Implying he isnt right

>implying he isnt right
youtube.com/watch?v=kTiRnbNT5uE
this is a humanities thread btw

Other urls found in this thread:

gao.gov/assets/690/683984.pdf
thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/04/15/maoa-race-and-crime/
theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/?print=1
andrewgelman.com/2013/02/12/that-claim-that-harvard-admissions-discriminate-in-favor-of-jews-after-checking-the-statistics-maybe-not/
projects.iq.harvard.edu/expose/book/cloak-meritocracy-harvard’s-“new-plan”-admissions-and-“jewish-problem
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886912004047
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278584601002883
twitter.com/AnonBabble

He's wrong about terrorism. He's citing the GTD and a simple Excel pivot table of GTD data would show that Islamist terrorism makes up the overwhelming number of fatalities in both Europe and the US. This is despite Islamists having a far smaller pool to recruit from.

Also, the Left doesn't censure saying "Blacks commit 54% of murders and high amounts of other serious crimes." That's not where the avalanche of attack comes in. It's when you say "only 26% of police shootings involved Blacks, but they commit 36% of serious violent crime, so maybe the fact that Blacks are shot by police more is largely drive by then being more violent."

He's saying it's ok to state facts, so long as you draw the "correct" conclusion from them. Based on the data, the correct conclusion on race/iq relations is most likely the one that is unacceptable to the modern Left no matter how many times it gets proven.

Those are actually pretty mild/introductory facts.

There's a whole other set of facts he didn't bring up that are even more problematic for the academy to deal with.

>Im a """RACE REALIST""""
lol

At least he doesn't deny evolution

He should have dove into the massive over representation of Jews in the media business, billionaires, and Ivys. That'd get some squirms but he's Jewish and Jews are white, so they'd be ok.

Then he could drop race/IQ studies and the different scores needed by each race to get into unis.

That'd get him roasted good. Fact is, there are certain topics you can't talk about because, unlike the ones he brought up, the best data we have doesn't support the liberal conclusion. This causes a lot of cognitive dissonance since liberals like to think of themselves as the more scientifically literate group, but they have their own versions of climate denial (although they aren't nearly as full on retarded as climate change denier.)

why do people keep bringing up jews being in every sector like it's a bad thing. they're successful so what?

Its more elementary than climate denial, they embrace creationism. The position is religious in nature.

>le base Jews are white when it’s convenient
The absolute state of the alt-kike

Imagine you have do an assignment for a university course your taking that you have to do individually.

However, there's this group of people, let's call them "Drews" that work as a group to finish their assignments. They help each other out and there's a trail of blatant plagiarism throughout all of their finished work.

You, having to do the assignment individually point out that this is unfair. However, when you voice this concern, you're told that they get a special exception on this rule because they're Drews and are a historically oppressed people. Not only do they get this exception, but they get marked as if they all did it independently. Not only do they get a plagiarism shield, you get punished for criticizing this rule.

I never said that. The problem with race and IQ is you have:

1. A recreatable difference that is large (over a standard deviation) and is not reduced by controls.

2. In the Minnesota study and others, half Black children adopted as infants measured far higher than fully Black children, even in cases when the adopted parents didn't know about their mixed race heritage and the half Black child presented as phenotypically Black.

Black children adopted by White parents in infancy do pretty much the same as other Blacks on tests. SES is not a mitigating factor.

If you read the conclusions and rebutalls of twin studies the field has come down to "well, the neonatal environment provided by Black mothers or White women who have children with Black men must cause it." That seems like a reach.

gao.gov/assets/690/683984.pdf
>Between 12 September 2001 and 31 December 2016, there were 23 fatal “Radical Islamist Violent Extremist-Motivated Attacks,” resulting in a total of 119 deaths in the United States. In the same time period, there were 62 fatal “far-right violent extremist-motivated attacks”, leading to 106 deaths.
muslim attacks are more deadly, but right wing attacks are more prominent

>i came from rocks

>Evolution doesn't real

This is exactly my sentiment. If anything people should learn to mimic Jews, Mormons, and other successful groups.

