Announcement

Join us on Discord: https://discord.gg/nf43FxS
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|3207
The American Psychological Association has said that while there are differences in average IQ between racial groups, there is no conclusive evidence for environmental explanations, nor direct empirical support for a genetic interpretation, and that no adequate explanation for differences in group means of IQ scores is currently available.[3][4] The position of the American Anthropological Association is that variation in intelligence cannot be meaningfully explained by dividing a species into biologically defined races.[5] According to a 1996 statement from the American Association of Physical Anthropologists, although heredity influences behavior in individuals, it does not affect the ability of a population to function in any social setting, all peoples "possess equal biological ability to assimilate any human culture" and "racist political doctrines find no foundation in scientific knowledge concerning modern or past human populations
again.
coke
Aye up duck!
+440|5661|England. Stoke

Jay wrote:

coke wrote:

I'm very far from a liberal, me disagreeing with you here has nothing to do with politics and more to do with your sheer stupidity.
So everybody on the planet is born equal and there are no genetic differences among us?
Clearly you have a genetic predisposition for being obtuse.
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|3207

coke wrote:

Jay wrote:

coke wrote:

I'm very far from a liberal, me disagreeing with you here has nothing to do with politics and more to do with your sheer stupidity.
So everybody on the planet is born equal and there are no genetic differences among us?
Clearly you have a genetic predisposition for being obtuse.
did your phone autocorrect that from 'obese'? cause jay will give you a sob-story about that no discrimination!
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,003|4310|London, England

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

The American Psychological Association has said that while there are differences in average IQ between racial groups, there is no conclusive evidence for environmental explanations, nor direct empirical support for a genetic interpretation, and that no adequate explanation for differences in group means of IQ scores is currently available.[3][4] The position of the American Anthropological Association is that variation in intelligence cannot be meaningfully explained by dividing a species into biologically defined races.[5] According to a 1996 statement from the American Association of Physical Anthropologists, although heredity influences behavior in individuals, it does not affect the ability of a population to function in any social setting, all peoples "possess equal biological ability to assimilate any human culture" and "racist political doctrines find no foundation in scientific knowledge concerning modern or past human populations
again.
To date, geneticists have identified plenty of genetic markers that are correlated with intelligence. Taken individually, however, these account for a paltry 1% of the variation in IQ scores. But now, an international team of scientists has identified a set of genes that appear to amplify each other's effects — resulting in a synergistic boost in intelligence.

The finding could change our sense of how intelligence works in the brain – and how it might be improved. But the study has its critics.

In the past, scientists have identified some 20 genetic markers that seem to be linked to intelligence. But none of those genetic markers have turned out to be a "magic bullet" for brainpower — at most, any one of those 20 markers tends to have very subtle effects.

Writing in Science Now, Moheb Costandi describes how neurologist Paul Thompson of the University of California devised a new large-scale strategy for tackling this problem. To this end, he co-founded the ENIGMA network in 2009 –- an international consortium of researchers who combine brain scanning, genetic data, and standardized IQ tests to study brain structure and function.

Their first breakthrough came earlier this year when they identified genetic variants associated with head size and the volume of the hippocampus (a brain structure crucial for learning and memory). The researchers discovered that one of the variants was responsible for a boost of 1.29 points on IQ tests for those carrying it -– a difference they believed was significant.
http://io9.com/5921370/have-we-found-th … telligence
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|3207

Jay wrote:

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

The American Psychological Association has said that while there are differences in average IQ between racial groups, there is no conclusive evidence for environmental explanations, nor direct empirical support for a genetic interpretation, and that no adequate explanation for differences in group means of IQ scores is currently available.[3][4] The position of the American Anthropological Association is that variation in intelligence cannot be meaningfully explained by dividing a species into biologically defined races.[5] According to a 1996 statement from the American Association of Physical Anthropologists, although heredity influences behavior in individuals, it does not affect the ability of a population to function in any social setting, all peoples "possess equal biological ability to assimilate any human culture" and "racist political doctrines find no foundation in scientific knowledge concerning modern or past human populations
again.
To date, geneticists have identified plenty of genetic markers that are correlated with intelligence. Taken individually, however, these account for a paltry 1% of the variation in IQ scores. But now, an international team of scientists has identified a set of genes that appear to amplify each other's effects — resulting in a synergistic boost in intelligence.

