This is a revision of a post from my old blog, substantially updated and expanded.
According to a recent meta-analysis, the correlation between IQ and school grades in the general population is nearly 0.55. Meanwhile the correlation between IQ and years of education in the U.S. is also 0.55. Given the similarity between these two correlations, we can think of them both as just the 0.55 correlation between IQ and academic success.
So in a typical elementary school class (where you have the full range of cognitive ability, including dull students who will drop out later), you might have 30 students, which means that the lowest IQ in the class should be 28 points below average and the brightest in the class should be 28 points above average (IQ 72 and 128 respectively). However because IQ and academic success “only” correlates 0.55, the best and worst students in the class should have IQs only 55% as extreme: 85 and 115 respectively (U.S. norms).
Of course, elementary school grades are only one way we can quantify academic success in the general population. Another way, as mentioned above, is years of schooling or highest degree obtained.
High school dropouts: IQ 85 (U.S. white norms)
In 2006, roughly 17% of American adults, aged 25+ lacked a high school diploma or equivalent. That means that the median high school dropout was in the bottom 8.5% of education. If you’re in the bottom 8.5% of IQ, you’d have an IQ of 80 (U.S. norms), or 20 points below the U.S. mean of 100. But since the correlation between IQ and education is only 0.55, we’d expect high school dropouts to be only 55% as far below the mean, thus have an average IQ of 0.55(-20) + 100 = 89 (U.S. norms)
According to a source provided to me by commenter C, the actual average IQ of Americans with only a 9th to 11th grade education (age 20-90) tested in the WAIS-IV 2006 norming was just as expected: 88.77 (U.S. norms); 85 (U.S. white norms)
University grads: IQ 108 (U.S. white norms)
By 2006, roughly 26% of American adults, aged 25+ had a bachelor’s degree or more. That means that the median university graduate, is in the top 13% of education. If you’re in the top 13% of IQ, you’d have an IQ of 117 (U.S. norms), in other words, 17 points above the U.S. mean of 100. But since the correlation between IQ and education is only 0.55, the expected IQ of university grads would be 0.55(17) + 100 = 109 (U.S. norms).
How close does this prediction come to the actual data? The actual IQ of U.S. university grads (age 20-90) tested in the WAIS-IV 2006 norming was 110.77 (U.S. norms); 108 (U.S. white norms).
PhDs: IQ 119 (U.S. white norms)
In the U.S., a PhD roughly marks the top 1% in years of completed education, which suggests that the median PhD is in the top 0.5% in education level. If there were a perfect correlation between IQ and academic success, we’d expect the average PhD to have an IQ of 138 (the top 0.5%), but since the correlation is “only” 0.55, each point above 100 must be multiplied by 0.55, reducing the expected average IQ of PhDs to about 121(U.S. norms); 119 (U.S. white norms).
The only actual recent data on the IQs of U.S. PhDs that I’m aware of comes from Charles Murray’s book Coming Apart, which reported that for PhDs turning 25-29 in 2005-2009, the average IQ is 124 (U.S. norms). However this is probably too high because (1) Murray’s sample was limited to white PhDs, and (2) the test used was the AFQT, which is arguably an achievement test, not a conventional IQ test, and thus might over-correlate with education. The true average IQ of PhDs is probably several points lower, just as simple regression would predict.
Harvard students: IQ 125 (U.S. white norms)
Are there academic achievements more impressive than getting a PhD? Yes. Getting acceptance into Harvard: the world’s most prestigious university. Out of the 4.1 million 18-year-olds in the U.S. in a given year, only about 1600 go to Harvard. So if there were a perfect correlation between IQ and academic success, the dumbest Harvard student would have an IQ of 150 and the median might have an IQ of 153. However because the correlation is only 0.55, the median Harvard student should be only 55% as far above 100. Thus, simple regression predicts the typical Harvard student should have an IQ of 129 (U.S. norms).
Actually a sample of Harvard students studied by Harvard psychologist Shelley Carson and her colleagues clocked in at IQ 122 (U.S. norms); 120 (U.S. white norms) on an abbreviated version of the Wechsler intelligence scale. On the other hand, Harvard undergrads are rumoured to average 166 on the LSAT, which equates to an IQ of about 132 (U.S. norms). The abbreviated Wechsler estimate is perhaps too low because of ceiling bumping, poor sampling, and an over-emphasis on spatial ability, but the LSAT score may be too high because it’s too much of an achievement test. Averaging them both gives an IQ of 127 (U.S. norms); 125 (U.S. white norms). Very similar to the predicted level.
I completely ignored the stratospheric SAT scores of Harvard undergrads because being selected by this test, it’s an outlier on which they score high by definition.
Tenured professors: IQ 127 (U.S. white norms)
Another form of academic accomplishment that’s about as exclusive as attending Harvard is becoming a tenured university professor. Scientist Steve Hsu wrote:
…when an attorney prepares a case it is for her client. When a Google engineer develops a new algorithm, it is for Google — for money. Fewer than one in a thousand individuals in our society has the privilege, the freedom, to pursue their own ideas and creations. The vast majority of such people are at research universities. A smaller number are at think tanks or national labs, but most are professors…
So in terms of academic success, being a full tenured professor is a one in thousand level accomplishment. If there were a perfect correlation between IQ and academic success, the dumbest tenured professor would have an IQ of 147, and the average tenured professor would probably be around 150. But since the correlation is 0.55, we should expect the average tenured professor to be around 128 (U.S. norms); 127 (U.S. white norms) with quite a bit of variability around that mean, depending partly on the prestige of the university they teach at and the g loading of the subjects they teach.
Academic Nobel Prize winners: IQ 148 (U.S. white norms)
Are there academic accomplishments more impressive than becoming a professor or going to Harvard? Yes: Winning the Nobel Prize. Many years ago a respected psychometric expert named Garth Zietsman wrote an article about using this type of regression to estimate the IQs of Nobel laureates, though I don’t remember the exact stats he used.
But let’s say only one in a million American adults has a Nobel prize (excluding the Nobel peace prize which is non-academic). If there were a perfect correlation between IQ and academic success, we’d expect the dumbest American Nobel laureate to have an IQ of 171 and the average Nobel laureate to be around 174. But again, since the correlation is 0.55, the average Nobel laureate should have an IQ of 141 (U.S. norms); 140 (U.S. white norms).
The only data on the actual IQs of Nobel level scientists is probably outdated. In the Roe study, the average IQ of eminent scientists was 166 on a verbal test (the best proxy for IQ in the study). On the other hand, in the Terman gifted study, the IQ of the two kids who would grow up to win a Nobel Prize was 129 (too low for the study). The Roe study average was probably too high because of the academic nature of the test, and because the sloppy way the test was normed, while the Terman study suffered from too small a sample of Nobel Prize winners perhaps tested at too young an age. Averaging both studies together gives IQ 148 as the best estimate for academic Nobel Prize winners. This is higher than predicted by simple regression from IQ and academic success, perhaps because the data is outdated, or perhaps because at the highest levels, academic achievement becomes more creative, thus increasing the correlation.
Andy said:
Interesting post, and pretty addicting website all around. A few questions, if you don’t mind:
1. My statistics is rusty; could you briefly explain why you can do regression by just multiplying the deviation from the mean by the correlation coefficient?
2. I’m skeptical of your decision to model Harvard undergraduates as the occupying the 1600 most prestigious academic positions post-high school in the country. While Harvard may be the most prestigious institution on *average*, this just mathematically doesn’t equate to occupying spots 1-1600. .i.e. Caltech actually has higher average SAT scores than Harvard, and a prospective engineering student would probably choose MIT over Harvard, were they accepted into both. By your model, we should expect Harvard’s incoming class to approximate the 1600 highest SAT scorers in the country, but it isn’t even close to that; the overlap with other elite schools is very large.
3. What’s your opinion on the average IQ’s of certain professionals, and particular prestigious companies? .i.e. estimate on average Google engineer’s IQ?
4. How g-loaded do you think academic achievement would be if you fixed work ethic? That is, if we could get some accurate distribution of conscientiousness levels among students with known academic records, would we be able to pinpoint their IQ very precisely? Would the remaining noise mostly be random chance, barring cases of very lopsided cognitive profiles, or does academic success still load more than IQ tests on non-g cognitive abilities?
pumpkinperson said:
1. My statistics is rusty; could you briefly explain why you can do regression by just multiplying the deviation from the mean by the correlation coefficient?
Because in a bivariate normal distribution, when two variables are expressed as Z score (and IQs are Z scores multiplied by 15, added to a 100); the slope of the line of best fit in a scatter plot show Y as a function of X is equivalent to the correlation coefficient. If there were a perfect positive correlation, that slope would be positive one and there would be no scatter around the line of best fit. If there were zero correlation, the slope would be zero, showing no tendency for Y to increase as a function of X, and complete scatter around the line of best fit. A 0.55 correlation is between those extremes.
https://pumpkinperson.com/2015/09/30/what-is-a-z-score-a-definition-2/
2. I’m skeptical of your decision to model Harvard undergraduates as the occupying the 1600 most prestigious academic positions post-high school in the country. While Harvard may be the most prestigious institution on *average*, this just mathematically doesn’t equate to occupying spots 1-1600. .i.e. Caltech actually has higher average SAT scores than Harvard, and a prospective engineering student would probably choose MIT over Harvard, were they accepted into both. By your model, we should expect Harvard’s incoming class to approximate the 1600 highest SAT scorers in the country, but it isn’t even close to that; the overlap with other elite schools is very large.
Admittedly academic success is a vaguely defined variable so others can improve upon how I modeled things, but even if Harvard is the pinnacle of undergraduate academic success, we still would not expect them to have the 1600 highest SAT scores, as academic success and undergrad admission do not correlate perfectly with SAT scores (though the correlation is higher than with official IQ scores since SATs are directly selected for)
3. What’s your opinion on the average IQ’s of certain professionals, and particular prestigious companies? .i.e. estimate on average Google engineer’s IQ?
Probably in the 140s
4. How g-loaded do you think academic achievement would be if you fixed work ethic? That is, if we could get some accurate distribution of conscientiousness levels among students with known academic records, would we be able to pinpoint their IQ very precisely? Would the remaining noise mostly be random chance, barring cases of very lopsided cognitive profiles, or does academic success still load more than IQ tests on non-g cognitive abilities?
If you controlled for work ethic the g loading (which is not exactly the same as the correlation with IQ) of academic success should be incredibly high (maybe 0.8); the remaining noise might be that there are many cognitive functions not used in academia and subjectivity and bias when it comes to grading.
SophicDrippins said:
“estimate on average Google engineer’s IQ?”
That reminds me of this:
“In the future, employers may well begin to start testing these abilities in place of IQ; Google has already announced that it plans to screen candidates for qualities like intellectual humility, rather than sheer cognitive prowess.
The challenge will be getting people to admit their own foibles. If you’ve been able to rest on the laurels of your intelligence all your life, it could be very hard to accept that it has been blinding your judgement. As Socrates had it: the wisest person really may be the one who can admit he knows nothing.”
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20150413-the-downsides-of-being-clever
Oh, that reminds me… PP, have you done any work on the downsides of high IQ?
They drink more:
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/201102/more-intelligent-people-are-more-likely-binge-drink-and
Have fewer friends:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/03/18/why-smart-people-are-better-off-with-fewer-friends/
Have less offspring and more trouble finding mates:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/prospero/2012/06/quick-study-satoshi-kanazawa-intelligence
They stay up late:
Click to access PAID2009.pdf
Suicidal:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-petite/the-highly-intelligent-creative-self-destructive-white-male-in-literature-and-film_b_7667188.html
Mentally ill:
http://brainblogger.com/2014/12/18/does-high-iq-increase-the-risk-of-depression-and-mental-disorders/
http://www.medicaldaily.com/why-smarter-people-are-more-likely-be-mentally-ill-270039
“The neuronal calcium sensor-1 protein was associated in a mouse model with spatial memory and curiosity. Interestingly, that same protein has been linked in humans to bipolar disorder and schizophrenia.”
“In mining data on Finnish military conscripts, the Finnish researchers found an almost unbelievably high correlation between high-scorers and those who later received bipolar diagnoses — 12-fold.”
There are many individual articles, but someone needs to tie it all together.
RaceRealist said:
Thanks for the project. I’ll tackle this this weekend.
meLo said:
“They drink more:
Have fewer friends:
Have less offspring and more trouble finding mates:
They stay up late:
Suicidal:
Mentally ill:
There are many individual articles, but someone needs to tie it all together.”
It’s not hard to see. Mentally ill individuals will obviously have higher rates of depression and suicidal thought/tendencies, and as a result fewer friends, they feel as though they can’t relate, this is further exasperated if you’re of higher intelligence. This limits social activity, and couple it with binge drinking(to help cope), it creates a toxic atmosphere for reinforcing healthy relationships. With no social life, it becomes easier to stay up late and if your IQ is above average, you may be geared toward obsessive academic learning which I know has kept me up for hours and hours before.
That’s just an answer to a question though.
In reality, depression isn’t positively correlated with IQ.
“My own speculation on this is that high IQ people may be better at communicating their feelings (so your more likely to hear them say “I’m depressed”), have better, more educated support networks who might suggest to them that they are depressed, and healthcare to pay for treatment. Or they may be more likely to read books and recognize their symptoms.”
http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/fullarticle/481989
http://psycnet.apa.org/index.cfm?fa=buy.optionToBuy&id=1980-28826-001
Mental illness itself I can believe though. CEOs have higher frequencies of psychopathy. IF you’re intelligent then you’re dedicated to your work and this can mean staying up for hours on end to complete necessary tasks. If you have less hours of free time it makes children incredibly bothersome and it would be irresponsible. The higher intelligence you have, the lower the number of phenotypically similar individuals you will encounter, this may be offset by the fact that classes tend to mingle among each other more and may gravitate towards close proximity. kanazawa has also argued that more intelligent people will naturally have mental expressions and behaviors that are evolutionary novelties. As far as I’m aware Autism and schizophrenia are exclusive to homo sapiens.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/09/13/1-in-5-ceos-are-psychopaths-australian-study-finds/
http://www.evoanth.net/2016/10/27/autism-schizophrenia-evolved/
Click to access paid2009.pdf
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289607000669
Click to access paid2012.pdf
Some information on OCD and intelligence:
“There has actually been cognitive research done on exactly this! In terms of verbal IQ, those with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder typically have notably higher scores than their non-afflicted counterparts. This subhead of IQ refers to the ability to analyze information and solve problems using language-based reasoning.
However, regarding spatial intelligence, those with this disorder usually have lower-than-average scores. This type of intelligence encompasses spatial judgment and the ability to visualize clear mental images.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/14683728/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3181902/
I think Pumpkin posted a source claiming heavy drinking was negatively correlated with IQ but I believe kanazawa had produced studies substantiating the opposite.
Santo OPRAHNIC the titanic Oprah-cranium said:
The correlation between conformity unskills (whatever politics) and education is near to perfect 1,0.
Isn’t*
I DO NOT have your time said:
Source ?
Santo OPRAHNIC the titanic Oprah-cranium said:
There is a ranking of traits and their correlations with whatever stuff, education for example.
I think conformity disposition is very correlative with any thing humans do even in place that is famously known as ”organically inconformist” like ”artistic occupations”.
”Intelligence is a very strong predictor of school grades.
•
The type of intelligence test moderates the intelligence–school grades relation.
•
School-related factors (i.e., school subject, grade level) affect the relationship.
•
The relevance of intelligence for school grades has changed over time.”
Interesting highlights of this study you could point out to us PP.
I DO NOT have your time said:
Does this mean the academic successful are smarter than the rich ? Since the correlation between income & IQ is “only” 0.4.
pumpkinperson said:
Does this mean the academic successful are smarter than the rich ? Since the correlation between income & IQ is “only” 0.4.
When you look at cumulative lifetime earnings, and adjust for the fact that the earnings of stay at home wives is hard to measures (sine they don’t receive direct income but enjoy room and board as part of a marital partnership); the IQ-income correlation is probably closer to 0.49. Still lower than the correlation between IQ and academic success, but not by much; but yes, the academic top 1% will be somewhat smarter than the economic top 1%, on average.
Andy said:
I wonder how large the wealth-IQ correlation becomes if you control for partiality towards money. At the right side of the bell curve you see lots of potential investment bankers purposely pursuing lower paying fields like science and academia.
But I suppose that the differential selection pertains to academic attainment too, with some people who could’ve gone to doctoral programs choosing not to. Perhaps some weighted metric combining academic and professional success would yield an even stronger correlation.
pumpkinperson said:
Perhaps some weighted metric combining academic and professional success would yield an even stronger correlation.
Yes it does. I used such a metric to predict Obama’s IQ (see the bottom of this post) although I used an outdated IQ-education correlation:
https://pumpkinperson.com/2015/01/08/the-iq-of-president-obama/
Cocorico said:
Income is probably correlated with sociopathy, it may explain why it’s less correlated with intelligence than academic success is.
The very rich are probably dumber & more sociopathic than the academic successful.
Afrosapiens said:
“According to a recent meta-analysis”
I’m not attacking the robustness of your source but do you know any other journal but Intelligence ? Please don’t say Mankind Quarterly or Personality and Individual differences.
RaceRealist said:
The Occidental Quarterly? =^)
Afrosapiens said:
Lol. Maybe Emilikirkegaard.com as well.
RaceRealist said:
Dutton and Lynn released a book on racial differences in sports last September. I’m going to pick it up. I’ll let you know what I think about psychologists venture into my realm of physiology, human movement science and the like. Seems pretty good. Though I wish someone who wasan expert in this wrote it.
….maybe that’ll be me one day. Maybe one day I’ll write a nice book on radical differences in sports.
Afrosapiens said:
Have you received formal training in the science of sports ?
RaceRealist said:
Yea. I have a PT license and I got training at the school I attended. I may double major in kinesiology and nutrition. Not sure yet. I just changed it to biology last month. I’m pretty obsessed with learning all I can about the body. Especially how it moves. This is why early hominid evolution is fascinating to me. Especially bipedalism.
Thanks for that link. I’ll review it tonight.
Afrosapiens said:
Alright, then maybe you’ll be qualified to write a book on that subject one day. Do you often meet other specialists ?
Afrosapiens said:
On another topic, there is this long study about nutrition and early neurodevelopment
I haven’t yet read it in detail.
Click to access Nutrition-brain-development-early-life-A-TTechnical-Brief-2012.pdf
RaceRealist said:
I’ve met a few big names in my industry. Rather not say who. But they’re well respected. I want to meet Layne Norton.
