So why exactly was Columbia a bad place? Just because of "muh raycists"?

Go read up on your history, niggers make the perfect slaves. They never fought for their freedom, like all other people around the world. Only reason they are free now is because sympathetic whites gave it to them. Not even white and you ignorant American with your lack of knowledge in most stuff disgusts me

It was a bad place because every house had no interior and no functioning doors, so the public just slept on the streets, most of the populous got their nutrition from garbage cans. City streets contained about a dozen houses meant to suit the hundreds in the population and the city was more interested in investing in more balloons to float up theme parks than actual housing.

This was a bad game and we shouldn't be talking about it in any way but its major flaws.

The racism angle was slapped on at the last minute, probably because the rest of the game was ineffectual garbage.

sure they are usually too stupid to do anything on their own, but just a single leftist faggot lighting a small fire will make the whole thing blow like a powder keg
The best slaves are no slaves. The South was incredibly impoverished because all the lower class white men had no work, and only a few wealthy (and typically jewish) plantation owners had any power in the region.
Also, a large reason a lot of the northern states wanted to be free states wasn't because of muh poor oppressed minority, they just wanted to keep the niggers out, and that's why 150 years later the north is mostly white outside of the cities, and the south is still swamped with niggers up to their ears
Do yourself and all your ancestors a favor and just don't let niggers into your country, ever. Kill the indians and work the land yourself.

My country killed all the indians until they were less than 1% of the population and never brought in any slaves, so no niggers or mixbloods. Sure we were poor, but it was a nice h'white country for most of its 500 year history. until the socialist government opened the border, swamping us with so many mestizos and jamaican blacks that we're in danger of going extinct in our own land
Thanks, marxists

American niggers have, on average, 10% actual human dna. This is came from race mixing Irish/Scottish slaves to produce a perfect mix of docile and competent slave. Some of those slaves had more than 10% and those were the ones that revolted. It was rare, but it happened every now and then. Talkin' like I don't know how our slavery industry worked.

Read a book you dumb nigger there have been multiple slave revolts involving black slaves, look at Haiti that shit hole is the result of a successful slave revolt.

Lead by mulattos, who were then in turn killed when the finished the whites.

Holla Forums everyone, people who thinks they are smarter than other people and yet bite into easily disproved race theory.

At first I thought you were talking about Colombia, and Jesus fuck was I confused.

...

I think most cultures are more harmonious and productive when they are racially and and socall homogeneous. I don't buy into race theory as Holla Forums preaches it but I do agree with seperation except for trading and political matters such as defense treaties. Tourism in specially designated areas should pose little problem as well. Unlikely to occur but probably ideal for this stage of human development.

Basically.

It's fun how at the beginning of the game they show this clean, organized, educated society, it's only crime being not having enough niggers walking around, and at the end of the game the entire place is burning and everyone is dead because of the chimpout, and that's supposed to be a good thing.

...

In Haiti the french still gave them freedom. They didn't earn it.
The butchery began after the french cucks gave them freedom.

Same here, because holy shit.

Go back to tumblr.

Fixed

I'm already there (^:

No its the fact that took "God told me this land is mine and I deserve any means necessary" type of Manifesto and just radicalized it to the 10th degree

That's why Columbia is a bad place

WAIT A MINUTE, THAT CARD!

Alright then, disprove it then. Backed by sources of course.

debunkingstormfags.blogspot.co.uk/

Pretty much every rebuttal to the race argument is contained in this blog in some form as it exists on this site.

Saw it posted the other day.

For a tl;dr:

The human variation that they cite is precisely the reason race doesn't exist. Humans exist on gradients, where you draw the lines is completely arbitrary and varies from culture to culture and person to person. Even on stormfront they constantly argue over what "white" really is, if there are subcategories of "whiteness", and how "pure" you have to be to be considered truly "white". Yet these same people will insist that "white" exists in some absolute empirical form. The amount of mental backflips they have to do to keep their ideology from crumbling is mind-blowing.

Oh that explains why you seem like a complete newfag, just go back to tumblr

We're already on tumblr.
Like I said…lol

Fuck you for shilling your shitty site and do direct sources next time.

So you don't understand how biology works, right then. Waste of time trying to read that.

...

You just asked for a complete itinery of arguments against the racial theory, and are now complaining that you can't be bothered to read through it.

Typical Stormfaggot.

Read the blog and find out.
It's two posts in length.

Who fucking knows OP. They ripped that game apart multiple times DNF style because Ken Levine kept rewriting the script. That fucking hack got an ultimatum from 2K to release the game and still made a final rewrite to insert his daughterfu barely a year before the release. The shitty multiverse plot was added to justify all the previous build content being stitched together like a Frankenstein monster. His line about "writing on subjects he doesn't understand" is a fucking dodge to both justify his mess and get out of fucking up quantum mechanics. It was only used as a quick and dirty get out of jail free' card. There might've been more expanding on the racism angle if the previous builds stayed, but it would still be sanitized. Even without him changing his mind throughout production, that man has no backbone to offend his peers in the industry. Levine knew they would all be triggered, regardless of the context, so he took the easy way out.

I still find it funny that the auteur got his ass kicked in a father-daughter story, gameplay, and sales by the cash grab sequel, while his 5 year in the making masterpiece was destroyed by his own doing.

For everything you quote against race you quote something for race.
Everything you quote and explain is not confirmed either but hypothesis and theories themselves.

>>tl;dr blacks are not subhuman, they are not dumb as a race. Read these. >>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_African-American_inventors_and_scientists
>>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_African-American_jurists

This is your idea of your opposition ? Spamming wiki quotes and interpreting studies in your own ways ?

How butthurt were you when you made this entire blog ?
Are you a nigger or a jew ?

Let's not even get to genetic differences and diseases that come with them, you're just so ignorant of basic biology it hurts.

I'm guessing you are that troll that tried that in a different thread. Weren't you also butthurt when people starting saying your faith in Jesus being ok with your fagshit was not real christianity.

The blogspot is a reference is to the arguments against the blatant contradictory rationale propounded by 'racial realists' by misconstruing the very conclusions of the studies they quote to bludgeon people into believing their delusional conclusions.

I can quote the entire blogspot for you to point this out.

For a taster of what this will look like:

I assume you're referring to the article about giving Kenyan children the mirror test at saboteur365.wordpress.com/2015/08/13/the-mirror-test-white-babies-recognize-themselves-at-15-months-black-children-not-until-6-years-science-video/ which was linked at >>>Holla Forums6626916 , but if you look at the original research paper at www2.psych.ubc.ca/~henrich/pdfs/Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology-2010-Broesch- Cultural Variations in Children's Mirror Self-Recognition.pdf you'll see the authors put forward evidence the kids did recognize themselves but froze up rather than wiping the mark off their forehead because of how they'd been socialized:
And of course there is no evidence that black kids in Western countries do any worse on the mirror test than white kids.

That was not implied. What was implied is that the pseudo-empirical basis for an ethno-nationalist state / ideology is based on an entirely misappropriated corpus of science.

I think you don't have an argument to respond with to the contents of the post, and as such are conflating a paranoiac justification as a counter point against it.

If it's going to be wrong, there's no harm in reading it (^:

their own delusional conclusions*

Really, you all need to apply yourselves a little harder. If this is the best the white race can do, I think you're in trouble.

/thread

anything else is a bonus, the point the game was trying to make was the same as the first game, radicalization is bad.

Your own TL;DR proves you know jackshit. You basically just said that variance and humans existing in gradients is proof race doesn't exist when that's exactly why race exists.

It's called Speciation, when two groups from the same species become isolated from each other and can't mate (even if a small minor few manage to cross that barrier) then eventually the gene pools diverge from independant mutations and selection which will eventually result in different sub-species (races in context of humans). Basic Biology 101.

Thanks for diverting Holla Forums attention away from other threads for the time being, OP. Maybe we can talk about video games in other threads without constant Hitler shitposting and (((muh parenthesis))) for a little while.

That's not how the mirror test works, you know?

Which is dealt with but a page-down key further in an implicit attack upon the basis for the link between this justification and its attribution to the human species as a whole.

