Phrenology still scares me.

[Anonymous No.9304407]

Posted on the left is two pages of a 1902 "handbook" on how to indentify a person by the shape of their skull. Here, they're talking about what kind of husband a man might be...based upon the shapes of their heads in profile view.

Now, considering what site I'm on, I wouldn't be surprised if some people here actually believe this stuff.

But to tell you the truth, I'm glad most professionals in the science field mark this off as pseudoscience, because I can only imagine what this world would be like if the majority of it believed in this crap.

Keep in mind they used to have field days using phrenology to justify the "inferiority" of black people and nonwhite people in general.

And while it's sad there're still people out there who fall for this nonsense...just be glad it isn't a good deal of the world's population like it was during 1902.

Anyway, just wanted to get that out. Phrenology is worthless, baseless science, and no self-respecting scientist would dare use it in this day and age.

[Anonymous No.9304410]

>>9304407
Where do I subscribe?

[Anonymous No.9304428]

Phrenology is not as dumb as it might seem at first glance.

For example;
1. It is proven that testosterone makes person's face wider
2. It is proven that testosterone makes person more aggressive

Thus, we can assume that having a wide face correlates with aggressiveness to certain degree.

[Anonymous No.9304477]

>>9304407
Phrenology is as legit as the whole field of psychology.

[Anonymous No.9304566]

[Anonymous No.9304635]

>>9304407
>t. Nigger

[Anonymous No.9304640]

>tfw Society will never acknowledge you as the skull Chad you are

[Anonymous No.9304651]

>>9304407
But that isn't phrenology, it's physiognomy, and physiognomy is completely legit.
>muh pseudoscience
What do you think shapes bones? Growth hormones, which are influenced by sex hormones, which are in turn influenced by gene and diet in formative years.
What to know what else sex hormones influence? Your amygdala lateralization in the ventral stream, your vigilance, your SNS reactivity, your libido, your verbal vs visuospatial memory. All of them correlate to profoundly relevant social behaviors like social dominance, aggression, trustworthiness and promiscuity.

You're just triggered because you've been outed as the brachycephalic Yellow Press reader that you are.

[Anonymous No.9304657]

>>9304407
I agree that it used to be mostly unscientific shit in 1902. However, ML will give Phrenology a revival, it will be real science this time.

[Anonymous No.9304662]

Yes, this is the world we live in, we're pretty much going through the same thing with race now. If black people are given opportunities and have better guidance in 50 years they could be looked at the way Asians are looked at now and people will call race "Realism" retarded nonsense people used to believe 100 years ago. Its extremely retarded but I maintain my sanity by not thinking about it.

[Anonymous No.9304665]

>>9304662
> If black people are given opportunities and have better guidance in 50 years they could be looked at the way Asians are looked at now

Are you aware that an African male is eight thousand times more likely to express MAOA-2R than an East Asian male?

[Anonymous No.9304673]

>>9304651
>Psychology

[Anonymous No.9304684]

Phrenology was a protoscience and informed early neurology. Also people keep on conflating physiognomy and phrenology, which is wrong.

[Anonymous No.9304687]

>>9304651
>You're just triggered because you've been outed as the brachycephalic Yellow Press reader that you are.
kek

[Anonymous No.9304698]

>>9304407
t. unreliable husband

[Anonymous No.9304721]

>>9304407
Left: F. Scott Fitzgerald
Right: Harvey Weinstein

[Anonymous No.9304725]

>tfw traditionalist
>have to listen to nu-nazi retards espouse scientific nonsense they know nothing about: now with less citations!
>have to listen to nu-scientist retards espouse political nonsense they know nothing about: now with more self-aggrandizement!

if only there was a middle ground between "gas the kikes race war now, global holocaust of the mudraces" and "everybody is exactly equal, biology is the devil, fuck my wife"
why cant people just be left alone and allowed to forge their own destiny free from the shackles of globalistic imperialism and artificial population replacement? but I guess saying that costa ricans have just as much a right to exist as ethnic poles makes me a nazi, oh well

also stop using plastics

[Anonymous No.9304735]

>>9304725
Physiognomy is real, and isn't a central or essential tenet in any kind of "nu-nazi" belief system anyway.

[Anonymous No.9304753]

>>9304651

The guy on the right kinda looks like an elf.

[Anonymous No.9304778]

>>9304428
which is why phrenology is retarded. phrases like "assumes...correlate...to a certain degree" we're few and far between.

instead you'd get quotes like OP pic where "this" means "that" so stay away or wtv

a main criticism of phrenology is the confidence and black/ white nature its pioneers attributed to correlations/ associations.

[Anonymous No.9304781]

>>9304477
claims like this are quite legitimately more retarded than phrenology itself

[Anonymous No.9304805]

>>9304781
t. Sigmund "mofo" Fraud

[Anonymous No.9304806]

>>9304781
Phrenology probably has more repeatable results than psychology desu

[Anonymous No.9304816]

>>9304698
>testosterone levels were not significantly linked with attractiveness, masculinity or health.
/fit/ btfo they will never recover

[Anonymous No.9304845]

>>9304657
Does "rises ethical questions" mean "facts show our ideology is bs"?

[Anonymous No.9304861]

>>9304673
lol

[Anonymous No.9304976]

>>9304407
Where can I get a phrenology book to use on my own face?

[Anonymous No.9305225]

>>9304407
Explain this

[Anonymous No.9305360]

I look exactly like the guy on the left lmao

[Anonymous No.9305363]

>>9305360
>>9304651
meant to reply to this

[Anonymous No.9305611]

>>9304816
And, more masculine faces in both men and women have recently been linked to autism.

[Anonymous No.9305745]

>>9305360
I don't believe you

[Anonymous No.9305759]

>>9304407
last year they made machine learning that had 100% homo recognition from face pics.

[Anonymous No.9305771]

Seems legit to me; guy on the right looks like Cenk Uygur.

[Anonymous No.9305773]

>>9305759
Source?

[Anonymous No.9305864]

>>9304428
>Thus, we can assume that having a wide face correlates with aggressiveness to certain degree.
No. Doesn't account for the whole. And phrenology was used to basically just make up shit, you would never be able to discern such complex things as "what kind of husband a man might be". You need to break that down into something that actually means anything, for starters.

[Anonymous No.9305976]

>>9304407

[Anonymous No.9306134]

All you need to know

[Anonymous No.9306173]

>>9304665
Don't start. You want to be made a fool of?

[Anonymous No.9306191]

>>9304778
>which is why phrenology is retarded. phrases like "assumes...correlate...to a certain degree"

Does smoking produce lung cancer?

[Anonymous No.9306217]

>>9304407
It's 100% true though, if a mans skull has the shape of a chimps then he will 100% put babbys in you and flee.

[Anonymous No.9306220]

>>9304566
thanks for ruining my day

[Anonymous No.9306232]

>>9304407
Yeah, we now know what DNA is.

We can just look at a persons DNA and tell them their strengths and weakness.
But this is very taboo. So we don't do it and go on pretending nurture is everything.

[Anonymous No.9306273]

>>9304662
People believed this shit about Asians 200 years ago. People also believed this shit about indian people that they were dumb and lazy. It never ends. You have to ignore it, but it gets really scary when people start getting really retarded ideas which are gonna affect other people because they saw some stupid shit written by some retard and liked the idea.

[Anonymous No.9306351]

>>9305773
https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/faculty-research/publications/deep-neural-networks-are-more-accurate-humans-detecting-sexual

[Anonymous No.9306367]

>>9304407
Firstly. While I have absolutely no source, are you sure this isn't satire? Or are you sure this isn't the 1902 example of some shizo writing an absolutely retarded book?
Secondly. Why would it scare you? It is a reasonable hypothesis, nothing to be afraid of. Science is about testing things and coming to a conclusion.
Thirdly. Who cares? It is outdated, it has proven to be retarded. If you believe in Phrenology you might as well deny evolution or argue that there are no biological differences between groups of humans.

[Anonymous No.9306890]

Why is it so easy to tell if somebody s gay just by lookin at his face?

Why is it so easy to tell that somebody is thug just by the way his face look?

