/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.5331554]

Are Africans genetically inferior?

[Anonymous No.5331567]

>>5331562

Africans aren't that good at many Olympic sports though.

[Anonymous No.5331562]

>>5331554
Olympic results, they say no-

[Anonymous No.5331569]

>>>/pol/

[Anonymous No.5331575]

Go back to /pol/. If you want to discuss genetics bring something to the table rather than an open question made to incite racism and trolling.

[Anonymous No.5331585]

>>5331554
>>5331407

Get out.

[Anonymous No.5331587]

>>5331575
We want to legitimately discuss this /sci/.

[Anonymous No.5331588]

>>5331554
In terms of intelligence, yes. They are good athletes and socializers though.

[Anonymous No.5331590]

>>5331554
Genetically inferior is a nonsensical term.

[Anonymous No.5331591]

>>5331575

Haha check out this nigger lover

[Anonymous No.5331592]

Nice.
Epic.
I like it.

[Anonymous No.5331596]

>>5331591

the luddite batallion has emerged

[Anonymous No.5331601]

>>5331590

It's fact that northern European men are the strongest in the world, African men are the fastest, white men are the best swimmers etc

[Anonymous No.5331604]

>>5331554
Genetically inferior, no.
Genetic superiority doesn't exist, unless you are talking about certain environments.

Lions are more genetically superior in Africa than white people.

[Anonymous No.5331608]

>>5331596

If I was a Luddite I wouldn't be using technology to troll a nigger loving faggot like you from the other side of the world.

[Anonymous No.5331610]

>>5331588
>They are good athletes and socializers though.
>socializers

Being extremely loud when around others of your own kind, and being pushy enough to coerce chubby white girls with low self esteem into sex isn't great socializing skill.

[Anonymous No.5331607]

they have smaller brains

its a fact they are inferior

[Anonymous No.5331619]

>>5331608

So why do you come to /sci/ to preach anti-science

[Anonymous No.5331620]

>>5331610
But they sure do know how to form brotherly bonds.

[Anonymous No.5331622]

[Anonymous No.5331625]

>>5331619

I haven't "preached anti-science" at all.

Mainly I come here to make children such as yourself very upset. Today it's working well.

[Anonymous No.5331624]

>>5331554
Your mom is genetically inferior.

[Anonymous No.5331627]

>>5331625

cute

[Anonymous No.5331629]

[Anonymous No.5331630]

>>5331619
>anti-science
I'm sorry, sociology isn't a science, juden.

[Anonymous No.5331631]

>>5331630

genetics is a science, just too bad your approach to it is not scientific

[Anonymous No.5331632]

>>5331619
"racist" scientists are frowned upon so much, that no one can climb near any argument that even has a spec of "racism", because they don't want to be called a "racist". Study of the human population should actually be a top priority among science, but it's one of the most hidden and shunned fields.

[Anonymous No.5331634]

>>5331624

[Anonymous No.5331644]

>>5331632

Statistics show black people underperform on several areas. That's a scientific fact. "niggers are genetically inferior" is not science it's pseudo science at best which seems to be pol's specility

[Anonymous No.5331649]

They're purer in their genetic code if you consider other Human subspecies (I'm talking about Homo Sapien Neanderthalensis and Denisova hominins) as impurities. About 5% of genetic code of a European descendant is composed of Neanderthal DNA.

In my opinion, there is no answer considering that organisms are well-adapted to some very specific environments, whether that environment exists or not.

[Anonymous No.5331650]

>>5331631
>evolution ends at the neck
Lel

[Anonymous No.5331656]

>>5331631
There was a Danish science group that was studying human populations, and they came up with the conclusion that human populations were intellectually different. This was seen, by other scientists and liberal journalists, to be racist. The scientists didn't think so; they wanted people to admit that there is an intellectual difference, not so they could be further segregated, but so we can know what problems to address, mainly regarding with helping those who suffer lower intelligence.

[Anonymous No.5331667]

>>5331644
I didn't claim that blacks were inferior. Inferiority, even among animals, is ridiculous unless you are talking about their adaptation to the environment.

[Anonymous No.5331678]

>>5331656

thanks for bringing up some actual science. If you keep doing it maybe the thread won't suck so much ass.

To clarify my position it's my opinion based on statistics that when as much error as possible is removed (basically when growing up under equal conditions) black people do worse.

I really think it's a shame uninformed racism is making the subject hard to discuss, you sort of have yourself to blame for that because of your inability to cite sources (like Im doing right now lel)

[Anonymous No.5331694]

>>5331678
Another anon. But whenever I am seeing debates of this kind, I always see them citing sources. ok some might start trolling 'hurr durr niggers'

But the egalitarian side almost always dismisses the arguments calling it pseudoscience with no evidence at all.

