/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.1597705]

Are some races genetically superior to others?

If not, how do you explain whites being responsible for most of civilization and technology throughout history while blacks stayed primitive?

[снайпер No.1597713]

biased image is biased

Africa had its own empires, and they did pretty well. Rome and Carthage in particular had a big spat that Rome barely won.

anyways, I'm outta this troll thread now.

[Anonymous No.1597716]

Pic related

[Goethe_girl !i2in/qISHQ No.1597727]

>>1597713

>implying that Carthaginians were black Africans, and not Europeans

[Anonymous No.1597729]

We already have this thread >>1595660

[Anonymous No.1597742]

>>1597713
show great african ruins or gtfo

[Geordi Picard Captain Engineer Star !FLEET.IgrI No.1597749]

I wasn't aware they had photo cameras during the roman era.

[Anonymous No.1597750]

Master race is actually the asian race. The agricultural revolution was kickstarted when we got implements from them.

But niggers? They never did anything worthwhile.

[Anonymous No.1597758]

hey again, /sci/ how's it goin'?

[Goethe_girl !i2in/qISHQ No.1597770]

>>1597750

>implying that the Mesopotamians magically received agricultural implements from undeveloped civilizations in Asia

[Anonymous No.1597775]

>>1597713Rome and Carthage in particular had a big spat that Rome barely won.

Just because they lived on the Northern Coast of Africa doesn't mean they were of African ancestry. Carthage was created by Greek settlers.

[Anonymous No.1597779]

>>1597750Master race is actually the asian race

Then why can't they drive?
Whites: Everything
Everyone else: 0

[Anonymous No.1597780]

>>1597770
>18th century

[Anonymous No.1597805]

blacks didn't need to evolve beyond safeguarding their hunting territory.

whites, they had to evolve to deal with antediluvian food shortages.

[Anonymous No.1597807]

>>1597779
It's true, Asians can't drive. Nobody's perfect.

[Anonymous No.1598015]

>>1597805
Is this an actually scientific theory?

[Anonymous No.1598037]

>>1598015
>evolve

No, it's a geuss.

[Anonymous No.1598100]

In case you didn't notice, the black tribes in Africa have survived and remained unchanged for thousands of years while Rome and countless other technologically superior civilizations have been snuffed out in time. It is only due to the western impact that Africa now faces poverty. Just sayin'. (I'm 50/50 Asian and European so don't think biased comment is biased.)

Define 'superior'.

[Anonymous No.1598126]

>>1598100
>Rome and countless other technologically superior civilizations have been snuffed out in time.

Conflict and competition fuels progress. Albeit this doesn't seem to be the case with Africa.

[Anonymous No.1598132]

>>1598100

>Implying blacks were living in highly organised, rich society and were not- in fact- split into primitive tribal cultures constantly at war with each other before The White Man Came

Explain how Africa is poorer now, than when blacks were herded onto the boats.

[Anonymous No.1598160]

I like how Rome 2,000 years ago looks better than the beehive skyscrapers and homes we have now.

What in the fuck happened to luxury?

[Anonymous No.1598182]

>>1598160
And most of the stuff is not built to last. Unlike over engineered Roman structures.
>sadfrog.jpg

[Anonymous No.1598189]

>>1597705
Yes, the "Ashkenazi Jews"

They have the highest IQ of any race

\thread

[Anonymous No.1598214]

Sorry, your rage obviously clouded your vision, OP. /int/ is that way.

[Anonymous No.1598217]

>>1598132
Because the currency changed from sticks to gold.
Africa wasn't colonized for its wealth, it was colonized so that european countries could use the amount of africa owned to compensate for their own lack of cock.

Africa was conquered regardless of the fertility of the area, but the most fertile places took priority over the more useless areas.

[Goethe_girl !i2in/qISHQ No.1598226]

>>1598189

they're more German and Polish than anything else...and protip, if someone has eyes in any colour other than brown/black, then they're Germanic, not Semitic

[Anonymous No.1598272]

>>1598226
Black people with blue eyes. crossbreeding. Ever heard of it?

