SCI BTFO BY BASED POL

Yes only accept scientific studies if they are published in (((approved))) journals and not on the basis of the paper itself

Nice try, but everyone knows that the authors are just as much into it as the journals are and will suck dick at the chance to be in a higher impact journal. Like it or not, impact is a good measure of the quality of a paper.

This image sums up what is about to happen to liberal ideologies once genomics advances over the next years.

Attached: QRIiSlB.jpg (1293x969, 339K)

>The collective brainpower of /pol/

Attached: 1517432244962.jpg (1000x989, 106K)

>With the help of these tools, we are learning that while race may be a social construct, differences in genetic ancestry that happen to correlate to many of today’s racial constructs are real.

wut

Trying to ease the sheep back to pasture. Can't push them too hard. Have to give them help to cross the gap back to reality.

They see the coming revolution in genomics and are getting positioned to not be completely destroyed by what it reveals.

We all knew this was right. Amerindian higher civilization potential is a historical fact

Now go back to europe, subhumans, your pestilent inferior kind keeps poisoning this land
Disgusting creatures

>Amerindian higher civilization potential is a historical fact
[citation needed]

>europeans
>from aurignacian proto-gravettian to solutrean:10000 years (30000BC-20000BC)
>from aurignacian-antelian to start of crop development: 9000 years(30000BC-21000BC)
>from start of crop development to neolithic revolution: 10500 years (21000BC-10500BC)
>from neolithic revolution to earliest use of copper: 5500 years (10500BC-5000BC)
>from neolithic revolution to earliest use of tin bronze: 6700 years (10500BC-3800BC)

>Amerindians:
>from aurignacian proto-gravettian to clovis: 5500 years (16000BC-10500BC)
>from aurignacian proto-gravettian to the start of crop development: 5000 years (16000BC-11000BC)
>from start of crop development to neolithic revolution: 7000 years (11000BC-4000BC)
>from neolithic revolution to copper: 3000 years (4000BC-1000BC)
>from neolithic revolution to earliest use of tin bronze: 4700 years (4000BC-700 AD)

-"2003a. Tiwanaku Period (Middle Horizon) bronze metallurgy in the lake Titicaca basin: A preliminary assessment. En Tiwanaku and its hinterland, T 2. A. Kolata, (Ed.), pp. 404-434. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D. C."
-"1997. El bronce arsenical y el Horizonte Medio. En Arqueología, antropología e historia en los Andes: Homenaje a María Rostworowski, R. Varón y J. Flores E. (Eds.), pp. 153-186. Instituto de Estudios Peruanos, Lima."
-"researchgate.net/publication/317346941_Ancient_metalworking_in_South_America_A_3000-year-old_copper_mask_from_the_Argentinian_Andes";
-"Historia de América Andina: Las sociedades aborígenes"
-"link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02859340";
-"journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0141923";
-"whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/1873/";
-"es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleoamericano";
-"en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluefish_Caves";

Amerindians had a higher development rate than europeans, therefore Amerindians have more civilization potential than europeans.

How is this hard to get?

define "civilization potential"

Yes. Set of characteristics human individuals share that makes it possible for them to achieve civilization by themselves. Some humans lack some of these characteristics, or have less than others, thus they cannot develop themselves as fast as others.

Amerindians had a higher development rate than europeans. Therefore Amerindians have more civilization potential than europeans.

How is this hard to get?

Race is a social construct and I'll tell you why.
We judge people on the content of their character, not the color of their skin.
By this judgement, you're all equally just a bunch of fucking niggers.
Whether you're a white nigger or a black nigger or an asian nigger or a sand nigger or a hispanic nigger, you'll all be judged by the same standards in the eyes of the lord, and you'll all be judged as fucking worthless niggers.

Bleach your soul, not your skin.

there are too many different variables other than genetics involved to ascribe older inventions to "their genes make them have civilization"

Attached: 1515961513471.jpg (1024x463, 94K)

When you say characteristics, i take it you mean phenotypes, which involve a confluence between genotype and intellectual environment and physical environment.

IE someone can have genes that predispose for short-sightedness, but they live in modern civilization so they wear glasses and the phenotype is then no different than folks with normal sight.

200 years ago, glasses were expensive, so there was a hereditary difference that corresponded to a phenotypic difference. That disappeared over time. Does that mean microevolution happened? Of course not; we changed the physical environment and the intellectual environment, and then the outcome when interacting with genetics was different.

