Morphological differences have arisen between different populations of humans

>wiggers
>white nigger

So you agree that the actitude of so called "niggers" is cultural and is therefore passed down? So you agree that the reason blacks show that behavior is because of previous opression which then turned into a culture which was then passed down to their kids, who then passed it down to their kids, who then passed it down to their kids, and so on. Which then implies that a change in black culture triggered by reparations will be the solution to all the problems in the black community?

Oh, you sure are red pilled my man. You finally understand! So, how high should the white tax be my friend?

Thomas sowell opinion on niggers.

the nigger culture was a hidden job that the russians (cultural marxists) invented to destroy the USA.

newfag.

>since people always say that it's been scientifically proven that there's no mental difference between the races
Argue with those idiots then. On /pol/. Where this thread belongs.

Well, I am no historian and I don't mean to find the original source the opression black people felt. What is true is that, whoever the opressors were, they were white. Therefore, reparations must come from white people who now benefit from the benefits their ancestors reaped on the backs of working black people.

Again, I am glad we agree on this point. How high should the white tax be? I think 50% is a good start.

I have spend time reading about blacks history.
your mockery is simply a non honest interest in them.

fuck off to pol, m8.

They simply need to be left alone.

No, this is a thread about biological differences between races, it belongs here

>biological differences
It's literally not. How about you learn a bit about science before shitting up the board?
Lurk more, dumb /pol/ poster.

I already told you.
culture and poverty is a bigger cause of nigger behaviour than race.

Surely biology could affect traits usually associated with psychology?

I'm just saying the effects could be there, not that we know what they are.

they would be overriden by culture in any case.

What makes you say that?

I don't know if culture can give someone 30 points of IQ.

white people on the first test of IQ (in 1910 or something) would had scored 70 points if they would had used a modern test.

look up the flynn effect.

reason.com/blog/2012/12/13/american-iqs-in-1900-averaged-67-points

What would black people have scored?

we don't know what's the real limit of black people.

is been proven that poverty hinders IQ.

so we don't know.

yes.

the IQ of someone can be impacted with
>culture
>nutrition of the mother while pregnant
>nutrition as an infant
>nutrition growing up to an adult
>exercise
>influence (what stupid shit does your kid watch?)
>discipline (must be thought by parents)
>mother and father figures growing up

even small things like hobbies can increase or decrease your IQ.

this should be common sense by know, m8

Leave. I don't like you.

Why is it that race is a better predictor of IQ than poverty?

flynn effect.

we just don't know.

>neurology is a science not psychology
You meme scientists are almost as bad as /pol/. Neurology is medicine ya dolt. You are thinking of cognitive neuroscience.
You have confused psychology for psychiatry as well.
>2016 and being a hardline empiricist Truth can be rationally derived you kno.

Also. This bait has nothing to do with psychology. Just the fact that humans have symbolic minds (psyche)
>Next we're going to have threads on Veeky Forums about what makes you sad because "oh how you become sad is because biology :^)" and how niggers make you angry.
Hold up a minute. Is this bait? Reported.

All I'm saying is that it's POSSIBLE that the cause could be biological.

This statement alone will make somebody a social pariah

IQ isn't 100% genetical.

No one is saying this.

ok, so what if there are differences? why should that matter regarding how we treat people?

it doesn't.
what does it when you base your conclusions on dodgy research, and use it to justify discrimination. a lot of self professed "race realists" (not even mentioning how fuzzy "race" is) squirm when east asians and ashkenazi jews come across as more intelligent that whites.

Just stop... constantly raiding Veeky Forums will not change reality.

Science is not a list of facts you "debunk." It's a process whereby we try to refute falsifiable predictions in order to find the ones that are true, or as close to true as we know.

Basically the only fallback you have is "science is a conspiracy and everyone is being paid/manipulated to lie!"

>I'm not saying IQ is 100% genetic

>but we should segregate people based on race on the assumption that it is

It's actually not possible at all. We have measured the genetic variation if humans, and we also know that a trait like IQ probably involves hundreds of genes. There isn't enough genetic variation for a trait like IQ to be caused by differences in genetic variation. Almost all the minor genetic differences we have are only things relating directly to the the environment, like the immune system or skin color

>There isn't enough genetic variation for a trait like IQ to be caused by differences in genetic variation
Can you expand on this?
Also, is there any good research to refute the claims of people who link race with IQ? It's pretty disheartening seeing the stuff they come out with.

