Genetic Tests Can Predict Cognitive Ability

>>7987183
Genetics is the finger pointing to the moon. Don't mistake it for the moon itself.

>>7987186
The glass is only imaginary if you imagine it.

Look, I can post retarded 2deep4u trash too.

> genetics matter
> cognitive abilities are inherited
another /pol/ thread ?

>>7987183
It's been obvious that genetics are a central aspect in determining intellect to anyone with sense since for as long as genetics has been a thing.

>>7987201
It's not science?

> 1Centre for Cognitive Ageing and Cognitive Epidemiology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
2Department of Psychology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
3Medical Genetics Section, University of Edinburgh Centre for Genomic and Experimental Medicine and MRC Institute of Genetics and Molecular Medicine, Edinburgh, UK
4Queensland Brain Institute, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
5Division of Psychiatry, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
6Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK
7MRC Human Genetics Unit, MRC Institute of Genetics and Molecular Medicine, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK
8Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
9Institute of Psychological Medicine and Clinical Neurosciences, MRC Centre for Neuropsychiatric Genetics and Genomics, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK
10MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK

Conclusion from full article

The present results make advances in, and encourage much further work on the genetic foundations of cognitive differences. Until recently, GWASs of cognitive functions had provided converging information about their polygenic architecture—especially via SNP-based heritability estimates—and modest power to predict cognitive phenotypes in independent studies. However, they were near-bereft of significant, replicable genetic variants that could be followed-up to understand why some people have more efficient cognitive functioning than others. This drought is ending; work can begin on the genetically driven biological mechanisms of cognitive differences and the biological foundations of the many associations between cognitive abilities and bio-medical, health and social variables.

>>7987214
> genetics matter
> cognitive abilities are inherited
these are memes. memes are not science

>>7987183
>partly heritable

So a whole lot of nothing then. No shit some people are smarter. The rest is your effort.

>>7987218
I don't trust this conclusion. It's very hard to predict what the change would actually be for society as a whole if everyone accepted genetic determinism.

>>7987221
You seem retarded. This is science. It's systemic study through observation and experiment.

>>7987224
genetic illnesses are also inherited, which are NOT nothing.

> Polygenic score analyses indicate that up to 5% of the variance in cognitive test scores can be predicted in an independent cohort

This basically confirms to me that genetics is a factor but not the most important one by far.

>>7987183
OY VEY WHY ARE YOU SO RACIST

SHUT IT DOWN

No but seriously, jews are really retarded, we are about to have designers babies, why are you trying to create a slave race through mongrelisation.
It won't work you retards.

>>7987233
Because muh pure jewish blood. Honestly its quite funny that they are so deluded in their purified jewish race that Askhenazis don't breed with other people because fuck knows why. But ironically they carry all the genetic diseases down to their generations. Thier lifespan is shorter than other people in general .

>>7987231
You misunderstand

That is what is possible to predict now with the information we have. It used to be 1-2%, it is now up to possibly 5%.

It signifies an incredible advancement in determining intelligence through genetics test. Which is the first leap towards genetic selection / gene engineering of a more intelligence society.

It means we can reliably increase intelligence in a society through PGD already.

>this drought is ending; work can begin on the genetically driven biological mechanisms of cognitive differences and the biological foundations of the many associations between cognitive abilities and bio-medical, health and social variables.

>>7987218
This implies that much of learning isn't just developing the ability to utilize the neurological architecture you already have.

Frankly, genetics are a central aspect of inherent ability, but environmental factors are still highly important as with any developmental aspect.

>>7987318
Better yet, what if the "genetics" side of the argument is by intelligent people who will also look to maximize a lot of different positive traits like determination and grit as well as intelligence.

A simple example not to be taken as any evidence is the "work drive" in dogs to chase. Part of selecting a dog to go through military training is simply judging how high their chase drives are.

For instance Belgian Malinois are tested and how long they hold onto a ball when the trainer tries to fight for it. Other similar tests are done and the extreme outliers in drive are selected for training.

This is done specifically on Belgian malinois because it is a working breed with these innate drives. It is on a completely different planet to a normal dog's drive.

There is probably opportunities to improve traits besides just intelligence that also give great rewards to productivity and economic output.