There's no need to prejudge any population by race; we can just develop our understanding of science and our technology, and we can fix our environment to eliminate the less desirable hereditary differences that exited between us in the context of the environment we currently live in.

Nobody can deny that that /pol/ is the most diverse board on Veeky Forums.

Attached: 1485820622565.jpg (2452x4000, 1.38M)

Yeah no reason to consider it when importing millions of people with genetics that might have higher crime rate and horrible economic outcomes which tax social nets.

I'm sure swedish love higher crime rate and have to work longer before retirment now because "genetics dont matter". The rape victims and murder victims due to the higher crime rates in Germany since mass immigration sure enjoyed it.

For instance

>Why are black people higher poverty, higher crime, and other negative things?

Is it because of genetics? Is it a nuanced view?

It's pretty much "whites are racist and holding back blacks" and that is used in things like public funding, policy decisions, and popular culture. When the reality is if you look at the group and outcomes vs IQ you see similar outcomes for whites of the same IQ. The genetic differences cause the difference in outcomes but we have to pretend it doesn't which leads to horrible allocations of resources and blame.

what I find most important about this article is that the author offers a candid glimpse into the leftist mental process. he says that the problem could escalate to the point when IT WOULD LOOK AS IF RACISTS WERE RIGHT FOR THE WHOLE TIME. we all know about the leftist mania of desperately demanding the role of intellectual superiority and mental health, while everybody else must be a mentally ill brainlet (I wonder if this is just some human universal gone wild or did their idea actually come from the way rabbis are respected).

fact is, if folk intuition had something to say about e.g. the distribution of visible stars which, upon closer inspection, would turn out to be mostly correct, nobody would make any bones about including these amazing trivia in any book about stars. but if folk intuition says other races are different, then at first those folks are evil, then it is demanded that such an intuition be exactly formulated, and at last they will be told that something similar exists but it is not what they think, because they think this and this (cue insert total strawman). all this time they make great efforts to misunderstand and misrepresent any popular claim about race, in addition to fantasizing about outcomes of accepting such an idea and presenting those fantasies as facts. just a hint: some trolls demanding the extermination of blacks does not equal race realists wanting to kill anyone.

apart from the fact that a honest evaluation of IQ statistics would give us a better way to gauge racial discrimination (races not being represented in their proportion in the population would look like a retardedly primitive idea), the most important outcome would be to make these liberal profs eat crow. they are already trying to claim that 'no one says that there are no races' etc., except when claiming so.

Yes. The most beneficial outcome would be America belonging to Amerindians the same as europe belongs to europeans.

Is this that hard to get?

It's pretty interesting that the reasoning isn't "This is the truth and we have suppressed it while ruining lives and blaming groups in society falsely"

It's simply, "We can't keep lying anymore due to advances in technology and communication"

you are having a bit of difficulty understanding written text, don't you?

Yes, it's basically this.

Attached: 1518735146705.gif (540x624, 1.42M)

I think it is worse than that: they genuinely don't care about truth. 'lying' has connotations like feeling bad about it, knowing it is not right etc. none of that applies: they worry about an incoming blow to their ego, or rather, to their right to hold themselves in high esteem as priests of science and be able to expect this from their peers and demand it from us peasants.

Complementing a post with intuitive conclusions is wrong for you?

America belongs to Amerindians the same as europe belongs to europeans, don't you agree?

every piece of land belongs to those who last took it by whatever means, force, trickery or outfucking the natives. what does this have to do with racial differences?

So you agree with european replacement?

try not to sound so trollish. you are keeping score by how little you type compared to me. what european replacement, the fucking up of indians by europeans, or the current clusterfuck of brownies coming to europe for gibs?
if brownies can take europe, they can have it. but we are also in our rights to fight this, with deadly force if necessary. where does 'agreement' enter the picture?

and now stop this retardation, or explain what does it have to do with racial differences. that is assuming you have a notion of 'explaining' or indeed 'something having to do with something else'.

It's pretty simple actually.
The act of populating "x" land for the greater good:
- "Civilization": which had been supported by europeans for centuries. Amerindian populating Americas is a consequence as Amerindians have more civilization potential than europeans.
- "Native": Amerindians are native to America the same as europeans are native to europe.
- "might makes right": supported by europeans with cognitive dissonance. As europeans needed more than 20 diseases to destroy Amerindian civilizations, and still couldn't do anything against Inca armies as they won most battles before dying by epidemics; yet arab, chinese, mexican, west african are literally invading and replacing all european populations without any effort whatsoever.
>troll
Denying intuitive conclusions with buzzwords or goalshifting won't stop the truth. Try again.

