Why is /sci/ so scared to discuss race and IQ? I've brought

>>8893537
Wow. Great contribution to the discussion.

>>8893537
Good since he betrayed us.

>>8893545
Also not that it should matter but I didn't vote for trump.

How much can the average IQ of a population change within a generation?

>>8893551
I voted for Bernie Sanders in the primaries and Jill Stein in the general and I think race is tied to IQ because I'm not intellectually dishonest.

>>8893534
There's no good to be had in talking about it. That's why we stay silent on it.
If you can think of some compelling reason though, then I suppose my position would be different.

>>8893556
It's an inherently interesting topic and can help us understand how genetics are tied to intelligence

>>8893534

/sci/ isn't "too scared" to discuss race and IQ. /sci/ as a whole generally accepts that there are IQ discrepancies between certain racial groups.

/sci/ does, however, generally understand the notion of confounding variables and the need to separate correlation and causation enough to be able to reject the naive conclusion that these discrepancies are caused by race alone. Combine this with the fact that said confounding variables generally fall under the scope of social science, and you will see why a board full of mathematicians, natural scientists, and engineers is uninterested in this discussion.

We were geographically separated for extended periods of time in different environments. Clearly there are morphological differences between the races. There's no reason to think that evolution spared the brain. All the tests show as much.
There, what more is there to discuss, unless you have some in-depth knowledge on the subject?

>>8893562
/thread

>>8893562
>it's a complex issue and doesn't fall in out domain, so we're not interested in discussing it
That doesn't stop plenty of other discussions about topics that meet the same criteria
We all know the real reason we don't discuss it much.

>>8893574
People post threads about it all the time though

>>8893574
*our domain

>>8893567
Essentially, the brain is plastic enough to make any discrepancies in intelligence marginal,
It is more about the environment in which you were raised and your parents' patterns of thought

>IQ
>meme scientist
Go back to /pol/

>>8893575
I concur. Maybe OP's new and had a couple bad experiences right off the bat.
To be fair, there are a certain number of users who won't touch it, but that's not ALL of /sci/.

The scientific discussion of it is fine, it's just that filthy engineers always want to design solutions to the science, and social engineers' proposed designs tend to be catastrophic.

>>8893578
I was arguing with a /pol/tard the other day, and he brought up that there was some study about how adopted children raised by parents and in an environment of a different race still end up with the same IQ as the other members of their race. He couldn't point me to the study so I don't have any reason to think that there's anything to it, but I'm willing to keep an open mind. Does anyone know of any such study actually existing?

>>8893574

It is a complex issue, but the complexity isn't the deterrent. The deterrent, again, is the fact that everything surrounding race and its intersection with some property x concerns topics (again, social science) in which we are not interested.

In my time on /sci/, there have been a few instances in which we have addressed the question of race and intelligence. I have noted a consistent pattern, however, that whenever the users of /sci/ attempt to engage the complexity you mention to an extent that they reject the claim that certain groups are inherently inferior to white people, the thread quickly goes to shit, usually with the OP throwing a fit.

So, yes, in a manner of speaking, the real reason we don't discuss race and intelligence is not strictly what I stated previously. Rather, it's an issue of (a) not being interested in the details of the problem and (b) not being interested in the tantrum to be thrown when the OP doesn't get the "[non-white group here] suck" validation he desires.

>>8893556
>compelling reason
The assumption that all the races are cognitive equals shapes our policy, both domestic and foreign, and perhaps that's helped contribute to some frustrating outcomes because we're unwilling to acknowledge some uncomfortable truths?

>>8893598
>[non-white group here]
You mean blacks. Everyone's willing to accept that East Asians are the smartest.

>>8893600
Yeah see e.g. affirmative action

East Asians and Ashkenazi Jews have the highest IQs, African pygmies the lowest.

>>8893601

This is not true on /pol/. There's an argument there that, somehow, IQ is an apt measurement of intelligence for blacks and whites but not for Asians. The claim is something along the lines that the IQ test somehow misses some special form of creativity that Asians lack (and, of course, which white people have).

>>8893601
Ashkenazi Jews are actually smarter.

>>8893609
To be fair, there is no Asian Shakespeare, or Michelangelo, or Mozart...

>>8893609
IDK man most people on /pol/ I've talked to acknowledge Asians are smarter. Different experiences I guess.

>>8893613
Thoguht they were about equal. Do you ahve the stats?

>>8893614

There have been plenty of East Asian cultural figures akin to our Mozart and Shakespeare. Simply because they do not operate in the western cultural sphere does not mean that they do not exist.

There is no excuse for the inconsistency. It is what it is, and it is among the core reasons why very few have interest in engaging in discussions like these.

>>8893614
Shakespeare is an overrated hack. No one is willing to say as much because he's been enshrined as some great writer when actually in his own time his stuff was written to appeal to the common pleb.
Also, even with our creative intelligence, East Asians still come out ahead.

>>8893601
On the basis of what? Sure, Asians win a lot of math Olympiads, but where are their Fields Medals?

>>8893534

Because its full of niggers

File: wewuz.jpg (93KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

93KB, 1280x720px

>>8893534
Look racist, modern humans came from Africa. And over the centuries, mankind advanced to explore the solar system and made profound leaps in science and engineering. Africa having the premier space program, best colleges, and all the most prestigious academic journals. They just keep them to themselves so albino brainlets don't taint them.

>>8893621
They haven't been as brilliant, but there are might be socioeconomic and geographical reasons for that.

>>8893624
>Shakespeare is an overrated hack.
Lol yep, I'm on /sci/ alright.

>his stuff was written to appeal to the common pleb.
His primary patron was the King of England

>>8893626
Guys like this OP.

>>8893621
Not that guy, but could you perhaps name a few of those figures?
I'd like to look into them

>>8893609
>IQ is an apt measurement of intelligence for blacks and whites but not for Asians
>IQ only works when it supports my racist beliefs

I too, hate facts.

>>8893637
The Chinese poet Du Fu is the one who comes closest. No one else really compares

I'm seeing all sorts of inconsistencies and contradictions here in the thread. Just fucking discuss it already, stop pussy-footing. It's not going to hurt ya.

>>8893635

>they haven't been as brilliant

What is your basis for this claim? You literally have nothing to rely on other than your lack of knowledge of these figures and some elementary idea that "OUR ART IS BETTER!"

Again, this line of reasoning is precisely why threads like these have little value.

File: japanart.jpg (12KB, 176x287px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 176x287px

>>8893621
Exactly. You tell them.

Because, while there's likely some correlation between race and IQ, it's not as cut and dry as some people like to make it, people who will abuse the information (and no I don't just mean whites) ruin it for the rest of us. Until there's more understanding of the subject it's best to just leave it alone.

File: art.jpg (458KB, 600x977px) Image search: [Google]

458KB, 600x977px

>>8893645
at least don't be retarded enough to post af ucking thumbnail

>>8893642
Not everyone in this thread is being like this guy. We shouldn't not have these threads because of a few bad apples.

>>8893534
So what's your stance? Do you just want us to tell you whether or not we should discuss this, as opposed to you just starting a thread about your subject and having us respond? I don't want to discuss discussion.

Anyways, the correlations seen in test scores is due to the material conditions each race is subject to. Less wealth=less opportunity=lesser education=lower intelligence. And if you want to consider IQ scores, and claim that one race is less intelligent by genetics, then I would tell you the same thing. If you subject a race to conditions that would produce less intelligent/educated people, then have their kids grow up in the same conditions, educated individuals will be less and less common.

>>8893645

This proves europeans are tryhard faggots, simple is nicer

>>8893648
Sorry, I'm not white and my IQ shows.

>>8893648
>>8893645
this is because japan was hardcore isolationist. they had a ruling class that rejected diversity and foreign influence.

>>8893642
It's based on my personal experience of their art. I doubt you've read any Chinese poetry.

>>8893653
retard

"We shouldn't have this thread for a few bad apples"
=
If something won't be/isn't perfect, don't even make an attempt at it.

>>8893661
They aren't exactly diverse now unless you count robots as a race that's also on the gender spectrum.

File: 2017-05-07 19.50.59.png (13KB, 429x158px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 429x158px

>>8893534
Intelligence is partly genetic and partly environmental. Blacks have a much lower ceiling to what they can achieve intellectually, in average, when compared to Whites and East Asians.

>>8893534
>Why is /sci/ so scared to discuss race and IQ?
It isn't. You must be new here. It has been discussed millions of times.
>but all people do is telling me to go back to /pol/
This topic has been brought up so much that we are jaded now, so go back to /pol/.

>>8893667
Blacks are artificially kept down because white "liberals" need a victim class to be a permanent voting block and want to attack anyone else as "racist" for arguing with them.

File: 800px-iq_by_country-by-current-resident-majority (1).png (115KB, 800x364px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 800x364px

>>8893667
IQ test data is consistent throughout history and shows that in terms of intelligence:

East Asians > Whites > Arabs / Mestizos > Natives of the Americas > Africans > Australian Aboriginals

All high IQ countries are either White or East Asian majority.

>>8893678
There is no IQ testing ever carried out anywhere in the world where blacks as a group managed to equal whites in intelligence.

Meanwhile Asians or Jews fresh off the boat manage to do so.

>>8893655
What's even more annoying about these poltards also have a very superficial understanding of genetics, probably because they focus only on a small body of literature from the 40's-70's

They are completely ignorant to the existence of second-order effects on genome, for example that that environmental factors like starvation can alter the genome of offspring
http://www.nature.com/ejhg/journal/v14/n2/full/5201538a.html

It's quite hard to have a productive discussion with them because they are averse to facts

>>8893663
>>8893662
Autocorrect strikes at the worst time again.

>>8893562
Many of the confounding can be controlled for using. For example, black IQ is still lower than a white child when adopted and raised by upper middle class parents.

East Asians have built objectively superior societies to Europeans, who built objectively superior societies to sub-Saharan Africans. Africans never built societies because they have an average IQ of 70.

>>8893702
It's ok m8. When they resort to such unscientific arguments, you know you're making them nervous.

>>8893715
No it can't. And when you try to prove it using that Minnesota shit I can point out in the study where it says they couldn't control for it. It helps to actually read things.

>>8893562

>that these discrepancies are caused by race alone

Yes, even when evidence shows otherwise.

