I said it can be compensated for, not that it's natural. Aristotle observed the problem with ethnicity and faction over two millennia ago. Having very different haplogroups exacerbates what was already an issue between similar haplogroups.
Behavioral genetics aren't quantified very well, because we don't fully understand what genes contributes to behaviors, what epigenetic factors manifest them, and frankly, an academic fear of what my be found. MAOA is a bit unique, in that it's mechanical function of the MAO-A enzyme would ostensibly explain some of the observations.
I'd like to find the full paper on this again, but it seems to have been paywalled everywhere I look.
Distributions of low functioning variants vary greatly between "races", though most studies are on African American's, not Africans. It's prevalence is far less among American Caucasians, though. It's so rare in Asian populations, a large enough sample can't be found to study it.
That's just one area of genetic behavioral difference though. We're slowly learning of the genes that play key roles in IQ, but we're still a ways off.
I've known a few, and a lot of them changed their ways (I'm referring to myself and my own circle of friends, here. We did crap, but we moved forward). There are certainly some hopeless cases, but this is a cultural argument, and people are capable of finding flaws within cultural influence if they have marginal intelligence.
I have a strong problem with transhumansim. It's utopian. It demands the same inhumanity of communism, libertarianism, or nazism. People are fucked. We need to focus on the foundation to minimalize the fuckage.
That's why I come to the genetic conclusion. You're not wrong. There is a whole pyramid of human behavior that we really only understand in the vaguest of senses.
Here's the thing. I have no desire to eliminate any group of people. If Western civilization annihilates itself in nuclear fire, Africa is that little place of hope. A lot of the population isn't fit for Western civilization, but that's okay. As long as that preserve persists, new civilizations should spawn from it. It might take thousands or tens of thousands of years, but I'm hopeful that it can spawn humanity again, even without Denisovan or Neanderthal influence.
Science gets overturned a fair bit, but we're in an age where it's overturned for non-scientific reasons. It's hard to take that seriously. James Watson is a non-persona in the scientific community, even though he's one of the most important people of the 20th century.
I understand that science finds new conclusions. My issue is that moralism overrrides science in modern academia.
And I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that Jews participate disproportionately in this new fucked up moralism.
I said it can be compensated for, not that it's natural. Aristotle observed the problem with ethnicity and faction over two millennia ago. Having very different haplogroups exacerbates what was already an issue between similar haplogroups.
Unfortunately, it's getting harder to find research papers free on the web.
https://www.gwern.net/docs/genetics/heritable/2013-beaver.pdf
Behavioral genetics aren't quantified very well, because we don't fully understand what genes contributes to behaviors, what epigenetic factors manifest them, and frankly, an academic fear of what my be found. MAOA is a bit unique, in that it's mechanical function of the MAO-A enzyme would ostensibly explain some of the observations.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11126-013-9287-x#page-1
I'd like to find the full paper on this again, but it seems to have been paywalled everywhere I look.
Distributions of low functioning variants vary greatly between "races", though most studies are on African American's, not Africans. It's prevalence is far less among American Caucasians, though. It's so rare in Asian populations, a large enough sample can't be found to study it.
That's just one area of genetic behavioral difference though. We're slowly learning of the genes that play key roles in IQ, but we're still a ways off.
I've known a few, and a lot of them changed their ways (I'm referring to myself and my own circle of friends, here. We did crap, but we moved forward). There are certainly some hopeless cases, but this is a cultural argument, and people are capable of finding flaws within cultural influence if they have marginal intelligence.
I have a strong problem with transhumansim. It's utopian. It demands the same inhumanity of communism, libertarianism, or nazism. People are fucked. We need to focus on the foundation to minimalize the fuckage.
That's why I come to the genetic conclusion. You're not wrong. There is a whole pyramid of human behavior that we really only understand in the vaguest of senses.
Here's the thing. I have no desire to eliminate any group of people. If Western civilization annihilates itself in nuclear fire, Africa is that little place of hope. A lot of the population isn't fit for Western civilization, but that's okay. As long as that preserve persists, new civilizations should spawn from it. It might take thousands or tens of thousands of years, but I'm hopeful that it can spawn humanity again, even without Denisovan or Neanderthal influence.
Science gets overturned a fair bit, but we're in an age where it's overturned for non-scientific reasons. It's hard to take that seriously. James Watson is a non-persona in the scientific community, even though he's one of the most important people of the 20th century.
I understand that science finds new conclusions. My issue is that moralism overrrides science in modern academia.
And I'd be remiss if I didn't mention that Jews participate disproportionately in this new fucked up moralism.