Nice, I'll be able to abort every single baby until I get one that isn't a sub 150 IQ brainlet.

>>7987452
>tfw 149 IQ
>tfw won't be able to develop this new retinoblastoma diagnostic technique because aborted
:(

>>7987470
Serves you right for being a brainlet

>>7987201
>genetics don't matter
>a cockroach can be just as intelligent a child with downsyndrome who can be just as intelligent as jon von neumann if you raise them right

It's another leftwing pseudoscientist

>>7987472
All this IQ eugenics shit don't matter. None a' this matters.

>>7987229
>and experiment.
No.

That said, I'm not the same anon, I don't object to the study

File: drake-hotline-explanation.jpg (36KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 600x400px

>>7987476
>strawmanning this hard

>>7987230
Wow, that's such a new scientific revelation

>>7987183
Who is this semen demon

>>7987201
how is the discussion of genetic racial differences not /sci/ related?

>>7987930
What is there to discuss?

>>7987935
I don't see that as an answer to my question, did you fail to read it properly?

>>7987939
Not the guy, but there are lots of topics that are /sci/ related (genetics and intelligence included) but are not discussed because there is nothing to discuss. The appropriate data that paves the way for meaningful discussion (statements with hard evidence) on genetics and intelligence just hasn't been obtained yet as there is ongoing research on the matter.

>>7987935
It's a science publication showing a great leap in our understanding of genetic links to cognitive ability.

The conclusion of the article summarized it quite well.

>The present results make advances in, and encourage much further work on the genetic foundations of cognitive differences. Until recently, GWASs of cognitive functions had provided converging information about their polygenic architecture—especially via SNP-based heritability estimates—and modest power to predict cognitive phenotypes in independent studies. However, they were near-bereft of significant, replicable genetic variants that could be followed-up to understand why some people have more efficient cognitive functioning than others. This drought is ending; work can begin on the genetically driven biological mechanisms of cognitive differences and the biological foundations of the many associations between cognitive abilities and bio-medical, health and social variables.

It's an extremely good piece of evidence to support genetic determinism and to reiterate that genetic factors are extremely important in predicting outcomes.

It's like hearing about an experiment that is consistent with the standard model. What it does is reinforce a genetic model for looking at human outcome. Which also helps people also understand why the world exists at it does now.

>>7987960
we can't discuss it, because there is nothing to discuss?

could you make less sense?

did you read the OP? several genes related to intelligence have been found

is it not more likely that you don't want it discussed because it proves an entire field of science is being covered up? and this embarrasses you? or maybe you can't cope with the cognitive dissonance, knowing that one of your bedrock beliefs is not just wrong, but based on organized lies

>>7987975
The last thread about this was actually deleted by an admin because of arguments like that. It was a sham argument about how it had nothing to do with sci and a lot of other silly stuff meanwhile "math 300k meme" threads covered the front page.

It's not just that poster but admins of /sci/ who dislike it as well.

>>7987975
>librul conspiracy/coverup

literally /pol/: the post

Holy fuck you people are dumb as fucking shit.

WHERE did I say that we CANT discuss it? I said that there is nothing MEANINGFUL to discuss because the DATA is INCOMPLETE.
WHO here doubts that intelligence is not defined by genetics??? Scientists and people with scientific knowledge were the FIRST people to base their views that intelligence or part of intelligence is determined by genetics, before any dumbfuck /pol/ack started distorting their words to fit their own biased worldview.

Goddamn your extreme strawman arguments are pissing me off to no end. I hope some other anon has the patience to entertain you.

>>7987992
>The last thread about this was actually deleted by an admin because of arguments like that.
they're censoring honest and rational scientific inquiry?

how incredibly dishonest, biased and unscientific

>>7987999
>the DATA is INCOMPLETE
there are lots of scientific issues where the data is incomplete, that's not a valid reason for not discussing them. There is evidence, even if it's not 100% conclusive.

Here we have a study that claims to have found several genes relating to intelligence. How is it not meaningful to discuss?

>distorting their words to fit their own biased worldview
I see, your worldview is unbiased, and you are some kind of saintly unbiased person. how is it distorting the scientists words, if the data and argument comes from scientists?

