For years commenter Mug of Pee has been saying that HBDers naively assume the Phenotype = Genotype + Environment model.
A good example of this model is sex and height. For example in 1914, the average Canadian man was 5’7″ and the average Canadian woman was 5’2″. Then after 100 years of modern nutrition and health, the average Canadian man is 5’10” and the average Canadian woman is 5’4″.
So even though environment added a few inches of height to both sexes, it did not change the male > female rank order and if expressed in SD units, may not have even changed the gap. The P = G + E model sees environment as a rising tide that lifts all boats but doesn’t change their relative heights. No matter what the environment, having a Y chromosome predicts greater height, while no matter what the genome, 20th century nutrition predicts greater height. In other words, both the genetic effect and the environmental effect are independent of one another and thus can be added together.
By contrast the reaction norm model sees environmental effects as lifting only some boats, while at the same time sinking others. So rather than adding environmental effects to genetic effects, you either add or subtract depending on which environmental effect combines with genomic effect.
While I thought this model was interesting, I couldn’t think of many real world examples.
Then one night I was watching the The evolution of us, a two part documentary on both netflix and amazon prime, which features such luminaries as John Hawkings, Steve Hsu, and Daniel Lieberman. The documentary briefly discussed the Tarahumara.
In their native Copper Canyon environment, the Tarahumara are extremely fit and slim and can outrun white athletes who come and visit, yet when they move to urban areas, they appear to be several standard deviations fatter than white people..
It’s not surprising that the Tarahumara are fatter in an urban environment than in a pre-industrial one (that’s true of all populations). But the fact that they are so disproportionately penalized by an urban environment might be an example of reaction norms.
Of course I know of no evidence of the cognitive equivalent of the Tarahumara: a group that scores as high or higher than whites in one environment, yet scores lower in another.
Pumpkin Person 
Had the different races been separate for 5-10 million years rather than 50-100k, I could totally envision reaction norms, but I don’t think different groups are different enough from each other to respond so differently to different environments.
I’m sure there’s some evidence for it in the plant/animal kingdom. I think Mugabe compared redwoods to cacti, which was pretty clever.
Interesting documentary.
Are there any proven ways to increase verbal iq. Nothing makes more mad than research suggesting that higher vocabulary equals higher income. Yes I’ve kept the concept of g in mind, but those knowing words not used the average joe’s day to day working vocabulary really that impressive? I’ve recently been more attentive when coming across words I don’t know, and memorizing them has to be one of the most grueling and boring process ever. I almost need to become a schizophrenic so that the words stick in my brain. In other words: it’s not a natural process for me.
Please respond.
use Quizlet
Read more.
Read less
No try to memorize words just to signalize better vocabulary. Understand yourself before try to change yourself to given task.
^^^ hahaha. This guy is hilarious.
Yes or no: reading increases vocabulary and can increase verbal ability.
Yes rr…. verbal ability you mean capacity to write difficult words to pass as an intellectual…
The inportant for language is to use it to understand the world. Have a bigger vocabulary often mean3 extense knowledge about synonimous…
^^^ hahaha
Any sources that have proven reading raise verbal iq?
What’s the average increase?
H
Oh surely reaction norms exist as environment is a central factor in how an organism will respond to anything. In the post before this one, I mentioned how Indians respond to reaction norms because of shifting environments giving them access to things that make their genes/brain/learning processes the most effective and efficient at being used.
I think you could even use non-living things as an analogy for reaction norms, such as cars that can use their features better in dirt roads more effectively than on regular streets. Or a smart phone that is solar-powered will charge faster in a brighter, sunnier place than a place dimly lit or cloudy.
Technologies like that serve as just analogies but they can be profound ones for reaction norms if the concept is being understood correctly…
right. taleb uses the example of a horse vs a ferrari or something. a ferrari is faster…on a road…but if there’s no road it’s useless.
What can I say…great minds think alike.
As for human characteristics, I think behavioral traits are most affected by reaction norms…like empathy and conservatism.
These two traits are exhibited differently in third world countries but when arriving in Industrialized Western countries, we see a significant change in how they are expressed.
This guy was 15 when he made this music video. Has 29 million views. I don’t know how YouTube records viewership but if that’s 29 million people, that’s more viewers than most movies have domestically. Crazy.
why is pakistan allowed to expel it’s low IQ population and britain and america forced to accept it?
Just like any country, there is a smart fraction that exists that serves to support and build the structural organization of society. Thusly, every life facing this phenomenon becomes important. I don’t agree with it yet it exists and I am living proof.
From an aesthetics perspective, my song is better than yours. From an emotoinally sentimental perspective, your song is far superior than mine. However, intelligent people would rather listen to the latter than the former. Any particular reason?
