Is it over, guys?

He's getting old.

Lmfao, because studying Talmud, Law, Torah, Gematria, Accounting, diamond craftinng, finance makes you good at symbolic reasoning, reading comprehension and gives you an outstanding verbal Autism Level. A society where every male studies rigorously vs one where over 80% of the population is illiterate and fucking superstitious faggots is going to have an advantage intellectually.

Iq is related closely with educational attainment and wealth. If you are low Autism Level you will not get into a good school and will not attain status or wealth. Its not that complex. Smart people game the system so stupid people end up serving them. I guess there's your answer

Double trips of truth.

No one said that, we're talking about whether or not Autism Level is important and it is. That's it. This word filter is legitimately the fucking gayest thing about this board, complete fucking faggotry for blocking words like glorious uprising and Autism Level. No respect for mods/BO who can't handle normal discourse or words they don't like to hear.

ah yes because every ashkenazi is an orthodox jew. or maybe the kikes in control of the answer key can make up any result they want

IQ

What word changes to "autism level"

No but the historical development of askhenazi Autism Level comes from the middle ages and enlightenment and the explosion of "reformed" and "conservative" jews comes from the early 20th century and integration into post-ww2 society. Most Jews were orthodox or highly involved in religious life for most of their history. These adaptations were passed on to their kids. Its notable that Askhenazi Autism Level has declined significantly due to outbreeding with non-Germanics and non-Ashkenazi and due to the general degeneration of all the great races of man thanks to technology.
fucking dumb nigger faggot retard. Autism Level tests were invented by the British and Germans you stupid fucking faggot

ah yes, brits and germans, truly exemplary races of only the finest minds

iq changes to autism level because the big secret is that intelligence science is settled (like climate change) and has a huge impact on economics and social issues and this board is incapable of dealing with this. So our lovely BO and super awesome mods who tried to force the board off of 8ch censor any attempts to talk about intelligence. Sam Harris is just another person whose not a reactionary or a right winger or a racist WHO wants to talk about intelligence. And of course no one hears him out because they're mentally weak faggots who want to continue being ignorant

lol

iq Autism Level Autism Level Autism Level Autism Level

The Brits and Germans and French are the 3 greatest races of humans to ever exist faggot. They invented everything and are responsible for computer science, atomics, space travel etc. Jews are great because they interbred with Germanics so much and because they absorbed English-French-German cultural practices (like not being a fag with your money). You're just fucking mad because the best races come from NW Europe and the most influential race since the Brits are Jews who learned directly from brits how to do business. Total jealousy and impotence

Protip: the wordfilter is in because it continuously and without failure, makes people like you sperg the fuck out.

...

iq Autism Level Autism Level Autism Level score Autism Level Autism Level Autism Level

it seems not well set up

lmfao fag

the nahua and han have created the longest lasting, most successful empires to ever grace this miserable planet and you still defend forest and fog niggers

the word is filtered because it is the go-to talking point of Holla Forums tourists and trolls. it's just a gag

Han are ant people who don't respect human dignity, Mongolians are fucking nigger savages with down syndrome (not joking mongoloidism is down syndrome). The greatest empire of all time is the British empire and Napolean's empire and the Roman Empire. All non-caucasian empires are fucking extended trash heaps with constant in-fighting and regressive social developments. Faustian culture is the apex of human achievement, not orientalist confucian backwards ancestor worship. The self must rise above itself, ant people culture will never rise above itself

Non retarded version is that last year, the board was filled with race "realism" autism and some people considered having a cheap laugh at stromfags spamming their shitty talk points.
Whites have higher Autism Levels than Blacks being the typical result of the filter.
It was that or good boy points

LIKE
POTTERY

haha self-own like nobody's business if you ask me. you sure showed those rayyycisss that they needed to learn how to debate properly and not use loaded terms like "intelligence quotient" or "general intelligence"

central america has seen the construction of great monuments, beautiful statues, massive architectural feats which require the sharpest minds. it's seen the rise and fall of civilizations with scientific knowledge beyond even our own modern science. it even saw the conquest of an empire which took thousands of slaves every day, which subjugated all in its path. and what of europe? here we find a great wasteland

nah you guys are just unaware of what a self-own is

I'm witnessing one right now.

Europe is a monument to human greatness, S America is a gigantic festering teeming ball of horror and violence, fuck those death cult civilizations im glad Cortez massacred them

Low I Q Reddit, go and stay go.
Worldfilters are nothing but a joke ever since the Weeaboo case.

european """people""" spent thousands of years shitting in the woods and screaming GIBMEDAT at the romans, meanwhile high Autism Level mexicans were charting the stars

nah you guys are the laughing stock of the alt-sphere, no one takes people seriously who don't understand how important genetics and intelligence are to social planning. you guys are an embarassment to the intellectual tradition of the West

the wests intellectual tradition of fucking boy thighs and shouting about the platonic ideal boyfuck

mexicans are fucking spergs who just like the babylonians spent thousands of years making minor star charts they were autistically fixated on. they never figured out laws of motion, they never used their observations to make theories about matter or energy, they never posited the existence of mass, they never discuss momentum or inertia or velocity. Fucking dumb maize weevils, barely intelligent enough to find the right herbs in their jungles.

Euros took to classical learning better than arabs and Jews who had possession of the classics for a thousand years. In just 6 years they went from retarded vikings to the Dutch East India Company. Sorry but they're the premier members of our species

ah yes, trading companies, a fine example of the europeans only skill: getting other people to do his work!

confirmed dumb shit brainlet

You mean best.

