[Anonymous No.11086043]

>>11086039
*88%

[Anonymous No.11086049]

>>11086039
This is also the reason why stormfaggots should stop sticking to him like flies. But I guess just saying "niggers dumb" is enough to earn you the title of "based".

[Anonymous No.11086050]

>>11086039
said that while he hoped that everyone was equal, "people who have to deal with black employees find this not true".

[Anonymous No.11086067]

A reminder this guy's son suffers from schizophrenia. Some of his relatives also developed it later on in life, what makes you think that he didn't?

[Anonymous No.11086073]

>>11085978
>another watson thread

Holy fuck this is getting worse than the IQ threads.

[Anonymous No.11086077]

>>11086039
If you aren't a blank slatist, then you are a pseudoscientist!

[Anonymous No.11086216]

>>11086039
80% sounds about right

your genes determine you're life

[Anonymous No.11086250]

>>11086067
He won a nobel prize. No other nobel prize winner has ever had schizophrenia.

[Anonymous No.11086298]

>>11086049
Not like any of them actually read anything he wrote past "anyone who's worked with blacks knows they're dumb"

[Anonymous No.11086333]

>>11085978
>James Watson Institute.

Excellent! and we will introduce a NON-minority scholarship

[Anonymous No.11086541]

>>11086216
Genetic heritability varies trait to trait. IQ does seem to sit at about 80% but that's not due to anything else being so.

[Anonymous No.11087617]

>>11086067
But he's supposed to be a genius.
Why do geniuses never pass on their genes?
Never makes sense.
Why did he just have 1 One son?

[Anonymous No.11087629]

>>11086216
>>11086541
It's actually 57% to 73% heritable.

https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Genetic-and-environmental-influences-on-human-Bouchard-Mcgue/5941daec6de7e3f11b7668336b26b03b9249d6b1

[Anonymous No.11087631]

>>11087617
He has a daughter, who isn't a schizo.

[Anonymous No.11087636]

>>11087631
So he just produced 2 kids. Great.
Guess what, pajeet produced 8

[Anonymous No.11087637]

>>11086039
Plomin says IQ is 60-80% genetic in adults with the value increasing with age.
Child IQ can be as low as 20% but this is mostly due to external environmental factors like nutrition.
The more your own genes are able to impact your own environment with age the higher the correlation becomes.

[Anonymous No.11087638]

>>11086216
>>11086541
>>11087629
You're all are fucking retarded. Heritability is NOT same thing as heredity. It describes the VARIANCE of a trait in a population.

If it did mean the same and we take the worst-case scenario (80% heritability of IQ), then a 100 IQ person can increase it by 20 point. More than an entire fucking deviation.

[Anonymous No.11087641]

>>11087629
>2003

[Anonymous No.11087647]

>>11087641
Still better than the recent batshit studies that suggest that nurture is more important.

[Anonymous No.11087652]

>>11087638
/sci/ will not touch this.

[Anonymous No.11087656]

>>11087652
/sci/ is nothing but a place for me to do psyops after a hard day at uni. I come here to turn /pol/tards into incels

[Anonymous No.11087659]

genetics sets the potential,
environment imoposes the limits

[Anonymous No.11087667]

>>11087641
Guess we should discard all the studies about everything a century ago and start all over?

[Anonymous No.11087674]

>>11087667
you would be more convincing if you actually used updated science

[Anonymous No.11087675]

>>11087667
This is data science, we have way larger sample sets and gene testing now instead of just adoption and twin studies

[Anonymous No.11088496]

>>11087638
This. Retards fucking LOVE to misuse heritability to make their stupid claims

[Anonymous No.11088503]

>>11087638
The good thing about heritability is the fact that it disproved that IQ is either fully environmental or fully genetic. Which BTFO'd blank slatists and biological determinists alike.

Other than that, I do agree with you. Heritability doesn't tell us shit about the genetic determination of a trait since it varies from person to person.

[Anonymous No.11089172]

>>11087638
>Heritability is a statistic used in the fields of breeding and genetics that estimates the degree of variation in a phenotypic trait in a population that is due to genetic variation between individuals in that population.[1] In other words, the concept of heritability can alternately be expressed in the form of the following question: "What is the proportion of the variation in a given trait within a population that is not explained by the environment or random chance?"[2]

>worst-case scenario (80% heritability of IQ
impartial as ever
>then a 100 IQ person can increase it by 20 point. More than an entire fucking deviation
No, they could increase it by 0.2 of 1sd, which is 3 points. You've used the average instead of the variance.

[Anonymous No.11089737]

>>11089172
>>Heritability is a statistic used in the fields of breeding and genetics that estimates the degree of variation in a phenotypic trait in a population that is due to genetic variation between individuals in that population.[1] In other words, the concept of heritability can alternately be expressed in the form of the following question: "What is the proportion of the variation in a given trait within a population that is not explained by the environment or random chance?"[2]

That just proves my point.
Also:
>quoting wikipedia

>No, they could increase it by 0.2 of 1sd, which is 3 points. You've used the average instead of the variance.

The deviations are arbitrary and created by humans themselves. Most tests have deviations of 15 points, while others have deviations of 10 or 20 points. How much do you want to be if one of the latters was popular instead you would've said that you can increase it by 2 or 4 points instead?

[Anonymous No.11089760]

>>11089172
>No, they could increase it by 0.2 of 1sd, which is 3 points.
You would have to ditch thousands of twin studies, intervention programs and US Army studies on retards to believe that this is true.

[Anonymous No.11089823]

>>11089172
Explain why heritability itself varies from country to country, study to study and even from person to person?

[Anonymous No.11089827]

>>11089737
>proves my point
What you said was wrong though and a lowly wikipedia quote proves it.
>deviations are arbitrary
>e if one of the latters was popular instead you would've said that you can increase it by 2 or 4 points instead?
Yeah and you can measure your weight in kilos instead of pounds to get a lower number but you'll still be fat.