I am living proof.
INDEED!
I don’t know anything about this subject.
It seems thought that the two models aren’t contradictory, one is just a discrete version of the other.
I would infer that pleiotropy favours the reaction norm model.
Epigenetic, if it exists, should be neutral, because it could go both ways (the combination could ponderate for or against the recruited genes by environement for example). It would be different if epigenetic was an enhancer or stabilizer of change.
Then, it’s normal that it would be very difficult to notice reaction norm changes : lets say a recruited gene contribute to a bit more imagination, socialization, empathy and body cynetic but reduces symbolic logic and spatial rotation abilities. Actual measuring power of different physiological, physical and above all mental traits would make it impossible to notice yet. If epigenetic had even a 10% role, it would make harder.
But it’s not impossible – in theory – to get one day both all measurements of all traits and a map of each gene impact given all interactions possible with the rest of the genes. That would also help measure the non-shares environemental effect ans may be identify (discretize) some of it .
“Epigenetic, if it exists”
What the fuck?
“lets say a recruited gene contribute to a bit more imagination, socialization, empathy and body cynetic but reduces symbolic logic and spatial rotation abilities. Actual measuring power of different physiological, physical and above all mental traits would make it impossible to notice yet. If epigenetic had even a 10% role, it would make harder.”
I don’t even know what this means.
CHALLENGE#
RR
Explain to Bruno what is epigenetic with your words!!
3, 2, 1… now!!
Epigenetics—the science concerned with the causal role of networks of interacting genes and the networks and environments that bring about the ontogeny of the phenotype.
CHALLENGE#
Santo
Construct a valid argument with the subject of your choosing for PP’s blog with your words!!
3, 2, 1… now!!
PREDICTION
Santo won’t answer the challenge because he doesn’t know how to think because he wasn’t taught how to think.
Hahahahaha
What a joker!!!
( very cautious about each word here…. doesn’t sound you are finally HONEST now)
So vague and poorly explained, isn’t??
“He wasnt taught how to think ”
Revealing and sooo dumb, r
Eternal conclusion
Rr is a self parody all the time
Hundred of RR’s ”arguments” in the PP comment section:
”depression”
“He wasnt taught how to think ”
What does that even mean?
I did what you asked of me. When are you going to do what I asked of you?
Were you taught how to think?
I was not doctrined to believe in Neolamarkism as you, RR
“What does that even mean?”
He wasn’t taught how to think critically, how to reason about things. It’s evident by him not accepting my challenge (among other reasons).
“I was not doctrined to believe in Neolamarkism as you, RR”
What is “Neolamarckism”?
Who indoctrinated me? What did they indoctrinate me into?
I think reaction norms do exist but may be overstated for an attribute like intelligence. It’s an interesting perspective. If anything reaction norms may favour domesticated humans more in terms of greater adaptation to civilised environments and more quickly.
But I still believe there is a ‘fundamental’ rank order. I dont think that would change even if you gave blacks the most superior nutrition and the exact best environment to develop their cognitive abilities. Afaik whites would still score higher in Bermuda than black but the gap is closer.
Wouldn’t you need to know how Europeans living the Tarahumara lifestyle to draw any conclusions from this?
Anyway, something like lactose intolerance could clearly change the rank order of height/weight of different people depending on whether milk was consumed in a society or not, right?
Whereas European and Africans will not change their rank ordering on skin color regardless of environment.
Seems like a stupid debate, it obviously varies for different traits and genes.
Wouldn’t you need to know how Europeans living the Tarahumara lifestyle to draw any conclusions from this?
Technically but the tarahumara living a tarahumara life are so thin & fit that it’s hard to believe that whites with the same life style could exceed them in skinniness and fitness to anywhere near the same degree that they do in urban environments. Of course it’s posdible whites in that life style would look completely anorexic, in which case the p = g + e would be confirmed
Seems like a stupid debate, it obviously varies for different traits and genes.
The question is how would it work for IQ
If whites lived a Tama lifestyle then that would include foodstuffs, too. I doubt they’d be as thin as the Tama. Isn’t this the group that can run for like 100miles or something like that? I’ve got some good stuff from Skoyles and Sagan (2002) on the matter
I doubt all tuktuman people who become obese in (i mean stupid) white trash lifestyle…
EVIDENT genes have a fundamental role…
High levels of exoticism [an specie or community which is strongly adapted to restrict ecological niche] is more related with ”reaction norms” than generalized
It’s just compare eukaliptus with sequoia…
All parts of the organism-environment system have such a role.
”All parts of the organism-environment system have such a role”
– RR’s Coach
^^^ hahaha
There is an example pumpkin.