>strawman
how is any of my arguments a strawman? why do stupid people just claim any argument they don't like is a strawman, even when they aren't, and refuse to refute them. Perhaps because they can't refute them

>>7988015
>there are lots of scientific issues where the data is incomplete
And that promoves more genetics reseraches. That's great. But make sure to report the eugenics circlejerk members, ok?

>>7987999
[triggered] the post

Intelligence and genetics have been heavily censored by academia. If you actually did a poll of actual professors and administration at any university you would absolutely find huge argument.

The paper itself is noteworthy enough to look at and spread regardless if the discussion is amazing.

>>7988024
>eugenics circlejerk
?

>>7988015
Yep

It's why I left the OP blank except for the actual abstract. Last time the same person arguing in here was reporting it because the OP had text besides the article. Made it slightly harder to justify deleting regardless of the fact any other topic I would feel fine adding some sentences of thought to the OP.

calm down pls

>>7988039
>they banned because x
Man, can't you understand that you can discuss whatever the fuck you want if it's /sci/ related?
But it always derails by eugenics circlejerk posters and more /pol/ shit. It always happens.

>>7988064
Do you consider genetic engineering or embryo selection the same sort of eugenics as forced sterilization or genocides?

>>7987218
>tfw fixed mindset
i feel like it wasnt always like this.
who or what did this to me?
;_;

>>7988015
>that's not a valid reason for not discussing them.
Well, I highlighted I meant MEANINGFUL discussion twice. You can discuss things, but a lot of it is bound to be speculation because the data is incomplete, as you yourself said. I didn't say it shouldn't be discussed or anything. But that's just my opinion.

>how is it distorting the scientists words, if the data and argument comes from scientists?

I referred to the /pol/acks who use those papers without understanding them as 'proof' of race difference, I probably should have specified. As I said, I am absolutely of the opinion that a good part of our intelligence is defined by our genes, but not completely.

>how is any of my arguments a strawman?
You tried to present my argument as a restriction for scientific discussion on the matter, which is vastly different from what I said.

You also talked about librul conspiracies and coverups and I really don't know why.

Also:
>how incredibly dishonest, biased and unscientific
That thread was incredibly unscientific if you were there. It was a complete mess and the mods were right to delete it. Don't base your arguments on what other biased /pol/acks tell you.

>>7988033
Indeed I was triggered, and I apologise for the tone of the post.

>Intelligence and genetics have been heavily censored by academia.
what? Any proof of that?

>The paper itself is noteworthy enough to look at and spread regardless if the discussion is amazing.
If you think so, no problems there. Spreading and talking about it is OK, pretending to get any meaningful results out of it is what I disagree with.

>>7988077
>as 'proof' of race difference
are you saying the best sprinters aren't African?, and the best swimmers aren't Whites?

>>7988071
That's eugenics anon. Do a thread about genetic engineering and embryo selection.
Genocide and forced sterilization are also irrational arguments.

>>7988077

>what? Any proof of that?
Really? Are you pretending to be stupid?

http://www.nature.com/news/ethics-taboo-genetics-1.13858

>>7987229
Check out the PISA study by OECD. They found that the main determinant of academic success for a country's high school students was whether or not they believed that intelligence was innate or whether it can be developed. South Koreans, for instance, generally hold the belief that academic achievement is directly correlated with the amount of time that you spend studying a particular subject, while Americans are more likely to believe that it doesn't really matter how much you study because if you are dumb then you are irredeemable.

The counterargument that intelligence is innate is easy, there exist mentally handicapped people, but this does not preclude the possibility that the vast majority of neurologically sound people are not even close to developing this intelligence to the fullest extent.

The PISA is a fascinating read, I recommend at least skimming through the findings.

>>7988094
Interesting, I actually thought the topic wasn't taboo among academics, but I should've guessed anyways. Too bad. Thanks for that.

>>7988095
I can't convey how innately stupid that idea is.

South Koreans have an immensely stressful study culture. They definitely do not believe you become a genius by studying hard and have the same IQ ideas as any other country.

I would seriously doubt any such study as being completely absurd. Just the sample size alone is far too low to compare across countries and actually find evidence of that.

Not to mention >psychology study

File: 18zmaw0tkh8fzjpg.jpg (75KB, 640x424px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 640x424px

>>7988113
I strongly suspect whoever determined Korea has high scores because of belief in IQ or not was a total idiot.

