Crucial to Rushton’s hypothesis was the idea that evolution is progressive and that some populations are more advanced than others. Rushton noted that newer forms of life tend to be bigger brained and more complex than their archaic ancestors.
Source: http://www.cmkosemen.com/dinosauroids.html
Applying this logic to humans, Rushton became an early supporter of the Out of Africa model of human origins. This was ironic because the theory is usually associated with anti-racists who argue such a recent sub-Saharan origin for our species makes us all African under the skin. Rushton however used it to argue that Negroids branched off the evolutionary tree prematurely (200 kya) and Mongloids being the most recently emerged race (40 kya) are new and improved.
Although Rushton cited genetic studies from the 1980s, 40 years later his evolutionary sequence holds up though the exact splitting dates might be disputed.
Source: https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2012/issue132a/
There is however a problem with Rushton’s model. If instead of looking at the three main races in the human species, we look at the three main species in the Homo genus, I’ve noticed modern humans branched off before Denisovans or Neanderals. To quote my bitchy 10th grade science teacher who was one of the few people to truly get it: “if you’re the first branch, and you don’t do anymore branching, then you’re less evolved than higher branches.”
So are we less evolved than Neanderthals and Denisovans and if so, how does this square with us being so superior? Well we can start by noting that evolvement is only a proxy for progress, there’s no reason to expect a perfect correlation. It’s only when you step back and look at the big picture does progress seem inevitable.
Secondly, we split from the ancestors of Neanderthals and Denisovans over half a million years ago, and only in the last 50,000 years did we show any kind of superiority. On the contrary, maybe they were superior because they occupied most of the World while we were confined to Africa and every time we tried to leave, they’d force us to retreat. Only in the Upper Paleolithic did we finally pull ahead.
Thirdly, the data might simply be wrong. Other genetic models show Denisovans branching off first:
Pumpkin Person 
Rushton’s evolutionary progress argument will never get old. It’s also false. Rushton was proven wrong on so damn much, I wonder why people still take him seriously.
There’s also the fact that it seems like growing a larger brain is outside of the reptilian bauplan.
“I would argue, as does Feduccia (44), that the mammalian/avian levels of activity claimed by Bakker for dinosaurs should be correlated with a great increase in motor and sensory control and this should be reflected in increased brain size. Such an increase is not indicated by most dinosaur endocasts.”
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234150370_Relative_Brain_Size_and_Behavior_in_Archosaurian_Reptiles
that’s a point fodor missed because mentally retarded jew. sad.
evolution can’t do anything and everything.
the genetic code determines the bauplan!
rr [screaming]: but i’m an inconsistent retarded person who is actually jewish…there’s no other explanation for my prolixity…there are retarded jews you antisemites…i’m proof!
still waiting for rr’s 23andme.
Sorry RR, I don’t really see where in those articles you linked me that you addressed anything I wrote. That said, some of my views have changed since then, so it may not be relevant.
I’ll just ask you once, do you know more about Physiology and fitness/health than me?
Also, Lurker still doesn’t understand Hume’s Guillotine. Even you got that after a while.
Yes I would say that. But that doesn’t mean that M is measurable, it merely means that I have a better understanding of a field than you do.
And this is where you have a fundamental misunderstanding. IQ tests aren’t like thermometers. They are just assessments used to gauge someone’s understanding on a range of subjects relative to another.
Since you can say with confidence that you have more knowledge than me on Physiology, just like I have more knowledge than you on Anthropology, then we have successfully contrasted one’s mental abilities. Is knowledge not an aspect of M? That’s all it takes. And if you don’t’ want to call that “measurement” then fine, but literally no one cares. IQists (whatever that means) aren’t going to suddenly cry in despair because their worldview has been overturned. Anyone reading that is just going to call it what it is. A strawman.
“IQ tests aren’t like thermometers”
See, I care about what the big shot IQ-ists say, that’s who I respond to. So in the 70s when they made those claims, they’re outright wrong. (Eg Jensen, Eysenck, Urbach.) The point is that they are wrong to compare IQ tests to thermometers and IQ to temperature.
Its not “measurement”, it merely shows how well someone has performed on something; there is no “measurement” taking place. It’s definitely not a strawman, since most IQ-ists talk about “what IQ tests measure.”
I haven’t read Jensen in nearly a decade and I don’t know the other two, but I guarantee you that Jensen probably doesn’t distinguish between assessment and measurement because they practically serve the same purpose.
So, hypothetically speaking, what are you going to do if someone measures, say, nerve conduction velocity and then finds it has a strong positive correlation with IQ? What relevance would your argument have then?
We already have chronometric tests that correlate 0.7 with IQ.
Your first para doesn’t have relevance to the fact that hereditarians have claimed identity between measuring temperature and “intelligence.”
There are of course correlations between IQ and certain variables, but that’s not the same as saying that they would then be similar with thermometers and temperature.
“Your first para doesn’t have relevance to the fact that hereditarians have claimed identity between measuring temperature and “intelligence.””
What, is “paragraph” too long of a word for you to type now? What do you think my first “para” is about? I guarantee you that IQists (whatever that means) equivalate measurements and assessments because they serve the same purpose. You can contrast two ‘s heights with a ruler in a similar way that you can contrast our knowledge on a range of subjects with a criterion-based test.
“There are, of course correlations between IQ and certain variables, but that’s not the same as saying that they would then be similar with thermometers and temperature.”
I don’t think you’re grasping my point, so I’ll just put it in a way that you’ll understand.
P: X is a measurement
P2: IQ is an assessment
P3: If X has a sizeable enough correlation to IQ, changes in X will accurately predict changes in IQ
P4: If X can accurately predict IQ, X can be considered an IQ test.
C: Some IQ tests are measurements
1-3 is definitely true. 4 is the only one you could contest, but Pumpkin would be more qualified to weigh in on that. But even if 4 is wrong and the argument isn’t sound, the fact that a bonafide measurement is able to predict IQ makes your entire argument pointless. At that point, who cares if IQ isn’t a measurement?
Is measurement the assessment of quantity? Height is a physical measure, and at best all one can say is that test differences show one’s affiliation and familiarity with certain kinds of knowledge.
That’s an invalid argument, your conclusion doesn’t follow. If IQ isn’t a measure, then it’s not measuring anything. It’s a mere indicator of how one performs with a number of questions which have been chosen for practical reasons.
“That’s an invalid argument, your conclusion doesn’t follow.”
I apologize for not being clearer in how my conclusion follows from the premises.
X is a measurement. If X can predict changes in IQ, then it can be considered an IQ test (predictive validity). If X is an IQ test, and also a measurement, then therefore, some IQ tests are measurements.
“the genetic code determines the bauplan!”
Delusional.
Ban RR now.
rr: i know what the word “bauplan” means.
mugabe: delusional.
if rr doesn’t apologize and admit he’s wrong he will be banned forever.
the generalized structural body plan that characterizes a group of organisms and especially a major taxon (such as a phylum)…
this is BY DEFINITION determined by the genetic code.
AGAIN!
if rr doesn’t apologize and admit he’s wrong he will be banned forever.
There’s no justification for this reductionism.
FURTHERMORE RR IS CONTRADICTING HIMSELF!
outside of the reptilian bauplan
REPTILES ARE DEFINED BY THEIR GENOME!
1. IF SOMETHING IS OUTSIDE A REPTILIAN BAUPLAN IT CAN ONLY BE BECAUSE THE BAUPLAN IS DETERMINED BY THE GENOME.
2. IN GENERAL NOTHING CAN BE OUTSIDE A BAUPLAN EXCEPT BY BEING OUTSIDE WHAT THE GENETIC CODE ALLOWS.
DRRR!
Reptiles are defined by their phenotype which isn’t reducible to genes, genes play a (necessary) part in phenotype construction.
rr is making a distinction without a difference. he’s imagining some possible world where species have the same genomes but a different bauplan because DST or some other jive. the bottom line is if i tell you the genetic code of reptiles you’ll know they’re reptiles. i don’t have to say, “oh…btw…i mean reptiles on this planet…not the ones in your imagination.”
it’s called “phylogenetics” rr. check it out. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phylogenetics
but there’s no reason to believe such animals are possible in the first place. you’d have to claim there is something else inherited from the beginning of life to the reptiles of today. what is that? is there such a thing? just call it genes but perhaps not in the form of dna. it’s easy.
the point is if you say, “well all these other things are inherited, not just dna” that’s right, but you’d also have to show those things have no basis in the phylogeny of the organism. you’d have to prove that that other stuff was not occasioned by a change in the dna. what are such things in general, if they exist at all? how might you classify them?
Phylogeny emerges as a result of the developmental system’s derivative history. The presence of traits in species reflects the mere presence of sufficient developmental interactants. Of course there are other things inherited other than DNA, and DNA has no primacy compared to other interactants. There is also behavioral, cultural, and symbolic inheritance along with epigenetic inheritance (the EES is an epigenetic view on evolution). Nevermind the concept of directed mutation, where an environmental pressure can cause a beneficial mutation that can be adaptive to the organism.
Other non-genetic forms of inheritance can and do cause different traits can arise due to need at that moment. Evo devo isn’t reductionist at all. Especially since it’s related wkth DST.
there is no such “missing material element of inheritance”. it doesn’t exist.
rr: but the fish example.
mugabe: that’s NOT evidence. can you tell me why?
rr: no. it’s evidence.
mugabe: sad. the answer is that the effect was mediated by the dna of the other species but indirectly.
rr: error. error. error. anal philosophy is philosophy.
two famous jewish anal pseudophilosophy, kripke and putnam agree with me.
kripke: “water is H2O” is an analytic a posteriori truth.
putnam: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_Earth_thought_experiment
What does this mean?
“there is no such “missing material element of inheritance”. it doesn’t exist.”
It’s not about being a missing material element of inheritance, it’s about the whole suite of inherited interactants that forms the phenotype.
directed mutation is totally irrelevant to my comment. and it doesn’t exist.
epigenetics is your only example. and it doesn’t last.
behavioral, cultural, and symbolic inheritance do NOT affect bauplan.
the whole suite of inherited interactants
and the only one you named that might affect bauplan was the temporary epigenome.
it occurs to me rr doesn’t unnuhstan what i mean by “determine” in the context of my first response and following.
“within the bauplan” refers to a range of specific phenotypes. this range is what is determined by the genetic code. the genetic code determines the boundary of what is a possible reptile and what can’t be a reptile.
obviously there is variation. but it is limited, as i said in my first response. the space of possible reptiles, the “within which” large brained reptiles putatively cannot exist, is determined by the genetic code of reptiles.
it is determined in the sense that to get outside this space the genetic code would have to change so much the creature would no longer be a reptile…putatively.
determine:
3
a
: to fix the boundaries of
b
: to limit in extent or scope
It occurs to me that you think that genes determine things. That’s outright false. That range of phenotypes isn’t determined by genes, it’s environmentally-induced. Genes aren’t relevant to environmental-induced variation. What you said isn’t relevant to what I said about phylogeny and development and how they arise.
“directed mutation is totally irrelevant to my comment. and it doesn’t exist.”
What are you smoking? I’ve shown that DMs exist
What are you smoking? I’ve shown that DMs exist
what are you speaking?
you have never shown anything ever!
all you’ve ever done is say “i’ve shown…”
anyway rr will be banned permanently or i will leave peepee to comment on her own blog…sad.
Yea I did.
^^^delusional^^^
also “DMs” CONFIRM what i said:
the genetic code determines the bauplan.
if rr is not permanently banned then i will never comment again. and peepee’s blog will die. sad.
What are you talking about. That doesn’t “confirm” your claim. You know that development can precede genetic change right?
It occurs to me that you can’t speak english.
what is your native language rr?
yiddish?
“that’s a point fodor missed because mentally retarded jew”
Actually, Fodor’s second part of his book is basically about how evolution is limited to an organism’s bauplan.
It’s definitely not a strawman, since most IQ-ists talk about “what IQ tests measure.”
they’re using “measure” in a different sense than you are = strawman.
AND
IQ-ists are mentally retarded. why would you respond to them?
go back and read what i wrote then apologize for being retarded and not being able to speak english.
fodor’s article was titled Why Pigs Don’t Have Wings and he concluded it was because darwin was wrong because he is a mentally retarded jew motivated by his hatred of evo-psych (something only a retard would take seriously, let alone so seriously as to claim darwin was wrong because retarded non-reasons).
all of rr’s jive applies to beauty. IQ is an operationalization of “smart”. rr thinks “smart” and “dumb” are meaningless words.
rr: no i don’t.
mugabe: then you are DISHONEST!
melo and rr have been allowed to comment. why?
here is another person explaining it to melo.