[Anonymous No.11089829]

>>11089760
But all the studies agree with that.

[Anonymous No.11089830]

>>11089172
>they could increase it by 0.2 of 1sd

Why a deviation if we are measuring the heritability of a person's entire IQ?

[Anonymous No.11089831]

>>11089829
>no u

[Anonymous No.11089836]

>>11089827
>Yeah and you can measure your weight in kilos instead of pounds to get a lower number but you'll still be fat.

Shit analogy. This isn't physics.

[Anonymous No.11089871]

>>11089830
See the definition. >>11089737
Heritability's about variance, not total or mean values.
>>11089823
Why wouldn't it? Genes and traits of people all vary between each other, countries and studies.
>>11089836
No it's a good analogy. Your point was bad. Intelligence is approximately normally distributed and that doesn't change with what units you use.

[Anonymous No.11089874]

>>11085978
> Francis Crick

more like Francis Cu.ck

[Anonymous No.11089880]

>>11089871
>Why wouldn't it? Genes and traits of people all vary between each other, countries and studies.

I think you missed the entire point. What I complained about originally in >>11087638 are people thinking that heritability = genetic determination of a trait.
That's obivously not the case considering the definination you gave yourself and you admitting that it varies.

[Anonymous No.11089883]

>>11087674
>anything and everything I don't like can be traced back to a specific, obscure, satirical imageboard* on a formerly popular website called 4chan
Rent free.

* An "imageboard" is a type of internet forum or BBS, popular in the 2000s, which allows users to post images together with text-based messages.

[Anonymous No.11089890]

>>11089871
So if we imagine for a second that IQ has a heritability of 0% or 0.1%, Does that mean we can increase it by only 15 points...?

[Anonymous No.11089901]

>>11089172
>No, they could increase it by 0.2 of 1sd, which is 3 points.

This is retarded. IF we imagine that IQ had a heritability of 0% or 0.1%, then you're basically implying that it could only be increased by 15 points.

[Anonymous No.11090039]

>>11087629
>It's actually 57% to 73% heritable.
Maybe in childhood or adolescence but it is about 80% heritable in adulthood.

[Anonymous No.11090044]

>>11090039
The study was done on adults.

[Anonymous No.11090045]

>>11086049
>But I guess just saying "niggers dumb" is enough to earn you the title of "based".
I see no problem with this.

[Anonymous No.11090048]

>>11089172
>No, they could increase it by 0.2 of 1sd, which is 3 points.

Now, I consider myself a heredatrian. But fuck, what you said was dumb.

[Anonymous No.11090051]

>>11090044
It was done on both.

[Anonymous No.11090054]

>>11090051
And they did found that heritability increases in adulthood.

[Anonymous No.11090060]

>>11087674
i don't understand why people like you don't just use re/ddit where opinions you don't like isn't allowed

[Anonymous No.11090066]

>>11087674
4chan memes are reaching reddit levels of cringe

[Anonymous No.11090067]

>>11090060
Most of the people posting edgy shit and racebait are redditors who got banned from reddit for posting it.

[Anonymous No.11090073]

>>11090067
Reddit is for humble people. 4chan is for

[Anonymous No.11090075]

>>11090073
?

[Anonymous No.11090079]

Does anyone have the original transcript, article, video or whatever?

[Anonymous No.11090080]

>>11090073
Some hate to love. Some love to hate. Some are in reddit. Some are in 4chan.

[Anonymous No.11090081]

>>11088496
Honest what are the differences?

[Anonymous No.11090083]

>>11087636
If you're going to be a disgusting breeder (instead of a based anti-natalist) then 1-2 kids is the ideal. Indians are especially subhuman in this category.

[Anonymous No.11090085]

>>11090083
Israeli

[Anonymous No.11090089]

>>11087636
Look up r/K selection theory. Having few children is good for the expression of genes that increase intelligence in a population.

[Anonymous No.11090091]

>>11087674
Are you fucking retarded?

[Anonymous No.11090095]

>>11090085
I think Jews/Israelis should be the first to adopt antinatalism, as they're the biggest pushers for the overpopulation of lower class minorities, then the lower class minorities themselves should adopt anti-natalism. That would allow White people and choice Asians, and what children they have in the short term, to take care of the aging. I don't think the smartest, wealthiest and most empathic people should stop breeding first, unlike what you might assume. They need to stop breeding and die naturally last (actually, I'm cool with agelessness and would prefer to pursue that instead of AN, but both seem unlikely) to ensure that people are being taken care of in their last days, but I will say that they need to stop breeding as well.

Everyone on Earth should.

[Anonymous No.11090110]

>>11090089
I think your egg is first when the chicken should be.

People who tend to have less children are likely more intelligent to begin with.

[Anonymous No.11090115]

>>11090066
Shit, vomit, farts and piss are tried and true tools of the satirical arts.

[Anonymous No.11090125]

>>11090095
>Everyone on Earth should [stop breeding]
nihilist faggot, kill yourself

[Anonymous No.11090127]

>>11090110
This is the same thing as:
>Do intelligent people like maths because they are intelligent or are they're intelligent because they like maths?
>Are junkies stupid because they do drugs or do they do drugs because they're stupid?

The answer to all of these kinds of questions is "both". Look "Feedback cycle".

[Anonymous No.11090129]

>>11090127
Look up*

[Anonymous No.11090135]

>>11090125
Nihilists would want everyone on Earth to kill themselves as no lives have meaning. While I believe already existent people live, or, rather, can live, meaningful lives while they're still kicking.

