/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.9880737]

Daily reminder I'm more intelligent than all of you!

[Anonymous No.9880747]

>>9880737
If IQ is measured in co-authorship? Probably.

[Anonymous No.9880749]

>>9880737 Just another nigger mixed pavement monkey who regurgitates already pre existing data, and spouts it off as if it's the byproduct of it's own ingenuity.
>Intelligent
Pic related.

[Anonymous No.9880751]

>>9880749
First: >>>/pol/
Secondly: That isn't how it works. The brain would still have the same general anatomy.

[Anonymous No.9880754]

>>9880751
>The brain would still have the same general anatomy
Pic related and GTFO back to: >>>/lgbt/

[Anonymous No.9880757]

>>9880754

[Anonymous No.9880758]

>>9880757

[Anonymous No.9880760]

>>9880754
>>9880757
>When you don't understand what "general anatomy means".
You're only displaying JUST how retarded /pol/tards are.
When I mean GENERAL ANATOMY, I mean, they would still have the SAME lobes.
Whether those lobes are of the same proportion within differing populations is neither here nor there as that isn't the argument made in: >>9880749
Nice try though, idiot.

[Anonymous No.9880762]

Probably. I don't even know what is holomorphic function and if you'd ask me simple shit I learned and did from signal and linear systems modelling I would be stumped. Seriously, I couldn't even recognize autoregression if my life dependent on it.

t. works now as CAD monkey

[Anonymous No.9880766]

>>9880760
>Projecting a self diagnosed mental problem
You insinuated that having a smaller prefrontal cortex along with varying neural traits can fall under a gestalt of generality when discussing intelligence. This of course is wrong as a single minute difference in a given organism can alter it's entire genealogical structure.

[Anonymous No.9880770]

>>9880766 Difference in terms of gene expression by the way. I should of specified that in the post I'm same fagging to.

[Anonymous No.9880774]

>>9880766
No I didn't.
What I literally said was: >>9880751
In reply to: >>9880749
In which YOU insinuated they entirely lack a frontal lobe. Which they don't.
Of course, I wouldn't expect a /pol/tard to actually understand that.
By the way, racism isn't allowed on /sci/ as per the rules.

[Anonymous No.9880789]

>>9880774
>Moving the goal post
The image doesn't state that the monkey in question lacks a pre frontal cortex entirely, but rather illustrates how small it is.
>You insinuated
I never insinuated anything, I merely posted a picture and you responded in a very autistic manner. That's all there is to this conversation.
>Muh racism
Oh just shut the fuck up you nigger babbling moron.

[Anonymous No.9880792]

>>9880789

[Anonymous No.9880798]

>>9880792

[Anonymous No.9880799]

>>9880789
>The image doesn't state that the monkey in question lacks a pre frontal cortex entirely, but rather illustrates how small it is.
Then why not properly display the anatomy? Rather than taking an illustration and cropping it? That implies propaganda and not rigorous argumentation.
>I never insinuated anything, I merely posted a picture and you responded in a very autistic manner. That's all there is to this conversation.
In other words, you espoused (therefore adopting) that position as your own.
Which IS insinuation, dumbfuck.
>Oh just shut the fuck up you nigger babbling moron.
It's literally against chan-wide rules, idiot.
Then again, if you weren't as dumb as those you lambaste, you might be able to read those rules.
By the way:
>race realism =/= racism
It's the difference between posting propaganda and posting scientific evidence, /pol/ infographics isn't rigorous evidence, it is propaganda.

[Anonymous No.9880804]

>>9880799
>More inarticulate nigger babble
If you actually go back and analyse the picture, you'll see that there's a small chunk of the pre frontal cortex not cropped out.

[Anonymous No.9880810]

>>9880804
>Actually being this pedantic to make this as an argument.
Why don't you get an actual picture, of an actual African brain and compare it to an actual picture, or an actual European brain? You know, instead of CROPPING AND ILLUSTRATION?
Jesus fuck, why're you so dumb?

[Anonymous No.9880813]

>>9880810
>*and = an

[Anonymous No.9880815]

>>9880737
I know OP is just trolling, but are there people who genuinely think this guy is super smart? I mean he's definitely above average, but he's a very mediocre scientist and a poor speaker, too, I honestly don't understand why people fawn over his retarded opinions so much.

[Anonymous No.9880819]

>>9880810 I'm guessing by African you mean a pure unmixed Sub Saharan? If so, measuring the brain differences between Eurasians and Africans is some what pointless when we're talking in generalities. As simply visually analyzing the cranium size differences between races would produce evidence sufficient enough to support my previously aforementioned assertions.

