What do we think about this?

>rich blacks are more violent than poor asians
truly makes one ponder

It's a groundbreaking text to the social sciences and also entry-level redpill literature. You should read it in preparation to pic related

Attached: 41E3KHQXFKL._SX315_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg (317x474, 27K)

>board is anonymous
>white supremacists consistently make the worst posts on the board
>jewish authors constantly attacked by ressentiment filled swine
>white supremacists never contribute and when they do its trying to ruin N or force some fucking gay schmittian/de Maistren sophistry down the boards throat
>white supremacists samefag, brigade and bump trash threads constantly
>whyte supremacists whine, beg, scream like infants
fuck you

it was discredited by practically every serious researcher in the field
the only people who would be convinced by it are the same sort of people who would be convinced by e.g. samuel hahnemann's treatise on homeopathy
wogs are still pretty stupid tho

the best (worst?) part is that half of these posters are quite literally american mutts going on about racial purity, when their DNA has many "nonwhite" races, such as irish, italian, or slavic genes
they don't even call themselves americans, they just label what percentage of different european countries they are when their nationality gets brought up

>it was discredited by practically every serious researcher in the field
no, it wasnt

You should really stop posting here. This is a board for white people who want to discuss their cultural heritage, not some loafing space for bored, itinerant muds with an internet connection.

>neither side providing a single source to back that up

Attached: WEW.jpg (267x251, 7K)

sup /leftypol/

>ressentiment
>popularized by Nietzsche
>who believed Jews were the progenitors of a literal slave morality
>who believed Jews entire morality stems from pure hatred of their masters and nothing else
>aka jews were the original ressentiment filled swine

its ressentiment filled swine all the way down

>it was discredited by practically every serious researcher in the field
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainstream_Science_on_Intelligence
Looks like your statement is somewhere in between 'extremely untrue' and 'largely untrue'

Our society's obsession with intelligence is one of its worth traits, and this book was designed to appeal to it. Other than that its too flawed to take seriously.

I don't get why American rightists fetishise IQ, by any measure they are on the middle of the bellcurve, with white liberals, over 1 billion chinks, Jews and MTF trannies(the demographic with highest average IQ in the world) all above them in their arbitrary totem pole. You can tell they are ex libertarians still fixated in a scientistic utilitarian vision of the world, they don't realize fascism is all about the aethetization of politics.

blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/the-real-problem-with-charles-murray-and-the-bell-curve/

You'll note that in the first paragraphs the author claims that attempts to debunk the book for the last two decades have failed.

He then presents his own argument as to why the Bell Curve should be dismissed. I don't think it's a very good argument, but I'll leave that to you.

pls dont compare poltards to the sophists

>Fifty-two professors, most of them researchers in intelligence and related fields, signed "Mainstream Science on Intelligence",[15] an opinion statement endorsing a number of the views presented in The Bell Curve
>"Mainstream Science on Intelligence" was a public statement issued by a group of academic researchers in fields associated with intelligence testing that claimed to present those findings widely accepted in the expert community. It was originally published in the Wall Street Journal on December 13, 1994 as a response to what the authors viewed as the inaccurate and misleading reports made by the media regarding academic consensus on the results of intelligence research in the wake of the appearance of The Bell Curve by Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray earlier the same year. It was drafted by professor of psychology Linda Gottfredson, sent to 131 researchers,[1] and signed by 52 university professors specializing in intelligence and related fields, including around one third of the editorial board of the journal Intelligence,[2] in which it was subsequently reprinted in 1997. The 1997 editorial prefaced a special volume of Intelligence with contributions from a wide array of psychologists.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainstream_Science_on_Intelligence

>Over two decades after its publication, one set of scholarly authors stated that The Bell Curve contained ". . . very little information that has since come into question by mainstream scholars. . . . The Bell Curve is not as controversial as its reputation would lead one to believe (and most of the book is not about race at all)."