This is a study box in Korea, parents put their kids inside and lock it to "help" them study. The average hours of sleep is lowest in the world in Korea because they force their kids to study so much.

>>7988141
Also if they say shit about how "it's because we believe study increases IQ" they are full of shit. It's because in Korea it's normal for parents to expect financial help from children. They are extremely incentivized, same as in China, to have financially successful children. The work situation is also much more brutal than America has been over the past few generations.

I've never actually heard a single whisper about this belief in "increasing intelligence" in Korea before. They definitely believe in static intelligence and IQ.

File: tumblr_m7x779cVf61ryvhlao1_500.jpg (51KB, 350x350px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 350x350px

>Blacks carping on whites for bring 'the man' down
>Whites carping on Jews for bringing them down
It all makes sense now

>>7988172
Wow. I had no idea Noble prizes were so racist and discriminant. It's nothing more than a jewish circlejerk it seems.

>>7988172
Ashkenazi Jews descend from roman women who converted. So in fantasy land they are actually true descendants of Rome as well.

https://www.geneticliteracyproject.org/2013/10/08/ashkenazi-jewish-women-descended-mostly-from-italian-converts-new-study-asserts/

Israel belonged to Rome before, and it belongs to Rome's children today.

File: Ohwow.jpg (39KB, 562x437px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 562x437px

>>7988177
And this "chess" they speak of must be soem kind of Jewish popularity contest!

>>7988190
> justified racism
kek

>>7988177
>>7988184
>>7988190
How to spot out /pol/ 101: bring up Jewish intelligence

Knew you fuckers were in here. This is a /pol/ op. Shut it down

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/140909/ncomms5835/full/ncomms5835.html

>>7988198
Bruh, >>7988190 is clearly sarcasm.

>>7988198
> I tell who /pol/ is and who isn't
How to spot pathetic wormy jewish nationalist goldstein. Did it trigger you that people talk about your racism ?

>>7988206
>this triggers the white nationalist
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SVi15LJgZrc

>>7988206
Get shrekt. You were outed. These threads were always /pol/ under the guise of le science.

Oh, and be sure to show up tomorrow at 8 am. I got some extra work for you to do

>>7988209
>>7988211
> trying to justify jewish racism
You can't bullshit your way out of racism Chaim

>>7988216
>muh racism
You don't see the irony do you?

File: TINFOIL-HAT-facebook[1].jpg (43KB, 594x297px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 594x297px

>>7988211
> i-its a /pol/ cunspiraccy
go be a fat loser somewhere else

>>7988220
There is no irony in jewish racism and sexism and any desperate attempt to justify it. Please stop embarrassing yourself further.

>>7988226
Got it, so you don't see it.

Daily reminder to hide and ignore all /pol/ threads on /sci/.

>>7988221
You too goy. 8 am. I need my shekels.

>>7988233
> I tell whats pol and whats not
thats just cute you poor sjwtard :^)

>>7988240
>sjwtard
Definitely not /pol/ at all

>>7988245
> only pol calls retards by their name
nope, everyone does

>>7988245
SJW is common slang now.

File: 08b-Jewish_Money_Lender.jpg (15KB, 324x406px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 324x406px

>>7988251
>>7988252
You will always be /pol/

I have my proof.
>>7988177
>>7988184


I'm done here. I need to go do something productive. Like steal from goyim.

>>7988254
> People can't criticize jewish racism and sexism
> if they do I'll just deny them and call them names
Trying too hard there kid.

File: 1458990047797.jpg (27KB, 457x480px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 457x480px

>>7987193
He's trying to say a certain degree of overanalysis like what we do in speculating upon the benefits of manipulating our DNA. Maybe the moon is highly radioactive, perhapsly in some realm of physics we haven't had indication of, and the only indication will be when we start mutating among other 2late4u things.

>>7988295
You do not understand science at all if you posted this.

> perhapsly in some realm of physics we haven't had indication of

You are stupid. Stop posting about anything regarding science. Your post belongs in /x/.

>>7988172
here's a very interesting article written by a jew

http://www.unz.com/article/the-myth-of-american-meritocracy/

>>7988233
yeah, ignore all science not approved

>>7988991
An interesting article that doesn't address the well-known fact of Ashkenazi Jewish intelligence.