Millions and millions of years since we diverged from frogs and we still retain a bunch of thing form that time.

The time it took for us to develop traits to adapt to the locale is a blink in the evolutionary scale.

>the nigger culture was a hidden job that the russians (cultural marxists) invented to destroy the USA.

You really gonna post that bullishit here?

If it were 50% genetic, that would make a case for segregation.

The question is whether genetics are the dominant factor.

Height involves hundreds of genes as well. You're gonna need to provide some sources

It's funny but sad to me to see people like this looking for evidence to fit their preconceptions that we are all equal, and not even realizing their irrationality

>Are humans genetically unequal across the board
yes, get over it.

We are everywhere.

If dubs black people should be considered a separate subspecies

Hahahahahahahaa

Your dubs have no power here. Roll a prime and we may hear you. Roll a carmichael number and your words are our commands.

They take their reparations and spend it on rims and gold necklaces

>Also, is there any good research to refute the claims of people who link race with IQ?
Yes.

There's no way to determine race genetically. If anything, the IQ-race correlations /pol/ likes to throw up suggest that IQ is not significantly determined by genetics.

>There isn't enough genetic variation for a trait like IQ to be caused by differences in genetic variation.

No, what an arbitrary conclusion to come to. The immune system alone can make receptors that recognize over 100 million antigens in the span of 300 genes using genetic recombination and junctional diversity. Saying IQ is impossible to code is ignorant.

>minor genetic differences
They aren't minor. What would you consider a major one, like different organs? That's ridiculous. Blacks do however have an incredibly high instance of an extra muscle that helps in running, I'll let you figure out if it has anything to do with adapting/environment, which brings me to

>relating directly to the the environment
Why wouldn't development of higher IQ be stimulated by a particular environment?

Stop drinking the egalitarian kool-aid.

>IQ is not significantly determined by genetics.

Nonsense, heritability of IQ is quite high (0.7 or so). This applies to IQ differences in general, not merely between races. When it comes to differences between races or ethnicities, factors such as poverty or malnutrition can have strong effects, and may overwhelm genetic effects of race, assuming there are any.

>their preconceptions that we are all equal
Everyone having different abilities doesn't mean that we are not equal. Someone like Stephen Hawking proves that.

There is no chance of blacks ever being on par with whites or asians ever.

Its a simple case of genetic imperialism, there are far more feral retarded blacks than intelligent civilized ones meaning no matter where you are in Africa the feral retard genes WILL ALWAYS BE DOMINANT in the population.

Notice when smart black americans breed they produce civilized children this is impossible back in Africa because the feral retards are instinctively attractive to men or women, black males love stupid black women, and black women love psychotic thuggish black men the most. So the smart negros will always remain a genetic minority till the sun blows up until Africa experiences a climate change that offs the feral retards allowing the civilized negros to become genetically dominant.

The same applies to Black America, notice only the morons are multiplying while the smart ones are slowly going extinct because as niggers gain more power in American cities, African conditions return meaning smart blacks fail to breed as much as the feral ones eventually leading to smart blacks being a very small genetic minority like seen in preslavery Africa.

Yes you heard me you smart blacks reading this, you only exist due to the conditions white people have made.

For the most part, your reasoning is sound, but there really is no need to append bias by saying, 'dats rite smart blak guys, u only smart cuz WHITE MAN!!1' Do yourself a favor: eliminate the implicit white supremacy in your rhetoric and be consistent. Intelligent blacks are intelligent due to conditions allowed by people who aren't feral; the "white" part is simply auxiliary to this point.

No you idiot, I am saying white created the conditions that allow intelligent blacks to multiply without being reduced to a tiny genetic minority like back in Africa.

> Is it unfair to suspect that there may be some psychological differences as well?
Yes. But the real question is, how many times are you going to ask the question?

What does that make of whatever race you are? To be conquered by a bunch of subhumans.

Come on pal. I'm probably more aligned without views than the other guy, but it is conventional knowledge the correlation is .6 TOPS. Where did you find .7?