Why is it so easy to tell that somebody is a virgin just by the way his face look?

it is not a pseudoscience

[Anonymous No.9306961]

What does this skull say?

[Anonymous No.9306966]

>>9306961
ayy lmao

[Anonymous No.9306982]

>phrenology is wrong
>100 years later
>oh wow it turns out blacks have lighter and smaller brains and a smaller cranial capacity
>Oh wow it turns out no matter what we do and what controls we place on blacks including environment , their IQ is always inferior to other races in the same control environment.
>Oh wow it turns out black men reach puberty earlier and have higher testosterone resulting in not only massively disproportionate prostate cancer risk , but also aggressive and violent behavior
>oh wow it turns out when you mix low IQ with aggression you get a dangerous result , hyper impulsive criminality
>Oh wow the same people who deny this are the same people that swear on richard dawkins that gender is a spectrum and giving children sex hormones and delaying their puberty is a humane practice and surely wont contribute to suicide in young people.

LOL

[Anonymous No.9306998]

>>9305745
lol'd

[Anonymous No.9307298]

>>9304662
>If black people are given opportunities and have better guidance in 50 years they could be looked at the way

They did get it.They still aren't seen as Asians. People noted behavioral differences between blacks and Asians hundreds of years earlier, and what they say still sounds contemporary. They never will be seen as Asians, because black behavior is genetic and its not gonna fucking disappear in 50 years.

[Anonymous No.9307305]

>>9304407
>Keep in mind they used to have field days using phrenology to justify the "inferiority" of black people and nonwhite people in general.

Oh no. How terrible.

Jesus fuck, you sound like a completely and utter leftist faggot. What the fuck is your fucking problem? Too bad that "physiognomy" is legit and making a comeback so hopefully, you'll blow your brains out faster.

[Anonymous No.9307486]

[Anonymous No.9307492]

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Racialism

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Phrenology

[Anonymous No.9307501]

>>9307486

[Anonymous No.9307575]

>>9304976

Yeah. I want confirmation I'm a bad guy. I do bad shit but I get sad, an I both or schizophrenic?

t.Understands Psychology better than they do so can't get answers when I have theirs already.

[Anonymous No.9307584]

>>9304428
ehh, really? I mean you'd think so, but I recall reading that testosterone correlates with social status and high stat doesn't commit crimes. When you feel secure in your position you are not agressive. At least not in the way of bludgeon-people-with-a-pipe-because-they-looked-at-you-wrong agressive.

[Anonymous No.9307590]

>>9304428
It's almost like you unironically think testosterone is evil and bad, fuck off BuzzFeed

[Anonymous No.9307596]

>>9304976
This. Genuinely interested to see what they would've thought of me if I lived during the age of Phrenology.

[Anonymous No.9307619]

>>9304651
>oblivion speechcraft minigame

[Anonymous No.9307631]

[Anonymous No.9307707]

[Anonymous No.9308023]

[Anonymous No.9308103]

>>9304684
>physiognomy

Is mostly useless

[Anonymous No.9308238]

>>9306961
Don't know about the skull but the eyes say "run and don't look back".

[Anonymous No.9308345]

>>9304976
You don't need a book.

Any flat surface will do.

[Anonymous No.9308363]

>>9308345
Heh. GOTEEEEM

[Anonymous No.9308368]

Why are supposed intellectuals so afraid of the tackling the genetic implications of race?

[Anonymous No.9308378]

>>9306173
Not the guy you were talking to, but don't be anti-science on /sci/ and act like a holier than thou bitch, cheers cunt.

More recently, Beaver’s team has focused only on the 2R variant rather than the low-expression variants combined [6, 7]. He and his colleagues have discovered that African American males carrying 2R were more likely to be involved in extreme violence — shooting and stabbing — than African American men with other MAOA variants [6]. The relationship between the rare MAOA version and antisocial behaviors has raised eyebrows because, quite simply, this gene is not distributed equally across ethnic groups. In the Add Health database, 5.5% of African American men, 0.9% of Caucasian men, and 0.00067% of Asian men have 2R. (No information is currently available on the frequency of 2R in males of African black descent outside the United States.) Since the rare MAOA variant is virtually non-existent in whites, all of the males in Beaver’s study were black Americans [6].

Beaver’s sample of 133 African American men from the Add Health database included 6% that carried 2R. Overall, 5.6% of the men in the sample reported shooting or stabbing someone at some point in their lifetime. The association between 2R and committing a shooting or stabbing crime was statistically significant. Based on Beaver’s evidence, 2R appears to increase the risk of shooting or stabbing a victim during adolescence or adulthood [6]. For some commentators in the public arena, MAOA-2R has become a symbol of a new era in behavioral genetics research — an era that has reintroduced race into the nature versus nurture debate over the source of ethnic behavioral differences [1].

[Anonymous No.9308433]

>>9307575
Borderline PD.

[Anonymous No.9308448]

>relying on vague correlations to predict personality traits when you can literally test individuals on their actual traits

Why?

[Anonymous No.9308457]

>>9305225
Witten might be smart, but he lacks motoric skills. Jesus fucking Christoph, look at that line to the left of his head- it's as crooked as his head is!

[Anonymous No.9308459]

>>9308448
>Why is multiplication useful when you can just count the jellybeans?
>Why is trigonometry useful when you can just measure the shapes?

Do you happen to have moderate to severe mental disabilities by chance?

[Anonymous No.9308466]

>>9308459
>personality testing is as simple as counting jellybeans
>it is an easily predictable phenomenon, of which we know everything and current methods can predict with great accuracy

[Anonymous No.9308564]

>>9308466
Our methods are not perfect, but that's why we should further work on them to make them more accurate, not just abandon them saying "it's just some Nazi pseudoscience shit"

[Anonymous No.9308571]

>>9304662
Niggers have been getting opportunities for 150 years and they're still niggers.

[Anonymous No.9308573]

>>9307492
*tips fedora*

[Anonymous No.9308603]

>>9308378
>>9304665

Not that anon but the sampling from the Add Health for which the study in question utilizes is irregular with respect to the races in question.

Add Health is based on U.S. school population sampling of 132 schools which attempts to reflect racial/ ethnic distribution in the country overall. If we follow the entirety of the study and not the excerpt you posted it shows while true whites have the lowest MAOA variants reported within the study. There are several other groups with the original MAOA-r3 variant higher than 50% which includes Maori 56%, Chinese 56% and Taiwanese 61% (African Americans have 58%). Two of these groups (the Maori and Taiwanese) have low population in comparison to Whites, African Americans and Chinese.

https://scientiasalon.wordpress.com/2014/07/31/the-extreme-warrior-gene-a-reality-check/

Assuming that having a higher percentage of the MAOA-R3 variant correlates to an increase probability of the R2 variant, an issue appears. The Taiwanese only make up 194,000 of the U.S. population while the Maori barely make up 2000.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwanese_Americans

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Māori_people

Because of these low population numbers despite having roughly the same percentage of R3 as African Americans they are not sufficiently represented. On top of this Add health database appears not to have them available for sampling purposes within the context of the study. Only the Chinese appear to be confirmed as stated on the site via the wave I page involving

http://www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/addhealth/design/wave1

The reason why this is important is because the statements involving comparisons between Asians and African Americans cannot be assessed properly using the study for probability purposes in expression. As it would utilized skewed results (Beaver research only focusing on Americans) and from skewed data (Add Health small sampling of Chinese and little to no sampling of Taiwanese and Maori).

[Anonymous No.9308611]

> pretty people are nicer ,more reliable and generally better people then ugly ones
No shit literally everyone knows this

[Anonymous No.9308614]

>>9308459
>Exact mathematical formulas are equivalent to making extremely confident statements about individuals based on weak correlations in populations with huge variance

The retard was you all along, anon.

[Anonymous No.9308618]

>>9308433

HS, mostly 8th grade, dropout...you?

[Anonymous No.9308625]

>>9308433
Oh, yeah, no. Ive had an assault of mental and physical batteries for years. *I* dictate what the test results are by *MY* answers, what part of "know it better than them" did you not read?

