One of the single best predictors of a population’s IQ is the winter temperature of their ancestral environment, with colder ancestral winters predicting higher IQ today. Explaining this correlation, Richard Lynn proposed that higher IQ evolved in colder environments because you had to figure out how how to build shelter, sew clothes, make fire, hunt animals etc.
To me this makes good sense, but critics would point to the cold adapted Neanderthals who are generally considered less intelligent than modern humans, as evidence of the cold not requiring much intelligence. After all the Neanderthals survived the ice age just fine until our own species invaded their territory.
Or did they? New research suggests that our species was not to blame for the Neanderthal extinction.
The Guardian’s science editor Ian Sample writes:
The Neanderthal population was so small at the time modern humans arrived in Europe and the Near East that inbreeding and natural fluctuations in birth rates, death rates and sex ratios could have finished them off, the scientists claim.
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2019/nov/27/bad-luck-may-have-caused-neanderthals-extinction-study
But why were their populations so small to begin with? Probably because they weren’t smart enough to adapt to the cold so their death rates remained too high for their population to grow. Despite the fact that their short muscular physiques were exquisitely adapted to the cold per Allen’s rule, it was a problem they never fully solved.
Pumpkin Person 
Being in cold weather requires self-regulation. Homosapieans have a smaller ribcage from Neanderthals. Neanderthal was bulky to store heat. Homosapians lost heat faster so they needed to control the organ system to survive lethal levels of cold.
Homosapians had to maintain a core temperature without freezing their extremities off.
There regulated heat better in their bodies. The range of viable food increased.
Some survived without cloths naked in the snow.
josef koeberl
Just to let everyone know.
Animekitty found an online special needs home to stay at. (pumpkins blog)
Here is the video exposition from when I was 5yo.
Ronald McDonald Children’s Charities PSA – Love Lifted Me (1990) *Cartoon All-Stars to the Rescue VHS*
“Explaining this correlation, Richard Lynn proposed that higher IQ evolved in colder environments because you had to figure out how how to build shelter, sew clothes, make fire, hunt animals etc.”
#justsostories
“Probably because they weren’t smart enough to adapt to the cold so their death rates remained too high for their population to grow.”
#justsostories
“Despite the fact that their short muscular physiques were exquisitely adapted to the cold per Allen’s rule, it was a problem they never fully solved.”
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/07/04/homo-neanderthalis-vs-homo-sapiens-sapiens-who-is-stronger-implications-for-racial-strength-differences/
Wait? You don’t need to build shelter and sew clothes and make fire to survive in the cold? All those skiers skiing in their coats, sleeping at their ski lodge rooms heated with natural gas are being fleeced. A tent and bermuda shorts would be much more economical.
Pumpkin, I read somewhere that the information and arithmetic subtests were the best predictor of school achievement. How true is this?
It’s probably true. Wechsler noted that people with low info + arithmetic + vocabulary had an education impairment. I think vocabulary + arithmetic is a good proxy for how you’ll do on the SAT, especially if combined with social class
ideally porn serves the purpose of preventing rape, the actors remain anonymous, there is no story, it’s just two strangers fucking, and the actors are very well compensated.
Male pornstars are not really.
if you know wine and alcohol in general you know…
1. the difference between “fine wine” and wine in a box is usually small even for the experts. but there are some totally disgusting undrinkable cheap wines.
2. unlike wine, beer has an enormous and obviously discernible variety and scotch goes from sick metallic tasting to bland to peat bomb, very discernible.
give me a serious drinker whose drink of choice is wine and i’ll give you a snob, fake, moron, etc.
the difference between an abbey beer and miller light simply doesn’t exist in the range of wines.
that is, beer is actually many countries, whereas wine is one country.
and wine gives my hangovers while no other adult beverage does, so i hate it for that reason alone.
Wine’s a lot like fine art v. talented amateur art.
Is there really a massive difference in quality between Picasso and a talented amateur who sells her stuff at local restaurants? I don’t think so.
Although that’s not to say that a few artists weren’t truly in a league of their own.
Also, weren’t Neanderthals more spatial compared to humans?
Is it generally accepted that there weren’t many of them remaining after the last Ice Age? Lynn’s hypothesis looks pretty good if so.
Other than Neanderthals, are there any big exceptions to the cold winters –> higher IQs hypothesis? I’m a n00b to this stuff, sorry.
At the most there were probably 70,000.
But unfortunately for pumpkin this doesn’t prove Lynn’s hypothesis in any way. Simply because it’s validity doesn’t hinge upon what caused the extinction of the Neanderthals.
Based on archaeological and anatomical evidence we were clearly the “superior” species, not only in intelligence and creative output but also the energetic efficiency of our social structures and Athleticism.
The fact that the most intelligent Hominin evolved in Africa not Europe or any other freezing environment is evidence against Lynn’s claim.
1) we arguably didn’t become more intelligent until after we left Africa
2) arguably two of the three most intelligent hominin species (Neanderthals & denisovans) evolved in Eurasia
3) the dumbest hominin species evolved in Africa too
1) My claim isn’t controversial in the slightest. We had more sophisticated art and technology before we even met Neanderthals. The bow and arrow were invented in Africa. Homo sapiens were the first to make art. Even then, Cro magnon was genetically closer to African Homo sapiens.
2) Well no one knows how intelligent denisovans were and that still doesn’t change the fact that the smartest came from a hot climate.
3) Yeah that’s because we originated from Africa. What alot of people don’t understand is that Africa isn’t easier to survive in than Europe. Hot climates can be even more deadly than cold ones. There are always challenges it’s only the type of challenge you face that changes when transitioning into a different climate. Even if we were “more used to” a tropical setting, Africa has so much environmental variation (environment is not just temperature) that it’s erroneous to suggest that cold temperatures introduced problems so novel that we had it caused Selection on our neural architecture.
1) My claim isn’t controversial in the slightest. We had more sophisticated art and technology before we even met Neanderthals.
No we didn’t. At best we had someone carving a few Xs into a rock about 70 kya:
Neanderthal art was at least as advanced over 65 kya:
The bow and arrow were invented in Africa.
Was it? Wikipedia begs to differ:
The earliest definite remains of bow and arrow are from Europe. Possible fragments from Germany were found at Mannheim-Vogelstang dated 17,500-18,000 years ago, and at Stellmoor dated 11,000 years ago. Azilian points found in Grotte du Bichon, Switzerland, alongside the remains of both a bear and a hunter, with flint fragments found in the bear’s third vertebra, suggest the use of arrows at 13,500 years ago.[7] At the site of Nataruk in Turkana County, Kenya, obsidian bladelets found embedded in a skull and within the thoracic cavity of another skeleton, suggest the use of stone-tipped arrows as weapons about 10,000 years ago.[8] Microliths discovered on the south coast of Africa suggest that projectile weapons of some sort may be at least 71,000 years old; however, these may have been used to tip atlatl darts, rather than arrowheads.[9]
Well no one knows how intelligent denisovans were and that still doesn’t change the fact that the smartest came from a hot climate.
They are extremely closely related to Neanderthals, suggesting similar intellect
and that still doesn’t change the fact that the smartest came from a hot climate.
One example does not make a trend, especially when that one example seemed no smarter than Neanderthals until leaving Africa
Even if we were “more used to” a tropical setting, Africa has so much environmental variation (environment is not just temperature) that it’s erroneous to suggest that cold temperatures introduced problems so novel that we had it caused Selection on our neural architecture.
We were the first hominoid in 25 million years to successfully adapt to prolonged cold. If that doesn’t qualify as novel change, not sure what does.
“No we didn’t. At best we had someone carving a few Xs into a rock about 70 kya:”
They obviously represented some form of symbolism because of how wide spread consistent that pattern was and the newly discovered Neanderthal art is not that much more complex. If at all.
“Was it?”
It was.
https://sci-hub.tw/https://doi.org/10.3213/2191-5784-10211
https://sci-hub.tw/https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00100134
https://www.persee.fr/doc/paleo_0153-9345_1975_num_3_1_4193
“One example does not make a trend, especially when that one example seemed no smarter than Neanderthals until leaving Africa”
It’s not just one example, the vast majority of our evolution has been in Africa. Subsequently so has the vast majority of our encephalization. The point is that cold temperatures are not a larger selection force on Intelligence than Tropical or Dessert climates.
“We were the first hominoid in 25 million years to successfully adapt to prolonged cold. If that doesn’t qualify as novel change, not sure what does.”
First of all, no we are not. Second, my point is that even with the novel problems that come with temperature reductions, you can’t be certain that moving to the other end of Africa wouldn’t cause the same effect.