And is "glorious uprising" a wordfilter of glorious uprising?

oh yes, tell us more about seafaring, a skill that literal cavemen mastered with ease

Just as I thought

MODS=GODS

You can argue with racialists all day long, with papers to source your claims, it's always dismissed as kike conspiracy, whereas they always go on about muh Jensen, muh Rushton, muh Lynn, and when you point out debunking, it's "nuh uh doesn't count".
They are limits on how much anyone can argue in good faith with a brick wall.

nope faggot try again
you guys are eternally mad that no one will provide substantial scientific evidence to prove anything you believe and the science is only growing behind ideas which will make Leftism look like an outdated and obsolete mode of thinking. You're going to be outpaced by science and the public will ignore you. I'm only here to remind smart Holla Forums users that we know Holla Forums is full of shit but we've bought into fabian society, new world order ideas that we're all equal, that stalin did nothing wrong, that sexual liberation is "liberating" and that drugs are harmless and intelligence is merely a product of background. these are all insane things that this board reeks of every day.

ok…

Actually, a lot of Holla Forums comprises of people who are relatively actually reactionary or socially libertarian, but they're communists economically. The idea that sub-Saharan Africans are stupider than Anglos doesn't necessarily invalidate communism as a mode of production to aspire to, jesus.

you don't have papers to support your claims. All the studies done on intelligence say that almost .50 of the origins of intelligence are genetic and the genetic hereditary nature of intelligence increases dramatically with age. So an idiot born of idiots but given good schooling will be slightly more intelligent than he would if left alone. But the idiot will regress terribly as soon as they leave college and their Autism Level will be determined almost exlusively by genes by the age of 30 and thus their business and career decisions depend on inherited intelligence. The heritability correlation for intelligence poly-genic traits like Intelligence is around .2 at birth, the herritability by adolescence is around .4-.6 and by 30 is almost .8 which is mostly genetic. Gene expression fluctuates as one's hormones change, so it makes sense that in puberty the true heritability of one's intelligence starts to come out. Epigenetics cannot account for massive gaps in human intelligence and the Flynn effect is nonsense, children of immigrants perform standard in adulthood and their children tend to perform sub-par. Regression back to the mean is common for immigrants and we are also dealing with the absolute best and brightest who escaped warfare. So eugenically selected immigrants who perform well in primary school is nonsense. Look at their intelligence after graduation, nothing special at all. Most STEM proffessionals with visas are average or slightly above average intelligence. They are doing rote work, no visual thinking, no creative use of mathematical logic, could be replaced with algorithm easily.

Genetics is a settled science, intelligence is more heritable than 90% of all poly-genic traits. Its more heritable than attractiveness and height AND its selected for by assortative mating and thus seems to become locked up in certain concentrated population groups. Which explains brilliant lineages of scientists and doctors, i think of all careers being a successful academic is the most heritable.

s.ocially c.onservative lel

Let me guess, heritability is the actual word used in thoses studies right?

archive.is/uPGEN
archive.is/I9vEh
archive.is/GFOBo
archive.is/An7zF
archive.is/zyLDD
Anyway, i don't want to turn this into race autism thread numbr 192384183981 so here are samples of such threads.
Nothing new will be said.

I don't even understand how this is up for debate anymore. Even Chomsky says that Autism Level is mostly highly inheritable and Dawkins who so many blindly worship like he's a new God wrote "The Self Gene" and is very aware of behavioural genetics. It's not up for debate, it never will be. What is is the need to seize the means of production. Anyone butthurt about objective reality is just a liberal bourgeois.

bump

I won't click because my blood pressure will triple.

you don't understand what heritability is at all and neither does the cat poster who spams the same 7 links every time one of these threads comes up.

from wikipedia: " Heritability increases when genetics are contributing more variation or because non-genetic factors are contributing less variation" and thus if for instance heritability were to go up with age in regards to intelligence phenotypes. Then it is obvious that either environmental variation is decreasing (unlikely, if intelligence is a learned behavior then it shouldn't start rotting instantly the moment its not maintinenced) or because genetic variation is going up (because gene expression is modulated over time and becomes more important after puberty and in adulthood when mating is important and thus the endocrine system becomes a major factor for life outcomes). You guys are just wasting everyone's time. All of your articles are weasel worded attempts at obfuscating the truth, which is that most of the heritability of intelligence comes from genes and your genes are the number one deciding factor in how you will marry, how you will perform and how you will think. If you are of bad stock you are in need of gene therapy immediately. This is what people should be taking away from all this.
Its not up for debate, no one is debating this. What they're doing is trying to prevent STEM students from talking about this with their graduate instructors and with other peers. This is being silenced by the media and the academic establishment. Its an open secret and it will cause a cultural catastrophe if its forced into the public's consciousness when its too late. Now is the time to drop the black pill about intelligence, not later when things are dire and force will need to be used. What people are doing on here is unacceptable and dangerous for the future. Being unable to accept science is dangerous

Can you autists in this thread stop feeding obvious bait?

...

lmfao pathetic

...

i have bad grammar and syntax, deal with it

if you were white and didn't have a subhuman i.q. it could have been avoided

No one is silencing the idea that intelligence is largely hereditary, leave the Holla Forums victim-conspiracy mentality behind. The issue is saying intelligence is racial and that people are poor or criminals because they're dumb, which is obviously trying to justify eugenics. Race does not exist, and crime and poverty is a societal issue, not some individual genetic one.

No one is anti-science except the genetic determinists and racialists ITT.

Watch these:
youtube.com/watch?v=vVmj8dDx9yY
youtube.com/watch?v=teyvcs2S4mI

Yes I-Q differences are real, between individuals and ethnic Groups. I Think this knowledge is very valuable for creating a better society for all. If we could raise the average I-Q of every country there would a significant decrease in crime and a good increase in productivity.

Low I-Q correlates with criminal activity.

Yes, that's obvious by looking at the statistics. But you don't hear of many retards being gangbangers, so it seems to imply criminality is much more than just a simple matter of "high Autism Level* = upstanding, hardworking citizen, low Autism Level* = degenerate criminal scum".

The videos did not talk about race it talked about ethnic groups.

