The Bell Curve and Scientific Racism

[Anonymous No.3846922]

Alright, we've had a thread going in /lit/ for a few hours now and that really isn't the place, so lets talk about it here. Serious work flying in the face of conventional (liberal) academia, or stupid racist claptrap: you decide!

[Anonymous No.3846934]

>>3846922

the original thread:
>>/lit/2116557

[Anonymous No.3846940]

>>3846934
>>>/lit/2116557

[Anonymous No.3846942]

They spent too long promoting the idea that all races are the same to back down now even though the evidence is contrary. Now they are afraid that admitting this will undermine everything and start a genocide or segregation ect. It's a kind of a shame really, but every generation is wrong at something, and racial equality is it for this one.

[Anonymous No.3846955]

>>3846942
Can you provide any substantial evidence that contradicts the liberal concept of racial equality?

[Anonymous No.3846959]

How does race affect intelligence?

[Anonymous No.3846964]

errenight, this samefaggotry.

[Anonymous No.3846969]

>>3846922

>Serious work flying in the face of conventional (liberal) academia, or stupid racist claptrap: you decide!

>conventional (liberal) academia

>implying a conspiracy of academics

Hoooooh boy.

Okay so there's probably one or two fields of science where that might be likely: medical research and pharmaceuticals, and social psychology. Social psychology is notorious for being full of shit and big pharma has created a gigantic pressure towards biased research and seeing connections where none exists. Neither of these biases are "liberal," however the fuck you want to define that.

As for The Bell Curve itself, Stephen Jay Gould (and the APA) totally ripped them apart. I don't like impugning motive, but when you have a co-author like Murray, who is a member of the anti-science advocacy group, the American Enterprise Institute, then you know that something is fishy here. The other co-author was Richard Hernstein, whose major contribution to psychology had nothing to do with IQ or even intelligence.

What we have here is like a mix between Freakonomics (a pop economist/pyschologist trying to toot his own horn about his pet theories) and The Skeptical Environmentalist (a political scientist who doesn't know what the fuck he's talking about and is too ideological to keep his facts straight).

[Anonymous No.3846973]

>>3846955
Pic related.
The fact that every African run nation is doing poorly despite of it's location is another dead giveaway(e.g. north of africa, south of africa, Haiti, ect.). Along with a noticeable difference in crime rate dependent on race for every single country is another one. Then there is the IQ tests, the SAT tests, and even when accounted for wealth of the participants it still comes out that race plays a crucial role.

People basically have to bury their heads in the sand to ignore this, not unlike religion.

[Anonymous No.3846976]

>>3846955

I'd rather not repost all this:
>>>/lit/2116816

Should be everything you need.

[Anonymous No.3846980]

>>3846942
THANK YOU. I mean, I'm white, and you dont see me complaining that asians are on average smarter than us. I dont know why the african american community cant just accept what is by now clearly basic evolutionary science- genetic drift will cause speciation to occur and differences like in intelligence are bound to be part of that. blacks can also run faster and jump higher, on average so its not like they got the short end of the stick or anything (if you know what I mean)

OH WAIT its not the blacks its the white progressive scientists who cant stand the idea of acknowledging that differences even exist. in the future it may very well be seen as racially insensitive to imply that african americans have, on average, darker skin than caucasians.

Frankly it is embarrassing that so many academics are unwilling to acknowledge the vast quantity of evidence that contradicts the liberal dogma so emphatically preached in academia. Science should be free of politics.

[Anonymous No.3846987]

>>3846973
your also forgetting social factors such as they do shit because people think they should do shit.

[Anonymous No.3846991]

>>3846969
Could you please address the points made by:
>>3846976
He seems to make a persuasive argument with the evidence at hand.

[Anonymous No.3846992]

>>3846987
Sheep mentality is also a sign of low intelligence.

[Anonymous No.3846998]

>>3846980

>THANK YOU. I mean, I'm white, and you dont see me complaining that asians are on average smarter than us. I dont know why the african american community cant just accept what is by now clearly basic evolutionary science- genetic drift will cause speciation to occur and differences like in intelligence are bound to be part of that. blacks can also run faster and jump higher, on average so its not like they got the short end of the stick or anything (if you know what I mean)

I don't think you understand how race, genetics, evolution or science work.

hint: not like that, unless you're trolling

[Anonymous No.3847002]

>>3846973

>The fact that every African run nation is doing poorly despite of it's location is another dead giveaway(e.g. north of africa, south of africa, Haiti, ect.)

Colonialism as NOTHING to do with it? Sure thing buddy. In b4 "the strong conquer the lesser because they are virtuous, therefore whites are smart because they are white." Plato disproved that bullshit 2500 years ago.

In order to "prove" that race is the only factor that influences intelligence, you'd have do something like this:

Imagine there are two families. One consists of white parents living in America. One is a college professor and the other a physicist at NREL. They earn six figures and are both healthy with no major genetic disorders. The second family is black and lives in Botswana, and are at the national average levels of income. While impoverished, they are not starving to death, stunted due to early childhood malnutrition, nor do they have any major genetic disorders.

Now each family gives birth to a son. The instant that these babies are born, they are enveloped by a magic forcefield that swaps their appearance. They are also physically and instantaneously switched with each other. Now the black baby (who appears white) is in the hands of the white parents, and vice versa.

Will the white parents raise a dumb criminal who aspires to be a drug dealer? Will the Botswana parents raise a Nobel Prize-winning scientist?