Most views purpoted by the book are mainstream nowadays

>that entire post
W E W

>I don't get why American rightists fetishise IQ
because the left is going off the deep end over egalitarianism and intelligence and related shit btfos them

Then ignore said threads and don't waltz right into them you dumb ass

you clearly have zero understanding of the subject at hand, yet you're quick to make sweeping, grandiose claims. why is this board so full of pseuds?

well if we are just trading wikipedia articles
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve#Criticisms
you won't find a single serious researcher (i.e. not a fringe loony) who would express support for the bell curve
keep on thinking it matters though

>you won't find a single serious researcher

we just linked you a manifesto from over 100 elite researchers supporting most views presented on The Bell Curve. why are you so intellectually dishonest?

Can't really blame them it's basically career suicide to agree with the book based on the status it has accumulated

I think it comes from their desire to preserve our social institutions in a society that justifies its social organization through intelligence and education.Being smart makes you a better more deserving person in America.
They support a normative social equality more than anything else. IQ doesn't mean much to them. The right should do the same for social hierarchy.
Tell me where I'm wrong.

Yep. Nietzsche: jews are "a nation of ressentiment par excellence."

Yet from my experience the people most likely to level this term at whites are jews. Jewish projection at its finest.

Gould himself - the most notorious critic of the book - is considered a fringe loony of sorts by many, many people and his views on IQ were famously out of touch with the current literature.

Gould was unsurprisingly a jew, and he is an extremely discredited one at that.

Based on that IQ map, looks like the Chinese are the master race.

>(and most of the book is not about race at all
most of the book is in fact about the bourgeoisie being high IQ patricians entitled to rule over the masses. Murray was a CIA asset during the vietnam war and later employed by multiple oligarch funded 'libertarian' think tanks. Clinton's shutting down of the welfare system was likely based on Murray's ideas. You are most likely among the mass of useless eaters

>In a 1997 speech at an event hosted by the Libertarian Party of Los Angeles County, Murray cheered the explosion of wealth inequality since the start of the Reagan Revolution, noting that greater concentration of wealth meant the rich had much more political power, "making it harder for politicians to bash the rich than it used to."

>Murray on outsourcing American jobs: "We are underestimating the number of [laid-off] people out there saying 'This is great!'"

Ha! Being smart in modern America makes you an object of derision for being too 'smug.'

>many people
Right wing idiots online are not the intelligensia you inbreed

>is considered a fringe loony of sorts by many
way to weasle out.

A lot of you lads would be far less enthusiastic about this stuff if you found out your own IQ wasn't as special as you think lol

>ITT butthurt low iq mutts appeal to nameless authorities about how the bell curve is pseudoscience
Go back to reading word salad philosophy

The last four presidents and the current one and every sitting justice on the supreme court all have Ivy League educations. These institutions all allow the upper classes to claim their domination is just and natural, and they work to further cement their domination.

The famed American anti-intellectualism is really just a healthy defense mechanism against this, and the only problem with it is that it isn't radical enough.

>word salad philosophy
the most brainlet of statements

>normative social equality

Attached: 1475884942062.jpg (360x360, 41K)

Be honest. How many analysis and lectures "deciphering" the works of pseuds do you read/watch a day?

Gould was a researcher turned into pop scientist. Most of the stuff he published from the 80s onwards was tarnished by "radicalism" and political bias. Not surprisingly, his 1981 book on psychometrics is by far his most widely criticized work. Anything he has to say on the matter should be taken with a grain of salt.

i don't read pseuds

just so you know science isn’t thinking and reading studies you didn’t even design while working an eng or cs job also isn’t thinking by definition. crunching numbers isn’t thinking, business isn’t thinking, law isn’t thinking, medicine isn’t thinking. whatever you do for a living you probably don’t think very much

i agree. Nice try figuring me out tho

>nd MTF trannies(the demographic with highest average IQ in the world)
wat
pls source this sounds fascinating

>intellectually dishonest?
>Galileo we just linked you to a manifesto from 100 elite researchers saying the sun moves around the earth, why are you so intellectual dishonest?

oh wow so you think we can measure intelligence with quantitative tests but you agree that inductive reason isn’t thinking? what kind of an esoteric shadow ninja philosopher are you user? woke technofascist platonic mathematician??

Wouldnt surprise me, everyone knows about the link between mental illness and intelligence

lmao at all the brave defenders of black people itt that would rather die than live in a black country among black people

Europe has only been richer than the rest of the world for the last few hundred years. Why weren't the white people so far ahead in 1000 BC if they were racial superior to Indian, Chinese or Arabs?

lol galileo wasn't as contentious among contemporary peers, but nice try you ignorant hack.