Again, all you need to do is look at the sprawling metropolis and bastion of science in the heart of Africa. It's too bad the Africans felt the need to hide it with their superior cloaking technology. They just don't take any chances that wiggas gonna come up in their and fuck it up. Shiiiiiiit

>>8893534
I don't see a reason to talk about. Okay, what if sub-Saharan Africans have an average IQ of 70-85? Getting stuck in the mentality that they aren't capable of certain things and are "useless" or something doesn't get us anywhere. I don't like any kind of deterministic thinking, including the thought that we don't have free will.

tl;dr: it might be true but what do we gain out of knowing that?

>>8893716
>East Asians have built objectively superior societies to Europeans

Yea, because suicide, anime, and malfunctioning escalators are qualities of a good society.

>>8893534
IQ is a biased test effected heavily by living conditions.

File: not-this-shit-again.jpg (44KB, 554x371px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 554x371px

>>8893534
> I've brought it up in a couple threads
More than a couple. When you post the same, tired post day after day until anyone who would disagree gets tired of presenting the facts, that's not a discussion. It's you being obsessed with winning an argument by attrition.

> told to go back to /pol/ (which I don't even use).
Maybe you should start.

>>8893762
Ignoring the fact they learned how to eat raw fish wrapped in seaweed. Who needs fire when you are on that level.

File: 1493918710595.png.png (133KB, 556x610px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 556x610px

>>8893758
>Okay, what if sub-Saharan Africans have an average IQ of 70-85?
It's unlikely in the 70's.
Black people in America would never reach 88 if it were. Source on their mean.
http://www.peterdanpsychology.ro/ro/pagina/25/files/docs/black%20iq%20gains.pdf

Sub saharan african IQ is about 80.
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ883450

There's also the Flynn effect so they'll improve further relative to other groups.

Finally, under optimal conditions blacks have reasonable scores. Pic rel.
>inb4 selection
Somehow the SD wasn't affected by it, all 3 black groups had the same amount of selection, but no selection took place for other whites and all the other groups - unlikely. Finally the scores of mixed individuals do not regress to some magic absurdly low means. But to the means of their parents, as you would expect.

>>8893534
Only people who are scared is the same folks who keep posting data from r.lynn as if it's reliable. Same people who will never mention Asians or come up with ad hoc crap to explain away the Asian IQ - like Rushton according to whom Asians are just too brainy and not creative.

>>8893556

This is an anti-scientific attitude.

That which can be destroyed by the truth, should be.

>>8893560
but the truth is painful thing to hear

ALSO, FUCK CHAPTA

>>8893562
/sci/ also don't like direct evidence

>>8893534
Derp.

>>8893534
Because there's more to science than """truth""" you myopic twit.

There's also such a thing as social cohesion. Investigating something that THREATENS social cohesion undermines society and therefore science itself.

Even if races could be said to exist, which they don't, and even if they had different levels of intelligence, which they don't, the fact that it's mostly white people pushing this narrative tells me they're just butthurt about Asians and Jews being smarter than them, which they are.

>>8895004
/pol/ in disguise everybody, pls ignore

>>8895004
This, more or less. Some ideas are not good for society, no matter how carefully you approach them. Imagine if you could prove that an asteroid was going to hit the earth in 100 days. Would you say anything and risk panic? Or would you let people live out their lives?

>>8895004
I'm Hispanic and I dont have any problem with it. Only blacks and guilty white liberals seem to.

>>8893534
there's no politeness in saying one race is smarter than another.

>>8895088
Exactly. Why can't scientists be polite like everyone else?

>>8893562
>/sci/ does, however, generally understand the notion of confounding variables and the need to separate correlation and causation enough to be able to reject the naive conclusion that these discrepancies are caused by race alone.
/thread
also
>>>/pol/

>>8893562
>/sci/ isn't "too scared" to discuss race and IQ. /sci/ as a whole generally accepts that there are IQ discrepancies between certain racial groups.

REEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>8893534

>>8894208
>It's unlikely in the 70's.
I figured the 70ish statistic was down to malnutrition is sub-Saharan Africa, but decided to leave it in the range so /pol/tards wouldn't get triggered. At the same time I realize blacks in the US are 20-25% European on average.

Warning fellow Antifa, this is a HATE FACTS thread! Silence this bigot!

MIC CHECK

MIC CHECK

MIC CHECK

>>8895004

>threatens social cohesion

You know what really threatens social cohesio? Niggers. Niggers and mexicans. That's why we need an all-white society.

>>8895682
Basically this, also fuck white people and fuck Donald Drumpf

File: 1491521902778.jpg (64KB, 604x354px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 604x354px

>>8893534
It's not a nice discussion to have bc it leads people to try and justify racism.
What you think of people around you should be based off their behaviour towards you and others, and things like personality/common interests. You may only hang out with people as clever as yourself but before you meet someone intelligence shouldn't really be a factor.

Regardless the amount of people you get to know over your lifetime is such a ridiculously small sample of the population and the way you meet people (work, school, social class, hobbies etc) means your sample is going to be extremely skewed anyway, so any statistical conclusions about a race can't really be taken as a prejudice before you meet someone of that race. The research doesn't offer any obvious benefits to society while potentially causing a divide with it.

From a pure science perspective there may be differences and it doesn't really matter that there are, and so they should be investigated bc that's good science. But it clearly will be used by racists for bad rather than good so I don't mind science being held back in this case.

You get told to go back to /pol/ because asking for research into things like this makes you come of as a racist looking for justification of your belief.

>>8893534
Race is too broad a category for there to be significant differences between races.
Now, if we're talking about different smaller scale populations, then it's almost inevitable that there are going to be differences (I don't think 15 points though) between them.

>>8893635
>if it was attended by the king of england, then it obviously couldn't have been written for the peasants to relate to!
You are indeed on /sci/

>>8893715
post proof, because i always just hear the opposite argument; "proven" by this study (the study was shit, but it's the only one i hear getting quoted in this matter):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyferth_study

>>8893534
Lol, dumb science nigger

>>8895927
lol i am dumb

>>8893624
>No one is willing to say as much because he's been enshrined as some great writer when actually in his own time his stuff was written to appeal to the common pleb

His stuff being written to appeal to plebs isn't a bad thing though?

>>8893534
The reason people don't like to discuss IQ and race is because these threads tend to devolve into clearly racist individuals trying to find scientific reasoning to reaffirm their clearly racist behavior. Another reason which can sometimes go hand and hand with the first reason, is that statistics on IQ relating to race can often be worthless for the discussion at hand.

For example, say if the average black IQ is 80 (I'm bullshitting the number don't worry) and the average white IQ is 100 or so, a person who's clearly lazy as hell would clearly chalk this up to race and race alone. But that's a terrible idea, as such a statistic doesn't take into account other variables, such as income, education on average, or the cultural influence in neighborhoods that are primarily black. So measuring IQ based on race is a fools errand as environment can largely effect one's growth in intelligence.

It's not to say that there isn't something genetic that effects IQ but, it is to say that measuring such a thing based on statistics (which most people do) is a shit idea.

>>8893534
Because we have this stupid thread every fucking day. Fuck off already.

>>8893715
This sounds like you're pulling this out of your ass so can you link me to the study that shows this. Also, there are studies showing that adopted children have reduced intellectual development, that varies greatly depending on where they're adopted from.

File: effect.png (271KB, 760x773px) Image search: [Google]

271KB, 760x773px

***REMINDER - RICHARD LYNN IS A FRAUD***
https://dienekes.blogspot.com/2006/09/more-massaged-data-from-richard-lynn.html

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100121155220.htm

pic semi rel.

>>8893534
maybe because the difference between 102, 99, and 95 is totally unnoticable in day to day life?

>>8896029
No pure Subsaharan African group has ever scored that high on an IQ test, nice try though.

>>8896044
http://newsrescue.com/blacks-especially-igbos-prove-more-intelligent-than-whites-including-the-asian-leaders/#axzz4ga49aEFl

read this carefully, understand it

>>8896044
Neither would any randomly selected /pol/ group.

>>8893609
What're you on about? I've never seen this, and I'm a regular on /pol/.

File: lynn.png (57KB, 595x301px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 595x301px

>>8896044
They have actually, but those studies are overwhelmingly deemed "not representative"
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289609001470
Pic related

>>8896082
It comes up literally every time you compare white and asian IQ, I could make a thread right this moment and >b-but creativity will be first post

>>8896092
Richard lynn is a fraud
>>8895990

>>8896123
Yes, I know, that's what the picture and link are about

>>8893562
>(((confounding variables)))

dropped

>>8894443
>anon states that they are impartial as a consequence of disregarding trivial, ineffective talking points; however, remain observant in light of being convinced otherwise.
>THAT'S AN ANTI-SCIENTIFIC ATTITOOD

Take your juice-box and sit in the corner, anon - this board is above you.

>>8895990
The entire field of psychology is a fraud.

File: 1443395551890.png (319KB, 909x960px) Image search: [Google]

319KB, 909x960px

the IQ/intelligence gap is a total myth

that is why there hasn't been a single black majority country on this planet that achieved developed world status despite having most of the tools/knowledge/infrastructure handed to them

even without one iota of precedence that would indicate that they are just as capable as Europeans, we can extrapolate our own liberal opinion and say that they are without a doubt just as capable and intelligent as Europeans and Asians

and if anyone presents any evidence to the contrary I can throw a petty wrench in their data, say it's unconclusive, and call it a day

File: Screenshot_20170313-094419~2.png (650KB, 1440x2304px) Image search: [Google]

650KB, 1440x2304px

>>8896465
>despite having most of the tools/knowledge/infrastructure handed to them
Europeans so generous :^)

>>8896477

didn't realize the Congo (Africa's biggest jungle ridden shithole) was the only black majority colonialized country

>>8896477

Ireland was raped by the Brits perpetually and experienced mass exodus

it isn't hard to recover from hardship in a couple of generations if the people are resourceful, hardship is how you improve

being a slave country to a tiny European no-name expeditionary force isn't commendable in the first place

>>8896465
>I can throw a petty wrench in their data, say it's unconclusive, and call it a day
Nice misrepresentation of the opposing side.

It just shows you have no arguments other than rhetoric.

>>8896526
Oh please, do tell

File: hardmode.jpg (811KB, 2482x1755px) Image search: [Google]

811KB, 2482x1755px

>>8896465
But Africa is hardmode. Huge swaths of practically uninhabitable desert.