[Anonymous No.11090137]

>>11090135
>Nihilists would want everyone on Earth to kill themselves as no lives have meaning.
according to them*

[Anonymous No.11090151]

>>11090127
Okay, I may have misunderstood, let me ask a question:
Are you saying something similar to "Promoting running in effective ways is good for the expression of genes that increase cardiovascular health in a population"?

[Anonymous No.11090187]

>>11090083
1 or 2 kids is cuck tier. No wonder you're White.

[Anonymous No.11090195]

>>11090151
Yeah.

Thing is in my original post I didn't imply that just having fewer children is gonna express genes for intellect out of the blue. With fewer children the parents would be able to focus all the resources on them, teach them and nurture them. Etc. It also expresses genes for other good traits.

So telling whites or east asians to just throw that strategy that made them great in the first place and start fucking like niggers is just gonna, eventually, turn them into niggers.

[Anonymous No.11090198]

>>11090195
Having 3-7 is optimal. 3 if you're poor or a weird guy with anger issues.

[Anonymous No.11090205]

>>11090081
The soil is different from one planter to the other. The plants should be labeled. Plant A through G in each planter. The "A"s for each planter are genetically identical, and so on. It shows how a different environment can change the expected variations. See plants A and C for example. With the soil in planter #2, A seems superior due to genetics. Put them in planter #1, now they are equal due to genetics. Trying to do this with an incredibly complex trait like intelligence is almost frivolous.

[Anonymous No.11090211]

>>11090081
The soil is different from one planter to the other. The plants should be labeled. Plant A through G in each planter. The "A"s for each planter are genetically identical, and so on. It shows how a different environment can change the expected variations. See plants A and C for example. With the soil in planter #2, C seems superior due to genetics. Put them in planter #1, now they are equal due to genetics. Trying to do this with an incredibly complex trait like intelligence is almost frivolous.

[Anonymous No.11090212]

>>11090205
Don't forget that intelligence is an omnigenic trait. Which makes it even more of a clusterfuck.

[Anonymous No.11090216]

>>11090212
Set for deleting my post, had a typo :(
But you're right.

[Anonymous No.11090220]

>>11090216
Lmao.

[Anonymous No.11090229]

Make a Rosalind Franklin institute and unironically tell people the lizardmen had her killed to take away her nobel prize.

[Anonymous No.11090232]

>>11089901
0% heritability but still with 15 variance means environment causes 100% of the 15 variance, and a 15 variance distribution spans about 90 points so 90's the potential increase.
BUT increasing intelligence isn't a thing that anyone's worked out how to do yet anyway so implying only small possible gains is right.

[Anonymous No.11090256]

>>11090232
Okay, that makes sense. Should've clarified it earlier though.

[Anonymous No.11090290]

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

I wonder how IQ "realists" and James Watson fans feel about this.

[Anonymous No.11090314]

>>11090187
I'm not though.

[Anonymous No.11090322]

Thanks for bumping utter garbage, /sci/!

[Anonymous No.11090328]

>>11090198
Not him but I can't tell if you're trolling or not. If you are, 7 is way too many but not as ridiculous as you'd think. I'm half-Black and my great-grandmother had 19 kids (my great-grandfather probably had way more).

2 seems ideal, if you think people should be having kids. That way each generation replaces itself, prevents too much overpopulation and decline.

[Anonymous No.11090334]

>>11090290

[Anonymous No.11090341]

>>11090290
Why do you people have to make these ridiculous conversations in your head and then pretend it's something anybody has ever said?

[Anonymous No.11090344]

>>11090290
They love Jews. Many of the pioneers of IQ research were Jewish or part Jewish (Richard Herrnstein, author of The Bell Curve, or Richard Lynn)

In fact, I think Hitler banned IQ test for "being Jewish". If you're against IQ testing, you are of the same opinion as Hitler. Let that sink in.

And once it's sunk in, kill yourself.

[Anonymous No.11090346]

>>11090290
STOP! NOO!! YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO POST THIS!!!!

[Anonymous No.11090352]

>>11090341
The world doesn't revolve around your ignorance. The Stormfront mindset (which is just status quo in these circles) is very much akin to that image.

[Anonymous No.11090353]

>>11090089
not if you're only having 2 kids, that is a net loss, minimum of three to have any form of growth.

[Anonymous No.11090354]

>>11090344
>Richard Lynn
He's not a jew.
But the part about IQ is true. Many people don't even realize that the arguments they make against IQ are quite similar to what nazis were making.

[Anonymous No.11090357]

>>11090354
Shit, had a brain fart. Meant Arthur Jensen.

[Anonymous No.11090364]

>>11090353
How is that a net loss? Seems balanced.

[Anonymous No.11090365]

>Cochran et al. calculated an average IQ of 112–115
> 1954 study found that 24 of the 28 (86%) children in the New York public school system who had an IQ of 170 or higher were Jewish.
> a 1958 study of yeshiva students demonstrated that they had an extraordinary high verbal intelligence (which includes verbal reasoning, comprehension, working memory, and mathematical computation) as their median verbal IQ was found to be nearly 126.
>Only about 2% of the U.S. population is of full Ashkenazi Jewish descent,[1] but 27% of United States Nobel prize winners in the 20th century,[1][4] 25% of the winners of the Fields Medal (the top prize in mathematics),[8] 25% of ACM Turing Award winners,[1] a quarter of Westinghouse Science Talent Search winners,[8] and 38% of the Oscar-winning film directors[6] have either full or partial Ashkenazi Jewish ancestry. Jews comprise up to one third of the student populace at Ivy League schools[10] and 30% of U.S. Supreme Court law clerks.[11] In Great Britain, Jews are overrepresented among Nobel prize winners by a factor of 8.0.[4] In Hungary in the 1930's, Ashkenazi Jews comprised 6% of the country's population, but 55.7% of physicians, 49.2% of attorneys, 30.4% of engineers, and 59.4% of bank officers.