I have more european blood than most Holla Forums users do and I have a remarkably above average Autism Level thanks to my ethnic background
no I started skipping too much school when SAT grammar was taught and I stopped reading almost completely until the age of 20 so unfortunately I will never master English grammar. I try to pay close attention to the parsing of the literature and academia articles to help pick up grammar norms, but I still end up typing like a vulgar autist.
Yes they are, please don't tell me about my own lived exprience. And please don't associate me with Holla Forums this is the only board I post on
You'd have to carefully define what you mean by that because as this user just stated you seem to be arguing something counterintuitive.
yes eugenics is absolutely necessary and you're insane if you don't think this is the case
correct, there are no phylogenetic sub-species of homo sapiens. There are haplogroups which correlate with clusters of phenotypes which are found in similar rates among people who also happen to be of certain ethno-religious backgrounds, for instance Askhenazi Jews, Coptic Christian Egyptians, Libyan Berbers etc are all obviously genetically distinct from their host populations (Arabized North Africans, Arabized Egyptians and Europeans in reverse order respectively).
its biological and it then becomes social
I've never met a bio-determinist or racialist who was anti-science in my entire life. I've only ever met anti-science leftists who are atheists and love homosexuality and drugs but hate the idea of negative selection or assortative mating.
no faggot
haplogroups are valid, race is used in social sciences so why not in socio-biology and economics? It makes no sense to me that race is studied in psychology and sociology but is left out of models for economics and socio-biology.
yes it is, the cat poster and a number of other posters on here are literally convinced that epigenetics accounts for nearly all of the discrepancies in human intelligence between lets say sub-saharans and nords. Which is insane and anti-science and out of touch with reality.

nice try, but we've seen the Holla Forums pics. none of you are white

A ratio genetic variance / phenotypic variance for a given population in a given environment.
That's literally what it is. It's not the percentage of genetic influence in a trait.
If you calcualte the heritability of number of fingers in the US population, you have something near zero because losing fingers is much more frequent in accidents than being born like that.
Does that make the number of fingers independent from genetic factors? Of course not.

Holy fuck why does Holla Forums never stop feeding trolls?

This post should have been the hint to disengage. The guy is too retarded to understand the most basic ideas about the literature he's engaging with

Gangmembers might not be retards but many who join gangs have lower then average I-Q, see:
cla.auburn.edu/econwp/Archives/2011/2011-03.pdf

From the PHDCN, I find that after conditioning on a number of other
neighborhood and individual characteristics, persons below the mean level of Autism Level in the
neighborhood are far more likely to join a gang. The PHDCN results, interpreted in context of
the existing literature (Thornberry, Huizinga, & Loeber, 2004; Venkatesh, 2006), point to
19

neighborhood-level, economic processes which generate a comparative advantage in gang
activities for those with a lower Autism Level.

I don't understand why people are opposed to voluntary eugenics. If it's true that intelligence is an important factor in a child's success, and that genetics play a role in intelligence, then smart people should be encouraged to have children, family planning should be supported by the state, and people receiving welfare benefits or criminals should be encouraged to have few children.

Suppose that the environment plays a significant role in intelligence, beyond childhood nutrition, which can at least be addressed. What's the plan here, state-issued copies of Polgar's Bring Up Genius!, or something?

Like some user once said, lurkers thinks this way:"if nobody answers, then surely it can't be constested"
If you don't call out bullshit when you see it, it becomes consensus.
That's one of the reason imageboards are in this shape today.

And that do apply also against every faggot that comes here to strawman about muh goernement and rabid babby eaters.
You will always have to spoonfeed newfags asking stupid shit again and again and again

The ride never ends.

Within 5 years we will have the ability to select for higher intelligence through embryo selection. The trick is to make it affordable for as man as possible.

I'm not from Holla Forums i can't stand stupid people, they think the Federal Reserve is owned by the Rothschild family and that the CIA is controlled by Israel from Tel Aviv. Those are fucking insane things to base a whole movement around, it took me literally 5 minutes to figure out how the Federal Reserve is managed and owned (hint: by member banks, most of which are owned by mutual funds) and anyone who thinks Israel would be such a middling economy if it was in charge is so dumb I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell them

correct but do you know why its significant?
No but it is an indicator of genetic variation being responsible for phenotype variation. The only way heritability goes up is if genetic variance goes up (the differences in phenotypes explains it) or because environmental variance decreases (environmental differences cease; so educational standards being applied uniformly would be this kind of heritability increase). Therefore heritability of intelligence is based around the genetic and environmental variance experienced in shared and non-shared environments. So if heritibility is high its either because there is very little variation in environment OR because there is massive variation in genetics (which is why Sub-Saharan Africans have significantly different intelligence quotients than nords do). So it is useful for determining how much variation is due to genes or not, though obviously the authors of any genetic analysis study must control for these things and rule out other factors (such as a decrease in environmental variance, which is probably not the reason for heritability of intelligence increasing over time).
Does that make the number of fingers independent from genetic factors? Of course not.
literally nonsense. I just ignored the last two lines because I know you don't know what you're talking about and don't understand why heritability is studied or what it means. The faggot article that cat poster put up about "hertiability is not inheritence" is what you're going off of. Cute but pathetic and unworthy of attention. You lose, you don't even have the most basic grasp of the subject you're discussing and you want to debate with actual settled science.

no I understand exactly what its a measure of, its a measure of the amount of variance in phenotype expression within a populatin that is due to either: increased genetic variance or decreased environmental/non-genetic variance. When heritability is low there is high non-genetic variance and thus minimal genetic variance. The intelligence phenotypes will even out if for instance genetic variance goes up and thus heritability would plummet. Its the complete reverse of the faggot arguments you autistics are trying and failing to make.

You guys are fucking pathetic. Every single attempt to obfuscate this does nothing.

they also have lower impulse control, more likely to have facial features which can be correlated with low impulse control and are more likely to engage in risky behavior as children (before any contact with gangs).

It gets way deeper, a chinese algorithm recently correctly matched 70% of the faces it was exposed to with behavioral traits that correctly correlated with their criminal backgrounds. We're going to be able to do phrenology and physiognomy and its going to be beautiful. Its all coming back, we just needed technology and a little bit of time and genetics.

The Christians won't like that much.

It was actually 90%

Correlation is not causation. The argument is whether it's a causative relationship dependent on genetic factors.
At least you're honest about it.
Yes, yes, the point being they are not significant enough to say "this very minuscule genetic difference is the single or main reason why these two ethnic groups are so different".
What does that mean?
Being a racialist is be definition anti-science, since the concept of human race is universally rejected by biologists.
If you're not from Holla Forums you should probably try to refrain from using the same type of "muh degenracy" language they use.
Yes faggot. The first one is specifically about race and genetic determinism.
Precisely because race only has any validity in social sciences, since it only exists on a sociological level, not a biological one.

