/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.5128210]

Yesterday:

>how can you believe the earth is flat? scientific evidence shows that it's clearly about spherical

Today:

>how can you believe that god put humans on the earth 6000 years ago? scientific evidence shows that we evolved over millions of years

Tomorrow:

>how can you believe that all human races are the same? scientific evidence shows that blacks are less evolved than whites and there are major differences in intelligence between the races

I'm just wondering, how long will it take people before they get over their feelings and accept the truth? Or maybe the Jews will remove our freedom of speech even more and brainwash everyone into thinking we're all equal.

[poland No.5128212]

youre right OP
the jews (cultural marxists) will do anything to kill whitey

[Anonymous No.5128213]

another newfag using pseudoscience to justify his racist, primitive beliefs

[Anonymous No.5128214]

>>5128210
Just how autistic are you?

[Anonymous No.5128215]

>>5128213

Genetics isn't a pseudoscience. I'm not even White, I don't care about politics or trying to get niggers back to Africa or any of that shit, I just want the truth, in the same way people wanted the truth about religion 500 years ago. That's what science is about. Don't like it? Fuck off back to liberal school where nobody's feelings can get hurt.

[Anonymous No.5128223]

>>5128215

>durr science right fuck off you don't know shit
>clearly doesn't understand evolution

>scientific evidence shows that blacks are less evolved

That doesn't make any sense in a scientific context. You saying fish are less evolved than humans? Because they're not. The tuna of next year will be "more evolved" than the homo sapiens of today.

Get back to /b/ faggot.

[Anonymous No.5128230]

>>5128223

You see, if I had actually said fish are less evolved than humans, you wouldn't be mad, but because you let your feelings distort reason (you're not a rational human being) it makes you mad and you can't see simple truths like Blacks being less intelligent, more violent and prone to crime, and generally more like animals.

[Anonymous No.5128234]

>>5128230

Look, retard. I recognize the differences between the phenotypes of homo sapiens, and in some cases one could perceive one phenotype to be superior to others, that still doesn't have anything to do with less or more evolved.

If you said "fish are less evolved than humans" I would've been just as likely to reply to you, it's just as retarded as what you're saying.

[Anonymous No.5128240]

>>5128210


>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.5128241]

>less evolved
Every time.

[Anonymous No.5128242]

>>5128230
>if I had actually said fish are less evolved than humans
Fishes are much better swimmers than humans. They're also able to live under water. I don't see how they are 'less evolved'.
Also reported.

[Anonymous No.5128244]

>>5128210
>talking about species living at the same period
>less evolved
0/10

[Anonymous No.5128245]

>>5128230
>if I had actually said fish are less evolved than humans, you wouldn't be mad
I don't know if he would be "mad", but all of /sci/ would call you a retard, and tell you to stop using words you don't understand.

[Anonymous No.5128247]

>>5128245 here
Oh look it happened while I was typing.

[Anonymous No.5128253]

>>5128242

>don't like thread
>reported

This is why shit like this gets suppressed into obscurity even in the scientific community.

There are studies done on scientific racism, but you won't see them because kikes keep reporting them HUE UEHEUEHEUE

nigger

[Anonymous No.5128254]

>>5128242
>>5128244
>>5128245

Mad, White-guilted liberals, nitpicking at semantic.

Here's a peer reviewed, irrefutable study on the behavior of Blacks that proves that they're not human:

http://www.worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshhfCQpG8y006cNS3DH

[Anonymous No.5128257]

>less evolved

I seriously hope you are trolling.

Reported

[Anonymous No.5128258]

>>5128257

You reported this before of the mistake, or because the truth offends you?

[Anonymous No.5128259]

There is such a thing as "less evolved". A species could stagnate in terms of mutations, and remain in the same state, while another could progress very quickly and change a lot.

Who resembles the homo erectus more, Whites or Africans? Who acts like apes more? Who is closer in cognitive ability?

[Anonymous No.5128260]

>>5128258
Give one shred of evidence that proves that black people or any other race are INHERENTLY different.

You can't use an image that essentially says "BLACK PEOPLE ARE STUPID" without proof or without taking other things into account.
You also must have a source.

3/10 for making me reply.

[Anonymous No.5128266]

>>5128260

If you're over the age of 20 and are still asking me to provide evidence instead of having found any yourself, you're beyond help.

