[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]

/pol/ - Politically Incorrect

Politics, news, and current events

Catalog

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4
Max filesize is 8 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 5 per post.


YOU COULD HAVE PREVENTED THIS

File: 1455100004263.jpg (35.58 KB, 333x499, 333:499, image.jpg)

fbfb05 No.4917793

What evidence is there than races are different, that race actually exists? share some links please. Also post links to places where the out of Africa theory is debunked, where Polygenism is supported.

I'd really like to learn more about it for a class I'm doing and for my own englightenment

Why do scientists deny it? Why do a majority of scientists and their research contradict it? I dont know, I need evidence for the race science side.

ebd7fd No.4917799

>>>/pdfs/ has a shitload of info for you to study.


ebd7fd No.4917807

>>4917799

Forgot >>>/polarchive/

And I`m going to be rude and check myself. Double dubs bitches!


acbed4 No.4917808


6ed521 No.4917998

The genetic distance between whites and black Africans is greater than the genetic distance between dogs and wolves, for example. Dogs and wolves are completely different subspecies. You don't need more evidence than that, but leftists will never accept it.


95cefe No.4918045

>>>4918038

>>4918038

misposted it, but is interesting.


3f51a1 No.4918067

File: 1455104299325.jpg (48.56 KB, 500x292, 125:73, ew girls.jpg)


077f37 No.4918072

Anyone that doesn't believe in races ought to get a bone marrow transplant from a nigger.


a287b8 No.4918091

http://pastebin.com/brTWZwPr

Creating a Foundation

Genetic Structure of Europeans: A View from the North-East (goes into detail on genetic differences among Europeans and confirms a wide genetic gap between Europeans, Africans, and Asians)

>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2675054/

We'll come back to this one…

Genetic Variation, Classification, and Race (a similar older study on genetic groups)

>http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v36/n11s/full/ng1435.html

The Inconvenient Science of Racial DNA Profiling (describes evidence that race can be determined from DNA alone, implying that it is based on biology)

>http://155.97.32.9/~bbenham/2510%20Spring%2009/The%20Inconvenient%20Science%20of%20Racial%20DNA%20Profiling.pdf

http://behavior.org/resources/113.pdf?origin=publication_detail

>The Race Concept: A Defense

http://www.mediafire.com/?nde9krd75h1vh8a/

>Race: A Social Destruction of a Biological Concept

http://www.mediafire.com/?bj5g10gjdrvi849/

>Is Homo sapiens Polytypic? Human Taxonomic Diversity and its Implications

http://www.mediafire.com/?m78qfc7qyccm12c/

>The Genomic Challenge to the Social Construction of Race

http://thenatureofrace.files.wordpress.com/2014/01/thenatureofrace1-01.pdf

>The Nature of Race

———————————————————


a287b8 No.4918099

>>4918091

Pastebin Table of Contents

Part 2: Brain Differences Between Whites and Blacks

Part 3: Intelligence

Part 4: Behavior and Development

Part 5: Social Success

Part 6: Body/Bone Structure

Part 7: Miscellaneous

———————————————————

Consider the following…

Genetic diversity of dog breeds: between-breed diversity, breed assignation and conservation approaches

> http:// tinyurl com/pvcbzo8

> http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB4QFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.saunalahti.fi%2Fraiaho7%2FLeroy2009_2.pdf&ei=V9KiVMCzNNKpyATg5YCgAw&usg=AFQjCNEV503SN24i75lf1ziZI5fKcnt3qw&sig2=wcKbpE7QkvjiRwuNxwOGnA

Including…

Table S1: Analyses of FST values and Da distances of the 61 dog breeds and 14 wolves compared in pairs

> http:// tinyurl com/o6ofag2

> http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1111/j.1365-2052.2008.01843.x/asset/supinfo/AGE_1843_sm_TableS1.pdf?v=1&s=d0cb9b449f87b8b370aa5089c43f734b42ef1056

… And remember when I said we'd get back to this?