The conclusion of what you're about to read is that genetic significance is so marginal as to not warrant a distinct factor in human evolution. I.e. Speciation does not exist in any meaningful form other than phenotype differentiation:

James Flynn (2012), pp. 140–1 argues that there is an inherent flaw in Jensen's argument that the correlation between g-loadings, test scores and heritability support a genetic cause of the gap. He points out that as the difficulty of a task increases a low performing group will naturally fall further behind, and heritability will therefore also naturally increase. The same holds for increases in performance which will first affect the least difficult tasks, but only gradually affect the most difficult ones. Flynn thus sees the correlation between in g-loading and the test score gap to offer no clue to the cause of the gap.

Hunt (2010), p. 415 states that many of conclusions of Jensen, and his colleagues rest on the validity of Spearman's hypothesis, and the method of correlated vectors used to test it. Hunt points out that other researchers have found this method of calculation to produce false positive results, and that other statistical methods should be used instead. According to Hunt, Jensen and Rushton's frequent claim that Spearman's hypothesis should be regarded as empirical fact does not hold, and that new studies based on better statistical methods would be required to confirm or reject the hypothesis that the correlation between g-loading, heritability and the IQ gap is due to IQ gaps consisting mostly of g.

Too bad we have DNA tests now user.

other than phenotype differentiation as attributes to deviation in ethnic communities*

They're only doing what's best for the site. Jews, niggers, liberals, and idiots need to be purged

Which was addressed in post:

To be fair you deserve it for even considering talking about Bioshock.

You know it's bait when someone posts the skulls.

No it isn't, saying that 'nuhuh I disagree with IQ gap, genetic distance, brain differences and bone structure' is not addressing shit.

With scientific reasoning for doing so.

To continue:

Neisser (1996)

Therefore, a high heritability measure does not imply that a trait is genetic or unchangeable, however, as environmental factors that affect all group members equally will not be measured by heritability and the heritability of a trait may also change over time in response to changes in the distribution of genes and environmental factors.

In regards to the IQ gap the question becomes whether racial groups can be shown to be influenced by different environmental factors that may account for the observed differences between them. Jensen originally argued that given the high heritability of IQ the only way that the IQ gap could be explained as caused by the environment would be if it could be shown that all blacks were subject to a single "x-factor" which affected no white populations while affecting all black populations equally, as covered by Jensen (1998)

Jensen considered the existence of such an x-factor to be extremely improbable, but Flynn's discovery of the Flynn effect showed that in spite of high heritability environmental factors could cause considerable disparities in IQ between generations of the same population, showing that the existence of such an x-factor was not only possible but real, (Flynn 2012)

Today researchers such as Hunt (2010), Nisbett (2012) and Mackintosh (2011) consider that rather than a single factor accounting for the entire gap, probably many different environmental factors differ systematically between the environments of White and Black people converge to create part of the gap and perhaps all of it. They argue that it does not make sense to talk about a single universal heritability figure for IQ, rather, they state, heritability of IQ varies between and within groups. They point specifically to studies showing a higher heritability of test scores in White and medium-high SES families, but considerably lower heritability for Black and low-SES families. This they interpret to mean that children who grow up with limited resources do not get to develop their full genetic potential.

Nah that ((())) shit is basically Summer, faggots from cuckchan refuse to adapt to different post formatting.

Christ user did you even bother to study Biology first before you decided to tackle this? Here let me spell it out for you genotype is about organisms' genome and phenotype is about organisms' physiology, morphology, and behavior . Pretty big fucking deal right there.

Go study up on basic fucking science you Nigger.

You just quoted scientists arguing with each other. Which they do every day.
That is not proof.

When someone can tell your race when all that's left is some bones you know races are real.

You forgot the "alt-right".

...

wow Holla Forums is really shitting up this thread usually they just spam a few posts and leave in shame, this one is in full denial.

Scientists discrediting the conclusions and methodology of research used as blatant spin which remains monopolized by frog worshipping internet nazis.

Now quote a deconstruction of the arguments posted so far by peer-review.

The point was that the phenotype is the basis for the differentiation in racialized conclusions and that genetic factors are insignificant in so far as they contribute to statistically significant data results on measures which purport some form of hereditary qualities in humans. Thus the argument of Speciation when taken to its conclusion in the application of data sets proves itself either false for what the research aims to demonstrate or inherently unreliable

for example:

A review of candidate genes for intelligence published in Deary, Johnson & Houlihan (2009) failed to find evidence of an association between these genes and general intelligence, stating "there is still almost no replicated evidence concerning the individual genes, which have variants that contribute to intelligence differences".

Hunt (2010), p. 447 and Mackintosh (2011), p. 344 concurred, both scholars noting that while several environmental factors have been shown to influence the IQ gap, the evidence for a genetic influence has been circumstantial, and according to Mackintosh negligible. Mackintosh however suggests that it may never become possible to account satisfyingly for the relative contributions of genetic and environmental factors. The 2012 review by the Nisbett et al. (2012) concluded that "Almost no genetic polymorphisms have been discovered that are consistently associated with variation in IQ in the normal range".

Nisbett and colleagues (2012) consider the entire IQ gap to be explained by the environmental factors that have thus far been demonstrated to influence it, and Mackintosh does not find this view to be unreasonable.

A known false parallel

Hereditary qualities in humans which distinguish them in forms of standardization on factors such as intelligence*

proves itself false in reference to the above arguments*

Libcucks will be libcucks.

Yuri warned us of this. At least he'll be one of the first to be executed.

...

Are you aware those are all opinions with 0 proof trying to deny ACTUAL EVIDENCE just with words?

As again shown in now three posts, this distance is so far uncredited with regards what it is used to imply that it cannot and will never prove itself as a foundation for the differentiation of humans according to the political notions upon which it is justified.

BUT user A LAWYER SAID IT SO IT HAS TO BE TRUE

with regards to what it is used to imply*

In short, then:

The human variation that they cite is precisely the reason race doesn't exist. Humans exist on gradients, where you draw the lines is completely arbitrary and varies from culture to culture and person to person. Even on stormfront they constantly argue over what "white" really is, if there are subcategories of "whiteness", and how "pure" you have to be to be considered truly "white". Yet these same people will insist that "white" exists in some absolute empirical form. The amount of mental backflips they have to do to keep their ideology from crumbling is mind-blowing.

I miss when science could remain pure without faggots politicing or censoring the truth because of MUH FEELINGS.
>circumcision.org/brain.htm

Nice, come back when you have anything of substance backing up your 'debunking'.

?

Take your collectivist "equality" tripe elsewhere, kike. You're not wanted here.

Wrong, Your own TL;DR proves you know jackshit. You basically just said that variance and humans existing in gradients is proof race doesn't exist when that's exactly why race exists.

It's called Speciation, when two groups from the same species become isolated from each other and can't mate (even if a small minor few manage to cross that barrier) then eventually the gene pools diverge from independant mutations and selection which will eventually result in different sub-species (races in context of humans). Basic Biology 101.

proof, you know, science works like that.
You can't just talk shit because you have a lab coat and claim to be right with no evidence.
You need evidence.

First two games were pretty alright famalam.

"((()))" wrap-around isn't a formatting tag for 4chan that I'm aware of, it's referring to that le ebin "(((JEWS)))" browser plugin which was funny the first fifty times but not anymore

I was actually hoping someone would post that comic where a mom goes online to ask a question and someone answers with a post ending in "trust me, I'm a lawyer"

You have not addressed any point in the post.

Please reference the particulars of this.

As in the previous post, and something you have consistently misunderstood due to your fear of appearing to not know "basic biology", Speciation is not being argued against, but what it is being used to analogistically imply.

Please reread the posts.

I have posted evidence.
Please read the posts and quote me particulars so that I may address this.

Clever girl, I'm deeply sorry I can't help with your request frankly.

words and opinions are not evidence user.

Given up?

Reread your own posts, you claim race doesn't exist when it clearly does. Even if your Lawyer was right that's only one out of pretty much one trait out of everything that makes races different from eachother woopty fucking doo.

Seems like a good idea if all you got is faggots going on and on arguing against solid evidence without providing any proof of their own to debunk it, just theories.

That's not how the scientific method works user.

I think people are giving up on trying to pierce your brainwashing, but there's no reason to ever concede anything to you because you haven't posted proof. Just opinions. No matter how much you call them proof they're still just opinions of people with no research backing them up.

Oh dear.