Look at the Jews. In a environment, both cultural and influenced by family, have a superior verbal or “overall” iq compared to their counterparts. But if they were put in a environment that doesn’t require verbal iq, (which is more inherit/influence by family compared to the genetic nonverbal iq), they won’t have such a great time when it comes to intellect.
Forgot to put Jews before have***
Their intellect would be equivalent to the mentally obese Mexicans in the documentary.
Less instead of more before inherit*
Influenced*
Sorry for the typos; I wrote it quickly.
Hope to hear thoughts on my observation.
Sequoia is a highly endemic species. It’s mean its organism can adapt to narrowed range of enviroments. Eukaliptus is an highly adaptable species to a diverse range of enviroments. Human intelligence is more like a sequoia or eukaliptus??
I’m writing in smartphone. It’s mean my pooor englishch is even dirty than when i write using mouse in mein hantz.
Pumpkin, ever tried any of the high range IQ tests like Ivan Ivec, Jonathan Wai, Ron Hoeflin, etc etc? If so, how accurate are they?
Whitey have proved thousand times they are not capable to manage a global civilization.. so they are appealing for artificial intelligence
(P1) If the Hereditarian Hypothesis is false and we believed it to be true, then Policy A could be enacted.
(P2) If Policy A could be enacted, then it will do harm to group X.
(C1) If the Hereditarian Hypothesis is false and we believed it to be true, then it will do harm to group X (Hypothetical Syllogism, P1, P2).
(P3) If Policy A is enacted and it would do harm to group X, then we should ban whatever lead to Policy A.
(P4) If Policy A is derived from IQ tests, then IQ tests must be banned.
(C2) If Policy A is enacted and it would do harm to group X, then we should ban IQ tests (Hypothetical Syllogism, P3, P4)
(C3) Therefore, if the hereditarian hypothesis is false and we believed it to be true, then we should ban IQ tests (Hypothetical Syllogism, C1, C2)
(Post this, fixed typos.)
if the hereditarian hypothesis is false and we believed it to be true
this is a contradiction rr.
Something can be false and we can believe it to be true, due to ideology, for example.
We used to believe that phlogston caused disease. We used to believe the earth was the center of the universe. We can hold something to be true when it is indeed false.
yes rr. but the way you’re using it is a contradiction.
a little logic is a dangerous thing…especially for grease balls.
If Policy A is enacted and it would do harm to group X, then we should ban whatever lead to Policy A.
what if not enacting policy A harms group Y?
rr says, “as long as it doesn’t harm blacks or jews that’s fine.”
I don’t see how not enacting policy A would harm group Y since, for example, there would be other ways to assess achievement or similar ‘attributes’ (for lack of a better term). If the hereditarian hypothesis is false, then the research would bring harm and one of their biggest ‘weapons’ is the IQ test. So if the HH is false then we should take their weapon away since no good can come from it since whatever policy that follows from IQ tests would be destructive to group X due to the falsity of the hereditarian hypothesis.
you yourself have admitted college entrance exams are IQ tests.
and a battery of subject specific tests (like british O-levels and A-levels) is an IQ test.
there’s no way to get around it greaseball.
your precious negroes score lower on ANY AND ALL objective measures of academic achievement or ability.
there’s nothing magical about tests which call themselves IQ tests. ALL objective tests are going to “discriminate” in EXACTLY the same way.
“you yourself have admitted college entrance exams are IQ tests.”
The correct phrasing would be “IQ tests and achievement tests are different versions of the same test.”
“your precious negroes”
???
“score lower on ANY AND ALL objective measures of academic achievement or ability.”
Right. The issue is causation.
“there’s nothing magical about tests which call themselves IQ tests. ALL objective tests are going to “discriminate” in EXACTLY the same way.”
Because they’re built to.
“… the IQ testing movement is not merely describing properties of people: rather the IQ test has largely created them.”
“As in the construction of tests themselves, you don’t get what you see: you get what you want to see.”</em
— Richardson, Understanding Intelligence
how about a society that doesn’t have “groups”?
ever thought of that?
imagine there’re no races.
it’s easy if you try.
imagine there’re no classes.
above us only sky.
imagine all the negroes…
living in sicily…
you hoo oo oo oo
you may say i’m a dreamer.
but i’m not the only one.
some day you’ll join us.
and the world will live as one.
You need to qualify P3.
If casual observations led to a policy that harmed group x, would you ban eyesight?
See again: If the hereditarian hypothesis **is false.**
“If causal observations” were false which would attempt to lead to Policy A that harmed group X, then it wouldn’t be enacted because the observations are false. On the other hand, if the hereditarian hypothesis is false (and the assumptions of IQ tests with it, disregarding all of the arguments I’ve given against their validity) then it would cause harm to group X so it should therefore be banned.