And if you live in the US, you ought to know that an extremely insignificant amount of blood (like my 1/64th Cherokee) is socially (and usually) genetically insignificant. Since, I think, the areas in which the IQ measure rely on more than one gene, the odds of a great deviation from av. racial IQ are not so different than that of a full blood from that race. Though I suck at biology, I think eyecolor is only known to have one gene. If that is true, then eyecolor should not really be indicative of anything other than genetic history.

[M. I. Wright No.1598289]

>>1598189
Nazi Jews? They can't be that smart. LOLOL

[Anonymous No.1598299]

excuse me i'm off the the rape dungeon...er bath house

[Anonymous No.1598302]

geographical: mostly landlocked with no major rivers or canals for easy transportation
biological: malaria, hiv, and tuberculosis are rampant and almost entirely untreated - this situation is only replicated in papua/new guinea that has even worse situations than africa
infrastructure: no continuous roadways or irrigation for efficient food production and market access, totally unreliable electricity and sanitation
social: with no reliable public services, subsistence farming is used by 90% of the population, fertility an average of 6 children per household (with only the eldest son educated at all) and infant mortality of over 10%
political: while corruption is modest compared to some rich countries, aid distribution is meager and inefficient, with almost no investment in any of the above stated reasons.

africa is stuck in a poverty trap, which can be fixed. with 0.7% of our gdp invested in africa over 20 years, in a hundred years, they will be as large a contributor to global economics as eastern china and india are today, and america will have earned back its investment a million fold easy.
and you guys are wondering why humans aren't on the moon or mars right now. it's because long term achievements aren't our thing. sucks to be us.

[Anonymous No.1598313]

>>1598302
>implying aid programs make people rich

[Anonymous No.1598324]

>>1598313
>implying poor people get rich from education, employment and health that isn't there

[Anonymous No.1598329]

>>1598302
You're my bro, bro.

[QUIT FEEDING No.1598335]

ancient Egypt predates both Rome and Greece

/thread

[Anonymous No.1598344]

Because different parts of the world had significant geographical and argicultural differences that gave very large advantages to some cultures, that's why.

[Anonymous No.1598346]

>>1598335
>Ancient Egypt
>Conquered by Alexander
>Conquered by the Romans

[Anonymous No.1598356]

>>1598346
>Alexander's place fucked in the ass by Turks
>Rome conquered and raped in the ass by Huns

what's your fucking point, child?

l2 timeline

[Anonymous No.1598368]

>>1598356
My point is that a single Greek city-state under Alexander conquered the entire known world at the time. That seems to imply that Greeks were vastly superior to everyone around them.

[Anonymous No.1598373]

It is an interesting question. There are racial differences in intelligence, if that is what you're projecting in your question. It is arguable how much of the difference is caused by genetics and how much is caused by environmental factors (this very much so includes quality of nutrition in early development), but there is a clear racial discrimination in intelligence that is brought on by genetics. African Americans also suffer from a rising dysgenic population much more than other races. African Americans of lower intelligence tend to have much more children. Four times as many in fact.

[Anonymous No.1598376]

>>1598368
>at the time

you sure are a fucking moron ...

[Anonymous No.1598379]

[Anonymous No.1598383]

>>1598376
Europeans are still doing better than Africa. Time has nothing to do with this.

[Anonymous No.1598384]

[Anonymous No.1598389]

[Anonymous No.1598483]

>>1598368
I have conquered the entire known world once too!

How the fuck can you say "entire known world" He didn't even conquer an entire continent. There was still land there. What, did the land where he stopped conquering suddenly cease to exist? I'm sure the Chinese knew about land that Alex did not. Just that alex was too idiotic to realize that it was there, that makes him great?

[Anonymous No.1598502]

White people's best strength, and the reason they were the first to conquer the world, is that they work together better than any other race. They get along with each other the best.
Either the Neanderthals that bred with the homo sapiens to make white people were especially chilled out, and some of that has remained behind, or - and this is my personal theory - when it was hella cold outside and all the whiteys were huddled up in caves surviving on the body warmth of their neighbors, ones who couldn't get along with the group were banished from the cave, which usually amounted to death.
What say you?

