Weekly reminder that race is a factor in intelligence

Weekly reminder that race is a factor in intelligence

Other urls found in this thread:

nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1435.html
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982205002095
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369848613000460
science.sciencemag.org/content/298/5602/2381.full
nature.com/index.html?file=/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1455.html
pnas.org/content/94/9/4516.full
genome.cshlp.org/content/14/9/1679.full
nature.com/nature/journal/v526/n7571/full/nature15393.html
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/tan.12165/abstract
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2271140/
sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929707610015
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encephalization_quotient
genographic.nationalgeographic.com/neanderthal/
newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2008/09/09/neanderthal/
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1559732/
academic.oup.com/mbe/article-lookup/doi/10.1093/molbev/msr024
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21266489
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1552043/
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11253074
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1193729/pdf/466.pdf
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1209419/pdf/477.pdf
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11396999
nytimes.com/2010/12/23/science/23ancestor.html?hp
nature.com/news/2011/110922/full/news.2011.551.html
cnn.com/2013/12/09/health/oldest-human-dna/
scientificamerican.com/article/denisovan-genome/
science.sciencemag.org/content/355/6328/969
twitter.com/AnonBabble

...

...

We don't need a reminder just look at the crime statistics. Black peopled killed more than Asian people.

funnily enough, neither of these are wrong

>inb4 "B-but muh poverty"

I said Asians. Are you literally blind and being narrated to by your brother? I SAID ASIANS. How convenient that they're left out your graph. Face it Asians have the highest IQ.

This. White people are like black people to asians

Yeah but Asians tend to pretty much stay together and mind their own business
The IQ difference between whites and asians is negligible whereas the gap between whites and blacks is 12-15 points. Whites actually outscore asians in every subject but math

because of this its harder to get into competitive schools. fucking racist fucks. some white kid with a 3.4 and the same extra curriculars and a fucking essay with fucking spelling mistakes gets into Berkeley over an asian with a 3.9 and a spotless essay. That asian is even more social than the autistic white fuck who incorrectly claimed to be 1/8th Cherokee. fucking racist fucks FUCKING FUCK FUCK LIFE KILL MYSELF FUCK

weekly reminder that your accomplishments are only your own and taking pride in anyone else's accomplishments makes your a tryhard brainlet

>Implying negroes have any

I have seen these all posted in various amounts, and never have been refuted. Ball is in your court.

nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1435.html

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982205002095

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369848613000460

science.sciencemag.org/content/298/5602/2381.full

nature.com/index.html?file=/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1455.html

pnas.org/content/94/9/4516.full

genome.cshlp.org/content/14/9/1679.full

nature.com/nature/journal/v526/n7571/full/nature15393.html

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/tan.12165/abstract

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2271140/

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929707610015

Sucks eh? Why dont you use your anger to attack (((them)))

>Geography predicts neutral genetic diversity of human populations

That doesn't take into account the fact that the ancestors of Europeans and Asians interbred with Neanderthals, who had larger cranial cavities. This would have driven hybrid vigor in Eurasians while Africans stagnated

Because traditional concepts of race are in turn correlated with geography, it is inaccurate to state that race is "biologically meaningless." On the other hand, because they have been only partially isolated, human populations are seldom demarcated by precise genetic boundaries. Substantial overlap can therefore occur between populations, invalidating the concept that populations (or races) are discrete types.

did you read it or skim for bait worthy tidbits for you to make a strawman argument with?

git gud

But Neanthertals only lived in Europe and the Middle East

>On the other hand, because they have been only partially isolated

Not really, there are zero genetic markers in sub-Saharan Africans. You posted a Gish Gallop of material as opposed to concentrating on one area. I addressed one point
And?

They are all describing the same thing. Race is not an accurate categorization of human beings due to excessive overlap and inability to separate them into discrete categories.

Thus making generalizations on groups that dont have any discrete consistency between them is useless and says nothing about the individuals or the nonexistent discrete groups.

Race isnt a thing, sorry.

But you're ignoring the huge demarcation I just pointed out. You have a population whose ancestors bred out an entire sub-species of hominids.

