Both Richard Lynn and Jayman have argued that cold winters helped select for racial differences in IQ, but both of them also noted that the cold winter explanation was incomplete. For example, the most cold adapted race are the arctic people yet these appear to be somewhat less intelligent than Whites even though their brains are supposedly much bigger than those of Whites.
Richard Lynn resolved this paradox by arguing that because of their low population, Arctic people did not have genetic mutations which increased brain efficiency. So even though Arctic people faced more selection for high IQ than whites did because of the cognitive demands of their colder winters (making clothes, shelter, fire & hunting etc), evolution could mostly just select for bigger brains, while in Whites, selection was weaker but had more ways of making people smart, so more cognitive evolution occurred.
Although this theory makes sense, it appears to be wrong. Davide Piffer’s data shows that Native American (a proxy for Arctic people) score way below whites on polygenic scores for education (a crude proxy for IQ), even though the SNPs used are common in all races.
Jayman on the other hand argued that cold winters selected for brain size (via thermoregulation) but that only those cold adapted big brained races that acquired civilization would evolve high IQ.
The problem with this theory is that if civilization selected for IQ, it would also have also likely selected for brain size (though to a much lesser degree than if brain size were directly selected by the cold) and that doesn’t seem to have happened. Also, if civilization had selected for IQ, then people today would be better at drawing (a crude proxy for IQ) than they were in Upper Paleolithic Europe, and that doesn’t seem to have happened either.
Thus I’ve been forced to propose a third theory. Cold winters both selected for IQ directly (survival skills) and indirectly (big brains keep you warm) but the ratio of direct to direct selection was higher in Whites than in Arctic people because Whites lived in more population dense areas, where resources were running out. By contrast Arctic people (and Native Americans) were had a whole continent to themselves so there was less competition for survival skills, but you still need big heads to keep warm.
Pumpkin Person 
Nice ad hoc hypotheses (yours and Lynn’s).
do you have a better one?
Why do you think I need to “have a better [hypothesis]” to be justified in the rejection of hypotheses that only exist to save a theory from falsification? What novel predictions does the hypothesis generate? Why should one accept the hypothesis in question?
Because rejecting a theory without replacing it with a better one does nothing to advance our knowledge.
Embracing a refuted theory does nothing to advance our knowledge.
It’s a facade.
Calling a theory ad hoc is not a refutation unless a less ad hoc one is suggested
Lmfao if you had any idea how ridiculous that was, you wouldn’t of said it.
If you only knew that we know you stole that line, you wouldn’t have stole it. An ad hoc theory can still be correct. It’s just that when given a choice, the less ad hoc theory is more likely to be correct. RR didn’t provide an alternative resolution to the paradoxes described in the article.
LOL I didn’t steal it. I was making a reference to a video we both watched. You were supposed to notice it doofus.
Get over yourself.
“RR didn’t provide an alternative resolution to the paradoxes described in the article.”
He doesn’t have to. End of story.
How do you distinguish which is “more or less ad hoc”?
The simplest theory that explains the facts.
How simple are yours and Lynn’s “theories” and how do they “explain” the “facts”? How many assumptions do they make and what are they?
Our theories are very simple in that 90% of putative genetic difference between groups can be explained by just 2 variables: ancestral temperature and ancestral population. Lynn believed population affected IQ via mutation but Piffer’s novel data seems to have contradicted this so, with the suggestion of Piffer, I changed it to population size increasing competition (an idea Melo once endorsed).
My modification of Lynn’s theory is a good example of science progressing when a novel prediction was falsified.
Ratio of explanatory variables to data explained. Higher the ratio, the more ad hoc the theory.
“RR didn’t provide an alternative resolution to the paradoxes described in the article.”
Why don’t you understand that I don’t need to “provide an alternative resolution to the paradoxes described” to be justified in rejecting just-so storytelling? What novel predictions do the hypotheses make and what are the independent verifiers?
Why don’t you understand that I don’t need to “provide an alternative resolution to the paradoxes described” to be justified in rejecting just-so storytelling?
Because science abhors a vacuum. Scientists are story tellers so you can’t just leave huge plot points unexplained; thus scientists must adopt the best hypothesis. You also can’t reject a theory for being ad hoc, because ad hoc is relative, so unless you provide a less ad hoc alternative, my theory can not be relatively ad hoc. Now if you said something like “I reject your hypothesis because artic people actually had greater population density than whites and here’s proof”, then you’ve actually debunked it so no alternatives needed. But simply saying it’s ad hoc is vacuous, intellectually lazy and quite frankly, rude.
What novel predictions do the hypotheses make and what are the independent verifiers?
The novel predictions it makes are (1) Paleolithic measures of population density will predict racial differences in IQ and polygenic education, independently of latitude (2) Paleolithic measures of population density will predict racial differences in IQ and polygenic education independently of brain size, and (3) Latitude will predict racial differences in brain size independently of IQ and polygenic education.
LOL!
“leave huge plot points unexplained”
You don’t fill those plot points with obviously wrong theories until further notice. Science has never operated that way.
“You also can’t reject a theory for being ad hoc”
Yes you can
“because ad hoc is relative”
No it’s not. As soon as you start trying to accommodate a theory instead of falsifying it it becomes ad hoc.