Please reread my posts and quote me any sections you are having difficulty understanding.

Please refer to:

Fuck off kike.

Please refer to

But where's the proof user.
Someone claiming something doesn't make it true.
I could claim the earth is flat but all evidence points to the contrary. I'd need some solid proof to show you how the Earth is not a sphere, not just words like you have posted.

Please see:

ED tier.

Please refer to

If you haven't figured out that this guy just wants to run the post count up until the bump limit then you are slow to catch on. He will respond to every post with bullshit just to kill the thread.

see

Not only are the races clearly marked, but you can also see how they are related, or in the case of Africans, completely alien to the rest.

Which is explained in

Thus, please refer to:

Please see:

Please refer to

Please refer to

goddammit, way to fuck up a thread you fucking mongoloids. I would take the entire thread shitting on the franchise than this.

Fuck right off.

I understood it perfectly, you quoted big walls of text and your own summaries proved you know nothing of what you quoted.

In fact this entire thing you quoted?

It actually proves you wrong since if you could actually read it properly you'd know it's saying genetics is one factor instead of being the sole factor.

then your own summary here completely falls flat both in your inability to understand what you even read let alone what phenotype is (hint: they're disagreeing with Jensen and Rushton but also say they do have a point but they should use more data and other ways before jumping to conclusions)

And on and on it goes your failure to understand what you're even reading it's pretty clear you're "proof" falls flat by virtue of the fact you don't even know what you're even reading.

Holla Forums on the warpath son, aint nothing to help it now

lets see if we get this guy to (300)

coursehero.com/file/p2pc0jb/26-A-common-myth-about-crime-is-that-whites-are-more-likely-to-commit-white/
amren.com/tag/race-and-intelligence/
archive.unews.utah.edu/news_releases/are-humans-evolving-faster/
wired.com/2007/12/ps-dna/
genetics.org/content/176/1/351.full

Steven Pinker: "There is a widespread myth that there is no such thing as race whatsoever, that it's purely a social construction"
pnas.org/content/105/32/11093.full
ln.edu.hk/philoso/staff/sesardic/Race.pdf
The
arguments for deconstructing race are fundamentally unsound because they ignore,
misinterpret or distort relevant scientific facts. Therefore, it is time to abandon the
mantra about the biological meaninglessness of race. Instead of wasting our time on
‘‘refuting’’ straw-man positions dredged from a distant past or from fiction, we
should deal with the strongest contemporary attempts to rehabilitate race that are
scientifically respectable and genetically informed. Philosophers (and others) have
too long tried to destroy the scientific notion of race in different ways; the point,
however, is to understand it.

dienekes.blogspot.bg/2007/04/prediction-of-continent-of-origin-using.html

One of the arguments of those who deny the existence of biological races is that their reality is subjective. Some extremists have argued that race is totally socially constructed; this is, however, disproven by the fact that socially constructed race is correlated with physical characteristics. Thus, rather than being separated from biology, the social phenomenon of race is rooted in biology.
A different argument holds that race is correlated with biology, but the differences are "skin-deep", i.e., involve only superficial, visible, (and by some strange logic unimportant) characteristics. According to the proponents of this view, the idea of biological race places an undue emphasis on a set of traits: it is a result of the subjective choice of a set of traits as race-defining. Thus, the commonly recognized races of traditional physical anthropology are discounted as subjective organizations of the biological data: we could just as simply speak of a "lactose-intolerant race" according to this view.
In forensic science and admixture analysis scientists often discover and use polymorphisms which exhibit large inter-population differences. Decoding DNA isn't free, thus, it makes sense to use the most informative, most "biased" markers when one is trying to discover the origin of a biological sample.

tl;dr: you are full of shit and guys like you are trying to destroy the field of science by coining terms like *scientific racism* and outright shutting down opposing studies from getting published

No it isn't explained for shit, whinning because you disagree with solid evidence does jack shit like some guy openly denying a paternity test that came out identifying him as the father.

You can cry all you want but until you get a new test showing why that's bullshit all you have is hot air.

A point further concluded in

Upon

The 2012 review by the Nisbett et al. (2012) concluded that "Almost no genetic polymorphisms have been discovered that are consistently associated with variation in IQ in the normal range".
Nisbett and colleagues (2012) consider the entire IQ gap to be explained by the environmental factors that have thus far been demonstrated to influence it, and Mackintosh does not find this view to be unreasonable.

Mackintosh however suggests that it may never become possible to account satisfyingly for the relative contributions of genetic and environmental factors.

The argument here of the impossibility of being able to establish the link apriori

Again, please reread the posts and grasp the framework of the rejections made.

All of which can be explained in

And all above.

That's just silly user, you can't just deny solid proof with words

It is becoming clear that you have not understood the criticisms for their scientific content as studies in biology.

Please reread the posts to the best of your ability, and, further, the blog in which this material is contained.

oh right

No user. These studies outright call you a modern day moron for quoting other modern day scientific morons.
Remove thyself.

Holla Forums, you're being like the SJWs with your "intersectionality" right now.

Please reread the posts to the best of your ability.

You have presented a fear of inferiority in knowledge and have not made a rebuttal founded on a solid proof.

Please present a clear, cogent, and precise argument against these posts with criticisms that are not subject to the errors you have previously shown.

errors you have previously shown in your own reasoning*

So you do know that word, now go find some

I hope this has satisfied your request.

Please refer first to

then to

then to

I'm also glad you've changed baiting tactics.

All attempts were unsuccessful. It is a shame you were slow to catch on.

You have presented inconclusive studies and wide swinging assumption of the beliefs of others.

Please reread the studies I linked you.
One of them in particular tries to deconstruct "race" and finds it more withstanding to modern deconstruction methods than the alternatives provided.

Why are you so insecure user?
You just need evidence and STUDIES backing up those claims.
The claims alone are just that, empty.
They need to do some studies to back them up now.

That's the issue when you link arguments made by lawyers trying to get into science.

0 evidence, 0 studies to confirm their theories, all that time wasted just making shit up and hoping the jury swallows them up with 0 effort into proving those theories right.
A complete insult to the scientific method.

And I was going to give a serious reply but this is perfect, a classic "read X to understand Y" case.

No user, I disagree with it because I do understand what I'm reading it's a criticism from a university textbook but it's not an actual solid argument by scientific standards because it's not an actual counter study. I mean shit mang you don't even understand the basic steps of writing a research paper here where you posit that the researchers putting forward the alternative that they did recognize themselves as evidence when that is in fact part of the standard for writing an actual credible research paper to show that you did consider this and the evidence for that alternative conclusion but you take that as gospel instead when it means they are more convinced it's not that instead.

Why are you debating species and evolution and shit anyway, aint Holla Forums devoutly christian, belief in evolution makes lots of god shit null and void.

Exactly, "We think there might be other factors" is not proof the previous study is debunked like he claims, it just needs to execute studies to see if his theory of it being due to cultural issues holds true or not.

This guy fails at even understanding the basics of the scientific method, the difference between theories and actual proved true studies that can still be proven wrong through the correct methods, not just with nice sounding PC theories like that retard thinks.

Dude bro fuck this going for dubs

Thread was bait from the fucking beginning

...

...

Tell me about it. I work in a science institution, but in an engineering field.
Although I'm low tier and will probably leave soon the reality for these institutions is terrible. I have a glimpse on the inside at engineer, mathematics and psychology paper pushers. I go to launch with them regularly.

close

pathetic, both of you

Fuck off Satan

Checked Satan

...

hail satan

These studies are either criticisms of or direct proofs against the connection between such caricature arguments of race and intelligence…

Neither of those links under pink point to any content of pinkers. If you are referring to the quote, considering that Pinker is arguing for a better understanding of the race as a social construct by clarifying its mystification in the biological sciences, I'd say that you need to change up those copy-pastas you save.

Also, they are all subject to the criticisms made earlier, in that an apriori impossibility exists on causal connection.

You have failed to demonstrate any criticism that you can substantiate against those made in the blog. Thus you are now simply throwing content at me hoping that you are right.

I have no doubt you have misunderstood.
It is what happens in the hard sciences called meta reviews, where an entire corpus of literature undergoes evaluation to demonstrate whether a central thesis can be proved or moved aside. Aside from the hard papers that actually do conduct field research, your complaints are understandably misplaced.

