Africa's IQ

In areas like africa where there is mostly jungle and desert, there arent a lot of options for agriculture or domestication of animals for useful purposes. In the desert you are pretty much limited to camels, which suck at doing work, other than transport, and being food. Desert is also a shit climate to grow anything in. Without modern technology it is almost impossible for humans to thrive there. That leaves them with the option of living in the jungle, which has zero options for domesticated work animals, and very few options for agriculture. What the jungle does offer is food and water literally everywhere. You dont even need agriculture because you can walk in any direction and find food easily. The only problem with the jungle is it has apex predators like lions, and jaguar. The climate is warm enough to be naked in year round so there are almost zero problems that need solving to thrive in the jungle. The only attribute you need to survive, and pass your genes on, is that you need to be faster than the guy who becomes jaguar food. So thats what evolution selected for, athletic morons. Its a similar situation with native americans, although they had agriculture, they didnt have big strong DOMESTICATABLE (that is a key word here, bison dont make good pets) animals to do the heavy lifting for them so agriculture never advanced very far. Europe had problems that needed to be solved (cold climate, need shelter and food for the winter), and the tools to solve them (farmable land, large working animals). So the most successful way to survive and pass on your genes in Europe was to be smart and utilize the tools given to you to solve the problems that nature threw at you. So thats what evolution selected for. Out of shape white people who were smart enough to enslave animals to do their work. You see what i did there?

/thread

WHY ARE /POL/ THREADS NOT A BANNABLE OFFENSE.

FUCK OFF BACK TO YOUR CIRCLE JERK.

There is no need for violence. I know it is easy to condemn the peoples of sub Saharan Africa, but you must realize it was us who armed them and enabled them to carry out a lot of the despicable acts we see in the news. We should have simply left the jungles alone after exploring and mapping the terrain, allowing further access thereafter for strictly scientific and very minimal industrial purposes.

This thread ia getting decent responses. Fuck off to tumbler you fucking triggered cubt.

>bison don't make good pets

Neither did Aurochs. Neither did wolves.

That's the point of domestication retard.

SJWtards who use the made up term /pol/something deserve to be permabanned. You are 100% percent of the problem for all the scientific threads going to shit.

I think he was arguing African wildlife is impossible, it at least much more difficult to domesticate. He probably read jarred diamond.

In countries like Sudan it's expensive to get even an elementary education, none of it is free, and given the extreme poverty only the wealthy can get educated.I believe this is why the average IQ is so low in Sudan and a majority of African nations. I was born in Sudan, luckily my family decided to come to Canada so me and my siblings could get an education.

>IQ is related to education.
I haven't seen any school giving IQ classes or IQ lectures anywhere in the world...

Most of what IQ tests determine is not education based but problem-solving/memory/visualization/learning based

Do you think people have raw intelligence limited at birth? And in China they do give those sort of classes.

That requires experience with encountering those problem and a good basis in school experience.

IQ measures your ability to problem solve, recognize patterns, and your logic and reasoning skills, which is something that education improves. I do believe that some people may have better problem solving or pattern recognition skills naturally than others, but these skills can be trained in the same way your muscles can, and this is what education is meant to do. For example, if someone struggles to comprehend a concept in a certain subject, they can practice this till they fully comprehend it.

and many of those differences are minor as fuck, aren't, exclusive to one race or extremely hard to determine.

Many factors limit your intelligence including genetics. Genetics determine the intelligence of next generations, thus a low IQ population. And due to their low IQs they can't utilize the land they live in and waste everything (eg: Africa, Middle east) and high IQ people stop throwing the bricks at each other and start building cities out of them(eg; Asia, Europe)

It's quite a simple logic to follow.

this is the stupidest post ive seen for awhile. expect better from Veeky Forums.

again this charade shows why natural selection is so good at explaining the origin of species yet does not in the slightest explain the emergence of any particular phenotype with any sort of consistency.

It's also quite simple and logical to follow that a shitty diet and poor conditions lowers IQ. They aren't mutually exclusive.

yeah but IQ tests were invented by a guy who wanted to find a common factor that could explain why kids who do well at school in one subject do well in another, so it is relevant to education.

>shitty diet and poor conditions
And who is responsible for those? Do you think the animal farms and vegetable farms in asia and europe just fell from the sky without people using their heads?

and someone with a low IQ would fall for the trap of making massive reductions and generalizations on an extremely complicated topic and further make assumptions which are not even warranted yet by any data on earth.

0/10

It was far easier for Europeans to construct agriculture and domestication giveb theuie conditions so in slne sense it did fall from sky for them

They exclusively test the wealthiest cities and use only those results.

Leave this place and never return. The first farmers were from Asia Minor and it transmitted from there to the East and West.