[redacted by pp, may 16, 2021]
You don’t fill those plot points with obviously wrong theories until further notice.
It’s not obviously wrong; that’s the point.
Science has never operated that way.
Science couldn’t progress if it just stagnated until every single theory was proven, so scientists routinely invoke the best hypothesis they have even if it’s far from proven. A good example is the Drake equation. We have no idea what most of the variables in that equation are but scientists routinely make their best guess based on limited information.
No it’s not. As soon as you start trying to accommodate a theory instead of falsifying it it becomes ad hoc.
I didn’t accommodate Lynn’s population size cause mutation theory. Piffer falsified it but suggested an alternative: population size causes selection (a theory you once embraced).
You have a bright future in really niche memes Ganzir 🙂
I also have a bright present and past there
Think of the Bob Semple tank. It was flawed to being nearly useless – but nobody else was coming up with better ideas!
meanwhile the jesus cult is taking over china.
and most’ve’em will eventually become papists. oh believe me.
y’all aren’t getting it. anti-racism is the new mafia. that’s why rr is into it.
reading encyclopedia article from 1960 on “race”. this was before genome sequencing but after dna was discovered as the means of inheritance.
the article was woke even by today’s standards. this is proof rr needs to be deported to albania.
all it got wrong was classifying negritos and melanesians as negros. peepeetard has done this too.
and it categorized polynesians and abos as caucasoid.
I define negroid as a grade, not a clade; thus andaman islanders are negroid:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_grade#/media/File:Clade-grade_II.svg
no idea what that means peepee.
melanesians and negrtioes and abos and papuans are supposedly descended from the first group out of africa. caucasoids and mongos from a second later group. this is what spencer wells said in his story of man show.
A clade is any group that shares a common ancestor and all of its descendants. This is why scientists say we’re all Africans under the skin; because any ancestor common to all sub-Saharan Africans is common to all humans.
But by the same logic, you could say we’re all reptiles under the skin since any ancestor shared by all reptiles is shared by all mammals too .
So some scientists use the term grade so that it’s possible to speak of groups that all share a common ancestor, while still excluding those descendants who evolved into something new. This allows us to say mammals evolved from reptiles instead of mammals are a type of reptile.
Thus I define Negroid as only those descendants of the common human ancestor who retained that African phenotype, and that includes some non-Africans (Andaman islanders).
“Who was right about cold winters: Richard Lynn or Jayman?”
Neither because CWT has been refuted.
” Davide Piffer’s data”
Has also been refuted.
“it would also have also likely selected for brain size”
Unless there was selection against brain size. Which was the case because agriculture didn’t provide enough nutritious food and the climate was warming.
” if civilization had selected for IQ, then people today would be better at drawing”
No. There is no evidence for that.
“Thus I’ve been forced to propose a third theory.”
[redacted by pp, may 14, 2021]
“By contrast Arctic people (and Native Americans) were had a whole continent to themselves so there was less competition for survival skills, but you still need big heads to keep warm.”
Typical. There are now so may exceptions and contradictions to CWT that you have to implement other causal factors to explain the missing variance, most of which I demonstrated to you. So now CWT isn’t even really about CW anymore. [redacted by pp, 2021-05-14] This is why RR bitches about novel predictions so much.
Neither because CWT has been refuted.
No it hasn’t Melo. There’s a strong correlation between latitude and (1)brain size, (2)IQ, (3)polygenic education scores, and (4) prehistoric technology. That needs explaining.
” Davide Piffer’s data”
Has also been refuted.
You’re not qualified to make that judgement.
“it would also have also likely selected for brain size”
Unless there was selection against brain size. Which was the case because agriculture didn’t provide enough nutritious food and the climate was warming.
Good point.
” if civilization had selected for IQ, then people today would be better at drawing”
No. There is no evidence for that.
The evidence is Cro-Magnon cave art
Typical. There are now so may exceptions and contradictions to CWT that you have to implement other causal factors to explain the missing variance, most of which I demonstrated to you.
You don’t think other scientific theories have lots of exceptions? Bergmann’s rule has no exceptions? Allen’s rule has no exceptions?
” latitude and (1)brain size, (2)IQ, (3)polygenic education scores, and (4) prehistoric technology. That needs explaining.”
It doesn’t need to be explained at all. I don’t need alternatives to refute your bullshit. I’m curious Pumpkin, what are the correlations for all of those variables?
(1) Thermoregulation (2) Countries in higher latitudes are easier to live in and thus civilization thrives which selects for IQ. (3) REFUTED (4) No. The triarchic racial theory doesn’t hold prehistorically. That is all new. If we went by that it’d go Europeans>Africans>East Asians.
“You’re not qualified to make that judgement.”
What? So now we need degrees to make statements about shit?
“The evidence is Cro-Magnon cave art”
You think art hasn’t gotten better since the Upper paleolithic? Are you high?
“You don’t think other scientific theories have lots of exceptions? ”
Not in the way CWT does. It’s not just it having exceptions either it’s that you’ve had to add some many addendum to the original theory it’s no longer “Cold winter causes racial disparities in IQ” it’s “Cold winters modulated by Population size, competition, mobility, mutation rate, etc. causes racial disparities in IQ”. Which you still have no real evidence for. You’ve made the theory weaker. Cold winters doesn’t explain anything now.