The contention under question isn’t whether novel environments act as a selective pressure, it’s whether colder environments offer something more in regards to that selection compared to other novel environments.
They obviously represented some form of symbolism because of how wide spread consistent that pattern was
How wide spread and consistent was it? The reason it caused such a stir is nothing similar was found from that era.
and the newly discovered Neanderthal art is not that much more complex. If at all.
But you’re claiming our species was smarter than neanderthals even before leaving africa, yet their art was at best equal
“Was it?”
It was.
No bow from that era has been found in Africa; the only evidence we have are arrow heads. Many experts feel the African arrowheads were too big or odd-shaped to be arrow heads. Further, if the bow and arrow predated the Out of Africa exodus, you have to explain why Australian aboriginals didn’t have it and why it didn’t fully spread through the Americas until a few thousand years ago. The simplest explanation is that it wasn’t invented until after the ancestors of both Australoids and Native Americans became isolated, which would be consistent with the earliest definitive evidence.
But even if we had the bow as early as 70 kya, neanderthals invented pitch 200 kya. One could argue that Neanderthals were even smarter that pre-exodus modern humans; indeed the first time our species tried to leave africa Neanderthals forced us to retreat. It was only by the upper paleolithic that we could out-compete them
It’s not just one example, the vast majority of our evolution has been in Africa. Subsequently so has the vast majority of our encephalization. The point is that cold temperatures are not a larger selection force on Intelligence than Tropical or Dessert climates.
If we weren’t smart enough to survive the cold until recently, then of course most of our evolution would have occurred somewhere warmer
“We were the first hominoid in 25 million years to successfully adapt to prolonged cold. If that doesn’t qualify as novel change, not sure what does.”
First of all, no we are not.
Our genus is the first.
The contention under question isn’t whether novel environments act as a selective pressure, it’s whether colder environments offer something more in regards to that selection compared to other novel environments.
The further one migrates from their homeland, the more likely they are to find novelty of any kind. It’s probably the novelty that’s relevant, not the cold per se. If neanderthals had migrated into africa, they might have been selected for more intelligence too because their bodies and culture wasn’t used to the heat.
“The further one migrates from their homeland, the more likely they are to find novelty of any kind”
Sounds like Kanazawa BS to me.
Yes, except for the BS part
So to be clear, it’s a Kanazawa-like claim re evolutionary novelty and IQ?
Let me guess, Kanazawa has been debunked (as has all HBD according to you)
Actually it goes back to Jerison (1973, 2000). He looked at encephalization over 225 million years and found two major factors predicted growth spurts in relative brain size:
1) occupying new niches (you need intelligence to adapt to new environments)
2) cognitive arms race between carnivores and herbivores (the hunted get smarter to avoid being hunted, forcing the hunters to get smarter to catch them)
70,000? That is a whole lot more than the near contemporary Aurignacian people.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0211562
Aurignacians might have numbered around 3,300 which is crazy, no wonder they themselves got replaced later on by other populations of hunter gatherers. By ~10,000 years ago only ~15% of European hunter gatherer DNA came from Aurignacians and the rest came from those who replaced the Aurignacians.
meLo
A tropical climate is defined as a climate in which the temperature never goes below 64 F (18 C). In most tropical countries(most of sub-saharan africa) the temp range is only 2 C hovering around 25 C(+-1). That sounds pretty idyllic to me…25 degrees all year round, what are you kidding me? If you can handle a bit or rain during the monsoon season then this sounds like a place to retire(a lot in fact do). Contrast this with the European climate which ranges from 5 to 40 C in the south and -5(or less) to 30 C in the North. Now that is quite the temperature range which for prehistoric man might have been quite the struggle to survive through, not just the cold but also the extreme heat too(45 degrees record highs in some southern regions).
So this notion you have that Africa is hot is actually woefully misinformed, Africa is a paradise when it comes to temperature, it only gets problematic due to extreme heat further up north in the sahara regions and the middle east. Now the question is, which is harder to survive, extreme heat or extreme cold? Well I would argue that extreme cold might be a little harder since extreme heat( 45-50 C in some middle eastern countries) can always be fairly easily mitigated by shade, night time, and water. Extreme cold(less than -30 C) can only be mitigated by layers upon layers of clothing and shelter and/or fire, all things that would have been very hard to come by 10-70 kya. You only think cold is easy to deal with due to modern technology, trust me when i say that it is not. Try camping out at -15 C with no access to a fire/heat if you don’t believe me.
As for whatever else might have made life hard for Africans well there is no denying that nature comes at us in all manner of ways but other than wild animals I can’t think of anything too problematic. Well you see wild animals are often more scared of us than we are of them while humanity likely figured out how to take down big game(and predators) a very long time ago(pre-modern humans). Also keep in mind that the argument isn’t whether Africans are stupid or human even, with all the complex cognitive traits that characterizes us(yes some idiots actually argue in favor of this). No the argument is whether Africans are AS smart as Europeans or East Asians. Unfortunately though there is by now mounting virtually irrefutable evidence(to the keen intellectually honest intellect, that is) that they are most likely not as smart as E or EA(as a whole and on average that is) and this is probably due to genetic differences. This is not a condemnation nor an attempt to marginalize, it is simply an attempt to look at the naked truth. They obviously have other genetic talents some of which we have yet to discover, no doubt(music, kineasthetic intelligence, and possibly comedy might be some of them). Of course all this is merely academic, only a fool would use population wide statistics to judge or pre-judge an individual(of any race).
@pumpkinhead
There is just one problem- tropical diseases. But yeah once the local population adapts to that it can be desirable.
PumpkinPerson,
“How wide spread and consistent was it? ”
I’m sorry I made a mistake, they weren’t widespread, but they were consistent in the pattern that they had.
“The reason it caused such a stir is nothing similar was found from that era.”
You could say something similar about the newly discovered Neanderthal art. It’s the oldest, yet also the most complex which is strange. Europe has had far more archaeological finds because of historical and environmental reasons, yet this is this first time we’ve seen an example of actual cave paintings from Neanderthals.
“No bow from that era has been found in Africa”
I’m aware but that’s more than likely because wood and string do not last long.
Phil and I had a similar debate a year or 2 ago. If I recall correctly, he had provided me a source that indicated that the arrow heads showed similar damage to that of bow and arrows used by the san. I’m in the process of seeing if he still has that citation. So I’ll get back to you on that.
“you have to explain why Australian aboriginals didn’t have it and why it didn’t fully spread through the Americas until a few thousand years ago.”
I do not have to explain that at all. That’s a strange request.
“neanderthals invented pitch 200 kya. ”
Right, and African Homo sapiens also used glue to stick their arrow heads to the shaft of the arrow
“indeed the first time our species tried to leave africa Neanderthals forced us to retreat. ”
See I’m pretty sure I know which evidence you’re talking about and I can almost guarantee that Neanderthals did not “force us to retreat”. More than likely we just couldn’t adapt in time, and then Neanderthals came in and interbred with the remaining survivors. But they also had home team advantage. If neanderthals had tried creeping into our territory they probably would have suffered the same fate. It doesn’t imply they were smarter.
“If we weren’t smart enough to survive the cold until recently”
But clearly we fucking were because homo erectus survived and later “became” what we know as Neanderthals.
“t’s probably the novelty that’s relevant, not the cold per se.”
Thank you! But even then now you have to show novelty is a selection pressure on intelligence.
King meLo,
“you have to explain why Australian aboriginals didn’t have it and why it didn’t fully spread through the Americas until a few thousand years ago.”
I do not have to explain that at all. That’s a strange request.
It’s not a strange request at all. It’s the standard way scientists make inferences about our past. If an invention was made by Africans 71 kya, we’d expect all the non-African descendants of this population to have it too. And yet the Australoids and Native Americans did not (until recently), suggesting its invention post-dated their split from the modern human family tree. Since Native Americans split 23 kya (Reich, 2018), the simplest explanation is that it was invented sometime after that, and indeed the oldest definitive evidence of the bow and arrow is from 18 kya.
By the same logic David Reich suspects that long-blade stone tools were invented around 50 kya, because not only is that around the time they first appear in the archaeological record, it’s also around the time Southeast Asians (who didn’t have the technology) split from West Eurasians who did.
“neanderthals invented pitch 200 kya. ”
Right, and African Homo sapiens also used glue to stick their arrow heads to the shaft of the arrow
evidence for modern humans producing and working with tar doesn’t appear until about 70,000 years ago, over 100,000 years after Nenderthals were using the stuff to help them take down mammoths.