I should strengthen it. I was thinking either a hypothetical syllogism, disjunctive syllogism, or a constructive dilemma leading into other premises. I’ll do it tomorrow.
Either way the argument is valid.
This breaks down at p3 .
Why?
ENACTED
Which premise does that address?
Paging Melo. Where you at buddy?
Nigga, you know I’m a subjectivist. Either way it’s laughable that anyone would put the blame on IQ tests when it’s really the idiotic people that assumed a false notion to instead be true.
So who did puppy vote for in the Canadian election?
I see hilary called jill Stein and Tulsi gabbard Russian spies.
Dont worry, concerned high iq citizens like melo are super informed and ready to vote the correct way for israel.
She’s probably being blackmailed by epstein’s group
The attorney general William Barr was ordered by trump to investigate who invented the russia spy shit. I doubt they’ll be allowed find out anything. Justice dept and state dept not as powerful as CIA and the euphemistically termed “intelligence community” or ‘secret police’s to you and I.
and barr is an rc. his dad converted. mischlinge like himself would ordinarily be israeli assets. but the roman church still has lots of super anti-semites like mel gibson. the russian orthodox church is explicitly anti-semitic.
why? because the new testament is anti-semitic.
Maybe.
I know a bunch of mainstream libs that think/sound exactly like Hillary. My guess is that to a large extent she believes what she’s saying about Gabbard/Stein. That’s not to say there isn’t any room for blackmail.
She’s not nearly as bright as you think she is.
I suspect she might be blackmailed because she’s a former liberal high SAT wasp who became a huge neocon puppet & because bill Clinton hung out with Epstein all the time. Could be wrong though
Some of the stuff rr says…..
He might even be dumber than melo but at least hes smart about the russia nonsense. Rr did you support the Iraq war before it started?
I don’t hold the belief that IQ tests should be banned. I read Horgan’s article in Sci Am yesterday and saw that he said we should ban research into cognitive differences between groups. I said if the hereditarian hypothesis is false then we should ban the research because it could do harm. So one challenged me on that and I made the argument just to argue.
I made the argument for fun and to see responses. You can argue something without holding the belief.
“russia nonsense.”
Lol, he really is autistic.
Rr will has a life to figure out pseudo Science is characteristically what he is doing in every vague and poorly developed sentences about key subjects of this blog. And that the other side is far to be perfect but still more scientific than his neolamarckian garbage.
But white people tend to behave exactly like that, irrational (unbalanced/ ideologically)
“CHALLENGE#
Santo
Construct a valid argument with the subject of your choosing for PP’s blog with your words!!
3, 2, 1… now!!
PREDICTION
Santo won’t answer the challenge because he doesn’t know how to think because he wasn’t taught how to think.”
“And that the other side is far to be perfect but still more scientific than his neolamarckian garbage.”
Quote me saying “neolamarckian garbage.”
What is pseudoscience?
“But white people tend to behave exactly like that, irrational (unbalanced/ ideologically)”
How do Brazilian people act?
RR doesn’t believe in averages
What is “neolamarckian garbage”?
Can you quote me saying “neolamarckian garbage”?
What is pseudoscience?
How does the average Brazilian act?
When will you accept my challenge?
————
Five questions Santo won’t answer.
You don’t answer my questions, why i would answer yours**
”What is “neolamarckian garbage”?”
pseudo scentists using academia to spread that human behaviors are infinitely plastic while they aren’t. A kind of molecular-based behaviorism.
People who say ”lamarck said nothing wrong” as you
Lamarck theory:
if i start to work my muscles and procreate, my descendents will inherit my body changes
Nothing wrong here…
Darwin:
If i work my muscles and become very strong and marry a woman with similar body trends some of our kids will inherit these common proclivities.
”Can you quote me saying “neolamarckian garbage”?”
I have no time to do it. In every sentence* and not just this specificity but also your pseudo scientific tactics.
”What is pseudoscience?”
hahahahahaha
If you don’t know….
If you can’t differentiate…
”How does the average Brazilian act?”
Are you not capable to speculate**
This explain how ignorant murricans are…
”When will you accept my challenge?”
when you stop to hide yourself from mostly nonsense quotations and begin to talk with your own words.
Who are these “pseudo scientists using academia to spread that human behaviors are infinitely plastic”?
Lamarck did nothing wrong. What’s wrong with that claim?
“Lamarck theory”
Lamarck’s dictum was: (1) environmental change; (2) the response to the environmental change is a change in behavior; and (3) this change in behavior due to environmental change leads to a change in morphology through the generations.
You’re not even aware that real “neolamarckians” don’t believe what you think they do.
Can got quote me saying “neolamarckian garbage”?
