Miscegenation (Race Mixing)

Scientifically, is miscegenation overall good or bad? From a genetic, health, aesthetic, etc, point of view.

not really a science issue

>biology isn't science

Genetic diversity is generally seen as a good thing.

What a retarded post and poor attempt at couching a /pol/ issue in Veeky Forums.
I mean, how is aesthetics scientifically applicable?
Also the genetics and health are variable, as some populations (even within the same ethnicity) have more beneficial genetics than other populations.
Something like this cannot be oversimplified into a Veeky Forums post for some /pol/ack retard, because it has too many variables.

But as said, generally avoiding genetic bottlenecking is a good idea.

Just go to /pol/ They are constantly arguing over who is "really white." Even they can't get their own ideas of race straight. A mixed race baby is genetically 50% of each parent, but /pol/ thinks mixed raced babies are someone just as bad as ones from a single race they don't like, as if the idea of genetics has some kind of purity.

I always though that aesthetics (what humans find beautiful on average) is generally an indication of good genes and even health, no?

What?

The problem with your thoughts on aesthetics being used that way is that aesthetic preferences appear to be driven much more by social norms than genetic ones. Look at the kinds of things that were considered beautiful in different regions throughout history. In the middle-ages, fat men were considered attractive because it implied wealth and stability. Those aren't genetic traits, those are socio-economic traits

considered attractive by fucking who? how many women in the middle ages could even read much less write what they thought was attractive

I don't believe that. We're attracted to what we're attracted to (duh). If Victoria's Secret & Chanel says that fat chicks are beautiful, they're not gonna change any man's opinion on the matter. Doesn't work like that.

>lowering your childs IQ by fucking with a negro

>lowering your child's IQ by telling them they don't need to go school, college is liberal brainwashing, and all science is a conspiracy

i wonder (((who))) is behind this general view?

What makes you think that it'll lower their IQ?

These idiots believe IQ is 100% deterministic and is determined by skin color.

Whilst I don't care greatly about race, I will not allow this retarded "IQ has nothing to do with genetics" bullshit, it does, a lot, more than enviroment.
Read this book:
>Pic related
I can provide you with a PDF if you want.

Genetics doesn't mean something is deterministic. Also, differences in traits between populations do not imply differences in heritability.

What do you think is it good to dilute the vine with water?

>Also, differences in traits between populations do not imply differences in heritability.
>Whilst I don't care greatly about race
Please read.
>Genetics doesn't mean something is deterministic.
I know, I just checking you weren't implying that genetics didn't matter, because it does.

>Mom am I adopted?
>No, why would you think that, honey?

>read muh pop-sci trash book i beg you!!1
lol

Mixing everything is not diversity.

Are you really that retarded? Go and research the book, it isn't popsci.
Neo/sci/ really need to fucking leave, I've had it with you brainlets.

Not him but it's actually a pretty good read desu. It changed my perspective on a few things.

All of them more qualified than you with your HS diploma. :)

anyone who stated that intelligence can taken out of social context and studied genetically is a pseudoscientist.

>Being this intellectually dishonest and still honestly thinking your argument has any merit.
Nice strawman, maybe actually read the book.

Except iq is not science, user. Iq is pseudoscience.

>[CITATION NEEDED]
Whereas in the real world, it is actually a fairly accurate predictor of academic success.

>r values below 0.7 are significant

>genetic
I mean if you want to go the dumb route path, yeah race mixing is good. But you were to say, have decades of evidence and statistics, a means of genetic sequencing, and a minimum of logic, you would conclude that all race mixing other than white-asian doesn't produce a beneficial result.

>health
Blacks and spics/indians have poor genetic health. They're generally bad stock from a medical standpoint.

>aesthetic
Caucasoids have the best skull, mongoloid-caucasoid hybrids have the best face. See pic related as to why "that's just racism" meme response is nonsense.

...

If you studied basic statistics, you'd know r values below 0.8 are laughable. Not my opinion.

That's albinism, not miscegenation.
Veeky Forums really is nothing but posers and /pol/sters nowadays, isn't it?

>That's albinism
That's the point. Negroids have shit facial structures, and it isn't about skin color that influences that determination.

Look, either read the book or don't. I've given you a source to be able to understand the relationship between genetics and intelligence from a neuropsychological (which is as much a school of neuroscience, as psychology, so not just memes) standpoint. If you aren't even going to read the basis of it, then this conversation is pointless because you will not understand my standpoint as you will be in a place of ignorance. And no, I'm not going to sit here and distill the entire book for you. Either read it or don't, but just remember, a strawman and intellectual dishonestly aren't a substitute for an argument.

To clarify, albino indians, from india, basically look irish. It's the skin color and hair that makes indians look bad, not their facial structure.

I think Indian women from Brahmin or Kshatriya castes look attractive, on the whole.

I'm specifically referring to your statement about the correlation between IQ and 'life success'. You don't understand basic statistics. This is a general problem with /pol/tards, you run with things without understanding them, leading you to incorrect or overinflated conclusions.

> I'm not racist
> Look at me talking all science like
> spics

>mixing with sickle cell ridden apes
people dont actually do this, right?

Oh and strawman again. That wasn't my entire argument, that was a part of it and I wasn't calling it statistically significant, but it is certainly something to consider. Also, it wasn't 'life success', reread my post, it is ACADEMIC SUCCESS, which probably has a higher correlation.

History

>because you didn't want to specify both hispanics and latinos, skull structures magically don't fall into three general racial categories.
Get a load of this faggot.

On average it will. I forgotten the figures, but on average if you are a white person fucking a black person your child will be around 20 points lower IQ. Conversely from the black person's perspective their child will on average have a higher in IQ. Overall though it lowers population IQ meaning that it isn't good news for anyone. Think Idiocracy and you'll get a good idea of where we are headed with this 'diversity is our strength' Orwellian bullshit.

Reality can be a bitch.