DNA pioneer James Watson is stripped of the last of his honorary titles for "racism"

[x-trainer ben]

These discussions never end well but a couple things that jumped out.

1. "The laboratory, calling the latest remarks 'reprehensible' and 'unsupported by science"
2. "'My dad's statements might make him out to be a bigot and discriminatory,' he said, but that's not true. 'They just represent his rather narrow interpretation of genetic destiny."
3. "Mr Watson's son Rufus said Friday in a telephone interview that his father, who's 90, was in a nursing home following a car crash in October, and that his awareness of his surroundings is 'very minimal."

[DIREALBOSS]

No, culture/social environment and economics systems can be effected by;

The natural environment (Jared Diamond talks about this a lot, you can find talks on youtube, or read his books. Richard Nisbett also proposes that Western and Eastern cognitive differences were heavily influenced by natural environment. Please bear in mind that research shows that Asian-Americans have a mixture of Eastern and Western cognitive habits, as do the French, so it's not genetic.).

War. (Please do research into what Japanese culture was like prior to the end of World War 2... They were renowned for the violence towards each other and foreigners... Now they are renowned for their respectfulness.)

Non indigenous religions.

International trade. (Trade affects that national/regional socio-economic system, which has a massive impact on shaping culture.)

Colonialism.

Immigration.

Technology (ie. the advent of the printing press, profoundly changed culture as the population became literate and knowledge that was only previously accesible to the wealthy or fortunate, became accessible to anyone of any class who was literate.

Also, the primary medium of communication and information acquisition arguably, and research is also agreeing, affects our cognitive habits. Basically someone who acquires most of their information from books, is going to have different cognitive habits to someone who acquires their information primarily through videos. )

Etc,



DIREALBOSS, cultures/social enviroments aren't created in a vacuum.

Those things are secondary and have no basis of their own without a people first creating them, so you're wrong. There can be no economy, religion, or trade without first there being a people to use these things. The attributes of the people ( determined by their race) is what influences all of the things you listed. You have to be retarded to think that culture grows from the ground, it comes from the PEOPLE.

Technology didn't come from the sky, it was created by people. Different races of humans created primitive or advanced technology according to their abilities. Thats why when Europeans discovered black people in Africa they found that the blacks have not even invented the wheel yet, extremely primitive compared to the rest of the world.

Some of the most successful empires in the world were created in natural environments with little resources, the natural environment is something that can be overcome by human ingenuity. Once again it depends on the capabilities of the race. Humans create their own environment according to their abilities, their abilities are determined by which racial group they belong to.

Culture is created from a distinct people living together(surviving together) in a certain environment and going through a unique situation. The society/culture is just a reflection of the race in a certain circumstance. Which is why different ethnic groups who belong to the same race have similar societies even though their environment and circumstance differ. When talking about any human society the number one factor that determines how the society looks and functions and its accomplishments is the race of the people. Everything else is secondary


Get over yourself, race is real, it is in our DNA. It is the number one determining factor of life for any human society.

[BetaAsPhuck]

Those things are secondary and have no basis of their own without a people first creating them, so you're wrong.

All the things I mentioned, can be created by people outside of the ethnic demographic or nation, are you denying that?

If you don't deny that, then on what basis are you claiming that social environment is soley due to the people within that social environment?

There can be no economy, religion, or trade without first there being a people to use these things. The attributes of the people ( determined by their race) is what influences all of the things you listed. You have to be retarded to think that culture grows from the ground, it comes from the PEOPLE.

What is culture to you?

I think if you define, here for everyone to see, you'll see how culture can (and is) influenced by people and things outside of the ethnic demographic.

Technology didn't come from the sky, it was created by people.

Not necessarily people of that ethnic demographic. Are you denying that?

The printing press was developed by Germanic peoples, yet influence the culture of every ethnicity on the planet. Are you denying that?

Some of the most successful empires in the world were created in natural environments with little resources,

I didn't make any claims about 'success' so that's a strawman, I argued (like many others have) that culture is also shaped by natural environment (amongst other factors).