It doesn’t need to be explained at all. I don’t need alternatives to refute your bullshit. I’m curious Pumpkin, what are the correlations for all of those variables?
IQ and polygenic education both correlate about 0.7 with latitude. Not sure what the correlation between brain size and latitude is but it’s well documented.
(1) Thermoregulation
But the IQ differences are too large to be explained by brain size differences.
(2) Countries in higher latitudes are easier to live in and thus civilization thrives which selects for IQ.
How are they easier to live in?
(3) REFUTED
The correlation between polygenic education and latitude was never refuted.
(4) No. The triarchic racial theory doesn’t hold prehistorically. That is all new. If we went by that it’d go Europeans>Africans>East Asians.
Mongloids possibly didn’t even live in East Asia until the end of the Paleolithic. Regardless, the correlation between latitude and prehistoric technology is a potent one:
Torrence focused on time stress. She hypothesized that as time stress increased, hunter–gatherers could be expected to produce more specialized tools and therefore more diverse and complex toolkits. Torrence tested the time stress hypothesis by measuring the statistical association between toolkit structure and latitude in Oswalt’s [9] sample of 20 hunter–gatherer populations. She employed latitude as a proxy for time stress on the grounds that, all other things being equal, the length of the growing season for plants decreases with increasing latitude. The significance of this, according to Torrence, is that as latitude increases, the number of edible plants available for hunter–gatherers decreases, and therefore they have to depend more heavily on animal resources, which as noted above are more taxing as far as search and pursuit time are concerned. Torrence’s analyses strongly supported the time stress hypothesis. She found that toolkit diversity and complexity were positively and significantly correlated with latitude.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3049102/
You think art hasn’t gotten better since the Upper paleolithic? Are you high?
You can’t compare the greatest artists of today to average artists in the Upper Paleolithic. To make a fair comparison, you’d have to take 20 random Europeans off the street, put them in a cave with some paint and see if they produce anything better than the art found in the average Cro-Magnon cave.
Melo you can compare Upper Paleolithic art to neolithic art and note the differences. Not just the art but also the sculptures. Magdalenian sculptures were more detailed than neolithic sculpted designs like the ones on Gobekli Tepe. Things don’t develop linearly. Not just Europe, but also other places like Indonesia and Australia which developed both realistic art and abstract art (Bradshaw art for example) to a considerable degree, only to end up degrading later on. I think the old selection pressures that resulted in these works ended up changing and newer populations didn’t sustain what their precursors did.
Is there any estimate for what proportion of descendants of Native Americans in cold climates are from hunter-gatherers versus farmers? I’m curious whether farming selects for intelligence regardless of population density.
I jotted down some IQ results of Native Americans of different regions compared to whites from somewhere I can’t remember:
northern woodlands -12 points
desert -8 points
northwest coast -7 points
plains -5 points
These could of course be affected by environment and selective emigration in recent history, but otherwise perhaps they could offer some clue to what climate and lifestyle selects for IQ the most.
I always assumed the vast majority were hunter gatherers
“Countries in higher latitudes are easier to live in and thus civilization thrives which selects for IQ.”
So if you believe in that but not in CWT, shouldn’t the oldest civilizations have the highest IQ people and the youngest the lowest? Northern Europe lower IQ than southern Europe for example?
I can understand why you moderated the personal insult, but the line about pseudoscience?? Pumpkin what you said is literally pseudoscience. It doesn’t have to be but the way you presented it is a text book example of it
Don’t feel too bad though. A lot of actual scientists don’t understand the philosophy behind their profession.
“But the IQ differences are too large to be explained by brain size differences.’
Okay?
“How are they easier to live in?”
Higher presence of competition between species and within, more Parasites, Viruses and Bacteria, more deadly predators, lack of water during dry seasons, you’ll die quicker from heat exhaustion than hypothermia,Larger climatic variation i general etc.
The tropics is a terrible place for civilizations compared to places like Europe or Northern America which have relatively stable ecological conditions.
“The correlation between polygenic education and latitude was never refuted.”
That correlation is dependent on the validity of the data set. Which has been called into question recently
“Mongloids possibly didn’t even live in East Asia until the end of the Paleolithic.”
Source.
” the correlation between latitude and prehistoric technology is a potent one”
No it’s not. You didn’t even read the study: However, the results of our comparison of the toolkits of hunter–gatherers from the plateau and northwest coast were not consistent with this prediction. The plateau populations in our sample did not create more diverse and complex toolkits than the northwest coast populations. As such, the results of our study do not support the risk hypothesis.
However, they do note that maybe this effect does exist on a larger scale where risk of failure is larger, but if that is the case then: (1) The actual effect resource allocation has on tool complexity is weak and (2) The idea that Eurasia has higher risk of resource failure is doubtful.
And before you say: “bUt ThAt dOeSn’T mEaN tHeRe iSn’T a CoRrElAtIoN”, the whole point of that correlation being significant is that higher latitudes supposedly have higher risk failure.
“To make a fair comparison, you’d have to take 20 random Europeans off the street, put them in a cave with some paint and see if they produce anything better than the art found in the average Cro-Magnon cave.”