But I know enough about muscle fibers and somatypes to know that racial differences in sports come down, largely, to those variables. I’m going to expand on my theory later tonight.
The fact that Kenyan is the only African country to place in the WSM lends credence to my theory. They have slow twitch fibers which are good for marathons and endurance. Those same fibers are good for strength. That is one plus for my theory. I’m pretty confident in it. I may go through life history variables tonight on how these were selected for.
Afrosapiens said:
“But I know enough about muscle fibers and somatypes to know that racial differences in sports come down”
It’s gonna be hard for you to be accepted by a serious editor if you present your book as a racial theory. You’d rather say population differences because as you acknowledge, there are differences between populations on the “same” race.
“The fact that Kenyan is the only African country to place in the WSM lends credence to my theory. They have slow twitch fibers which are good for marathons and endurance”
Can you give me the name of the Kenyan participants so that I can find their ancestry ?
Because the majority of Kenya’s population are West African descended Bantus. The Marathonians are indigenous highland Nilotics.
And how strong do you think these Senegalese guys are ?
https://www.google.fr/search?q=senegalese+wrestling&espv=2&biw=1422&bih=771&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi77KW16cnRAhVExRQKHcYeAoUQ_AUIBigB
And these Japanese Sumos ?
https://www.google.fr/search?q=sumo&espv=2&biw=1422&bih=771&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjQ4d_S7MnRAhWBnxQKHdUkAIkQ_AUIBigB
Because the WSM is not a scientific measure of everything, not every strongman knows there is this championship nor is interested in competing.
RaceRealist said:
Thanks for the tip. I know the word workarounds lol.
I was reading reviews for John Entines book last night and they said he didn’t touch on why there are differences between East and West Africans. It’s simple.
Well, it’s only a small subset of the Kenyan population that’s like this. I think there are a few villages with them. I believe this is a great example of cultural evolution. They are lengthy, tall, have low body fat, all of this will help with winning these competitors.
It’s a good measure. I’ll take a look at the links later and go more in depth when I’m not on mobile.
Afrosapiens said:
“I know the word workarounds lol.”
Yeah, I’m certain you can be creative.
“Well, it’s only a small subset of the Kenyan population that’s like this. I think there are a few villages with them. ”
No no, the “runner tribe” are the Kalenjin and they number 5 million people, 10% people. As a whole, indigenous east Africans account for a good third of Kenya’s population. And we can also ad all of Ethiopia’s 100 million population as well as Somalia, Djibouti, Erythrea and Sudan which have a combined population of about 60 million. Significant caucasoid looking black minorities also live in Tanzania (the Maasai), in Rwanda, Uganda and Burundi (the Tutsi) and in the West African Sahel (Songhai, Kanuri, Fulani…)
There is debate as to where these people come from though, Eurasian admixture is unsignificant outside the Horn of Africa and the Arabic influenced parts of Sudan and West Africa.
“It’s a good measure.”
I don’t think so, I didn’t even know this contest existed and it seems that there has been few French participant.
Afrosapiens said:
“No no, the “runner tribe” are the Kalenjin and they number 5 million people, 10% people.”
10% of Kenya’s population.
RaceRealist said:
“No no, the “runner tribe” are the Kalenjin and they number 5 million people, 10% people. As a whole, indigenous east Africans account for a good third of Kenya’s population. And we can also ad all of Ethiopia’s 100 million population as well as Somalia, Djibouti, Erythrea and Sudan which have a combined population of about 60 million. Significant caucasoid looking black minorities also live in Tanzania (the Maasai), in Rwanda, Uganda and Burundi (the Tutsi) and in the West African Sahel (Songhai, Kanuri, Fulani…)”
Thanks for the info.
Northeastern Africa has significant Caucasian admixture. Ethiopians are around 40 percent Caucasoid. Same with Somalis. I’d assume it’s mostly on the Y DNA and not mtDNA.
But it has to do with elevation, training, diet, etc with why that subpopulation is so good. Of course training has a lot to do with it, but I believe people who are naturally good at something and have the somatype for it will gravitate towards what they’re good at. And clearly someone with better genetics and the same training will beat out someone who has worse genetics and the same training. Like say we do a 70 year study on two people of the same ethicity and raise them from birth exactly the same and give them the same in a metabolic chamber, give them the same program and diet and keep them in a metabolic chamber and give them the same exact interactions. They start training at 15. Who will be stronger in their prime? Who will be better? The one with better genetics, all other things being equal.
“There is debate as to where these people come from though, Eurasian admixture is unsignificant outside the Horn of Africa and the Arabic influenced parts of Sudan and West Africa.”
Here’s a good article.
“I don’t think so, I didn’t even know this contest existed and it seems that there has been few French participant.”
It is the best of the best in the world. I doubt there is anyone stronger than them.
RaceRealist said:
And I think Mark Henry is one of the strongest people to ever live.
World record total in squat, bench and deadlift; he was a squatting 600 pounds as a freshman; as a teenager, he had the 8th best total regardless of age group.
http://www.powerliftingwatch.com/records/raw/world
http://articles.latimes.com/1990-04-23/sports/sp-343_1_lifting-records
He’s a freak of nature.
Afrosapiens said:
“Northeastern Africa has significant Caucasian admixture. Ethiopians are around 40 percent Caucasoid. Same with Somalis. I’d assume it’s mostly on the Y DNA and not mtDNA.”
You’re talking of Ethiopians of Amhara and Tigray ethinicy (who speak Semitic languages) as well as the Somalis who were in constant contact with South Arabians since the earliest time. But I doubt the other non-Semitic Populations of Northeast Africa have Eurasian admixture. Judging from a linguistic perspective, it is entirely possible that caucasoids first emerged in East Africa because it is believed that the Afro-Asiatic language family (that includes Berbers, Arabs and Hebrews, but also the Hausa who are typical west African Blacks) originated in current day Ethiopia where it reaches its highest degree of linguistic diversity.
One strange coincidence about these caucasoid blacks is that they’re all pastoralist and milk tolerant, even those with no Eurasian admixture like the Maasai, Fulani and Tutsi. So maybe some caucasian traits have something to do with milk consumption.
“But it has to do with elevation, training, diet, etc with why that subpopulation is so good.”
Sure, highland Africans are adapted to life in altitude, but they also lack genetic malaria resistance because malaria is endemic in the lowlands.
“They start training at 15. Who will be stronger in their prime? Who will be better? The one with better genetics, all other things being equal.”
Sure, and I guess that’s what every specialist believes. But the environment matters too, including cultural environment. there are many African-American and Jamaican top sprinters but we see much fewer Haitians and Nigerians. On the other hand, there are many top West African soccer players and not that many African Americans and Jamaicans. For the very same reason, the Japanese sumos and Senegalese wrestlers may be using their strength in more lucrative ore culturally more prestigious competitions than the WSM.
“It is the best of the best in the world. I doubt there is anyone stronger than them.”
Ooops, sorry for my ignorance. Lol.
“He’s a freak of nature.”
Indeed, but I’ve never seen him in the news.
RaceRealist said:
“You’re talking of Ethiopians of Amhara and Tigray ethinicy (who speak Semitic languages) as well as the Somalis who were in constant contact with South Arabians since the earliest time. But I doubt the other non-Semitic Populations of Northeast Africa have Eurasian admixture. Judging from a linguistic perspective, it is entirely possible that caucasoids first emerged in East Africa because it is believed that the Afro-Asiatic language family (that includes Berbers, Arabs and Hebrews, but also the Hausa who are typical west African Blacks) originated in current day Ethiopia where it reaches its highest degree of linguistic diversity.”
I admit I am extremely ignorant of African culture and genetic history. Do you have any good references?
“One strange coincidence about these caucasoid blacks is that they’re all pastoralist and milk tolerant, even those with no Eurasian admixture like the Maasai, Fulani and Tutsi. So maybe some caucasian traits have something to do with milk consumption.”
Well, the lactase gene came from, if I recall correctly, the Corded Ware culture (in modern-day Germany). So it’s weird that they can drink milk. The Khoisan have some admixture from Europe due to a back migration around 3kya. I remember Razib Khan writing an article saying there are problems with admixture in certain African populations. I asked him about this study
http://www.nature.com/news/african-genes-tracked-back-1.13607
And he said he knows David Reich personally and that there was nothing wrong with the robustness of the study.
“Sure, highland Africans are adapted to life in altitude, but they also lack genetic malaria resistance because malaria is endemic in the lowlands.”
Of course. Selection for certain alleles can only happen with certain environmental pressures.
I actually have a great paper on culture and how it drives genetics. It talks about milk-drinking genes and malaria in Africans and how changing the environment, for instance with Africans, can lead to selection for alleles that protect against malaria. When I find it I’ll post it. Extremely interesting paper.
“Sure, and I guess that’s what every specialist believes. But the environment matters too, including cultural environment. there are many African-American and Jamaican top sprinters but we see much fewer Haitians and Nigerians. On the other hand, there are many top West African soccer players and not that many African Americans and Jamaicans. For the very same reason, the Japanese sumos and Senegalese wrestlers may be using their strength in more lucrative ore culturally more prestigious competitions than the WSM.”
Of course. Though that’s only ancestral environment, selection for those traits wouldn’t happen (too) quickly. I fully see where you’re coming from here, however. What type of environmental differences do you think lead to that, in the case of Africans? Also, the same traits that help people excel in one sport may help in another. I’m not saying that, say, wide reciever Desean Jackson (used to be one of the fastest wide recievers in the NFL) can just jump into soccer and dominate. Because somatype (and other genetic factors) along with current environment (as you say, and I agree with you) plays a large part.
I don’t know a thing about Senegelese wrestlers nor sumo wrestlers. I’ll get back to you on that.
“Ooops, sorry for my ignorance. Lol.”
No worries. It is a great gauge of strength. That’s obviously for the elite populations, but the best I can find for Average Joes is hand grip strength tests. I would kill for a study with a high n with people from all over the world see what kind of differences occur in the body while lifting, along with fiber type percentage on average and who bests who in overall strength. I won’t get my hopes up though.
“Indeed, but I’ve never seen him in the news.”
I don’t see Magnussen in the news, nor I see Brian Shaw
in the news either. But these guys are the strongest of the strong, some of the strongest people to ever live. Mark Henry is a BEAST.
Afrosapiens said:
“I admit I am extremely ignorant of African culture and genetic history. Do you have any good references?”
Eh, how can you talk so much about Africans while knowing so little about Africa ? Fortunately I know you’re not a guy that likes to remain ignorant. I can’t give you references for Africa as a whole because it is a large continent. But I can give you some research keywords by sub-regions which are on average at least as big as Western Europe.
The Sahel: it is the southern shore of the Sahara, the environment is semi-desertic, the populations are mostly classified as typical blacks though they tend to be taller and darker than other Africans. There are some caucasoid looking black minorities as well. The language spoken there belong to the Nilo-Saharan, Niger-Congo and Afro-Asiatic families, this is an almost exclusively Muslim region with some remaining pockets of paganism.
Keywords: Hausa people, Fulani people, Kanuri people, Songhai people, Dogon People, Mossi people, Bambara people, Mandinka peopld Wolof people
Coastal West Africa or the Gulf of Guinea: South of the Sahel, it is dominated by the savanna proper (not the steppe where people go on safari) which is a transitional environment between the arid Sahel and the rainforest. The people are what you think of when you think of typical blacks. The spoken languages belong to the Niger-Congo languages and the religion is very superficial Christianity or in some parts Islam, paganism dominates cultural practices.
Keywords: Yoruba people, Igbo people, Edo people, Bamileke people, Bamun People, Fon people, Ewe people, Akan peoples, Ashanti people
The Congo bassin: The northern part is sparsely populated rainforest, the southern part is savanna proper. The people are Coastal West Africans with varying degrees of Pygmy admixture and there are still some pygmies too. They tend to be shorter, more robustly built and lighter skinned (even reddish sometimes) than Africans further north. They all speak languages from the Bantu subgroup of the Niger-Congo people and the religion is superficially christian too.
Keywords: Bakongo people, Mbundu people, Bakuba people, Baluba people, Lunda people, Pygmy peoples
Southern Africa: The western part is the Kalahari desert, the far south has a Mediterranean climate whereas the east coast has a climate that resembles that of the Southern USA. The Drakensberg mountains have a cool climate and experience snowfall. Inland regions are either dry or tropical. The indigenous inhabitants are Bantus with significant Khoisan admixture in some groups which results in slanted eyes, lighter skin and shorter stature. The languages all belong to the Bantu subgroup of the Niger-Congo family except for the small Khoisan languages. The religions are a mix of paganism and Christianity.
Keywords: Shona people, Matebele people, Xhosa people, Zulu people, Basotho people, Batswana peopld, Khoisan peoplds
South-Eastern Africa: It is the area between the Great Lakes and the Indian Ocean. The environment is very diverse, there are some cooler highland regions, some very hot a dry steppes like the Serengeti, and some areas of savanna proper. The majority of the people are Bantu speaking blacks related to Coastal West Africans, a significant minority are caucasoid looking populations, there are some Pygmies in the great lakes and others in the dry steppe who speak click languages resembling that of the Bushmen. The language spoken predominantly belong to the Bantu and Nilo-Saharan families and there are very small minorities of Afro-Asiatic and Khoisan speakers. Like most Africans, their religion is a mix of paganism and Christianity but Muslim and Arabic influence is very strong on the coast and the nearby islands. Madagascar is an outlier with mixed race population of Bantus and Malays.
Keywords: Banyarwanda people, Baganda people, Luo people, Gikuyu people, Kalenjin people, Wanyamwesi people, Maasai people, Swahili people, Chewa people
The horn of Africa: Between the red sea, the upper Nile valey and north of the Great Lakes. It is a region where the lowlands are desertic and the highlands have mild tropical to temperate climates. The inhabitants are virtually all Caucasoid looking blacks with some minorities whose morphology resembles that of Sahelians and that of people of the Upper-Nile. The languages belong to the Afro-Asiatic (Including Semitic) and Nilo-Saharan families. The region in very connected to Yemen and can be seen as an extension of Southern Arabia in some aspects but its accidental terrain favors a huge cultural diversity. That’s why you find pagans, Orthodox Christians and Muslims scattered across the region.
keywords: Amhara people, Tigray people, Somali people, Omo Valley peoples
The Nile Valley: The south has an environment of wetlands and savannas, the middle part resembles the Sahel and the north is desertic but the Nile river banks are extremely fertile. The people of the South are very dark (almost blue) very tall and slender and they have the highest frequency of slanted eyes in Africa after the Bushmen. As you move north, people gradually look more caucasian and are typically Mediterranean in the North of Egypt. The indigenous languages belong to the Nilo-Saharan or to the Egyptian subgroup of the Afro-Asiatic family. But Arabic dominates in Egypt and Sudan where people identify as Arabs except for the Orthodox Christians who identify as Coptic or Nubian. The southerners are pagan-christians.
Keywords: Dinka people, Nuer people, Sudanese Arabs, Nubians, Ancient Nubians, Egyptians, Ancient Egyptians, Copts.
The Maghreb and the Sahara: Mostly desertic area except for the coastal plain north of the Atlas mountains that enjoys a Mediterranean climate, this is where all the population lives apart from the nomadic peoples of the Sahara. The inhabitants are mostly caucasoid and are sometimes very fair skinned, there are some blue eyed blonds in Algeria. But Saharans and Moroccans have substantial Subsaharan admixture. The inhabitants are either Berbers or arabized Berbers. They are almost 100% Muslim but a large Jewish population has historically existed after they were expelled from Spain during the 15th century and before they voluntarily emigrated to France and Israel or were forcibly expelled from the independent Maghrebi states during the 20th century.
Keywords: Berber peoples, Moors, Tuaregs, Maghrebi Arabs, Kabyles, Chleus.
There is this amateur forum where they discuss anthropology and genetics
http://www.forumbiodiversity.com/
It is not an HBD forum but they have their ethnocentrists, revisionists and nordicists.
“Well, the lactase gene came from, if I recall correctly, the Corded Ware culture (in modern-day Germany). So it’s weird that they can drink milk.”
There are multiple hotspots of milk tolerance, they are probably linked to pastoralism
“I actually have a great paper on culture and how it drives genetics. It talks about milk-drinking genes and malaria in Africans and how changing the environment, for instance with Africans, can lead to selection for alleles that protect against malaria. When I find it I’ll post it. Extremely interesting paper.”
Alright, that sounds interesting.
“What type of environmental differences do you think lead to that, in the case of Africans?”
Mostly social and cultural ones as well as some obvious climatic ones like the practice of winter sports that is unknown in the tropics.
In Jamaica they have track running schools, in West Africa they have soccer schools. For an obscure reason, French schools have promoted handball and France now dominates international handball championships. African Americans suck at swimming, but nearly 70% of African Americans can’t swim at all because they were never taught to.
Tradition plays a role too. Who plays cricket outside the British Commonwealth ? And don’t the Scots have a traditional game that consists in lifting huge trunks ?
Social class is another factor, there are upper class sports and there are prole sports. I’m not entirely denying the role of genetics and morphology but population differences in performance can’t be reduced to biology.
“I don’t know a thing about Senegelese wrestlers nor sumo wrestlers. I’ll get back to you on that.”
I don’t know how strong they are either but I know they earn so much money and fame in their countries that they wouldn’t compete in the WSM even if they could win. You know it’s a bit like beauty pageants, we all know miss universe isn’t the hottest chick in the world, even if beauty could be objectively assessed. Because many beautiful women don’t want or don’t have the opportunity to compete.
“But these guys are the strongest of the strong, some of the strongest people to ever live. Mark Henry is a BEAST.”
I agree that they are impressive, but it looks like such performances require a specific training that itself requires specific amenities and professional accompanying that are probably not equally available for every strong man in the world. And culturally related countries tend to observe, copy and challenge each others. If a Lithuanian sets a record, Latvians and Poles will be more interested in breaking it than Indonesians, so they will set up professional organisations earlier and they will have gained more experience by the time Indonesia becomes interested in the competition.
Afrosapiens said:
Test.
Is Marsha a blacklisted word ?
pumpkinperson said:
Yes, because of the vitriol directed against her life style and because i put her in moderation.
Afrosapiens said:
Why is she in the dungeon ? Is she revealing confidential information such as PP patronizing whores, being a quick ejaculator or having a small dick ?
Afrosapiens said:
Test:
PP met Mar$ha at his N.Y.C speaking gig.
The two spent some time together.
They drank a little too much.
