/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.4778397]

Hi, /sci/, I have an important question for your brilliant minds. I am sure you can answer it.

How do you explain the fact that Black students from families with incomes of $80,000 to $100,000 score considerably lower on the SAT than White students from families with $20,000 to $30,000 incomes? How do you explain why social class factors, all taken together, only cut the Black-White achievement gap by a third? Culture-only theory cannot predict these facts; often its predictions are opposite to the empirical results.

[Anonymous No.4778415]

-SAT could be more geared towards knowledge which a white/asian mans brain can process better than a black guys.

tl;dr SAT racist

[Anonymous No.4778422]

It scares me that people think a single written test can determine the unchangible future of an entire race of billions.

Scary shit.

[Anonymous No.4778424]

>>4778415
What about reaction time tests? Is reaction time racist?

>In 1991, Richard Lynn tested 1,468 9-year old children consisting of Blacks from South Africa, East Asians from Hong Kong and Japan, and Whites from Britain and Ireland. The content of the tests involved flipping a switch after one or more lights came on. Lynn found that the decision times (the time taken to make a decision about what to do) had a low correlation with IQ data on Raven's Progressive Matrices tests also administered during the same study, and that movement times (the time taken to execute the decision) did not show any correlation. He found that the Asians had the fastest decision times, followed by the Whites, and then by the Blacks. He also determined that the Black children had movement times that were substantially faster than those of Whites and Asians on certain tests.[31] Studies have shown similar patterns in response time on tests of arithmetic [32] and international studies confirm the trend.[33]

>Jensen (1993) has stated that this allows for an extension of Spearman's hypothesis to include reaction time. Based on these results, they have concluded that the observed East Asian-White-Black differences have a neurological basis.

>Inspection times correlate with IQ by about .30 to .50 (Grudnik and Kranzler 2001).

31 Richard Lynn, "Race Differences in Intelligence: A Global Perspective,"(http://www.mugu.com/cgi-bin/Upstream/lynn-race-iq)) The Mankind Quarterly 31, no. 3 (1991): 255–96; Means for Progressive Matrices and 12 reaction time measures for 9-year-old children from five countries. (http://www.mugu.com/cgi-bin/Upstream/People/Lynn/lynn-race-iq-table7.html))
32 Jensen 1993; Jensen and Whang 1994.
33 See Lynn and Shigehisa 1991 for Japan; Chan and Lynn (1989) for Hong Kong and Britain; Lynn (1991) for Ireland; and Lynn and Holmshaw 1990 for South Africa.

[Anonymous No.4778431]

>>4778422
It scares me that people who can't spell unchangeable are allowed to vote.

[Anonymous No.4778442]

>>4778431
>babby's first spelling error

[Anonymous No.4778443]

Come on /sci/, this is important.

I need hard data and scientific rebuttals to go beat those nasty racists on /pol/.

[Anonymous No.4778444]

>>4778431
it scares me that people think spelling acuity should be a determinant in deciding who votes

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.4778452]

>>4778397
>Culture-only theory cannot predict these facts; often its predictions are opposite to the empirical results.
Excuse me, you seem to be doing a false equivocation. Let me help you out. Economic class != social class. Blacks are discriminated against and treated worse whether or not they're rich or from affluent neighborhood. All of the studies done to date do not attempt to account for this. For this, you would need to go to another culture where the omnipresent anti-black sentiment does not exist, or even better where omnipresent anti-white sentiment exists in a majority black population, and then compare white vs black in that culture.

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.4778458]

>>4778424
This is a new one. That's interesting. Without having looked at the study, I suspect one of:
- Complete bullshit and fabrication
- biasing the data
- too small sample sizes
- publishing bias
- difference in diet leading to health differences
- various other bullshits w.r.t. how the samples were picked

[Anonymous No.4778466]

>>4778452
I'm pretty sure Asians are discrimitated just as much if not more, since their arrival. Asians have always been looked at as suspicious devils from the east. They worked their hardest on any job and got successful at it. Blacks hate asians. White people make fun of asians and think they're suspicious. Asians themselves hate each other. At every interaction between Asians and White cultures, white people have always discriminated asians. This holds true even now.

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.4778476]

>>4778466
Doubt it. Sorry I don't have time to look up evidence. If you want for next time, try to find some reputable word association tests, and see if people in the US associate Asians with the same negative words as they do with blacks. I believe this is unlikely. In fact, I suspect you'll see the exact opposite. You'll see bullshit like what you just said, where everyone thinks Asians are hardworking smart guys, as opposed to the pervasive cultural stereotype of lazy criminal blacks.

I'm arguing it's unclear if the difference is genetic. It's uncontroversial that blacks in the US do as a matter of fact do worse on standardized tests and commit more (violent?) crime per capita.

[Anonymous No.4778472]

>>4778466
>implying Asians were and still are discriminated as much as Blacks.

Go fuck yourself.

[Anonymous No.4778474]

>>4778452
>even better where omnipresent anti-white sentiment exists in a majority black population, and then compare white vs black in that culture

Okay, here you go:

>Out of a total of 36 problems, the African students solved an average of 22, the East Indian students, 25, and the White students, 29 (P< .001), placing them at the 57th, 64th, and 86th percentiles, respectively, and yielding IQ equivalents of 103, 106, and 117 on the 1993 US norms. Four months earlier, they had completed the Standard Progressive Matrices. The two tests correlated .60 or higher for both the Africans and the non-Africans, and both tests predicted final end-of-year grades with mean r’s = .30 (P’s < .05).

