A popular theory among U.S. elites: Trump ran for President because he was so humiliated by Barack Obama at the 2011 White House Correspondents’ Dinner that it was the only way to save face. Explaining the theory Dan McLaughlin writes:
Despite being born to wealth, he’s lived his whole life as the nouveau riche kid from Queens whose fame, fortune, Ivy League degree, fashion-model wives, TV shows, casinos, beauty pageants, football team, political largesse . . . none of it could get his old-money Manhattan society neighbors, the smart kids, the political movers and shakers to treat him as a peer, an equal, a man of consequence.
Partly because of this, The New York Time‘s Charles M. Blow argues Trump is jealous of Obama:
Trump wants to be Obama — held in high esteem. But, alas, Trump is Trump, and that is now and has always been trashy. Trump accrued financial wealth, but he never accrued cultural capital, at least not among the people from whom he most wanted it.
Therefore, Trump is constantly whining about not being sufficiently applauded, commended, thanked, liked. His emotional injury is measured in his mind against Obama. How could Obama have been so celebrated while he is so reviled?
The whole world seemed to love Obama — and by extension, held America in high regard — but the world loathes Trump.
Obama was a phenomenon. He was elegant and cerebral. He was devoid of personal scandal and drenched in personal erudition. He was a walking, talking rebuttal to white supremacy and the myths of black pathology and inferiority. He was the personification of the possible — a possible future in which legacy power and advantages are redistributed more broadly to all with the gift of talent and the discipline to excel.
Given this backdrop, when Obama lured Trump to the 2011 White House Correspondents’ Dinner to be laughed at to his face by a room full of U.S. elites and on international TV, he snapped, according to The New Yorker‘s Adam Gopnik:
On that night, Trump’s own sense of public humiliation became so overwhelming that he decided, perhaps at first unconsciously, that he would, somehow, get his own back — perhaps even pursue the Presidency after all, no matter how nihilistically or absurdly, and redeem himself
Explaining further, McKay Coppins writes:
On the night of the dinner, Trump took his seat at the center of the ballroom, perfectly situated so that all 2,500 lawmakers, movie stars, journalists, and politicos in attendance could see him….But as soon as the plates were cleared and the program began, it became agonizingly clear that Trump was not royalty in this room: He was the court jester. The president used his speech to pummel Trump with one punchline after another…When host Seth Meyers took the mic, he piled on with his own rat-a-tat of jokes, many of which seemed designed deliberately to inflame Trump’s outer-borough insecurities: “His whole life is models and gold leaf and marble columns, but he still sounds like a know-it-all down at the OTB.” The longer the night went on, the more conspicuous Trump’s glower became. He didn’t offer a self-deprecating chuckle, or wave warmly at the cameras, or smile with the practiced good humor of the aristocrats and A-listers who know they must never allow themselves to appear threatened by a joke at their expense.
Instead, Trump just sat there, stone-faced, stunned, simmering — Carrie at the prom covered in pig’s blood.
It’s ironic that Coppins seems to hint at Trump’s lack of social intelligence in this situation since commenters on this blog often praise Trump as one of the greatest social geniuses of our time, a reasonable opinion given Trump beat the top politicians in America at the their own game, despite no political experience. Perhaps Trump was just too angry to display his social skills on that night, or perhaps his type of social savvy can’t adapt to upper class environments.
More interesting, given it’s Halloweek, was Coppins’s reference to Stephen King’s first novel. In Carrie, after being lured to the prom by the elite kids only to be publicly laughed at, a high school senior takes her revenge by becoming the most powerful girl in the World (destroying the school with her telekinetic powers).
Similarly, after being lured to the White House Correspondents’ Dinner by U.S. elites to be publicly laughed at, Trump got his revenge by becoming the World’s most powerful man, displacing the President who mocked him.
He who laughs last, laughs best.
Pumpkin Person 
This theory is probably wrong, and for one obvious reason: Trump didn’t run in 2011-12, and instead endorsed this guy:
Trump running in 2012 would at least have won Ohio (where Mitt Romney never led in the polls).
If Trump endorsed Romney, are we to assume that he really wanted to run in 2020 or 2024? Implausible. I believe Trump sincerely thought Romney should have won in 2012 and would not have run for President if that happened.
Not saying the theory is necessarily true, but it takes time and the right opportunity to run for President, and he needed time for people to forget about that White House Correspondents’ Dinner.
Pill = The Philosopher
Mug of Pee is the guy who usually posts as “Ian Smith” or some names I redact.
Ashkenazis are socially geniuses. Trump not but he is above in this range. Socially geniuses tend to be subtler than him, indeed he is Tara McCarthy with penis.
I mean, many asheks
You can’t see that he is acting most of the time?
Trump does not talk like a 15 year old with business associates. Look at his interviews from the 1980s. He can be very articulate, depending on his audience.
Look at his interviews from the 1980s. He can be very articulate, depending on his audience.
But he was also much younger then
Its rare someone is more articulate when they are younger than older.
You’re relying on Jew approved journalists to analyse something. Thats stupid. Any stooge approved by jews usually isn’t insightful or refuses to analyse social phenomenon for many reasons.
In any case, Trump really is something of a freak in terms of social intelligence. Its not just becoming president: supermodel women, billionaire in Manhatten real estate (vs jews), no.1 tv show, debating talent, and as he likes to say, negotiations. Any one of those things you could call lucky on its own, or deliberately planned and executed. But altogether its pure genius and talent.
There has been talk of trump running since the early 1990s. Its not to ‘get back at Obama’s speech. In fact, I suspect Trump privately views Obama as out of his depth or a magic negro type figure based on his seriousness about investigating his birth certificate.
People that think you are a manchurian puppet, tend not to take you too seriously.
And he does laugh frequently at the dinner.
He’s been talking about running for President since the 80s
But he didn’t actually do it until after Obama mocked him.
I think he decided to run for lots of reasons but I wouldn’t be surprised if that was one of them, because with all he’s accomplished, he didn’t need the aggravation. He could have just retired and enjoyed his wealth and family as Howard Stern explained:
Magic Negro figures are abundant in the corporate world. I can walk on McKinsey’s floor for an interview and pass the one black guy and think ‘affirmative action’. There’s a bit of a how shall I put this, perception in the business world that blacks promoted to high positions tend to be placed there. I strongly suspect Trump thinks these types of thoughts and extrapolated it to the president.
Its well known in corporate circles that blacks above a certain IQ, and competency are in short supply. These corporations have to face the jewish morality commissars and explain why their black numbers are too small, even if they hired loads of asians and indians.
It is this kind of executive level concern that in my opinion, was an element as to why he bought a lot of the birther stuff. I suppose many liberals reading this would say that its ‘rac-ism’. Which kind of defeats the purpose of explaining why corporations, law firms and consultancies feel the whole thing is a pony show.
But many ‘republican’ executives can’t figure out why the pony show exists. It almost like a weather phenomenon to them. They can’t figure out why a social fad like this exists. Mystery!
These same republican executives 1000% talk about it privately with Trump. Theres no doubt in my mind Trump has had a conversation about diversity hiring with another businessman.
“I mean, you got the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy,” Biden said. “I mean, that’s a storybook, man.”
– Joe Biden, Vice President of the United States.
See what I mean now?
“Pocahontas just stated that the Democrats, lead by the legendary Crooked Hillary Clinton, rigged the Primaries! Lets go FBI & Justice Dept.”
The entertainment value of Donald Trump as president of the United States is immeasurable.
The Economist keeps mentioning France has a 9.8% unemployment rate. It will never mention 80% of France’s unemployed are immigrants, children of immigrants, people displaced by immigrants.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/nov/03/radical-new-approach-to-schizophrenia-treatment-begins-trial
Interesting. Is it an immune system disease?
I suspect the way the microglia react to stress on the immune system is indeed geentically programmed. This explain the hereditary nature of schizophrenia. People with primitve genes e.g. blacks, me…react to stress differently than more husbanded humans.
I still think its genetic. Its kind of ironic they have a black man from Cameroon as the first patient. If the bothered to not be politically correct they would see blacks get diagnosed with schizo 5 times more than any other race of man. Its genetic. It has to be.
I have serious memory issues these days. The other day I forgot the name of my favourite writer. I can’t remember most of my teenage and college years. But if I am deeply relaxed, memories will resurface and depersonalisation will go away. I suspect the stress/pain of it causes the brain to oxidate (oxygen ages the body), and the actual perceptual or cognitive irregularities do not actually cause the memory loss.
This condition is the one thing keeping me in a basement commenting on these blogs. I can’t solve it. There is no way out of it. I’ve been on and off different meds for years. Seen 6 or 7 psychiatrists and had about 5 different psychologists. If I don’t play video games and distract myself, within about 3 minutes I get sucked into a painful obsessive craze and my mind races to suspicion after suspicion, trying to debunk one after the other, perpetual whack a mole.
Sometimes Ill realise something and try to ignore it and just have it sitting like a physical radioactive lump in the back of my head for hours until I sleep. I was very stark with my last psychiatrist: I am in continual agony. I live in suffering.
In some ways it would be better if I joined my mother and ‘let go’ – there is no dissonance in complete untreated psychosis. You don’t need to ruminate on whether its true or not. Its always true.
Tried praying to God?
Can’t harm, can it?
Yes.
Also, try fasting, fish oil, vitamin D, cardio, blueberries, low carb diets, stuff like that.
good post
you should post more political stuff
good post
you should post more political stuff
Thanks
Philo, depersonification / derealization are fréquent among borderline disorder condition. If you had schizoid tendencies, it’s normal to get some effects . That doesn’t mean your health is going down at all.
Interesting thing is the sens of self must be a particular function of the brain : many philosophers have attached it to what is now known as episodic memory, because recall and projection make the person experience his self. But having no episodic memory or imagery , I have a strong sens of the continuity of my self , without recall. I don’t need to experience it to know it. I have recently noticed that if I don’t verbalize what I do , for example eating somewhere , I will never be able to remember what I eat nor where nor when nor if. Everything that doesn’t imply internal vocalization through my working memory buffer is erased but I always know my own self as a continuum of experiences and traits .
Sens of self is a specific brain function. Not sure it is that important . But using your recall , or projection, should help reinforcing or rebuilding it .
I read research into it. A person’s sense of being alive is connected to emotional being. In people with depersonalisation, the limbic system has shut down to reduce the amount of stimulus the brain takes in, as it cannot handle the anxiety. There are a bunch of russians experimenting with anti heroin addiction drugs that stumbled onto this realisation in their experiments with drug addicts. Theres a very good book on the topic. It is of course impossible to ask a local psychiatrist to prescribe opiod replacements generally. But I think that is the best way you would treat it with drugs. I also think you could treat it with meditation, but sitting still is a very bad idea for me.
This is the book. Its very good. Summarises the entire history of research into the phenomenon.
psychiatry and psychology are mental illnesses.
everyone with a social IQ above 40 knows this.
thus it is seen that the real problem with the schizo’s mind is lack of “insight”. insight into other people and insight into himself.