Shared their racist opinions.
That’s why Mar$ha brutally appeared in the comment section and seemed familiar with PP from the start.
RaceRealist said:
Lol solid theory.
Afrosapiens said:
Yeah, and I’m saying it seriously.
pumpkinperson said:
I redacted your test posts since they passed the test and were cluttering the board.
We’ve never met. I’m not even sure if she’s an HBDer. She defends Santoculto out of compassion for gays not support for racism. One of her ex-boyfriends was black.
RaceRealist said:
PP if you could be more heavy-handed with moderation that’d be cool. Especially if all your articles will be in topic, addressing the content of what you wrote. It’s annoying seeing unrelated comments. You should be more like jayman and razib with moderating. =^)
pumpkinperson said:
I’ll try.
Afrosapiens said:
“We’ve never met. I’m not even sure if she’s an HBDer. She defends Santoculto out of compassion for gays not support for racism. One of her ex-boyfriends was black.”
Unmoderate her, I’m thirsty for some Mar$haLeaks.
You’ve been weird with her lately. You’ve been exceptionally tough on her trolling, it makes me suspicious.
marshamurphy1 said:
Listen to Afro! Let me out of moderation you fucking tyrant! I’m going nuts in here.
pumpkinperson said:
Fine, but no more unhinged rants about your past.
marshamurphy1 said:
Thank you Afro!
marshamurphy1 said:
And they’re not unhinged, you just don’t know anything about poetry!
Afrosapiens said:
You’re welcome, my favorite stupid whore.
Can we have your version on what’s going on between you and PP ?
marshamurphy1 said:
You’re welcome, my favorite stupid whore.
Dude, just stop.
Can we have your version on what’s going on between you and PP ?
Nothing yet, but I’m drawn to his innocence. When you’ve fucked as many guys as I have, innocence becomes the World’s most valuable currency.
Afrosapiens said:
“Dude, just stop.”
I thought you enjoyed denigrating people and that you were mature enough to expect the same in return.
“Nothing yet, but I’m drawn to his innocence. When you’ve fucked as many guys as I have, innocence becomes the World’s most valuable currency.”
Alright, I noticed his innocence too but it made me feel sorry. I thought he was a teen for a long time.
RaceRealist said:
I thought pp was a woman when I started reading his blog, to be honest. He had a very feminine writing style.
Afrosapiens said:
It is true that the jury is still out on his gender. Although I believe he’s a man, I have noticed that many women were among the person he respects the most and he seems to have much respect for some feminine mental traits.
JIMMY said:
lol i thought that PP was a girl too, but he mentioned that his girlfriend dumped him..
pumpkinperson said:
I said we broke up; never said she dumped me.
JIMMY said:
oh and what the hell is up with pumpkinPERSON ? why not pumpkinMAN? lol
i’m getting scared
RaceRealist said:
PP is very sensitive to people’s pronouns.
SophicDrippins said:
“PP if you could be more heavy-handed with moderation that’d be cool. Especially if all your articles will be in topic, addressing the content of what you wrote. It’s annoying seeing unrelated comments. You should be more like jayman and razib with moderating.”
For what it’s worth, I disagree. PP shouldn’t be like anyone, but be unique.
A heavy hand with moderation is a slippery slope to censorship.
People can skim over what they don’t want to read.
Society (ie the commenters) should enforce its own rules with peer-pressure rather than appeal to a state for dictatorial control.
SophicDrippins said:
“lol i thought that PP was a girl too, but he mentioned that his girlfriend dumped him..”
Did he use an elucidating pronoun or could he possibly be a lesbian or bisexual woman who was dumped by a girlfriend?
Afrosapiens said:
Gender neutrality is huge problem in English language. He couldn’t be so mysterious about his gender if he wrote in French.
Yesterday he joked about mailing sperm to Mar$ha and having biological children with stratospheric IQs with her.
pumpkinperson said:
LOL. Marsha’s trolling has really gotten under your skin. You’re obsessed with her.
Afrosapiens said:
Kind of, I’m actually obsessed about what’s going on between the two of you.
pumpkinperson said:
Shared their racist opinions.
I don’t have racist opinions.
Afrosapiens said:
Oh, “race realist” opinions, it’s the same.
RaceRealist said:
That word has no power over me.
Afrosapiens said:
Well, it’s a fraudulent phrase. saying “race realism” is implying that everything else said about race is fiction. No science presents itself as having a monopoly over reality.
marshamurphy1 said:
I call it race surrealism.
The Philosopher said:
You people don’t understand. If Afro had to admit he was an AA adoptee, academic inductee, legal practice diversity hire, AA model, and AA husband it would be the beginning of the end of his ego.
For this reason, afro could never be a philosopher.
He can only be a sophist.
The Philosopher said:
If the jews didn’t exist, Afro would be in Haiti.
I guar-an-fucking-tee it.
Also:
1. White men would not be whipped.
2. The West would be more like the 1950s.
3. The west would be far more wealthier
4. America would be social democratic with a large welfare state
5. Africa’s population would be a lot smaller without medical intervention
6 Millions of muslims would still be alive.
7. Our economy wouldn’t be beholden to finance.
8. Basically everybody would be happy, less obese, less medicated.
Zion destroyed Romen, Eygpt, Russia, Germany, the British Empire and soon the US.
Its a remarkable thing as Nietzsche says, that they have actually successful portrayed themselves as the poor victims of history.
Afrosapiens said:
“You people don’t understand. If Afro had to admit he was an AA adoptee, academic inductee, legal practice diversity hire, AA model, and AA husband it would be the beginning of the end of his ego.”
Ok, now I understand, you’re jealous. You’d dream to be me or you’d dream to be black. Question yourself, maybe your lunacy is the sole cause of your failures.
“If the jews didn’t exist”
-Christianity and Islam wouldn’t exist. The Roman Empire would have remained pagan or would have converted to Buddhism, Zoroastrism or Hinduism, orèwould have invented its own organised religious doctrine. And whites would have kept on selling each others as slavesèand would have left the Africans alone.
-Technology, economy and science would be lagging below India and China’s 18th century level.
The Philosopher said:
You’re a dummy. Hahaha. Only you can’t see it.
Afrosapiens said:
“You’re a dummy. Hahaha. Only you can’t see it.”
I’m not supposed to see your schizophrenic hallucinations.
Bjorn said:
Is there AA in France ? Did Afrosapiens beneficiate from it ?
(Serious questions)
Afrosapiens said:
Nope, there is no AA in France, this is forbidden by the constitution.
But phil believes that any form of non-failure that a black person can achieve is due to racial favoritism.
In his schizophrenic brain, even Nigeria’s billionaires have benefited from AA. Only black athletes can attribute their success to themselves.
RaceRealist said:
“Nigeria’s billionaires”
They’re all part of the Nigerian Prince scheme. Duh.
Afrosapiens said:
A scheme that was initiated by ZION. And the Mossad keeps the largest part of the profits from scams, KINSHASA are just dumb executants of ZION’s schemes to destroy whites.
#ThinkLikePhil
JIMMY said:
i think if you split the harvard ( or any top schools) students by race im sure you’ll find that the white students ( non-Joo/non-legacy) had a high mean IQ.
the reason that these schools have lower means than expected is because of all the asian cheating, joo privilege, AA and legacy places.
Unz wrote an article about so called discrimination against asians, but college staff often mention the fact that the asian test scores do not match their ability
There have been cases of asian students who have gotten a perfect 800 SAT-V but cant speak English properly.
mentioning hate facts like that wont change the minds of people like steve Hsu , who think that the big bad WASP elite are keeping his poor asians strivers down.
The Philosopher said:
Its the jews that keep asians and gentiles out.
They cover it by letting blacks in to look nice, but who are not competition in elite circles.
The Philosopher said:
One of the things people are going to have to come to grips with if they want anything original to say is that, like me, we’ve been conditioned from birth with black men in buddy cop movies, Nazi bad guys and race blindness idolatry.
The key intellectual advance of this century will be to do what alpha males do instinctively and be ‘bigoted’ or SHRUG brainwashing.
That is why women love alphas – they don’t go for knee bending.
Robert disappoints me greatly in that he too has a soft spot for magic negro.
I’ve had many black friends myself, but I was very open about some of my views and lost them. That’s the way I am – I tell the truth.
AA hires are not anywhere reflective of Kinshasans. And in sufficient numbers, we’re all dead if we don’t follow our instinct and be ‘rac-ist’, the jews worst fear as they would lose all privileges and their enslavement racket of white gentiles.
The Philosopher said:
Arabs, asians, slavs, latinos, amerindians, indians, and virtually all races of man are allowed to follow their instinct.
Except whites, who stupidly let Zion control their media and academia.
Trust Instinct.
Your reason has been sabotaged!!
The Philosopher said:
Ok, I’m going to go off now and calm down.
If I think about the complete and total evil of Zion anymore I’m going to throw the laptop into the wall.
La La La Dee Dee Dee.
illuminaticatblog said:
Zion destroyed Romen, Eygpt, Russia, Germany, the British Empire and soon the US.
Could it be because they were threatened by those nations? You say Jews are the most racist group on earth. Shouldn’t it be considered that they destroy their enemies is a sign of superiority? Or just that half the people agree with them and thus they win. Half of Romans thought Jews had good ideas no? For example if Germany did not do the holocaust I would not sympathize with Jews as a people. It is not that hard to understand that the only reason sympathy happens is because real persecution has happened. Not all Jews are racists but they are racists because they are the most persecuted. You need to describe cause and effect. Why would it be the total cause of jews and not the people who fight for them. In the west the history of them tells me that they have opposition and the have people on their side because people value different things. Nietzsche hated Christianity because it made people weak. But you cannot say Christianity is a religion of the weak because if that were true it would have been destroyed long ago. Only the strong survive but stupidity confuses strength with weakness. Christianity is a strong religion because God gives the believer his strength to endure anything. Physical strength is pitiful in comparison. I am not saying herd mentality is good. I am saying that you cannot overcome those who truly believe what they believe. You cannot blame everything on programming. People have free will and anything that goes against that will is destroyed.
The Philosopher said:
And where is your sympathy for those empires/nations?
The jews are the most intelligent race.
But it doesn’t mean they are right.
Least of all about their prescriptions for your genetic interest/tribe/family.
The idea of my family being brainwashed and molested by Zion is sickening. It should be for everyone.
illuminaticatblog said:
Jews as a people have been most defined by their religion. If their religion right or if it is wrong, it has been accepted by people because no nation is capable of divorcing itself from religion. To blame them is just to blame human nature for the primitive monkey we are in believing in the gods or God. More Romans thought the Jewish God was better than the Roman Gods. And it was the emperor who used that religion to rule once it was seen as the most easy religion to control. To say Romans did not use religion for control before Christianity is to not understand the methods of control all religion has on all societies. Religion controls people, this is universal not just Jewish.
The Philosopher said:
Jews are not a religion. They are a race of man.
Deal with it! said:
This blog is kind of becoming unbearable now… Too much drama, even for me.
The Philosopher said:
I think (((Scwharzman))) might just be a psychopath. He either talks to people like their babies because he has an incredible IQ, or he has a this veneer.
He a disarmingly creepy guy I’d say to talk to.
I think Heartiste wrote about how to spot a psychopath in personal interaction.
Deal with it! said:
I think I might have ruined this blog. The comment section had way more substance before I came along…
The Philosopher said:
That’s true. Far as I recall you were the first to start saying racist, misogynist, anti-semitic and anti-species things.
The Philosopher said:
To be honest, I think you should apologise.
meLo said:
LOL
Afrosapiens said:
I think Santo Culto and Phil are the most deranged here, it would be ok if there was only Mugabe because he’s atypical but not insane, although he trolls real hard time to time.
Deal with it! said:
If Mugabe left, I’d probably quit too.
He’s a smoldering smartypants
Gypsyman said:
They’re more intuitive guys, though.
They’re all wrong a lot, IMO, but they cut through the bullshit and deliver straight truth sometimes.
Afrosapiens said:
They’re completely irrational. Phil has schizophrenia and Santo Culto is downright retarded.
Santoculto titanic oprah crabium said:
Gypsy is other.
Feel fear = involuntary respect.
Gypsyman said:
I’m not averse to looking through trash for diamonds when it amuses me to do so.
The Philosopher said:
Think about it like this Afro. Use Kinshasas famous empathy here.
Imagine the blacks had high IQ and somehow invented large scale agriculture and created a civilisation. Then over many centuries, flies came to get some of that economic surplus.
Let’s call them ‘jews’ for arguments sake.
And the flies had very high IQ, even higher than the blacks but retained the barbarian instinct and preyed on their niceness. In fact let’s pretend that black women were noted worldwide for their beauty precisely because of this empathy as an example of the niceness of blacks.
And in time, the flies cuckolded, inverted, and suppressed white…sorry blacks from their own universities, economies, banks, courts, millitary, even families and made the blacks fight never ending wars on the flies mortal enemies, lets call them, ‘the arabs’ for arguments sake.
And the flies really rubbed it in your face by endlessly promoting magic negroes, let’s call them ‘orcs’ for arguments sake in an effort to liquidate them in the sexual market in a fairly brazen manner and banned black music and promoted orc men in their media and tried to turn black men into lame pussys with brainwashing having formerly been the men that conquered the world.
And then eventually the flies then resorted to setting up a supercomputer and surveillance state in the end to finally formally enslave the blacks who kindly took them in.
If you can see it, you can’t un-notice it.
Its definitely The Plan. I have described something that is true and of course, its not psychologically nice to know considering I can never ever mention it to people in person, precisely because the flies have conditioned people to reject it out of hand as ‘deranged’.
But if you see patterns, read widely, and most importantly travel to various countries, you notice ‘glitches’ in the Illusion. And eventually start asking questions.
There’s too much historical evidence, examples and contemporary evidence of their affinity to fraud, lies, brainwashing and frankly, deranged evil hatred for the height of er, black civilisation in the 1950s.
Put yourself in my shoes. Try to do something no gimme dat ADHD black has ever done before. As a black man, you could win a Nobel Prize in literature just proving a reading comprehension above 4th grade if you do.
As I said before, if the flies promoted a picture of a famous Zimbabwean actress being touched by two whites suggestively in a mainstream newspaper headline photo, Zimbabwe would liquidate the fly. You know that to be true about African, and Haitian leaders. Don’t deny it.
Now multiply that by 100. I notice the ads on the subway of a white woman surrounded by blacks selling music headphones? Market headphones to who? Its a 99% white country?
Or newspapers saying a black man will play James Bond, despite blacks being 2% of the UK population? Who wants to see it that bad – ((((newspapers)))
And its never fully black women they promote.
Think about that glitch.
And never nerdy, gay or mental black men.
Think about that glitch.
They don’t care. Its not about the money. Its about the message.
You can’t see it because you benefit from it. In fact, you mentioned that you may have been in some of these very ads at a smaller level.
You can’t bring yourself to see that you are just a trojan horse useful idiot.
Ethiopian jews fair as badly under Zion, as blacks under the Afrikanner boot.
Think about that glitch.
They think you are a joke. They’re trolling us with you.
Once you see the Illusion.
You cannot.
Unnotice it.
You must have some level of intelligence to see its all a racket? The wars, the financial ponzi system, the medieval tv dramas with blacks, the black physicists in movies, ‘Russia hacking’ – the last white nationalist country not in Zion’s control, the magic negrification of pop culture etc etc.
ITS A PLAN. NOT A PATTERN LIKE ROBERT SAYS…ITS A FUCKING PLAN.
You must admit the social engineering is extreme, leaving blacks aside.
Trannies? Destroying white religions? Abolishing monogamy? Open borders?
Verstanden now?
Afrosapiens said:
It’s too long, Phil. My tiny black brain would need years to read your commment, let alone comprehend it.
The Philosopher said:
Funnily enough, Afro in his dimness has finally made me unify my various observations into one single seance as through certain half-deserted streets,
The muttering retreats
Of restless nights in one-night cheap hotels
And sawdust restaurants with oyster-shells:
Streets that follow like a tedious argument
Of insidious intent
To lead you to an overwhelming question …
Oh, do not ask, “What is it?”
Let us go and make our visit.
In the room the women come and go
Talking of Michelangelo.
And was it worth the the protestations, condemnations and vain-jiggery
To say
“I am not stupid”
“I am not a priest”.
I shall part my hair and roll to my side, a watch contentful men in rainjackets stare electrified upon symbols yiddish,
my memories in watercolour
cannot speak to border terriers.
The Philosopher said:
#upon neon yiddish
That’s better.
#cannot speak to roving bandits
That’s better.
The Philosopher said:
Who said I wrote that for you Michaelangelo.
You can be a useful idiot for me too to get my point across.
Ah-ha
Ha
Ha
Ha
Ha
Ha.
Afrosapiens said:
“Who said I wrote that for you Michaelangelo.”
Yourself:
“Think about it like this Afro. Use Kinshasas famous empathy here.”
I feel really sorry for you Phil, really.
Afrosapiens said:
Zion has brainwashed you so much that you know believe that Kinshasa can read. But Kinshasa can’t, whites in the 50s knew it was pure waste of time to write to the race of orcs. But Zion has been so powerful that they have imposed AA kindergarten for Kinshasa where they are taught to read and write their names at the expense of deserving whites.
#ThinkLikePhil
Gypsyman said:
Interesting use of TS Elliot.
Gypsyman said:
Is the proper reading:
“And was it worth the the protestations, condemnations and vain-jiggery
To say
“I am not stupid”
“I am not a priest”.
I shall part my hair and roll to my side, and watch contentful,
Men in rainjackets stare electrified upon symbols yiddish,
my memories in watercolour
cannot speak to border terriers.”
Or is there an enjamberment, and the proper reading is “Contentful men in rainjackets”?
Afrosapiens said:
Can’t take this sniper killshot of truth Phil ?
Afrosapiens said:
I’ve just read you schizophrenic rant and I’m amazed by the accuracy of my imitation of you. It’s not that often that I can read the mind of someone who has 30 IQ points of me so clearly. You didn’t say Zion but used flies instead, Kinshasa was here from the first sentence, Whites in the 50s too, even the orcs were here. Only Affirmative Action was absent. But you’re giving me an Affirmative Action quit while packing for Zion-free and Kinshasa-free Irkusk or Vladivostok. Farewell Phil, and don’t forget your pills, Russians are not empathic with the mentally ill.
Santoculto titanic oprah crabium said:
I think you no have any capacity to give any precise judgment.
Deal with it! said:
I’m smarter and more academically accomplished than you. Don’t cry now.