Fodor’s question doesn’t really make sense. Why don’t pigs have wings is the same as asking why didn’t pigs become bats. Or why are there pigs? Natural selection also answers the related question as to why horses don’t have a single horn on their foreheads…How would natural selection take place in order to result in a flying mammal. It is to the bat genome, not the pig genome that we should look. So much, I think, for the “feel” of the first alternative to natural selection. It really ends up supporting natural selection…
I think nothing in his article poses either conceptual or empirical problems for the theory of evolution by means of natural selection as proposed by Darwin.
I think nothing in his article poses either conceptual or empirical problems for the theory of evolution by means of natural selection as proposed by Darwin.
Dude give it up!
Even Mug of Pee now agrees evolution is progressive:
rr should watch this video and then pay everyone reparations.
peepee: aha! evolution is progressive!
mugabe: only if more complexity is in general “worth it”. in reality, more complexity is NOT free and sometimes NOT “worth it” in terms of fitness.
if it were FREE then evolution would be progressive without qualification OBVIOUSLY in the sense that ALL creatures would just get more and more complex over time.
BUT YES! the question of creature complexity is more SUBTLE than gould claimed. it’s MORE than just a matter of a melting candle and an increasing level of variation in complexity.
Mugabe has the correct answer. Its very complicated. But if you look at the dinosaurs theres no evidence to say higher intelligence is a pre-destined destination of evolution.
Correction. Mug of Pee does not believe evolution is progressive.
pill, whats to say dinosaurs were not the smartest creatures of their time?
Who’s to say that’s true?
Correction. Mug of Pee does not believe evolution is progressive.
this is also a lie if interpreted as equivalent to “Mug of Pee believes evolution is not progressive”.
read what i wrote and unnuhstan it.
more complexity is good…and bad…but in different ways. the video makes the good part clear. but to be realistic the code would have to penalize complexity too.
AND as i’ve said a bajillion times…viruses have evolved to be simpler. their niche trajectory penalized complexity severely.
gould’s explanation was gay.
RR, We dont know whether they were the smartest or not of their era, so how can we say dinosaurs prove that evolution is not progressive?
an example peepee deleted:
birds!
“bird brain” is an english idiom meaning “stupid”.
BUT some birds are very NOT stupid…
AND birds CAN’T have big brains and still fly…
but they can have…
DARWINISM has solved this problem (but only partially) by making bird brains DENSE (in the good way) in neurons…
my own mother feels enormous guilt for abandoning her parrots…they were like dogs…or even smarter… but the US government wouldn’t let her bring them back…or so she claims.
parrot brain volume vs dog brain volume…what is it?
hyacinth macaw vs irish setter?
my guess is my irish setter’s brain is at least 4x the volume but he may be dumber…sadly.
look it up!
RR why do you criticize Stephen Dawkins and his selfish gene theory?
Pumpkin Person read Chris Langan’s CTMU + Satoshi Kanazawa’s Savannah Hypothesis. Also I am a counsultant as well.
hey Mikey remember me? i enjoyed our interesting discussions many moons ago.
Peeps,did light skinned mongoloids arise first or darkskinned ones?
Tough question. Some of the old genetic work by cavali sforza implied northeast asians were more related to caucasoid than to southeast Asians
did light skinned mongoloids evolve first or light skinned caucasoids (white people)?
I will tell you the answer. Light skinned mongoloids evolved first. That means according to the ‘evolution is progressive’ logic light-skinned caucasoids (white people) are more advanced.
Pumpkin do you have a photographic memory? eidetic in any way? i think youve mentioned you do! do you think i show any signs of that?
on another note i must say Mug has a very good understanding of everything. he is a modern polymath. he is so smart.
im trying to be like him when i grow older he is probably in his 50s or 60s so i have a lot of time b4 that happens.
My mother would always praise my memory but than an another family member would gaslight me by insisting that my memories were wrong. Part of the problem was my memories were so vivid that she couldn’t believe I could be remembering that much detail and dialogue and she also didn’t find my memories believable or palatable.
But she wasn’t 100% wrong. After I was tested on the WISC-R as a child I remembered exact questions but when I actually got access to the test kit a few years later, I was devastated that some of the questions and tasks were completely different than I remembered.
The truth is our brains do not record reality with anything like the accuracy of a photograph or tape recorder. Instead we construct memories based on the essence of what we think happened. And when we remember again we remember not the event but the memory of the event so it becomes a reconstruction of a reconstruction so quality degrades every time we retrieve it.
i have the same thing happen where people dont trust my memory or intellect particularly my mother or her family!
but as 4 memories themselves i feel as though one can partake in having crisper memories by using visual heuristics. like there are snapshots our brain can take of a particularly activity we are engaging in just from a visual perspective or even other sensory perspectives and then attach them with emotions to recreate a memory.
i dunno if i can delve into details now but maybe i can write a guest post on the importance of memory and its significant contributors to its utility etc.
Ok Puppy. Its time.
are you waiting to unload on us or what? after i criticize you you take hours and hours of contemplation just 2 make me feel bad and go savage mode.
just b urself bruh.
How can you say evolution is progressive when we had fucking dinosaurs around for millions of years. They didn’t even look vaguely like becoming humans.
Our ancestors didn’t look vaguely human during dinosaur times either. You have to give them at least as much time as we’ve had.
Apes didn’t co-exist with dinosaurs. In fact dinosaurs were around longer than apes/humans.
That’s not the point. Life began 3.7 billion years ago so humans have had 3.7 billion years to evolve. Dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago so they had only 3.635 billion years.
False logic. The meteor wiped out most life on earth so humans had 65m years to evolve. Dinosaurs had 3bn years.
But it did not wipe out the lineage that would one day become human so we had 65 million extra years to evolve. Who knows what dinosaurs could have become with all that extra time.
They had 3bn years puppy they were hardly going to blossom into high IQ humanoids in the final 1% of the time.
Also the meteor is what scientists call a Mass Extinction Event. In other words, it killed all ancestors of apes and humans, if there were any (and there were not, based on archaeological findings).
They had 3bn years puppy they were hardly going to blossom into high IQ humanoids in the final 1% of the time.
That’s exactly what we did.
Also the meteor is what scientists call a Mass Extinction Event. In other words, it killed all ancestors of apes and humans
So we’re ghosts? LMAO
Are you really stupid or something? The meteor killed everything except insects. Google it. There were no apes in the time of dinosaurs dumbass. Not even RR thinks that. We evolved as a completely seperate species post the MEE. Get that through your thick head.
LMAO. You wrote:
Also the meteor is what scientists call a Mass Extinction Event. In other words, it killed all ancestors of apes and humans
If all our ancestors were killed, we wouldn’t be here dumbass.
Yes we would. You just don’t get it. You need to talk to Marsha. Email Marsha and get her to explain how humans evolved after the dinosaurs.
No you’re very confused & know that by clarifying further, you’ll expose even more of your ignorance.
Bottom line is that our ancestors survived the extinction because they were small rodents. If we could go from rodents to humans in the last 65 million years, dinosaurs could have done something similar. They were already bipedal.
Dinosaurs evolved after at least 1 billion years. There is no evidence they were going to suddenly become humanoids in the next 65m years.
Mice went into humans after 65m years after a meteor hit.
These are called ‘discrete’ timelines and events puppy.
Google the word discrete.
The same planet, the same environment and 2 different species evolved. The so called less intelligent species evolved over 100 times the human timeframe.
Dinosaurs didnt evolve into mice puppy….
Again I think you need Marsha to explain it to you nicely without calling you an idiot.
Dinosaurs evolved after at least 1 billion years.
So did rodents
There is no evidence they were going to suddenly become humanoids in the next 65m years.
And there was no evidence rodents would either, but they did. Change tends to happen very rapidly after long periods of stasis.
Google the word discrete.
Google the definition of stupid and then upload your photo next to it.
I understand what pill is trying to say but he doesn’t have the verbal IQ to say it.
My verbal IQ is so high, I wonder if it’s even higher than my math IQ.
But then it’s hard to imagine anything being higher than my math IQ.
What pill is trying to say is that even though dinosaurs had 65 million years less time to evolve than humans did, they effectively had more time because the reptile era outlasted the mammal era. In other words, mammalian evolution was suppressed because dinosaurs were hogging all the resources & only after they died did mammals get their chance.
So pill’s point is that the failure of dinosaurs to become humanoid despite having effectively more time proves humanoids are not predestined, but of course I never said they were. What I do say is that progress is predestined, at least once complex multi-cellular life emerges.
So Puppy agrees with me in the end and now pretends humans aren’t predestined. Great.
I agree that the point you were struggling to make is a valid one after I salvaged it.
It would be cool if humanoids were inevitable but I agree the evidence isn’t there.
Having said that, progress simply means that the majority of species could out-compete the majority of their ancestors in the majority of environments and I suspect that was true of dinosaurs just as today it’s arguably true of mammals.
When theres a problem with the model, then the model is wrong. Branching is only one factor for being more evolved. Clearly it is not a dominant factor in regards to humans. East asians are in some ways less evolved than blacks e.g. testosterone, social intelligence, creativity.
Again you’re imposing your values as a gay man on to nature. Nothing superior about testosterone
And East Asians are more Creative where it matters.
Well I’m not saying T levels are a superior trait. But in certain environment they simply are a better trait to have. In a fight, a black would always beat an east asian. Its that simple.
Do you have a reference for that T claim yet or not?
Go fuck yourself.
pill, isnt that the cae because blacks have more denser bones?
I have seen gitanos from Seville celebrating a gay wedding recently.
So probably Philo can get acceptance from his Irish traveler community. That solves the personal part.
I don’t know if the financial sector is that accepting but I guess many professionals would be entertained and even welcome from one of their reception clerk, like Philo, a flamboyant & flaming attitude.
a flamboyant & flaming attitude.
I think Bruno just outed pill. LMAO
Just as I thought.
Blacks do have denser bones but that’s not an effect of T to the best of my knowledge.
Its the androgen receptors. Even if I showed the paper to RR, he would call it ‘not credible’ unless written by a jew. Therefore he needs to fuck himself.
You must like being wrong.
^Lol.
It’s weird to call blacks more socially intelligent when every African country has much higher rates of violence than any East Asian country, and this is considering that East Asians will live in tiny apartments right next to each other. Pretty sure they understand social behavior better overall.
Also I don’t buy that Asians are less creative. Every great black artist comes from a place where other races do all the actual hard work of creating the society. Meanwhile, there are good East Asian artists in both Western countries and their own countries.
A lot of the crap cultural “achievements” in the black community will not stand up to time. A lot of their creativity is a very sophmoric view of creativity, like taking up painting or making beats or rapping with one’s friends over blunts. Blacks are just more creative in a very obvious way.
i could be the smartest guy here (thats saying something since this is blog is meta about intelligence and smarts etc.) but there arent a lot of people who gimme the time 2 express myself in a smart way.
i am way smarter than the average person since im creative resourceful etc. but the world is full of parasites.
the human race is 1 where there are 2 many malevolent characters and opportunists like fuck em.
I’m guessing east asian women might find black men more attractive too.
Are you crazy?
100% think this is true. But the are scared of their neighbours and parents judging them for dumpster diving. But they are very attracted to the testosterone.
You’re too autistic to imagine how racist women can be. A lot of East Asian women will prefer a white guy or even an Indian guy over their own men, but sadly most have no interest in black men
Unlike you puppy I actually have black friends and thats even though I’m secretly racist. They tell me they’ve been with asian women. It happens. Black men have probably the best chances in the game.
Pill, How do you know they arent lying? Some men lie about stuff like this.
This particular person wouldn’t lie to me. Its intuition. Also afrosapiens used to brag about getting asian women. Many blacks can get asian women but its low key and usually 1 night stands.
this blog obviously attracts sum of the most brilliant minds on the planet but there is so much division between us we need 2 unite and make a difference in each others lives.
its not codependence and fuck it even in the chance it is because a lot of people are codependent on the evil in this world.
So we can’t comment on RR’s blog because he bans me and others, but he shits all over this blog with his Berkley cultist drivel. Ban him.
