Genes are everything.
>Some animals are more intelligent than others.
>Some animals are faster than others.
>Some animals are more violent than others.
Even within the same species, such as the example of dog breeds, we see a great deal of phylogenic diversity.
So I beg the question,
Is it possible that blacks are genetically predisposed to violence and possess a relatively lower IQ distribution with respect to other races?
Other urls found in this thread:
thealternativehypothesis.org
en.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
of course. but why do you call niggers "blacks"?
This might offend some people. Please remove this content for violating the universal rule of hate speech.
For there are different varieties of niggers that span multiple races. For the sake of an argument based on common ancestor, I found that the most accurate term to be blacks
For example, here is a picture of some rice niggers
>phyLOGenic
i think it was advantageous to breed slaves strong and stupid.
Jesus christ
different varieties of niggers:
niggers
curryniggers
sandniggers
beanniggers
niggers
and, let's not forget, baguetteniggers (even though this variety has white skin)
>implying Africans aren't stupid and violent as it is
spat my fucking milk out
Yes?
No you're inferring that. It could be that I meant that it could also be that I mean the decedents of slaves could be even dumber than those in africa.
Please think before you type.
Quite a nice quote; 'Racial differences end at the neck', Its true some races are more intelligent (on average) than others and there are some exceptions (genetic outliers) but no one wants to talk about it
But the data indicates that American blacms have a higher average IQ than those of the home continent. Perhaps if you were already familiar with the data, you would understand my point.
Possible side effect of inbreeding after they got their free lodging here stateside. Or they're just a bunch of butthurt cunts
Yes which is why you should interbreed with them to help their genetic material improve over time
Research shows environment (or in other words, nurture), is significantly more correlated to intelligence than genetics (nature). Basically, the more money you have, the more education and knowledge you have access to, the smarter you can become. It also helps being raised in a good family where psychological trauma is less liekly and the chance of developing a personality disorder is kept to a minimum.
I'm more partial to the latter hypothesis as the state of africa isn't exactly an African utopia
but dogs are bred to be the way they are?
The research overwhelmingly endorses the notion that biology contributes the large portion if basal intelligence. From there, about 20% of IQ is a consequence of environment, however, unfavorable environments can produce mental disabilities.
and yes, some people are born more intelligent and some people are born retarded. But the difference is negligible in the majority of cases. If you took 1000 orphans and put htem in impoverished households, then you took another 1000 orphans and put them somehwere in middle class USA, it is massively likely that the second group of kids will., on average, have higher IQs than the first group of kids.
In 1972, Richard Lewontin performed a FST statistical analysis using 17 markers (including blood-group proteins). He found that the majority of genetic differences between humans (85.4 percent) were found within a population, 8.3 percent were found between populations within a race and 6.3 percent were found to differentiate races (Caucasian, African, Mongoloid, South Asian Aborigines, Amerinds, Oceanians, and Australian Aborigines in his study). Since then, other analyses have found FST values of 6–10 percent between continental human groups, 5–15 percent between different populations on the same continent and 75–85 percent within populations.[31][32][33][34][35] This view has been affirmed by the American Anthropological Association and the American Association of Physical Anthropologists since.[36]
...
Yes, which indicates the role of genes in behaviors such as gregariousness and aggressiveness.
isnt some genetic variation good for a species?
This has been thoroughly tested. It has consistently come back as false with anything newer than 1860s "race science". There's no genetic component to black/white IQ differences. It's entirely mixes of cultural and economic factors. This is well known in the scientific community.
He'll, by virtue of the existence of pack/herd animals in nature, behavior conducive to gregariousness is a consequence of genetics.
Given that genes factor into IQ, it is possible.
It does not appear to be the case, however.
The right genetic variation. Europe was genetically diverse as it was.
This guy gets it.
And they managed to beat the US army as a bunch of illiterate rice farmers. What does that say about the USA?
...
I'm gonna need a citation on that... because tests indicate that IQ is upwards of 70% heritable according to recent studies.
That indicates that there is a genetic, and possibly phenotype component.