It becomes a problem because if you accept Leftist privilege theory that Whites should have to face higher standards for university admission or to be hired, then by the same logic Jews should face an even higher level of discrimination. Asians as well.

This is not however what the left embraces because Asians for instance are an oppressed group and POC. Thus when transferring resources from the haves to the have nots, you can't just base it on who has the resources. You base it on if they're white or not.

so what are you saying? that jews got to those positions because of affirmative action? or that it's impossible to criticize the fact that they're in those positions?

You realize Jews aren't discriminated against, there's discrimination in their favor, right?

Jews only make up 6% of the high-achieving student population according to the SAT

Both

See
For an example

>the Left
Dropped like a Blockbuster bomb.

>[citation needed]
also, how does any of this correlate with black people being genetically inferior mentally?

>le jews

Or maybe they helped each other despite being a far smaller group. If you're an autistic cunt and can't appreciate the value of teamwork you are doomed.

Explain this then

>minnesota
>half black
explain why somalis are dumb as shit then.

That study was done in the 90s before all the Somalis were dumped into Minnesota

>Those are actually pretty mild/introductory facts.

They aren't on certain university campuses, that's literally his point, did you even listen to what he said?

I said the Minnesota Twin study but there are many others. Google race, IQ and twin study in scholar.

I did

What he's failing to do is bring up facts that he himself can't easily put in context and explain away with classical liberal ideas

>just outright ignoring that he BTFO all the main alt-right talking points

Now compare the number of far right people with the number of Muslims.
Also, love how they have to start post 9/11 otherwise the statistics get skewed as fuck

How did he btfo them?

We should embrace heuristics in every other subject but reject them when it has political implications? Why?

so basically you're complaining that they're succuessful.

domestic terrorist attacks. 9/11 wasnt domestic homegrown terrorist cell. And what is the number of muslims vs far right people? You cant really lump in the standard republican or conservative or libertarian in with the far right.

lmao. look at the right side of that chart.

It says that Jews are represented 4 times higher than their own merit would predict.

It also shows systematic discrimination against non-Jews and against whites in particular.

>How did he btfo them?
>Just because women have different priorities or career goals does not make them inferior to men and no real logical conclussion can be drawn from this

>just because capitalism is better than communism doesnt mean we should do away with all or most regulations/ancap is retarded

>just because blacks are more violent crimes doesnt mean they are genetically disposed to being more violent or that they will always be like this. Irish Americans used to be a notoriously violent group years ago, and they have calmed down

>just because islamic terrorist is a big problem does not take away from the fact that most domestic terrorism in the US is done by far right wing groups

watch the video again

just a chart. jews are known to be very intelligent. you haven't given concrete proof of jewish nepotism. also how are white people being discriminated against when they're mostly competing with asians?

>No source
>Unreadable, obviously misleading statistics representation

For all I know they could have compared five white families from the middle class LA suburbs and ten Jewish high class dudes.

Even then, due to millennia of persecution Jews have developed a very strong tradition in the trades of law, medicine, business, etc. I can confidently say that's why they are still alive despite being treated like shit until a few centuries ago.

You don't look too much like the retarded /pol/fag kind, you still got some rational thought in you. Question what you are being fed. They always say "question what (((they))) say", but do you question what YOU say? What your "allies" say?

>What he's failing to do is bring up facts that he himself can't easily put in context and explain away with classical liberal ideas

What the fuck does this mean exactly, give examples.

>Pirate hub for centuries
>Frontline for religious and ethnic wars for centuries
>Italian invasion and occupation
>Italian occupation as UN mission
>Messiest pullout in the history of Africa

>capitalism is better than communism
It isn't. They're both equally shit.

Black violence fits into a pattern that's not exclusive to America. Back Caribbean countries and most Subsaharan countries are the same, there's maybe two or three black countries in the world that don't have astronomical murder rate.

>just because blacks are more violent crimes doesnt mean they are genetically disposed to being more violent or that they will always be like this.
This has been measured, there are genes linked to violence and they're significantly (multiple times) more prevalent among Black populations than Asian or White populations

>just because islamic terrorist is a big problem does not take away from the fact that most domestic terrorism in the US is done by far right wing groups
This is a strawman of the position. Even if that were 100% true, the position is that muslims are a high-risk population group. Nothing he said disproves this.