>having the tools/knowledge/infrastructure handed to them
You mean being overrun by foreign invaders?

>and if anyone presents any evidence to the contrary I can throw a petty wrench in their data, say it's unconclusive, and call it a day
Yes, that evil academic rigor thing. There's a board for your kind, you'll have more fun there: >>>/pol/

>>8896092
Even if he selected all the datapoints it would be below the Western average.

Show me a study that puts Africans on par with Whites. Rich Western-raised Africans against poor Whites if you want to.

I'll be waiting.

File: soils.gif (78KB, 800x579px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 800x579px

>>8896610
grassland is the soil that's arable, second place for forest soil, mountain soil can be useful too

desert soil - no
semi desert - no
red soil
Red soil is a type of soil that develops in a warm, temperate, moist climate under deciduous or mixed forests and that have thin organic and organic-mineral layers overlying a yellowish-brown leached layer resting on an illuvial (see illuviation) red layer. Red soils generally derived from crystalline rock. They are usually poor growing soils, low in nutrients and humus and difficult to cultivate because of its low water holding capacity.

rainforest soil
http://indianapublicmedia.org/amomentofscience/rain-forest-soil-poor-trees-cut/

this is just the soils by the way

>>8895898

Wouldnt it be good to just want the best for the future of humanity population wise ? Nobody should ever ban science on a subject because of personal preference, this is exactly what holds humanity back at so many things !

>>8896613
>Even if he selected all the datapoints it would be below the Western average.
Correct! Weicherts et. al. conclude Subsaharan IQ to be 80, far above Lynn's estimate of 69. It clearly says so in the study I linked, which you didn't read, or even skim.

However, 80 is not low enough to where the gap can't be completely explained away by environment, flynn effect, and testing inaccuracies. It is also not low enough to lower overall "black" IQ down to 1 SD below white IQ. It just wouldn't be statistically significant enough to support Lynn's "genetic differences" agenda.

>Show me a study that puts Africans on par with Whites. Rich Western-raised Africans against poor Whites if you want to.
Not sure I understand. Are you saying you actually want to see a biased study?

File: main-qimg-df24d0799ba03f96522425b38b6a17ae-c.jpg (74KB, 602x1071px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 602x1071px

>>8896830
>Not sure I understand. Are you saying you actually want to see a biased study?
I'm saying not even on biased studies Africans manage to be on par with Westerners. Feel free to try and prove me wrong.

When you account for environmental factors (nutrition, flynn effect, education, wealth, etc.) blacks still fall behind.

so the real question is what would happen if there was incontrovertible proof of racially based intelligence.

first, lets look at what it would take to get that kind of proof. it would take a team of guys who each spent 8+ years in academia working for at least 5 years to produce the evidence, and would also require huge sums of funding for an idea that has no immediate return on investment via patents or industrial applications. the minute these guys publish their results, the first thing thats going to happen is a bunch of ignorant faggots who've never set foot inside a university are going to use their work to champion their retarded genocidal ideology. it will be "LOOK GUYS THE SCIENTISTS GOT DA PROOF ABOUT NIGGERS, TIME TO GAS THEM ALL HAHA". what professional academic wants their work to be heralded by such people? no one, especially when there isn't even any money in it.

second, even IF they could come up with some kind of incontrovertible evidence, it wouldn't fucking matter because we live in an egalitarian society. there aren't going to be any camps, there isn't going to be some great purge, no eugenics programs or mass sterilizations or any other nazi-tier nonsense. so in the end the research itself is a fools errand. thats why nobody talks about it.

you want to tell everyone how stupid you think niggers are? go to school and get a PhD and then put your entire career on the line. oh, wait you want someone else to do that for you.

>>8896849
Studies only focus on large populations because they actually have to look at societal trends. I'm sure I can find a black family that scores higher IQ than a white family. But that would be useless.

File: race_income_sat_2.png (3KB, 309x212px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 309x212px

>>8896849
>Feel free to try and prove me wrong.
okay then

>The SAT (/ɛs eJ ti/; es-AY-tee) is a standardized test widely used for college admissions in the United States. Introduced in 1926, its name and scoring have changed several times; originally called the Scholastic Aptitude Test, it was later called the Scholastic Assessment Test, then the SAT I: Reasoning Test, then the SAT Reasoning Test, and now, simply the SAT.

The problem with this chart is very simple. At the lowest brackets only the brightest take SAT. The higher you go, the larger % of people take the SAT - but in highest brackets it's no longer only the brightest that take it, since it's expected of a rich kid to go to college etc. If you are with me so far then you'd clearly see that you are unable to compare the lowest brackets to the highest due to selection bias.
What you can do is compare the same income brackets.

Converting to IQ's (approx) you get pic related - a gap of about 10 points.
Which makes sense given
http://www.peterdanpsychology.ro/ro/pagina/25/files/docs/black%20iq%20gains.pdf

And there's also the fact that it's impossible for the dumbest whites to be smarter than the smartest blacks, which a cursory view of the IQ distributions of the two groups will tell you.

>>8893534
no we are not
eg i'm a female and i have iq of 157...unbelievable and cant be noticed but like..ikfr!

>>8893660
u are missing all the fun while rotting in jail for stealing cars kanye!

>>8896871
Eugenics is pretty solid too. And where?

>>8896610
>But Africa is hardmode. Huge swaths of practically uninhabitable desert.
Didn't the deserts only form 6k years ago?

>>8893614
Exactly. Western art is dead after Mozart (i.e. long dead), Asia continues it after that. At least asian art exists and is contemporary.

>>8896977
Also I have a question. Why don't we know all the genetic and developmental factors that lead to intelligence? Why can't dolphins, elephants or chimps be taught to do high skill jobs?

File: tmp.jpg (156KB, 831x999px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 831x999px

Mighty western art.

>>8897009
i think you misunderstand the picture - look at it closely and think about it

you sound like the people who complain about >((((modern art)))) instead of trying to understand it

File: tmp.jpg (586KB, 2024x2497px) Image search: [Google]

586KB, 2024x2497px

muh Michelangelo

>>8897016
LOL, whatever the picture means I better think without it.

>>8896849
>I'm saying not even on biased studies Africans manage to be on par with Westerners. Feel free to try and prove me wrong.
You seriously don't see how trivial such a proof would be?

There are African IQ samples that average 100 (see >>8896092). Meanwhile, we know the average White IQ is 100 (basically by definition), which means there are White IQ samples that average below 100.

Thus, I could construct a biased study of African 100 IQ samples against sub-100 IQ white samples, "proving" Africans not merely on par with Whites, but actually superior.

But that would be retarded, so nobody does that. Except Lynn and his cohorts, of course.

>>8896408
no he said we remain silent on it. if we do that, how is he supposed to remain observant if nobody ever does any research

File: IMG_3897.jpg (21KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 480x360px

>>8893537
Mfw people like you are so buttmad about this

>>8896871

This. We aren't stupid, OP. We know the underlying reasons of your obsessed with this topic.

And no you cannot go from

"ethic group A has a lower average IQ than ethnic group B"

to

"this individual below to ethnic group A, therefore this individual is stupider than that other individual from ethnic group B"

That doesn't follow, logically.

>>8897115
I'm actually enjoying the thread.
One by one like lambs to the slaughter the little /pol/tards come in, get schooled by facts and logic, and slump out of the thread, defeated. It's taking about 3 posts per tard right now.

>>8893537
Donald Trump is not racist for the last time.

Trump doesnt hate mexicans he hates illegal mexicans. How can Trump be a white nationalist if his own children are jewish?

>>8894910
Science should not be conducted in the manner which best makes you or another disenfranchised group feel good, it should always be conducted with a mind towards the truth. If the truth makes you unconfortable, go somewhere else but don't shit up our threads with you cancer.

>>8896922
That's not proving him wrong, your African samples still score below Whites at the same income level

File: 1GZX_Haemoglobin.png (1MB, 1600x1600px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1600x1600px

>>8893534
>Let's have a POLITE, honest discussion please.


Fuck that.

Just listen to the entire podcast of two people with IQs so high they make yours look positively knuckle-dragging
https://www.samharris.org/podcast/item/forbidden-knowledge

>>8897916
>Charles Murray
Nice joke.
We've already established Lynn as a fraud ITT. We can "redpill" you on Murray also, if you'd like.

>>8893534
>Shouldn't we be willing to discuss things that make us uncomfortable?
If you are from the left things that make you uncomfortable are racist/homophobic/bigoted.

That is why the left has become even more anti-science then the religious right there refusal to deny obvious facts (like the existence of males and females) is even more irrational then creationism.

>>8898185
>anti-science
>irrational
Except this very thread is filled with poltards getting blown out by facts and logic then giving up and going back to their safe spaces.

>>8897916
I just finished the podcast. It was refreshingly civil.

>>8898243
I don't see any poltard getting blown the fuck out, just liberals making up excuses even they don't believe.

>All IQ studies show large gaps between black and white IQ
>All studies show large gaps in white and black cortical neurons count
>All studies show large gaps in white and black cranial capacity

>Butthurt liberals try to discredit the authors while failing to provide a single study with different results

File: PMC2668913_gnes119-692-f5.png (41KB, 419x287px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 419x287px

>>8898548
>>All studies show large gaps in white and black cranial capacity
if you adjust for body size the only large gap is found between two other groups

this data rushton took from studies, so the only likely bias is in favor of your pov btw - rushton is the secondary source, primary source is US perinatal study

i wouldn't say differences are super significant
according to (contains sources)
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain_size

a caucasian male brain varies between 1050 to 1500 with a mean of 1260 - most of the variation is within groups

>>8898548
>Butthurt liberals try to discredit the authors while failing to provide a single study with different results
studies can be discredited purely by their own methodology, regardless of results. but anyway, several studies highlighting lynn's bullshit, and showing different results, were provided >>8896092 >>8895990

but, big surprise, like the rest of the poltards, you don't (or can't) read them.

also seems like you failed to understand the "liberal" argument, try it again, slowly this time.
protip: no one is denying the black white "iq test score" gap. the debate is over what causes it.