>Rushton, J. P., Skuy, M., & Fridjhon, P. (2003). Performance on Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices by African, East Indian, and White engineering students in South Africa. Intelligence, 31, 123-137.

What now?

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.4778480]

>>4778474
See my earlier possible complaints. I am not familiar with the study, so I cannot say right now. I also fail to see the needed evidence of the pervasive anti-white culture in South Africa.

[Anonymous No.4778481]

>>4778466

I don't think asians have ever been nearly as discriminated against as blacks. Asians are considered the model minority. Hard working, studious/academic/nerdy, non-threatening.

[Anonymous No.4778483]

>>4778458
Why do you suspect these things? Why could the study not be valid and true?

I am looking for scientific evidence here, not dogmatic denial.

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.4778488]

>>4778483
>dogmatic
Nope. I'm arguing from prior experience and knowledge. My close friends have taken a cultural anthropology class or some such where they actually spent a week or two going over every purported study like yours and ripping it apart - showing the biases, statistical bullshits, and so on.

I'm drawing on prior uncited evidence, which makes me not dogmatic. However, it does make my arguments here uncompelling.

Besides, you're just a troll and/or a white supremacist, just trying to heckle us.

[Anonymous No.4778494]

>>4778480
The anti-White culture in South Africa is far more vicious and pervasive than anything Negroes faced at the hands of Whites.

You don't strike me as a scientifically minded person.

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

[Anonymous No.4778489]

other social factors could be at work besides income.

[Anonymous No.4778503]

>>4778476
Could it be that Asians _are_ hard working and intelligent people and Blacks _are_ lazier and less intelligent?

Why or why not?

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.4778506]

>>4778494
Yes, but that doesn't show that the whites were educated in an environment with constant subtle social cues that they're stupid, criminal, lazy, etc. Because of apartheid, I suspect the exact opposite actually. You see, they were segregated quite strongly, and the whites were in charge, so I doubt the white kids were in a similar negative environment as US blacks.

[Anonymous No.4778507]

>>4778488
Your friends have taken a propaganda course where they were indoctrinated with a certain dogma, and here you are spreading that same dogma.

You have no basis for dismissing reaction time studies other than your desire to cling to that dogma.

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.4778509]

>>4778503
Seems unlikely. People far more educated than I have looked at the genomes, and the variation between any two human beings is far less than the variation of two chimps in the same tribe. I find like this great lack of genetic diversity points towards the socio-economic hypothesis and not the genetic hypothesis.

[Anonymous No.4778515]

>>4778474.
Q.E.D

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.4778517]

>>4778507
Let me use an analogy - Suppose we had another anti-science hate group, like creationists, who just cited some obscure hitherto unknown study that conclusively disproves evolution. Am I going to accept it out of hand despite the overwhelming amount of prior evidence, and despite the known biases of the speakers? No, that would be silly. I would research into it, and wait for it to percolate in the halls of academia.

[Anonymous No.4778540]

Race is a social concept, not a biological one.

>There are genetic differences among different races but if you were to have a race for every difference you would have over a million races.

Research at UW st. louis concludes there are not enough differences between various races for the term to be compared to trusted terms like species and sub-species.

>Race is only significant because its easy to see.

http://news.wustl.edu/news/Pages/184.aspx

[Anonymous No.4778547]

Here's a recent Norwegian documentary series about this (mainly arguing for the naturist side)

"Hjernevask (Brainwash) is a controversial Norwegian popular science documentary series that aired on Norwegian television in 2010. The series was produced by Harald Eia and Ole Martin Ihle, and was completed in seven episodes consisting of interviews with Norwegian and foreign researchers who have different views on the nature versus nurture debate."

There's video links on the wiki page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hjernevask

It's pretty interesting, I guarantee you'll enjoy watching

[http://www.goodrumj.com/RFaqHTML.html No.4778551]

>>4778509
Do you also deny that there are differences in intelligence between dog breeds, or other animal subspecies?

>Q: How genetically differentiated are human continental populations (the major races) from one another compared to populations of other species?

>Here are some comparative figures for humans and other species (again, sampled across most or all of their ranges except as noted), based on autosomal microsatellites.

>Wolverines, polar bears, Canada lynx and humpback whales have not traditionally been divided into subspecies, while two or more subspecies (or ‘breeds’ in the case of the Asian dogs) have been named in all of the remaining non-human species listed above. The overall FST value for African buffalo is not particularly large, but the mean value of 0.095 between the central African population and other populations was considered large enough to support their traditional subspecies status. Based on cranial morphology and geography, 24 subspecies of the gray wolf in North America were reduced to five in 1995, while North American coyotes are considered to have eastern and western subspecies.

[Anonymous No.4778569]

I'm a big believer in equality for EVERYONE, but the genetic difference between humans and CHIMPS is less than 2 percent. I don't think anyone is better than anyone else, but I do think that it's a possibility that people of different races are different in other ways because of their race. It's a possibility, I suppose.

