In so far as there tends to be an inverse correlation between those, yes. But the point has to do with the correlation between brain size (volume) and intelligence.
More evidence for the haters out there.
Between-Group Mean Differences in Intelligence in the United States Are >0% Genetically Caused: Five Converging Lines of Evidence
[Russell T. Warne](javascript:)
The American Journal of Psychology (2021) 134 (4): 480–501.
https://doi.org/10.5406/amerjpsyc.134.4.0479
" Abstract
The past 30 years of research in intelligence has produced a wealth of knowledge about the causes and consequences of differences in intelligence between individuals, and today mainstream opinion is that individual differences in intelligence are caused by both genetic and environmental influences. Much more contentious is the discussion over the cause of mean intelligence differences between racial or ethnic groups. In contrast to the general consensus that interindividual differences are both genetic and environmental in origin, some claim that mean intelligence differences between racial groups are completely environmental in origin, whereas others postulate a mix of genetic and environmental causes. In this article I discuss 5 lines of research that provide evidence that mean differences in intelligence between racial and ethnic groups are partially genetic. These lines of evidence are findings in support of Spearman’s hypothesis, consistent results from tests of measurement invariance across American racial groups, the mathematical relationship that exists for between-group and within-group sources of heritability, genomic data derived from genome-wide association studies of intelligence and polygenic scores applied to diverse samples, and admixture studies. I also discuss future potential lines of evidence regarding the causes of average group differences across racial groups. However, the data are not fully conclusive, and the exact degree to which genes influence intergroup mean differences in intelligence is not known. This discussion applies only to native English speakers born in the United States and not necessarily to any other human populations."
Whites are evil, Jews and black and everyone else are good.
That is just the world we live in today.
No one can deny this.
1 Like
Here we go, a nice way out for the libs. They can at least claim that roughly 2/3 of the intelligence differences between races has to do with environmental factors. Racism, etc.
But in so doing, they must also admit that roughly 1/3 of the intelligence differences between races are due to biology, specifically in this case having to do with brain volume (and probably other gene-mediated functions of how the brain itself actually works.. logically it is probably not ENTIRELY down to merely differences in volume alone).
Question is… can the modern lib accept the SCIENCE here even if it does validate their belief in environmental influence as the MAJOR factor explaining race differences in intelligence? They get their 2/3 victory, but at the expense of a 1/3 ‘loss’ (from their perspective).
No…this is the worldview of Americanism, we live in.
This is not so around the world.
We are dominated by a mental disease.
1 Like
As I said, this is the world WE live in.
I can’t speak to race attitudes in India, China, Brazil, Singapore, Iran or anywhere else than within ‘the west.’ Although from what I pick up, many of the non-western places have very racist attitudes, so similar to here in the west. In the west, everyone (except for the more earthy and based right-wing people) is racist against whites and racist in favor of non-whites. Maybe it is the same in other parts of the world too, I don’t know.
1 Like
This infection will kill the American empire of lies.
Haven’t I been saying this for years?
When you convince dimwits and midwits that race is a “social construct” how else would theory explain their failure to to produce parity?
The lie directs them to one conclusion…‘systemic racism.’
This is the beginning of a civil war, based no a lie.
I would tend to agree, and I would add that a group of people so entirely delusional and divorced from reality, with no value whatsoever for truth itself, cannot possibly survive for very long in reality.
I have said before that a society which cultivates entire generations so completely maddened with delusions and false ideas, intentionally divorcing them from the real world and keeping the truth from their minds, is most likely preparing them for slavery.
I understand your claim, but I don’t think this is true for individual intelligence. Humans have been eusocial since before sapiens and neanderthals diverged, so to the extent they’re dealing with environmental stressors, they’re doing it as a group. That dynamic doesn’t favor individual intelligence, because a single intelligent tribe member confers its selective benefits to the whole group, but takes on the full cost of a resource-intensive brain. Shared benefit and individual costs selects against the individual.
Where intelligence confers individual benefits is in competition for mates within the group. We have other examples of this type of adaptation – this is the peacock theory of intelligence: big brains are like a peacock’s tail. Unlike with intelligence’s usefulness in dealing with environmental stressors, this use of intelligence confers its benefits to the individual, creating a dynamic that selects for individual intelligence.
But that’s not true. In a species with an extended geographic distribution, adjacent population are similar to each other but populations distant from each other can be quite different. I mentioned ring species before, species that live around the poles or around large bodies of water, where a series of adjacent populations that can each interbreed result in populations different enough that they can’t – i.e. A can interbreed with B, B with C, C with D,…, Y with Z, but A and Z are different enough that they can’t produce fertile offspring.
