Message from @OneTrueGod
Discord ID: 624953627051556876
> English people are retarded and don't have a control of their tongue.
π π π― π π π
@Seven Proxies
> This went on for generations and so will ultimately be responsible for racial differences exhibited between human populations today.
I don't think it was long enough to make any massive changes, past some small changes in appearance related DNA [1], evidenced by the fact we can still inter-breed without issue. Our brains are essentially the same [2]. Assuming there are differences though, as long as somebody from another race exhibits an understanding and agreement of the same cultural and ideological fundamentals, what difference does it make?
> It is completely illogical to simply dismiss the racial differences and the rational self-interest in having allegiance to ones own race, when the prehistoric isolation between human groups have clearly had such an huge impact on the genetic psyche of them.
If these differences are so evident in the brain, please link the Scientific articles. You can find small differences in brain structure of course [3], but show me something that indicates a fundamental difference that is the result of nature rather than nurture, which changes the race's processing of certain information.
My point is, as long as somebody from a different race shares my fundamental beliefs (the beliefs I am am unwilling to compromise on), such as culture and ideology, what difference does it really make? Personally, I value my culture and ideology over the colour of my skin.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_human_evolution#Homo_sapiens
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence
[3] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2964318/
Anyway, fathering adopted children is only "being a cuck" if it isn't advantageous to your genes or your culture somehow. And by "your genes" I mean the larger pool of people in some way related to you. If someone (in Slovenia) told me they were adopting Ukrainan orphans, fine, not a cuck, they're fellow Slavic people, similar customs, similar religion, ... If they adopted subsaharans ... Extreme Cuckoldry
I would point out that behavior patterns can be inherited, these can be passed on through generations
> I would point out that behavior patterns can be inherited, these can be passed on through generations
Citation needed
I'm willing to concede if you can prove it
Aggression has been bred out of several species, domestication of animals, no need to cite a source, just like water is wet
Humans are no different
No, humans are quite different
Come on, I asked for a citation
More cognitive, but we aren't from another planet
Surely it's massively researched
No, its not
So, you're saying you don't have evidence...
Animal domestication is much more different from behavioural patterns
Why would there be, can you find a study on human behavior that isn't circumstantial
Aggression was bred out of them
Hence, aggressive behavior can be passed on in one form or another
As can passivity
Also, knowledge, in some species
These things are extremely complex
Indeed
@B[] Unless you've got the genome completely mapped out, you can't say for certain that the differences would only be "some small changes in appearance related DNA". Also, it doesn't make much sense that only appearance would've been affected since there is really only one enviromental factor in prehistoric times leading up to today where appearance might've granted a survival edge, and that would be the relative sunlight exposure (black skin protects better against high sun exposure, white skin allows for more absorption of sunlight in places that have fewer hours of sunlight of the year).
But there were so many more factors to take into account which has influenced the survival strategies and ways of thinking with prehistoric tribes than just sunlight.
The fact that we can interbreed "without issue" (disputed claim, but I'll go with it for the moment) doesn't prove anything, since humans could interbreed with far more removed variants of hominids, like the fact that white people are a result of hybridization between homo sapiens and homo neanderthalensis, while black people have no genetic trace markers from homo neanderthalensis at all.
Neanderthals where further genetically removed from homo sapiens, in pre historic times than white people are today from black people, yet they could still interbreed.
Domestication is something completely different
There are literally genetic markers in some animals that control aggression (hence floppy ears)
Its behavior being changed through generations, if behavior couldn't be passed on, aggressive species would stay that way
Sharing knowledge is a completely different thing again
Not entirely, there will be mechanisms for it that we know nothing of
Recent research also suggest that behaviour and even memories are inherited https://www.iflscience.com/health-and-medicine/ancestors-genetic-memories-passed-on-14-generations/
If you make a flatworm learn a maze, grind it up, feed it to another flatworm it will complete the maze as if learned, they manage to process memory by digestion
so its not out of the question
"This particular study looked at C. elegans nematodes, types of roundworms with very short lifespans. The researchers genetically engineered them to carry a glowing gene, a protein that fluoresced, so they could track it under UV light.
They then placed the worms in a cold environment and watched as the gene glowed, but dimly. Moving them to a warm environment, they saw the gene glow far more brightly. When they were moved back to the cold room, the gene continued to glow, which suggested the βmemoryβ of the warm environment was maintained.
Incredibly, when these worms reproduced, this memory, via this glowing gene, was passed on through an unprecedented 14 generations, no matter whether they received it via eggs or sperm. This means that their offspring would be βawareβ of the warm environment even without having experienced it themselves."
That's cool
I don't like cross correlations between race and intelligence
Its too complex a thing
@Seven Proxies
> Unless you've got the genome completely mapped out, you can't say for certain that the differences would only be "some small changes in appearance related DNA". Also, it doesn't make much sense that only appearance would've been affected since there is really only one enviromental factor in prehistoric times leading up to today where appearance might've granted a survival edge, and that would be the relative sunlight exposure (black skin protects better against high sun exposure, white skin allows for more absorption of sunlight in places that have fewer hours of sunlight of the year).
I obviously don't have the human genome mapped out, and of course if I did, I wouldn't have the ability to comprehend it in a meaningful way. But, what I can do is look at how long it took for other features to develop and hypothesise about how long it would take to make significant changes to the brain.
From an evolutionary perspective, all races pretty much faced the same types of hunter/gatherer survival scenarios where they had come down from their trees and began to make tools. There's not much reason for them to have massively changed.
> The fact that we can interbreed "without issue" (disputed claim
Disputed by who? I'm talking strictly from a "does a valid baby get made" perspective, not any social issues you may or may not have.
> doesn't prove anything, since humans could interbreed with far more removed variants of hominids, like the fact that white people are a result of hybridization between homo sapiens and homo neanderthalensis, while black people have no genetic trace markers from homo neanderthalensis at all.
They were still quite close.
> Neanderthals where further genetically removed from homo sapiens, in pre historic times than white people are today from black people, yet they could still interbreed.
It's because they weren't massively different. If you can still breed with another race/species, then your genetic markers haven't changed too much.
@OneTrueGod Of course it is. But it has to be put in there if someone argues that the only differences between races are "appearance based".
Now while the exact cause of IQ differences is yet to be pinned down, the fact that differences do exist also makes it impossible to claim that the only differences between races are appearance related.
Well, as a baseline, I think the west produced more intelligence, just by comparing technological progress by orders of magnitude