Trust the science
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
Comments (42)
sorted by:
The Revolution is continuously in Year 0, Comrade.
So what if the Father of RNA Vaccines came out and said that our Glorious Fauchi Ouchies were a bad idea? What does he know, he is a right-deviationist and a wrecker, not committed to our cause!
So what if the Father of Modern Genetics came out and said that there are genetic differences between humans (who are all perfectly identical from the neck up)? What does he know, he is a right-deviationist and a wrecker, not committed to our cause!
Many such cases, Comrade...
They aren't the fathers of anything. Big Brother invented both genetics and mRNA, except when it's racist; then both are misinformation.
Progressives like to think of all people as blank slates which can be elevated to equality with sufficient resources. If people were not blank slates, if our biology imposes limitations on us, then that carries two implications: First is that there are limits has to how many people can be elevated to equity. Second is that the unequal status quo may actually have good reasons to operate the way it does, given the constraints of human nature. Both of these problems place limits on the progressive ideal of universal equity and add legitimacy to the present, unequal society. Naturally, this is unacceptable to progressives.
Progressives believe that it is possible--and morally necessary--to socially and politically engineer away the ills of society: racism, poverty, pollution, etc. But if people are not blank slates, if human nature is a constraint, then that puts limits on how effective those engineering programs can be. Worse, it also suggests that the institutions that progressives decry as oppressive and illegitimate have good reasons to exist the way they do. And once you start noticing that, it's just a matter of time before you're carving swastikas into your forehead.
The concern they have about racism is a byproduct of the very existence of differences between the races. If they didn't exist, people wouldn't be racist.
That said, there is one path to equity they refuse to acknowledge. The salvation offered by Jesus Christ is available to everyone, regardless of wealth or resources or upbringing. What they want is within reach but they reject it because they reject God and think they can supplant God.
Biological inequalities ensure that people have unequal value at various times and places.
A soul gives inherent worth and provides a baseline value and dignity to any individual person. Regardless of genetic gifts or curses or anything else. Everyone has different values at differing times and places, but no-one can drop below the base value that having a soul provides.
Theyy have confused the notion of equal rights with identicality.
Everyone is equal under the law (in theory). That is what the phrase "all men created equal" means. But they have warped it.
it's amazing this guy discovered genetic science, and gets his name printed in all the biology text books and gets shamed for it all within his life span
The entire field of genetics, IQ, and all that jazz is was literally demonized because people noticed too quick upon it being discovered and a few of Hitler's boys used it in a way the Jews didn't like.
If you want the sad actual science, the “blank slate” ideology (tabula rasa) ,which accounts for the majority of government “spending”today, has repeatedly been found to be pseudoscientific. This is on every spectrum from race, gender, to even extreme targeted examples like neuroplasticity. This was so thoroughly documented by the late 90s/ early 2000s that only a mass wave of societal/governmental pressures (cunts, coons, and troons) forced scientific research to run with their tail between their legs or lose all funding and be blacklisted.
Just like how the church burned people for saying earth wasnt the center of the universe. Wokeness is just a religion with zealotness and fanaticism.
I think one of the explanations I once heard is that we have a lot of things locked up in our genetics and the environment we're born in (access to clean water, shelter, environmental like heat or extreme cold etc) is critical to unlocking higher intelligence.
Given that races themselves are an evolutionary trait to the environment they are in, it isn't that crazy to believe there is a difference in Intelligence based off race but the question is how much of that can be mitigated by environment as I doubt them growing up in leftist shitholes like Baltimore or totalitarian places like North Korea assist with this.
I bet the starving north Koreans are still smarter than the well fed blacks. whatever the difference that can be 'unlocked' by better diet and environments clearly isn't that much, maybe bump up iq by 5 points, otherwise the blacks adopted by whites would have similar test results to whites and asians instead of only slightly better than other blacks.
I think there's another environment we're missing here, social. The Democrats successfully created a culture where other blacks target the ones trying to better themselves and improve.
Uncle Tom and playing white, you majority of the time hear blacks calling other blacks that. Whites and especially Asians have expectations on them to do better, blacks even if they have dedicated white parents have a social expectation outside of their home to STAY worse.
Democrats put fuel the fire, but we see black people tearing each other down all around the world.
SocraticMethod1 is just engaging in wishful thinking, like a liberal, that it's somebody else's fault - Democrats / the environment.
There's no example anywhere in the world of large groups of blacks even in good conditions being compatible with a thriving Western society.