That's a pretty good line.

You're just making loose claims with no evidence..

Post some research. I would genuinely like to consider it, but i take multiple people with physical evidence and degrees over a one liner from somone online that doesnt back it up.

Anything that confirms that only those groups interbred and that cranial size is related to intelligence in any way.


And i am purely spit balling, i could be wrong, but from what i know neanderthals were less intelligent. So there is your evidence that bigger cranial cavities do nothing to make people smarter.

> redpanels.com
Weekly reminder that it's summer.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encephalization_quotient

genographic.nationalgeographic.com/neanderthal/

newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/2008/09/09/neanderthal/

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1559732/

Neanderthals were at least as intelligent as humans at the time. They had art, music and performed funeral ceremonies.

Well you also mentioned asians.

True, they have more Neanderthal DNA and higher IQs on average. It's not a coincidence

Wrong.

>Genetics is probably a factor in intelligence, together with environment and other stuff (in particular, certain genes may be conductive towards intelligence in certain environments and non-conductive in others).
>It seems that genetics is not really a factor in race (race determination seems to rely more on specific physical characteristics, mannerisms, cultural cues, etc..).

>Changing your stance two times in three sentences

Welcome to sci

They have been discussed in these threads before. You can find it in the archive.

Essentially they don't say what you think they're saying and you're confounding a large number of things in order to jump to a false conclusion. The science is correct, your understanding of it is not (no need to refute).

>thinks race = intelligence
>thinks social science = science
lol, kill yourself or go back to your containment board, retard.

>posting right wing science denialist comics on a science anime website

fantastic meme

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1559732/
>Hybrid vigor, or heterosis, is the increase in stature, biomass, and fertility

Nothing to do with race or intelligence. And the article overall indicates that this would be an interesting thing to research, not that anyone has gotten any physical results related to it except for plants. And applying research of plants to humans is a big stretch.


The rest are two pop-sci articles that have no references and a wiki page that itself has links that oppose the viewpoint that encephalization point is the most important or even remotely relevant factor to intelligence. And more importantly all the research that is linked in the wiki page has absolutely no evidence regarding humans.

I am genuinely curious have an invalidity of race doesnt apply to a claim related to race.

What do you think i am assuming them to mean and what do they really mean?

And ill check the archive.

>some people will unironically think this is justification for climate change denial

Translation

>I'm going to scrape and claw to find a way to ignore everything presented rather than actually consider it as my prior intellectual dishonesty would have led people to believe

How do you mean?

I presented valid counter arguments to every article, and all i got from my articles was a one-liner responding to one part of one article..

The earth goes through heating and cooling cycles independant of humans, dumbass.

Stay mad, dog eaters.

No you didn't. You grazed over the link regarding heterosis, playing weasel words with it then dismissed the others with genetic fallacies

>independant
>,dumbass

>being a grammar nazi
>in the year of our lord 2017

that is the only one i addressed seriously..

>Nothing to do with race or intelligence. And the article overall indicates that this would be an interesting thing to research, not that anyone has gotten any physical results related to it except for plants. And applying research of plants to humans is a big stretch.

My bad, I thought you were posting "research papers in support of race existing".

/pol/ users have done that in the past despite the papers they take the time to link actually tearing apart their argument (unfortunately it seems that /pol/esmokers are often incapable of understanding even just the abstracts of the papers they link).

Those papers do in fact point out that race is basically garbage theory from a pre-genetics era of science.

>White people have the most neanderthal DNA meme.

See picture from a paper published in molecular biology and evolution:
academic.oup.com/mbe/article-lookup/doi/10.1093/molbev/msr024
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21266489

It's literally the complete opposite you delusional tard. A minority with the same qualifications as a white person is more likely to get into a specific university because of Affirmative Action.

>Costanza memes
>Anno Domini MMXVII

Heterosis, or outbreeding, is known to improve genetic stock. That would include but not be limited to intellect

If blacks are equal then why, when they're left to their own devices, do they revert to the stone age?