If I read through your brain stroke there correctly, I think you said it fell from the sky for the people who successfully made it happen.
I don't think anyone will take your post seriously after this desperate bullshit rationalization.

I hate how this map looks exactly like a racist sees the world

>lol those robotic chinks and japs with high IQs as ever
>The white american and European race strong!
>Those sandniggers at the middle as expected
>Those disgusting niggers at the bottom

WHY?

I was referring to
It may be an oversimplification, but you are denying any sort of environmental context in your arguments and basically saying muh genetics without considering that no proper scientists has really an absolute definition of intelligence and could link gentic abd epigenetic factors as a whole explanation of what we consider intelligent behavior.

Also Asia minor is not the fucking Congo you illiterate retard. The fertile crecent is in that region.

I love how this map looks exactly like the distribution of brainlets who cry about racism. The more red you go, the more primitive apes you find that blame their problems onto everyone else.

Africa is far more suitable for farming and anywhere in northern Europe or Russia. You have lands slowly transitioning from deserts to fucking jungle rainforests that you can find a sweet spot to do your farming. Whereas farming in most places in the north and Europe has a lifespan of 6 weeks until winter kills all your food and veggies.

It's clear that you haven't thought through your environmental argument since it's actually proving you wrong.

hes saying it depends on environment

>all these posts and no one brings up bottlenecks and founder population.

Seriously how are you anons this retarded to not bring this up? It is the main reason why almost everyone else outside Africa has a higher IQ average and why their gene diversity is lower.

Not him, but you think deserts and rainforests constitute fertile land for farming and agriculture? Did you even look up the Fertile Crescent like the other user told you to? The rise of civilization didn't happen because the fertile crescent was full of deserts and rainforests, it happened because it was an arid land full of rivers, the best kind of crops to farm, animals prone to taming and domestication that could plow the land to farm more effectively and a climate that doesn't boil you alive. Civilization didn't start in Europe with its "less suitable" farming conditions, it started from the middle east and radiated towards Europe from the mediterranean basin.

why does that result in higher IQ?

>You have lands slowly transitioning from deserts to fucking jungle rainforests that you can find a sweet spot to do your farming

Let me know when you grasp an elementary level of reading comprehension.

>Neither did wolves.
We didn't domesticate wolves, we formed bonds with the species of wild dog that was already following out camps and eating our garbage. This "great white hunter, bending the wilds to his whim" meme is not helping anyone.

It only would if everything were purely genetic and the people who got the Smart Mutation left Africa.

Basically this guy got a C in general genetics

thats what i was thinking lool

Yea, I think most people are aware that northern Africa developed almost on par with Europe. But I think everyone is talking about subsahariana civilizations.

africa has nothing
that is its biggest asset in the geopolitical war.

since other countries dont look for strategic advantage in africa,
africa doesnt realy need to compete.
because of this, there is no propper education.
resulting in the aformentioned sub-monkey tier IQ

I think he's saying that the small population of people that left had a higher IQ than the general population of Africa.
Such a thing is almost impossible to know with current technology though. We can't subject a long-dead population to IQ tests, so until such time as we have a better picture of how genes code for intelligence skills, and which genes they are, it's just speculation. As far as I've seen, right now, the proof for the idea of a "genetic basis" for IQ is just about heritability, while no actual genes have been identified.

Africans constantly massacred each other over turf wars, practiced shamanizm and eat some dead animal parts thinking they have magical powers. I thought that would somewhat help with natural selection but it seems only the most primitive ones survived unfortunately.

None of these, including the intentionally vague "transition" lands between desert and rainforest constitute good farming and agricultural regions. I guess you ignored the whole rest of my post that explains when a region is considered "fertile", which, surprise surprise, doesn't rely just on what type of land we are referring to. Please refrain from posting if you aren't willing to do rudimentary research on a topic. The kind user even linked you to the fertile crescent and you didn't even bother to read that, I don't know what I was thinking in responding to you seriously.

Let us know when you've managed to attain a comprehension of world history and technologies that's more sophisticated than a game of Sid Meier's Civiliztion.

What if I told you Koko the gorilla was smarter than the average black person?

Based on that pic, Koko could very well be smarter than many average Europeans as well.

i just feel theres literally no reason to make any of those assumptions that would mean the bottleneck thing would work.

>There were no fertile lands in whole of Africa
the quality of your bullshit is so weak that I'm having hard time deciding if you're trolling right now.
seriously, learn to read first. it's not that difficult.

Maybe in your dreams, but not according to the IQ statistics. Sorry.

vague responses and insults are easy to do, user

This isn't /pol/ however, discussion here means having a higher standard than throwing shit at each other because of their flag. Either adapt or don't post.

