A good friend of mine and his father both have occipital buns. Does it correlate to the fact that they are low IQ white trash? Serious question
A good friend of mine and his father both have occipital buns...
Other urls found in this thread:
smithsonianmag.com
rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org
nature.com
en.wikipedia.org
upload.wikimedia.org
umich.edu
twitter.com
Honestly black people have that shit the most.
So yeah I guess.
Fuck off back to /pol/.
Or maybe it means people teach what they are taught?
Oops, I forgot every individual has a DNA based fate amIrite /pol/?
Occipital buns are a typical neanderthal trait and are associated with higher intelligence usually. Where did you read / see that blacks have it the most? They literally have 0 neanderthal admixture in their genes.
No. I have a prominent mound of bone at the base of my skull (where it spatially meets the cervical atlas) and am not low IQ white trash. Though neither of my parents did / do.
Not sure what causes it nor what it might cluster with in an average case. Probably nothing. I always figured it was some kind of fetal deformation, as my ankles are built a bit strangely as well. I imagine it could (marginally) protect the spine in the case of a blow to the back of the head.
There is no scientific correlation between cranial shape and intelligence. Get a textbook that's newer than the 1880s.
u mum cheated lol
Nah, unlikely. I look, act, and (apparently) think very similarly to my father and that side of the family. My mother is 5'4", my father was 5'7, and I'm 5'6".
Etc.
1. All humans except for a small percent of Sub Saharan Africans have a percent of DNA similarity with neaderthals. NOT ADMIXTURE. There is no solid evidence we gained any gene alleles or coding DNA from them.
Also, neanderthals were more primitive than homo sapiens.
>Also, neanderthals were more primitive than homo sapiens.
No. They were sailing and understood state changes of matter well before humans had even left Africa.
>There is no solid evidence we gained any gene alleles or coding DNA from them.
Also no. The only thing that is known to be very unlikely is that any modern human has their mitochondrial DNA.
...
No.
kek
i hope this isn't drawn to scale
neanderthals had bigger brains than sapiens
smithsonianmag.com
Go back to your containment board, autistic moron
Mostly because they devote a larger proportion of neuronal architecture to muscles / motor control / etc instead of higher cognitive function. After correcting for this, it's smaller
...
how do you even notice that shit?
like how is this an issue at all?
wtf is wrong with us. We need to go outside.
uh oh
somebody let this brainlet on the board
nature.com
stuff like this was common to neanderthals as well as burying their dead
if you look at pic related it will help you understand why france leads the world in both fields medal awards and nobel prizes for literature
en.wikipedia.org
>Tiny brain
>No convolution
>Outperforms old and new world primates in deductive reasoning, memory, and is capable of novel tool creation
Besides, that brain layout and mosaic size is just guessword based on orbit size and what it implies about pupil diameter, and thus projected machinery required for visual processing. Going on this sort of naive heuristic is foolish at best, we know little if anything about the actual neurological function and layout of the neanderthal brain. We assume they and the denisovans weren't substantially different from the mechanics we see at work in ourselves and other primates, but this could be incorrect.
Again, it's guesswork. I also notice your image lumps together frontals and prefrontals, making me question its validity even as projection.
>how do you even notice that shit?
Pretty easily. For me it's a large bony lump on the back of my head to the base of my skull. My parents readily noticed it.
>nature.com
>annular constructions made of broken stalasgmites
WEW LAD
ITS FUCKING NOTHING
In fairness the Caledonian crow has the biggest brain of the birds
>it hurts my feelings so it's over-extrapolation
>a crow in an entirely distinct taxonomic class is somehow a better homolog, because I say so
you're just grasping at straws at this point
Let's take a scientific approach:
>Person 1: Bun: Y. White Trash: Y
>Person 2: Bun: Y. White Trash:Y
So,
P(White trash | Bun)=1
Yes. Scientifically it correlates 100%!
So birth just averages everything? Even behavior? You might act like your father because he actually raised you.
I'm not saying your mum cheated, but still.
No, but being friends with low IQ white trash correlates with being low IQ white trash.
>So birth just averages everything?
I'm just saying there are no traits that are marked outliers, and a lot that directly overlap.
>Even behavior? You might act like your father because he actually raised you.
This goes back to the old nature vs nurture. Can it be clearly said where one ends and the other begins.
One thing is certain though, we're by no means born tabula rasa. And I do think it seems probable genes can bias towards certain behaviors and mindsets. Whether directly or indirectly.
Yep. I've got a bit of a headache and don't care to go into metabolic factors, and proportion of brain devoted to motor control and sensory processing, etc. The direct comparison between primates and crows is much more useful than the more intra approach.
Not worthy of investing the calories to generate a legitimate response. Just know I think you're a dork.
black trash
way to admit your defeat after getting thoroughly BTFO
better luck next time kiddo
Nah.
>lumps together frontals and prefrontals
???
upload.wikimedia.org
umich.edu
I am corrected. I'd always delineated the two, given that what I consider the true "frontals" aren't involved in visual preprocessing and information extraction.