Race has nothing to do with intelligence

Race has nothing to do with intelligence.

Other urls found in this thread:

cshe.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/shared/publications/docs/ROPS.CSHE_.10.15.Geiser.RaceSAT.10.26.2015.pdf
humanbiologicaldiversity.com/
news-medical.net/news/2005/04/26/Race-differences-in-average-IQ-are-largely-genetic.aspx
vdare.com/articles/j-philippe-rushton-says-color-may-be-more-than-skin-deep
humanbiologicaldiversity.com/#IQ
youtube.com/watch?v=bBIubgsfK8E
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Huh really does make you think about statistical insignificance and averages...

You are probably correct but the "propulsion system" thing sounds like clickbait bullshit. I can't find any relevant papers or patents for Aisha Mustafa and propulsion systems.

because intelligence is a myth

>statistical insignificance and averages..
You mean the same ones that keep increasing? Ironically with the more developed the shit country becomes?

>Race has nothing to do with intelligence.
>posts two intelligent races

It does. That bell curve is a scientific fact.

If it's true, you should look under patents filed by her husband or father.
>posts 2 examples
>makes it a generality

>I can't find any relevant papers or patents for Aisha Mustafa and propulsion systems.
It seems like it was a patent that never got improved.

How does two cherrypicked examples prove anything, let alone such a huge statement as "race has nothing to do with intelligence"?

If you wanted to prove such a notion, wouldn't it be more accurate to cite per capita figures or something like that?

It's a low effort bait thread that belong in Sup Forums

>implying Persians and Orientals aren't historically based

cshe.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/shared/publications/docs/ROPS.CSHE_.10.15.Geiser.RaceSAT.10.26.2015.pdf

> Rather than declining in salience, race
and ethnicity are now more important than either family income or parental education in accounting for test score differences.

Biodiversity between races is pretty well documented to be quite honest anyways.

We are not all equal.

>Egyptian
>Persian
lad

tfw too smart to create a device than can take us to space without any fuel and cure cancer at the same time

t.ping "Thomas" pong

whoops forgot where she was from

just glanced at her paleness

Cool propulsion system, Ahmad.

Well it does prove that statement "every person of race X is dumb" is untrue.

Generalizations can be useful, but are not really reliable when judging individuals.

Cool bomb ahmed, wanna come to the whitehouse and show us the clock on it?

but im not him

One Chinese schoolgirl performs as well as an Egyptian physicist.
It really shows the difference in the quality of their respective country's education system.

>Well it does prove that statement "every person of race X is dumb" is untrue.

Gee really? I don't think anyone has ever claimed that EVERY person is dumb. More that some races are more intelligent than others, and perhaps that indeed it may be nature over nurture.

humanbiologicaldiversity.com/

>and ethnicity are now more important than either family income or parental education in accounting for test score differences.
source?

It's the pdf, baka. For fucks sake.

news-medical.net/news/2005/04/26/Race-differences-in-average-IQ-are-largely-genetic.aspx

huh, wow. Really does make one consider.

vdare.com/articles/j-philippe-rushton-says-color-may-be-more-than-skin-deep

encourages one to consider.

>Biodiversity between races is pretty well documented to be quite honest anyways.
Most sources say that we do have differences, but not in intelligence.

>Most sources say that we do have differences, but not in intelligence.

humanbiologicaldiversity.com/#IQ

The sources cited here really do make one think

>most sources
>provides 0 sources

youtube.com/watch?v=bBIubgsfK8E

>Kills cancer
Which kind(s) of cancer? Cancer is not one sole object that invades the body and starting "making more cancer". On top of that how does it "kill" it?

it just kills it okay?

Upvote the damn post and move on.

It kills all cancer with science.

first thing that came to mind was the em drive but i thought that was "invented" by a white guy

>Gee really? I don't think anyone has ever claimed that EVERY person is dumb.

You make it sound obvious, but let's be honest: do you genuinely think that people complaining about niggers actually care whether or not they are condemning individuals that are intelligent/talented/honourable/kind etc together with the brown mass of flesh that is "chimping out"?

It's one thing to acknowledge that there are psychological and biological differences between us as individuals, and that you can even split individuals into categories based on some traits they tend to have in common, but it's another thing entirely to justify your own emotions with it.