That wouldn’t prove anything. Cro-Magnon was always more likely to paint and draw then any human on the planet. It’s not like they had iPhones or Androids to sit there and play Among Us on in their free time.
The actual effect resource allocation has on tool complexity is weak and
Even weak correlations can have strong effects when comparing regions as different as the tropics and Northern ice age Eurasia, multiplied over 50 thousand years of selection.
Cro-Magnon was always more likely to paint and draw then any human on the planet. It’s not like they had iPhones or Androids to sit there and play Among Us on in their free time
They only left a small number of drawings so there’s no evidence they had a lot of practice. The average person today, bombarded with pictures, photographs, cartoons etc. on everything from TV, computers, billboards, cereal boxes to school books has had far more exposure to pictorial representations than a bunch of cavemen 30,000 years ago in ice age Europe.
“Even weak correlations can have strong effects”
That’s not what I said. If it only has any noticeable correlation on the global scale then it is a weak effect that does not affect tool diversity much at all.
“They only left a small number of drawings”
Right so it’s fallacious to claim the average Cro-Magnon was a better drawer than modern humans.
Cro-Magnon was smarter than modern man. Their IQs were lower though. You don’t understand the difference sadly.
For the same reason Bill Burr is the most ”alpha” man on the planet.
That’s not what I said. If it only has any noticeable correlation on the global scale then it is a weak effect that does not affect tool diversity much at all.
If it has a noticeable effect on tool diversity on a global scale, then it likely had a noticeable effect on selection for intelligence on a global scale.
“They only left a small number of drawings”
Right so it’s fallacious to claim the average Cro-Magnon was a better drawer than modern humans.
So only the above average ones were allowed to draw or do you think nature magically only preserved the above average ones?
Cro-Magnon was smarter than modern man. Their IQs were lower though. You don’t understand the difference sadly.
You don’t understand the similarity sadly.
It’s possible that only the above-average drawers, or mainly the above-average drawers, made the drawings. People like doing what they’re good at.
I agree above average drawers might be overrepresented because they might have wanted or been encouraged to draw more often, but even compared to above average artists today, they seemed to be more accurate (at least when it comes to depicting animals):
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/cavemen-were-much-better-at-illustrating-animals-than-artists-today-153292919/
Of course they were more familiar with animals than today’s artists, but today’s artists are like the top 1% of today’s drawing skill & have a life time of training, while in small caveman tribes, they were likely only the top 10% & training was minimal.
“artists are like the top 1% of today’s drawing skill & have a life time of training, while in small caveman tribes, they were likely only the top 10% & training was minimal.”
Pumpkin literally just made that up.
Educated guess.
For once, pp, I’m not willing to buy your educated guess without at least an explicit reason to believe that you’ve aimed in the general area of the correct answer.
IQ was certainly higher in Cro Mags. If their IQ was indeed lower it was environmentally suppressed. Im sure the genetic IQ of a Cro Mag wouldve been really high.
Science is all educated guesses MeLo. There is no way of verifying a hundred percent anything is a fact or not.
I would agree with pumpkins assertion and even say that this is conclusive because of how specialized professions are compared to how much they would have been.
This right here I believe contributes to racial disparities more than any other factor:
Honor culture is a bitch. Even as I transcended the social class I was raised in, it stuck with me and got me into way more trouble than I care to admit. If some pencil-necked faggot like Pumpkin or Mugabe came up to me trying to flex some kind of social superiority I’d just break them over my knee. I didn’t give a fuck until it was too late. That’s why instead of being a Biology professor I ended up owning a carpentry business. It’s the only thing I could afford to do, and I almost didn’t do it. IT’s also why I thrived. I was smarter than all the rednecks around me but my Testosterone was high enough that I didn’t take shit from them. Men shit test each other too and the way low class men do it is by busting each others balls.
Look at the way they insult one another. Someone with a low social IQ would think they hate each other, but nope. That’s just how niggas talk to each other.
Notice how David Blaine has to change his demeanor to match their aggressiveness. If he seems like too much of a pushover it will be seen as weakness and their playful aggression will turn into real aggression.
That’s REAL social intelligence.
On another note Blasian culture is the best. It’s not surprising why so many blacks love Anime and go figure one of the greatest cartoons of all time (Boondocks) and one of the greatest musical groups of all time (Wu-tang) have Afro-asian roots
We can agree that The Boondocks is a great show. Aaron McGruder is a genius.
I have a gay white-Filipino friend who has introduced me to a lot of minorities, which I appreciate. He also taught me that Filipinos are heightist af. They associate stature with social status hardcore.
“I have a gay white-Filipino friend ”
My father tells me that in the Philipines gay people aren’t like the gay people here in America. They don’t act like females. You’d think they were straight until you see them kissing a man. Is he gay or is he gaaaaaaay?
“He also taught me that Filipinos are heightist af.”
Really? They’d love me over there. My dad told me they’d love me because I’m half white but i guess now i’d be a super model there. I was raise don’t he white side of my family. Didn’t know any of the Filipino side until I was almost a man.
Not like swishy gay. Knows a lot about sports and has masculine interests, but before he came out, there was some sus stuff. Very into fashion.
Yeah his family is tall and aristocratic, and they hate on one of his uncles for marrying down. They call his short spawn “munchkins.” Other uncle is also a peter puffer.