You'll see like the bathing and sauna traditions, which are part of Icelandic culture are influence by the natural environment.

You'll see that siesta culture in Spain, is influence by the natural environment.

Both white, but both have different aspects of their culture influenced by their environment. Are you going to deny that Icelandic sauna/bathing customs, and Spanish siesta customs, have had no influence by environment and is due to genes?

Have you done any serious research into culture differences between ethnicities, not race ethnicities? Ethnicity within the same race.

Srs question... Have you done any serious research into the cultural differences between European nations?

Why was Scandanavian and English culture so radically different in the middle ages? Genetics? Or are you going to serious argue that there was no significant differences between Scandanvian and English culture in the middle ages? That they were interchangeable cultures, because they were both white?

IF you think that say Finnish and Spanish culture have no glaringly deep differences (regarding social habits and general customs), then I think you are delusional.

Which is why different ethnic groups who belong to the same race have similar societies even though their environment and circumstance differ.

I think you need to do way more research into the history of Europe. There have been radical differences between the cultures of different regions and ethnicity in Europe.

If you think otherwise, then I don't think you know anything about the history of Europe.

Unless you are going to argue that Germanic tribal culture had no strong differences to the Romans, because they were both white?

No difference between Anglo Saxon and Roman culture either?

If so, do you know anything about Roman culture vs the surrounding regions culture?



I'm going to blunt, I think you are talking from pure historical ignorance, and you seriously need to do some research into the history of Europe.

[DIREALBOSS]

All the things I mentioned, can be created by people outside of the ethnic demographic or nation, are you denying that?

If you don't deny that, then on what basis are you claiming that social environment is soley due to the people within that social environment?



What is culture to you?

I think if you define, here for everyone to see, you'll see how culture can (and is) influenced by people and things outside of the ethnic demographic.



Not necessarily people of that ethnic demographic. Are you denying that?

The printing press was developed by Germanic peoples, yet influence the culture of every ethnicity on the planet. Are you denying that?



I didn't make any claims about 'success' so that's a strawman, I argued (like many others have) that culture is also shaped by natural environment (amongst other factors).

You'll see like the bathing and sauna traditions, which are part of Icelandic culture are influence by the natural environment.

You'll see that fiesta culture in Spain, is influence by the natural environment.

Both white, but both have different aspects of their culture influenced by their environment. Are you going to deny that Icelandic sauna/bathing customs, and Spanish fiesta customs, have had no influence by environment and is due to genes?

Have you done any serious research into culture differences between ethnicities, not race ethnicities? Ethnicity within the same race.

Srs question... Have you done any serious research into the cultural differences between European nations?

Why was Scandanavian and English culture so radically different in the middle ages? Genetics? Or are you going to serious argue that there was no significant differences between Scandanvian and English culture in the middle ages? That they were interchangeable cultures, because they were both white?

IF you think that say Finnish and Spanish culture have no glaringly deep differences (regarding social habits and general customs), then I think you are delusional.




I think you need to do way more research into the history of Europe. There have been radical differences between the cultures of different regions and ethnicity in Europe.

If you think otherwise, then I don't think you know anything about the history of Europe.

Unless you are going to argue that Germanic tribal culture had no strong differences to the Romans, because they were both white?

No difference between Anglo Saxon and Roman culture either?

If so, do you know anything about Roman culture vs the surrounding regions culture?

Sauna/bathing customs and Spanish Fiesta customs are not what I consider major differences between two peoples. Im talking about the essential... You're nitpicking small details. I already made it clear that there are differences between ethnic groups who belong to the same race, but the similarities in the essential features are what I'm pointing out.

Im not talking about what influences people, im talking about the organic cultures and societies of different peoples and how race is the major factor that decides what a countries society will look like.

Europe is not racially homogeneous. Finns and Spaniards are not the same race. We are talking about the differences between the human races. If you're arguing that all are equal then you're wrong on every front and history alone as well as the conditions of the world today prove it. If you want to argue that it is culture that causes the differences, then you're wrong because you cannot separate a culture from the people who created it. You cannot separate the social environment from the people who created it.

