Movement for Black Lives releases its agenda

[Loren Pechtel]

The Old World had year-round alcohol for a long, long time. Those especially vulnerable to it's lure were likely to take themselves out of the gene pool...

Right...because people who drink alcohol never find themselves in bed with someone.

In a society with good contraception, yes.

 

[repoman]

what's up with the freakout in Milwaukee?



So what kind of "Gibs Me Dats" will they get for this idiotic rioting? This shit has been going on since the 2001 Cincinnati riots. They got rewarded.



And yes, I think that the white guys in the Bureau of Land Management incident needed to not be rewarded in any way at all for their freakout. The response should have been Whiskey Rebellion style.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Right...because people who drink alcohol never find themselves in bed with someone.

In a society with good contraception, yes.

and you really think that Native Americans were using contraception most of the time when having drunk sex when the Europeans first arrived?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blo...sparities-among-races-ethnicities-and-nations

Author mentions Flynn affect as well as variables that contribute to race/ethnic/national IQ difference such as nutrition, disease, and literacy rate.

Not included in the article--I will add that nutrition, disease, and microbiome should be expected to be very similar for twins and further the ways in which identical twins react to those variables should be expected to be more similar than how fraternal twins react to those variables.

 

[repoman]

 

[JonA]

All races learn and use language equally.

And language has very little relation to intelligence except in extreme cases not representative of general human abilities.

 

[untermensche]

All races learn and use language equally.

And language has very little relation to intelligence except in extreme cases not representative of general human abilities.

The ability to acquire a language has EVERYTHING to do with human "intelligence", whatever that is.

It is what separates humans from all other animals.

And most of these so-called "intelligence" tests are merely teats to determine how people deal with language.

They test exposure to kinds of language use, not "intelligence".

The animal is created by two things. Genetic endowment and exposure. Without exposure and you do not get full genetic expression.

This is clearly seen in language.

To acquire a language merely requires exposure to a language at a critical stage of development. There is no "work" on the part of the animal to acquire the language. It is a part of it's genetic expression like growth.

But if you do not get the proper exposure at the critical stage of development you do not get the expression. Everybody understands this who has tried to learn a second language after a certain age. It is work because you have passed the critical stage of language acquisition.

Intelligence = Genetic endowment + Exposure (environment) at critical stages of development

And one of the most critical stages is the womb. That is why twin studies are flawed. They are looking at people who developed in very similar conditions because they developed in the same womb. Their "intelligence" is partly a result of this exposure, not only a result of their genes.

 

[untermensche]

Right...because people who drink alcohol never find themselves in bed with someone.

In a society with good contraception, yes.

In every society.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Some people think poor in the US have more children than rich. So that would affect the natural selection you're talking about if true.

Yes, that's true. It has long been known as the "dysgenic effect," more recently as the "Idiocracy effect." It works in the opposite direction of the "Flynn effect," which is the observable upward secular shift in intelligence from one generation to the next along any given ancestral line, for an unknown cause but probably epigenetics, 3 IQ points every decade. The Flynn effect is currently faster, overshadowing the dysgenic effect, but the Flynn effect probably has an upper limit and will eventually stop, and the dysgenic effect has a very distant theoretical lower limit, so the dysgenic effect will probably win in the end.

The observations and assertions by you and Loren are not derived from a consistent explanatory theory, i.e, because the Flynn Effect applies more to such persons as the poor and the ethnicities proposed to have less IQs, it means their potentials have been underestimated.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And language has very little relation to intelligence except in extreme cases not representative of general human abilities.

The ability to acquire a language has EVERYTHING to do with human "intelligence", whatever that is.

It is what separates humans from all other animals.

And most of these so-called "intelligence" tests are merely teats to determine how people deal with language.

They test exposure to kinds of language use, not "intelligence".

I don't recall anything about how people deal with language on the IQ tests I've seen. There is vocabulary on such tests--what you know, not how you use it. There will also be some math, some pattern manipulation.

But if you do not get the proper exposure at the critical stage of development you do not get the expression. Everybody understands this who has tried to learn a second language after a certain age. It is work because you have passed the critical stage of language acquisition.

Intelligence = Genetic endowment + Exposure (environment) at critical stages of development

And one of the most critical stages is the womb. That is why twin studies are flawed. They are looking at people who developed in very similar conditions because they developed in the same womb. Their "intelligence" is partly a result of this exposure, not only a result of their genes.

In other words, genetics matters--just the opposite of what you said!

 

[untermensche]

The ability to acquire a language has EVERYTHING to do with human "intelligence", whatever that is.

It is what separates humans from all other animals.

And most of these so-called "intelligence" tests are merely teats to determine how people deal with language.

They test exposure to kinds of language use, not "intelligence".

I don't recall anything about how people deal with language on the IQ tests I've seen. There is vocabulary on such tests--what you know, not how you use it. There will also be some math, some pattern manipulation.

