RSS
From Nature last May, a paper I’ve referred to in one or two other posts recently:
Genome-wide association study identifies 74 loci associated with educational attainment
Nature 533, 539–542 (26 May 2016) doi:10.1038/nature17671
Received 24 June 2015 Accepted 16 March 2016 Published online 11 May 2016Educational attainment is strongly influenced by social and other environmental factors, but genetic factors are estimated to account for at least 20% of the variation across individuals.
Number of years of schooling is a measure that can be found in many recent medical studies that look at genes. It’s not an ideal measure from a qualitative standpoint for studying the genetics of intelligence, but quantity has a quality all its own when it comes to ferreting out the impact of genes on intelligence. Huge sample sizes are crucial:
Here we report the results of a genome-wide association study (GWAS) for educational attainment that extends our earlier discovery sample of 101,069 individuals to 293,723 individuals, and a replication study in an independent sample of 111,349 individuals from the UK Biobank.
If all goes well, the sample size in this research project could be expanded to a million or so in the near future.
We identify 74 genome-wide significant loci associated with the number of years of schooling completed. Single-nucleotide polymorphisms associated with educational attainment are disproportionately found in genomic regions regulating gene expression in the fetal brain. Candidate genes are preferentially expressed in neural tissue, especially during the prenatal period
See, I’ve been telling you that the really important period for education isn’t pre-K like everybody says these days, it’s pre-natal: 8 months and 29 days before birth. But not a day sooner!
, and enriched for biological pathways involved in neural development.
In other words, most of these genetic variations of small but significant effect on educational attainment are found exactly where you’d expect them to be found: in genes known to affect prenatal neural development.
Our findings demonstrate that, even for a behavioural phenotype that is mostly environmentally determined, a well-powered GWAS identifies replicable associated genetic variants that suggest biologically relevant pathways. Because educational attainment is measured in large numbers of individuals, it will continue to be useful as a proxy phenotype in efforts to characterize the genetic influences of related phenotypes, including cognition and neuropsychiatric diseases.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
lol, liberals are mad that Richard Spencer is so smart and articulate.
https://twitter.com/LPDonovan/status/807777669979000833
Either he saw the light....... or felt the heat.
Assuming he's on board with the ideas in his statement, this is good news. I don't fully trust him, but I also recognize that he's a careerist and opportunist (like most of our political class). He might be willing to compromise his views to be apart of this administration.
This statement shows that Stephen Miller, Jeff Sessions, and Steve Bannon are running the show, at least with respect to immigration.
The nomination of the pro-Putin Exxon exec also shows that the usual people may not be as influential as we feared. If Trump was going to let establishment Republicans and neocons run his White House, he wouldn't have made that pick.Replies: @SFG
the first wave of white displacement was mostly blue collar and less articulate so it was easier to paint them in a negative light
Steve you should do a blog about a Black lawyer named Elie Mystal who said it should be legal for Blacks to murder Whites.
http://mobile.wnd.com/2016/12/black-lawyer-free-anyone-charged-with-murdering-whites/
That view held by Elie Mystal is so Far Left that it makes Al Sharpton look like a moderate middle of the road centrist in comparison.
Maybe The Democratic Party will make Elie Mystal the new chairman of their party, LOL. After all most Left Wingers believe The Democratic Party was not anti-White enough which caused so many Black voters to stay home and that’s why they lost big in 2016 when it comes to the presidency, the senate, and the house. They believe the key to DNC victory in 2018 and 2020 is to double down even more on anti-White politics.
The positive feedback loop here is for even more righteous indignation on behalf of "minorities". Not only will they suggest we legalize murder, they will move even further left and advocate making it mandatory. Such cults tend to spiral towards a vat of purple kool-aid for all, or crawl under a purple, triangular blanket wearing Nike tennis shoes.
Another nail in the coffin of the “blank slate” hypothesis.
From the paper:
It would also be a mistake to infer from our findings that the genetic
effects operate independently of environmental factors. Indeed, a
recent meta-analysis of twin studies found that genetic influences
on educational attainment are heterogeneous across countries and
birth cohorts15. We conducted exploratory analyses in the Swedish
Twin Registry to illustrate how environmental factors may amplify or
dampen the impact of genetic influences (Supplementary Information
section 7). We found that the predictive power of the all-SNPs polygenic
score is heterogeneous by birth cohort, with smaller explanatory power
in younger cohorts (Extended Data Fig. 10; see also Supplementary
Information section 7.4 for discussion of the contrast between these results and findings from a seminal twin study that estimated educational
attainment heritability by birth cohort16).
iSteve,
It appears that you are coming at the phenomenon and impact of IQ from a different angle. Perhaps these “74 genome-wide significant loci associated with the number of years of schooling completed” are also factors affecting measured IQ.
