Message from @asdf
Discord ID: 327667732848050176
Summary of Human Differences
We are often told that all men are created equal, but this is the biggest lie in world history. Not one person was ever born equal to another; some people have worse hearing and some people have better, some people are blind and some people have better than perfect vision. It is obvious when this is examined that this notion is simply lunacy. The crux of inequality applies not only in regards to the differences in the sexes (as centrists like Sargon of Akkad like to point out), but to even beyond that in the human races. These racial differences can even be broken down further into ethnic group differences, but the broadest category that covers the most differences is race. “What actually is race?” you may ask. Well race is simply put, the taxonomically defined different genetic ancestral groups. Races can be identified by genetic testing, bone structure, skull shape, skull size, and a variety of different biological aspects. Races score differently on intelligence tests, and these intelligence tests are 50-80% genetically determined. (As evidenced by twins reared apart studies, transracial adoption studies, and genes being identified in association with intelligence) This is due to the evolutionary differences in how groups evolved. Some groups (Europeans and East Asians) evolved in the far north where cold winters and agriculture accelerated the development of civilization. It put a higher bar for traits like intelligence and deferral of gratification. This is evidenced by the work of Philippe Rushton, Richard Lynn, Charles Murray, Steven Pinker, and the many other accredited social scientists who have studied this topic. This is a large part of the explanation for why there is such large socioeconomic inequality in the world.
This is so true
this is on the sexes rather than race
how long is this?
In fact, a case
where a person of one nationality is closer genetically to someone
of a distant nationality than to his or her own compatriots
never happens. If you’re Swedish, every Swede (not counting
recent immigrants) is genetically closer to you than any person
in Japan.
For whatever reason, a lot of people think that regression to the mean will keep happening to someone’s descendants until they research original population’s mean. This is not true. Once the next generation inherits an additive genetic advantage in some trait it keeps it. Their kids and their grand kids will continue to have it.
Can anyone here please link to evidence that hapas are more likely to have mental health problems?
Thanks
He's arguing "no it's actually different if they are specifically Japanese-German hapas"
What a retard
@asdf this applies universally
Objectives. This study compared the health and risk status of adolescents who identify with 1 race with those identifying with more than 1 race.
Conclusions. Adolescents who self-identify as more than 1 race are at higher health and behavior risks. The findings are compatible with interpreting the elevated risk of mixed race as associated with stress.
speaking of which
two idiots with no expertise are mad at Rage After the Storm
@vaultright apologize for the tag but misinfo annoys me
and I want people to know this will be happening
kraut and jeff are about to go full steven jay gould on us @The Goat
I'd like to see what the have to say lol
Probably radical centrist nonsense
if you want a taste of Holiday (it seems like his thing, just using Kraut's platform) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XUs2ZdLksSc&t=52s
I think iowa is a good place to live
Not very scenic compared to other Midwest states, but probably the most conservative.
Dr. Sakaluk,
My roommate had some reading assigned to him in class and I decided to read the article as well. I felt like some of the claims that it made were wrong and I wanted your opinion. Below is a quote from the article.
“There is no biological basis for classifying race according to skin color instead of body form—or according to any other variable, for that matter. All that exists is variability in what people look like—and the arbitrary and culturally specific ways different societies classify that variability. There is nothing left over that can be called race. This is why race is a myth.”
It’s my understanding that we can almost exactly classify people, surely not based on some phenotype but based on things like haplogroups and mitochondrial DNA. Putting people into a "Race" is surely a shallow classification but it could be done. Is this incorrect? This article later goes on to talk about how Americans believe that an Avocado is a vegetable because they eat it in salad but a Brazilian will tell you it’s a fruit because they eat it with sugar; and that just like this example cultural differences change the perspectives of people. This still doesn't change the fact that an Avocado is a fruit. I feel like this article conflates a lot of scientific topics. Specifically saying that simply because there is no accurate way to classify people based on phenotype that there is no way to classify them at all. Am I wrong?
I've gotten to a point where debating people on this has become tiresome. I've just become smug and sarcastic. If you're debating someone about race realism ask them to describe the process of Evolution to you. Ask them to describe the specific selection pressures that confer adaptations to mammals and how they work. If a person doesn't understand the biological principle of Adaptive Radiation then debating them will literally go nowhere.