[Anonymous No.5128268]

>>5128210
>blacks are less evolved than whites

Nigger you don't understand how evolution works. Get this shit back to /pol/

[Anonymous No.5128269]

>>5128259
less evolved is quantified.

Please assign some depth to these terminaolgoies..

its meaningless. i suspect you are a faggot pol user..

But anyways i do not shy form controversy. What you should be saying is that blacks are less cognitively complex OR are a lower branch on the evolutionary tree that do not poses the same modern societal advantage of other Quote unquote race. Be very careful using race becaue gentic varience is greater amoungst "whites" and in reality whites coudl be said to be a collection of many different races. only classified as white because of the color of their skin. However on close inspection you will notice remarkable differences, same applies to other skin tones.. however whites ARE the most varied and genetically variable "race".

[Anonymous No.5128271]

>>5128268

maybe you should read the thread before posting

[Anonymous No.5128274]

>>5128266
>Ignorance
>Beyond help
What?

And if you are talking about those "experiments" from the 1950's you must be genuinely retarded.

Quite sure this is a troll now. This is my last post. Abandoning thread.

[Anonymous No.5128277]

>>5128271
I did, and all it had was some retard claiming that evolution could be quantified with shit that has nothing to do with evolution. Some shit becomes simpler less genetically complex as it evolves. This is not called devolution.

The only reason to use your definition of "more evolved" would be because you believe in new age religious unscientific bullshit.

[Anonymous No.5128279]

>>5128269
Nigga while I agree with your first sentences, you are just going full retard.
Whites don't have the most variety, in fact it's quite the opposite.
There is more genetic diversity on the African continent than in the rest of the world.

[Anonymous No.5128284]

>>5128260

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

[Anonymous No.5128290]

>>5128284
>minnesota
>yes this applies to all black people across the planet
>in fact it's so good that I can use these correlations when deciding how to label ambiguous people as either white or black

Social science is the most unscientific garbage out there.

[Anonymous No.5128294]

>>5128284
The tables show that black are getting less intelligent as they are growing up so they were equally intelligent as they were babies thus their intelligence is not determined genetically

[Anonymous No.5128295]

>>5128294
Stop reading in diagonal, this is not what the tables show.

[Anonymous No.5128304]

>>5128290

Yet you'd be happy with the methodology if it wasn't applied to a racial study. The thing is, you're always going to find excuses because you think it's wrong to say bad things about people. LOL.

[Anonymous No.5128312]

>>5128279
well i think you may actually be right in some regards.. but not in a positive light. when i said most diverse i mean within the modern realm of society. africans are only more diverse becasue they have primitive pigmies with literally average 60 iq's.. my and i should have specified most diverse cognitively capable.

tl;dr the africans that are diverse are the ones left behind by modern evolution, not something to really be excited about sadly, but interesting to study, i honestly don;t even really consider pigmies to be human.. but then again... i am an asshole

[Anonymous No.5128314]

>>5128312

You're a retard.

[Anonymous No.5128316]

>>5128304

No, I as a pure math major I consider most hard science methods to be bullshit tier levels of rigorous. Social science is less rigorous than even religion.

[Anonymous No.5128317]

>>5128312
>making shit up
It only works for a while before people realize you have no clue.

[Anonymous No.5128318]

>>5128316

oh fuck off with your 'hurr math only subject that can be proved lol :DD' crap

it's proved beyond reasonable doubt, if you don't find it rigorous enough, go back to proving useless shit, nerd (:DDD)

[Anonymous No.5128319]

>>5128316
How about not giving your opinion on a social science issue then?

[Anonymous No.5128335]

>>5128319
>posting social science on /sci/

[Anonymous No.5128336]

There was an identical thread on /pol/ yesterday.

Can you racist fucks go back there? If there is undeniable evidence that a certain race is less intelligent, I will believe it.

There is no such evidence as of now.

This is a poor attempt at using "socul sciance" to justify your bigotry.

[Anonymous No.5128337]

>>5128316
>less rigorous than religion

That's not really hard, the only other science that is as out of touch with reality as religion as to employ a non-falsifyable system of premises is after all...maths.

[Anonymous No.5128338]

There are white-boy looking monkeys too

[Anonymous No.5128342]

>>5128336
>If there is undeniable evidence that a certain race is less intelligent, I will believe it.

No you won't, just like creationists won't believe anything you tell them. You're just brainwashed beyond reason.

[Anonymous No.5128346]

>>5128342
He clearly just denied it.