If Autism Level* was the main factor, and a lower Autism Level* influences it even more, then why aren't most retards criminals? If poverty is a result of low intelligence as is criminality, why do poor rural areas have less crime than poor urban areas? Why is Africa such a failure when it has the same average Autism Level* as Western Europe had in the 1930s?

Really? I didn't think it was that accurate. Either way this shit is completely real and its easily put into practice with algorithms and machine learning. I don't see any reason why full eugenics and physiognomy/phrenology don't come back into vogue in the next 30 years. The attractiveness thing will be smoothed over with the popularization of cheap plastic surgery and body augmentation. By the time everyone is one brown mass of vaguely cute bug-people, they'll forget about Blackness and gay rights and "diversity' and they'll all want to have their offspring edited into 6'4 Supermen with european features and all of the alleles we associate with intelligence and impulse control which are most predominantly found in Europeans. Its going to be beautiful and they will forget they ever argued against it in the first place. This will all seem like a lost childhood quarrel with mommy over whether or not you are going to eat your vegetables. lol

Thats the thing, we dont know why, we only know that crime correlates with lower I-Q, everywhere. I Think we will understand it in time. W Europé did not have the same Autism Level as Africa(which part doesnt matter) in the 1930s.

I just checked the paper on arxiv, they said that their best classifier reached an accuracy of 89.51% in predicting criminality. Now, there is still the issue of >Chinese science with this paper, but there is probably something to it.

Its going to be hard to do that in the west, but there are no such considerations in China or Taiwan. I Think the west will accept it when they see that we cannot compete on any level with chinese.

As an anarchist, this is how I feel about arguing with the exponentially multiplying mounds of bullshit from tankies.

nothing in this rant indicates you have an above average intelligence

Gasp! Are, are you blaspheming the one true faith ('MUH TECHNICS') how dare you! You must kneel before the altar of instrumental rationality.

I am against the all pervasive ideology of science. It's just a way to sell neoliberalism to redditors.

If there was a .8 correlation between someone showing up to your house to hangout and one of your valuable pieces of dinner-ware going missing would you act on that?
I believe in brutal honesty over everything else. Eugenics is necessary and good, we would be insane not to implement it, along with gene therapy and mandated bio-medical intervention in human development cycles
Completely wrong, Jews are the way they are Whites are the way they are because of genetics. There are genetic reasons for the "Jewish" personality and behavior patterns just as there are for "Whites" and "Blacks". You're just uncomfortable with this idea
It originates in the endocrine system and nervous tissues and then becomes "social" when multiple genetic environments interact with each other. Socializing is negotiating between different genomes
Believing that intelligence isn't hereditary is anti-science and I would rather someone believed in biological races than believed something so dangerous as that
degenerates are disgusting and a threat to the human gene pool and prosperity of the species
no fuck you, learn to argue and use rhetoric effectively. I don't give youtube views to fags anymore
But haplogroups are real and correlate strongly with behaviors which are concentrated among these groups and correlate with ethno-religious groups. Therefore its worth incorporating these understandings into economics and sociology. There should be a consciousness of genetics and race in economics, is my point.

are you attempting to argue that Western Europeans had lower Autism Level's than Sub-Saharans at any point in human history? I'm sorry but I don't believe you. I've never for a moment felt that to be the case

Remember we literally have to train AI not to be racist and we have to train AI not to be sexist

I don't think that an anonymous biased communist on a Laotian Knotted-Wares making board is a good judge of my intelligence. But considering I am the only person in the thread who understands why heritability is important and I guarantee I'm one of only 3 people on this entire board who reads studies for fun, I doubt I have an Autism Level below 120. Also considering that I read for fun in my free time and have been able to pick up new ideas faster than my peers throughout my life I think I probably have a well above-average intelligence quotient. Probably significantly higher than most posters on this board and than you and your entire family lineage going back 40 generations.

Well if crime is being strongly associated with certain genetics traits then I'd say it is. Like it or not if there are alleles in the population that serve as a detriment to society the only way to fix the problem is to get rid of them, this doesn't mean active genocide or any Holla Forums shit. I'd rather just pay genetic idiots (or anyone with a negative trait, like being a carrier for cysticfibrosis or dwarfism) to not reproduce with some sort of eugenic stipend. Do you have good genetics? We'll pay you to have kids! Have shitty genetics? We'll pay you to get your tubes tied/vasectomy! It's win-win. There's also no reason it would be "racial", plenty of smart+healthy black people would get to reproduce and we'd end up with a population where positive traits wouldn't be associated with "race" anymore as all children would be born of only the best of the best anyways.

The only faggots who'd be opposed to it are: 1.anarcho-darwinists who think we should have natural selection via some stupid Nazi masturbation fantasy or 2. are spooked by evolution into caring for their genetics over the good of society

I wrote that W Europe did not have the same I-Q as Africa in the 1930s. Regardless of which part of Africa we compare to W Europe.

Man is defined by Technics and the Soul is expressed most clearly through Technics. Without Technics we are merely risen apes. We will liberate ourselves through technology or we will die trying friend. There is no other way, there is no exit and there is no return to the primordial Eden. We are not welcome back, remember Uriel is waiting for you with a flaming sword should you choose to turn on your destiny. He will cast you out faggot

Eugenics was popular in the Progressive Party in the US as recently as the 1910s. It only became unspeakable because of the Nazis. I think concerns about white supremacists are understandable, but white supremacists are largely people who already have an "ought" and are looking for an "is".

This is a non-statement, what do you mean? Western Europeans had higher Autism Level as Africans in 1930 because Western Europeans experienced selection pressures and random mutations which encouraged high Autism Level sexual selection and produced robust, healthy and intelligent off-spring. They also were vigorous and constructive and engineered their environment to be conducive to high Autism Level breeding and development of off-spring. Africans didn't experience or do any of this and suffer continuously for it. This is all there is to it. Its just shitty luck and a lack of elan on the part of that group of peoples. sucks

I agree. English is not my first language maybe thats why it came out in a confusing way.

I can't even imagine how full of myself I'd have to be to brag about "reading studies for fun" and "reading in my spare time" to a board full of people who read studies for their profession and use "read a fucking book for once" as one of their most common refrains. Your writing is substandard and so is your reading comprehension.
Your doubt or lack thereof is of no consequence. We're not in the business of accepting faith based claims

...