[Anonymous No.3847005]

>>3847002
Adoption studies, bro. It's the best science has to offer. Guess what they've found:
>>3846976

[Anonymous No.3847008]

>>3847002
This guy basically listed a bunch of instances where your hypothetical was acted up and it seemed to back up his point:

>>3846976

[Anonymous No.3847011]

>>3847008
acted out, sorry
also beaten

[Anonymous No.3847013]

>>3846991

He cited a bunch of decades-old psych studies. Psychology is like pharmaceuticals, correlations errywhere and ne'er a causation established.

It's not enough to list a bunch of studies. You must explain to us exactly what the arguments are and what the evidence is behind it. Most of all, the onus is on you to establish a clear genetic/racial link to intelligence, and why it exists.

[Anonymous No.3847015]

Do human races exist?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrKrGkgeww4&feature=channel_video_title

[killLibs !PH5F8eeO2s No.3847018]

one of many serious works that have been suppressed

the amount of science done proving the heritability of intelligence, and even the low intelligence of blacks as a heritable trait, is countless

[Anonymous No.3847026]

>>3847018

>killLibs !PH5F8eeO2s

Clearly an unbiased, rational-minded person who is totally not trolling.

>one of many serious works that have been suppressed

>popular book

>serious

Choose one.

[Anonymous No.3847028]

>>3847018
are you asian?

if not, why do you advocate your own inferiority?

this isn't meant to be argumentative, I just don't understand why white people would advocate a world view which places them second on the evolutionary ladder.

[Anonymous No.3847035]

>>3847028

I'm going to predict that the stormfags will say "it's not actually average IQ that predicts intelligence, but that the number of Nobel Prize winners in a given ethnicity"

Or something

[Anonymous No.3847037]

Nobody seems to have specifically addressed what actually makes The Bell Curve "wrong" yet. I don't really understand, if it's so obvious why can't it be explained?

[Anonymous No.3847038]

>yfw the scientific community discourages studies on race and ostracizes those who are brave enough to do such studies.

When science must follow political correctness, it's no longer science.

[Anonymous No.3847039]

>>3847002
You seem to be confusing intelligence, knowledge, and success. Right now your question is asking if race is the only determinant in success. The answer is no, highly successful people are almost always helped by society by a lot. As seen in the book "Outliers" (its a good book to read by the way). However, this does not mean that everybody will become successful with the same amount of help given by society. Generally, more intelligent people will be more successful than less intelligent people given the same amount of help by society. Now I have solved your "paradox" without undermining the fact that races differ in intelligence on average.

[Anonymous No.3847040]

seriously is anyone in this thread not a troll

[Anonymous No.3847045]

>>3847013
But I did just that. I gave you the best science and quantitative anthropology have to offer on the subject and explained their findings. What do you want me to do, discover the genetic bases of intelligence and demonstrate how it varies between every conceivable group of individuals on the planet?

Why don't you link to some published articles that refute the findings of mine?

Also, if you'd read all the way to the bottom, I posted the (fairly obvious) reason why there has been so little recent literature on the subject.

[Anonymous No.3847046]

>>3847039
see
>>3847015

[Anonymous No.3847050]

>>3847028
>second on the evolutionary ladder.
Fuck you for not understanding how evolution works

[Anonymous No.3847051]

>>3847040
I am not.
>>3847046
*me*

[Anonymous No.3847059]

>>3847028
>>3847035
whitefag here
It's true--East Asians are a point or two ahead of whites in IQ. That's not even mentioning Askenazi Jews, who are a full standard deviation ahead of whites (though they have a host of other genetic problems to deal with). It's stupid and jealous to argue about a fact just because it shines less favorably you than someone else.

I think the distinguishing feature of whites was that they (especially the males) had a higher standard deviation in intelligence than other races. We get more geniuses, but also more total retards.

[Anonymous No.3847065]

why are you racist, holy shit just because they on average have a lower IQ doesn't disqualify their race

fucking morons

[Anonymous No.3847068]

>>3847065
No one in this thread has said that. Quit projecting.

[Anonymous No.3847069]

>>3847046
That didn't really say anything meaningful. It's argument that humans aren't too different because we are all related is dis proven with 2 seconds of thought. All it did is show that race isn't the only factor to intelligence, it didn't provide evidence to suggest that race isn't a contributing factor. Do you have anything better than a logic hole riddled youtube rant?

[Anonymous No.3847073]

>>3847068
Sure they did, quit deflecting

[Anonymous No.3847074]

>>3847045
could you please respond to:
>>3847015

the information presented there seems to contradict your thesis.

[Anonymous No.3847082]

>>3847073
>fullretard.jpg

Where?

[Anonymous No.3847097]

>>3847069
the issue isn't whether or not intelligence (measured in IQ) is correlated with race. the issue is causal. If race is not based on genetics, then saying that race in some way determines intelligence cannot be based on biology.

[Anonymous No.3847100]

>>3847039

>However, this does not mean that everybody will become successful with the same amount of help given by society.

Sure, but we're not talking about "everybody" in terms of individuals. We're talking about groups of hundreds of millions or billions of people here. Does it make sense to lump a billion people into a single category and treat them as dumber than all the others? Aren't the differences withing these groups so vast that it is statistically indistinguishable from the average of these billion people with the average of another group of a billion people?

>>3847045

>But I did just that. I gave you the best science

>the best science

>psychology

>the best science

coolface.png

Seriously though, psychology is notorious for implying weak correlations and the same thing as rigorous causation. Now if you combined the insights of psychology with genetics and neuroscience, maybe you'd have something there.