If I am so insecure, why do you keep responding?

Because I'm sure if I keep asking for evidence you'll eventually try to find some instead of mere theories with no proof or studies backing them up and presenting them as facts.
And for pic related.

proof.
you need proof user, just claims with nothing backing them up does not pass as scientific evidence.

I think you are a very troubled person.

Why are you so desperate I cannot get a word in before a response?

Where do you think we are?

because I find it hillarious you wrote a whole blog 'debunking' scientific studies and genetic tests of thousands of individuals without a shred of evidence.

This is not my blog.
I found it in one of the race bait threads.

Why is it hilarious?

Again, I understand exactly what it is and I disagree with it because I understand that it's just a university textbook written by a psychologist. All that shit you quoted? Non of that matters only actually honest to goodness studies matters if it's just some guy explaining why something is wrong without studies to back him up I don't give a fuck, if you quoted an article with written studies that have redid a test and posted their results to prove it's a fluke then you'd actually have a solid argument.

How can someone defend something so hard without even a basic understanding of the scientific method.
As described

Sadly a common case these days.

Pretty much, to counter a 'theory' with no data backing it up, a theory is enough, to debunk it you need evidence proving the theory was wrong.

But to counter studies with evidence behind it you need to up your game and not just post some moron's opinion with absolutely no solid proof, that's just not how science rolls. Hell, ask the church, they had plenty of issues with that.

It has taken you all around 100 replies to come to the conclusion that a response to debunking the racialist arguments in genetics does not matter because "there are no arguments" without having read either the content of the posts and having understood them in response or having read the entirety of the blog posts made on the blog.

Had you understood the literature you could surely mount a more scathing attack than the typical prejudices which are so common in the many race bait threads. Unfortunately, all arguments put forward have faltered in the conception of the very framework OF scientific study - that is, a structure of specialized social knowledge in the study of the natural world through its discrete methodologies; the point being that nobody has tackled the glaring issue that they cannot reject with quotes the claims substantiated by the authors themselves.

When an argument is put forward, it has already been dealt with in the studies. When this is inevitably rejected as falsehood because it does not agree with your opinion, you drag it back to the very start, demanding a demonstrable proof of a known impossibility - that is, a discourse with recourse to analogy that can constitute itself empirically within the proofs you have ring-fenced. Hence the image in

is all the more valid, showing that if anything, every post so far has been bait.

Thus, please refer to

Good, now try harder next time, get some studies backing up those theories and prove the studies the racist guys did were wrong.

I have proof.
You will not accept it because it does not agree with your opinions.

...

No, you have a lawyer talking sophistry and providing no evidence for his claims.

Again, please refer to

and

HE ACTUALLY POSTED THIS OUTSIDE OF /LEFTYCUCKS/
E

A
C
T
U
A
L
L
Y

...

I'm taking a page out of your book.

Good, hope it's 'The Scientific method for dummies', you desperately need it

Holy shit, it always ends the same. Are you all fucking shills or just retarded?

On the topic of vidya writers not understanding that morality isn't fucking black and white

Why the fuck was Pagan Min a bad guy? The only fucking bad things you see him do is torture terrorists who start skirmishes with local fucking settlements like niggers. Fucking hell, if you listen to the ministry dialogue he was even pro-gun ownership and allowed citizens to purchase and license to own firearms. He was against over-hunting of local wildlife as well. He only didn't like the Golden Piss because they were terrorist faggots

The funny thing is that you CAN actually side with him, all you have to do is stay still for the first 15 minutes of gameplay, as if Ubisoft was basically telling us that the only winning move is not to play

why not both? autistic too

Please refer to

It's actually a partial quote from memory of the vague abstraction that is the sociology of scientific knowledge. The fact that you agree with it makes it all the more questionable.

ok son enough shitposting its time to go back to Reddit with the other children

Well he was pretty cruel. Meanies are bad.

I meant literally, you failed in the very basics.

I'll see you there.

Please quote what you believe to be the fundamental error I have made so that I may correct your misunderstanding.

What studies, you've just been quoting a textbook which is basically an opinion piece and crammed them in a blog. And now obsessively quoting that blog instead.

They do understand as the secret ending shows, but the groups they catered to don't or don't like moral complexity. That's their underlying assumption anyway.

...

You don't even understand how scientific studies work.

don't worry ill lock you in the Reddit play pen so the evil facts wont get you

Are there even any non-PC leddit boards left or are they all here already?

No, he had a short temper

You have no idea what true evil really is

Please elaborate.

Your criticism boils down to the fact that because they are actual references to papers explained in their rejection of racialized arguments through a blog form they are therefore invalid. Which of course is its own refutation.

Why are you so concerned with reddit?

Hooo Dayumn

Please see

because you have to go back

Back to somewhere you've admitted you go to? Lol…

nigga i have never been to reddit all i know is its a shit hole

opinion pieces are not evidence, you can't use those to debunk jack shit.
It's funny watching you try, but you don't even know how the scientific method works, you need to back up your theory with tests, using controls to make sure you don't fuck up, then finally you have something useful that CAN still be wrong.
That's what the ewul wacisns did, you can't just counter that with a 'NUH UUH I SAY U R WONG' like your blog is doing.

also as i said earlier i am just trying to get this person to (300)

Yeah, yeah look Chaim come back when you actually have some studies. Your walls of text isn't worth anything, not even as a crude brutish form of gaslighting.

(heil)
Kek has spoken

They are not opinion pieces.

The papers referenced can be accessed by googling the Journal number / title with a clear reference and subsequently viewed either directly or with a website called sci-hub.bz

You are repeating a criticism previously debunked repeatedly. Please put forward an actual criticism of the content of the studies which can substantiate the claim that the racial construct within the biological sciences is not inherently flawed.

I was asked for scientific studies disproving racial theory in

and I have responded as such. Please read the posts and address a central issue.

I believe I can help.

With the rise of the alt-right, far right neo-nazis have gone to the very edges of 4chan and Holla Forums to spread lies and conspiracies, much like the third feminists and regressive leftists they claim to oppose. This fanaticism and "race realism" often leads to online arguments, and the stormfags derailing threads with out dated information, conspiracy theories """""info graphs""""" and cherry picked information to push forward a blue pilled agenda. One such subject is that blacks are subhuman. With evidence which I have appropriated from various blogs and articles, I will debunk this meme. Mind you this article contains the information written within these articles.

racialreality.blogspot.com.au/2011/11/african-iq-and-the-flynn-effect.html?m=1

Proposed causes of the Flynn Effect include improvements in test-specific skills (Greenfield, 1998; Wicherts et al., 2004), improvements in nutrition (Lynn, 1989, 1990), urbanization (Barber, 2005), improvements in health care (Williams, 1998), a trend towards smaller families (Zajonc & Mullally, 1997), increases in educational attainment (Ceci, 1991), greater environmental complexity (Schooler, 1998), and the working of genotype by environment correlation in the increasing presence of more intelligent others (Dickens & Flynn, 2001). Many of these environmental variables have not undergone the improvement in developing sub-Saharan African countries that they have in the developed world over the last century. This suggests that the Flynn Effect has great potential in sub-Saharan Africa (Wicherts, Borsboom, & Dolan, 2010b).

Although the implications of our psychometric findings for the potential of the Flynn Effect in sub-Saharan Africa remain unclear, the Raven's tests and other IQ tests have shown robust increases in many populations (Daley et al., 2003; Flynn, 2007). So suppose that there were a well-validated IQ test that showed measurement invariant scores between westerners and Africans. Even then, lower IQs of Africans still would not support Lynn and Vanhanen's (2002, 2006) assertion that countries in sub-Saharan Africa are poorly developed economically because of their low "national IQ". Wicherts, Borsboom, and Dolan (2010b) found that "national IQs" are rather strongly confounded with the developmental status of countries. Given the well-documented Flynn Effect, we know that "national IQs" are subject to change. An average IQ around 80 among Africans may appear to be low, but from a historical perspective this average is not low at all. A representative sample of British adults, who took the SPM in 1948 would have an average IQ of 81 in terms of the British norms of 1992 (J. C. Raven, 1960; J. C. Raven et al., 1996). Using older British norms, the average IQ of Africans would be much closer to 100. This is evident in Figure 2, where we compared SPM scores of Africans to older norms. In this figure, the average IQ of several African samples is near or above 100.