Genetic Structure of Europeans: A View from the North-East (goes into detail on genetic differences among Europeans and confirms a wide genetic gap between Europeans, Africans, and Asians)

>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2675054/

The first article represents genetic information regarding dog breeds and variation between popuations (as represents by Fst values in Table S1), which can be paired with the second article (containing similar Fst value data for human ethnic/genetic-variant populations) for the purposes of comparative examination of inter-population human genelines.

A statistically significant degree of genetic variation in such human genelines is emergent.

For example, comparative variation between the examined Sub-Saharan African population (Nigerian Yoruba) and European population (Germanic) - represented via HapMap data groups - is shown to be approximately equivalent in comparative scope to variation between canine genelines exhibiting extensive physiological and (consequentially) psychological/behavioral variation, for example, Coton de Tulear and Great Dane genetic lines.

———————————————————


a287b8 No.4918101

>>4918099

> http://therightstuff.biz/2015/09/02/race-and-iq-genes-that-predict-racial-intelligence-differences/

> For the past century, psychologists have recorded racial differences in intelligence test scores showing that Asians score higher than Whites who in turn score higher than Blacks. The causes of these intelligence differences have been heavily debated.

> One challenge often put to the so-called “hereditarians,” those who say that the gap is significantly caused by genetics, is to name the specific genes which make some races smarter than others. Until recently, this has been impossible due to technological limitations and so hereditarians have relied on less direct evidence when making their case. However, in recent years, new research has come out which has pinpointed several genes that are probably involved in racial intelligence differences. This post will describe this research and explain why what has been found thus far provides powerful evidence for the hereditarian viewpoint.

> The Genes

> The research comes from 3 papers which looked at how 14 alleles (gene variants) which were previously associated with intelligence, or a proxy for intelligence, vary by race (Piffer 2013), (Piffer 2014), (Piffer and Kirkeggard 2014). In a sample of 101,069 10 of these 14 alleles were each found to predict higher than average educational attainment (Rietveld et al. 2013). The predictive ability of each allele was then retested again across 12 samples totaling 25,290 people. All 10 alleles were found to be associated with intelligence in multiple samples, though the the associations were not always statistically significant. Importantly, the samples consisted of only white people, which means that no genes arbitrarily associated with race will be falsely thought to associate with education just because race does. What were the alleles associated with biologically?

> These genes were only shown to directly associate with education, but there is good reason to think that they predict intelligence as well. For one thing, intelligence highly correlates with education. Secondly, previous studies that have sought out alleles associated with education have found that they predict intelligence test scores even better than they do education.

> The other four alleles come from more varied sources. The first is a version of the NPTN gene, which is involved in how the brain changes itself (neural outgrowth and synaptic plasticity). A particular allele of this gene has previously been found to predict lower IQ scores and less cortical thickness. The second allele comes from the FNB1L gene and has been associated with high intelligence across multiple studies. The third allele is a version of the CHRM2 gene and has been associated with high intelligence in 4 separate studies. Finally, in a meta-analysis of 77 previous studies, a version of the APOE4 gene has been found to predict better memory, perceptual speed, and general cognitive functioning. Each of the studies involving these four genes used different sets of controls and statistical adjustments. Because they have been found to associate with intelligence so consistently, a causal relationship between the allele and intelligence is likely.


a287b8 No.4918104

>>4918101

> The Databases

> Data on the frequency of each allele across different racial populations was taken from three databses: ALFRED, HapMap, and 1000 Genomes. Each of these databases collects genetic data taken from samples all over the world. Combined, they have genetic samples from well over 100 distinct populations. They are highly reputable, and having access to three different databases allows these findings to be replicated multiple times. (The first ten alleles were tested across all three databases while the other set of four were only tested across ALFRED and 1000 Genomes.)


a287b8 No.4918107

>>4918104

> The Results

> The 14 alleles were found to be patterned such that, based on this genetic data alone, Asians would be predicted to have the highest IQs followed by Whites and ending with Blacks.