> white created the conditions that allow intelligent blacks to multiply
Wrong. Read The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America by Richard Rothstein.

Following WWII, the Federal Housing Administration offered low cost, subsidized housing loans to returning veterans - IF they were white.

The deeds specifically said that the houses could be resold ONLY to white people. No blacks. Blacks can serve in wars, die and pay taxes in America, but only whites could reap the benefits.

Once blacks settled in the only places allowed by law (often white owned slums), white zoning boards - at which blacks were not allowed to speak - designated all toxic and industrial sites to be in black neighborhoods.

White neighborhoods appreciated, and whitey reaped all the profits. The blacks? Still stuck in the ghetto.

Blacks do not rise because of whites. They rise in SPITE of whitey's racism. Of course, the truth is a hard pill to swallow. /pol/ would rather believe in muh brain.

>by Richard Rothstein.
Ahahaha yeah I'm going to read that (((book))) right now.

>the implicit white supremacy in your rhetoric
You are literally a redditor. This is lterally, 100%, a post from reddit.

It seems the general consensus among the resonable people on Veeky Forums is:
Jews: Smartest overall
Asians: Best discipline(culture), high IQ low creativity
Whites: 3rd in IQ as far as sheer brain power, more creative than asians, controlled by, and therefore inferior to jews
Indians: Not as smart or creative as whites but dilligent and hardworking
Hispanics: Pretty middle of the road in everything, their culture dictates that its not how smart you are its the life you lead that matters so they don't frequently see exceedingly high levels of success.
Black people: dumb as fuck, good at anything similar to escaping predators in the jungle(see running/sports)

I know some of these are race classifications and some are more based in culture and/or religion(swap whites for caucasian and jews for semites if it rustles your jimmies, you know its all the same shit) and is based on no evidence, but i dare you to tell me that deep down you dont know this is fact.

t. A reasonable caucasian human that doesnt give a fuck about your feelings

> Ahahaha yeah I'm going to read that (((book))) right now.
If you object to the author because his name ends in -stein (Typical /pol/), try Urban Housing Segregation of Minorities in Western Europe and the United States by Elizabeth Huttman, Juliet Saltman, and Wim Blauw.

Or are you too busy masturbating to Mein Kampf?

> consensus among the resonable people
> resonable
At least muh brain managed to spell 'fuck' correctly.

How do you even log in without SOME form of spell check?

You must be a nigger because you didnt comprehend my post at all.

Let me make it simple for you

DUH THE WITE MAN CREATED CONDITIONS IN AMERICA THAT ALLOWED DUH SMART BLACK MAN TO FUCK AND MAKE MORE SMART BLACK MAN UNLIKE AFRICA WHERE DUH SMART BLACK MAN BARELY EXISTS AT ALL.

WITHOUT DUH WITE MAN THE SMART BLACK MAN WOULD BE GETTING TORTURED BY FERAL BLACK MAN TO THIS VERY DAY AS IS THE DESTINY OF ANY SMART PERSON SURROUNDED BY IDIOTS IN A STONE AGE CULTURE.

YA FEEL ME MY NIGGUH.

>They rise
Affirmative Action is great isnt it? Without AA niggers would have nothing in America because no one likes them.

>generalizing creativity by race
Now thats just stupid.

>jews smart
Um no jews would have take over the world 2000 years ago if they were smart, the fact jews cant anything unless they have empathetic pussies like white people to do their dirty work for them shows they arent that smart.

Oh boy dont get me started on these "jews" that look indistinguishable from Europeans either.

Jews are a race of absolute madmen.

What's the latest scientific consensus on the existence of race? I've always thought clines described humanity better than races.

Severe lack of facts in this thread
Let me help out.

under somewhat ok educational conditions genotypic mean sub saharan african IQ is ~90(a figure lower than 100, but still not that low since we also know that 100

Thanks for the graph/link. That's pretty encouraging.
I think we should acknowledge differences but still seek to treat everyone decently and strive for universal improvement.

>more creative than asians
love this meme

I'm not reading 20 pages, where are they getting the 'predicted iq' from?