The finding could change our sense of how intelligence works in the brain – and how it might be improved. But the study has its critics.

In the past, scientists have identified some 20 genetic markers that seem to be linked to intelligence. But none of those genetic markers have turned out to be a "magic bullet" for brainpower — at most, any one of those 20 markers tends to have very subtle effects.

Writing in Science Now, Moheb Costandi describes how neurologist Paul Thompson of the University of California devised a new large-scale strategy for tackling this problem. To this end, he co-founded the ENIGMA network in 2009 –- an international consortium of researchers who combine brain scanning, genetic data, and standardized IQ tests to study brain structure and function.

Their first breakthrough came earlier this year when they identified genetic variants associated with head size and the volume of the hippocampus (a brain structure crucial for learning and memory). The researchers discovered that one of the variants was responsible for a boost of 1.29 points on IQ tests for those carrying it -– a difference they believed was significant.
http://io9.com/5921370/have-we-found-th … telligence
not seeing how that above article links any of those to race.
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,003|4310|London, England
I would just be very surprised if they didn't eventually find genetic markers that play a large role in brain development and intelligence. That's why I keep an open mind.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,003|4310|London, England

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

Jay wrote:

Uzique The Lesser wrote:


again.
To date, geneticists have identified plenty of genetic markers that are correlated with intelligence. Taken individually, however, these account for a paltry 1% of the variation in IQ scores. But now, an international team of scientists has identified a set of genes that appear to amplify each other's effects — resulting in a synergistic boost in intelligence.

The finding could change our sense of how intelligence works in the brain – and how it might be improved. But the study has its critics.

In the past, scientists have identified some 20 genetic markers that seem to be linked to intelligence. But none of those genetic markers have turned out to be a "magic bullet" for brainpower — at most, any one of those 20 markers tends to have very subtle effects.

Writing in Science Now, Moheb Costandi describes how neurologist Paul Thompson of the University of California devised a new large-scale strategy for tackling this problem. To this end, he co-founded the ENIGMA network in 2009 –- an international consortium of researchers who combine brain scanning, genetic data, and standardized IQ tests to study brain structure and function.

Their first breakthrough came earlier this year when they identified genetic variants associated with head size and the volume of the hippocampus (a brain structure crucial for learning and memory). The researchers discovered that one of the variants was responsible for a boost of 1.29 points on IQ tests for those carrying it -– a difference they believed was significant.
http://io9.com/5921370/have-we-found-th … telligence
not seeing how that above article links any of those to race.
Why does it have to be a racial difference? I'd expect differences to develop along economic backgrounds more than anything else. I can just see why someone like dilbert can then extrapolate that out to race due to general wealth differences.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
coke
Aye up duck!
+440|5661|England. Stoke
They should compare black people and Irish people because everyone knows they are the "white niggers".
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|3207
but why do you assume one race has a monopoly on those genetic markers? i don't get it. at what point does identifying genetic markers become a racially divided thing. all of the evidence points to race being a completely unwieldy classification for dividing intelligence. totally arbitrary. unless you are a closet racist, of course, in which case it is very complimentary to your ideological beliefs.

Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-03-26 16:01:22)

Jay
Bork! Bork! Bork!
+2,003|4310|London, England

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

but why do you assume one race has a monopoly on those genetic markers? i don't get it. at what point does identifying genetic markers become a racially divided thing. all of the evidence points to race being a completely unwieldy classification for dividing intelligence. totally arbitrary. unless you are a closet racist, of course, in which case it is very complimentary to your ideological beliefs.
I'm not assuming anything. That's the whole point I'm making.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Whiteroom-
Pineapplewhat
+572|5611|BC, Canada
This is why jay felt so at home when he toured the south.
coke
Aye up duck!
+440|5661|England. Stoke
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BBEeLG5CUAAIOC7.jpg
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|4131|Sydney

Jay wrote:

Jaekus wrote:

The thing I find incredible is the belief that genetics (ie. race) predisposes people towards intelligence, "brain performance" and the like, and compare this to penis size. And by incredible I mean so fucking sad it's incredible.
Why is that really so absurd? Natural selection works in humans, does it not? The only reason the idea has been pushed aside is because it's impolite and it's been used in a condescending manner to prove racial superiority and as an excuse to 'put people in their place'. Look, there are differences between different races, my kids are far less likely to become good enough at sports to make it at a pro level compared to the kids of a black family. Black people are just generally faster, bigger and stronger. So what? Why is it ok to say that, but it's abhorrent to suggest that maybe black Americans have lower intelligence on average due to genetics? I'm just kind of curious why the line has been drawn there.
Your kids are likely to be overweight due to their parenting which is far more likely why they are likely to not excel at sports.

You're lumping a whole heap of racial stereotypes together then complain when you get called out on it.

Because race comprehensively structures people’s lives in the United States, it is correlated with many environmental factors that can influence IQ and achievement. People of different races tend to live in different neighborhoods, so they may be exposed to different levels of lead, different quality schools, different diets and different levels or types of stress. They may be exposed to different attitudes about achievement. People of minority groups may routinely experience racism, a kind of stress that can have long-term physiological consequences. On average, people of different races receive health care at different institutions, and the care they receive is not of the same quality. In sum, racial groups differ with respect to so many environmental factors that it is entirely plausible that environmental differences explain current racial gaps in mean IQ scores.

The environment can be modified in ways that genes cannot. When the environment is changed, the trait of interest (in this case intelligence) may also change even though genes also play a role in shaping that trait. For instance, in one study African-American children in Milwaukee who were thought to be at risk for cognitive disability were randomized so that half received intensive day care and early, enriched education, while the other half received ordinary day care and schooling. 50 By age five, children who received the intensive intervention averaged 110 on a standard IQ test (above average), while children in the control group averaged 83 (well below average). The effects of early, intensive education were still apparent by adolescence, when the children from the intervention group scored, on average, 10 points higher on IQ tests than the children from the control group.

There is some evidence that differing environments have influenced the entire human population’s IQ scores over time. People’s average IQ scores have risen by about 3 IQ points per decade over the last century. 50,57 The average IQ score from 1917 would amount to about 73 on today’s tests. This effect almost certainly is not due to changes in human genetics, because there has not been enough time for new intelligence-related mutations to arise and spread throughout human populations. The most likely explanation for the rise in IQ is that some relevant environmental factors have changed, causing people to develop in ways that are reflected in higher average IQ scores.

Another piece of evidence concerning widespread environmental influences on IQ is that the mean difference between black Americans’ and white Americans’ test scores has narrowed since the 1970s. Using data from several different IQ tests that were administered in a standard manner to black and non-Hispanic white people, Dickens and Flynn showed that blacks have narrowed the IQ gap by one third to one half of what it was in the 1970s. 58 If IQ were a fixed, intrinsic quality of races, then the IQ gap should be stable over time, but it is not.
http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetic … W7SVHY.pdf

Last edited by Jaekus (2013-03-26 16:56:37)

KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,913|5584|949

Jay wrote:

Why is that really so absurd? Natural selection works in humans, does it not? The only reason the idea has been pushed aside is because it's impolite and it's been used in a condescending manner to prove racial superiority and as an excuse to 'put people in their place'. Look, there are differences between different races, my kids are far less likely to become good enough at sports to make it at a pro level compared to the kids of a black family. Black people are just generally faster, bigger and stronger. So what? Why is it ok to say that, but it's abhorrent to suggest that maybe black Americans have lower intelligence on average due to genetics? I'm just kind of curious why the line has been drawn there.
haha isn't the whole "black people are better athletes" an example of selective breeding, AKA the opposite of natural selection?  Maybe you're mistaken Jay?

