1. The purpose is to log events as they happen over the coming days. Everything is connected, Everything has meaning. 2. Yes, we all see the attempts to demoralize us and derail our redpills to the normies. Stay strong lads. Focus and believe 3. Stick to your choice. No one tells you what to do, so just do the voodoo you do so well Sup Forums 4. How would *you* succinctly break all this news to your blue-pilled friend? Does the initial message need to answer every detail? Do normies even post here? Bring them along for the ride and celebrations lads. 5. Get Comfy, Believe in your bones that we're riding the greatest timeline in existence.
MOTIVATION → → also POTUS confirms Q in #small tweet →
Latest Q !ITPb.qbhqo
Nov25 → 43 line stringer → >NOTE: Q Post was a reaction → → →
I am guessing the regular bakers got shoahed last night? When I left we were filling fake threads because real threads kept getting pruned.
Jaxon Brooks
Our Father who art in Heaven Hallowed be thy name Thy kingdom come, thy will be done On earth as it is in Heaven Give us this day our daily bread And forgive us our trespasses As we forgive those who trespass against us And lead us not into temptation But deliver us from evil
For the kingdom, the power, the glory are yours. Now and forever.
Amen.
Anons, spent the morning re-watching an old favorite. A movie where almost every single line has a subtext and hidden meaning. The players all have fake names and pasts that they'd rather be kept secret. Everyone is being blackmailed. Murders cover their crimes. In light of these Q posts and the history of the world that has painted, I have come to at least one piece of information that, if nothing else, should serve to make us all laugh.
Communism was just a red herring.
Continue digging, please keep baking. My prayers and good intent are with all of you.
Bentley Butler
yknow theres this shit called pastebin right why do you niggers INSIST on having a 12 post OP
Adrian Nelson
Filter and ignore spammers and shills who want to obfuscate connections between wealthy and powerful elite pedophiles.
William Lopez
Shilling was crazy last night
Chase Torres
They're boomers, it's amazing they managed to figure out how to post on Sup Forums using an iPhone.
Gabriel Anderson
You are one autistic motherfucker.
Gavin Johnson
It was a full scale snowflake meltdown attack the likes of which I've never seen.
Nathan Evans
Because these boomerfags think this is LReddit. Instead of lurking to learn the ins and outs of the board and it's culture they just start shitting the place up.
Nathan Kelly
you boomer faggots moved to infinity chan bye bye kill yourselves on the way out
Nathan Thomas
more and more people have become aware of the A.U.M as happenings increase. does it all tie back to them?
what is their goal?
Logan Sanders
I'm a TEMP, not a pro, lol Just baking until a real trusted baker shows up. Tired of the shill threads.
Jose Campbell
Bump for God and country
Isaac Garcia
Hey there, baker. Awesome work.
Attached is a more recent QMAP2 if you'd like to add that to the batter instead of what you've got now.
Kayden Flores
Any news since "Ed has aids" stopped baking fake bread. Couldn't handle the shillstorm
Shills are trying to get people to move to another chan. They want to divide and conquer. There is no reason to move to another chan. There is a mass influx of normal people coming here because of the tweet from Trump yesterday.
Now its more important than ever to keep these threads healthy and on topic. Do not let the shills slide. Do not reply to shills. Do not spread disinfo. Verify things yourself. Answer peoples questions. Help people learn.
Joseph Morris
Pray.
Brody Foster
it just fucking activates my almonds that threads can be consistently like this 24/7 no nigger every thread ive seen has grown exponentially in the amount of posts "needed" for an OP if you faggot boomers dont understand how to make a goddamn pastebin or condense the important information into a google doc you need to fucking lurk moar or go away
Asher Green
Almost 600 breads, and still these peons try to derail. Definition of insanity, anyone? Im so glad grandma showed me this board.
Blake Richardson
>There is a mass influx of normal people coming here because of the tweet from Trump yesterday. That is not a good thing. You need to leave.
Evan Perez
Thank you, I'll add it to next one. Hopefully another Baker will show, probably only got one or 2 more bakes in me,lol
Juan Hill
Another paid shill, this jerkoff needs to hang from a tree you were here last night you fucking scumbag spreading fake Q post
Kayden Thomas
TONNES of MEMES → in this pasta below. All the links are toast. I don't know how it gets broken or how to fix it. Perhaps Bookman knows how to fix it.
Benjamin Hughes
I talked about having a concise OP 100 threads ago. but no one listens to me. even irl, fml.