How can there be undeniable evidence if someone is denying the evidence?

There can't. QED

[Anonymous No.5128349]

>>5128346

[Anonymous No.5128350]

>>5128342
Well we won't find that out until you do have undeniable evidence.

Come back when you've found a stupid gene that exists only and in all black people

[Anonymous No.5128352]

>>5128337
>Mathematics
>1+1+1+1=1+1+1+1

Do you even Frege?

[Anonymous No.5128355]

Why is it so ridiculous to think that two different populations of the same species separated for thousands of years would eventually develop different traits?

[Anonymous No.5128356]

>>5128337
Of course, mathematics does not try to talk about the real world. It only tries to talk about self consistency.

[Anonymous No.5128362]

>>5128355
Because it conflicts with our daily experience and all scientific evidence, which consistently show no detectable differences.

[Anonymous No.5128364]

>>5128355
They weren't really separated. The genetic differences between humans isn't even close to the genetic difference between dog breeds.

[Anonymous No.5128370]

>>5128362
>which consistently show no detectable differences
>the only research shown in this thread shows substantial differences
>all IQ tests ever have shown racial differences

[Anonymous No.5128373]

>>5128356
So you commend a science that is concieved for and preoccupied with rigorousness for its rigorousness. Might I suggest that depicts a lack of rigorousness?

[Anonymous No.5128375]

>>5128362
>>5128364
Where's the evidence? For either side? Also,
>they weren't really separated

So nordic people had regular contact with africans? I doubt that.

[Anonymous No.5128377]

>>5128210
>>5128212
Wikipedia:
"Since the second half of the twentieth century the associations of race with the ideologies and theories that grew out of the work of 19th-century anthropologists and physiologists has led to the use of the word race itself becoming problematic."

Races exist, yes. But we don't need to talk about it because some retards use those facts to feed their nasty, anti-science, anti-humanity ideology.
Now stop posting this shit all the time and do some real science instead.
Of course humans are different and can be classified by race, but no race is better than another
Talking about that brings more problems than it solves.
Plus, it's not an interesting scientific field.

[Anonymous No.5128379]

Dude, seriously, who cares?

[Anonymous No.5128385]

>>5128210
>how can you believe that all human races are the same? scientific evidence shows that blacks are less evolved than whites and there are major differences in intelligence between the races
>Tomorrow
>1939 isn't tomorrow

[Anonymous No.5128388]

>>5128379

People who have done nothing with their lives need something to take pride in. They find the closest smart person wearing the same t-shirt as them and they start bragging about it

[Anonymous No.5128390]

>>5128373
Math isn't science.

[Anonymous No.5128394]

>>5128210 scientific evidence shows that blacks are less evolved than whites and there are major differences in intelligence between the races
Black dude with IQ 138 here. From my viewpoint, most humans are complete retards. And especially as a scientist I laugh about retards fighting over who is more retarded.

How about if we declare Mensans to be a race of their own? Then the rest of humanity can fight over 5 point deviations while even the most stupid of the master race reside 30 points above.

I do not even believe that IQ is that important, but this is what always comes to my mind when people compare average intelligence. How about setting the bar higher? Then you would suddenly see quite some colored people outsmarting millions of whites. Call them "exceptions" if you want, but why dismiss people who are exceptional in the first place?

Judge the individual, not the race. If you are an idiot, I will not think better of you just because you happen to share some genes or skin pigments with smarter people.

[Anonymous No.5128396]

>>5128388

I'm not White and hate my country. Any more ad hominem bullshit you got there?

>Dude, seriously, who cares?

Why are you morons on a science board? We care for the same reason people care about how the world words, the laws of physics etc.

This is seriously one of the dumbest boards on 4chan, just because it has science in the title it doesn't mean anyone here knows anything about science.

Dumb fucks.

[Anonymous No.5128399]

>>5128394
>Judge the individual, not the race.

Yes, I do that, but it isn't going to stop me from making observations about populations

> If you are an idiot, I will not think better of you just because you happen to share some genes or skin pigments with smarter people.

I could be Black and still make the same comments, this has nothing to do with associating myself with a group of people.

[Anonymous No.5128400]

>>5128342
>>5128346

You have no undeniable evidence.

If you can find some, I WILL believe it. You telling me I won't doesn't change the fact I know I will.

The world would be a HELL of a lot better if we looked at eachother as humans, not by race. Then, we could simply separate the dumb and intelligent.