Maybe you’d say that A and Z are isolated from each other? I have interpreted you as making a stronger claim.
Sapiens.
This claim is besides the point. While I think colonialism is wrong, that isn’t what I’m arguing for here. I’m arguing against your claim that the location and timing of the development of advanced civilizations and technologies is good evidence for a difference in innate intelligence between groups of humans.
… Yes, I think that’s right. It depends on what we’re calling civilization, but if we mean something like the shift from humans being primarily hunter-gatherers in small bands to being sedentary agriculturalists, that happened after humans had developed the superficial differences we would call ‘races’ today.
I’m not sure what I’ve said that you think is in tension with this.
I agree that sapiens were probably more intelligent than neanderthals, and drove neanderthals to extinction for that reason. But I think the evidence suggests not that humans won not merely by numbers, but in direct conflicts: sapiens had better weapons and more complex strategies. Surely those also meant more numbers, but my understanding is that in equally sized groups of neanderthals and sapiens, sapiens win.
I would also consider neanderthals as a distinct species, rather than a sub-species; despite the evidence for a certain amount of interbreeding, evidence suggests most hybrids were infertile. The distinction is somewhat rhetorical, but it’s an empirical question whether sapiens and neanderthals were more genetically distinct than any two populations of modern humans (they were, much more).
But I still don’t see you addressing the issue that sapiens’ greater intelligence presents for you theory. Neanderthals left Africa earlier, and lived longer in the places you argue exerted environmental stressors that favored the development of intelligence. And yet the sapiens that stayed in Africa became more intelligent than the neanderthals dealing with those stressors. Why isn’t that a problem?
I’ve looked a bit into this, and while I agree that there’s a correlation, I don’t think it’s as straightforward as cold climates exerting selective pressure towards intelligence. Temperature has developmental effects on brains for a variety of reasons – different diets, requirements for advance planning. Temperature also has acute effects on intelligence; our brains just work better in colder temperatures.
The most important point here seems to be that the correlation between average local temperature and IQ is seen in places where evolutionary changes are not a possible explanation because not enough generations have passed for such an effect to be visible (e.g. US states).
(Many other posts I’d like to respond to but don’t have time right now, I’ll try to get to them later tonight.)
. That dynamic doesn’t favor individual intelligence, because a single intelligent tribe member confers its selective benefits to the whole group, but takes on the full cost of a resource-intensive brain. Shared benefit and individual costs selects against the individual.
What?
Do you even udnerstand how natrural selection works?
An individual’s mutations that offers an advantage are passed on, gradually becoming part of group traits.
Superior individuals, belonging to the same group, pass on their genes…inferior ones do not.
The superior individual’s DNA becomes the group’s DNA…in time, after mutiple generations.
A smart neanderthal, let’s say, has more offspring than a dumb one, belonging to the same group…in wolf packs the dominant pair has offspring and the other pack member help.
The dominant pair’s traits become the entire packs traits.
There are hierarchies established within a group and without…the entire environment being the most important factor in determining which traits dominate.
But that’s not true. In a species with an extended geographic distribution, adjacent population are similar to each other but populations distant from each other can be quite different.
What does that have to do with anything?
Are you high?
Obviously those populations that became isolated last would have more in common.
Do you even udnerstand how isolation works?
The time line is important…populations adjacent, are obviously those that became isolated last…
Without isolation and time no species can ever become distinct…if you cannot understand how isolation works then you cannot understand how speciation works.
I’m arguing against your claim that the location and timing of the development of advanced civilizations and technologies is good evidence for a difference in innate intelligence between groups of humans.
Location has to do with how adverse an environment is…timing has to do with the period of time a population remains isolated, within its unique environment, to become DIFFERENT.
Adversity is about how much time is required to produce profound differences…not superficial ones.
If this confuses you, or you cannot accept it, then it explains your entire delusional thesis about human IQ reaching its peak in Africa.
Yes, I think that’s right. It depends on what we’re calling civilization, but if we mean something like the shift from humans being primarily hunter-gatherers in small bands to being sedentary agriculturalists, that happened after humans had developed the superficial differences we would call ‘races’ today.
Superficial?
See…you cannot accept that these differences were anything but superficial.
Environment does not leave the brain unaffected while it naturally selects such profound physical differences…are you that naive?
History does not support your delusions…Africans were dominated…why?
