Racism and dogs...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by KarlRex

Danish military have a problem with immigrants not performing to standards in their IQ test.

Swedish military have a problem with - yadda yadda...

How come some genetic variances are more apt than others?

Might it be because of genetics?

Or do you refuse genetics, thus pushing science back some Ummmmpteenth of deceniums?

---

Perhaps I'm just genetically too advanced for some people to understand?

http://time.com/91081/what-science-s...-and-genetics/

Quote:

---

Tribalism seems to be the default mode of human political organization. It can be highly effective: The world’s largest land empire, that of the Mongols, was a tribal organization. But tribalism is hard to abandon, again suggesting that an evolutionary change may be required.

---

One shouldn't try to argue with superior people who have evolved beyond one's primitive tribal genes.

As I have noted elsewhere, there is little or no support for any sub-group's genetics mattering on IQ scores, problem solving, etc. Genetics profoundly affects any individual, but within group variation in genetic difference equals or exceeds between group variance thus strongly suggesting that such labels as "race" are useless beyond a few basic shared physical characteristics on a genetic level.

Cultures have a profound impact however. Are students taught to think critically about information or does the culture value acceptance of authority and not questioning one's elders? Does the culture preference conformity to group norms or individual achievement and how do these values manifest? These things can make a profound impact on IQ scores (since those tests mostly preference Western style learning) group compatibility, etc.

So if the Danes are having a problem with immigrants performing to standard, it is likely because the immigrants come from a culture or cultures the preference different values and approaches to learning that leave them under-prepared by Danish standards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilrandir

IIRC, you were about to embark on some political career (at least you said it was time to do something instead of just talking) before you took sabbatical. Any progress on it?

---

Let's hope not!

Normally I'd agree, but considering he's in sweden I cant exactly say it would be a downgrade to have him in government.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

[...] within group variation in genetic difference equals or exceeds between group variance thus strongly suggesting that such labels as "race" are useless beyond a few basic shared physical characteristics on a genetic level.

---

Such formulations seem rather deceitful. If the vast majority of the human genome is invariant between populations, then the average difference between populations will be tiny, while the differences within populations can be large, even if different populations have distinct signatures (drowned out in the average by the overwhelming amount of similarities).

You only need to change a single nucleotide (e.g. an A to a T) in the human genome to get a big change in phenotype. Sickle-cell disease is one such example.

Many single-nucleotide variations (SNPs) specific to certain populations are also known, as one would expect. And apparently:

Quote:

---

Despite their potential significance, population-specific SNPs have not been studied extensively.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Viking

Such formulations seem rather deceitful. If the vast majority of the human genome is invariant between populations, then the average difference between populations will be tiny, while the differences within populations can be large, even if different populations have distinct signatures (drowned out in the average by the overwhelming amount of similarities).

You only need to change a single nucleotide (e.g. an A to a T) in the human genome to get a big change in phenotype. Sickle-cell disease is one such example.

Many single-nucleotide variations (SNPs) specific to certain populations are also known, as one would expect. And apparently:

---

But these formulations are exactly the point. The two questions of how to draw populations and the presence or significance of distinguishing characteristics between populations are open questions, not givens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Viking

Such formulations seem rather deceitful. If the vast majority of the human genome is invariant between populations, then the average difference between populations will be tiny, while the differences within populations can be large, even if different populations have distinct signatures (drowned out in the average by the overwhelming amount of similarities).

You only need to change a single nucleotide (e.g. an A to a T) in the human genome to get a big change in phenotype. Sickle-cell disease is one such example.

Many single-nucleotide variations (SNPs) specific to certain populations are also known, as one would expect. And apparently:

---

I am all for more study on the issue.

My larger point was the profound impact of culture as opposed to genetics on a number of the issues being brought up. After all, first generation Americans generally evince IQs, values, etc. fully in line with those of multi-generational Americans. The difference is the change in culture, not the small degree of genetic change possible in one generation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

I am all for more study on the issue.