Just repeat nonsense above nonsense.
Its kind of hard for me to understand why you think even more in catchall ways than even I do.
has nothing to do with it. trump ran because he’d be too old any later. why was he the butt of jokes? because he was already campaigning with the birther stuff. trump has been exploring a bid since the 80s. as a democrat and as candidate of the reform party. he just never went through with it.
If you read this as Trump’s humiliation, something is wrong with you.
Successfully becoming the leader of the free world, deposing the democrats, replacing them in both the senate and the house, and proceeding to unravel Obamacare is your standard for a mere outlash you don’t have a dictionary with an adequate definition of either revenge or humiliation.
But in case you wanted to see what it looks like, it was Obama’s “At least I will go down as a President” gaffe.
The problem with talking big is sometimes you have to eat your words, that’s why Trump keeps his to salad.
If successfully*
If you read this as Trump’s humiliation, something is wrong with you.
Successfully becoming the leader of the free world, deposing the democrats, replacing them in both the senate and the house, and proceeding to unravel Obamacare is your standard for a mere outlash you don’t have a dictionary with an adequate definition of either revenge or humiliation.
The theory is that trump was inspired to run for president in part because he was humiliated at the dinner. No one suggested that his achievements were nonetheless spectacular but it’s a popular idea that even the greatest achievements have very simple universal motives.
Mostly liberals love to push this theory because they like the idea that trump was humiliated by Obama. At this point it’s all they have to hang on to.
As I said, I doubt trump takes obama seriously in the same way a person on the street reading USA today every morning takes Obama seriously as a ‘statesman’. Most of these business types see the world in a much more clinical ‘what is he going to do for me’ way. Like jews actually!
[redacted by pp, Nov 4, 2017]
that is, the example of celiac disease is a concrete, not merely hypothetical, example of how high local heritability is reduced to almost 0 once the estimate is made on a global sample.
and…the geographic and temporal variation in celiac disease is not just about gluten. just as age adjusted cancer rates are halved in the developing world, so the risk of celiac is reduced by relative poverty, increased by relative affluence, and these are not proxies for wheat consumption. the celiac epidemic in sweden has gone away. have the genes changed? no. has wheat consumption changed? no. one possibility is it was due to baby formula with gluten.
and…if you listened to the audio i linked to you’d learn that despite an equal frequency of antibodies in the blood, americans are diagnosed with celiac much less often than italians and other europeans. so either it’s underdiagnosed or the presence of antibodies doesn’t mean the presence of disease.
The notion of reaction norms debunking HBD has already been debunked, here: http://lambdaphagy.tumblr.com/post/134013779994/reaction-norms
you’re retarded if you really think that debunks anything. maybe you’re joking.
whoever wrote that doesn’t understand what “reaction norms” means. sad!
here’s an example:
cactus thrives in desert, rots in forest.
red wood thrives in forest, rots in desert.
and it’s even more than that.
the specific cactus thrives in a specific desert.
the red wood thrives in red wood national forest.
the phenomenon of invasive species is a concrete example. these species thrive in an environment which is NOT their native environment. but i expect this is the exception to the rule. that is, in general if a species is placed in a random non-native environment it will tend to do very poorly.
the asian carp.
the jari project.
the attempt by european framers to settle africa north of southern rhodesia (zimbabwe). their plants died, their animals died, they died.
and now celiac disease can be added to this list.
big time.
locally celiac is very heritable, perhaps the most heritable “complex” disease. by “complex” is meant “many genes of small effect”.
i expect type 1 diabetes can also be added to the list.
it’s stupid.
as steve jones said, “smoking doesn’t cause cancer in some people for genetic reasons. is the solution to smoking caused cancers to select such embryos as are immune to the cancer causing effects of smoking or is it to stop smoking?”
4. All medical risk analysis proceeds from the statistical (analyzing groups of people) to produce recommendations concerning a specific individual.
yes. and it is also almost always meaningless, because the groups of people are local
(-ized).
“many genes of small effect” is modern day snake oil, medical fraud.
celiac is like phenylketonuria…
except!
it happens that genetic identical populations vary in the frequency of celiac disease for reason unrelated to how much gluten they consume.
whereas phenylketonuria afaik always obtains if the genes for it are there.
the many genes of small effect faggots would be a lot more trustworthy if they wanted to test for objective physical dimensions like brain size.
but as the environment changed for the reference population, the genomic prediction would get worse and worse. it would have to be recalibrated every decade.
the many genes of small effect faggots would be a lot more trustworthy if they wanted to test for objective physical dimensions like brain size.
It’s more exciting to skip the middleman and go straight for the real prize: IQ
but as the environment changed for the reference population, the genomic prediction would get worse and worse. it would have to be recalibrated every decade.
Assuming there was no norm-crossing, they could just predict population specific Z scores (instead of absolute phenotypes) as you once suggested.
[redacted by pp, nov 5, 2017]
im going to fly to cambodia and measure the iqs of british sexpats in order to work out british iq
I need more clarity on what Philosopher thinks on Wittgenstein. I have a problem with language in that it is derived from my unconscious representation. I do not have images in my head, so the nature of my representations of the world is purely unconscious when I use language. I can have an intuition of a pink elephant on a tricycle but not an image of one my brain generates for me to see.
Wittgenstein in a Nutshell
I’ve talked about this topic at length numerous times.
i disagree with philosopher.
i don’t think trump is smart, or a genius.
i think he is smarter than people think he is.
i don’t think he is a (social) genius.
i’m quite convinced he’s a puppet of more deliberate clinical powers.
so yes, i agree with pp that small, personal moments like this are certainly (one) of the factors leading to his decision to run for president.
all humans operate on ‘vibes’.
reason is a slave to passion.
never forget.
No, its obvious to me he is a ‘very superior’ socially intelligent person, if they could figure out a way to measure it. There is too much evidence for this. Read Scott Adams blog. I’ve provided links to videos where you can see he’s trolling or making oblique references to things. In fact, watch a video of him from the 1980s and compare it to his interviews today…a normal person would think he was a chernobyl victim and had brain damage…his spoken manner is an affect. He knows exactly what he is doing.
The question you might want to consider though is if he gets too emotional sometimes. I think he does. But many psychopaths get emotional as well. Emotional control, is not necessarily a key facet of social intelligence. It kind of defeats the purpose of being socially intelligent to get money, women and fame if you are not emotional or aspy.
In fact, watch a video of him from the 1980s and compare it to his interviews today…a normal person would think he was a chernobyl victim and had brain damage…his spoken manner is an affect. He knows exactly what he is doing.
No his birther theories were an affect. His speaking style is mostly real. Few people would dumb themselves down that much on purpose unless they wanted people to think they were dumb, and Trump has way too big an ego to do that. The 80s was 30 years ago and the brain shrinks and declines in old age. He remains socially brilliant but his verbal has likely declined.
The question you might want to consider though is if he gets too emotional sometimes. I think he does. But many psychopaths get emotional as well. Emotional control, is not necessarily a key facet of social intelligence.
As I tried to warn you, personality’s different from intelligence. Trump has a high social IQ (a cognitive trait) but lacks impulse control (a personality trait). Personality (emotions, motivations) and Cognition (intellect) are two different psychological clusters. Intelligence is just the brain’s problem solving computer but personality (if it’s healthy) motivates us to solve problems that enhance our genetic fitness. A smart person can fail in life because of dysfunctional temperament.
Look at videos of Obama 2007 and Obama in 2014. Ever notice the way Obama sounds like a black preacher in 2014. Uses the word ‘folks’. Talks like a midwesterner. He grew up in Hawaii and Indonesia. Hes a lot smarter than that. He was told to do it by his advisers in my opinion.
Trump doesn’t need advisers on how to interact with normal people or wealthy people or scientists. Notice the way Peter Thiel is a friend of his. Although most of trumps friends seem to be ‘proles’ as Lion would say. I would admit that is his natural affinity group.
On your second point I agree, that personality is comprised of things like preferences, emotional stability and that. But from what I can see one’s cognition is part of their personality because ones tastes and emotional control, or aspects like curiosity and quickness to confrontation are linked to your cognition and your type of cognition in my opinion.
I would go as far as to say, IQ tests tell you alot about the persons personality. And I mean, IQ tests that would hypothetically test for all types of intelligence – social, musical, too.
mbti is my favorite personality type test
“personality (if it’s healthy) motivates us to solve problems that enhance our genetic fitness. A smart person can fail in life because of dysfunctional temperament.”
yes
Emotional intelligence is all about subtlety…
If he was at least above avg in psychological intelligence he would be capable to convince most of american liberals that he is their president too.
Trump delight the flavor of white american masses, just like a mirror, they look themselves in trump disgusting face.
I was reading an article about 2 years ago by this journalist investigating cuckolding couples. She called cuckolding the ‘phD fetish’ as it seems ultra educated ‘white’ (reading between the lines, jewish) men seem to partake in it with black men a lot. South Park made a joke about it with Chef and Kyles mother.
In my opinion, a lot of the promotion of black men in media is actually part of a strange sexual fetish jewish men seem to have. Its beyond coincidence that cuckoldry in real life is a very jewish thing and jews cant stop promoting blacks day in day out. Nor the fact that the main porn directors that shoot interracial porn are all jewish.
The evolutionary reasons for cuckoldry as a fetish are a mystery to me. Why would a man seek out the most low IQ barbaric men to impregnate his spouse? Keeping in mind jews are extremely tribal.
It makes no sense, unless you believe in good and evil overall. And the jews are from the side of darkness and can’t stand living among ‘goodwhites’. McDonald talks about how Freud almost seems to say gentiles are mentally ill because they are too wholesome.
no. cuckolding is a product of the most extreme form of virtue signalling. the man wishes to feel like a good person, believing that if he truly loves his spouse, he should want for her whatever she wants
and for women bbc fetish is a thing
no man actually likes cuckolding. because cuckolds, just like gays, are bred out instantly.
homosexuality isn’t genetic. homosexuals don’t reproduce. bi-sexuals do, however, which is why like 90% of civilizations in history such as romans, greeks, persians, japanese, had sex with teen boys as well as girls
”homossexuals don’t reproduce”
oh my GOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOD,
”intelligent design”**
where**
just like
”fertility rates in Europe is 1,5 = K reproductive ”strategy’ ”
the same Rushington vibes…
Firstly, the world is not
”be homo or not, that’s the question”
Between exclusively hetero and exclusively homo we have a SPECTRUM, so called SEXUAL VARIATION or DIVERSITY.
TODAY, exclusively homos indeed are not reproducing themselves BUT in the past, many if not most them were forced and self-forced to adapt to conservative society and would reproduce.
Even TODAY there are NON-EXCLUSIVELY heterossexual in different degrees and many this people reproduce.
If the imprinted genes theory is very right, homossexuality is one of this products when the mother genes win the father genes or otherwise in the case of lesbians.