This retarded comment you had the other day about me being aspergers….If you take into account I have mild schiz, I’ve done very well economically compared to the 90% of other schizotypals who are drug addicts or homeless.
your schiz is not mild. its pretty severe imo. schiz is not a mild disease.
if you even consider you have mild schiz youd still be an idiot 4 having such a low success in life.
yes youre smart but only in specialized ways. overall your critical thinking skills are subpar.
keep trying though you may end up with some form of intellectual stability if you put your perspectives 2 actual good use.
Blacks evolved to be around other humans. East asians evolved to serve Master. Neither way is ‘superior’.
“East asians evolved to serve Master.”
You actually mean: evolved to serve father/the head clan.
Practically speaking, ‘Master’ means ‘oneself’: Asians are actually more likely to work for themselves than for others, whether here or in their own countries: Fully 25% of South Korean working-age adults is self-employed; the figure for Americans is 7 or 8%. Not that they don’t have options: S Korea has many big firms that offer essentially cradle-to-grave benefits. Well into the 2000s, half of Silicon Valley companies were founded by Asian immigrants (thousands of firms), about evenly split between Indians and Chinese who’d left established companies like HP and Intel to start their own. These include blue-chip firms like Lam Research, Vizio, Kingston Tech and Marvell. Going further back to the 1800s, Chinese ex-railroad workers in California went off to work for themselves rather than look for another employer like the Central Pacific RR, hence the proliferation of restaurants, laundries, groceries, and farms owned and operated by Chinese in the late 19th and early 20th century. Going even further back, remember that after the Chou dynasty fell, China split up into dozens of states and scores of petty kingdoms, and it took 500 years of constant warfare to bring China back together under one ruler: everyone wanted to be a king.
I was thinking that, as too clans in Japan, you did have each family fighting to be emperor. but the army was not conscript like in rome. everyone lived together, the economy was home industry. you built your own castle. trade was just a means not the purpose like the greeks system supposed.
you need a conscript army when your family is not that big.
that is why trust is higher in japan that other places, everyone is related/considered related
It’s funny that the only people who defend East Asians and Indians are the people whom belong to said races.
No one thinks their achievements are ever worth it.
no, I just think pill is dumb.
Anime you are probably even dumber than RR if you look at the fact at least RR completed high school.
pill is too dumb to remember that anime graduated high school and said so many times.
Well you barely graduated.
Master vs Slave is a Western Roman conception.
Pingback: A fresh challenge to Rushton’s theory – Glyn Hnutu-healh: History, Alchemy, and Me
You can have a great career if you drop out of high school btw. This estate agent guy I used to live with has the same salary as me with no education LOL.
peeps, who here has come closest to guessing correctly who you are? i mean gender and ethnicty/race? and age.
At fine enough resolution, the egg cell must contain even more information than the genome. If it needed to be coded digitally to enable us to ‘store’ all the information necessary to recreate life in, say, some distant extra-solar system by sending it out in an ‘Earth-life’ information capsule, I strongly suspect that most of that information would be non-genomic.
Yong Hua Sun et al. did was take the nucleus of one species of fish and insert it into the denucleated but fertilized egg cell of a different species. What they got as an adult — it’s very rare that you get an adult from such a cross-species clone — but what they got as an adult is intermediate between the two, whereas, of course, in a gene-centric view you should — and assuming the genes are defined as DNA — you should get the animal from which the nucleus was taken. That doesn’t happen in Yong Hua Sun’s experiment. — denis noble
1. iirc it wasn’t intermediate except in a limited way.
2. the reason why “it’s very rare…” is that the genome is incompatible with the egg, the machinery in the egg is determined by the dna…another way of saying there are no mammals with reptile dna in a galaxy far far away.
3. all dst amounts to is asking “which came first the chicken or the egg?” but in a really really elaborate way.
epigenetics are irrelevant to evolution. reptiles wouldn’t be mammals with the right epigenome. https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2022/08/07/denis-noble-goes-after-darwinian-evolution-again-scores-own-goal/
There’s nothing wrong with those 5 points at all. Coyne just knows that the death of the MS and the rise of the EES is coming. As West-Eberhard showed, developmental plasticity has its place in evolutionary theory.
delusional!
As West-Eberhard showed, developmental plasticity has its place in evolutionary theory.
1. who denied that? answer: no one.
2. the plasticity is genetically determined. DUH!
you should argue with the pill personality. you’re both autistic. all i’m interested in is ridiculing you.
“the plasticity is genetically determined”
Shut up, you’re wrong. Genes don’t determine anything.
Developmental Plasticity plays a role in the ontogeny of new traits, but it’s not reducible to genes. Developmental Plasticity is interesting, but I don’t see the relevance in reducing it to genes. Evolution and development are more complicated than saying “it’s genes.”
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2011.0971
I’m not saying that Noble has no right to weigh in on modern evolutionary biology simply because he was a physiologist. No, I’m asserting that Noble’s claims about the death of modern evolutionary biology should be ignored because there is virtually no data to support them. His claims should be ignored because he is ignorant, and willfully so. (Others have corrected him many times.)
I’m through with Noble; he says the same thing over and over again, tilting at the windmill of modern evolutionary biology with a soda straw. I probably should have ignored Noble’s mush, but the laws of physics compelled me to write. At least the readers here can be aware of his numerous errors and misstatements, even if Noble plays the same tune until he’s underground. — jerry coyn
rr: delusional!
Jerry Coyne is a delusional hack. Epigenetics is definitely involved with evolution, as Oyama, Laland, Moore, Jablonka and Lamb, Noble and others have shown.
rr has now proved he is psychotic or a troll in addition to being a retarded psychopath.
if mammoths are brought back we’ll see what comes out of the elephant. if a dinosaur comes out we will know rr is right.
The first interspecies somatic cell nuclear transfer (iSCNT) experiments were carried out between Rana species in the 1950s. These early studies concluded that egg cytosol cannot maintain replication of foreign nuclei, and that changes induced in nuclei are heritable through mitosis, and species-specific.
You lack social intelligence. Frankly you lurker and the others that debate this hack do. RR believes in genes and DNA. Hes just ideological. It would be like trying to convince you that Jesus Christ wasn’t a superhero. Its a waste of time talking to someone like that.
^^^autism^^^
Her book Developmental Plasticity and Evolution developed in detail how such environmental plasticity plays a key role in understanding the genetic theory of evolution.
rr can’t argue. all he can do is throw out catch phrases and citations he doesn’t unnuhstan. he’s a clown.
i said “the genetic code determines the bauplan.” this is a fact.
peepee’s chart says thed french are just as advanced as chinapipo and her theory predicts native americans are even more advanced.
and the heritability of IQ at age 12 is only 40%. this explains why peepee is mentally retarded even though she scored high on a fake gypsy test when she was 12. sad.
LOL! Every time someone attacks Mug of Pee he retaliates by attacking me. Mug of Pee must convince himself that all his critics are secretly me, because he’s too arrogant to accept that his critics are legion.
Having said that, he is correct that the tree does show Caucasoids and Mongoloids splitting from each other, yet Rushton interpreted this as Mongoloids splitting off of Caucasoids. For a full explanation, see here:
Native Americans are a hybridized subrace not a race.
Hybridized with what??? Sasquatches? The native americans in your model should be more advanced just because they branched off later. Are you seeing problems in your simplistic model now?
Where did Rushton say that? Quote?
Haha isn’t that one of Rushton’s retracted papers?
“The native americans in your model should be more advanced just because they branched off later. Are you seeing problems in your simplistic model now?”
Exceptions, explained away, blah blah blah.
Rushton’s theory was definitely wrong. He was wrong on evolution. He was wrong on T, brain size, penis size. What does Rushton have left?
Rushton was right about 80% of things. You are wrong on 99% of things. So comparing you to rushton is laughable.
“so the answer to which came first the chicken or the egg?” is…
they’re one thing which can be identified by either.
“water is H2O” is equivalent to “reptiles have the following genomic features.”
the phylogenetic definition of species and other phyla is like the molecular definition of water.
they are both analytic a posteriori and true in all possible worlds.
obviously i should’ve typed:
so the answer to “which came first the chicken or the egg?” is…
very embarrassing.
the material element of heredity = dna…
and what else?
and what else? = the missing material (molecular) element or elements of heredity…
mugabe: there is no such element.
rr: yes there is because…because…because…
mugabe: gimme one example…and it has to pass from parents to child for more than 3 generations…AND it affects the bauplan.
rr: but anal philosophy.
mugabe: you’re a fraud and belong in a camp.
——————————————————————————–
the missing material element or elements of heredity = your kind’s version of “the missing heritability”.
More than DNA is inherited – fact. I’ve named some of them. Evolution and development isn’t reducible to genes alone but they are needed. Genes are followers, not leaders, in evolution and development. Fact.
^^^LAME + DISHONEST^^^
YOU SOUND LIKE A FUCKING MOSSAD VERSION OF CHATGPT!
“i’ve named some of them” … which have ZERO effect on bauplan.
DNA methylation, histone modification, the inheritance of developmentally-induced variation. Genetic inheritance isn’t the only thing, non-genetic inheritance plays a substantial role in the proliferation of species.
^^^LAME + DISHONEST AGAIN!^^^
DNA methylation, histone modification = epigenetics = doesn’t last!
the inheritance of developmentally-induced variation = doesn’t last!
AND these are modifications in gene expression only. they don’t make new stuff.
every protein in the body is coded for by a gene or genes.
there is no conceivable material means of inheritance other than the genome.
when the machinery changes it’s the result of a change in the genome. the machinery is proteins.
AND
The Central Dogma. This states that once “information” has passed into protein it cannot get out again. In more detail, the transfer of information from nucleic acid to nucleic acid, or from nucleic acid to protein may be possible, but transfer from protein to protein, or from protein to nucleic acid is impossible. Information here means the precise determination of sequence, either of bases in the nucleic acid or of amino acid residues in the protein.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_dogma_of_molecular_biology
there are also ribozymes and deoxyribozymes. but these too are coded for in the genome.
my bad i meant richard dawkins tf. lol.
It’s entertaining watching RR and Mugabe go back and forth despite believing the exact same things. Certain words just have different meanings to them, so they just sit there and talk past each other.
Wittgenstein was correct (the first time).
Puppy needs to ban both at this stage. This fake debate rr is having is gumming up the thread. RR loves these fake debates.
if you think it’s a debate then you need to be banned for low IQ and autism. melo needs to be banned for being aggressively low IQ and not speaking english.
Its clearly a debate.
believing the exact same things said a moron who needs to be banned.
rr doesn’t believe anything. his IQ is too low. he’s chatGPT the dumb version.
You guys have the same views.
You both use interactionism as a rebuttal to hereditarianism. The only difference is that RR shits and pisses himself if you dare to give genes any credit to phenotypic variance.
I said it once; I’ll say it again. The only thing that’ll put this debate to rest is empirical evidence. So far, you have more. Most of RR’s arguments are “theoretical.” (I’m sure he’ll misinterpret this.)
You both use interactionism as a rebuttal to hereditarianism. The only difference is that RR shits and pisses himself if you dare to give genes any credit to phenotypic variance.
but this is a contradiction.
interactionism = every genome has its own norms of reaction = its own range within a range of environments
i’ve said it many times. rr talks about GxE, but he means E, and as far as i can tell no hereditist unnuhstans it either. at most they mention it, and then go back to talking about it like it doesn’t exist.
should’ve been:
at most they mention it, and then go back to talking like it doesn’t exist.
Some understand it, they just don’t think it explains any of the IQ variation, at least not within the U.S..
false.
you can’t name one.
Jensen understand it. He mentioned it way back in the 1960s but argued twin studies show it’s a non-issue at least within the U.S.
“but this is a contradiction.”
No. Your disagreement is semantic. He is an “interactionist”. He just thinks using causal language to describe what genes do is overly reductive.
I think it’s dumb too. in fact, it’s almost entirely driven by ideology, but he does believe the same thing that you do.
im not sure why we are even arguing this its not like the debate really brings anything 2 fruition the majority will believe whatever they want 2 believe.
its fun 2 have these debates in good spirit and 4 truth seeking but pushing an agenda like RR does or trying 2 win a debate like others do (Mug sometimes) isnt actually purposeful like 1 might think it is.
wrong!
No. YES! YOU’RE TOO LOW IQ TO RESPOND TO ME SO STOP IT. I WARNED PEEPEE.Your disagreement is semantic. FALSE. YOU DON’T UNDERSTAND WHAT GXE MEANS BECAUSE LOW IQ. He is an “interactionist”. SO WHAT? HE DOESN’T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS AND NEITHER DO YOU BECAUSE LOW IQ. He just thinks using causal language to describe what genes do is overly reductive. TOTALLY IRRELEVANT. LEARN ENGLISH!
