Message from @Nerthulas
Discord ID: 638986908839706654
`These are valid concerns – because genetics are rarely accounted for in sociological research on parental, neighborhood, and school influences on children, if genetic factors are related to shared environments and the outcomes, genetic confounding is a possibility. Because sociological and other social science research frequently concludes that these social environments are major determinants of educational prospects in early childhood (Alexander, et al., 2007, Fryer and Levitt, 2006, KewalRamani, et al., 2007), adolescence (Camara and Schmidt, 1999, Hedges and Nowell, 1999, Kobrin, et al., 2007) and beyond (Elman and O'Rand, 2004, Roscigno and Ainsworth-Darnell, 1999), it is important for sociological researchers to critically examine this literature to evaluate its conclusions.`
I don't care about naked theory
@Nerthulas it cant be the case that things could be heritable because that would be racist
@TheUserNameofPeace, have you actually looked into the sociological side?
therefore it must be something else
@BabygottBach yes
Or are you only familiar with the behavioral geneticist side?
I'm sorry you're majoring in sociology
Nice!
We're going to eliminate it
You've got no argument against the sociologists
Sociology has what 80 percent replication crisis
Lmao
Sociology has a huge body of evidence that IQ is social
@Deleted User, so does genetics
(((huge body of evidence)))
we've addressed this please stop posting it
`The exponential fall in genome sequencing costs led to the use of GWAS studies which could simultaneously examine all candidate-genes in larger samples than the original finding, where the candidate-gene hits were found to almost always be false positives and only 2-6% replicate;[7][8][`
😄
Have you addressed this passage?
@BabygottBach
Epistasis is biologically real but generally insignificant for selection purposes
https://t.co/tPjSuuDw13?amp=1
The replicability of sociology was brought up
But genetics also has this problem
how can anyone possibly cope
Smart parents have better SES to pass to their kids because they are smart @BabygottBach Classic example that correlation does not equal causation
tapirs have the largest pecker
one for the hall of retard
GWAS was replaced with GCTA which found that the traits were highly polygenic @BabygottBach
so yes I've addressed it I think three times now
`Lewontin claims that equation (1′)(1′) above presents the most accurate picture of the contributions to phenotypic variance. He goes on to argue that VI,VG×EVI,VG×E and COV(G,E)COV(G,E) are not negligible. In fact, he argues that these are always part and parcel of the variance in traits. As a result, apportioning the phenotypic variance between genes and environment is no easy matter and standard analyses of variance simply cannot come up with useful and informative values for h2bhb2 and h2h2. `
soft science lol
Listen, yo. Maybe there are neuron elves which help on IQ tests in some environments and not others. So we've got to toss out all your highly correlated genetic IQ data.
Sociology TM
"reading to your kids makes smart kids", or it's just the fact that smart parents read to their kids that inherit their intelligence
I know a lot of stupid people who read novels like crazy
@BabygottBach that quote is meaningless without context
lol