> a real trusted baker most of them are banned and/or on infi-chan. hopefully never coming back to this compromised shithole.
Benjamin Morgan
There are no boomerfags or faggot boomers. There are only people who don't want you discussing elite pedophiles and their networks, and the people who want to investigate and put and end to the pedophiles. Pray.
Eli Nguyen
You know what's funny about the shills?
They want people to believe this is a "huge disruption" of the board, and the "quality" of pol is at risk... when its just 1 thread.
I don't go into the PTG thread unless he does something great, and I wanna sound off. Other than that, its just a thread. 1 thread. Among many. It causes no harm. Lets people vent. Gives us something to do.
That's why people fight back so hard against others perceived as "shills". If you don't like the thread, you filter it. You move on. Its the same thing you do with the countless "how do we fix white women" threads, which are far more pervasive and do more to shit this board up, immeasurably worse.
LARP or not, its just one thread. The more shills attack, the more people fight back because they think they're onto something if people are constantly trying to derail everything.
Cooper Edwards
There is no real trusted baaker
There is just anons like you
Chase Clark
how does the migration factor into A.U.M's game what do you know about them? keep digging. was murmuration involved?
Blake Jenkins
8ch down right now?
Wyatt Sanchez
Boomers...
Alexander Collins
You fucking retards can't figure out how to format a single thing properly. That is a genuine fact.
Luke Edwards
Ex NSA goon Michael Hayden outed his Mockingbird boys at Fox. He's mad Trump put down CNN in his tweet.
Jack Hernandez
>They want people to believe this is a "huge disruption" of the board, and the "quality" of pol is at risk... when its just 1 thread.
this thread represents a big black cock thread they can't have. it pains them so.
Juan Phillips
oldfag here, I get what youre saying and I agree to an extent. But CBTS is about redpilling people to some serious shit thats about to unfold. I care about the sanctity of this website just as much as you do. But I care more about my country.
Jordan Lee
If you want a quick laugh check that place out, it's full of cringe posts and anons spamming it into oblivion.
Gabriel Hughes
You realize you sound hyperbolic, and paranoid, right? Get help. And praying doesn’t do jack shit. Piece together what’s tangible, instead of creating conclusions that suffice your fringe ideas. It’s really that simple.
Cameron Long
Steven Spielberg is a pedophile? How many Spielberg movies have you seen? Have they influenced American culture? Why is this a problem? Why would someone have an issue with you knowing and discussing this openly?
Landon Parker
Lads, please remember the first rule of fight club.
Camden King
Nope
Kevin Rogers
A common argument against the taxonomic validity of race is that there is more genetic variation within than between races and so races must not be genetically different enough to be subspecies. This argument comes from a 1972 paper by the Harvard geneticist Richard Lewontin (Lewontin 1972). As will be shown, Lewotin’s argument fails because the metric of genetic differences he used has no obvious relevance to subspecies and because human races are equally or more genetically differentiated than recognized subspecies from other species are.
To understand Lewontin’s argument you have to have a conceptual grasp of a metric used in population genetics called an Fst value. Say we take two random animals from the species and look at what variant they have for some specific gene. There will be some probability, called the species’s total heterozygosity, that these gene variants will not be the same. Now say we do the same thing, but this time the two people are picked from the same sub-population within the species. This time the probability that their genes variants will not be the same will be called the sub-population heterozygosity. To calculate an Fst value you subtract a the sub-population heterozygosity from the total heterozygosity and then divide by the total heterozygosity:
Fst = (Ht-Hs)/Ht
In other words, an Fst value tells us how much the probability of picking different gene variants increases is the gene variants are picked at random from the entire species instead of the same sub-population. When calculating an Fst value, geneticists run this analysis for many genes and then find the average increase in heterozygosity.
Robert Hall
When an Fst value is calculated for a species with multiple proposed sub-populations the values are averaged. So, for instance, if we conducted a study and found that two people having different gene variants was 10% less likely if they were both picked randomly from the Asian population instead of humanity at large, 8% less likely if they were both from the European population instead of humanity at large, and 6% less likely if they were picked from the African population rather than humanity at large, we might assign humanity an Fst value of (10%+8%+6%)/3% = 8% under this 3 race model. And this is what we would mean if we said something like “Only 8% of human genetic variation is between races while 92% is within them”. (The proportion of variation within groups is just 1 – the Fst value.)