Holy fucking shit. Nazis BTFO. How can you even hate Jews if they are this fucking based?

[Anonymous No.11090366]

>>11090352
No one's mindset is akin to that image. Maybe except the few people who share this pic and have no idea what stormfag argument even are and think that they are exposing some epic hypocrisy.

If some nigger complained that whites control the government the first /pol/fag response would be that it is because whites make up majority of US population. Not that it is result of white superiority of whatever else you imagine they would say.

The analogous situation to this is if there was a number of white nationalists living in Israel and complaining that jews run Israeli media and Israeli government.
This is the only situation when posting that pic would be valid.

[Anonymous No.11090368]

>>11090328
Given losses from accidents, sterility or homosexuality 2 is too low to be sustainable at best both parents are replacing themselves but there's a net loss overall
2-3 would be optimal for static population under stable conditions,
my grandpa was one of 13 and a great great grandpa on the other side was one of 21 but the mortality rate used to be very high in old english towns

[Anonymous No.11090370]

>>11090365
>How can you even hate Jews if they are this fucking based?
By having low IQ

[Anonymous No.11090371]

>>11090365
You will never guess where else are jews over repersented in.

[Anonymous No.11090375]

>>11090371
This is the crux of the problem. Who cares if Jews are overrepresented as surgeons or as Nobel prize winners - that's great. The problem is when they become overrepresented in organs which influence public policy (the media probably being the biggest one of them), because Jews have a very particular set of beliefs and a history of persecution which causes them to act in a direction which - for lack of a better term - undermines and weakens the society they live in.

[Anonymous No.11090376]

>>11090371
It's not OVER representation if they are genuinely the best at those jobs like their insanely high IQ are suggesting they are.

Why are you whining? It's natural that the most intelligent people hold the top positions of society right? Guess low IQ whites like you should just shut up and stop whining that you're inferior. You're white skinned niggers compared to Jews according to your own logic and worldview.

[Anonymous No.11090377]

>>11090364
accidental death, homosexuals, sterility, bad luck etc, etc

[Anonymous No.11090379]

>>11090366
It's not just about America. Whites have exerted more control over and impacted more people worldwide than they have in their own numbers. Whites are overrepresented in this regard.

In this situation, Stormfags will explain that they're racially superior, and that's why they were able to nearly conquer the world, and why nearly every country in the world is expected to go by the standards Whites have set.

[Anonymous No.11090380]

>>11090375
the persecution was a result of their tendency to undermine societies though.

[Anonymous No.11090383]

>>11090380
This is bullshit and you know it

[Anonymous No.11090384]

>>11090376
>their insanely high IQ are suggesting they are.
You do realize it's only 110, right? Besides, they make up only 2% of population.

[Anonymous No.11090385]

>>11090375
>The problem is when they become overrepresented in organs which influence public policy
It's only natural that the most intelligent people get to become decision makers for society. That's not over-representation. That's just efficient leadership.

[Anonymous No.11090388]

>>11090376
>It's not OVER representation if they are genuinely the best at those jobs like their insanely high IQ are suggesting they are.
That sentence does not even make logical sense. The definition of over representation is not linked to whether or not it is deserved. Blacks are over represented in the NBA, because they're genuinely the best ball players, and they deserve it, yet it doesn't negate the fact that blacks are over represented in the NBA. That's just a fact, that you can deduce by comparing the share of black players in the NBA to their share in the overall population.

One thing I know for sure is that you're not a Jew, your IQ seems too low for you to be one.

[Anonymous No.11090389]

>>11090379
>It's not just about America. Whites have exerted more control over and impacted more people worldwide than they have in their own numbers. Whites are overrepresented in this regard.
You are now moving the goalpost. Nigger depicted in that pic is clearly making general white privilege argument. Nothing about colonialism.

[Anonymous No.11090392]

>>11090384
That's the average. 98% of people with an IQ higher than 170 is Jewish. This is why every serious scientist in every field since the 1800s has been Jewish.

[Anonymous No.11090404]

>>11090385
Not if those people make up 2% of population.

>>11090392
>That's the average. 98% of people with an IQ higher than 170 is Jewish.
And why do you think IQ of 170 is relevant treshold by which to judge over representation? Do you know how few people have IQ that high? If media and Hollywood hired only >170 IQ people those organizations would practically empty.

[Anonymous No.11090405]

>>11090380
Debatable.

>>11090385
Yes, it's natural, but it can still be problematic.

In a homogeneous society, the high IQ individuals would still be the decision makers, but they would feel some *affinity* with the rest of the population, a sense of "noblesse oblige", which would make them consider, when implementing new policies, of the effect it would have on the larger segments of the population. However, when a foreign elite, or an elite which views itself as "different", rules over the same mass of people, this crucial link is missing. In the case of Jews, you can see this in their contempt of "inbred rednecks", i.e. anyone who votes for Trump or doesn't live on one of the coasts.

This is not a Jew thing only by the way, the exact same pattern of a high IQ minority dominating the elite of a foreign society and being persecuted for it can be found among the Chinese of south east Asia, and the Indians of Africa.

[Anonymous No.11090415]

>>11090366
>>11090379
>>11090389
To shift it a bit closer to the image, it is also about America. Whites make up the majority of the US population, yeah. Why? They're not originally from that piece of land, right? They got the land from another race and that's why they're so common on it, yeah?

If you think the stormfag answer as to why they got that land from the other race and why that other race basically doesn't exist anymore has nothing to do with racial superiority then you aren't paying attention to them.

Moreover, their narrative is also that they're afraid that the Jews want to be the dominant, most common, race on Earth, is it not? That Jews are making other races infertile in their own country but actively encouraging other Jews to reproduce. That Jews want to take over the Middle East, at the very least.
Colonialism is inseparate from this discussion.