Present-day sub-Saharan Africa is one of the poorest regions in the world and the home to some of the world's most deprived children. The majority of sub-Saharan children are chronically malnourished, not only from lack of food but particularly from food lacking vital elements related to both physical growth and intellectual development. It has been estimated that up to 70 percent of rural children live in absolute poverty and 90 percent suffer severe deprivation (Gordon, Nancy, Pantazis, Pemberton, & Townsend, 2003). A substantial number of sub-Saharan African children are under-educated. According to Garcia, Gillian, and Dunkelberg (2008), only about 12 percent of sub-Sahara African children have attended preschool, and this generally for well less than a year. They note that children who do not attend or have only minimal experience in pre-primary school tend to do less well in primary school than children who have had that experience. Further, it is important that the preschool experience be successful. For example, Jaramillo and Mingat (2008) have shown that children who have a poor experience in preschool and have to repeat a year or part of a year have a high drop-out rate in primary school (r = -0.875). The probability of preschool without repetition and who complete primary school is low but positive (r = 0.209). With or without preschool experience, approximately only fifty-five percent of 10-14 year-olds in sub-Saharan Africa complete primary school.

come on nig your almost to (50) ill let you reward your self with a nice glass of semen

I'm a girl by the way

unz.com/article/the-iq-gap-is-no-longer-a-black-and-white-issue/

In a Harvard University paper that later sparked some unfortunate controversy, Richwine (2009) estimated the IQs of the black African immigrants from a supposedly culture-free test of backward digit span as 89. Although many in the hereditarian HBD crowd accepted these numbers on faith (and the Heritage Foundation used his paper to try to influence immigration policy), such estimates can be highly misleading. They lump together black Africans into one homogenous group when there are different kinds of black Africans, including a good number coming in as refugees from highly troubled countries, while other nationalities consist of the most educated ethnicities in America.

Without accepting this fact, the IQ approximations of Africans do not make sense in the context of their academic achievements in the US compared to black Americans. For example, when one HBD blogger broke down the IQs of black Americans by state using one of Lynn’s methods for estimating national IQs, he found over 30 states that had black IQ above 89, i.e., higher than the black African immigrant IQ found by Richwine. If these black immigrants really have a representative mean IQ from a normal distribution that is lower than the black mean in 30 whole states, there is no way they would dominate the native black Americans so conspicuously and predictably in all academically elite institutions. The black Caribbean immigrant IQ of 83 (assuming it is represented under “Central America/Carribean”), which is lower than Alabama’s black IQ, is even more implausible in the context of their well-noted achievements. Correcting the different states’ black IQ by subtracting 5 IQ points from each state would still not fix the problem of plausibility: if there is even one state with blacks that are definitely smarter than (or just equal to) the black immigrants, it would be the children of the blacks from that state who would be conspicuously over-represented in those elite programs. There certainly would be no Caribbean names there.
The only plausible way to possibly salvage Richwine’s data is to accept that there are such large variations mediated by highly variable environmental factors (rather than restrictive genetic factors) within the African (or Caribbean) immigrant group that their mean IQ is totally inappropriate to use for estimating social expectations for every black immigrant group within the United States. As the UK data below shows, it is very unlikely that children of immigrants from the Igbo or Yoruba groups of Nigeria or the Ashanti group of Ghana, for example, have an average IQ below the white mean IQ.

The most definitive proof of Africans’ grossly underestimated genotypic IQ (80 according to Lynn, or 70 according to Jensen and Rushton, et al) has come in recent years from the performance of African school children in the UK. These results sparked instant reactions in the IQ debate world as soon as they started being reported by the news media, with some strong hereditarians suddenly becoming some kind of neo-environmentalists just to explain why white school children were not showing the kind of academic superiority over blacks that they have become accustomed to in the United States (wrong tests, declining white culture, an alleged war on whites, etc – the same kinds of reasons they always dismissed from liberal environmentalists explaining black underachievement in the US).
The first report that caused some consternation in the IQ blogosphere indicated that black African pupils were apparently catching up with British white pupils on their GCSE tests and that in fact, they had already overtaken them at the lower end: the poor black kids were now performing better than poor white kids

You don't even know what that word means.

What most scholars and bloggers in the IQ world seemed to not know is that by the time these pieces of news were coming out in the media, there were already African nationalities that had overtaken the white average by a significant margin. The reason it seemed that the black Africans were only trying to catch up now was the usual academic tendency of lumping Africans together into one big racial group when other groups were being identified by nationality (e.g. Chinese, Indian, Pakistani, etc rather than “Asian” or “South-East Asian” etc). Grouping Africans into the monolithic “Black African” ethnicity concealed the different experiences of African immigrants from different nations, some of whom had emigrated as refugees from war-torn countries, while others lad left countries that did not speak much English and were thus disadvantaged in the tests. A negative correlation with English as Another Language was evident on both the CAT scores and the GCSE scores.

4.bp.blogspot.com/-1MrUzTbMYZE/V4SfyZiIihI/AAAAAAAAAO0/hKJRknynvZcDG5aiqsxbGxu7Icc38sBrwCK4B/s1600/Chisala-7.png

As the table above shows, some African nationalities, particularly Ghanaians and Nigerians, score way above the England mean (and the white British mean), while others, like the Somalis and Congolese, score way below (but still not as low as the Portuguese immigrants, apparently). The low scoring African groups are the ones that migrated as refugees and/or could not speak English, besides being very poor. Improvements among the Somalians have been impressive, especially due to programs dedicated to teaching them English.
Although the Chinese and Indians are still very conspicuously above even the best African nationalities, their superiority disappears when the Nigerian and other groups are broken down even further according to their different tribal ethnicities. Groups like the famous Igbo tribe, which has contributed much genetically to the African American blacks, are well known to be high academic achievers within Nigeria. In fact, their performance seems to be at least as high as the “model minority” Chinese and Indians in the UK, as seen when some recent African immigrants are divided into languages spoken at home (which also indicates that these are not multigenerational descendants but children of recent immigrants).

(Be free to read the article in full, which debunks the blacks are dumb as a race etc.)

Nisbett (2012) suggests that high SES individuals are more likely to be able to develop their full biological potential, whereas low SES individuals are likely to be hindered in their development by adverse environmental conditions. The same review also points out that adoption studies generally are biased towards including only high and high middle SES adoptive families, meaning that they will tend to overestimate average genetic effects. They also note that studies of adoption from lower-class homes to middle-class homes have shown that such children experience a 12 - 18 pt gain in IQ relative to children who remain in low SES homes.

A large number of studies have shown that systemically disadvantaged minorities, such as the African American minority of the United States generally perform worse in the educational system and in intelligence tests than the majority groups or less disadvantaged minorities such as immigrant or "voluntary" minorities, as stated by Neisser.

"The differential between the mean intelligence test scores of Blacks and Whites (about one standard deviation, although it may be diminishing) does not result from any obvious biases in test construction and administration, nor does it simply reflect differences in socio-economic status. Explanations based on factors of caste and culture may be appropriate, but so far have little direct empirical support. There is certainly no such support for a genetic interpretation. At present, no one knows what causes this differential."

That being said, if we are going to continue with the whole IQ factor and why blacks as an average tend to perform badly academically…

The explanation of these findings may be that children of caste-like minorities, due to the systemic limitations of their prospects of social advancement, do not have "effort optimism", i.e. they do not have the confidence that acquiring the skills valued by majority society, such as those skills measured by IQ tests, is worthwhile. They may even deliberately reject certain behaviors that are seen as "acting white." as covered by Neisser 1996 and Ogbu 1978, 1994

Environmental factors are also why blacks tend to score lower on the iq test. Environmental factors including lead exposure, breast feeding, (as stated by Campbell, 2002) and nutrition (as covered by Ivanovic, 2004 and Salojee and Pettifor, 2001) can significantly affect cognitive development and functioning. As stated by Qian (2005), For iodine deficiency causes a fall, on average, of 12 IQ points.

thats even better its good for you

Such impairments may sometimes be permanent, sometimes be partially or wholly compensated for by later growth. The first two years of life is the critical time for malnutrition, the consequences of which are often irreversible and include poor cognitive development, educability, and future economic productivity. (As covered in The Lancet Series on Maternal and child Undernutrition, 2008)

The African American population of the United States is statistically more likely to be exposed to many detrimental environmental factors such as poorer neighborhoods, schools, nutrition, and prenatal and postnatal health care (Nesbit, 2009 and Cooper 2005).

