Kraut and Tea doubles down

Why isn't there a thread about Kraut's newest video?

youtube.com/watch?v=n88bx5KRnc0&bpctr=1512127991

Other urls found in this thread:

twitter.com/MillennialWoes/status/936309247821930497
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability
youtube.com/watch?v=ObmCzalA_Ro
youtu.be/ezUGLqVBhO4?t=43m54s
youtube.com/watch?v=JB_omHQwYh8
youtube.com/watch?v=hJk2dW6BOnA
youtube.com/watch?v=IaJXPRj_9SA
thealternativehypothesis.org/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Quick rundown perkele?

...

TL;DR: Another steaming pile of shit by Kraut and tea. Kraut doubles down on his retarded find the genes dogma, completely ignores general heritability. Kraut’s demand is like saying that you have to find gravitons to prove gravity (we don’t, because we can just observe stuff falling down). He says you need muh molecular genetics to prove dem genes, without realizing that it’s been done already. It’s no wonder that Kraut, being the idiot he is, shies away from quantative genetics, because even he ahs to realize that quantative genetics isn’t on his side.

I also wrote a full rundown, although in hindsight it's a shitload of text (Kraut's video was almost an hour long)

Thanks. Has he debated Ryan Faulk yet?

Of course not, Kraut is nothing without his "experts". He hasn't even responded to JF

brainlet thinks gravity is a force

According to JewTube the video is "offensive" and thus comments are disabled. Did one of you guys flag it or something? Never seen this message before.

>brainlet thinks gravity is a force
What are you even on about here spermany-san?

Some assblasted faggots claim that "le alt-right" has been mass-flagging it or something. Don't know if it's just butthurt kraut & co making stuff up

thanks suomi

You are giving this faggot more attention than he deserves

Probably, but it's still fun to make fun of his spergery.

And it took him 3 months?
Why does a video of what quality take 6 months.
I can't believe he spend the last 12 months working on such a mess. What a waste of a decade.

I'll just wait for the video where Ryan Faulk tears his shitty video to pieces. Can't stand listening to the mutt's obnoxious fake accent.

>Ryan Faulk
le flavour of the months e-celeb
are you paid or do you do it for free?

>2 years
8 years to make a fucking video jesus christ

>And it took him 3 months?
>Why does a video of what quality take 6 months.
>I can't believe he spend the last 12 months working on such a mess. What a waste of a decade.
Afaik he's made 4 videos in the past 3-4 months. But yeah it takes time, Kraut is a brainlet high-school dropout who knows nothing about the subject

Wut? Based Ryan Faulk has certainly contributed more to humanity than you have

>let's dwelve

fuck off nigger

He makes good content. And watching Kraut come back for more after each beating is pretty funny. Well written.

Sup Forums has given me a genuine love of fins and their wonderful brand of autissm

Why was this video taken down and then the reupload was put into limited state?

Can someone explain to me what's going on? Sargon said it was "alt-right trolls" who took down the vid at first, but can flagging put vids into limited state?

>fuck off nigger
Watch your mouth sheep fucker

>Can someone explain to me what's going on? Sargon said it was "alt-right trolls" who took down the vid at first, but can flagging put vids into limited state?
I don't know. Youtube says that 75% of videos are put into limited state by an algorithm without any human help. I don't see why anyone would even bother mass flagging kraut videos given that he's nothing more than a lolcow

>twitter.com/MillennialWoes/status/936309247821930497
It was spergs.

What a bunch of faggots. Discord is filled with cancer.

How long til Ryan Faulk makes him look like an idiot again?

Probably

Indeed, they might want to take advise from Napoleon:
‘Never interfere with an enemy while he’s in the process of destroying himself.’

>Quantitative genetics
Like I give a fuck, I just don't want nigger run around in my country, that's all. I don't need a fucking science or prove anything.

I saw something about a DCMA for animation used in the video, something about /leftypol/, but I don't know. I did see an american sperg in threads bragging about flagging it for CP, but who fucking knows.