[Anonymous No.11090416]

>>11090380

[Anonymous No.11090437]

>>11090383
the trans atlantic slave trade was literally run by the sephardic jews.

[Anonymous No.11090441]

>>11090415
>If you think the stormfag answer as to why they got that land from the other race and why that other race basically doesn't exist anymore has nothing to do with racial superiority then you aren't paying attention to them.
I don't deny some of them would say this but it is irrelevant.The discussion was about standard white privilege crap. Whitey runs the government and media. While whitey also makes up 70% of population. Stormfags will say the same about jews but jews make up 2% of population. This is why those aren't analogous situations.

>Moreover, their narrative is also that they're afraid that the Jews want to be the dominant, most common, race on Earth, is it not? That Jews are making other races infertile in their own country but actively encouraging other Jews to reproduce. That Jews want to take over the Middle East, at the very least.
Not really. They are against jews pushing immigration into the west and promoting degeneracy. I think most of them would be fine if all jews moved to Israel and started practicing zionism.

[Anonymous No.11090469]

>>11090437
and?

[Anonymous No.11090523]

>>11090469
try saying this in a major newspaper or tv channel

[Anonymous No.11090528]

>>11090380
I can't believe people actually believe this shit. It was usually due to resentment of the success of Jewish people (like BLM groups against whites) or because populist leaders needed an easy scapegoat to rally their population against (us vs them) style. Another common thing was that leaders would take on a loan from Jewish merchants or bankers and decided that killing and/or expelling the Jews was cheaper than paying them back.

No matter in which society Jews lived they always ended up as the top performers.
>Jews were at the top of the Egyptian Empire where they started as slaves.
>Jews ended up on top of the Roman Empire.
>Jews ended up on top in the Persian civilization.
>Jews ended up on top in the republican courts of Venice.
>Jews ended up on top in the Netherlands during the Dutch golden age
>Jews ended up on top in france after the French revolution
>Jews ended up on top in the Prussian court
>Jews ended up on top in Victorian England
>Jews ended up on top in the German Confederacy
>Jews ended up on top in the German Empire
>Jews ended up on top in Tsarist Russia
>Jews ended up on top in the Soviet Union
>Jews ended up on top in the USA
>Jews ended up on top in Israel and by extension the middle-east
>Jews ended up on top in the EU

Jews will also end up on top in every future society as long as they have the highest IQ out of all demographics. It's unavoidable and inevitable that the smartest people end up on the top of a society. It has nothing to do with a conspiracy. It's just how competition works, the most capable ends up on top. In our world that are the Jews.

[Anonymous No.11090536]

>>11090523

[Anonymous No.11090581]

>>11090441
>This is why those aren't analogous situations.
Just make the Black guy a circa 1700-1800 Native. A Native back then would naturally say it's unfair that a minority race has so much power in what used to be their lands. He would say it's unfair that they control the government of his land and what gets put in the papers. He would get upset that he can't make a respectable living in the societies built on his land.

The reason for why this happened is obvious, he lost. Why would the stormfag say he lost, anon?

Since you love not moving goalposts too much. I'll start my next point and do so by admitting something you'd likely bring up:
Yes, Black men had and sold slaves. However, why were the overwhelming amount of slaves sold to White/White-affliated men instead of Black men who would naturally want for manual laborers, builders and concubines? How did the White race hold so much power over these people that the Blacks would rather sell to them over other Blacks? A lot of potential Black buyers were also killed by White men, how did they get so overwhelmed?

What would the stormfag answer to these questions likely have some element of? Not racial superiority, right? That'd be /completely/ divorced from the discussion?

1/2

[Anonymous No.11090587]

>>11090441
>>11090581
>what does slavery have to do with it
One reason the Black guy might give for why he's treated like that is that they're racist against him because of the perceptions of Blacks as a slave class. Stormfags saying "we conquered NA from the Indians, colonized Africa and got the capital, influence and power to purchase slaves there partly because we're racially superior" is them saying "We're the majority in NA and Blacks were the slave class because we're racially superior."

I will admit that you could just say "they're not the ones who control the government because they're not the majority" again but here's the thing: Whites that weren't Scottish or English were also a minority in the US either. Yet, due to /massive/ amounts of intermingling, the majority of the government consists of descendants of those minority groups.
There are also more than a few cases, in the 17th-19th centuries, where German-Americans, French-Americans etc. (ethnicities lower in population than the number of African slaves at the time) rose to positions of massive power and influence with relative ease.

This means that being a minority isn't the only reason you don't control the media or the government. So many of the stormfag answers for why this all came to be would, in fact, include "racial superiority" or "racial inferiority".

>They are against jews pushing immigration into the west and promoting degeneracy
They're doing what the White man did but more effectively, and taking into account their smaller population and momentary tech non-advantage. Stormfags seethe at the thought of tasting their own medicine.

2/2

[Anonymous No.11090591]

>>11090441
>>11090581
>what does slavery have to do with it
One reason the Black guy might give for why he's treated like that is that they're racist against him because of the perceptions of Blacks as a slave class. Stormfags saying "we conquered NA from the Indians, colonized Africa and got the capital, influence and power to purchase slaves there partly because we're racially superior" is them saying "We're the majority in NA and Blacks were the slave class because we're racially superior."

I will admit that you could just say "they're not the ones who control the government because they're not the majority" again but here's the thing: Whites that weren't Scottish or English were also a minority in the US. Yet, partly due to /massive/ amounts of intermingling, the majority of the government now consists of descendants of those minority groups.
There were also more than a few cases, in the 17th-19th centuries, where German-Americans, French-Americans etc. (ethnicities lower in population than the number of African slaves at the time) rose to positions of massive power and influence with relative ease.

This means that being a minority isn't the only reason you don't control the media or the government. So many of the stormfag answers for why this all came to be would, in fact, include "racial superiority" or "racial inferiority".