“They call his short spawn “munchkins.”
LOL that’s fucked up.
“peter puffer.”
Hmmmmm what is your social class Teffec?
I’ve lived the patrician experience for the most part. My foreign-born grandfather became the CEO of an investment bank, but Pumpkin might argue I’m not upper-class in a taxonomic sense because of my family’s humble origins. “Peter puffer” I don’t think I’ve heard anyone in my life say, but I did for some reason.
Bill Burr is easily the most “Alpha” person on the planet.
He’s intelligent, he’s successful monetarily and reproductively, he’s good looking (or at least not ugly), he isn’t racist and yet he doesn’t fall for that fake-woke virtue signaling that Philo erroneously accuses me of, he’s high T, etc.
He married a black women for christ’s sake. He actually doesn’t like white women because he thinks they’re dumb.
Imagine the balls it take to roast PHILLY on stage and walk away alive. He did not give any fucks.
Look a how he just calls Joe Rogan on his bullshit and emasculates him.
Evolution wise Bill bur is peak human. I don’t have many heroes but I aspire to be this nigga.
This is my Oprah.
Elon Musk is the alpha of Man. He’s tall, the world’s richest gentile, and just sends rockets into space and impregnates beautiful artists, producing only sons.
Bezos is Jewish?
He looks like it. But I don’t think it’s been confirmed.
Elon only convinces other dorks that he’s cool. And only impregnates beautiful artists because he’s rich and white girls are gullible. He’s the billionaire version of those chicks that say “I’m not like the other girls”
He’s dumb. Bill burr is just perfectly rounded. He’s not the best in any one category but he’s well above average in all of them.. If this were prehistoric times he’d be our king.
“producing only sons”
Why would that matter lmao?
Rothschilds et al.
I doubt any individual Rothchild is anywhere near as rich as Elon Musk. Old money tends to fall behind.
The rate at which the wealth of billionaires is fluctuating is ridiculous. I thought Bezos was down after the divorce and Musk was sailing high but Must lost like 20 billion recently. An interesting question is who has the most immediately liquitable wealth. Anyway as far as relying on influence is in question Burr is worse off that him in comparison. It might have something to do with him having a small face, his wife’s face is bigger than his lol.
*Musk lost like 20 billion recently.
correcting the autocorrect
Elon’s cult is creepy. He’s an ugly psychopath!
Elon is certainly a hard working guy with great creativity but his grandiose personality alongside his toxic influence on society really hurts his public image.
So were’ going to take advice on who is the best man to worship from a gay that sits in the corner holding rosary beads and wears a nun’s habit while his girlfriend gets pumped by a random black guy? Please.
Why would we take advice from Mugabe?
Im pretty sure Pill was talking about you Melo.
^^ PEE PEE. N-WORD
It’s the less offensive variant
It becomes less offensive when you put the “a” in the word in front of it instead of at the end in place of the -er?
Oh, you were reading a different comment which didn’t use the -er
Oh I see the one you mean. Got approved by accident.
I’d really like to see an objective biography of Sen McCarthy’s career. Afaict no such thing exists.
The overton window for McCarthyism is very narrow and all the allowed talking points seem ethnically motivated. According to KMac, over half of the people forced to testify in the HUAC hearings were [redacted by pp, may 15, 2021]
I’m a free speech absolutist, so I doubt I’d walk away admiring him, but Knowledge is Good.
After Mbango from Africa had finished with Mrs Melo, Melo fell down on his knees, a sweaty mess, crying and begging for more. “PLEASE give her some more. We are not worthy!!”
I just realized that you’re a real life personification of Dale Gribble from King of the Hill.
He’s so paranoid about everything but is somehow too oblivious to realize he’s being cucked the whole time.
You guys make this too easy.
Will Philosopher be the next EL James? LOL!
Anyone notice the way puppys theories all come from comic books?
Which comicbook did this one come from?
The Adventures of Melo the Cuckold im fairly certain.
Who was right about cold winters: Richard Lynn or Jayman?
neither.
mugabe was right.
europe was colder until 10k years ago.
europe was colder until 10k years ago
As we’ve discussed before, much of the ancestry of Europeans was not in Europe until the Holocene.
Burn.
[redacted by pp, may 17, 2021}
1. MONGLOIANS AND CENTRAL ASIANS should be the smartest people.
2. the aryans were in a super cold place at least 6,000 years ago. the steppes of russia.
[redacted by pp, may 17, 2021}
[redacted by pp, may 17, 2021}
1. MONGLOIANS AND CENTRAL ASIANS should be the smartest people.
2. the aryans were in a super cold place at least 6,000 years ago. the steppes of russia. wherer where they befoire then?
PEEPEE IS PROMOTING THE MARGINAL ARMENENIA/ASIA MINOR URHEIMAT HYPOTHESIS BECAUSE 100% NON-ARYAN.
[redacted by pp, may 17, 2021}
Things aren’t as straitforward as just the cold. Indo Europeans living on the steppe had smaller brains than the Cro Magnons. Cold can be one of the possible selection pressures but it isn’t the only one. Pre holocene Australia wasn’t super cold and it had people with bigger brains than their modern descendants.