See I’m pretty sure I know which evidence you’re talking about and I can almost guarantee that Neanderthals did not “force us to retreat”. More than likely we just couldn’t adapt in time, and then Neanderthals came in and interbred with the remaining survivors. But they also had home team advantage. If neanderthals had tried creeping into our territory they probably would have suffered the same fate. It doesn’t imply they were smarter.
The preponderance of evidence suggests that the two species were of similar intelligence until the Out of Africa exodus when modern humans leaped ahead. Of course this doesn’t prove leaving Africa is what made us smarter. It could be that getting smarter is what allowed us to leave Africa as Klein argues.
“If we weren’t smart enough to survive the cold until recently”
But clearly we fucking were because homo erectus survived and later “became” what we know as Neanderthals.
Current data indicate that archaic H. sapiens were not able to move into higher altitudes until very late in human prehistory (~40,000-30,000 years BP), when barriers from very harsh environments were effectively overcome. This was a period when only modern H. sapiens with fully modern behavior roamed the landscape
“t’s probably the novelty that’s relevant, not the cold per se.”
Thank you! But even then now you have to show novelty is a selection pressure on intelligence.
Well we know that cold novelty selected on human intelligence because the harshest period of the ice age killed off Neanderthals, leaving only the smartest homo species as the survivor.
In 2012, paleoanthropologist Rick Potts said:
Whenever glacial habitats invaded Europe and Asia, it appears that the Neanderthals moved south, into Iberia and the Italian peninsula, to take advantage of the warmer places. Overall, their bodies show evidence of cold adaptation. Yet during one cold period, when the Neanderthals retreated, populations of Homo sapiens began to infiltrate the cold regions. How could they do this, especially since these populations were dispersing from tropical Africa? The difference is that these early populations of our species had developed the ability to invent new tools, like sewing needles that were useful in producing warm, body-hugging clothing.
In a 2013 article in the BBC, Oxford university professor Robin Dunbar is quoted as saying the following about Neanderthals:
They were very, very smart, but not quite in the same league as Homo Sapiens. That difference might have been enough to tip the balance when things were beginning to get tough at the end of the last ice age
PumpkinHead,
“That sounds pretty idyllic to me…25 degrees all year round, what are you kidding me? If you can handle a bit or rain during the monsoon season then this sounds like a place to retire”
Imagine how retarded you have to be to think that Tropical Africa is the same as Tropical Hawaii. It’s not some leisure place that you can dickoff at 24/7. Our species wasn’t just confined to one area in Africa, we were spread out and constantly migrating within it.
“So this notion you have that Africa is hot is actually woefully misinformed”
No it’s not, the majority of Africa is incredibly hot.
“can always be fairly easily mitigated by shade, night time, and water. Extreme cold(less than -30 C) can only be mitigated by layers upon layers of clothing and shelter and/or fire, all things that would have been very hard to come by 10-70 kya. ”
This comment showcases how ignorant you actually are. I love how you just list off all the ways to mitigate the heat and the cold but then just assert with no evidence that the latter mitigation is “hard to come by”. We already had clothes, we already had the ability to create fire. What, you think our ancestors were just magically were dropped in Europe? No dumbass they migrated there gradually and assuming our ancestors weren’t complete dipshits they probably noticed that it was getting colder and colder the more they moved and planned ahead for it.
Starting a fire isn’t that difficult when it’s cold, as long as it’s dry or windy out.
“You only think cold is easy to deal with due to modern technology,”
You only think heat is easy to deal with due to modern technology.
“Try camping out at -15 C with no access to a fire/heat if you don’t believe me.”
I have. I hunter gather as a hobby sometimes. This winter was incredibly mild (thanks global warming) but last year it was around -6 for a few weeks.
“I can’t think of anything too problematic.”
Well you clearly didn’t think hard enough. Africa has Extreme heat, little clean water, snow (that’s right), large predators, more competition from other hominins, venomous/poisonous organisms, parasites, disease, pestering insects, etc. As far as I’m concerned you’re just another privileged white boy (?) who doesn’t realize that Africa arguably has the most climatic variation out of all continents.
“Also keep in mind that the argument isn’t whether Africans are stupid or human even, with all the complex cognitive traits that characterizes us”
I’m aware of what the argument is and only someone with severe reading difficulties could come to the opposite conclusion. Have you been paying attention to Pumpkin and I’s debate? Try and keep up.
“Unfortunately though there is by now mounting virtually irrefutable evidence(to the keen intellectually honest intellect, that is)”
Hahahaha, it’s like watching someone try and suck their own dick.
“and this is probably due to genetic differences. ”
Hahahaha.
MeLo
“It’s not some leisure place that you can dickoff at 24/7. Our species wasn’t just confined to one area in Africa, we were spread out and constantly migrating within it.”
Hey douchebag, I lived in Africa for many years(west African tropical country to be exact) and have travelled all across it. Clearly you aren’t very bright since most of your assumptions tend to be quite off. First of all DO YOUR RESEARCH…moron.
Here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropical_climate
Here is a map indicating the tropics
Here is another map showing the population density of Africa. Notice any similarities? Yes most people in Africa live in the tropical regions. I wonder why? If you haven’t guessed it yet it’s in large part because the weather and in particular the temperature is idyllic.
Here is the year round weather of the capital of the most populous nation in Africa.
https://weather-and-climate.com/average-monthly-Rainfall-Temperature-Sunshine,abuja,Nigeria
Notice how the daily average is never too far off from 25 degrees Celsius ALL YEAR ROUND! I don’t know about you but 25 is perfect, 30 is mostly just fun, 35 starts to get hot but to some is easily manageable while it only ever gets unbearable once we get over 35 towards the 40s. Even then it really is not an issue if you know how to adapt physically and of course stay out of the sun. It’s a whole lot easier to stay out of the sun than it is to stay out of the cold. Like I said most of sub-saharan Africa is tropical and by definition a tropical nation is defined as one in which the average daily temperature stays above 18 C all year round and while some dry/hot tropical nations can see high temperatures(30+) as long as it stays below 40 then it’s a walk in the park(more often than not it does).
Here is a list of tropical nations by continent.
https://www.hobotraveler.com/tropical/list-of-tropical-countries.php
Notice how most of the nations in sub-saharan Africa are tropical.
“Imagine how retarded you have to be to think that Tropical Africa is the same as Tropical Hawaii.”
I was referring to the weather as the sort to retire in not the actual nations in Africa themselves. How stupid can someone be to think that I was equating tropical Africa to Hawaii in terms of lifestyle and living conditions by virtue of their similar weather. It is truly baffling to me that you are spending a lot of your time on a blog/forum dedicated to IQ while yours is severely lacking.
“No it’s not, the majority of Africa is incredibly hot.”
What do you mean by majority of Africa, we are talking about sub-saharan Africa here or did you not get the memo? Even then if we go by population density the majority of the population in Africa lives in the tropics averaging 25 degrees Celsius. Also it depends what you mean by incredibly hot. Is 25 incredibly hot or is 30? If we go by the definition of extreme heat the kick of temp is 32 C though if you ask me it only starts to get uncomfortably so above 35 C. Most tropical African nations(ie sub Saharan) do not experience extreme heat.
“This comment showcases how ignorant you actually are. I love how you just list off all the ways to mitigate the heat and the cold but then just assert with no evidence that the latter mitigation is “hard to come by”.”
It goes without saying you simpleton. You think 70 kya winter coats were hanging on the trees. We had to kill big game and then fabricate heavy clothing out of their fur, all this mind you in extreme cold conditions.
“We already had clothes, we already had the ability to create fire.”
Sure back then clothes were readily available at the local target while fire was only a strike of a match away.
“What, you think our ancestors were just magically were dropped in Europe? No dumbass they migrated there gradually and assuming our ancestors weren’t complete dipshits they probably noticed that it was getting colder and colder the more they moved and planned ahead for it.”
Right, and that process of migrating into colder climates is what cultivated their ability to plan ahead and make necessary preparations which likely bumped their IQ up a few points. Like you implied there, it was a slow process and likely took thousands of years.
“You only think heat is easy to deal with due to modern technology.”
Uhm, I’ve lived in very hot and very cold climates and there is simply no comparison the cold is far more brutal. I can survive the extreme heat by taking my shirt off and moving into the shade. To survive the extreme cold I need to procure specialty clothing(a jumper and a simple jacket won’t suffice) and not stay away from shelter and heat for too long.
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/weather/2015/05/20/cold-weather-deaths/27657269/
I can’t believe we are still having this argument.
“but last year it was around -6 for a few weeks.”
And how did you cope with that LOL
“As far as I’m concerned you’re just another privileged white boy (?) who doesn’t realize that Africa arguably has the most climatic variation out of all continents.”