>They are against jews pushing immigration into the west and promoting degeneracy
They're doing what the White man did but more effectively, and taking into account their smaller population and momentary tech non-advantage. Stormfags seethe at the thought of tasting their own medicine.

2/2

[Anonymous No.11090623]

>>11090528
I am not disputing this, but I am still affirming that they have a habit of undermining societies, look at the Sacchlers and how they used opium dens to bring down chinese society or mass production of alcohol in russia, or the prohibition in america, look at the assassination of kennedy

[Anonymous No.11090634]

>>11090623
or the role jewish merchants played in funding Oliver Cromwell the coup against britain that led to killing Charles 2nd
jews were banned from england since 1290 by Edward 3rd because of numerous child ritual blood sacrifices

[Anonymous No.11090649]

>>11090623
>>11090634
>but I am still affirming that they have a habit of undermining societies
>or the role jewish merchants played in funding Oliver Cromwell the coup against britain that led to killing Charles 2nd
If they are, in fact, better are being rich, successful, intelligent and well-read, and are over-represented in that department, and this is the type of person who's best at enacting massive social change, then naturally Jewish individuals would be over-represented in that department.

In history, there's always been a clever and rich person conspiracy far more than there has ever been a unified conspiracy by any single group.

[Anonymous No.11090655]

>>11090649
>better are being
better at being*

[Anonymous No.11090660]

>>11090649
OK so taking your perspective here, what's so wrong with massacring the lot of them so they aren't a threat to the majority population any longer? surely this violent ethnocentrism is just as valid on your terms?

[Anonymous No.11090663]

>>11090660
We appeared to have veered away from the topic of science and math
compare the parsees with the jews since they're a high IQ merchant race that are often referred to as the anti jew because of their open honest behaviour.

[Anonymous No.11090666]

>>11090660
Because your overarching/core goal is to stop oppressive conspiracies against the majority population, if you wanted to do that then you'd have to kill anyone who's smart, can work a system, gain capital and get on top and stop every group that would encourage such a thing. Otherwise, history will be bound to repeat itself, there will be Jews in new clothing.

[Anonymous No.11090678]

>>11090666
the teachings of the talmud and kabbalah seem to lead to a certain set of behaviours when followed
many of these behaviors we would lable sociopathic.

[Anonymous No.11090685]

>>11090678
As opposed to other religious texts

[Anonymous No.11090691]

>>11090678
Men wrote those books and men created groups to follow those books. Men like that, their books and their groups will exist again unless you were willing to kill everyone and anyone displaying the listed traits. Otherwise there will always be someone conspiring against the majority population.

[Anonymous No.11090717]

>>11090685
religions are a mix of metaphysics and morality
the genocidal nature of islam is also disturbing.
One curious point is that some religions seem to actively promote a form of eugenic selection for certain traits
I'm not informed enough to explore these topics as fully as I would like but I feel that unless we acknowledge the danger that these groups pose we put ourselves in grave danger from their followers.
I have no problems with individuals but collective delusions are disturbing and render us tribalistic
crony capitalism and communism seem like just another set of false dichotomies
I'm rambling

[Anonymous No.11090760]

>>11090581
>>This is why those aren't analogous situations.
>Just make the Black guy a circa 1700-1800 Native
Okay, I take this as your unspoken admission that the meme indeed wasn't depicting analogous situations and thus didn't prove any hypocrisy so we can close that and move on to another topic.

>A Native back then would naturally say it's unfair that a minority race has so much power in what used to be their lands.
They weren't a minority. Pre-Columbian US population was 1.5 million people (see: Milner and Chaplin (2010)). The number of whites by 1780 was 2.7 million. If he would be pissed it wouldn't be because it's a minority race controlling his land but because it is simply another race controlling it. Again, you were attempting to make parallel to what /pol/ says about jews to make your argument valid.

>The reason for why this happened is obvious, he lost. Why would the stormfag say he lost, anon?
>Since you love not moving goalposts too much. I'll start my next point and do so by admitting something you'd likely bring up:
Yes, Black men had and sold slaves. ...
>What would the stormfag answer to these questions likely have some element of? Not racial superiority, right? That'd be /completely/ divorced from the discussion?
I dont know what this is supposed to prove. I admitted in my previous reply that they would say IQ/superiority.

>what does slavery have to do with it
>One reason the Black guy might give...
>I will admit that you could just say ...
>There were also more than a few cases, in the 17th-19th centuries,...
Looks like you dont even need me anymore. You are having debate with yourself just fine.

>>They are against jews pushing immigration into the west and promoting degeneracy
>They're doing what the White man did but more effectively, ...
Really? Were white people also promoting third world immigration into America or their colonies? Were they pushing homosexuality and trannies as well? If so I would like to know more.

[Anonymous No.11090835]

>>11090760
>Really? Were white people also promoting third world immigration into America or their colonies? Were they pushing homosexuality and trannies as well? If so I would like to know more.
You know what that is?
Destabilization of a nation's power structures and the subversion of its defining culture by a foreign entity.
You know what White people did in spades? The only difference is that the Jews don't have the numbers or tech advantage, and they're better at it.

>Looks like you dont even need me anymore. You are having debate with yourself just fine.
Covering my bases.

>I dont know what this is supposed to prove. I admitted in my previous reply that they would say IQ/superiority.
You said /some/ would in regards to Whites conquering Natives specifically. If you're saying that the group in general would respond in a way that would include that in this situation as well, then what's so ridiculous about the mock overview of their views seen in the original image?

> Pre-Columbian US population was 1.5 million people (see: Milner and Chaplin (2010)).
I'm getting different numbers. Downwards to less than 2 million but upwards of 18 million.
https://science.sciencemag.org/content/268/5217/1601

Either way, there was a point where the Whites had governance over Native lands despite being a minority. There is also a pretty thin difference between using numbers and tech advantage and using shiftier, survival conscious, methods when the end result you want to get out of it is the exact same: Resources, land and people to use for your burgeoning new empire. For your manifest destiny.