Santoculto titanic oprah crabium said:
Of course only in your vulgar dreams…
Your levels of zombiefication is alike with “academic accomplished”.
Afrosapiens said:
But they no have self-awareness, trully intelligent people no be mundane subhumans
They only is self-deception, should be enslaved or sterilized.
Congozapiens is nigger, understand APE ?
#WriteLikeSantoCulto
RaceRealist said:
^^^ lol
illuminaticatblog said:
illuminaticatblog said:
Has anyone noticed that kem trails appear in the sky?
aspartame is a not good for you.
Most people lack trace minerals to stay healthy. Food grown in today’s soil lack nutrients for high IQ.
This paper says that kids in middle-income home with IQ 100 increased IQ by 11 points because they received trace minerals.
RAISING-I.Q. THROUGH VITAMIN AND MINERAL
SUPPLEMENTATION: AN INTRODUCTION
H. J. EYSENCK
Institute of Psychiatry, University of London, London SE5 8AF, England
Click to access introSuppsraiseIQEysenck91.pdf
JIMMY said:
nutrition is mega important for cognitive function.
I went hardcore on supplements for a self experiment and my simple reaction time halved !
nutrition is king especially Iodine and B-vitamins
JIMMY said:
pp you have got to let Mugabe back on.
live and let live .
pumpkinperson said:
He’s been posting here as Ian Smith
Afrosapiens said:
And is Cocorico related to Mugabe ? Their writing style is slightly different but there are some similarities between the two.
pumpkinperson said:
And is Cocorico related to Mugabe ? Their writing style is slightly different but there are some similarities between the two.
No
Afrosapiens said:
And is Cocorico French ?
The Gallic rooster is France’s emblem and cocorico is the French transcription of the rooster’s sound.
pumpkinperson said:
I don’t give out personal info about commenters; you’ll have to ask him
Deal with it! said:
Philosopher is obsessed with me… He posted this on another thread
I’m not particularly jealous of you. I outearned you at your age coming from a much less privileged background, am secure enough in my looks not to post pictures to a random 5 on a HBD blog and prove the ha ha hatas wrong – Yeah SUCKA! -and….wait for it….
He’s under the impression that misogyny and racism are attractive. They’re not. Sexism doesn’t make you alpha dude.
Santoculto titanic oprah crabium said:
I think he’s not 😉
I think you’re obsessed with your mirror.
Deal with it! said:
It’s called confidence honey. Try it sometime. I can tell you have a very low self-esteem.
Afrosapiens said:
How could he be proud of what he his ?
This guy is a failure in every domain.
Santoculto titanic oprah crabium said:
Obsessed with your own image is narcissism. Maybe you’re right. Over confident while smarter people, real ones, tend to be quite humble but paradoxically they tend to appear to be sometimes very proud about themselves but because they know, their confidence is a direct product of real self knowledge, subhumans simply no have, as you.below almost living beings, and well deserved.
Santoculto titanic oprah crabium said:
My haters love me. What a problem I hate stupid fans.
Talk bad, but talk about me.
Gypsyman said:
Gonna need Bletchley Park for this one…
Santoculto titanic oprah crabium said:
Right people like Robert Lindsay and Erwin Schmidt for example know who and how I’m. Irrational haters only know hater. Interesting how pseudo smart and their serviles tend to hate so much those they tend to emulate.
Some people are always as actors. Others are genuine, authentic. Actors hate real gems.
Santoculto titanic oprah crabium said:
Only know HATE.
Afrosapiens said:
“Right people like Robert Lindsay and Erwin Schmidt for example know who and how I’m.”
They no have self awareness***
You is self-deception trailer metisse nigger. The most dumbest people here the need is sterilized.
Understand APE ?
#WriteLikeSantoCulto
Deal with it! said:
I don’t hate you Santo honey.
I’m just giving you advice. You know, it’s funny. You’re older than me but I feel more mature than you.
Santoculto titanic oprah crabium said:
I truly despite apefugee but it love me so much it can’t forget me. Now it come back to senzala.
Dill was trolled by PP when she said “you’re the socially smartest here”
she’s mediocre in every angle starting from your cheap appearance.
This blog is dangerous, always was. Waste of time stay here “debating” with distractive scum, voluntarily stupid subhumans who fight against those who want destroy their selfish and evil comfort.
Santoculto titanic oprah crabium said:
PP want to have the most popular blog on hbd o sphere. She’s using their commenters direct or indirectly to reach this goal whatever how abusive the pseudo debates are becoming.
I become awake that PP is using us as useful idiots, as trampoline to your fame.
If I will stay here and every day instead debate really interesting things I will answer same stupid childish, nonsense “replies” so I think I’m really wasting my time.
I repeat what I already told about PP character. If she is a really responsible and good person she already had prohibit dispensable and trolll commenters here they are here only and fundamentally to harm other people even when they are supposedly debating about real things and not offending other people. But not. She want become famous.
Ok PP. I hope you can. But you will not become famous by my help. Anymore.
pumpkinperson said:
Santo I’ve actually protected you a lot on this blog, but if you’re going to make such racist comments about people, don’t be surprised if they insult you back.
Santoculto titanic oprah crabium said:
Some people here are so loser they can’t avoid remember the names of their natural masters, they are miserably reluctant to accept. They are obsessed and intrigued because some people just born superior than them even without any unsubstantiated prove just like a stupid diploma or higher degree in “education” or social class. Naturally noble people are noble whatever place or spade they are, even in the trash. Something absolutely dispensable commenters here never Will understand and of course they are enemies, agent Smiths of the system.
illuminaticatblog said:
Afrosapiens said:
Wanna see something indispensable to this blog and to the world in general ?
This perfect Colgate smile.
GondwanaMan said:
Nice smile!
Afrosapiens said:
Thanks, but don’t say it too loud or some people are gonna imagine bizarre things.
GondwanaMan said:
I’m not gay (and yes, I do believe homosexuality is a mental illness!)
RaceRealist said:
^^^^ this
Check this out GondwanaMan
http://www.mygenes.co.nz/summary.htm
I know of a solid paper on this. Will link it later.
Afrosapiens said:
“I’m not gay”
You should have added “no homo” from the start. lol.
” I do believe homosexuality is a mental illness!”
I’m on board.
And according to RR’s link, gays are mentally ill by choice. That’s worse than I thought.
RaceRealist said:
Afrosapiens I have a better link of a study done by the same author. I’ll link it afternoon.
Afrosapiens said:
I would make sense for evolution if faggotry and confuse gender identity were genetic though. It would be one of the most powerful tools for sexual selection to select against unfit homosexual traits.
And on the other hand, if homosexuality ran in families, such families would have disappeared by now unless SSA is only expressed itself in homozygotes.
Santoculto titanic oprah crabium said:
I’m so important to this blog that PP accept me even without a gravitat. If I’m absolutely dispensable here she or he would refuse my participation. Think about it and thought out.
Afrosapiens said:
But PP no have self-awareness. True intelligent people no want gravatar. Only materialistic mundane subhumans like you and APEsapiens
They need be deported to haiti and is sterilized. They insult all white people here with they jewish wife
Cuck! Me no is pathological liar. Me have great self-awareness, only real intelligent people see. Me is kindest people in the world.
Understand, APE ?
#WriteLikeSantoCulto
GondwanaMan said:
Wow, you’re beating up everyone on here!
Afrosapiens said:
Lol, they have deserted PP’s blog now.
pumpkinperson said:
Wow, you’re beating up everyone on here!
It’s not a fair fight. Afro knows English; Santo doesn’t. Also, Afro threatened Santo which wasn’t cool.
On the other hand Santo was viciously racist against Afro which was reprehensible.
Still, I think Santo’s a smart moral person deep down and I would love to see him and Afro make peace.
Afrosapiens said:
“It’s not a fair fight. Afro knows English; Santo doesn’t. Also, Afro threatened Santo which wasn’t cool.”
There is nothing unfair, Santo pretends to be superior to me and to be my natural master. So he engages in this fight expecting me to lose.
His language issues are not an excuse. I’m not a native English speaker either, I understand him because I can read the Portuguese, and by extension, French underlying patterns of his speech. If I rewrite his comments in standard English, they still make no sense and it has nothing to do with his knowledge of English
And you see, he doesn’t like it either when I speak his dialect.
Santo started the physical threats with this comment:
“Its’ good ”u” have fear about me…
when CHIMPCONGO’s as ”u” (i mean, IT) come back to have fear about ”white men” you will be again the incompetent but controlled servants…
And exceptionally good black individuals will be separated from trash as you… high functioning criminal beast”
I don’t know what made him believe that I was afraid of him. But since he talked about fear, I showed him who had to be afraid.
As a blogger, it is your responsibility to strictly moderate genocidal or pro-slavery speech. If you find it acceptable, you must accept whatever I can say in response.
“On the other hand Santo was viciously racist against Afro which was reprehensible.”
But you never reprehended him. And santo overreacts to the most benign attacks. It’s not only me that receives torrents of insults: Deal! RR, even the poor inoffensive animekitty gets his share.
Santo is an adult and a despicable one. So he must be treated like a despicable adult.
“I would love to see him and Afro make peace.”
It will require unconditional and unilateral capitulation from him.
My conditions are:
-Sincere apology from Santo Culto only (He must acknowledge and show profound regrets for everything he tried to do to hurt me)
-No more attacks directed to me, including remarks about “blacks” that I will systematically take personally (I’m not supposed to understand “on average” or to agree with his stats)
If he respects my conditions, I’ll ignore him. If he doesn’t I’ll keep on being a nuisance for him.
illuminaticatblog said:
Pumpkin Person,
I took this academic test, What is my IQ?
Mikey blayze said:
Your IQ is extremely low by that paper. You would not pass a GED test. The equivalent of a hi school education. Your IQ would be in the low 80s.
Mikey blayze said:
What are you in the 9th grade?
illuminaticatblog said:
Something must be wrong with the test. I wonder how it was normed?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tests_of_Adult_Basic_Education
I took the WAIS 4 in 2015 and got FSIQ 113. If the test says I am IQ 83 that is a difference of 30 points. The coefficient between the test and IQ would be near (0.1)
Mikey blayze said:
But this isn’t an IQ test it’s a test for school. According to this test you do not have the knowledge capable of graduating hi school.your school knowledge is at a 9th grade level possibly 8th.
Deal with it! said:
I think these are the corresponding scores in terms of your grade level.
Reading – grade level 2-4
Language – grade level 11-12
Total Mathematics – grade level 4-6
Deal with it! said:
Your reading score is shockingly low. Were you rattled in any way on test day?
illuminaticatblog said:
The questions were multiple choice. I always look for the answers that are definitely wrong. Then I focus on the two questions that look the same. That is why I get so many wrong. The last two questions look equally good. And I would think that the question should tell me something about how to pick between them but it is a hard choice. Maybe I just do not read good? I understand technology better than I do stories.
That is about it, I do not get / understand stories. I am factual, I like things to be clear, I do not like room for interpretation. Tests expect you to interpret things in a way I do not follow. It is a learning style. Tests make people who learn differently look stupid. I always got A’s and B’s in Language Arts because I could explain in easy what the stories meant. If I was so dumb as to read at a third grade level at age 29 years old, I do not understand how I past high school?
I would also expect that many people devolve after high school because they stop practicing for tests. The average score for a person not in college should go down because they stopped doing what it is school provide for getting good tests score. Maybe it is normal for people age 29 to read at the third grade level because they read at a higher level when in school but then devolved with no school to reinforce their skills.
In Math I never paid attention because I never found it interesting. Most of what I know about math. I hated the math books because we always started in the middle and never finished them end to end. I just did the paper handouts and that was good enough for the teacher. When I took this recent test the girl at the test told me I got a question wrong because I reversed the minus and plus sign. I know what those things are so it is odd I messed up. I am just not good at taking tests.
gs said:
The claim that the average IQ at Harvard is only 125 might be refuted by the LSAT, which points towards and IQ of 137.
The average Harvard LSAT taker scores a 166 (LSAC tells you the average LSAT score of your college after you take the LSAT). A 166 is ~93.5% or approximately 1.5 standard deviations above average. If the average LSAT takes is approximately 1 s.d. above average, than a 166 LSAT could only be achieved by approximately 1 percent of the population.
gs said:
My bad, I see you have finally addressed this, although your estimate of 132 seems low.
pumpkinperson said:
Average IQ of college grads gone down & they’re the ones who take the lsat
ian smith said:
talk shows hosts never interview themselves and when they give interviews they are remarkably boring.
it’s not a business for prima donnas peepee.
pumpkinperson said:
1) you need to remove your gravitar if you want to post but everyone else needs to keep theirs
2) you get so obsessed with whatever topic I’m interested in
3) talk show hosts are the most fascinating celebs in show business with the possible exception of comics (the two overlapp) & Oprah in particular was the first talk show host to become the star of her own show through intimate confessions that revolutionized the culture. Jack parr said “you know you’re good when you’re bigger than your guests. Oprah’s more important than the celebrities she interviews”
Deal with it! said:
why do you want him to remove his gravatar? why are you being so mean to him?
pumpkinperson said:
I’m playing 3D chess 🙂
Deal with it! said:
Don’t be immoral Pumpkin. You’re a nice guy. We all appreciate that. Don’t be an asshole like Philosopher and Mugabe.
Afrosapiens said:
Speaking about Phil, is he sulking over our last argument or is he in moderation ?
The Philosopher said:
Or do I have a non AA job where I do real work?
Afrosapiens said:
Do you mean you have no AA autonomy in your super prestigious occupation ?
Phil is actually a non AA factory worker, or he can’t AA multitask and do the things right.
Andy said:
Pumpkinperson (since a lot of these posts are off-topic anyway, lol),
Has your position on dysgenic effects since the industrial revolution changed since the last time you’ve posted about it?
I think the most crucial question is whether the absolute number of smart people is going down.
pumpkinperson said:
I’m a lot more skeptical than I used to be.
Andy said:
Maybe that would be a good idea for a post? 🙂
The logic behind dysgenic genotypic IQ trends seems pretty solid – it strikes me as a question of the magnitude of the effect. IMHO it’s a race to see if we either gather the social/political awareness to address the trend, or if genetic engineering and general AI and come to fruition fast enough before the number of people capable of doing so fades.
RaceRealist said:
Did you see the paper that care out the other day that said the natural selection is selecting against “education genes”. Hmmm. Over a very long period of time, I don’t need to say what will happen. And American society is dysgenic as fuck.
Afrosapiens said:
“Did you see the paper that care out the other day that said the natural selection is selecting against “education genes”. ”
I didn’t. Have you got a link ?
RaceRealist said:
Afrosapiens
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/jan/16/natural-selection-making-education-genes-rarer-says-icelandic-study
Full paper is here.
Click to access 2017-kong.pdf
RaceRealist said:
By the way, I start my first sociology 101 class tonight. Should be a doozy. Was reading reviews of the professor and numerous people said that if you have opinions that differ from his he’ll call you out and try to embarrass you. Good luck there buddy!
Here are my thoughts on the social sciences.
I have a damn good memory, both numerically and remembering random things. Especially study names, years and details. This will be a fun class. Hope I don’t trigger anyone too hard.
Afrosapiens said:
Thanks,
Well, if you remember the paper that you linked, the one about play and cognitive development, formal education is evolutionary absurd. So it’s not a fatality if we’re able to find teaching methods that are closer the fundamental needs of the developing brain.
Afrosapiens said:
RR I wanted to ask you.
-Are you openly “race realist” in real life ?
-Are your clients racially diverse ?
-If yes, does it affect the way you train them ?
RaceRealist said:
“Well, if you remember the paper that you linked, the one about play and cognitive development, formal education is evolutionary absurd. So it’s not a fatality if we’re able to find teaching methods that are closer the fundamental needs of the developing brain”
I still need it finish it. I’m very interested in that research.
“-Are you openly “race realist” in real life ?”
To a point. I say a few factoids.
“Are your clients racially diverse ?”
Of course. I don’t discriminate.
“-If yes, does it affect the way you train them ?”
No I treat everyone individually. That doesn’t mean that I don’t use my knowledge in racial differences in this stuff to better help them achieve their goals. It’s very helpful in my business. That’s another reason why I’m interested in racial differences in anatomy and physiology.
Afrosapiens said:
Alright, thanks for your honesty.
When you say “factoids” you mean some really controversial HBDhypothesis or some morally acceptable stats like “blacks are over-represented in prison” ?
Afrosapiens said:
According to the study you linked above, 1/3 of Iceland’s population is on a genetic database.
This is impressive and scary at the same time. But, with such a huge sample of individuals, the fact that scientists aren’t able to find concrete and conclusive evidence of genes affecting intelligence (not education) should raise questions.
pumpkinperson said:
This is impressive and scary at the same time. But, with such a huge sample of individuals, the fact that scientists aren’t able to find concrete and conclusive evidence of genes affecting intelligence (not education) should raise questions.
In order to find genes for intelligence, the participants would have needed to take a quality IQ test which is rare in such studies. Also, very few genes for height have been discovered even though few scientists would doubt height is highly genetic. The problem is that when a trait is so polygenetic that each SNP has such a tiny effect, isolating a single one seems to be incredibly difficult. But we know from not only twin studies, but now Genome-wide Complex Trait Analysis that heritability is high, at least at the local level.
RaceRealist said:
“When you say “factoids” you mean some really controversial HBDhypothesis or some morally acceptable stats like “blacks are over-represented in prison” ?”
A bit of both. Group averages are meaningless to individuals. I treat everyone different and tailor their program to their strengths and weaknesses. There are also ways to test if you have the actn3 gene. East Asians and Europeans have it turned off if I recall correctly. That’s what causes explosive power but it only lasts for about 40 seconds until a wall is hit. It has to do with aerobic and anaerobic pathways.
Put it like this. If a black client wanted to power lift I’d assess him. If he doesn’t have the right somatype nor leverages I’ll tell him to get into Bbing. Blacks excel as that due to less fat free body mass on average. Look up Phil hath and Shawn Roden. The tow best in the world right now.
Afrosapiens said:
“A bit of both. Group averages are meaningless to individuals.”
Most of my relatives, and they are diverse in their political leanings would be outraged by the most benign parts of HBD.
“There are also ways to test if you have the actn3 gene. East Asians and Europeans have it turned off if I recall correctly.”
It’s more nuanced, according to this study:
“https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1180686/”
Fewer than 1% of Africans have it turned off, but only 18% of Europeans and 25% of Asians have it turned off too. So you must assume that people of all backgrounds have it turned on on average but the risk that it is turned off is much higher in non-Africans.