I don't know if was 'alt-right,' copyright holders, false flaggers or trolls. Kraut might have done it himself, for all I know. Just le enlightened skeptics making claims without evidence at this point.

Krauts opponents have no reason to flag his video. The cunt gets BTFO by the responses and comments, so why would people interested in the discussion take that away?

tl/dr: No one knows.

>Kraut’s demand is like saying that you have to find gravitons to prove gravity (we don’t, because we can just observe stuff falling down)
Theories of gravity involving gravitons aren't yet proven though

Lazia is /leftypol/. They're the guys that flagged Murdoch Murdoch, threatened Black Pigeon Speaks.

You don't have to know what causes gravity to make observations about gravity.

none of this shit even matters we are one or two generations from modfing genese to give you the color you want for your future child regardlessly.
So in the end whity will exist no matter what lol

How!=that.
Gravity works, lacking an explanation as to how it works won't make you suddenly float into space.

Oh fuck really?! I was so pissed when they took down Murdoch's channel, they can all go burn in hell.

Oh, yes, white-washed cryptoniggers. What a wonderful future. As long as we remove the aposematism everything will be fine, we'll finally solve racism!

If you want to draw conclusions you do. We can measure constants all day long it won't ever tell us what exactly is causing us to accelerate down.

IQ differences lacking a genetic explanation don't automatically get assigned to genetics if it seems to be a cause.

>let's dwelve

>If you want to draw conclusions you do.

Oh wow, Aussie user just BTFO Newton. Well done, you fucking sperg. Now take your scientific findings to the Nobel committee, you'll get a medal and blowjobs for life.

I can draw conclusions about the effects of gravity without knowing what causes gravity.

>don't automatically get assigned
That's right, there's nothing automatic about it. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability
You don't need to find specific environmental causes or genes to assess what portion of the total variation in a population is due to heritable factors(genes) and what's due to environmental factors.

Just like you don't need to find a graviton to observe that gravity works.

BPS goes into it here.

youtube.com/watch?v=ObmCzalA_Ro

Newton wasn't (entirely) correct about gravity though. To say that mass causes gravitational attraction is an incredibly simplified description of how later theories of gravity would describe attraction.

>I can draw conclusions about the effects of gravity without knowing what causes gravity.
Completely agree, so why draw conclusions about racial differences without knowing if their cause is genetic or environmental?

Just listened for 8 minutes and he's rambling about the same muh molecules shit again.

Ya I've seen it, just didn't know they where the same people, fucking bastards.

Because heredity can be observed, even if the effects of specific genes can't.

>Theories of gravity involving gravitons aren't yet proven though
The point is that you do not need to prove the exact mechanism that causes gravity, in order to infer that gravity exists.

>If you want to draw conclusions you do. We can measure constants all day long it won't ever tell us what exactly is causing us to accelerate down.
Well, you could argue that no amount of measurements can ever prove that gravity exists. We can get deep down into the philosophy of science if you want, but what does it matter? The world behaves exactly as though gravity exists, as posited by our theories. Same thing with intelligence. It behaves exactly the way as one would expect if it were highly heritable. For all intents and purposes, intelligence is mostly genetic (as in, heritable)

>IQ differences lacking a genetic explanation don't automatically get assigned to genetics if it seems to be a cause.
We do have a genetic explanation.

First of all, intelligence is a product of either environment or genes or some combination of both. There are no known environmental factors that could account for the IQ gaps. Meanwhile, we have general heritability. In addition to that, scientists are in the process of finding the actual genes that are linked to intelligence, and what we've found so far are not evenly distributed among different races

It's just speculation at this point. If the screenshots MW has are accurate, then /leftypol/ was involved to some degree. Not that I'm white-knighting the 'alt-right.'