A second problem is that all those studies are based on research conducted, at the absolute latest, 20 years ago. 20 years is a long fucking time in academia, especially in the fields relevant to our discussion where things move very fast. It's also the same few articles I saw all the time back when /new/ was around, posted in every single stormfag thread.

>Why don't you link to some published articles that refute the findings of mine?

Why should I do that? You haven't even explained anything except that black people do worse on IQ/SAT tests on average. We need more to go on than just a bunch of links. In global warming and evolution threads, arguments against global warming denial and creationism are always made explicit. The citations themselves are not the core of the argument.

[Anonymous No.3847101]

>>3847082
It's implied in every post.

[Anonymous No.3847103]

>>3847074
Stop promoting that piece of shit youtube video. It is full of so many logical fallacy it isn't even funny. Even worse is it doesn't even provide any evidence to suggest that races are the same intellectually. It honestly sounds like a video a cult would show you to promote their crazy religion.

[Anonymous No.3847105]

>>3847069
>>two seconds of thought discounts race as a social construct, instead of explaining this i go on to implicate conclusions on no basis from the video having to do with intelligence.
elaborate.
Stop being purposely nebulous because you cant explain your faith based position, either put up or shut up. I wont play cat and mouse with you.

Like this picture, CLARITY, not secrets, explain how this video can be discounted in two seconds of thought and clearly.

[Anonymous No.3847106]

Blacks should admit to being stupid and even take pride in their stupidity. Keep it real. Don't try to fool smart people into thinking blacks are intelligent.

[Anonymous No.3847107]

>>3847103
I havent promoted the video yet, that was someone else.

could you please identify the logical mistakes in that video?

[Anonymous No.3847111]

>>3847101
can't tell if trolling or just stupid, either way, not worth having an intelligent conversation with.

[Anonymous No.3847116]

Hey, here's an idea guys, if you're so smart why don't you take your soundproof arguments and run with it! I'm sure you'll be famous in no time

[Anonymous No.3847117]

>>3847097
But race is based on genetics. A race is an extended family that through the years has partly inbred. Racial characteristics have the same basis in biology as familial characteristics.

[Anonymous No.3847118]

>>3847103
see
>>3847105
You make no substantiated claims. and offer no evidence.
do not try my patience, I don't get on /sci/ to be strung along by morons, start making clear unambiguous posts and stop concealing the information you claim exists.

[Anonymous No.3847123]

>>3847107
I'll do you one better, you state any point in the video that suggests that races don't differ in intelligence on average, and I'll tell you where the logical fallacy is.

[Anonymous No.3847126]

>>3847103
>Even worse is it doesn't even provide any evidence to suggest that races are the same intellectually
You seem to be mistaking the purpose of the video. So much so that I suspect that you didn't actually watch it at all. This combined with your last line about crazy religion makes me believe that you are, in fact, a troll. Confirm/deny?

[Anonymous No.3847129]

>>3847123
How is that doing me one better? You seemed to imply that the logical fallacies were obvious, could you please identify them?

[Anonymous No.3847132]

>>3847111
because race wars is totally intelligent, ahahahahaha

AHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHA

[Anonymous No.3847134]

>>3847117
"Race" as its used commonly does not have the same meaning as it does in evolutionary biology.

[Anonymous No.3847135]

>>3847100
>The citations themselves are not the core of the argument.
I summarized the findings. Want me to copypaste the whole article for you? Because requesting that would be the next logical step for your laziness.

Here, I'll link again for you, since it seems you missed it the first time and I'd really rather not have to repost all this. I'll even link to each of the posts I made.
>>>/lit/2116816
>>>/lit/2116821
>>>/lit/2116822
>>>/lit/2116829
>>>/lit/2116835

[Anonymous No.3847137]

>>3847126
Deny, the guy seriously sounds like he is in a cult. I guess it's the too much talk about love and peace and the weird monotone voice that makes my cult sense tingley.
It seems the main point of the video is to talk about how embracing/ignoring our differences is for the better. A point which is irrelevant to the conversation, and has no supporting evidence.

[Anonymous No.3847140]

>>3847117
have you seriously never even had high school biology

nobody is this dumb

[Anonymous No.3847145]

>>3847134
But it is very strongly related. Just because it isn't a perfect category (as if there were such a thing) doesn't mean that it isn't useful. All taxonomy is makeshift.

[FAGGATRON_3000 !!PEF7BVl3fW0 No.3847147]

Studies like this directly attack the assumptions that American democracy is based on, namely inherent equality.

Ignorance is SOMETIMES strength.

/new/ out.

[Anonymous No.3847148]

>>3847137
>>talk in a warm polite voice
>>obviously a cultist
confirmed retard,

observation: he had a calm and happy voice and a cheery message.
Conclusion: he must secretly belong to a CULT I"M SERIOUS GUYS.

I do hope you understand that this kind of behavior is destroying what little credability you've got?
You've also proved you did not even recognize what the video was about.

[Anonymous No.3847153]

>>3847129
well I wanted you to point out the statements so I didn't have to watch that video again, But i'll name a couple. The beginning part where he implied that humans aren't that different because we are all related is easily wrong because we are all related in the same sense we are related to chimps. And I think it is obvious chimps aren't as intelligent as us. Then it says "we are all Africans" as if that even demonstrates that it makes us the same. There are plenty of hominid species that originated in africa, and are "Africans" by his definition. Yet, nobody would call them the same as us. I'm not going through the entire video again, but if you think he made a good point that you want me to explain why it is wrong, feel free to ask.