Sure, a privileged white boy who served in the special forces, lived in Africa for many years, and lived half his life away from the country he was raised in. You my friend are an idiot. Are you often this tragically inept and woefully instinct-less. You chose the wrong person to pick a fight with.
“I’m aware of what the argument is and only someone with severe reading difficulties could come to the opposite conclusion. Have you been paying attention to Pumpkin and I’s debate? Try and keep up.”
Alright clever boy, what is your position regarding African IQ and to what degree the difference(if any) is genetic? Because from the sound of it you seem to take the position that there isn’t much of a difference and what difference there is it’s not due to genetic variation brought about by environmental pressures(ie differences in weather conditions).
Flaminghotcheetos
“There is just one problem- tropical diseases. But yeah once the local population adapts to that it can be desirable.”
That’s right, one of them being malaria which is why incidences of sickle cell anemia are far greater among Africans than any other population on earth. It turns out that it offers a resistance to malaria. The thing is however that more often than not(particularly during pre-historic times) solutions to tropical diseases were not really in people’s hands, a lot of people had to die until a resistance to the ailment popped up in our genes somewhere. This had very little to do with intelligence. One could argue that this rationale could also be applied to resistance to cold but the truth is that the difference between Europeans and Africans in terms of our resistance to cold is not that great and a huge majority of Europeans would still die if exposed to extreme cold conditions for extended periods of time without shelter heat or adequate clothing. As such these extreme cold conditions would have triggered a do or die mentality among early Europeans, that is figure out how to stay warm or it’s game over(which required a lot of planning and skill acquisition). This in addition to staving off predators(Africans only had to worry about predators) probably was reason enough that their IQ got bumped up a few points. That is those that couldn’t figure out how to stay warm died and those that did lived. Generation after generation after thousands of years an increase in intelligence likely occurred.
Another reason that is often cited and I also believe to be a contributing factor is that intelligent people tend to be novelty seekers. In all likelihood those that sought to discover new land and new places were among the more daring and intelligent in Africa. Those that preferred the safety of their home territory might not have been as bright.
Another theory(this one is mine, or at least I haven’t heard of it elsewhere) is that those that decided to venture outward and leave their homeland and people behind were probably high on disagreeability. Several studies have shown that disagreeability is only second to open mindedness(or novelty seeking) in correlation to intelligence. So a typical scenario might have been that these disagreeable individuals decided to leave the tribe(perhaps because they did not like the political climate or culture of the tribe) and set up shop elsewhere. Those that did this and managed to survive the arduous journey and dangers this novelty seeking would have presented them with(all well outside their comfort zone) were likely the smartest of the bunch. Once outside Africa every venture beyond that would have required and produced an excess in intelligence that would have taken several thousands of years to produce. Though don’t think that the difference is astronomical, we are talking about 1-2 standard deviations. Some might argue this is huge but I think it is enough to explain economic, scientific and other disparities but certainly not such that it would put Africans in the mentally challenged category. This notion is mostly due to taking Africans out of context and comparing them to our advanced culture.
Africa is an easy-to-survive-in place with plentiful foodstuffs while the harsh cold of the European ice age is devoid of easy-to-find food with many, many apex predators around to sharpen the whits of the migrants who migrated into the land.
RR
Spot on. Succinct and to the point.
Unfortunately he doesn’t mean it.
He’s joking you assclown
RR doesn’t believe you can make any selection hypothesis without it being ad hoc.
PP , meLo
Is that so, well he is still right though.
If this is his attempt at taking the piss he did a very poor job of it. Mind you I have not done as much research or put as much thought on the availability of food in Europe vs Africa but it does stand to reason that the colder conditions would not allow for as much a variety of plant food while hunting would certainly be made harder due to the scarcity of prey animals and other difficulties a colder climate would present. As for which continent had more predators, I guess it’s debatable but the fact of the matter is that Europe had lions and tigers some 10 kya. Ultimately though I would probably agree that Africa has better hunting conditions for predator possibly even greater predator numbers. Was this enough to level the playing field, probably not.
“Is that so, well he is still right though.”
Nah it’s just bullshit HBD-ism. Even Dobzhansky thought that living in more tropical climates was harder than more temperate climes.
RR
“Nah it’s just bullshit HBD-ism”
How so, surely you aren’t relying solely on Dobzhansky, what is your rationale behind this position? Could it be that if he was a northern European he might not have been as accustomed to the tropical climate and therefore partial to finding it less livable?
Lets look at the facts shall we:
– A temperate climate ranges from -3 C but does not exceed 18 C. That is a range of 21 with a likely average around 7.5 C.
– A tropical climate ranges from 18 C to the mid 30s and though the commonly accepted value for the average tropical temperature is 25 C lets just assume for arguments sake it is 26.5 C
– The commonly accepted value for ideal room temperature for humans is around 22 C
– The year round average temperature of Abuja(a tropical climate) is 25.7 C and the average temp of Paris(a temperate climate) is 11.3 C
Given the above information Paris offers a 10.7 degrees C deviation from the ideal while Abuja offers a 3.7 degrees C deviation from the ideal. Keep in mind that back in the cave man days there were no heaters or ACs and humans were exposed to the full force of nature more often than not. It should be pretty clear right now that based on the sole parameter of temperature Africans had it easier, a lot easier, in fact almost threefold easier.
Come on dude are you still arguing about this, it really goes without saying a tropical climate is far far better than a european temperate climate, hence why most people consider the tropics as a holiday paradise. I mean what is wrong with people arguing on and on in opposition to logic and reason, there’s being disagreeable and then there’s being stupid. On the other hand you might just be one of these virtue signalers who want to feel good about yourselves by supposedly defending minorities from the “machinations” of the “evil” white man. Well guess what, no one is after the minorities no one is trying to put them down, if anything the exact opposite is going on these days but reality is reality. You may not agree with genetic racial intelligence differences(still not fully scientifically proven) but one thing is for sure there ARE racial IQ differences. You may not agree that there are overall environmental differences in adversity(still possibly partially contested due to the number of parameters that need to be considered) but surely you aren’t still rejecting the cold winters component of environmental adversity and likely subsequent impact on IQ.
I’m a realist and meritocratic at heart. As a consequence of being incurably meritocratic I have developed a very keen sense of not only my abilities but also the abilities of those around me. Almost instantly and quite instinctively I know how good someone is in any one thing, after all what sort of meritocracy would we live in if we did not know whether the best suited for the job actually ended up getting it. As such this makes it impossible for me to even remotely go against this instinct of mine even when it comes to historically oppressed minorities. If i see a disparity in intelligence strength character etc etc I cannot unsee it(and trust me I am slavishly thorough and impartial in my evaluations). This does not mean I’ll let it hang over myself or that person for all eternity nor will i let it get in the way of our interaction but at the end of the day it is what it is(while I always welcome being proven wrong). I mean I wish history were different(sans slavery), I even wish there were no intelligence differences between the races but one thing i learned at a very young age was that some people were born smarter taller better looking than others and that’s just the way it is.
PP
“Unfortunately he doesn’t mean it.”
LOL I don’t think HE even knows what he means. He’s a contrarian, and seems to have adopted a hard line PC way of thinking. I don’t know why but maybe his blog audience/influences/exposure may have something to do with it. Bottom line is I honestly don’t think he is sincere, either that or his IQ is even lower than his test score would indicate despite having a fairly decent handle on the English language. It is not unheard of to have a dismal PIQ and an above average VIQ.
LOL I don’t think HE even knows what he means. He’s a contrarian, and seems to have adopted a hard line PC way of thinking. I don’t know why but maybe his blog audience/influences/exposure may have something to do with it. Bottom line is I honestly don’t think he is sincere, either that or his IQ is even lower than his test score would indicate despite having a fairly decent handle on the English language. It is not unheard of to have a dismal PIQ and an above average VIQ.
He’s not dumb but he attended horrible schools growing up so his reading comprehension and critical thinking skills may have some gaps which he is working hard to overcome through vociferous reading and university attendance. He used to be an HBD extremist, but as he started to read more about it, he inevitably found himself bombarded with HBD denial because that’s most of what’s written on the topic. HBD is one of those rare subjects where the man on the street knows more than the ivory tower professor. Unfortunately RR was seduced by the latter.
A little clarification to my previous statement.
“some people were born smarter taller better looking than others and that’s just the way it is.”
….and if we see such a disparity between individuals AND we notice such disparities all across the natural world, across and within species then why in god’s green earth would there not be such a disparity between the races. All of a sudden the powers that be( be it god, allah, odin, zeus, or the spaghetti monster) decided that with humans the laws of nature and evolution don’t count anymore and we’re “all the same” just because it hurts the feelings of some people? Absolute hogwash, use your intellect man, use your brain, not your “feelings”, all evidence points to this disparity yet some people refuse to accept it. I mean the days of old are over, as long as there is no oppression abuse or exploitation then I only have two things to say, “it is what it is” and “live and let live”. It is only when you face up to reality that you will you ever be in the position to do something about it. If you don’t face up to it, it will only get worse.