Africans never created anything comparable to what humans created when they moved out of sub-Saharan Africa.
Why didn’t Africans take white slaves?
Where are sub-Saharan Africa’s philosopher’s engineers, artists?
There was on whitey to exploit them for tens of thousands of years…and they created nothing of any worth.
I would also consider neanderthals as a distinct species, rather than a sub-species; despite the evidence for a certain amount of interbreeding, evidence suggests most hybrids were infertile.
Wong again…Europeans have Neanderthal DNA…
This is evidence that the period when the populations, that were to become Neanderthals, was close to the period when homo sapiens followed them into present day Europe…otherwise they could not have interbred.
races evolve gradually…Europeans, or white, or Caucasians, or Indo-Euroepans, were not suddenly born when they entered into the geographical area we call Europe, no more than Egyptians are Negroes because their empire developed in norther Africa.
But I still don’t see you addressing the issue that sapiens’ greater intelligence presents for you theory. Neanderthals left Africa earlier, and lived longer in the places you argue exerted environmental stressors that favored the development of intelligence. And yet the sapiens that stayed in Africa became more intelligent than the neanderthals dealing with those stressors. Why isn’t that a problem?
No, again you are not following.
Europeans didn’t suddenly become Caucasians when they migrated into Europe…there’s a long way to go before Caucasoid men became as they are…
What are the Caucasoid, on Indo-Europeans came from the Caucuses, migrating into Europe, and northern India, much later…carrying with them Neanderthal DNA from their earlier encounter.
Aryans, some have caleld them…a trigger word for your kind. Associated with Iran.
I call them Indo-Europeans for a reason.
The hominids that splintered off and migrated into Europe did so relatively early, otherwise no interbreeding would occur…here’s where you pretend you cannot udnerstand, I hope, because if you cannot then the issue is more than your brainwashing.
The humans that migrated out of Africa did so via the red sea, and then into Europe…where they cohabited and competed and interbred, for a period, with Neanderthals…so they had splintered off the African populations for a time BEFORE they came in contact with Neanderthals.
At that point IQ differences were not so great between Neanderthal and homo sapiens.
Evolution doesn’t stop wherever you want it to stop, Careless.
It is occurring right now…it never stops…only now there is no isolation, and no significant environmental stressors.
Both major factors in creating species and sub-species, such as races.
Racial diversity did not complete then and there…what followed is more significant: more isolation, more time, more adversity…to produce Mongoloids…and then Native American hybrids, Eskimos etc.
Environment includes EVERYTHING, including competing groups, of the same or other species…EVERYTHING.
Evidence does not suggest that Neanderthals were immediately exterminated…but that this happened gradually.
Neanderthal greater mass could have been a determining factor in their disappearance, during the Ice Age…
Experts say, intelligence differences, at that point, were not significant, because both used the same weapons and tools…so race creation does not end there, this is only a small part of the process.
Sorry…you cannot get away with such nonsense.
Meanwhile the Sahara kept homo sapient populations isolated from whatever was occurring in Europe.
Homo sapiens continued evolving throughout this process… migrating eastward…into the Caucuses…where Caucasians became distinctly what they are today…and some moved on, eastward, becoming Mongoloids, and into North America, via the Bering Sea, which was frozen over, back then, becoming Native Americans.
The tribes that became Europeans descended into Europe, much later, overpowering local populations, long after they first homo sapiens came in contact with Neanderthals.
Time line…you have to follow the time line.
Once more…Environment does not affect the body, whilst leaving the brain unaffected.
Natural selection is never superficial.
Otherwise, natural selection could have never produced the multiplicity of species, and sub-species - including human races - we can see are different, because they are.
Our senses did not evolve to fool us into believing that something is different when it is the same…otherwise mimicry would not have evolved. as a defensive strategy.
Even when it is a product of conscious selection, such as dog breeding, or cow breeding…the consequences are never superficial…poor Careless.
Appearance is never superficial.
I know mommy told ya otherwise, but it was a lie, Careless…a lie mothers tell their children, to protect them from nature’s injustices.
What lies, you have told yourself to preserve your comforting delusions.
I think going on with this is hopeless…on my end.
Your focus on Neanderthals tells me you have an emotional block…
Something so simple you considered an “I gotcha”…
I don’t think any evidence, any reasoning, will ever convince you to let go of your comforting lies.
You need Capitalism to be the culprit…social factors…so that’s as far as your mind can go.