I mean...yeah, read yours wrong, but I never took psychology. Thats "pedestrian" pseudo-science, for most people that is.

[Anonymous No.9308630]

>>9308625
Cool

[Anonymous No.9308742]

>>9308564
Yes. That's my whole point: using something like cranial shape to predict someone's personality is stupid (and has been scientifically proven to be so). There are other indicatives, and they are most likely not obvious as physical appearance. Personality can't be reduced to one single indicator, even if that is somewhat more accurate than others.

[Anonymous No.9308797]

>>9307631
>emphasize in the most absolute way
>all danger lies in these two faculties
>there are no other sentiments and no other places to look for them
>we say this with absolute cetainty
You can tell just by the language that this is pseudoscience. Not even physics textbooks are this definitively worded.

[Anonymous No.9308798]

>>9308742
But maybe shape of the skull can tell something about personality, maybe alongside other indicators and in ways we can't read yet, but we can't just say "duh, phrenology is stupid, saying that shape of skull has something to do with personality is just like saying there are numbers that become negative when squared, what a nonsense"

[Anonymous No.9308857]

>>9308798
No, it's not like saying there are numbers that become negative when squared. It's like saying we have a function [math]f(x_1,...,x_n)[/math], and another function [math]g(x_1,...,x_n)[/math]. A hundred years ago, some faggot decided [math]f[/math] was probably a good predictor for the value of [math]g[/math]. However, investigating this hasn't found any strong correlation. Meanwhile, we've discovered ways to measure several [math]x_i[/math] and make MUCH better predictions of [math]g[/math] than [math]f[/math] ever yielded, so using [math]f[/math] is probably a waste of everyone's time.
[math]f[/math] is phrenology.

[Anonymous No.9308870]

>>9304407
>Phrenology is worthless, baseless science, and no self-respecting scientist would dare use it in this day and age.
Politically incorrect != incorrect.

[Anonymous No.9308877]

>>9308857
>No, it's not like saying there are numbers that become negative when squared.
Anon, i...

[Anonymous No.9308902]

>>9308877
Yes? If you assume there are numbers that become negative when squared, you get interesting mathematical results. If you assume phrenology is true, you get a shitty predictor with a lot of noise. Therefore, the two are not similar.

[Anonymous No.9308917]

>>9308870
That's all very well and good, but I'm 100% from European ancestry: Romano-Brythonic, Norman-Gaelic and Flemish-German and yet, because I have mandibular prognathism, I have a forward sloping mouth.
So, how do you account for genetic complexities even in thoroughly European populations?

[Anonymous No.9308938]

>>9307492

[Anonymous No.9309004]

>>9306191
>does smoking produce lung cancer
Smoking, while proven to correlate to a far higher likelihood of lung cancer, does not account for all cases of the condition.
It's entirely possible for a smoker of 10 years to not have contracted the condition, whereas a similar person who has not once touched a cigarette would as a result of other factors such as radon gas exposure.
You can't just assume X equals Y unless hard unequivocal evidence finds this to be true. This is why the concrete nature of phrenology and other psychological theories in a similar vein are BS

[Anonymous No.9309047]

>>9304407
Facial morphology and skull structure correlates with personality type and underlying behavioral biases. It's not a matter of tinted perception, it's a solid heuristic that when used, needs very few inputs to narrow down the reality of the matter. It's just a fact of life, and the longer you do it, the better you get.

Anyway, you seem to be confusing propaganda and other people's purported reality for an actual "implementation", then are using that strawman to discard the whole topic.

[Anonymous No.9309520]

>>9307631
this isn't even pseuedoscience, this is just straight up making up your own version of reality

[Anonymous No.9309666]

>>9308625
Very cool.

[Anonymous No.9311649]

>>9309047
And that's exactly why you'll likely forever remain a nobody on 4-chan, and not somebody on the forefront of the field of science.

To type "anyway" after typing all that, as if what you said's no big deal and it's just something I should come to terms with...

You think I'm not going to question that?

I mean, I'm not surprised anymore, considering this is 4-chan, but you're mistaken if you really think you can just label and pinpoint people's personalities and such like that.

Sad thing is that's no different that the excerpt I posted about husbands... Sad how there're still people out there who think this way, but I don't care anymore.

You can live your life like that if you want; you obviously have no remorse for the things you say or do, so I suppose you'll have a nice life, anyway.

[Anonymous No.9311655]

>>9309047
It's okay to reject a theory for being flagrantly wrong.

[Anonymous No.9311656]

>>9306982
Congradulations for proving your arrogance and ignorance, and how being an intellectual with the ear of millions of people isn't your strong suit.

[Anonymous No.9311661]

>>9306367
"argue that there are no biological differences between groups of humans"

Sad thing is I was with you all the way up until this point. Should've expected it, but whatever.

[Anonymous No.9311664]

>>9306273
Exactly. Imagine if a person in a positon of power like the US presidency believed in phrenology...

Now that would definitely be terrifying, to be sure.

[Anonymous No.9311666]

>>9308571
No, they're human beings. They're "niggers" only to people like you, because something happened to you in life and now you can't acknowledge the as human beings.

And the saddest thing of all is you likely don't understand you're a part of the problem when it comes to how nonwhite people, let alone blacks, are treated in this world.

Which is why I believe the world will be a better place, it not a little bit, once someone like you is dead.

[Anonymous No.9311672]

>>9307298
Thanks for proving his point there. I guess this really is the world we live in. A world where people have no qualms calling it "black behavior" and saying it's something they're born with?

And completely igoring the fact there are succesful, upstanding black people out there who've proved to the world that not every black person's some petty, brutish thug?

THIS is what happens when you see only what you want to see and hear only what you want to hear.

What makes you think black people would want to change, let alone be "seen as Asians," for someone like you when it's obvious you'll forever raise that bar.

You'll never be satisfied when it comes to have black people act, thus you'll never stop hating them. And that's why it's better off leaving lost causes like you be.

[Anonymous No.9311698]

>>9307707
Isnt this from one of those famous "how to draw" books?

[Anonymous No.9311944]

>>9311666
>they're human beings.

So?


>And the saddest thing of all is you likely don't understand you're a part of the problem when it comes to how nonwhite people, let alone blacks, are treated in this world.

Give me a fucking break you piece of shit. What predictable behavior. Is this genetic? Absolve all responsibility and blame whitey? Because it seems to be the only thing blacks can ever do. Even that last sentence is to pit whitey against all non-whiteys. To reduce the complexity of the world's racial relations to a moronic black-white mindset because when you have an average IQ thats considered borderline mentally retarded among Europeans, thats what happens.

Yes white people are the problem. Not shitty black behavior who, in every single decade, have attacked and harassed whites for their own problems. Who have destroyed every country they live in. Who murder and kill at higher rates, turning the former first world nations of South Africa and Rhodesia into third world shitholes. Yeah, they're not a problem, they're not the main factor of why black people are universally hated. Its fucking white people. It always is.

You're part of the problem, this shit you spew, is the same shit most blacks and marxist spew out to make excuses, it is the main reason why I despise blacks in a way I don't feel for any race, even Australian Aborigines who are without a doubt even dumber then the average black. You don't get it. You'll never get it.

[Anonymous No.9312478]

The carte blanche view or human capability that seems to be promoted on every level these days goes away.

another anon said something like this but it needs to be said. There needs to be a middle ground between gas the kikes and complete egalitarianism.

physical isolation effects evolution and people, like animals, adapted to their environments. telling everyone theyre equal only sets people up for failure.

[Anonymous No.9312484]

>>9311666
>>9311672

literally not an argument.

[Anonymous No.9312489]

>>9308368
they know the real answer, but the societal implications would be drastic

[Anonymous No.9312507]

>>9312484
Here's one.
Premise 1: The world should be a more just place.
Premise 2: People like you, by discriminating against people on the flimsy biological basis of appearance, make the world less just by judging people before getting a real assessment of their character.
Conclusion: You make the world less just, and should eliminate such behaviors.

[Anonymous No.9312509]

>>9312507
you can set up a premise for some lame ad hom, but you still havent argued the basis for biological and genetic differences between races and how they impact behavior and intelligence.