My larger point was the profound impact of culture as opposed to genetics on a number of the issues being brought up. After all, first generation Americans generally evince IQs, values, etc. fully in line with those of multi-generational Americans. The difference is the change in culture, not the small degree of genetic change possible in one generation.

---

See how the Pakistani immigrants fare in the UK and US. The former tend to come from rural areas, and are generally conservative (by Pakistani standards). The latter tend to come from professional classes, and are generally liberal (by Pakistani standards). Genetics are the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

See how the Pakistani immigrants fare in the UK and US. The former tend to come from rural areas, and are generally conservative (by Pakistani standards). The latter tend to come from professional classes, and are generally liberal (by Pakistani standards). Genetics are the same.

---

Indeed. One of my daughter's good friends in high school comes from such descent. Her father came to the USA for school and stayed, working as a chemical engineer. Thinks of himself as an entrepreneur, though he is pretty corporate. Is a practicing muslim, though not the strictest in keeping halal. Plays Spanish style guitar and is always working on his golf game. Her mother was the arranged bride who came here and now teaches science at an Islamic private school. She adopted the hijab here about10-12 years back, is fairly devout and stricter in her religious observance than her husband. Neither of her girls went to that private school though they have the money and they both are passionate about their two girls getting excellent grades and education. Both girls eschew the hijab, love films, and adore rap music. Though both travel yearly to Pakistan, neither likes to speak Urdu at home even though they are fluent. Neither has anything resembling a central Asian accent.

In short, the cultural mores of the USA are as, if not more, salient to them then the cultural values the parents were raised with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Montmorency

But these formulations are exactly the point. The two questions of how to draw populations and the presence or significance of distinguishing characteristics between populations are open questions, not givens.

---

They rather give the impression that the questions are no longer open.

If, as a different scientific paper puts it: "individuals from different populations can be genetically more similar than individuals from the same population", then what use appears at first glance in comparing different populations? Such formulations may be technically and logically correct, but I think they are easy to misinterpret (as the same paper also puts it: "The fact that, given enough genetic data, individuals can be correctly assigned to their populations of origin is compatible with the observation that most human genetic variation is found within populations, not between them.").

I presume that over selected regions of the human and chimpanzee genomes, a human can be more genetically similar to a chimpanzee than other humans. In the context of this debate, it would be interesting to see how large such regions can be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

I am all for more study on the issue.

My larger point was the profound impact of culture as opposed to genetics on a number of the issues being brought up. After all, first generation Americans generally evince IQs, values, etc. fully in line with those of multi-generational Americans. The difference is the change in culture, not the small degree of genetic change possible in one generation.

---

The powerful potential of culture and, presumably more importantly, things like education (maybe a part of culture by some definitions), is why people pointing at actual IQ studies as evidence that some groups are smarter than others because of their genetic heritage are getting it wrong. The understanding of the topic should be far too inadequate to confidently draw such conclusions at present.

For the same reason, opposing activists insisting, for whatever reasons they might have, that such genetic differences do not exist (some might dodge the question altogether by branding its debate as 'racist', I guess) are also getting it wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Viking

For the same reason, opposing activists insisting, for whatever reasons they might have, that such genetic differences do not exist (some might dodge the question altogether by branding its debate as 'racist', I guess) are also getting it wrong.

---

They do not exist. The paper you quoted says exactly that.

As far as I know, there are no papers that show a particular nation, or race more intelligent than others. There are thousands of pseudo scientific papers that show that, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

As far as I know, there are no papers that show a particular nation, or race more intelligent than others.

---

http://simplyjews.blogspot.com/2014/...ter-extra.html

Vladimir Medinsky, Minister of Culture of the Russian Federation:
"I think that after all the disasters that hit Russia in the twentieth century, beginning with World War I and ending with the "Perestroika", the fact that Russia has been preserved and developed, proves that our people have one extra chromosome."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sarmatian

They do not exist. The paper you quoted says exactly that.

---

As far as I can see, none of the papers discuss intelligence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilrandir

IIRC, you were about to embark on some political career (at least you said it was time to do something instead of just talking) before you took sabbatical. Any progress on it?