>>8898572
To add to this

>Studies demonstrate a correlation between brain size and intelligence, with larger brains predicting higher intelligence. It is however not clear if the correlation is causal.[29] The majority of MRI studies report moderate correlations around 0.3 to 0.4 between brain volume and intelligence.[30][31] The most consistent associations are observed within the frontal, temporal, and parietal lobes, the hippocampus, and the cerebellum, but only account for a relatively small amount of variance in IQ, which suggests that while brain size may be related to human intelligence, other factors also play a role.[31][32] In addition, brain volumes do not correlate strongly with other and more specific cognitive measures.[2] In men, IQ correlates more with gray matter volume in the frontal lobe and parietal lobe, which is roughly involved in sensory integration and attention, whereas in women it correlates with gray matter volume in the frontal lobe and Broca's area, which is involved in language.[1]

from the same wiki article on brain size
let's say the relationship is casual - between size and intelligence(if we don't then argument ends here lol)
a correlation of 0.35 means that about 12% of the variance in intelligence is explainable by brain size
if you look at the studies, they include mostly Caucasians - ranging from 1050 to 1500(a variance much higher than that between races)

actually assuming non-caucasian races vary as much and in a similar manner around their own means (a reasonable assumption, for example in a normal distribution) you'd see that mean difference in brain size between groups is insignificant and unable to cause large iq gaps

if the iq gaps are genetic, the effect isn't through brain size.

>>8898598
>showing different results
They still show a significant gap in all the measures cited

>no one is denying the black white "iq test score" gap. the debate is over what causes it.
In an aonymous survey of experts in the matter, the majority agreed the black-white IQ gap is partly genetic (Snyderman-Rothman 1988)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_IQ_Controversy,_the_Media_and_Public_Policy_(book)

>>8893534
Too many variables like education and economic disparity among races . We won't know if your theory has any merit for atleast the next 100 years

>>8893534
For jobs requiring a high IQ, affirmative action is an obstacle for intelligent whites, but also a trap for blacks, since they'll be more likely to fail in a career.

However, IQ doesn't take into account idiosyncratic domain knowledge, which matters a lot more than IQ for most jobs.

So if a black with a low IQ has enough street smarts, he'll be able to dodge this obvious trickery. While a clueless white with a high IQ may try and compete in any case, which is actually really stupid.

>>8898908
By then it isn't going to matter.

>>8898674
>They still show a significant gap
but the gap is much smaller, to the point where its statistical significance is questionable.

>the majority agreed the black-white IQ gap is partly genetic
a slight majority. just over 50%, i think? certainly nowhere near close enough to say there's no debate.

>>8899346

No, an overwhelming majority. It's actually a very minority position to claim there is NO genetic component.

File: 1487878518268.jpg (86KB, 500x383px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 500x383px

>>8893534
>"1969 : man went to the moon"
>"2017 :...."

his tweets

>>8893562
>caused by race alone
What a bizarre way to frame this. The debate is about the between-group heritability, and there is no bugaboo attribution that says it's "because of race"; a concept that doesn't make any sense.
>>8893609
This is NEVER said, not even on /pol/ who tend to rationalize white people to the top of everything.
>>8893638
Okay but notice how any concession that IQ isn't the only thing that matters is immediately shot down by you because it potentially advantages white people in policy.
>>8893699
This is dumb. You are so averse to the debate itself that you fundamentally misunderstand that you have to quantify the effect size of these confounders on the IQ gap itself. It's like pointing out that a gasoline diet would lower IQ, but you would obviously have to find out how much of the variance in IQ is due variation in the prevalence of a gasoline diet. The joke is on you, as you are so distant from the debate itself that you have such a fundamental misunderstanding of even your own egalitarian position; and egalitarian researchers like Flynn, Dickens, Nisbett, Wickerts, etc. would laugh you out of the room for this comment.
>>8894208
Lynn's work is good except for his systematic error in sub-Saharan cohorts. Nearly everybody who discusses race and IQ mentions east Asians even if they have animosity towards brown people.
>>8895898
What? The IQ gap and it's genetic etiology is pertinent information for understanding differences in life outcomes. It demonstrates that life outcome differentiation over large groups are from in-born differences. Instead, people think that there are no such in-born differences, and so something nefarious and unfair must be going on when in fact there isn't. Thus, billions and billions of dollars expended on "the achievement gap" and shuttling brown people into careers that they are not fit for and fail more often in becomes the norm and unfathomable amounts of damage are done.

>>8899355
oh, i was wrong. it wasn't even a majority. it's 45%.

24% say there's not enough info and 15% believe there's no genetic component at all.

of the 45%, we have no idea how they believe the two factors should be weighted. we also don't know if they believe the "genetic factors" are necessarily those directly related to intelligence.

this book was a political defense of scientists who got vilified by the media, to show that the "intelligence is heritable" crowd is not just some right-wing fringe element. it succeeded in showing that. it's a real stretch to try to draw any solid conclusions about scientific consensus from that survey.

>>8893574

>That doesn't stop plenty of other discussions about topics that meet the same criteria

It really doesn't. We generally never talk about social science. It does happen, but rarely. /his/ is really where you're supposed to go for humanities. In fact, IQ and psychology are the only two humanities we ever mention on a regular basis. They comprise about 1% of the boards topics, with 20% being science and math and the rest being creationism and retarded conspiracy theories and mathematical trolling. So no, we don't unfairly not talk about IQ, we probably talk about it more than every other humanity put together.

>>8899411
>This is NEVER said, not even on /pol/
It's said in almost every single thread about the topic on /pol/.

>This is dumb. you don't understand anything blah blah
>All that righteous indignation
I was merely giving an example of a surprising result in recent literature, to illustrate that human genetics is orders of magnitude more complicated than our current understanding. It was really an off-topic aside. The point, as I made in that post, is that the average /pol/tard is insufferable to debate because they steadfastly believe in outmoded models.

As for the esteemed scientists you namedropped in a misguided attempt to shame me; with all due respect, they're not geneticists.

>your own egalitarian position
Jumping to conclusions now, are we? Cute.

>>8899434
>24% say there's not enough info and 15% believe there's no genetic component at all.

Which leaves 61% who think there is definitely some genetic contribution.

>>8899572
>which leaves 61% who think there is definitely some genetic contribution.
>he didn't even read his own link
classic /pol/. you forgot to subtract the 14% who didn't respond to the question. try again.

>>8899627

I would have assumed that the 14% are those who say it's entirely genetic, as compared to the 45% who say there is a genetic component. Those who don't want to answer would have picked "not enough info".

Even if the 14% did indeed not answer, we have to ask, why didn't they answer? If they held the trendy and politically correct belief, wouldn't they be happy to share it?

>>8893594
Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study anon.

>>8893609
No-one has ever said this.

>>8893537
kek

>>8893562
You say caused by race alone but I assume you meant genes. Well here's the thing, to argue that the discrepancies are caused by environment alone it would require much more radical differences in environment between blacks and whites than is apparent in modern times. Although it may not be 100% genetic it is at least 50% (IQ is at least 50%) and because the other 50% can't be caused entirely by the environment (that is what I meant by my earlier point) it has to be >50% genetic.

>>8895898
I think the main point to learn from this is that making policies that treat blacks as an oppressed class is presumptuous and evidence points to it being objectively wrong.

>>8899640
>making assumptions instead of actually reading the link YOU posted

>Snyderman and Rothman state that the experts who described themselves as agreeing with the "controversial" partial-genetic views of Arthur Jensen did so only on the understanding that their identity would remain unknown in the published report.
the whole point of the study was to dispel media bias about the prevalence of the "intelligence is heritable" belief, by offering a survey where identities are masked.

this minimizes the possibility that the results are tainted by "political correctness". which, again, was the point of the survey.

>Even if the 14% did indeed not answer,
which they didn't, if you read the study YOU posted

>why didn't they answer?
considering their identity was hidden, they didn't stand to gain or lose from it. most likely explanation is they knew they don't have the expertise to make a decision (i.e. "it's not my field")

listen man. you need to read the link, i mean ACTUALLY read it, line for line. to not do so is considered rude on this board

>>8899653
Which has faults as well.

>>8899164
Why do plebs always bitch about AA?
Pro-tip: white women benefit from AA the most by far of any group.

>>8899846
We should get rid of it then.

>>8897916
I like that these threads conveniently disregard the part where Sam and Charles both agree that there is more variation between people within their own racial groups than variation between individual racial groups, and to judge any person by their race instead of their merit as an individual is nonsense and not at all what they're suggesting.

I personally find it okay that there is a genetic difference between groups mentally, kinda reminds me of classes in DnD or some shit, but at the same time it is not such a big difference that it becomes justification for bigotry based purely on factors outside of individual control.

>>8899853
I agree actually but I think it does make a good case for getting rid of policies that take assume blacks are oppressed by whites.

>>8899853
>but at the same time it is not such a big difference
I find that there is a pretty huge difference, just simply looking how the majority act.

>>8899852
Because is worked in most of he cases and it;s worked for white women too.

>>8893534
we literally discuss it constantly because you idiots are always coming here to try to "redpill" us on the blacks

>>8899653
A decent study if you actually read the thing instead of cherrypick data and jump to conclusions.

>>8899878

Not him but you can say that about any sub-population within any given demographic.

>>8899878
The majority of people are not something to live your life by. You don't and won't ever meet a majority of people. Ever.

Unless you're some fucking turbo famous person, you're literally just meeting an incredibly small amount of people in your lifetime, which is not where the statistics shine. They shine in the larger groups, so generalizations are always just that, generalizations. I find nothing wrong with approaching other races with caution, but that's just safety and protecting your own neck. There's a fine line between "around blacks don't relax" and "all niggers are chimps lets lynch 'em!". One is based on logic formed from a small number of people met in the average lifetime and your average anecdotal interactions with them, the other is taking those smaller interactions and applying them to literally all of millions of people.

I live grew up in a well off mostly spanish/white suburb. Currently live in a white redneck neighborhood in the outskirts of central florida, and work in the ghetto of orlando. It's still literally impossible for me to meet someone for the first time and be able to completely guess what they're going to be like, regardless of race.

I don't want to go full #notallmuslims type liberal nonsense, as yes, there is plenty of reason to be mindful of other groups, but I will reiterate my stance: variations between races are not enough justification for bigotry based on factors outside of the individual. You can never be sure if the next person you're going to meet is going to become your best friend, or your murderer. You can only make logical conclusions and play it safely from that point until you have a better judge of their character.