What is pseudoscience?
How does the average Brazilian act?
I “talk[ed] with [my] own words” in the valid argument I provided. You obviously don’t understand the function of quotations.
are not you
aren’t you
fuck
You are part of the BIG problem called
WHITEY
the horizont is clear as white skin. The biggest problem is not still those who no have fundamental power to do very stupid and cruel things as the masses of black people, for example. Even, i believe they WILL BE USED as demographic weapon when africa become overpopulated and incapable to sustain such population and they will immigrate for places Europe.
it’s all the time the same fucking macacchiavellian bullshit
divide and conqueeeeeeer
whites, collectively speaking, have a very long time to
– manage a ecologically correct big-civilizational system
– domesticated people they dominate and changed them as ”allies” or Good friends [really]
– advance science WITH philosophy and reducing all levels of bad socioeconomic outcomes
BUT
whitey were too concerned about ” wars for jesus christus mythology”; PARASITING themselves and other groups; GOLLLLDDDDD/MONEY [well, jews love money as whites do.. the difference is that jews are clever to accumulate this $hit]; spreading stupid injustices against groups even against fundamentally important groups as women… for thousand years…
”I “talk[ed] with [my] own words” in the valid argument I provided. You obviously don’t understand the function of quotations.”
NEVER in the real world.
you don’t know what is a true argument and this is a very old discussion everyone with brain have with you since ~2013… you trully look like a robot.
You obviously no nothing about what i know about quotation function. It’s works in academic-like conversations, not in blog like this. In trivial conversations, people who overuse quotations don’t know how to debate without them, that’s perfectly your case.
”“Lamarck theory”
Lamarck’s dictum was: (1) environmental change; (2) the response to the environmental change is a change in behavior; and (3) this change in behavior due to environmental change leads to a change in morphology through the generations.”
USE my example you piece of shit from catania slum
It’s not a correct way to debate, as expected from you.
”Lamarckism
G.S. Stent, in Encyclopedia of Genetics, 2001
Lamarckism was an important forerunner of the Darwinian theory of evolution, which, just as did Lamarckism, assigned a critical role to the environment in evolutionary processes. Contrary to a misconception held widely even among present-day biologists, Lamarckism is not in conflict with Darwin’s theory of natural selection. According to Lamarckism, the offspring of those giraffes that did succeed in transmitting an acquired extension of their necks to the next generation could obtain more food than other members of their cohort. They would thus be more numerous, which, in turn, would result in an increase of the average neck length in successive generations. Thus Darwin’s ‘classical’ Darwinism is an improvement over Lamarckism but not its refutation, since Darwin had no more clear idea than Lamarck had of the genetic basis of the hereditary variations that are at the root of the evolutionary process.”
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/lamarckism
It’s not just a matter of neck lenghts…. fuck.
Shorter giraffes already had comparatively long necks…
If long necks was a fundamental body change from short to tall, so tyranossaurus rex would had developed big necks BUT fucking not…
that’s the problem of incompetent whitey and jewy infecting science and philosophy.
I stated his dictum.
“piece of shit”
lol
Quotations? Errr
Yea giraffes are the go-to example for the failure of Lamarckism. Mr. Santo obviously has never read contemporary authors on the matter.
YOU DON’T ANSWER MY ANSWERS… you don’t know and you consciously run away from DIRECT CONVERSATIONS or TRUE DEBATES where the debators answer by replica or treplica what was wrote,
”Who are these “pseudo scientists using academia to spread that human behaviors are infinitely plastic”?”
You think this is an adult, fully mature proper answer but it just super cansative. Your dissimulation is boring, stupid, easily perceivable and criminal. As happens with unfortunately nearly 90% of leftists and progressists-like people, you believe your game is efficient out of the academic bubble you live. You’re very stupid to understand most stuff you stubbornly believe is an expert or authority. Inacceptable levels of pedantism and sofistry, a truly kind of mental disorder, if psychology was not predominantly a modern church. And, this is a very old conversation we already had and without any fruitful development.
Rr always answer frontal or objective questions with lateral answers. And believe psychological is a kinda metaphysical magics..
Should I ask subjective questions?
I just bought Sternberg’s edited book “The Nature of Human Intelligence” this weekend (stupidly, the full pdf is on Google) and I’m reading the article “Is Critical Thinking a Better Model of Intelligence?” and Halpern and Butler write:
” In our conception of what it means to be intelligent, a person with high intelligence adapts well to the demands of her or his environment, regardless of the nature ofthe demands. Given this assumption, students who are intelligent in a contemporary classroom would have done comparatively well if born during a different time period where they may have had to kill animals, forage for food, build safe places to live, make clothing that protects against the elements, avoid poisonous plants, and eludethe host of hazards that were common to life in different time periods.”