In 1972, Richard Lewontin became the first person to empirically measure the human Fst value and found it to be 6.3%. Based on this finding, Lewontin declared that categorizing humans racially has no “genetic or taxonomic significance”.
Unfortunately, Lewontin never explained why an Fst value of 6.3% should mean races have no taxonomic or genetic significance. And it isn’t obvious that it should. In fact, Sewall Wright, a founder of population genetics and the man who invented Fst values, thought that they had nothing to do measuring taxonomic significance and continued to believe in Human races long after Lewontin’s famous article (Wright 1984).
Nolan Robinson
Stop making these breads. Just wait for Q-user to make an own thread. There are way too many shills and disinfo. I can't read all of this. The site is too messy.
Logan Gray
That Lewontin’s idea never took hold in the world of biology can be seen by looking at a 2006 report be the U.S Geological Survey which reviewed more than a century of popular proposed criteria for when a population counts as a sub-species. It never mentioned Fst values let alone Lewontin’s paper (Haig et al. 2006).
Since Lewontin’s paper, research has suggested that the Human Fst value is actually about twice as large, 12%, as what Lewontin suggested (Elhaik 2012). This has not altered the stance of Lewontin on races. Indeed, it isn’t obvious that his stance is open to changing because he has never said how high an Fst value would need to be in-order for a population to be of taxonomic signficance. Instead, he has just said that the human Fst value is too low.
Furthermore, Lewontin has never adressed the fact that there are many species with recognized subspecies which have Fst values lower than Humans. As can be seen below, I was easily able to find 8 other species with recognized subspecies which have Fst values no higher than humans. In fact, it isn’t hard to find researchers in the nonhuman literature taking any Fst value greater than zero as evidence that a population is a subspecies. See, for instance, Lorenzen et al. 2007 and Williams, Homan, Johnston, and Linz, 2004. Given this, it is clear that most biologists do not use Lewontin’s criteria, whatever exactly that is, for subspecies. And given that he has never made any argument for using it, neither should we.
Adam Garcia
Pewdiepie go away
Mason Carter
Instead, many biologists use a criteria of subspecies based, in part, on the idea that a population can only be a subspecies if you can analyze the traits of an organism in that species and accurately predict whether or not it is a member of a proposed subspecies.
Based on this traditional understanding of subspecies taxonomy, multiple geneticists have pointed out that an Fst value of 6% is just the average increased probability of a single gene being different and that, by combining data from multiple genes at once into our analysis, we can very accurately predict whether or not someone will be a member of a given race (Mitton 1977). To get a conceptual understanding of what this means, imagine that you were told to guess whether a person was a male or a female based on whether they were taller or shorter than average, or hairier or less hairy than average, or whether their voice was higher or lower pitched than average, etc. If only one of these facts were told to you, you could make an educated guess but there would be a decent chance that you would be wrong. But if you combined data on, say, 20 such sex differences, your chances of correctly guessing the person’s sex would become quite high. By the same principle, a singe gene might not be a very good predictor of someone’s race, but that doesn’t mean that the combined data of many genes wont be. It was on this basis that the famed population genetic A. W. F. Edwards dubbed this argument against race “Lewontin’s Fallacy” (Edwards 2002).
Charles Gray
Further more, an Fst value is not even a good measure of genetic differentiation. Consider the work done in Long and Kittles 2003, which provided a powerful demonstration of just how ridiculous an Fst subspecies criteria really is. Long and Kittles calculated the Fst value of the global human population at 11%, which is pretty typical of modern studies. They then calculated the Fst value of the global human population plus a population of chimpanzees to be 16%. Thus, the inclusion of Chimpanzees into the calculation only raised the Fst value by 5%, and most Fst based subspecies criteria would therefore conclude that a population of humans and chimps has no significantly different sub populations within it!
This work is not only amusing, but illustrative of the primary problem with Fst values as a measure of genetic differentiation. Recall that an Fst value tells us how much more likely it is two gene variants will be different if they are picked out of the entire species instead of from member of the same race. Well, what if the probability that they will be different is really high even when the genes are picked from the same race. Say, 85%, for instance. Well, in that case the most that the probability of picking different genes could increase would be by 15%, which is only an Fst value of .15.