Brain evolved to serve the body…protect it from whatever threatens its well-being…and your brain, sheltered and brainwashed, with comforting lies, intuitively knows that you can never acknowledge nature’s injustices, so it will never allow you to go further.
You need human differences to be reversible, correctable…so they must be made into social constructs.
So…I leave you to discuss racism and how fools, like me, believe races are not social constructs…with your equal…Sculptor.
He’ll explain to you how technologies are irrelevant…'cause, dolphins, whales, and elephants, have bigger brains.
Workers of the world unite!!!
Ta, Ta,
Then this part [from PN]:
"Now, what is still of interest to me is how Satyr and others of his ilk here would enforce [politically, legally] their own dogmatic “natural” philosophy. In other words, if they were able to encompass that power here in America.
Then the part where I ask them to note what Hitler got right and what Hitler got wrong regarding his own views on race."
How exactly would he walk the talk regarding race if he had the capacity to enforce his own particular set of assumptions in any particular community? There are those who appear content to just keep the races separate, but others seem quite prepared to go all the way.
The rest [over and over again] is history.
Oh Mary…the same shit over and over.
There’s no secret agenda, Mary.
How exactly would he walk the talk regarding race if he had the capacity to enforce his own particular set of assumptions in any particular community?
Miss Land…why would anything have to be done about it?
Why is the truth something you must “resolve”?
Is not knowing enough?
Truth is truth…what is done about it, or not, is besides the point, Mary.
The truth informs man’s decisions…his free-choices, determining his fate.
More truth, means more informed your choices are.
Lies corrupt, leading to bad choices and constant disappointing failures…Mary.
Is this hard for a modern American woman, like yourself, to understand?
Between lies and truths, which one, do you think will best serve your judgements, leading to better life choices?
But, Mary…since you asked, for the tenth time, I will respond for the third time…
Diversity, Mary, real diversity and not the bullshyte diversity you have in the states, means preservation of racial and ethnic and cultural differences.
Preservation, Mary, not assimilation, or conversion into a product or a fashion.
Every race and ethnicity should live in accordance with their ethics, ideals, principles…their own creativity, their own art…their own standards.
This implies autonomy…and separation.
Then, if races are truly social constructs, all will be okay…if not…let natural sectional determine the outcome, as it already has…but liberals and communists want to correct.
In the Russian SueprState they’ve set up a federation where each ehtnic group can maintain its autonomy within Russia’s greater federation.
Allow Muslims to live in accordance with their ideals and values…and traditions,…unlike the fake diversity of the states where all culture is erased and converted into a product, wihtin America’s culture-of-no-culture…full of lonely vacuous, lost, fracture and fragmented shzizophrenic individuals, like yourself, Mary.
This is the 3rd time I’ve answered this…will it be the last, Mary?
Nope…
Know why?
Because it isn’t genuine. It’s a feminine way of trying to “expose” my “secret” motives.
Mary, what are you expecting me to say…that I will gather them up in concentration camps and fire-up the gas chambers?
Mary, you are showing your age. Is the holocaust your only frame of reference?
Can you think of no other options other than mass extermination, like what is happening in Gaza?
Why are you silent about that holocaust, Mary?
Your “amoral” ethical system is very selective…fractured and fragmented like you.
Schizoid…
It explains why you believe your choices are determined…you cannot break free from the brainwashing, can you, Mary?
1 Like
Satyr:
"Every race and ethnicity should live in accordance with their ethics, ideals, principles…their own creativity, their own art…their own standards.
This implies autonomy…and separation.Then, if races are truly social constructs, all will be okay…if not…let natural sectional natural sectional determine the outcome,"
Separation? And for those who choose not to live separately? What specific policies would be pursued in order to achieve and then enforce this? What of things like, say, interracial marriage?
“According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the number of interracially married couples has increased from 310,000 in 1970 to 651,000 in 1980, to 964,000 in 1990, to 1,464,000 in 2000 and to 2,340,000 in 2008.” wiki
“In the 2020 United States census, 33.8 million individuals or 10.2% of the population, self-identified as multiracial.”
“In 2022, about 19% of married couples in the US were interracial, a significant increase from 3% in 1967 when interracial marriage was legalized.”
Anyway, for men and women of color – black, brown, red, yellow – at least they can rest assured that if those of your ilk ever do attain power, there would be no need for any “final solutions”.
Right?
Satyr:
When it comes to racism, that’s always going to be on the table. After all, it shows us just how far it can be taken.
Can you think of no other options other than mass extermination, like what is happening in Gaza?