>flynn effect
africans are learning how to take tests, great

>jews smartest overall
I also find it these IQ studies typically always distinguish between the different ethnicities of Asian (discerning between north east and south Asians, in particular) and Jews (ashkenazi vs sephardic), yet all gentile whites are pooled into one (Irish with English, northern Italian with southern, everyone else!).

Interestingly, the old stereotype of jews was similar to that if Asians: good at working in formal systems but lousy at creating them.

that's because there's no difference between northern and southern italian
and between irish and english

Many argue they actually have higher IQs, or that there is no difference. In fact, Reaction time evidence suggests that the average white in the Victorian era had an IQ 15 points (an entire standard deviation) higher than the average today. This puts them at or higher than the purported Jewish estimate. I would bet that if our culture and popular entertainment didn't push such a degenerate, anti intellectual agenda on the poor, working class and uneducated, our average IQ would be just as high. I believe the same holds true for African Americans too.

>if nigerians could do it now, all of sub saharan africa can do it
No.

>northern Italian with southern
There's a smaller genetic distance between northern and southern italians than between northern and southern germans.

>In fact, Reaction time evidence suggests that the average white in the Victorian era had an IQ 15 points (an entire standard deviation) higher than the average today
No it doesn't. The sample from the victorian age isn't representative of the average person back then.

>There's no way to determine race genetically
...

You're right, it is representative of Caucasians of the Nordic / Germanic type.

What about between ashkenazi and sephardi jews?

the point is there's no IQ difference as well

No, I'm saying it's not representative at all of the average english person back then, the test was taken only by people who were above average.

You sure about that?

I've no idea if there is, I doubt that there is but I'm not aware of any data on the matter.
Probably more than between the groups I mentioned earlier.

I will have to go back and investigate the study myself but if I recall the sampling was sound. Regardless, you could then analogously argue the average east Asian iq is inflated; if you don't solely sample from urban / industrial areas the average is in the 90s (China in particular).

>probably
Whatever helps you sleep at night Shlomo.

>I will have to go back and investigate the study myself but if I recall the sampling was sound.
The data we have on reaction times back in the Victorian time was assembled by Galton, who tested people inside a museum, after having them pay a fee. In other words, the only people who were tested were those who could afford both to go to a museum and to spend extra to be tested. In other words, not the average person back then.
I'm not jewish, nor do I like the jewish archetype. I'm basing the probability on the idea of them mixing with the local population like ashkenazim did, then comparing the distance between the population the two jewish groups bred with.

On east asian IQ, I think there's evidence (studies on early adopted kids) to suggest the white-asian gap might be in significant part genetic.

>I've no idea if there is, I doubt that there is but I'm not aware of any data on the matter.
richard lynn claimed an IQ difference of 10 points between northerners and southerners - he based it on PISA scores (scores that have actually converged in the last few years - by some 40% as of 2013)

here's a blog that contains references to studies done by italian researchers to find out whether there's a difference
i can't post the link for some reason because the system thinks it's spam
anyways
>Naglieri et al. (submitted for publication) studied the differences between the psychometric qualities of the CAS [Cognitive Assessment System] for the Italian and US standardization samples. Although the goal of that study was not to make regional comparisons, they did report that there were no significant differences (F(1, 806)=2.19, p=.11) between the average CAS-Italian Full Scale standard scores (set at a mean of 100 and standard deviation of 15) for students from the northern (M=100.5; SD=13.2), central (M=101.2; SD=11.9), and southern (M=103.1; SD=11.6) regions of Italy. The mean standard scores for the students in the north were only slightly lower than the mean for those in the south (effect size=.21)

lynn's argument was that the further south you go the lower the IQ since north african admixture grows and as you know brown people are inferior, while northern italians are more germanic

Yeah, I know about Lynn's hypotheses, I was only referring to the absence AFAIK of good studies on the matter.

geneticshumanagency.org/ff/on-genes-as-inherent-merit/

yes, intelligence and behavior are different among races.

>There's no way to determine race genetically.
23andme.com/

>Yes
Why?

I don't get posts like this. Is mainstream science too afraid to talk about this subject? It's weird how these "scientists" and "critical thinkers" are so afraid to talk about certain subjects because it makes them feel uncomfortable.