[Anonymous No.3847160]

>>3847103
But the video is just stating facts about biology, it only ever makes a single argument and that's at the end (that race is a social construct which is not useful) so how can it be riddled with logical fallacies?

[Anonymous No.3847172]

>>3847153
>we are all related in the same sense we are related to chimps.
we all share a common ancestor several thousand years ago with chimps?

my god... the young earthers were right!

[Anonymous No.3847175]

>>3847153
Wow.. okay we can go home guys, we win

[Anonymous No.3847177]

>>3847135

No offense or anything, but you really need to know how to write a fucking summary. 4 serious

Imagine that I was arguing against a global warming denier. And I said something like this:

>EXHIBIT 983-dash-69-Beta: Annan and Hargreaves (2011). "On the generation and interpretation of probabilistic estimates of climate sensitivity." Climate Change 104:423-426.

>The underpinnings of climate sensitivity are analyzed, and high climate sensitivity was found to be a probably outcome. Deniers announce victory! Those foolish Cultural Marxists can now join Adorno in their intellectual graves!

Did you understand shit about the article I cited? This is basically what you're doing. We don't know about the methodology or any kind of attribution to racial (or some other form of) causation. We haven't learned beans. It certainly doesn't help that you throw in an ad hominem towards stormfags' proclaimed enemies after each "summary."

[Anonymous No.3847178]

>>3847148
No, they also have to talk about love and compassion. And then make logic error riddled arguments that follow irrelevent scientific facts.

I'm not saying the warm voice and love is why he is wrong, just simply that it is a common trait shared by people who promote cults.

[Anonymous No.3847186]

>>3847178
>logic error riddled argument
WHAT FUCKING ARGUMENTS

stop evading already, jesus christ

[Anonymous No.3847188]

>>3847153
>>easily wrong
please go into more detail, I want to know how anscestory is clearly not a good indicator of biological history of a person, and why you seem to think our relation to chimps is relevant in the face of that data
>>other species of homonids
I clearly hope you are not impling your race constructs are in fact separate species? His point, to clarify, is that through out the history of the homo sapians, we have spent the majority of our time and development there, and in tracing lineage and ancestry, vastly most of our ancestors have lived there, would you say that is not relevant to the videos point to point out that? if so, why?

[Anonymous No.3847190]

>>3847186
read
>>3847153

[Anonymous No.3847194]

>>3847147
>>3847147
>Studies like this directly attack the assumptions that American democracy is based on, namely inherent equality.


no, american democracy is not based on people being inherently equal genetically but that people have equal rights, equal opportunity and be treated as individual and not as a group.

It sucks to be given the shitty roll of the genetic dice but you play whatever cards you are given. Some people are born blind, it sucks but you can't just pretend he can see as well as other people. Some people are born less smart.

It just so happens that certain group of people are born on average less intelligent than other group.

[Anonymous No.3847196]

>>3847172
The best part is that the whole out-of-africa thing isn't entirely true. All red hair alleles and most alleles for pale skin came 100% from Neanderthal admixture. Pic related.

Significant admixture from another group of proto-hominids--the Denisovans--has also been recently found in East Asians. The races have been diverging for much longer than everyone thought.

>>3847175
Truth of fiction: whose side are you on?

[Anonymous No.3847198]

>>3847190
read
>>3847172

[Anonymous No.3847199]

>>3847178

>I'm not saying the warm voice and love is why he is wrong, just simply that it is a common trait shared by people who promote cults.

Wait, what?

Tell me if I'm wrong: Carl Sagan, Mr. Rogers, the cast of Sesame Street, Mohatma Gandhi, various people's memories of their own mothers, etc. are the sort of people that can be expected to promote cults?

Tell me if I've misinterpreted you. That seems to be the implications of what you're saying.

[Anonymous No.3847209]

>>3847188
I'm implying that neanderthals originated in africa, but that doesn't make them the same as us. His "we are all africans" argument is invalid.

Likewise, his "we are all related, so we aren't that different" argument is retard tier logic. We are related to chimps, but that doesn't mean we aren't that different.

[Anonymous No.3847210]

Fact 1: You poop
Fact 2: I poop
Fact 3: We all poop
Fact 4: We all poop out or our butthole
Fact 5: We are all the same.
Fact 6: You poop exactly the same as Michael Jackson, Michael Jordan and Mohammad Ali.
Fact 7: You poop like a nigger.

[Anonymous No.3847216]

>>3847209

Black people are probably a lot closer to us, genetically and phenotypically, than chimpanzees

Just sayin'

[Anonymous No.3847223]

>>3847210

This is a pretty bad analogy considering the fact that all humans do poop in roughly the same way

[Anonymous No.3847226]

>>3847196
I studied briefly under Wolpoff and I adhere to the MRE hypothesis but he repeatedly expressed disdain for the misappropriation of his work by scientific racists.

[Anonymous No.3847233]

>>3847209
> I'm implying that neanderthals originated in africa, but

>neanderthals
>africa

oh so you literally know nothing about human evolution whatsoever and are just talking out of your ass

[Anonymous No.3847235]

>>3847199
You are missing the part about promoting world peace of any sort. Aside from that, I wouldn't quite say they would be the type you would expect to promote a cult, just that if they demonstrate all those characteristics you should be initially skeptical of them fact check them.

[Anonymous No.3847238]

>>3847226

Seriously, in most contexts "Neanderthal" is used as an insult, and now stormfags are trying to say that they're actually ultrasmart cooldudes that gave white people powers by fucking them

[Anonymous No.3847244]

>>3847209
You are ignoring my questions entirely
I am going to ask you one more time.
thats it.