---

Yepp, all the questions I worked for are now public data :)

The state can no longer hide the information as it is out, now the problem is just that people are quite often somewhat to retarded to get information... But when the nation goes to hell, at least they can't blame it on data about it not being public :)

Last rape-survey from 2012 - 2017 (all cases) was real cute, 95%+ of assault rapes commited by immigrants, as an example.

[totally unacceptable]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Husar

Perhaps I'm just genetically too advanced for some people to understand?

http://time.com/91081/what-science-s...-and-genetics/



One shouldn't try to argue with superior people who have evolved beyond one's primitive tribal genes.

---

Speaking of tribal primitive genes, how's celebrating New years in Cologne doing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

As I have noted elsewhere, there is little or no support for any sub-group's genetics mattering on IQ scores, problem solving, etc. Genetics profoundly affects any individual, but within group variation in genetic difference equals or exceeds between group variance thus strongly suggesting that such labels as "race" are useless beyond a few basic shared physical characteristics on a genetic level.

---

Wrong.

Sure whites and blacks are genetically rather similar, just like asians and whites are, or [removed] are... and and and...

With that said, there are still DNA-differences between the groups, and yes, more important than skin colour.

Quote:

---

Cultures have a profound impact however. Are students taught to think critically about information or does the culture value acceptance of authority and not questioning one's elders? Does the culture preference conformity to group norms or individual achievement and how do these values manifest? These things can make a profound impact on IQ scores (since those tests mostly preference Western style learning) group compatibility, etc.

So if the Danes are having a problem with immigrants performing to standard, it is likely because the immigrants come from a culture or cultures the preference different values and approaches to learning that leave them under-prepared by Danish standards.

---

Culture also have an effect on dna.

Inbreeding is one factor, ties in closely with intelligence. Arabs and Africans tend to inbreed way more than whites, as an example.

Who gets a child (or more) is also a cultural factor that effects DNA... Is the society making strong but dumb guys get kids, or non-aggressive and smart? In example.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

I am all for more study on the issue.

My larger point was the profound impact of culture as opposed to genetics on a number of the issues being brought up. After all, first generation Americans generally evince IQs, values, etc. fully in line with those of multi-generational Americans. The difference is the change in culture, not the small degree of genetic change possible in one generation.

---

This even went to court in the states, court basically said "yeah black people are stupid".

Even today USA have to accept their University students after race, otherwise it would be real unfair.

It's hard to get in if you are east asian, real easy if you are black.

Blacks seem to need some help on the intellectual field.

I think it's called "Affirmitive Action", google it..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

See how the Pakistani immigrants fare in the UK and US. The former tend to come from rural areas, and are generally conservative (by Pakistani standards). The latter tend to come from professional classes, and are generally liberal (by Pakistani standards). Genetics are the same.

---

Genetics are not the same, in Pakistan people evolved different in the rural areas compared to in the cities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Viking

As far as I can see, none of the papers discuss intelligence.

---

There's a whole internet of information :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Wrong.

Sure whites and blacks are genetically rather similar, just like asians and whites are, or [removed] are... and and and...

With that said, there are still DNA-differences between the groups, and yes, more important than skin colour.

---

Of course there are differences. Asiatics and Amerinds are highly likely to carry the marker for intolerance/allergy to ethanol. Certain subgroups are prone to sickle cell anemia. West African descent persons are likely to carry a higher percentage of "fast twitch" muscle fibers, etc. Most such things are largely "physical" differences. I have yet to see good research indicating a base difference in intelligence issues based upon race.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Culture also have an effect on dna.

Inbreeding is one factor, ties in closely with intelligence. Arabs and Africans tend to inbreed way more than whites, as an example.

Who gets a child (or more) is also a cultural factor that effects DNA... Is the society making strong but dumb guys get kids, or non-aggressive and smart? In example.

---

Now THIS is an elegant argument. We know that close inbreeding does dampen the genetic potential for intelligence, at least over the course of several generations. I also acknowledge that cultures whose values skew breeding pairings could end up reinforcing those genetic traits that contribute to a reduced propensity for genetic intellectual factors.

