The Interview THEY Didn't Want You To See

[Solvedit]

Do you know about being cancelled?  Maybe you don't have that in your country.  Not everyone wants to talk about race because they might find themselves living on an iceberg.  

The views he holds, and things he has said, are public knowledge. 

He compares Somali immigrants to Gorillas and argues that some racial groups have a lower average IQ due to genetics.

He thinks that interracial relationships are socially harmful.

And believes that selective breeding is the answer where certain populations are concerned.

What he is and what he believes is rather clear.

I see you want to dismiss everything he said based on the unsavory views you allege. 

There's no credible scientific evidence that modern racial groups differ in innate intelligence down to genetics.

I tend to believe you dismiss what you run across, perhaps by reasoning by authority as stated above, in order to render non-PC views easily impeachable.

And Neanderthal or Denisovan DNA contributes small traits, not our intelligence hierarchy.

Do you have evidence?

Race is a social category, it's not a biological one.

And humans share 99.9% the same DNA.

Realize that humans probably share 99.7 or 99.8% of their dna with H.neanderthalensis, H.denisovus, H.erectus, H.ergaster, H.habilis, H.naledi, H.rudolfiensis, and various as-yet-undiscovered prehistoric hominins?
Speaking of humans, if there weren't different bloodlines with different traits, why aren't we all the same? For that matter, why doesn't broccoli, collards, Brussels sprouts and cauliflower look identical despite coming from the same species?

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar...utm_source
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PM...utm_source

I see you quoted the second paper directly but what they said does not prove intelligence is evenly distributed across racial groups. Racial characteristics such as color or facial structure don't have a direct correlation with intelligence but that also doesn't prove intelligence is evenly distributed between different racial groups.

It is good that science is loath to discuss it too much because people are too mathematically illiterate by-and-large to not draw unwarranted conclusions. The Nazi party was started by the least capable Germans, for example, but they wanted to think in big, dumb categories i.e. German vs Auslander.

This is probably why science allows you to think what you do and no one's paying for a large enough study to prove what you seem to consider dogma. 

Plus, it probably strikes most geneticists as an irrational way to frame the issue because there are huge differences between the members of any given racial group and the things which group them into racial groups are only a small percentage of their DNA.  Skin color, for example, is controlled by a gene that affects almost nothing else.  That still doesn't mean you can assume discrimination occurs when there is a difference in outcomes in racial averages. 

In our time, there was no profit at all in providing fuel to the least adequate people to think in groups, but then they started asking for equity and using differences in outcomes to try to prove unfairness.

[Solvedit]

The extraordinarily intelligent are the synesthete-savants IMO.  Like Daniel Tammet, who learned Icelandic in a week.

Remember "sprechen ze Deutsche, baby?"

How do you know Sonne herself didn't teach him?   How do you know Holy Diver didn't sharpen his sword?  How do you know he didn't learn at a "breakfast table in an otherwise empty room?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DwYZKjXxEE

[Maxmars]

I balk at using scientific modelling approaches towards deciding whether there are differences between peoples.

Even subtleties can be used to excuse the illusion that one human supersedes (somehow) another.

If you are hearing this (metaphorically speaking) you might already realize that we live in two very different worlds.

There's everything you see and hear... all events and occurrences...  there's that world...

and then there's the human world... impossibly contorting itself at every turn... making up "rules" inventing "gods."  Pretending that our desires are all "natural"... for eons pretending that we are 'just superior animals.'

I have lived too long and traveled too far to be expected to believe the myths that pass as social science.

People are not definable by attribute... only by action...
it speaks to the nature of the subject... 

There are terrible people just like you, and terrible people just like me - everywhere... always.

We can talk about the animal all you like...

I suspect that is not the "human," that gets measured (and discounting that as irrelevant is the first step down a bad path... where people are truly objects 'before' they are people.)

If it were all a material matter... we'd all have the same 'human value' anyway...

[IdeomotorPrisoner]

He is truly an idiot, asserting that Trump's IQ is on par with that of a Harvard professor.  His racism only serves to lower his IQ further, as intelligent people recognize the importance of seeing individuals rather than groups.r"

Trump nailed his admission to Wharton though. And made it though with "flying colors." 




Unlike that uncivilized *Mod. snip* so poor he actually had to test into Harvard, and then deliver pizza to put himself through it... what a loser...  

Though this is a very uncomfortable idea with some "racist" truth. 

And maybe there is a heiarchy of intelligence among 4 major genetic groups, I once read there was. Multiple times actually. 

In order it went;

• Sephardic/Ashkenazi Diasporic Jews (112)
• Asians (106)
• White (100)
• Black. (Posting the average IQ of black people on Earth makes you look racist. It's lower)

Top 25 in 2024 according to one study.

But really it comes down to culture.  Its NOT lack of capacity, but developement of that cognitive capacity that makes this uncomfortable average. 

Like Asians are higher than White because, "have you seen Chinese Schools?"  Jeezus...  Only Jews push their children harder.  

White people COULD be as high as Asians or Jews, but they dont usually push their kids to practice the piano for 3 hours after 2 hours of homework and 10 hours of school. 

Lowest IQs are largely Subsaharan Africa with some being in the 60s.  Mostly in places where tribal culture still prevails and education is missionaries teaching English through Jesus. 

They dont get videos about shapes at 2 years old. It's not as prioritized as hunting, surviving, and communal dancing. 

And its what EVERYONE would still be without the education promoting culture of civilization.  

Because while you can divide it by race, thats not universal because Bermuda IS ONE THE SMARTEST (CARRIBEAN) COUNTRIES (By average IQ) ON EARTH AND 97%  BLACK.

But also British-founded and wealthier than most. With western education standards. 