Here's a counter example: the #1 factor in whether a neighborhood gets better or worse is the number of black residents. Higher than poverty, access to jobs, resources, hospitals - anything else. In other words, a wealthy all-black neighborhood is all but guaranteed to quickly go to shit. And these are kids with all the benefits of wealth and successful, smart parents and they still fail.
Democrats didn't create the "urban" morass, they just allowed it to happen by removing corporal punishment from schools and other things to try to impose Western-style civilization.
You're anchoring incorrectly.
Full nutrition allows your potential to be realized, but it doesn't raise the ceiling.
Starving in early developmental phases is catastrophic to mental and physical growth.
So if the broad Black cap is 110, that explains africas failure, nobody was well fed enough to reach even that bar.
If starvation drops you 35 points, eliminating starvation still the most leverage option to raise IQ. Even if it'd never going to push any black past 110.
Genetics = potential. Environment = how far to the potential you can get.
Bad Environment hampers good genetics. Good Environment promotes reaching potential. There is no way Good Environment can elevate bad genetics beyond potential.
Chihuahua vs greyhound in a race theory.
It's wild that people will accept without question that race can denote average differences in skin colour, hair type, height, which athletic events you excell at, even apparently your rhythm.
But somehow differences in brain power in certain tasks is completely absurd to even consider, like it's not a physical organ just like all those other ones.
Environment plays a part because it forces natural selection harder.
Blacks, and many other "less civilized" groups lived in much harsher places, so they never had a chance to develop higher level intelligence. Think of Maslow's hierarchy, they could never ascend past the bottom level because they were never physically safe enough. And that still applies to both Africa blacks and them elsewhere, as they live in the most violent shitholes in nearly every country.
This doesn't mean you can just pluck one into a nice home and they magically grow smarter, anymore than a pitbull magically turns into a corgie in a good home.
IQ is heavily genetic, period, and countless centuries of that kind of environmental pressure means that women consistently choose the thuggish men (for safety and other valuable traits) to pass on the genes, while any weaker child usually dies off due to the harshness.
This doesn't have to even be a racial thing, it just is because the environment that makes such an evolutionary path also happened to be the same one that had the harshest sun to evolve skin colors.
i think its the opposite. They lived in warmer places with plentiful amounts of food and never had winters, so they never needed to have long term planning to survive the winters that had no food.
Kinda true actually, can't even use dangerous fauna as an excuse as Europeans just cleansed them than have them be an issue.
Then look at the places Whites colonised in Africa and they turned deserts into gardens and breadbaskets. The Whites were actually on HARD MODE on where they spawned lol.
Lacking winter might help, but many areas just straight up had drought and dry seasons that made food just as difficult to grow. Often times more than just for a winter, which is why agriculture was far less developed if at all.
Its also not just "its hot" level problems, the fauna there is far more dangerous than in most other areas, with a lot more bite and venom to go around. Because even the animals themselves adapted to the harshness of it by becoming more lethal. Which means even the abundance of it isn't nearly as helpful because of how many you'll lose dealing with them.
There is a reason why nearly every "civilized" nation came out of somewhere that had cold/temperate climates, no matter how bad winter is, and most of the tribal slower to civilize ones came out of tropical and desert ones.
A problem with bringing up blacks is that they have pre-hominid ghost genes. They have ancestors in their DNA to an earlier ancestor than all the prior-hominid species.
The belong to a distinct hominid ancestor distinct from the other races.
This is so problematic as blacks belong to a different genera. Their correlation of genes to all the other races is as distant between wolves and coyotes if not more so.
Different species display different behaviors. Regardless whether they are IQs are the same or not... Accounting for different species displaying different behaviors is like the dog giving up his bed for the cat in the house.
It is like having cats and dogs in the same house...the cat doesn't seem to mind but the dog is without space.
With regards to geography, consider this.
All groups that arose from the southern hemisphere are basically retarded.
Because they have no winter.
They don't have to develop long term planning to survive winter. Long term planning is one of the strongest correlated traits with intelligence.
good point about Africa and that it is vastly abundant in easily procured food.
The reason that African's never had to make a 2 story structure, a religion, a written language, the wheel, a boat, etc is that Africa is so terrifically abundant in animal and plant stuffs.
They literally have no need for refrigeration or any modern analogue that we use in the North. Because Africa is crazy abundant with food.
Of course this changed when they became dependent upon "Aryan" manufacturing in Africa. But, that is a separate discussion.
Africa is a crazy technological analogue of iz-real's Abundance and the jews lack of advancement to gather a "real" homeland of Ukraine when they had it.