I think it’s dumb too. in fact, it’s almost entirely driven by ideology, but he does believe the same thing that you do. HIS IQ IS TOO LOW TO BELIEVE ANYTHING RETARD!
What kind of power do you think you have on this blog? If you’re going to leave, then leave. You’re incapable of having normal conversations with people.
“YOU DON’T UNDERSTAND WHAT GXE MEANS BECAUSE LOW IQ.”
Lol, Reaction norms are an easy concept to understand. I’m just telling you that RR’s grievance with you is the causal language you use to describe how the “bauplan” restricts ranges of phenotypes. It’s extremely relevant, and I don’t really understand why you aren’t grasping the point.
>”the causal language you use to describe”.
translation:
Your definitions are bad, therefore: stupid and incorrect.
sure, I’m stupid and incorrect because I use a different language/understand vocabulary differently; sure.
genes “cause” phenotype means I am the stupid one; sure.
Elden Ring might beat my playtime record for Assassins Creed Valhalla. I spent 250 hours on the latter.
I have an IQ of 87 due to conditions like insomnia and (headaches upon lying down which destroyed my iq since 2015). But if i had similar IQ scores to most people here i would be smarter than them. Most but not all though 🙂
It is what it is. I have a mild form of schiz which studies say reduces IQ over time. My mother was a mental person and my dad is mildly intellectually disabled so if I was raised by ashkenazi jews in New York who know what my IQ might be. Everyone has there own issues.
IQ doesnt test full intelligence. Even if had similar IQ to most others here i would be smarter than most of them about things we discuss here.
I agree with Mugabe on 90% of things but its clear he has some sort of serious social intelligence problem. He believes jesus had super powers, that Oswald really did kill JFK, etc.
In my opinion math IQ is basically seriously detrimental to having good social IQ. I’ve seen it my whole life. If someone told me they were top 5% in math, I would mentally note they are probably bottom 5% socially.
It even applies to me. I’m in at least the top 10% of math and my social skills developed much slower than the other kids at school.
^^^autism^^^
i do not believe jesus had super powers. but i don’t disbelieve it either. i think christianity in its roman/orthodox form is a moment in the weltgeist…something which can’t be dismissed in the way pill dismisses it or at all…same goes for islam and buddhism and their founders…
AGAIN!
pill must be banned for low IQ and autism…
OR the real pill has to come back.
AND unban LOADED!
Its a fucking jewish cult that made it mainstream in Europe and not the middle east. What more is there to understand about it? The claims of the religion are all totally false and made up and the only evidence is the cultist’s writings. Are you fucking Anime level socially retarded?
Oswald really did kill JFK, etc.
i used to believe that but rr showed using anal philosophy that JFK’s head spontaneously exploded because rare epigenetic modification.
life is an IQ test but it depends on whom the author is. i would ace most peoples reasonable tests but there are so many idiots making their own rules nowadays they need 2 be taught a lesson themselves.
it truly is catastrophic that the modern human is allowed 2 live as it is.
I don’t even like math. I hate it but its clear being good at it involves a developmental trade off in the brain with social intelligence.
I would guess Trump and Oprah are an idiot at math.
I agree, but maybe it’s not a trade-off and it’s merely due to weak correlations between the two.
If you assume like a 0.1-0.2 correlation, math geniuses would be close to average in social skills (lower than their verbally-oriented friends/colleagues) and social geniuses (i.e. Oprah) would be close to average in math skills.
I don’t think being a math genius precludes the possibility of social genius, and vice versa.
im both very mathematically and socially oriented i dont think theyre mutually exclusive whatsoever.
What is the point of the CFA? Active management seems dead outside of a minority of hedge funds. You’d have to be an idiot to be actively managing a portfolio.
^^^serious social intelligence deficit + low IQ^^^
if no one manages actively prices become very obviously wrong very quickly. and thus the return to active management becomes enormous.
this is like a sophmore (or freshman) level finance course for undergrads in the US. it’s obvious if you don’t have autism.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grossman-Stiglitz_Paradox
I know the paradox. But its not rational for the majority of investors to be active. Case closed. 90% of empirical studies back me.
Even if you are some sort of investment genius like Buffet, the time it takes to run a portfolio might be better spent learning coding.
Don’t blame pill. Even though he’s 35, he was killed at age 25 by a meteor and only had 10 years of life to learn all this. LMAO
gaslighting is dependent on a form of projection that ends up orchestrating itself in many forms. its difficult pinpointing what types of forms these might have usually but from what i encountered its about putting a projection into the situation maybe not directly 2 u but things you are afraid of and such.
i realized a lot of life is about overcoming fear and that is the essence of all aspects of what youd call a denial of death at least in the psychological sense.
i enjoy psychology and theory on social phenomenon above the importance of the hard sciences.
my intellect shows a strong governance and high self awareness. i think the opposite of that is when people fail to act on what is appropriate.
i can do math well and think critically enough to grasp a few concepts in hard science but i wouldnt be able 2 get a bigger picture reading like i do with social understanding.
Two of my friends are CFAs. The smarter one has a background in math and left the financial sector to get a physics PhD and become a Christian apologist, but the other makes a healthy six figs managing a bunch of Mumbaikars.
the white man deserves the worst. simply put.
What’s hilarious is while you cry about white cocks because you’re a Pakistani American incel or misunderstood 5’3” genius or whatever, a bunch of black and brown people got millions of dollars (each) just because they were too stupid/crazy to pass the teacher’s test. The guy in this video literally has a chirping smoke detector that he hasn’t changed (because of racism preventing him from finding AA batteries and opening his detector). All while criminals get away with theft and rampant drug use in places like San Francisco.
There’s the America you want! Congratulations!
https://nypost.com/2023/07/15/nyc-bias-suit-black-hispanic-teachers-and-ex-teachers-rich/
The Densiovans branching first is only true for mtDNA and yDNA. Denisovan mtDNA branching is partially caused by what some state is a Homo Erectus admixture into Denisovan. Its not certain but that is one hypothesis. But that doesn’t explain the entirety of the reason. Most of the mtDNA divergence and yDNA divergence is because Neanderthals and AMH exchanged yDNA and mtDNA after splitting. This means that first, there was an AMH-Neandersovan split, then Neanderthals and Densiovans split, and finally Neanderthals and AMH exchanged uniparental markers. Some people believe it is AMH admixture into Neanderthals that caused it, others like Iosif Lazaridis believe that Neanderthal admixture into very early AMH caused this.
More importantly, yDNA and mtDNA are only a small part of the genome, most of the genome is autosomal DNA, and autosomally it is clear that Denisovans and Neanderthals clade together to the exclusion of AMH.
Seems strange that mDNA and yDNA would both agree that Denisovans branched off first but autosomal DNA does not. What are the odds of both the male line and the female line being wrong? One of the advantages of using mDNA and yDNA is they’re both relatively selection neutral are they not? I’m worried that by using the whole genome, they’re confusing convergent evolution or recent admixture with shared ancestry, and thus overestimating how closely related neanderthals and denisovans are.
They aren’t wrong. They are showing 2 different things. What happened is there was a mixture event between Neanderthals and Anatomically Modern Humans in the distant past. Whether it was Neanderthal -> AMH or AMH -> Neanderthal is known. Whatever it was, it was a small amount and didn’t affect the Neanderthal or AMH autosomal DNA much. Hence in autosomal phylogenies, Neanderthals clade with Denisovans. But the small amount of admixture was enough to replace the pre-admixture lineages both on maternal or paternal side. The receiving population lost it’s original maternal and paternal lineages. Hence, AMH and Neanderthals cluster together in mtDNA and yDNA phylogenies.
>One of the advantages of using mDNA and yDNA is they’re both relatively selection neutral are they not?
Well, in this case, it looks like there was a strong selection on both.
>they’re confusing convergent evolution or recent admixture with shared ancestry, and thus overestimating how closely related neanderthals and denisovans are.
Well, convergent evolution wouldn’t explain autosomal similarities. But mixture could. I don’t know exactly how they calculate it, so you could ask a public facing human population geneticist/paleogeneticist. My guess is that they know enough about Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA to ascertain if there is an admixture, like in one instance a mixed Neanderthal-Denisovan individual from Siberia was identified as such. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-06004-0
Still, it is possible that pre-Neanderthal and pre-Denisovan individuals that are not yet on the ancient DNA record could show evidence for such an earlier mixture, explaining the the Neanderthal-Denisovan commonality due to mixture between pre-Neanderthals and pre-Denisovans. But I suspect such a finding would be unlikely.
And you say your verbal intelligence is great…its fucking terrible Puppy. It took you 4 attempts to understand my argument about dinosaurs before you finally agreed and I was explaining it like I was explaining it to a baby.
You literally said all our ancestors were killed by the meteor which is the most verbally retarded thing one could possibly say. I think what you meant was all the creatures that might have evolved into humans were killed off and life started again at zero. Perhaps you’re simply unaware that biogenesis only happened once (as far as we know) so every living that has ever lived on Earth shares a single common ancestor.
So you think the gaseus fluids that formed after the Big Bang count as an ‘ancestor’ too? How proposeterous do you want to be? Another example of weak verbal logic.
What are you smoking? Can I have some?
You said Mice count as an ancestor to humans. So why not Big Bang debris? Why not single celled organisms? I mean its all progressive right?
In fact all life is descended from a single-cell, bacterium-like and that cell eventually evolved into the first reptiles. The descendants of these reptiles split with some becoming dinosaurs, others progressing into mammals and eventually human mammals.
“So you think the gaseus fluids that formed after the Big Bang count as an ‘ancestor’ too? ”
According to DST all parts of the environment are inherited and irreducibly interact with each other.
You dont know what the word ancestor means puppy.
Cool story bro.
Marsha is the only super high IQ person on this blog that has ever demonstrated social intelligence and an awareness of jews at the same time.
Well Marsha’s IQ is 170 so when your general intelligence is that high, even your social IQ is pulled way up.
No its not! Look at Bruno. He’s fucking retarded. He literally admitted he gets his girlfriend to explain movies to him because he can’t tell the different actors apart.
Bruno has what we call sub-test scatter. If he took the original versions of the WAIS, he’d be off the scale on some subtests but perhaps borderline retarded in others and would show a huge verbal > performance IQ split. Marsha on the other hand would be off the scale on all 11 subtests.
And I base this on what Bruno himself has publicly disclosed. If his own self-assessment has been to harsh, then I’m wrong.
Bruno would score well on everything but the test doesn’t measure common sense and social intelligence. It doesn’t measure if you can recognise someone lol. This is just taken for granted by test makers. Also his higher verbal/theoretical reasoning would be awful like all aspergers people.
They older versions were much more like the tests I gave you. They weren’t designed to measure social intelligence but often did by accidebt. In fact the original army tests that Wechsler ripped off included a subtest called common sense.
I’d like to go back to academia someday and do another degree or PHd even. I like the academic lifestyle.
in ‘mer’ca we have these people called “mormons”.
smith was OBVIOUSLY fake and gay…but mormons are cool.
that is…
we ‘mer’cans have this obvious example of a new religion (which is totally fake and gay)…
BUT…
christianity was TOTALLY NOT like that! same goes for islam and buddhism.
AND…
EVEN THEN…
the end result of this obviously bullshit religion…
is pretty cool.
Religions have a certain role in all human civilisations but if youre asking me about the truth value of religions theres basically zero content. You would get more knowledge from a phone book.
Why does this asian guy talk like a black??
Neandercel will rise again.
God created man. Man created religion.
Indians are almost as dogmatic as they are ideological. why do Indians insist God exists when the only Indian religion that was any good (Buddhism) was anti-theist.
All dharmic religions are good. I cant say the same about you. And you are only saying that because of general antipathy between muslims and hindus.
No I think Hinduism is legitimately degenerate!
But they’re very moral in their refusal to eat cows who experience unspeakable suffering to provide beef for us.
i understand im a pescatarian myself and have been for at least 15 years. its not a big deal.
one persons contribution means nothing in this world.
pill getting another degree:
Obviously if they made that movie today 50% of the cast would be black especially the law professor.
Meanwhile when I got my degree:
Strange hes a very high IQ east asian and somehow doesn’t look like a total nerd.