Homossexuality is like a chemical change/mutation and heterossexuality diversity is like a physical change/ recombination.
no. there is no spectrum.
you have sex with men or you don’t.
there’s no 12% having sex with men and 57% having sex with men.
bonobos are the best example.
they just fuck everything in sight. humans are the same.
there are no gay bonobos. only bi. literally no gay bonobos. zero.
“SEXUAL VARIATION or DIVERSITY.”
what??????????????????
asians are a slave race. santo literally quoting jews.
this is why we have them make our clothes and iphones.
you have sex with men or you don’t.
No some gay men never have sex with other men, and some don’t even want to. Sexuality’s not about sex as Mug of Pee argues, but about physical/romantic attraction.
And some straight me do have sex with men, especially in prison.
does this change the fact that most humans are genetically bi-sexual and that being homosexual is quite an evolutionary fatal condition to have?
”no. there is no spectrum.
you have sex with men or you don’t.”
DIO SANTO
And you think you’re a genius***
really**
”there’s no 12% having sex with men and 57% having sex with men.”
oi*
”bonobos are the best example.
they just fuck everything in sight. humans are the same.
there are no gay bonobos. only bi. literally no gay bonobos. zero.”
and…
“SEXUAL VARIATION or DIVERSITY.”
what??????????????????
”asians are a slave race. santo literally quoting jews.”
”this is why we have them make our clothes and iphones.”
i’m not white santo, [redacted by pp, Nov 7, 2017]
This strange obsession that jews have for blacks is probably the key social development of the later 20th century.
If you told someone in the 1920s that you really cared about blacks, wanted blacks in your tv shows, and wanted to campaign for black rights, they would simply ask:
Why do you care so much about blacks anyway?
At this point you have to invent a fairly bizarre notion that jews are the most selfless race of man and so untribal that they were moved by sheer injustice to rescue the blacks.
I find the better explanation is either (a) jews use blacks as a trojan horse or (b) subsconscious sexual overtures?
(a) doesn’t hold up, because its not logical you would elevate the most hated and unruly group like that. It doesn’t make sense that you would conspire to choose the most violent and vicious people a poster boy for social engineering.
But (b) is also kind of ridiculous.
I just can’t figure out why jews love blacks so much. Someone bail me out.
Well if you look at Israel, its clear they do don’t like blacks. So maybe it is (a). Its just stupid you would pick the heaviest weight to pick up and lump at ‘goody two shoes gentile’. There must be a another motivation.
Maybe the answer lies with [redacted by pp, Nov 5, 2017] Bill Gates, who similarly feels physical stomach cramps thinking about ‘po ‘po african poverty, and not south asian poverty or central american poverty. What is going through Bill Gates mind?
Bill Gates, who similarly feels physical stomach cramps thinking about ‘po ‘po african poverty, and not south asian poverty or central american poverty. What is going through Bill Gates mind?
The same thing that goes through Angelina Jolie’s mind when she adopts African babies. Helping Africa = good publicity.
I bash bill gates all the time. God knows I do.
But he is not a cretin like that for publicity.
None of Gates’s African charity happened until after the Clinton Justice Department tried to destroy him. He realized then that too many people hated him and were jealous of his wealth so he decided to reinvent himself as a philanthropist that everyone loves.
I don’t think this is the correct narrative. Maybe I’m wrong, but Bill is good friends with Buffet, which tells you a lot about his personality.
it’s communist/open society subversion. blacks are useful idiots just like feminists are. simple.
also, religious jews hate blacks.
capitalist atheist jews like them because they’re on george soros’ paycheck.
jews aren’t the monolithic tribal unit you make them out to be. those damn jews!!!!!!!!!
yes. the same happened with j d r. he had lots of bad press. it was deserved. he was a douche. but he didn’t like it that people knew he was a douche, so he started the rockefeller foundation.
The ability to feel stomach cramps at others poverty is a white person genetic legacy. In my opinion, it is this high empathy that also meant their economies could rely on common social understandings and rules like ‘constitutions’ and general ‘goodwill’ to make their economies more advanced in terms of human economic relations that the rest of the world.
Remember – only whites paid back the jewish moneylenders. Jewish moneylenders in Eastern Turkey didn’t do so well because people basically said, why should I pay you back?!
[rest of comment redacted by pp, nov 5, 2017]
hmmmmmmmmmmm is it now? but white people don’t take care of their own homeless, let alone other people in poverty.
come on now. enough of this
Is John Sonmez, K?
This is a very good lecture by Soros. I think this is the one in the series where he mentions humans have 2 functions: a Narrative function and a Cognitive Function.
I explained it to my friend. If you imagine being in a dark room with a flashlight. A person with cognitive capabilities can use the light to find out the facts of the room. A person with narrative capabilities can look at a certain desk or chair in the room and conjecture the age of the owner of the room from the design period of the desk.
Every fact a person knows, is actually wrapped within a context of alignment with prior narratives of the facts he has. A lot of people these days do not have cognitive problems. The scientific instruments and standardised statistical methods a donkey can use. The problem is that people are just not able to put the correct Narrative on what the desk in the room means.
Yes, its subjective and related to life history. But at the end of the day, there are only a few facts about the desk that can help you escape the room.
This is the difference between philosophy and science by the way.
This is why I find Wittgenstein’s paradigm detour and how we can’t say anything about the desk unless the sentence is constructed carefully almost to be evidence of a jewish conspiracy to make sure nobody figures out what is going on.
Think about it: Anyone with a verbal IQ over 140, which historically meant you were doing philosophy or theology or such like, is now saddled in a quagmire of grammer debates. Philosophers change the world, by interpreting facts….not scientists.
If I see another article saying how ‘anti science’ conservatives are, I will explode. Whether one believes in HBD or climate change is not a ‘scientific’ position either way. Science is just a process. Its like saying you believe in incubation or you are ‘anti detective work’.
As Scott Adams mentioned, you can’t be pro science and believe in climate change modelling, because modelling is not traditional ‘science’.
I have said before even math is not science.
These things a works of logical deduction, not induction.
What people on either side really mean to say is – “you are a hack, I can prove it” or your interpretation is motivated by X.
Even I have doubts about HBD in a ‘scientific’ sense. There’s nothing much ‘scientific’ about HBD probably because scientists are barred by jews from studying it, outside of medical rare diseases and that). Most of it is common sense more so.
If modelling was ‘science’. Than any Wall Street analyst or card counter at a casino can call themselves a ‘scientist’.
What people mean when they say someone modelling is ‘doing good science’, is that they are applying scientific findings to extrapolate. The better term for modelling is ‘engineering’.
If you look at demographic modelling from the 1970s, none of it has come true.
In the same way, I expect climate modelling will not come true due to the ironically very reason we worry about climate change – human activity.
I am not scientist. I hated science in school. I find the idea of being in a lab super boring. I never thought about spending 3 years investigating a hypothesis and increase its ‘truthiness level’ with numerous studies.
I suspect I have a better understanding of science, than at least a majority of science college students just reading Popper’s writings.
If you ask me 10 random questions about the world, I bet 5/10 I would go against the ‘scientific consensus’ by pointing out the studies are not really science, but modelling/engineering or frauds.
There is one category of scientific findings that are a gray area. These are ‘tenuous findings’. The study was done correctly against a control. The study might even have been replicated. But common sense would say its too complicated to say what the study is saying for sure. You get that a lot in pharmacology studies or medicine. Nutrition studies are infamous for these.
on global warming:
the vikings lived in southern greenland for 500 years from 1000 to 1500 approximately.
why did they leave?
it got colder. a lot colder. eventually they adopted the eskimo life, but it was too hard for them. they left.
it’s still much colder than it was in 1000 ad.
IQ genes seems more a domestication confound, for example for verbal IQ. People must realize that proper writing is a CONVENTION and not a TRUE FACT. And a verbal convention is a kind of COMMAND some people are truly good to internalize. If verbal skills are essential for human intelligence, so ….
True intelligence is always the reasoning, verbal skills and even mathematical skills are very useful accessories to reach the proper reasoning with correct products.
Intelligence, as well many other ”things”, have contextual concepts or applications AND universal ones which are present and in some underlying way determinant to all types of contextual intelligence/adaptations, a ”type of ether”.
Universal concept of intelligence is what it is whatever the place and time it is. It’s mean intelligence is teleological because ALWAYS have as fundamental end the balance//survive, at individual or at collective ways. The methods are very diverse but the end is the same for all.
IQ is a type of contextual concept of intelligence because it’s work very well in complex societies and with domesticated humans.
the morally superior white race arrived upon the shores of america
treated like gods and with the utmost hospitality by the natives
the whites said:
gibs me dat
lesson to be learned
Should white people apologize for being better at conquering and enslaving than the other people ?
Yes, and we should start by asking ex-military badasses to start apologizing first. We are sure to get our asses kicked.
of course not – they should proud. they should learn not to be hypocritical and claim moral superiority however.
Ok
“All races are more or less equal in intelligence”
Congolese spatial program :
“At least all Caucasians are more or less equal in intelligence”
Algerian engineers installing an electric pylon right in the middle of a road :
The real world is often far more telling than simple IQ scores.
Meanwhile in the UK.
“At least all Caucasians are more or less equal in intelligence”
AHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAAH
yes, yes they are more or less equal in intelligence. we can be members of ‘awkwardly installed poles’ races together.
No, only algerians had the brillant idea to install one right in the middle of a highway.
You clearly underestimate the berber creative genius.
it’s done intentionally by a phenomenon called ‘rogue contractors’. they take government money, do an intentionally shit job, then run with the cash
it’s criminal activity, not stupid activity
our living standards are better than russia, greece and half of europe, we have social welfare and an extensive medieval history, during which we have conquered white civilizations several times – and are probably the only race on the planet to have ever done so
and of course ruled most of spain for nearly a millennia
current consensus from whites seems to be that berbers are less intelligent than the african-american negro
oh dear
they really don’t like us
Sure, it was intentional. It completly flew over my little white head. Algerians are so smart. When they do something seemingly stupid, their is actually a very precise purpose behind it.
So your explanation of the failure of your people is not they are dumb but rather evil scum who can’t live without stealing each other.
I also wonder why they emigrate to europe if life in algeria is so cool. I know probably know more north africans than you do and curiously they all spend their holidays in morocco, even if they are algerians.
Algeria is a shithole even compared to the rest of maghreb.
Algerians are also really mean people.
I’m pretty sure north africans would score the lowest on the agreableness part of personality tests. They are very unpleasant people.
“I’m pretty sure north africans would score the lowest on the agreableness part of personality tests. They are very unpleasant people.”
shiet i got a 0 in agreeableness!!!!!!!!!!! must mean i have sub-human intellect too
take one yourself, i wish to compare
“So your explanation of the failure of your people is not they are dumb but rather evil scum who can’t live without stealing each other.”
it’s more like, we don’t like outsiders as a rule. very family oriented/tribal people
there are 10 tribes in the maghreb, i am from the kabyle numbering around 6 million. i am very kind/good natured to kabyle. i’m not particularly fond of the other tribes, or outsiders in general. very paranoid/hostile to people that aren’t family
only care for my genetic ‘people’. similar to jews in that sense. infact, most jews are north african or ashkenazi.
certainly don’t care about white people or their societies.
regardless, white people will be extinct by the end of the century at the rate things are going. natural selection at work.