The only thing that you can really be sure are my quints.

>>8899999
>can really be sure are
>sure are
>of

Wasted quints

File: 1355739283325.jpg (237KB, 1100x1380px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 1100x1380px

>>8899999

>>8893534
When I came here 9 years ago, this board was the first place I heard of race and IQ. We talk about it plenty.

>>8893594
Read something similar in a book about psychological diagnostics. They also claim higher discrepancies in IQ between races the higher income gets.

>>8893699
>What's even more annoying about these poltards

Fuck off. What's even more annoying about these leftards is that I have to endure their ignorance on IQ and race just so they can continue to cling on to their racial equality garbage. Other wise, you would that almost all the IQ science that ever gets posted here are from the 80s and by Rushton.

It's quite hard to be productive because leftists like you are crawling to the epigenetics myth as your savior from genetic explanations.

>IQ is purely hereditary

That explains why people can't improve their score with practice.

>>8899990
No, you can't say that any race are a complete societal failure, that label only applies to black. You also can't say that all races will never receive high SAT scores, that only applies to blacks. You also can't say that all races commit a high amount of crime rates per capita. Only blacks. You can't make these same predictable prediction of what a huge population of one race will do, why? Because these effects are significant. Again, stop it with this racial equality garbage. It is not true, it never will be true. The differences between races are so strong, that they can determine the fate of nations. If I want a happy prosperous first world nations,then this race discussion needs to happen. Denying it is 100x more dangerous then climate change will ever be.

>>8899999
Christ, I've been forced to read your idiotic bullshit for so long and I can already tell who you are. You're that negro that seems to be threaten by racial differences aren't you? Seems like you did some searching in your vain attempts to debunk this shit, and you found critique of Richard Lynn flawed methodology for his IQ and intelligence book, and you think Lynn is a fraud. He's not,and no matter how often you babble "poltard", he never will be. His data is for the most part legit. Races are not equal, and quite frankly, seeing how blacks behave has essentially made you the only race a truly hate.

>you're literally just meeting an incredibly small amount of people in your lifetime, which is not where the statistics shine

I mean negro, do you even understand statistics? If the majority of blacks are violent, have an IQ lower then 85, then the average black you will met will fall into those unpleasant categories, there is a reason they are so hated. And if you never met them, don't worry, your wallet will as your tax dollars will as they fund a bunch of inner city black schools that's only gonna produce failure and a bunch of blacks who will blame whitey and kill eachother.

File: image.jpg (40KB, 425x398px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 425x398px

>>8900617
>first world nations are all the same "race"
>majority of "blacks" are violent
>racial minorities are more dangerous than climate change

>>8899956
Of course it is a decent study, it proves that racial IQ gaps are mostly down to genetics. Frankly, all the pictures you see here and the wiki article does a good job summarizing it. Of course, lefties will read the thing and think that the evil "poltards" were just cherrypicking because the authors believed that they were going to get proof of a "environmental explanation". They didn't.

>>8899519
Yup, because I already know how you think negro. You gene denying fuckwad. What's even funnier is that you,is that you post a study that sub-saharan African IQ isn't in the low 70s but in the low 80s. That's even worse! It means that, instead of believing that putting blacks in a highly industrial first world would raise their IQ by 20 whole points. It only raises it by 5. This strengthens the hereditarian view (that IQ is mostly, maybe even entirely driven by genes)

What's that your best argument? Christ, I am so tired of this faggot continually screaming "/pol/tard" like your average "WE WUZ KANGZ" faggot.

>>8897932
Yeah, Lynn using flawed methology doesn't make him a fraud negro. Nor does it make The Bell Curve a fraud. I find it funny that you think you can insult Charles Murray when you unironically use the term "Flynn Effect" to make your race look good, a term coined by Charles Murray in The Bell Curve.

>>8900624
Yes, your race is just that garbage. I guess I can understand why you'll be afraid of this information, since tons of whites will probably start getting legitimately angry at your race.

Man, a gene denier, a crime denier and destroyer of first world nations, can you get any worse?

>>8893534
looping is cancer, go back to /pol/

http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1435.html

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982205002095

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369848613000460

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/298/5602/2381.full

http://www.nature.com/index.html?file=/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1455.html

http://www.pnas.org/content/94/9/4516.full

http://genome.cshlp.org/content/14/9/1679.full

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v526/n7571/full/nature15393.html

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/tan.12165/abstract

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2271140/

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002929707610015

File: image.jpg (17KB, 307x228px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 307x228px

>>8900633
>pull blacks out of their ancestral African jungles
>subject to centuries of slavery
>"freed" just over roughly one (1) century ago
>installed in concrete jungle below the poverty line to recover

>"its their fault, they just can't make the most of the great opportunity we gave them"

File: image.jpg (35KB, 500x370px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 500x370px

>>8900639
>all "white" people are genetically similair
>all "blacks" in America or Africa are genetically similair
>racial infighting is more dangerous than the planet overheating and another mass extinction

>>8900642
>go back to /pol/

Can you come up with a more clever insult you fucking stupid negro? You don't seem to understand that you're the one denying genes here not me.

>>8900644
And then the negro does his dumb shit, were he continues to blame whitey instead of his genes. There is no country on Earth were blacks will ever thrive. And there never will be, and with blacks like you, I don't feel any sympathy.

File: image.jpg (195KB, 1500x1500px) Image search: [Google]

195KB, 1500x1500px

>>8900657
>no country on Earth where blacks will thrive
>OriginOfTheHumanRace?.gif

>>8900657
>Can you come up with a more clever insult you fucking stupid negro? You don't seem to understand that you're the one denying genes here not me.

insult? Im providing literally the only peer-reviewed research in this entire thread. Make an argument, refute my research or provide research of your own or gtfo and go back to the forum of logical fallacies..

File: yashwin selfie profile picture.jpg (57KB, 530x530px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 530x530px

>>8900653
>whites and non-African aren't far more genetically similar then they are to Africans
>Africans aren't the same in lower cognitive and behavioral abilities compared to non-Africans
>denial of racial difference isn't more dangerous then climate change even though recognition of the former will save first world countries by creating intelligent first world countries, help stabilize third world nations, cut food aid, help reduce overpopulation, reduce the carbon footprint of humanity, prevent mass extinction of African megafauna from African overpopulation.

>>8900664
A peer reviews research that supports the fact that blacks are genetically less intelligent. Great one. The best part of your research is that black IQ can never increase by a large amount.

Here's a 2017 survey. I'm not interested in arguing with you negro. Or having a serious debate. Not a single fact will ever convince. Why you are still on 4chan when you are scared of /pol/ is a mysterious. You look like an idiot and everyone knows it.

So I'll just add this. A 2017 survey of intelligence researchers.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886916310984

The Flynn effect is over. Done.

https://www.amren.com/news/2017/05/no-1-high-school-america-practice-discrimination/

Isn't it amazing that the best high school shows the same racial IQ hierarchy shown everwhere despite the school desperatly trying to be diverse? No cause its genetics.

>>8893635
>haven't been as brilliant
you can't measure that.
But I would agree that western classical music is very different from other cultures' music and one might say it is better or more complex.
The for reason for that, though, is not the composers "brilliance". Bach, Mozart, and Beerhoven weren't just geniuses who simply trned their crrativity into masterpieces, that's not how it works.
The western world developed a complex music theory and also significant infrastructure to perform large works with (orchestras, instruments etc.). Only becquse of the music theory they had been studying could the great composers write their works.
Did this happen because of the white man's brilliance? Maybe, but it is far more likely that the environment in europe where the church dominated created a situation where relatively massive commercial demand for music was there. And when it is already cultral aspect of culture lords aren going to onvest in large orchestras too for prestige.

File: image.jpg (59KB, 530x530px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 530x530px

>>8900677
>"whites are closer to Australian aboriginals than Australian aboriginals are to africans"
>"race" is totally not a meme guys

>lower cognitive abilities make you the same "race"
><90 IQ whites are now "black"

>admitting racist pseudo-science will reduce the carbon footprint of all mankind, cut food aid... SAVE FIRST WORLD COUNTRIES
>a handful of blacks recieving welfare is why we are not in space guyzzz
>da gubbermint would totally invest in science if not for "blacks" guyzzz

>>8900607
Hmmm

>>8895922
holy shit this study is trash

>>8900677
From the Abstract in your sciencedirect link
>Experts expected 21st century IQ increases in currently on average low-ability regions (+ 6 to + 7 IQ points, in Latin America, Africa, India) and in East Asia (+ 7 IQ),
that will put africa at 87, that will put latin america, india at ~100, while east asian countries will all reach ~107 (including places like thailand indonesia)

>The Flynn effect is over. Done.
Your link disagrees.

>>8893614
Ayy lmao dude, I'm a white nationalist /pol/ack, but that's just ignorant of you.
I'll admit that there don't seem to be any historical paintings from Asia on the technical level of Europe since the Renaissance, but the literature at least is well developed.
If you actually are interested, check out the Four Great Classics for starters for Chinese great works

>>8893661
>rejected diversity and foreign influence.
You sound like a fag. Are you a fag?

>>8893782
What facts, faggot? All I see you saying is "Ugggh, like that racist guy is sooooo last year"

>picture of King Nigger
thought as much

>>8896408
>this board is above you.
>A board on 4chan
>Above anything
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHA
Holy shit, all because it says science and math doesn't mean that it's a "smart" board

>>8900687
>a handful of blacks recieving welfare is why we are not in space guyzzz
Social security and health spending make up over 50% of mandatory federal spending faggot.
If we were spending that money on space instead of throwing it down the black hole of gibs we sure as hell would be.
Also Johnson's Great Society

>>8900780
The government will never spend that much on science though, because it doesn't fit into our current 4 year cycle structure for democracy.
That has nothing to do with welfare.

>>8896477
Why were African communities not developed to the extent that European communities were prior to European colonization?

>>8899519

No, you still don't understand that you have to quantify the contribution of the confounder every time you find one. It doesn't matter how many confounders you come up with, you fucking retard.

>they're not geneticists

??? They don't have to be geneticists. You fundamentally don't understand the debate.

>Cute.

Yeah but probably accurate given that you used the non-sensical phraseology "caused by race" when attempting to describe narrow sense heritability estimates. There are several red flags indicating that you're a pancake on this subject.

>>8900644

Yeah and fifth string Europeans have gone into literal wilderness with next to zero wealth multiple times and have replicated Europe. Japan and Korea have been bombed into the stone age and then made societies that became wealthier than France, and the same can be said of Germany. It's because they're not worthless niggers.

Meanwhile, Zimbabwe inherited the infrastructure of the fifth largest grain exporter in the world, and oh what a big fat surprise Zimbabwe is a corrupted shithole now because it's full of niggers. And South Africans who control the government have inherited the infrastructure of Europe but oops the power plants regularly stop functioning because niggers are retarded.

And then whites build up cities that look like, well, Europe, and then when nogs try to move into them all of the infrastucture gets hollowed out every single time, in every city they go to in all of North America. I'm sure it's all because dey wuz slaves 150 years ago.

And the mind boggling thing is that we know the end result: hollowed out cities and decayed infrastructure, and so even if it was entirely due to oppression then we should just conclude that blacks are too easily oppressed and should not be apart of the United States because they're always oppressed enough to hollow out every city they go to live in unless it receives exhorbitant outside funding from whites like Harlem is getting now.

>>8896477

The estimate of 10 million is clownish given population figures and the killings were not done by white people but rather by blacks working for white people, of which there were hardly any in the Belgian Congo. Also, Europeans were the ones that convened basically emergency conferences about the situation and forced Leopold to relinquish control.

Also, Liberia and Ethiopia are just as shitty despite never having been colonized, but I'm sure the Congolese would be colonizing Andromeda if it weren't for mean old Leopold.

>>8893555
>I'm not intellectually dishonest
>I voted for [leftist statist] and [eco-terrorist statist]
... ... ... What?

Oke Doke...

In this thread there are people who believe that the brain isn't impacted by genetics because they are foaming leftists, and people who believe that the brain is impacted by genetics because they aren't retarded.

IQ tests are not culturally biased, they only test reasoning ability, not knowledge. So unless your culture is sub-human tier, that's not a point. And the type of people who believe that IQ is culturally biased also falsely believe that all cultures are equal.


>tl;dr
racial differences are real
intelligence is heavily genetic
the races are genetically distinct
sub-humans are retarded (sub-85 IQ)
Most non-whites and non-orientals have IQ's well below 85

>>8900838
>people who believe that IQ is culturally biased
Funny story. Some psychologists came u with an IQ test that was not culturally biased. Blacks did even worse in this test than in the "culturally biased" test.

>>8900833
>>8900838
>In this thread there are people who believe that the brain isn't impacted by genetics because they are foaming leftists
Strawman. The argument people are making to you is that intelligence is affected by genetics and Environment. This is entirely correct. About 40%-50% of the variance in intelligence is explainable by genetic differences.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21826061
Rietvald et al, 2013 report a smaller figure.
>IQ tests are not culturally biased, they only test reasoning ability, not knowledge.
IQ tests are culturally biased
Skuy et al 2002 report that a brief training session on Raven's matrices increased African scores by 14 points and white scores by 4 - meaning having practiced matters. Practice is knowledge.


>racial differences are real
how many races, what are they
>intelligence is heavily genetic
partly genetic
>the races are genetically distinct
no, races have the same genes
if they were genetically distinct, they wouldn't be races
>sub-humans are retarded (sub-85 IQ)
No group other than maybe sub saharan africans are sub 85 in somewhat reasonable conditions and environment.
Sub saharan africans are currently sitting at an 80. That should give you perspective
Source is >>8894208

>Most non-whites and non-orientals have IQ's well below 85
Are orientals a race? I can't really decipher that last one.

ps
>b-but chinese cheat
:^(
>>8900851
Not really
http://iapsych.com/wj3ewok/LinkedDocuments/edwards2006.pdf
Here's a bias free test.

You have a funny story, I have a study.

File: Only_10_Int.png (165KB, 303x311px) Image search: [Google]

165KB, 303x311px

>>8900633
>Of course it is a decent study, it proves that racial IQ gaps are mostly down to genetics.
Ah, I see someone didn't read it! Please read the findings again.

>>8900793
Because "progress" doesn't work like that, the same way "evolution" doesn't mean constant improvement. The need for complex society and economics was due to agricultural dependence. Scientists say that the ability was there all along because humans are adaptable like that.
And Europe only became like that within a couple thousand years, a drop in the bucket for human presence there. They were doing much worse than Africa for the majority of their time there.

>>8900811
>the colonies, along with the rebuilding of German and Japan had absolutely no external funding

Wew lad, in modern cash black welfare is a drop in an ocean compared to bankrolling a new colony.

>>8900838
Okay, then. What's your point? Exterminate those with a sub-85 IQ? Is that your point?

>>8900974
I'm wondering whether average IQ in the population plays a role at all in the development of a civilization: I suspect that a place with a 10% of Newtons or Galileos and 90% of simpletons would run circles around Averagejoeonia

Oh, this thread again.

I love it how people seriously compare African kids with absolutely NO education and NO nutrition to Europeans who don't enjoy only good, but the best education and nutrition in the world, both of which have been proved by several scientists across centuries to affect IQ dramatically. Is it merely impossible to find simple logic from 4chan, whatever board you're on?

>>8900974
>The need for complex society and economics was due to agricultural dependence
Um no the Sumerian natives could have hunted and gathered in the Mesopotamian region to this very day but they decided to start farming. Farming is not out of necessity it is done by curiosity and intelligence.
>They were doing much worse than Africa for the majority of their time there.
North Africa, the black parts of Africa have always been backwater kingdoms or wilderness.

>>8901071
>I love it how people seriously compare African kids with absolutely NO education
Its a retard thinks education means intelligence episode.

African schools are not even that hard as non africans that live in Africa pass them quite easily proving that the natives are just fucking stupid.

>>8901071
>I love it how people seriously compare African kids with absolutely NO education and NO nutrition to Europeans
Comparing Europeans to Asians reveals some other answers(you know asian>european) and comparing europeans to non-africans who aren't asians is kind of pointless since if there are differences they are either negligable or smaller than the european-asian difference

this is why people(you know who) jump on africans

>>8901078
African IQ is 30 points below Asians and Europeans meaning its cannot be a nutritional problem because blacks were hunter gatherers until recently and hunter gatherers HAD MORE NUTRITIONAL DIETS THAN FARMERS.

>>8901088
>African IQ is 30 points below Asians and Europeans
>he didn't even read the thread

Educate yourself.
>>8894208
>>8896830

>because blacks were hunter gatherers until recently and hunter gatherers HAD MORE NUTRITIONAL DIETS THAN FARMERS.
Let's assume you are right about african history.
You do realize that what diets people had 200 years ago doesn't affect the diets they are having today right.

Also
>Asians and Europeans
Asians have a higher average IQ than europeans, get it through your head that saying "and" means their mean IQ values are somehow equal

some race realist you are

>>8901073
Africa had agriculture and domestication too. I am talking about a large amount of people being completely reliant on a small number of farms as their only form of food.

>>8901100
>80 IQ
Not possible that would mean the Africans are around the intelligence of the dumbest Amerindian tribes which is not true at all because African blacks display more animalistic behavior compared to them. Their IQ at its highest average is only 72 but mostly in the high 60s. The only negro with 80 IQs are the American ones due to their white DNA.

>>8901119
Egyptians didnt have to spend centuries building those pyramids but they did, just give up already making excuses for blacks.

>>8901121
>Not possible that would mean the Africans are around the intelligence of the dumbest Amerindian tribes
All the IQ values you've been told have been lies.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100121155220.htm
This is why sub saharan african IQ being 80 matters so much.
Also look at >>8896092 to see the amount of cherrypicking that went on before concluding 'the average black iq is 70'

I know, it's shocking to find the truth, but here it is.

>>8901088

Wow, holy shit you're fucking dumb. You think the current IQ averages from Africa come from fucking hunter gatherers?? IQ is a fairly new way of measuring intelligence (which you seem to lack quite a lot). The current IQ points come from Africans (as I said earlier, a great amount of whom lack ANY kind of education completely, plus they are severely malnourished) of TODAY, not fucking hunter-gatherers from hundreds of years ago. And the current IQ points of Europeans come from Europeans from today who enjoy, as I already said, the best school system and nutrition.
This is proved when looking at how well students in the United States school system perform. The white students do better in school than African Americans or Latinos. But the majority of white students are in schools with a GOOD level of education whereas the majority of black students are in schools with a BAD level of education. And the determining factor: It has been proved that white people in bad schools don't do ANY BETTER than black students. If white people were somehow intellectually superior, that would mean that they perform better no matter the situation. They score better scores in the US school system solely because they have access to the best schools, unlike black people who have to deal with the worst schools in the country. If they were intellectually superior, they would simply perform better than black students no matter if it's the worst school in the country's history they're in or MIT.
You seem to think of IQ as some sort of an all-defining, all-explaining measure of intelligence that doesn't change in the individual at all. It's been proven that IQ can decrease by several points even during the course of a long break from school, such as the summer holidays. In this particular test the IQ of students in a class was higher by several points before the start of the summer holidays. Your conclusion probably: people who are on holidays are dumber.

>>8901131
No it comes from african citizens.
>>8901130
Well I guess the test is wrong because it keeps scoring the Africans in a range that shouldnt be possible.

Blacks are objectively the dumbest humans on earth, every other human group is smarter than them on average. Having an 80 IQ is like having the intelligence of a white 10 year old yet the blacks cant even run exported civilizations like most of modern Africa.

>>8901142

You're truly a fucking moron. Did you know that people who take pride in their own race have also been proven to have lower-than-average IQs? And you're still comparing Africans who lack ANY SORT OF NUTRITION OR EDUCATION ALMOST COMPLETELY to Europeans / Westerners who enjoy the BEST NUTRITION AND EDUCATION IN THE WORLD WE KNOW TODAY. You're such a fucking moron. Jesus fucking Christ, seriously. You probably think of yourself as some sort of an Einstein when you have the logic of a fucking Tubulinea.

>>8901142
>Well I guess the test is wrong because it keeps scoring the Africans in a range that shouldnt be possible.
>this didn't happen because this doesn't happen

Okay m8, feels over reals

>>8901148
>Did you know that people who take pride in their own race have also been proven to have lower-than-average IQs?
So Jews are lower than average?
>who lack ANY SORT OF NUTRITION OR EDUCATION ALMOST COMPLETELY to Europeans / Westerners
What makes you believe nutrition will make the negros smarter, they have always been fucking retards since the rashidun caliphate?

Education is a meme said by morons who dont understand how the brain works, your intelligence is what determines who educated you can become, since blacks are retarded on average they can almost never be educated period as seen in Black America and Africa today.

>>8901125
They were one of the biggest and most successful civilizations ever yo. The pyramids were bigger than anything in Europe for thousands and thousands of years. You can't compare.

>>8901160
You missed my point.

>Human group A spent centuries doing impossible task while Human group B did jackshit

>>8901158

IQ is such a fucking vague way of even measuring your intelligence in the first place and you in your mind of a 10-year-old think that it's the perfect, one and only way of measuring your intelligence. And what the fuck do Jews have to do with this?? Again, you're just taking a bunch of people and pathetically making kids on this board think they're all the same. You're fucking pure evil. I'm serious, you're a fucking twisted, insane sociopath. It's not like I'm even talking with a human being.

>>8901173
>IQ is such a fucking vague way of even measuring your intelligence in the first place
Oh sure but if your a jew then IQ does mean something http://immortallife.info/articles/entry/why-is-the-iq-of-ashkenazi-jews-so-high
>And what the fuck do Jews have to do with this??
Jews are humans who place value on their own racial group over everything else that exists on this planet, you called people who do that low intellect so you call jews low intellect by saying so.

>>8901173
>You're fucking pure evil. I'm serious, you're a fucking twisted, insane sociopath. It's not like I'm even talking with a human being.
Typical white behavior, once your moral crap has no effect on your victim you resort to shaming then mentally dehumanize your opposition to morally rationalize your psychotic intentions towards them.

Christians called it removing sin
Liberals call it Progressiveness

>>8901166
>centuries
That's fucking nothing dude. Europeans spent thousands of years doing nothing but fucking neanderthals. And after neanderthals went extinct (40,000 years ago!!!!), nothing of significance arose until about 1000 BC. Many thousands of years of jack shit.

>>8901194
Are you fucking retarded?

You said blacks didnt do agriculture because it was too hard or they didnt need it, then I pointed out Egyptians spent centuries building those giant rocks they didnt even need contradicting your bullshit excuse for negro laziness.

>>8901199
Then I pointed out that Europeans literally did the same thing. Because they were around during pyramid construction too. We're they lazy too or what?

>>8901208
Yet Euros developed civilizations of note while black barely did shit. Also dont give that hurr no trade partners crap either because Africa is huge the black fucktards could have traded with eachother.

>>8901241
They did eventually. And Africa did as well. Pre-Greece civilizations of Europe were pretty similar to civilizations that were already in Africa. Both regions actually independently discovered iron forging around the same time. But all that is besides the point. You don't develop giant complex societies out of being not-lazy. The pyramids aren't a complex society in of itself. It is the result of an already established agricultural empire. Your idea of "progress" is flawed. It's not something that naturally happens, in the same way evolution has no end-game of forming the perfect being.

>>8900617
You haven't been forced to read my shit at all you fucking newfaggot shithead. I made literally two posts in this thread, the one with quints and the one replying to the guy I was replying to. Unless you're stalking /gif/ or /o/ then you don't fucking know shit cause those are the only boards I actually respond to threads on regularly. On /sci/ I literally just lurk unless I feel like responding to an idiot for shits and giggles. Not even going to read your faggotry after that bitchy little cunt response. Kill yourself.

>>8901160
Pyramids werent build by blacks. What the actual fuck are you arguing.

>>8901071
Education has almost no bearing on IQ, nutrition only a dozen points which still doesnt nearly make up differences nor explain persisting current gulfs. Get out with your disproven arguments

>>8893534
Race doesn't matter but genes do.
An extremely black person with 100% black features can still have an IQ of 150 because he possesses the genes of intelligence. His children are also likely to be as smart as him as long as he marries a girl that is also quite smart.
A blonde white guy with blue eyes can have an IQ of 70. And if he marries a blonde girl with blue eyes with a similar IQ to him, his children are also likely to have the same IQ.

It's all about the genes.

>>8901270
Wut. I'm arguing there is no "norm" for what homo sapiens were meant to achieve. "Success" and "progress" are only measured by how you define those terms. To look at "progress" between two populations and/or regions is flawed. There is no end-game.

>>8901263
>Pre-Greece civilizations of Europe were pretty similar to civilizations that were already in Africa
North Africa not the black part which was wilderness in that time.

>>8901278
Again with this bullshit, there are more smart white people than there are smart black people.

>>8901319
you don't know that.
They're starving and live in poor countries because all the whites have the cash.

>>8893534
There is no point in speaking about race as it has nothing to really do with science, directly. It doesn't belong on this board and by the looks of every thread thats started based on race, its just a way to affirm your own subjective opinions about race. This is a place where all races should be allowed to flourish in an intelligent matter and simply bring up race excludes some people from their own credibility.

Also, what the fuck are you even saying. Statistically, race threads are the most popular threads because everyone has something to say about it. Nobody here gives a fuck about whether or not its difficult to talk about. I once saw a guy post that he has considered cloning his daughter and having sex with the clone then killing it. You think race is off limits?

>>8901324
Bell Curve dumbass.

>>8901315
>not the black part which was wilderness in that time.
No, the black part. It was the Nok culture in Nigeria that discovered iron forging. There were lots of civilizations throughout all of Africa.

>>8893534
We're not scared of the discussion, most of us are mathematicians and physicists, we just don't care. Now we do have a problem with people like you spamming the board with race and IQ threads every single day.

>>8895965
This so much.

>>8896871
Damn what a good post.

>>8901343
Nok didnt even exist in pre Greece times.
>lots of civlizations
Not really

Besides what matter is not their civilizations what matters is the simple fact that african blacks are mentally uncivilized on average and slowly destroy any society they enter, who gives a fuck if they had civlizations so a few smart blacks managed to keep the feral monkeys distracted long enough to erect societies? SO FUCKING WHAT, the feral monkeys would eventually destroy it anyway.

>>8900823
>eco-terrorist
You're killing me.

>>8901000

Oh boo hoo, blacks in the United States have similar PPP to Poland, and yet Warsaw isn't Detroit or Baltimore.

You're right it's because nogs just "create" places that we would consider analogous to being war damaged right off the bat. Also note that the concept of Africans being able to bankroll anything using prior wealth is laughably ridiculous because they're Africans. Why haven't Africans ever been able to bankroll any project of any appreciable size?

Also, even if it were all because of oppression, that would still be reason to keep them out of, well, everywhere because they are so easily put upon that everywhere they inhabit becomes a hollowed out nightmareland. Think it's because of oppression? Okay, well then the onus is on you to come up with some consistent program that gets them un-"oppressed" so that they stop hollowing out every city they live in.

>>8893534

Left leaning people, specially those in Academia just cannot deal with a world where there's inherent differences in people that give them an advantage, it all needs to be about equality for both the starting ground and outcome. They are blinded by their need for social justice, so they'll just ignore anything that's inconvenient to their world view, even if that's more destructive and than the possible solutions we could come up with if we all accepted the reality we live in.
It's deplorable, but it's crumbling.

File: 1491593867208.jpg (940KB, 2440x1800px) Image search: [Google]

940KB, 2440x1800px

>>8896871

>>>Let's ignore reality because it's inconvenient
That's how you get another Hitler. Systems based on lies, die. You're about to experience a rise of the alt right, and possibly the collapse of society with a resurgence of all the ''bad ideas'' you guys have been trying to hide under the carpet. And all, because instead of being honest and sincere, you decided to obfuscate the truth we all know.

>>8893534
Go back to /pol/

>>8902068

>Proving OP's point


I am going to assume you're from /pol/ role playing to muddle the waters.

>>8901130

Africans having such a low IQ perfectly explains why their societies are failures. It's a good model of reality, imo.

>>8893534
>muh IQ superiority

back to your containment board faggot

>>>/r9k/
>>>/pol/

File: 1491699925884.png (106KB, 662x594px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 662x594px

>>8902116

I cannot wait till Science takes over society and we start euthanizing brainlets.


>No more rednecks
>No more niggers
>No more chavs
>No more gypsies
>No more abbos
>No more Sandniggers


>Just an elite population, bringing forth the ultimate golden age of humanity.


It's going to be glorious.

>>8902143
Do you really think an elite population would be as glorious as you suggest? Do you really think your utopia would be problem free?

>>8902143
And no more poltards.

>>8902150
Nothing in life is ever conflict free, but if you think a world where the only inhabitants are in the 140+ IQ range as the AVERAGE would not bring forth the greatest golden age humanity has ever experienced, you are deluding yourself.


The consequences of eliminating the low IQ population, are so deep and meaningful it's hard to imagine how much better our world would be. Just imagine a world without ghettos, rednecks, Indians pooping in the streets, chavs getting drunk and killing innocent people on a crash, no more Abbos sniffing petrol and raping children, no more Mexicans and their fucking cartels, behading people. No more Sandniggers bombing innocents in the name of Allah, no more Christian cucks getting in the way of scientific advancements.
It would be fucking glorious.

>>8902159

That's arguable, since high IQ tends to come with a decent dose of paranoia. There's always be deluded mutts nearing schizophrenia diagnosis. But we could eliminate the retarded white supremacists thinking Scandinavians where the builders of civilization, when they were in fact, nothing but mudhut barbarians ass fucking each other while the Southern Europeans build modern thought.

>>8902164
Golden age huh? How can you be so sure those 140+ people would actually contribute to humanity? Who's to say they wouldn't become the new poor and would become the new niggers of your utopia? Your blindly assuming that putting a number on someone's cognitive capacity will mean that they will contribute to your utopia rather than take advantage of it or selfishly serve their self.

File: 1481251201272.jpg (29KB, 680x453px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 680x453px

>>8902171

You are implying cognitive capacity has no meaning beyond being a number relative to the cognitive capacity of the society, an individual lives in. Which is basically like saying, there's no difference between someone with down syndrome and Albert Einstein, if the average IQ of the society where Albert Einstein lives in one comparable to Lagan.
Obviously, you can see how much non-sense that statement is, right?

>>8901071
It's actually worse than you think

They exclude iq samples from uneducated whites because they aren't representative of whites, and then they exclude iq samples from educated blacks as being unrepresentative of blacks. Literally rigging the results

Also in this thread there are morons who don't think education improves iq score or that you can't teach to an iq test. Yet there exists a lisp AI (i.e. a device with zero human intelligence) cogsketch that outscored 75% of whites on ravens matrices

>>8902178
No I cannot. Langan was said to have a higher IQ than Einstein yet he's contributed nothing of major value to society as opposed to Einstein who's made great strides in Physics.

Cognitive capacity means nothing if you never use it. If Einstein did nothing with his intellect, he would be on par with someone with down syndrome in terms of his value in society.

>>8893534
>scared
You mean avoiding? It's not a discussion, the correlation is decidedly fact, it's just a waste of time

File: 1491773564108.jpg (174KB, 837x1024px) Image search: [Google]

174KB, 837x1024px

>>8902194

>Cognitive capacity means nothing if you never use it

You cannot, not use your cognitive capacity. You are using it every time you are awake and living, whether or not you use that capacity to bring forwards something meaningful to society does not define your capacity to do so. Obviously is better to have an average population like Lagan than one made up by your average 70 IQ south African black person. If anything, for the differences in behavior alone.
I find it hard to believe you have trouble seeing the difference between your average 50 to 60 IQ person with down syndrome and someone like Albert Stein, and sounds more like wishfully ideological thinking and anything else, to be honest. This conversation is rather pointless too, as soon as we can genetically modify off spring to increase IQ, even the most left leaning Marxists will want a piece of the cake.
Embrace the cold reality we live in instead of running away from it, it'll make you stronger.

>>8902214
So you group me with the left because I disagree with you? Tell me, what would be the benefits of having an average intelligence with Lanagan's intellect as opposed to a 70IQ south African? What would the benefits even be there?

If your as right as you believe, surely you can explain your rationale.

>>8902221

>Higher socio economic status
>Lowered crime rates
>Increased life span and health
>The capacity to learn, apply and create complex things


All attributable to IQ, regardless of whether you actually use your cognitive capacity to provide your society with an astonishing scientific advancement. The implications of the above, are very deep. Do not take them at face value.

>>8902221

> what good would the average parson being smarter bring?

This has to be bait.

Sure, if they were all geniuses with 200 IQ society would be pretty shit. Sweet spot would Be around 130.

>>8902228
>Higher socioeconomic status
Someone has to be poor for someone to be rich m8

>Lowered crime rates
>Implying smart people don't commit crimes. Just because you don't brazenly do it or never get caught doesn't mean you don't commit crime

>Increased life span and health
High Intelligence doesn't mean higher life. And by the way, it's typically Christians that tend to live longer with their strict eating habits.

>The capacity to learn, apply and create complex things
You could teach someone with an IQ of 70 to do all of those things.

None of those correlated with IQ m8. And how are any of these "deep"?

File: 1479958522457.png (98KB, 575x548px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 575x548px

>>8902239

I agree, this response >>8902241 is not making our suspicions any better.


>''You can teach someone with an IQ of 70 to be a quantum physicists''. Jesus Christ.

>>8902239
I don't necessarily mean that the average person being smarter would be bad, but either way, like you said, after a certain point the level of intelligence means nothing. As long as they have the skills necessary such as reading, writing, and ability to do basic calculations, to participate in the most basic facets of society, the average person's intelligence doesn't matter.

>>8902245
It would take time, but if you started at the most basic level, yes you could teach someone with an IQ of 70 quantum physics.

File: IMG_3194.jpg (970KB, 2592x1936px) Image search: [Google]

970KB, 2592x1936px

>>8895004

> no such thing as races
> no such thing as inteligence difference

Jews and Asians are smarter than whites

Ok.

>>8902251
Doesn't having 65 IQ make you literally retarded? Do you really think someone with downs syndrome is gonna be a quantum physicist?

>>8902247
>>8902251

Look friendo, it's obvious the idea of IQ hurts you. But you need to grow up, there is no place in modern society for someone with an IQ below 100, and if everyone was 140+ our society would be heaps ahead in technology, art and socio-economic stability. I would go as far as to say, Communism might even be a viable option in such conditions.

>>8902259
You call me the left yet you try to deviate away from the topic at hand like the left. How does the idea of IQ hurt me if i'm simply trying to have a discussion about why IQ is as important as you make it out to be?

>>8902256
The bases of knowledge is rooted in connections. If you could understand how a retard operates, you could then understand how to relay that knowledge so the retard would understand.

It doesn't seem like we do much to understand defective humans. We simply belittle them or coax them through life rather than studying them or trying to understand the differences in their cognitive functionality.

>>8902254
dumb phoneposter

>>8902268
>The bases of knowledge is rooted in connections
Or it is rooted in capacity and maybe retards don't have the capacity to understand.

>>8902273
How exactly is knowledge rooted in capacity?

>>8895058
>Would you say anything and risk panic?
Yes, let people have some fun before they die. Do you want everyone to die while they are at their shitty jobs?

>>8902268

>The bases of knowledge is rooted in connections. If you could understand how a retard operates, you could then understand how to relay that knowledge so the retard would understand.

[CITATION NEEDED]


>>If you can explain quantum physics with rocks, you can teach a caveman quantum physics

Lie down the weed, pal.

>>8902275
How is it rooted in connections? My point was that you don't know that you could ever teach a retard quantum physics and it may be because he simply CAN'T ever understand it. It seems more likely that it is that way considering IQ is not really a measure of knowledge but intelligence.

>>8902271

Not an argument.

>>8902277
Seriously? You need to hear it from a random source? Your the one who suggested that knowledge is rooted in capacity? So prove to me that your right.

And here's a dictionary definition of knowledge

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/knowledge

>>8902287
dumb phoneposter

>>8902288

I am not who you think I am.

>>8902282

Correct.

The reason that knowledge and understanding is ultimately rooted in capacity is because when somebody teaches you something, they aren't just giving you the knowledge. They are assentially giving you as much help as the possibly can to figure it out by yourself. There's a difference between grasping an idea and knowing it.

>>8902297
Right but there is still only so much you can actually know. This should be obvious, do you seriously think a bird or frog can understand the same things humans can? Obviously not.

>>8902295
Who do you think I think you are?

>>8902297
That help your being given is the connections necessary to understand the information someone is trying to relay to you.

>>8902301
Birds and frogs can't understand human creations and connections can so how can you verify the limitations of an animal's understanding.

>>8893656
That's why you are on /sci/.

>>8902309
You really think a frog can be a quantum scientist?

>>8902304

The guy talking about IQ being rooted in connections, and not knowledge.

>>8902315
I don't know the capabilities of animals as there is very little basis for connections with animals as far as I know. The only linkage I'm aware of at this time pertains to instincts such as pain, death, and reward.

>>8902301

I don't think that. I'm in support of your argument. You might be confusing me for the retarded dude.

>>8902318
I'm saying knowledge is rooted in connections, IQ is simply a number that we attach to a very limited scope of our knowledge. And our methodology for determining this number is inherently flawed and discredits its legitimacy.

File: Scien pepe.jpg (40KB, 396x385px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 396x385px

>>8902315

Yah

>>8902326
Actually it's not even assigned to knowledge, it's based on how many questions you got right on a multiple choice test.

>>8902326

> IQ is just a number we attach to our knowledge.

IQ has nothing to do with knowledg. IQ measure she your ability to induce rules, make connections, and generally figure stuff out. How much you know and understand does not come into play during an IQ test.

>>8902324
Ah okay, my bad.

>>8902320
Really? That is too ridiculous for me. But good luck trying to teach frogs how to be quantum physicists, I doubt anyone will fund you.

>>8902326

I know what you are saying, but are a wrong. Otherwise, IQ would not be the best predictor of socio economic success and health we have. It's literally the most reliable thing Psychologist ever came up with. And to be honest, IQ is very easy to spot in individuals, as much as one can observe how people who are tall get treated much better and get more mates.

>>8902335
Last time I checked, Psychologists were saying that EQ (emotional intelligence) was the best indicator of success.

>Most reliable thing Psychologists came up with
I'd be deeply concerned if that was the case

>IQ is easy to spot in individuals?
What if a genius was acting like someone with down syndrome in public and looked the part as well?

>People who are tall get treated much better and get more mates
Generalizations don't apply to the whole

File: 53f.jpg (27KB, 600x765px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 600x765px

>>8902341

>(emotional intelligence
>Real
Hahahahaha

File: 1491686114947.gif (349KB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

349KB, 300x225px

>>8902341
>>8902343

I am off to do something productive with my time, no way I am wasting any more minutes of my life arguing with such a naive Anon. Good luck teaching clinically diagnosed retards quantum physics.

>>8902343
I'm just saying what I heard from the psychology department. The same department that IQ came from.

>>8902341
>Last time I checked, Psychologists were saying that EQ (emotional intelligence) was the best indicator of success.
That's completely false. EQ is not even real.

>>8902346
Good luck with that, I should get back to my obligations as well.

>>8902348
https://psychcentral.com/lib/what-is-emotional-intelligence-eq/

Look up EQ or emotional intelligence

>>8900642

Nice host of non-sequitur articles for race denial ignoring the extreme accuracy of microsatellite marker clustering.

>>8902159

OK but without people that you would assuredly consider "poltards" any sort of standards for culling the human genome for improvement would be shot down completely, just like it is right now with people who are single-mindedly obsessed with handing every ounce of political power to Africans, mestizos, and Arabs.

>>8902268

Okay nice data-free asspulls about how people with an IQ of 70 can do anything if they really, really believe it from the bottom of their heart lmfao.

>>8900804
> It doesn't matter how many confounders you come up with
Obviously wrong. Consider a case where 3 major confounders exist, but you only recognize 1.

>You don't understand the debate
Or maybe you don't understand it. In other words: "Not an argument."

>you used the non-sensical phraseology "caused by race"
No, I didn't. These are mine >>8899519 >>8893699
Believe it or not, we're not all one poster, moron. You are either new, stupid, or being disingenuous. You've resorted to placing words and arguments in my mouth and then triumphantly calling them out as "red flags". It would be funny if it wasn't so sad, but guess I can't expect any more from a /pol/tard.