This genotype alone can hardly explain why Jamaica outperforms Germany in sprinting by such a margin. I guess what gives blacks an edge in running is the optimal bipedal morphology: long legs, narrow pelvis. That’s why lowlands Africans make good sprinters and highland Africans make good marathonians whereas Himalayans, Andeans or Alpines don’t.
meLo said:
“said the natural selection is selecting against “education genes”. Hmmm. Over a very long period of time, I don’t need to say what will happen. And American society is dysgenic as fuck”
Didnt i show you that study? It also showed american women were maturing slower, which is a eugenic effect. Didnt you make a blog post about it? Either way suppsedly the effect is negligible with us only spending a week less in school now.
http://www.evoanth.net/2016/09/20/americans-evolving-less-educated/
Also you might find this entering Apparently scientists have developed a revolutionary way in determining whether particular genes have been under selection or not for certsin trait expressions:
https://m.phys.org/news/2017-01-scientists-animals-ancient-genes-evolution.html
RaceRealist said:
“Most of my relatives, and they are diverse in their political leanings would be outraged by the most benign parts of HBD.”
I care about truth, not feelings. Things need to be debated without feelings involved.
“It’s more nuanced, according to this study:”
Right. I read that two times the other day.
They say that 45 % of the variation in muscle fibers is due to genetic factors. Yea you can do certain training to change your typing a bit, but you’re pretty much born with your fiber typing.
“This genotype alone can hardly explain why Jamaica outperforms Germany in sprinting by such a margin. I guess what gives blacks an edge in running is the optimal bipedal morphology: long legs, narrow pelvis. That’s why lowlands Africans make good sprinters and highland Africans make good marathonians whereas Himalayans, Andeans or Alpines don’t.”
Of course. I don’t believe that muscle fibers explain all of the variance, morphology matters as well. But it explains a lot of the variance.
RaceRealist said:
“Didnt i show you that study?”
The one I posted is different. It was done in Iceland.
“Also you might find this entering Apparently scientists have developed a revolutionary way in determining whether particular genes have been under selection or not for certsin trait expressions:”
8 percent of the genome has been under recent selection.
RaceRealist said:
Also, from the very last paragraph on the ACTN3 gene:
It is likely that there is a “trade-off” between sprint and endurance traits that imposes important constraints on the evolution of physical performance in humans and other vertebrates (Garland et al. 1990). This hypothesis is supported by recent data from world-class decathletes, which demonstrated that performance in the 100-m sprint, shot put, long jump, and 110-m hurdles (which rely on explosive power and fast fatigue-susceptible muscle fibers) is negatively correlated with performance in the 1,500-m race (which requires endurance and fatigue-resistant slow fiber activity) (Van Damme et al. 2002). This suggests that an individual is inherently predisposed toward specialist performance in one area (sprint/power vs. endurance). In humans, this appears to have been achieved, in part, through the maintenance of genetic variation by balancing natural selection. The result is that there are genetic differences among individuals, such as we have demonstrated for the ACTN3 locus, that may be useful predictors of athletic performance at the elite level.
Afrosapiens said:
As we were talking about the WSM above, does strength requires fast twitch or slow twitch muscles ?
RaceRealist said:
Slow twitch fibers always fire first, no matter the activity, then the II A and II X get recruited. But strength is related to slow twitch:
The largest motor units that contain the fast-twitch B fibers have the highest threshold and are recruited last. No matter what the workout intensity, slow-twitch motor units are recruited first. If the workout intensity is low, these motor units may be the only ones that are recruited. If the workout intensity is high, such as when lifting heavy weights or per- forming intervals on the track, slow- twitch motor units are recruited first, followed by fast-twitch A and fast- twitch B, if needed.
Click to access MuscleTraining.pdf
BBers have a higher proportion of type II fibers.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1479884/
But the literature isn’t consistent (read this a few times, it’s extremely long, and it’s the most comprehensive article I can find on the subject).
https://www.strengthandconditioningresearch.com/hypertrophy/muscle-fiber-type/
And other studies show that PLers et al don’t have different proportions of fiber typings.
http://strengtheory.com/muscle-fiber-type/
The two last articles should be good enough for you to know a lot about this if you read them a few times and a few of the source materials. Studies show a lot of variation.
meLo said:
Forgive my grammar in the last post, I was typing with my phone.
“The one I posted is different. It was done in Iceland.”
Yeah, but the article says: “finds that groups of genes that predispose people to spend more years in education became a little rarer in the country from 1910 to 197[8]”
Is it still continuing? Is this a universal pattern? I am very skeptically that modern society is dysgenic.
“8 percent of the genome has been under recent selection.”
True, but this new method can actually decipher which genes code for what.
“Siddiq and Thornton realized that this hypothesis could be tested directly using the new technologies. Siddiq first inferred the sequences of ancient Adh genes from just before and just after D. melanogaster evolved its ethanol tolerance, some two to four million years ago. He synthesized these genes biochemically, expressed them, and used biochemical methods to measure their ability to break down alcohol in a test tube. The results were surprising: the genetic changes that occurred during the evolution of D. melanogaster had no detectable effect on the protein’s function.
Working with collaborators David Loehlin at the University of Wisconsin and Kristi Montooth at the University of Nebraska, Siddiq then created and characterized transgenic flies containing the reconstructed ancestral forms of Adh. They bred thousands of these “ancestralized” flies, tested how quickly they could break down alcohol, and how well the larvae and adult flies survived when raised on food with high alcohol content. Surprisingly, the transgenic flies carrying the more recent Adh were no better at metabolizing alcohol than flies carrying the more ancient form of Adh. Even more strikingly, they were no better able to grow or survive on increasing alcohol concentrations. Thus, none of the predictions of the classic version of the story were fulfilled. There is no doubt that D. melanogaster did adapt to high-alcohol food sources during its evolution, but not because of changes in the Adh enzyme.”
RaceRealist said:
“Is it still continuing? Is this a universal pattern? I am very skeptically that modern society is dysgenic.”
Based on a sample of 1/3 of the country born between 1910 and 1990, polygenic scores decreased by ~0.010 SDs per decade. Look at it as a FLynn Effect reversal. Just like what is seen in France (which is not due to immigration):
The authors of the new paper attribute the loss to mothers delayed reproduction and fewer children.
How is modern society not dysgenic? We’ve completely shifted selective pressures in first-world countries due to policies that allow the less fit to breed more than the more fit (let’s use lower and higher IQ respectively). The FLynn Effect will continue to reverse in the first world while it increases in the third world.
What do you think of the theory that IQ isn’t related to national development but that national development itself increases IQ? Wicherts et al 2009 say that, and Epigg et al say that third world countries with high rates of parasitic load should be monitored for IQ increases as parasitic load and other diseases decrease (we SHOULD see this).
I need to read more into honestly, causalities could (I doubt it) be reversed. I’m open to changing any of my views with sufficient empirical data.
“True, but this new method can actually decipher which genes code for what.”
True. I await human studies.
meLo said:
“Based on a sample of 1/3 of the country born between 1910 and 1990, polygenic scores decreased by ~0.010 SDs per decade. Look at it as a FLynn Effect reversal. Just like what is seen in France (which is not due to immigration):”
Nice post. Well it seems france is definitely having some kind of dysgneic trend but again, is this universal? I think you hit the mark with the malnutrition as a significant competent, the majority of modern diets are incredibly horrible for you. I just doubt this is due to relaxation on the stipulation of efficient mental attributes. I don;t think hunter gatherers are as malnourished as we’d like to assume. At least within their natural habitat.
“How is modern society not dysgenic? ”
First, hunter gatherer social structures are far less complex than modern ones. We have cell phones, computers, calculators, cars etc. that make life easier, but the required knowledge is still more demanding than creating simple stone and bone tools. The fact that it takes researches over a decade to replicate levallois and aurignacian tools is a big indication that the in a cultural perspective it would be common practice for young males to learn essential survival methods from their fathers and other relative group members. Just how it is cultural norm to buy a car, pay taxes and go to work. Tribal peoples do not work as many hours of the day as we do and essentially score very poorly on IQ tests, which suggests they lack the level of hypothetical/abstract reasoning that we do. They may be more pragmatic. You might have a case for cro magnon(and maybe even idaltu) having more potential g than us. Based on their absolute brain size and level of competent nutritional status.
The correlation isn’t perfect either, my article showed that maturation rates were decreasing which is a sign of k selection. High intelligence is not dependent on education, there are plenty of successful and smart individuals who have had sub -par educational backgrounds. Celebrities are a great example of this.
“We’ve completely shifted selective pressures in first-world countries due to policies that allow the less fit to breed more than the more fit”
In america we effectively keep low IQ populations in check through systematic imprisonment, discrimination, and debt allocation. Low IQ populations breed more but their offspring don’t do anything relevant besides that. As society becomes more convoluted in it’s inner workings the “feeble minded” will slowly be displaced. At some point the average majority of blacks will be become as intelligent as present day whites. According to pumpkin the average IQ of welfare reciptents is 92 while the average world IQ is 87-90.
“What do you think of the theory that IQ isn’t related to national development but that national development itself increases IQ? Wicherts et al 2009 say that, and Epigg et al say that third world countries with high rates of parasitic load should be monitored for IQ increases as parasitic load and other diseases decrease (we SHOULD see this).”
Honestly I’ve been arguing that for a while, you and I even conversed about it in the past. Though, I don’t think parasitic load is the main causal factor. I think Modern civilization is simply more cognitively demanding, while the intelectual variation is bigger
RaceRealist said:
“is this universal?”
As far as I know, it is. It’s reversing in first-world countries.
“First, hunter gatherer social structures are far less complex than modern ones. We have cell phones, computers, calculators, cars etc. that make life easier, but the required knowledge is still more demanding than creating simple stone and bone tools. The fact that it takes researches over a decade to replicate levallois and aurignacian tools is a big indication that the in a cultural perspective it would be common practice for young males to learn essential survival methods from their fathers and other relative group members.”
I agree with you here. See the posts below on Kanazawa’s ‘Savannah Hypothesis’.
“Tribal peoples do not work as many hours of the day as we do and essentially score very poorly on IQ tests, which suggests they lack the level of hypothetical/abstract reasoning that we do.”
Kanazawa’s hypothesis states that the environment for hunter-gatherers isn’t ‘evolutionarily novel’, so this may be why hunter-gatherers may be less intelligent. I also like how he said that less intelligent people are better at doing most things and that general intelligence was only useful for a handful of evolutionary novel things. Ouch PP…
“You might have a case for cro magnon(and maybe even idaltu) having more potential g than us. Based on their absolute brain size and level of competent nutritional status.”
I need to look into their diets. But intuitively, it seems like they would have been better nourished than we are today. I do believe that they had greater potential than we do, mainly because of their diet. I do believe that Heidelbergensis and Neanderthals had the potential to be equal, or even our betters. They do have a modern range of neurons. And using neuronal scaling with muh brain size shows 75.9 billion for Heidi, 84.8 billion for Neanderthals and 88 billion for us. Cultural transmission beginning with the stone tools and other things is why we are their betters. But I do believe their potential was on our level.
“The correlation isn’t perfect either, my article showed that maturation rates were decreasing which is a sign of k selection. High intelligence is not dependent on education, there are plenty of successful and smart individuals who have had sub -par educational backgrounds. Celebrities are a great example of this.”
Right. But entertainers don’t need to have high IQs, per se.
“According to pumpkin the average IQ of welfare reciptents is 92 while the average world IQ is 87-90.”
Dude, homeless people don’t average 3 figures per year.
For instance in San Francisco, the average panhandler makes 25 dollars a day, 9,125 dollars per year. Hell, look at cities like NYC. I go there often, people make a lot of money. Trust me.
This study shows the median income per month for homeless people in Toronto is 300 dollars per month.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC121964/
“Honestly I’ve been arguing that for a while, you and I even conversed about it in the past. Though, I don’t think parasitic load is the main causal factor. I think Modern civilization is simply more cognitively demanding, while the intelectual variation is bigger”
What do you think would happen if they had modern society.
pumpkinperson said:
Race realist is full of shit
The homeless are very very poor
People steal the money the beg for
And many are in drunken stupors for weeks
RR doesn’t get it
Never will
RaceRealist said:
“The homeless are very very poor”
I live in a well-off area, and I see some homeless people around. They make good money. In rich areas (cities and suburbs), people have a much higher chance of making money. You cited a study from Chicago. I guess blacks give less money to people, because the SF study showed a lot more than that study stated.
One more thing, free food and other amenities need to be accounted for as well. How many clothes were they given? Food? Other things? That factors into it as well.
Homeless people aren’t as poor as you think.
I do get it. Sorry not sorry that I don’t agree with everything you write.
Afrosapiens said:
PP sounds like Santo when he’s drunk.
meLo said:
Sorry for the late reply, I didn’t forget about you, I was just on a camping/kayaking trip.
“As far as I know, it is. It’s reversing in first-world countries.”
Maybe across white countries, I still don’t think it necessarily means we’re becoming dumber,
“I also like how he said that less intelligent people are better at doing most things and that general intelligence was only useful for a handful of evolutionary novel things. Ouch PP…”
This is undermined by the theory of neural efficiency. I’d like to see the source of the specific study indicating that lower IQ people are better at more simple tasks. Assuming this is true, the aforementioned hypothesis already demonstrated that despite similar levels of performance on low skill tasks, higher neuron activity was found in less bright individuals, indicating that there is still a discrepancy in efficiency occurring. I’m sorry but dumber people are still mentally deficient compared to smarter ones, even when their g is applied to the “ancestral domain”
“I do believe that Heidelbergensis and Neanderthals had the potential to be equal, or even our betters. They do have a modern range of neurons. And using neuronal scaling with muh brain size shows 75.9 billion for Heidi, 84.8 billion for Neanderthals and 88 billion for us. Cultural transmission beginning with the stone tools and other things is why we are their betters. But I do believe their potential was on our level.”
That’s highly implausible, I’ve explained this to you before they had a completely different cranial morphology. The nuerons could have distributed in the wrong areas, and AMH could have had higher neuron density as well. Their potential probably had a little overlapping variation. The reason I was using absolute brain size as a proxy is because Cro magnon, AMH, and modern humans are all the same species. So my conclusion is relevant because i’ve theoretically made corrections for other factors. Using absolute neuron count is just as fallacious as brain size when not corrected for
“Right. But entertainers don’t need to have high IQs, per se.”
Yeah, but my point is that in first world countries(especially america) Academics is not and never will be the mental focus of even the majority of the population. But Intelligence is not dependent on academics, Intelligence is general.
.
“Dude, homeless people don’t average 3 figures per year.
For instance in San Francisco, the average panhandler makes 25 dollars a day, 9,125 dollars per year. Hell, look at cities like NYC. I go there often, people make a lot of money. Trust me.
This study shows the median income per month for homeless people in Toronto is 300 dollars per month.”
Precisely. 300 dollars aint shit, especially in Toronto, that won’t even get you a place where I live. 25 dollars is all they get? Still this further proves my point and says little on social safety nets.
“What do you think would happen if they had modern society.”
If who did? African hunter gatherers? Or cro magnon? You’d get what you see with modern day blacks. You can’t force hunter gatherer/pastoralists populations into modern society, otherwise you end up bastardizing their culture.
RaceRealist said:
Here’s a question that’s been on my mind, maybe PP can answer. Rushton, Lynn, Jensen, Gottfredson, et al all are interested in human differences. Why not get into genetics or some other field? Ii understand that Rushton used to believe environmental explanations (PP if you haven’t read Altruism, Socialization, and Society by Rushton, for do it. It’d a great read. Shows Rushton before he was the evil racist. Solid research too).
JIMMY said:
you have way to much respect for them.
those who cant , become psychologists
Gypsyman said:
All of this talk about PP’s sex has me playing Marlowe, and I looked and looked and looked and I found it! Evidence!
You ready?
You really ready?
You promise?
Well, don’t say I didn’t warn you.
REAL LIVE FOOTAGE OF PP:
All in good fun Pump, I couldn’t resist!
pumpkinperson said:
LOL! I haven’t seen that movie since a party during my final year of high school. Brings back memories.
The Philosopher said:
If you use the word ‘racist’ you probably have dyslexia after reading my comments, or you’re autistic.
Or black and in denial.
The Philosopher said:
eh-lo! eh-lo! Bonjour! Bonjour!
Hello everybody!
I am not stoopide. No No No! How can you say blacks are stupide? Did you control for space-time instabilitie from period 1 to period 2
quantum mechanisticalie?
Eh lo. Eh Lo. Bonjour Bonjour
I am so riche and powehrful!
I will send IRS flying monkeys from my lair in Hai-ti
Eh lo Eh lo.
I AM SO SEXIE.
PLEASE TOUCH ME. PLEASE TOUCH ME.
My BOOTIFUL SMILE.
But I AM NOT HOMOSEXUAL.
Eh lo Eh lo.
A BOOTIFUL SMILE
A GORGEOUS AFRO
Jay Z et fuck bu-ddy
Et autre fuck bu-ddy.
Homosexual Sapiens.
Bite the bullet.
The Philosopher said:
Now, thass what we feller like to call a DEMOLITION JOB.
AU REVOIR BONHOMEY. AU REVOIR!
The Philosopher said:
I don’t want to keep elbow dropping Afro all the time.
For example, Mikey Blaze is honest and accepts what I’m saying even to the point of awkward frankness.
But Afro
Who has a BOOTIFUL SMILE
Cannot accept
And so he becomes a BOOTIFUL PINATA.
Hahahaha.
Mikey blayze said:
Thanks!
Afrosapiens said:
Man. you’re a fool.
RaceRealist said:
lol
The Philosopher said:
I think I’ve said everything I want to say about HBD with my ‘schizophrenic rant’ above. Anything else would be a derivative or Tourettes.
I’ll leave you all for the time being with 5 observations:
1. Avram Grant became Chelsea’s manager after Mourinho despite only having managed Maccabi Haifa. Why? Because the jew robber baron Roman Abramovich and his mentor Mikael Khodorovsky think about the boys first.
2. Autism is driving on the right side of the road and following signs. Schizophrenie is seeing a quicker way through the fence and bushes and knocking down foul rodents to make shortcuts.
3. The Devil’s Chessboard is the greatest historical work of scholarship chronicling the 20th century and should be required history study for high school students. We are not doomed to repeat history.