The SOURCE has nothing to do with race per se, but can manifest itself in a fashion that appears "racial" depending on how completely the culture in question and the phenotype in question cohere.

Good argument Kadagar

Chicken or egg, what came first.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh

Of course there are differences. Asiatics and Amerinds are highly likely to carry the marker for intolerance/allergy to ethanol. Certain subgroups are prone to sickle cell anemia. West African descent persons are likely to carry a higher percentage of "fast twitch" muscle fibers, etc. Most such things are largely "physical" differences. I have yet to see good research indicating a base difference in intelligence issues based upon race.



Now THIS is an elegant argument. We know that close inbreeding does dampen the genetic potential for intelligence, at least over the course of several generations. I also acknowledge that cultures whose values skew breeding pairings could end up reinforcing those genetic traits that contribute to a reduced propensity for genetic intellectual factors.

The SOURCE has nothing to do with race per se, but can manifest itself in a fashion that appears "racial" depending on how completely the culture in question and the phenotype in question cohere.

Good argument Kadagar

---

WHO (World Health Organization) made a report about Arabs and inbreeding. It seem hard to find on the internet now :(

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin...he_Middle_East

Search from there.


However, other factors plays in.

Here in the north, as an example, you have to plan on having no/next to no food for some 4-6 months of the year.

In Africa and in the Middle East you do not.

People who didn't plan got weeded out.

The list goes on and on and on and on...

We have seen what happens in Sweden when we accept Arabs and black people.

The nation has gone to ****.

Sweden used to be an exemplary nation, now we are way behind other European nations. All because of arabs and blacks.

Some areas the police have lost control in completely, that would have been unthinkable when I grew up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Chicken or egg, what came first.

---

Whenever I read your posts, and remember you are sane, I still have to remind myself you live a whiff away from Amsterdam, smoooooking country.

It's a sane question. SF put himself in a dificult position, he would first have to take for a fact that races exist and have different traits if he wants to ask himself where they come from.

I don't smoke by the way I am more the cocaine-type

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

It's a sane question. SF put himself in a dificult position, he would first have to take for a fact that races exist and have different traits if he wants to ask himself where they come from.

I don't smoke by the way I am more the cocaine-type

---

In all fairness, anyone jabbering against me is in a though position on these issues 2017 - as the facts are now proven in Sweden and out there.

Again, 95% assault rapes being from immigrants over the last years comes to mind. These facts are now irrefutable, as we have gone through all the court cases.



Oh an Frags, if you do cocaine (I don't know if it was a joke or not), please stop and seek help - or just stop - even better.

Hey it's me, i already know about Sweden and it's curious suicide for quite some time

Belongs in Immigration-topic though

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Hey it's me, i already know about Sweden and it's curious suicide for quite some time

---

I might write a book about it one day...

Did you know Sweden in 2010 changed it's ground-laws (in USAnian that would mean "the constitution")

Sweden is now a multi-cultural country.

It takes 2 sitting governments to change it :(

So 2022 is the fastest those pesky swedes could redeem it, but given it's soon 2018 and not a word, 2026 is the first "sane-world" fastest.

2030 is the real term from me, IMHO.





If Sweden hasn't turned into Yugoslavia by then :(

What would you have the constitution changed into? It's already too late, changing the constitution was just a kick in the face abandon all hope thee that stays in this place. Sweden will just have to serve as an example to otbers on what reckless immigration-policy and mass-denial and cultivated denial can do

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

What would you have the constitution changed into? It's already too late, changing the constitution was just a kick in the face abandon all hope thee that stays in this place. Sweden will just have to serve as an example to otbers on what reckless immigration-policy and mass-denial and cultivated denial can do

---

Chill mate, Yugoslavia managed to sort it, I am sure Sweden will as well.

Regardless, people from Africa or close thereby don't tend to like the arctic cold all that much anyway.

So I am sure that it in 50-100 years it will have worked itself out for the best, with Sweden being from the arctic circle and up - with a new caliphate around the Stockholm and southern regions.