I laughed when I read the PP-ism.
I kind of agree with you on this rr. When puppy says 170 iq Bill Gates would do just as well 1000 years ago in medieval europe I have to laugh. You’re somewhat right that iq measures a kind of modern cultural adaptation to abstract reasoning. But at the same time I think it’s still a fairly useful I dictator of intelligence. Maybe not intelligence in the universal sense however. I have tried to compensate for this in puppys comment section by saying how social intelligence or common sense is different to pure abstract thinking as seen in aspergers people who only have the latter.
I never said he would have done just as well in another era. A big part of success is being born at the right time.
However I do think the average self-made billionaire would do better than the average middle class person who would better than the average homeless person in any period of history, although at the individual level there’d be exceptions
And mug of pee claims Jews didn’t do well until very modern times
Mugabe is wrong. It’s well known jews did well even changing the state religion of the Roman empire and long being noted as merchants even with tons of anti semitic laws enforced against them by church and state.
Jews didn’t get as rich because they really were discriminated against for most of European history.
It doesn’t take a genius to realise that’s why jews are so on point about civil rights or the colloquial terms ‘jewish rights’.
Jews were 2% of Greek Ptolemaic kingdom in Egyp and Seleucid empire and they had 30% of revenue and wealth, if historian are to be believed. It’s even more than in USA. And they were successful has been considered equal to Greeks, at a time of every family reminded from wich part of Greece their ancestors came from.
When they treasoned the Greek for Roman, they were even more succesful before their destruction.
no you dumbass!
“jewish intellectual accomplishment” doesn’t exist until at most 200 years ago.
marx is the first world renowned jewish intellectual. (spinoza was nobody until promoted by his co-ethnics.)
mugabe never claimed they didn’t have the lifestyle of minor nobility in medieval europe.
pill and peepee need to study all of my comments like the talmud.
AND mugabe has already said that christianity may be regarded as just another jewish intellectual movement.
RR just likes playing Devil’s advocate; he doesn’t really hold any beliefs of his own other than those that apply to weightlifting.
My beliefs are irrelevant to the arguments I make.
But here:
I’m something-like-a-dualist (in that I believe the mind is immaterial), I believe hereditarianism is false, I believe nature vs nurture is a false dichotomy, i believe people think worse of themselves then they really are (you’re your own worst critic), I believe IQ tests test class-specific knowledge and skills, I believe people need to workout and eat right, I believe everyone should take logic and reasoning courses early in adolescence.
Maybe I’ll add more later. Not looking to debate anything in this sub-thread (beyond what I’m debating in the overall thread).
it’s OBVIOUS you converted to judaism 2 years ago when you had sex with a black woman for the first time.
rr says:
driving tests are culturally biased against amish people therefore mario andretti wasn’t a great driver.
This website is almost a group therapy session for autistic savants.
as i’ve said:
the SS was drunk ALL the time.
ALL the time!
they couldn’t do their JOB otherwise.
i saw this vid from the one CONFIRMED alcoholic mongolian.
if a mongolian loves his drink, then he’s cool.
if a non-mongolian hates his drink, he’s trump or a moron.
is prosperity caused by greater alcohol consumption, or is it…
greater alcohol consumption causes greater innovation and the ability to work 12+ hours a day etc.?
or is it…
greater alcohol consumption is caused by higher IQ, greater creativity, whatever personality traits make china people ashamed by the white cock?
answer:
BOTH!
europeans and alcohol are co-symbionts.
WORKING CLASS BRITAIN IS STILL…
THE FULCRUM OF WORLD REVOLUTION.
THEY DO NEGRO BETTER THAN NEGROES.
interesting that that vid makes the point that…
the ruling elite has descended into insanity because the internet breaks the mass media monopoly.
also interesting is that when the vid says “mafia” the picture is of [redacted by pp, oct 22, 2019]
I think Hillary’s a good example of how raw fluid intelligence decreases with age. Her turn to neoconservatism might be in large part due to an impaired capacity to think rationally brought on by less fluid intelligence.
It might all’ve just been for power when she was in office, but what’s her motivation for saying it now? Blackmail? Maybe, but what would a potential blackmailer get out of her badmouthing Gabbard/Stein? It’s not like they have a chance at winning.
Hilary was a neocon for the same reason john mccain and lindsey graham have been. If you remember while she was sec of state her department issued a reset with russia where they agreed to start over fresh with putin. Then putin helped syria and israel got pissed off.
It’s not complicated. Hilary is saying it now about tulsi and Stein because she may still be financially dependent on the deep state, may still socialise with these people and may depend on them for book deals publicity and promotion. There are a million reasons why someone captive to neocon interests would hate on anti war people like stein and tulsi.