Then why is the graph about countries and not races?

eh, that pic says that koko could have an IQ of 70-95, a range that includes European countries' averages. Just sayin'

>bringing up pol boogeyman when you're out of shitposts
why am I not surprised? it was obvious where you're coming from.
You've failed to come up with a single counter-argument even after your environment theory was debunked. Please leave with your desperate rationalizations with zero scientific context. You don't belong here.

i feel like also africa had less access to good quality staple food to grow which could be stored for a long time. east asia had rice, near east had grain and shit

your theories are really bad though.

>Italy highest in West

Those farming lands that Africans just got around to make use of are not theoretical user. Please learn what theory means as well.

Pathetically weak sauce with a topping of desperation. You're exposing your pol buddies pretty badly in this episode.

USA IQ around 95. Koko's IQ 70-95. Are you living in another man dream?

>US is a 100% white country

Take your meds. You seem to have a lower IQ than Koko.

>pathetic
>weak
>pol exposed !'!!!!11!
>im happy with being retarded

That was easy. Next question?

+1

Now go back and report to HQ. You have a new crisis brewing, you won't have the time to post here any longer anyway.

bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-37892138

You can't give IQ tests to something incapable of speaking.

You're wrong.

Iodine-deficiency and other conditions resulting from poor nutrition.

Just because you're a constantly humiliated minority in /pol/, doesn't mean you don't belong to there you dumb mouthbreathing SJWtard.
Now back to

No you.
But seriously IQ test is not designed for non humans. Some other intelligence test might be used but there's a lot of skepticism if they measure anything at all. Not to mention that a gorilla with a 70 IQ strains imagination.

kek, wat

>But seriously IQ test is not designed for non humans.

Darwin would disagree.

>The difference in mind between man and the higher animals, great as it is, certainly is one of degree and not of kind.

Fuck off children. This is a board for discussing science and math. If you want to complain about /pol/, take it to /b/.

Don't bother replying to this post, I won't waste my time to answer.

>860▶
>

you shouldnt be here, youre clearly not interested in truth

>I won't waste my time to answer.
yes you will :^)

I'm positive that the tests Koko got were infant IQ tests. The resulting IQ score hardly has any significance in drawing conclusions about us if that's the case.

Also Koko can communicate decently with human sign language which is much more impressive than scoring on par with unintelligent humans on an IQ test, so being doubtful of the latter doesn't make much sense. 70 is a lower bound estimate, it's probably higher than that.

Because Niggers.

Intelligence quotient is designed to be independent of education. Furthermore, many sub-Saharan Africans for decades have fine access to food, be it through aid or through hunting.

Stop making excuses.

Oh fuck off Jared, Africa has the most fertile soils in the world. Zimbabwe used to provide food for the whole continent and export elsewhere too.

im still sceptical.

to be fair koko probably gets looked after, more attention and enrichment than humans in some of the worse conditions in the world

Pic related.

How often have you encountered progressive matrices in school?

>that vid
Jesus christ

Was Darwin even alive when IQ tests where designed?
What does he have to do with anything?
There is skepticism to Koko's ability to use sign language. To me it looks like a lot of wishful thinking from his handlers.

IQ just tests pattern recognition and abstract thinking. It doesn't matter if you live in New York or were raised by lions in the savannah.

No Koko pretty much is the interpreters filling in the blanks. Half the time she's asking for food or smokes.

and having fine access to food is the only thing that affects IQ.

IQ cant be independent of education if intelligence isnt independent of education.

of course it does, are you retarded? You think living conditions and practice in problem solving and pattern recognition don't matter in IQ results? The practical difference is huge.

The Irish, the French, the Ukrainians, and the English working class (and many many more) all lived in hideous poverty for ages, yet these conditions didn't produce moronic subhumans.

>What does he have to do with anything?

Darwin believed the difference between humans and higher animals was one of degree, not kind. That's an argument against the claim IQ tests are invalid for non-humans because of some imagined difference in how they think compared to how we think.

it's reality

and no, the high asian IQ is not to be derided, it is to be celebrated

>You think living conditions and practice in problem solving and pattern recognition don't matter in IQ results?

IQ tests are explicitly designed for those things to not matter. If they did matter, IQ testing would be invalid. Its validity is premised in part on its ability to assess intelligence independent of culture.

Yes, animals have different degrees of intelligence, that's obvious. The point is that no one has found a reliable way of measuring the differences quantifiably, for non-humans. IQ test refers to a specific kind of test that animals are incapable of taking.

First of all, hideous poverty is better than Africa's tribal stage, it's not even close. Second of all, yes, these conditions did produce moronic subhumans, who do you think brings down the average IQ of a country, the educated middle class people living in the city and going to university or the commonly ridiculed for their low intelligence uneducated redneck workers?

You're still not understanding what that statement means. There is no difference in kind between humans and higher animals for intelligence, only one of degree. Claiming you can't assess intelligence in animals means you believe there's a difference in kind.