/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.5941741]

>"Scientists and pundits who insist on recycling racial theories of intelligence portray themselves as courageous defenders of scientific truth. I see them not as heroes but as bullies, picking on those who are already getting a raw deal in our society. It’s time to put these destructive theories to rest once and for all."

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/2013/05/16/should-research-on-race-and-iq-be-banned/

>MY FUCKING FACE WHEN THIS IS WHAT LIBTARDS ACTUALLY BELIEVE HOLY FUCKING SHIT

[Anonymous No.5941748]

Shouldn't let beliefs cloud science.

[Anonymous No.5941751]

>>5941748
Racists always ignore epigenetics though.
There is no middle ground.

[Anonymous No.5941896]

>>5941751
bullshit they ignore epigenetics. epigenetics is modern and race science is ancient. if cultural marxists didnt get rid of race based science, theyd be exploring that by now as well.

[Anonymous No.5942377]

>>5941751
EPIGENETICS IS FACTORED INTO ESTIMATES OF HERITABILITY AS THE ENVIRONMENTAL PORTION

FUCK YOU

[Anonymous No.5942396]

>>5941748
>Shouldn't let beliefs cloud science
>ban research because it might offend people

[Anonymous No.5942412]

>>5941741
and what is your scientific background?
im working in a systems biology lab at imperial college, i agree with this article, intelligence is not quantifiable if you had read any of the literature you would know this

[Anonymous No.5942428]

>>>/global/rules/3
>Do not post the following outside of /b/: Trolls, flames, racism

[Anonymous No.5942430]

Science may be the study of truth but there is no need to study truths that only have the power to be used to hurt. Even if there's a passing bit of truth in this it should be ignored because it will not be used to make anyone happier but by racists to further there cause.

[Anonymous No.5942436]

>>5942430
That's like saying research into disability can only be used to hurt. How else are we to give people the support they really need?

[Anonymous No.5942448]

>>5942436
That's different, a person without a leg is a person without a leg. A person born black should not be judged different just because they are black. Even if, as a hole, it turns out that a certain race is mentally inferior it doesn't bias the individual and therefore counts for zip.

[Anonymous No.5942452]

This thread is neither asking nor providing scientific information. Blog entries about political correctness can be discussed on >>>/pol/ or >>>/b/

[Anonymous No.5942455]

>>5942448
But it's okay if it's a person born deaf?

[Anonymous No.5942458]

>>5942448
Why a black person shouldn't be judged different because of being born black?

[Anonymous No.5942602]

>>5941741
Sounds more conservatard.

[Anonymous No.5942611]

>>5941741
Sounds more conservatard.

[Anonymous No.5942636]

I think this video can explain this entire racial issue, it's simple and goes right to the point:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rj878_ICHE0

[Anonymous No.5942643]

>>5942448
It's not different. Black countries suffer from severe development and education issues, and so do black populations in other countries.
If solutions are to be put in place to solve this, they HAVE to take those things into account.

You know how people often say "IQ only measures one kind of intelligence, etc". Well if that is true, maybe education programs in Africa should, oh I don't know, take that into fucking account and emphasize on those "other kind of intelligence" people say Africans are better at.

Obfuscation and willful ignorance will never, ever, be beneficial in the long term.

[Anonymous No.5942666]

In all honesty, I believe that there are biological differences between races.

For example, blacks are more likely to have sickle cell anemia, and jews are more likely to have cystic fibrosis. This is due to history and are biological predispositions.

But intelligence is subjective. In the USA, if you took a black, white, and spanish kid as a sample, give them the same teacher and teach them, they would be AROUND the same intelligence. Of course, some are born to be smarter academically than others (having better logical thinking, being better at maths, etc.).

You also have to take into account work ethic and attitude towards learning. The family and culture play a big role in this, and as much as people don't want to admit, blacks as a majority don't really look at school as something useful.

[Anonymous No.5942723]

>>5942666
No no no. You can't say that kind of things in such a thread. It's an insult for all the posters who discussed it before.

What you say is plainly, factually wrong.
Where people disagree is in the interpretations of that and the consequences.

Income and school differences do NOT explain the gap in America.

[Anonymous No.5942763]

>>5942666
>666
Nice.

Also, studies have been done on blacks and whites in the SAME schools, the general trend is that there is a statistically significant difference in IQ between the races.

[Anonymous No.5942794]

>>5942763
What schools? Where? Bullshit! You never gonna convince us that white people has lower IQ than blacks.

[Anonymous No.5942820]

>>5942794

wat

[Anonymous No.5942835]

I find it funny that every time we have this thread, which is sometimes multiple times per day, we make the same exact posts and the same arguments ad infinitum.

Why do we always start at square one?
OP, you don't expect me to believe it's been a different person each time, do you honestly?