The Jews are just a smaller, tech non-advantaged, and otherwise better version of the White colonists. Except it's got stormfag attention because they're not White, because they have to use other methods and because they see Whites like colonial Whites saw everyone else.

[Anonymous No.11090839]

>>11090717
>I'm rambling
At least you're lucid enough to realize this.

[Anonymous No.11090981]

>>11090095
Are you 12?

[Anonymous No.11091002]

>>11090981
No, I'm 25. Are you 80? Anti-natalism makes sense.

[Anonymous No.11091014]

>>11091002
I'm not someone driven to ridiculous ideas like nihilism, typical of failures who think the world owes them something, even a meaning for life.
And what if I was 80? If anything that'd likely make me less of a wimp than most young people.

[Anonymous No.11091017]

>>11091014
Anti-natalism isn't about me or you. It's about people yet to be.

If I were a nihilist, I'd be a pro-mortalist and I wouldn't be open to adoption or helping people live better lives.

[Anonymous No.11091071]

>>11090835
> If you're saying that the group in general would respond in a way that would include that in this situation as well, then what's so ridiculous about the mock overview of their views seen in the original image?
You can mock it if you like but It's still ridiculous because its attempting to make /pol/ look hypocritical even though its depicting two different situations with different circumstances as I said here>>11090366

>I'm getting different numbers. Downwards to less than 2 million but upwards of 18 million.
Yes, the 18 million estimate comes from a 1983 book called “Their Number Become Thinned”. And I dont know what the methodology was since it isnt free book. However, most sources on this give estimates closer to mine. And also given the population density of hunter-gather societies the 18 million figure is pretty impossible.see pic

>Either way, there was a point where the Whites had governance over Native lands despite being a minority.
Yes, there was. Apartheid, Rhodesia etc. We agree, so what is your point? Are you implying that jewish control of media is comparable to colonialism and apartheid?

[Anonymous No.11091132]

>>11091071
>You can mock it if you like
:^]. I was saying that the overview to begin with was a joke, insincere and tongue in cheek but the core of it isn't so ridiculous. Superficially different situations with different circumstances can be started for the same or very similar reasons, can lead to very similar events taking place (Natives having less power, fewer numbers and reduced influence in their own lands, Whites having less power, fewer numbers, reduced influence in their own lands) with very similar end goals (Supremacy of the White race, supremacy of the Jewish ethnicity umbrella.)
>see pic
Interesting.
>Are you implying that jewish control of media is comparable to colonialism and apartheid?
Yes, very much so. It's different methods to achieve the same goal. The Jews are going to treat Whites like the Whites treated everyone else. (Not to imply that the Jews aren't going to fuck over everyone else as well.)

The stormfag is stuck either accepting that he's also racially inferior or that his racism is part of why the people lower on the ladder are where they are. In either case, the stormfag is stuck being a dumb stormfag and the Jew is off ruining the world.

[Anonymous No.11091139]

>>11091071
>You can mock it if you like
:^]. I was saying that the overview to begin with was a joke, insincere and tongue in cheek but the core of it isn't so ridiculous. Superficially different situations with different circumstances can be started for the same or very similar reasons, can lead to very similar events taking place (Natives having less power, fewer numbers and reduced influence in their own lands, Whites having less power, fewer numbers, reduced influence in their own lands) with very similar end goals (Supremacy of the White race, supremacy of the Jewish ethnicity umbrella.)
>see pic
Interesting.
>Are you implying that jewish control of media is comparable to colonialism and apartheid?
Yes, very much so. It's different methods to achieve the same goal. The Jews are going to treat Whites like the Whites treated everyone else. (Not to imply that the Jews aren't going to fuck over everyone else as well.)

The stormfag is stuck either accepting that he's also racially inferior or that his (and others') racism is part of why the people lower on the ladder are where they are. In either case, the stormfag won't accept shit and is stuck being a dumb stormfag while the Jew is off ruining the world.

[Anonymous No.11091154]

would love to see the detailed molecular biology explanation for how genetics determine IQ - no? uhh alright, is there a model in neuroscience -

oh wait

there is none

[Anonymous No.11091158]

>>11091154
No detailed molecular biology explanation for [thing]? Better throw out all the other data and dismiss it as fiction!

[Anonymous No.11091167]

>>11091154
>we need to find the genes

[Anonymous No.11091174]

>>11091158
>I can't give you a grasping explanation of why genes would determine IQ
>but I am absolutely certain that IQ is 100% genetic

>>11091167
nice job posting memes about an obscure youtube politics channel. very funny! I bet everyone is into the same internet skeptic stuff as you

[Anonymous No.11091178]

>>11091174
>>I can't give you a grasping explanation of why genes would determine IQ
>>but I am absolutely certain that IQ is 100% genetic
Who are you quoting?

[Anonymous No.11091187]

>>11091178
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>quoting

[Anonymous No.11091203]

>>11091154
I personally am unconvinced that genes have anything at all to do with the developement of the human brain, instead that it spontaneously grows exactly the same way in every human being, as intended by God.
Until I see a detailed explanation in an easy to understand format of every stage racists can go hang.

[Anonymous No.11091208]

>>11085978
>watson thread
>its full of frogs and wojaks and /pol/infographs
hmm

[Anonymous No.11091212]

>>11091174
>>I can't give you a grasping explanation of why genes would determine IQ
>>but I am absolutely certain that IQ is 100% genetic
>Identical twins are identical because of identical genetics
>But not their brains!