More generally, the table below makes two points. First, for simple mathematical reasons, an Fst value can never be larger than one minus the sub-population heterozygosity. Second, because an Fst value is a measure of how much heterozygosity increases when gene variants are picked from the entire population rather than the same population, expressed as a percentage of the total heterozygosity, the same absolute difference between total and sub-population heterozygosity can lead to radically different Fst values depending on what the absolute values of these variables are:
James Morales
To connect this back to humans, our sub-population heterozygsity levels range from .70-.76 (Jorde et al. 1997). Thus, no matter how different the races were, our Fst value could never be greater than roughly 25%. Each race could literally be as different, genetically speaking, as dogs are from cats. It wouldn’t matter. Our Fst value would never seem intuitively high. and most of our genetic variation would still be contained “within races”.
For these and other reasons, geneticists are increasingly recognizing that Fst values cannot be meaningfully compared across species, which have different total heterozygosities, and so, beyond testing that an Fst value is greater than zero, it cannot possibly be the foundation for criteria of sub-species (Jost 2008).
Appendix 1: Alan Templeton and Fst > .25
Aaron White
the point of you fucking leaving is that the instant anything credible comes up in uranium one threads or any other actual investigation threads, shills can just go "YEAH WELL LOOK AT THOSE CBTS CONSPIRITARDS" to try and invalidate anything people like me have worked hard to investigate ive yet to see a single fucking concrete thing come from these awful fucking threads. i physically wince when (((Q))) posts and you fucking mongrels leap on it like carrion to a corpse everyone going OH SHIT HE SAID GREEN TREES IT MUST MEAN THAT BILL CLINTON IS A RAPIST and drawing conclusions where there arent, posting fucking youtube videos revealing yourselves to be my parent's fucking age just admit you are all being played by the millennials you think are incapable of doing anything making you run around like headless chicken
Camden Thomas
No it's not. Some people here may have good intentions but the majority come off as complete fucking retards. You guys make Alex Jones at his most off the rails moments seem like the most sane person in the world to the average normalfag. Constantly acting like every little thing is some cryptic message. You take genuine things like the pedo rings in DC and completely taint them with your schizo bullshit. You need to leave and stay gone.
Adam Myers
Talk about Spielberg, Geffen, Singer being pedophiles, get spammed
Ryan Reyes
A highly cited 1999 paper by the geneticist Alan Templeton claimed that requiring that a subspecies have an Fst value of at least 25%-30% is “standard in the nonhuman literature” (Templeton 1999). Templeton, who uses this claim to argue against the existence of human races, cites the 1997 paper “Subspecies and Classification” by Smith, Chiszar, and Montanucci, to substantiate that this Fst standard is common place in biology (Smith, Chiszar, and Montanucci, 1997.). But Smith et al. 1997 never even mentions Fst values! It appears that Templeton assumed that this is what Smith et al 1997 meant when they wrote that subspecies cannot “overlap in variation of their differentiae” by more than 25%-30%. This is almost surely not a reference to Fst values. Instead, this paper was referencing the so called “75% rule”, which is criteria of subspecies which stated that a population would count as a sub-speices if you could analyze the traits of organisms in the species and, on this basis, predict whether or not they were a member of the proposed subspecies with an error rate of 25% or less. There are several reasons for thinking that Smith et al. 1997 were referring to the 75% rule and not an Fst based criteria for subspecies:
They referred to “differentia” implying that multiple traits can be used to differentiate subspecies. This is consistent with the 75% rule, several observable traits were the norm, and not an Fst value criterion. Smith et al. 1997 goes on to state “A subspecies name draws attention to a geographic segment of a species that in some way is recognizably different”. This appeal to recognizable differences clearly implies that subspecies are differentiated based on observable traits, as in the 75% rule, and not a molecular genetic analysis.
Angel Sanchez
As demonstrated by Haig et al. 2006, large teams of researchers reviewing the subspecies literature have never heard of Templeton’s Fst criteria. Haig et al do, however, spend several paragraphs talking about the 75% rule. As is evidenced above, an Fst criteria is not, in fact, commonly used. But the 75% rule was. Given that Smith is an expert in subspecies taxonomy who has been writing on the topic for decades, it is therefore far more likely that he was talking about the 75% rule than Templeton’s contrived criteria which can’t be found anywhere else in the literature.
Thus, Templeton’s paper is based on an extremely misleading reading of Smith et al 1997 and fails to establish any Fst criteria for subspecies.
