it's frankly incredible how insom is completely indistinguishable from a white female libtard in her 30s.
Itâs been an open secret for years that prestigious journals will often reject submissions that offend prevailing political orthodoxiesâespecially if they involve controversial aspects of human biology and behaviorâno matter how scientifically sound the work might be. The leading journal Nature Human Behaviour recently made this practice official in an editorial effectively announcing that it will not publish studies that show the wrong kind of differences between human groups.
the National Institutes of Health now withholds access to an important database if it thinks a scientistâs research may wander into forbidden territory.
My colleagues at other universities and I have run into problems involving applications to study the relationships among intelligence, education, and health outcomes. Sometimes, NIH denies access to some of the attributes that I have just mentioned, on the grounds that studying their genetic basis is âstigmatizing.â
What is NIHâs justification? Studies of intelligence do not pose any greater threat to the dignity of their participants than research based on non-genetic factors.
1 Like
i fucking love science
2 Likes
The tech that would allow for people to select the traits of the children (specifically those relating to intelligence, educational attainment) is put on hold because it would prove that black people are by and large â â â â â â â â â
i'd rather let god decide the intelligence of my children.
1 Like
Tech that allows baby modification? it's called the vaccine.
You'd say you and I are the cognitive elite of the forum?
1 Like
Would you describe this as a better to be a "big fish in a little pond" scenario?
Mdae your bed and now lie in it
Nightly racism discussion who up
The thing about saying a certain race of people has lower IQ, on average, is that it is not, by definition, racist. Sometimes the posters saying this also happen to be racists (an odd coincidence) but the disagreement about IQ statistics remains one based purely in fact.
I am tired of being trolled by insom, reading nonsense about how "eugenics doesn't exist" anymore, when specifically post-HGP and the advent of cheap sequencing, genetics (and specifically EUGENICS through the usage of IVG/Polygenic Prediction) has been one of the few areas of science with actual progress.
The better question is: What are the fastest and most effective ways of increasing purebred Blacks' IQ.
I think it's quite clear that the system isn't taking the right steps, socially and culturally.
well that's obvious: execute all the dumb ones and you're only left with the smart ones.
I genuinely think it can be done in 1 generation if lab-rat experimentation was allowed.
If it's a "dominant" gene (Or Dominant Meme?) that won't work.
i'd rather talk about ukraine and russia personally
no it'd move the bell curve far to the right instantaneously: once they've started reproducing you'll get reversion to the mean.
based on this: Domesticated silver fox - Wikipedia
The least domesticated are in Class III; those that allow humans to pet and handle them, but that do not respond to contact with friendliness, are in Class II; the ones that are friendly with humans are in Class I. After only six generations, Belyayev and his team had to add a higher category, Class IE, the "domesticated elite", which "are eager to establish human contact, whimpering to attract attention and sniffing and licking experimenters like dogs. They start displaying this kind of behavior before they are one month old. By the 20th generation 35% were 'elite', and by the 30th generation 70% to 80% of the selected generation was 'elite.'"
the average black child is sexually mature at age 12?, so 25~ * 12 = 300 years.
if you're willing to grow black people in vats you could do it in 20~ or so.