Read pdf.

Expcet people like you abuse hereditarianism en masse

debunkingdenialism.com/2012/08/11/the-widespread-abuse-of-heritability/

debunkingdenialism.com/2013/12/27/abusing-heritability-libertarian-realist-edition/

debunkingdenialism.com/2014/02/08/abusing-heritability-libertarian-realist-edition-part-ii/

1/2

From Graves

Population subdivision is a means to test the amount of genetic variation among sub- populations within a species. This concept was developed by American evolutionary geneticist Sewall Wright (1978). Populations, which have undergone significant adaptation to local conditions, differ in population dynamic history, and limited gene flow between them should differ in allele frequencies at a number of loci. The population subdivision statistic (FST) compares the allelic diversity of each of the subpopulations against a pooled total population. Since Wright’s invention of F coefficients, which examine the proportioning of genetic variation between different levels within a species, population geneticists have utilized a minimum value of differentiation between subpopulations and the total species as the threshold for identifying the existence of biological races (FST > 0.250). Wright chose this value to maximize the probability that the subgroups were actually fixed for alternative different alleles at various loci.
At the level of the DNA, the alleles are the four nucleotides: adenosine (A), Thymine (T), Guanine (G), and Cytosine (C). In coding regions of the genetic code, three nucleotides in succession determine which amino acid should be placed in the resultant protein. The code is redundant, but a change in a position can result in a dif- ferent amino acid being specified. When we examine the coding and noncoding regions of DNA in a population, most organisms will have the same nucleotide at the vast majority of the positions within the code. However, at some positions, a variant will be found in some individuals. Such a variant is called a single nucleotide poly- morphism or SNP. Genetic variation in SNPs has been studied extensively in humans (Barbujani & Colona, 2010; Dunham et al., 2012; The 1000 Genomes Project Consortium, 2010). One study examined 4,833 SNPs in 538 clusters across the human genome in Europeans (N = 30), African Americans (N = 30), and Asians (N = 40; Clark et al., 2003). In the study, the mean frequency for FST at each locus was 0.083, with only 10% of the loci exceeding FST of 0.18 and about 6.5% exceeding FST of 0.250. This is consistent with the general finding that, averaged across the genome, FST in humans does not approach Wright’s threshold (and is generally FST = 0.110).

2/3

The other criterion by which one might identify geographic races within a species is to determine whether unique evolutionary lineages exist. This means populations that have had limited gene flow with other populations for a sufficiently long period of time. Such lineages, should they exist, would necessarily have large values of FST compared with nonunique lineages. However, we observe no such highly differenti- ated lineages within our species, anatomically modern humans (Barbujani & Colona, 2010; Lawson Handley et al., 2007; Templeton, 2002, 2013). The best way to under- stand human genetic diversity is through isolation-by-distance. This means that gene flow between different populations of humans is proportional to the geographic dis- tance between them. Geographic barriers to dispersal of humans exist, such as mountain ranges and deserts, but these barriers only account for 2% of the variation of FST, whereas isolation-by-distance accounts for 75% (Lawson Handley et al., 2007). Attempts to represent human genetic variation as “clustered” has been attempted (Rosenberg et al., 2002).
Furthermore, it has been claimed that these clusters roughly match the five continents, and thus correspond to the five-race scheme for modern humans (sub-Saharan African, European, East Asian, Australoid, Amerindian). This was accomplished by the use of a computer algorithm called STRUCTURE. The problem with this analysis is that underlying assumptions are essentialist and do not correspond to the evolution- ary history of our species (Weiss & Long, 2009). A typical STRUCTURE-like analysis defined a number of parental populations (either by user input or statistical inference) and then assigns fractions of parental ancestry to individuals. Unrealistic assumptions are made about the nature of the parental populations, such as random mating, with Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium for allele frequencies, and minimal linkage disequilib- rium between parental populations. Of course, the most unsupported assumption of STRUCTURE-like analysis is that the world once harbored distinct and independently evolving populations (Weiss & Long, 2009). To determine the genetic character of the “parental populations,” one needs alleles that are “private” to the purported parental populations. However, these sorts of genetic markers, called ancestry informative markers were determined from small- to medium-size samples taken from geographically distant populations (Europe, West sub-Saharan Africa, and East Asia). Given this sampling, it is a circular exercise to structure individuals into clusters. Of course, if the AIMS are not really informative of population ancestry, a STRUCTURE analysis may be simply meaningless.
On balance, the modern population genetic analysis suggests that our species, anatomically modern humans, does not display biological races (Barbujani et al., 2013; Graves, 2005a, 2005b; Montagu, 1997). We do have geographically based genetic and physical variation, and this fact has been consistently misinterpreted as evidence of the existence of biological races in our species. However, our species is young, has very little genetic variation, has maintained relatively high levels of gene flow throughout its history, and thus has never reached the levels of differentiation between its sub- populations consistent with the identification of geographical races (see discussions of this in Templeton, 2002; also see Graves, 2011; Lawson Handley et al., 2007; Serre & Paabo, 2004). Unfortunately, most researchers involved in projects that are affected by genetic variation do not have training or understand the historical context of evolution- ary thinking concerning speciation and the role that geographical races play in the process (Nesse et al., 2010; White et al., 2009). This is illustrated by the fact that they often assume that socially defined races are legitimate biological races (Bliss, 2012; Friedman & Lee, 2013; Graves, 2010, 2011).

You rant on about muh low I.Q races (which i've disproven, as well as given reason as to why your race doesn't determine your intelligence) But you do realise that social conservatives like yourself have low I.Qs.

May as well remove you from the gene pool, for the good of the volk, of course.

livescience.com/18132-intelligence-social-conservatism-racism.html

dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2095549/Right-wingers-intelligent-left-wingers-says-controversial-study--conservative-politics-lead-people-racist.html

We're literally giving you evidence and you're rejecting it. This is just, lad.

Now we're thinking.

Well considering 16 millions adults believe chocolate milk comes from brown cows over there…
There is a non neglectible probability he's one of the brightest in his surroundings…

Sam Harris is a pseduo-int along with Peterson. Considering the fact that Peterson actually thinks that communists= everything the USSR did and is responsible for more deaths, it's amazing how these fuckers feed off eachother for """muh rational liberalism"""". What's also telling is that Harris had Murray, the author of "The Bell Curve" on.