>You don't need to find specific environmental causes or genes to assess what portion of the total variation in a population is due to heritable factors(genes) and what's due to environmental factors.
These are just prediction models though, these methods aren't precise. Nothing is proven genetically until its actually reflected in your genes. The whole last part of the video is about this:

youtu.be/ezUGLqVBhO4?t=43m54s

>Just like you don't need to find a graviton to observe that gravity works.
You can know how something works without any proof you just wouldn't have verification. If you're making predictions about gravitons/genetics without actual evidence of gravitons/genetic influence then your theory is unfounded. Heritability is an educated guess, not concrete proof.

Of course, and it would make sense. The "alt right" has no reason to take down Krauts video since he was just humiliating himself. As well the main admin is a Turk I think and his fascist pretensions just sound like larping to me.

>flavor of the month
Faulk has been at it with his autistically data driven redpills for years faggot

>You can know how something works without any proof you just wouldn't have verification. If you're making predictions about gravitons/genetics without actual evidence of gravitons/genetic influence then your theory is unfounded. Heritability is an educated guess, not concrete proof.
No, it's pretty much concrete proof. We can reliably infer the existence of these genetic mechanisms by the effects they cause

And i actually got into the server, they are accurate.

i don't know shit about half the things they're talking about nor do i care about it enough to read the papers

But basically if I understood correctly, Kraut is just trying to muddy the waters with "well you haven't found the exact genes ergo humans are equal"

Like as if equality in any trait is supposed to be the default assumption. It's not. You would expect EVERYTHING to be wildly divergent if you believe in evolution at all.

>e-celebs
nobody gives a fuck about your youtube retards and faggots, fingol
>in all fields

It was probably his fellow skeptic community controlled opposition shills because they saw that cuck and tea kept making a fool of himself and giving guys like faulk a larger platform to show tons of people how race is real and intelligence is heritable

To put in in mafia terms, the family is whacking this one soldier who keeps running his mouth

>It's just speculation at this point. If the screenshots MW has are accurate, then /leftypol/ was involved to some degree


That would imply that leftards want arguments against the Alt Right silenced. Interesting. Also in line with what's been happening to muh skeptics on social media.

We can't have loud mouthed neckbeard fedoras harming the greatest asset of the left after all. Let's instead call all the the people trying debunk them "alt right" and claim we are working hard to crack down on this dangerous fascist movement while strangely leaving the actual Alt Right alone apart from masses of media coverage for GayBoy Dick Spencer.

Well now, I wonder if the enlightened skeptics are going to apologise for making claims without evidence? I doubt it. Bunch of pretentious fucks.

youtube.com/watch?v=JB_omHQwYh8
>These are just prediction models though, these methods aren't precise. Nothing is proven genetically until its actually reflected in your genes.

Agriculture. How does it work? Our ancestors bred domesticated animals and plants for specific traits. Without knowing the genes.

Quantitative genetics is a scientific field that studies these traits without knowing the genes. Read Mendel.

That just means we dont know WHY gravity is a thing. Gravity as an observable effect is absolutely true. Likewise, I don't need to know the exact gene for hair color or height to know that these traits have a genetic component. Its not like we only knew that people inherited traits until after dna was discovered and specific genes were sequenced

>nobody gives a fuck about your youtube retards and faggots, fingol

Sup Forums is just youtube comments section without censorship at this point.

Leave the banter to the pros, sheepfucker. Liberals have been running interference for commies for years.

Because he's gay

You realize you don't have to click on this particular thread, right?

There's a hundred others, go there then. Why focus on this one and how much you "don't care" about it?

I was being serious cunt. The Alt Right is mostly controlled opposition. I have seen plenty of evidence.

i'm just wanting for JF to BTFO thot and low-t again

Whos jf?