[Anonymous No.9312517]

>>9312509
Not my intention. All I wanted to demonstrate was that your prejudice makes the world a less just place.

[Anonymous No.9312521]

>>9312517
1.) Races vary in general behavior, intelligence and preferences.
2.) The forced integration of these races leads to conflict, decrease in social cohesion, violence and general disease (per Bowling Alone, Patterson) much of which is undeserved and thus unjust
3.) Conclusion: It is just for races to willingly self segregate.

[Anonymous No.9312531]

>>9312521
Premise 1 is an unreasonable. Social conditioning affects behavior, intelligence and preferences is subtle ways. Placing a causal relation on race is disingenuous because humans are very social and cannot be analyzed in isolation from their environment.

Additionally, race is not well-defined, so enabling prejudice is even further removed from reality.
"From a scientific point of view, the concept of race has failed to obtain any consensus; none is likely, given the gradual variation in existence. It may be objected that the racial stereotypes have a consistency that allows even the layman to classify individuals. However, the major stereotypes, all based on skin color, hair color and form, and facial traits, reflect superficial differences that are not confirmed by deeper analysis with more reliable genetic traits and whose origin dates from recent evolution mostly under the effect of climate and perhaps sexual selection". ~Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza

[Anonymous No.9312534]

>>9304651
I look exactly like pic on right :D

[Anonymous No.9312546]

>>9312531
I disagree.

>Social conditioning affects behavior, intelligence and preferences is subtle ways
I agree. Its subtle. Genetics make a much larger contribution. That selection you quoted is merely an opinion. Race is not exact, there are gradiations for sure but physical isolation leads to different evolutionary outcomes. Imperfection=/= nonexistence. Its also much more than facial structure and skin color. Anon above mentioned hormonal differences, general IQ variation, fuck, even certain diseases prevalence and predispositions aside from social conditions indicate that racial variation exists. Blacks have to be dosed differently for Ace inhibitors because they have a different concentration of renin.This correlated with the fact that no black civilizations ever developed any basic form of technology, complex language or agriculture doesnt really leave much doubt in my mind about the existence of race.

Im not saying there is inherently superior. There is no objective standard. People just adapt to their environment.

From James Watsons Wiki
>He says that he is "inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa" because "all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours – whereas all the testing says not really", and I know that this "hot potato" is going to be difficult to address. His hope is that everyone is equal, but he counters that "people who have to deal with black employees find this not true". He says that you should not discriminate on the basis of colour, because "there are many people of colour who are very talented, but don't promote them when they haven't succeeded at the lower level". He writes that "there is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically. Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage of humanity will not be enough to make it so

[Anonymous No.9312564]

>>9312531
same anon replying

>Placing a causal relation on race is disingenuous because humans are very social and cannot be analyzed in isolation from their environment.

This is preposterous. Race is developed on a cellular basis first. We are not having a conversation with black peoples neurons. Just because people are social doesnt mean they are immune to analysis on a cellular level. For psychology pseudoscience I would agree with your premise, but when dealing with genetic and molecular factors that directly impact intelligence and behavior/impulsivity that fails to be true.

[Anonymous No.9312571]

>>9312546

"the fact that no black civilizations ever developed any basic form of technology, complex language or agriculture"

That's a lie but...whatever. A simple Google search or two would put you in your place, but it's obvious you're not open to change.

Again, you have no qualms posting something as erroneous as that. You really think they just...did nothing for thousands of years?

Get your head out of your ass, because that type of shit's going to get you in trouble someday.

[Anonymous No.9312576]

>>9308611
Then you're an idiot, if you seriously think that's the case 100% of the time.

How stupid can you people be? You realize there're a lot of people out there who're beautiful on the outside yet complete pieces of shit on the inside, right?

If you don't think looks can't be decieving, you're a moron, plain and simple.

Again, it's going to get you in some deep shit, if you actually believe that and live thinking that way.

I thought this subsection of this site would've been more thoughful and patient...but it looks like it just confirmed my reasoning for getting rid of this place even more.

[Anonymous No.9312577]

>>9312546
same anon you replied to here

I accept that there will be variations in and across populations, but there's a problem in the flow of logic here. All of the scientific parameters you used to evaluate the existence of race are smooth in that if you lived 100 years ago and walked from the cape of good hope to St. Petersburg, all those statistics, skin color included, would more or less smoothly change as you moved North.
However, race in modern culture is a set of boxes: white, black, aboriginal, etc based on skin color and face structure. It is absurd to claim that the statistics which transition smoothly across geography also fit into the box model of race. The divisions of "black, white, etc." are even more ludicrous when you consider how a Russian and a Brit might be considered both white, and an American and a Nigerian national both black.
Sure, discrepancies across populations are certain to exist, but to use skin color as your heuristic is silly. Since our conception of race is based mostly on skin color, the concept of race is pretty meaningless if you want to go the statistics route.

[Anonymous No.9312587]

>>9311944
No. It's people like you who're the problem. And do you want to know the primary reason why people like you are the problem?

Because you go out of your way to confirm your delusions of the world around you, ignoring the things that prove you wrong, and shutting out the people who don't agree with you.

You'e done it so much it's become second nature to you, and that's how I know you're beyond help.

And that's also why I'm glad you're just some powerless asshole at the end of the day, because I would HATE to see what the future would hold with someone like you in a position of power.

I don't care if you think I don't get it. If "getting it" ends up turning me into you, I'd rather remain ignorant till I die.

[Anonymous No.9312588]

>>9312571
>That's a lie but...whatever. A simple Google search or two would put you in your place, but it's obvious you're not open to change.

Is this bait? Until recently if you punched "SubSaharan Africans and technology" into google you wpuld see my claims were true. The word is getting out and theyre doing damage control.

[Anonymous No.9312594]

>>9312571
Dude, you just used 3 lines of reddit spacing to act bewildered but say absolutely nothing. I'm sure if you're so set in your convictions you can find just ONE example to support your case.

[Anonymous No.9312599]

>>9312577
Im not arguing for the basis of race to be based entirely on skin color.

Race is the whole picture:geographical isolation, genetic differences, morphological differences and yes, skin color.

Terms like black, white etc are a broad way to cover these differentiations

[Anonymous No.9312609]

>>9312599
That makes sense. Thanks for discussing with me

[Anonymous No.9312611]

>>9312576
youre not gonna like it here, redditrefugee.

>Again, it's going to get you in some deep shit, if you actually believe that and live thinking that way.

this is the smug liberal logic everyone is sick of. None is saying "go kill blacks" Just that we are different in many different ways.

[Anonymous No.9312614]

>>9312609
Likewise anon.

[Anonymous No.9312730]

>>9304662
>>9306273

It is not wrong to say that black people are not as smart as white people in general. It is also not wrong to say that white people are not as smart as Asian people in general.

So what is your problem then? I mean that doesn't mean that a black man can't be as educated than as a white man in a white society.

You don't seem to understand the combination of collective things. RaceIQ+Location+Ideas.

European people had the best combination of those 3. End of discussion.

[Anonymous No.9312736]

>>9312730
Remember that one of the biggest factors in IQ is nutrition. Take those red countries with a grain of salt (they can't).

[Anonymous No.9312747]

>>9312736
Yes it is a factor. I don't believe that black African men have an IQ of about 60. Probably more about 80-70. But other than that I think the graph is fairly right.