[Anonymous No.1598503]

>>1598483

Also Mongols conquered more.

[Anonymous No.1598509]

>>1598483
His army turned around and went back home after a while, he still conquered more to the east than people knew existed before he started out.

[Anonymous No.1598511]

>>1598384
>black doctor
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5TPNcXxiK0

[Anonymous No.1598513]

>>1598483
He conquered the Persian Empire and all the Greek city-states. That was all the world that the Greeks knew about. Therefore, he conquered the known world. Learn some history before you make an ass of yourself.

[Anonymous No.1598519]

Its not a race issue. Egypt was once great too, it is the strategies that were used to control the people which made the differences in the civilizations. I think Africa would be more prosperous if other countries didn't rape it of its resources. You can't expect someone to get up on their feet if you keep kicking them in the back.

[Anonymous No.1598523]

>>1598519
What resources?

[Anonymous No.1598524]

>>1598272

[Anonymous No.1598529]

>>1598344

Yes.

[Anonymous No.1598538]

>implying the brain is not a generalized trait and that we're not all just humans with various skin adaptations based on the UV levels in the areas we live in.

[Anonymous No.1598541]

Roman empire = Dead
African tribes = still alive and kicking

Just like with biological evolution, cultural evolution isn't a ladder. There is no imperative to become more technologically advanced, and it's not even necessarily the most successful cultural path.

[Anonymous No.1598556]

>>1598132
Corporations are the new colonials, they go into underdeveloped nations and buy up all their valuable resources, thus keeping them from developing and becoming players in world wide economy. This is the case in MANY nations that would be quite wealthy if all their valuables didn't belong to multinational corporations.

inb4 tinfoil hat. This is what is actually happening.

[Anonymous No.1598560]

>>1598538
Sorry son, Kenyans run the best for a reason. There's lions there.

[Anonymous No.1598586]

Day in the life of the average citizen:

Roman: Overworked and overtaxed. Forced to serve in the military, where you spend years of your short life lugging around 100s of pounds of equipment while in some shithole country crawling around in the mud being the bigger soldiers' little bitch.

Africa: Smoking a pipe while lying back on the skins of your most recent kills, getting blown by the local teenage mistress.

[Anonymous No.1598591]

could it just be that infrastructure is fucking hard to maintain in most of Africa (except South Africa due to climate; not a coincidence)? Europeans also aren't the only ones responsible for getting us where we are today. North Africans beat Europeans to that, and China and India were both substantially more wealthy than Europe, which is why it took years before Europeans (Brits) could find anything they could trade with the Chinese (opium). India was also the wealthiest country in the world right before Britain invaded them. And the Middle East (Baghdad in particular) was at the crossroads of the major civilizations of all 3 continents. The city used to be so well-irrigated it wasn't even a desert, and the Grand Library of Baghdad was literally the center of the scholarly world, as it had copies of pretty much every famous book written on any continent, up until the Mongols ransacked the city.

Also, the Mayans were possibly the first civilization ever to discover the concept of 0.

Meanwhile, the primary reason Africa is so impoverished today is because of the West exploiting their populations and utterly ruining their infrastructure (Africans didn't starve or fight the way they do today until Europeans established mass single-crop farming and drew arbitrary borders to split the continent among European powers). They would still be poor by international standards if it wasn't for European exploits, but it'd be closer to South American poor instead of the child-soldiers-and-endless-shitting poor they suffer today.

[Anonymous No.1598596]

>>1598556
You can't buy something if someone isn't selling

I keep hearing how whites raped black people of their land and natural resources during the colonial period

But 90% of the time white people bought that shit fair and square, blacks were just to stupid to realize the implications of what they'd done

[Anonymous No.1598604]

>>1598541
Rome isn't dead. Sure, the empire is, but Rome set the pattern that all successful civilizations are currently emulating. Look at any successful nation, and you'll find a country that is ruthless, ambitious, and takes advantage of weaker nations.