[Anonymous No.5331696]

>>5331667
This, we mainly assert that black people are at large poorly adapted to participate and function in modern western civilization on a competitive level.

[Anonymous No.5331698]

ITT: /sci/ fails to see that OP's question implicitly assumes that racism is a justifiable fact.

>/sci/ gets trolled again by autism

[Anonymous No.5331714]

>>5331698
I'm not sure what you mean. Can you just take the question as what it is, a question waiting to be answered?

[Anonymous No.5331719]

>>5331698
justifiable with regards to what? we don't care about morality, that's /phi/'s job.

With regards to OP: 'inferior' is ill-defined. Try again.

[Anonymous No.5331722]

>>5331719
>that's /phi/'s job.

But we ARE /phi/. Philosophy is a science.

[Anonymous No.5331726]

>>5331719
Not OP: Rephrasing the question as: Are there quantifiable differences between races especially in conitive abilities?

[Anonymous No.5331731]

>>5331726
Yes. There are people who can spell "cognitive" and there are people who can't. Guess who has better cognitive abilities.

[Anonymous No.5331734]

>>5331731
Are you really sinking that low /sci/?

Wow whatever leave it. Stay in your own little echo chamber.

[Anonymous No.5331735]

>>5331722
Although philosophy literally means "the love of knowledge", I'd say what we'd refer to as philosophy parted ways with science a long time ago...

[Anonymous No.5331737]

>>5331734
>bawww

babby butthurt?

[Anonymous No.5331740]

>>5331734

>/pol/ talking about echo chambers

[Anonymous No.5331745]

>>5331737
You misspelled 'baby'.

>>5331740

We are the ones that came here to have a discussion.

[Anonymous No.5331743]

>>5331735
Philosophy is rational inquiry. Science is rational inquiry. Therefore philosophy is science.

QED
(that means it's proven, you pleb)

[Anonymous No.5331753]

>>5331745
>You misspelled 'baby'.

[Anonymous No.5331754]

>>5331737
Not that guy, but your post was bad and you should feel bad.

>>5331726
I think so. I also think there have been studies that show as such. I don;t have sources however. Last time around I immediately got shouted down when I said so, so I'll pre-emptively add, I don't care enough to go look for sources.

[Anonymous No.5331758]

>>5331754
> I don't care enough to go look for sources.

In other words: you're talking out of your ass and have no evidence.

[Anonymous No.5331763]

>>5331758
Why are you calling me out on what I basically stated myself? I don't see anyone else posting any links to studies either.

[Anonymous No.5331765]

>>5331743
I'd like to disagree and throw a counter-example at your logic...
Cake is tasty. Fruit is tasty.
Is cake a fruit?

[Anonymous No.5331769]

>>5331763
>admits being a retard
>complains about being called a retard

lulz

[Anonymous No.5331776]

>>5331765
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fruit_cake

Yes.

[Anonymous No.5331785]

>>5331765
Are you stupid? Shitty strawman is shitty

[Anonymous No.5331787]

>>5331554
Am I reporting this thread?

[Anonymous No.5331791]

>>5331765
0/10

[Anonymous No.5331793]

>>5331769
Silly me, trying to have a conversation.

[Anonymous No.5331794]

>>5331554
I don't know, are they? Is Africa a thriving industrial continent or a desert hellhole where people get burned alive for theft and some people still live in housing constructions as sophisticated as a bird's nest? It's not that hard, really.

[Anonymous No.5331796]

>>5331793
>conversation
>making idiotic claims without evidence

Choose exactly one.

[Anonymous No.5331808]

>>5331796
He clearly said "I think so", which isn't a claim. Why do you get so upset over someone stating his opinion? You know a consensus over "inferiority" is in this regard highly subjective?

[Anonymous No.5331814]

>>5331808
I don't care about the topic of this thread. I'm just calling out a retard for posting here even though he knows that he's a retard.

[Anonymous No.5331822]

>>5331814
Why are you so angry? He stated an opinion.

[Anonymous No.5331835]

>>5331575
So asking a question is racist trolling?
If that's what you call science, it certainly explains why you're posting pictures on the internet instead of having a science occupation.

[Anonymous No.5331840]

>>5331822
Opinions don't belong here. This is a science board.

[Anonymous No.5331841]

I wish there were mods

[Anonymous No.5331846]

>>5331840
that´s just your opinion

[Anonymous No.5331849]

>>5331840
Funny how you apply that logic only to him and not to yourself. You have only stated your opinion as well.