These differences were statistically significant and were replicated across all three databases.

> More extraordinary was the finding that all 14 alleles differed between Blacks and Whites in a way that would predict that Blacks would be less intelligent.

> This result strongly suggests that the hereditarian viewpoint is the correct one. The egalitarian viewpoint would predict that each allele should have, on average, a 50% probability of existing in a greater frequency among either Blacks or Whites.

Therefore the probability of the first 14 alleles examined all favoring Whites would be a mere 1 in 16,284.

> Obviously, the probability of this happening under the hereditarian model is much higher.

> Given the logic of science, this clearly suggests that the hereditarian viewpoint should be favored: we have two competing hypotheses one of which would make an outcome extremely unlikely and the other which would make it probable. We have found that said outcome has materialized and, on this basis, can declare one hypothesis, egalitarianism, highly unlikely; and the other hypothesis, hereditarianism, probable.


a287b8 No.4918111


a287b8 No.4918119

>>4918111

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mainstream_Science_on_Intelligence

Mainstream Science on Intelligence was a public statement issued by a group of academic researchers in fields associated with intelligence testing that claimed to present those findings widely accepted in the expert community. It was originally published in the Wall Street Journal on December 13, 1994 as a response to what the authors viewed as the inaccurate and misleading reports made by the media regarding academic consensus on the results of intelligence research in the wake of the appearance of The Bell Curve by Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray earlier the same year. It was drafted by professor of psychology Linda Gottfredson, sent to 131 researchers,[1] and signed by 52 university professors specializing in intelligence and related fields, including around one third of the editorial board of the journal Intelligence,[2] in which it was subsequently reprinted in 1997. The 1997 editorial prefaced a special volume of Intelligence with contributions from a wide array of psychologists.

Richard D. Arvey, University of Minnesota

Thomas J. Bouchard, Jr., University of Minnesota

John B. Carroll, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Raymond B. Cattell, University of Hawaii

David B. Cohen, University of Texas at Austin

Rene V. Dawis, University of Minnesota

Douglas K. Detterman, Case Western Reserve University

Marvin Dunnette, University of Minnesota

Hans Eysenck, University of London

Jack M. Feldman, Georgia Institute of Technology

Edwin A. Fleishman, George Mason University

Grover C. Gilmore, Case Western Reserve University

Robert A. Gordon, Johns Hopkins University

Linda S. Gottfredson, University of Delaware

Robert L. Greene, Case Western Reserve University

Richard J. Haier, University of California, Irvine

Garrett Hardin, University of California, Santa Barbara

Robert Hogan, University of Tulsa

Joseph M. Horn, University of Texas at Austin

Lloyd G. Humphreys, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

John E. Hunter, Michigan State University

Seymour W. Itzkoff, Smith College

Douglas N. Jackson, University of Western Ontario

James J. Jenkins, University of South Florida

Arthur R. Jensen, University of California, Berkeley

Alan S. Kaufman, University of Alabama

Nadeen L. Kaufman, California School of Professional Psychology at San Diego

Timothy Z. Keith, Alfred University

Nadine Lambert, University of California, Berkeley

John C. Loehlin, University of Texas at Austin

David Lubinski, Iowa State University

David T. Lykken, University of Minnesota

Richard Lynn, University of Ulster at Coleraine

Paul E. Meehl, University of Minnesota

R. Travis Osborne, University of Georgia

Robert Perloff, University of Pittsburgh

Robert Plomin, Institute of Psychiatry, London

Cecil R. Reynolds, Texas A&M University

David C. Rowe, University of Arizona

J. Philippe Rushton, psychologist, University of Western Ontario

Vincent Sarich, University of Auckland New Zealand

Sandra Scarr, University of Virginia

Frank L. Schmidt, University of Iowa

Lyle F. Schoenfeldt, Texas A&M University

James C. Sharf, George Washington University

Herman Spitz, former director E.R. Johnstone Training and Research Center, Bordentown, N.J.

