User Controls
Apparently we were kings and shit
-
2017-11-21 at 10:44 AM UTC
Originally posted by inb4l0pht Out of Africa has a lot of empirical support and is most likely correct, but it was only the beginning of divergent human evolution. Africans are the original homo sapiens sapiens, Europeans are a new and superior subspecies.
I mean I win either way, if we evolved in europe/many different places then we didn't come from niggers and if we did come out of compton then we are more evolved by simple fact of us having to deal with more/other challenges, works for me. -
2017-11-21 at 11:36 AM UTC
Originally posted by Number13 I mean I win either way, if we evolved in europe/many different places then we didn't come from niggers and if we did come out of compton then we are more evolved by simple fact of us having to deal with more/other challenges, works for me.
not really.
on one hand, it means that both of you are unparalleled creatures and have nothing to do with each other ...
while the other insinuates that the both of you are just as good .... but just not yet. -
2017-11-21 at 11:42 AM UTC
-
2017-11-21 at 1:25 PM UTCOOA or not it is this simple...
1st Ford
2018 Ford
So it doesn't matter if OOA is true or not, white is better. -
2017-11-21 at 2:26 PM UTC
-
2017-11-21 at 3:29 PM UTC
-
2017-11-22 at 12:42 AM UTC
Originally posted by Captain Falcon Not by any biological metric, no.
At the very least, it's an open question and there's a debate to be had, which biologists and geneticists don't want to engage in, or do so disingenuously for pretty obvious political reasons. There are species with less morphological and genetic differentiation than humans (gray wolves for example) that have been divided into several subspecies, so a case can certainly be made for separate population level classification. -
2017-11-22 at 12:47 AM UTC
-
2017-11-22 at 1:27 AM UTC
Originally posted by Captain Falcon There is no evidence for any biological basis for any difference in intelligence etc.
From a strictly biological perspective we hardly know anything about human intelligence, period. The best GWAS on intelligence have only turned up enough genes to explain like 5-10% of the population variance, so we're at least several years away from having the data necessary to definitely answer the IQ question.
The strongest case for the hereditarian hypothesis on race and intelligence is made using social science data, which shows a persistent gap of about 1SD and has arguably ruled out most environmental explanations (at least in modern western countries). I don't have nearly as much confidence in this research as alt-righters though, and I'm waiting for the biological evidence to arrive sometime in the future before I take a strong stance on this specific topic. -
2017-11-22 at 1:32 AM UTC
Originally posted by inb4l0pht From a strictly biological perspective we hardly know anything about human intelligence, period. The best GWAS on intelligence have only turned up enough genes to explain like 5-10% of the population variance, so we're at least several years away from having the data necessary to definitely answer the IQ question.
The strongest case for the hereditarian hypothesis on race and intelligence is made using social science data, which shows a persistent gap of about 1SD and has arguably ruled out most environmental explanations (at least in modern western countries). I don't have nearly as much confidence in this research as alt-righters though, and I'm waiting for the biological evidence to arrive sometime in the future before I take a strong stance on this specific topic.
This is why I said there is no evidence for any biological basis. Once you move outside of the biological evidence, you lose any biological/evolutionary basis for your racism. -
2017-11-22 at 6:43 AM UTC
-
2017-11-22 at 7:38 AM UTC
-
2017-11-22 at 10:25 AM UTC
-
2017-11-22 at 1:39 PM UTC
Originally posted by Captain Falcon There is no evidence for any biological basis for any difference in intelligence etc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Transracial_Adoption_Study
tl:dr - Black children adopted into middle-class/upper-class White families (advantaged environment) showed no increase in average Black IQ.
IQ is certainly not 100% biological, but it absolutely has some genetic basis. -
2017-11-22 at 2:09 PM UTC
-
2017-11-22 at 3:23 PM UTC
Originally posted by 霍比特人说中文不好 The scientific consensus is in support of the OOA theory. If you want to disagree you need to, you know, science.
I would like to point out that if you want to make a point on behalf of science, you need to... you know... science. Not just say "science says ____, so you're wrong". That's a Biblethumper-tier argument. I think we can all agree that there's nothing more embarrassing than a complete layperson arguing against "the truth", but this applies to complete laypeople arguing both for and against scientific consensus.
Post last edited by HTS at 2017-11-22T15:27:04.742810+00:00The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