[Anonymous No.11091213]

>>11091139
what do you mean? the whites aren't one uniform group, the whites are also the only group to abolish slavery
you seem full of shit, the jews have also been at the lead of pretty much every campaign of economic exploitation and destruction, just look at the rothschilds

[Anonymous No.11091229]

>>11091213
*anything that continues will be more of the same or the jews integrating with the elites
look at the bush clan

[Anonymous No.11091233]

Are we about to enter a malthusian scarcity trap again?

[Anonymous No.11091234]

>>11091213
>the whites aren't one uniform group
Nearly every European country's government had a hand in colonialism.
Its goals are the same as what the Jews are attempting to do, except this time it benefits Jews instead of Whites. Whites are in the crosshairs and that's the only reason they care.
>the whites are also the only group to abolish slavery
The most brutal war in American history didn't occur to free the slaves. It happened because one group of White men wanted to have the freedom to do what they wanted with non-White people and anything and anyone else in their lands, while the other group of White men wanted to have the freedom to do what they wanted with the former group of White men.

>the jews have also been at the lead of pretty much every campaign of economic exploitation and destruction
Campaigns directed at Whites. Who exploited and destroyed what economies there were in non-White countries during colonial times? Whites.
Oh, by the way, I'm sure the Jews will airdrop some food and supplies every once and while after they're through destroying your country and subverting your race.

[Anonymous No.11091259]

>>11091234
the brits abolished slavery long before the yanks mate
the british abolition movement was led by a diverse group, curiously tea shops and women's groups played a major role

[Anonymous No.11091261]

>>11091234
>Who exploited and destroyed what economies there were in non-White countries during colonial times? Whites.
Try again sweaty. We can only hope that jewish influence will be at least half as beneficial for us as ours was for brown people.

[Anonymous No.11091262]

>>11091234
Since you seem to have a major chip on your shoulder which racial group do you come from?

[Anonymous No.11091269]

This thread used to be good and civil.
Now it's just DA JOOS BAD or DA JOOS MASTER RACE!

[Anonymous No.11091280]

>>11086250
John Forbes Nash Jr

[Anonymous No.11091282]

>>11091259
Doesn't matter, they still owned slaves.

>>11091261
>contradicting a large literature
Show me the paper that tackles and reviews this article.

>>11091262
My dad's Cherokee and mulatto, my mom's Japanese-Brazilian. I'm from the US.

[Anonymous No.11091294]

>>11091282
Read it till the end, bud.

[Anonymous No.11091300]

>>11091282
>they still owned slaves
an incredibly small minority owned slaves mostly the owners of distant sugar plantations which is why the boycott of sugar hurt them so badly.
>cherokee
your ancestors were a ruthless bunch of violent marauding thugs that genocided at least three other small tribes that I'm aware of

[Anonymous No.11091463]

>>11091282
>My dad's Cherokee and mulatto, my mom's Japanese-Brazilian
I can't imagine how ugly your face is.

[Anonymous No.11091467]

>>11090066
/sci/ is re/ddit if you haven't noticed

[Anonymous No.11091597]

>>11090290
When IQ deniers find studies showing jews are smart suddenly IQ is real and tests are accurate and no wonder they're all bankers, or when asians have a higher IQ than whites suddenly IQ is real because it means whites are inferior.
But when whites are smarter than someone else it's back to denial. IQ studies are fake and racist and evolution isn't real.
It's like IQ denial has an anti-white agenda.

[Anonymous No.11091623]

>>11091597
Is believing "Everyone who disagrees with me or challenges my beliefs is wrong and also the same person" a trait of the Nazi ideal of the uberman?

[Anonymous No.11091624]

>>11091597
>But when whites are smarter than someone else it's back to denial.
Lol what? The gif that the guy you're replying to posted clearly shows the stupidity of niggers. He's not denying it at all.

>It's like IQ denial has an anti-white agenda.
Adopting a persecution-complex when somebody's superior to you, eh? That's literally what that guy's gif shows. The memes write themselves.

[Anonymous No.11091667]

>>11091624
>if you point out my hypocrisy then you must have some sort of victim complex

[Anonymous No.11091709]

>>11091667
There's no "hypocrisy" here. Whites are smarter than niggers but they're both, in the end, dumb.
If you deny this, then you're the one denying IQ.

[Anonymous No.11091837]

>>11091463

[Anonymous No.11091899]

>>11085978
This man looks evil, we should kill anyone who looks like him.

[Anonymous No.11091928]

>>11091624
>not denying it
lol what yourself, did you learn reading comprehension from a book?
The text of that guy's comment implies IQ isn't "real" which makes him a denier.
The gif shows a stupid flipflopping nazi believing that niggers are stupid but not that jews are smart. The nazi represents "realists", not the poster.
>persecution-complex when somebody's superior to you, eh? That's literally what that guy's gif show
No sweaty. The gif implies only white people believe in IQ and only when it supports their racist white supremacist beliefs. We're not shown a black guy raving about melanin theory or jocks complaining that nerds are overrepresented among bankers, we're shown the white guy being wrong because he's white.
My persecution complex would relate to IQ deniers not the jews in the comic, and is because of the evident anti-white agenda not because they're superior.

If you think about it IQ deniers can't be intellectually superior. If they're right there's no IQ to be superior with and if there is IQ they're too stupid to know it.

[Anonymous No.11092296]

>>11091928
I interpreted it differently. The Black guy doesn't want to admit anyone's smarter than him. The White guy knows one reason why the Black guy is lower than him is because of the latter's lower IQ but doesn't want to admit that his racism against Blacks is also a factor in why the Black guy is in a lower position. However, because it's him this time, it's immediately apparent to the White guy that the Jew's racism against his group has a factor in why he's in a lower position.

The White guy doesn't want to admit that the Jew's higher IQ is a factor and the Jew wants the White guy to think it's /just/ the higher IQ, no racism or intentional subversion involved.