My focus was not on *race* as a biological taxonomisation.

"I explained how what it shows can be attributed to social factors which are independent of 'muh biology'." lol you first say they did not look at enviormental factors, yet you say this

you are flip flopping so hard

I never said 'they did not look at environmental factors'.

This was the screenshot you brought up to say that I said that.

niter is enviormental

lol

nurture *

And yet we can change the environment too.

So no, biological determinism is not proven.

You dont even know what you are talking about , you are out of your depth and just bs

lol

the straw and misconclussion

threre is a large correlation found 😄

You kept dodging my claim about it not being a matter of other kinds of prejudice.

And of course, socially-enforced *enabling factors*.

And after that i showed you 2 sets of statistics that show that enviorment and social factors dont correlate

You did not, you said that it correlates with race.

which you keep ignoring completly as it doesnt fits "your argument"

But not that it is owed to haplotypes, genes, alleles or any of that.

And it does

No, you haven't proven that link.

beaver 2003 found that it does

you read this

and still are in denail

Beaver 2003 said that there were social factors *and* genetic factors.

i havent proven that link lol

yeah so

if your parrents have the maoa alle that means they have a higher likelyhood of being shit parrents

the star grasping oif you is ludecris

Yes, but *what else causes them to be shit parents*?

their parrents haveing maoa alle

That's not the only factor, hence why I asked 'what else'?

You can't read.

so the parrents have shit genetics,. so they create a shit enviorment for the offspring with shit genetics

how is this cogeetive disocance to you
?

And the social structures which are enforced on them are also owed to their genetics?

Or someone else's?