Why are you silent about that holocaust, Mary?
Actually, mass extermination anywhere around the globe is something I would be opposed to. It’s a political prejudice of mine. It’s just that there does not appear to be a philosophical argument that can establish deontologically whether this is inherently and necessarily wrong. And with those like you, anyone who does not share your own dogma regarding biological imperatives is a “moron” or a “retard”.
As for Gaza, if it wasn’t the Jews pursuing the conflict, would you give a damn about it yourself? And Hamas is little more than a fanatical religious movement that those of your ilk have little tolerance regarding.
Speaking of Jews, what particular policies would you pursue regarding them if you were in power? Would you demand that they separate themselves as well from the rest of us?
Or else?
Your “amoral” ethical system is very selective…fractured and fragmented like you.
Schizoid…
How can a moral philosophy be both very selective and fractured and fragmented?
No, what I believe is that given this…
All of this going back to how the matter we call the human brain was “somehow” able to acquire autonomy when non-living matter “somehow” became living matter “somehow” became conscious matter “somehow” became self-conscious matter.
Then those here who actually believe that what they believe about all of this reflects, what, the ontological truth about the human condition itself?
Then those who are compelled in turn to insist on a teleological component as well. Usually in the form of one or another God.
Meanwhile, philosophers and scientists and theologians have been grappling with this profound mystery now for thousands of years.
…mere mortals in a No God world don’t seem able to resolve this…logically? Or naturally?
As for brainwashing, I’m not the one here who is arguing that others should think exactly like I do about any of this. On the contrary, over and over again I remind others that those with your own clique/claque mentality are everywhere.
After all, how many of these folks…
…will react to you in much the same way you react to them?
Hundreds and hundreds of God and No God fanatics actually convinced that their own assessment really, really is the One True Path to…enlightenment?
Interesting, so I did some research on 23andMe came up with this:
23andMe faced an FDA ban because they were ordered to stop marketing their saliva collection kit and personal genome service after failing to provide sufficient evidence to support their claims about the accuracy and reliability of the tests.
Also where 23andMe went wrong was in collecting massive amounts of sensitive genetic information without adequate data classification to determine appropriate security levels. 25 Mar 2025
Apparently 23andMe has been banned.
This has lead to a wave of calls for Americans to delete their DNA from the company’s database.
Many people and organisations actively prey on the vulnerable and should be accepted with at least some degree of skepticism.
Let me explain to you the levels of desperation involved in Careless…
I realized this after I posted my final reply to him…not being able to understand why he was insisting on proximity…
The idea is so ridiculous I could not imagine Careless would stoop to this new low, to preserve his delusion that race is a social construct, or that human differences are entirely superficial, intellectually, even if they exhibit profound physical differences.
Then I realized what he was trying to do…but in his desperation he made a fool of himself, once again.
Let’s recap…
First it was his theory that human IQ fully developed in Africa, in sub-Sahara Africa, and that for 80,000 years, or until trade began, the environment affected humans physically but had ZERO effect on them mentally. Humans were uniformly intelligent…this is what he wanted to believe to preserve his mythology.
This only applies to one species, buy the way…convenient, no?
Now let’s delve into Careless latest absurdity, sacrificing what’s left of his intellectual integrity.
In his mind, Europeans are white, Africans are black, Asians are yellow, Natives are red…his conception of race is continental. American.
African Americans…you see…not Negroes. Blacks are African…this is how simplistic his understanding of race is…or he wants to believe a “racist’s” understanding is.
In his mind everyone in Africa is black…everyone in Europe is white…everyone in Asia is yellow, everyone in the Americas is red.
1st issue…
Unfortunately for Careless, and his kind, Europe is not next to sub-Sahara. There are two formidable, isolating natural barriers…the Sahara desert - ergo sub-Sahara is where Negroes come from - and the Mediterranean basin…an even greater barrier.
First point. there is no proximity. There’s more proximity to the Levant, and Semitic peoples.
Second…
What we call the Caucasian race, or Indo-Europeans, did not evolve in Europe…but in the Caucasus…and they, much later, descended into India, mixing with local populations and setting up the caste system, and in Europe…mixing with local populations and setting up the civilizations we know.
They were fair skinned and fair haired…and this is why northern Indians and northern Europeans are more fair than their southern cousins.
Local populations must have migrated across the Red Sea, into the Levant, and then into Europe…some moving eastward, and to the north.
