I don't think the race and IQ meme holds any validity, or does the r/k selection theory. I like a lot of what the

I don't think the race and IQ meme holds any validity, or does the r/k selection theory. I like a lot of what the
>right?
stands for and such, but one of its pillars it stands on is extremely shoddy in my view and needs to be address before it collapses on you at the worst possible moment. A friendly debate? I'm 85% sure I can dismantle any argument if we debate sincerely, and I'm not looking to
>win
anything, only seek the truth.
Maybe we can start with Socratic touch and define the basis and concept in with we enter into the arena of argument? and go from there?

Would you agree that selective breeding in dogs has produced widely different and variable breeds, with different attributes and defining traits?

What's the "meme" here?

Yes like a pug for example.interbred specifically to accentuate physical traits I believe.
>NE Asians' Countries
Is that generalizations like, japan, Vietnam, Singapore, china? and for blacks' countries; Somalia, Nigeria, South Africa? Is that specifically testing blacks only in said countries or including all citizens (non-blacks) It seems like the lowest developed places have lower education, and as expected the well developed area's have citizenry who test higher scores on tests, I can only conclude regional education.

...

So how does breeding not work the same way for humans, except on a larger scale? For centuries, large groups of people, separated by distances larger than we perceive today, have interbred and passed on certain genes and traits down to their descendants. These traits were beneficial to survival on a regional basis, as natural selection weeded out the weak genes in place of ones that would improve chances of survival. Iq is one of these traits. In colder climates, where food was scarce and planning and strategizing took precedence over raw physical strength, IQ took a higher precedence over said physical strength. I’m warmer climates, where food is abundant, and all you have to do is chase it down and catch it, physical strength took precedence over IQ. See where this is going?

The only people who voted for Trump are rural and suburban retards.

City people all voted for Hillary.

I don't think you can just take information like this at face value, there are a lot of factors never touched upon. Blacks have a culture that doesn't value academic achievement, It's all about getting tattoos, having cool shoes. So maybe they're not incentivized to really try in school. This would be black American sub-culture. Was this study done in USA?
I think you're arguing for nurture (vs nature) like living in a household with problems in which ones survival or success requires ones creativity to solve those problems, not exclusively confining itself in genetic intelligence.
The most sheltered people voted for Hilary, while those with less help on their hands and convince, almost saw and valued the flexibility and freedom for the individual to flourish and succeed. I voted Trump and live in the center of LA.

No, I’m arguing just the opposite. Nature takes precedence over nurture. On a large scale, genes will always win out over how the specific individual behaves in society. And genes are passed down specifically through the nearby environment. Especially in ancient times, where travel to distant lands was difficult to impossible, you passed your genes down in a small region around you. This caused different “breeds” of humans, if you want to call it that, to pop up. Just as melanin is predicated on what gene is expressed, so too is natural intelligence, or IQ.

You really think culture alone can account for wealthy blacks (who would be a fair bit removed from ghetto culture regardless) barely out-performing dirt-poor whites? Do you think that culture only exists along racial but not economic bounds?

Why don't you instead try to prove that race isn't real?

The argument is
>race & IQ
I believe there is race, but I don't believe they're exclusively connected.

>comparing countries
You know that a black man from England is gonna be WAY smarter than a white from Uganda, that's has nothing to do with raisins everything to do with education.

If you reject the idea that genetic predisposition creates environment s then you will naturally reject any measure.

or because he got into England because he was already a lot smarter than the average in his home country?

I "can only conclude" that it's the other way around. Ireland has a lower IQ than Vietnam, despite being far wealthier and having a far better education system.

>On a large scale, genes will always win out over how the specific individual behaves in society.
So the say, inhabitant who's been in region far longer than a new comber (say the native Nigerian vs the immigrant Cambodian), Then how would you explain colonization.
I know a few blacks doing pretty well for themselves, lexus nice loft, vs white trailer family who didn't even own a car and were on food stamps. I'm going to save that picture to scan over it when I get home. Holy shit if that's the real red pill it's going to be a hard one to swallow, but if that's that case, I must, for truth.
Yeah I think environment, hones ones "self definition" reflecting into "biological definition" and DNA
That's what I'm thinking. I bet blacks in Europe perform way better then blacks here in USA because we have shit culture. I think there was evidence complementing this idea, comparing academic scores again I think.

I've never understood this? Don't Niggers mostly live in cities and vote democrat?

No I don't know that.

Blacks in Europe, proportionally speaking, lag as far behind as blacks here. Just look at the state of France

Your debate is Irrelevant
Pilpul is for faggots
You will bend to our will

interesting, but look that the standards today, literally don't even have to speak English and if you can resist the urge to rape children in front of then for 5 min you're presidential material.
Cause the Irish are always drunk? and those Asians are crazy about "succeeding" and maintaining their honor despite living in straw shacks.
Yeah, I don't know how that disgusting rap culture got over there, did that come from America?

>interesting, but look that the standards today, literally don't even have to speak English and if you can resist the urge to rape children in front of then for 5 min you're presidential material.
well the statement I was replying too was baseless anyway, I was just offering an alternative explanation for findings like that

I'll be a little more proactive: I think its unfair to discriminate via IQ. I think the test itself is flawed and only illustrates ones ability to memorize things from a book and recite them acutalty in a given amount of time. I can memorize Elgar's cello concerto without sheet music, or certain parts of books word for word. I don't think that indicates an advantage over anyone else, In life I've seen most people memory is actually pretty impressive. Also who are subjected to the test, is that standard consistent? where's the control? who is being tested, a pool of people with exclusive access to such academic tools? I think the devil is in the details.

And to implement it into actual practice, could lead to problems,

Colonization took place in the colonial era, long after these groups dispersed and were segregated. How does that have anything to do with what I’m talking about? In fact it just reinforces my point, because it brought these distinct groups together and you could see the differences very distinctly even more.