[Anonymous No.1598615]

>>1598596
yeah, that's not true. European powers deliberately built roads straight from inland Africa to designated coastal cities, effectively ruling out any other competitive forms of trade other than where the roads led (European-run port cities), and fulfilling the demand that those port cities and their trading partners had (i.e. mass single-crop exports). The only thing that could have prevented Africans from being subject to that is a zerg-like hivemind.

[Anonymous No.1598620]

>>1598615
You want to trade, build your own damn roads.

[Anonymous No.1598631]

I'm a relativist in the sense that I think genetics are among the smallest factors, and that culture is among the largest. But I'm not a relativist in the sense that I do believe that some cultural traits are indeed inferior, and others superior. I believe that there are inferior cultures in the world, but no, I don't believe there are any inferior people. I'm not calling for the abolishment of their tradition and custom either; that's largely irrelevant.

It has to do with where a culture places its values. You do a poll, and everybody's going to say they value education, hard work, determination, and self-sacrifice. But the reality is not so plain, when different societies decide what they're will to sacrifice to educate their children, what they're willing to give up for infrastructure or what-not. Typically in the West, we'll put the value of a child's education at equal or greater than 16 years of the child's time (8 of which potential labor), in addition to about 5 years wages in expenses (including those paid in taxes, food, and shelter which the child would otherwise be paying himself). This is a vast amount of time and effort that goes into every child here, a huge sacrifice. But we reap the rewards.

Look at Israel. It is a couple acres of dust. It has no natural resources to speak of, and it is not agriculturally self-sufficient. In terms of natural gifts, it's much worse off than every one of its neighbors, and despite this, its a regional power. A highly developed, highly affluent country. Look at Japan. Same story, it's forced to import all of its natural resources and food. And its the second largest economy in the world. The common thread between these two is that, despite the retention of their traditions and customs, they've been instilled with highly Western value systems following the second world war (although the Jewish people held those values for quite some time before then).

[Anonymous No.1598641]

>>1598620
>oversimplifies complicated things to maintain callousness
yeah, try competing with a rich, organized empire if they want to build an infrastructure favorable to themselves. let me know when you learn how to magically make cement without any established infrastructure of your own.

[Anonymous No.1598653]

>>1598641
If you have no established infastructure, that is your own fault. And if you wind up being exploited by someone who actually knows how to get shit done, you have nobody to blame for it but yourself. The world is a cruel, nasty place filled with people who will gladly cut your throat if it puts them at an advantage, and the only way to beat them is to be better at what they do than they are themselves. Deal with it.

[Anonymous No.1598655]

>>1598513

I guess if a tribe in Madagascar conquered all of Madagascar, that would mean they conquered "all the known world" since that's all they knew about.

What a bunch of faggotry.

[Anonymous No.1598660]

>>1598653
be a little more subtle man. nobody's stupid enough to blame a single generation for the direction given to them by multiple prior generations.

[Anonymous No.1598670]

>>1598655
Known world = world you know

Conquer the world you know = conquer the known world

The key word here is not world, but known.

[Anonymous No.1598681]

>>1598660
The prior generations should have gotten their shit together as a precaution.

[Anonymous No.1598704]

>>1598681
prior generations had no way of predicting that a continent that didn't know existed would colonize them with technology they never knew was plausible.

[Anonymous No.1598729]

>>1598704
Which is why we should invest money in a system to protect us from alien invasion.

[Anonymous No.1598732]

>>1598729

>implying we don't already control your simple and weak species.

[Anonymous No.1598743]

>>1598732
>implying we aren't letting you do so to trick you into thinking it's that easy

pic related. the last thing aliens will ever see.

[Anonymous No.1598816]

>>1598302

The funny thing about the "lets invest in Africa" idea you mentioned is that's exactly what the public reason for invading Africa was for Europeans in the late 19th/early 20th centuries. Lets go in and build roads and schools and cities and then they can buy from us!