From the experience of raising two sons, a grandson, and a year of coursework associated with an adoption process, I would extend the period of neural vulnerability beyond the womb to include the first crucial 18-24 months of life. The brain is still developing and the child is making definitive, life-forming decisions about whether the world is a pleasant or hostile place to live. The latter is later associated with a sociopathic view of life called the Reactive Attachment Disorder.
Perhaps it would be useful to study the prenatal and postnatal nurturing habits of differing cultures and populations to look for statistical variations in IQ. My sense is that the results will prove the utility of taking mid-night feedings and affectionate nurturing environments seriously.
What they say isn't wrong, but they want inattentive readers to see the environmental effects they crave. If shared environment did matter much, the only way the kid's genes could affect it (and hence be picked up by this kind of study) is by affecting the parent's behaviour.
But of course as we know from twin & adoption studies, shared environment (within usual vaguelly 1st-world conditions) seems to matter very little. It's genetics plus noise.Replies: @Steve Sailer
I highly doubt that the evolutionary origin of, say, high intelligence--potential for high adaptability and innovation--was "midnight feedings and affectionate nurturing environments."
One of the many possibilities is that "nature's" regulator in these matters is everything our ancestors, of all species, ever did. We are the sum total not of OUR decisions, but all of theirs. That's not something most people want to think about.
Obsession with comfort and nurture is an extremely late, and mass consumerist, phenomenon. If there is evidence that this in fact makes kids brighter, fine, I'm open to it. What I've observed and seen measured is quite the opposite: bubble-wrapped hovermommy'ed kids believe that the world is a hostile place to live...and further it owes them the standards of comfort to which they have become accustomed.
lol, liberals are mad that Richard Spencer is so smart and articulate.Replies: @Patrick Harris, @NOTA, @JohnnyWalker123, @anon, @Negrolphin Pod Pool Party
I don’t have much truck with Spencer’s particular brand of “race idealism,” but I did use a picture of him to get a pretty nice haircut from my barber the other day.
Nobody believes in blank slate. It is interaction of genes with environment.
From the paper:
It would also be a mistake to infer from our findings that the genetic
effects operate independently of environmental factors. Indeed, a
recent meta-analysis of twin studies found that genetic influences
on educational attainment are heterogeneous across countries and
birth cohorts15. We conducted exploratory analyses in the Swedish
Twin Registry to illustrate how environmental factors may amplify or
dampen the impact of genetic influences (Supplementary Information
section 7). We found that the predictive power of the all-SNPs polygenic
score is heterogeneous by birth cohort, with smaller explanatory power
in younger cohorts (Extended Data Fig. 10; see also Supplementary
Information section 7.4 for discussion of the contrast between these results and findings from a seminal twin study that estimated educational
attainment heritability by birth cohort16).
“Prenatal” is just the authors trying to thow the PC police off the trail.
What they say isn’t wrong, but they want inattentive readers to see the environmental effects they crave. If shared environment did matter much, the only way the kid’s genes could affect it (and hence be picked up by this kind of study) is by affecting the parent’s behaviour.
But of course as we know from twin & adoption studies, shared environment (within usual vaguelly 1st-world conditions) seems to matter very little. It’s genetics plus noise.
lol, liberals are mad that Richard Spencer is so smart and articulate.Replies: @Patrick Harris, @NOTA, @JohnnyWalker123, @anon, @Negrolphin Pod Pool Party
No, liberals are ecstatic to be able to appoint this guy as the spokesman for all Trump voters or everyone to the right of Hillary Clinton.
all the media did was make Bannon/Sessions the voice of the respectable Right
lolz
What they mean is:
Educational attainment is strongly influenced by social and other environmental factors, we are obliged to say to cover our arses.
But genetic factors are estimated to account for at least 20% of the variation across individuals; do you hear that? At least 20%. At least.
Lord knows what the 20% might be replaced by in ten years time. Forecast: publications from China will suggest 80%, forecasts from the former First World 0%.
What will be the blank-slatists response to this??