The test was not entirely in language?

But if you do not get the proper exposure at the critical stage of development you do not get the expression. Everybody understands this who has tried to learn a second language after a certain age. It is work because you have passed the critical stage of language acquisition.

Intelligence = Genetic endowment + Exposure (environment) at critical stages of development

And one of the most critical stages is the womb. That is why twin studies are flawed. They are looking at people who developed in very similar conditions because they developed in the same womb. Their "intelligence" is partly a result of this exposure, not only a result of their genes.

In other words, genetics matters--just the opposite of what you said!

What others have said is that the genes tell us everything.

Total nonsense.

Expression is not simply due to genes.

Expression is also dependent on exposure (environment).

If one is exposed to Chinese at the right time one will acquire the Chinese language. No work involved, mere exposure will give the individual the language.

If one is exposed too late then one may be able to struggle to learn the language to some degree but one will not acquire it in the same manner or to the same degree.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

That was their condition before they were saved from the jungle. And that was just from their own people. Their genetic incompetence in dealing with the natural world made things even worse for them.

There is no such thing as "genetic incompetence".

In any group, it doesn't matter what the average is, there will be some with high "intelligence" and some, like you, with clearly inferior "intelligence".

What a group does has everything to do with random circumstance and environment and nothing to do with average "intelligence".

If you say so, but who elected you dictator? Your authoritarian manner is necessary for you to cover up the deep doubt you have about what your told is a morally superior perspective.

 

[untermensche]

There is no such thing as "genetic incompetence".

In any group, it doesn't matter what the average is, there will be some with high "intelligence" and some, like you, with clearly inferior "intelligence".

What a group does has everything to do with random circumstance and environment and nothing to do with average "intelligence".

If you say so, but who elected you dictator? Your authoritarian manner is necessary for you to cover up the deep doubt you have about what your told is a morally superior perspective.

I have no doubt you don't have the slightest clue how to form a rational argument.

You're clearly a "low IQ" individual.

You must have a lot of "black blood" in you.

So must the endless string of ignorant white people I see all over the place.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I don't recall anything about how people deal with language on the IQ tests I've seen. There is vocabulary on such tests--what you know, not how you use it. There will also be some math, some pattern manipulation.

The test was not entirely in language?

Oh, come on now--the point of the test is finding the answers, not understanding the questions. The latter is far easier.

In other words, genetics matters--just the opposite of what you said!

What others have said is that the genes tell us everything.

Total nonsense.

Expression is not simply due to genes.

Expression is also dependent on exposure (environment).

Nobody has said it's entirely the genes. If it were then identical twins raised apart would have virtually identical IQ scores.

If one is exposed to Chinese at the right time one will acquire the Chinese language. No work involved, mere exposure will give the individual the language.

Wrong. Babies put a lot of work into learning language.

If one is exposed too late then one may be able to struggle to learn the language to some degree but one will not acquire it in the same manner or to the same degree.

True. You have done a fairly major move of the goalposts here, though--you were insisting genetics doesn't matter.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You must have a lot of "black blood" in you.

Given that the initial humans were black I will agree with you--as everyone has 100% black blood!

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

You must have a lot of "black blood" in you.

Given that the initial humans were black I will agree with you--as everyone has 100% black blood!

It's more shades of purple or red and blue.

 

[untermensche]

If one is exposed to Chinese at the right time one will acquire the Chinese language. No work involved, mere exposure will give the individual the language.

Wrong. Babies put a lot of work into learning language.

Bullshit!!!

A language "grows" in a child by mere exposure. Many words are acquired in one exposure. That is not work.

Language acquisition (at the right time) involves as much work as acquisition of the traits of puberty.

If one is exposed too late then one may be able to struggle to learn the language to some degree but one will not acquire it in the same manner or to the same degree.

True. You have done a fairly major move of the goalposts here, though--you were insisting genetics doesn't matter.

I can't respond to every bit of nonsense you pull from your ass.

I spelled it out as clearly as possible.

But that requires actually reading.

Intelligence = Genetic endowment + Exposure (environment) at critical stages of development

 

[JonA]

And language has very little relation to intelligence except in extreme cases not representative of general human abilities.

The ability to acquire a language has EVERYTHING to do with human "intelligence", whatever that is.

How can you make a claim when you admittedly don't even know the meaning of the words you're using?

 

[untermensche]

The ability to acquire a language has EVERYTHING to do with human "intelligence", whatever that is.

How can you make a claim when you admittedly don't even know the meaning of the words you're using?

I say it in the next sentence.

Because language is what separates humans from all other animals.

Non-human animals may have forms of communication but they do not have human language.

And a great deal of human thought is in human language.

Take away language and you do not have humans as we know them.

 

[repoman]

Gimme gimme gimme.