So arabs have empathy for their family members but not for the rest ? How does it work ? When the arab brain identify someone as an outsider his empathy immediately turn off ?
A more rational explanation would simply be that arabs overall have low empathy level.
I have lived most of my youth in a 70% north african neighborhood and i can tell with 100% certainty they have not that much empathy for their own.
They only unite themselves to hate someone else. Arabs and blacks against whites. Arabs against blacks. Algerians against moroccans. Neighborhood A against neighborhood B. Family A against family B. Even between family members. Family stories often go very very far with these people. A man jealous of his brother, etc, and this often end up in a dramatic way.
Not even mentioning beating their children and wife is the rule. Some do not, but they are an exception. Just like a white man beating his wife is an exception.
“regardless, white people will be extinct by the end of the century at the rate things are going. natural selection at work.”
Does this make you happy ? The world gonna be a shithole without white people.
i’m berber not arab, so i don’t know much about them. i’m not particularly fond of arabs, but neither am i particularly fond of french people.
french people killed 10% of the population of my tribe in the independence war, so i can’t say i’m particularly fond of you french, either. i can travel to my village in kabylia and see the graves of the people you killed all with my family name written there on the stones.
from my perspective it’s the french who’re callous and without empathy. i only have to look at that psychopath banker macron.
the french also lead a coalition to bomb libya just recently – killing thousands of people and stealing the entirety of libya’s gold reserves and transforming libya from the nation with the best living standards in africa to a failed state.
so, my point is
1. french immigrants in algeria behaved like psychopaths
2. algerian immigrants in france appear to behave like psychopaths
we can see that immigrants in other countries tend to form parasitic groups inside their host country and act in a psychopathic way to the host, be they french or algerian.
are algerians psycopathic towards each other? no.
does algeria have infighting that limits development? yes, between islamists and secularists.
i’m secular myself. islam is brain rot.
it has little to do with intellect. after defeating the islamists in the civil war, we’re making slow and steady progress to a completely secular country and have completely liberated women.
“Increasingly, women contribute more to household income than men.[3] As of 2007, sixty-five percent of university students are women, with more than 80% joining the workforce after graduation.[3] They are encouraged by family members to become educated and contribute to Algerian society. Algerian women are among the first in North Africa to become taxi and bus drivers.[3] Their numbers are also increasing in the police force and security positions.[2]”
“Does this make you happy ? The world gonna be a shithole without white people.”
i’m just trolling, i know that’s one of the lines that sends white-supremacists into a bitter frenzy
no pill. trump’s elliptical manner of speaking is not affected. social intelligence has nothing to do with the willingness or the ability to deceive, manipulate, or affect. he talks that way because he’s honest. pleonasm is disguise.
think about it. of all famous people who’s the one you’d be most surprised to learn was a pervert? trump. if he’s fake, he’s an authentic fake.
trump won the nomination and the election with less than half the money in both cases. why? because trump is real. there’s no facade. that’s who he is. it’s all up front. even when he’s lying, people know he’s lying, and he knows that they know he’s lying. so he isn’t really lying. so he wasn’t angered by seth meyers’s jokes. he just didn’t find them funny, so he didn’t laugh. trump is a lesson in the virtues honesty and sincerity. but then so is a mongoloid.
100 examples of norms of reaction.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_globally_invasive_species
and contra the individualist ideology social intelligence is more than insight into other individuals and oneself qua isolated and pristine individual. it is primarily insight into society.
thus thatcher is an example of an autistic in power. and america’s governing elite are an example of an autistic elite. though a (((minority))) of the american elite knows that the individualist ideology is bullshit and uses it as cover. that is, it denounces as paranoid conspiracy theorists and haters any who name them.
But they are not completely wrong about what they believe as you foolishly think.
Because many them are gullible it’s still doens’t mean they are completely wrong in their heuristics or factual understanding.
the individualist ideology is autism.
Firstly, you need to grasp the different concepts of
INDIVIDUALISM
AND
INDIVIDUALITY
Autists are overwhelmingly INDIVIDUALS and not individualistics, aka, selfish.
an eskimo like peepee is adopted at birth by bedouins. what happens?
HBDer answers: the eskimo will still build igloos and eat blubber. when his parents serve him goat meat he will cut off all the fat very carefully. then he will eat the fat and refuse to eat the meat.
HBDers are autistic.
just look at them. they look autistic. just listen to them. they sound autistic.
pill is more autistic than zuckerberg. he takes psychology seriously. sad!
[photo redacted by pp, nov 5, 2017]
Question for Mug of Pee: how much of the 15 point black-white IQ gap in the U.S. is genetic in your judgement?
[redacted by pp, Nov 5, 2017]
for traits like IQ the cake can’t be sliced. it must be unbaked. as steve jones said to charlie rose, “it’s not that murray’s claims are wrong. it’s that they’re meaningless.”
if it happens that rank order of tests scores within populations can be predicted directly from the genome without changing the scoring algorithm from one population to another but using the same one for all populations, then the HBDers would be proven correct. but that’s never going to happen. it’s not even going to happen for celiac disease. but it might happen for height and brain size.
the murder rate in ghana. the tfr in barbados. and the black white gap in bermuda prove that HBD is wrong, or at least simplistic.
if sesardic doesn’t talk about the phenotype(genotype, environment) surface then he hasn’t made any sense of heritability.
both the blank slate and the hereditists are wrong. but the blank slate people don’t exist.
for traits like IQ the cake can’t be sliced. it must be unbaked. as steve jones said to charlie rose, “it’s not that murray’s claims are wrong. it’s that they’re meaningless.
Yes, you mentioned that 3 years ago & I understood back then, but Murray was assuming a P = G + E model.
if it happens that rank order of tests scores within populations can be predicted directly from the genome without changing the scoring algorithm from one population to another but using the same one for all populations, then the HBDers would be proven correct.
But this is not good standard. An algorithm created in the general population would not as strongly predict IQs in the Down Syndrome population, yet you’ve admitted on Lion’s blog that that IQ gap is independently genetic.
but that’s never going to happen. it’s not even going to happen for celiac disease. but it might happen for height and brain size.
Actually it wont even happen for height. They now have algorithms that can strongly predict height from genetic variants in Western samples (r = 0.65) but their predictive power plummets in South Asians
Skin colour is another example in that East Asians and Whites are both light skinned, yet because of different genetic variants in both populations. So a genetic algorithm built on whites would fail in East Asians.
I know a girl who is 35 and she can read really fast. It took me two months to read two books by Issac Asimov 300 pages and 400 pages respectfully. My friend claimed it would take her 1 day to read both books. Her IQ is 135.
I go with the figure that my IQ is 118 (g is definitely 130). The deviation my friend has above me I certainly view as genetic. I can hardly imagine the increase a person at 170 would be. The molecules simply arrange themselves by the protein shape and allow greater processing. It is like the difference between a gardens market and wall-mart. The shapes of the proteins matter for the organization and coordination of the brain for intelligence.
So that is basically how it works, the shapes of proteins matter. A Ferrari is shaped differently than a Toyota Prius. Functionality follows form.
The challenge is to see what protein shapes metabolize the system in such a way to allow intelligence. Statistics may not be enough because the specificity of interactions is hard to predict. Metabolic proteins interactions may simply be limited to the individual and their metabolism cannot be compared to the general public. There may be only a superficial commonality between metabolisms in people brain and intelligence.
it isn’t genetic. the 5 point iq gap between british blacks and british whites is genetic.
bigger iq gaps like the 15 point gap in america are due to cultural and educational factors.
proven by huge iq gaps between two segments of the same population
east germany, (85) west germany (100)
irish (90), irish americans (105)
rounded to nearest 5 cuz i dont feel like googling the studies right now
[redacted by pp, nov 6, 2017] 97% of the variation is within each race. no such failure would happen. [redacted by pp, nov 6, 2017]
But such a failure would happen if you were trying to predict skin color, though perhaps that’s a bad analogy since it’s so much less polygenetic than IQ. But if Cochran and Harpending were right about unique Ashkenazi diseases causing high Ashkenazi IQ, then a genonomic predictor created in Australian aborigonals could never predict IQ in Ashkenazim, even if the genetic difference between them was 100% independently genetic.
that means only 3% of alleles are found in one race and not in another. drrr.
the difference is the correlation structure of the alleles, not their existence.
[redacted by pp, nov 6, 2017]
“There may be only a superficial commonality between metabolisms in people brain and intelligence.”
Totaly mest up here.
Finding the genes of intelligence is difficult because variation in metabolism is had to predict intelligence by genes since genes = metabolism but not common to all high IQ people.
Two high IQ people may share no gene in common yet have the right difereing genes from each other to have a metabolism allowing high IQ.
Fenoopy and Ian talking a lot of nonsense today. I thought when I was joking about how you can’t compare Koko to a black child because of his crack cocaine addicted mother that people would get the joke.
”the murder rate in ghana. the tfr in barbados. and the black white gap in bermuda prove that HBD is wrong, or at least simplistic.”
Maybe this proved that it’s you who are simplistic…
Firstly, do you knew that ”white bermudians” seems more mixed than, for example, average white-americans** [ i hope yes]
And that there are white sub-populations who are not mixed and still have lower cognitive outcomes**
Do you knew that it’s not ALL black populations who express the same macro-behavioral patterns**
And that yes, some governmental decisions can make some important differences** But that it’s extremely important to search for ”genetic confound”** [ make, Ghana there are right now less NATURAL troublemakers among them than in other places].
Maybe this proved that it’s you who are simplistic…
Hahaha! Exactly Santo!
bermuda isn’t brazil you retarded latam.
the british are very persnickety about race, unlike the iberians.
white bermudan means WHITE. 100% pure WHITE.
black bermudan means ONE DROP.
i hate gooks.
santo can’t produce or comprehend english.
his last post is just agreeing with me, yet he thinks he’s disagreeing.
pork-and-cheese is not a language.
Completely loser, alcoholic and homo-obsessed this GARBAGE
well, AGAIN, your supposedly MOTHER-TONGUE english also is FAR TO BE fantastic…
”100%” white**
I doubt.
In the end, there are ”’stupid”’ whites you knew*
You’re a example about how to be stupid even when ”ur” IQ ”is” higher.
santo’s english is the cutest thing ever
because you call yourself “branco”, you think all new world whites are mixed.
they aren’t.
in america you’d be “pardo”.
my comments aren’t for you or any others. they are for me. so i can read them in the future and think:
SantoCulto
“In the end, there are ”’stupid”’ whites you knew*”
The studies of both black and white Bermudian scores are compared to the UK norm. They are neither a lower performing white subgroup, nor more mixed.