Similarly, the people that created the ancient-Egyptian civilization were not sub-Saharan Negroes, but, most probably, Semitic tribes…because Arabs and Berbers, still living in Northern Africa, are not Negroes. They share a different linguistic family tree than Indo-Europeans and sub-Saharan Negroes.
Language families give us an outline and a method of tracing heritage.
Those that created the ancient-Egyptian civilization had migrated out of Africa, a long time before they returned to norther Africa, via the Sinai, finding there Negroes in mud huts, that had used the Nile to cross the Sahara…in small insignificant numbers.
Northern Africans are not blacks…tell one of them that he’s the same as a negro and see what he says.
So, what became the Caucasian race did not evovle in Europe, but in northern Asia, explaining why they have fair straight hair and pale skin.
Homo sapiens were already there, in small numbers…but no Neanderthals, which means they were either absorb or exterminated for unknown reasons.
Were the first humans to enter Europe, finding there Neanderthals, the same as them?
No…but they were close enough to interbreed…
But IQ did not stop developing then and there, Careless…
We might speculate that whatever slight mental advantage humans had, compensated for their physical disadvantages, relative to neanderthals…but these were not what we would call Caucasians, nor Negroes…you poor fella, but a intermediate type of hominid that was later absorbed into the Indo-European invasions that followed much later.
So, there was disparity, explaining why the Neanderthals died off, but it was not the end of the racial story…but a phase, another sub-species.
Thirdly…
Environment does not miraculously only affect the body, of only one species, whilst leaving its brain unaffected.
There is no mind/body divide only for ONE species, because it suits Careless.
Appearance is not superficial, only for ONE species…it indicates inheritance… historical ancestry…its nature.
Nature does not work that way…it does not create cosmetic differences…just for the hell of it.
Back to basics, Careless, because you’ve strayed out of reasoning, into emotionally fueled ideological madness.
There can be no more different races than Negroes and Caucasians or Orientals.
We all see it…some of us do not doubt our own senses, to preserve a comforting lie.
Life evolved senses to perceive differences…so differences matter…they are never superficial. Nature does not want to fool us…
The fact that some species evolved the survival strategy of mimicry proves how important appearances are.
The fact that humans go through all that trouble to alter their appearance, proves how important it it.
The fact that moderns sacrifice their sanity to deny the importance of appearance, proves how important it is.
Fourthly…
Isolation is a fundamental aspect of speciation.
Mixing produces uniformity…not distinctiveness.
Without long periods of isolation, and adversity, no species can splinter off from a common ancestor. There would be no diversity of life…all would be uniformly the same.
Appearances are not superficial…no matter how similar a coyote is to a grey wolf they are not the same.
No matter how similar a black bear is to a grizzly, they are not the same.
Can they interbreed?
Yes…
Will the mix produce a better type of bear…no.
Natural selection selected the traits ideal for the environment each evolved in.
But, this is how desperate they’ve become to preserve their American myth, that races are social constructs, like genders, no doubt…and this is so only for ONE species…
All these mental acrobatics because they cannot endure the truth.
They lack the constitution to be true philosophers.
And now I’m done with him…
Pathetic.
Already done that…anything else?
You are not just a pretty face.
Not at the moment.
Separation? And for those who choose not to live separately? What specific policies would be pursued in order to achieve and then enforce this? What of things like, say, interracial marriage?
Mary…study the places where they have maintained real ehtnic and cultural diversity.
People, Mary, are inclined to keep to their own kind…even in the melting pot of America, this is so.
Self-love is a factor.
It’s a natural instinct, for healthy minds to want to keep to their own…and if they udnerstodo what races are, then this knowledge would suffice.
Individuals of European descent, Mary, want to stay among their own…away from the blacks and their twerking and violent impulsiveness.
Asians prefer to live among Asians…and blacks, Mary, tend to prefer living among blacks.
Nature does the work, if the system does not intervene to brainwash them with lies…like they have you.
Race mixing is one of the reasons the US is declining…unable to maintain its technological advatage.
Race mixing, is why there is no cultural nor biological cohesion in the States…leading to a second Civil War.
Race mixing is why average IQ, in the States, is dropping…violence rising…tribalism returning.
Race mixing produces uniformity…non-distinctness…individuals lost, seeking meaning and purpose…like you Mary.
Are you mixed?
As for Gaza, if it wasn’t the Jews pursuing the conflict, would you give a damn about it yourself?
I must admit, Mary, the fact that it is the Jews, the top of the victim hierarchy, in America, makes the hypocrisy all the more difficult to ignore…and your silence on it is deafening.