Without said people there would exist no culture. If culture is separate from race then I wonder why native Americans and African Americans still have a world of difference between each other and even bigger differences compared to white Americans. You have whites living in Australia, the USA, Canada and South Africa who all have way more in common with each other compared to other races that live in the exact same environment. Does SA resemble a European society or a black society ? Why?

[BetaAsPhuck]

Sauna/bathing customs and Spanish Fiesta customs are not what I consider major differences between two peoples. Im talking about the essential... You're nitpicking small details. I already made it clear that there are differences between ethnic groups who belong to the same race, but the similarities in the essential features are what I'm pointing out.

That was an example.

Please name or list what you consider to be the essential features then.

Europe is not racially homogeneous. Finns and Spaniards are not the same race.

What race do you consider each to belong to?

What are the different racial groups indigenous to Europe?

We are talking about the differences between the human races.

So am I.

If you're arguing that all are equal then you're wrong on every front and history alone as well as the conditions of the world today prove it. If you want to argue that it is culture that causes the differences, then you're wrong because you cannot separate a culture from the people who created it. You cannot separate the social environment from the people who created it.

I wouldn't argue that they are the same. I am arguing that ethnic differences within the same race, are just as significant as the differences between races.

I'm not a genetic determinist, like you seem to be though.

Without said people there would exist no culture. If culture is separate from race then I wonder why native Americans and African Americans still have a world of difference between each other and even bigger differences compared to white Americans.

Those demographics belong to different sub cultures, and have developed their subcultures in different socio-economic contexts.

You have whites living in Australia, the USA, Canada and South Africa who all have way more in common with each other compared to other races that live in the exact same environment. Does SA resemble a European society or a black society ? Why?

They all speak English.

Media is a very powerful tool for transmitting culture. (Also Australians came from Britain, Americans - the first settlements, that were the precusors to the US - came from the British isles. The founding fathers were heavily influenced by British philosophers.)

This shows how much influence Britain had on the countries you named... (Ie. the adoption of the Westminister Parliamentary system)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westminster_system

Also, Christianity was a unifying cultural force in Europe. (I hope you won't deny that.)

However, again I'm asking you have you studied European History?

Are you claiming there was no significant cultural differences between middles aged Scandinavians and Anglo Saxons? No significant cultural differences between the Germanic tribes and the Romans?

Please answer the above questions. I'm asking you for the second time.

[ForPeteSake]

Wish I had more time to participate in this IQ thread

cliffs:
-G factor appears to be genetic. (taking into account good upbringing/environment)
-G factor affects IQ potential.
-IQ breaks down into categories with different weights. Different races score differently.
-Certain races are better at certain things, proven. Jews tend to have higher verbal intelligence, Whites have higher spacial. (one reason why there's no jewish engineers lol)
-Blacks have lowest scores. This hasn't been disproved in idk how many years. Just emotional nonsense trying to come for reasons that become accounted for that do not make significant change.


Just because certain races are better at certain things is not a bad thing. We all evolved/adapted to our primary environments.
This also does not mean there are black people who cant score better than an askanazi jew.


There is hope in changing IQ in the future as technology gets better.

As of right now I think you have to be like 4+ standard deviations from the norm in wealth in order to change IQ by 15 points or so.



edit: I got Mod Negged for this post.

[KyleAaron]

And this, boys, is why bb.com is known through the internet as an emotionally safe environment for the alt-right.