The jews may be more similar to africans than how they appear in that they both don't appear to have a authentically derived god...like the Norse, Greek, and Romans, etc.. that the god of the bible was contrived from the jews to be their god, henotheistic.
africans and the jews "chose" their god from many gods (which in the west and the incorrect bible scholars say is mono-theistic) when it is in fact heno-theism...sort of like the democrats calling America a "Democracy" when it's actually a "Republic"
Graham Hancock has a bible translator who says that they don't necessarily know what the word god is in the bible...and whether it is singular or plural. But, the usage in the bible is plural (Elohim) and not used in the singular (El)
anyhow, the jews had a hard time to make a natural god like the African's...
Its all part of the same system. They have no winter because its fucking hot as shit basically year round. It being hot as shit made everything fucking miserable, from dangerous animals to lack of water.
As in, they couldn't afford to put water in the ground for food later because they need to drink now. Nor could they always afford to stay in one place as they had to follow herds for food today rather than later. This isn't 100% the case all the time, but simply having fucking water, and with it fertile land another major lacking in the rest of the continent, is a major reason why Egypt is such an outlier in the continent even before Europe got involved.
Not to mention the lack of natural borders like mountains in Africa specifically meant constant tribal warfare, and the burning and moving it brought. The having of this, and all the forests, likely contributed to South America, despite being similarly uncivilized, being able to develop some stronger development.
They are all retarded, but part of the reason is because their environment selected the most retarded, but hardy and brutish genes to pass on. And the lack of ability to build surplus meant they couldn't develop very well beyond that, because when you are physically lacking you don't really think about higher concepts that can improve.
That's evolution literally at play. And its why you can't just bring a nigger or, worse, a Brazilian into modern society with food and education and create a civilized gentleman.
Plus the water they did have are breeding grounds for malaria, practically dooming any attempts at irrigation. You still have Africans today that refuse to drive on bridges over water out of fear of "evil spirits".
Good addition, I didn't even remember to add the diseases to the list.
But the list goes on and on. Shit sucks in Africa, and when literally everything is killing you at every moment you generally don't evolve big brains when you need hardy bodies that are physically able faster.
Equatorial groups basically. No time pressure of an impending harsh winter. You are right
"safety" would provide a dysgenic affect as the strongest/smartest wouldn't be the only ones to survive. Hardship generally improves genetics unless it's too hard and extincts you.
This is exactly what I'm getting at. It was the exact right hardness to keep them from being able to evolve much further, but not completely extinct them.
You can see the exact scenario play out on the individual level right now with the extreme poverty/homeless people. Those who can just skirt by enough to not die, but can never actually get anywhere near enough to begin improving their lot.
The issue is basically with the word itself. "Race" as it is used in policy discussions is almost purely a political construct, that tends towards being self-defined.
An actual biological race is something we can find, but you can't use it for political policy because there's nothing about a biological race that gives a deterministic outcome to behavior.
This is because all behaviors are both partly genetic, partly environmental, and even environment can effect genetics. As you've pointed out, you can't get higher IQ with malnutrition.
The effect of Leftism on IQ has been identified, but is even more quietly buried than a link between race and IQ. This is because Leftism leads to starvation, violence, low-trust, poor education, so on and so forth. If you take a population of people and expose them to Leftism for a generation or three, the statistics are grim.
A good example of this is the 1 SD IQ difference between East Germans and West Germans after the Berlin Wall fell. To be clear, these are effectively the same people by any biological means, but Leftist policies are so poisonous that they damaged everyone to a severe degree. Consider that the lockdowns, which only went on for a year or so, caused IQs among American children to drop by 20%
https://archive.md/2tNvM
Poor guy. He says that because it's genuinely what he thinks given the available data. But he doesn't realize that he's only allowed to say what the secular cult of The Science believes.
Pretty sure he knows, he's just old enough and old-school enough to not give a fuck and wants to spit in the face of skinsuit "science" before he loses his chance. He's been pushing their buttons on this subject for years now.
And that makes him a good man.
The soft sciences collectively suffered a mental break after physics described reality in increasing detail for a century. They remade themselves in the image of physics, in a cargo-cult hope it would bring them the same validation.
Ironically, the only thing that even comes close is IQ. Read The Bell Curve and be amazed at the predictive strength of IQ and its resilience against manipulation (blacks raised by adoptive parents from birth in upper-middle class, White environments, completely separated from their race, do not have White IQs).
Naturally, the soft-science equivalent of uniting electricity and magnetism, in terms of impact on the field, is strictly verboten.
This man was responsible for the savings of thousands of lives. But if you go against the (((narrative))), they will shoot you down. You can find the cure for cancer, but if you don't bow down to the system, they will come after you.
This is just such an obvious duh. Intelligence is around 80% genetic, that's not disputed in anyway.