There are black people just as smart as you, there are black people smarter, and there are black people dumber.

The same can be said for EVERY race.

[Anonymous No.5128402]

>>5128390
Oh please, sweeping generalisations are something for Mathematicians.

[Anonymous No.5128404]

>>5128370
That's because people are sorted into racial categories based on immediate traits, claimed family history, and researcher preconceptions, rather than proper observation and tracking of their true origins.

Due to societal biases, people come to believe that they are of the race that they most closely resemble the stereotype of. It's like the great migrations of middle second millennium, during the rise of racial prenationalism, when the myth of race caught the public imagination, and people began moving to the country they "belonged in" according to the pseudoscientific classifications of the time, and editing or destroying records, and relocating graves, so their families could appear to have lived in those places forever.

The whole idea of race has no scientific basis, and emerged as a purely social phenomenon inspired by crackpot theories.

[Anonymous No.5128408]

>>5128402
It's not. Science is empirical and based on evidence using the scientific method. Mathematics is not empirical and does not use the scientific method. Instead it uses the mathematical method. No matter how much evidence you have in mathematics, it will never constitute a proof (unless you do proof by exhaustion, but those are generally considered unintuitive last resort solutions at worst and mathematically immoral solutions at best).

inb4 >I don't know what mathematical morality is and I'm not going to google for a research paper because I'm retarded.

[Anonymous No.5128410]

>>5128396
Go back to /pol/ you retard. You are beyond saving as you clearly don't even want to understand the scientific method.

[Anonymous No.5128415]

>>5128402
Maybe.. IN OPPOSITE LAND

[Anonymous No.5128413]

>>5128399
I support a system where people under 150 of IQ get deported and mass slaughtered.
Don't worry, there will be enough room for you and your family in the departure train.
Oh, and I hope you'll realize before your death that people like myself make the distinction between subhumans under 150 of IQ and the others for the good of humanity, nothing less.
After all, the race of those under 150 IQ is inferior to the other one.

[Anonymous No.5128417]

>>5128408
>Mathematics is not empirical
Mathematics are empiric you fucking retard.
Add 1 and 1, one million time and you'll always find 2.

[Anonymous No.5128418]

>>5128399
> Yes, I do that, but it isn't going to stop me from making observations about populations
Feel free to do that, I do the same. However, I found it infinitely more helpful to look at the culture than searching for genetic traits. "Race" in the sense of "optical appearance" can be a helpful proxy to make a guess about someone's cultural values and personality, but only as long as no superior data is available. Just like I assume that any human I meet is a superstitious, science-illiterate, emotion-driven animal - in most cases that assumption is correct, but I am open to give up that prejudice quickly once I receive data that falsifies it.

> this has nothing to do with associating myself with a group of people.
Why categorize people on such superficial traits? I would only do that if I have no better data. Even the nationality make me take a better guess at someone's values than his skin color. And I am anything but a nationalist.

[Anonymous No.5128420]

The word you're looking for is cultured, not evolved. Give me a proper means of quantifying the evolutionary status of a species or go back to /pol/ and jerk eachother off about how you're superior to niggers.

[Anonymous No.5128419]

>>5128408
It's nice to see you fall for the same kind of obvious pretend (I hope) retard trolls that social scientists generally have to deal with.

Anyhow I don't really have the stomach for this. Maybe I'll open an interdisciplinary cybernetics/systems theory thread in the next days and one of you guys explains George Spencer-Brown to me.

[Anonymous No.5128422]

>>5128413
You realize here, by making this hyperbolic genocide argument, you're basically stating your position as, "For reasons of social justice and basic human decence, we shouldn't admit any substantive difference between people of different races, just as we shouldn't admit any substantive difference between people of extremely high intelligence and people of lower intelligence."

[Anonymous No.5128423]

>>5128417

No, that's only in an axiomatic system where you've defined 1, 2, addition, and equality. There are an infinite number of axiomatic systems out there where 1+1 do not equal 2.

Furthermore, to take it further, you could make arguments like 1 trillion is the largest number and compare it to 1, 2, 3,.. After a million experiments you will be convinced that no number can be larger than it. Take this into much more convoluted and complex scenarios where you can't be sure about shit and suddenly you're coming up with a bunch of shit that as far as you can tell is equal to pi (google mathematical coincidence).

[Anonymous No.5128425]

>>5128422
>decence
Don't ask me how I got an E there instead of a Y...