Appendix 2: Joseph Graves and Sewall Wright
Joseph Graves is a biologist who has written several books and countless articles arguing against the biological existence of races. In his writings he often says something such as this about Sewall Wright, the inventor of Fst values:
“Wright felt the latter, measured by Fst was equivalent to the subspecies used by taxonomists (also called biological or geographical race.) Population subdivision can be calculated at individual genetic loci or for numerous genetic loci simultaneously. Wright’s statistic can range between 0 and 1.00. He arbitrarily suggested that the minimal threshold for the existence of great variation was Fst = 0.250 and moderate variation Fst = 0.15 to 0.250. He examined individual loci derived from protein electrophoresis from a variety of species, finding a range of differentiation from 0.023 to 0.501 (average Fst= 0.168).
Joshua Foster
lol he lost his mind
Ayden Torres
Subsequent studies of multiple loci, including whole genome analyses, have generally shown human Fst at much less than Wright’s critical value.” –Graves 2006
As we have already seen, Sewall Wright did not think that Fst values should be a criteria for sub-species. He literally dedicates an entire chapter two the fourth volume of his X to race and never mentions Fst values, not does he anywhere else state that they should be used as a criteria for subspecies. In fact, on page 85 Wright cautions readers against using Fst values as a straight forward measure of genetic differentiation:
We will take F = 0.25 as an arbitrary value above which there is very great differentiation, the range of 0.15 to 0.25 as indicating moderately great differentiation. Differentiation is, however, by no means negligible if F is as small as 0.05 or even less” – Wright 1984
Thus, Graves is misleading readers by separating these two sentences, only showing his readers the first, and thus stripping it of its proper context. Wright’s views do not, in fact, lend credence to the idea that human races do no exist.
Julian Peterson
>When these CBTS fags speak and post similliarly just like the reddit T_donald faggots
Eli Williams
It is sometimes argued that human genetic variation is continuous and so grouping people into discrete categories is illegitimate. The flaw in the first argument is simple: organizing continuous variation into discrete categories can help us predict and explain the world, and, so, can be valid scientific categories. In fact, scientists often group continuous variation into discrete categories. Consider, for instance:
Medical researchers break continuous blood pressure variation into discrete categories such as “high” and “low”. Physicists group continuous variation across the color spectrum into discrete colors such as “blue” and “green”. Social scientists break continuous variation in income into discrete categories such as “poor” and “rich”. In each of these cases, scientists are taking continuous variation and breaking it down into discrete categories because it is useful to do so. The usefulness of discrete categories comes from their power to predict. For instance, knowing that someone has “high” blood pressure, or knowing that someone is “poor”, can help you predict various other things about them. Similarly, knowing someone’s race can allow you to make predictions about any variable in which the races differ. Thus, racial categories are useful for prediction, which is a key function of science.
Luis Evans
ALL OF HOLLYWOOD. Most of DC.
Jacob Ramirez
this much spam for a nothingburger
Evan Ward
It’s also worth noting that human genetic variation is not, in fact, continuous. Or, at least, not across racial lines. Genetic variation becomes continuous when there is a large amount of gene flow between populations. However, gene flow can be significantly hindered by geographical features such as mountains and seas. Such geographic obstacles often stood in the way of the inter-racial mating pre-historically. For instance, Native Americans were separated from the rest of humanity by an ocean, Blacks were separated by the sub-Saharan desert, and Europe was separated from many Asian peoples by the Ural and Caucus Mountain ranges. Of course, cultural practices also limited inter-racial mating and explain way, for instance, even after 300 years of living in same areas, roughly 96.5% of American whites have basically no African admixture in their genomes (Bryc et al. 2015).
That human genetic variation is not continuous across racial lines was shown byRosenberg et al. 2005 who found that two populations of the same race are, on average, more genetically similar than two populations of different races, even when both population pairs are equally far from one another geographically. If human genetic variation was continous across racial lines, a computer program told to group human genetic variation into clusters such that intra cluster genetic similarity is maximized and inter cluster genetic similarity is minimized would not group people into races nearly 100% of the time. But it does (Tang et al 2005, Rosenberg et al. 2005, and Rosenberg et al. 2002 ).
Evan Kelly
The illuminati elite are known to escape to Antarctica when they think they're in for it. They believe they are descendants of something that lives there... could it be their own "ancestors"? There are undergound complexes. What did Buzz Aldrin say about it?
Tyler Parker
It is also importance to realize that racialists have virtually always known that, to some degree, the human variation is continuous. Below are quotes from three important thinkers, all writing before 1900, who explicitly recognized this in their writings.