“He’s a contrarian, and seems to have adopted a hard line PC way of thinking. I don’t know why but maybe his blog audience/influences/exposure may have something to do with it.”
This is hilarious. I’m right wing. I know that’s hard to grasp.
“On the other hand you might just be one of these virtue signalers who want to feel good about yourselves by supposedly defending minorities from the “machinations” of the “evil” white man.”
Be real here. Do you think I believe this? Can you quote me saying something to this effect?
My beliefs are irrelevant, in any case. The arguments matter.
RR
“This is hilarious. I’m right wing. I know that’s hard to grasp.”
You don’t know WHAT the F you are man. I’m just left of center and I simply adhere to scientific principles and acknowledge what the data is pointing towards while you claim to be right wing all the while peddling left wing garbage and propaganda online that flies in the face of logic.
“Be real here. Do you think I believe this? Can you quote me saying something to this effect?”
The things you write about so far fall perfectly in line with leftist thinking and ideologies. You’re not fooling anyone shit for brains.
“My beliefs are irrelevant, in any case. The arguments matter.”
I’ve yet to hear a single coherent and factually consisted argument from you and all this while you conveniently ignore me thrashing your argument and position twice in this thread and despite my countless attempts at steering this conversation towards a healthy debate and constructive back and forth.
@RR and pumpkinhead
Before you engage in this debate, you should familiarize yourselves with the paleo-population genetics landscape of ice age Europe. There were a ton of population near-replacements/turnover. By the time the ice age ended, the original post-Neanderthal European hunter gatherers (the cro-magnon types) were largely replaced by a new group of hunter-gatherers (WHGs). IDK where the WHGs came from but my best guess would be from somewhere in the Balkans. It would also explain the minor east Eurasian-shift (due to some lasting Oase-like admixture). The cro magnon/Aurignacian-Solutrian-conservative Magdalenian type ancestry went down to around 15% in western European hunter-gatherers while the WHG ancestry was around 85% by 8,000 years ago (this is just before a further influx of farmers). Then the farmers outnumbered the WHGs and then they were in turn uprooted by the Yamnaya steppe migrations. You can look up the details of the hunter-gatherer replacement in some papers like the following:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/331750232_Survival_of_Late_Pleistocene_Hunter-Gatherer_Ancestry_in_the_Iberian_Peninsula
I have more saved in stock, but they are unorganized. If you need some help then I might be able to provide the pertinent papers.
I’m currently on mobile, I hate writing long comments on my phone so when I have time to I will respond in full.
How can I be mistaken about the contents of my beliefs?
“On the other hand you might just be one of these virtue signalers who want to feel good about yourselves by supposedly defending minorities from the “machinations” of the “evil” white man.”
Quote? Implicit or explicit. Your choice.
“I’ve yet to hear a single coherent and factually consisted argument from you and all this while you conveniently ignore me thrashing your argument and position twice in this thread and despite my countless attempts at steering this conversation towards a healthy debate and constructive back and forth.”
Where did I make an argument in this thread? Can you identify it for me?
PumpkinHead
” First of all DO YOUR RESEARCH’
I have, that’s how I know you’re full of shit.
I’m aware that tropical environments don’t have much variation in regards to temperature, it also doesn’t surprise me that most people in Africa live in the tropics. None of that is irrelevant to the argument at hand. Every dipshit knows that the temperate/arctic climates have harsher temperatures than tropical ones. See desert climates are just as hard if not harder than Arctic ones temperature wise, we were exposed to this alot in our evolutionary past. Even then, Tropical climates are easy temperature wise, but incredibly difficult in other areas, which I already listed off…you know the list you conveniently ignored in your response.
“How stupid can someone be to think that I was equating tropical Africa to Hawaii in terms of lifestyle and living conditions by virtue of their similar weather.”
You’re not fooling anyone, that’s exactly what you were doing. You claimed Africa sounds “idyllic” because of it’s temperature. You basically ignored all other possible hardships and made an idiotic claim.
“we are talking about sub-saharan Africa here or did you not get the memo?”
No. We’re talking about the entirety of Africa, not just its tropical zones. Again, try and keep up. It’s obvious you don’t actually understand what’s being debated. Showing modern temperature and population density maps is irrelevant, we’re talking about the past. Since you clearly having reading difficulties allow me to elucidate this for you. WE WERE NOT ISOLATED TO ONE PART OF AFRICA DURING OUR EVOLUTION.
“You think 70 kya winter coats were hanging on the trees….that process of migrating into colder climates is what cultivated their ability to plan ahead and make necessary preparations which likely bumped their IQ up a few points. ”
So the point flew over your head as usual. See our migration to Europe was a slow and gradual process. Before we got there we already had the ability to create fire, make clothing, and plan ahead, so THEREFORE adapting to the cold environment was incredibly easier then you are trying to play it off as. Simply because we had the time to prepare.
“Uhm, I’ve lived in very hot and very cold climates and there is simply no comparison the cold is far more brutal.”
Uhm, your personal anecdotes don’t count as actual evidence, try again.
“You chose the wrong person to pick a fight with.”
HAHAHAHA! Who do you think you are buddy? You’ve already proven how dumb you are, between your mischaracterization of RR’s motives and your complete ignorance in basic Anthropology and geography it is pretty apparent that your “pumpkin head” is filled with mostly water.
Here is what one of the founding fathers of the modern synthesis thinks on this discussion:
Now, the processes of natural selection which arise from encounters between living things and physical forces in their environment are different from those which stem from competition within a complex community of organisms. The struggle for existence in habitats in which harsh physical conditions are the limiting factors is likely to have a rather passive character as far as the organism is concerned. Physical factors, such as excessive cold or drought, often destroy great masses of living beings, the destruction being largely fortuitous with respect to the individual traits of the victims and the survivors, except for traits directly involved in resistance to the particular factors. As pointed out by Schmalhausen, indiscriminate destruction is countered chiefly by development of increased fertility and acceleration of development and reproduction, and does not lead to important evolutionary advances. Physically harsh environments, such as arctic tundras or high alpine zones of mountain ranges, are inhabited by few species of organisms. The success of these species in colonizing such environments is due simply to the ability to withstand low temperatures or to develop and reproduce during the short growing season.
Where physical conditions are easy, interrelationships between competing and symbiotic species become the paramount adaptive problem. The fact that physically mild environments are as a rule inhabited by many species makes these interrelationships very complex. This is probably the case in most tropical communities. The effectiveness of natural selection is by no means proportional to the severity of the struggle for existence, as has so often been implied, especially by some early Darwinists. On the contrary, selection is most effective when, instead of more or less random destruction of masses of organisms, the survival and elimination acquire a differential character. Individuals that survive and reproduce are mostly those that possess combinations of [[p. 221]] traits which make them attuned to the manifold reciprocal dependences in the organic community. Natural selection becomes a creative process which may lead to emergence of new modes of life and of more advanced types of organization.
The role of environment in evolution may best be described by stating that the environment provides “challenges” to which the organisms “respond” by adaptive changes. The words “challenge” and “response” are borrowed from Arnold Toynbee’s analysis of human cultural evolution, although not necessarily with the philosophical implications given to the terms by this author. Tropical environments provide more evolutionary challenges than do the environments of temperate and cold lands. Furthermore, the challenges of the latter arise largely from physical agencies, to which organisms respond by relatively simple physiological modifications and, often, by escaping into evolutionary blind alleys. The challenges of tropical environments stem chiefly from the intricate mutual relationships among the inhabitants. These challenges require creative responses, analogous to inventions on the human level. Such creative responses constitute progressive evolution.
http://people.wku.edu/charles.smith/biogeog/DOBZ1950.htm
“what is your position regarding African IQ and to what degree the difference(if any) is genetic?”
When HBDers refer to a trait being “genetic” they mean it’s either robust or evolved. We know intelligence is not the former, that’s just a fact from basic neuroscientific principles. The latter is what’s under contention. As Philo says I can’t put my dog through college and then expect him to suddenly be as intelligent as me. Now I’ve seen the evidence with GWAS and Polygenic scores Ive also seen that there is genetic variation in Neural structures between races, but to what extent they affect intelligence I’m unware of. It’s a possibility but we simply arent there yet and may never be because of the ethical issues present in trying to perform such experiments. Maybe china will do it for us?
