Does eugenics actually work? Is it possible to create a better rate e with selective breeding...

Does eugenics actually work? Is it possible to create a better rate e with selective breeding? I haven't seen any conclusive evidence about it.

Other urls found in this thread:

iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country#
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Didn't work with blacks when it was tried.

Look ate american sports
Football, basketball.
Now find 20 people in Africa that look like those players.
That's was selective breeding dude.

Africans are also dying if aids and starving to death.

It works with dogs.
Why not people?

reminder his two sons are flabby pampered faggots and his third son is a half mexican mongoloid

It's been successfully done with every single animal we've ever domesticated. There is no reason it wouldn't work with Human beings.

Yes. Evolution.

It works for every other animal. No reason it shouldn't work for humans.

Yes, it's one of the simplest concepts of genetics and one of the natural results of evolution (improving genotype to fit the environment).

Bear in mind though that genetic traits never actually disappear, they just get the back row seat and may re-emerge.

Humanity has and continues to this day practiced eugenics. Just not in a directed or coherent way.

Look at ashkenazi jews and their mean 115 iq.

Work? That depends on the goal you retard?

(Whos) trying to achieve what how?

>mfw jewish grills apparently select for intelligence
>I've always been a shitty student but have still given ashkenazi jewesses the Big Goy Cock

That's because we didn't get all of them.

We do it with all livestock. Dog breeds are eugenics, so are lab rats, and a whole host of other animals. No reason to assume it wouldn't be true with humans, after all we're another mammal.

Slave owners bred larger and stronger slaves. No one was trying to breed smart ones.

It wasn't tried except for on two estates and the heritable path of human performance shows that's heterozygous physical traits signal regression to the mean.

There's no way they could have been bred to be strong in such a short period and with no knowledge of genetics or traits especially given how consanguinous blacks are.

We're not outside of evolution, so yes.

China currently has a massive and long running eugenics program
It's goal is to breed supercommandos

Their Olympic athletes are offshoots of this program

Eugenics is a big no-no in the West so we are watching China's program very carefully and learning all we can from it

The taboo surrounding eugenics is why you haven't seen any conclusive evidence on it because if you're a scientist even talking about the subject will get you ostracized and ensure that you never receive any grant money again

This taboo developed because in the first part of the 20th century there was a lot of talk about using eugenics to create a super race

Affluenza is a powerful thing my friend

John McEnroe in a recent interview was asked why his kids didn't play tennis and his answer was affluenza; they're too comfortable to try to get good at anything because they never need to and lack the drive to do so

>Slave owners bred larger and stronger slaves

That's a myth

See

Most of the American stated had eugenics laws back in the 30's, it's only when the German's programs were discovered that these laws were abandoned.

Dog breeds are inbred with tons of maladies due to their being inbred.

Sweden of all places had one of the longest running eugenics programs, based around Madison Grants ideas of nordic superiority.

It's sad seeing that gene pool being destroyed now.

Now the Chinese are going cut straight to genetic engineering. Who knows what kind of people they've cooked up by now.

However, they are superior when it comes to the traits we selected for. That's the point after all. Eugenics is a double edged sword.

Works for dogs, cats, horses, cows, sheep, fish, ...but not humans of course, don't be silly!

But thats laughably wrong. Liberal fantasy.
Selective breeding of livestock has been ubiquitous for hundreds of years. Its as simple as mating the biggest and strongest males with the youngest healthiest females. You really think slave owners needed to keep a written history for this? A healthy slave was a massive financial investment akin to buying a luxury car today. Slave owners trying to maximize their profit wouldn't risk their slaves giving birth to another mouth to feed who would grow into a shitty worker.

Kennel club breeds have health issues because people force mothers to fuck their sons in order to preserve a made up guideline of breed traits.

That has nothing to do with the fact that all various breeds of dogs originally came from selective breeding.

>i havent seen any conclusive evidence about it

Are you retarded or pretending? Have you seen how farming works? Its literally eugenics for animals.

Yes it did. They weren't breeding for intelligence. They were breeding for strength.

Yes, in Sierra Leona
Their IQ is the highest in Africa(91) because they are the bloodies country in the world, they are at the level of Lithuania which is a 100% white country

iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country#

The very theory of evolution supports eugenics inherently as a viable way of improving a population's health and abilities.
So obviously yes.

Not all

Good breeders will introduce new stock to eliminate problems such as hip dysplasia and kidney disease but you won't find that in breeders who are only creating show dogs because it doesn't matter what happens to the dog in the long term as its only goal is to win a show and they are entered usually at 2, 3, and 4 years old

Breeders in Europe are far better at it because there's a greater emphasis on producing working dogs which is why the companies that provide dogs to the military usually get their puppies from Germany the Netherlands and Belgium and then bring them over here to train them up

>there's no way

Actually

Modern day dogs literally popped into existence, on a larger historical context, each breed so completely different from each other living in different regions.

Scientists can't even explain it. Our best assumption is that direct human contact and breeding over a marginal amount of time sped up their adaptations and split them into beautiful and unique breeds.

There's no reason to doubt that Humans, being a far more adaptable species, could not do the same. Hell, we're smart enough to evolve ourselves within our own lifetimes.

We will soon be able to evolve into cybernetic machines, even augmented from birth.

Now that's hyper evolution in action, friend.

yes, jews practice it but the drawback is still the higher probability of genetic diseases and mental illnesses.

We can only go by what we have proof of

We can't say that eugenics was occurring on more than those two plantations because there isn't evidence to indicate that it was

>but what about LeBron James, Terell Suggs, etc
Could be eugenics or it could be random mutation due to natural birth

If anything freaks like Shaq were able to be born due to the american diet.

Food.

That's one of the biggest factors.

Genetic engineering can vastly reduce the harmful side effects and it will only get better as we learn more about it

The only problem with eugenics is that it could lead to a GATACCA-like society in which naturally born children become an underclass because they simply cannot compete with a child who was engineered to have high intelligence, perfect eyesight, speed and agility, etc

> I haven't seen any conclusive evidence about it.
what about the selective breeding of nearly every domesticated species on earth?

Correct

One needs only to look at the Korean Peninsula to see the effects that diet has on people
South Koreans are now just as tall as Westerners while their genetic counterparts in Best Korea are all reaching max heights of like 5'4"

...

damn