4. Marsha is emotionally disturbed because her limp wristed liberal joke of dad helped her (a) become a prostitute (b) do art history (c) had no objection to her sleeping with blacks. You see Rollo Tomassi’s Rational Male asserts a fundamental truth – strong, masculine, dominant men create the happiest families. Weak craven nu-males create intense female angst.
5. The problem is not Idiocracy. The problem is stronger selection for autism. Mr Google Engineer is retarded. Socially. And that’s not good. We can always use Bing or Yahoo….but we need socially competent citizenry to speak truth to power.
Adieu.
Time for a renaissance!
Gypsyman said:
>but we need socially competent citizenry to speak truth to power.
Risks have to be made, quality of life has to be improved, actions must be taken.
What’s the significance of the raincoat, Phil?
pumpkinperson said:
Phil often uses “the people who wear raincoats indoors” as a euphemism for autistics. I always though that’d make a great title for a horror film.
Afrosapiens said:
Thank you, Phil.
Thank you for your precious insights.
Thank you for allowing us to enjoy cognitive diversity.
Hope you’ll do well in Vladivostok.
One last piece piece of advice: don’t start an impression show there, you really suck at it.
Adieu
Et bon débarras !
GondwanaMan said:
At least Mugabe keeps it short and simple, this guy rambles on forever!
david d'amato said:
let the tickling begin!
I DO NOT have your time said:
3 Qs for Phil
(1) How old are you ?
(2) Were you in a mental hospital at some point in your life ?
(3) How did you get diagnosed with schizophrenia ?
Gypsyman said:
I’m interested, is this for a project or just personal amusement?
david d'amato said:
In dominance and submission scenarios, sexual partners may agree upon a safeword such as “watermelon” or “bicycle” to signal that tickling should stop.
http://teamcoco.com/content/norm-macdonald-reveals-safeword
Wieland said:
Hey PP. Will you be making a post on Davos?
I think that would be interesting.
pumpkinperson said:
You mean what their IQs are?
The Philosopher said:
David or Robert has quite the predilection for blacks.
His deleted comment mentioned I needed to focus on Jews and not blacks for ‘credibility’.
But why Robert? Do you like being tickled by blacks?
How about being cuckolded in the literal sense?
Is that boring?
My guess is that Robert is very good friends with some blacks in his life.
But is socially unaware of how much a threat black friends can be for his and his non-black friend’s female companions.
They don’t have your ‘honour’ or social sensitivities as a white man. Hence…Africa.
They see themselves among foreigners, even if they’ve grown up among whites and went to 95% white schools.
Like the jews.
You can’t separate the two groups dysfunctions, because they both have the same vantage point. They’re here to plunder and they don’t consciously see it like that as such, but it’s in their genes. Hence the state of race relations.
Its zero sum Robert. I’ve tried to square that particular circle myself and my own friends. I tend to get on with blacks more than guys of other races because we think alike in some ways.
Another fun fact about Robert is that he watches more porn that all the rest of us put together.
Robert don’t respond, if you’re going to, with a joke. You’re sexual retardation and porn collection is the ‘joke’.
Check your girl’s/exes friends lists on facebook. You’re smart enough to work from there with probability statements. Its a neat little string to pull on and will lead to some interesting pattern recognition.
Socially unaware men are a real turn off for women. Women love predators.
Like Allen Dulles.
Because they work for them, not others genes.
JIMMY said:
damn! this is dagger to the heart stuff.
Deal with it! said:
Socially unaware men are a real turn off for women. Women love predators.
No we don’t like “predators”, rapists, misogynists and assholes.
Gypsyman said:
God Phil, you in’t arf bloody boring and repetative are you?
A lot of fun at parties, I bet.
Do you do Bar Mitsvahs?
The Philosopher said:
Gypsy. You are incapable of insight.
Anything interesting you could possibly say is a derivative of what I say or a corollary.
Respect your intellectual superiors. You can’t read people either.
I can almost feel the middle class place you grew up in, your To Kill a Mokingbird essay and your mid level intellect passionate pub conversations about humanitarian interventions (right or wrong boss?).
I hereby christen you,
Cornflakes boy.
Afrosapiens said:
And Notting Hill Carnival ?
Gypsyman said:
Live footage of Philostomy bag entertaining at a Garden Party:
What? You said you were like Chris Brown…
The Philosopher said:
Gypsy, you have never won a debate with me because you are a safe driver.
Likewise you will get your mortgage, your middle class job, read your sanctioned newspapers and feel important with your mid level opinion based low IQ journalists who are told what to write by people that think like me.
And your wife will be fucked by guys like me if I’m in their vicinity and you’ll never cotton on.
Except my facebook technique – deduct how its algorithm works.
You may see me there someday ahahahah.
There is no greater crime than mediocrity – at least with low IQ, you get the test boost as Afro is fond of sharing with us.
Gypsyman said:
Look, if you want me to talk sweet to you again you’ll have to dress up all frilly and sleep in the wet patch.
The Philosopher said:
Cornflakes boy may want to reflect how his political opinions over the past year have been wrong….
Would Cornflakes boy like to hear how to jump 3 points in sexual market value.
Robert says money is all that matters showing his sexual market retardation….
Actually, you can engineer it. But it takes hard work.
Will dedicate middle class mediocrity Gypsy ascend to Olympus?
The Philosopher said:
Actually to be serious, I really would have to charge for that nugget.
Gypsyman said:
>Will dedicate middle class mediocrity Gypsy ascend to Olympus?
If that’s an oblique request to get high with you, I TOLD you you gotta dress nice, swish around a little.
Shake yo money maker.
And then maybe, just maybe I’ll sleep with your girl and she can tell you what that feels like second hand.
Gypsyman said:
I heard working class guys liked second hand things, I’m just considerate like that.
The Philosopher said:
Humour is an indication of intelligence.
On that count, you are not even mediocre.
Gypsyman said:
Of course, as we all well know the Zenith of humor is French impressions.
Afrosapiens said:
“Humour is an indication of intelligence.”
And you think you’re funny ? I mean willingly funny, because you are laughable but it’s at your expense.
The Philosopher said:
Also Marsha knows I’m right deep down about her hatred for her father.
The world’s highest IQ man is a psychiatrist.
And he has the same eyes as me.
People are the most complicated thing in this world because they are layers of contradictions.
But Jung was on to something with animus, daemon and other metaphysical aspects we just don’t have the tools to see yet.
The Philosopher said:
Our best tool I believe to see these things is aesthetics and instinct. Our reaction to aesthetics is vital, even though they can be distorted with plastic surgery, disguises and brainwashing and so forth.
What does this invoke in you?
And this:
And this:
Used car salesmen usually look greasy.
Empathetic women look empathetic.
And so on.
Cocorico said:
Pretty dishonest choice of pictures, to be fair.
The Philosopher said:
Streetview Kinshasa.
The Philosopher said:
Or Kingston, or fevela or Joburg township.
Afrosapiens said:
Street view Kampala:
https://www.google.fr/maps/place/Kampala,+Uganda/@0.3125566,32.5844367,3a,60y,90t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBSsDAT9Ux1xQ0PVVxmUclA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x177dbc0f9d74b39b:0x4538903dd96b6fec!8m2!3d0.3475964!4d32.5825197!6m1!1e1
Afrosapiens said:
Now that’s better
The Philosopher said:
Cognitive dissonance is strong with you. Blacks have very strong egos, as per their survival instinct.
You seriously believe whites are as violent as blacks?
And equally as intelligent?
And you have not had homosexual feelings?
Fine. You don’t need to prove anything to me in that instance.
As you say yourself, I am crazy. Nothing I say could be true.
Afrosapiens said:
Yes you are crazy but I’m benevolent so I allow myself to teach you some lessons in coherence.
Either you post 3 regular street scenes or you post three demonstration scenes. You can’t post one demonstration scene and two regular street scenes or people will notice that you’re trying to fool us.
Like someone says “you no have self-awareness”
Now be grateful.
The Philosopher said:
More cognitive dissonance.
Afrosapiens said:
Elaborate…
GondwanaMan said:
What does this invoke in you?
GondwanaMan said:
Actually, I think the right word is “evoke”…
RaceRealist said:
Solid video. I think it’s cool.
Afrosapiens said:
If I were Phil, I’d say it’s in line with their æsthetics.
RR, are you into death metal and stuff like that ?
The Philosopher said:
“Racism” was first mentioned by Trotsky in his writings I’m informed.
Then the Frankfurt school of philosophy formalised it through declaring language irrational and hence, labels irrational.
But labels are not logic.
RaceRealist said:
““Racism” was first mentioned by Trotsky in his writings I’m informed.”
Yep.
The Philosopher said:
I should charge people for this. A thousand scientists doing a thousand experiments for a thousand years wouldn’t be able to work this out.
Funnily enough, all they had to do was unlearn their education.
The Philosopher said:
Schizophrenia aka “the black man’s disease”.
I’m not full schizophrenic.
But I would have more in common with Chris Brown and Stan Collymore than Bill Gates or Warren Buffet.
Even though Gates has probably 100 points on Brown.
The lean is the personality differential predictive indicator, not IQ.
I actually don’t get along at all with most Mensa types, nerds, failed actuaries and so on.
Afrosapiens said:
“Schizophrenia aka “the black man’s disease”.”
LOL
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemiology_of_schizophrenia
The Philosopher said:
Read about the history of schizophrenia.
You don’t read books because you have ADHD.
Legal books don’t count.
Afrosapiens said:
Don’t care about hkstory, your statement is currently wrong, period.
RaceRealist said:
Seems to be the tropic man’s disease. Just like Sickle Cell Anemia.
Afrosapiens said:
I’d say a developing world’s disease unless Poland is in the tropics
RaceRealist said:
Hm maybe. How would one disentangle the causal factor?
Afrosapiens said:
In 1st world, schizophrenia is more frequent among the poor like Phil. So this pattern of poverty increasing the risk of schizophrenia must be universal.
RaceRealist said:
I don’t recall what I learned about schizophrenia in my ab psych class. What is actually the causality for poverty causing schizophrenia? Blacks also have higher rates of APD iirc.
Afrosapiens said:
There is a specific wikipedia article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_schizophrenia
What does APD stand for ?
RaceRealist said:
Antisocial personality disorder. I think they have it at a pretty high rate. I’ll check my notes in a bit and get back to you.
Afrosapiens said:
According to the meta-analysis below, blacks tend to have lower levels of personality disorders (including APD) than other groups.
RaceRealist said:
Maybe my professor told me outdated information. IIRC she said they have it around 33 percent.
And oh man. That sociology class…. I don’t know if I should drop it. I think it’ll trigger me.
Afrosapiens said:
Loool ? What’s wrong with it ?
Afrosapiens said:
Damn, I didn’t even post the link:
http://bmcpsychiatry.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-244X-10-33
Solid, recent source.
RaceRealist said:
I can’t find my Ab Psych textbook at the moment to get the figure for APD. I’ll find it tomorrow.
I read that paper last year when I heard about blacks having a higher prevalence of APD. I’ll read it again.
“What’s wrong with it ?”
Social perceptions: women are not intelligent, blacks are good at sports, Mexicans are good cooks
That’s what he said. Though I did contest what he said about women and intelligence citing Rushton and Jackson 2006, apparently other studies show no variation in FSIQ but show a difference in spatial favoring men and verbal favoring women.
But the ‘blacks are good at sports’ is a ‘social perception’, as if it’s fake. As if over 70 percent of both Leagues are super-majority black by accident.
And he said that everything we know about Western Civilization ‘will be challenged’. Ugh. He asked everyone their ethnicity and called people stereotypic names. Some guy got mad because he called an Egyptian girl a terrorist and he left.
And the biggest blunder—saying that Carver ‘invented’ peanut butter. I said no that was Gilmore Edson in Canada, a white man, in 1882. Most of Carver’s peanut recipes were garbage and weren’t used.
A woman came up to me after class and said ‘good job with the facts; someone needs to challenge him. I didn’t believe you about peanut butter but I looked it up and you were right.’ Nice. This should be a fun class. Seems like I’ll disagree with over 90 percent of it.
Afrosapiens said:
Why did you take a class you knew you would disagree with ?
I mean, it’s alright to challenge what people say but being disruptive is disrespectful to the teacher and the students who in the end are gonna be judged on the teacher’s opinions, not yours.
There are other ways to disseminate what you think to be true.
I think you should restrain yourself, see how the course is structured, what you’ll get from it in the long run and ignore the details.
RaceRealist said:
It’s a requisite I need.
“I mean, it’s alright to challenge what people say but being disruptive is disrespectful to the teacher and the students who in the end are gonna be judged on the teacher’s opinions, not yours.”
How do you think I get my participation grade? =^)
“I think you should restrain yourself, see how the course is structured, what you’ll get from it in the long run and ignore the details.”
Every time I hear something I know is wrong I always say something. Like the peanut butter thing. That’s a huge myth.
Though I did challenge my ab psych teacher, I did get something out of the course. I scoffed at cultural relativism, but by the end of the course I started taking to it a bit. Then I read a few books by Gould and some of his articles and started accepting it more. I’m sure I’ll get something from the class, but sociologists don’t take genetics into account and they deny evolution’s effects on human behavior. I, obviously, take issue with that.
Afrosapiens said:
“How do you think I get my participation grade? =^)”
Alright, that makes sense. Didn’t think of it, it’s rare to have participation grades after high school in France.
“I’m sure I’ll get something from the class, but sociologists don’t take genetics into account and they deny evolution’s effects on human behavior.”
Their opposition to considering genetic factors is dogmatic but on the other hand, it is not what they are trained for. So at least, they remain in their field of competence in opposition to some other guys that we often mention here.
RaceRealist said:
“Alright, that makes sense. Didn’t think of it, it’s rare to have participation grades after high school in France.”
It’s only 10 percent of my grade.
“Their opposition to considering genetic factors is dogmatic but on the other hand, it is not what they are trained for. So at least, they remain in their field of competence in opposition to some other guys that we often mention here.”
True. But they’re missing out on other causal mechanisms. I like unified theories. And it’s not a ‘science’. I hesitate to call psychology a science.
I don’t deny that sociality and perception, etc affects things, but other variables should be looked at and combined with it.
I showed the study about ‘culture being genetic’ in Mexicans and Puerto Ricans right?
In a study published in the academic journal eLife, researchers examined DNA methylation — fingerprints of DNA that can be inherited or altered by life experience and shape how our genes are expressed —among 573 Mexican and Puerto Rican children. DNA methylation reflects individual circumstances — for instance, PTSD stemming from traumatic experiences, air pollution from environmental conditions, after effects from maternal smoking, etc.
They identified 916 differences in methylation associated with Mexican or Puerto Rican ethnicity. Looking at that pool, the researchers identified that only three-quarters of the differences between the two ethnic groups could be explained by genetic ancestry.
This led the researchers to theorize that a large fraction, one quarter, of the DNA fingerprints likely reflect biological signatures of environmental, social or cultural differences between the ethnic groups.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/culture-etched-onto-our-dna-more-than-previously-known-research-says/
I peruse some alt-right boards (the amount of people who are ‘Christian Identists [look that up and read a bit into it, it’s ridiculous] and deny that man evolved from animals is a trip. That tells you something about the intelligence level of people there. And it’s a lot of them that believe this. They believe that Jesus was ‘Aryan’ and had blonde hair and blue eyes) and I see them say that this study ‘proves’ that culture is ‘genetic’, as if someone born outside of their area of ancestry will automatically pick up their ancestor’s culture. lol
david d'amato said:
before peepee’s blog dies i’d like philosophe to explain why…
the american MB has doubled since 2008, but M1 has also only doubled.
theoretically M1 should have increased by a lot more, “the money multiplier”.
i can’t find data on excess reserves or on what fraction of the new MB goes back to the treasury.
The Philosopher said:
Because says law does not apply to credit.
Supply does not create demand.
david tomato said:
i understand that my nigger.
my question is what did the banks actually do with all that extra MB?
they didn’t lend it. did they just let it pile up in their fed account? did they buy US treasuries? what did they do with it? where did it go?
pumpkinperson said:
I wonder if he saw your question
Wieland said:
Here’ something Mr. PP! I dashed to your site after reading it.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/01/19/trump_cabinet_highest_iq_history_presidency.html
This you MUST cover!
RaceRealist said:
They’re all Jews. Business as usual, goyim. He isn’t “draining” any swamp. He kisses Netanyahu’s feet. Great way to MAGA!!! As I’ve said for the longest, he is controlled. He won’t so a thing for us Americans. Yet another “Hope and Change™” except this time he didn’t explicitly said it and used “MAGA” as his slogan.
And the sheeple bought it.
RaceRealist said:
The pick that worries me the most is Steve Mnuchin. Don’t know if there’s any snake worse than that in his cabinet.
Gypsyman said:
Goyim is plural.
RaceRealist said:
I know. I was addressing all of the goyim here. Trump won’t do anything. Seeing people freak out over this is hilarious. Muh WWIII! Won’t happen. Trump won’t deport illegals, he won’t build a walls and he won’t bar Muslim immigration from MENA countries.
The sheeple will see it soon enough. That is, unless they’re too brainwashed by the cult of personality.
JIMMY said:
have you ever noticed how it annoys them when someone says jew instead of jewish.
There was this one Jew HBD guy called Lawrence auster who cried a lot about that.
david tomato said:
Funny joke. It’s the richest by far, but not the richest in better correlated measures like educational prestige. One of the two billionaires is just an heir, and the other, Wilbur Ross, isn’t too impressive…but he’s a Yalie.
Trump may be a genius, but not in IQ terms. How many geniuses are? A genius has a special ability.
My guess is he’s a lot smarter socially than any president has ever been, but that’s not saying much. The elite media’s hatred of him proves this. In America high social intelligence is bad for your career…in a manner of speaking. Of course low social intelligence is bad for it too. Trump merely exploited the obvious. He said what the electorate thought rather than what its socially retarded sheeple representatives deemed acceptable to think. Trump is president because he has the virtues of the little man, the common man, he lacks the vices of the greasy pole climbers, AND because he was born rich…he never had to change…he was never selected for his ovine-ness and a-morality.
Deal with it! said:
Trump is president because he has the virtues of the little man
Trump has the vices of the white trash
Deal with it! said:
White trash are virtueless. Trump is president because of his vices.
Deal with it! said:
Philosopher is a chav?
GondwanaMan said:
Aw I had my comment deleted. The Philosopher’ would’ve hated it
pumpkinperson said:
I never deleted a comment by you, intentionally.