A long time ago I had a hypothesis that the reason behind possible intellectual discrepancies was because European ancestors had competition with Neanderthals on top of the novelty they faced in going to a different climate.
To me saying that resource allocation selects for intelligence is a no brainer, I could say the same about virtually any trait and be correct. So to me CWT is an incredibly vague theory and is too general to have any real explanatory power. SO I suggested social competition and learning was the main cause of not only our intelligence as a species but the differential of individuals. Hence, why I believe Tropical climates are harder to live in. Adaptations are not absolute, I could be intelligent enough to master my environment but if someone comes around that’s even more intelligent then I’m fucked, because I have to compete with them.
“Furthermore, the challenges of the latter arise largely from physical agencies, to which organisms respond by relatively simple physiological modifications and, often, by escaping into evolutionary blind alleys. The challenges of tropical environments stem chiefly from the intricate mutual relationships among the inhabitants. These challenges require creative responses, analogous to inventions on the human level”
This. We have a homedynamic physiology for a reason.
Exactly.
It’s easy to see how this homeodynamism could constitute the functional structures of general intelligence. And how these structures could be selected for in a tropical environment. Which most erroneously assume does not have seasonal changes.
Plus I love how this article inadvertently debunks Rushton’s r/k selection theory
Flaminhotcheetos
Thanks for the information, that is quite interesting and while I have run into some of this stuff before I will perhaps look into it in more depth to see if there is anything of pertinence to glean in aid of our current discussion. I am quite busy at the moment but I will try to respond to our unfortunately misguided fellow pumpkinites in a thorough analysis of where their line of thinking might have derailed and why their failure to address some very crucial points(even in this discussion) puts them on a road to nowhere.
10$ says your “thorough analysis” is more anecdotes, strawman arguments, hand waving, and pure ignorance of evolutionary biology.
PP
“He’s not dumb but he attended horrible schools growing up so his reading comprehension and critical thinking skills may have some gaps which he is working hard to overcome through vociferous reading and university attendance. He used to be an HBD extremist, but as he started to read more about it, he inevitably found himself bombarded with HBD denial because that’s most of what’s written on the topic. HBD is one of those rare subjects where the man on the street knows more than the ivory tower professor. Unfortunately RR was seduced by the latter.”
Right, I gathered most of that which is why I concluded that he is a closet leftie, either that or he is dumber than I thought and is a right winger who for some inexplicable reason keeps peddling leftie ivory tower professor nonsense. I have to say that the biggest danger for the US at the moment isn’t Trump but actually is the troubling percentage of left wing academics is the US.
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/02/27/research-confirms-professors-lean-left-questions-assumptions-about-what-means
They will bring about the undoing of the US if this trend continues, and while I’m not even american(and not even right wing, actually just left of center ideologically but generally a centrist) I think america’s downfall will be severely costly to the world. Most of them are all closed up in their intellectual bubbles high up in their ivory towers and they have no real understanding of reality on the ground or of fundamentals(outside their fields) be it, evolution, politics, philosophy, or statistics. Yes that’s right statistics, I am convinced at this point that the most important subject in schools in the 21st century should be statistics. Most people I meet are not only statistically illiterate they simply have next to no understanding of even the most basic principles instead relying on crude anecdotes or superstition to inform their decisions.
“Right, I gathered most of that which is why I concluded that he is a closet leftie, either that or he is dumber than I thought and is a right winger who for some inexplicable reason keeps peddling leftie ivory tower professor nonsense. I have to say that the biggest danger for the US at the moment isn’t Trump but actually is the troubling percentage of left wing academics is the US.”
“You disagree with me so you must be of the political party that says what you say. ”
Dude shut the fuck up.
What do people think of transgender athletes. I feel sorry for women having to compete with guys with identity issues. Maybe they should create a separate category for trans sport.
this is what i think of trans athletes and trans people in general:
When I was a kid, the great debate was about how to defeat the Soviet Union. And we won. Now we are told that the great debate is about who gets to use which bathroom. This is a distraction from our real problems. Who cares?
That’s a legit good idea. Trans sports would make sense because it would promote diversity and other things that are valued by that segment of the population anyways while fostering a sense of identity and giving them a place to compete on a fair level.
Genius idea, Pill.
Right but trans sports could only apply to tans women(ie men that transitioned to women). We couldn’t possibly have a category of trans sports that put trans men and trans women together, that would be very unfair.
I actually prefer the idea of having a women’s category and an open category for everyone else. This way women are protected from the dispossession of opportunity and acclaim by biological men. In the open category anyone should be able to compete(but mostly men by default), even women too but especially trans women. I’d like to see them try to beat other biological men while sporting long hair, nails and breasts. I guess an exception could be made for trans men(ie biological women) competing in the women’s category provided they have never undergone hormone therapy and are not currently hopped up on testosterone.
What about sport segregation on the phenotype that’s more likely to be successful in a sport? Like fast twitch fibers and long limbs for sprinting? I think Kerr and Obel’s proposal is interesting in theory but I’d like to see it in practice.
I don’t think MtFs should compete with women; either attempt the proposal by Kerr and Obel or have separate competitions for them.
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2018/01/29/sex-segregation-ending-should-athletes-be-assessed-by-somatype-and-physiology/
“(1) Don’t let transgender athletes compete with women.
This is the most obvious course of action. Due to the anatomical and physiological differences between men and women that I described above, these types of people have an unfair advantage over women who did not go through the same type of puberty that they did. Now, one can make the same type of argument for Caster Semenya, who has been the subject of controversy the past few years, though, point (3) will address this.
(2) Have a separate competition for transgender athletes.
This seems to be a logical point. Just because people “identify” as something does not mean that they should compete in that competition. If someone identifies as disabled—even though they are not, physically, for instance—should they then be allowed to compete in the Special Olympics? Having separate competitions for these types of athletes would end these types of discussions—women who bust their ass year-round in order to succeed against their competition would not have to worry about competing against someone who went through a male puberty which would then throw out all of their hard training out the window.
(3) Separate individuals by anatomy and physiology.
This third and final point is separating individuals on the basis of anatomical and physiological parameters. Kerr and Obel (2017) compellingly argue that, instead of segregating sporting competitions by sex, sporting competitions should be segregated by anatomical and physiological parameters.
For example, take sprinting. Success in sprinting hinges on a few things: (1) muscle mass; the more muscle mass one has, especially in their legs, the more power they can generate in order to efficiently move; (2) fast twitch fiber count: the greater number of fast-twitch fibers in, for example, the vastus lateralis dictates how quick and explosive one can be. Coupled with the right morphology and fast-twitch fibers, this leads to more explosive contractions in RR genotypes (Broos et al, 2016). So we can say that for the 100m dash, it can be segregated on the basis of RR genotypes, an abundance of fast-twitch muscle fibers and a mesomorphic somatotype. So, if we know about what certain anatomic and physiologic variables are conducive in certain sporting events (we do know this) then segregating certain sports on the types of variables more conducive to success in that sport would lead to more balanced competition.
This would then end these types of arguments. Transgender athletes would then compete with individuals—male or female—on the basis of whichever anatomic and physiologic variables are conducive to the sport in question. The argument that Kerr and Obel advance is certainly intriguing—dare I say, it makes sense. Though it would take a lot to get it put into practice, it is an interesting thought experiment and makes more sense than just segregating based on sex alone.”
https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2019/02/27/that-high-school-running-competition-anatomic-and-physiologic-differences-between-men-and-women-and-the-possibility-of-sports-segregation-by-anatomy-and-physiology/
“not currently hopped up on testosterone.”
What do you think of the long-running debate in the literature on whether or not endogenous testosterone gives an athletic advantage?
Well I would say that just for the sake of practicality and in order to maintain viewership(not sure how many people will tune in to watch trans sports) the best bet would be to have two categories, female, and an open category. This way anyone who wanted to try their luck and qualified they could participate with the men(not sure how many women would actually qualify for the men’s 100m though seeing as qualifying is 0.6s lower than the fastest female times). The key here would be to ensure trans women competed with other biological men given their genetic and physiological make up, instead of dispossessing and disenfranchising the women’s category… and then may the best runner win be it trans, female or whatnot, assuming they were willing to take their chances with the men.
I’m not opposed to a trans competition just for trans people but obviously trans women would have to be separate from trans men(ie two categories). This idea that the innate advantage they were born with can be erased through hormone therapy and so on is total hogwash. It’s just far too difficult to level the playing field effectively. Whether this sort of endeavor is viable is another question, like I said what do we do, create the trans Olympics and who is going to watch it/pay for it? I think the trans community is much much smaller than the disabled community(1/10th at best)?