[Anonymous No.5128427]

>>5128423
Too bad Physics rely on the same axiomatic as Mathematics, and even use a lot of it's tools.

[Anonymous No.5128434]

>>5128422
You realize I was being ironic and my my words had to be taken in a sarcastic way.
What I wrote was merely an accurate description of the hypocrisy of race supremacists.

[Anonymous No.5128437]

>>5128427
They don't. They create something in physics that they like to call axioms and try to construct the rest of their physics on top of it, but it's really just an attempt to provide a model for their physics. Unfortunately it's all bullshit and has both the weaknesses of mathematics and science. None of the breakthroughs in this pseduomath translate to breakthroughs in mathematics.

>tools
Theorems are not "tools". They are the very structure.

[Anonymous No.5128443]

>>5128437
Mathematics axioms are included into Physics axioms.
The main difference is that Physics include some axioms that are completely related to our world and how it works.

[Anonymous No.5128450]

>>5128434 What I wrote was merely an accurate description of the hypocrisy of race supremacists.
Personally, I would not mind to live in a state filled with smart decent people. I would not tie it to the IQ - even a high IQ guy can be superstitious or misogynistic - but the idea is nice. How about buying a little patch of land in Canada or Australia? There must be at least one billionaire on this planet with Sim City or Bioshock ambitions. As Israel shows, it does not even need to be a large area.

[Anonymous No.5128452]

>>5128443
A special axiomatization in mathematics is included into Physics axioms.

This I am okay with. It should be noted that there are an infinite number of possible axiomatizations out there and several hundred are studied at any time in modern mathematics.

[Anonymous No.5128454]

>>5128450
>I would not mind to live in a state filled with smart decent people.
The problem is that they don't want you to live with them.
See? If everyone were thinking and behaving like race supremacists, living in the world would be far more difficult. And science wouldn't have been what it is nowadays.

[Anonymous No.5128456]

>>5128434
So straighten this out for me: were you being straightforwardly sarcastic, as I originally thought, intending to imply an equivalence between believing in meaningful racial differences and killing everyone who doesn't meet a certain IQ score, implying that you see racial differences as equally valid to very large measurable differences in intelligence, but that you also see acknowledging this reality as tantamount to genocide?

Or were you being sarcastic in your sarcasm, meaning to mock people who see a problem with recognizing racial differences, implying that they're as unreasonable as someone who would equate this recognition to a program of genocide of people below a certain IQ score?

Because it seems like you're saying that it's the first thing, but at the same time you also seem to think that saying this is a correction to a post that was also saying it's the first thing.

[Anonymous No.5128459]

>less evolved
what does that mean? learn2biology dumb faggot

[Anonymous No.5128465]

>>5128456
>So straighten this out for me: were you being straightforwardly sarcastic, as I originally thought, intending to imply an equivalence between believing in meaningful racial differences and killing everyone who doesn't meet a certain IQ score, implying that you see racial differences as equally valid to very large measurable differences in intelligence, but that you also see acknowledging this reality as tantamount to genocide?
If my statement made yourself worried because I used the term "mass slaughtered" and "deported", then I can reformulate the whole thing and say that subhumans people under 150 IQ have to stay outside of the country or to play lesser roles in politics, science and education.
Doesn't change the fact that it shows how hypocritical it is to think that because some other people are less intelligent, we should dismiss them, and not helping them.

>Or were you being sarcastic in your sarcasm, meaning to mock people who see a problem with recognizing racial differences, implying that they're as unreasonable as someone who would equate this recognition to a program of genocide of people below a certain IQ score?
I see no fundamental differences between what I said and the way some stubborn people think.

>Because it seems like you're saying that it's the first thing, but at the same time you also seem to think that saying this is a correction to a post that was also saying it's the first thing.
What I said is pretty clear, in my opinion.

[Anonymous No.5128472]

Evolution as adaptedness to a socially constructed environment. Interesting idea. So following /pol/ logic, as soon as white people enter a tribal society, they must be considered less evolved and inferior?

[Anonymous No.5128474]

>>5128465
Okay, so now your position is that any willingness to recognize meaningful racial differences is morally equivalent to declaring people of sub-150 IQ subhuman and excluding them from society: i.e. based on an understanding of real differences, but still reprehensible.

So what you're saying is, the differences are real, but we mustn't ever admit they are real, because it's inherently immoral to do so.

Interesting position.