I accept your concession

It's really not about race

I agree that pratitioners dont need to do a lot of thinking. As for psychometric intelligence, you dont need to interpret the results, it is possible to do the number crunching without providing any narrative and simply relay the results e.j. Blacks have the lowest mean IQ out of the four measured ethnic groups

They were, but you have a limited understanding of ancient history and aren't aware of obvious things like how the upper castes of India have high European admixture, so you're not really worth discussing this subject with.

it was all in our hearts all along :3

Asians are white. In fact, Asians are the Aryans.

>contentious
he had a massive trial, the pope had to get involved, and he was kept on house arrest until he died the fuck are you on about

Attached: Two Intellegant.png (659x525, 164K)

still not knowledge, repeating stats isn’t helpful to my understanding of reality. if it wasn’t apparent niggers are lessers intellectually to you you’re probably of low intelligence.

>we wuz ancient Indians
Even if there is high European admixture, why was Europe, with pure European blood, so much poorer? Who else was actually white? I'm assuming you'll say Egypt. What about China? Or Mesopotamia?

There's a strong negative correlation between average skin darkness and average IQ among populations (r=-0.90) (Templer and Arikawa, 2006)
What does that mean, bros?

More melanin = less intelligence

yeah it's not like you see backwards, conservative institutions of power being opposed to critical and scientific consensus throughout history.

what's this 'we' shit this ain't france lol

probably some memery about living up near the Arctic selecting for intelligence

>the Kshatriyas and Brahmins have EUROPEAN admixture
jesus fucking christ
you fucking ignorant ant person, both of you should be burned alive. STEPPE GENETICS ARE NOT EUROPEAN GENETICS YOU FUCKING NIGGERS. A GERMANIC HAS LESS THAN 50% STEPPE ADMIXTURE A PAKI HAS WELL OVER 50% KILL YOURSELVES YOU FUCKING DILETTANTE INSECTS

idk its pretty weird how Chinese who have yellow skin, Jews who have tanned skin and Japs who have light yellow skin have the highest iq and whites don’t even come close

America's social institutions, from universities, to the electoral system and the presidency are increasingly obsolete. If there is power, it lies in the immanent potentialities of the network, currently dormant, a model laid down by military industrial technicians as a means of preserving the chain of command even after a nuclear strike. Right wing bugbears like google are merely the descendants of the old deepstate bureaucracies and corporations. America is a whiggish representative democracy with lots of parallels to the thalassocratic republics of antiquity, such as athens, down to the reliance on war empire and the existence of an underclass deprived of political rights. The Lockean/jeffersonian aspect lies in the ideal of the citizen as self sufficient smallholder, which post war suburbia revived under new technological conditions. Trump makes evident the nature of sovereignty as a borderline concept, he exists both within and outside the system at once. The war machine function and the universalist levelling processes of uninhibited exchange are two faces of the same coin. You will never reassert muh white male authority within the sphere of the professional-managerial state if that's what you want, the best you can hope for is unironically a nuclear war or a third worldist uprising.

>Even if there is
There's no question about it. DNA tests of Egyptian mummies have also shown they are more closely related to Europeans (r1b) than Egyptians today, and the original people of Sumer spoke an Indo-European language. There have also been many ancient links between these early civilizations and China. Look up the work of Chang Tsung-tung if you are interested.

Attached: e3ba513cc7f35ff32a3686800d2a1ea693be11402a3aef9adec59b1f65226585.jpg (943x1629, 310K)

r1b isn’t even close to half the blood found in europeans. the ancient egyptians did not resemble modern europeans at all, one study saying something tangential to that does not make it so. the sumerians were not Aryans and just looking at the physiognomy of their statues they were absolutely not white nord/germanic. Pakis and North Indians have higher R1B and so do Estonians and Armenians than almost all Germanics do. FUCKING KILL YOURSELF YOU KNOWLEDGE HATING WE WUZ FAGGOT. THE HAN ARE NOT WHITE YOU FUCKING NIGGER THE EARLIEST PEOPLE ON THE YANGTZEE WERE NOT WHITE YOU FUCKING NIGGER GET OFF MY FUCKING BOARD YOU LITTLE APE. R1B COMES CROM THE STEPPE NOT EUROPE THE ORIGINAL STEPPE POPS THE YAMNA HAD BLACK HAIR, BROWN EYES AND SWARTHY SKIN LIKE A GREEK FUCKING END YOURSELF IM TIRED OF RUINING YOU PEOPLE