Therefore America belongs to Amerindians the same as europe belongs to europeans.
How is this that hard to get?

Attached: ciudadsagrada2.jpg (2249x1569, 1.28M)

how is it hard to get that this has absolutely nothing to do with racial differences and you should go start a new thread instead of shitting up other threads if your mania does not allow you to relax?

See this post: The mention and inclusion of race, ideology and politics is complemented by , as it's an intuitive conclusion of the Amerindian situation in the Americas.

I believe even eurangutans can get this logical process...

>intuitive conclusion
you are an idiot.

It's a pretty valid syntactic construction.

America belongs to Amerindians the same as europe belongs to europeans. Time to face the facts, inferior being.

>It's pretty much "whites are racist and holding back blacks" and that is used in things like public funding, policy decisions, and popular culture. When the reality is if you look at the group and outcomes vs IQ you see similar outcomes for whites of the same IQ. The genetic differences cause the difference in outcomes but we have to pretend it doesn't which leads to horrible allocations of resources and blame.

The problem is, many conservatives are saying there can be average differences in different traits between two populations, therefore any attempt at using public and business policy to level the playing field across communities is unfounded.

It's fair to ask how much of the difference is attributable to prejudice, but few people are seriously arguing all difference in outcomes are due to unfair treatment.

If we use research, it looks reasonable that some differences are a product of individual choice and talent, and some differences are a product of prejudiced treatment.

It's not difficult to find studies that establish unfair treatment of women and minorities on the basis of gender or race, like studies where researchers change names on resumes applying to similar positions and finding they only receive as little as half as many callbacks for more foreign sounding names.

We should be cognizant of what outcomes to expect when we have truly equitable treatment in the economy, but we should simultaneously have programs and systems that correct for unfair discrimination when it does happen. I'm not a fan of quotas, but let's at least first correct for the problems when we know they exist.

Attached: b6520e5377b68d7ff2cc4299bedb578f.jpg (400x301, 44K)

To continue this, there's also the issue of inheriting environmental influences that are disadvantageous. In a society with a robust social safetynet and competent standards of public education, this is less of an issue.

But in the US where at least in some states inherited wealth can be a determinitive factor in whether children have the same opportunities to maximize their economic participation, a community that's faced institutional discrimination for generations in business and government, like categorically being disallowed access to higher education, if our aim is a meritocratic society, does deserve some kind of compensation or guarantee that their children for some time will enjoy the same opportunities.

This is at least in part due to university, and especially for women. Smart men who go to university and get a high paying job can get a fecund young woman, whereas a 30 year old roastie with a phd is on the road to a darwinian dead end.
Chalk up another success for feminism.

Attached: iq and fecundity.gif (911x623, 21K)

Blame conservatives for this, we on the left have always been proponents of sensible population control. We should use positive reinforcement to encourage high income potential folks to have larger families, like tax breaks and subsidized daycare so they can still focus on work or education. while making contraceptive and abortion widely available for low earning potential folks.

>mobile
Typical phoneposter.

Attached: 1503709316333.png (1229x417, 75K)

desu this whole place has gone down since the leaked celebrity nudes, which I think was in 2014 or 2015

>we on the left

>sensible population control
>left
Explain mass immigration of third world peoples into first world countries then.

>we on the left

Attached: 68d0655812dc45e8d6963341a6f57da0e403a50f7f7c4f5401cc50ac32594325.png (644x598, 124K)

Harvard Geneticist, David Reich in NY times.

David 3rd Reich!

youtube.com/watch?v=EInzpVmgCwk

Attached: Nazi Pewds.jpg (480x360, 106K)

Attached: Tanya 14.jpg (1280x720, 77K)

>/pol/ is so retarded that when Veeky Forums tells them where a race begins and ends is subjective means that we don't think different population groups of different genetics
/pol/ is literally no smarter than SJWs.

>we believed in all of those pol things but obfuscated them
keep back pedaling.

"Just call them populations"
"Of course there are genetic and behavioral differences due to them"

Attached: 1521921973354.jpg (1235x486, 128K)

celebrate with some citypop
youtube.com/watch?v=pGHhBlgOWV4

*libtards screethcing in background*
>NOOOOO
youtube.com/watch?v=q2R2btO4MEo

Attached: Screetching.gif (435x250, 1.52M)

Attached: 1519161340758.png (500x568, 168K)

>sci
>pol
Back to r/T_D, you retarded immigrant.