So we don't have verification of gravity working yet?
>If you're making predictions about gravitons/genetics
We're not. It's about gravity, or heritability, and for that there's absolutely no need to find a graviton(the genes) as it's irrelevant as to the effects of gravity. It's an explanation for a causal mechanism leading to the already observed fact of gravity existing(IQ being highly heritable).
>these methods aren't precise
Heritability isn't a precise concept as it's dependent on the population examined and its environment. It is however valid.
>Nothing is proven genetically
Wrong. We covered this. How!=that

We're not talking about how it works(IQ being inherited), we're talking about whether it is. There's no need to establish a causal explanation for that, as it's not a question of causality(is it inherited/how is it inherited). Statistical analysis is sufficient to prove the existence and extent of heritability. Just like we can measure gravity without having found the graviton yet.

>We can't have loud mouthed neckbeard fedoras harming the greatest asset of the left after all

They weren't though. /leftypol/ just interrupted a skeptic as he was making yet another mistake, denying race realism. Kraut went from being BTFO 4 times in a row to having an out, "the evil alt-right shut me down."

You're cheering on someone shutting down the discussion of race realism. Which just makes me think you're either retarded, or some chink sheepfucker commie faggot trying to muddy the waters. Either way, you're a retard.

Heritability isn't precise and is itself highly contingent on the groups chosen to measure

>The point is that you do not need to prove the exact mechanism that causes gravity, in order to infer that gravity exists.
By which theory of gravity? If it involves gravitons then your theory will not explain gravity if no evidence is found. Cruder theories (i.e. quantitative genetics evidence) might still describe gravity in a more basic way but such frameworks are simply aren't equipped to answer whether or not gravitons cause gravity.

>It behaves exactly the way as one would expect if it were highly heritable
That's way too complex a question to ever be answered on an imageboard.

> For all intents and purposes, intelligence is mostly genetic (as in, heritable)
Variation of intelligence sure

>There are no known environmental factors that could account for the IQ gaps
You say this as if IQ's worldwide didn't jump by 20-40 points over the past century. The quantitative impact of nutrition, schooling, parents etc. isn't exactly known, there is no way to attribute any amount of the gap to genetics or environment.

>In addition to that, scientists are in the process of finding the actual genes that are linked to intelligence, and what we've found so far are not evenly distributed among different races
Source?

Some euro biologist. French or Belgian. Maybe French Canadian.

youtube.com/watch?v=hJk2dW6BOnA

youtube.com/watch?v=IaJXPRj_9SA

I pretty much agree with you on everything, but there's a few things I have to comment on

1. It's true that heritability varies based on environment, but it's still pretty precise, or at least reasonably so

2. As for the causal link, I don't think anyone serious is going to argue against environment/genes dichotomy. That means that if you rule out environment as an explanation, then that leaves genes as the only possible explanation (unless of course someone here wants to argue that there are more possible causes that do not fall under either genes or environment).

You're right in that technically heritability does not establish causality, but in practice it does. Of course someone could always argue that there's some magical force out there that works exactly the same way as genetics but isn't genetics, but it seems a bit redundant to seriously consider such arguments

>Heritability isn't precise and is itself highly contingent on the groups chosen to measure

The heritability estimates of quantitative genetics are far more precise than you're insinuating. Which is why this field is still practiced today.

How fucking arrogant do you have to be to discount an entire field of study? Who the fuck are you? What are your credentials? Are you a toilet cleaner, high school drop-out like Kraut, perhaps?
You know race isn't skin deep, right? Evolution did not just stop at the body and not effect the brain.

>why don't you cater worthless internet celebrities
Who the fuck cares man, stop promoting this bullshit

>So he put his own video in a limited state,
>gave it to sargon and told him to do the same
>then 20 hours later Vee condecends to everyone.
>Somehow everyone is supposed to make a rebutal to Krauts retardation minutes after he uploads it.
Do I have the gist of it?

Essentially.