[Anonymous No.9312749]

>>9312736
>biggest factors in IQ is nutrition

I mean subsaharan blacks live in one of the most fertile regions in the world and they still never developed adequate agriculture

[Anonymous No.9312796]

>>9312587
>calling the kettle black

[Anonymous No.9312804]

Phrenology has been proven incorrect

[Anonymous No.9312882]

>>9312749

First of all only Nigeria ranks in the top 10 arable lands in the world.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arable_land

Second sub-sahara Africa's soil is nutrient deficient in multiple areas.

https://www.nature.com/news/african-agriculture-dirt-poor-1.10311

>Fertilizers make such a profound difference here because the rusty red soil, as in many parts of Africa, is deficient in organic matter and in key nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus. By farming intensively without replenishing soil nutrients, farmers across sub-Saharan Africa have lost an average of 22 kilograms of nitrogen, 2.5 kilograms of phosphorus, and 15 kilograms of potassium per hectare annually over the past 30 years.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277707643_The_State_of_Soil_Degradation_in_Sub-Saharan_Africa_Baselines_Trajectories_and_Solutions

>Spatial Scales Sub-Saharan Africa is an enormous region of 24.6 million km2, with a huge range of soil and land management types [24]. The predominant soils (Table 1) are Arenosols (21.5%), Cambisols (10.8%), and Ferralsols (10.4%), and Leptosols (17.5%). The type and degrees of soil constraints vary widely. Nearly 40% of soils in SSA are low in nutrient capital reserves (<10% weatherable minerals), 25% suffer from aluminum toxicity, and 18% have a high leaching potential (low buffering capacity; [25]; Table 3). A region’s initial soil fertility will affect the extent of soil degradation—with regions of low soil fertility degrading more quickly than regions with higher natural soil fertility. If (plant-available) soil nutrient stocks are initially high, the process of nutrient depletion can take a long time, but the absolute amount of nutrients lost will be high. However, if nutrient stocks are low to begin with, this process can reach critical levels within a few years.

Just because a land is observably fertile does not mean it is optimized for human nutrition and growth.

[Anonymous No.9312931]

>>9307305
>What the fuck is your fucking problem?
This is bait, right?

[Anonymous No.9312938]

>>9304662

Lol, you can't be this delusional. Sub Saharan Africans and aboriginals in Australia are obviously very, very different in terms of intellectual ability.

[Anonymous No.9312960]

>>9308573
>>9308938
Not arguments

[Anonymous No.9313260]

>>9304651
>The weak fear the strong

Which is the better husband, the strong man or the weak man?

[Anonymous No.9313263]

>>9304651
The further to the left the more similar the features are to the sub-Saharan skull.

[Anonymous No.9313409]

>>9311661
>"argue that there are no biological differences between groups of humans"
Yes. Females and males have different genetic makeup.
Do you honestly disagree with that?
Or would you disagree that people of African descent are genetically more likely to have a higher amounts of melanin in their skin compared to people of northern European descent?
That is just established science dude, go ahead point out any geneticist that will tell you that chromosomes are faked and that Africans having black skin is not genetic, ill wait.

[Anonymous No.9313449]

>>9304651
I thought I was subhuman for a long time, because I was brachycephalic but turns out that brancycephalics actually have bigger skull capacity and therefore bigger brains. many of the greatest people in the world were Branchycephalic

[Anonymous No.9313453]

>>9312736
It's not in American blacks and they are still not as smart, every argument you offered has already been tested and debunked. you just a science denier at this point.

[Anonymous No.9313456]

>>9313449
They have bigger brains because they are more muscular. Muscles need a lot of neurons to work.
Brachycephaly itself is not an asset nor a drawback. It simple means that your brain is more horizontally than vertically allocated.

[Anonymous No.9313479]

>>9313456
Branchycephy means that your skull is close to being round, which makes it the most efficient, apes and archaic humans have dolichocephalic skulls, Abos have Dolichocephalci skull and they are bunch of retard, whole Gooks are branchycephalic and are the smartest.

http://dienekes.blogspot.com/2006/02/cranial-size-and-shape.html

[Anonymous No.9313497]

>>9313479
>abos
>dolicocephalic
They are as neanderthal as asians, and neanderthals were very brachycephalic.
Also, a great chunk of asians are dolichocephalic.
There is a lot more to intelligence than shape and size of the skull.

[Anonymous No.9313498]

>>9311649
Why do you believe I'm mistaken?

[Anonymous No.9313612]

>>9304428
Also, being ugly makes you more unfulfilled, which makes you more likely to cheat if given the chance.
If given the chance.

[Anonymous No.9313660]

>>9304651
>STOP RIGHT THERE, CRIMINAL SCUM
>By Azura, by Azura, by Azura! The Grand Champion!

[Anonymous No.9313671]

>>9306134
Whoa, how did that guy go back into the character creator?

[Anonymous No.9313677]

>>9308870
>Politically incorrect != incorrect.
Sure, but politically incorrect != factually correct

Factually correct = factually correct

[Anonymous No.9313761]

>>9313497
First of all just because you have certain amount of Neanderthal DNA doesn't mean that you are going to look the same amount neanderthal and you are wrong. abos have very long skulls along with Neanderthals, but Neanderthals most likely were very smart. does pic related really look short-headed to you?

[Anonymous No.9313793]

why is it that a few bad hypotheses discredit entire avenues of investigation?

yes most phrenology things like OP's are silly, but they should be taken as starting points for more verifiable hypotheses, e.g., inner eye width correlation with testosterone, facial width frame cheekbone to cheekbone (some anatomy nigga can verify that youre measuring from the same point on each person's face each time) correlated with height, something like that

it doesn't matter if there turns out to be zero correlation, in an ideal world I think its perfectly reasonable to want to leave no stone unturned particularly if the implications of a hypothesis are interesting

I swear to god some of you brainlets insist that a hypothesis have a study backing it before you even propose it. how else do you think studies come about? someone has some anecdotal evidence, some dumb trend they notice, and decide they'll look into it and see if they can verify it empirically via scientific data

[Anonymous No.9314095]

>>9313498
You outright posted that the form of one's face and the shape of one's skull correlates with their personality and how they behave.

As if it's 100% certainty and it can never be wrong...and it's obvious from how you worded it that you've been thinking this way for a long time.

But the reason I'm not all that concerned is because, at the end of the day, you're just some guy on 4-chan. You have no pool or status, so there isn't really that much to fear from you.

Real scientists and intellectuals will be there to prove people like you wrong.

[Anonymous No.9314103]

>>9313409
It's fine. It isn't like I'd gain anything from converting a nobody on 4-chan, anyway.

Bye.

[Anonymous No.9314106]

>>9312749
That's a lie, but whatever you say. Like I said, Google is your friend.

[Anonymous No.9314116]

>>9312588
Sure. I'd knock your teeth out, too, but we're seperated by wires, so I guess I'll let it go.

[Anonymous No.9314120]

>>9312938
And with that you proved his point. Why do you even care about something like that? What does that have to do with you?

[Anonymous No.9314125]

>>9312938
You can't even be bothered to explain these obvious differences. You just say there're difference, the comment ends, but you don't even explain anything.

And we're supposed to just accept that like it's a definitive fact? And you wonder why nobody bothers to take this site seriously...

I don't care if you want to think like this, but don't get into a position of power. I don't want to hear your shit for years on end.

[Anonymous No.9314172]

>>9312588
Sub-Saharan Africa is literally where complex language and human society began. For someone claiming to be scientific, you don't know much about the science

[Anonymous No.9314226]

>>9314172
Yes, and then everyone left.

[Anonymous No.9314275]

Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's baseless pseudoscience.

[Anonymous No.9314305]

>>9314226
Again, it isn't that simple as you think it is. I don't know why you do, but it isn't. You really think you can chalk it up to "and then everyone left"?

Because you're mistaken if you think that's what really happened. That's far from reality, and you're an idiot if you're seriously living your life thinking like that.

[Anonymous No.9314310]

>>9314275
Except it is. And any serious, genuine professional in the science field will tell you that.

You can personall believe it if you want, but that doesn't mean the ones who're actually at the forefront of all this will care.

[Anonymous No.9314317]

>>9314226
You don't bother with learning your history, that's your problem. Which is why you're likely doomed to repeat it, like so many people are doing so now.

[Anonymous No.9314322]

>>9314305
>>9314317
Please guys, don't post so many fucking examples at once or I won't be able to read them all.

[Anonymous No.9314950]

>>9312730
>china >105
>believing communist lies

every chinese student cheats.

[Anonymous No.9315287]

>>9304428
>What is logic
Testosterone makes a person's face wider, but is not the only factor that might lead to a person having a wider face. Therefore you cannot assume a person with a wide face will be aggressive.

[Anonymous No.9315327]

>>9304407
There is much you can infer about someones genotype by observing there phenotype. There are also interesting correlations that have been found based on measurable physical characteristics.