[2RDEYE]

I still feel it is culture and environment that affects intellectual development. If you live in an environment which has the means and infrastructure to ensure access to good healthcare, hygiene, food, and education and the cultural upbringing that promotes learning, hard work, and stable family structure then that will result in all around intellectual and social development.

i agree with this. i work with temps i've literally managed a thousand temp workers and these are 95% of the time immigrants, many times first month or week in the country. teams of up to 30 new temps every month. and yeah there are very strict cultural differences between all ethnicities, and it also matters on how wealthy the family is. i don't mean to racial profile but this is just my observations because it's my job to evaluate the workers and the only race i've found to be really ****ing terrible at work ethic are east indians. we fired 100% at the last company i worked with because they **** around and cannot be motivated to work to the very best of their ability for some reason. the east indian women however are like completely different people, they work very hard, it's like they are not related at all to east indian men, they try their hardest and do the job correctly. i have a lot of other observations over the years regarding race/ethnicity in the workplace but they aren't so significant as east indians in general being absolutely terrible workers lol. regarding black people it's all different. i've noticed nothing to generalize, aside from individualism. most of the time they are solid workers, these are black people straight from africa. i've only had 1 so-so black worker, but he was young and from here, he still worked and did his job but he was really lazy. but of the other many african workers i've had they were all solid good workers. probably the best regarding race i've had to manage right under the huge batch of workers from afghanistan i had. that team was literally perfect. best people i've ever worked with.

[KyleAaron]

3. "Mr Watson's son Rufus said Friday in a telephone interview that his father [...] his awareness of his surroundings is 'very minimal."

Sounds like an American. Or a Miscer.

[mynameisuntz]

I love these IQ threads where everyone talks about IQ but can't name a single IQ test. I think most people believe IQ tests are the ones you take online, which are nonsense, rather than the ones that receive literally decades of research across tens of thousands of separate studies and with hundreds of thousands of participants across dozens of countries.

Also IQ test isn’t really the best way to measure intelligence as others have noted.

What is the best way to measure intelligence? How do you define intelligence?

IQ is a swindle

********************/incerto/iq-is-lar...e-f131c101ba39

This has been massively debunked.

[Sezzors]

LMAO what a fuking idiot, he spoke on a very touchy subject and said things which obviously wouldve caused an outrage. Personally don’t he meant it with ill intention, but I don’t agree with him, I think the environment/social circle around the child plays more of a role determining their intelligence, work ethic etc...and it’s sad to see a great mind go down this way...and of course the misc racists will 100% be defending what he said even though they’re probably dumb as fuk too lololl

[hittman]

At first i thought SJW's were out to get him but it turns out the guy is generally just a piece of **** with racist views going way back:

“Some anti-Semitism is justified”

“Whenever you interview fat people, you feel bad, because you know you’re not going to hire them”

“Japan should be bombed for dragging its feet on supporting the Human Genome Project”

“All our social policies are based on the fact that [Africans] intelligence is the same as ours – whereas all the testing says not really”

“I think having all these women around makes it more fun for the men but they’re probably less effective”

“And there’s a difference on the average between blacks and whites on I.Q. tests. I would say the difference is, it’s genetic…It’s awful, just like it’s awful for schizophrenics”

“I’m not a racist in a conventional way”

“There is a biochemical link between exposure to sunlight and sexual urges.. that’s why you have Latin lovers”

“[The] historic curse of the Irish.. is not alcohol, it’s not stupidity.. it’s ignorance”

“People say it would be terrible if we made all girls pretty. I think [doing so by genetic selection] would be great”

“By choice [Rosalind Franklin] did not emphasize her feminine qualities.. There was never lipstick to contrast with her straight black her, while at the age of thirty-one her dresses showed all the imagination of English blue-stocking adolescents. So it was quite easy to imagine her the product of an unsatisfied mother who unduly stressed the desirability of professional careers that could save bright girls from marriages to dull men.. Clearly Rosy had to go or be put in her place. The former was obviously preferable because given her belligerent moods, it would be very difficult for Maurice [Wilkins] to maintain a dominant position that would allow him to think unhindered about DNA.. The thought could not be avoided that the best home for a feminist was another person’s lab”

“The one aspect of the Jewish brain that is not first class is that Jews are said to be bad in thinking in three dimensions.. it is true”

“Women are supposedly bad at three dimensions”

“[Rosalind Franklin] couldn’t think in three dimensions very well”

“[Rosalind Franklin] had Aspergers”

“People ask about [Rosalind Franklin] and I always say ‘autism’”

“[Francis Crick] may have been a bit autistic”

“I think now we’re in a terrible sitution where we should pay the rich people to have children.. if we don’t encourage procreation of wealthier citizens, IQ levels will most definitely fall.”