[Anonymous No.4778591]

>>4778476
Asians: Gooks/Chinks/Slanteye/Human-calculators/etc
Blacks: niggers/monkeys/animal/etc

looking at word association alone doesn't say anything about any race. You have to look at how people perceive those words and what effects it carries. You will almost never see anyone saying niggers. There are many instances of people saying chink/gook/slanteye/human-calculators towards asians. And they say it casually and jokingly. Their attitude toward asians are that of an inferior culture. When you call people out on their casual/joking racist nature towards asian people, they will say its a joke and laugh if off. If you casually make a joke about niggers and pass it off as if you did nothing wrong, you will be fired from your job, looked down upon you by your colleagues, etc. The reactions are completely opposite. Asians are treated as a race/culture that they can walk down upon without much/any retributions. Blacks are treated carefully because they are protected from the laws/society.

This type of discrimination isn't just casually their. It's practiced in many higher institutions. Asians are often discriminated in the academics circles as well. Where as Affirmative action helps blacks/latinos/native americans, it discriminates asians.

[Anonymous No.4778602]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_genetic_clustering

Race is both biological and social construct. Racial groups as traditionaly defined can be inferred by unbiased mathematical analysis of human genetic variation. The "social concept" notion does not mean race is not real or with biological basis, that is a misconception.

[anon No.4778611]

quick question, since when has intelligence been determined genetically?

[http://www.goodrumj.com/RFaqHTML.html No.4778605]

>>4778540
The topology of human trees (Figs. 4, 5) is remarkably consistent regardless of which class of loci are considered, and principal component analysis of genetic data also produces predictable clustering (Fig. 6). Either method gives a good visual overview of the general relatedness of the world’s populations.

By analysis of classical markers, Nei & Roychoudhury (1993) identified five major human clades: sub-Saharan Africans, Caucasians, Greater Asians, Australopapuans and Amerindians. Evolutionary trees constructed with autosomal RFLPs,[105] microsatellites[106] and Alu insertions[107] show similar topology. Frequently, Amerindians are grouped together with Asians, indicating four major clades, and it has been suggested that this should be a minimum.[108] Obviously, additional structure exists within each of these groups, but as we’ve seen, it’s generally weak compared to the differentiation among the ones listed here. For this reason alone, the term ‘race’ applies well to these major groupings.

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.4778617]

>>4778615
To be fair, that's only part of the "equation". Environment does matter, as hinted at.

[Scientist !!ThFjnJh4EkH No.4778615]

>>4778611
Since always. There's a reason you're smarter than a dog, and its not because you were well fed or went to a good school with lots of social and cultural encourage.

[http://med.stanford.edu/news_releases/2005/january/racial-data.htm No.4778619]

>>4778540
Without knowing how the participants had identified themselves, Risch and his team ran the results through a computer program that grouped individuals according to patterns of the 326 signposts. This analysis could have resulted in any number of different clusters, but only four clear groups turned up. And in each case the individuals within those clusters all fell within the same self-identified racial group.

"This shows that people's self-identified race/ethnicity is a nearly perfect indicator of their genetic background," Risch said.

[Anonymous No.4778628]

To get back to the original question of why blacks perform worse on standardized tests than other ethnic groups you may want to review the literature on stereotype threat: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereotype_threat

Also as previously noted there is well known cultural bias within standardized tests. This extends not just to different race-based cultures, but also to different geographic areas. Standardized tests are harder for other cultures because they often involve problem solving relating to "familiar" concepts. Just so happens if those concepts aren't familiar to you personally (say you're never built a snowman) then suddenly questions involving those concepts (say calculating the volume of snow needed for a particular snowman) becomes harder.

There's tons of evidence in the developmental literature that infants in different socio-economic groups start off with similar cognitive abilities and start diverging around the same time that these infants are learning language (high SES kids hear lots more language than low-SES kids).

[Anonymous No.4778634]

>>4778517
The problem with this analogy is that there is no evidence supporting the belief that all races share the same cognitive faculties. It's entirely faith based.

Creationists and egalitarians are in fact two sides of the same coin. Both of them believe evolution doesn't apply to humans, and that we were all "created equal".

[Anonymous No.4778638]

>>4778619

Correlation doesn't equal causation. There's a correlation there because the genetic identifiers are observable and therefore discrimination can occur.

[Anonymous No.4778653]

>>4778628
I have read about stereotype threat and other similar excuses, but none of them have successfully accounted for the racial IQ gap. Simply put, it's hogwash.

>“Numerous laboratory experiments have been conducted to show that African Americans’ cognitive test performance suffers under stereotype threat, i.e., the fear of confirming negative stereotypes concerning one’s group. A meta-analysis of 55 published and unpublished studies of this effect shows clear signs of publication bias.”

>“The effect varies widely across studies, and is generally small. Although elite university undergraduates may underperform on cognitive tests due to stereotype threat, this effect does not generalize to non-adapted standardized tests, high-stakes settings, and less academically gifted test-takers.”

Stereotype threat and the cognitive test performance of African Americans, by Jelte M. Wicherts & Cor de Haan, University of Amsterdam

[Anonymous No.4778652]

>>4778611

>quick question, since when has intelligence been determined genetically?

Truth is that we dont yet know to what degree genetics and intelligence is related. All we know is that it is unlikely to be as important as environment. But beyond this, we are dealing with a subject joining three incredibly complicated and still largely unknown fields of genetics, sociology and neuroscience. So, "unknown"is currently the answer.