Both are measured against the British (UK white) norm.
If the whites were dumber (i.e especially dumb whites) than the generally used white average/norm (the British), they would have scored lower when compared/”normed” to it.
There is no reason to assume that Bermudian whites are more “stupid”, nor evidence of it (Bermuda is a prosperous country).
Bermuda is a tiny country…
”The studies of both black and white Bermudian scores are compared to the UK norm. They are neither a lower performing white subgroup, nor more mixed.”
”There is no reason to assume that Bermudian whites are more “stupid”, nor evidence of it (Bermuda is a prosperous country).”
Yes maybe i was quite precipited but still don’t mean ”genetics no have a rule in Bermudas”, it’s what i want to say, fundamentally.
”HBDer answers: the eskimo will still build igloos and eat blubber. when his parents serve him goat meat he will cut off all the fat very carefully. then he will eat the fat and refuse to eat the meat.”
If you really believe HBdears think like that, so you’re dangerously undervaluing them.
celiac disease has the highest AUC on this list after AMD, yet it can be avoided 100% of the time by eliminating one simple component of the environment, gluten.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predictive_genomics#Applications_in_complex_human_diseases
my guess is that no matter how high one’s score for any of these ailments, there are environmental changes which will eliminate all excess risk. so the use of such tests is merely to motivate people to make lifestyle changes they should have made anyway.
[redacted by pp, nov 6, 2017]
it’s possible to breed europeans into chinapeople WITHOUT any mutations. NONE. except for that 3%.
Question: Why do Americans call Asians monkeys
Answer translated from Japanese:
“Speaking of animals that are the closest to humans is a monkey. Caucasian is not regarding yellow race as the same human being as them, because it sees as a nearly imaginary living thing to a monkey that can be seen at a glance.
Even in the West, monkeys are recognized as animals with the habit of imitating things. So then, looking at the Asians who are immediately packed with Westerners, Caucasian ridiculates the Asians as being monkeys.
Even now and in the past, all Japanese cars are copies of European or American cars. Most of them think that they do not possess technical skills to create excellent cars in Japan, design and mechanics are also keeping their cars. In fact, the recent design of Toyota is Audi’s pakuri, handling etc. We are researching German cars thoroughly and getting out of it. Even if it is a recent bullet train, the Kyushu Shinkansen etc is a design that paked high speed railway in Europe.
Humans mimic their dresses of Westerners alike, they dyed his hair to brown hair and blond hair, and the figure that he wanted to be hard white as a white man is just a monkey imitation itself from a white man. Not only Japanese but also Asians dyed the hair in the same way, it seems that there is a habit of hoping to imitate yellow races like monkeys as well. If you are imitated and cool, you can understand it yet, but somehow it has become an ugly figure unnoticeable. From white people, Asians will only look like ugly monkeys. So prejudice against the Asians, discrimination does not decrease at all. No, I have more escalation these days.
The Japanese looks down on China and Korea as a pakistan state, but in the long run what Japan does is exactly the same. I can not help it because I want to be like a white man, so I am certainly buying it at overseas brand shops are Chinese, Korean, and Japanese. From the perspective of them, it is the same ugly yellow monkey.
The face of Asians also looks like a monkey to them. It is the same as thinking Japanese seem to be gorillas looking at African citizens. For them familiar with the Caucasian face all the time, the face of Asians really looks like a monkey face. From a Japanese point of view, I wonder why there is a man who wants to marry a gorilla-like civil woman, but from the local man’s perspective, a citizen can be seen as an attractive woman. Caucasian, Asian relations are the same as this. This is not simply a visual one, it seems to be due to a more complicated mechanism of the brain.”
Fenoopy the stereotype of Asians being monkeys is completely different from the stereotype of blacks being monkeys.
For starters, the Asian stereotype was more a “monkey see-monkey do” metaphor, and the physical resemblance was to distantly related monkeys proper, who do kind of have slanted eyes:
But no one ever literally thought Asians were monkeys
By contrast the stereotype of blacks being monkeys related to their perceived resemblance to the anthropoid apes who humans actually evolved from in Africa, so this stereotype was taken much more literally.
oh i know, i just like to look around websites in other languages to see what people from foreign cultures think, it’s very interesting
(in other words, i did not ask the question, a japanese person did, i simply thought the question and answer were very interesting and translated/posted the comment here)
also… that monkey kind of does look like a gook…………….
because many of them look like monkeys.
not s asians. they don’t look like monkeys.
ne and se asians rook rike monkeys. sad!
abos, papuans, and melanesians have very dark skin. the melanesians even have kinky hair.
but they look less like monkeys than chinapeople.
sad!
“ne and se asians rook rike monkeys.”
lmao
very interesting. if wikipedia can be trusted.
the medical establishment in one large european country thinks even less of psychiatry than i do. the grandfather of this country’s psychiatric establishment is even affiliated with the scientologists’ Citizens Commission on Human Rights.
the country is italy. the grandfather is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giorgio_Antonucci.
psychiatry is a fucking joke though
the entire profession is based upon diagnosing people with fraud diagnosis
like adhd and bipolar disorder
if they don’t make a diagnosis they don’t make money
so yes the profession is snake oil salesmanship
doesn’t mean HBD is wrong tho. bushmen aren’t as intelligent as other humans. just fact. aboriginals too.
And after all i’m the cluesless here and there and for.
do you think gender dysphoria is legit science santo?
obviously real mental illnesses exist but for the most part, the profession is a business
i’m not so stupid or dishonest to deny that some people do have mental problems.
what i deny is that these are ex nihilo or “ex genetico”. the same thing.
‘stead o’ kisses we get kicks…it’s the hardknock life…
fenoopy gets it.
just like the food business has the fixed stomach problem, the business of psychiatry has the problem that at most 2% of people are genuinely crazy at any one time.
but psychiatry has a yuge advantage.
it’s just talk.
it’s just opinion.
the demand can be artificially hypertrophied…
just make the definitions of crazy more vague.
the only reason psychology exists is allow dumb people to get college degrees.
at any one time, 1 in 6 americans is taking a psychiatric drug. italy is low on the list. korea is lower. if you’ve read Crazy Like Us you will learn that in japan there is no such thing as depression in the american sense. drug companies tried to sell the idea to the japanese. they failed. maybe it’s the same in s korea. both countries have high suicide rates.
maybe it was because the japanese didn’t know what “deplession” was.
what is deplession?
Also Fenoopy keeps mentioning irish and irish americans. Has he seen recent PISA scores for Ireland or seen any IQ study not from pre 1990s when Ireland had the same living standards as Greece?
Go to ireland and look at the way the towns are planned out, the litter on the street, the way the people dress.
Now go to jamaica, or south africa or Brazil and see if you can infer intelligence to be ‘roughly equal’ leaving out crack cocaine mammys. Its ridiculous how crystal clear it is
Steve Saller writes a lot about how Detroit and Compton were in the 1960s compared to today. Asian immigrants also very poor, but they don’t make their living environs look like Kinshasa.
Always and everywhere, blacks revert to Kinshasa given enough freedom. Would an eskimo child build an igloo? No, but it would be introverted, have a better memory and tend towards alcholism..
what? i don’t disagree with hbd or your points at all
i think caucasians are relatively equal in intelligence controlling for factors like height etc
do you personally think caucasians have vastly differing IQs?
both ireland and portugal have been backward and alcoholic in the recent past or in the present.
what do they have in common?
geography!
both are on the western fringe of europe.
even iceland has had lots of problems recently.
it too is on the western fringe.
the pork-and-cheese are the master champion drinkers of western europe. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_alcohol_consumption_per_capita#2010_WHO_data
The government is run by blacks and is poor. But its clean thanks to some government policy.
When I say ‘you can’t compare populations because Oprah was on at 7PM EST and not 10PM EST and so people couldn’t hear her shows and develop their brains as children….
Dont take me seriously.
nobody did
Pumpkin’s point is right, any ‘standardised foolproof way’ of measuring intelligence can’t account for aberrations like people with down syndrome. I would concede africans raised in western nations would gain in IQ from introduction to symbolic reasoning, nurtrition, less disease….but what makes [redacted by pp, nov 6, 2017] a hack is when he infers Africans, who never even invented the wheel, says they would start doing well in the nobels, or dominating college hard science departments. Its ridiculous.
Face it, humans evolve for different environments.
Why are blacks naturally athletic?The brain is a physical organ as well.
didnt invent the wheel?
didn’t JM8 prove africans were building stone temples/buildings and were capable of agriculture? independently of other races
african’s aren’t monolithic as a race either, there are different breeds/tribes of varying intelligence
didn’t JM8 prove africans were building stone temples/buildings and were capable of agriculture? independently of other races
Agriculture appeared first in Caucasoid North Africa before spreading to hybridized East Africa and then later appearing in West Africa. The question is whether it appeared in West Africa independently or just travelled there from East Africa.
As for stone buildings; it’s true these appeared before any known contacts with Eurasians, however a lot of the proto-civilizations Jm8 likes to cite are associated with pastoralism which recent genetic evidence suggests is associated with back migrations into Africa from the Middle East.
african’s aren’t monolithic as a race either, there are different breeds/tribes of varying intelligence
There’s some evidence congoids score higher on IQ tests than capoids and pygmies, but then the tests are biased against hunter-gatherers for obvious reasons.
PP:
“As for stone buildings; it’s true these appeared before any known contacts with Eurasians, however a lot of the proto-civilizations Jm8 likes to cite are associated with pastoralism..”
That really is not the case.
Most of the civilizations and proto-civilizations in West and Central Africa (e.g Nigeria Ghana and others in the forrest zone and forrest savannah border region, and much of the savannah), and most in Africa (esp. West Africa) arose mostly on a base of agriculture rather than pastoralism, though sometimes with some degree of stock keeping later, as a suppliment. In places like Yorubaland, the Nok culture, Benin, and the Cameroonian grassland region cultures farming was the primary base of subsistence—and trade having a significant role in some, usually local/regional trade of agricultural produce and crafts, etc—, and hunting/fishing (usually only minorly-modestly supplemented with things like small stock farming; of goats, sometimes sheep, often the guinea fowl—a native domesticate species—, and cattle more in the the savannah/sahel toward the north of SS West Africa—large stock like cattle could not survive in much of the forest region due to the tsetse fly.
(and the
Even Jenne Jeno, Dia and Dhar tichitt (in the Mali region) were sedentary agrarian societies based mainly on millet, sorghum and rice farming, though of course supplemented with pastoralism and small stock keeping as well as intensive fishing—which had been important for some groups from very early times and allowed sedentism for a few. The river valley town builders and traders/merchants/craftsmen of early Mali (Jenne jeno , Dia Shoma, etc) were heavily agrarian based.
And there is not Middle Eastern genetic admixture in those regions/in the relevant ethnic groups involved in those cultures (i.e. in humans)—though off course I think you were rather talking about the genetics of the cattle themselves, which would indeed likely have roots in the strains of the middle east, (where I believe some may have been hybridized with native pre-existing strains of cattle at least in parts of Africa).