[Anonymous No.5942843]

>>5942794
>white people has lower IQ than blacks.

thank you for illustrating exactly why this isn't science anymore.

[Anonymous No.5942851]

>>5942835
>Why do we always start at square one?
I don't know man. I just don't fucking know. Those threads are just tiring.

[Anonymous No.5942854]

>>>/pol/
Keep it in your shithole. That's why no one likes you.

[Anonymous No.5942874]

The full range of intelligences exist within all races. The upper bounds of human intelligence can be found within Africa and were selected for in Africa.

Data clusters appear randomly given any two seemingly disparate values. Finding an average difference isn't meaningful by itself.

There have been something like 80 generations of human diaspora, so at any point you can draw race boundaries. Or you can define race according to income or academic sucess or geographic region or climate or culture or favorite film. Regardless you will always find correlations, average differences, guarenteed, even though changing the boundaries will mix the populations relative to many other categories. Even if we discriminated on the basis of phenotypes themselves, you would have plenty of blacks that are white, yellow, brown, and vice versa.

The only reason for using race as the basis of dicrimination seems not to have to do with the fact that race boundaries are necessarily meritocratic or biologically significant so much as that they're socially recognized and people historically have most readily identified with them for a variety of social reasons.

So, yeah, it does sometimes seem opportunistic that scientists do studies that provide fodder to supremacists who don't know any better. It's not inconceivable that scientists like Rushton might have had racial biases. Scientists are humans too.

[Anonymous No.5942879]

>>5942854
>WAHWAHWAH
>Facts I don't like are poopy heads

Fuck off and grow up

[Anonymous No.5942878]

>>5942874
>Data clusters appear randomly given any two seemingly disparate values. Finding an average difference isn't meaningful by itself.
What the fuck am I even reading?

[Anonymous No.5942890]

>>5942878
Let's look at the correlation between TVs per square mile and median income

[Anonymous No.5942896]

>>5942890
... there's an obvious causality between the two. What are you even trying to say?

[Anonymous No.5942906]

>>5942878
something that is clearly above your head...

[Anonymous No.5942922]

>>5942906
You're not making any sense.

[Anonymous No.5942928]

>>5942396
I'm actually very much against the idea.

[Anonymous No.5942946]

>>5942922
You're not making sense, you senseless insensitive.

[Anonymous No.5942990]

>>>/pol/
>>>/global/rules/3

Return to your containment board, faggots. Nobody wants you out of there.

[newt !!mJynHgb6BCd No.5943017]

>these people are defending facts and evidence. I on the other hand don't care about truth , only people's feelings , so I call them bullies

-liberal, post-modern, critical theoretical america

[newt !!mJynHgb6BCd No.5943051]

>>5942412
alright.

So who is more likely to be better and more capable at mental problem solving, grasping new concepts , learning new things quickly and deductive reasoning, a person with a measured IQ of 80 on a modern IQ test or a person with a measured IQ of 130?


You post is totally bogus and intellecutally dishonest.
IQ is a very good and robust as a low-resolution measure of intelligence.
The fact taht a person with an IQ of 131 isn't 131/130 "times as intelligent " as a person with an IQ of 130 doesn't change this.

and if you ask me to define intelligence, of course I would use the one commonly used in this society which is basically
>mental problem solving, grasping new concepts , learning new things quickly and deductive reasoning

The fact that in a tribal african society "intellgience" probably means how well you can think like an animal in order to hunt it doesn't matter. There society isn't the one the world cares about. There is only one society these days. And that's the global society where people succeed by communicating with other people , b,developing strategies, solving mental tasks quickly, etc.

I'm so sick of you intellectually dishonest lefty fuckwits. especially those peopel with good academic careers know full well taht some people are just naturally better at using their brain to understand thigns and solve problems than others.
But you pretend otherwise when you don't like the logical implications of that.
Go fuck yourself.

[newt !!mJynHgb6BCd No.5943064]

>>5942874
People study race when it comes to IQ because "race" is an informal way of saying "groups of ethnic groups"

we know that differnet ethnic groups have different allele distrinbutions.

In the case of Ashkenazy jews, there's already evidence that some of these alleles directly contribute towards differences in mean intelligence between other ethnic groups.

Since we know from twin adoption studies that IQ almost certainly has a genetic component, it makes sense that some of these genes might have alleles that are more present in some ethnicities than others.

Hence why we test for innate mean IQ differences in race.

[Anonymous No.5943090]

The taboo of research into human races pisses me off. Humans are no different than any other animals, and are just as prone to divergent evolution and the creation of subspecies.

Nobody tries to claim that a chihuahua and german shepherd have the same characteristics/capabilities, yet they do the same with all types of humans.