Because the East Asian IQ is genetically high, high IQ is part of their NORMAL variation and thus less freaky than high IQ of people from other backgrounds.
Personal questions can be asked by email. I’ll unblock your email.
because im officially unblocked as it is already July 13th in Iceland i want 2 say Pill has been shitting on this blog much more than i or Anime ever have.
Pill has no self awareness. he is an NPC. i feel bad 4 him and have empathy unlike him so id rather not him be banned but he is a sadistic retard.
we should fight him on all aspects of his beliefs since he keeps saying the most obvious things and thinks he is some profound dude when he is a loser.
By normal variation you of course mean the “East Asian bauplan”.
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/385708500342?chn=ps&norover=1&mkevt=1&mkrid=710-153316-527457-8&mkcid=2&itemid=385708500342&targetid=&device=c&mktype=&googleloc=&poi=&campaignid=431056650&mkgroupid=1304021167791016&rlsatarget=&abcId=&merchantid=0&msclkid=29cda2375cdf148083f1c69875f3fe56
They wrote this book for half the comment section here.
the hyacinth macaw’s uniquely juice brain reminds me of the first fake celebrity listed as dying from AIDS.
sorry i was thinking of “hibiscus”.
pill would know more about this.
Hibiscus (1949–1982) American founder of the psychedelic drag queen troupe The Cockettes.
and it turned out i was too sexy for this blog.
A human brain weighs around 1300-1400 grams, while the average dog’s brain weighs only about 70 grams…
VS
In the parrots studied, body mass ranges between 23 and 1,008 g, brain mass from 1.15 to 20.73 g…
pre-school bing-ing proves that i am too sexy for this blog!
…at least not within the U.S….
PROOF PEEPEE DOESN’T UNNUHSTAN GXE.
SAD!
No I do understand but environment is relative. Jensen studies heritability in the U.S. and there’s no evidence of genes that boost your IQ in New York but lower it in LA. You might say the U.S. is too narrow a range of environments but even if we did a worldwide twin study, we would never be able to say categorically that any gene has a 100% independent effect. There might be other planets where having a Y chromosome makes you shorter or having an extra chromosome makes you smarter. There are even environments here on Earth where apes might grow up smarter than people. For example if a human and ape were both raised by apes, the human might become so severely retarded that the ape would actually score higher on a toddler non-verbal IQ test.
GXE is always context dependent.
more proof peepee is rr’s babydaddy.
neither unnuhstans GxE.
a concrete example from professor shoe…
according to professor shoe a very small % of embryos have 6x or more the risk of various diseases.
okay. so now ask: how does the age adjusted frequency of those diseases vary over time and place?
okay. so now you ask: do ANY of the diseases shoe would CULL embryos for have a significant age adjusted risk in all environments?
answer: NO!
unnuhstanning means you ax questions like these.
shoe doesn’t unnuhstan.
OBVIOUSLY!
BUT…
MUGABE IS 100%…TOTALLY…FOUR SQUARE…BEHIND EUGENICS WHEN IT COMES TO 100% PENETRANT PATHOLOGICAL GENETIC VARIANTS. AND HE THINKS THOSE AGAINST SUCH ARE EVIL.
pen·e·trant
[ˈpenətr(ə)nt]
ADJECTIVE
genetics
(of a gene or group of genes) producing characteristic effects in the phenotypes of individuals possessing it.
If he didn’t understand GXE he wouldn’t talk about whether the polygenic predictions are replicated on other continents, although he might just be worried about population stratification and not GXE per se.
what steve shoe means REALLY (though he’s too retarded to know it) when he speaks of “healthy babies” is…
metaphorically…
babies who can grow up to be heavy smokers and not get cancer, emphysema, or CVD.
babies who can grow up to eat the SAD diet and never come close to developing diabetes.
babies who can grow up to be chirren who can sit in an uncomfortable chair surrounded by strangers and learn from an imbecile shouting at them in the front of the classroom.
ETC.
shoe is a [redacted by pp, 2023-07-14] and a joke!
rr is RIGHT about that.
He’s a businessman selling a product that is useful in a particular cultural context. He’s only claiming the genetic improvements will help your kids in Western countries, not if they become hunter-gatherers in the rain forest. But I see your point that for the good of the species, the focus should be eliminating genes with “independent” bad effects at least on Earth and Earth-like planets.
@pumpkinperson I’ve heard that Masi Oka was tested to have an IQ of 180 or 189 at the age of 5. Do you know how valid the claim is and which test he took?
If the anecdote is true, given the tests that were around in 1979, he likely obtained a mental age of 9 at age 5 giving a ratio IQ of say (9/5)X100=180. But keep in mind that this method gives a mean and SD of 102 and 16.4 respectively so 180 becomes 171 on the modern scales that use 100 and 15 respectively. Also keep in mind that IQ has limited stability before at least age 10 and that ratio IQs are only normally distributed from about 60 to 150 and even that might be pushing it.
What kind of an old test for children do you think went beyond 5 sigma? IIRC Marilyn Vos Savant’s IQ when calculated via the age ratio method was over 220, but when tested with the mega test she got 186 (SD 16).
As i’m sure you know, by definition no one score above 200 on the Mega because the test forces scores to fit the bell curve. The old Binet was not forced to fit the bell curve which is why you get far more freakishly high scores than the normal curve predicts.
The max score of 48 on the mega test corresponds to 190+ on SD 16. It can’t tell the difference between a 6 sigma and a 7 sigma individual. Vos Savant must have gotten a 46 out of 48 on the Mega test, which means she is definitely within 6 sigma. I get that the age normed values will be bigger, but in the context of the age normed and more modern methods, it seems to me that translating a 220+ score results in a 180+ score where the latter is on an SD of 16. I was wondering if Vos Savant’s 220+ score was calculated the same way as Masi Oka’s. I only know of Oka’s alleged score of 180+/189, not what test he took.
Childhood IQ tests are a waste of space.
Translation: pill was a retarded child
Whats the correlation between childhood and adult scores? 0.2? 0.3? Thats my guess.
my childhood IQ was much higher relative 2 my peers than my IQ is right now. probably because i had a stimulating productive and nonthreatening environment.
these days society seems 2 be in a shitshow level of turmoil and 4 that very reason i think it will collapse in less than ten years. itd be a miracle if it doesnt.
people are prepared 2 lose their lives but they dont know anything about the consequences of death because they live in the pervasive mode of believing in religion and such.
eventually they will all suffer a fate that will be the utmost unbearableness 2 them.
Loaded your childhood IQ score is trash. It means nothing.
dude im way more intellectually capable and smarter than you in every way.
youre Dunning Kruger in its purest form.
youre Dunning Kruger in its purest form.
Very insightful comment. Pill’s delusions of grandeur prevent him from seeing the flaws in his theories and thus improving. He constantly claims to be 100% certain of things no human could be certain of.
and he criticizes other people without any understanding of other peoples motives etc. pertaining 2 the topic at hand.
he assumes a lot basically and so do my dumbass family members so its not as uncommon as we would like 2 think but its very pervasive in the circumstances of Pill and some very ill-equipped individuals.
You misinterpreted me. I’m not saying your scores were low I’m saying the validity of those tests are rubbish.
i understand that in retrospect but how am i supposed 2 comment when all you do is criticize other people obviously the default mode of my conversational ability will be 2 assume youre bringing a negative attitude towards me 2 the table.
Pill, good question!
Peeps, what is the correlation between childhood and adult IQ scores?
The correlation between age 11 and 90 is 0.67:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797613486487
Taking the square root of that, I’d guess the correlaion between age 11 and 51 is 0.81
most people like my mother dont have social awareness. theyre in very high positions of intellectual influence but dont have anything worthwhile 2 say about anything.
these old people need 2 be put down like dogs sometimes theyre screwing over all sorts of people who deserve more of a chance 2 live than them.
Loaded, are you black, or a Hindu?
a pakistani muslim (non-practicing and very disavowing of all religions) but mainly with a lot of Afghan and Turkish influence possibly a couple of percentage points Italian or something 2 because i have Mid East ancestor who might have actually been a Crusader knight in the area during the 7th Crusade or sumn i dunno.
yes i do have Hindu influence as well a lot of it because i do have south indian and north indian ancestry mostly but there is enough Afghan and Caucus influence 2 making me a very mongrelized dude.
Ah, pardon me. I seemed to recall that you were from somewhere in South Asia.
I’m something of a mongrel myself, probably as Slavic as I am Germanic. People are generally completely unsurprised when I ‘admit’ to being a Pole.
Loaded is a very mentally ill illegal migrant. This is the trash America gets with Master’s open borders policy.
i remember you said you enjoyed the company of South Asian people so that makes sense.
i personally dont south asians are a bunch of retards.
i also have Papuan ancestry *maybe only 1 or 2) and maybe Jewish Middle Eastern or Indian ancestry like id say theyre their own racial groups since theyre so tribal and dont interact with other groups of people in a cultural manner.
Papuans are cool but very dumb. Jews arent cool and very smart in certain ways but overall 2 autistic 2 get along with any1 but their stupid peoples.
i like the Parsis or other isolated groups 2 even though i doubt i belong 2 them. theyre very smart.
i just like K selected people overall but heavily r-selected peoples like blacks and Papuans are cool 2. i hate jews whites latin americans east asians and sometimes south asians.
east asians are the worst and jews are just kinda meh luckily theres not a lot of the latter but the former is like the population of the world only a few century agos. theyre all retarded though humans are a worthless species.
1 or 2 percentage points i meant. but im not proud of it. my mother side of the family is absolutely religiously evil and otherwise degenerate.
i hope my comments are read by people and they empathize with me or at least bring a productive attitude 2 my situation.
im an underdog and im a quintessentially good person.
Besides chromosomes (which have no causal privilege) and organs, literally any difference between male and females can be found between racial groups. Height, bone density, hormone levels, musculature, hip-to-waist ratio, torso-to-leg ratio, body hair, baldness, facial development (neoteny), skin color or thickness, etc.
So should we try to make women equal to men as well?
equality is idiotic it totally defeats the purpose of meritocracy and capitalism. its inherently evil.
In opportunities? why not?
But i also believe men should be given equality in stuff they arent given…like divorce laws etc?
Well look at what is happening with men and women in the modern world and you can see “why not”.
The point is that even given equal opportunities to men and women, only an idiot would expect them to be the same in their performance and preferences.
Equality of opportunity is not what is being argued nowadays, it is implicitly being argued that everyone has equal potential and that it is only racism/sexism/classism/whatever else that causes people to be unequal, and therefore we need to remove all of that and even remove people’s property and jobs from them and give them to others, even though it is pretty obvious that men and women are better off being different due to the differing functions they serve and hence, their differences are not necessarily the fault of bigotry.
I agree with Lurker but I also think there is a historical opportunity for women to do something with themselves whereas before they were told to just be baby machines. 100 years ago nobody thought women could be doctors or lawyers and now they are. Although the very best lawyers and doctors are probably going to be men due to the innate abilities.
Lurker, they are peowho argue that women should be given equal opportunities and there are people who argue( esp third wave feminists a.k.a feminazis) that argue that jobs opportunities from men should be taken away and given to women. The latter should be ignored. Just because the latter are saying what they are saying it doesn’t mean there shouldn’t be equality between men and women and/or equal opportunity.
Women are such hypocrites they think they cant be judged yet do an egregious amount of judging.
Like pumpkin do you really think im racist or sexist for calling groups of people out on their bullshit? If so that’s stupid!
Im not doing it out of malice like others ive really had terrible experiences with others!
Great you let a seriously mentally ill person back on again. That will improve the conversation!
yes im seriously mentally ill but that doesnt mean im a bad person. you act like i deserve 2 be put 2 death 4 something firstly i have no control of and secondly something that with positive reinforcement can be overcome!
im not even that mentally ill btw i think youre all neurotic and just want 2 put people like me down. obviously im not as high IQ as some of you other users but that doesnt mean im that much dumber.
you and Melo assume that just because i have strong opinions im mentally ill. you two are exactly the same!
your strongly opinionated as well and its obviously disturbing 2 some but manageable 2 others who want 2 see truth.
same with my comments. nothing i say is inaccurate or a falsification.
my family is more mentally ill than i am and theyre well adjusted.
so r sum of u. i dont put people down unless they instigate so i dont think its ever my problem 2 do something crazy like that.