Blacks are, in fact, genetically predisposed to have a lower IQ
thealternativehypothesis.org
So get your facts straight before you talk shit.
This is a meme. The U.S. army wasn't defeated on the field. The Soviets undermined the war interests in the home front by sewing anti-American sentiment through culture, academia and the media.
Doesn't that just correlate with the age at which the subject can test well?
There's no fucking way that IQ is 20% nurture. I don't care if you have Einstein. You stick that nigger in the trap and he is much less likely to succeed. If you wanna say 20% (which I consider extraordinary) you gotta back that shit up.
Keep your hate speech off my campus
Don't encourage him.
I for one agree with you it was the political side that lost Vietnam, not the war front, however Im not convinced that they would of won on the field even if politics didn't intervene
There are simply more variables that come into play. You can adjust for population, but that doesn't mean you've accounted for all the variables.
This does not indicate genetic causality. Ideally you would want double blind twin studies or some shit.
Review the death ratio between the U.S. and the rice farmers. They only have so many men to offer and they've nearly lost a 1million by wars end.
The US had to meet a quota of Vietnamese dead so sometimes dead civilians were counted to falsify those results and make them seem like they were doing better than they were
Say average IQ is 100. Conditions conducive to brain development can produce IQs of say 120 and conditions antagonistic to development can produce sub 80 results. I do not see the controversy. Fact of the matter is that genes are the 80-100 IQ points inherent to man.
Of course
We gotta protect our superior white genes!
It says your understanding of history is fucking pathetic.
The Tet Offensive was a colossal military defeat for the Vietnamese. The Vietcong were almost completely destroyed.
North Vietnam asked for negotiations after Nixon authorized air raids into their country. A treaty was signed. The US forces withdrew.
Several years later, they broke the treaty and re-invaded South Vietnam.
Kill yourself.
I don't have to say that the average IQ is 100. It is 100.
>Conditions conducive to brain development can producide IQs with a differential of +/- 20 or less.
I'm just asking you to back this up. It really seems unbelievable to me.
I'm not as well read on this subject but didn't some recent studies find 9 SNPs that effect IQ and account for some of the distribution between the races. Also from Kraut and Naked Apes debate, ape was arguing that socioeconomic and environmental factors have been pretty much ruled out and that at this point in the analysis genetic differences between the races must account for the bulk of the variation. I don't know if the 70% or 80% figure is correct but this seems to check out.
Now what you do with this knowledge isn't really self-evident imo. I don't agree with the ethnostate idea at least.
don't forget snowniggers, swampniggers, alpniggers, jungleniggers and mediterraniggers
>The US forces withdrew.
didn't happen
>Several years later, they broke the treaty and re-invaded South Vietnam.
soundly defeating the US
Agreed.
I've met rich-middle class black kids have straight A from 1st grade to graduating college.
I've also seen poor white not graduate middle school before dropping out and working on a farm no shit a month ago like it's the 1920s again.
It's easy to have high IQ, and intelligent when you have the money, the family push and desire to succeed academically.
But if you don't value education of course you're going to look like a low IQ mouth breather.
The point was that the whole thing was more between the USA and the USSR rather than the riceniggers standing against the CIA niggers
IQ isn't a measure of how educated you are for fucks sake. It is near impossible to raise IQ through any means after birth.
I never got that. If you're only achievement in life is being born white
That's some pretty shit low hanging fruit.
How can you even seriously say that? If you're never taught to read you cannot take an IQ test. You learn to read after birth. Without reading, your score will be terrible. After reading you are able to score not terribly based on other factors. Reading is necessary but not sufficient. To that extent it increases your score on IQ. Since you learn to read after birth and since it increases your score by virtue of comprehension, then you can increase your IQ score after birth.
this is factually wrong.
Cletus is really making some good arguments in this thread, lol
Jack Naglieri, research professor at University of Virginia:
The answer to this question, like many others, depends on a number of factors. If you look at the research where they've made people smarter (i.e. improved their IQs), what they're really doing is to make people function better.