You spend hours repeating the same shit on hypothetical scenarios…and not a peep about a real life ehtnic cleansing, happening during your lifetime.
This hypocrisy is what inspires me to expose you and your kind.
Hypocrites.
Like your selective application of your amorality and your delusion that you have no free-will, whilst accusing others, like Objecitvists, and Nazis, as if they do have free-will.
Your not fragmented, Mary…your a hypocrite that uses compartmentalization to use double-standards…like the Jews do.
It’s so amazing and infuriating, how people, like you, can still remain unaffected by their own self-contradictions…your fractured and fragmented brain, Mary, is a product of your self-deceit.
Speaking of Jews, what particular policies would you pursue regarding them if you were in power? Would you demand that they separate themselves as well from the rest of us?
Haven’t they, already, Mary?
Jews do it themselves…it’s part of their survival strategy. They ghettoize themselves, they cultivate resentment, towards them, to preserve their distinctiveness…they set up an apartheid state…which does not trouble your amoral ethical standards…oh Mary, what a hypocrite you are.
All you see are Nazis and the Holocaust…you see nothing in your immediate environment.
you do know that Hitler wanted to move them, not kill them, don’t you?
Or has your American upbringing denied you that bit of information?
You do know that the Jews, of America, declared a trade war on Germany, before the war, don’t you Mary?
You do know that Jews, like gypsies, tend to live in their own ghettos, among their own, don’t ya Mary?
How can a moral philosophy be both very selective and fractured and fragmented?
It can’t Mary…I’m not fractured and fragmented…YOU and your kind are.
Mind/Body dissonance of trannies…you all share it. Schizoids.
Careless magically declares that natural selection only affected the human body not the brain…for tens of thousands of years…another fractured and fragmented libtard…all of you compartmentalize…self-contradict…no cohesion in your thinking…different standards for different contexts, often contradicting each other. Orwellian, Mary.
Zero intellectual integrity.
As for brainwashing, I’m not the one here who is arguing that others should think exactly like I do about any of this. On the contrary, over and over again I remind others that those with your own clique/claque mentality are everywhere.
Mary, Mary, Mary…of course you are.
You want everyone to become fractured and fragmented…to become hypocritically amoral, to believe they have no agency, because omnipotence is impossible. You want to create your uniform collective.
You use your feminine subversive, Jewish methods…undermining confidence, trying to create internal dissonance.
You desperately want others to think like you, Mary…to stop conflicts.
Mary, where have I told others to think "exactly as I do?
Mary disagreeing with someone is part of philosophical discourse.
Subjective perspectives are not equally true, Mary…there’s an objective reality those of integrity use to evaluate all perspectives.
Delusions and leis do not deserve the ‘benefit of the doubt’ Mary, because man is not omniscient.
Conflict is part of natural selection…your ideology cannot get rid of it, no matter how much you use shame to silence it…you contradict yourself with every attempt to impose your fractured and fragmented psychosis, upon the world, Mary.
You are the one insisting on uniformity of thought, to eliminate conflict, Mary…I want passionate conflict, disagreements…competition…
You are projecting your critique of yourself on me, Mary.
You’re the one insisting that abortion is good…whereas I contently repeat, that 'ALL value-judgments are relative to an objective"…so, depending no your objectives abortion can be good or it can be bad…and what detemines which is true…the consequences, Mary. Not you, not I…nature…the world wihtin which we put into practice our theories.
I, Mary, only seek truth…I don’t give a shit what people do or think…if they have arguments to support views that are not founded on lies, I’ll consider them.
Conflict is what I consider an indispensable part of natural selection.
Mary…natural selection applies to ideas…
How does science prove the superior probability of its theories, Mary?
Actions…application.
Apply your thinking, without contradicting them, Mary…see what consequences follow.
Consequences, Mary.,…that’s what determines what was closest to the truth.
Consequences, unhindered and un-sheltered from the consequences of their own actions.
Free-will…
Doesn’t matter how the mind becomes conscious Mary…just as it doesn’t matter if we know how life emerged. The fact that we experience it, means it exists.
Mary…your mind games will not work on me, as they have on you.
A dog doesn’t need to udnerstand what life is, for it to perceive life existing…
First is the act, Mary…not the word.
We see life…we experience mind…and free-will…it exists.
Your kind scrambles to declare it an illusion…so desperate you are.
No, Mary…if you experience it, and others also experience it, it exists. How it came about, how it works, is a secondary issue…we can share theories…but that it exists is not up for speculation.