>>It behaves exactly the way as one would expect if it were highly heritable
>That's way too complex a question to ever be answered on an imageboard.
No, it really isn't (we can get into that). Smart people have smart kids. Environment cannot explain this. Therefore it's genetic (unless you want to argue that environment/genes dichotomy is invalid, and that there are more causal factors that do not fall under either category)

>> For all intents and purposes, intelligence is mostly genetic (as in, heritable)
>Variation of intelligence sure


>>There are no known environmental factors that could account for the IQ gaps
>You say this as if IQ's worldwide didn't jump by 20-40 points over the past century. The quantitative impact of nutrition, schooling, parents etc. isn't exactly known, there is no way to attribute any amount of the gap to genetics or environment.
We can get into the whole Flynn effect and whether or not it exists, but what's the point? Hereditarians believe that intelligence is a result of both genes and environment. That there might have been environmental change does not contradict that in any way.

We may or may not know how big of an impact nutrition etc. had 50 or 100 years ago, but we do know how big of an impact they have today (quite small)

>>In addition to that, scientists are in the process of finding the actual genes that are linked to intelligence, and what we've found so far are not evenly distributed among different races
>Source?
Piffer 2015

Thank you for the quick rundown Fin

>No, it's pretty much concrete proof
Measure heritability of the same trait for 20 different populations and you get 20 different answers. It's not even close, its highly contingent on the groups chosen and highly contingent on the environment.

>Agriculture. How does it work? Our ancestors bred domesticated animals and plants for specific traits. Without knowing the genes.
I never said you couldn't make guesses about genetic influence.

>That just means we dont know WHY gravity is a thing. Gravity as an observable effect is absolutely true
Sure, but that means we can't go saying things about graviton models of gravity as if they're proven to be true so,

>Likewise, I don't need to know the exact gene for hair color or height to know that these traits have a genetic component
You shouldn't then draw conclusions about genetic influence when you don't know why these things are genetic.

>precise
I don't know the vernacular, I'm probably wrong. What I meant is that it's not a general concept but heavily context dependent.
>causality
There's always a difference between the questions of whether something is, or how it is so. Of course the concept of heredity is causal, but the question here isn't. For example
>"Is it raining?" contra "Why does it rain?"
>"Do the races have different IQs?" contra "Why do the races have different IQs?"
>"is IQ heritable?" contra "how is IQ inherited?"
The question here is a matter of facts and not of causal mechanisms. Of what is, not how it is. It's an important distinction. It does not demand a causal explanation.
>Of course someone could always argue that there's some magical force out there that works exactly the same way as genetics but isn't genetics
This is actually a pretty good argument if you ask me seeing as it's pretty much how genetics pre-genes were handled. With some theoretically extant hereditary particles. Like gravitons.

So are you saying we should live in Planet of the Apes or not. Really all this rigamarole is to justify through evidence restrictive immigration policies against savages.

>Measure heritability of the same trait for 20 different populations and you get 20 different answers. It's not even close, its highly contingent on the groups chosen and highly contingent on the environment
Nope. The general heritability in WEIRD countries (western industrialized rich countries) has been established to be around 0.75 (we can go into specifics on that if you want). According to all evidence we have, this also applies between groups (see that adoption studies, such as )

Good on you, I gave up writting walls of texts with timestamps on his 3rd video. He's not gonna read em nor is anyone else, so why bother?

Modern quantitative genetics use genome-wide data to obtain heritability estimates from unrelated individuals. You're talking about sample sizes in the thousands.

>why isn't there a thread about
no one gives a fuck about ecelebs.
cease this faggotry

>It does not demand a causal explanation.
This is, of course, an excellent point. Whether or not IQ gaps are the result of genetics is almost a meaningless question, since we cannot close those gaps. So in practice they are almost completely genetic, regardless of the causality

>I never said you couldn't make guesses about genetic influence.
Funny way of writing "valid predictions".

>WEIRD countries (western industrialized rich countries)

>So we don't have verification of gravity working yet?
Any theory involving gravitons yes. There's proof of Newtonian gravity and gravity as predicted by general relativity.