Not only has Murray been proven wrong, but it's also fun to see who funds Murray.

(sources proving Murray Wrong)

bostonreview.net/archives/BR20.6/block.html mensa.ch/sites/default/files/Intelligence_Neisser1996.pdf
dartmouth.edu/~chance/course/topics/curveball.html
bolesblogs.com/1998/03/23/a-review-of-the-bell-curve-bad-science-makes-for-bad-conclusions/
blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/the-real-problem-with-charles-murray-and-the-bell-curve/

As for the people who FINANCED his research

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_Fund
The pioneer fund is a known fascist think tank, whose research is also deeply flawed.

Why not through revolution? Or through God for that matter? Technology is merely the State theology of the modern neoliberal order. science worship is a theology, it has little in common with 20th century positivist philosophy, and more with Protestantism and the ideology of capital. I've noticed many people, STEMgags and Americans in particular, get personally offended if you suggest value free technics are anything less than the salvation of the universe.

So with this in mind, what does this say about Harris?
What is his agenda?
Considering the fact that he supports US imperialism to "Make the middle east better", I'd say he's using his philosophy to justify shitty acts for the sake of """rationality""", with him being a shill for the liberal establishment.

If we take his associates into account, is it really a surprise that Ben Stiller would want to act like a jack ass along with Peterson. This is pure spectacle imho.

Yeah, you're from Holla Forums buddy.

The leading intelligence researchers agree that I-Q is highly heritable.

infoproc.blogspot.se/2017/06/scientific-consensus-on-cognitive.html#disqus_thread

Yes, but you keep abusing it's methods for "muh race"
Again, read these.

debunkingdenialism.com/2012/08/11/the-widespread-abuse-of-heritability/
debunkingdenialism.com/2013/12/27/abusing-heritability-libertarian-realist-edition/
debunkingdenialism.com/2014/02/08/abusing-heritability-libertarian-realist-edition-part-ii/

total pseud

Revolution and God are for people who want to eat shit and wear out their knees
No
They're called verificationists now and they're still extremely mad and autistic
Its Judeo-Protestantism mixed with Germanic Faustian Alchemical Spirituality (but all the cool parts are dying and worthless now, the age of planes trains and automobiles is over and now we have pleasure skins, VR porn, dick pic apps and hologram waifus).
You read the wrong books if you believe that technics have values attached to them, they're anti-meaning. They literally obliterate the idea of ethics, meaning and morality. The nature of our thinking is something that is not capable of surviving in this kind of environment, you won't be able to ask these kinds of questions in 30 years. No one will remember to ask these questions, they won't make sense and they won't have any ground for meaning. Its just totally unavoidable and insurmountable. Truly horrifying beyond comprehension, it makes me happy knowing I'll live long enough to see the beginning of it

different day, same fucking stupid links

...

Lol, get out of here, Howard Scott/Cleric of Technology. I know it's you.

Except we debunk you when you bring Rushton and Jensen and Lynn.

See

Fun fact, they're all funded and linked to the Pioneer fund.

See

Howard is significantly more autistic and in love with early AM train-stop/bus-stop vagrant qt's than I ever could be

nah, but feel free to bring forth the details for all to see. We will be happy to assess what you have to offer i'm sure

Every fucking time. That was the pattern of every thread before this one, that's the one currently happening, and also the one of every thread that will come after this one.

Nothing new under the sun…

debunkingdenialism.com/2012/08/11/the-widespread-abuse-of-heritability/

"A high estimate of heritability for a trait does not mean that genes have a strong influence on that trait."

Another example is the number of fingers on one hand. We know that genetic causes of having a different number of fingers than five is extremely rare. In other words, the factor that accounts for almost all cases of having more or less than five finger is e. g. industrial accidents and other environmental factors. That means that the heritability of having five fingers on one hand is almost 0. Yet, we know that there are genetic influences on finger development.

This is completely false. There are also 6 definitions of heritability.

Skin color, five fingers are each highly heritable traits, i dont know why anyone would dispute this.

Except you yourself don't read them. I know who you are, you got BTFO when you said I used outdated sources.

You're a joke.

"There are also 6 definitions of heritability"
I meant in the article.

The whole point is that heritability as used in academic papers isn't used as a synonym to heritable you fucking autist.
The number of finger is heritable and do present a low heritability simultaneously. Because of the way heritability is calculated.

Sorry man, infographics are pleb tier knowledge.

Based on your writing style, I believe you're an engineer with delusions of grandeur. No science professor would give you a pass with your poor grammar.
So please, try to grab an actual biology book before spouting shit you don't actually understand.

You are crazy. MODS plz ban.

Nah you guys ignore everything I post

archive.is/JIvYU

archive.is/OEPJ

And last time I went and read all 6 links that catposter gave me and even looked at the sources cited. Half of them are useless, of the 3 that were vaguely scientific and obviously written by scientists only 1 of them had citations from recent studies from the last 15 years. Most of the citations are from books from the late 90's and early 00's and obviously seeking-specific-conclusions type articles and books for that matter, the kind that concerned liberal humanistic scientists write because their "possibly racist" colleagues start publishing lots of research that suggests genetic determinism or the extreme heritability of intelligence compared to most other traits. Its fucking annoying to deal with, at this point you're just training my mind to look for weasel words and a lack of citations or follow up research from other research teams.

Are you sure you want to shill Lynn and Murray and use this as a complaint?

I Think you are fucking liberal trying to shut down any uncomfortable discussions. Fuck of fucking worm fuck.

t. Pioneer fund

READ YOU NIGGERS, stop fucking with me and read this shit

And again, you get BTFO in threads as seen in

Pioneer fundie detected.

Your assertions are all laughably false and your arguments are non-existent.

read my studies cat or stop talking as if you've done anything other than cry about "epigenetics" something that's never been observed in mammals past the 3rd generation of offspring. Seriously read, I'm so tired of this shit. You should know better than to pretend like you aren't arguing from a position of weakness on this subject. You cannot make an idiot into a physicist without gene therapy and constant coaching and nutritional supplementation. If you gave them ADHD meds, nootropics and made them room with 3 autists then sure they'd get more intelligent but we're artificially boosting their intelligence, if you need technics to boost the capacity of a huge portion of the human population then obviously you have a problem of genetic degeneration or unequal distribution of intelligence.