When the first humans saw the sun they didn’t know what it was, or how it worked…but it existed, no Mary?
Their subjective understanding was not necessary to its objective existence.
You cannot make things disappear by ceasing to believe they exist,or by redefining them in ways that make them impossible to exist Mary.
You cannot use words to erase what you experience, Mary.
Same goes for consciousness, races, will…
Mary, none of this will register…because you are a lost cause.
Nothing anyone can say will ever get through your thickness…your fractured and fragmented defenses.
You mus know that insanity is a defensive reaction to what the conscious brain cannot endure…so it goes insane to survive.
That’s why you’ve become fragmented, dear woman…to endure what you find unendurable.
You’ll just repeat your mantra…until Godot comes knocking.
Natural selection produced different subgroups of the human species, which subgroups we call races. Each race then produced its own culture, society language tendencies values etc.
The human races are akin to the different breeds of dogs. Except dogs have been deliberately confined and bred to produce very specific traits, leading to a larger intra-species variation when it comes to dogs than when it comes to humans. In fact I believe dogs have the largest intra-species variation of any species on earth. Some dogs are four or five times the size of others. Imagine if this was true of humans, lol. And yet dogs can still reproduce with each other.
Just like humans of different races can reproduce with each other. That does not mean that the human races are not subgroups or subspecies, breeds, within the broader human species.
Human races have different physical, mental, emotional traits as individuals and different tendencies at the group societal level. Hence, the VERY different cultures the various races have created over history and continuing into the present day. Also the differences in personalities, tendencies toward things like valuing higher education vs valuing antisocial criminality, differences in mating practices, differences in creativity and levels of innovation, and differences in intelligence. All of this is rooted in biology, i.e. caused by genetic differences between groups.
Racial groups can be identified extremely accurately through genetic analysis using various combinations of allele clusters. This has already been done, and it correlates with intelligence. Certain allele groups closely associate with higher intelligence. I have already posted plenty of scientific evidence in this topic, I notice the libs here have simply ignored it. Don’t expect me to waste my time posting even more for you to merely ignore.
And even the fact that environment has influences on us, is still largely genetic. This is called epigenetics and social epistasis. I have posted about this before. Take intelligence as an example: if you are around people who are smarter and value intelligence and education you are more likely to turn out similar to them. BUT this effect is not perfect, it is still mediated by the underlying genetics of the individual him/herself. Why is this? Because the environmental influence affecting a person is acting upon the genes of that person. And the extent of the environmental influence is limited by the degree to which it can actually affect those genes.
If I have genes for extreme autism, or alcoholism, or schizophrenia, or mental retardation, no amount of environmental influence is going to alter those conditions very much. If I have genes for severe ethnocentrism (what libs call “racism”) no amount of social reeducation propaganda is going to actually change that.. but what it MIGHT do is force me to suppress this, to hide it. That has also been the positive effect of things like religion on society historically, they force group norms that keep potentially damaging genetic outliers in line. If a person has genes for being gay, and/or go through an experience that triggers their genes in a certain way during a pivotal developmental stage causing them to become gay, strong cultural and religious norms would have kept that person in line. They would hide their gayness, probably still get married and have kids like a typical person. That is an example of real environmental influence: it can cause the individual to hide, to suppress what their genes are trying to make them do, but it does not actually change them away from what they are.
Environment WILL change genes over long periods of time, due to natural selection. Nothing else changes genes over time except environmental influence, via random mutation / heritability / selection pressure / genetic drift. We are seeing the harmful effects of this today, since for a while now (since the industrial revolution, roughly speaking) the western world has been under selection against things like fertility, religiosity, and intelligence. These have been declining. Why? Because our modern environment doesn’t need or want them. The environment of the modern world has become so hostile compared to what humans evolved for, the strong fitness traits that we earned over a hundred thousand years of our history, that this hostile environment is now and quite quickly breeding these strong fitness traits out of us.
Most people need glasses. Have allergies. Autism. Some sort of mental health disorder. Gets cancer. Auto-immune disease. And on and on and on. IQ is declining rapidly. Libtardism is on the massive increase. Kids think they are weird genders now and no one wants to have kids and families anymore. Most people are atheists.
All of this shit going on today is NATURAL SELECTION. The environment is selecting out the good traits we earned over time, because they are no longer needed. THIS is the real environmental influence that libs think governs everything… yes, it governs the dynamics of the group over long periods of time, over centuries… and yet, as I pointed out above, this is only possible because of its effect on our genes.