*youre
what conversation are you referring 2 even Pill? it doesnt make sense 2 me.
picture of GxE:
“i love having AIDS.” — melo and rr
melo: rr says he believes such and such therefore he believes it.
mugabe: false.
melo: but…
mugabe: no one believes a proposition unless he knows what it means. and no one knows what it means if he habitually makes statements which would be false if the proposition were true.
melo: peepee. please ban me.
youre creative enough Mug why do you induce schizophrenia on yourself 2 suffer? suffering is bad.
off topic though but no 1 considers their impacts 4 the future. future orientation is impossible due 2 having 2 having 2 many variables in the society we live in.
i really hate my family members. theyre such control freaks. i feel like controlling behavior and such is the utmost disgusting thing in the world.
people are just like that nowadays. like that commenter Aeoli was exactly the same way and when you call him out on it he doesnt even post your comments about the situation!
absolutely uncalled 4.
Haha. This is the most red pill I’ve ever seen a mainstream conservative talk about black women. The only thing he didn’t say was that theyre so ugly!
Puppy probably wants to kill Charlie Kirk for calling black women AA. Oprah is a genius y’all you hear? GENIUS.
He didn’t mention Oprah because anyone who knows anything about broadcasting knows Oprah’s the most talented person in the business. Her spontaneity, her quick wit, her ability to read the audience and make people cry, her memory for details, her sense of timing & rhythm. Even Trump said “I went to the Wharton school of business and there is no one with more IT factor than Oprah”. Have you any idea how BRILLIANT an overweight black looking black woman has to be to be worshiped by a racist, sexist, ageist, fat phobic straight man like Trump. She is a GENIUS get it through that tiny schizo brain:
Who has a higher IQ, Oprah or Conan?
Have you listened to his podcast? The dude is a genius but pretends to be humble.
He’s pretty liberal, but I can almost sense that he has some conservative views that he hides.
He might be smarter than her. He went to Harvard & is super tall & his brain is almost as big. Both had national talk shows which is a high IQ occupation
Oprah wouldn’t have made it past high school without AA. The jews literally scoured the entire state to find the one black woman who talked like a normal person and put her on tv front and centre to shove it to whites.
You’re such an idiot. Elite Jews didn’t even know she was alive until she became the #1 talk show in America in 1986. The only AA she might have had was getting a job in local news at 19. You’re schiz which means by definition you’re delusional which means by definition you’re wrong about how the world works. Just as autists are blind to Jewish influence and only see market forces, you as a schiz see Jews behind every bush and can’t grasp how capitalism could produce an Oprah Winfrey.
Now Jews might have changed the system so that blacks had opportunity, but they were horrified to discover the black who most skillfully exploited it was Oprah. In the early years many Jews hated Oprah for pandering to working class whites. A Jewish writer for New York magazine did a massive hit piece on Oprah and one show sparked massive boycotts from organizes Jewry.
But Oprah brilliantly adapted and is now the Queen of the elites.
Oprah has been given a leg up by jews her entire life. Want me to post the link to the article that proves Oprah is AA? You keep banning it and I can keep posting it. Remember – her first co-host was a jew to introduce her to a white audience and keep things neat and Kosher. Later of course, jews pushed blacks into everything – movies, sport, tv, music even politics. Without jews blacks would be worse off than even the native americans. Oprah would be a single mother in Alabama living in a shack with no running water. I’m not even joking. That would literally be the outcome without jewish interventions.
Oprah has been given a leg up by jews her entire life. Want me to post the link to the article that proves Oprah is AA?
I already acknowledged that she got a job in Nashville news when she was 19 which she speculates was AA. So what? Georges Soros got his first job in finance because a Hungarian Jew felt sorry for him. Mel Gibson got his first job in show business because of his blue eyes (aka whiteness).
Remember – her first co-host was a jew to introduce her to a white audience and keep things neat and Kosher.
And she introduced him to a black audience to keep things kosher. Half the audience in Baltimore was black and probably more than half on daytime TV because unemployment. That’s called a mutually beneficial partnership. And she had no white co-host when she came to Chicago to host a talk show solo & beat the legendary Donahue in his own backyard:
Later of course, jews pushed blacks into everything – movies, sport, tv, music even politics. Without jews blacks would be worse off than even the native americans.
Only because every time blacks became successful in the free market, a subset of angry whites would literally form mobs & destroy everything they worked hard for and they’re still doing it btw. So I agree that without Jews blacks would have been Native Americans, but the brilliant Oprah would have been the one Native American that owned the casino.
Steven Spielberg (jew) gave her an acting role in the Color Purple. Oprah got into movies as a fucking talk show host LOL. If she was white she would have not even been known by Spielberg.
She wasn’t known by Spielberg or anyone else. She was a huge star in Chicago but unknown in most of the country. Quincy Jones was in Chicago to testify in a court case and just happened to see her on TV. They had been looking everywhere for someone with the talent to play Sophia and when Quincy saw Oprah, he knew she was perfect for the part.
Nearly 30 years later it’s widely considered the best film performance of 1985:
Pumpkin you must post my comments we must defeat this evil dude Pill.
He is a bastard. he should have something really really bad happen 2 him 4 the rest of his life. so that he understands the value of things.
But posting vulgar comments does not defeat him, it only makes you look bad. They way to defeat Pill is with intelligence.
As Tucker Carlson once said, when normal people tell the truth calmly and rationally, we become POWERFUL.
whats wrong with telling him the truth!
Your comments are vulgar and disgusting but it’s partly my fault for letting him attack you.
Are you at least willing to admit her entry into Hollywood was AA?
What does it even mean to say someone got a movie part based on affirmative action? The movie was about black people based on a book about black people. That part was always going to go to a black person.
Moreover virtually every role in movies is written with a certain race in mind so every actor gets hired for their race.
Of course now days there’s an explicit agenda to increase diversity in Hollywood to the point where they’re having white historical figures rewritten as blacks but there was no wokeness when Oprah entered Hollywood. In fact THE COLOR PURPLE was boycotted by black people for portraying black men as beasts. Saying Oprah got her part because affirmative action makes about as much sense as saying Hattie McDaniel got her part in GONE WITH THE WIND because affirmative action.
i dont always forget whats on my mind!
“Only because every time blacks became successful in the free market, a subset of angry whites would literally form mobs & destroy everything they worked hard for and they’re still doing it btw. ”
I understand that Philosopher doesn’t get that Oprah is legitimately more intelligent than 99.9% of black people, but this is just your fantasizing. Besides, even if there were a bunch of racist white people hell-bent on destroying black achievements, there are a lot more whites who are pathologically altruistic and who are cucks for other races, especially nowadays. So it would balance out anyway.
Name 1 talk show host that was cast in multiple oscar bait serious big budget hollywood films. Exactly. Not even jewish talk show hosts get that kind of treatment.
Its obvious the jews identified Oprah as some sort of exceptional talent they wanted to push really hard on America in the 80s and basically put her in everything going. They found the one black woman who didn’t talk like a skank and in the end it worked. People basically had no choice but to accept Oprah.
Name 1 talk show host that was cast in multiple oscar bait serious big budget hollywood films
It was not big budget & it failed to win a single Oscar despite being nominated 11 times. As for other talk show hosts who did not play themselves in movies:
Ricki Lakes (Baby Cakes, Hairspray)
Jimmy Fallon – Fever Pitch (2005)
James Corden – Cats (2019)
Jimmy Kimmel (PAW Patrol: The Movie)
Jimmy Fallon (Taxi)
John Oliver (The Lion King)
Jon Stewart (Big Daddy)
Chelsea Handler (This Means War)
Arsenio Hall (Coming To America)
Meanwhile whoopi, Rosie O’Donnel & Joan Rivers have been in too many movies to count.
Its obvious the jews identified Oprah as some sort of exceptional talent they wanted to push really hard on America in the 80s and basically put her in everything going.
Complete nonsense. First of all Oprah was obsessed with the book THE COLOR PURPLE & told everyone she wanted to be in it. Second the film’s producer (Quincy Jones) who discovered her for the part was black not Jewish, as was the film’s casting director. Yes the final decision was Speilberg’s but who else was he going to cast? The part called for an overweight dark skinned black woman and Hollywood’s not exactly teaming with those, especially not 40-years-ago. There was no Jewish conspiracy to promote Oprah in fact Spielberg didn’t even know who the hell she was to the point where he refused to put her name or photo on the poster despite her warning him she was about to take her talk show national.
They found the one black woman who didn’t talk like a skank
Well spoken blacks are a dime a dozen. That’s not what made her unique.
People basically had no choice but to accept Oprah.
They had lots of choice. Phil Donahue was the #1 talk show in the country and his show was in the same city & time slot as Oprah’s, but Oprah’s show became such a huge hit that Donahue was driven out of Chicago and had to relocate to New York and once she went national, she became such a pop-culture sensation that Donahue was driven out of his time slot. To quote Oprah “I was like a hit album just waiting to be released.”
Pill is a white cock worshipper like my whore mother. Black cock worshippers at least have some respect but Pill and my whore mother need 2 be put in cages 4 loving white cock [redacted by pp, 2023-07-15]
What the fuck? LOL.
im a novelty seeker. my mom hates i bring up genetfics as a very intelligent comments!
The reason Pill calls you a black cock worshipper is because you are not black but go on and on about their music talents. Calling a white person a white cock worshipper because they like white people is like calling someone gay because they touch their own genitalia.
I’m surprised you have to be told this.
i understand the premise i dont clearly understand what the detriment in all of the implications might be!
im glad you hold my intelligence in high esteem but i have a different perception 4 that reason because we are all unique and experience the world differently especially when we differ in intellectual interests and such.
what if the zulu and xhosa were as far apart genetically as whites and chinapipo?
peepee: but major racial group and flushton and densen.
mugabe: why aren’t they major racial groups?
peepee: because…because…i have a low IQ.
mugabe: sad.
Even if we split the African branch in two, the non-African branch still has at least 3 branches because australoids
sadly peepee can’t learn and she will keep repeating the same lies flushton told because extremely low IQ and racist.
Yes mug of pee some recent research suggests the African branch might have done more branching than I once thought
I’ll deal with that later
Peeps, if you scale chris langan body to oprah size his head will be almost equal to oprah.Yet his IQ is 30 points more than oprah. That is how important the connectome is. You dismiss it by putting into the category of cortical thickness, glucose metabolic rate etc (other factors that influence intelligence). But is almost equal in importance to brain size. It is closer in importance to brain size in influencing intelligence than closer to cortical thickness, gmr etc. Cortical thickness and gmr can be changed by the individual but brain size and connectome can’t.
obviously intelligence is way more complex than just brain size. Scientists focus on brain size because it’s the most interesting, most visible, most fossilized & most proven cause of intelligence.
I remember Ruston saying that children of high-IQ Blacks regress more precipitously because the regression is toward their group mean, not IQ 100. I don’t see how that could be the case, and I hope that it isn’t. Is there real empirical evidence of this in other traits, like Dutch children being taller than Chinese children when controlling for parents’ heights?
Of course it’s the case. Most people resemble their parents and most people in a group resemble the group’s average. So if that’s all you know about a person, your best guess is between those two data points.
Pumpkin if you moderate my comment 2 Lurker so help me i will make things very difficult 4 you.
you are on a power trip. do you not understand that? how is one so seemingly unaware of 1self.
just check it m8 and go ahead n post that comment im not going 2 play another round of games with u u need 2 mature.
I was going to post your comments but since you just threatened me I wont.
Permanently banned.
GET THE FUCK OUT OF HERE AND NEVER COME BACK!!!!!!!!!!!
Loaded, Peeps is not powertripping. That is why nobody sees her as so. if she was so, people would have noticed by now….dont you think? She is as far as i know the least power or any tripping person. She takes a lot of abuse and bad words and irrational criticism without banning somebody. Or even giving it back. More than other columnists hbd or otherwise. Only if it gets extraordinarily extreme does she ban. That means if you have been banned by peeps you have crossed all limits of human verbal interaction. I am surprised she even let you stay so long here.
Jimmy got banned for not even 10% of what Loaded has said.
Regression to the mean happens once from what I’ve heard.
capitalism is dying…
so it has to commoditize the most ridiculous opposition, like transgenderism…
protests for so many months about a guy who died from a drug overdose while being restrained by cops…
RR AND MELO AND PILL ARE EFFECTIVELY THE ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE…
BUT THEY BELIEVE THEY ARE THE OPPOSITE…
THE GENIUS OF CAPITAL!
BUT IT COULDN’T STOP YE!