[Anonymous No.1598926]

>>1598389
>>1598384
any moar liek these?

[Anonymous No.1598948]

I seriously hope you're all trolls, and that nobody is retarded enough to think that the concept of race is even remotely relevant to serious biology classifications.

[Anonymous No.1598964]

>>1598948
>biology

This is a science board. This is not the place for your nonsensical biologist voodoo.

[Anonymous No.1598999]

>>1598541
well i wouldn't like to live in a hut made out of shit! would you?

[Anonymous No.1599000]

Are Golden Labradors genetically better because lassie was golden? I don't know, but Black labs are pretty damn cool, even though they may be a bit behind. Chinese Crested are still the master race though, even though they aren't lookers. German Bulldogs had a few good moments, then some bad moments. And the American Bulldog sits on its lazy ass all day criticizing other dogs.

Maybe dogs and people aren't that different after all

[Anonymous No.1599002]

>>1598964
>science
>taking races seriously
Pick one.

[Anonymous No.1599010]

>>1598964
>>1598948
All Homo Sapiens that left Africa intermarried with Neanderthals and became Homo Sapien Sapiens
/thread

[Anonymous No.1599025]

>>1599010
Neandertals were more intelligent than Homo Sapiens. Also, according to you, there are only Neandertals in Africa. I think you should stop posting now.

[Anonymous No.1599035]

>>1599025
Nobody said that africans were neandrathals but you.

They're niggers. Totally different.

[Anonymous No.1599103]

>>1599035
Can you not use that word, please? Every time you use that word, the other side wins a little more.

[patachu !LULZISTwQI No.1599119]

africa, 4500 years ago.

[Anonymous No.1599151]

>>1599119
Well, we can thank them for photography

[Anonymous No.1599156]

>>1599119
Oh please, everyone knows the egyptians were white.

The place even went to shit under the Nubian pharos.

[Anonymous No.1599173]

How does OP explain that white people were primitive enough to conduct a genocide just 70 years ago?

[Anonymous No.1599193]

>>1599173
Actually, that was a very well-organized genocide. It sucked butt, but it was well-planned.

[Anonymous No.1599207]

>>1599193

We crackers don't do anything half-way.

...except sail to India.

[Anonymous No.1599227]

>>1599173

>implying the capacity for murder isn't only found in higher intelligence

[Cunt Mouth Delicious Face !6PptXsbJVw No.1599247]

i'll just leaves these here

http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/1994egalitarianfiction.pdf
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB115040765329081636-T5DQ4jvnwqOdVvsP_XSVG_lvgik_20060628.html?
mod=blogs
http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushton_pubs.htm

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2149895/

http://www.rlynn.co.uk/

[Anonymous No.1599254]

>>1599247
Yeah, like I'm gonna believe that shit.

[Cunt Mouth Delicious Face !6PptXsbJVw No.1599289]

>>1599247
also

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/01/050128221025.htm

[Anonymous No.1599344]

>>1599247
wow, interesting

[Anonymous No.1599378]

>>1599247
Thanks I haven't read some of these.

[Anonymous No.1600085]

I think it's got something to do with the fact that a lot of black civilizations have flourished in areas where the environment propels them to believe that it is precious.
So they believe that the earth is their deity, Ie; Australian aboriginals, native Americans, Native Mexicans (in a way)

Whereas we whites had always looked to the sky for deity. So we had no fucking problem walking all over our landscape and building large sky scrapers...

But that's just my opinion.

[Anonymous No.1601780]

i think the climate and the geography influenced the european superiority. and once the europeans became so much advanced, it has been impossible for the poor world to change the situation.. nowadays money goes to the ones who have money!

[Anonymous No.1601791]

lol thread is 25 hours old O.O

[Anonymous No.1601803]

>Are some races genetically superior to others?

of course not, that wouldn't be fair now would it? the world is a a just place and all people are created equal so clearly we should blame white people for africa and black people sucking.