Cultures like Ijebu (site of Sungbo’s eredo), Ife, Nok, the Nigerian Benin cultures, those of Ghana (i.e. the Ashanti/Akan peoples) and Cameroonian grassland cultures like the Bamileke, Bamoum, Bafut, etc were far from pastoral societies, but rather agrarian. And their rise did rally not relate to a pastoral economy.
Many (though not all) of the cultures with more advanced traits (esp. in West Africa—less of course in East or southern, Africa which were more pastoral): e.g. large-scale architecture, (like: Ashanti, Ijebu, Ife and other Yoruba states, Benin), urbanism, early scripts (like nsibidi in the south East part of Nigeria), early iron metallurgy (south east Nigeria—Nsukka/Leija in Igboland, the oldest—and parts of central Nigeria—the Nok) and other advanced traits, were actually the less/least pastoral and non-pastoral ones.
And of course the pastoralism of Europe and (wholly or for the most part) Asia was derived from that of the middle East.
To Fenoopy:
The wheel was only invented in one or maybe two places: Mesopotamia and/or the Central Asia Caucasus region, from which it spread to the other regions that would eventually use it. So people in the rest of the world (including Europeans—except perhaps for parts of Easternmost Europe near the Caucasus) did not invent it either, nor did most Asians (though some of them of course, like Europeans, later adopted it) , Native Americans, or Pacific islanders.
Dhar Tichitt was founded by pastoralists if Wikipedia has its facts right:
Dhar Tichitt is a Neolithic archaeological site located in the southwestern region of the Sahara Desert, in Mauritania. It is one of several settlement locations along the sandstone cliffs in the area. The cliffs were inhabited by pastoralists starting at around 4000 BP and lasted to around 2000 BP
“…And there is no Middle Eastern genetic admixture in the regions of West Africa discussed/or in the ethnic groups involved in those cultures…”
“…e.g. larger-scale architecture, (like: Ashanti, Ijebu, Ife and other Yoruba states, Benin, and the Cameroonian grassland kingdoms. etc).”
regardless, the wheel was probably worthless trash for most cultures. a good donkey was probably better, given difficult terrain.
i can’t see where a wheel would be useful, aside from on a road or on flat ground.
most cultures probably used livestock or boats in canals.
i doubt inventing the wheel was beyond them – simply it was worthless.
meaning the typical statement: they didnt even invent the wheel!!!!!!!!! is worthless garbage most of the time
Fenoopy:
I wouldn’t say worthless, but definitely better suited to some terrains than others. And it’s not surprising that it was likely invented in the very flat steppe terrain of Central Asia (and never invented/used in places like the Andes).
“meaning the typical statement: they didnt even invent the wheel!!!!!!!!! is worthless garbage most of the time”
Oh. I see. Yeah, I would agree. That statement is that most of the time.
I mean “. …That statement is that way most of the time.”
The civilizations or proto-civilizations in SS Africa (as also in the more advanced parts of Eurasia or elsewhere) formed after the initial establishment/foundation of the basic base of farming and/or pastoralism. The usual process of course being that first a basic/more simple neolithic society appears, and (in some cases) more complexity develops gradually from that base, forming a proto-civilization or civilization (such as the ones mentioned).
Then why do they use the wheel in africa today?!
cuz roads r a thing
they dont use wheels in kabylia today cuz its a fukin mountain
but these are clever people – who haven’t invented the wheel
“Even Jenne Jeno, Dia and Dhar tichitt (in the Mali region and savannah) were sedentary agrarian societies based more-mainly on millet, sorghum and rice farming, though of course supplemented with pastoralism and small stock keeping as well as often significant intensive fishing in some areas esp. the niger and senegal valleys and Chad basin…”
“(in the last case,Tichit, “agro-pastoral” or mixed agriculture-pastoral-fishing/aquatic hunting based).”
The Philosopher:
“Then why do they use the wheel in africa today?!”
Today they use the wheel in most places, (and motorized travel also has yet more obvious advantages in all terrains—even those that were not ideal for the wheel before—and has made the wheel even more prevalent than it likely otherwise would have been). The wheel, which was only invented in one or two places (but most likely once, in the Eurasian Steppe by pastoral nomads or semi-nomads), spread to most of Europe and Asia (which did not invent it: China/East Asia, Greece and the rest of Europe, the Maghreb/Morocco/N. Africa region, most or all of the the near East etc. all adopted it from elsewhere), but did not spread to much of Africa (until a bit later—it reached less isolated E.Sudan and Ethiopia earlier) partly because of isolation from where it was used, and did not reach the Americas or the S. Pacific (until much later) also because of isolation (from the regions where it was used).
Traditional animal-drawn carts or chariots were/are still often somewhat less useful in mountainous places like the Andes, Himalayas, Atlas mountains, or Ethiopian highlands (or even hilly but less steep terrain which is common in Africa, as well as being relatively unsuited to forested areas also communion parts pf Africa—though savannah is common too) than they are in flatter areas, and local people do sometimes (or did until motor travel) often prefer to travel with load-bearing livestock (both for riding and as pack animals) alone without wheeled carts. Another thing that discouraged the wheel in some areas was a lack of suitable draft animals. The Americas and S. Pacific had no draft animals—except the Andes which had llamas/alpacas but was very mountainous— (the Pacific had only the pig). Parts of Africa tended not to have large stock so much (like horses and cattle)—with goats and fowl being more common because of the tsetse fly—, while some other areas sometimes could or did , but generally they were not nomadic.
Some believe that the first wheel was the potters wheel (invented in Mesopotamia), and that the wheel for transportation was invented (or the wheel was put to use for transportation) later by nomads somewhere north of the Middle East (like the Eurasian Steppe)
It would seem that the wheel (for transportation) would be most likely to be invented in a flatter region, by people who not only had large herd animals, but relied on them a lot and were often moving. Thus it is not surprising that the people who first used it were the heavily pastoral semi-nomads of the far Eastern European or Eurasian Steppe.
PP
“Dhar Tichitt was founded by pastoralists if Wikipedia has its facts right:”
It was founded by agro-pastoralists who also relied on millet (and also fished as a significant part of their subsistence). It was a mixed economy with farming, fishing/aquatic hunting, and herding, later, once the culture progressed bit with some segments of the population focusing more on some than others (and evidence of some craft specialization, as in other early African proto-civilizations).
“https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tichit”
“The Neolithic site of Dhar Tichitt in this area was settled by agropastoral communities around 2000 BC”
And the period of substantial settlements and structures started around 1,700 bc (lasting until around 700 -500 bc), after the initial stage when people had first settled at the site (and were still somewhat more mobile/semi-itinerant), when people became more fully settled there and subsisting more largely from farming.
The other prehistoric early Malian polities like Dia form ca. 900bc and Djenne Jeno (and other towns along the niger river valley and Chad basin (where early cultures like Zilum and the Gajiganna culture evolved) were heavily agricultural, but sometimes agro-pastoral or had subgroups that were.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Djenné-Djenno#Agriculture_and_urban_organization
“Historically, the Inland Niger Delta has been an ideal location for the mass production of staples such as rice, millet and vegetables due to its predictable floods and summer rains.[5] …. Along with this, evidence for domestic cow, sheep and goat cultivation is present at the site. The land surrounding Djenné-Djenno lent itself to such high-yielding crops due to its mixture of highland and floodplain soils at different elevations that allowed floodwater farming of rice. Moreover, the Djenné-Djenno site lies in close proximity to dune landscape, which allows for necessary recreation needed for keeping cattle in floodplain environments. Overall, the diversified sources of food provided food security that allowed for permanent settlement in a region of volatile climate.[6] It is believed that this food production, especially that of African rice, was one of the main contributors to population rise in the city of Djenné-Djenno and was widely exported to nearby centers (including Timbuktu)”
Much of the niger valley peoples’ subsistence was based on the selective breeding of a diverse variety of strains of rice (and of millet and sorghum) suited to/in preparation for the many/especially diverse) soil types and seasonal conditions and micro-climates of the area.
Anyway most of the other more advanced cultures of West Africa were not pastoral, or were very modestly or minimally so, and were primarily agricultural (“The river valley town builders and traders/merchants/craftsmen of early Mali (Jenne jeno , Dia Shoma, etc) were heavily agrarian based”., Though domestic livestock were present and kept, their economies were not primarily or even largely pastorally based, nor were those of Nok, or the forest states—the forest states (where iron was first smelted ca. 2k bc in S.E Nigeria, where the Yoruba, Benin, Igbo Ukwu, the S.E. Nigerian Kalabar culture—where Nsibidi is first seen—, and Ashanti/Akan and Cameroonian states formed, etc. even less so—and Western central Africa where the Kongo, Kuba kingdoms, and Kisalian culture were, less so as well—i.e. less pastoral or not at all (though East Central Africa of course, around Uganda and especially toward Rwanda and Burundi had a substantially stronger Pastoral aspect, combined with crops like millet and bananas, as did Southern Africa).
Thus I wouldn’t say that, “a lot of the proto-civilizations I cite are associated with pastoralism” (unless you mean East of South Africa, where most are associated more strongly with it), in the sense of it being their chief base or even a very significant one in many cases (at least in most of West Africa—though in some regions of that area it, had some importance, and even then usually more of small stock than cattle, but usually still very much secondary to farming), or in the sense of it being the prime factor responsible for/behind them forming (it probably helped in many cases, but farming was as prominent—or more often, more so). And often advanced civilizational traits formed locally once food producing had existed for a while, evolving from a simpler neolithic base (as is often the case generally). Though things like early pottery were invented in Africa, in the mesolithic (South Central Mali and/or Central Sudan) before either farming or agriculture (as it was also separately invented in East Asia or East Central Asia), by relatively advanced and settled or semi-settled intensive, crop managing but not fully agricultural, hunter gatherers.
As mentioned previously:
Cultures like Ijebu (site of Sungbo’s eredo), Ife, Nok (from 1,600 bc-200 ad), the Nigerian Benin cultures, those of Ghana (i.e. the Ashanti/Akan peoples) and Cameroonian grassland cultures like the Bamileke, Bamoum, Bafut, etc were far from pastoral societies, but rather mainly agrarian.”
“Many (though not all) of the cultures with more advanced traits (esp. in West Africa—less of course in East or southern, Africa which were more pastoral): e.g. large-scale architecture, (like: Ashanti, Ijebu, Ife and other Yoruba states, Benin), urbanism, early scripts (like nsibidi in the south East part of Nigeria), early iron metallurgy (south east Nigeria—Nsukka/Leija in Igboland, the oldest—and parts of central Nigeria—the Nok and other advanced traits, were actually often the less/least pastoral and non-pastoral ones.”
“…associated with pastoralism” (unless you mean East or Southern Africa, of course where where most are associated more strongly with it).”