Let the elites divide & conquer with identity politics. I hope more trans women kick female ass at sports which birthing people shouldn’t be playing anyway
Fuck the people!
Let them eat cake.
are you my personal parody account? why are so many people copying everything i say word 2 word and people like Pill still tripping on the fact that their penis is 2 small.
simulation? i wonder.
shouldn’t be playing anyway?
you believe being pressed on the neck by a knee doesnt cause death but a drug overdose for which there is no proof can cause death? Are you believing what you want to believe?
Why was it an official way to restrain a suspect in Minneapolis then? Why was Floyd saying “I can’t breathe” long before anything happened to him? Why would Chauvin randomly try to “murder” someone while being recorded?
What are you even talking about? You realize drug overdoses cause death and happen all the time? You can get hypoxia and stop breathing from a Fentanyl overdose.
Floyd also had Covid-19, which I’m sure you believe kills everyone in their tracks, if you believe the official libtarded narrative about Floyd. Go be a cornhole somewhere else.
You and that knucklehead Mugabe are too ideological on this. Its on tape and the coroner said it and the investigators said it. Jesus christ. Give it up. The guy killed Flloyd. The real issue isn’t floyd. It was the [redacted by pp, 2023-07-19] media picking this one accident of literally hundreds that happen every year and blowing it up into a fake phenomenon. The power of the [redacted by pp, 2023-07-19] media to control people’s opinions and morality is truly incredible.
^^^peepee^^^
the pill personality will be permanently banned for low IQ and autism.
bigfoot is also on tape and oswald was found to be the lone assassin and OJ was acquitted and…
As far as I know, Chauvins own lawyers didn’t even contest that Flloyd died of a drug overdose. Its such a stupid thing to say. Really.
Look I am way more right wing on blacks than you and lurker put together. But I’m also a balanced and rational person. Flloyd was a disgusting person. He invaded a womans home along with a bunch of other blacks. He was a lifelong druggy. But he didn’t deserve to die like that.
die like what?
you have ABSOLUTELY NO idea what you’re talking about so STFU!
why is the pill personality still allowed to comment?
I agree that pill should not be allowed to comment. All he does is repeat the same points over & over like an autistic broken record.
Lurker, people die from overdoses i never said they don’t. I asked what made him(mug) think Floyd died from overdose and/or covid. I am asking you too that.
^^delusional
^^Permanently banned^^
Would Floyd have died even if Chauvin didn’t (unlawfully) restrain Floyd as he did? Does speaking imply that one is breathing? Since Floyd had about 3300 ml of oxygen, and since it’s estimated that he would have been exerting about 437.5 ml of oxygen per minute, then that shows how he could have stayed alive for 8 minutes exclaiming “I can’t breathe.”
https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-4186
By the way, there were 2 autopsies commissioned and both came to the conclusion that he died from the way he was being restrained.
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/voices/george-floyds-autopsy-and-the-structural-gaslighting-of-america/
I think the coroner (one of them) said that there was no evidence of asphyxiation, but that it “obviously occurred because of the video evidence” or something like that. I just don’t think that would kill a normal (fairly healthy) person, given that putting the knee over the neck/shoulder was allowed by their police department. Seems like a very strange oversight. I don’t know of Chauvin ever having those kinds of problems (police brutality).
Meanwhile we do definitely know that Floyd was on drugs and apparently had covid, and we know his troubled history as an inner-city democrat.
Anyway I’m guessing he may have lived if he had medical attention, and I’m sure being arrested and put in that position did not help his breathing and heart, but Floyd was also a 6’5” muscular male and I’m 99% sure Chauvin did not know he was near death (and couldn’t do anything about it either way given that he was not cooperating).
Also I’m not saying he deserved to die like that but the point was that no one knew he was about to die (except the tards holding phones who can’t even keep their city from being crime-infested yet love to pass judgment on people trying to do something about it).
The autopsies of course acknowledged the fact that Floyd did have drugs in his system at the time of death but, correct me if I’m wrong, the levels weren’t high enough to be deadly. Although even if the levels of drugs in his system at the time interacted wkth Chauvin’s knee to the neck, it’s obvious that that’s what the deciding factor was in causing his death. I don’t think he would have been dead without the knee to the neck.
Lurker do you have a source saying that “putting the knee over the neck/shoulder was allowed by their police department”?
By the way, there were 2 autopsies…
btw you just LIED and must be permanently banned.
rr AND lurker AND pill …
HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT AND WILL BE PERMANENTLY BANNED!
“Lurker do you have a source saying that “putting the knee over the neck/shoulder was allowed by their police department”?”
It was reported at the time. Why else would he do that you idiot?
I’m not a walking atlas of Minneapolis police code, go look it up yourself.
“References”
Fuck off please.
Also I really don’t care about George Floyd. Who gives a shit? This is what triggers you to comment? Does any of this mean anything? Can we move on to something that doesn’t involve one likely asshole (a member of the modern police force) with a worthless criminal?
It’s just sad that they can’t even get one genuine example of white supremacy and that anyone can poke holes in every BLM martyr story. That’s how criminal African Americans are in America.
Why don’t you respond to my argument about discrete information?
Also go fuck yourself for saying “good riddance” about the death of Lynn. Whine about commenters making fun of you for having a half-black baby yet you say stuff like that. But I’m sure Lynn was evil so it’s all OK right? Cuck.
Mugabe,
Eat a bag of shite. Learn how to communicate normally.
“Although even if the levels of drugs in his system at the time interacted wkth Chauvin’s knee to the neck, it’s obvious that that’s what the deciding factor was in causing his death”
OK then go and deal with all of the world’s drug-addled 6’5” criminals yourself, you big boy. Or does that interfere with your gay blog?
The police chief said that Chauvin’s use-of-force was unjustified. Also:
“Lt. Johnny Mercil, who has been in charge of teaching the use of force in the Minneapolis Police Department’s training division, says former officer Derek Chauvin’s use of his knee on George Floyd’s neck is not a technique the police teach when instructing officers how to restrain people.
Mercil is the latest in a string of police officials who are testifying about the department’s training and Chauvin’s use of force against Floyd, who died in police custody last May. Chauvin is facing murder charges in the death.
Displaying a photo of Chauvin holding his knee on Floyd’s neck and looking up at a bystander, prosecutor Steven Schleicher asked Mercil, “Is this an MPD-trained neck restraint?” “No sir,” Mercil replied.”
There’s nothing to respond to— “discrete information” isn’t a unit of measurement.
It’s a good thing that Lynn is finally dead. 70 years of pushing racist pseudoscience.
What fixes 140 points of IQ? How many “quantums of information” is 1 IQ point? How many IQ points is 1 “quantum of information”? What is the rule by which we can assign numerals to psychological traits?
My point about hypothetical and latent constructs regarding psychometrics in my previous comment was valid—they’re by definition unobservable. If they’re unobservable, then we can’t measure them. This doesn’t even speak to the fact that the so called hypothesized, latent construct may not even exist. Psychometrics is a bullshit-laden field, and they don’t even know how to measure what they claim to. Your little spats about “quantums of information” is pretty much irrelevant to me, as I’m responding to psychometricians and how they claim to be measuring something that’s obviously immaterial.
If they’re unobservable, then we can’t measure them.
Intelligence is not observable but intelligent behavior is. So that’s what we measure. Obviously if someone couldn’t move or speak, we’d have no way of observing what their mind can do and an IQ test could not be given.
“Intelligence is not observable but intelligent behavior is.” – Equivocation
“So that’s what we measure” – What’s the object of measurement and measurement unit?
1: If X (psychological trait) is not directly observable, then we cannot measure it solely through observable behavior.
2: X (psychological traits) is not directly observable.
C: So we cannot measure X (psychological traits) through observable behavior.
How can you liken your fallacy-ridden passage to IQ test-taking? Again, Ceci’s study rears it’s head, in any case.
If height were not directly measurable we could still measure it by measuring shadow length. So your first statement is wrong thus falsifying the syllogism.
Measurement units represent and quantify fundamental physical properties of objects and phenomena in the natural world.
P1: For something to be considered a measurement unit, it must have a clear and universally accepted definition in the scientific community.
P2: “Quantums of information” does not have a clear and universally accepted definition in the scientific community.
From P1 and P2 I can deduce: P2′: “Quantums of information” isn’t a valid measurement unit since it lacks a clear and universally accepted definition in science (psychology, for this discussion).
P3: Measurement units are established based on rigorous scientific principles and are used to quantify physical properties or phenomena with standard and consistent units.
P4: “Quantums of information” does not conform to the established principles of measuring physical properties or phenomena with standard and consistent units.
From P3 and P4 I can deduce: P4′ “Quantums of information” doesn’t conform to the established principles of measuring physical properties or phenomena with standard and consistent units.
C: Therefore, “quantums of information” isn’t a measurement unit. (inferred from P2′, P4′)
QED
I’ll read all that later but I guarantee you it does not address my argument. You keep saying “quantums of information” in quotations as if I’m not referring to something obviously real. Call it whatever you want, it is discrete information.
Things either exist or don’t exist, in some form with some definition or not. If something doesn’t exist, it doesn’t exist. If it doesn’t have any well-defined structure or meaning to anything else, it doesn’t have meaning at all and hence is indistinguishable from nonexistence.
All things in the universe have existence and meaning.
Therefore they are discrete.
You can’t acknowledge that so there is no point in talking about measurement units.
“Displaying a photo of Chauvin holding his knee on Floyd’s neck and looking up at a bystander, prosecutor Steven Schleicher asked Mercil, “Is this an MPD-trained neck restraint?” “No sir,” Mercil replied.””
Oh yes, that is amazing evidence that Chauvin was never trained to do that. Even though he is a cop and literally did that. I wonder where he got the move? Was he a professional wrestler?
Hmmm. I didn’t realize what some guy said about it being a MPD-trained restraint was evidence. If that’s the case, then IQ must be real because a lot of people say it’s real!
“Psychometrics is a bullshit-laden field, and they don’t even know how to measure what they claim to. Your little spats about “quantums of information” is pretty much irrelevant to me, as I’m responding to psychometricians and how they claim to be measuring something that’s obviously immaterial.”
They are not little “spats” (your the guy who literally brings syllogisms to internet debates). I’m explaining it in the most specific way I can. Other people, including Melo, understand that information exists and that some people can process more of it. It’s not something I made up.
“My point about hypothetical and latent constructs regarding psychometrics in my previous comment was valid—they’re by definition unobservable.”
You don’t believe intelligence is quantifiable, which is a separate argument from whether it is measurable like temperature is, which is furthermore a separate argument from whether it is at least indirectly measurable as PP is pointing out.
Discrete information processing shows you how intelligence is quantifiable.
“How many IQ points is 1 “quantum of information”? What is the rule by which we can assign numerals to psychological traits?”
I already gave you rules.
If it’s the same type of information, but more of it, you could say that person is more intelligent. (If I can memorize a longer number sequence).
If there are different types of information, but you can process more of them than someone else, you are more intelligent. (If I can process more separate algorithms and apply them to a problem.)
Anyone with two brain cells to rub together (by the way, two is more than one!) can see how this is the type of thing IQ tests are measuring. More of the same type of information processing, or more of multiple types.
“2: X (psychological traits) is not directly observable.
C: So we cannot measure X (psychological traits) through observable behavior.”
You can measure if someone might be angry, sad, jealous, etc. because you know those feelings exist, and you know what triggers them. Just as you know that information processing and thinking exists.
“Measurement units represent and quantify fundamental physical properties of objects and phenomena in the natural world.”
Again, you need to prove any substantial difference between the meta-substance that encompasses physical properties and mental properties. Both are fundamentally the same type of thing (information). Or you need to show how mental traits or information is immune to measurement.
“P1: For something to be considered a measurement unit, it must have a clear and universally accepted definition in the scientific community.
P2: “Quantums of information” does not have a clear and universally accepted definition in the scientific community.”
Appeal to authority.
Do you need the scientific community to confirm whether your parents or your wife loves you? (By the way, even if you think you can’t quantify “love”, the fact that you are saying it either exists or not is a type of measurement. Just a binary one. The measurement unit is itself.)
“From P1 and P2 I can deduce: P2′: “Quantums of information” isn’t a valid measurement unit since it lacks a clear and universally accepted definition in science (psychology, for this discussion).”
How much clearer of a definition can I give?
“P3: Measurement units are established based on rigorous scientific principles and are used to quantify physical properties or phenomena with standard and consistent units.