It's ok to say because we recognize slave masters forced reproduction between people with physically superior traits.  That's it.  They didn't pick especially dumb people to breed to keep the black man down - mostly because they made sure slaves were as stupid as possible by keeping them uneducated. It's primarily a lack of education due to their social standing and concerted social effort than a genetic predisposition to be dumb. 

Over the last 200 years there has been a concerted effort to keep the black man dumb, and at the same time make sure they are athletic as fuck so we can exploit them.  That's why it's OK to recognize athleticism as influenced by hereditary and understood that intelligence has been influenced by social factors, not genetic predisposition.

Are you ready to make the usual bet, Mortimer?
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,268|5668

Macbeth wrote:

British colonialism in the new world was much worse than Spanish and Portuguese in many ways.
At least slaves survived in the British colonies. Brazil practically worked 95% of their slaves to death.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
Macbeth
Banned
+2,443|4538

Had way more relaxed attitudes towards natives and freed slaves in totality. British and Americans did everything they could to separate themselves from native people and others. The Spanish and Portuguese actually mixed in and built new societies with them. It is why race relations are as close to humanely perfect as possible in Latin, and Portuguese America as opposed to apartheid South Africa, recently desegregated U.S., and Australia.
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,268|5668

Macbeth wrote:

Had way more relaxed attitudes towards natives and freed slaves in totality. British and Americans did everything they could to separate themselves from native people and others. The Spanish and Portuguese actually mixed in and built new societies with them. It is why race relations are as close to humanely perfect as possible in Latin, and Portuguese America as opposed to apartheid South Africa, recently desegregated U.S., and Australia.


Yeah the spanish didn't try to wipe out Central and South American civilization at all.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
Adams_BJ
Turns out you were cucked
+2,040|5575|Little Bentcock

Macbeth wrote:

Had way more relaxed attitudes towards natives and freed slaves in totality. British and Americans did everything they could to separate themselves from native people and others. The Spanish and Portuguese actually mixed in and built new societies with them. It is why race relations are as close to humanely perfect as possible in Latin, and Portuguese America as opposed to apartheid South Africa, recently desegregated U.S., and Australia.
Most of us have no problems with our natives.

its the bludgers (stereotype abo) we have an issue with.
Macbeth
Banned
+2,443|4538

Cybargs wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Had way more relaxed attitudes towards natives and freed slaves in totality. British and Americans did everything they could to separate themselves from native people and others. The Spanish and Portuguese actually mixed in and built new societies with them. It is why race relations are as close to humanely perfect as possible in Latin, and Portuguese America as opposed to apartheid South Africa, recently desegregated U.S., and Australia.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6E9WU9TGrec

Yeah the spanish didn't try to wipe out Central and South American civilization at all.
I got through two minutes of that mickey mouse shit and had to turn it off.

anyway

The Black Legend (Spanish: La leyenda negra) is a phrase used to describe historical writing or propaganda that depicts the Spanish Empire as "cruel, bigoted, exploitative and self-righteous in excess of reality."[1] The term was coined by Julián Juderías in his 1914 book La leyenda negra y la verdad histórica ("The Black Legend and Historical Truth"). Deriving from the Spanish example, the term "black legend" is sometimes used in a more general way to describe any form of unjustified demonization of a historical person, people or sequence of events.

A more pro-Spanish historiographical school emerged as a reaction, especially within Spain, but also in the Americas. The style which describes Spanish history in an exaggeratedly favorable manner has been referred to as the White legend.
Basically most of what is known in the English speaking world, the one you inhabit due to the colonization of your people, is biased due to the long running rivalry between Spain and England. I could go into it more but it is probably wasted on you judging from that stupid video.

on the racial end of it refer to the Casta system. In short the Spanish developed a huge classification system describing the potential results of mixing whites, blacks, and native americans. they came up with 16 different potential types of people. while whites were on top, the system allowed social improvement and moving over several generations. You could theoretically have a family descended from a slave move into the white category if people were careful with their marriages. This is opposed to the one drop rule that America operated on. Half white children weren't automatically slaves like in the U.S.