“i doubt inventing the wheel was beyond them – simply it was worthless.
meaning the typical statement: they didnt even invent the wheel!!!!!!!!! is worthless garbage most of the time”
This is true. For instance, the Maya knew of the wheel. Used it on children’s toys:
Here is a good take on it:
So as we can see, the Maya had the wheel. They used it in toys. They used it for keeping time and astrology. They used it in their sculpture and in their architecture. They used donut stones and round stones as bases for pillars. And they certainly knew that the wheel rolled. But – – they were smart enough to not try and use it in their neighborhood. The Yucatan peninsula is very, very, flat – but only in a very general way. But it is also very irregular, lots of rough bumpy ground, mud and marshes, rivulets and hidden mires. You couldn’t roll a wheel across it without major problems.
http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/349187.html
So clearly it’s possible to understand the concept of something without actually using it in day-to-day life. Further, the wheel wasn’t conducive to their city-state layouts. Why use the wheel when there is no practical use for it in your society?
I find it funny how people use the wheel as evidence of anything. Europeans had the wheel along with writing introduced to them, so how ‘smart’ are they since they didn’t ‘come up with’ it on their own? It’s such a shitty argument. It doesn’t make any sense. Numerous other societies invented things without being shown how to create them. Hell, using this dumb metric you can argue against the so-called ‘genetic superiority’ of Europeans. See how stupid the argument is when looking at the whole of history?
I cosign everything Jm8 wrote.
Numerous other societies invented things without being shown how to create them. Hell, using this dumb metric you can argue against the so-called ‘genetic superiority’ of Europeans. See how stupid the argument is when looking at the whole of history?
But at the same time, looking at the archeological record for evidence of technological and cultural advances is the standard way paleoanthropologists decide how intelligent “human” populations were. I don’t necessarily mean in an IQ sense since Skoyles argues that IQ tests are incomplete measures of intelligence, but few scientists would deny that anatomically modern humans are a lot smarter than Homo erectus. And it’s not just because of our larger brains that we’re assumed to be far more intelligent, it’s mostly because of our technology.
So if there really are ancient racially genetic differences in intelligence, we shouldn’t even need IQ tests to detect them. They should be visible in the archeological record to some degree. Will the correlation be perfect? No because there are all kinds of other factors that influence cultural progress, but we should see some kind of pattern.
For example Baker claimed that Caucasoids achieved all 21 criteria for civilization in four independent locations, East Asians also achieved all 21 in China’s Sinic civilization, Native Americans achieved roughly half of these criteria, while sub-Saharan Africans and Australian aboriginals achieved virtually none. So you can see a very clear correlation between the IQ/brain size of the race, and the amount of ancient achievement. Of course Jm8 argues that sub-Saharan Africans did achieve many of these civilization achievements independently in places like Dhar Tichitt so a lot of Baker’s claims may have since been discredited.
RR
True. Also many (esp. West) Africans (and I think maybe some MesoAmerican American peoples like the Maya—but I’m not quite sure re: them, as their weaving methods might have been different) also used the wheel in another device not related to transportation: the heddle pulley used in traditional weaving (especially common in SS West Africa). Often made with decorative figures at the top.
traditional heddle pulleys, mostly from Mali, the Ivory coast and Ghana:
https://www.google.com/search?q=heddle+pulley&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjlkcOrkLDXAhXolFQKHYwPDc8Q_AUICygC&biw=1092&bih=752
“…many (esp. West) Africans…also used the wheel in another device not related to transportation: the heddle pulley used in traditional weaving (especially common in SS West Africa). Often made with decorative figures at the top and (when complete) uses a wheel-like apparatus
(I think the heddle pulley in particular may be more associated with the narrow loom, which was more often used in West Africa and common there—where narrow and broad looms both existed—, than with the broad loom more often used elsewhere incl. Mesoamerica, and thus heddle pulleys were likely as far as I know not present in Mesoamerica—the heddle in general though of course was more broadly used: present/invented in many parts of the world incl. Eurasia, Africa and the Americas):
Its purpose:
https://www.metmuseum.org/art/collection/search/314287
“Baule peoples and their neighbors to the West, the Guro, are famous as weavers, and are known for their fine indigo-and-white cotton fabrics. Used on the traditional narrow-band loom, heddle pulleys are functional objects used to ease the movements of the heddles while separating the warp threads and allowing the shuttle to seamlessly pass through the layers of thread.”
http://www.mfa.org/collections/object/heddle-pulley-479278
“…associated with the narrow loom used to weave strips of cloth later sewn together, which was more often used in West Africa…”
that mayan toy is heartwarming. i love little expressions of humanity in an otherwise harsh environment
“And it’s not just because of our larger brains that we’re assumed to be far more intelligent, it’s mostly because of our technology.”
This is true, however you know what the argument rests on (I’ll return to that during the weekend).
You’re grouping ‘Caucasoids’ as one large group when it’s much more nuanced today. By doing so, you give Europeans the invention of writing, the wheel, etc when no European society accomplished that independently. The Maya, sans the wheel (who knew why it was used and what for as I have shown) accomplished those two things completely isolated. That’s what I mean; Europeans (genetic Europeans, not some large concept of a ‘Caucasoid’ race) did not invent a lot of things. So, as I stated in my previous comment, looking at different time periods and what people got done, a new picture of human history emerges.
“For example Baker claimed that Caucasoids achieved all 21 criteria for civilization in four independent locations, East Asians also achieved all 21 in China’s Sinic civilization, Native Americans achieved roughly half of these criteria, while sub-Saharan Africans and Australian aboriginals achieved virtually none. So you can see a very clear correlation between the IQ/brain size of the race, and the amount of ancient achievement. Of course Jm8 argues that sub-Saharan Africans did achieve many of these civilization achievements independently in places like Dhar Tichitt so a lot of Baker’s claims may have since been discredited.”‘
1) What are these criteria ‘for civilization’? I find it funny how ‘Caucasoids’ are grouped together to give whites writing, independent civ, etc when alt-righters et al don’t like them.
2) The ‘very clear’ correlation between brain size and IQ of the ‘race’ (I’m talking about ethnies, not racial groups) is due to climate. I’ve seen papers showing, for instance, the Maya had a 1340 cc brain (I’ll look for the reference later). Either way, correlations don’t have to be causal. (post hoc, ergo propter hoc.)
3) In the case of the Maya, you must realize how hard it is to maintain a civilization in the jungle. It’s also worth noting that the Maya started smelting iron around 700 AD (towards the tail-end of their Golden Age which lasted for about 800 years if I recall correctly).
In sum, I think it’s dumb to group MENA peoples and Indians with Europeans; that’s antiquated terminology and classifications of peoples are much more nuanced today. Because by grouping Europeans with other, non-white groups, you’re unfairly attributing others’ independent accomplishments with a whole imaginary, arbitrary group, all to buttress your argument.
“And it’s not just because of our larger brains that we’re assumed to be far more intelligent, it’s mostly because of our technology.”
This is true, however you know what the argument rests on (I’ll return to that during the weekend).
Does that mean you disagree that technology gives a reasonable proxy for the intelligence of different hominin species? Few scientists would deny modern humans are smarter than Homo Erectus who were smarter than Homo habilis who were smarter than Australopithecus and this ranking is strongly correlated with their respective technological achievements.
You’re grouping ‘Caucasoids’ as one large group when it’s much more nuanced today. By doing so, you give Europeans the invention of writing, the wheel, etc when no European society accomplished that independently.
When anthropologists say Homo Erectus invented Acheulean tools, that doesn’t mean every single Erectus race did so independently. Similarly, when I say Caucasoids invented the wheel, I don’t mean every single Caucasoid ethnic group did so independently. If you try to slice the data too thin, you often get unreliable results since a lot of random local factors can influence who invents what, but when you lump humans into huge groups spanning huge geographic ranges, random factors cancel out and you can better see the big picture.
1) What are these criteria ‘for civilization’?
1. In the ordinary circumstances of life in public places, they cover the external genital organs and the greater part of the trunk with clothes.
2. They keep the body clean and take care to dispose of its waste products.
3. They do not practice severe mutilation or deformation of the body, except for medical reasons.
4. They have knowledge of building in brick or stone, if the necessary materials are available in their territory.
5. Many of them live in towns or cities, which are linked by roads.
6. They cultivate food plants.
7. They domesticate animals and use some of the larger ones for transport (or have in the past used them), if suitable species are available.
8. They have a knowledge of the use of metals, if these are available.
9. They use wheels.
10. They exchange property by the use of money.
11. They order their society by a system of laws, which are enforced in such a way that they ordinarily go about their various concerns in times of peace without danger of attack or arbitrary arrest.
12. They permit accused persons to defend themselves and to bring witnesses for their defense.
13. They do not use torture to extract information or for punishment.
14. They do not practice cannibalism.
15. Their religious systems include ethical elements and are not purely or grossly superstitious.
16. They use a script (not simply a succession of pictures) to communicate ideas.
17. There is some facility in the abstract use of numbers, without consideration of actual objects (or in other words, at least a start has been made in mathematics).
18. A calendar is in use, accurate to within a few days of the year.
19. Arrangements are made for the instruction of the young in intellectual subjects.
20. There is some appreciation of the fine arts.
21. Knowledge and understanding are valued as ends in themselves.
I find it funny how ‘Caucasoids’ are grouped together to give whites writing, independent civ, etc when alt-righters et al don’t like them.
Well Michael Hart argued that although Southern Europe had the climate & IQ for agriculture (and thus civilization), it lacked the right indigenous crops and animals, but claims that despite their late start, superior IQs allowed Europe to leapfrog over the Middle East. I agree it’s an awkward argument though.
In sum, I think it’s dumb to group MENA peoples and Indians with Europeans; that’s antiquated terminology and classifications of peoples are much more nuanced today. Because by grouping Europeans with other, non-white groups, you’re unfairly attributing others’ independent accomplishments with a whole imaginary, arbitrary group, all to buttress your argument.
So by that logic we shouldn’t group all humans together into a single species because by doing so we’re giving pygmies and bushmen credit for going to the moon, or we shouldn’t lump all MENA people together because only the Mesopotamian MENA independently invented civilization. Where do you draw the line between one group and another, and by what standard?
The ‘very clear’ correlation between brain size and IQ of the ‘race’ (I’m talking about ethnies, not racial groups) is due to climate.
A bigger head loses less heat but bigger brains may also have generally been required to cognitively cope with the novelty of cold climates, given that our ape ancestors spent roughly 25 million years living in Africa.
Either way, correlations don’t have to be causal. (post hoc, ergo propter hoc.)
They don’t have to be non-causal either.
RR:
“It’s also worth noting that the Maya started smelting iron around 700 AD”
Are you sure? I can’t find anything about iron, only copper, gold, and silver (and I think occasionally copper alloys).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metallurgy_in_pre-Columbian_Mesoamerica#Southern_Maya_area
“1) What are these criteria ‘for civilization’? I find it funny how ‘Caucasoids’ are grouped together to give whites writing, independent civ, etc when alt-righters et al don’t like them.”