The Holocene brain size decrease was not genetic
By the beginning of the holocene period, there was already a substantial decline in brain size which started over 20,000 years ago. At the beginning however, at least outside of farming populations, the size was still upward of 1500cc. In Australia it went from 1500+ cc to the current value which is around 1300cc.
You’re overestimating how big brains were because only the biggest tend to preserve. You’re also underestimating how big brains are today because the most recent samples come from before WWII when everyone was malnourished.
There are samples from as recently as 2012 which are bigger than WW2 and post-WW2 measurements, they are right here on the blog, you know that. So 1500cc isn’t a major underestimation. As I mentioned earlier, I don’t put much stock in the idea that degradation differences will be significant enough to make a difference. This stuff isn’t just limited to Europe and Africa. It is also found in Australia, where all of the early to pre-Holocene Australian skulls that I know of are bigger than the modern Australian average, that is uncanny and using selective preservation of range of variation argument doesn’t make things go away.
How do you know what the modern Australian Aboriginal cranial capacity is?
A bunch of different papers, if you want one example, then here it is: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2053614/
Of course the exact value varies by paper to some extent.
My response to your most recent comment in this string didn’t get through. Maybe because it had a url in it. What I said was the exact value varies on the study, but the modern Australian aboriginal male average tends to be around 1300 cc. Some studies put the average somewhat lower, some studies put it a little higher.
Well the brains of white people also shrunk in the Holocene but then rebounded in the 20th century. The simplest explanation for this is that the malnutrition of agriculture shrunk brain size but then modern nutrition more or less recovered it.
Not sure why Australoid brain size hasn’t recovered. Either they’re still malnourished from colonialism, or their brain shrinkage was genetic
I think that we are on the same page now. But know that brain shrinkage didn’t happen only in the holocene. I don’t recall the exact value 12000 years ago, but it isn’t a whole lot bigger than today’s European value of approx. 1500cc. The average might have been up to 1550cc but that is what you find in some Mongol groups and Eskimos anyway. There was also a decline leading up to the holocene. Some of this is also because of genetic turnover since most people in Europe prior to the LGM were replaced sometime between 21000 and 14000 years ago, long before farmers arrived.
As an aside that wasn’t the first AMH-AMH replacement either, there was another one 37000 years ago but this one wasn’t associated with a change in cranial capacity, only in shape AFAIK.
I’ve been able to confirm some pre-Holocene shrinkage in Europe, but it’s so small that it might be explainable by decomposition bias or sampling error:
https://pumpkinperson.com/2018/09/02/have-we-recovered-our-paleolithic-brain-size-yet/
Those values are different from what I have seen in other sources. Here is one example: https://www.persee.fr/doc/bmsap_0037-8984_1979_num_6_4_1979
These are gender-combined.
My source is the one most anthropologists cite. More up to date.
There is other stuff that I know about but I don’t have access to now. But the conclusion of the mesolithic cohort having the highest cranial capacity is strange in the light of all of the things I have seen so far. But I do have an explanation for it near the end of this post. Although in that post you do note the problem with applying the same equations to populations with different morphologies. So you also list Beal’s directly measured data. The thing is, I have seen some values from Beals 1984 for certain skulls and they differ from the values of those skulls in other sources (like Schoenemann and a bunch on google books that I saw a few years ago).
BTW the Beals difference gives a difference of 30cc in favor of the older group. Even when ignoring the facts that I am more concerned about pre-20,000 vs post-20,000 year old comparison and that groups between 30,000 and 20,000 years ago had more affinity to pre-30,000 populations than to mesolithic populations; it still gives as much if not more of a difference as is between modern Europeans and modern east Asians which isn’t trivial. At this point, details become important. Like were north African samples among the “mesolithic” cohort? If so then it screws things up, because my original comment was crucially about European populations (Indo-European vs Cro Magnon). The Iberomaurusian epipaleolithic, in terms of capacity is closer to the European pre-LGM values than to European mesolithic values. And there are plenty of available Iberomaurusian skulls as well, so if they were a big part of the “mesolithic” series and also the 30K to 10K year old series as well, then it is decreasing the gap between what would be a European-only pre-LGM vs European-only mesolithic comparison.
Lastly, there is a comment on page 9 of the data where it states that the mesolithic male stature was 169 cm. This is much higher than any post-LGM value that I am aware of, and I have seen plenty. The only case where that value is true is with the eastern European mesolithic, and that group definitely has a lower cranial capacity than pre-LGM Europeans. Why am I bringing this up? Because if this kind of erroneousness is possible with stature (maybe representing one subset more than the others in that trait) then it is also possible with cranial capacity (like flooding the mesolithic group with lots of north African samples).
I just found a video about Mugabe.
Hilarious!
a better name for the melo personality would be muskmelon. all of peepee’s personalities should be named after large round vegetables/fruits.
Wheres Loaded? Did you ban him?
