In 1970 Lewontin wrote a thought experiment to discredit IQ hereditarian arguments about differences between populations (races). In 1984 he rewrote that thought experiment as follows:>A simple hypothetical but realistic example shows how the heritability of a trait within a population is unconnected to the causes of differences between populations. Suppose one takes from a sack of open-pollinated corn two handfuls of seed. There will be a good deal of genetic variation between seeds in each handful, but the seeds in one’s left hand are on the average no different from those in one’s right. One handful of seeds is planted in washed sand with an artificial plant growth solution added to it. The other handful is planted in a similar bed, but with half the necessary nitrogen left out. When the seeds have germinated and grown, the seedlings in each plot are measured, and it is found that there is some variation in height of seedling from plant to plant within each plot. This variation within plots is entirely genetic because the environment was carefully controlled to be identical for all the seeds within each plot. The variation in height is then 100 percent heritable. But if we compare the two plots, we will find that all the seedlings in the second are much smaller than those in the first. This difference is not at all genetic but is a consequence of the difference in nitrogen level. So the heritability of a trait within populations can be 100 percent, but the cause of the difference between populations can be entirely environmental.Basically picrel shows how environmental factors could explain 100% of between-group IQ heritability. I.e. you can't control for environment to prove between-group IQ heritability.What are your arguments against this? I think, for one, there are other traits that carve out a space between groups, the problem is that they don't strictly follow race...
>>544166945for example fast twitch muscle fibres in west African and Carribean populations that make them faster runners (100 and 200 metre dash dominance); sickle cell in sub-saharan populations, etc.
>>544166945>Retarded Pajeet sincerely thinks Lewontin's fallacy is a good argument SNP averages are a thing, go get fucked by a bull Pajeet
>>544166945Second generation somali rape gangs, Hamilton New Zealand.
people are calling that a thought experiment? i would call it an insult to intelligencei really dont know what youre tryint to tell me: use half the fertilizer, plants dont grow. yea ok? why would i care if a nigger is 170cm tall or 165 cm from lack of nutrition?from starvation we know the neurons go last so the important iq thing always has the nutrients it needs, thats a non argument. the brain is always developed to its maximum possible
>>544166945I have no arguments against it exactly other than that you can't practically run an analogous experiment on humans. Theoretically you probably could, though, and if you did then maybe you'd find that some differences between populations are entirely environmental, or maybe you wouldn't.
>>544166945Wont trust a clown called Lewontin sorry it sounds ridiculous
>>544166945My dick is a plant that craves pussy nitrogen.
>>544167291I agree that the analogy is false. But the point is that environmental conditions could influence IQ. how do you control for those conditions while measuring IQ?
>>544166945What a genius. He proved that environment has an effect on organisms, not just individuals, but entire populations at once. That takes real insight.
>>544167571I appreciate the sarcasm. I believe he was responding to race based IQ studies in the United States specifically, where blacks have been poorer and less well educated as a population.
>>544166945He set up his experiment to reach his conclusion.He started with them being equal then treated them differently to influence the outcome then said all difference is due to treatment.All difference is only due to treatment in HIS example because he ruled out genetic differences beforehand.>>544167513Assuming that you can measure and quantify environmental conditions you would use "multifactor anova". It isn't really that hard to do if you have the data but these people are not looking for reality only to reach desired outcomes.
>>544167680I appreciate you wasting everyone's time like this! Lewontin is an arsehole and his 'fallacy' is purest pilpul
>>544167513>how do you control for those conditions while measuring IQ?use a big enough sample size?
>>544167829I think his point was that you don't know exactly what to look for in a multifactor anova, since you don't know exactly which environmental factors are causing the lower IQ.I agree that he begs the question, but it is a thought experiment, and it would be begging the question in the other direction if you assume that the two groups have genetic differences that result in IQ differences.
>>544167918you haven't explained his fallacy and how it relates to his thought experiment. also, how is it wasting time on this shit board to provide further arguments for race realism? Put the arguments out there and let people see read them.