I've been able to teach children to be better in mathematics without teaching them mathematics. You can teach a child to better utilize their ability to plan, and that improves their academic performance not only in math, but in reading comprehension. So, what I would say, is we didn't make the children smarter, but we taught them how to use what they have more efficiently, and better.
Understanding changes in IQ also requires carefully considering how intelligence is being measured. People confuse ability with knowledge. We all can study and improve our vocabulary. But I would argue that doesn't make us any smarter.
The best way to measure intelligence is to measure those abilities that underlie the acquisition of knowledge, separately from the knowledge we have.
So this is analogous to the child knowing the Pythagorean theorem without being taught it.
The problem breaks down because you have to be able to understand each other (ie the child must speak a language and one of you must speak the other's language) in order to instruct the child.
We have to improve our vocabulary. It's almost synonymous with increasing our understanding, and increasing our understanding will allow us to reach the skill barrier on IQ tests. This necessarily implies that we can increase our IQ after birth (albeit this particular point is somewhat pedantic), and that you are wrong about what you are saying.
--
This is all beside the point though, more or less, because it would be extremely hard for someone to prove that there is a genetic component to race that relates to IQ. It would just actually be very difficult. Between the vagueness of race and the many other factors involved in a person's ability to take the test
(aware of the seeming circularity of that later point).
I'm sorry I guess I should have qualified that. I used the Intelligence Quotient and intelligence synonymously because this kind of argument is common here. While it is the case that IQ scores can be raised or lowered after birth, the underlying range of variance is almost predetermined. This is confirmed by multiple knockout studies and statistical analysis.
However this has no bearing on the race argument, that much is true. The fact is that the average IQ differences between the races are within the environmental margins.
Word. We good then, nigga. Carry on
something that hasn't been mentioned
if you're going to make this argument based off logic, rationalism, and an adherence to philosophy
It's time OP, it's time you learn "begging the question" doesn't mean what you think it means
>Thinking anal will produce offspring
Nignog detected
Faggot
Also, timberniggers, aka injuns.
>there's tree niggers all over!
>free lodging
>kidnapped and forced to work, without pay, for life
>free lodging
Lol as if we have a shortage of blond hair blue eyed chicks. Why are you fucks so obsessed with interracial porn? It really makes one wonder...
>kidnapped
Sure user, they were all dragged out of their African tribes
Best post ITT, the rest is trash.
First of all, "begging the question" is a logical fallacy, it means to make an argument that has an assumed conclusion buried in one of its premises. It's one of the most misused phrases in the English language and I really wish people would be more aware of it because it immediately makes me lose all respect for a person's ability to participate in an informed conversation.
Second of all, it is an irrefutable fact that blacks are inferior sub-humans who on average tend to be of low intelligence and prone to acts of unwarranted aggression, so congratulations on being 100% right about everything else.
Forgot potatoniggers. (Also white)
Suck my fucking dick faggot
...
...
irregardless
real african castle..
Wrong as fuck
Operating on really shitty science
mental faculties are not solely environmental or gene dependent
it's like saying notepad (the windows program) is binary code so it'll only be able to write zeros and ones (the brain is notepad)
the brain is plastic, that's what it's supposed to do
You're ignoring the entire field of psychology because it doesn't suit you
we wuz kangz n shiet
Possible, or probable?
i mean they definitely built castles. they exist
Of course! Instead of rehashing the same shit over and over again on this shitty Mongolian knitting art-gallery why aren’t you doing everything in your power to raise awareness of the god-sent gift that is to implement IQ-based positive(or negative)-eugenics? If third-world and African countries implemented eugenics programs, which they could easily get away with, they’d usurp the first world in the span of a few generations in terms of standard of living.
Teepee-niggers
AMERITARDS ON SUICIDE WATCH
BEATEN BY GOOKS, DEFEATED BY GOOKS
This one was actually good
Have you heard of the Flynn effect?
...
*is IQ-based positive-eugenics
Self-edit.
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
Luanda-City, Angolia
...
If politics were’t involved we would’ve had a couple military bases in the middle of vietnam by the end of the war
Oh shit this is interesting stuff.
most populous Portuguese-speaking capital city in the world,
Is that the language of the negroids?