The problem with intelligence signalling

Someone can come along and ask for your proof.

[Assuming they can’t easily google it.]

Browse tfw to intelligent and you’ll quickly realize about half the posts have a good point the idiot reading rejects out of hand. They don’t notice shades of grey. It’s like the I Fucking Love Science people who always assume the popular consensus on a topic’s labelling (there is no pseudoscience, there are only disproven former theories) are objective, timeless fact. See: how most astrology is actually astronomy, and astronomy ripped it off.

If they bothered to google it, the whole world runs on cycle.
Plot twist: we’re part of that natural world.
http://www.near-death.com/paranormal/astrology/scientific-evidence-suggestive-of-astrology.html

This applies to internet subcults.

e.g. The literal Man Card, I win argument.

21st century American men are smarter than all women ever, it’s science!

Note: an intelligent person would still notice they’re valuing themselves based on a measurement in comparison to women as the standard. A still-smarter person would note they’re measuring themselves and class is a bigger factor, as is race.

to quote a random internet comment

as you do

“Science isn’t a consensus, if it was, a person with a lot of money could hire people with degrees and get them to say anything they want.”

The problem with credentials. They become priests with a different scroll.
They talk of rent controls, what of education controls? Renting is always useful.

Yeah, like white supremacy.

Right, Tyson?

 

Socialists in science trying to avoid being scientific

http://quillette.com/2017/07/06/social-sciences-undergoing-purity-spiral/

You picked the wrong fucking field to have feelings.
Especially if those feelings involve censorship of facts you disagree with.
Do you know how many people continue to object to evolution?
Still true. We can see a fetus undergo the stages of evolution in real time.
It’ll never not be true.
We’ve found plenty of Missing Links, and Creationists move the goalposts.
That’s crazy, like suppressing crime and IQ data.

Scientism isn’t real, whatever your false idols tell you. They’re false by nature.

Nurture, as you call it, is mostly measurement error.

You are wrong in MATHS.

Only now, at the end, do they understand.

The multicultural experiment (official media term) was always going to fail because their core premise was that human nature itself could be controlled and experimentally manipulated.

Yeah… people rebel against that.

And it was just colonialism in reverse, instead of going to the poor people to feel superior (missions), they come crawling to you.

“What’s interesting about Haidt’s alternative interpretation of the liberal progress narrative is that he mentions two elements central to the narrative—private property and nations. And what has happened to a large extent is that as the failures of communism have become increasingly apparent many on the left—including social scientists—have shifted their activism away from opposing private property and towards other aspects, for example globalism.”

There’s no such thing as globalism, it’s a void of values. Like there’s no one language, a single language would be the starting point.
Empires unite nations, that’s why the British Empire taught everyone English.
It’s the best language, so you’re still using it.
Globalization has failed because the East has outcompeted the West. A world without white people will not be dumb enough to hand the enemy in various wars your very factories for slightly cheaper Nikes.
In real terms, they bred more, we paid for it and called it ‘aid’ and the future belongs to them barring famine.
Accept your death began with manufacturing. You gave away future prosperity, that’s gonna affect the birth rates.

“But how do we know a similarly disastrous thing is not going to happen with globalism as happened with communism? What if some form of national and ethnic affiliation is a deep-seated part of human nature, and that trying to forcefully suppress it will eventually lead to a disastrous counter-reaction? What if nations don’t create conflict, but alleviate it? What if a decentralised structure is the best way for human society to function?”

…If?

IF.

jesus my sides

genophilia is a dictionary word

ingroup preference is a well-studied phenomena

genetic diaspora exist, ask HBD chick

they’re so close to the pendulum of r/K, aren’t they?

nations formed of genetic tribes to alleviate conflict when weaponry advanced and made mass slaughter possible but, duh, undesirable, ask a forensic anthro or any evo biologist

hell, ask sacred cow Dawkins if supranationalism, the true name for globalism, is even genetically possible
chimps can’t do it, softy peaceable chimpanzee frequently murder one another for literally no reason than territory
it’s been filmed, I’ve seen it

“What if the type of mass-scale immigration

dictionary definition of invasion met but ok

even without weapons, you can ‘rape’ a nation’s women and state coffers (“economic migrants” literally invaders) and that is their intention

search weapons cache European mosque or something like it
happens all over
just the ones we find

currently occurring in Europe,

meanwhile, Christian genocide in MENA too

Look! A distraction!

containing relatively large amounts of people with different nationalities, cultures, and religions, is going against some of the core features of human nature?

Show me one place multiculturalism in history hasn’t involved a genocide at some point.
ONE.
Look up Neanderthals, it’s now in our blood because it’s the reason we’re here and they’re not.

Maybe it isn’t, but if it is, do we have to wait until after the fact to say ‘well, globalism doesn’t work’, as we did with communism? Surely there is a better way.”