Johan Bumlenbach was a founder of modern anthropology and, in the late 1700’s, devised a 6 race categorization of humans that still matches common sense today. He was one of the first writers to speak of a Causation race which included both Europe and north Africa and an early proponent of the idea that the Races all had a common ancestor. In 1775 he described the way that traits vary geographically from one race to another as an “imperceptible transition”.
“No variety exists, whether of color, countenance, or stature, so singular as not to be connected with others of the same kind by such an imperceptible transition, that it is very they are all related, or only differ from each other in degree.” – Blumenbach 1775
Comte de Buffoon is the most important popularizer of the idea that a species should be defined as a population that can produce fertile offspring. He was also another early proponent of the idea that all the races have a common ancestor. Here, we can see Buffoon describing populations as differing by “imperceptible degrees”. This is clearly consistent with the modern terminology describing genetic variation as continuous.
Ayden Wright
“Man descends, by imperceptible degrees, from the most enlightened and polished nations, to people of less genius and industry; from the latter to others more gross, but still subject to kings and laws, and these, again, to savages” – Buffon 1753 (page 186)
Finally, we have Darwin. Darwin’s significance in general biology hardly needs to be explained. It is worth noting, though, that Darwin was probably the single most important historical advocate of the idea that human races are subspecies, rather than species. Here, we can see him using the continuous nature of human genetic variation as evidence for this claim:
“But the most weighty of all the arguments against treating the races of man as distinct species, is that they graduate into each other, independently in many cases, as far as we can judge, of their having intercrossed.” – Darwin 1871 (page 226)
In summary, human genetic variation is not continuous across racial lines. But even if it was, this would not mean that we can’t put that continuous variation into discrete categories. In fact, many of histories most important racial thinkers believed that human variation was continuous across racial lines, and this did nothing to sway them from their race realism.
Angel Allen
Praying.
Chase Parker
The reason we left was because mods deleted all good breads, left only poison breads, banned many of us. Had to move. Then Q posted on 8.chan so we are over there now. I suggest being in both places in case we get deleted here again. ty and God bless.
Anthony Anderson
You can’t get through a 100 level anthropology class without hearing this line. And when people hear that race is not a biological concept but, rather, that it is a social construct they assume that categories that are valid and used in biology are not social constructs. In other words, they assume that being a valid biological category and being a social construct are mutually exclusive. This is simply not true.
Anytime we categorize objects we decide to group things one way as opposed to another. In this sense, all categories are social constructs. If we wanted to we could get rid of the category “table” and, in its place, invent two new categories: one for all “tables” that are brown and another for all “tables” that are not brown. Of course, it is more useful to have one single category which denotes all tables and so that is what we go with. But the point is that we choose to “go with” one category scheme and not the other. Thus, there is something “social” or “artificial” about all categories.
But this isn’t specific to race. All categories, including scientific ones, are tools and their validity must be determined by whether or not they are useful. Simply noting that a category is man made tells us nothing about whether or not it can aide scientists in predicting and explaining the natural world. This, that race is socially constructed is irrelevant to its validity.
Kayden Torres
It is important to realize that these “socially constructed” categories are also “biologically real” in that they are socially constructed ways to organize natural biological variation. We could chose another way. There are nearly countless ways you could group people based on biology.
In fact, we often do chose other ways. For instance, when we talk about “diabetics” and “non-diabetics” were are talking about a way of categorizing humans, which we invented, based on biological differences between them. Does this mean that “diabetic” has no place in medical science? Hardly.
This fact, that racial categorization is made by humans rather than nature, has been recognized for hundreds of years. For instance, when considering the nature of Varieties, the major below-species category of early biology and the taxonomic level to which Linnaeus relegated races, Linnaeues, the founder of modern biological taxonomy, wrote that “”Species and genera are regarded as always the works of Nature, but varieties are usually owning to culture.” (Stuessy 2009 page 154).
Similarly, Johan Blumenbach (1795), the founder of physical anthropology, when arguing that a 5 race scheme was better than 3, 4 or 6, race scheme, said: Five principal varieties of mankind may be reckoned. As, however, even among these arbitrary kinds of divisions, one is said to be better and preferable to another, after a long an attentive consideration, all mankind, as far as it is at present known to us, seems to me as if it may best, according to natural truth, be divided into the five following varieties: which may be designated and distinguished from each-other by the names Caucasian, Mongolian, Ethiopian, American, and Malay. ”
Benjamin Wood
The shilling last night was insane never seen anything like it, they day is coming and they know, they are getting desperate
Austin Howard
There was never a migration. Shills made previous cbts threads then they stooped doing them to force division of the community into other boards
Alexander Torres
Note that he refers to “varieties” or, what today would be called subspecies, as an arbitrary division. He does also mention “natural truth”, and this is referring to the fact that man made categories sort natural variation. None the less, Blumenbach clearly recognizes that racial categories are invented, rather than discovered.