>genetic tests
>already flame war
>jewish shit
Are you actually debating the OP's topic?

>>>/pol/

>>7989118
sure it does

>We are therefore faced with the clear conundrum that Jewish students seem to constitute roughly 6 percent of America’s highest-ability high school graduates and non-Jewish whites around 65–70 percent, but these relative ratios differ by perhaps 1000 percent from the enrollments we actually find at Harvard and the other academic institutions which select America’s future elites. Meanwhile, an ethnic distribution much closer to this apparent ability-ratio is found at Caltech, whose admissions are purely meritocratic, unlike the completely opaque, subjective, and discretionary Ivy League system so effectively described by Karabel, Golden, and others.

> highest-ability high school graduates
>equals IQ
Try again

>>7987183
Where did you get this image? Google search returns this thread.

>>7989148
I'm not interested in politics, I want to know scientific truths

File: tumblr_mndkviKkR81qhwdcyo1_400.jpg (38KB, 320x426px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 320x426px

What length of time will it be before it is cost effective to do PGD for cognitive factors on the general population of a country?

>>7989148
Why are you upset about this topic? Just ignore it friend.

>>7989223
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t42JA-Bnooo

>>7988376
>You do not understand science at all if you posted this.

Maybe it was his twin how posted it on his behalf?

>>7989253
Don't reply to the retarded shitposters trying to police the threads. Talk whatever you wanna talk about.

>>7989295
yes sir! fully understood and altered into my neural cortex network for ever and ever until I die

>>7988221
>>7988226
>>7988240
>>7988251
>>7988252
>>7988259
>>7988991
>>7988995
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HHgxOXEQaFU

File: tumblr_ntni0kALh61ueiaxzo1_1280.jpg (39KB, 550x550px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 550x550px

>mfw this seriously fascinates me
>mfw I really wanted to discuss this topic
>mfw SJW's and /pol/ are bickering over nonsensical shit
>mfw people can't be united through scientific discussion

>>7989360
Move to China. Chinese literally have no qualms about eugenics. That's why the head of theoretical physics at UMich and a bunch of other theoretical physicists, entrepreneurs and a National Academy of Science award winner moved are working at Beijing Genomics Institution, which has 3 times the combined sequencing power of Harvard-MIT.

You have to be pretty smart to work for their Cognitive Genomics Lab though (no shit) or even to submit your genes for testing. At least 1560 (760 verbal and 800 M) to even be considered a sample in their research.

>>7989335
top kek

>>7989360
It's $1000 for whole genome sequencing and decreasing rapidly.

Meaning the only real bottleneck for genetics right now is interpretation.

It is extremely obvious that switching to full PGD for any modern society is now cost effective. Meaning that if we start having every single baby born through IVF and PGD the costs would be vastly outweighed by the benefits.

Something like half of all hospital visits by children are genetic in origin.

It's actually amazing there is not an enormous push by any logical society to switch entirely to PGD + IVF.


http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1181899/
n underlying disorder with a significant genetic component was found in 71% of admitted children. The vast majority (96%) of underlying chronic disorders in children in this study were either clearly genetic or had a genetic susceptibility. Total charges for 1996 were >$62 million, of which $50 million (81%) was accounted for by disorders with a genetic determinant. The 34% of admissions with clearly genetic underlying disorders accounted for 50% (>$31 million) of the total hospital charges.

https://www.stjude.org/media-resources/news-releases/2015-medicine-science-news/new-study-suggests-more-than-8-percent-of-children-with-cancer-have-genetic-predisposition.html

>>7989374
>>7989389
?
Think you replied to the wrong person.

>>7989374

Have they gone completely silent because of all the attention and anti-China propaganda they got? Seems like it.

>>7989360
>calling out /pol/ is now SJW
They have already won

>/r9k/shit
>jewish shit

>"there is no /pol/ over here!"

When will MODS learn?

>>7989282
Is that eggman?

>>7988086
That's not intelligence

>>7987970
Underrated
>>7987999
Education in the west is invariably based on the assumption that cognitive faculties are extremely malleable which is now shown to be false.