The whole episode shows why she would have been a horrible fuckin president.
Hilary was a neocon for the same reason john mccain and lindsey graham have been. If you remember while she was sec of state her department issued a reset with russia where they agreed to start over fresh with putin. Then putin helped syria and israel got pissed off.
it started long before that, pill. As a senator from NY, Hillary voted for the Iraq war in 2002, probably because as a woman running for president, she wanted to look tough on foreign policy in the wake of 9/11, and also because her donors, the new york media, and many of her new york constituents passionately hated Saddam Hussein.
Going back even further, Bill Clinton had an extremely brutal sanctions policy against Iraq all through the 90s which by some estimates, caused the death of half a million Iraqis.
There are lots of reasons why both Clintons served as neocon puppets for so long, but given bill’s proximity to epstein and inability to keep it in his pants, I can’t help but wonder if they’re being blackmailed by lewd photos. After all Hillary implied putin is blackmailing trump which implies she’s seen that game played before.
pill + 50 IQ points = pumpkinperson
I was aware she was a neocon since the 90s puppy. That doesn’t mean you have 50 points even if I didn’t…..
Poor puppy
Toxic ”mascuelinity” is the biggest rock in the true human evolution path
What about toxic femininity? The idea that females are entitled to acting only on instinict rather than rational thought.
Toxic femininity is the prey syndrome, Toxica masculinity is the predator syndrome.
I knew that, Santo, I really did. Best of luck on your journey in life!
even if whites were starving living as tarahumararashamalamadingdongs…
the norm for health would be crossed.
even though the norm for adiposity would not be.
also btw, ronan farrow is OBVIOUSLY sinatra’s son.
if you don’t see it, you have face blindness.
FACT) ronan farrow is frank sinatra’s son.
CONCLUSION) homosexuality is NOT genetic.
alpha zero is God? probably. but if any human could beat it, he would NOT necessarily be the human who would be best vs other humans.
of all grandmasters ever which one might have a chance?
capablanca (and maybe petrosian) would be humanity’s only chance.
They’re just low IQ, and low IQ people in West civ are fatter because of an irresponsible diet. In the wild, low IQ people are thin because of more primitive food gathering techniques have lower yield.
This is a troll^
What a lack of understanding of obesogenic environments.
The dem establishment has revealed itself to be an arm of robert rubins book club.
The Republican establishment at least has more diversity with neocon facing off against eccentric billionaires, money hungry oilmen like koch and the alt right types. Then you have murdoch who is the only mainstream media supporting trump.
Its I credible but through to say that the dems have more diversity of puppets by race and gender etc while the Republicans have a more diverse intellectual donor base.
Clearly trump is not controlled by neocon completely otherwise he would have never of taken troops from syria and invaded iran already.
Puppy thinks someone like Bill Gates or a talk show host has more power than robert rubin lol. [redacted by pp, oct 23, 2019]
Bill Gates is loved by people around the world and worth $106 billion
Robert Rubin is reviled as a greedy banker by the few people who have even heard of him and worth around $100 million.
By what measure is Rubin even remotely as powerful as Gates? He may know more powerful people, but he hasn’t been part of a white house cabinet since the 1990s.
Because he can get people killed but if gates does it hell be arrested.
gates can get people killed too. $106 billion buys a lot of hit men. plus gates would do the scientific research to find out what killing methods look natural
Btw the alt right seem to love tulsi gabbard. I’ve seen comments saying she should run in the republican primary.
I’ve left a comment calling lion a neocon jew. Let’s see if hell publish it.
HAHAHAHA he published it! My respect for him just went up a bit.
and peepee won’t even publish my [redacted by pp, oct 23, 2019]. what a loser.
lion is autistic. most jewish supremacists aren’t very self-aware. they lie to themselves too. a conspiracy isn’t necessary and harping on it suggests the harper is a jew himself.
Mug of Pee, are you a sociopath or just mentally ill?
Sociopathy is a mental disorder [DIS-ORDER]
I’m sorry, Santo. I really am.
I’m sorry for much of a dumbass you and Pumpkin both are.
Jk. I’m a dumbass, you’re a dumbass, we’re all dumbasses.
That’s not the point, dumbass!
Homosexuality is even worse than sociopathology. Nothing degrades the human mind and body as much as sexual debauchery.
If someone told me they were a sociopath I’d have more respect for him than a homosexual or transsexual. I consider them to be unfit evolutionarily speaking.
That’s define your extremely low levels of morality, philosophy… sad, people as you exist.