'Evidence is steadily accumulating to support a neurodevelopmental basis of pedophilia,' said Fiona Dyshniku of the University of Windsor in Canada.

'If we find that paedophilia has a biological basis, with a very early, even prenatal onset, this will influence and hopefully improve methods of treatment for this group.'

Facial anomalies could, among others, include having non-detached earlobes, malformed ears, or a high palate.

The researchers found that overall, paedophiles also have other physical irregularities known as Minor Physical Anomalies (MPAs).

MPAs can include low-set ears, a furrowed tongue, a curved fifth finger, a third toe longer than the second toe and an excessive gap between first and second toe.

These features develop during the sensitive first and early second trimesters while a baby is still in the womb.

They are created from the same primary embryonic tissue layer that gives rise to the central nervous system.

In another interesting study scientists found niggers more likely to commit crime and Jews more likely to help another Jew climb corporate hierarchies.

[Anonymous No.9315346]

>>9314950

No, the 105 is probably accurate. The problem is just like the PISA tests the results come from a select few regions but is considered "representative" of the entire country.

[Anonymous No.9315375]

>>9304687

>tfw you are credulous and love cheap and untrue sensationalism.

[Anonymous No.9315380]

>>9309004
The problem with the world is there are some people who inately translate all things they read into probabilities rather than truths, others who translate all probabilities they read into truths, and of these two kinds there are subtypes who either get upset or do not get upset over the others actions.

This confusion could all be solved if philosophy was mandatory education.

[Anonymous No.9315385]

>>9312577
>Since our conception of race is based mostly on skin color
It correlates to a useful degree.

I judge people based on their actions, if i condemn a group of people for their actions, and they all have the same skin color, i am called racist. Im not the one using skin color as the primary factor in my judgement here.

[Anonymous No.9315893]

>>9314103
>It isn't like I'd gain anything from converting a nobody on 4-chan, anyway.
Yes. Especially if you are arguing against hundreds of years of established science.

[Anonymous No.9315909]

>>9312587
>I'd rather remain ignorant till I die
Don't worry, nearly everyone figured that one out many posts ago.

[Anonymous No.9315940]

I dunno. It's hard to ignore all the evidence, but most blatant racists will ignore any waft of "culture" or "environment" that crosses their mind when it comes to something like an IQ test.

I wonder if there's been any studies on how the Chinese/Japanese languages would make one suitably prepared for the matrices and pattern recognition one would find on an IQ test.

That besides, the Flynn effect is slowing down in the west whereas in the developing world it's still chugging along (relatively). Before someone drags out the African American statistics, which are also subject to "muh historical oppression" arguments, I want to remind people that something like "this race has a higher propensity of x gene which leads to greater y hormone production which leads to z" is a much more limited statement than "niggers are animals lmao".

Even if, say, it was genetically proven that blacks are 1 std below whites on the IQ scale, going by rule of thumb, around 30% of them would be of average white intelligence or above. When you talk on the scale of billions, that's quite a lot of blacks.

TL;DR: People are making too much of a deal about muh nature nurture shit

[Anonymous No.9316018]

>>9315940
Sad thing is what you're saying isn't what the majority of the people in this post want to hear.

....Say it, anyway.

[Anonymous No.9316024]

>>9314322
It doesn't matter; what you're saying is false and I'm not just going to let you get away with saying such erroneous shit. You really believe they just left and nothing happened afterwards?

The ignorance isn't even funny anymore, and the fact you likely feel nothing when you type this kind of shit just makes it worse.

[Anonymous No.9316029]

>>9315327
Yes, refer to black people as "niggers." That definitey proves what you're typing isn't coming from a place of malice. Give me a fucking break.

[Anonymous No.9316034]

>>9315893
Even though, everything, even science changes. New things are being discovered every day in the field of science. The things people found in the past are being discredited and being replaced with something new today.

And the same's going to happen with what's being discovered now. Thus one day what you've "discovered" about whatever group of people will one day be discredited.

So I hope you enjoy your false sense of superiority for now, because there's going to be someone out there who'll wipe that smirk off your face soon enough.

[Anonymous No.9316037]

>>9313612
You say that like you're not one of them. Really, I highly doubt any of you here are supermodel status.

[Anonymous No.9316052]

>>9316037
Probably less than 5% of earth is supermodel status.

[Anonymous No.9316478]

>>9304845
If facts and religion contradict, then the facts are somehow wrong. Even if it is not immediately obvious how.

[Anonymous No.9316497]

aeolipera.wordpress.com

>>9316052
>5%
Mpre like 0.00005%

[Anonymous No.9316529]

>>9316034
This post is so negro its amazing. Like, amazing how blacks make it difficult even tolerate. This negro is so retarded that he thinks science is gonna debunk evolution and genetics sometime soon. Sorry negro. You're denying race and you're denying genetics, and you're denying evolution. I also don't think you completely comprehend how changes in science. Its true that science changes, but science just doesn't dismiss the foundations of an entire field (genetics) all of a sudden. Newton's theory on gravity is still influential to this day idiot. Rather science understands of genetics will modify and be more precise, and its not gonna find blacks are equal.


>So I hope you enjoy your false sense of superiority for now

Its hard not to feel superiority against brain damaged negros like you, but I don't feel superiority. No, that's just your typical black narcissism and insecurity acting up. I fucking despise you, thats all. Its why you and your race say such stupid shit. You hate genes because your black narcissism acts up. Your opposition to it is retarded.

Mate, the future of this world is gonna be eugenics,and the future humans of this world will be light years to blacks. So where is this false sense of "superiority" you're talking about? You behave like a piece of shit, you get treated like a piece of shit. Get the fuck out.

Your genetic denial is retarded, especially since we can already control the behavior of animals.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Mmsah0v9Qc

[Anonymous No.9316560]

>>9315940
>but most blatant racists will ignore any waft of "culture" or "environment" that crosses their mind when it comes to something like an IQ test.

There is no such thing as "racist", and you're just bullshiting when you think that's a valid argument. Define "racism", you can't. Its just a slur. If races differ genetically, then treating races inherently different is not morally wrong, its objective reality.

More over, anti-racists will ignore any waft of "genetics' or 'DNA'. People who think that IQ is 100% genetic are closer to the truth then those who believe in environmental determinism.

>I want to remind people that something like "this race has a higher propensity of x gene which leads to greater y hormone production which leads to z" is a much more limited statement than "niggers are animals lmao".

No one serious about this says that, but it also means that black genetics is the source and cause of societal problems, not "racism".

>Even if, say, it was genetically proven that blacks are 1 std below whites on the IQ scale, going by rule of thumb, around 30% of them would be of average white intelligence or above. When you talk on the scale of billions, that's quite a lot of blacks.

You act like thats not a big deal, but any nation serious about its future can see the huge implications of what having a entire population IQ be 1 standard deviation below whites would have. That means for every white person, 5 whole black people will be less intelligent. That completely changes the cost and dynamics for societal stability, equality, tax revenue, education costs. It also makes people who want to restrict immigrants 100% valid.

>TL;DR: People are making too much of a deal about muh nature nurture shit

Yeah, because there is no such thing as "nature/nurture". Behavior is genetic. Black with the same IQ DO NOT BEHAVE THE SAME AS WHITES. This seems to be something people still don't get.

[Anonymous No.9316679]

High foreheaded people seem to be less impulsive on average albeit more prone to neurosis

[Anonymous No.9316706]

Would the "ideal" brain shape be both really high and wide and barely "deep" at all? Like really flat for maximum brain surface and with little precious brain mass wasted on motor areas

[Anonymous No.9316800]

>>9312587
>Previous poster states arguments
>(You) write rant because you got nothing to back your thoughts

Really makes you think....

[Anonymous No.9316811]

>>9304698
I fuckin hate cortisol

[Anonymous No.9316816]

Literally no one believes in phrenology

[Anonymous No.9316820]

Why WOULDN'T certain behavioral patterns and temperaments express themselves via certain cranial and facial morphologies?