>>544167472https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qqXi8WmQ_WM&ra=m
>>544167990so are there any studies that do that? and what are the environmental factors they control for?
>>544167513>But the point is that environmental conditions could influence IQthe usa, the richest nation on earth, has several ethnic groups that behave very predictable over decades despite changing environments all the time. its nonsense. billions over billions have been poured into them and yet it did nothing
>>544167291Jews will ramble incoherently and other jews will pretend it is profound. In this case just do the inverse; take seeds from different species and put them under the same conditions. They grow to different heights. Ergo, intelligence may be 100% genetic.
If you mean something like the black-white gap, there are no 'environmental factors' which would have caused such massive gaps in traits and characteristics. Blacks and whites in the US lived in the same cities/areas under the same weather and same air and everything else. Attempts to find these 'environmental factors' have always failed. Another problem is that while environment can suppress your ability to reach your natural capability in areas like g-factor, it does not seem to increase or raise the inborn genetic ceiling for those traits. In other words, negative 'environmental factors' can hurt you, but there is no corresponding set of 'upside' environmental factors which can make you smarter than your genes already dictate.
>>544166945The pajeet has found his new jewish spam subject
>>544168111
>>544168252you're begging the question though by assuming that the groups involved are different species. Fst differences don't support that hypothesis.
>>544166945Refine the experiment to control for nitrogen levels in the soil.
>>544168361thanks for that image, it is helpful.>>544168338i haven't posted about this ever before, but it's a much more worthwhile topic to discuss than most of the shit on this board. thanks for contributing.
>>544166945>shitskindian unironically trying to resurrect lewontin's idiotic fallacykek, absolutely pathetic.
>>544166945Well thats the reason why indias IQ has lept up considerably since the 76iq meme started. Better education, living standards, nutrition and medicine.
>>544168371>Fst differences don't support that hypothesisPhhh dysgenic liar.Go fuck your sister jeet.
>>544168297there's lots of differences between black and white neighbourhoods, let alone economic status. I like this argument about failure to find the environmental factors, that seems like a strong counter argument.
>>544168371I have more genes in common with a 40,000 year old dead species than I do your black or brown ass.
>>544168441Yes you did Sukhdeep. Now fuck off and go eat some shit.
>>544166945die nigger
>>544168463I can think of two species that have Fst differences comparable to human pairwise differences eastern coyote and eastern wolf. but there is genetic transfer between the groups which accounts for this. instead of ad hominems how about you provide the neophytes with strong arguments by making one, nigger
>>544166945Counterargument: The plants from the nutrient deficient plot can't hop on a boat to normal plot and rape and murder the tall plants. Unless a (((gardener))) helps them.
>>544168540>>544168601>commits ad hominem fallacy instead of making an argumentreally makes you think
>>544168618https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/mono.12460>>544168540I already posted the picture suckdeep.You’ll never be white.
oh look its trying the leftist thing of selective understanding
>>544168698You’re brown and retarded and you’ll never be white and you’ll never reincarnate into one. You’ve lost your izzat madar chud.
>>544166945Studies of nigglets adopted by whites debunks this.
>A simple hypothetical but realisticAll entirely bullshit, man makes the environment and the environment makes man.The difference between us is a mixture of genetics and environment but at no point is it entirely environmental, we have shaped our environment so that we have grocery stores, cars, planes, and computers.This isn't even a thought experiment, a guy just said things and claim things. We have done tests on all of these traits and your experiment has no relation to twin studies, you just said a thing.>>544167513>All of these people with non-argumentsThe actual thing they did was twin studies, you take twins who had grown up in different households and you see how they develop differently - this has been done countless times.And every single time it shows that it literally is the genes.>Twin Correlations: Identical twins raised together show an average IQ score correlation of around 0.86, while identical twins raised apart correlate around 0.76. Fraternal twins typically show correlations closer to 0.50 to 0.60>The Wilson Effect: The influence of genetics on IQ is not static; it increases with age. Heritability starts lower in infancy (around 20%) and rises into adulthood (around 60%–75%) due to processes like niche-picking (people actively seeking out environments that match their genetic tendencies)IQ is around 70% heritable. The man makes the environment, the environment makes man. We have a great amount of control over all of this. Twin studies have been done countless times.