[Anonymous No.4778660]

>>4778628
Survey of opinions on the primacy of g and social consequences of ability testing: A comparison of expert and non-expert views

>Though some commentaries give the impression of controversy regarding the importance of cognitive abilities and the validity of ability testing, the results of this survey clearly demonstrate that there are areas of resounding consensus among experts. Our results indicate that there is consensus among experts in the science of mental abilities that g is an important, non-trivial determinant (or at least predictor) of important real world outcomes for which there is no substitute, and that tests of g are valid and generally free from racial bias.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2008.03.007

[Anonymous No.4778668]

>>4778602

This is fairly straightforward.
"Race is a classification system lacking a basis in modern biology...",
" Although lacking in scientific validity as a phenomenon of natural science, the concept of race remains as a real phenomenon both in popular culture and as a subject of study in social science."

[Anonymous No.4778678]

>>4778652
>All we know is that it is unlikely to be as important as environment.
What do you base this on? Wishful thinking?

Reasonable estimates put the racial IQ gap at 80% genetic.

>The hereditarian model of an 80% genetic–20% environmental weighting for the Black–White IQ difference is based on the hypothetico-deductive method (Sections 2 and 14), not a patchwork of narrow, often inconsistent or unreplicated facts. Our “indirect” evidence includes the fact that (a) the gene–environment architectural matrix is the same for both races (Section 5); (b) inbreeding scores from Japan predict mean Black–White differences in the United States (Section 5); (c) regression to the mean operates consistently in both races (Section 9); (d) psychometric g is one and the same factor in both Whites and Blacks (Section 4); and (e) race differences are greatest on the g factor extracted from both IQ tests and reaction time tasks (Section 4).

Rushton, J. P., & Jensen, A. R. (2005). Wanted: More race-realism, less moralistic fallacy. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 11, 328-336.

[Anonymous No.4778681]

>>4778668
Huh? Take random blood samples and you can reasonably deduct what race the donor is based on DNA. It's the same thing as animal breeds.

[Anonymous No.4778682]

>>4778668
Already debunked. See: >>4778605, >>4778619

[anon No.4778685]

another question, why is IQ considered by many to be an accurate measure of intelligence even after significant evidence demonstrating the neuroplasticity of the brain?

[Anonymous No.4778703]

>>4778685
In what way does neuroplasticity contradict IQ as a measure of intelligence?

[Anonymous No.4778708]

>>4778685
IQ/g usually predicts major life outcomes better than does any other single predictor in broad samples of individuals. For example, whether IQ predicts strongly (educational performance) or weakly (law-abidingness), it predicts better than does social class background.

[Anonymous No.4778725]

>>4778628
>There's tons of evidence in the developmental literature that infants in different socio-economic groups start off with similar cognitive abilities

Can you provide some of that evidence? Your claims are contradicted by physiological factors such as cranial capacity. The racial gap is measurable at birth.

>Discoveries using Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), which creates a three-dimensional image of the living brain, have shown a strong positive correlation (.44) between brain size and IQ (see Rushton & Ankney, 1996, for a review). And there is more. The National Collaborative Perinatal Project on 53,000 children by Sarah Broman and her colleagues, showed that head perimeter at birth significantly predicts head perimeter at 7 years — and head perimeter at seven years predicts IQ. It also shows that Asian children average a larger head perimeter at birth than do White children who average a larger head perimeter than do Black children.

>Racial differences in brain size have been established using a variety of modern methods. Using endocranial volume, for example, Beals et al. (1984, p. 307, Table 5) analyzed about 20,000 skulls from around the world. East Asians averaged 1,415 cm3 , Europeans averaged 1,362 cm3, and Africans averaged 1,268 cm3 . Using external head measures to calculate cranial capacities, Rushton (1992) analyzed a stratified random sample of 6,325 U.S. Army personnel measured in 1988 for fitting helmets and found that Asian Americans averaged 1,416 cm3, European Americans 1,380 cm3, and African Americans 1,359 cm3. Finally, a recent MRI study found that people of African and Caribbean background averaged a smaller brain volume than did those of European background (again see Rushton & Ankney, 1996, for review).

[Anonymous No.4778730]

>>4778628
How do you explain differences in reaction time tests as mentioned previously (>>4778424)?

Are reaction time tests biased?

[Anonymous No.4778742]

We've gotten quite a couple of threads from /pol/ recently.

Also:
>Biology
>Hard science

[Anonymous No.4778767]

>>4778742
Someone is going on /pol/ and saying "/sci/ has beat you guys 999x in arguments! You wouldn't dare go over there and spout your racism! They will give you an intellectual smackdown!, etc."

After the hype I was expecting more of a challenge. Sad.

[Anonymous No.4778772]

>mfw I have an IQ of 120
>mfw I am Black.

Does this make me the Isaac Newton of my community?

Feels great being a double minority. Also, you guys are weird, dedicating this much time just so you can say "niggers are dumb and Jews control the world". Say you are right, what would you do?

[Anonymous No.4778776]

>>4778772
>Be black
>have IQ of 123
>Mah nigga!