[Anonymous No.5943091]

>>5941741
>the field of sociology now needs to look for something else other than disparity between different groups.

[Anonymous No.5943093]

>>5943064
>People study race when it comes to IQ because "race" is an informal way of saying "groups of ethnic groups"

white / black / yellow are not ethnic groups.
ethnic groups are defined according to language, which is partially hereditary and does in fact influence intelligence, but nonetheless race is not ethnicity. For example I am Persian, I speak a language from the indo-european language group. That is my ethnicity. Medes, or Kurds, are another ethnic group that traditionally spoke a different language but we're still the same race.


>Hence why we test for innate mean IQ differences in race.

What exactly do you mean by innate.

If your definition of innate is genetic, then it's certainly not innate to the race, but the individual.

Race are a biologically arbitrary category, there have been at least ~80 generations of human diaspora out of Africa, and the line at which races are drawn is biologically arbitrary.

>In the case of Ashkenazy jews, there's already evidence that some of these alleles directly contribute towards differences in mean intelligence between other ethnic groups.

There are blacks with every allele and every IQ. As I said, the intelligence of the human species evolved and was selected for within Africa, that includes the alleles found in Ashkenazi Jews (which is not a race) and every other human.

So if we were to diivde the categories on the basis of alleles or phenotypes themselves, then we would have some blacks grouped with some Ashkenazis and vice versa. There is no innate merit to race categories other than they are typical social divisions we readily identify with for a myriad of cultural reasons.

Drug companies frequently mention people of certain races need to be weary of particular side effects. Not because race categories are the best indicator of whom will be susceptible to what, but because that's what we're traditionally familiar with.

[Anonymous No.5943108]

>>5943090
>Nobody tries to claim that a chihuahua and german shepherd have the same characteristics/capabilities, yet they do the same with all types of humans.

I'm glad you brought up the example of do breeds, because the vast majority of phenotypes between breeds have not undergone any significant selection and do not differ between breeds.

The idea that because some traits were subject to selection pressures across environments, then all were, is incorrect. Evolution does not select for beneficial traits differently in different environments just because. Each phenotype has to serve a particular reproductive advantage in competition for resources or it will not be selected for.

In the same way, dog breeds were artificially selected for on the basis of particular and relatively few phenotypes but are otherwise indistinguishable.

For example, we know that blacks span the full range of human intelligences, and that the intelligence for modern humans was selected for within Africa. So that is obviously a trait that had experienced universal selection pressures between human diaspora populations.

However, skin color, the ability to digest certain foods (which indirectly influences intelligence via nutrition), lung capacity, did undergo selection pressures.

If you are pissed off, then I would take it out on those who use race to marginalize or pre-judge individuals. They are the ones misinterpreting data and misrepresenting studies, sometimes willfully.

[Anonymous No.5943126]

anyway, this is a good read for anyone interested in differences between African Americans, American southerners, and Northerners:

tinyurl
.
com
/
northsouth01

This is also a good read on the FLynn effect in the US. Prior to WW1 the US had a mean IQ estimated about 70 by today's standards, even though its population was more European by ancestry, and today contains proportionately more blacks and mexicans:

tinyurl
.
com
/
wsjIQ01

[Anonymous No.5943145]

>>5943126

Reading through that second link, it seems that we're more conditioned to scientific thinking than ever before, and conversely that people in older times were quaint yokes and bumpkins by our standards.

[Anonymous No.5943169]

Sorry, but racism has no scientific basis.

humans have very little genetic diversity, and are all very related. things like intelligence and behavior are highly polygenic. Those to facts combined indicate that genetic contributions to our behavior will have little differences between any populations.

[Anonymous No.5943173]

Looks like /pol/ is leaking again

[Anonymous No.5943176]

>>5943064
>we know that differnet ethnic groups have different allele distrinbutions.
Only in specific cases, and when looking at certain genes.

Overall, genetic diversity is very low and allele frequencies do not differ that much between populations.

[Anonymous No.5943178]

>>5943090
It's not taboo at all. Plenty of research is done on population genetics, the origins of man, and so on.

Racists are just mad that the results do not conform to their beliefs.

[Anonymous No.5943189]

>>5942428
>>5942452
If it's good enough for Scientific American, it's good enough for >>>/sci/.

[Anonymous No.5943208]

>>5943169
Are you saying humans don't have tribalistic instincts? People are often obsessed with cultural/religious/ethnic identities and go to great lengths to promote and defend them. All social behaviors have a biological basis. To say that racism is the only social aspect of humanity that has no scientific basis is scientific dishonesty.

[Anonymous No.5943211]

>>5943208
Racism has nothing to do with "tribalism"

Racism is the idea that somehow different "races" are drastically different in their genetics or characteristics.

You are using some kind of red herring