[Anonymous No.1601828]

I swear to god that if Africa had a single resource worth cultivating, somebody (anglo) would have gone over there and just taken it from them.

[Anonymous No.1601833]

Geography. Black people have adapted to suit their environment. Australia was once a black dominated country. Now that it is almost entirely white, it has the highest rate of skin cancer in the world. Go figure.

White babies learn to talk sooner than black babies. But black babies learn to walk sooner than white babies, and I have witnessed this firsthand. See, in Africa, being able to be mobile was a great advantage wheras in whiter parts intelligence was selected for.

This does not mean blacks can not learn higher skills, like advanced mathematics. Most black people these days, because of society, think "Oh, this is algebra. I can't do it because I'm black". It becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. Much in the same way a white guy says "Oh, this is Hip-Hop, I shouldn't like it because I'm white".

It's all really ignorant and easily dissected. It's a cultural thing. Black Americans have a culture of anti-assimilation, and that is why they have such a terrible plight.

[Anonymous No.1601844]

Ever heard of Egypt?

[Anonymous No.1601859]

>genetically superior
no such thing exists in genetics.
there's only "better/worse adapted for current living environment".
>whites being responsible for most of civilization and technology throughout history
no. history did not begin in the 14th century

[Anonymous No.1601861]

>If not, how do you explain whites being responsible for most of civilization and technology throughout history

Christianity

[Anonymous No.1601874]

>>1601861

"white" is not a race, it's a complexional
Jesus was a jew

[Anonymous No.1601881]

http://erectuswalksamongst.us/
/thread

[Anonymous No.1601895]

I do think that clacks are closer to our distant ancestors than others. After all, we evolved from blacks (though no one uses the term in that context). That does not mean that we are vastly superior. We are just adapted for the environment we live in. What holds them back in America is their attitude and ego.

[Anonymous No.1601899]

>>1601859

>no such thing exists in genetics as genetic supiorority

Wrong. Predators are almost always genetically superior to their prey.

[Anonymous No.1601901]

>>1601844
>>1599119
egyptians were white..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_of_Ancient_Egyptians
or "northen european"
black no understand pirameeds

[Anonymous No.1601905]

>>1601899
That's... that's not how it works.

[Anonymous No.1601909]

>>1601899
>implying predators are ever as succesful as their prey

[Anonymous No.1601928]

>>1601909

Unfortunately, they are.

You may like to think everything's equal and all so friendly but you're mistaken. It's a cat eat mouse world out there.

[Anonymous No.1601933]

>>1601928
But that's just the entire point. They ARE just as successful. If they weren't, there would be an imbalance in the ecosystem, most likely leading to the extinction of one or the other.

[Anonymous No.1601942]

i for one believe some races are superior to others, iq tests show a constant difference in racial scores, some biological differences indicate intellectual superiority as well. but i am no racist though.

[Anonymous No.1601943]

>>1601933

Depends on how you define success.

If success means being forced to breed twice as much, feed on half as much, and living in fear of total erradication as your predator is success then I guess you have a point. Otherwise, nope.

[Anonymous No.1601948]

>>1601933

Depends on how you define success.

If success means being forced to breed twice as much, feed on half as much, and living in fear of total erradication is success then I guess you have a point. Otherwise, nope.

[Anonymous No.1601951]

>>1601942

>> Implying being more intelligent makes you superior

>> Implying IQ tests measure intelligence

[Anonymous No.1601954]

>>1601943
Success in an evolutionary context simply means being able to uphold a viable breeding population. So basically, keeping the species alive. The individual is irrelevant.
Prey animals fill their niche quite nicely, and are hence successful.

[Anonymous No.1601960]

>>1601933

Define "successful". Animals that are typically prey outnumber their predators in most instances. The pray is FAR better at surviving in THEIR situation. They are equally successful at filling their niche, this is how evolution works. Predators can only exist because the prey is succsesful enough to provide them with a food source. Without prey, predators would die. Without predators, prey would thrive, though this would likely be short lived as the population would be out of control.(too successful)

[Anonymous No.1601976]

>>1601951
superior in terms of intellect

iq tests test parietal lobe controlled abilities, why would only one part of the brain be more advanced than the other parts? general intelligence my friend, it all correlates

[Anonymous No.1601987]

>>1601976
IQ tests test only one thing: the ability to take IQ tests.