I’m pretty sure the one you’re referring to is there
GondwanaMan said:
I don’t see it. But that’s a good thing because its link to a x-rated video I stumbled upon. I obviously spend to much time on the Internet…
GondwanaMan said:
Bad attempt at trying to be funny…
Deal with it! said:
Bipolar eyes
Afrosapiens said:
You look like my type of girl. Is your skin tanned under natural light ?
Deal with it! said:
I tan a lot. It’s something I’m trying to cut down because it’s not good for your skin but I hate being pale.
Afrosapiens said:
Your Native ancestry could make things a bit better in terms of skin ageing, provided your white ancestors aren’t a bunch of Scots and Swedes, which is unlikely if you say you tan easily.
Deal with it! said:
I’m not your type Afro. I’m a fat ugly slutty sperm urinal who has bipolar clinger on issues.
Afrosapiens said:
“I’m a fat ugly slutty sperm urinal who has bipolar clinger on issues.”
Fat: no, you said your size and I told myself you’re so tiny that I’d break you into pieces if I’m not careful.
Ugly: what I’ve seen of you looks promising for the rest.
Sperm urinal: I lake girls who like sex a lot, but sex with me only.
Psychological issues: I prefer balanced girls.
You get a 2.5/4, because I prefer fit curvy girls to skinny ones.
That’s ok for a one night stand.
JIMMY said:
” I’m not your type Afro. I’m a fat ugly slutty sperm urinal who has bipolar clinger on issues. ”
Ive never seen a girl so desperate to avoid a guy ! lol
Afrosapiens said:
lol, I agree.
RaceRealist said:
Thoughts on Satoshi Kanazawa’s ‘Savannah Principle’?
Click to access AP2010.pdf
The human brain has “difficulty comprehending and dealing with entities and situations that did not exist in the ancestral environment. Burnham and Johnson (2005, pp. 130–131) referred to the same observation as the evolutionary legacy hypothesis, whereas Hagen and Hammerstein (2006, pp. 341–343) called it the mismatch hypothesis.”
RaceRealist said:
What, if any, evolutionary advantage does intelligence give us?
Actually, less intelligent people are better at doing most things. In the ancestral environment general intelligence was helpful only for solving a handful of evolutionarily novel problems
http://www.economist.com/blogs/prospero/2012/06/quick-study-satoshi-kanazawa-intelligence
meLo said:
But intelligence is not domain specific, it is a general application. The novelty theory is not good evidence of domain specific intelligence, or at least the way kanazawa has interpreted it.
In one of his first examples he describes intelligence as a complex novel abstraction from observation. But this is where the fallacy lies. intelligence is domain specific through relevant levels, so what is “ancestral” to one population is not to another. The placement point for what constitutes more novel behavior becomes more arbitrary.
It also suffers from frame problem:
“Biologists and psychologists have an unfortunate tendency to refer to the properties
of domain-specific (but not domain-general) mechanisms as “constraints.” For
example, the one-trial learning mechanism, discovered by Garcia and Koelling
(1966), that permits a rat to associate a food taste with nausea several hours later
is frequently referred to as a “biological constraint on learning.” Reviews or treatments
of domain-specific elements in psychological systems frequently have titles
such as Riolo~ic~rl Ro~rntltrr~i~.~ of Lclnrnin,g (Seligman & tlagcr, 1072), Con.s!r~c~irr!.s
on Lrtu.tririg (Sl~ettleworll~, 1972), or even ‘l’t~e ‘lungled Wing: Biological Constraints
on the Hunlan Spirit (Konner, 1982). This terminology is seriously misleading,
because it incorrectly implies that “unconstrained” learning mechanisms
are a theoretical possibility; it implicitly denies the existence of the frame
problem.
All constraints are properties, but not all properties are constraints. Calling
a property a “constraint” implies that the organism would have a wider range of
abilities if the constraint were to be removed. Are a bird’s wings a “constraint on
locomotion”? Obviously, such usage would be absurd: Wings expand the bird’s capacity
to locomote. On the other hand, a thick rubber band placed in such a way
that it pins a bird’s wings to its body is a constraint on the bird’s ability to locomote,
constraining the bird to walking. If anything, wings should be called “enablers,”
because they enable an additional form of locomotion”
You should read this paper it’s quite interesting, particularly page 23-25
Click to access Fromevadap.pdf
Secondly Evolutionary novelty through climate is not a causal factor of encephalization. Intelligence in humans is like the tail feathers of a peacock.
Socialization is the lynchpin and demands more novel pressures than any climatic situation.
RaceRealist said:
Kevin MacDonald argues the same thing.
Click to access Intelligence-as-Domain-General.pdf
And Tooby and Cosmides argue for domain-specificity.
http://www.cep.ucsb.edu/primer.html
A trait can be both an “evolved adaptation and an individual difference variable.” All humans are bipedal, see, and talk, but some humans run better than others, some have better eyesight and still others are more proficient in their native language, speaking earlier than others.
Kanazawa also thought up the ‘Savannah-IQ hypothesis’, where more intelligent people are better able to deal with evolutionarily novel situations than lower IQ people, but general intelligence doesn’t affect individuals’ ability to deal with evolutionarily familiar entities and situations.
Click to access SPQ2010.pdf
“You should read this paper it’s quite interesting, particularly page 23-25”
Will do tomorrow. I’m a huge evo psych fan.
“Secondly Evolutionary novelty through climate is not a causal factor of encephalization. Intelligence in humans is like the tail feathers of a peacock.”
Beauty and facial symmetry is (though beauty can be said to be facial symmetry, which is then correlated with IQ).
Don’t warm climates impose restrictions on large brains in hominins? Something about heat dissispation?
“Socialization is the lynchpin and demands more novel pressures than any climatic situation.”
It’s more than climatic accidents; it’s about all ‘natural disasters’, ‘contingencies of history’ that are evolutionary novelties. I do agree that socialization had a large part to play in what makes us human though, with cultural transference and acquisition being a large driver of it.
meLo said:
“A trait can be both an “evolved adaptation and an individual difference variable.” All humans are bipedal, see, and talk, but some humans run better than others, some have better eyesight and still others are more proficient in their native language, speaking earlier than others.”
Exactly, which is why kanazawa is applying it wrong(as usual) Domain specificity(in regards to human intellect) is more concerned over observation and the emprical model of which we base our truth on. This is in fact what science is at it’s core, not a method of truth but instead a model of phenomena we observe and explain. Like in kanazawa’s example of the color of a banana, it’s not that we can’t comprehend that it is in fact not objectively yellow, it’s that we are limited to our physical constructions. What drove intelligence is not just evolutionary novelty but instead hypothetical/abstract reasoning. AKA theory of mind which is mostly selected for in highly social environments. What comes from novelty is simply creativity but not the intelligence that applies it. This is a very interesting discussion.
For example just because you couldn’t mentally comprehend what a 6th dimensional being would look or behave like doesn’t mean you don’t understand the possibility of one.
“Beauty and facial symmetry is (though beauty can be said to be facial symmetry, which is then correlated with IQ).”
Not entirely, phenotypic expressions of intelligence is an attractive feature besides good looks humor, smarts, and personality are also taken into consideration.
“Will do tomorrow. I’m a huge evo psych fan.”
Did you read it, what’d you think?
“Don’t warm climates impose restrictions on large brains in hominins? Something about heat dissispation?”
Yes, which reinforces the concept that socialization is the key factor at least within africa’s encpehalization.
RaceRealist said:
“Exactly, which is why kanazawa is applying it wrong(as usual)”
That is literally what he wrote in his paper though…
“AKA theory of mind which is mostly selected for in highly social environments. What comes from novelty is simply creativity but not the intelligence that applies it. This is a very interesting discussion.”
Yes it is a very interesting discussion. I’m very willing to challenge all of my views and things I ‘know to be true’ with new information now. I enjoy our discussions. The discussions I have with you, PP, chiokaka, and Afro are why I visit this blog. I always learn something new everyday.
Kanazawa brings up ToM in his paper:
If so, can such individual differences in the evolved psychological mechanism
of theory of mind be heritable, since we already know that autism and Asperger’s syndrome may be heritable (A. Bailey et al., 1995; Folstein & Rutter, 1988)?
A very interesting question that I will look into.
“For example just because you couldn’t mentally comprehend what a 6th dimensional being would look or behave like doesn’t mean you don’t understand the possibility of one.”
Since we can ‘comprehend’ that God exists, does he exist? That’s the basis for many ontological arguments (which I do not take to because I am an empiricist).
How can you understand the possibility of one if you cannot commprehend what a being would look like or behave that is a 6th dimensional being?
“Not entirely, phenotypic expressions of intelligence is an attractive feature besides good looks humor, smarts, and personality are also taken into consideration.”
They all correlate.
One study showed that people tend to find their own face when morphed into the opposite sex most attractive, even when he/she doesn’t know it’s his own face, strongly suggesting that people typically prefer those who look like themselves, in other words their own racial/ethnic group. The more genes that people share in common, the more likely they are to look for similar characteristics in their partners.
Click to access pentonvoak1999.pdf
Kanazawa also has a piece on this as well.
Click to access I2004.pdf
“Did you read it, what’d you think?”
Didn’t have time to read it. I will tonight. Looks meaty.
But evo psych specifically says that intelligence is domain specific. Dr. MacDonald also says as much.
Also, Kanazawa’s theory hasn’t really been debunked.
I’m going to buy his books (I already have too many) and read them.
Further, we don’t even have to call it the ‘Savannah Hypothesis’; we can just call it an ‘evolutionary mismatch’, of which there is a ton of evidence to back multiple evolutionary mismatches that we have due to our current modern environment being different from our ancestral one.
“Yes, which reinforces the concept that socialization is the key factor at least within africa’s encpehalization.”
Would you say that group egalitarianism decreases brain size?
meLo said:
“That is literally what he wrote in his paper though…”
That doesn’t mean he actually understands it’s implications.
He is mistaking levels of order with domain specificity.
I don’t necessarily disagree with the idea of evolutionary novelty or domain specificity, but I am confident that intelligence is a general potential and that it’s varying ranks is not the same as a physical constraint.
Just to make sure I’m not misunderstanding you, Kanazawa is basically trying to argue That evolutionary novelty selected for higher levels of g and the theory of domain specific intelligence reinforces this, correct?
“I enjoy our discussions.”
Thank you, I feel the same.
“Since we can ‘comprehend’ that God exists, does he exist? That’s the basis for many ontological arguments (which I do not take to because I am an empiricist).
How can you understand the possibility of one if you cannot commprehend what a being would look like or behave that is a 6th dimensional being?”
It’s not about god though. You’re starting to get it I think. Intelligence is potential, it is rationalism, it is pure math. Knowledge is empirical, it is the actualization of the potential itself. A 2-d person will never be able to actually see a 3rd dimensional one.
Please, take a look at this:
https://www.quora.com/How-is-the-4th-dimension-explained-Or-the-ones-past-it
and this: it starts about 3 to 4 minutes in.
Our bodies are not 4th dimensional objects but we still understand it, this is because intelligence isn’t completely physical even though it is catalyzed through physical means.
“One study showed that people tend to find their own face when morphed into the opposite sex most attractive, even when he/she doesn’t know it’s his own face, strongly suggesting that people typically prefer those who look like themselves, in other words their own racial/ethnic group.”
If it’s true it’s true, but I would be ugly as fuck if I were a girl. My “boo thang” has a higher forehead and different teeth structure, she’s also completely white.
“we can just call it an ‘evolutionary mismatch”
Elaborate more on what you mean by that.
“Would you say that group egalitarianism decreases brain size?”
Now that is definitely an interesting question. Domestication lowers brain size in a lot of species, but egalitarianism =/= domestication. Humans nowadays(at least in white countries) are pretty egalitarian. Egalitarianism could cause higher gene flow but at the same time lower competition. The ideology may not be absolutely applicable to any concrete set of effects.
I think agriculture and Civilization cause real drops in IQ but, through different methods.
Agriculture causes malnutrition but civilizations tend to to have safety nets for lower intelligence individuals. The difference being there is no drop in real IQ within a first world society, there are just more dumb people now, we aren’t progressively getting stupid at least not in a universal way. Society itself is not some all around benefit to encephalization, but when it is applied properly it is in fact eugenic.
RaceRealist said:
“Just to make sure I’m not misunderstanding you, Kanazawa is basically trying to argue That evolutionary novelty selected for higher levels of g and the theory of domain specific intelligence reinforces this, correct?”
That’s my understanding of it. Basically, things and events that are evolutionarily familiar to us do not take high levels of general intelligence, but evolutionarily unfamiliar events and situations take higher g to solve, since these things are things that didn’t/rarely happened on the Savannah. So those who are better able to handle situations NOT familiar to us evolutionarily are more intelligent. I’m beginning to like it to be honest.
“It’s not about god though. You’re starting to get it I think. Intelligence is potential, it is rationalism, it is pure math. Knowledge is empirical, it is the actualization of the potential itself. A 2-d person will never be able to actually see a 3rd dimensional one.”
Surely you can see where I’m coming from with my God statement. Right, intelligence is potential, I agree.
“Please, take a look at this:”
The first answer was a perfect visualization.
“If it’s true it’s true, but I would be ugly as fuck if I were a girl. My “boo thang” has a higher forehead and different teeth structure, she’s also completely white.”
It is true.
“Elaborate more on what you mean by that.”
The easiest way to think about this is to think about how one evolved to their environment and think how the processes that alter the environment. A perfect example is African farmers. They may dig a trench to divert water to better irrigate their crops, but this then would cause a higher rate of mosquitoes due to the increase in still water and then selection for genes that protect against malaria would be selected for. This is one example of an evolutionary mismatch turning into an advantage for a population. Most mismatch diseases are caused by changes in the environment which change how the body functions. In other words, the current first-world diet is correlated very highly with diseases of civilization and drive most of the mismatch diseases. Most likely, you will die from one of these mismatch diseases.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/path-optimal-living/201508/evolutionary-mismatch
“Now that is definitely an interesting question. Domestication lowers brain size in a lot of species, but egalitarianism =/= domestication. Humans nowadays(at least in white countries) are pretty egalitarian. Egalitarianism could cause higher gene flow but at the same time lower competition. The ideology may not be absolutely applicable to any concrete set of effects.”
I believe it does. It causes people to work together, and since people need to work together, why do you need a ‘big brain’ to survive if you can bounce ideas off of other people in a large social structure?
“I think agriculture and Civilization cause real drops in IQ but, through different methods.”
Evolutionary mismatch.
“Agriculture causes malnutrition but civilizations tend to to have safety nets for lower intelligence individuals. The difference being there is no drop in real IQ within a first world society, there are just more dumb people now, we aren’t progressively getting stupid at least not in a universal way. Society itself is not some all around benefit to encephalization, but when it is applied properly it is in fact eugenic.”
I believe letting society take its natural course (however natural ‘society’ is) will lead to people becoming stupider. People become complacent and don’t strive for anything else because they are pampered by the ameninities of first-world countries.
meLo said:
“So those who are better able to handle situations NOT familiar to us evolutionarily are more intelligent. I’m beginning to like it to be honest.”
I always had some basic Idea that novelty was beneficial but kanazawa put it another way for me. Novelty isn’t just differing situations, it can be a complete change in axioms.
“Surely you can see where I’m coming from with my God statement. Right, intelligence is potential, I agree.
The first answer was a perfect visualization.”
Oh I do, but it’s beyond my point. At this moment I believe I am mostly against domain specificity. Math is not empirical, it’s rational, intelligence is not empirical, it is rational, it is logical.
Concerning the perception of other dimensions, the endeavor is futile, but mathematically or geometrically true. Which is my ultimate point, that your potential, while dependent on, is not a component of physical limitations. It is metaphysical in nature. You cannot perceive higher dimensional beings or objects but you can mathematically provide proofs for them.
“The easiest way to think about this is to think about how one evolved to their environment and think how the processes that alter the environment.”
So it’s like our genes have not caught up with our current niche?
“I believe it does. It causes people to work together, and since people need to work together, why do you need a ‘big brain’ to survive if you can bounce ideas off of other people in a large social structure?”
Ah, but maintaining social structures requires a big brain to begin with. It’s why primates have such uniquely scaled brains.
Socialization is a primer for theory of mind. You have to understands someones intentions, personality, and intelligence to effectively cooperate in the most efficient manner. Sociality is not exclusive to simple group number, Dunbar’s number is the weakest link in his pet theory. Socialization is a response to survival and competition, this all produces a feedback loop, as the hierarchical structure becomes more complex, the level of intelligence to maintain a consistent “tournament” for power, or status increases.
You talk about egalitarianism and cooperation but the two are distinct. I’m not sure if prehistoric hunter gatherers were egalitarian, but I’m sure there was a wide range varying social organizations. In the end the ones who had the most specialized or “classist” systems were the most successful in allocating the necessary resources to provide for their clans.
https://m.phys.org/news/2007-08-savanna-habitat-birds-cooperative.html
https://m.phys.org/news/2017-01-cooperation-mammals-survive-tough-environments.html
https://m.phys.org/news/2013-07-social-monogamy-evolved-result-competition.html
https://m.phys.org/news/2007-02-birth-competition-major-players-hominid.html
https://m.phys.org/news/2009-08-early-human-hunters-meat-sharing-rituals.html
“(however natural ‘society’ is)”
That’s exactly it though, it becomes arbitrary in defining any kind of set path on what society should do. It’s incredibly subjective and suffers the same problem as morality. Though I like to be optimistic and assume that as g rises so will our eating habits. As technology increases engineers and scientists will replace proles.
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Naturalistic_fallacy#Hume.27s_is-ought_distinction
meLo said:
Could you get that pumpkin?
RaceRealist said:
“I always had some basic Idea that novelty was beneficial but kanazawa put it another way for me. Novelty isn’t just differing situations, it can be a complete change in axioms.”
What do you mean that Kanazawa put it in another way for you and are you using axiom in a philosophic way?
If you think about it, it is a type of stasis. A psychological stasis, so to speak. But when these ‘rare’ (not today since our whole environment is novel, i.e., out obesogenic environment) events occur, those who are more intelligent will survive when it comes down to it. This goes well with PP’s (the main pusher/theorizer of it) and yours intelligence is the ability to adapt, it just has a little bit more of an evolutionary spin on it.
“At this moment I believe I am mostly against domain specificity”
I’ll change that.
“Math is not empirical”
Right.
“intelligence is not empirical”
The standard definition of intelligence is to acquire and apply knowledge and skills. Those who can acquire and apply knowledge and skills are more intelligent than others who acquire less knowledge and skills. Therefor, intelligence is empirical since it is measurable in that manner.