Do you even read your own sources?

The first two laws come from quantitative genetic research, which uses, for example, the twin method to assess the net contribution of genetics to individual differences without knowledge of the genetic architecture of a trait, such as the number of genes involved or their effect sizes. A third law has emerged from molecular genetic research that attempts to identify specific genes responsible for widespread heritability, especially genome-wide association (GWA) studies of the past few years: The heritability of traits is caused by many genes of small effect.12 This was the premise of quantitative genetic theory set out nearly a century ago,13 but quantitative genetic methods themselves could not shine much light on the distribution of the effect sizes of genes in the population. For decades, the failure of linkage analyses to identify replicable linkages to chromosomal regions could be interpreted as support for this hypothesis because linkage has little power to detect small effect sizes. However, GWA studies have made it clear that the largest effect sizes of associations are very small indeed. For example, we are aware of almost no replicated genetic associations that account for more than 1 per cent of the population variance of quantitative traits such as height and weight. Because GWA studies have adequate power to detect such effect sizes, we can conclude that there are no larger effect sizes, at least for the common single-nucleotide variants that have been used in such studies to date. If the largest effect sizes are so small, the smallest effect sizes must be infinitesimal, which means that such associations will be difficult to detect and even more difficult to replicate. For example, the largest GWA study of intelligence differences, which included nearly 18 000 children, found no genome-wide significant associations. The largest effect sizes accounted for 0.2% of the variance of intelligence scores.14 Another recent GWA study of a sample of 1500 children reported an association that accounted for 0.5% of the variance of intelligence scores,15 but this association showed no effect in the study of 18 000 children (P=0.73; Benyamin B, personal communication). A GWA of educational attainment—which correlates moderately with intelligence—included more than 125 000 individuals; the DNA variant with the largest effect size accounted for 1% of the variance in years of education but the variance explained was only 0.02% in a replication sample.16 ‘Missing heritability' is the catch-phrase to describe the great gulf between heritability and the variance explained by associations with specific DNA variants.
Rather than reviewing evidence for these general laws in relation to intelligence, our review focuses on five findings from genetic research that are specific to intelligence. Because of the controversy and confusion that continues to surround intelligence, especially in the media and the general science literature,11 we begin by briefly discussing the definition, measurement and importance of intelligence.

Fuck off fucking libshit, baizuo piece of shit. Fuck your mother, Fuck your father, Fuck your wife, Fuck your son, Fuck your daughter, Fuck your dog, Fuck your Life. Piece of useless garbage.

you sound like a completely normal and well adjusted individual, would be friends with 10/10

...

From your own article

But you don't even read them yourself.

At least Porky flag try, kys.

every time

That's actually pretty freaky. I'd suggest taking a break from using the computer, your mobile device, or anything else with internet access.

And even more

We shall explain in this section that, akin to, but broader than cognitive and learning abilities, intelligence shares genetic causes with education and social class, which are touchstone ‘environmental' variables of diverse social scientists. Major human phenomena studied by these social scientists are social mobility and health inequalities, which are unarguably important. They are studied by sociologists, epidemiologists and economists. Finding out why some people more than others make positive progress in their social position through the life course, and why some people are more prone to illnesses and early death have drafted in the two favourite ‘environmental' social science variables of education and social class. Education and parental social class are predictors of people's social position in adulthood.98,99 Both, and the person's own adult social class, are associated with health, illness and mortality: less educated people and those in less professional jobs tend to die earlier.100, 101, 102, 103 However, there is a third variable in social mobility research, and a third variable in health inequalities research: intelligence.104 Both education and social class are substantially correlated with intelligence.29,61,105

Is based black cat flag poster schooling another retard itt

He's already been schooled, believe me. By his own sources no less

This tbh, I cannot understand why this is so controversial.

Why not both?

This has nothing to do with the idea that dumb people are inherently criminal. The question is asked "why are they more likely to go to crime" and you give simple, ignorant intrinsic answers like "poor impulse control" when the answer is significantly more likely to be "Because urban poverty is correlated with crime, and low intelligence with poverty; intelligent people are used better by Capitalism in higher fields, taking them out of poverty", the answer then becomes "Why are urban poor more likely to be criminals?" which the answer is likely to be "because there are significantly few job opportunities, their communities are torn about and made dysfunctional by the prison-industrial complex, and the only skill set they know that can make them decent money are criminal skills".
Completely unfounded and just wrong. Just watch the fucking video for three minutes. Simply put, there is only about an 11% genetic difference between major "racial" groups and natural selection has played an extremely minuscule role in that difference.
youtube.com/watch?v=vVmj8dDx9yY&feature=youtu.be&t=6m
Absolutely no one has said intelligence is not hereditary. The entire argument is the causes behind certain behaviors and whether I-Q can be attributed to race.
Nice soccer-mom moralizing.
Correlation is not causation. No one is arguing whether the average I-Q of a sub-saharan African is particularly low, the argument is whether that is an intrinsic genetic trait.
No, I'm arguing that. By judging the scores of Western Europeans in the 1930s to the average today, they would've had an I-Q of about 80. That being the case, they should've had a society on par with Sub-Saharan Africa.
This is just ridiculous pseudo-science that conveniently ignores the vast majority of history. That being until 800 AD most Europeans were irrelevant shitters living in huts, or how China was a major center of civilization in Ancient history but was an irrelevant, poor country before Mao made it relevant again. Why is the US known for its high number of Nobel Prize winners while simultaneously known for its colonization and later mass immigration of poor peasants with nothing to lose?

There is not an 11% difference between any two humans on the planet.

Western Europeans did not have an average I-Q of 80 in the 1930s. What scores are you referring to?

This is from the section 'what is intelligence and why is it important', and its from the sub-section "Intelligence brings (some) genetics to ‘social' epidemiology" which is literally just molecular psychiatrists and geneticists trying to cope with the fact that idealist social sciences are incompatible with natural sciences and will be swept away.
lmfao fam too stupid to hang

That's all you need to read. Again you're just fucking stupid and ideologically motivated cat. You don't actually read what I post. Yes of course Environment is like 40% of what goes into intelligence and in childhood its around 60-80% but it dramatically diminishes in importance over time

Genetic heritability of intelligence increases dramatically with age as one approached adulthood.
Well obviously those selections of environments are based on genetic predispositions so the amplification is due to intelligence which is inherited.