The other ones I haven't heard being made except for ancaps. Ancaps justify their position from assumed axioms about human nature, economics and the nature of the state and make moral claims. Ancaps aren't ancaps because they look at North and South Korea; in fact there's an old David Friedman clip from the 1970s where an ancap tries to make the case that the US government is no worse than the Soviet Union because he in his mind had combined them all into an abstract "state" that he was against.

Regardless, Pinker doesn't understand or is strawmanning that position.

>You cant really lump in the standard Sunni or Shia or Ibadi in with the radical movement.

>no worse
no better, sorry

>there are genes linked to violence and they're significantly (multiple times) more prevalent among Black populations than Asian or White populations
[citation needed]

>This is a strawman of the position.
no it isnt. A strawman isnt "argument I have no real response to"

> Even if that were 100% true
it is true, see

What's your solution then? Mixed market? Markets are two sided spectrums. It's either controlled or free with different degrees. I guess syndicalism is a different one but that's it.

National syndicalism.

>a group (Muslims in america) is responsible for X amount of terrorist attacks

>another group (far-right groups in america) are responsible for Y amount of terrorist attacks.

Far right groups are probably even a per capita smaller group than every denomination of muslims in america, and they are still more inclined to terrorism

>[citation needed]
thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/04/15/maoa-race-and-crime/

>no it isnt. A strawman isnt "argument I have no real response to"
He did state the actual position making it a strawman. The position isn't that muslims are worse than the far-right, the position is that they are a high-risk population.

>did state
didn't state

...? The hell is that? Is it related to that other NATSOC meme?

no dude i'm on your side

>alternative hypothesis
Oh wow, a fucking neo-nazi blog as proof!

Continuing, I thought you were diminishing the numbers of far right members. Sorry chap!

>a neo nazi blog

Those figures are already relative to the high-achieving population. Its already factored in higher merit from Jews.

theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/?print=1

The sample sizes are quite large. And again, I'll make this clear. The right-side has already factored in merit. That figure on the right is adjusted not to the base population size, but to the proportion of Jews that are high-achieving.

Those figures on the right cannot be explained by simple merit, no way. It has to be some form of nepotism even if its not explicit (could be that the children of alumni are favored). Regardless there is some nepotism there - that's proof of it, you can't get away from that.

>The hell is that?
Google is your friend my uneducated friend.

The consistent finding that the mean IQ of Blacks (~85 for American Blacks) is incompatible with success in a modern society.

>If I call it neo-nazi that means its false
The irony is that the guy who runs that site is explicitly Anti-Hitler (has made multiple videos on it) and gets called a Neo-Nazi anyway.

that's the iq for most middle eastern countries (morocco, turkey, iran) and they're functioning well.

So fucking what? American blacks are like 12% of the population.

>that's the iq for most middle eastern countries (morocco, turkey, iran) and they're functioning well.
First of all the mean IQ of Arabs in a Western environment is in the low 90s and second of all those countries are shitholes

>mean IQ of Arabs in a Western environment is in the low 90s
And the mean IQ of blacks is in the 70s.

They as a group will never be successful

give me a source. and second none of those countries are shit. iran for example has a far higher hdi rate than literally any african country and they have african american tier iq.

Successful is a culturally bounded term. Who gives a shit.

...

Okay but you can also measure it in terms of aptitude to do a set of processes, like in the chart I posted

>>If I call it neo-nazi that means its false
>The irony is that the guy who runs that site is explicitly Anti-Hitler

Meanwhile, on the site itself...

>About “The Alternative Hypothesis”

>Welcome to our site! Here at TheAlternativeHypothesis.org, you can find an alternative to the status quo perspective on issues like race and diversity

>When trying to come up for an expose to avoid dealing with the arguments on this site, some people call us “racist”. This site is mostly in the business of making factual statements and empirical arguments. As such, it is only “racist” to the degree that facts and numbers are “racist”

>Q: "This site has non-peer reviewed articles. Why should I trust them?"

>This website is not an academic journal As such, while articles are often discussed with peers prior to being published, they are not put through a formal process of peer review.