>>544168834Correct>>544168749you can take the nigger out of Africa but you can never take Africa out of the nigger.
>>544166945I knew he was a Jew because his argument is so convoluted and complicated it borders on the absurd.Is IQ a property of the brain? Y/NIs the brain a physical organ? Y/NAre the properties of physical organs determined by genetics? Y/NIf all three answers are Yes, then IQ is determined by genetics.
>>544166945>showsit doesn't show shitthe guy just unilaterally declares that only environmental factors mattereven in his own explanation, the difference between the various genetic strains being subjected to the same environment would manifestit's honestly embarrassing that leftypol is trying to turn this into a thing
I just find it funny that subhumans the world over spend almost all their time trying to peddle an endless stream of lame excuses and delusional counterarguments to try to deny reality and pull white people down rather than just demonstrating the supposed correctness of their claims by turning their homelands into something even semi-decent by themselves. I mean, come the fuck on! White people are so weakened and are at such an all-time low that most are even going out of their way to actively harm their own interests and genuinely champion other races at any cost, yet literally billions of these brown monkey motherfuckers STILL can't figure out how to build decent, functional, non-corrupt countries or anything really worthwhile by themselves.Give me a break.
what fucking now you gynormous faggots
>>544166945Lewontin is arguing that there is no way tell to "good" browns from "bad" browns. This is an argument AGAINST immigration/equality/whatever, but he's twisting it to justify the exact opposite conclusion.
>>544166945fair point. so when you take a seed descended from the stunted-growth environment and plant it in a fertile environment, it should grow more or less normally, right? this is what we observe in effect in humans: if you bring a sub-saharan african into a rich country, within one generation their children are largely doctors, lawyers, scientists and such at a rate essentially equivalent to their rich country native counterparts.
>>544166945>if we're all malnourished we can't tell>so let's raise some individuals in really good environments and seethe about it while making the world really shitRemember to reframe your narrative to make bad actors look like deliberately hostile actors.
>>544166945Sounds like lyskionism I.e communist evolutionThourougly debunked.Either that or this experiment is incredibly antiquated You see fields of monsanto conrn onions and wheat and they are all incredibly uniform.
>>544167291PSSSST.IODINE.Please stop being retarded on purpose.
So, what exactly is or is not determined by genetics?Have these enlightened liberals ever spelled that out? Has (((science))) definitively explained what is or is not determined by genetics?weightheighteye colorskin colorbehaviorIQmoralitybone structuremuscle tissuespatial awarenessthe power of the five sense...etc.
>>544169697>what do you mean it could primarily be rate of growth?>what do you mean the corn could be malnourished?Sounds like you didn't think before you typed.
>>544169950>five sensesPlease upgrade your database to include the rest of the senses. Welcome to adulthood.Start with proprioception.
>>544166945The way this argument works is>if I can convince you of a plausible-sounding narrative to explain the difference, then I win by default, because hegemonic control of media and power brokers means that your argument will be shut down and any actual scientific research will be suppressed unless it agrees with meIt's the kind of argument you aren't making in good faith, but to suppress and oppress another position. Sort of like, let's say this was the nazi regime where the nazis conquered Europe. Someone tries to argue whites aren't from Hyperborea at all, and are actually from Africa originally. Then some academic spins up apologetics to diffuse your arguments, and come up with a plausible narrative. He doesn't need proof, he just needs "reasonable doubt" and then trust that the media and institutional power supports him, letting him win by default.
>>544166945Thought experimentThat's just a better way of saying came to him in a dream
>>544166945If whites took control of Africa, Africa would be first world+ today owing to the abundance of resources.If niggers took control of Europe then Europe would become/is becoming the same shithole that Africa currently is.It’s entirely down to genetics/species.Niggers are animals and lewontin was nothing but a lying kike rat.