>"In plants"->"dominance model" ->"It postulates" ->" this concept is reasonable."

ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1552043/

The references which the author provides context for the article:
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11253074 (corn)
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1552043/ (tomatoes)
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1193729/pdf/466.pdf (peas, does not say anything about animals except for one sentence in intro and conclusion, 1917)
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1209419/pdf/477.pdf (sound math, purely hypothesis, 1948)
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11396999 (multicellular eukaryotes)

Heterosis has played an important role in AGRICULTURAL practices. Many CROPS are planted as hybrids to increase yield over open POLLINATED varieties. Also, as noted, hybrid vigor plays an important role in evolution. The new results will provide grist for the mill of further research into the genetic and molecular basis of this important biological problem.

This has actually been fun.

No, not in plants.

Outbreeding is literally the opposite of inbreeding, in plants AND animals

Is it truly controversial to suggest that ethnic populations, separated by tens of thousands of years, have evolved differently, thus leading to nonidentical IQ distributions among these various ethnic populations?

Yep, not going with the status quo makes you a dirty bigot

Weekly reminder that OP is a faggot

But neanderthals didnt live there

Is that factoring in Denisovans and "Hominid X?" Because last I checked Abos have a very large amount of Denisovan (which in turn means Hominid X) DNA present, moreso than than any other group, save for Papuans and associated islanders.

Why would that be? There is evolutionary pressure for intelligence in every society.

>IQ is a joke amongst psychologists
>psychology is a meme

>Excavations in eastern Asia are yielding information on human evolution and migration. Li et al. analyzed two fossil human skulls from central China, dated to 100,000 to 130,000 years ago. The crania elucidate the pattern of human morphological evolution in eastern Eurasia. Some features are ancestral and similar to those of earlier eastern Eurasian humans, some are derived and shared with contemporaneous or later humans elsewhere, and some are closer to those of Neandertals. The analysis illuminates shared long-term trends in human adaptive biology and suggests the existence of interconnections between populations across Eurasia during the later Pleistocene.

Neanderthals lived in Europe and asian ancestors passed through Europe
Not necessarily. They have made do for millennia with sticks and huts

So some neamderthals lived there? But how do asians have the highest percentage?

But you have to also consider the Papuans and associated islanders may have had more Denisovan influence, but Baitloreans (which in turn means Hominid Z) DNA present, moreso than Abos

So did every other human. Civilization is a luxury.

link or just greentext?

So middle easterners got double the amount?

Yeah but most of them moved past it.

Do you think Europeans just got to Europe and there were farms and infrastructure?

>Weekly reminder that race is a factor in intelligence
Daily reminder that correlation is not causation.
Hourly reminder that /pol/ needs to stay in /pol/.

How do you think correlation and causation work?

Enough correlation = causation.

You have one race that invariably lives in shit. They can't even be gifted civilization and keep it up.

Well a large bunch if European ancestors are middle eastern farmers who brought agriculture with them so in a way yes

No, not in any way was farming or infrastructure there before people got there

>How do you think correlation and causation work?
>Enough correlation = causation.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
Fucking No.

Well yeah no shit there werent farms already built there. But agriculture was introduced to europe from the middle east alongside other things. And there were people living in europe at that time

It's controversial because we didn't evolve differently. Genetically we are all identical, there is more genetic variation within groups than between them. You could have more in common genetically with someone in Sub Saharan Africa, than your next door neighbor

Now that's probably bullshit, but I was just noting that they had _some_ presence in the area.

Touchy, ain'tcha.
>Analysis of the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) of the finger bone showed it to be genetically distinct from the mtDNAs of Neanderthals and modern humans. Subsequent study of the nuclear genome from this specimen suggests that Denisovans shared a common origin with Neanderthals, that they ranged from Siberia to Southeast Asia, and that they lived among and interbred with the ancestors of some modern humans, with about 3% to 5% of the DNA of Melanesians and Aboriginal Australians deriving from Denisovans.
nytimes.com/2010/12/23/science/23ancestor.html?hp
nature.com/news/2011/110922/full/news.2011.551.html
cnn.com/2013/12/09/health/oldest-human-dna/
scientificamerican.com/article/denisovan-genome/

science.sciencemag.org/content/355/6328/969

Holy shit you're right.