Discounting the entirety of phrenology is magical pseudo religious thinking (let's not even get into the fact your brain stereotypes certain faces in certain ways in literal microseconds whether you like it or not, god knows everyone knows morons and imbeciles have a certain look to them. Have yourself some fun and check out the online mugshots of your local county jail sometime)

[Anonymous No.9316822]

>>9304816
>>9305611

t. low test nu-males

[Anonymous No.9316830]

>>9316820
Proof?

[Anonymous No.9316837]

>>9316830
https://www.nyu.edu/about/news-publications/news/2016/may/neuroscientists-find-evidence-for-visual-stereotyping.html

[Anonymous No.9316863]

>>9316820

Unless you're trying to prove that phrenology suffers from cognitive fallacies such as the halo effect and circular reasoning then the source provided hurts your argument more than helps it.

As stated in >>9316837 link

>hand movements to reveal less-conscious cognitive processes, the researchers found, for instance, the brain patterns elicited by Black male faces, such as the above, were more similar to those elicited by objectively angry faces, even when such faces did not display any actual angry features—a perception the researchers linked to stereotypes of Black individuals as hostile.

>Despite their conscious responses, the subjects’ hand movements revealed the presence of several stereotypical biases. Notably, men, and particularly Black men, were initially perceived “angry,” even when their faces were not objectively angry; and women were initially perceived “happy,” even when their faces were not objectively happy. In addition, Asian faces were initially perceived “female” and Black faces were initially perceived “male,” regardless of the faces’ actual gender.

Also the perception of behavior patterns being innate and judging that innateness via observation of facial morphologies is extremely vulnerable to utilizing single example/ small sample size feedback loop that can become.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homunculus_argument

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_regress

Without rigorous testing that shows connection to behavior and morphology, independent of human perspective and social influence on to that perspective.

[Anonymous No.9316928]

>>9316863
I don't understand what infinite regress has to do with phrenology as a concept. Either way, it's not exactly something that can be dismissed as a concept outright. Neoteny observed in domesticated animals in of itself vindicates phrenology/physiognomy as a concept.

[Anonymous No.9317509]

>>9316034
Genes are a thing you evolution denier.
You are right that science can change, but the existence of genes is an undeniable fact, just like genetic differences are a thing.

It is about as solid as the theory of gravity, sure our understanding of gravity might change, but the basic fact that mass attracts other mass never will.

You are even more anti-science then the most fundamental Christian.

[Anonymous No.9317721]

>>9316679

[Anonymous No.9317742]

>>9304651
>trusting people based on how they look
don't you listen to what people say and do and adjust accordingly?

[Anonymous No.9317866]

>>9312736
>Take those red countries with a grain of salt (they can't).
Nice

[Anonymous No.9318884]

>>9313453
American blacks are way smarter than their African counterparts

[Anonymous No.9318984]

>>9316052
And, like I said, I highly doubt you're one of them. I know I'm not one of them, and I couldn't care less. And besides, I highly doubt the human race would've gotten as far as it did if people were that cynical and shallow like you about looks.

[Anonymous No.9318988]

>>9316560
Again, very silly, very dangerous shit you're posting here. I really don't know what happened to you that got you this way, but it's obvious you're beyond help.

Please, keep this crap to yourself.

[Anonymous No.9318994]

If Phrenology scares you why wouldn't /sci/ scare you?
I've heard retards on this board say suffering is proof you're retarded.

[Anonymous No.9319004]

>>9316820
Because phrenology has been discredited? Like, geuinely discredited by actually professionals in the scientific field, and I'm just relaying that knowledge?

http://www.victorianweb.org/science/phrenology/intro.html

It's silly, man; you think it matters if YOU, some nobody on 4chan, believes in it, but it doesn't.

When are you going to realize nobody in the real world cares what you think, about anything?

(That part about the brain and microseconds doesn't mean anything to me, by the way; I don't know why you brought that up, and whether it's true or not's no concern to me.)

[Anonymous No.9319006]

>>9318994
Just don't be a monster about it.

You're not a monster, are you?

[Anonymous No.9319298]

>>9319004
>you think it matters if YOU, some nobody on 4chan, believes in it, but it doesn't
>That part about the brain and microseconds doesn't mean anything to me, by the way; I don't know why you brought that up, and whether it's true or not's no concern to me.

The lack of self-awareness is breathtaking.

[Anonymous No.9319405]

>>9319298
Don't you get it? None of you on this website have money, power, or status, so there isn't exactly anything to fear from any of you.

That's why it doesn't matter if you believe in phernology or not, because it isn't like you have the means to get your opinions out there and make them "mainstream" or whatever you want to call it.

You want to saw lack of self-awareness, go ahead, but I know I'm right. I've nothing to fear from any of you; I never did and I never will.

[Anonymous No.9319467]

I feel like this is a reverse psychology bait thread

[Anonymous No.9319509]

>>9312576
ugly nigger redditor detected

[Anonymous No.9319922]

>>9312576
>Then you're an idiot, if you seriously think that's the case 100% of the time.
You are seriously brain dead.
People like you would react to "blacks have a lower average IQ then whites" with "WHAT ABOUT THAT SMART BLACK MAN I HAVE SEEN ON TV".

Everyone knows that it is not 100% of the time and aside from you everyone understands that AVERAGES are what we talking about.
AVERAGE means that it is NOT ALWAYS the case but there is a certain correlation.

[Anonymous No.9319988]

>>9304428
What about GH faggot. Acromegaliacs have the widest faces around.

[Anonymous No.9320284]

>>9304428
>2. It is proven that testosterone makes person more aggressive
that's just an indirect correlation,

testosterone primarily makes you more willing to take risks. Meaning in a lawful country bad folks with more t are more likely to go through with their aggression than low t analogs. That doesn't mean the later wouldn't commit horrible deeds if they didn't expect to get punished for it.

[Anonymous No.9320386]

>>9304725
>if only there was a middle ground between "gas the kikes race war now, global holocaust of the mudraces" and "everybody is exactly equal, biology is the devil, fuck my wife"

But there is, just not on the internet.

[Anonymous No.9320896]

>>9313671
He just visited Galathil in the Ragged Flagon.

[Anonymous No.9321349]

The only thing we know about races is that Amerindians had a higher development rate compared to europeans.

[Anonymous No.9321420]

>>9321349
>t. spic

[Anonymous No.9321429]

>>9320284
How do you know ypur explanation is also not an indirect correlation.

[Anonymous No.9322007]

>>9319405
Why are you behaving as if phrenology is some hidden spooky esoteric heuristic for viewing the world and you are the one who is gatekeeping this dangerous knowledge from the rest of the world?

People understand that physiognomy is valid on some level, it's generally accepted among the general population and isn't some obscure thing that is only talked about on 4chan, woman's magazines still write articles about looking for features in the faces of men that indicate "boldness" and "intelligence" ffs and do pseudo phenological analyses of famous men's faces constantly.

[Anonymous No.9322607]

>>9321420
>denying consensus
Amerindians had a higher development rate compared to europeans. How is this hard to get?

[Anonymous No.9322636]

>>9319922
That's the thing a lot of people (some people in this thread, actually) don't get about statistics. You can use statistics to draw conclusions about a POPULATION, not an individual. The fact that blacks commit more crimes, Asians have higher IQs, etc, does not allow you to draw any conclusions about an individual you meet on the street. It's not a useful tool for dealing with other human beings.

[Anonymous No.9322711]

>>9304566
small nose
>warrior

lmao

[Anonymous No.9322725]

>>9321349
What do you mean by development rate?

[Anonymous No.9322731]

>>9322725
>eurangutans:
>from aurignacian proto-gravettian to solutrean:10000 years (30000BC-20000BC)
>from aurignacian-antelian the neolithic: 15000 years(30000BC-15000BC)
>from neolithic proto-agriculture societies to neolithic revolution: 6000 years (15000BC-9000BC)
>from neolithic revolution to copper and arsenical bronze generalized use: 4000 years (9000BC-5000BC)
>from neolithic revolution to bronze age and tin bronze: 5200 years (9000BC-3800BC)

>Amerindians:
>from aurignacian proto-gravettian to clovis: 4000 years (15000BC-11000BC)
>from aurignacian proto-gravettian to the start of crop development and neolithic: 7000 years (15000BC-8000BC)
>from neolithic proto-agriculture societies to neolithic revolution: 5000 years (8000BC-3000BC)
>from neolithic revolution to copper and arsenical bronze generalized use: 2000 years (3000BC-1000BC)
>from neolithic revolution to bronze age and tin bronze: 4000 years (3000BC-1000 AD)
Amerindians had a higher development rate compared to euroepans.