[Anonymous No.4778778]

There's a number of factors to take account actually

-peer pressure
-malnutrition
-ideas and aspirations of what is define as "success"
-poor parenting
-absence of potential venues of interest that can lead to a productive career in non physical activities (lack of exploitable opportunity).
-lack of culture (african american culture is pretty much a sub-culture of american culture and even then many of us debate if even that is a legit culture)
-do both parents work (for instance the white father works as an engineer making 60k while the white mother is stay at home vs. black father and mother work as teachers both making 30k a year which technically qualifies them in the chart since this is "family income" based).

Also like everything else thats tested there are outliers that really don't get taken into account. So those "bright" blacks who do well in academics either are not counted or their presence doesn't make enough difference in the average.

also

Notice how in op's pic the 60-70k mark everyone sees a sudden sharp rise in test scores, what is that? Is there some universal threshold that automatically spikes the test averages in each population?

Yeah there's tons of shit to take account for really, not saying it's going to make a huge difference but a difference is a difference.

Feel free to disagree though.

[Anonymous No.4778781]

>>4778772
End affirmative action and all other policies which are based on the false assumption that races share equivalent abilities.

[Anonymous No.4778787]

>>4778781
>Asians 30%
30% asian cap looks to be true

[Anonymous No.4778796]

>>4778776
feelsgood.jpeg

>>4778781
No, it makes up for all the shit your ancestors have done to mine. Think of it as reparations. Let it go on for 400 years then maybe I will change my mind.

[Anonymous No.4778801]

>>4778778
When the OP asked you to "explain", it meant that you should make a logical argument based on evidence.

Not that you should regurgitate a mess of hypothetical excuses with no factual basis, many of which are already debunked in this thread.

This is, after all, supposed to be a scientific board.

[Anonymous No.4778814]

>>4778796
>all the shit your ancestors have done to mine
You mean introducing them to modern civilization, increasing life expectancy, reducing infant mortality, increasing their standard of living, and giving them jobs? The horror.

If you want to undo all those horrible things you are welcome to move back into the jungle and live like your ancestors did before White people did "all the shit" to them.

[Anonymous No.4778820]

>>4778796
Maybe you should pay reparations for cannibalism committed by your ancestors.

They were still practicing cannibalism when White people discovered them.

[Anonymous No.4778821]

>>4778814
Too late, too little. I will take advantage of my affirmative action while you cry about how butthurt you are over the internet.

[Anonymous No.4778833]

>>4778801

>hypothetical excuses

Can you really call things like malnutrition, peer pressure and lack parental involvement excuses?

>supposed to be a scientific board.

Don't get cute anon, there's a been quite a few threads designed for ulterior motives that have little to do with actual math or science.

[Anonymous No.4778837]

>>4778833
Yes, because that's exactly what they are.

To make matters worse they are excuses that aren't supported by any evidence and don't withstand scrutiny.

[Anonymous No.4778843]

>>4778837
Malnutrition is definitely supported by evidence:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/11/041117005027.htm
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1530341/

It is also obvious that social/cultural influences such as peer pressure and lack of parenting influence behavior, thinking and IQ. A complete lack of peers and parenting leads to feral children who have extremely low IQs and barely use language.

Clearly, you are exhibiting many biases in trying to justify your racism. I would suggest reading Thinking Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman if you want to understand more about your cognitive biases.

[Anonymous No.4778844]

>>4778821
Of course you will, because niggers have no dignity, are lazy, and you know you are inferior and cannot compete on a level playing field.

[Anonymous No.4778851]

>>4778843
Those are just articles on malnutrition in general.

You could also link an article about how being beaten in the head with a baseball bat can cause brain damage. Would that mean the racial IQ gap is a result of Negroes being beaten in the head with baseball bats?

It's very sad that this is what passes for a rebuttal on /sci/.

A (non-Black) child could see the flaws in your claims.

[Anonymous No.4778850]

>This thread

Why can't I hold all this /pol/

Because my arm is busted

[Anonymous No.4778874]

>>4778851
Blacks have been the most impoverished group in America, and face malnutrition by living in ghettos which are basically food deserts with little access to expensive, healthy produce.

[Anonymous No.4778884]

>>4778874
>ghettos which are basically food deserts
O LAWDY, DIS BE ONE DUMB CRACKA

[Anonymous No.4778891]

>>4778874
>ghettos which are basically food deserts
O LAWDY, DIS BE ONE DUMB CRACKA

[Anonymous No.4778895]

>>4778874
I see you are posting in a thread where you did not even read the OP. Good for you!

Now that you have learned how to type and post, the next step is learning how to read.

>How do you explain the fact that Black students from families with incomes of $80,000 to $100,000 score considerably lower on the SAT than White students from families with $20,000 to $30,000 incomes? How do you explain why social class factors, all taken together, only cut the Black-White achievement gap by a third? Culture-only theory cannot predict these facts; often its predictions are opposite to the empirical results.

[Anonymous No.4778904]

>>4778891
Clearly you don't understand what a food desert is. It is a lack of grocery stores with fresh produce and nutritional foods. The only foods sources in ghettos are fast food chains and convenience stores which are unhealthy and full of fats/carbs which leads to the picture you attached.

