[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
▼ Settings Mobile Home
/his/ - History & Humanities

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.

08/21/20New boards added: /vrpg/, /vmg/, /vst/ and /vm/
05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
[Hide] [Show All]


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: 1756921619854655.png (278 KB, 600x699)
278 KB PNG
From a historical and humanitarian perspective, how are Chuds going to deal with the fact that reality doesn't agree with their racist delusions?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33529393/
>No support for the hereditarian hypothesis of the Black-White achievement gap using polygenic scores and tests for divergent selection
>Polygenic scores for educational attainment were constructed for African and European samples of the 1000 Genomes Project. Evidence for selection was evaluated using an excess variance test. Education associated variants were further evaluated for signals of selection by testing for excess genetic differentiation (Fst ). Expected mean difference in IQ for populations was calculated under a neutral evolutionary scenario and contrasted to hereditarian claims.
> Tests for selection using polygenic scores failed to find evidence of natural selection when the less biased within-family GWAS effect sizes were used. Tests for selection using Fst values did not find evidence of natural selection. Expected mean difference in IQ was substantially smaller than postulated by hereditarians, even under unrealistic assumptions that overestimate genetic contribution.
> Given these results, hereditarian claims are not supported in the least. Cognitive performance does not appear to have been under diversifying selection in Europeans and Africans. In the absence of diversifying selection, the best case estimate for genetic contributions to group differences in cognitive performance is substantially smaller than hereditarians claim and is consistent with genetic differences contributing little to the Black-White gap.
>>
>>18739124
science keeps humiliating nazi retards, this is nothing new
>>
>>18739124
I don't care about IQ autism but that meme doesn't disprove social Darwinism. Hitler himself said in the last days of WW2 that the German people have failed the test and that they are weak and rightly doomed to defeat.
>>
how much more funding per capita is going to turn those zoomalis into the future engineers and scientists of tomorrow
>>
>>18739382
Honestly bro there is probably enough Indian talent still waiting to be unleashed that the market won't need another country to supply it.
>>
File: 1785867862096307.jpg (115 KB, 643x900)
115 KB JPG
>>18739124
>how are Chuds going to deal with the fact that reality doesn't agree with their racist delusions?
Even if this paper was 100% factual, it would be better if it wasn't, because IQ was being used to explain shit like pic related and the prevalence of black-on-white crime in white nations.

The only other plausible explanation is that blacks are just naturally more violent, which nobody wants to admit.
>>
>>18739394
indians are low IQ also
>>
File: twin studies.png (99 KB, 708x470)
99 KB PNG
>Tests for selection using polygenic scores failed to find evidence of natural selection when the less biased within-family GWAS effect sizes were used.
But we have done twin and adoption studies and they prove that genes are actually more influential than environment.

>did not find evidence of natural selection
But the evidence for natural selection is overwhelming elsewhere.

The study is flawed in that it hyperfixates on the source material and ignores wider evidence and general background knowledge. Effectively nit picking. The motivation is obvious since this is a controversial topic and a scientist risks losing their career suggesting a genetic component to racial disparity.



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.