Attached: 1507781071165.jpg (1378x2000, 244K)

How the fuck it was published in the NYT?

I thought that Harvard and NYT were radical leftists.

They are on damage control.

He's basically making the argument that because science will inevitably prove the differences between races at a DNA level, scientists should start taking the sting out of the argument by admitting it now to some degree.

/pol/ and Veeky Forums are usually of one mind when it comes to race being real. Ignoring it won't make it go away.
the real issue is how you deal with race.

read it. They know the jig is up and are re-positioning.

this

lol faggot, sage

Why the homophobia?

Is that Harvard professor tenured?

If so the Leftist Harvard won't be able to fire him so easily.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reich_(geneticist)

Reich is a Jewish Surname.
Why a Jew is defending Race realism?

Attached: DavidReich_Photo_0.jpg (250x300, 60K)

Ask that on /pol/. I would also like to know.

Attached: 1520714337559.jpg (898x1123, 98K)

It's a meaningless question. This question would only occur to you in the first place if you were brainwashed on a low IQ echo chamber like pol/stormfront.

/pol/ != stormfront

Jews think that (((themselves))) are the true maste-race

Its funny that the political right has become so accustomed to political corruption and fabricating information that whenever anyone on the left changes their mind or opines for a view without any immediate or apparent personal benefit, their first reaction is to demand to know who is paying them, where they're getting their talking points from, and what their ulterior motive is.

Objective reality is lost on these folks.

Attached: 1515631684375.png (416x396, 174K)

Italians can be arrogant. Keep in mind most of the genetic testing for "jewishness" uses populations from 500 years ago in Europe, already heavily mixed.

It's not backpedaling you retard. Race is literally a social construct in that what defines the start of one race or the end of another is literally opinion, however different populations do have different genetics. Learn basic biology faggot.

How do we define race? Blacks alone have more genetic diversity than all other races combined. Should blacks be 8 different races all themselves? What scientific definition should we use to define what a race is? /pol/ is fucking retarded.

>anime girl

Stop posting Alt-Right propaganda

Where we've always differed is the importance of race. Just because there are average differences between two populations doesn't mean it's worthwhile to create and use categories on their basis. The genetic differences are being defined on the basis of race, race isn't being defined on the basis of genetic difference. The difference is important.

Attached: 1521398863957.jpg (500x471, 67K)

You should feel very, very insecure about your brain if you can't grasp what those two people are saying. It's not opinion, it's fact, and it's about as simple as basic arithmetic.

people of all politics should be united in their love for anime qts

Attached: Want_to_be_Friends-_120426_1280x720-theAnimeGallery.com-.jpg (1280x720, 116K)

I hated that show, the ending was garbage.

fag

Homophobic

Attached: 1513501469371.png (1200x741, 1.29M)

I have to agree on that.

Yes. Ashkenazi Jews are indeed heavily mixed with Europeans.

>Literally can't comprehend what he's saying
>HE MUST BE SAYING ALL PEOPLE ARE THE SAME AND IS THEREFORE AN SJW

>Nigger hates anime
What alternative universe is this? You ever hear of Dragon Ball?

World peace through Anime

Attached: Anime peace sign.jpg (500x281, 18K)

All that image does to prove is how much of a retarded and wrong faggot Hitler is. If hitler thinks Chinks are superior or on par with humans than he is objectively wrong. Chinks make niggers and jews look decent.

Anime cuties represent the apex of Indo European beauty. This is why jews hate anime so much.

Attached: 1520888327906.jpg (480x400, 27K)

Anime is the polar opposite of the Jewish degenerate modern art (entartete kunst).

Attached: 1520899742831.jpg (679x960, 116K)

It's also for guys because they are taught all this marxist nonsense rather than "get a job and have plenty of kids to continue the family name" sorta thing
These people are also worse off financially than someone who started working at 16 after dropping out of high school.

>many conservatives are saying there can be average differences in different traits between two populations
No conservative says anything like that in public because its fucking ILLEGAL even in the USA
>unfair
>prejudiced
Society is FILLED with you marxists who have imported foreigners and then you babble about how we need to cater to them.

numbers are also social constructs
elements are social constructs
etc
fucking retard
The only reason to use the term "social construct" is to assert that it DOESN'T EXIST