99% of people who breath air die
99% of people who drink water die
100% of people who live, die

I think we have stumbled onto something, girls.

Yes, that's how it works

I honestly can't tell if you're just baiting, or if this is actually the level of scientific understanding /pol/shitters have.
The latter would explain a lot.

If humans were just most morphologically similar to chimps with no other homology lining up as such, that would be a correlation that does not equal causation.

But as it stands every single field correlates to chimps being the most closely related primate to humans.

At no point in human history have people been separated.

Except for the last 65,000 years when everyone has been diverging away from sub-Saharan Africans while they live in shit

Thought it was twice that long.

>But as it stands every single field correlates to chimps being the most closely related primate to humans.
That's still not enough. The idea that humans and chimps are closely related also requires an underlying biological understanding of how species change and adapt (evolution). It's not enough to say "these two things are similar" or "these two things happen together", you need to be able to construct a theoretical model that actually connects them and explains WHY they're connected.

Correlation isn't causation.

First time in a while I've genuinely laughed out loud while reading /pol/

We've already debunked all the renorming of cherrypicked IQ studies you call "scientific evidence"
back to pol now.

South pacific migration is wrong. Pacific islanders came from Taiwan, not New Guinea. They look nothing like the fuzzy-wuzzies from New Guinea.

But there were several migrations from africa to the rest of the world in that time. There were also some genetic bottleneck events which further similiarize the human populations

Look at Aborigenes. They were literally a stone age civilization before the anglos came.

I already have in this very thread regarding the intellectual disparity between the races. Divergence and outbreeding

>Implying /pol/tards can comprehend proof by contradiction
Remember your audience. You're talking to edgy teenagers, the opioid addicted sons of coal miners, and NEETs

I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you’re referring to as race, is in fact, culture/ethnicity, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, ethnicity plus culture. Race is not an unique cultural group unto itself, but rather a large group of cultures and ethnicities stereotyped into a single unholy entity. Many users of the race exists mindset run a modified version of the culture + ethnicity mindset every day, without realizing it.

Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of intelligence factoring OP used uses wide averaging over groups of widely varying diversity, depending on whether the choice of separation is by race or culture plus ethnicity

...

...

That's a huge stretch.
>known to improve genetic stock
Not all of the time, applies almost entirely to plants, and "improve" is a subjective and unscientific way to refer to genes.
>That would include but not be limited to intellect
How so? Has heterosis ever been shown to impact intellect?

Take your junk science out of here. If you're not trolling, you're cherrypicking and generalizing from research that does not support your ideas.

No, it's not, but the evidence does not support that, that's why it has at this time been abandoned by most experts. Very few ethnic populations were truly isolated, there has been nowhere near enough time for significant evolution to occur, and there is equal pressure for intelligence in every population. That's why its junk science.

I agree. I'm Ashkenazi, and every race, including Whites, are fucking braindead compared to us.

No. Whites are not docked nearly as much as East Asians are, when it comes to Affirmative Action. This is because adcoms know about their genetically superior brains.

It's fucking disgusting.

>implying the scientific consensus isn't "who gives a shit"
Wow, sub-SD deviations in average IQ among races when adjusting for income. It's a curiosity, but only that. Besides, if you weren't a brainlet you'd take pride in your own accomplishments, rather than the average IQ of your own race.

/pol/ pls go. how insecure do you have to be to come here and to other board with this nonsense. If anything you're the niggers running a muck, and looking like idiots

IQ is not linear. 5 pts avg difference is a ton

>running a muck
retarded illiterate spotted.

One day they gonna do a U.N. ruling on talking shit about IQ and race and you all gonna be put away or hopefully worse. This shit will die or you will, one of the two.

This

Veeky Forums has a surprising number of bluepilled posters when it comes to race. Wondering if this is due to the higher percentage of Jews and Asians here (who are both liberal) or some other factor.

...