Is racialism based in any sort of reality whatsoever or is it

>>8755651
If there was a difference, what behavioral changes would you expect to be appropriate (a)In your own life? (b)In a society?

>>8755663
I'm not really sure.

>>8755669
Then it's not useful to ponder.

>>8755651
>On that note are sexes at all diffrent in any significant way in terms of intellect?

Have you ever lived with a woman?

>>8755651
>are sexes at all diffrent in any significant way in terms of intellect?
>Diffrent
Not really.
Were society to have an even playing field from the beginning I guarantee you would have seen a more even spread contribution in regards to science and other things

>>8755718
Why is the NBA almost entirely black? It wasnt that way when it started and im sure everyone has a nearly equal chance of making it based on just their athletic ability. Theres a difference between races. To think that evolution stopped at skin color ONLY when humans were adapting to their environments is just plain silly.

>>8755779
>Why is the NBA almost entirely black?
Historical and cultural context.

Why is the NHL mostly white? Must be because pale skins are genetically predisposed to moving on foot blades on frozen water and playing with wooden sticks.
Idiot

>>8755779
>almost entirely
60%

how can white guys compete there too though

>>8755688
Are you saying that knowledge is not worth seeking unless it has a readily apparent practical application? That seems rather short sighted
>>8755718
I'm not so sure. Studies tend to show that the distribution of IQs for men is more spread out than for women. There are more idiot men, but also more super-genius men. Even while the average IQ of both sexes is exactly the same, or even if women had a higher average IQ, I would still expect there would be more men in the high IQ jobs, just because a man is more likely to have extremely divergent intelligence

>>8755795
Researchers in favor of no sex differences or inconclusive consensus
In 2000, researchers Roberto Colom and Francisco J. Abad conducted a large study of 10,475 adults on five IQ tests taken from the Primary Mental Abilities and found negligible or no significant sex differences. The tests conducted were on vocabulary, spatial rotation, verbal fluency and inductive reasoning.[33] Roberto Colom in 2002 found that males' IQs were 3.16 points higher on the WAIS III test, but that there was no difference on the general intelligence factor (g) and therefore explained the differences as due to non-g factors such as specific group factors and test specificity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_intelligence#Researchers_in_favor_of_no_sex_differences_or_inconclusive_consensus

>>8755795
>Studies tend to show that the distribution of IQs for men is more spread out than for women.
post studies by someone who isn't lynn

>>8755808
You seem to be misunderstanding. You are quoting a block of text saying that general intelligence is the same on average. I'm not disputing that. I'm talking about variance,which is something that isn't studied as much. Scroll down that wikipedia page to the part about "variability"
>>8755814
Wai, Jonathan; Cacchio, Megan; Putallaz, Martha; Makel, Matthew C. (2010). "Sex differences in the right tail of cognitive abilities: A 30year examination"
Lehrke, R. (1997). Sex linkage of intelligence: The X-Factor. NY: Praeger
Lubinski, D.; Benbow, C. P. (2006). "Study of Mathematically Precocious Youth After 35 Years: Uncovering Antecedents for the Development of Math-Science Expertise"


Hell, even that Wikipedia page, the second paragraph of the page is "Some studies have concluded that there is larger variability in male scores compared to female scores, which results in more males than females in the top and bottom of the IQ distribution."

>>8755835
The whole tl;dr of that page is 'Yea, there might be some minute differences between male and female brains, like slight difference of IQ spread and slightly different spacial awareness, but there's nothing conclusive about it and self fulfilling prophecies have more affect on human behavior than natural variation. Don't condition the populace and you can make the most out of them'

>>8755835
i wonder how asian females fare vs white males then
in terms of bell curves

>>8755855
>he thinks human biology boils down to conditioning
>he thinks women will have sex with them if he treats them as equals

Holy fuck I'm laughing so hard. Women are retarded. I'm out of here.

>>8755862
I've got a gf, m8.
No skin off my back what you think though, enjoy living your hate filled, prejudiced life ^_^ \ /

>>8755651
Only brainlets rely on race to define intelligence. Once you know that there are genes that define intelligence and that the can be found in literally all races, you'll stop this faggotry.

Women are more likely to spend less time on study and competition -learning due to the ability to have sex any time they please. Plus they can have relationships just for big money.
Men have a different position in the game of life. And different objectives.
That's about the only real difference.
Race has nothing to do with being intelligent. Environment and social wellbeing are most important factors for intelligence.

>>8755783
Yes in fact whites are much better at moving on foot blades on frozen water than blacks.

>>8755651
Even if there is a difference between races it's only a couple of iq points at the most. No reason to dehumanize people of a different race.

>>8755783
>Why is the NHL mostly white?

Because blacks haven't made inroads there yet.

When they do it's all over.

>>8755786
That's a massive amount of black people considering their proportion in the population.

There isn't enough rock hard evidence to make an indisputable judgement, it really depends on what you want to believe but to say that there is no evidence at all of genetic differences is about as credible as a collection of talmud quotes from /pol/

>>8755651
The brainlet looks at first-hand evidence and then pretends a difference doesn't exist.

>>8755651
We have this thread every day.

File: seedisgust.jpg (6KB, 236x188px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 236x188px

>>8757892
>such as the thoroughly disproven studies by rushton&jenson

>>8755783
It's because there aren't any hockey rinks in the hood, the equipment for hockey costs more than a mesh jersey, a basketball and two hoops, and hockey season happens at the same time as basketball season.

It's really easy to see and if you actually buy into the idea that there are no biologically superior peoples and the opposite then you fail a very low standard.

>>8755651
>is it a dead hypothesis
To be dead it would have to be disproven.

Besides discredited people like Boas, who rejected Darwinism and was caught falsifying data to prove that second generation immigrants to a North American population exhibited spontaneously changed physiology to match host populations - look it up - it's called Orthogenesis), I am unaware of anyone who has attempted to disprove the hypothesis.

Lyshenko maybe.

>>8757198
Must be because of that second ligament allowing them superior footblade control