Actually, I find alt-righters (daily stormer etc) a lot more agreeable than traditional white nationalists (storm front) who are a stones throw away from flat-out afrocentrists and are exceptionally stupid individuals.
I’ve said it before, but I believe caucasoids are more or less equal in intelligence given for controlled factors such as height and nutrition.
I have no positive experiences with Africans and consider Africans to have borderline sub-human intelligence (on average) despite having met a handful of clever Africans. The clever Africans I did meet were always Ethiopian Semitic mixed Africans, not Bantu west Africans.
I don’t mean that in an anecdotal way – what I mean to say is I’ve never met a clever African and when an African does post here, the stereotype of low intelligence is only reinforced.
Also, until more accurate measurements/genetic tests are available, all HBD science is pseudo-science and speculation, so my anecdotal experiences are to me, just as valid as the terrible ‘studies’ conducted by people such as Richard Lynn, given that I adjust my opinions when presented with solid argument.
Jm8, I cannot find anything at the moment (I read it in a book a while ago I don’t remember which), but there is evidence that, at least the people who built Tiahuanaco made it to the Bronze Age:
These analyses of tools from Tiahuanaco, and the Island of Titicaca are instructive, for they show that while the other nations (with the exception of the Inca) in South America, were undoubtedly in the Stone Age, the builders of Tiahuanaco it seemed had advanced into the Bronze Age and produced tools and implements of that metal.
Click to access aztec-metallurgy.pdf
I’ll dig up more sources later. Even if I recalled in error, that makes it even more amazing that they got all that done with such ‘rudimentary’ tools (environment is a huge factor in civilization which I don’t think any serious person would doubt. Diamond did kind of have a point, but not to the effect he claims).
RR.
Yes, copper alloys (or at least one, bronze) did definitely occur in a few places/occaisonally (though stone was usually the was the primary material for tools in most of the Americas, and sometimes copper in a few places esp. in parts of South Mexico and the Andes—and gold and silver for jewelry in Central America and the Andes).
>”because only the Mesopotamian MENA independently invented civilization.<''
what? I know people say agriculture spread from there to india and egypt but earliest IVC and egyptian civilisations are not independant either? The writing system, town planning, house building knowledge of IVC is different from that of mesopotamia. So is the writing system of egypt. And as far as i know, there wasnt equivalent of the knowledge required to build the pyramids in mesopotamia or india of those times either.
Doesn’t reaction norms vindicate HBD?
Human being in a jungle.
Human being in a temperate climate.
Human being near a desert.
Human being in a mountain region.
Its obvious they evolve for different environments. But whereas I say its because the body makes tradeoffs with IQ to get other personality traits in different places, you say it ‘proves’ genetic IQ is fake or something.
The question is how fast the human being ‘reacts’ to being in Manhatten. After 200 years of blacks living with whites in far better conditons than Africa, the ‘reaction’ might be happening, but its happening at such a slow rate it is fair to say the difference are intrinsic to the genes more than a reflection of the environment.
In the very long term, Robert is right that IQ is completely flexible.
But thats like saying, in the very long run blacks can become white skinned and vice versa to the point its kind of ridiculous to even say it.
I mean, blacks can become smarter by mixing with whites genetically much quicker than waiting for the environment in america to select for IQ (which it doesn’t by the way, in fact Americans have become steadily dumber over the past 50 years).
no. american overall average iq is less because the country is less white. white iq has only increased.
What you said is interesting because different environments tend to force us to react in different ways. But still doesn’t men that natural selection have a huge role there.
Doesn’t mean natural selection NO hage
Jeez
Reaction norms smells like something Stepehen Jay Gould would say. Its plausible, elegant and explains a lot of things, but it masquerades as an explanation of the here and now, rather, it is more of an overall tendency.
It reminds me a lot of the things you see in economics textbooks actually. A tendency masquerading as an explanation.
Pumpkin, I’ve just watched creep 2, it is even better than the first one.
Off topic: Do you know the anime Dragonball Z? You might like the show because the show touches many topics that are very similiar to IQ, intelligence testing, heritability, etc. For example: There is a planet trade empire in the show that sends fighters to different planets to conquer and trade them. The fighting power of every warrior is estimated at birth with a scouter. The scouter gives a precise number. Fighters with lower FQs (fighting quotient) are sent to planets that are inhabited by weak fighters. So the scouter is like an IQ test in that sense. Fighting power can be divided into two main areas: speed and strenght. Just as IQ is divided into fluid and crystallized abilities.FQ seems to have a strong genetic base. For example: A villain in the show, Vegeta, was born with a high FQ. He belongs to a royal family. His father was a king and also the leader of a group of fighters, whereas other fighters with low FQs usually belong to underclass fighter families. There are also racial differences in FQ. Aliens have a much higher FQ on average than earthlings. Even the strongest earthlings, at least in the beginning of the show, only have FQs around 200-300, wheareas even weak aliens tower with FQs of 1000. FQ even determines your rank in the planet trade empire.
Sounds fascinating. Where can I see this? Do they actually use the term FQ (Fighting Quotient)?
The term used is ‘power level’.
I see.
No, they don’t actually use the term FQ. I’m from Germany, so I can’t say if this show airs on canadian television. You can buy the whole show on Amazon or Ebay. It’s pretty expensive. It costs around 300 $ (10 seasons, 291 episodes). You might want to try one season or two seasons first to check if it’s for you. You could also search for a used DVD on Ebay, that might be cheaper. Otherwise you can buy the original in japanese language with english subtitles on Ebay (just make sure you check the box “worldwide search” and type “Dragonball Z 1-291”). Malaysia sells it for 30 $ or so. The original japanese version has a big advantage. The americans were quite sloppy with the original dialogues sometimes, making up their own stuff and making a western hero figure of Goku, who is much more egoistic in the original.
Here is a scene in japanese with subtitles:
The english version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5196mjp9fcU
awful garbage show but i loved it as a kid and used to rush home after school to watch it in arabic
LOL
monkey:
vs
https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-952bf0eaf9232bd5ec0a4dd8663a0be3-c
a remarkable fact: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d8/IrelandEuropePopulation1750.PNG
Conan O’Brien is 10 inches taller than me.
is american black culture just trolling? is trolling more than basement dwelling nazis?
civilization.
+
a marginalized population within it.
=
intentionally barbarous art by members of that marginalized population, a way of saying “fuck you!” to the man.
and it needn’t be deliberate. it needn’t be a choice. when the marginalized have no other experience.
why gangsta rap? because blacks are inferior? maybe. because the heroes of industry for blacks are gangstas.
it may have been the same for italian americans back in the day.
gangsta rap is a way of saying, “i am a man…even though the only means i have of proving it is…selling drugs…as a gladiator…singing…dancing….looking ridiculous.”
all they have is self-promotion.
it’s pathetic.
but it’s authentic. no disguise.
NEVER APOLOGIZE.
you’re not wrong.
what the difference between “not wrong” and “right”?
there’s a name for trolling as fine art. it’s “conceptual art”.
this tin sold for more than $200,000.
here is the height of rap as art. the song makes fun of the cute version of hardship palatable to the lite vs real hardship.
the only thing stopping utopia is brainwashed proles like peepee.
You’re confusing my scientific views with my political views. I’m not brainwashed into thinking free markets are good for society, but watching different races compete in a Darwinian struggle is good for the HBD study of society.
because in the real world, there are rarely single reasons for events/phenomena but often many.
wrong is wrong
not wrong just means he described one factor out of many factors
right would mean accurately describing all major factors
and one of the major factors for the situation blacks are in today is lower iq
you lie peepee.
you said i was an elitist who wanted to tax away your hard earned income.
no!
the exact opposite!
at least in america the biggest tax payers (in % of income terms) are professionals in states like new york and california.
not rich people.
this is bullshit.
it shows how the rich control american government.
the tax slaves are people with high earned income…and little or no capital income.
I do think a lot of liberals are motivated by elitism but it doesn’t mean their ideas are bad.
needless to say elitism…
PLUS anti-racism (anti-whatever) is…
self-contradictory…
…
the elite anti-racists must believe in…
individual differences but not in racial differences.
…
they “think” the only thing wrong with america is the distribution of suffering or the distribution of power…among groups they’ve identified…
as long as the elite and the prison population are representative of the population as a whole…
no problemo.
…
so much flows out…
your bp goes to 100/60…
it’s like dysentery…
if you realize that…
1. the world today is man made…
2. 99.9% of men (and women) are evil…
…
VS
I like the noblemen bellow the guy pointing the finger.
Much better than people I’ve known.
Nice person, I could talk too.
My mom just told me she knew my father’s dad looked Native American with dark skin and the facial features and straight hair. (full native American by his parents my mom saw them also) His parent had a pig farm. My mom had me visit his sisters and they were dark skinned and had the facial feature as well that I remember seeing them. (my great aunts who took care of their mother(who had a pig farm) were my grandfather’s sisters).
So my mom knew what my great grandparents looked like on my fathers, fathers side.
This information might not change Mugabes mind but I do plan on getting a DNA test.
btw, greenland is like south africa but more so.
there are no indigenes (pre-european natives) of greenland.
as far as archeology is concerned the vikings actually arrived BEFORE the inuit.
so if climate change had been different one can imagine an apartheid greenland where the inuit would claim to be the natives and the whole world would believe it.
it’ll happen this year.
2018 world cup. in russia.
the brazilians will have the chance to prove they aren’t faggots.
they will fail. because they are faggots.
and the italians. because they are faggots. oooo i got tripped. faggots!
the brazilians and italians will go to a bathhouse.
germany wins!
bet on it.
i have been reading this blog for a while and still don’t get how this reaction norm theory debunk anything.
why blacks are at the bottom of society everywhere in the world, why jews and asians at the top ?
lebanese arrived in haiti dirt poor iirc and they now are the most prosperous community of the country.
same thing with indians in east africa.
same thing with japanese in south america.
elites in latin america and the arab world are light skinned while most of the population is brown.
it’s the same pattern all around the world.
yes. elites in berber countries are also light skinned, while the inhabitants are brown.
iq between the slave classes and the ruling classes are massively different, too.
[redacted by pp, nov 6, 2017]
the debunking is “technical”. but it’s fun to make fun of HBDers.
if the bermuda data is veridical…
the explanation in technical terms might be…
blacks are very “stenotopic”.
euros are “eurytopic”.
rr deleted my post to this effect. sad!
of course the euros who tried to settle northern rhodesia and nyasaland were kicked in the face by reality. they’re dead.
so it’s just a generality.
euros are kudzu…the ultimate invasive species.
they grow wherever…and choke out the natives.
No. You cant compare. In my opinion, until we have at least another 2000 years of himan history, we may never figure whats going on out there.
or may be it’s simply european’s big brains that make them “eurytopic”.
and african’s smaller brains making them more “stenotopic”.
as pp says intelligence is the ability to adapt.
don’t you think europeans can thrives in more different environments than africans because they are smarter to begin with ?