Malnutrition is very prevalent in low-income families, especially among blacks. Lack of good food also leads to low IQs, and behavioral problems as previous cited.

http://www.lsuagcenter.com/en/family_home/family/childcare/children_childcare/malnutrition+impairs+u
s+childrens+health+behavior+says+lsu+agcenter+food+and+nutrition+expert.htm

[Anonymous No.4778909]

>>4778895
Why is culture not relevant? Richer black children would still be very influenced by other blacks and their culture in general.

[Anonymous No.4778918]

>>4778895
Black people are not treated fairly by others even if they're rich.

The only way you can win this argument is to separate a portion of each population, have them raised by robots, and give them IQ tests.

[Anonymous No.4778935]

>>4778918
Black people are treated _better_ than other races.

>The data indicate that pronounced differences in the background distribution of skill and human capital, not arbitrary hurdles imposed by employers, are the principle factor behind racial imbalances in most jobs. Moreover, blacks lag behind whites in actual on-the-job performance, which indicates that employers are not unfairly excluding minorities from the workforce but rather bending over backwards to include them.

http://lsr.nellco.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1366&context=upenn_wps&sei-redir=1#search=
%22disparate%20impact%20realism%22

[Anonymous No.4778939]

>>4778918
From a philosophical perspective, the entire problem with this issue is that the burden of proof has been misplaced. It is not up to me to show that humans are neurologically diverse. It is up to you to show that they are neurologically identical.

Of course your ilk have seldom even started to try, and when they have they tend to fail. Typically, the Gould-Rose-Lewontin crowd's approach is to postulate a theoretical mechanism by which the observed facts could be explained without reference to human biodiversity, and demand that their opponents disprove this mechanism. Once you know the game, however, there is no reason to play it. Everyone from Rushton and Jensen to Shockley and Watson has been put in the position of a 15th-century atheist, from whom the faithful demand proof that God does not exist.

The doctrine of human neurological uniformity is the Russell's teapot of our time, and as its hierophants engage in more and more stereotypical theocratic behavior the parallel grows harder and harder to conceal.

[Anonymous No.4778945]

>>4778397
Because blacks have a lower mean IQ.

Why do you care so much though? Seriously get a fucking hobby or something.

[Anonymous No.4778949]

>>4778939
What university is that?

[Anonymous No.4778960]

>>4778945
The racial equivalence myth has infected all politics in the West and is causing many nations to implement disastrous self-destructive policies that are based on a huge lie.

What could be more important than informing people they are being so heinously bamboozled?

[Anonymous No.4778962]

>>4778939

I'm inclined to believe that is copy pasta good sir.

0/10

[Anonymous No.4778968]

>>4778945
He is autistic and it just so happens that he is obsessed about race rather than "My Little Pony".

[Anonymous No.4778970]

Do you think the race-iq disparity will increase or decrease in the future? And what of the consequences? If the population keeps growing as it is right now, there will be tons of low-iq people in america

[Anonymous No.4779030]

>>4778970
The racial IQ gap is increasing due to the Flynn effect.

The consequences of American demographic change will result in collapse. It is unsustainable to burden a shrinking White population with the welfare of an exploding third world nation.

It will end up like Mexico. Mostly ruled by drug kingpins with terrible violence everywhere and a small Jewish elite which lives in secured communities and controls the reigns of government.

[Anonymous No.4779048]

>using test scores to demonstrate intelligence
>any black comedian could outwit all of /sci/

[Anonymous No.4779056]

>>4778960
Oh look, yet another loser who thought he was special but failed to get into a good school and now blames it on the niggers.

Pathetic.

[Anonymous No.4779066]

>>4778960
Read the protocols of the elders of zion and you'll understand.

>>4778939
that picture is rather bullshit and you should not use it.

>>4778904
They have malnutrition because they CHOOSE to eat shitty food. The things you complain about are a CONSEQUENCE of their basic stupidity and criminal behavior.

Further it doesn't explain why RICH BLACKS are STILL DUMBER THEN EVEN THE POOREST WHITES

[Anonymous No.4779071]

>>4779056
Oh look a blind liberal retard who has no argument.

[Anonymous No.4779073]

>>4779071
lol he doesn't even deny it. What a tragic little man.

[Anonymous No.4779075]

>>4779048
I don't think black comedians know about the second law of thermodynamics. Then again no one seems to know about that either on /sci/

[Anonymous No.4779087]

>>4779075
I'm actually a bit shocked at how dumb the few people on /sci/ who tried to defend the egalitarian myth are. And they say they are black themselves. Not surprising there.

Seems like a shitty board in general. Just a bunch of pretentious people with their heads up their asses who think they know everything because they read The Mismeasure of Man and actually believed it.

[Anonymous No.4779088]

Because the race/IQ disparity exists OP. Nobody is allowed to say it though.

[Anonymous No.4779092]

>>4779087
There is no point to discuss anything with negros, just stop talking to them after they mention they are black.

You can't convince them, they can't grasp how to argue, and they are an alien people who benefit from all the socialist/leftist lies anyways so even if they thought it was wrong, they would STILL push it!

[Anonymous No.4779102]

>>4779092
edit: the perfect example is how negros yell "Racist" when women refuse to sleep with them.
Do they actually think its racist? Doubtful, they just are angry and want to get their way since they are dumb as dirt subhumans.

[Anonymous No.4779108]

>>4779087
Have you considered the possibility that all intelligent folk on here is ignoring this retarded non-sci related thread.
Honestly, I don't understand how do mods have a blind spot for this racist inane garbage.
inb4
>hurr durr ad hominem
I'm not arguing. I want you to leave.

[Anonymous No.4779117]

>>4779108
>facts are racist inane garbage
>I'll never leave my egalitarian fantasy world!

this is you

[Anonymous No.4779118]

>>4779108
No, I think the intelligent folk on here already agree with me and don't think it is necessary to preach to the choir.

The reason it is hard to find an intelligent person to defend racial egalitarianism is because you would have to be a moron to believe it.

[Little Mac No.4779129]

>implying race is a biologically valid concept
I explain it by "this trend is seen only in your data, and does not apply to such studies in general. Either you are pulling your stats out of your ass, or you are cherry-picking."

[Anonymous No.4779137]

>>4779129
>populations seperated for hundreds of thousands of years are still all the same!

[Anonymous No.4779142]

>>4779129
It has already been explained that race is a genetically valid concept. Read the thread before posting.

[Anonymous No.4779151]

Africans are less intelligent as proven by pretty much every intelligence test ever. It's not like there's anything you can do about it. You get what you're born with. I'm white and I accept that ON AVERAGE east asians are more intelligent than my race.

Fuck I hate the term 'scientific racism.' It's pretty stupid that we're going to try and refute solid evidence that IQ an genetics are related.

[Anonymous No.4779160]

>>4779129
>>4779142
Liberals are like a See 'n Say toy. They come with a few pre-recorded platitudes that they unthinkingly regurgitate, but quickly run out and start repeating themselves.

[Anonymous No.4779164]

>>4779066

>Further it doesn't explain why RICH BLACKS are STILL DUMBER THEN EVEN THE POOREST WHITES

The chart doesn't show anything past 70k+ so while we could use our inductive reasoning and imagination to analyze it further it only entertains the idea not solidify it.

Since outliers do exist so you could literally have a few blacks that do more well than usual and not be covered for the sake of correlation.

Also

>anything below 150k
>rich

So did you randomly forget we have millionaires and billionaires that exist? Do you really think any family that can amass around 60k-100k is rich? Even when most likely it's just two parents working 30 to 45k jobs 40+ hours a week with some benefits and seasonal bonuses?

[Anonymous No.4779171]

>>4779066
>They have malnutrition because they CHOOSE to eat shitty food.

Not much of a choice when they are impoverished and have little access to cheap, healthy food. Black culture also has a tradition of eating fatty, unhealthy dishes, exemplified by soul food.

>RICH BLACKS are STILL DUMBER THEN EVEN THE POOREST WHITES

Many rich blacks still subscribe to black culture in general, which does not value education. Also, most visible examples of success for blacks have been things unrelated to education like sports and arts.

You seem quite emotional about this matter though. Perhaps that is why you seek to rationalize your racism so much.

[Anonymous No.4779168]

>>4779108
Confirmed for butthurt jolly african american.

[Anonymous No.4779176]

>>4779164
>making 100k a year
>liberals still think its "poor blacks living in a ghetto who are starving"

[Anonymous No.4779177]

>>4779164
I can see what you're saying but also consider that it is 1995, so adjust for inflation.

[Anonymous No.4779184]

>>4779171
>Not much of a choice when they are impoverished and have little access to cheap, healthy food.

"healthy" food is always cheaper then processed or fast food.
When people say "healthy food is more expensive" they mean salads are more expensive at fast food then burgers.

>Many rich blacks still subscribe to black culture in general, which does not value education.
Education has nothing to do with IQ or intelligence.

>You seem quite emotional about this matter though.
Because you are blatantly lying and hundreds of thousands of people have died, millions have suffered due to your marxist lies.

[Anonymous No.4779189]

>>4779171
You're delusional. Black people eat so much better than White people these days. And Black children get hot healthy meals at school while White children are eating cold cereal at home because their parents are too intelligent and successful so they get punished for their responsibility.

>MY EBT (NOW ON iTUNES) - By @MrEBT & @CaptnHook_Maine
http://youtu.be/o64Fz-KW1Dk

[Anonymous No.4779194]

>>4779171
>Black culture also has a tradition of eating fatty, unhealthy dishes

>black culture in general, which does not value education

>most visible examples of success for blacks have been things unrelated to education

Are you TRYING to prove our points?

[Anonymous No.4779200]

>>4779189
yup, It's like they are living in the past still repeating their tired old lies which stopped being relevant in the 60's.

Perhaps they've learned their debating tactics from their masters, the jews.
Should have saved that image with the mein kampf quote.

[Anonymous No.4779216]

>>4779184
>"healthy" food is always cheaper then processed or fast food.

No, the United States subsidizes unhealthy foods far more than produce like vegetables and fruits. This is why a fast food cheeseburger is so cheap.

There are also built in costs to obtaining healthy foods since grocery stores are far from blacks' homes in the ghetto. Most of such foods have to be prepared which is a cost in time as well, compared to prepared food like McDonalds or packaged stuff from a convenience store.

>Education has nothing to do with IQ or intelligence.

Yes it does. If you are educated you maximize your possible IQ range far more than if you were raised in ignorant isolation. You can learn many of the reasoning skills to perform better on IQ tests.

>Because you are blatantly lying and hundreds of thousands of people have died, millions have suffered due to your marxist lies.