[Anonymous No.9880820]

>>9880819

[Anonymous No.9880824]

>>9880820

[Anonymous No.9880830]

>>9880819
>>9880820
>>9880824
>Northeast Asians.
>Smaller forehead than Europeans, check.
>Flat noses, more similar to Africans (and other apes) than Europeans, check.
>The most genetically distant race from chimp, or human common ancestor, check.
>Higher IQ than Europeans, check.
Mhm, doesn't seem to pan out.

[Anonymous No.9880834]

>>9880830 What doesn't pan out? Orientals generally have larger craniums than their European counter parts, which could explain why they also have higher IQs. This only further bolsters my argument you nigger tier retard.

[Anonymous No.9880840]

>>9880830
>Smaller foreheads than Europeans
Cite your assertion because this claim seems to be false from the data I've sifted through.

[Anonymous No.9880842]

Damn, liberals will be all for science when it comes to anything other than race. When you bring up countless evidence suggesting that races could some how be cognitively different on a genetic level (they admit that they physically are) they will cover there ears and screech “I can’t hear you!” How self important do you have to be to think that in this huge universe that humans, as a product of evolution, have some invisible egalitarian axiom that somehow rules over just human being. Fucking pathetic and regressive beasts; censoring reality to make people feel better is pathetic.

[Anonymous No.9880846]

>>9880834
>Orientals generally have larger craniums than their European counter parts, which could explain why they also have higher IQs.
[CITATION NEEDED]
Although, if you compare a European side-by-side with a Northeast Asian this doesn't ring true. And according to >>9880819 that's a perfectly acceptable method.
So, if you aren't saying we need rigorous proof, then why don't you agree with: >>9880810
Or is it just your double standards?
In the words your favorite idiot:
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ea-dnVJ1Sow

>>9880840
Well, if you compare an Northeast Asian to a European, side-by-side in a picture. They don't seem to and as per: >>9880819
That's apparently perfectly acceptable.

[Anonymous No.9880852]

>>9880846
>Makes a special pleading fallacy
What ever pin head, this conversation is going in circles and I have shit to get done/do. Good bye.

[Anonymous No.9880854]

>>9880852
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha
>own hypocrisy gets pointed out
>say we don't need rigorous proof for blacks, becase MUH PICTURE MATCHING
>apply the same logic to asian vs European
>waaa waaa waaa
Lol, fucking die, you idiot.

[Anonymous No.9880855]

>>9880852
btw, you are the one who made the special pleading fallacy, i only pointed it out to you
it's called baiting faggot, and you fell for it
R E K T

[Anonymous No.9880866]

>>9880737
>another /pol/ containment thread to keep the rest of /sci/ clean
Thanks OP

[Anonymous No.9880870]

>>9880866
We'll need a lot more than just one thread, and one warden. We need to organize a defense task force against the /pol/ incursion.

[Anonymous No.9880875]

>>9880842

Some would call me a liberal, so i'll try to answer you. My problem with this claim is that it's a.) extremely problematic from a scientific perspective and b.) is not brought up for scientific, but for policy reasons.

Would i be upset if you could SOMEHOW show a genetic difference in intelligence between "races"(the quotes are because i consider the concept of human races debunked) ? No. Would i be upset if you founded policy on it? Yes. Because if i am not allowed to prevent white trash from voting with some test, then you are not allowed to prevent others either ;)

Why do i consider this claim to be problematic on a scientific level? Because it deal's with unknowns. And unless we have some understanding of intellect and education we can't even dream about making such an assessment. That's why i tend to just disregard it as racist propaganda.

[Anonymous No.9880879]

>>9880737
>Fury rising.
>Rage going into overdrive.
>Lose mind.
>Go blank.
>Wake up, surrounded by metal constructs and robots whizing around.
>They all scream "We wuz kangz 'n' shiet" whenever approached.
>Realize I programmed them all in a drunken rage.
>Try to figure out their purpose.
>Turns out I am actually in space.
>In a deranged neurotic anger I had made a machine capable of steering an asteroid into earth.
>Massive screen flips on and I appear.
>"WHO'S SMARTER NOW BIATCH!?"
>Realize I had built a doomsday device.
>Feel ashamed that I fell for this bait so hard.
>I'm sorry /sci/. We had a good run...

*Pthooooooooooooom*

[Anonymous No.9880880]

>>9880875
There's definitely genetic differences between populations that are clustered by genetic similarities. But they exist even across traditional races. A more accurate term would be ethnicity.
Race as a concept is outdated and insufficient, ethnicity isn't.