Mackintosh (2011) points out that for American Blacks infant mortality is about twice as high as for whites, and low birthweight is twice as prevalent. At the same time white mothers are twice as likely to breastfeed their infants, and breastfeeding is highly correlated with IQ for low birthweight infants. In this way a wide number of health related factors that influence IQ are unequally distributed between the two group.

Oh.

Three other adoption studies found contrary evidence to the Minnesota study, lending support to a mostly environmental hypothesis:

Eyferth (1961) studied the out-of-wedlock children of black and white soldiers stationed in Germany after World War 2 and then raised by white German mothers and found no significant differences.

Tizard et al. (1972) studied black (African and West Indian), white, and mixed-race children raised in British long-stay residential nurseries. Three out of four tests found no significant differences. One test found higher scores for non-whites.

Moore (1986) compared black and mixed-race children adopted by either black or white middle-class families in the United States. Moore observed that 23 black and interracial children raised by white parents had a significantly higher mean score than 23 age-matched children raised by black parents (117 vs 104), and argued that differences in early socialization explained these differences.

Studies have employed different ways of measuring or approximating relative degrees of ancestry from Africa and Europe. One set of studies have used skin color as a measure, and other studies have used blood groups. Loehlin (2000) surveys the literature and argues that the blood groups studies may be seen as providing some support to the genetic hypothesis, even though the correlation between ancestry and IQ was quite low. He finds that studies by Eyferth (1961), Willerman, Naylor & Myrianthopoulos (1970) did not find a correlation between degree of African&/European ancestry and IQ. The latter study did find a difference based on the race of the mother, with children of white mothers with black fathers scoring higher than children of black mothers and white fathers. Loehlin considers that such a finding is compatible with either a genetic or an environmental cause. All in all Loehlin finds admixture studies inconclusive and recommends more research.

Recent reviews by Nisbett et al. (2012b) and Mackintosh (2011) consider that current data does show an average difference in brain size and head-circumference between American Blacks and Whites, but question whether this has any relevance for the IQ gap. Nesbitt et al. argue that crude brain size is unlikely to be a good measure of IQ; for example, brain size also differs between men and women, but without well documented differences in IQ. At the same time newborn Black children have the same average brain size as Whites, suggesting that the difference in average size could be accounted for by differences in postnatal environment. Several factors that reduce brain size have been demonstrated to disproportionately affect Black children (Nisbett 2012)

Rushton and Ankney do not use raw measurements of cranial capacity, instead they attempt to adjust the values using a mathematical formula that's meant to compensate for the effect of overall body size on brain size, but the formula they use is disputed by other scientists, see cpsimoes.net/artigos/art_reply_rushton.html :

Rushton's attempt to apply r/K selection theory to different groups of humans is seen as ignorant by actual evolutionary biologists (Rushton was a psychology professor, as far as I know he had no training in evolutionary biology), see scholarship.sha.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1327&context=articles and in particular the section titled "Selection Scenario for Race Differences in r and K" which says:

This faggot is using a whole lot of words to say that we still don't understand why niggers all act like niggers

Note that the referenced post by stormfags, therightstuff.biz/2015/09/02/race-and-iq-genes-that-predict-racial-intelligence-differences/ involves the author trying to use published data to draw his own original conclusions, as opposed to just summarizing peer-reviewed studies, so that alone is reason to have some skepticism about his analysis. Also, one thing to keep in mind is that the current thinking is that the genetic component of IQ involves something on the order of 10,000 different alleles which individually only contribute some small fraction of an IQ point, see arxiv.org/abs/1408.3421 and blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/08/half-the-variation-in-i-q-is-due-to-genes/#.V4XZQFeOLqF …so, those 14 alleles in the study cited in the rightstuff.biz post would probably only have a very small effect on IQ taken together.
Still, if we treat those 14 alleles as a random sample from all the IQ-related alleles out there, the fact that the graphs show 13 out of 14 have a greater frequency in whites than blacks might suggest this is true more often than not for all the other alleles. But I see a problem with the idea that they're a random sample: the post specifically mentions that they were found by looking for IQ-correlated alleles in an exclusively sample. Now, suppose that most individual alleles have somewhat different frequencies in white and black populations just due to genetic drift (random changes in frequencies not due to selection), but that in the absence of significantly different selection for intelligence, about half of the intelligence-boosting alleles have greater frequency in whites and about half have greater frequencies in blacks. But wouldn't it be true in this case that if you searched specifically for alleles that had significant correlations with IQ in a population, your filter would be more likely to catch the alleles that occur more frequently in whites if you looked at a white population, and more likely to catch the alleles that occur more frequently in blacks if you looked at a black population? In that case the sample isn't really random with respect to all 10,000 IQ-influencing alleles, and the fact that these 14 show up with greater frequency in whites doesn't tell you much.

Granted, one argument against this was that he found that the alleles occurred even more frequently in asians than in whites–but he doesn't say how big the difference is, and presumably didn't do any analysis to see if it was even a statistically significant one (and east asian populations separated from european ones a lot more recently than the separation between african and eurasian populations).

A review of candidate genes for intelligence published in Deary, Johnson & Houlihan (2009) failed to find evidence of an association between these genes and general intelligence, stating "there is still almost no replicated evidence concerning the individual genes, which have variants that contribute to intelligence differences".

Hunt (2010), p. 447 and Mackintosh (2011), p. 344 concurred, both scholars noting that while several environmental factors have been shown to influence the IQ gap, the evidence for a genetic influence has been circumstantial, and according to Mackintosh negligible. Mackintosh however suggests that it may never become possible to account satisfyingly for the relative contributions of genetic and environmental factors. The 2012 review by the Nisbett et al. (2012) concluded that "Almost no genetic polymorphisms have been discovered that are consistently associated with variation in IQ in the normal range".

Nisbett and colleagues (2012) consider the entire IQ gap to be explained by the environmental factors that have thus far been demonstrated to influence it, and Mackintosh does not find this view to be unreasonable.

Well actually, it does. Considering the fact that a large amount of black people live in low income areas, poverty, as displayed, has shown to be a main cause as to why people do commit crime.

...

You can try using that ONE SINGULAR COUNTY STATE (annecdotal evidence btw), but that doesn't explain some of the cultural systems behind the fact that black people do commit crime (as well as a large amount of poverty), which can be found in this article here.

therationalists.org/2016/07/13/why-do-black-people-commit-more-crime/

The problem with "race realists" is they can't despook themselves from arbitrary societal conventions of "race". They will defend it at all costs, even if that means purposely misrepresenting others arguments. They know that we know human variation exists, but they like to beg the question in an attempt to convince themselves.

The human variation that they cite is precisely the reason race doesn't exist. Humans exist on gradients, where you draw the lines is completely arbitrary and varies from culture to culture and person to person. Even on stormfront they constantly argue over what "white" really is, if there are subcategories of "whiteness", and how "pure" you have to be to be considered truly "white". Yet these same people will insist that "white" exists in some absolute empirical form. The amount of mental backflips they have to do to keep their ideology from crumbling is mind-blowing.

for my next trick watch as the reply counter goes to sixty in the blink of a eye

Some of the studies referenced

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence#CITEREFMoore1986

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence#CITEREFTizard_et_al.1972

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence#CITEREFEyferth1961

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence#CITEREFLoehlin2000

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence#CITEREFNisbettAronsonBlairDickens2012b

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence#CITEREFMackintosh2011

Behold, the progressive left's reality filter.

anepigone.blogspot.co.uk/2006/10/black-iq-estimates-by-state.html

Blacks are the minority and still commit the majority of crimes too

But naw, here's a lot of mental gymnastics

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence#CITEREFHunt2010

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence#CITEREFNisbettAronsonBlairDickens2012

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence#CITEREFDearyJohnsonHoulihan2009

By the way if you get caught by some BLM chimp out remember to hide in a library, that place is like kryptonite to them.

therationalists.org/2016/07/13/why-do-black-people-commit-more-crime/

a round of applause then for my co host

See particularly the second half in its clear attribution not to race but poverty.