And all of this is completely separate from issue of equality before the Law, which is a principle that already applies to a wildly varied spectrum of individuals, even within a "race".

Most of these kinds of statements are based on a study that goes something like
>put cancer cells in petri dish
>add drug/compound to dish
>if cancer cells die then drug/compound "kills cancer"
Which is dumb because extremely toxic substances like cyanide and polonium also "kill cancer" but have the side effect of killing human cells too.

cancer is bad ok. upvote if you hate cancer.

If that's the girl I think it is, the nanoparticles seek out the cancerous tumor and deliver a concentrated dose of medication directly into tumor tissue, rather than chemotherapy which just poison the whole body.

As I recall gold, as in AU, is also involved in some way, but it's been a few years since it was in the news.

Have you even taken a look ate the sources yourself? Have of them say we inherit our intelligence from our parents (which is true) while the other half are literally any random source the author could find. Why should I take anybody that throws in the DailyMail serious in understanding the message he's trying to send apart from spamming articles?

Didn't see any news about it, is it debunked?

* at

this. pop science likes to do that a lot. one thing shows a tiny little glimmer of something and before it even gets to animal testing its lauded as a miracle. thats why we're always seeing how awesome the future will be in ten years and never hearing about something thats available today. the vast majority will fall apart upon further study or the initial study can't even be replicated. we also have a problem with things just never being tested by other people. one university says something does x and no one else tries to replicate.

Not him but what does your abstract sophistry have to do with the correlation between race and IQ?

>Why should I take anybody that throws in the DailyMail serious in understanding the message he's trying to send apart from spamming articles?

The daily mail is only cited like once in around a hundred different sources. The rest of which are published by credible sources and people.

no, actually. i'm pretty excited about it but its unlikely. i'm not very literate on these things but my understanding is that if it DOES work it would change our understanding of the basic laws of motion so i'm not getting my hopes up.

...

Chinks area already superior to whites when it comes to intelligence so I have no idea why you included one of them.

are*

peer review was passed by NASA scientists recently. It does seem to work.

I'm merely warning against using statistical differences to condemn individuals, and against (ab)using scientific studies to justify your emotions.

>I'm merely warning against using statistical differences to condemn individuals

No one is doing that though.

There's just this weird thing where people believe in evolution yet reject the idea of races having differences. And mentioning it is looked at with contempt.

do they know why it works? isn't it perpetual motion? i don't understand.

That is how it is usually portrayed on Sup Forums tbf
>look at these IQ graphs / social statistics
>clearly [insert minority here] are inferior savages who cannot be trusted
When people say "there's no difference between races", what they are talking about is the ability to persevere/succeed in society, not IQ statistics.

>The rest of which are published by credible sources and people.
Some of it is and some of it clearly isn't. I'm seeing articles from the 19th century occasionally and I'm ignoring the ones that are clearly biased and desu- my opinion hasn't changed even after looking hard for some of the legitimate ones.

I read something about quantum theory playing a role but I'm not a science expert so I skipped through most of it.

Back to

it doesn't. the thrust generated is an error. its taking huge amounts of radiation to generate a ridiculously small amount of thrust, theres a lot of noise in the measurements.

It's based on a mirror cavity where one of the mirrors is oscillating (which is where the energy comes from). Apparently this can generate photons out of the vacuum, which produces thrust. IIRC the device requires one of the mirrors to be oscillating at nearly the speed of light, so it isn't exactly practical.

Race may have something to do with intelligence', but is not sufficient to make any judgement on individuals.

>american intellectuals

dat irony tho

I hope people that you know that this pic is entirely fake

>Created an advanced nanoparticle, one that kills cancer

Seriously...

Lol you're only saying that because your average IQ is 93 you cheeky stupid little bugger :P

>americans lol

>mexican doesn't want intellectual discussion
>in a thread discussing why race doesn't impact intelligence

ebin trolling my friend :DDD
now piss off

Americans serious question

This
We are not all dumb mareros and people who go to the private schools are ok here

I am a giant bigot low life racist redneck, and i ve gotta say you are actually right, its pure developmental; with a good nutrition and teaching everyone have the same intelligence