For a while now I have lamented that society has staked the case against prejudice and racism, on three ideas that are almost certain to be counterfactual: that race is a meaningless concept biologically, that all human populations are exactly equally distributed genetically across all possibly genetically-linked traits, and that intelligence is immeasurable.
As someone who is against prejudice, racism, and denying people opportunities, I have implored people to instead make the case against those based on simple moral values such treating people fairly and treating them as individuals as opposed to representatives of groups. But clearly these classically liberal ideas don’t imply the same radical leftist social prescriptions as blank-slatism; hence my advice has gone nowhere.
If they do, it will be just another nail in the coffin of their credibility. Though for a supremacist, he sure doesn’t talk much about, you know, supremacism. One more nail…
http://mobile.wnd.com/2016/12/black-lawyer-free-anyone-charged-with-murdering-whites/
That view held by Elie Mystal is so Far Left that it makes Al Sharpton look like a moderate middle of the road centrist in comparison.
Maybe The Democratic Party will make Elie Mystal the new chairman of their party, LOL. After all most Left Wingers believe The Democratic Party was not anti-White enough which caused so many Black voters to stay home and that's why they lost big in 2016 when it comes to the presidency, the senate, and the house. They believe the key to DNC victory in 2018 and 2020 is to double down even more on anti-White politics.Replies: @bomag
Spot on.
The positive feedback loop here is for even more righteous indignation on behalf of “minorities”. Not only will they suggest we legalize murder, they will move even further left and advocate making it mandatory. Such cults tend to spiral towards a vat of purple kool-aid for all, or crawl under a purple, triangular blanket wearing Nike tennis shoes.
lol, liberals are mad that Richard Spencer is so smart and articulate.Replies: @Patrick Harris, @NOTA, @JohnnyWalker123, @anon, @Negrolphin Pod Pool Party
Good news on Puzder.
Either he saw the light……. or felt the heat.
Assuming he’s on board with the ideas in his statement, this is good news. I don’t fully trust him, but I also recognize that he’s a careerist and opportunist (like most of our political class). He might be willing to compromise his views to be apart of this administration.
This statement shows that Stephen Miller, Jeff Sessions, and Steve Bannon are running the show, at least with respect to immigration.
The nomination of the pro-Putin Exxon exec also shows that the usual people may not be as influential as we feared. If Trump was going to let establishment Republicans and neocons run his White House, he wouldn’t have made that pick.
Going only by the quoted sections it doesn’t say “most”. Is says “disproportionately” which probably means more than you would expect if these were distributed evenly across the genome
These studies represent the beginning of the end of the Blank Slate paradigm, and all our woe.
And what an ugly, vicious paradigm it has proved to be.
Beware of Do-Gooders bearing Equality.
https://twitter.com/LPDonovan/status/807777669979000833
Either he saw the light....... or felt the heat.
Assuming he's on board with the ideas in his statement, this is good news. I don't fully trust him, but I also recognize that he's a careerist and opportunist (like most of our political class). He might be willing to compromise his views to be apart of this administration.
This statement shows that Stephen Miller, Jeff Sessions, and Steve Bannon are running the show, at least with respect to immigration.
The nomination of the pro-Putin Exxon exec also shows that the usual people may not be as influential as we feared. If Trump was going to let establishment Republicans and neocons run his White House, he wouldn't have made that pick.Replies: @SFG
Could be a deal between the right side of the Deep State and immigration restrictionists: we’ll let you cut down on immigration as long as we don’t have to pay any taxes.
Just as I would take the deal for reasonable support for Israel if the jewish leadership would stop pushing immigration.
There has to be confidence that this is the deal being offered, however.
Do these SNPs correlate with education within races?
Manipulation
https://stuartschneiderman.blogspot.com/2016/12/michael-lewis-on-trump-and-obama.html
Mr. Sailer,
did you see this recently-released paper, yet?
The Churches’ Bans on Consanguineous Marriages, Kin-Networks and Democracy
Jonathan F. Schulz
Yale University, Department of Psychology
November 29, 2016
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2877828
Cousin Marriage Conundrum
The ancient practice discourages democratic nation-building
https://www.unz.com/article/cousin-marriage-conundrum/
I will gladly take the deal of less corporate taxes for less immigration and foreign labor.
Just as I would take the deal for reasonable support for Israel if the jewish leadership would stop pushing immigration.
There has to be confidence that this is the deal being offered, however.