So its all about wealth and culture.  And the same Bermudans back in Africa are 20 points lower for no other reason than the local culture of education and opportunity.

So let's not DEPRIORITIZE EDUCATION and start holding UFC fights at the Kennedy Trump Center. 

Thats what I think.  And because I have a 160 IQ, you gotta listen to my thoughts.

[Solvedit]

So its all about wealth.

Which came first, though? The chicken or the egg?

And the same Bermudans back in Africa are 30 points lower for no other reason than culture of education and opportunity.

They may not in fact be the same.

African humans contain more genetic diversity than the rest of the world's people combined.

Can it be their home countries were in the habit of selling their smart people? Or could the black Barbadans whom you allege are so smart, are actually related to trans-Saharan slaves in Africa or to the English?

I don't think it's rational to say it's the wealth which pulled them up. Did England have a policy of enriching the black communities in their holdings in order to uplift them?  Does everyone who is exposed to the educational system in the English Caribbean wind up wealthy and smart?

[IdeomotorPrisoner]

Oh, Bermuda is exactly like the rest of The Carribean. 

They are all freed "Buffalo Soldiers" in the heart of the tropics.  

But what makes Bermuda test cognitively higher than Jamaica if their origins are relatively the same? 
 

Differences in standardized testing or cognitive data between Bermuda and Jamaica, if observed, are generally attributed to substantial disparities in socio-economic development, educational infrastructure, and environmental factors, rather than ethnicity. 

Bermuda has a much higher GDP per capita, leading to better-funded schools, greater resources, and a lower cost of living relative to income.

[Solvedit]

Oh, Bermuda is exactly like the rest of The Carribean. 

They are all freed "Buffalo Soldiers" in the heart of the tropics.  

But what makes Bermuda test cognitively higher than Jamaica if their origins are relatively the same? 

Race-based judgment detected.  Their origins are complex.  They were likely managed by their overseers and later their hosts, the English, who could have separated out a segment and sent them somewhere.


A likely scenario for what happened there is the English realized that for one reason or another, some of their former slaves were very smart and sent them all to one place to watch them.  (To remind everyone, they deported their African slaves after emancipation in 1807.)  When a country is ruled by a more-or-less unified ethnicity or set of ethnicities, they probably decide what to do with the outsiders.

The power of demographic management is often overlooked in a race-based issue.  For example, could it hypothetically be that since African sultanates and kingdoms sold the slaves to the European slave forts on the coast, they separated out the people who didn't fit in?  The geniuses, the trans-Saharans, and perhaps those who had used up all their chances?

[IdeomotorPrisoner]

Shit.  I meant Barbados not Bermuda.  And its changed since 2016.  They are both in the 92 to 96 range.  But far above Haiti and marginally above all other of sinilar origins.  

My point: 

Race is irrelevant.  If Singapore's culture was the same and they had black people instead, they would have the same IQ.  There is nothing that makes melanin lower test scores. Nothing about musical ability or athleticism.

Like Iran, our enemy. THE HIGHEST TESTING muslim country, towering above even the IQ of Israel, because they retained a culture (believe it or not) that still prioritizes language, math, and science. Thats not BS. Iran is Top 5. 

And their culture of education makes them test better. 
China's culture of education makes them test better. 
Ditto South Korea, Hong Kong, Japan, Macau, Taiwan and so on. 

Thats all it is. The wealth of their educational customs. And the resources devoted to developing that.

[Solvedit]

Shit.  I meant Barbados not Bermuda.  And its changed since 2016.  They are both in the 92 to 96 range.  But far above Haiti and marginally above all other of sinilar origins.  

Barbados is a prime tourist destination.  Can it be the former high scores had something to do with the tourists, then people realized and became more prayerful and likely to behave while visiting Barbados? 

One hopes the Barbadians hadn't trafficked any tourists to themselves.

My point:

Race is irrelevant. If Singapore's culture was the same and they had black people instead, they would have the same IQ. There is nothing that makes melanin lower test scores. Nothing about musical ability or athleticism.

Correlation does not equal causation but lack of causation does not preclude correlation.

A 1:1 correlation between racial or ethnic appearance and ability is impossible and disproven but a softer correlation is actually somewhat likely. 

If you genetically engineered Singaporeans with the color and facial structure of black people, then they would be the same as they are now. But other differences may or may not be present in other people, not necessarily indicated by race but perhaps weakly correlating with race. You can only say it's just the color and the culture if you give your point of view 100% of the benefit of the doubt.

A Youtube video described a skeleton found in a cenote in Yucatan which had been thought to prove that 12000 years ago, people of different genetic origin were present because of the different shape of the skull.  Genetic analysis proved otherwise, suggesting that facial features are mutable. 

They thought the foods in use 12000 years ago were tougher and led to stronger anchoring points for the chewing muscles, which had gradually changed as the people learned to cook better food.  This suggests that culture can affect appearance.  This further suggests that a group of interrelated bloodlines will resemble one another and serve as a loose correlation with what their genes hold with respect to traits and abilities.  

Culture selects for appearance in some societies as well.

Race is irrelevant because there is not a 1:1 correlation between race and abilities.  However, there is definitely no guarantee that any arbitrary racial grouping must have the same potential abilities as other arbitrary groupings.

"Whosoever would be a man, must needs be a nonconformist."  Tonglen your worry of what other people think of you.

[Solvedit]

There's no credible scientific evidence that modern racial groups differ in innate intelligence down to genetics.

There need not be a 1:1 correlation between heritage or ethnic or cultural group with abilities in order for demographic selectors to have produced a higher concentration of like-minded people than the random distribution of abilities you posit.  Culture and environment can shape appearance but those factors are not independent of ability nor always particularly conducive to an even distribution of abilities.