Julian C. Stanley, Johns Hopkins University

Del Thiessen, University of Texas at Austin

Lee A. Thompson, Case Western Reserve University

Robert M. Thorndike, Western Washington University

Philip Anthony Vernon, University of Western Ontario

Lee Willerman, University of Texas at Austin


a287b8 No.4918122

>>4918119

Conclusions[edit]

The letter to the Wall Street Journal set out 25 conclusions:[3]

1."Intelligence is a very general mental capability … it reflects a broader and deeper capability for comprehending our surroundings …"

2."Intelligence, so defined, can be measured, and intelligence tests measure it well. They are among the most accurate (in technical terms, reliable and valid) of all psychological tests and assessments."

3."While there are different types of intelligence tests, they all measure the same intelligence."

4."The spread of people along the IQ continuum … can be represented well by the … ‘normal curve'."

5."Intelligence tests are not culturally biased"

6."The brain processes underlying intelligence are still little understood"

7."Members of all racial-ethnic groups can be found at every IQ level"

8."The bell curve for whites is centered roughly around IQ 100; the bell curve for American blacks roughly around 85; and those for different subgroups of Hispanics roughly midway between those for whites and blacks. The evidence is less definitive for exactly where above IQ 100 the bell curves for Jews and Asians are centered"

9."IQ is strongly related, probably more so than any other single measurable human trait, to many important educational, occupational, economic, and social outcomes … Whatever IQ tests measure, it is of great practical and social importance"

10."A high IQ is an advantage because virtually all activities require some reasoning and decision-making"

11."The practical advantages of having a higher IQ increase as life’s settings become more complex"

12."Differences in intelligence certainly are not the only factor affecting performance in education, training, and complex jobs … but intelligence is often the most important"

13."Certain personality traits, special talents, [etc] are important … in many jobs, but they have narrower (or unknown) applicability or ‘transferability’ across tasks and settings compared with general intelligence"

14."Heritability estimates range from 0.4 to 0.8 … indicating genetics plays a bigger role than environment in creating IQ differences"

15."Members of the same family also tend to differ substantially in intelligence"

16."That IQ may be highly heritable does not mean that it is not affected by the environment … IQs do gradually stabilize during childhood, however, and generally change little thereafter"

17."Although the environment is important in creating IQ differences, we do not know yet how to manipulate it"

18."Genetically caused differences are not necessarily irremediable"

19."There is no persuasive evidence that the IQ bell curves for different racial-ethnic groups are converging"

20."Racial-ethnic differences in IQ bell curves are essentially the same when youngsters leave high school as when they enter first grade … black 17-year-olds perform, on the average, more like white 13-year-olds"

21."The reasons that blacks differ among themselves in intelligence appear to be the same as those for why whites … differ among themselves"

22."There is no definitive answer as to why bell curves differ across racial-ethnic groups. The reasons for these IQ differences between groups may be markedly different from the reasons for why individuals differ among themselves within any particular group"

23."Racial-ethnic differences are somewhat smaller but still substantial for individuals from the same socio-economic backgrounds"

24."Almost all Americans who identify themselves as black have white ancestors – the white admixture is about 20% … research on intelligence relies on self-classification into distinct racial categories"

25."The research findings neither dictate nor preclude any particular social policy, because they can never determine our goals. They can, however, help us estimate the likely success and side-effects of pursuing those goals via different means."


a287b8 No.4918142

>>4918122

> http://jenjdanna.com/blog/2012/7/10/forensics-101-race-determination-based-on-the-skull.html

> http://ir.lib.uwo.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1137&context=totem

> ((())))

Important part:

> within the field of forensic osteology, determining race from a skull is useful in its ability to aid in identifying human remains.

> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3351476

> Racial identification from the midfacial skeleton with special reference to American Indians and whites.


a287b8 No.4918215

File: 1455106319796-0.jpg (83.39 KB, 850x400, 17:8, Dawkins on Race.jpg)

File: 1455106319797-1.jpg (89.33 KB, 500x633, 500:633, 1423040806642.jpg)

File: 1455106319797-2.jpg (47.6 KB, 399x720, 133:240, 1418115622655.jpg)

>>4917793

> Why do scientists deny it?

Scientists are not Gods.

Stop thinking of 'science' as this certainty, science is an on-going process, and basically nothing can be assumed to be genuinely certain if one espouses the academic integrity of a true scientist.

It is entirely possible, though perhaps not so probable, that a year, 5 years, 10 years from now, a revolutionary condition of understanding might arise as to utterly change society at large, and your - our - perspective of the world, and in the process dispelling notions long held as 'scientific truths' by the handfull.

> http://narrative.ly/stories/nick-brown-smelled-bull/

Not Gods, no; most are merely rent-seekers.

Even the 'hard sciences' are rife with such nonsense.

… That said, why would scientists deny race in the current climate?

I don't know… Why don't you ask James Watson, eh?

> On October 25, 2007, Watson was compelled to retire as chancellor of the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory on New York's Long Island and from its board of directors, after he had been quoted in The Times the previous week as saying "[I am] inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa [because] all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours—whereas all the testing says not really." He went on to say that despite the desire that all human beings should be equal, "people who have to deal with black employees find this not true."

> Sale of Nobel Prize Medal

> In 2014, he decided to auction off his Nobel prize medal in view of his diminished income after the 2007 incident and to use part of the funds raised by the sale to support scientific research.

> The medal sold at auction at Christie's in December 2014 for US$4.1 million.

> Watson intended to contribute the proceeds to conservation work in Long Island and to funding research at Trinity College, Dublin.

> Watson is the first living recipient of the honor to auction the medal.

> The medal was subsequently returned to Watson by the purchaser, Russian tycoon Alisher Usmanov, who stated that Watson deserved the medal and that it was "unacceptable" that he should be compelled to sell it.

That's why.

> Why do a majority of scientists and their research contradict it?

Here you are confused, a majority of scientists and their research contradict the notion that race is NOT a biological fact.

Most scientific evidence, including (and especially), in the 'hard sciences', suggest race is real, that racial clades exist, albeit on a spectrum due to admixture in many places, and that this is a biological, chemical, physical condition, not merely a societal condition, nor one of simple perspective.


000000 No.4918525

>>4917793

>Why do scientists deny it?

Because most scientists aren't scientists. Calling every hack who works in a certain field a scientist is beyond a joke, it a perversion of western language.

Most people in these fields are not in it for the truth but for fun, social standing and money. When the truth threatens these things, as when it comes to differentiating the human species, they turn they backs on truth without a second thought. The absolute majority of people are incapable of being scientists because they are pack animals and it is impossible for them to go against a taboo even when the truth leads would them there. Most of them can't even go against consensus and say "this convention is wrong" unless they a very large group of people already sharing that view to take refuge in.

>Why do a majority of scientists and their research contradict it?

All actually scientific work, meaning things that are falsifiable, confirms that the differences are hard to overestimate. Those who oppose it stay far away from all empirical metrics such as differences in brain anatomy, hormonal levels and so on and either go into bullshit like "social structures" or use deceptive sweeping statements that smooth over any factual difference, like the "more genetic difference within a race than between" fallacy.


e5be25 No.4919387

bump


20e4db No.4922265

Bump

Good info in the thread

Thanks anons


5a6fbb No.4923221

Med student here, theres plenty on the pharmaceutical side of things. ACEi and ARB's are great for asian and white people hypertension while calcium channel blockers and diuretics work better in blacks.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Post a Reply]
[]
[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]