As for your third point I think that is obviously taking things too far. We need clear categories that would not be a nightmare to define let alone regulate. Perhaps in the future it might be possible but not now and certainly not in the way they proposed it where men would compete with women simply based on their muscle types. That is preposterous, there are other physiological and mechanical advantages, as you well know.
On a little side note I actually think that blade runners will have to be banned soon from competing with able bodied athletes. These blades are giving them an unfair advantage which will only get greater with time.
“What do you think of the long-running debate in the literature on whether or not endogenous testosterone gives an athletic advantage?”
Well clearly it does, what’s there to debate? Now the question then becomes, ‘should we ban people(women) that have high levels of natural testosterone’ and my answer to that is no. If they can prove that they are female(ie XX) then whether their testosterone is naturally(stress the natural) high, is neither here nor there. What are we going to ban Usain Bolt because he might have an abnormally high level of fast twitch muscle fibers. Of course not, the boundaries need to be clearly defined(which is why the simpler the better) and so if one is undeniably male then he should race with the men and if one is undeniably female then she should race with other women. No two women are alike so where one might have a muscle advantage another might have a mechanical advantage(ie ideal body mechanics/dimensions) and where one might have god like reflexes another might have elevated testosterone allowing for greater release of energy.
As for Caster Semenya, well she is clearly intersex and that should not be allowed.
As someone who’s lived in all types of climates, cold winters are the hardest to survive. I think that’s obvious to anyone who’s traveled even in the slightest.
It’s too bad your anecdotes don’t outweigh actual evidence.
I live in a climate where I face both extremes and both are a pain in the ass. The heat will kill you quicker though.
I dunno, being subcontinental means I’m adapted to the warmth. I think people with more melanin are naturally more adapted to a warmer environment than people with lighter-skin are to their environments, meaning people living in colder places do not have the necessary adaptations to survive at the same level as people in warmer climates do.
Anyways, it’s not even about the heat or cold itself but rather the difficulty of finding food to eat, the scarcity of available resources, etc. That’s definitely going to be much more of a problem in the cold than in warm places. So there’s no arguing in the fact that cold weather is a harsher environment to live in because of the scarcity of essential resources needed to survive.
“So there’s no arguing in the fact that cold weather is a harsher environment to live in because of the scarcity of essential resources needed to survive.”
And that is where you’re wrong. Food is harder to find in colder climates, but there is more competition in hotter ones and predation tends to have a larger selection force on Primates. Not to mention water is more necessary than food, and good luck finding a consistent source of water in desert environments. Some tropical rain-forests have less protein avaliable than deserts.
I would even argue that verbal intelligence would be high for people living in Neanderthal populations because you need a lot more communication in a smaller tribe, with symbolic intelligence having to be a lot more precise and accurate to get a point across than someone who is in a larger tribe where the importance of interpretation isn’t as important because you don’t need people to recognize a single idea or to arrive at the same conclusion.
However, in a larger tribe, social intelligence would pay off big-time, especially non-verbal gestures and cues that would signal some form of meaning to other members of your population. The Machiavellian brain comes from larger populations because in a smaller tribe, it’s almost impossible to lie or imply anything untruthful to anyone. But that’s just my guess at the framework about how the two are different.
Agriculture, not the development necessarily, but the mutations that arose when larger populations were constructed are the only times we would’ve seen a non-eugenic pattern of intelligence increase, in my take. Everything else is not necessarily adaptations of our brain architecture but more or less sexual selection of various traits that would be best for the group.
Oh and also Malthusian traps are responsible for changes in IQ over periods of time in populations.
The classic Malthusian trap is probably what happened to all civilizations or groups of people who died off, with different effects on different sizes of populations that different groups could attain.
For example, Dunbar’s number is probably the tipping point for chimps and other primates but is not as useful for humans, or at least in my belief can be stretched out and stuff.
Actually I’d go as far as to say Dunbar’s number is the primary driver of intelligence gains, if any, in small populations, but because we don’t see small populations reaching numbers over carrying capacity, the productivity is nil. Just examine the populations of Papuans and other hunter-gatherer societies still alive.
This might also be an explanation for so-called East Asian supremacy because their population sizes are the largest, meaning larger neocortex to deal with such incredible amounts of people. Might damage genius, though, because you see genius best expressed in small, independently functioning populations with more in-group interaction than out-group.
Pumpkin, does a below average spatial IQ make it so that even if you have above average math ability, it will still take longer to apply the concepts to problems? It seems like spatial stuff is more application than understanding, while matrix reasoning and stuff like that reflect understanding. But it doesn’t seem to be a power thing, more of a speed thing.
Pumpkin, does a below average spatial IQ make it so that even if you have above average math ability, it will still take longer to apply the concepts to problems?
Yes
I pretty much agree with Phil about homosexuality now. If it weren’t for activism, media promotion, and the religious right’s counter-activism, being gay would be the same as having a foot fetish or enjoying hentai: a weird preference that affects an extreme minority that most people don’t want to know about.
The marriage thing is contrived and it prevents everyone from seeing homosexuality in its proper context.
Regardless, gay “love” is obviously different than straight love. But most straight relationships and marriages are disasters, so the distinction isn’t as clear. But because marriage is weaker than ever, fighting gay marriage to preserve it is just as stupid and contrived.
the gay and tranny stuff is promoted by capital and by (((capital))) in order to…
1. distract from economic issues and ethnic issues.
2. divide the 99%…divide and conquer.
this is not a conspiracy theory because no actual conspiracy is required. all that’s required is:
1. those who fund political campaigns don’t want their politicians talking about soaking them or expropriating them.
2. those who own media and those who advertise on media don’t want it talking about economic issues.
3. so called “social issues” get people masturbating on cocaine because “social issues” means sex, drugs, and rock & roll.
It needn’t all be nefarious. Some elites promote gays for the same reason they endorsed Obama. To be on the “right” side of history.
But if you’re looking for darker motives, you missed the most obvious one.
it’s so obvious peepee won’t say…
or she’s said it’s to keep white TFR down.
but TFR is way lower in singsing, s korea, japans…and in the most based white countries, like russia and italy.
[redacted by pp, dec 28, 2019]
So mug of pee rejects white genocide theory or at least that gays are used for it?
To be on the “right” side of history.
= virtue signalling by rich folk…”we have a conscience, we love “sexual minorities”. we just hate poor people.”
Helping poor people costs money, so why not be moral on the cheap?
not at all.
the white genocide theory isn’t a theory. it’s a fact…it’s just that it doesn’t actually require a conspiracy…
it just requires that…
1. white capitalists be more xenophilic than they are ethnocentic, AND…
2. (((capitalists))) hate white people.
if you insist that there’s some sanhedrin planning all this shit then i suspect you’re a mossad agent or just retarded.
terre’blanche’s poetry was once required reading in some ZA schools.
[Redacted by pp, dec 28, 2019]
I agree it doesn’t require a conspiracy
But you reject the idea that gays are being consciously (not nessecarily conspiratorially) used to advance white genocide?
I don’t think white and Jewish elites are hostile to white people, per se. Just conservative white culture. Most secular virtue-signalers hated growing up in right-wing religious households, so they promote gays to feel superior.
I think most of them view immigration the same way. A handful of plutocrats see it in terms of dollars-and-cents, but someone like Buttigieg does not.
I even doubt that elite Jews promote mass immigration with hostile intent. They do it because it’s politically convenient—and because they’re conditioned to oppose anything other groups say that’s even remotely discriminatory. Dershowitz is a paranoid moron, not someone scheming for his tribe.
Thats where youre wrong. Derschowitz is scheming for his tribe. He was one of the defence attorneys for Epstein who seems to be some sort of mossad agent.
Puppy is partially right here – that the gentile white elites do it to ‘be moral on the cheap’. The question I keep asking and I keep not getting any answers to though is this – who controls what it means to be moral in Western society.
For that we have to ask who controls education and the media.
Answer is jews.
You haven’t answered anything. Which Jews conspired to make gays a moral virtue and why exactly would they do this?
within a nearly all white (or all anything) and very unequal country:
1. the 1% fear the 99% will take their wealth and power.
2. the would-be 1% or the middle class fear the poor because they fear they might be like them or become them.
the so-called jewish morality isn’t bespoke except when it come to the middle east. that is, identity politics and calling your enemies “racist” isn’t not obvious as a tactic. it serves gentile capital as much as jews.
He also wrote The Case for Israel. Can’t believe I forgot about that. Scheming was the wrong word.
I think one of the keys to understanding Jews in general, including Dershowitz, is that they really like to see their people succeed. And they love using contrived adversity stories to frame their success. Hence the ethnic periodicals, ethnic networking events, etc. It’s like a middle-aged guy cheering for his alma mater.
