[–] Firevine 0 points 14 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago
The idea of "science" has become a religion to leftists. I hate this because actual scientific theory and study intrigues me, and they've utterly perversified it. They find something that fits their narrative and absolutely worship it. Science being what it is, there will always be further information and findings, which they almost certainly view as heresy. By idolizing what they choose from "science", they become patently anti-science. It's amazing.
[–] HeebyKneegrow 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago (edited ago)
They say they love science not because they live science, but because they want to be viewed as an intellectual which makes them smart and makes them correct.
That's their logic. If they loved science they wouldn't be so confused about gender
[–] BlackSheepBrouhaha 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
"Study shows" = "Once upon a time"
[–] CrudOMatic 2 points 1 point 3 points (+3|-2) ago
The trees and clouds an shit is evidence of my jewish god, goyim. Now blend up with the negroid beasts and become their goyim slave, goy.
[–] AngelofDeath ago
Second box:
"Earth is a globe"
[–] CrudOMatic 0 points 3 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago
Flattards are amazing. Most are dumbasses who fall for Jewish religious tricks, but the hardkoar shills are more definitely than not Operation Mockingbird shills from Edward's AFB.
[–] lacrimamosa 0 points 9 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago
Got myself into a debate about race and IQ recently and they hit me with this article: http://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2017/science-genetics-reshaping-race-debate-21st-century/
I see the Lewenton fallacy there, but didn't have much more than that. My only reply was "because some people are mixed race that means race doesn't exist - because purple is a mix or red and blue, that means red and blue don't exist - because colors are on a spectrum that means colors don't exist."
They stopped replying to me but I wasn't satisfied with my response. Is there anyone here willing to give that article a more thorough takedown?
[–] FPSFairy 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
As others pointed out, that article doesn't really say that race doesn't exist, but let's go down that line of thought: It's true we don't have precise genetic definitions of what constitutes a race. We cannot say "If you have X, Y and Z SNPs, and these genes, then you're Scottish," for example. However, it is no mistake that we can look at someone and have a very good idea of generally where on the globe their ancestors are from, nor is it a mistake that we get a picture in our heads when someone talks about "black people," "asians," "jewish people," etc.
So yes, race is a murky concept when you get right down to it, but realize this: It is DESPITE all this murkiness that these differences still exist, not BECAUSE of it. There are plenty of studies showing that certain SNPs (Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms) are correlated with race and intelligence, so it seems likely to me that providing any genetic definitions of races would strengthen the relationship between the two, not weaken it.
And always be sure to point out that the differences are not just between "black people" and "white people." You can look at various local populations and still observe the same differences. IQ differences between Scottish people and Welsh people, for example, and those are fairly precise ethnicities.
[–] Acerphoon 0 points 6 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago (edited ago)
These jews and kikes really do have a skill to use word salads to mislead the audience.
First of all, Lewontin is obviously an idiot. You got that right. Lewontin has never adressed the fact that there are many species with recognized subspecies which have Fst values LOWER than Humans. You can easily find recognized subspecies which have Fst values lower than humans. Even more, it isn’t hard to find researchers in the literature talking about nonhumans, that they take any Fst value greater than zero as evidence that a population IS a subspecies.
See, for instance: Lorenzen et al. 2007.
Given this, it is clear that most biologists do not actually use Lewontin’s criteria, whatever that is, for subspecies. And given that he has never made any argument for using it, neither should anyone else.
Since then, there has also been more research, which suggested that the Human FST value is actually about twice as large, 12%, as what Lewontin suggested (Elhaik 2012). - This has not altered the stance of Lewontin on races though. And probably won't alter the stance of the author in your article either. No number will.
See, this is another clever tactic. While he says: "there has been no evidence for its effect on intelligence." referring to Neanderthal DNA in particular, he didn't mention that there ARE genes, like RS10119 that DO have an effect on intelligence. And those genes differ between races.
And wile he says, that neanderthals may not have been necessarily more intelligent because they had larger skulls, we do know that brain size and IQ are positively correlated - for which a larger skull would be needed. So although he is correct in what he says, he words it in a clever way to mislead the audience.
[–] lacrimamosa ago
Thanks for looking into it. Something else just occurred to me. How could humans have Neanderthal dna if the definition of species is that they can’t produce fertile offspring?
[–] VicariousJambi 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
Wow this article is pretty poor. Racists aren't saying that we have different hair or heights. It's about generalities. We're not disagreeing that we've come from the same source, rather that we are either "more" evolved or "better" as a baseline.
Just like with that color analogy there are gradients to the races, but the boundary between blue and green still exists.Just like the color analogy is you put whites at "true blue", niggers being "true red" is still a ways off.
Just because we are "more similar" to each other than to a banana or some shit like they like to spout doesn't matter. They are ignoring what they left unsaid. We are still different.
I could list the myriad of differences between the races. I could talk about the heritability of IQ, brain structure / volume differences, bone structure, societies, history, accomplishments, inventions, but that wouldn't matter to whoever posted this as they can't see the forest from the trees. They focus on irrelevant bullshit like hair and skin because they have a fundamental misunderstanding of why racists hate niggers.
They have been judged by their actions the whole time.
Here, because I'm not some liberal or nigger talking out of my ass, have some sources as well. I tend to like to put my best foot forward so to speak.
Variability in Frontotemporal Brain Structure: The Importance of Recruitment of African Americans in Neuroscience Research - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2964318/ - http://archive.li/C8Hmk
The genetic relationships of modern human races - https://archive.is/fsLTo
RACE, INTELLIGENCE, AND THE BRAIN: THE ERRORS AND OMISSIONS OF THE REVISED
EDITION OF S. J. GOULD'S THE MISMEASURE OF MAN - http://www.eugenics.net/papers/rushton.html - http://archive.is/GWNTt
Frontal lobe infograph - https://i.imgtc.ws/8hJO9hY.png
[–] HighEnergyLife ago
https://www.livescience.com/8472-genetic-variations-separate-great-danes-dachshunds.html