...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence#CITEREFFlynn2012

Final reference to journal article detailing these studies.

I was asked to provide a refutation of race theory in

Specifically the following text

That's great and all, but when you give the fucking niggers so much fucking support, and welfare, and they still end up in poverty, then they have nobody to blame but themselves

Poverty debunked.

Yeah but like video games.

It’s very convenient to self-validate by inventing excuses for one’s own poor choices to project the responsibility for them on to mythical concepts like “white supremacy”, and dismiss other successful black people as “Uncle Toms”. Not only does it allow one to place the blame on an entity that can never refuse it, but it also allows one to ignore inconvenient facts regarding the inconsistency of this white supremacy and its apparent concern with the welfare and social advancement of black people.

How can this be fixed?

The good news about all of this is that it is completely within the power of black people to solve the problems plaguing the black community. The first, and in my opinion most important, step is to begin the process of rebuilding the nuclear family.

This will provide emotional and financial stability to black children and their parents, it will provide incentives for parents to achieve and set a good example for their children to follow.

It will require black parents to take personal responsibility for themselves and their children. Subsequently, in time, this will improve the reputation of these communities through the improved moral character they will display.

To put it simply: I am recommending the empowerment of the black community through their own force of action. The barrier to this is little more than the will to change on the part of the members of this community.

Yeah I know but I just got to.

...

hay mate you wont get your paycheck if you don't respond i got a show to run and your the main act

Go back to reddit you fucking pathetic numale.

And I would also like to point towards the Jews, who were nearly genocided and pushed into ghettos and they STILL make up the population with the highest IQs and the wealthiest indiciduals

Blacks are just really stupid

I get you're an optimist and don't want to accept the fact these people have been cancer to western civilization, but it can't be fixed, the article even implies it requires them to step the fuck up, and it isn NOT happening

I'm happy to clarify race issues in a video game thread.

Please see

Oh dear, you seem to have misinterpreted my posts. Please see

no not that shit its all about the number

Please see

indians don't even have toilets.
They're still shit out fucking math geniuses every couple of years.

Could it be? Could he reach (250)?

nig i am getting tired of shitposting so when i come back i expect at least 150 reply's

My work is not limited by myself, but by others.

Someone archived this thread already :(

I'll update the snapshot:

archive.is/tu74r

...

Why are chinese doing even better than whites if they not only come from extreme poverty, they also usually don't even get welfare checks because they consider it dishonorable?

Poverty as the cause of low IQ and crime is throughfully debunked by the introduction of control groups, behold how the scientific method works.

Please put forward an argument against the criticisms of racial theory. None so far have been presented that can withstand the most basic of reasoning.

Good, good you're finally opening up on your failure, you're starting to understand the basics now.

Please shove your poor attempts at gaslighting up your own ass.

We all da same buddas

But we have put foreword many arguments. You provide criticism of race theory in response.

Your entire argument is also a gish gallop and is fallacious in nature

You're a faggot m8, you needed 70 replies to run mental gymnastics in response to statistics summed up in several sentences

The use of control groups is limited by a generalized self-contained self-constrained reasoning.

The primary failure - of which you can source in most textbooks meant for highschool education - is that they cannot isolate the variable of study without further abstracting from the circumstance in which their subject of study occurs.

The relevance of this critique is important as it defines not only how the subject is studied, but how it is operationalized and as such, problematized. This has profound consequences for what is considered as legitimate science, and the proofs which back the politics.

Go back to tumblr

Reading comprehension lad. You need it.

Why is it fallacious.

Also, these are not my arguments, but those put forward by researches, placed into a body for easy digestible reading.

researchers*

You are gish galloping this thread by flooding it with micro-argumentum and then asking us to provide counter arguments. This makes it fallacious, if you want to engage in proper discourse where we take you seriously then you might want to narrow your goal post next time

Too bad faggot, you are in a debate, and you are providing criticisms by others. You have to own it, its is your argument if you want us to debate you

Poverty does cause low IQ and crime but it's because of a bad child-raising environment, not because of not having money. Having more money doesn't make a child grow up smarter unless that money actually improves their upbringing which is not guaranteed. This is a separate issue from the maximum potential intelligence of a person, which is strongly heritable.

You're doing God's work, son.

Call out Mr. (74)s fallacies and he takes a fucking leave to process an argument

topkek m8 next time read the fucking blog posts you provide instead of copy-pasting from them

Genetics play such a huge part on it, that if you were to remove blacks and hispanic scores and crime rates in the USA, USA would score similarly to Europe in both fields.

He wont listen m8, these people will gladly accept genetics increase the likelihood of passing down superficial features and likelihood of fucking disease but will not accept IQ is linked to genetics

it seriously takes some real mental gymnastics to come to any other conclusion

As I said Yuri warned us about people like him.

Not really. I am willing to contend and mediate the conclusions of the arguments and subject these as my own. This is what I have done the entire thread.

You have as of yet to provide counter arguments because, nobody has. Also, for the idea of moving goalposts, see

In layman terms. The arguments are put forward to obvious bait in response to the question, why is the research flawed. No counter point is given. When a counter point is given, it is deferred to the research posted and then refused because the research cannot immediately demonstrate what is inherent in the research itself.

To clarify this.

_I_ am asking why the research is flawed, I am not asking _you_ why the research itself may be flawed. You are trying to present this as a fallacy, which is flawed. You are then demanding that because research not bound by the political stricture of whatever opinion remains unsaid in this thread does not address the unspoken issues in these opinions, it is not valid research.

The entire issue rests on the distinction between your need to simply shame someone into believing proofs by making a public example of a poster and then deriding someone for trying to argue by the merit of the case against this by the case of the research.

Considering that above, a hard body of research exists which demonstrates very clearly, when read over, why race as an issue within the biological sciences has no ground - and thus by connection, the conjectures of those that utilize it as a point for whichever retarded ideology they want to front - highlights the contradiction at the heart of this.

Even making this argument is redundant, because it will clearly be reduced to an analogistic interpretation for someone who simply wants to defend home-turf. Which just adds weight to the entire post above.

It cannot be avoided that when read over and interpreted the evidence above is so damning that it CAN be contested unless on the field of a scientific critique. Something which is acknowledged by a refusal to do so.

So that when anybody comes into this thread repeating what has happened for 200 posts, it is the same thing again and again.

I agree with user here.

I'm left leaning. and am a trap Being these things never stopped me from going on halfchan and it won't stop me from posting on Holla Forums ether.

After a while, white-posting, just like every single other meme, will die. When it does, a new shitpost will take it's place that's even worse than before. When that happens, i'll still be here, still trying to talk about video games.

on topic, bioshock infinite is a shit game

compared to rapture, Columbia is lifeless and unimaginative. That's what truly makes it a bad place

Finally, if you're stupid enough person to think that Colombia is a good place because it's a white utopia, it's not. [spoiler]because there are still black people there at all[/spoiler]

It was made by leftypol a week ago.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operationalization

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problematization

Check'em

Post lewd Cirno

I award you a reply m8

Of course it was, where do you think this guy is from?

Please post evidence of this.

...

You stole my 9, get over here and give it back

>>>Holla Forums794950

It took me 3 fucking seconds to find it

That is a link to a thread about race.

Again, please provide evidence of someone on leftypol actually creating that blog specifically. Simply pointing to a thread containing them does not constitute making them.

IMPREGNATE CIRNO

And so here we see how Holla Forums argues, they create an unfair platform by gish galloping threads, refuse to answer to arguments and use mental gymnastics when called out on it

Let it be known today that a poster from .eftypol/ just posted 77 posts of blindly copy-pasting from posts on leftypol and accomplished absolutely nothinjg

Please respond to

First two posts in that thread

Assuming those weren't the OP sucking his own ego by samefagging his thread, he gave neither of those posters replies of the contrary

The argument this case is not in your favor, nobody here cares about what you think, you are wasting your time

And now, for my last trick, explain to me why someone creating that blog influences the body of research the blog contains?

Christ your not even trying.

The blog itself is dated on it's first post

You keep calling different opinions from your bait.