“Men are a bit strange and their strangest quality is their ability to understand mathematics”

“[Rosalind] Franklin couldn’t do maths”

“Indians in [my] experience [are] servile.. because of selection under the caste system”

“Women at Oxford and Cambridge are better than Harvard and Yale because they know their job is to look pretty and get a rich husband”

“People who have to deal with black employees find [that they are equal] not true”

“[As a female scientist] you won’t be taken seriously if you have children”

“You can imagine a scenario where you make the decision, you’re going to be a mother at 45. And then you get an autistic child. Should you blame yourself? I say, yes”

“East Asian students [tend] to be conformist, because of selection for conformity in ancient Chinese society”

“[Linus Pauling] was probably always half-insane”

“Anyone who would hire an ecologist is out of his mind”

“[Rosalind Franklin] was a loser”

“The wider your face, the more likely you are [to be violent].. Senator Jim Webb has the broadest face I’ve ever seen on any man”

“We already accept that most couples don’t want a Down child. You would have to be crazy to say you wanted one, because that child has no future.”

“Disabled individuals are genetic losers”

“[With IVF] all hell will break loose, politically and morally, all over the world”

“If we knew our son would develop schizophrenia, we wouldn’t have had him”

“My former colleagues are pinkos and ****s”

“We should perform genome-wide association studies of women who have given up their children for adoption in order to find the ‘loveless gene’”

“[X University]- it used to be such a wonderful place. And then they started admitting women!”

“Catholics are more likely to forgive than Jews”

“If you could find the gene which determines sexuality and a woman decides she doesn’t want a homosexual child, well, let her”

[Bromance]

I don't think its racist at all the say the average IQ of one race is naturally lower than the IQ of another, its racist to say this person is smarter than the other based solely on race. I think he would also agree that blacks are naturally more athletic, we say this all the time but somehow its not racist because people are not offended by it

Right, one is an observation and one is an assumption

[TheAdlerian]

This has been massively debunked.

No it hasn't.

I'm not saying that link is typical criticism, because it's angry, but IQ tests aren't that respected.

IQ tests aren't considered very good in psychology. There's massive criticism that they aren't ethical because they aren't geared toward minorities, don't cover the full range of what intelligence is, and the MASSIVE criticism is that they typically only predict academic success.

I think they're highly unethical and I won't give them.

[ForPeteSake]

No it hasn't.

I'm not saying that link is typical criticism, because it's angry, but IQ tests aren't that respected.

IQ tests aren't considered very good in psychology. There's massive criticism that they aren't ethical because they aren't geared toward minorities, don't cover the full range of what intelligence is, and the MASSIVE criticism is that they typically only predict academic success.

I think they're highly unethical and I won't give them.

Are IQ tests not the best predictor of life success?

[rikugunchusa]

he was literally racist though, lol. If he didn't say all white people > all africans then maybe you'd have a case

[KyleAaron]

An example of the difference between "race" and "culture."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46846467

Several of you have interesting ideas which I will bear in mind.

[crunchfit]

Interesting. Not much in that abstract though.

Read the whole paper, it's informative. You can pay for it or access via university libraries. I've heard some people use SciHub for free access. Other papers have had similar findings.

[dizzin9]

Wonder what Neil DeGrasse Tyson thinks of this

[cncman]

Wonder what Neil DeGrasse Tyson thinks of this

hopefully he'd understand he's an n=1 outlier

[Syko617]

damn so many *******s were banned cuz of this thread

[TXBuddy]

just because he is a "racist" does not make his discoveries null and void

Right.

I always argue that there is a difference between racist and racial.

[MetroBrah]

Wonder what Marques Brownlee thinks of this