>>7990525
>cognitive faculties are extremely malleable which is now shown to be false.

show me a study that says that

>>7990620
http://www.nature.com/mp/journal/vaop/ncurrent/abs/mp201645a.html

turns out genetics testing can predict gender

holy shit!!

>>7987201
>Being on /sci/
>Not being a hard determinist

>>7990442
so you agree that there are physical differences between the races?

e.g. bone density, forensic scientists and archaeologists can determine the race and sex of a person from just a fragment of bone, with over 97% accuracy, and 10% accuracy with a chemical composition test.

differences in propensity to diseases, e.g. BiDil is a heart disease drug only approved for Africans.

you agree there are physical differences, presumably you agree that the differences are genetic, yet you think evolution stopped above the neck? please explain

>>7991244
I'm not the guy asking for proof about censorship, I was just pointing out the traits weren't intelligence, and physical traits are very distinct from mental traits

Though, that guy's right. Without actual research, race threads will just turn into armchair science and a pol kill all blacks echo chamber, and the odd
niggerfacts4.jpg infographic from the 1950's. There literally is nothing to discuss

Though desu, if I can input my own armchair science, I consider significant race differences unlikely. With racemixing, they'll become even more minimised.

If you want a good discussion, do something and remove the stigma on taboo topics. Until then it'll be polite sage central

>>7991306
>I was just pointing out the traits weren't intelligence, and physical traits are very distinct from mental traits
yet they are both based on DNA? did evolution only affect physical traits? are all mental traits learned and absolutely nothing to do with DNA? well, that's not what the OP study has found

different primates have different skull and brain sizes, this is not controversial. the reason for it is differences in DNA

>kill all blacks echo chamber
we should pretend reality isn't the way it is because we would be unable to control our genocidal impulses? give me a break. so many problems in society are caused by pretending all groups are the same, and therefore if one group does worse in school or employment, it must be because of racism. this leads to race based discrimination in hiring and admissions, and for every minority who gets ahead under these programmed, someone else is being penalized unfairly. There are smart Blacks, andI bet they feel awful having got where they are by merit, but being considered just another mediocre one who got a helping hand

>niggerfacts4.jpg infographic from the 1950's
you don't find it strange that research into the topic has been effectively banned for that long?

even so, we have research that has detected genes like the "warrior" gene, which is found at different rates in different races, and can cause aggression

>I consider significant race differences unlikely
why? we have differences in even our gestation rates and our life expediencies, why would evolution ignore the brain?

>remove the stigma on taboo topics
how do you suggest I go about that?

Intelligence is genetic, although you can affect it to a lesser degree. I don't like when people say stuff akin to "Are you saying that sub-Saharan African people are genetically disadvantaged in general when it comes to intelligence? You must hate black people and want to mistreat them!" as if it would be okay to treat someone like shit or look down on people just because they are dumber. Now, I'm not saying that all black people are dumber; that's not the point I'm making.

Treat individuals as individuals, but don't be surprised when the Koreans outperform Somalians in mathematics or when the Kenyans outrun the Russians in a marathon.

>>7987183
>>7991306
nuclear weapons aren't as destructive as the scientists claim them to be, but in an effort to not get people blown away by radioactive fire they churched it up to sound like everyone loses. and it worked.

so, now what you say is probably true, but in an effort to not give retards an excuse to commit genocide we're gonna just keep this one under wraps.

because lets face it /pol/, thats what you really want, and its why you come here. to attempt to "scientifically" validate your misanthropy.

remember first and foremost that the spirit of science is not absolute truth, but the betterment of mankind. absolute truth is the domain of religion and philosophy.

>>7991538
>misanthropy.
you assume anyone who realizes that science tells us the different races have differences in avg IQ, aggression, impulsivity etc hates all humans?

isn't the converse true though? those who cover up and pretend there are no differences, worship diversity etc, are in favor of genociding all races in order to create a mixed race future humanity who will not be exceptional in any way, but at least they wonl't be racist.

although it seems to be a prasox, love diversity so much that rather than support every peoples rights to maintain their homelands for their own heritage, people and culture, you want to mix away all that diversity and create homogeneity, but only in White countries of course

>>7987183
Does it predict interest in subjects too? :^)
Can you be too stupid to enjoy science?
Could have sworn such abilities were tied to actual interest and the following constant activity that follows to satiate that interest.

brainlet genocide when?