Projection much?

I never denied it wasn't genetic. Again read the sources I've posted ITT.

npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/03/28/521644395/study-suggests-childhood-exposure-to-lead-can-blunt-iq-for-decades

environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/newscience/iq-effects-childhood-lead-exposure-persist-in-adults/

And you call me a pseud.

Again, from your own sources

GCTA studies have recently explored the heritability and genetic correlations of intelligence, education and social class. A combined analysis of Swedish and Australian unrelated subjects (N~11 500) used GCTA to provide an estimate of 22% (s.e.=4%) for the heritability of years in education and 25% (8%) for attending college.16 In the Twins Early Development Study for 3000 unrelated children, GCTA-based estimates of heritability were 21% (12%) for parental social class and 28% (17%) for children's Autism Level at age 7 and 32% (14%) at age 12. The GCTA-estimated genetic correlation between parental social class and Autism Level was 1.00 (s.e.=0.47) at age 7 and 0.66 (0.31) at age 12.56GCTA-based estimates of heritability on over 6500 unrelated people with genome-wide SNP data in the Generation Scotland study were 29% (5%) for general intelligence, 21% (5%) for education and 18% (5%) for social deprivation.112 The genetic correlations were 0.95 (0.13) for intelligence and education, 0.26 (0.16) for intelligence and deprivation, and 0.45 (0.18) for education and deprivation. Therefore, some of the variance in the social scientists' key environmental variables can be found in DNA variation, some of which is shared with the DNA variation that causes some of people's differences in intelligence.

I mean gee willickers mr, it's not like black children are exposed to more lead than most other ethnicities in America right?

:^)

Weak posturing, I read my sources. You did some weasel snake shit
yes but less so than genetic factors and they again are no more than 40-50% of what's happening and the less than stellar results we've gotten from investing in education for low Autism Level populations indicate that its worth investing in gene therapy instead of free Harvard for everyone in Africa. Does that make sense my erudite not at all rote-bot friend?
lol ok friend lets read the end of this section, because the authors were self-owning OR they're weren't talking about what I was right? You're owning me right? I got BTFO'd again by BASED cat poster right? Oh wait they were just discussing some relevant data and how it might effect views of cognitive epidemiology vs social epidemiology

Elevated blood lead levels do not explain the I-Q gap. Also look closer at your of pic.

See

advisory.ey.com/digital/mobile-tech-improving-africa-health-economy

Read that again. You pretty much just BTFO out of yourself.

I don't really see the point in arguing with someone who doesn't even read their own sources.

Wow so it must be that the environment selection process is bad for black people in Africa historically, I never knew how tough it must have been having to select new environments to amplify the genes you have which are only partly responsible for your intelligence and then to go assortatively mate with other Africans for intelligence more often than you do for other traits and then to pass those traits on to a small population of descendants who will immigrate to Britain and be given welfare and extremely good education opportunities and diversity quota jobs. Its crazy how difficult that must be, and it must have a strong effect on their genes through epigenetics wouldn't it? Having such a tough environment to grow up in like Africa and racist America and UK that would really dampen someone's genetic robustness and probably cause maladaptive traits to fester and spread through populations right? wow that must be really tough having all those maladaptive traits that get passed on due to negative environmental selection and through socially imposed limitations. But you know what they say? Words are real, biology is fake. Through words we can overcome.

So not only are you illiterate, but historically illiterate too.

gatesnotes.com/Health/A-Disturbing-Link-Disease-and-Intelligence

ieet.org/index.php/IEET2/more/pellissier20120307

americanscientist.org/issues/feature/rising-scores-on-intelligence-tests/4

meant also for

I want you to point-by point explain how that cited passage
somehow renders me BTFO'd. Please do explain. What does this passage mean to you and how does it relate to me, for clarity i'd like to see you explain it. you can be brief if you'd like tho, i am sincerely confused and need help understanding what you're driving at right now.

Yes colonized and subjugated peoples tend to get mistreated by stronger, smarter populations. Its a reason that I find organic life to be pitiable, there is no organism capable of truly altruistic love and empathy.

That's interesting, I wonder how low the Autism Level levels in Africa were before colonists and slavers showed up? It would be interesting if we could extrapolate that from their skull size and dimensions and dna studies wouldn't it?
Yeah but that's just biology, there are dolphins and apes that do evil gangster shit to other apes especially females during breeding season. Truly gangster, underhanded shit but its just biology or ecology or however you'd like to view it.
They should all be colonized by China and forced to get CRISP'red and subjected to intense warfare and eugenics. Same thing needs to happen in South America too. Warfare is great for overpopulation and degeneration

Or you could just implement a one Child policy and mandatory CRISPr and embryo selection. Fucking hell war for depopulation, They are human beings. Plz stop being such and uberporky.

...

Believe it or not, thats how the world works.

Hence they themselves do not dismiss environmental factors and social class play a factor in intelligence, from access to resources and better health etc.

Hence, they acknowledge the environment in regards to class plays a roll.

Hence they're acknowledging that if there is more study on the environmental factors, we can and should adjust it to improve better health and living standards, which effect intelligence.

So rape should be condoned? Murder and terrorism should just be condoned? Because that's just "the ways things are"

Again, I don't see why I bother talking to you. You're an illiterate pseud who once again, gets BTFO.

Its not about condoning anything. A weak and dumb people are at the mercy of a stronger and smarter one. If they have a piece of land or natural resources that the stronger people want they will not be able to stop them, regardless if they dont condone it.

...

Also if you look at this globally you could Point the finger at the US, many have condemnet US invasions and US meddling in other countries affairs but they are powerless to stop it and that is because of the might of the US.

Thats the thing, if a so called superior race loses to and inferior one, are they really superior?

Also im not a nazi, im a commie I just try to look at the world honestly.

I meant that only 11% of the genetic difference between two individuals of different ethnic groups can be attributed to their racial group.