Why is recent anscestery not a good indicator of the biology of a person? what at all does this have to do with chimps?

Why does the fact that 80% of the homo sapiens species living and developing in Africa irrelevant to the point the video is trying to make?

So far i have heard you say they are not the same as us but you have provided no reasoning for why the arguements are actually flawed, to remind you to do this you have to explain the above to questions as to why the methods involved in determining this don't work, and so far you have not done that, you have only dodged the issue by talking about more distant species that where never relevant in the topic to begin with.

[Anonymous No.3847249]

>>3847233
http://www.ecotao.com/holism/hu_neand.htm
I could say the same thing about you, only it would be true.
>>3847216
Yes I know, I'm just disproving his notion that we are all inherently the same.

[Anonymous No.3847252]

>>3847209
>I'm implying that neanderthals originated in africa, but that doesn't make them the same as us. His "we are all africans" argument is invalid.

Actually, Neanderthals evolved in Europe and Asia. Something you would probably know if you knew virtually anything about human evolution.

But please, keep telling us about how riddled with logical fallacies that video is and how being related to chimps means black people are dumb.

[Anonymous No.3847253]

>>3847059
i would just like to point out that this does not help the position of internet racists, who are clearly not in the expanded genius category

[Anonymous No.3847255]

>>3847235

>You are missing the part about promoting world peace of any sort

World peace = cult? I guess I can see that, the UN is an institution devoted to peace and stormfags are hilariously paranoid about them.

Shit dude. I suppose the lack of great power wars these days is a real problem. If only those cults didn't stop us from blow each other up.

[Anonymous No.3847256]

>>3847226
>>3847238
Yeah, stormfags have gotten retarded about this shit. Still, all feelings aside, it explains a lot how human populations could diverge as widely as they have since sapiens began spreading from Africa.

[Anonymous No.3847258]

I have a solution to racial profiling based on intelligence:
Tattoo people's IQ's to their foreheads.
Now an employer will have no need to look at a person's skin colour to determine how capable they are, they can just look at their forehead.

[Anonymous No.3847260]

>>3847249
I, too, can google "neanderthal africa"

Might wanna scroll down past the first paragraph though.

[Anonymous No.3847265]

>>3847258

What if you had a bad flu or you were stoned the day you took the IQ test, and your IQ score suffered

Or what if you took the IQ test as a little kid and you grew up and became smarter

Or what if you studies extremely hard and practised all sorts of tests before you took the official IQ test, but you weren't normally that smart

Or what if you scored genius level IQ but you were severely autistic and couldn't even dress yourself

Or what if there was an error made by the tattooist and your IQ was represented inaccurately

Or what if ah fuck it

[Anonymous No.3847268]

>>3847244
If you cannot grasp these simple logical concepts I really have no point in debating with you. Do you even believe in evolution? I can't understand how anyone who actually knows what evolution is couldn't understand the point I'm making.

Also, I never that recent ancestory isn't a good indicator of a persons genes.

I'll try explaining my chimp argument I like I would to a kindergartener because you can't seem to understand it.

His supposed point was that all people are related, so we aren't that different. What he means by we are all related is that we all share a common ancestor. Since we share a common ancestor with chimps, in his sense we are also related to chimps. Since chimps are intellectually different from humans, we can conclude that being a distant relative of someone does not make them as intelligent as us. Ergo, his "we are all related, so we aren't noticeably different" argument is flawed.

[Anonymous No.3847270]

>>3847244
What you're saying: all sapiens races had a common ancestor in Africa, so we're all the same.

How he's parodying your argument: hominids and chimps had a common ancestor in Africa, so they're the same.

Obviously, neither is true. People have lots of similarities with chimpanzees, and blacks have lots of similarities with whites. There are distinguishing characteristics between both groups.

Since chimps and people can't interbreed (thank god), it's not a great analogy. A better one would be comparing two different races to coyotes and wolves, which can (and are, at an increasing rate). They're obviously different, but similar enough to reproduce.

[Anonymous No.3847277]

>>3847270

>Since chimps and people can't interbreed (thank god)

We don't know that for sure. For the sake of science, we must discover the truth behind this matter

[Anonymous No.3847279]

>>3847270
>and blacks have lots of similarities with whites

whoa whoa whoa hold on here
lets not say anything TOO controversial

[Anonymous No.3847285]

>>3847279

OH YEAH WELL HOW ABOUT THIS

IF A WHITE PERSON LIVES IN THE LOW LATITUDES FOR TWENTY GENERATIONS, THEIR DESCENDENTS WILL HAVE DARKER SKIN

SO IS HE LIKE A WETBACK NOW OR WHAT

[Anonymous No.3847287]

>>3847255
I'm saying that cults share a common trait of promoting peace, love, and talking in a warm voice. Not that everyone who does all three of these is in a cult.

Shit dude, logic 101. The average 4th grader can comprehend what apparently you can't.

[Anonymous No.3847289]

>>3847268
>>3847270
okay so do you understand that the distance between us and the common ancestor we share with other humans is measured in the thousands of years, and the distance between us and the common ancestor we share with chimps is measured in the millions?

[Anonymous No.3847301]

>>3847289
Actually, the distance between us and other races is closer to a hundred or two hundred thousand years. And a hundred thousand years is not a small enough time to call insignificant by any stretch. Can you understand that?