The adversity bullshit definitely affects their political thinking (i.e. brown people are the new Huddled Masses) but their politics are generally distinct from their ethnic cheerleading.
But yes, they definitely dictate what it means to be moral. No question.
Our shitty culture explains all of this, but culture has pretty much always been shitty throughout recorded history.
Before “liberation” we had lifeless rituals and no real freedom.
For a happy society you need free thought and altruism. As far as I can tell, this only existed in tribal days.
Civilization is the real culprit.
civilization can exist within a small homogeneous democratic sovereign state like iceland and ancient athens, but iceland is affected by the american economic, military, and cultural empire so it’s not totally sovereign or democratic. iceland is the oldest existing democracy. it’s men are the world’s largest yet live the longest. icelanders have the world’s best diet. yet, surprisingly, iceland is one of a few first world countries with male suicide rate higher than that of the US. maybe it’s the weather. anyway…the problem is imperialism not civilization per se.
and transnational capital whether headquartered in the US or germany or wherever is imperialistic. globalization means loss of sovereignty and thus loss of popular sovereignty because there are no global elections and thus rule by global capital.
I agree throughout most of history people were (and are) basically mind controlled by cults. Whether its the chinese communist party or Islam or in the West, ‘political correctness’/Christianity (both created by jew cult leaders). And the living standards for followers of cults traditionally has been a small proportion to the leaders of it. When you say people spent most of their time with ‘lifeless rituals’ we still have that nonsense with gay pride and praising blacks for not eating their own shit. Some would argue saying the rosary is a lot less stupid than affirmative action for minorities. I think people are biologically and psychological programmed to be in cults and in fact it is the people that are not hard wired in such a way – autistic people and others – that have odd thinking patterns if you exclude religious and zeitgeist type thinking.
Yes, people are hard-wired to be in cults. I was manic when I wrote that so what I meant wasn’t clear.
What I wanted to say is pretty much what you described. The rules that govern societal “cults” have changed a lot throughout history, but the common denominator is that they keep the ruling class in power. Rulers can develop contrived cults with those ends in mind or they can rise to the top because the rules favor their set of traits—or it can be something in between. Jews and neoliberalism are an in-between case.
My point about civilization is that status hierarchies drive people insane and make them miserable, especially when the gatekeepers endorse striver culture. You need a small, homogeneous society with a low gini coefficient.
speaking of cocaine:
i wondered what happened to the colombian cartels, medellin and cali.
apparently after about 1995 there are no cartels and the cocaine trade is fragmented….like a broken glass…the largest shard is not that big.
but i heard joe rogan speculate that there are 100s of billions in the hands of some small group of colombians.
this might just be his small vulgar mezzogiorno brain.
what does this have to do with imus and oprah? it’s an IQ test question beyond mere sandwich making.
What does what have to do with Imus & Oprah? Well, just as the alt-right might argue Hollywood pushes gays to get whites to stop breeding, some blacks believe Hollywood pushes rap to get blacks to commit crimes, because the same studios invest in prisons. When Don Imus was being taken down for calling black girls nappy headed hoes, Oprah did a show linking the controversy to rap music, hoping some misogynist rappers could be taken down with him.
Its all obvious a conspiracy or conspiracies overlapping with each other in education, media, intelligence agencies, government proper and finance. If it was random people interacting with each other and with no clear overarching agenda going on, how do you explain how the system picks its targets? Whether countries to invade or certain political and ethnic groups to praise/exclude? We have a culture in the West which is to basically deem it morally justified to bash the majority. This obviously took co-ordination and planning. It didn’t just happen by accident.
Pill you’re among the least socially intelligent people here. I know it, Dealwithit knows it, Afro knows it & both your therapists know it.
Idiot.
My cat has more social intelligence than Philo.
If you disagree then you’re autistic.
wahsington was not a jew was he peepee?
he was a plutocrat. the richest president before trump. the richest man in america at the time.
Happy, thrice happy shall they be pronounced hereafter, who have contributed any thing, who have performed the meanest office in erecting this stupendous fabric of Freedom and Empire on the broad basis of Independency; who have assisted in protecting the rights of humane nature and establishing an Asylum for the poor and oppressed of all nations and religions.
The bosom of America is open to receive not only the Opulent and respectable Stranger, but the oppressed and persecuted of all Nations And Religions; whom we shall welcome to a participation of all our rights and privileges, if by decency and propriety of conduct they appear to merit the enjoyment.
I am informed that a Ship with Palatines is gone up to Baltimore, among whom are a number of Trademen. I am a good deal in want of a House Joiner and Bricklayer, (who really understand their profession) and you would do me a favor by purchasing one of each, for me. I would not confine you to Palatines. If they are good workmen, they may be of Asia, Africa, or Europe. They may be Mahometans, Jews or Christian of an Sect, or they may be Athiests. I would however prefer middle aged, to young men.
more here: FTN
Pumpkin, which subtests measure how well you understand a concept?
matrix reasoning or picture arrangement
So Pumpkin, can you assume that understanding math comes from the matrix reasoning/similarities subtest, and the speed of application as block design, and math ability (figure weights), is the potential. As in, with low block design and matrix reasoning, with high figure weights, you can still do math, but you will be slower than your peers.
Can this same logic be applied to verbal concepts (philosophy, certain sciences, speed of thinking about arguments, fact recall, etc).
The crusade over the last 2-3 years to eradicate Fake News from the internet is pretty amusing. I’ll bet most of the people who support it actually think that banning accounts and assigning articles “truth scores” will magically make everyone think like them. Too funny.
Should we Fact Check the MAKE YOUR DICK FUCKING HUGE ads too?
PP, what do you think of the claim that the Flynn effect is not evenly applied across all IQ groups, and tends to inflate low-IQ scores rather than high-IQ ones?
From Wikipedia: “Some studies have found the gains of the Flynn effect to be particularly concentrated at the lower end of the distribution. Teasdale and Owen (1989), for example, found the effect primarily reduced the number of low-end scores, resulting in an increased number of moderately high scores, with no increase in very high scores.[15] In another study, two large samples of Spanish children were assessed with a 30-year gap. Comparison of the IQ distributions indicated that the mean IQ scores on the test had increased by 9.7 points (the Flynn effect), the gains were concentrated in the lower half of the distribution and negligible in the top half, and the gains gradually decreased as the IQ of the individuals increased.[16] Some studies have found a reverse Flynn effect with declining scores for those with high IQ.[17][13]”.
There’s probably some truth to that but if the Flynn effect were simply the bottom of the distribution being pulled up while the top stayed constant, we’d see a huge decrease in the variance. I haven’t seen that on the most Flynn affected subtests & neither has Flynn
Im not pp but it’s very plausible.
Lynn thinks that the Flynn Effect is caused by better nutrition, and if this is true you’d expect to see IQ go up the most among low-SES people with lower IQs. I’d imagine there are diminishing marginal returns to nutrition as a function of SES.
Your reverse Flynn example is probably just regression to the mean. Some of the Flynn Effect among low IQs is probably bc of regression too.
Also, Lynn thinks that genetic IQ has declined since midcentury, so you’d expect to find these declines concentrated among high SES people with higher IQs.
Lynn thinks that the Flynn Effect is caused by better nutrition, and if this is true you’d expect to see IQ go up the most among low-SES people with lower IQs.
That makes sense in theory but height gains are also caused by nutrition and these occur across the whole distribution not the bottom only
I’m sure the whole distribution has seen gains, but I’d imagine low SES people have averaged the largest gains. Height was a marker of class until about 80 years ago. It isn’t anymore.
Pumpkin, on the Ravens matrices, norms for 18-50 year olds and 16-17 year olds are drastically different. A score of 50th percentile for the 16-17 age bracket would be a 30th percentile for the 18-50 bracket. However, matrix reasoning subtest scores are equivalent for 16-17 year olds and 18 year olds.
Does test.mensa.no seem to feature more novel items, or do the patterns just repeat?
Ok, I took a matrix reasoning test, and it fit exactly with the ravens, however, I practiced the two ravens tests up to where I always get mid 120s, and I got it in the subtest on the WISC. So, were the ravens norms always accurate? Are the weschlers items different enough from ravens items that the practice transfer would only be 5-10 points?
Pumpkin, can you take these test and identify whether or not they are accurate?
https://free.ultimaiq.net/numerus_basic.htm
https://free.ultimaiq.net/nse.htm
I would need at least a dozen people to take them to tell if norms accurate
Cold winters ain’t the only thing that boost intelligence pp. Even less germ load regions, and coastal areas produce relatively higher iq people.