There is never a way to prove that a formal concept adequately captures our intuitions. That goes for iq and intelligence, but its the predictive validity and usefulness is an empirically verifiable fact. Negros' cognitive deficiencies are obvious to me but without the stats you'll be dismissed by people in denial

Let me rephrase that. Can I… No, actually I’ll just repeat the question:
Even if there is high European admixture, why was Europe, with pure European blood, so much poorer?

Attached: hqdefault[1].jpg (480x360, 16K)

this

Gould unironically believed in multiple intelligences, something that was never supported by empirical evidence

It's unfortunate that this board has so many idiots and non-whites. It means that things that should be known and obvious have to be repeated.

Attached: 00f331c2c3718eff988bd71b77af929803b9b2af54bc2e3c7960e08def5f1708.jpg (928x822, 133K)

GET OFF MY FUCKING BOARD YOU LYING FUCKING FAGGOT

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_history_of_Egypt

they’re fucking West Asians and North africans you lying nigger i want to smash your skull into little pieces
stop replying to WE WUZ posters you dumb fucking britcuck

Attached: 0E4F1C03-D1C5-4AFF-A7D8-507ACE5AE1BB.jpg (750x1334, 210K)

yes, germanic tribes where living in mud huts and eating their own shit until they got romanized/christianized, nobody is disputing that

Your question is nonsensical. It wasn't, and comparative material wealth in the ancient world is neither a proper measure of anything nor something that is even known.

>they’re fucking West Asians and North africans
They are now because that's who took over and destroying ancient Egypt over many centuries. Modern Egyptians can barely run their country with tens of millions in aid every year, you think they were building pyramids thousands of years ago? Get real.

first of all the study if you had read it was predicated upon Ancient Egyptians having late subsaharan admixture, no blaq egyptians, on the egyptians being most closely related to MODERN NEAR EASTERNERS AND LEVANTINES THAN MODERN EGYPTIANS, and egyptians being related to NEOLITHIC EUROPEANS which are fucking swarthy short brown haired farmers you dumb fucking faggot, which is BECAUSE EGYPTIANS ARE OLD STOCK EURASIANS FUCKING KILL YOURSELF YOU FUCKING NIGGER THE REASON FOR THAT WAS BECAUSE OF MASSIVE AFRICAN DNA FOUND IN MODERN EGYPTIANS NOT BECAUSE THEY WERE EUROS GOD I WANT TO STRANGLE YOU

Attached: 81B29C67-8B37-472C-9FF7-F3F18F5257C0.jpg (750x1334, 259K)

read my fucking post and stop replying afterwards you dumb fucking pseud, the ANCIENT EGYPTIANS were west asians and levantine+berbers they absolutely were not IE admixted at all

So this board can have blatant pol threads as long as there's a pol related book in the OP
seems like a design flaw

>Sweden in 1000 BC was just as rich and developed as Egypt or Persia

I'm sorry to burst your little bubble friend. But the Asian race is the superior one.

You sound mentally unstable or black. Not a good impression to give off if you want to be taken seriously.

So what you're saying is that Murray is /ourguy/? Shitting on brainlets is the right thing to do.

Christianity wiped out much of what we know about ancient Scandinavia but the Swedes were by then traversing the globe. These are not comparative examples though. Do you have any idea how difficult it was to survive in Sweden in 1000 BC?

Negative.

back to le reddit

not sure if you are promoting the guy or talking against him from your post?

heil hitler m8 1488 whatever Im just saying there is already a board for pol

I guess the consensus is... well there is no consensus. This thread is full of right wingers trying to push their ideology, and rational, level-headed non-political (perhaps even socially conservative) intelligent individuals telling you IQ is a bullshit metric.

Well they're right, especially if you're trying to apply IQ judgments to people, and entire races. Maybe next time, OP!

Oh I see. When whites were lagging behind it's not a comparative example. But when whites are ahead that's very meaningful?