[Anonymous No.1601997]

>>1601987
not really, i've taken many and have noticed a trend, its all mostly parietal lobe functions, it is also that lobe that when damaged most heavily effects your ability to take a iq test

http://www.neuroskills.com/tbi/bparieta.shtml

[Anonymous No.1601998]

>>1601960
>>1601954

This type of success could be described as being on top of the food chain.

You know, predators can eat whatever they want until the food supply runs out.

Humans for example can erradicate entire species on a whim. This is a prime example of genetic superiority.

Adaptation is the status quo of survival.

[Anonymous No.1602004]

>>1601998

>>Humans for example can erradicate entire species on a whim.

Funny why groups like PETA are around then trying to stop animals becoming extinct?

Checkmate.

[Anonymous No.1602007]

>>1601998
>This is a prime example of genetic superiority.
Except that it isn't. Genetic superiority has nothing to do with how many species you can hurl into extinction.

[Anonymous No.1602019]

EVERY ONE STFU
a life forms success is measured by how well it can survive. everything is relative from there

[Anonymous No.1602024]

>>1601998
again, there is no such thing as genetic superiority.

bacteria have better adaptability than any predator.

[Anonymous No.1602041]

>>1602024
genetic superiority is when you are more adept for survival than an other life form. once again its all relative

[Anonymous No.1602062]

>>1602041
>genetic superiority is when you are more adept for survival than an other life form.

In your environment and circumstances. You can't logically say that one species, adapted for their situation, is genetically better than a species adapted to survive in a totally different situation. It's like stating that motorcycles are better than transport trucks. They are different animals

[Anonymous No.1602066]

>>1602004

PETA wasn't around when we lost the Dodo. But still, I said CAN which denotes the ability to do so, rather than the desire to do so.

>>1602007

If it isn't then I don't know what is.

>>1602019

Wrong, humans have adapted to survive better in almost any environment.

When cows start a space program let me know.

[Anonymous No.1602072]

>>1602066

Cows will start a space program around the same time as Africans.

[Anonymous No.1602092]

>>1602066
>Wrong, humans have adapted to survive better in almost any environment.
Tardigrades are better at surviving than humans. in any environment.

[Anonymous No.1602095]

>>1602062
>You can't logically say that one species, adapted for their situation, is genetically better than a species adapted to survive in a totally different situation

but we are talking about humans, our greatest strength is being smart, evolutionarily intellect is the greatest advantage, especially when compared to an other human.

[Anonymous No.1602098]

>>1602062

No creature can adapt better than another in the same environment. But just imagine that one specie in another environment grows arms and starts using tools and comes over to the other creatures' environment and starts eating them.

Boom, superiority.

[Anonymous No.1602103]

>>1602095
try living in africa for a while, drinking from a river, eating whatever you manage to catch. i wonder how long you'll manage to survive.

[Anonymous No.1602105]

>>1602092

Which goes to show that success and subsequently genetic superiority is NOT measured by the ability to adapt.

[Anonymous No.1602108]

>>1602105

or survive.

[Anonymous No.1602114]

>>1602103
if they were smarter from the start that wouldn't be a problem for them now. like how that isn't a problem for the rest of the world now, it used to be though, but we were smart, they were not.

africans = inferior race

[Anonymous No.1602145]

>>1602114

I have to say, I can't fault the logic. Tough, I wonder if it is a cultural difference and not a genetic one.

[Anonymous No.1602171]

>>1602145
intellect: asians>white>black

female pelvice size: asian>white>black (to fit a babies head though, bigger head = bigger brain)

size of sex organs: black> white>asians

bone density: black>white>asian (indicates a more primitive lifestyle)

hmmmmm doesn't look good

[Anonymous No.1602177]

>>1602171
forgot my pic, these average scores occur over and over and over and over and over again in multiple tests

[Anonymous No.1602178]

>>1597807
The white race is a race of individuals.
Asians dont have individuality or creativity.
They haven't invented anything useful since the 4th century, and all the cars they build today are deathtraps.