>>544166945Dey feed niggers kfc and watermelon instead of yams and millet and despite the nutrientz dey cant read.Lewontin was a communist who selected experiments to support communism not for truthThe "more variance withing groups than between" slogan may aply to the dozen enzyme and blood group mutations he tortured the stats to check and not to the full genome or the measurable traitsUltimately its irrelevant unless theres a make niggers smart pill pipe dream obtained by honest research, dumb as we may be some opportunity is optimal
>>544172249Anon it's not just that. If whites took Africa, with the sheer size and population density of Africa, it would basically explode the Western-European white population by like 3x or 5x. Our innovation-rate as a species would fucking skyrocket off the chart.On top of this, if we had implemented some sensible eugenic policies, we would be literally 500 years ahead in our technology right now. That technological futuristic world people in the 50's were imagining might have actually come to pass. Africa could have been the ultimate, the most powerful and wealthy place on earth, the beating heart of our civilization.This stuff is literally what Darwin was calling for, if you read his writings. Eugenics policy, and colonization of savage lands. If we had just taken Darwin to heart and followed his path, we would be immortals already
>>544166945>environmental factors could explain 100% of between-group IQ heritability>could explain>COULDThat's a large caveat (You) got there, bud.Would be a real shame for an actual experiment to falsify it, but good luck with setting that up.Genotype is the potential, and phenotype is the expression of it.Why are 20-21% of israeli university students unable to read or do math beyond the level of a 10-year old child? Is it the Genotype or the Phenotype?
>>544168058The whole point of the anova is to see which factors are correlated with which outcomes.You just separate into the categories, race, income, whatever else you want to test for and then you test and see what you get.If you do honest statistical analysis then it isn't lying, usually the starting point is that "race doesn't effect anything and cant POSSIBLY be the reason so it HAS to be something else"
>>544172778This is the proper approach. You realize both arguments have some validity. Then do an honest scientific experiment weighing all variables. Then come to a conclusion. Honest people conclude that genetics has a substantial effect which simply cannot be erased with education or nutrition. But Lewontin's arguments are not like that, they aren't honest. They are more about spreading a type of uncertainty and muddying the waters around the topic, such that the societal-default is presumed to be the truth. Like I said earlier. If you were in Nazi germany and trying to argue humans evolved in Africa and not Hyperborea, you might find an academic like this. He wouldn't debate your point or your evidence, he would just handwave you and try his best to muddy the waters, such that most people just default back to the Hyperborea story. It's not about find the truth, but creating a plausible lie that never gets tested.
If intelligence has no genetic basis, how did it evolve in the first place?
>>544169055This is a better argumentI used to just say you could put a tree in school and it wouldn't get any smarter (so obviously genetic), but yours is better lol
There are no black chess GMsI wonder if there ever will be one
>>544166945Niggers are genetic retards, and jews rape kids.
>>544166945The experiment is flawed at the core because, to his own admission, they are seeds of the same type and place of a crop that was bred by humans over many many centuries of experimentation. That last part is crucial, because it only reinforces the opposite of his goal.
>>544168371>>544167051more nutrients = more growth in pantsthat's the result of the experimentwhatever bullshit he feeds you after is merely a trick lmao
>>544173626plants lmao
>>544166945But correlation is not causation work in both ways, the fact that enviroment can have an impact don't discredit the role of the genetic framework
>>544173246>There are no black chess GMsUh...
>>544166945>thought experimentTrust the... science.
>>544167513Through standardized testing of course. The real question is how do you control for cheating by the sub-100s?
>>544166945Genetics are the upper and lower limits of what is possible, environment is where you land within those limits for every trait. A nigger which is incapable of speaking words correctly, looks like a human that has partially devolved into a monkey, and has a sloping forehead more similar to a grazing farm animal than to an actual person, usually has an iq of around 60 - 70, but very rarely there can be outliers nearing 100. The resources needed to push all niggers to reach such a high level for themselves, at the maximums of their biological limits, is not really feasible or practical. You would need like a 100 to 1 white people to negro ratio to be present, with the whites hand holding them and coddling them the entire way, and even with this most of them will still turn out bad anyways.
>>544173626Wait so I need more nitrogen for growth in my pants?