Picking up a fucking history book?

The burden of proof was on the pushers. They never did. Not even in their neighbourhoods or schools. The People never consented. When asked (see Brexit), they reject it.

Like the Unis in general, the social sciences only have a shit reputation now liberals are running it.

Coincidence, this is not.

Eye colour genetics

It is completely unique, like a fingerprint but there are genetic markers that sway it broadly.

Dominance is the real theory, recession is just an absence of dominance. Recessive genes are more evolutionally novel, that’s why they’re quite easy to steamroll.

This is a simplified graph but instructive.

You could associate probabilities based on the parent’s DNA, their genotype, not phenotype outcome.

Don’t use Caucasian for White people

It’s wrong on every level and you sound outdated.

Tell me if your humours are balanced next. How about some phlogiston?

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2011/01/stop-using-the-word-caucasian-to-mean-white/#.WW-vGoTyvZ4

http://mentalfloss.com/article/50202/why-are-white-people-called-caucasian

Forensics and gene research also show it’s misleading.

“Blumenbach’s Caucasians weren’t even strictly white or European, as the term is commonly used today.”

http://www.straight.com/blogra/526526/five-reasons-why-we-should-stop-calling-white-people-caucasian

Indians, for example, are Asian, not White. DNA tests exist.
Even the SJWs agree with me on this.

“But “Caucasian” is an erroneous term. And, although many people use it to avoid sounding racist, the continued usage of this term actually perpetuates racism and Eurocentrism.”

The science is just plain false.

“It’s “highly unlikely” that white people came out of the Caucasus region in Eurasia.”

It’s literally wrong.

There are discussions of how white Jews are, exclusively by the term Caucasian.
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/12/are-jews-white/509453/

“Later laws limited the number of immigrants from certain countries, restrictions which were in part targeted at Jews. But unlike Asian and African immigrants in the late 19th century, Jews retained a claim to being “Caucasian,” meaning they could win full citizenship status based on their putative race.”

Sneaky.

https://www.sapiens.org/column/race/caucasian-terminology-origin

What can we do to change it? We need to acknowledge that the word “Caucasian” is still around and that its continued use is problematic. We should use terms that are more accurate, such as “European-American.” Doing so would at least be consistent with the use of descriptive terms like “African-American,” “Mexican-American,” and others that signify both a geographical and an American ancestry.”

I agree.

The world owes white people

Actually.

The list would be so long, and so what?

White people literally invented science itself.

You can’t top that.

http://www.springer.com/cda/content/document/cda_downloaddocument/9781441974877-c1.pdf?SGWID=0-0-45-1032441-p174029978

The Scientific Method?
1600s Europe, at the earliest.
Truly, the Scientific Enlightenment primarily in France, some England, a little Germany, formalized it. All those subjects and branches and divisions you now know? Taught in the universities. Nobody else even knew what these were, so they can’t claim it and they certainly didn’t teach it either.
All NW Europeans, mostly upper class men, a smattering of a few women.

Previously we had ‘natural science’ (the term for this is German, which should give you a clue), mucking about with plants mostly. Labeling and drawing, not really an experimental manipulation, is it?
I guess it’s like saying we had ancient ‘doctors’ – who didn’t see a disease they didn’t wanna stick a leech on.

Except… that isn’t the meaning of the term as we use it in modernity, is it?

Don’t be intellectually dishonest.

Fun fact: leech still means doctor, it’s a synonym.

It’s like trying to claim evaporation cooling was Muslim when at the latest it was Egyptian but probably stolen from more ancient civilizations, there are examples at Pompeii.
Islam mostly murdered its tall poppies because they questioned the religion. That isn’t whitey’s fault.
They had a few good philosophers – not scientists. There was the occasional competent mathematician, but if that’s how low your standard… not to mention, they only built upon Greek and Hindu developments.
I haven’t seen an Islamic Antikythera mechanism. If they had such an advanced knowledge, there’d be proof and they’d use it in battle. Compare with Greek fire, a variant of which was referenced in Game of Thrones. The knowledge of Greek fire was probably lost because of the Muslim conquests going on at the same time. Thanks, Mohammed. 

A little chemistry was developed during the Renaissance but kept quiet by something called a guild.
See Venice and mirrors.

You look at the root of anything STEM and I guarantee you there’s a racial European at the heart of it. I’ve yet to find a single exception.

However, the Egyptians did some fine, pioneering medicinal work in the field of surgery, which isn’t technically a science. These findings were stolen by Muslims.

Along with the country and its women. Look at the modern racial composition.

The eldest surgical examples I’ve seen are European, see trepanning.
Those damn Frenchies, inventing neurosurgery! (As English, we hate giving the French credit for anything except losing). It’s painful for me to admit that, viscerally painful.