[Anonymous No.3847303]

>>3847289
any number larger than 100 is really just the same thing...a big number...

so yeah, don't try to math your way out of this one

[Anonymous No.3847307]

>>3847287

>I'm saying that cults share a common trait of promoting peace, love, and talking in a warm voice.

HOW THE FUCK IS IT THAT PROMOTING PEACE AND LOVE AND SPEAKING IN A PLEASANT VOICE SUPPOSED TO- Ah fuck it, there's no use in understanding your deranged thought process

>Not that everyone who does all three of these is in a cult.

Okay. But what distinguished that Youtuber from Gandhi or Sagan or your mom, that makes him more cult-ish? Is it because he says things you disagree with? I don't get it

>Shit dude, logic 101. The average 4th grader can comprehend what apparently you can't.

I certainly wouldn't want to take the fourth grade in whatever fucked up elementary school you went to. Jesus shit.

[Anonymous No.3847308]

>>3847268
>>these simple logical concepts.
they are not logical concepts I'm asking for, I'm asking for a demonstration and proof. Your arguement hinges on discrediting a well established part of science, to do so you require more than just your word.
>>do you believe in evolution i dont understand how anyone who does could not understand the point I'm making
I understand the point you are making, I'm asking you to substantiate it with something empirical, If you feel ancestry is not a good indicator, as i understand you do, since you said this point is fallacious, then you need to substantiate it.
>>Also, I never that recent ancestory isn't a good indicator of a persons genes.
But you did say that, You said the videos point that we are all closely related and there fore extremely similar was incorrect, this was based on ancestry, If you do believe ancestry is a big determaining factor in things, you ought to have no problems with the videos point that we are all related and not that distantly.
>>His supposed point was that all people are related, so we aren't that different. What he means by we are all related is that we all share a common ancestor.
correct, I'm glad to see we are finally following along.
>>Since we share a common ancestor with chimps, in his sense we are also related to chimps
no, wait, we seem to have lost eachother here for a moment.
why are you talking about chimps? the common ancester he mentioned was clearly a human being, one to which every human being is related to, and according to the video this human ancestor was alive in recorded history, unless people back then where chimps, But I do not know of any chimp like creatures that record history besides human beings.

I hope this brightens things up for you a bit, as you may have been confused by the word common ancestor, and thought it to refer to chimps, this is not the case in the video at all.

[Anonymous No.3847310]

>>3847289
I provided a better example for you at the bottom of my post. Also, scroll back up--there's some stuff about admixture from other protohominids that had been evolving for much longer it sounds like you missed. Also, other species (off the top of my head: flounders, many types of flies, all domestic animals) have evolved greater differences in less time than it has taken the human races to differentiate.

[Anonymous No.3847311]

>>3847258

i have a solution of footsore, cut off the foot and now it's not sore anymore.

[Anonymous No.3847315]

>>3847308
>The common ancestor of all humans was alive in the time of recorded history
nigga please

[Anonymous No.3847316]

>>3847308
fuck dude, I already knew you were trolling to begin with, I'm just bored. But damn, now you aren't even trying. Can you at least give something a little more convincing for me to respond to?

[Anonymous No.3847322]

>>3847270
I think this is probably the most successful examination for the possibility that the arguement might be fallicious, but you're missing something important, the time frame involved is within recorded history. and so, shouldnt both wolves/coyotes and humans be restricted to the same time frame? and if so, would that short time frame go back far enough to show wolves and coyotes, if not, the clear differences you are alluding to would likely not have time to accumulate. this ruining the point.

[Anonymous No.3847327]

>>3847310

Obviously humans didn't completely differentiate because any race can have a fertile, healthy child with any other race. It's not look no interbreeding took place at all for those 100,000 years. It took only a few years for those crazy Soviets to develop those weird domesticated foxes with artificial breeding.

[Anonymous No.3847328]

>>3847287
and yet you immediately assumed the video was cult-like in nature, despite knowing this, how inconsistent.

[Anonymous No.3847334]

>>3847322
Dude just go to bed, the sleep deprivation is showing, you are getting worse and worse at trolling by the post.

[Anonymous No.3847335]

>>3847307
I found the YouTuber to be smug and unintentionally comical with his elementary rhetorical skills. Just a retard.

[Anonymous No.3847341]

>>3847328
I never said the video was a cult promotion, just that it reminded me of a cult promotion. Because it had all three of those traits.

[Anonymous No.3847345]

>>3847301
okay so here is your mistake: you seem to be under the impression that no genetic drift occurred at all after our early migration out of africa

let me correct you: our most recent common ancestor lived only a few thousand years ago

this is not the same thing as genetic eve, which indeed lived hundreds of thousands of years ago.

I hope you feel enlightened.

[Anonymous No.3847354]

>>3847316
I need not, You or someone has pointed out that you could explain the fallacies in the video. That is my purpose in posting, to explain those arguments and make sure the debunking is fair and scientific. If you have a problem with this common ancestors existence, Please substantiate it.

[Anonymous No.3847358]

this thread is now filled with trolls and a single dude who doesn't have the sense to just hide the thread.

dude even if they were sincere with their ignorance (pretty unlikely on this topic, on /sci/) its not like you could convince them. the pro-racialist arguers in this thread have consistently shown that they don't actually know anything about human evolution. just close the thread and let the trolls talk to each other for a while.

[Anonymous No.3847361]

>>3847327
By the same logic, wolves and coyotes didn't completely differentiate (I assume you mean speciate), yet they are considered different species and are markedly different (some would say as much as different races--e.g. Norwegians vs. Aborigines). Are the differences between wolves, dogs, and coyotes social constructs?