All the mass-graves that will be required troubles me somewhat, but hey, I don't live in Sweden so... :)

Not what I would like to see. You are a bit of my mr Hyde KAD's, what can happen if you take what I think to the exreme

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Not what I would like to see. You are a bit of my mr Hyde KAD's, what can happen if you take what I think to the exreme

---

Sweden already have 95% of assault rapes with immigrants as perputators.

Sweden already have no idea how to get inbreeds into a modern western society.


We have some woods in Sweden... So we have 3 outcomes.

1. These people will go back to some agricultural background around the arctic circle and make their life as they please.

2. We welcome them into a modern wellfare nation and **** them if they don't make it.

3. Taxpayers will continue to pay like the highest taxes in the world - and still have to give birth in cars or get sent to Finland - if they want to have kids, as the wellfare state has fallen - because of blacks and arabs in the gene-stock.



On TotalWar.Org I should mention that there is a 4th option, I just shudder to think about it.

Germany 1930's
Yugoslavia 1990's

Congratulations for going multicultural! :2thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

On TotalWar.Org I should mention that there is a 4th option, I just shudder to think about it.

Germany 1930's
Yugoslavia 1990's

---

Actually, on second thought, you are absolutely right, on this forum we should mention the unfortunate but necessary ways in which good old Germany dealt with retarded people who stand in the way of greatness, purity and public health.

http://www.autism-pdd.net/testdump/test21335.htm
https://www.warhistoryonline.com/wor...-chambers.html
https://www.ushmm.org/information/ex...f-the-disabled

:clown:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Yepp, all the questions I worked for are now public data :)

The state can no longer hide the information as it is out, now the problem is just that people are quite often somewhat to retarded to get information... But when the nation goes to hell, at least they can't blame it on data about it not being public :)

---

So your political career is over?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kadagar_AV

Chill mate, Yugoslavia managed to sort it, I am sure Sweden will as well.

---

Yugoslavia is no more. Do you wish Sweden to follow suit?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilrandir

Yugoslavia is no more. Do you wish Sweden to follow suit?

---

The tone of his posts doesn't suggest that he WISHES Sweden to be dismembered -- only that he thinks it all too likely to happen.


Frags/Kadagar:

While I have been arguing that "race" is not the core issue of the problem, and that a clash in cultural values is the core concern, I am actually in agreement with your basic premise. The current immigration and refugee policies being used in Sweden, The Netherlands, and numerous other EU countries are well intentioned but quasi-suicidal.

Multi-culturalism is a pipe dream and pursuing that mirage is going to tear at the foundations of Western culture in Europe until their is either a collapse or a horrific pogromatic backlash.

Cultural assimilation with some degree of cultural hybridity can be made to work provided that the influx of newcomers does not functionally overwhelm the existing core culture through sheer numbers. Over time, assimilation DOES create changes and adaptations in the existing host culture and generally for the better. Assuming all cultures are "equally valid" is to devalue your own identity -- which isn't healthy individually or societally. By all means, we should acknowledge that our own cultural values may be imperfect or lived up to imperfectly, and we should respect others' culture of itself.

This does NOT mean you have to accord equal treatment/use/allowance for others' cultural values when they are seeking to join your polity. A decent respect for the newcomer is appropriate, but does not mandate and should not mandate that natives functionally forgo their own values and beliefs to preference the those of the newcomers.

My own country was founded and built by immigrants (most voluntary, most European by ancestry). Yet long periods of my country's history have featured restrictions to immigration -- mostly to allow for assimilation before accepting another influx of newcomers. The nearly unrestricted refugee and immigration policies occurring in some EU countries seems to me almost suicidal.

Sweden and the Netherlands really can't be compared, things are pretty cozy here. What we call the leftist church is a dyig breed, in Sweden that is very different, they are frankly simply not sane, and the arrogance is bewildering, what doesn't work must work because even thinking that it won't is unacceptable. The outcome of the sum must be 100, and if it isn't they will just change the numbers. They know they are lying to themselves but the social control accepts no dissent. The Netherlands is much more realistic, the Dutch don't really care about being insensitive and things are better here because of that. Multifundamentalists still exist but not as many anymore