Message from @Xinyue
Discord ID: 523893932493635604
People are not a blank slate, different groups of people will react to different environments in different ways such that they're predictible
@Bird Wizard marxists think feels don't reals
shhhiet
Yes, people who accumulated those differences due to their unique environments. Darwin literally proves the entire viewpoint. The individual differences in genes are selected for *by the environment.* It is the *environment* that moulds people.
*NO FEELZ ALLOWED TODAY*
Like jfc
darwin is a marxist confirmed
```Yes, people who accumulated those differences due to their unique environments. Darwin literally proves the entire viewpoint. The individual differences in genes are selected for by the environment. It is the environment that moulds people.```
over hundreds of thousands of years that is 😩
Not even that. Much, much shorter timespans
generational ones
provide evidence that supports your claim
example?
arguing genes and environmental effects is also materialistic
it took white people 50,000 years of divergent evolution to advance two standard deviations of IQ over Africans
If you place people in an extreme enough environment, this can select for new type of group in just couple of generations compared to the group as it was on arrival. Because those who cannot adopt to the extreme environment will be cast out. Lets for the sake of argument take Antarctica as the environment in question.
???????????????
u do understand what you're implying, you're implying a survival of the fittest
dumping someone on antartica to see if he's going to surivive
Yes I do. But this proves the environment as essential and primary to the individual or "muh people"
so if we took a bunch of gorillas and put them in antarctica and kept putting gorillas in antarctica they were rapidly evolve
the argument is,
u'll needlessly kill people until u realize that dumping a guy with more hair has more chances
we have things that help overcome some the basic survival filters
we no longer live in a cave
that if you dump say, 2,000 people on Antarctica, some of them are people much better adapted to that kind of environment, say the Nenets people or the Greenlanders, and some others are like Namibians and Saudis, you won't probably have the latter group members present after two generations because they died out. You would, though, perhaps still have Nenets and Greenlanders
so the environment determines the composition of the group here
no way around it
Different Peoples react to Different Environments in Different Ways, Environment triggers those genes in you that are innate to you, but it can only trigger something that is innate to you.
Yes, there is genetic mutation, but it doesn't change things in radical ways over a few generations or you would see really high IQ Nogs in USA and South Africa on Average...
but you don't ..
^
"desert nogs die in snowland" wow what a boring and asinine point
people will die much sooner, before their ability to adapt kicks in
and this implies dumping them naked
> innate
you do mean the genes which
a) are literally material environment, that is, they came from the primordial soup of matter
b) were evolved in times due to changes in the environment
c) were further adjusted by interactions between the subject and foreign microbiological elements from the environment
@AdorableStormtrooper ?
Apartheid Africa was way different from the rest of Africa in ways that are predictable, they created a Wealthy Western society which Left Intellectuals hoped would carry on after nogs took over, but they didn't...
Different Peoples react to Different Environments in Different ways that don't change radically over short spans of time.
to claim otherwise is folly
Environment is primary here, without it you have nothing. The genes themselves arouse from what we consider "environment"
```> innate
you do mean the genes which
a) are literally material environment, that is, they came from the primordial soup of matter
b) were evolved in times due to changes in the environment
c) were further adjusted by interactions between the subject and foreign microbiological elements from the environment
@AdorableStormtrooper ?```
what even is your contention?
that environment is primary
you've just proven that it isn't with your previous example