This fact was not lost on future generations of racial scientists. Erynst Mayr, probably the most important taxonomist of the 20th century and the inventor of the most popular modern criteria of subspecies, called subspecies “a purely subjective” category. He went on to say “the subspecies is merely a strict utilitarian classificatory device for the pigeonholing of population samples” (Keita 1993). When responding in the 1960’s to a complaint about the subjectivity of subspecies taxonomy the biologist J. Tilden wrote “We should, I feel, have a mental reservation that our systems exist more in our mind than in nature. However useful our system may be as a tool, we cannot assume that no other system could be devised to express the same concepts as well or even better. By this line of reasoning, the concept of subspecies should no more be under fire than any other level of classification, since all are equally the products of man’s ingenuity.” (Tilden 1961)
Clearly then, it has long been known by those who see race as biologically real that race is also socially constructed. Moreover, in non-politically charged contexts this is seen as uncontroversial and irrelevant. The fact that a category is man made does not mean that it can’t help us predict and explain nature. And so it has little relevance to whether or not a category has a place in science.
Leo Bell
Nothing to see here about Jeb Bush being a blackmailed faggot, Spielberg being a prolific child rapist, and a dead Lord Rothschild. Just some raging beta failsons really mad about their board's integrity. Let's not lose sight of what matters.
Noah Stewart
pray during catpcha
Jeremiah Garcia
...
Christian Clark
...
Logan Parker
I'll try my best. :)
Luke Diaz
> Was /pol already a bit of a psy-op, that cbts may be disrupting?
Sebastian Kelly
I honestly don't see why that surprises you.
Colton Young
This article will lay out the basic case for “hereditarianism” or the view that genes are an important cause of racial IQ differences. At this point, you may already be thinking something like “no reputable scientist would ever think this!”, “Race doesn’t even exist!”, “IQ tests are culturally biased and don’t measure intelligence anyway!”, “What about poverty, racism, single motherhood, education, etc.,!” all of which will be dealt with in this article. For the time being, just try to keep an open mind. Then, after reviewing the evidence fairly, you can decide whether or not I’m a crack pot.
Race and IQ tests
Some people are skeptical of the very ideas of “race” and “IQ”, so let’s deal with that first.
Races are just populations that evolved in different environments. Racial groups correspond to genetic clusters and differ enough genetically such that differences in IQ are plausible. If you really doubt the basic existence of race, see this article dealing with that subject in isolation.
Nolan Green
Bump
Ian Perry
Now let’s turn to IQ. The most popular IQ tests include items which test mathematical ability, pattern recognition, short-term memory, verbal comprehension, and vocabulary. They are not perfect measures of intelligence, but they predict how smart a person’s peers say they are as well as how well people do in school and on the job (Denissen et al., 2011; Palhusand and Morgan, 1997; Bailey and Hatch, 1979; Bailey and Mattetal, 1977). In fact, IQ is a better predictor of income and educational attainment than parental socio-economic status is (Strenze, 2006).
Now, you might think that other notions of intelligence are important too. Certainly, IQ is not the only important thing about a person and whether to call a given skill “intelligence” is just a fight about words. If you want, you can replace the term “intelligence” with “IQ”. The important point is not that IQ is everything we normally call intelligence, it’s not, but that it is real and important.
Some people think that IQ tests only measure intelligence among Europeans. This is not true. Surveys of experts show that the vast majority of researchers in this area do not think that IQ tests are substantially culturally biased, and this is for good reason.
Sebastian Cruz
Shilling is not what you think it is, and it is not causative, nor correlative to your theory. Please go take your insulin, sausage fingered boomer.