Lol. And racism has never led to the vast suffering and systematic oppression or extermination of any people.

[Anonymous No.4779217]

>>4779200
This one?

[Anonymous No.4779212]

>>4778397
source of picture please

[Anonymous No.4779220]

>>4779194
If your point is that black culture is fucked up and a major cause of the problem, then yes I am.

[Anonymous No.4779223]

>>4779220
Culture is to humans as a beehive is to bees.

If you put a wasp in a beehive it will not become a bee.

[Anonymous No.4779231]

>>4779223
More like, settlements are to humans as beehives are to bees.

[Anonymous No.4779235]

>>4779217
ya that one.

>>4779216
You don't know anything about diet. There is no "unhealthy food" vs "healthy food"
Fruits are basically unhealthy, they are just sugar.
Vegetables literally have nothing but water and fiber in them.

These niggers on welfare get 200 dollars of food stamps a month if not more, that is MORE THEN ENOUGH to eat fantastically well.

>There are also built in costs to obtaining healthy foods since grocery stores are far from blacks' homes in the ghetto.
None of them work, so walking a little further to the store isn't a "built in cost".

>Most of such foods have to be prepared which is a cost in time as well, compared to prepared food like McDonalds or packaged stuff from a convenience store.

Hence why they want MORE EXPENSIVE packaged and prepared food, which kinda destroys your whole argument about them being too poor.

>And racism has never led to the vast suffering and systematic oppression or extermination of any people.
lol muh holocaust

[Anonymous No.4779242]

>>4779235
Lol. Poe's Law in action.

[Anonymous No.4779257]

>>4779212
Ogbu, J. U. (2003).Black American students in an affluent suburb: A study of academic disengagement. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

[Anonymous No.4779279]

>>4779257
pretty sure the source is the official SAT statistics

1995 was the last year they released such information, probably for the exact same reason we continue to use it.

[Anonymous No.4779287]

>>4779235

>200 dollars of food stamps a month if not more, that is MORE THEN ENOUGH to eat fantastically well.

Yeah if you're just one person you idiot. Which most "likely" they are not one person but 1 adult and 1+ child. Which makes a difference because the child or children in question are the real victims of this matter.

But alas I doubt you honestly give a shit about the general welfare of the child itself and just want to prove some sup-par point by any means necessary. Thread's becoming to /pol/ for me...I'm out.

[Anonymous No.4779291]

>>4779235

The healthiest food is fresh fish and fresh meat, and they're expensive as shit compared to processed foods. Especially the omega 3 fatty acids in fish are important to the health of the brain (and the whole body).

And they certainly don't sell that shit in local ghetto supermarkets.

[Anonymous No.4779314]

>>4779287
If they have a kid, then its like 375 a month, fucking idiot.
Also the government likely lies constantly about how much welfare money it hands out.
Oh so now the problem isn't poverty, but the fact that these niggers refuse to feed their kids, hence it's our taxes going to pay for negroids to eat in school while they buy alcohol with food stamps....

>>4779291
>ground beef
>unhealthy

>chicken
>too expensive

>buying fish oil pills
>extremely expensive

face it, you are just continuing to make up lies and excuses for the negroids.
It basically proves our point too, you are admit that they are not even sentient or capable of responsibility, so we need to coddle them.

[Anonymous No.4779321]

Sigh. Yes, yes, they are really dumb and we should send them to the gas chambers.

[Anonymous No.4779353]

>>4779291
They don't have supermarkets in black neighborhoods because blacks steal until they go out of business.

Of course that must be the fault of white people too.

[Anonymous No.4779366]

African-americans also breastfeed significantly less than other ethnicities. There are historical reasons for this. When you cite IQs and test scores this is an example of the sort of thing you ignore.

>>4779314
>it's our taxes going to pay for negroids to eat in school while they buy alcohol with food stamps....
Maybe it varies from state to state, but where I live food stamps don't buy alcohol.
Uneducated parents don't provide the best environments for developing children. You better believe there is a significant impact on development when a young child's diet consists largely of corn syrup and factory meat.

saging because this shit belongs on /pol/

[Anonymous No.4779449]

>>4779366
>but where I live food stamps don't buy alcohol.
What the government SAYS and what the reality is, often differs.

>There are historical reasons for this.
Your "historical reason" nonsense doesn't apply to EVERY OTHER PLACE BLACKS LIVE IN THE ENTIRE WORLD where they are the same or worse.

>Uneducated parents don't provide the best environments for developing children.
And yet rich blacks are still far below whites... Sounds like you have a lot of circular reasoning going on.
couldn't be just be that they are genetically less intelligent?

[Anonymous No.4779457]

>>4779449
You have been doing this for close to 12 hours. I am impressed. Brb in another 12 hours.

[Anonymous No.4779462]

>>4779366
I'm sorry, but you're still ignoring the income bracket.
Are you seriously saying that $70k+ black family lives in the ghetto while a $10k- white family does not?

Because that is fucking retarded.

[Anonymous No.4779482]

>>4778488
>my friends did X

look, that's great. Now what did they do?

Show me how it's wrong. Dude I like science not racism, but if science says that certain people are worse than others ill believe it if it's well supported and as should anyone who considers themselves a man of science.

>they ripped it apart
then show us, dude, that's all I want to see is how, and why this stuff is shit. Im listening.