For most of history, populations of humans have been more or less geographically isolated, which, as in all other species, has led to some differentiation. Unsurprisingly, characteristics common to a geographic area aren't that common on the other side of the world, but can still be found at lower frequencies in regions nearby. Race is on a continuum, though most people are still clumped together different ends.

[Anonymous No.3847370]

>>3846969

I wouldn't put a lot of stock in Gould's criticism of The Bell Curve.
See: Why Gould Was Wrong (http://books.google.com/books?id=tkb41TYJP0cC&pg=PA134&lpg=PA134&dq=gould+gets+bell+cur
ve+wrong&source=bl&ots=XWFyRWKV90&sig=pcdzNsr-rH5qsdnakjZbx9N8xss&hl=en&ei=CqOKT
rmaHYqQsQKcvO3OBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&sqi=2&ved=0CDQQ6AEw
Aw#v=onepage&q&f=false)

Gould is also the author of the statement, "We are the being who's essence lies in having no essence."

For such a broad subject, that's a pretty presumptuous statement.

You might also want to take a look at the bibliography of criticisms of Gould's anti-biological determinism book, The Mismeasure of Man, on its Wikipedia page, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mismeasure_of_Man#Criticism_2

[Anonymous No.3847388]

Kill all racist, Kill everyone in the right wing, Kill all stormfags. I fixed humanity!

[Anonymous No.3847389]

>>3847345
>our most recent common ancestor lived only a few thousand years ago
Not true. it is estimated between 5,000 and 15,000 years ago. And even that isn't indicative of our similarity, because given that much time that single ancestors contribution to our own genes is pretty much 0. It is actually about 0 at about 1,000 years in.

Humans contain about 3 billion dna base pairs, and assuming each parent contributes half of their genes, it only takes 32 generations for the ancestors contribution to be about 1 out of the 3 billion genes. (2^32>3,000,000). assuming each generation average about 20 years, this means any ancestors who lived over 700 years ago contributed to less than 1 of our 3 billion genes.
Now I hope YOU feel enlightened.

[Anonymous No.3847396]

>>3847361
Shit, I'm not even a biologist, but even I know that wolves and coyotes are different species, and aborigines and Norwegians are the SAME fucking species, Homo Sapiens Sapiens.

Fuck, you people make me ashamed to admit I was in the same fucking liberal arts degree program as you.

[Anonymous No.3847401]

>>3847396

forgot species names*

wolf: canis lupus
dog: canus lupus familiaris
coyote: canus latrans

[Anonymous No.3847407]

Can you explain why wolves and coyotes are a different species but Aborigines and Norwegians aren't? Because I was under the assumption that a species is defined as a group of organisms capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring. Which both appear to be capable of doing.

[Anonymous No.3847409]

>>3847396

forgot species names*

wolf: canis lupus
dog: canis lupus familiaris
coyote: canis latrans

[Anonymous No.3847413]

>>3847407
was meant to reply to
>>3847396

[Anonymous No.3847418]

>>3847396
Are you even reading what I wrote? I was trying to show how taxonomic divisions are provisionary. What do you think makes a species? The inability to reproduce outside of its species is the most common answer. But dogs, coyotes, and wolves can interbreed and produce offspring that--in the current environment, at least--are more viable than their parents. Thus, they make a good analogy to differences between human demes, or races.

[Anonymous No.3847421]

>>3847389
what's your point? are you saying these dramatic changes that resulted in the different 'races' are 5000 years old?
It would seem possible that, even with a lot of >>geographical separation, the MRCA of the entire world is still within historical times, 3000 BC - 1000 AD
this is the given age for this MRCA.

[Anonymous No.3847422]

>>3847418
you have yet to respond to this
>>3847322

[Anonymous No.3847424]

>>3847421
But that's wrong, you fucking retard.

Think about what you just wrote. You placed the most recent common ancestor of the human race as living between 3000BC and 1000AD. This just in--Plato is everyone's great great great grandaddy.

And on top of that bit of imbecility, you're completely ignoring protohominid admixture.

[Anonymous No.3847426]

>>3847389
what's your point? are you saying these dramatic changes that resulted in the different 'races' are 5000 years old?
It would seem possible that, even with the variation you allowed and the rate of change, just only 5000 years ago, the impact of this common ancestor would be much much more apparent. >>geographical separation, the MRCA of the entire world is still within historical times, 3000 BC - 1000 AD
this is the given age for this MRCA.

[Anonymous No.3847431]

>>3847426
0/10 or fullretard.jpg, can't decide which.

[Anonymous No.3847432]

yea let's kill people for no reason at all when in a couple of years genetics won't matter at all since we will be able too manipulate them to do what ever we want. good night white supremacist.

[Anonymous No.3847436]

>>3847322
Alright, biting. Your premises are fallacious. The mrca of humans is older than recorded history, and races are also delineated by the amount of neanderthal/denisovan genes they accumulated after migrating and becoming de facto geographically isolated.

[Anonymous No.3847437]

>>3847424
but it's not wrong. that's when the most recent ancestor is said to have lived.
http://www.stat.yale.edu/~jtc5/papers/CommonAncestors/NatureAncestorsPressRelease.html

[Anonymous No.3847438]

>>3847432
>stereotypical liberal who thinks that anyone who questions the notion that races are the same want to exterminate them.

[Anonymous No.3847443]

>>3847424
Dude, hes trolling. either that or he is too stupid to be worth debating in the first place.