I hope a sociopath [redacted by pp, oct 23, 2019]you soon, or, would be perfect if s/h/xe is a HOMOSSEXUAL
[redacted by pp, oct 23, 2019]
Why
because I’M THE TRUE PHILOSOPHER, I’M A PHILOSOPHER STAR.
you are my shit in the morning, comparatively speaking.
I improve philosophy while you use it to destroy it.
This blog is this
the loser muggy saying incoerent things, populating the comment sections with dog, big muscle men photos and unrecycled ”humor”
the loser rr quoting every piece of sentence and never writing something easily understandable and with substance, with clear meaning.
and this loser… i always thought it’s not true all homophobics are bi or homo closeted, but i’m becoming relatively open to speculate MANY hyper-homophobic trashy guys are, in the true, super anxious bi or homo who try everything they can to deviate any SUSPICIOUS about their [homo or bi]sexualitet.
AND, i’m still here…
answer the same questions and nonsenses of these catatonic guys while PP is dedicated to write texts about: OPRAH, IQ, BILL GATES…
Trump needs to conflate the current inquiry with the russia rubbish. Even uninformed low iq people with autism probably thought the russia stuff was stupid.
Well you have low IQ and autism as diagnosed by a healthcare professional. So that’s probably why you deny russiagate.
The mother-question is
What i’m still doing here***
I blame my partial autism to explain why i’m still repeating myself to adapt to this stupid environment… with good exceptions for sure, pp included.
It’s definitely a chronos prison. I must go out from here. Well, i was capable to never come back to certain brazilian blog with very similar right twink stuff and extreme repetitibility, i always visited it since ~2009. It was very long time until i was capable to stop to waste my time and patience with losers.
Please, folks, cross your fingers for me!1
[imagine 2030 and the SAME FUCKING SHIT…]
The countries with the largest Flynn effect are the ones with the lowest genetic intelligence. The smaller the Flynn effect, the smarter the country.
I think animals evolve pretty quickly, on a day to day basis. I think that is what should be happening to humans as well.
It’s all a numbers game. Basically, if you have hundreds of millions of people within a race, there’s bound to be so much variation…this causes a strong tendency towards one person in a race being more genetically similar than a person of the same race.
This is why I think I may be the Pakistani Peso Peso. He’s not a very well known rap artist but he certainly is a very skilled one for sure. Here ya go:
I like rap music because it reminds me of a psychedelic type reality. It embodies the counter-culture’s need for rationality and the knowledge of the abstract:
I’m sitting beside 2 americans in a bar. It’s easy to see why jews rule america listening to them. Americans are so dumb. Are people over there hypnotised from birth?
“Are people over there hypnotised from birth?”
I’d say people are strongly influenced to do X through ads. For another example, look to why’s food scientists do. They work to create a good ratio of sugar/salt/fat to make it palatable and for us to want it more. They then advertise it and people eat it. People want more. People become obese/acquire TIIDM and other maladies from eating more processed foods that are designed to make it more palatable and for us to eat it more. The book “The End of Overeating” by Kessler has a solid exposition on the matter.
2pac’s IQ is the ultimate question.
Pumpkin, if you don’t post the comment where I called Santo a dumbass, Im going to think you’re a dumbass too.
As a matter fact, why do you moderate any of my comments?
You know I’m the best poster here.
Please stop insulting my intelligence, PP. It won’t be your worthwhile.
Loaded honestly most of the time you sound like 12 year old who’s had too much sweets.
That’s the mind of a genius at work there, Pill.
And a little kid who eats sweets has probably the most hyperactive and intelligent brain, tbh.
Yes.. You keep believing that if it makes you happier.
You were never officially diagnosed but the fact that 2 independent psychologists both suspected you of autism is significant
The fact I was tested for ot and found not to have it is significant. Also the second guy changed his mind..
the test was based on your subjective self-evaluation & thus not as meaningful as the objective clinical impression of experts
The second guy changed his mind perhaps because of the test results and/or because he saw how you reacted to the label & didn’t want to lose your business
No the test was done by the 1st guy who changed his mind following the result. The 2nd guy changed it pretty soon after getting to know me beyond 1 session.
But first impressions might be more reliable here because that’s when you notice the more biological symptoms such as awkward body language, strange voice, rocking body motion, poor eye contact
But by the second session you used your verbal IQ to feign higher level social understanding
…….O-k puppy. You keep believing what you want to believe if it makes you feel better about yourself.
It doesn’t make feel better. It makes feel very sad.
^^^psychopath^^^
I wanna make a movie where a little white girl rejects a doll of sorts from a voodoo child and disrespects her and so the voodoo child turns it into a voodoo doll and the voodoo doll acts as a voodoo person for the voodoo child. This’ll torture the voodoo child’s voodoo person and thus the voodoo person becomes a voodoo sacrifice for the voodoo child.