>It's about gravity, or heritability, and for that there's absolutely no need to find a graviton(the genes) as it's irrelevant as to the effects of gravity
Its totally relevant. What if the possible force due to gravity (heritability) as measured as due to gravitons (genes) is far less than has predicted previously (quantitative genetics studies) when the graviton is actually observed? Current heritability values are likely to be mixed in with all kinds of environmental and population effects, taking current values as gospel is misguided until it can be confirmed. You get to this here:

>Heritability isn't a precise concept as it's dependent on the population examined and its environment. It is however valid.

>Wrong. We covered this
You're going to have to elaborate

>Statistical analysis is sufficient to prove the existence and extent of heritability. Just like we can measure gravity without having found the graviton yet.
I'd mainly make the point that, like gravity, there are different paradigms through which this can be viewed

Newtonian gravity and a quantitative genetics approach to heritability will give you a rough picture of the truth whilst more refined techniques and theories like general relativity/QFT and actual genetic observation will give a much better picture of the truth. This simply can't be waved away as merely an explanation of what the statistics already tells us because we've no reason to believe what the statistics tell us are true. Current measurements of heritability change group to group, country to country and environment to environment. Actual analysis of genes would hopefully yield a far more specific estimate of heritability free from possible environmental meddling.

>Actual analysis of genes would hopefully yield a far more specific estimate of heritability

It doesn't. Quantitative genetics is far more precise. You're asking for a less precise tool.

To clarify, the "find the genes" so called argument is retarded because were it valid, you couldn't make observations without first proving the cause of the potential outcomes. Of course it's not a valid argument as you're just demanding an answer to a different question than the one being examined, but if we held that same standard elsewhere then we supposedly wouldn't be able to tell if it was raining until we knew how rain comes to be, we couldn't tell if the universe exists before we managed to explain how it had come to be, you wouldn't know if your car started before you figured out what part was busted, and in fact it wouldn't run at all unless you'd perfectly explained how a combustion engine works.

It's just fucking retarded. It's not even an argument, just deflection. You're demanding an answer to a completely separate question.

I do it for free. He is very smart and he has all the data. He's published like 60-80 papers on thealternativehypothesis.org/ He puts out a tremendous amount of high quality work.

He isn't an e-celeb (a term pushed by shills to discredit). He's been around for years and he's a driving force for race realism. So fuck off faggot.

I also have to touch on this gravity analogy.

Kraut's demand is equivalent to him demanding that we find gravitons, before he will even consider that gravity exists, whereas our position is that we don't have to find them, it's enough to prove that out theory of gravity works in practice (it has predictive validity, meaning that the world works exactly as the theory would predict).

After all, you really want to go into asinine deconstructivism, then you can deny anything. But as far as one can make models about reality, the genetic model fits all the data whereas the environmental model does not.

I suppose this gravity analogy is somewhat off the mark in that genes vs. environment is pretty much a dichotomy (unless you want to argue otherwise). Same is not necessarily true for gravity.

Why should we assume 100% environmental until we find the genes? Why don't we have to find the environmental causes?

He said that bc of a screenshot of HIS OWN discord (someone even @ him) so it's likely taken out of context (lile a joke or pretending to be an 'alt right troll').

He then posted a 'false DMCA claim' and alluded that le nazis want to silence him. I checked the claimant and it's a large Chinese TV network. He just got DMCA'd for using a clip or audio of theirs.

Of course he pretends it's muh nazis because his remaining fans are too stupid to Google.

Its pathetic they all pretend people want to silence him because theyre "scared of his intellect", when in reality most of his views are people that despise him because they love seeing him make an ass of himself.

>Any theory involving gravitons yes
You're deflecting, answer the fucking question if you want me to read the rest of your wall of text.

Can you or can you not observe(verify) whether gravity exists without finding a graviton? I'm not asking about any causal explanation, I'm asking about the force. About its existence. Can you or can you not? Yes or no.
Now if you really are this fucking stupid and aren't just playing an utter retard as some grand rhetorical strategy to completely ruin any credibility some random jerkoff has, I'll make it even simpler.

Can you tell whether it's raining without understanding how rain is formed?

>*quadruples down
Yes, this is his fourth video trying to prove races are equal.