[Anonymous No.3847445]

>>3847436
then you surely should have something to say about the fact that there seems to be plenty of papers affirming as such, if you think this is fake, please debunk it. as implying saying 'it's wrong' is not a scientific exercise that you boasted at all.

[Anonymous No.3847449]

>>3847407
A species is a group that can interbreeed and produce viable offspring, but those off spring will be hybrids, half-coyote, half-wolf and mid range in size and will vocalize with a mixture of howls and yips.

Humans breed and all that you end up with is a range of skin/eye color and physique that's brought out by whatever genes are dominant in the mating pair. In other words, the offspring of humans are indistinguishable from any generic human anywhere. We do not get hobbits or aliens.

[Anonymous No.3847450]

>>3847437
>Chang established the basis of this research in a previous publication with an intentionally simplified model that ignored such complexities as geography and migration.
fullretard.jpg

Still, he got published in Nature. I have to give it to him.

[Anonymous No.3847452]

>>3847450
continue reading the article

[Anonymous No.3847453]

>>3847438
Nope not liberal at all, I am a militant leftist.

[Anonymous No.3847458]

>>3847449
In other words, the offspring of wolves and coyotes are halfway between a wolf and a coyote.

Also, the offspring of a white and a black is a mulatto.

That's my point. Read what you're writing, man.

[Anonymous No.3847468]

>>3847450
>>didn't even bother to read past that paragraph
well, I guess I'm done with you guys, I've warned you all about this kind of behavior, but I don't have time if you aren't going to play by your own rules, I have given the time to read every bit of information you provided, instead, you have all taken pains to make baseless assertions, personal attacks which I have done almost none in retaliation, and further more, I have to constantly fight you to get you to deliver your promises of debunking at all, I'll just leave you with the part you missed.


>>The current paper presents more realistic mathematical and computer models. It incorporates factors such as socially driven mating, physical barriers of geography and migration, and recorded historical events. Although such complexities make pure mathematical analysis difficult, it was possible to integrate them into an elaborate computer simulation model. The computer repeatedly simulated history under varying assumptions, tracking the lives, movements, and reproduction of all people who lived within the last 20,000 years.

>>These more realistic models estimate that the most recent common ancestor of mankind lived as recently as about 3,000 years ago, and the identical ancestors point was as recent as several thousand years ago. The paper suggests, "No matter the languages we speak or the color of our skin, we share ancestors who planted rice on the banks of the Yangtze, who first domesticated horses on the steppes of the Ukraine, who hunted giant sloths in the forests of North and South America, and who labored to build the Great Pyramid of Khufu."

>>The results can also work backwards, into the future. According to Chang, "Within two thousand years, it is likely that everyone on earth will be descended from most of us."

[Anonymous No.3847469]

>>3847458
No you wretch.

A mulatto is a just a color,it's melanin.

A 3/4 size wolf with red hair that vocalizes with a mixture of howlings and yips (wolves DO NOT yip) and coyotes DO NOT howl) is a hybrid.

It's subtle, yes, but a human being is a human being. Maybe dumb, maybe smart - maybe even black as the aces of spades and as sharp as Newton, but 100% human.

[Anonymous No.3847479]

>>3847468
my fave post was by the retard who thought neanderthals arose in africa and then linked an article that directly contradicted that as evidence

it really is amazing how little these guys actually know, considering how smug they all seem

for what it's worth I liked your posts weird anime dude

[Anonymous No.3847481]

>>3847468
I should also add this for said transgressions benefit, in the hopes that you will learn from the mistakes and use this model to provide better experience in the future.

I will not be going to bed, but I am no longer finding this discussion stimulating as It is not in my interest to play PAC mind games in order to get any debaters to deliver on their actual information.

[Anonymous No.3847487]

>>3847453
Oh im sorry, that changes everything. <insert sarcasm>
Anybody who lies to the extremes of liberalism or conservatives is retarded, because half of both political stances is retarded. For liberalism it is the everyone is equal/the same, for conservatives it is that religion bit, and policies stemming from it.

[Anonymous No.3847489]

>>3847453

In other words, self-entitled hipster.

[Anonymous No.3847490]

>>3847487
are you saying that possibly... the truth lies in the middle???

[Anonymous No.3847502]

>>3847487
>>3847489

Samefag. Make it more obvious, why dont you?

[Anonymous No.3847505]

>>3847479
Babby's first troll?

[Anonymous No.3847516]

>>3847505
maybe, who knows. I think its totally plausible that people really are that ignorant of basic facts of human evolution. plus this thread started in /lit/ so maybe some of those guys came over and they've never had any education in the sciences.

[Anonymous No.3847521]

>>3847490
nah, it is probably lies about one third left. conservatism right now has more flaws than liberalism.

[Anonymous No.3847526]

>>3847516
Being that ignorant and still being able to spell correctly and not totally mutilate their grammar? I don't think so, Tim.

[Anonymous No.3847544]

>>3847521
I'm about 3/4 left, and just short of anarcho-syndicalist. I think the Fox news epithet of "liberals" means grocery store clerks with library cards are anarchists in disguise. These days, though even a liberal Republican is damn hard to find, although there are many excellent and honorable examples. Nixon (when he wasn't being a criminal), the guy that invented the EPA was a California Republican, and others.

[Anonymous No.3847554]

>>3847516
>maybe, who knows. I think its totally plausible that people really are that ignorant of basic facts of human evolution.

ok, i'll bite.
what about human evolution are people ignorant of, or will not recognize because it goes against their sensibilities.