P4: “Quantums of information” does not conform to the established principles of measuring physical properties or phenomena with standard and consistent units.”
Everything I’m saying is apriori true. All you have to do is think about what the words mean and evaluate it. Just imagine my name is Lurkerstein and I’m sure you will have no trouble.
You’re saying that discrete information does not conform to established principles of measuring physical properties? Do you realize all of those things are made up of discrete information?
“Displaying a photo of Chauvin holding his knee on Floyd’s neck and looking up at a bystander, prosecutor Steven Schleicher asked Mercil, “Is this an MPD-trained neck restraint?” “No sir,” Mercil replied.”
RR is a genius who believes no one in law enforcement lies or doesn’t know what they’re talking about.
Nevermind the fact that this was an extremely contentious public case. Nevermind the fact that the whole case and BLM movement was BASED on the fact that law enforcement are corrupt. Nevermind the fact that the whole existence of civil rights is BASED on assuming that people will act selfishlessly for themselves or their group.
RR believes no one lies or doesn’t know what they’re talking about (when it suits the white cuck libtard agenda).
“Again, you need to prove any substantial difference between the meta-substance that encompasses physical properties and mental properties. Both are fundamentally the same type of thing (information).”
I should have said you need to show that there is no meta-substance that is the measurable substance. Because I see both mental and the physical as measurable and part of the same meta-substance (which is informational), given that they are comparable and contrastable and share many other properties that information shares (such as quantifiability).
“They are not little “spats” (your the guy who literally brings syllogisms to internet debates). I’m explaining it in the most specific way I can.”
Yes they are. Again: I’m responding to psychometricians, they don’t have a specified measured object, object of measurement and measurement unit for IQ. This is a fact. Your attempted, unintelligible co-opting of phrase to use as a measurement unit doesn’t make any sense, as my argument shows.
Again: Psychometricians talk about hypothetical, latent constructs. My arguments are to them, not to lurker. When I ask for the specified measured object, object of measurement and measurement unit for IQ, I’m asking for research papers which articulate that, and also an articulation from those papers on what those properties are.
“which is furthermore a separate argument from whether it is at least indirectly measurable as PP is pointing out”
That was a mere equivocation.
“I already gave you rules.
If it’s the same type of information, but more of it, you could say that person is more intelligent. (If I can memorize a longer number sequence).
If there are different types of information, but you can process more of them than someone else, you are more intelligent. (If I can process more separate algorithms and apply them to a problem.)”
Imagine thinking this is an answer to the question at hand. Nevermind the fact that, as I’ve been repeating, the tests are built based on certain a priori assumptions, which have changed in the past (as I’ve cited from Terman and Hilliard). What do you think I mean by “rules” here?
“Again, you need to prove any substantial difference between the meta-substance that encompasses physical properties and mental properties. Both are fundamentally the same type of thing (information). Or you need to show how mental traits or information is immune to measurement.”
I’ve shown this exhaustively—the mental is irreducible to the physical, only physical things can be measured, so the mental can’t be measured.
“Appeal to authority.”
That’s not an appeal to authority at all.
“How much clearer of a definition can I give?”
It’s not why you “can give”, it’s what’s in the psychometric literature—I don’t care about some term you co-opted that doesn’t even make sense in context as my argument shows.
“Everything I’m saying is apriori true.”
Obviously not—my argument is valid and sound and shows that “quantums of information” isn’t a measurement unit.
“RR is a genius who believes no one in law enforcement lies or doesn’t know what they’re talking about.”
So is it an established restraint hold behind closed doors and not to the public?
“Because I see both mental and the physical as measurable”
This if false, since they need to be identical (share identity) and due to Leibniz’s law, I can reject that claim
By the way, this paper cites CAS2 (4.5 point difference) and KABC-II (5 point difference) as showing way smaller gaps B-W than WISC, S-B and WJ.
https://www.mdpi.com/2079-3200/11/6/126
I can cite specific tests and references for my arguments. You have to co-opt a phrase, claim it’s a measurement unit and that it, when I’m quite obviously asking for what the psychometric literature says about the specified measured object, object of measurement and measurement unit for IQ, not what lurkerstein says about it.
“Yes they are. Again: I’m responding to psychometricians, they don’t have a specified measured object, object of measurement and measurement unit for IQ. This is a fact. Your attempted, unintelligible co-opting of phrase to use as a measurement unit doesn’t make any sense, as my argument shows.”
It’s not a co-opting of a phrase, I’ve never heard the phrase. Quantum is just the smallest measurable amount of something.
“Again: Psychometricians talk about hypothetical, latent constructs. My arguments are to them, not to lurker. When I ask for the specified measured object, object of measurement and measurement unit for IQ, I’m asking for research papers which articulate that, and also an articulation from those papers on what those properties are.”
My arguments are about what IQ and intelligence is, not about what some specific person wrote in some specific paper.
“That was a mere equivocation.”
What?
“Imagine thinking this is an answer to the question at hand. Nevermind the fact that, as I’ve been repeating, the tests are built based on certain a priori assumptions, which have changed in the past (as I’ve cited from Terman and Hilliard). What do you think I mean by “rules” here?”
“What is the rule by which we can assign numerals to psychological traits?”
I’m explaining how we assign quantifiability to psychological traits. You already know how they’re normed.
You are asking me to describe exactly what correlates to one point of IQ, when you don’t acknowledge that psychological traits are quantifiable and measurable (despite it being true apriori). So basically you are asking me to map the entirety of human intelligence, and basically solve probably every problem known to mankind in mathematical form, instead of admitting that intelligence is indirectly measurable.
“Again, you need to prove any substantial difference between the meta-substance that encompasses physical properties and mental properties. Both are fundamentally the same type of thing (information). Or you need to show how mental traits or information is immune to measurement.”
“I’ve shown this exhaustively—the mental is irreducible to the physical, only physical things can be measured, so the mental can’t be measured.”
You haven’t shown it, you repeated your conclusion. Saying that mental and physical words are not the same is not showing that they are not measurable, and it doesn’t show them as ultimately separate substances.
“That’s not an appeal to authority at all.”
When I’m giving you apriori arguments about intelligence being information processing, yes it is. I don’t care whether psychometricians know explicitly that whether they are measuring is information processing, as they clearly implicitly know it. Hint: That’s why IQ is so applicable to other areas of life and is so stable. If they weren’t measuring something similar that was real, it wouldn’t be. I’m just telling you, in more metaphysical language, what it is.
“It’s not why you “can give”, it’s what’s in the psychometric literature—I don’t care about some term you co-opted that doesn’t even make sense in context as my argument shows.”
I’m telling you what psychometricians are measuring, and I’m telling you what I mean. What the fuck else could you want?
“Everything I’m saying is apriori true.”
“Obviously not—my argument is valid and sound and shows that “quantums of information” isn’t a measurement unit.”
Stop repeating “quantum of information” as if that’s the only way I’ve phrased discrete, countable information. This is why you are autistic. Can’t see the actual argument past the way people phrase it.
“So is it an established restraint hold behind closed doors and not to the public?”
I’m saying the guy lied or is an idiot. There are restraint techniques used like this in law enforcement. Why else would Chauvin do it? Did he do it too close to the neck or something? Maybe. Maybe not. Was this case obviously another case where people twisted the truth as much as possible to make the black criminal not look like a criminal and the cops look racist? Yes, by all objective measurements.
I’m done arguing with you in any good faith way because you are clearly a hypocritical ideologically driven piece of shite. Good day.
@Lurker
Intelligence cannot be defined.
The mental cannot be measurable by definition.
Thus the brain has nothing to do with intelligence.
Do not interact with RR anymore lurker.
He does not get that intelligence can be “relatively” measured.
I am sorry pp but this blog has died.
“It’s not a co-opting of a phrase,”
Yea it is. Especially with the other phrases you’ve used for it (which mean the same thing as “quantums of information”).
“My arguments are about what IQ and intelligence is, not about what some specific person wrote in some specific paper.”
IQ is a mere proxy of one’s life experiences and their proximity to the middle class due to how the tests are normed and constructed.
They claim to be measuring something. But they don’t have the measurement unit the need to have. They also don’t have a specified measured object nor object of measurement. They’ve never articulated it. They claim their measure is like thermometers/temperature. That’s the issue.
““That was a mere equivocation.”
What?”
What PP said.
“I’m explaining how we assign quantifiability to psychological traits. You already know how they’re normed.
No, it isn’t an appeal to authority. I merely stated how a measurement unit is standardized. Your co-option isn’t a measurement unit.
By the way, funny that you say that “intelligence is information processing”, since on this very view that you hold, it was tested and found that there were knowledge deficits due to bias and when this bias was eliminated, they scored equally. Fagan and Holland state that intelligence is information processing and that knowledge depends on information processing. (By the way, they found no support for Jensen’s “default hypothesis”, that group differences in IQ have the same genetic and environmental causes as individual differences. Jensen assumes that blacks and whites have equal opportunity for exposure to information and thusly knowledge (outright false, since they are different cultural groups and different cultural groups have different knowledge bases). Fagan assumes that they blacks haven’t had the exposures to the information to be able to answer the questions (a much more valid assumption, given Vygotsky’s theory). Thus, based on this view, these tests are nothing more than mere white middle-class knowledge and skills tests. Again: There’s nothing being measured, it just shows how well someone does on a test of items chosen for practical reasons. The other reference along with the Fagan and Holland (2007) reference and how we know IQ tests are constructed points to one thing and one thing only: IQ tests are tests of class-specific knowledge and skills. Those Fagan and Holland papers actually are devestating for the hereditarian, and they show that my position is true.
“That’s why it’s so applicable to other areas of life”
Like where?
“and is so stable”
What do you mean by “stable”? The Wilson effect?
“as if that’s the only way I’ve phrased”
That obviously gets to the underlying idea—I’ve asked you many times what the measurement unit is and you said “discrete information” and “quantums of information”, but that’s NOT a measurement unit.
“the guy lied or he’s an idiot”
So is there a secret hold given behind doors and then their PR they give the public?
“So not interact with RR anymore lurker”
Haha what you said doesn’t follow at all.
What fixes 140 points of IQ, AK?
P. S.
The CAS2, KABC-II, and the Fagan and Holland test assume an information processing view, and—I’m sure shockingly for you—there are no to substantially reduced gaps in the results of those tests between races, which points to the conclusion I’ve been arguing for years—IQ tests are mere (middle-class) knowledge tests.
Let’s be real here—my working framework explains how and why groups differ in IQ, they are exposed to different knowledge bases and they have different experiences. So on the view I’ve just articulated (Fagan and Holland view and others), cultural bias explains why blacks score less than whites. It’s an empirical fact (Fagan and Holland, 2002, 2007).
“Saying that mental and physical words are not the same is not showing that they are not measurable, and it doesn’t show them as ultimately separate substances.”
This is actually a fallacy that RR commits quite frequently. One I addressed years ago in my post about the Neural properties of the mind. He has yet to address it.
One example that I really enjoy is as follows:
P: Water is knowable without a microscope
P2: H20 is not knowable without a microscope
C: Water is not H2O
The idea is that for two things to be identical, they must share all properties. However, this ignores the fact that discrepancies between the descriptions of physical and mental states (or any concept) do not necessarily entail that the two cannot be identical in reference.
@Lurker
RR is using information processing in a different way than how neuroscientists use it. That is to say “bandwidth” not knowledge which is just a memory of some kind of factual causal inference (dogs bark, cat meow).
“Bandwith” is what gives you the ability to parallel process data in such a way as to find relationships between the data sample. True causal inference is connecting all relationships in parallel to the fullest extent your intelligence can muster. So some people find it easy to understand new relationships well others find it hard because they are connecting different causal structures at different rates. That is why I call abstraction the ability to infer from a number of symbols the nature of reality. Symbols represent a compressed structure of causality in the real world.
IQ is a good measure of “Bandwidth” but poor at measuring abstraction. RR does not like the word “mental manipulation” i.e. he does not believe working memory exists. Working memory is the key trait of parallelism in the brain and is what allows for bigger abstractions to take place when experiencing reality.
I was reading about a second lesser extinction event in earth history in the Economist. The one where the wooly mammoth and the sabretooth tigers and so on died. They don’t know why it happened strangely.
I think an extinction event is actually pretty possible again. In which case you could see something completely different from humans emerge.
In which case you could see something completely different from humans emerge
Give it up! Your mamma’s never coming back for you!