[Anonymous No.9322745]

who here /dolichocepahalic/

[Anonymous No.9322786]

Can anyone explain to me why he uses 9 when calculating 5-1 instead of any number? I can't get this part.

[Anonymous No.9322788]

>>9322731
>from aurignacian proto-gravettian to solutrean:10000 years (30000BC-20000BC)
>from aurignacian-antelian the neolithic: 15000 years(30000BC-15000BC)
Yeah sure, my dude, I know exactly what you're talking about.

[Anonymous No.9322792]

>>9322786
You're 100% in the wrong thread.

[Anonymous No.9322793]

https://aeolipera.wordpress.com/2014/12/19/the-galley-hill-man-and-ettore-majorana/

[Anonymous No.9322846]

>>9322731
>>eurangutans:
>from conquering the world to getting extinguished 600 years (1500AD - 2100AD)

>>Amerindians:
Got genocided by the eurangutans, never conquered the world

[Anonymous No.9323075]

>>9322846
>eurangutans
>get 1 bubonic critter
>get 40% wiped out and invaded by just nomads

>A m e r i n d i a n s
>get 20+ diseases
>gets 90% assasinated yet survives and nobles get assimilated

Amerindians had a higher development rate compared to europeans. Time to deal with it, subhuman.

[Anonymous No.9323414]

>>9322636
And that's what these people and racists don't understand whenever they dabble with statistics. But then again, they don't really care; if it's something that confirms what they believe, they'll roll with it.

And that's the scary part, the fact there're people out there who'll cling on to ANYTHING, as long as it falls in line with what they believe.

[Anonymous No.9323488]

>>9304651
>le egg cuck face

[Anonymous No.9323498]

>>9313449
you ARE a subhuman
useing your logic, mexicans are smarter than nords lmao

[Anonymous No.9323511]

>>9323414
No, population level statements are what racists are making. You are such a brainlet and easily identifiable throughout the whole thread. Did you come to /sci/ out of desperation after being made fun of for your narrow forehead?

[Anonymous No.9323519]

>>9304651
Left is literally a pink nigger.

[Anonymous No.9323548]

>>9323498
Well, Amerindians had a higher development rate before the epidemic cataclysm of 1492. So it would make sense.

[Anonymous No.9323805]

Egalitarians are going to be in for a rough time this century. Maybe we'll just ban genetics or have genetic Maoism. For any given trait leftists seem to find a way to create a Maoism out of it.

[Anonymous No.9323942]

>>9323805
How so? Amerindian superiority won't be a problem though.

[Anonymous No.9324119]

>>9304407
Phrenology was based on the theory that the brain exerted pressure on the skull and deformed it. The various lumps and bumps on the cranium reflected enlargements of assorted brain-lobes, hence characteristics.
Like those joke diagrams you see; cross-section of a guy's brain with areas labeled "sex", "sports", and "anime". Girls are mostly "sex", "hair", and "shoes".

Of course, the brain is _very_ soft tissue, incapable of deforming bone even when a person is young and the sutures haven't fused.
There was also a good deal of racism involved. Certain head shapes were seen as "primitive". Always shapes different from that of the guys writing the papers.

[Anonymous No.9324588]

>>9304407
Well, it taught me to stay away from ugly people, which I will continue to do.

[Anonymous No.9324621]

>>9323498
Amerindians have larger cranial capacity, yes.

[Anonymous No.9325338]

>>9323942
If that becomes evident prepare for a second genocide, this time by leftists.

[Anonymous No.9325470]

>>9325338
Irrelevant. America belongs to Amerindians the same as europe belongs to europeans.

[Anonymous No.9326393]

>>9314172
Factually wrong. There is no archeological evidence that Homo sapiens originated in Africa.
The first "black man" or "african man" ever found is 12.000 years old.
The most proven theory at this point (we still know very little on this field) is that at some point what we could call a Sapiens or protosapiens migrated from the north and mixed with another hominid. Another theory states that africans are in fact simply those hominids. The discrepancy between the two comes from the known fact that we found very ancient european dna in some part of subsaharian african, but not every part

[Anonymous No.9326577]

>>9326393
Jesus, another idiot trying so hard to sound smart, as if his opinion on such a topic even matters.

Try all you want, but that's what the majority of the world believes. It's what children are being taught, it's what people are discussing, and you're not going to stop that.

[Anonymous No.9327503]

>>9304407
Is it just me or do both of those skull shapes look bizarre?

[Anonymous No.9327758]

>>9315346
>>9314950
in the one thats used the most the govt. only let researchers use uni students just for china though which makes a result of 105 incredibly dismal

[Anonymous No.9328523]

>>9323075
>Time
I just told you that the white race is going to die.
I don't think there is any time...

[Anonymous No.9328527]

>>9325470
>America belongs to Amerindians the same as europe belongs to europeans.
I actually agree, but I am very skeptic about letting the current Americans into Europe...
Also our leftists might genocide you if you are too successful, even on your continent.

[Anonymous No.9328600]

>>9304428
Just look at all the autistic screeching this one simple post generated oh my g-d.

[Anonymous No.9328707]

>>9318988
You do understand that under the "racist" rhetoric, the anon is actually correct about what he's saying, right? The Flynn effect in the US did nothing to bridge the gap between whites and blacks, and traits like IQ have an estimated heritability between 40% and 90%, with most studies putting it at significantly over 50%. These things are also borne out by twin studies, which show that societal factors, including the quality of parenting and schooling, have almost ZERO effect in differentiating these traits in twins.

[Anonymous No.9328782]

>>9318988
It needed to be said imo. You can't say anything like this at college anymore. If you can't speak freely on anonymous anime image boards, what the hell is really the point in having all these liberties? Or are our liberties just a token thing?

[Anonymous No.9329027]

>>9328782
the truth will set you free

[Anonymous No.9329076]

>>9313449
You sound like the type of big-brain nibba that needs to be hit with a rock, but that's none of my business

[Anonymous No.9329172]

>>9308917
>Romano-Brythonic
>european
okay

[Anonymous No.9329183]

>>9304407
>Phrenology is worthless, baseless science

The early stages of most sciences are pretty rough. Look at chemistry and its origins in alchemy.

There is some truth in phrenology. For example, skull size is correlated with IQ.

inb4 I heard on social media that IQ don't mean nuthin'

[Anonymous No.9329190]

>>9329183
Also we know that facial shape is highly correlated with testosterone levels and propensity to violence.

[Anonymous No.9329199]

>>9315940
>Even if, say, it was genetically proven that blacks are 1 std below whites on the IQ scale, going by rule of thumb, around 30% of them would be of average white intelligence or above. When you talk on the scale of billions, that's quite a lot of blacks.
You'd be more convincing if you didn't screw up standard deviations and if you didn't focus on only the "positive".
1. One standard deviation below white average would mean that (1 - 0.68) / 2 of blacks are above white average. That's 16 %.
2. That would mean that 84 % of blacks are below white average. If we assume that criminal behavior increases as IQ goes down, you'd expect to find drastically more black criminals than white criminals. Which you do. That then begs the question, why would we want these people in our countries?

[Anonymous No.9329224]

>>9306134

look at the chin, its inches not milimeters. pluss his whole face is distorted in the first pic, nose is fucked too

[Anonymous No.9329243]

>>9320284

no testosterone effects bone growth and bone density, as well as muscle mass and body fat percentage, there's nothing indirect about it, you can quite easily tell between two men who has higher testosterone levels.

[Anonymous No.9329530]

>>9304725
R A D I C A L
C E N T R I S M

[Anonymous No.9329691]

>>9329172
That is European!