File: Untitled.png (137KB, 726x618px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 726x618px

>>7987183
Racism is the radical notion that genetics can determine things like intelligence, aptitude, and temperament.

Check out these allele frequencies, bros. 2R and 3R are the violent chimp alleles. You can have 2R/2R, 2R/3R, or 3R/3R. Those are the violent chimp genotypes. All other genotypes are civilized white genotypes.

>>7991306
You can predict race based on a brain scan.

Brain morphology (folding patterns, size differences) are based on race.

>>7987201
>cognitive abilities come from ether my social science education told me so.

>>7990390
eggman is dead, long live eggman

>>7987183
I'm a Hispanic and I am not going to deny this

File: dumbass-nigger.jpg (50KB, 615x438px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 615x438px

>>7993107
2016 and people not realizing how demonstrably racist it is to suggest something like this. Where are you from? Mississippi?

>>7991538
I'm the second post, did you even read it, it's not /pol/ shit in any way

>>7987218
both Mindsets are wrong!

This is Nature vs Nurture.
You need both.

>Polygenic score analyses indicate that up to 5% of the variance in cognitive test scores can be predicted in an independent cohort.
>31%, 5%, 11%, 21%

These are really minor variants. This study is also using certain genes to make these correlations. We don't know how these genes create the circumstances they're testing for. It's already established that the cerebral cortex is where intelligence mainly develops. The things they tested for are pretty inconsistent with the current consensus on intelligence. They probably wanted to determine functionality moreso than intelligence in concept, since they can correlate (these few) physical phenomenon more appropriately across so many academics' findings. I'll have to say this study provides pretty limited and conditional results.

>>7991538
Bullshit

MAD worked because of second strike capabilities and not because of some shit invented by scientists.

>>7993107
>wikipedia
Go to the citations section and link me the articles it referenced so that I can use this against nignogs without them saying "its wikipedia therefore false".

>>7993994
You don't understand the study then.

It's just the beginning of filling in the gaps to reach 50%+ variance prediction ability.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kEgNjxptipM

The 5% is an increase from 1-2% less than a year ago. That is a massive amount of new predictive ability.

>>7987221
>biology is not science
t. the last time I saw any biology was during my first year of secondary school

>>7994595
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v16/n5/abs/5201999a.html
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2844866/
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886912004047

You can easily search for articles which go over MAOA 2R prevalence based on race. It's basically only in Africans.

>>7994607
Thanks based anon!

>>7994597
Context, I see. However my other points still stand.

Why are /pol/acks still here? Isn't Trump giving a speech or something?

>>7994651
No actually all of your post was stupid.

>>7994743
Really? Please educate me, o' enlightened one :^)

>>7994755
Very simply and compactly.

"We can now explain about 20 percent of the heritability of height, up from about 12 percent where we were before," says co-first author Tonu Esko, PhD, of Boston Children's Hospital, the Broad Institute and the University of Tartu (Estonia).

This is the result of expanding the sample size up to 250,000 for GWAS of height.

Those numbers you call minimal are only going to grow. The heritability of g is between 40% and 80%.

Also your point "we don't know how these genes ..." is also extremely stupid. Part of expanding our understanding of the genes involves identifying them. For instance specific genes for height have been shown to be additive in terms of how they work together.

That was deduced due to GWAS and big data.

>The things they tested for are pretty inconsistent with the current consensus on intelligence.

nonsensical statement by you

>I'll have to say this study provides pretty limited and conditional results.

Also nonsense, it's a huge leap forward that will only accelerate.

Basically, you are stupid is the basic thought I have after reading your post and trying to understand your thought process.

>>7994805
>Those numbers you call minimal are only going to grow. The heritability of g is between 40% and 80%.

Then why are we talking about it.
Did you start a thread on how height is inherited through genetics?
The science isn't done we have no idea what the cap is on genetic influences on height, It could be as low as 7% or 70%. Thing is we just don't know.

>>7994813
What is wrong with your ability to think logically?

Genomics is rapidly growing. The point of this article is to show that progress is being made in terms of linking genes to cognitive abilities and academic success.

Just like with height, which is more advanced currently, we will continue to see improved understanding in cognitive predictability.