But you say that intelligence is the ability to adapt to your environment, so that is, in a way, empirical. There are also certain parts of the brain in which intelligence rests. The neocortex and PFC are the main areas. The two previous parts of the brain have to do with general intelligence. And intelligence (the general factor) will become measurable one day. See:
We will figure out exactly what makes individual brains differ, how they differ and how certain brains look (along with differences in the genetic code); this will be possible soon.
“Concerning the perception of other dimensions, the endeavor is futile, but mathematically or geometrically true. Which is my ultimate point, that your potential, while dependent on, is not a component of physical limitations. It is metaphysical in nature. You cannot perceive higher dimensional beings or objects but you can mathematically provide proofs for them.”
It definitely is a component of physical limitations. You can only do as much as the human body evolved to do, along with other physical limitations we are stuck with due to the laws of physics, nothing more.
“So it’s like our genes have not caught up with our current niche?”
I just realized that sentence I typed sounded confused, but yea that’s exactly what it means, and gives credence to the Savanna hypothesis and the Savanna-IQ hypothesis. Along with how we view the world, and our evolved psychological mechanisms.
Have you read The Blank Slate?
“Socialization is a primer for theory of mind.”
Some people are better runners, some have better eyesight; both are heritable. Autistics do not have a good ToM, autism is heritable. Could ToM differ individually as well?
“this all produces a feedback loop, as the hierarchical structure becomes more complex, the level of intelligence to maintain a consistent “tournament” for power, or status increases.”
I agree.
“I’m not sure if prehistoric hunter gatherers were egalitarian,”
They weren’t. Read Better Angels of Our Nature.
Hmmmm…. Maybe since they were so violent this also was a part of the cause for a decrease in brain size?
I agee with all five of those links.
“That’s exactly it though, it becomes arbitrary in defining any kind of set path on what society should do.”
‘Should’ statements are moral statements. Morality and ‘moral reasoning’ evovled to better help the tribe, and it seems that we agree on morality.
“Though I like to be optimistic and assume that as g rises so will our eating habits. As technology increases engineers and scientists will replace proles.”
I doubt it.
I realized the fallacy after I submitted it. Oh well.
meLo said:
“are you using axiom in a philosophic way?”
Kind of, yes.
“Right.”
it’s not:
“Mathematics is certainly not empirical.
Empiricism is the philosophical standpoint that we gain knowledge through sensory experience and experiment. For the sciences, which study via experiment, their knowledge is empirically evidenced, by means of measurement. In the latin terminology, all such knowledge is a posteriori, or from the latter. It means our knowledge has been gained in light of what has been achieved (empirically) earlier. Science learns by taking empirical data and refining predictory models.
Mathematics, on the other hand, consists almost of entirely a priori knowledge, or from before, which is knowledge that can be obtained before seeking empirical observations (i.e., you could prove something exists before actually finding it. This obviously occurs in mainstream mathematics!). Mathematics learns by pure reason alone.
I said almost for mathematics, though, with good reason. You need a starting point. From where do we get axioms? They’re almost always explained as being the “self-evident truths” we believe require no justification as they are so obvious – but how are they so obvious? The contention might lie in that our axioms could well be empirically obvious to a human.
Personally, I don’t think this is much to worry about. After all, we could choose axioms which have interesting results, regardless of whether they are empirical or just totally made up, and sometimes we choose axioms which are “wrong” (e.g., Newton’s Second Law doesn’t contain the gamma factor!). This has little bearing on the validity of the results mathematically! (i.e., things can still be proved rigourously), and yet empirically would fail, given precise enough measurements. Mathematics, as a body of knowledge, is far larger than empirical means can uncover: Empirical means will learn you what is, Axiomatic reasoning will learn you consequences, whether they are out there or not.”
“Therefor, intelligence is empirical since it is measurable in that manner. It definitely is a component of physical limitations. You can only do as much as the human body evolved to do, along with other physical limitations we are stuck with due to the laws of physics, nothing more.”
Not exactly. That’s why i said Potential not ability. Yes you can measure intelligence but cognition is an abstraction. You’re right when you say that physical limitations are what place upon the predispositions in cognitive performance but you’re missing the point, despite the fact that we are not 4th dimensional beings we can create a mathematically true representation of their “traits”. At one point we evolved to extrapolate, hypothetically reason, creatively innovate, plan ahead, and use our imagination. Empiricism is involved because we are obviously physical animals, but our cognition is not or at least it’s innate potential isn’t.
“Have you read The Blank Slate?”
LMAO shoot me in the fucking foot.
“Could ToM differ individually as well?”
Yes, I’d imagine.
“Hmmmm…. Maybe since they were so violent this also was a part of the cause for a decrease in brain size?
I agee with all five of those links.”
No, our brains didn’t decrease as hunter gatherer and if you agreed with those links you would know that competition selects for higher intelligence just like cooperation.
“I doubt it.”
Well I feel like computers will replace prole jobs, and there will be a huge selection for mathematically competent individuals(more hypothetical reasoning)
RaceRealist said:
Some of this comment will be low quality. I don’t know a thing about this axiom stuff.
I’d rather not discuss this philosophy stuff (hate it, personally.) I cannot discuss something that I do not know about. I do not care about it either. I care about what I can directly observe. Think it’s a waste of time and mental masturbation.
What makes that comment stand out from the others? I’d rather stick to the main topic here. I admit my ignoance to this subject and that I cannot give a cogent answer. I don’t care enough about it. It’s meaningless to me.
“Not exactly. That’s why i said Potential not ability. Yes you can measure intelligence but cognition is an abstraction. You’re right when you say that physical limitations are what place upon the predispositions in cognitive performance but you’re missing the point, despite the fact that we are not 4th dimensional beings we can create a mathematically true representation of their “traits”. At one point we evolved to extrapolate, hypothetically reason, creatively innovate, plan ahead, and use our imagination. Empiricism is involved because we are obviously physical animals, but our cognition is not or at least it’s innate potential isn’t.”
One could hypothetically reason God, does that make it true? What does our ‘potential’ matter, if we are constrained by physical limitations and the laws of physics? Who cares about *potential ability* when what we are physically able to do matters much more.
Our cognition is limited based on the constraints of the human mind. That’s it. If it’s not possible for our brain to think it/do it, we can’t do it.
“LMAO shoot me in the fucking foot.”
???? Have you not read it?
“No, our brains didn’t decrease as hunter gatherer and if you agreed with those links you would know that competition selects for higher intelligence just like cooperation.”
I said ‘Hmmmm’ and ‘maybe’, it was a random thought that popped in my head, not something I was defintively saying.
“Well I feel like computers will replace prole jobs, and there will be a huge selection for mathematically competent individuals(more hypothetical reasoning)”
Dysgenics.
meLo said:
Sorry for the late reply.
“Think it’s a waste of time and mental masturbation.
What makes that comment stand out from the others? I’d rather stick to the main topic here. I admit my ignoance to this subject and that I cannot give a cogent answer. I don’t care enough about it. It’s meaningless to me.”
We’ve been talking philosophy for a while friend, that’s why I’ve only been posting quotes. You’ve given plenty of cogent answers, I just think I haven’t been explaining this to you right.
If you want something more empircal:
Click to access Kaufman-DeYoung-Reis-Gray-2011.pdf
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/is-general-intelligence-compatible-with-evolutionary-psychology/
“These results support our hypothesis that domain general cognitive abilities should facilitate the solution of any explicit cognitively complex problem, regardless of whether it is additionally facilitated by evolved modular heuristics. These results directly contradict the idea that general intelligence should only be related to performance on “evolutionarily novel” problems.
In fact, our results suggest that such a stark contrast between “evolutionarily novel” and “evolutionarily familiar” problems is misguided when considering individual differences, because we found that g is significantly associated with evolutionarily familiar forms of reasoning involving precautions and social exchanges. In sum, it appears that domain general cognitive mechanisms underlying g are actively involved in any form of explicit reasoning of sufficient complexity, even if more specific psychological mechanisms are also brought to bear on the task at hand.
These results also have important implications for theories of multiple intelligences and the great rationality debate.”
“great rationality debate”
That’s kind of what we’re having now
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Rationality_Debate
“One could hypothetically reason God, does that make it true? What does our ‘potential’ matter, if we are constrained by physical limitations and the laws of physics? Who cares about *potential ability* when what we are physically able to do matters much more.
If you were able to provide mathematical proof for god, then he would exist. SO far this hasn’t happened Subjective=/= false.
“Our cognition is limited based on the constraints of the human mind. That’s it. If it’s not possible for our brain to think it/do it, we can’t do it.”
Yet, we can think things we can’t do or perceive. How do you explain this?
“Dysgenics.”
How so? If proles are not needed, selection for higher IQ would be imminent.
meLo said:
Forgot to mention:
“???? Have you not read it?”
I have not read john lockes, but I did read a little bit of steven pinker’s criticism.
RaceRealist said:
Will reply later but Pinkers book should be read by everyone.
And I read that Kaufman article on Psychology Today.
“These sort of situations involve if-then reasoning”
This is literally logic. During novel times, those who had higher reasoning ability and abstract thought survived over the less able.
“We also found his evolutionary logic debatable. Evolutionarily novel events of the kind that Kanazawa describes are rare by definition. Although rare events can have consequences for evolution if they affect sufficiently large numbers of a species, most rare events are likely to affect a small proportion of individuals, and their rarity will prevent them from exerting consistent selection pressures.”
Kanazawa addressed this in his 2010 paper.
I do agree about exaptations though.
Complex and unpredictable events could, with reason, be called evolutionarily novel events.
Anyway, I think I will concede this. I think. I need to reread that Kaufman paper. I like his work. Especially on Cag repeats.
And I got a good story for you guys later. I triggered a black chick in class last night due to my views in immigration. Hilarious.
RaceRealist said:
And the reason why I like it so much is because it has explanatory power for racial IQ differences. I’ve not seen him explicitly say it, but think about it. Africans live in an environment close enough to the ancestral one. Eurasians live in evolutionary novel environments. See what I’m getting at?
Also came across this paper by Kanazawa saying that temperate and evolutionary novelty explains two thirds of between country variation in IQ scores.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228491945_Temperature_and_evolutionary_novelty_as_forces_behind_the_evolution_of_general_intelligence
See where I’m coming from?
meLo said:
“This is literally logic. During novel times, those who had higher reasoning ability and abstract thought survived over the less able.”
Exactly! Reason is rational not empirical because you can hypothetically reason something. Intelligence is domain specific in the sense that ones potential is dependent on brain size, nuerons, blood flow etc. which are all empirical but reason. logic, math, is not and is generally applicable because of it’s hypothetical nature. Meaning intelligence is only catalyzed empirically.
“And I got a good story for you guys later. I triggered a black chick in class last night due to my views in immigration. Hilarious.”
LOL this should be good.
RaceRealist said:
“Intelligence is domain specific in the sense that ones potential is dependent on brain size, nuerons, blood flow etc. which are all empirical but reason.”
Right. Which is what I said earlier. We can pinpoint the parts of the brain where ‘reason’ comes from, is that not empirical?
” Meaning intelligence is only catalyzed empirically.”
Refer back to my question to Dr. Murray. We will be able to scan or do whatever to individual brains one day, and find out exactly what differs in structure between brains. I then further assume that we’d be able to tease put what does what and be able to estimate with high probability how intelligent someone is. I believe IQ tests will be obsolete soon. We won’t need pen and paper when we have a machine to scan brain contents and genes for one’s cognitive potential.
IQ tests will become a relic of the past soon.
I enjoy Kaufmans articles, but at the end he said muh multiple intelligences. Yawn
“If you were able to provide mathematical proof for god, then he would exist. SO far this hasn’t happened Subjective=/= false.”
Godel?
“Yet, we can think things we can’t do or perceive. How do you explain this?”
Just because we can think about things we can’t do or “perceive” is meaningless. We have physical and mental limitations on what we can do. Sure I can think of a tower that stretches on and on forever and ever, but does it make sense?
Similarly, I can put a logical argument for God. Does that mean God exists? You can also use the prime mover argument and say that is God. Does God then exist because we can think of a being as great as him?
Speaking of. I was talking to a woman the other day and started talking about biology and evolution. This bitch said God created us and we didn’t evolve from tiktalik and hominids. I walked away. Fuck that.
It was hilarious. I was trying so hard not to laugh. I am the only nationalist in the room. It’s basically everyone vs. me. I put forth solid arguments too. Will explain later when I have access to a laptop.
RaceRealist said:
One more thing. You see where I’m coming from with civilizations and evolutionary novelty and intelligence rights?
meLo said:
“We can pinpoint the parts of the brain where ‘reason’ comes from, is that not empirical?”
Like where? It doesn’t invalidate my point. Different biological constructs can have identical purposes.
“We won’t need pen and paper when we have a machine to scan brain contents and genes for one’s cognitive potential.”
I’m sure they’ll refine IQ tests, but yes that will make this process so much easier.
“I enjoy Kaufmans articles, but at the end he said muh multiple intelligences. Yawn”
No? he was arguing the opposite, in fact domain specificity is more evidence for multiple intelligences.
“Godel?”
If you mean his incompleteness theorem then maybe, most people misunderstand what he was saying. Axioms(truths that an argument is based upon) do not have to be empirically valid for the conclusion to be true. Like with my pink goblin examples it all rests upon assumed axioms
“You can draw a circle around all of the concepts in your high school geometry book. But they’re all built on Euclid’s 5 postulates which are clearly true but cannot be proven. Those 5 postulates are outside the book, outside the circle.
You can draw a circle around a bicycle but the existence of that bicycle relies on a factory that is outside that circle. The bicycle cannot explain itself.
Gödel proved that there are ALWAYS more things that are true than you can prove. Any system of logic or numbers that mathematicians ever came up with will always rest on at least a few unprovable assumptions.
Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorem applies not just to math, but to everything that is subject to the laws of logic. Incompleteness is true in math; it’s equally true in science or language or philosophy.
And: If the universe is mathematical and logical, Incompleteness also applies to the universe.
Gödel created his proof by starting with “The Liar’s Paradox” — which is the statement
“I am lying.””
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Essay:G%C3%B6del's_incompleteness_theorem_simply_explained
“Just because we can think about things we can’t do or “perceive” is meaningless. We have physical and mental limitations on what we can do. Sure I can think of a tower that stretches on and on forever and ever, but does it make sense?”
But that’s just a fallacious example, when would I ever need to do that unless I was making some symbolic artwork? Hypothetical reasoning is incredibly useful in inter-tribal warfare and hunting, You have to be able to plan ahead and predict what the opponent or prey is thinking and that takes extrapolation and extensive imagination. You can’t make predictions off of variable results in novelty situations. Human intelligence has progressed from specificity to generality.
” Does God then exist because we can think of a being as great as him?”
But thinking of him isn’t the same as putting logical proofs in favor of him.
meLo said:
“It was hilarious. I was trying so hard not to laugh. I am the only nationalist in the room. It’s basically everyone vs. me. I put forth solid arguments too. Will explain later when I have access to a laptop.”
I had a similar problem when I was trying to explain to my Highschool junior history class why george washington was a piece of shit.
” You see where I’m coming from with civilizations and evolutionary novelty and intelligence rights?”
Yeah, we agree to some extent.
Jack Moresby said:
Here’s a TED talk by Greg Clark in which he proves the genetic basis of wealth and social mobility – https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0c2Ugb4VKH8
You should make a post on how genetics determines not only income but intergenerational wealth
RaceRealist said:
I like this Ted Talk.
The ability to plan for the future, a significant function of prefrontal regions of the cortex, may be key indeed. According to the best definition I have come across so far, put forward by MIT physicist Alex Wissner-Gross, intelligence is the ability to make decisions that maximize future freedom of action—that is, decisions that keep most doors open for the future. (Herculano-Houzel, 2016: 122-123)
Afrosapiens said:
As an adopted guy, I can hardly buy it.
Economic historians talking genetics is a joke.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_Clark_(economist)
RaceRealist said:
Nicholas Wade cites this guy in A Troublesome Inheritance. I’ll get some quotes later.
Afrosapiens said:
I don’t doubt that social reproduction exists, it used to be the norm. Pre-industrial societies had no social mobility at all. Individuals were assigned to a class or to a specific trade according to the status of their parents and marriage was endogamic.
But technological and economical revolutions have greatly reshuffled the social hierarchy. Society went from +95% peasantry/working class to +70% middle class/upper class , The bourgeois have replaced aristocrats at the top.
He doesn’t evoke the case of blacks who were institutionally prevented from building wealth until the late 60s, and the fact that minority groups have all been able to climb up the social ladder to a certain extent.
Social reproduction exists and we don’t need genetics to understand why. Wealthy parents have wealthy children who inherit their wealth, have their financial support and benefit from their social capital. It is obvious and I can tell you as an adopted kid.
pumpkinperson said:
I just googled the heritability of income, and it’s surprisingly high at the local level (at least in men; female income is harder to meaningfully measure since many stay at home)
This study put it at 54% implying a potent 0.73 correlation between your income and your genetic income:
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2253264
RaceRealist said:
I’m sure you know this is for Finns only and cannot be generalized to other populations.
pumpkinperson said:
cannot be generalized to other populations.
You could say the same about almost every study.
RaceRealist said:
You’re right. I guess you can generalize this study to Nordic populations, but diverse cohorts would be better for this in terms of American and Canadian income.
Brazen said:
I would like to ask a hypothetical question. Supposing an individual could live for an 𝑎 amount of time, and learns 𝑏 things in 𝑐 domains. What effect will 𝑎, 𝑏, and 𝑐 have on IQ, if any?
illuminaticatblog said:
As IQ increases a is constant b increases the most and c can increase but is smaller than a.
IQ (a * b(c))
RaceRealist said:
Maternal milk DHA content predicts cognitive performance in a sample of 28 nations.
Click to access Lassek%20%26%20Gaulin%202013%20DHA%20PISA%20math.pdf
RaceRealist said:
Muh PISA. sSill interesting.Ii’d like to see something like this with an actual IQ test though.
RaceRealist said:
Increasing n-3 (Omega-3) and decreasing n-6 (Omega-6) fatty acids may lead to higher cognitive ability in children, specifically women.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3206402/
Levels of n-3 showed a positive relationship with cognitive ability while n-6 showed a negative one.
hmmm
Our diets in America are chock full of n-6.
The typical Americacn diet containts about 26 percent more n-6 than n-3!
http://umm.edu/health/medical/altmed/supplement/omega6-fatty-acids
Afrosapiens said:
Afrosapiens said: