Dr.James Watson Dispenses Red Pills on Race

Wise Watson tells it like it is.

Other urls found in this thread:

nytimes.com/2007/10/25/science/25cnd-watson.html
youtube.com/watch?v=9HQ90iSGpJM
unz.com/article/the-iq-gap-is-no-longer-a-black-and-white-issue/
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

wow its real.

nytimes.com/2007/10/25/science/25cnd-watson.html

Dare I say it, he is /ourguy/?

fake news

clearly only intellectual city people voted for hillary while you rural and suburban retards voted for a stupid racist

Watson is a hack.
Most of the hard work in the discovery of dna was done by Rosalind Franklin.

lol all she did was take an xray picture. they already suspected it was a double helix and when they looked at her pics it only confirmed their theory.

lol and all they did was look at the picture and describe how it looks

Yes good goy (((Rosalind Franklin))) did all the work by just taking a xray picture.

You are believing fake PC history. Sad.

No he is not our guy because he is a scientist and we hate scientists...even though they sometimes agree with us.
Science and technology are degenerate and we will do without them in the future.

Can anyone give me a quick rundown on this guy?

Biologists used to be so redpilled

Nope, Franklin really was technically facile but lacked any imagination. Whereas Watson and Crick "played" with tinker-toys and balls of modelling clay to visualize possible structures. They were scoffed at and dismissed, by Franklin specifically.

Forgot my pic

i see now, it was a strong independent jewish feminist that discovered the structure of DNA

rural and suburban retards: 0
intellectual city people: 1

Thanks for doing my research for me

...

Literally all she did was take a picture and it was a job any other lab tech could have done.

True red pill is looking past skin color and measuring intelligence on an individual level. I rather share a community with smart darkies than dumb whities.

>straw manning this hard

By social policies he obviously refers to things like diversity quotas that suppose that all races are equal in intelligence. Kill yourself. Painfully.

You all are just proving my point .
She did the hard technical benchwork while watson and crick just used her data to support their clay figurines.

Also i'm literally lmaoing at all of you saying she "just" took a picture, as if x-ray crystallography is like taking a polaroid.

What's next, you're gonna tell me organic synthesis is just swishing around some liquids bro.

unless she discovered the specific method for taking the special picture herself, you should kill yourself too, leaf.

I used to work in various parts of Harvard/MIT/ biomedical/academia, he was completely shitpiled for it. When people say his name now people act there as if you spoke of Hitler.

wow yeah cuz the structur of DNA was instantly obvious to them when a strong independent jewish woman took this picture and they looked at it once. im sure they didnt have to do tons of math and chemistry to finalize their theorey

1. She didn't even take the famous picture, her assistant did

2. She was a notorious cunt and impossible to work with (pretty typical of a STEM jewess)

3. She vehemently disagreed with Watson and Crick

"Oh wow Rosalind took this picture I guess that means the structure of DNA has been discovered. Alright let's scrap that model we were working on."

>yet another old cis white male advocating policy change based on preliminary results
Listen up sweeties, Crick is basing what he says on old outdated junk science

Why so angry?
I agree that diversity quotas are stupid, I just went beyond that point to say that the reverse practice, total segregation, is also stupid.

>what is regression to the mean

Xray crystallography patterns are generated by crystalizing your sample (probably the most difficult part), rotating it as it's irradiated, and diffraction patterns appear. Interpreting the data is the difficult part

>In the years after he left Harvard to direct the laboratory, Dr. Watson transformed it from a small facility into a world-class institution prominent in research on cancer, plant biology, neuroscience and computational biology, the board said in announcing his retirement. Bruce Stillman, who succeeded him as president, said today that he had created an “unparalleled” research environment at the laboratory.

And they kicked out a nobel prize and an pioneer for saying that niggers are dumb.

Regression to the mean is miss-used by the alt-right constantly.
youtube.com/watch?v=9HQ90iSGpJM

Also, she posed like Pepe.
So she has that going for her.

Franklin wrote in her lab book that it could not be a helix. They literally had drinks to "mourn the death of the DNA helix".

He just stated what we all know to be true(even the lefties). By the way, Bill Shockley, winner of the Nobel Prize in physics, also said that niggers were dumb. Predictably, leftists flipped out.

>discovered the dna structure as a double helix while tripping on lsd.
> woke on race apparently
Thats all i got

Sorry, didn't give you a time stamp. Skip to 23 minutes in if you want to hear an argument against the alt-right's use of "regression to the mean"

>MUH YOOTOOB VIDYA
Wow.... so convincing.......

He references his sources in the description.
You just spouted some nonsense as a response.
Nice argument.

His argument is that "Alt-Right" faggots think there are no smart niggers and smart niggers can't or won't breed more smart niggers. Nobody thinks that.

Regression to the mean implies that within a smart nigger's selection of multiple offspring his chances of having more smart children than say, a Jew, is slim to none.

Continue that down the line and the grand scale population of niggers now has, on average, a lower IQ than that of their progenitor. Whereas the Jew's descendants have gotten busy to work corroding a new society in which they have moved into.

The offspring would still have an above average (100) IQ if properly selected though.
But it seems like you want to go beyond just "above average" and maximize intelligence absolutely (correct me if I'm wrong). If that's the case then us whites better all just get gassed to make way for jews and east asians.

Everyone knows dna is racist.

hate to be the asshole here but,

> community with smart darkies than dumb whities.

give me a single example of a large well respected or affluent predominately black community.

>if properly selected though.
>if
That isn't how social breeding works. It isn't as if the world runs on a definite eugenics program in which only smart people breed with other smart people and we select for specific mental traits that lead to even more acutely smart people.

Sure, if you had a genetic pool of 500 high IQ blacks all breeding together for 500 years and only their offspring would breed with each other's offspring then you would end up with a highly intelligent population of people. That is precisely how Ashkenazi Jews in Europe came to be.

But blacks don't do that and within their populations worldwide, whether in the US, the UK, China, Brazil, Colombia, Cuba, their entire continent of Africa, etc., they do not possess high enough IQs on average to set into motion such an event.

>If that's the case then us whites better all just get gassed to make way for jews and east asians.

Why? They have even lower birthrates than whites. With the exception of China, their numbers aren't going anywhere and we're right behind them.

In 80 years over half the world's population will be African. Think about that for a second.

Do you honestly think that they are going to be some space-travelling super race who will take us to the stars?

Look at their dwellings wherever they are and tell me that you honestly believe that they are "equal" overall.

The Igbo people are one such group.
Here's some reading: unz.com/article/the-iq-gap-is-no-longer-a-black-and-white-issue/
This isn't directed at you specifically, but if there's one thing I wish Sup Forums had a better understanding of, it's genetics. Classifying people purely by their melanin content is to ignore large swaths of underlying genetic diversity.

If you try to take away my science i will take away your life

>That isn't how social breeding works
To a certain degree it is though. Populations self sort all the time. People tend to marry within education levels and social levels. And educational/social success is largely determined by IQ (if we prevent affirmative action from interfering)

>In 80 years over half the world's population will be African. Think about that for a second.
Okay, but birthrates decrease as nations develop and begin to encourage family planning. But beyond that, what does it matter if half the world's population is African? You don't need billions of smart people to advance space travel, you just need a well funded group of highly intelligent engineers and scientists to create the technology. I didn't invent the internal combustion engine, but I can drive a car.

here's my reply in image form, because the shitty spam filter keeps going off for some reason.

Wasted trips.

You're speaking about breeding as if it were a clear-cut scenario. Of course IQ largely determines success but to say that only successful people breed with other successful people is not a reality. Only until recently has the phenomenon of women being successful in the workplace become anything more than a vague occurrence and outside the West it is still highly unlikely, especially in places like Africa.

That being said, other than the occasional black family of doctors and lawyers you will almost never see a black community of success. Can you think of a single one? Because I can't. This has the effect of not having a viable constant stream of higher IQ black individuals breeding back into the population at a rate that supersedes the low IQ breeders.

>but birthrates decrease as nations develop
True to a degree. But do you see Africa's population slowing down anytime soon? Because almost every economist in the world doesn't

>what does it matter if half the world's population is African?
What do you think they are going to do when they are starving and living in disease ridden shitholes just like they do today? Stay? No. They will flood the West, just as they are already doing, looking for handouts and free care, just as they are already doing.

We already supplement Africa's well-being as it is. They would starve to death if it weren't for the US and Europe. They would murder each other en masse if it weren't for the UN, and their disease ridden communities would disintegrate if it weren't for the world.

What do you think will happen when over half of our planet is just like that?

There's a strong association, true, but it's not the whole story.
>white guilt
That's shit like affirmative action, which I am against. I'm just trying to breakup the ethnic-nationalism circle jerk. Sup Forums's tribalism gets old pretty quickly

>They will flood the West, just as they are already doing, looking for handouts and free care, just as they are already doing.
This is why I'm all for a selective immigration policy and strong boarders.

>We already supplement Africa's well-being as it is. They would starve to death if it weren't for the US and Europe. They would murder each other en masse if it weren't for the UN, and their disease ridden communities would disintegrate if it weren't for the world. What do you think will happen when over half of our planet is just like that?
I'll agree that this is indeed a tricky situation. I'm curious though, what do you suppose we do? Maybe cut off aid and let Africa's population return to it's carrying capacity? That'd be ruthless, but it's the mess we're in.

Assuming intelligence is heritable, which you have to support your racial policies, the mean would be the average intelligence for the population of smart darkies

holy newleaf

well good luck with that

>This is why I'm all for a selective immigration policy and strong boarders.
Me too.

>I'll agree that this is indeed a tricky situation. I'm curious though, what do you suppose we do? Maybe cut off aid and let Africa's population return to it's carrying capacity? That'd be ruthless, but it's the mess we're in.
Yes. I'm sick and tired of feeling like my race, my people, are the ones that owe the world some debt or that my race, my people need to be compassionate and care for the world because we need to be some example of cooperation and peace.

I get that you're not some White nationalist, I didn't used to be either. But the more and more I look at the world and the more and more I look at reality all I see is everyone else acting one way and we are acting another. We didn't used to be this way. This is only a recent mode of behavior.

Why is there something wrong with wanting white nations for white people and white people looking out for white interests? Why can everyone else look out for their own interests but not us?

Let Africa starve, deport refugees and illegals, and cut off unnecessary aid to vampire nations like Israel and Mexico.

There is literally nothing wrong with eugenics

>Why is there something wrong with wanting white nations for white people and white people looking out for white interests? Why can everyone else look out for their own interests but not us?

I totally understand your sentiment, user, I'm just still to idealistic for my own good.

Also, thanks for the reasonable discourse. This is an uncomfortable subject for many to talk about, but it's an important one to have. Feels like humanity as a whole is at a crossroads right now between globalism and renewed nationalism. Interesting times ahead.

In addition to the physics nobel, he helped invent the first transistor, kicking off a new era in electronics

here's a good quote
"Prejudice that is not supported by strong facts is both illogical and not in accordance with truth. The general principle that truth is a good thing applies here. Some things that are called prejudice, which are based on sound statistics, really shouldn’t be called prejudice. … It might be easier to think in terms of breeds of dogs. There are some breeds that are temperamental, unreliable, and so on. One might then regard such a breed in a somewhat less favorable light than other dogs. Now some of the business prejudices against blacks, the pragmatic man-in-the-street prejudices, are not incorrect. The man in the street has had experience and knows what to expect from blacks in business. If one were to randomly pick ten blacks and ten whites and try to employ them in the same kinds of things, the whites would consistently perform better than the blacks."