By pointing out how the numbers seem small now, you are not realizing that those numbers will rapidly grow over the next few years.

I already explained, it has gone from 1-2% to 5% in the last year. They will continue to improve as the data improves or expands or if the parsing of the data improves.

The science will never be done as well. You show a complete lack of basic fundamental understanding of science or rational thought.

>>7994813
Not me.

>>7994805
Stop having a stick up your ass. You do understand how circumstance effects these things? You can't make a holistic assumption from one encounter. I skimmed through the study, sorry for that. I also only was working with whatever the study said, I didn't know about >>7994597 , study never said this. I don't follow this news regularly. I hadn't ever taken a biology class or cared to read about the subject. I might have been speaking out of my ass for that, but why is that a bad thing? Civil discussion is good for growth. By the actions you exhibit, people will be deterred from actually having a conversation and in turn growing, which will potentially perpetuate ignorance.

>Part of expanding our understanding of the genes involves identifying them.
The variables they were testing have a broad number of causes, it was quite vague their definitions for them, there wasn't really one given. This is what I meant.

>nonsensical statement by you
No, just unclear and without the source material I was referencing. There have been studies done comparing and contrasting the elephant brain with the human brain, the cerebral cortex in humans is better developed than in elephants despite the elephant's massive density. Meaning that there are a ton of other factors the study doesn't account for, since there's more to intelligence set by the standards of the aforementioned studies.

>>7994844
Civil discussion is pointless. I simply stated exactly how I reacted to the post. I also had a pretty big intuitive hit it was written by someone extremely biased because of their ideology.

Also the first response was civil and contained enough information for the person to correct themselves.

>>7994597

>>7994826
And we still have no idea what the possible cap is for how much genetics influences intelligence. It can either be a low number or a high number we have no idea until the work is done. Your jumping to conclusions to affirm your own racist world view, stop shitting up /sci/ until the work is actually done

>>7994869
What conclusion was jumped to?
What "racist views" are expressed in this thread?

Also we do have estimates of heritability of g and it is between 40% and 80%. That comes from scientific consensus.

>>7994866
It wasn't civil, you consciously insulted the other person. You might be calm about it, but that doesn't mean your responses do not directly effect other people. In insulting others that shows a lack of respect, the converse of civility.

I'm tired, I didn't watch the video.

>>7994876
Why do you deserve respect if you are arguing a point blindly?

>>7994879
Because we're both people, and people make mistakes sometimes. I didn't have any malice in my original post.

>>7994874
That genetics test can predict cognitive ability when currently genetics only explains 5% of cognitive ability among humans. Assuming that cognitive ability is determined by only nature and nurture that means that 95% of the variables that influence cognitive ability are still unknown in an individual. This is literally the definition of jumping to conclusions.

File: add.jpg (104KB, 1030x647px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 1030x647px

>>7994889
Study linked along with image, it shows how much of a test score can be linked to genetics.
http://www.nature.com/articles/srep11713/
The contribution of genetics towards explaining cognitive abilities is well studied. What the study in the opening post talks about is filling that information in with specifics. So we already know a majority of cognitive ability is determined by genetics. What we are learning now is what the specific genes and genetic regions are.

So basically the 5% and other % figures you see are like a loading bar filling up towards the overall 40-80% of genetic contribution. The numbers will only continue to go up as the holes go up.

>>7994928
holes go up - meant to imply that the bar you see in the picture for genetic contribution will be specifically determinable by a genetic test one day.

So we know the general contribution by genetics, and now we are filling in with the specifics which allow things like predicting g by a genetic test.

The point of the OP is that while we are just beginning in the genetics revolution, we can already do a genetic test and have some predictive capability of the subject's intelligence.

>>7994844
>circumstance effects these things

Your genes still determine how you respond to your environment.

>>7987183
A slight intake of tiberium is also proved of increasing the cognitive abilities.

>>7995868
How so? There are plenty of ways one interprets their environment due to abrupt factors. Are you going to say that someone is lazy for not doing chores around the house due to, say, migraines?

>>7989360
The feels are EXTREMELY relatable

I can tell a person is dumb just by looking at their face.

>>7997539
Then you're an idiot. Not just any idiot, the purest idiot that thinks so simply they're a danger to others self esteem.