Sorry, if I did not get something simple – I haven’t read the whole tread , to be honest. Anyway, what do you mean by , like, brain gets bigger to keeps you warm? Once you mentioned thermoregulation – is it a physiological thermoregulation? the stuff seems to be located in the trunk of the brain ,tiny initially, and can hardly influence the size as whole to important extend .Or it’s about behavior? Or both? Or something else? Do we know the structure of that “biggerrness”
Head size correlates with latitude. There are 2 plausible reasons why:
1) you need a big brain to be smart enough to keep warm
2) a big head itself keeps you warm because Bergmann’s rule/Allen’s rule
But if it’s about bigger surface of a head , this might be bigger due to thickness of the scull etc. Anyways, interesting reading, thank you , PP
Although this region is extensive in humans, its function is poorly understood.[3] Koechlin & Hyafil have proposed that processing of ‘cognitive branching’ is the core function of the frontopolar cortex.[10] Cognitive branching enables a previously running task to be maintained in a pending state for subsequent retrieval and execution upon completion of the ongoing one. Many of our complex behaviors and mental activities require simultaneous engagement of multiple tasks, and they suggest the anterior prefrontal cortex may perform a domain-general function in these scheduling operations. Thus, the frontopolar cortex shares features with the central executive in Baddeley’s model of working memory.
cognitive branching would be a good a.i. strategy if an environment existed where an agent had to multitask. where the tasks all correlated.
when I think about how I do tasks this really does seem to be a core feature of intelligence.
Pumpkin, what is my drawing IQ?
getting 80 on picture completion has a significant effect on the details of my drawings.
this drawing is the best face I can make.
Hard to say unless you draw the full person but I’d say about 103
Much better than mine. I have very poor fine motor skills.
higher than peepee’s.
peepee is 100% negro.
sad.
I dont think societal collapse will happen because people are dumb but more so due to the narcissism epidemic that has happened. Peoples’ grandiosity is off the charts now and this will end up annihilating any altruism and trust a society is built upon.
It sucks because even intelligent people can be exceptionally narcissistic so I think this pattern will not slow down.
Puppy have you ever considered killing yourself?
also…who are the palestianians? who are israeli jews?
because tarded like peepee people think that the roman, byzantine, muslim, ottoman, etc. governments of palestine must’ve been effected int he same way the jewish state has been…by mass immigration/invasion and replacement…
in reality the palestinians have a much greater % of their ancestors from hebrews than the invaders/so-called jews.
if you track the average palestinian’s ancestors back, you’ll find they aren’t from arabia, or from anywhere except palestine…2,000 years ago they were all jews.
they were hellenized/christianized under byzantium and then arabized/islamized under the sand [n word redacted by pp, may 17, 2021]
israel is like a bunch of african americans invaded and african country and claimed to be the true africans.
yeah. it’s sad that the cwt predicts europeans should had the highest IQ in 10,000 bc. and south chinese should be A LOT dumber than sicilians by now. very warm in southern chinastan.
and the cleverest people of all should be the mongols and central asians.
they aren’t.
why not the inuit and plains injuns? because haven’t been in those extreme climates for very long.
i think it was the scott thompson who made this point…
nazis are ALWAYS the sexiest guys in every movie.
if there are nazi gals, then they are the sexiest in any movie ever.
WHY IS THIS?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Thompson_(comedian)
WHY?
WHY?
WHY?
why not the inuit and plains injuns? because haven’t been in those extreme climates for very long.
And yet they were there long enough to evolve brains as big, and in the case of inuit, bigger than whites & Northeast Asians.
So we need a theory that explains why whites/Northeast Asians evolved higher IQs but arctic people evolved bigger brains.
My brilliant theory is that the cold selected for both high IQ and big brains, but in the arctic, the former was more a spandrel of the latter while in Northern Eurasia, the latter was a more spandrel of the former.
Interesting. This relates to that last question from your heritability degree test.
Suppose brain size and IQ correlate 0.4.
Then, if the selection was for higher IQ and bigger brains were a byproduct of that, a 2sd increase in brain size implies an increase of 2/0.4 = 5sd in IQ.
However, if the selection was for bigger brains and higher IQ was a byproduct of that, a 2sd increase in brain size implies an increase of 2 * 0.4 = 0.8sd in IQ.
Is this correct?
You got it!
Puppy CWT is nonsense. As usual puppy gets it wrong on the major topics.
HAHA, you’re just mad that Ashkenazi Jews are ignored by CWT. Like all religious fanatics, Pill goes absolutely ballistic when his Gods aren’t worshipped. If CWT is wrong, how do you explain the black-white IQ gap?
the other reason nazis are sexy is…
[redacted by pp, 2021-05-19] chinese are less closely related to n chinese than europeans.
but maybe s chinese means the chinese of se asia.
se asians like muskmelon are more closely related to melanesians than they are to manchus.
if s chinese in the Cavalli-Sforza tree means chinese of souther china then peepee’s theory predicts they should have lower IQs than northern chinese and IQs similar to those of filipinos.
Claims about the origins and characteristics of Bigfoot have also crossed over with other paranormal claims, including that Bigfoot, extraterrestrials, and UFOs are related or that Bigfoot creatures are psychic, can cross into different dimensions, or are completely supernatural in origin.
the above is a quote from wikipedia.
yet peepee is still in denial.
sad.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_Who_Killed_Hitler_and_Then_the_Bigfoot
what happened was many SS had planned their escape. first they went to patagonia, but then antactica. after only three generations of selecting breeding the sasquatch was made from the human. this body type was selected for the antarctic climate and its not incongruous enormous brain.