>we exist within the online community of people which has become the alt-right

How does that translate in your mind to "Neo-Nazi"?

>western enviroment
also where is iran?

user is under the delusion that every racist is a "nazi".

Yeah but you're still intrinsically biased. I get that you might be worried about crime, but if black people are too retarded to do anything else but be hunter-gatherers in the savannah in Africa, it shouldn't matter to you.

>posting biased NOT neo-nazi tier shit that admits its not academic nor peer reviewed and also outright states that it is seeking to push a certain political goal as proof

Propping them up has a cost; I cost I don't want to pay.

>islam was more enlightened than christianity because they never had an inquisition
This is your mind on liberalism

Again, how is any of that translate in your mind to "Neo-Nazi"

lol Unz is a fucking retard self-hating Jew. His methodology of counting who's Jewish was based on having a "Jewish-sounding" last name, completing ignoring the history the problems associated with that (ie Stein -> Stone etc) and his piece on Jewish nepotism in higher education has been debunked elsewhere. It's hilarious how white nationalists will say "stupid blacks whites are just more successful because of muh IQ" and then when someone says the same thing relative to Jews they go apeshit and find a million and one ways to poke holes in the theory.

I can't back that up unfortunately, I can't remember where I read it.

IIRC is something around 85 in Iran, which goes up in Western environments

Where was this debunked?

>I-Im not a nazi! Im just a race realist who believes in the same racial pseudo science as them!
Also, irregardless, your source is based wing nut horseshit

andrewgelman.com/2013/02/12/that-claim-that-harvard-admissions-discriminate-in-favor-of-jews-after-checking-the-statistics-maybe-not/

You realize that the generation of people who fought the Nazis believed the things you're now calling "Nazi", right?

you realize you are desperately trying to move the goalpost after you bullshit meme source was called out, right?

>ctrl f "ass"
>0 results
ass

I dont get it....

What goalposts am I moving? Your objection to the source is that it's "Neo-Nazi"; its clearly not and to show how its not I'm deconstructing your understanding of what is and what isn't "Neo-Nazi".

>Your objection to the source is that it's "Neo-Nazi"
your source is horribly biased, non academic, non peer reviewed hackery. Thats my objection. GG

Okay, I'm willing to give the benefit of the doubt here and posit that it could be innocuous.

I can't use this as proof. However, I would caution you in leading yourself to think that this article entirely deconstructs the data and proves the contrapositive.

No your objection was specifically that it was "Neo-Nazi".

You don't have a clear grasp of what that term means and yet you're throwing it around like people can't tell the difference. The mis-use of the term actually creates space for Neo-Nazism which I would agree is actually irrational.

No ones claiming academia discriminated against Jews today

Jews themselves actually try to re-use the Jewish quota argument

projects.iq.harvard.edu/expose/book/cloak-meritocracy-harvard’s-“new-plan”-admissions-and-“jewish-problem

>No your objection was specifically that it was "Neo-Nazi".
No, it was that it was biased nonacademic, non peer reviewed hakery meant to push forward their stated political goal. your source is laughable garbage and now you are trying to draw me into an argument over semantics in the desperate hopes no one notices this

This wasn't you?

>t-they arent neo-nazis! just race realist!
You do realize that no one is fooled by this bullshit at all, and that you are still trying to argue over semantics to distract from the fact that your source was biased pseudo-scientific bullshit, right?

Well first of all I never even self-described as a race-realist or described it as race-realist.

My claim in particular is that it was not "Neo-Nazi" which is demonstrable.

If you think it isn't and try to prove it, you will quickly embarrass yourself - something which you already know.

*it is

user, no one gives a shit. you posted a shitty blog that admits it isnt academic or peer reviewed as evidence of your neo-nazi race realist crap. Then you got called out and are desperately trying to distract from this. Post either an actual source for your claim or just stop posting all together

Calling something "Neo-Nazi" and being unable to substantiate it is not being called out, its more like dealing with a brainlet.

Here is a source

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886912004047

>thealternativehypothesis.org/index.php/2016/04/15/maoa-race-and-crime/

How long before Maoa-R2 goes the way of Maoa goes the way of Supermales?

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278584601002883