Carson Allen
If IQ tests painted non-Whites are being less intelligent than they actually are then they should under-predict how well non-Whites do in school and the work force. They do not (Kobrin, 2001; Cucina et al., 2016; Jensen, 1980). Moreover, if IQ tests are biased, there should be “bias” problems which are among the hardest problems for non-Whites but the easiest for Whites. Actually, Whites and non-Whites rank the difficulty of IQ tests items essentially identically (Jensen and McGurk, 1986; Reynolds and Suzuki, 2003). Further still, if IQ tests were really biased against non-Whites, you would expect Europeans to score the highest on them. They don’t, East Asians do (Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen, 2012; Faulk, 2016A). In summary, the idea that IQ tests are culturally or racially biased makes several testable predictions and they have all been falsified.
Establishing the Gap
It is uncontroversial that racial differences in IQ exist. Meta-analyses of data on more than 6,000,000 people have shown that Blacks in America score about 15 points lower than Whites do (Roth et al., 2001). East Asians, by contrast, score a few points higher than Whites do.
Charles Robinson
Shhh ;)
David Roberts
No worries, man, someone will swing by eventually. Thanksgiving weekend tends to slow things down everywhere.
Reposting: Qmap: 11/04/2017 148019575: WTL: writing to learn (we're fucking noobs and are only just getting started)
148019905: WTT: weapons tactics trainer ("soon you will become ministers of death praying for war")
148020278: SAHR(H?)S: secondary attitude and heading reference system (basically what CBTS is: making the connections independent of Q outright saying what is going on)
148021501: POCS (?): points of contact (finding links between major topics in lines of inquiry(?))
148022145: FCS: flight control system ASI: air speed indicator (uncertain if "=" counts; if not, SI could mean anything) (use the signatures to guide/link concepts)
148022342: MSG: multiple meanings; mission support group (basically what CBTS could become)
Code may ignore signatures (where applicable) and sentences w/? at the end, I'm not sure. For so many posts and combinations, it's hard to say. Anons, I'll keep this up if it stays good, otherwise I'll drop it. ?
Xavier Cook
Wow you mad?
Dominic Hughes
Of course, this does not mean that every African American has a lower IQ than every European American. Actually, these numbers imply that around one in ten African Americans will have an IQ of 100 or higher (the White average) and one in six Whites will have an IQ of 85 or lower (the Black average). The point is that these groups differ on average.
Why gaps matter
That being said, these gaps do matter. If you control for IQ, many social inequalities between the races disappear. For instance, if you hold IQ constant, Blacks are more likely than Whites to get a college degree and get paid the same for the same work.
Controlling for IQ also eliminates most of the Black-White Incarceration gap.
IQ is also an excellent predictor of national wealth, and changes in national IQ overtime predict changes in economic growth (Lynn and Vanhanen, 2012; Pietschnig and Voracek, 2015).
Thus, these differences have social importance aside from the fact that human differences are inherently interesting.
Jeremiah Morales
Here's Buzz Aldrin's tweet about it - he had to be medivac'd out of McMurdo station.
Gabriel Barnes
No the thread is messy. Not the site. Don't want the mess, stay out of the thread. Very simple. Make another memeball or BBC whitebois btfo thread to ease your mind. Otherwise, you are the shill.
Parker Cooper
If there wasn't a migration why is NightBaker baking threads there now?
David White
everyone psyops here dude. only the good guy make the good memes though. baddies are stuck in 2009-memeland
Adam Hill
Obvious Environment Causes
At this point, some people may be thinking that the Black-White IQ gap can by explained away by poverty, racism, education, or single motherhood. These explanations have each been refuted.
First, let’s look at poverty. Poverty does correlate with IQ, but controlling for socio-economic status, whether measured by parental income, education, neighborhood, wealth, or any other way, does not eliminate the Black-White IQ gap. This has been shown in more than 60 studies over the last 100 years (Last, 2016A). In fact, poor Whites do better on standardized tests than rich Blacks do.
(Black Journal of Higher Education, 2008)
The same is true of single motherhood. Even when just looking at people from two parent homes, the Black-White IQ gap persists (Prifitera et al., 2005, table 1.4; Weiss et al., 2016, table 5.6). Moreover, research has shown that the Black-White IQ gap, and the White-East Asian IQ gap, still exists even when only looking at people raised (via adoption) in White homes (Faulk, 2016A).
Joshua Davis
He's not wrong. I've been in here since the beginning. I had to lay off over the weekend cause of family, but also I got tired wading through the 10-15 OP posts trying to figure out what was new. Consolidate and pastebin that shit and make it cleaner with only new info up front. We've been at this for weeks. For all the time and effort we've all put in, please get it together before we do REALLY better banned...again.