Puppy thinks north americans have sasquatch ancestry.
I was being facetious. CWT predicts sasquatch does not exist because such a sub-human primate would be too dumb to survive the Canadian cold.
No you weren’t. You have a blog post on it.
Only you thought that blog post was bad.
I see Bill Gates has been getting a lot of media recently about him making unwanted approaches to women in his employ. Apparently he stepped down from the Microsoft board because he had an affair. I wonder what Tiger Woods thinks.
yeah. or was it women who were turned on by his money and power?
Who knew Bill was such a horn dog? It just goes to show that I was right about saying he wasn’t autistic. Puppy thought he was because low social intelligence.
You have no memory. You literally called him autistic DOZENS of times. And how low must your social intelligence be to think autistics can’t be horny.
pepe pls help me get gf
I’m probably the wrong person to ask since I haven’t dated anyone since I broke up with my fiancée in 2016. But women care a lot about looks so make yourself look as good as possible through fashion, diet, exercise, good hygiene, cleanliness and grooming. They also like confident, competent normal guys who take charge so always project leadership when you can do so without being obnoxious, stand tall, and avoid looking pathetic, inferior, or ridiculed when she’s around.
Also avoid looking weird so probably don’t discuss your interest in IQ or blogs like this one.
Women also want successful guys so be on track to get a high status, high income job.
This is why I can’t stand women. Straightforwardness is their kryptonite.
“150 IQ genes now available for all reasonably attractive females ages 18 to 27!* Get yours today!”
Ain’t that a sales pitch? It’s neither false nor misleading, so that puts it ahead of nearly all advertisements I encounter on a daily basis.
I’ll try to ingest fewer calories and lift more pounds though
*(the half-your-age-plus-seven rule being employed, here rounding up. Eligibility may be extended downward to 17 if you seem relatively mature and depending on state law, and up to 32 if you can pass for a few years younger, but no further than that either way)
Correction: The rule says I can go up to 28 but ew
Whats your wrist circumference Ganzir?
Puppy you just regurgitated what me and Afro educated you with. Before us, you were super blue pill.
Dude, I’ve always been more dating savvy than you, but that’s a very low bar. You once claimed smashing another guy over the head with a beer bottle would impress women (LMAO), and I had to correct you (which Afro co-signed).
You’re not that socially smart, you’re just willing to face certain truths that most people have been socialized to deny.
@Flaminhotcheetos: 8″ for both wrists
Puppy you said yourself you havent been with a woman in 5 years…
That means nothing. My best friend picks up women like they grow on trees but he has no understanding of how he does it. His girlfriends are always telling me that I understand them much better than he does.
Lol pepe ain’t gonna approve the 2 comments above that one. I see why
you once claimed smashing another guy over the head with a beer bottle would impress women
OMG! 😂😂
8″ for both wrists
Ganzir’s gonna be swole!
Puppy you said yourself you havent been with a woman in 5 years…
Based on comments, PP seems very attractive. The rest of you:
🙏🙏
@Ganzir
That is well above the average value of 18.42 cm so you shouldn’t have any problem with mass unless you are on a literal Auschwitz diet.
A lot more to attractiveness than just mass:
I know however he was talking about the need to lift more pounds. Unless he seriously has a higher tendency to accumulate fat than muscle, even with excess calories alone he shouldn’t have problem with a plan to the point where he needs to add a few more pounds to the current plan (whatever that may be).
LOL!
https://pumpkinperson.com/2018/02/19/karl-marxs-iq/comment-page-1/#comment-81214
https://pumpkinperson.com/2016/11/30/the-autism-schizophrenia-continuum/comment-page-1/#comment-39496
https://pumpkinperson.com/2018/07/14/open-thread-happy-friday-the-13th/comment-page-1/#comment-97684
melo isn’t commenting here anymore OMG
Its because of Puppys harsh moderation rules.
> Avoid using the N-word with the -er
> Avoid extreme personal attacks
> Avoid Vanguard News Network-level racism
> Rules could hardly be more lenient and easier to follow
> Rule-breakers have usually (maybe always?) been allowed to continue commenting
> “Harsh moderation rules”
hahaha!
there aren’t any rules when “racism” is one of the criteria as it’s a meaningless word.
The problem with PPs moderation policies is that he is highly inconsistent with how he judges one comment to be worse than another.
If he was careful about how he moderated comments instead of being impulsive and acting on a whim he wouldve displayed tremendous integrity.
Have you tried not being racist
But why would I want not to be racist??
why is racism bad?
why is antisemitism bad?
because 3 and 6 syllable words?
@Ganzir
Im not even that racist. Most others are more racist than I am because of inherent prejudices they have. I am racist towards others if their group acts offensively towards me and puts me in a box.
Especially stereotypical people offend me the most. Dont act like the negative stereotypes of your race and ill probably not treat you with prejudice because there is no reason to and no way of rationalizing my thoughts and actions in the moment.
Simply put if you act like a normal individual and are not ethnocentrically trying to put others down then i will treat you as an individual and not judge you by your race or skin color. however if you do the opposite then there will be legitimate consequences.
This rule applies to everyone I am hateful towards therefore including white people.
Ganzir what do you think about narcissism in intelligent people and in your own life?