[Anonymous No.1602181]

>>1602171
>>1602177

Implying that graph is anwehre close to being accurate

[Anonymous No.1602184]

>>1602171

Did you suddenly forget about genetic diversity?

You're implying every asian person is more intelligent than eveyr white person, who is in turn, more intelligent than every black person.

Who gives a flying fucking about ethnic averages. Each person is seperate and should be treat as such. Way too many variables to put it all down to DNA.

[Anonymous No.1602185]

[Anonymous No.1602194]

>>1602184
LOL but an average difference still does exist and thats all im saying.

i never said anything about treating people in any way

[Anonymous No.1602195]

Who knows? Shitskinned subhuman niggers are inferior creatures compared to the rest of humanity, that much is certain.

[Anonymous No.1602199]

>>1602185
interesting

[Anonymous No.1602201]

[Anonymous No.1602208]

>>1602194

Yes but an average difference isn't neccessarily genetic. It could be cultural, or even down to an artefact of the testing method.

Besides, IQ tests are in no way an accurate representation of intelligence.

One of my most intelligent friends is black, and he's a fucking genius. An average difference means nothing when the majority of blacks aren't educated.

[Anonymous No.1602211]

>>1602195
dont bring racism into this you stupid monkey, even if one race was superior to an other that doesn't mean they instantly deserve less respect than you

[Anonymous No.1602230]

Here you go OP
The origins of civilization itself.

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=the+day+the+world+took+off&aq=f

Even if this is a troll thread i recommend you guys spend the time watching it anyway.

[Anonymous No.1602240]

>>1602208
i see what your getting at. but there are just far FAR too many correlations for me to ignore. i for one am hispanic and deviate from these charts. iq tests are indeed a shitty way to determine intelligence but over all cognitive abilities correlate.

[Anonymous No.1602244]

>>1602184
All the genetic diversity we need can be obtained from Europe. There are several dozen countries in Europe, with their own borders, histories, and genetic groups. If Europe didn't have genetic diversity, then all of Europe would have died from the Black Death.

[Anonymous No.1602261]

>>1602178
>>1602177
ahh, /stormfront/ had found this thread.

few points:
- IQ isn't accurate measure of intelligence. ability to score better can be learned.
- better inteligence does not mean superiority.
- asian lack of individuality is a cultural thing.

[Anonymous No.1602277]

>>1602244
This.

Wipe out all niggers. If it wasn't for superior races aiding them, they would have been reduced to nothing by now.

Nature has selected that the niggers are failures in the experiment called the human race.

[Anonymous No.1602285]

>>1602230
Civilization was created by sandniggers then spread to Asia and Europe. The New world Americas already had their own advanced civilizations independently. Niggers cannot into civilization.

[Anonymous No.1602300]

>>1602244
There comes a time when diversity is bad. I.g. when niggers have influence to fight law enforcement for the purpose of continuing in their nigger culture founded on rape, murder, and theft. Niggers are the death of societies. Same goes for Muslims.

[Anonymous No.1604353]

Social Darwinism.


/thread

[Anonymous No.1604361]

>>1602277

Incorrect.

We are still part of nature, still subject to its laws. Do not think too much of yourself. If they had "failed", they would be extinct. They are not, therefore they are just as "evolved" as the rest of the world.

[Anonymous No.1604372]

The colder climates force technological advancement to survive. When life is easy there's less need to invent. Africa is the way it is now simply because there's little they need to do to acquire water and food. It's the same in all warm easy climates throughout the world.

/thread.

[Anonymous No.1604401]

This isnt a social science board, drown in piss

[Anonymous No.1604438]

same with the Native Americans, they were healthy and relatively peaceful, (with the exception of a few tribes). they were just unfortunate and raped by the white superior race.