This sort of relaxed attitude towards race  is why Japanese, black, white, and mixed Brazilians do not consider themselves anything other than Brazilian. The government of Brazil has an official policy of promoting race mixing and the idea of a historically mixed people. Other South Americans countries have this too. Now compare that to Australia where you Asians are considered by many to be an immigrant menace.
Adams_BJ
Turns out you were cucked
+2,040|5575|Little Bentcock

Macbeth wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Had way more relaxed attitudes towards natives and freed slaves in totality. British and Americans did everything they could to separate themselves from native people and others. The Spanish and Portuguese actually mixed in and built new societies with them. It is why race relations are as close to humanely perfect as possible in Latin, and Portuguese America as opposed to apartheid South Africa, recently desegregated U.S., and Australia.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6E9WU9TGrec

Yeah the spanish didn't try to wipe out Central and South American civilization at all.
I got through two minutes of that mickey mouse shit and had to turn it off.

anyway

The Black Legend (Spanish: La leyenda negra) is a phrase used to describe historical writing or propaganda that depicts the Spanish Empire as "cruel, bigoted, exploitative and self-righteous in excess of reality."[1] The term was coined by Julián Juderías in his 1914 book La leyenda negra y la verdad histórica ("The Black Legend and Historical Truth"). Deriving from the Spanish example, the term "black legend" is sometimes used in a more general way to describe any form of unjustified demonization of a historical person, people or sequence of events.

A more pro-Spanish historiographical school emerged as a reaction, especially within Spain, but also in the Americas. The style which describes Spanish history in an exaggeratedly favorable manner has been referred to as the White legend.
Basically most of what is known in the English speaking world, the one you inhabit due to the colonization of your people, is biased due to the long running rivalry between Spain and England. I could go into it more but it is probably wasted on you judging from that stupid video.

on the racial end of it refer to the Casta system. In short the Spanish developed a huge classification system describing the potential results of mixing whites, blacks, and native americans. they came up with 16 different potential types of people. while whites were on top, the system allowed social improvement and moving over several generations. You could theoretically have a family descended from a slave move into the white category if people were careful with their marriages. This is opposed to the one drop rule that America operated on. Half white children weren't automatically slaves like in the U.S.

This sort of relaxed attitude towards race  is why Japanese, black, white, and mixed Brazilians do not consider themselves anything other than Brazilian. The government of Brazil has an official policy of promoting race mixing and the idea of a historically mixed people. Other South Americans countries have this too. Now compare that to Australia where you Asians are considered by many to be an immigrant menace.
Bloody boat people
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,268|5668

Macbeth wrote:

Now compare that to Australia where you Asians are considered by many to be an immigrant menace.
Yeah like the 5% of population of queensland considers asians a menace.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
Macbeth
Banned
+2,443|4538

so racism against Asians isn't a big thing over there? I guess a lot of Asian people I hear talk about it are just whiners.
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,268|5668

Macbeth wrote:

so racism against Asians isn't a big thing over there? I guess a lot of Asian people I hear talk about it are just whiners.
Not even really a significant issue in Australia. Actually you know who's most racist in Australia? The Asians. The mainlanders (chinese) don't get along with the hongkies, koreans don't get along with anyone.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,760|5105|what

Don't be racist cybargs.
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png

"coz you a far cry from acclaim nigga ubisoft"
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,268|5668

AussieReaper wrote:

Don't be racist cybargs.
first it was the brits hating other europeans, then it was the other europeans + brits hating on wogs (greek), then wogs, euro's and brits were hating on asians, then everyone started hating on lebo's, then everyone including lebos start hating on boat people. it's just an integrated cycle of lolracism.
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2021 Jeff Minard