Because it shows their bias, the "research" is opinionated critique cherrypicked by leftist posters to boost their agenda, in this case trying to one-up Holla Forums, and failing miserably by the way

As expected of Holla Forums, the only people retarded enough to still believe in Marxism

Because when someone is asked to put forward a criticism of the research all that happens is an avoiding of the issue on the basis that they call it flawed without explaining why.

As seen in

All that happens is a conflation between my opinion and the research.

So when others do it, it's science.
But when someone you disagrees with does it, it's cherry picking?

Again, provide refutations of the content on scientific merit.

Not analogy.

That's not bait, that's not putting up with your shit. You post like a fucking bot and expect people to take you seriously.

Right, so when huge reams of theory on race is relentlessly spammed, it's bot like? Is that what you're saying?

He's gish galloping and asking people to nitpick at his arguments and refute every single one. this isn't even a proper argument to begin with, if I had decided to take this idiot seriously I'd be yelling at a fucking brick wall so-to-speak. This man types like he just recently saw someone engaged in an argument online and is trying to copy off of their general style or posting to sound smart. He's probably too used to boards without IDs so he can samefag to himself in support

83 fucking replies, Jesus Christ, we aren't arguing with you. nobody is going to argue with 83 replies, the platform of discussion is unfairly stacked with gissh galloped copy-pasting from blogs written by fucking leftist paradigms

And you have the fucking gall to counter-argue by saying "Y-yeah but isn't that what /pol. does?1"

Please respond to

How about instead I refute with a claim and you argue properly by providing me with a link to counter my claim

If superficiality like skin color and facial features are carried over by genetics and between races, as well as the likelihood of disease, how come IQ suddenly is not?

Of course.People who hails a failed system thanks to sophistry will be behind wall of text that says nothing and prove nothing.
Marx keeps tormenting us from hell.
Thanks God then.More than 100 years since Marx shitted out its theory and this failed system was, depending on your wording, or never tried or it never worked.Why the fuck would we use such a system?

See look at this fucking shit, you expect me to actually take this seriously when you do shit like this? You have so little respect for your own opinions you don't even bother to type it out again but reworded better.

Just came in this thread to tell you that that is a squirrel you faggot.

I'm not done yet! If I can't get, then at least check these!

How about instead I don't because you have given me nothing of argumentative substance to reply to this entire thread

I know it you fucking faggot.But the user who raged against it called it a fox and i left it that way.

Oh.

Due to environmental factors, which can be seen most notably in

The primary argument being that any evidence for the cause of a genetic factor involved in the determination of an IQ score cannot be solidly established or reduced into a form distinguishable among ethnic populations. That the studies in which any correlation between IQ and race is determined by compounding variables, which is incurred due to a failure of the researcher to take into account, relies upon this oversight in the study for its conclusion, and that where corrected, the idea that IQ is somehow determined by race wilters away. These, of course, behind a salient requiring for new statistical modelling.

For clarification on the issue:

That the basis for heritability is built into the system of a distribution of wealth, and that it is not exclusive to any one racial group as to warrant a distinction based on skin pigmentation.

MORE MORE MORE MORE

Eh

And that where shown as statistically significant, even in doubt

Its relationship still cannot withstand the pressure of scrutiny for determining a relationship.

Thus

That doesn't refute my argument, you are posting (or rather copy-pasting without even understanding the context) critique on the process, thats not evidence to the contrary. Which you have NEVER posted yet this entire thread

Jesus Holla Forums is bad at arguing

Such that where the case for an argument of a relationship between IQ and its hereditary aspect does occur, it cannot be given, even on whatever proof exists, on good ground.

...

What name calling, you constantly redirecting to walls of copypasta and you simply not taking the time to actually type out your own opinions again speaks to me that you're lazy and you don't really care about your own opinions.

I'm glad you addressed the central focus of the post and refuted its premise.

If you want to talk about abstracted from context, consider that the text is embedded within the point:

A review of candidate genes for intelligence published in Deary, Johnson & Houlihan (2009) failed to find evidence of an association between these genes and general intelligence, stating "there is still almost no replicated evidence concerning the individual genes, which have variants that contribute to intelligence differences".

Apply yourself.

But no, now you're just proving your point using the evidence at hand! How can I possibly respond to such obvious cherry picking!

id rather have horsefuckers than Holla Forums at this point

cute, he just got on his smartphone

...

The amount of projection is stunning lad

Consider the possibility that not everyone agrees with your paranoid delusions.

I wish it was racism just for the sake of some goddamn consistency in the plot but then it wasnt really. The plot was a giant ADHD clusterfuck and didnt really go anywhere. It was just a bunch of cool ideas their cutscene- and level designers had, bunched up together with no rhyme or reason.

First the racism is bad, then suddenly Columbia is a bad place because the guy who established it was a war criminal. But then it was a bad place because industrial revolution. But then the minorities and laborers who took control were the bad guys. While at the same time suddenly the main characters are now also bad because they ripped through too many parallel universes at once. And for them to fix the issue the villain must die because for some reason that fixes everything.

Nothing makes sense in that game.

user why the fuck are you samefagging so hard, do you not even bother to actually type that shit out on a notepad or similar program?

The only appropriate response, is that you're an idiot and you should feel bad for showing a lack of respect and conviction for your own opinions.

Says the man who says everyone who disagrees with him for copypasta responses to everything is bait.

Just get rid of the thread or the cucks, mods.

Fuck off Holla Forums scum.

We're finally starting to break him lads, it only took nearly 100 replies

kek

hay im back and im disappointed in your progress not even (100) 0/10 try again faggot

w-w-we were just trolling all along!
kek

nigga i have been shit posting this entire thread what are you on

Okay.

I just find it funny you got so upset from some simple criticism on the way you post.

Not today bucko.

how do i know its not one of yours?

Okay, but just 4 U

Jesus what a long night

off to bed lads

why though

I want you to know, you are the best user in this thread.

question do you know what ids are? also you cant stop now keep going

at least someone on Holla Forums has their fucking priorities straight even if their taste is a bit dubious

I'm sure r/4chan will love it

School me.

I'd wait for the (you)s to expire, then capture it in memory.

Thiose boatsluts have an Animu now? I thought that was just some card game where Otaku made up the boatsluts being bitches in heat.

don't stop now.

wait are you serious you dont know what ids are. are you the newfag king

Yep user.Who has never wanted to jerk off on tons of metal?

what's an id

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

a gift for you

nigger I'm exhausted and its late

have a shitty photoshop of them out instead then

You see those random numbers and letters next to the No. XXXXX? That's your ID every post you make in the thread without changing your IP will have that same ID indicating you're the same person.

Like what then.

Explain this.

Cirno-nee is a meme. And I thought getting dubs will be easier with double Ds. But I can't even get a 9. Only bakas are off by 1.

Pretty sure he's just b8'ing now but updated anyways

Your ID changes every thread, but in this thread your ID is 5966a6 and when your cursor is over it, it indicates how many times you posted.

Oh, not again. Maximum baka.

well you got me i cant believe theirs anyone this stupid so you must be baiting. also its your 100 post anniversary

i know of big sis cirno but why would anyone do that
and you are off by 1. maybe post normal cirnos

oh look, you posted loli cirno and got it immediately

Only loli cirno works user, you did it.

At last, I truly see.

How do you delete posts.

buy a Holla Forums gold pass

lurk moar

Also archive.is/sKQAf of this very thread.

First you change your ID after making an enormous fuck up of a thread and ask this question to hide your shame after the thread hits bump limit and hope nobody notices

That wasn't me

so this entire thread was just a ploy by Holla Forums to screen cap and archive a strawman sperging out to combat the rising anti Holla Forums sentiment

I seriously wish this were the case, but I fear people like him may actually exist

?

What? Are you talking about those assholes that scream Holla Forums at the top of their lungs for over a year and a half now?

...

...

I actually like this a bit more

Why are you posting these

Limp dicked racists getting BTFO ITT, delicious tears

Sums up leftypol nicely.

Weak!

...

he doesn't know what IDs are because Holla Forums doesn't have them

This is just desperate!

Yes, it is.

What a weak punch.

don't stop now!

Glad to know I've won

Guess I should take the chance to say that I was joking.

haha! I got you all.

:^)

btw I win because I posted last

Yes you sure did.

still winning btw

I know right, I love it