Western economy needs to be enriched by this kind of culture.
http://www.newnationalist.net/2016/12/09/indian-people-are-caught-in-the-grip-of-kleptocratic-looting-operation/
FWIW, Willy Bemis makes available online for free his PPT presentations related to the 3rd edition of Liem, Bemis, Walker, and Grande’s
Functional Anatomy of the Vertebrates (2001)
http://www.eeb.cornell.edu/Bemis/FAOV3.htm
http://www.eeb.cornell.edu/bemis/Powerpoint_Links.htm
For general readers new to embryology and comparative embryology, chapter (4) may be of interest.
The other possibility being that it is early challenge, discomfort, and need-to-strive that triggers these brain centers.
I highly doubt that the evolutionary origin of, say, high intelligence–potential for high adaptability and innovation–was “midnight feedings and affectionate nurturing environments.”
One of the many possibilities is that “nature’s” regulator in these matters is everything our ancestors, of all species, ever did. We are the sum total not of OUR decisions, but all of theirs. That’s not something most people want to think about.
Obsession with comfort and nurture is an extremely late, and mass consumerist, phenomenon. If there is evidence that this in fact makes kids brighter, fine, I’m open to it. What I’ve observed and seen measured is quite the opposite: bubble-wrapped hovermommy’ed kids believe that the world is a hostile place to live…and further it owes them the standards of comfort to which they have become accustomed.
I’d say the natural/evolutionary paradigm of Ancestors Decided This All For You has been pretty vicious as well, and without any of the comforting human myths.
It’s peachy to get these sorts of studies–the more the better.
But honestly, there is just zero doubt that “intelligence”, “smarts”, “educability” and even some sort of “interest in learning stuff” are highly genetic. There is essentially *no one* who doesn’t believe it when it’s about people in their own families, their neighbors and their own choices when mating. (You think the blank slate bozos at Slate don’t believe a smarter spouse will give them smarter kids?) It’s just bloody obvious in our daily lives–“he’s a sharp kid”, “Johnny’s always been a bit slow”, etc.
The “blank slate” nonsense is entirely political and only “believed” by people when they put their political cap on, and especially when someone bothers to notice racial gaps.
~~~
And while 74 loci is interesting, when all is said and done it will be hundreds if not thousands of loci involved.
What is the main human success “tool”? — Our brains.
And what has selection been working on, especially since the neolithic? Ok, sure disease resistance, but then … our brains for more smarts, conscientiousness, improved cooperation, reduced propensity for random violence, later literacy, numeracy, better social cognition, etc.
Think -- who do women have kids with when they are fertile? Hint, its not smart men, rather aggressive, socially dominant ones. When women are *LEAST* fertile but still have some left, they settle for intelligent males who spark not an ounce of desire but have the merits of making money or having connections.
If women cared about having smart kids, they'd seek out smart men when they were most fertile and have more than one kid due to the clock running out on fertility. Women who do have more than one kid do so with various bad boys, the local drug dealer, pro athlete, aspiring rapper, tattooed bicycle messenger, etc.
If you were to graph the number of kids men had by IQ, you'd find vastly reduced (on average) numbers for high IQ (nothing is so repellent to women than male intelligence) and the sweet spot around 80-90 IQ. Or thereabouts.
This is one reason our ruling class is so disastrous. Far from being smart, they are mostly the descendants of Upper Middle Class ladies who had one "settling" baby at 39 or more likely the by-blow of some really charismatic but dumb drug dealer.
I think separating the soft-hearted from the political is possible if they are convinced the genetic differences can be changed or improved over time
or
if they are convinced the benefits of accepting genetic reality would do more good than harm e.g. medicine.
But honestly, there is just zero doubt that "intelligence", "smarts", "educability" and even some sort of "interest in learning stuff" are highly genetic. There is essentially *no one* who doesn't believe it when it's about people in their own families, their neighbors and their own choices when mating. (You think the blank slate bozos at Slate don't believe a smarter spouse will give them smarter kids?) It's just bloody obvious in our daily lives--"he's a sharp kid", "Johnny's always been a bit slow", etc.
The "blank slate" nonsense is entirely political and only "believed" by people when they put their political cap on, and especially when someone bothers to notice racial gaps.
~~~
And while 74 loci is interesting, when all is said and done it will be hundreds if not thousands of loci involved.
What is the main human success "tool"? -- Our brains.
And what has selection been working on, especially since the neolithic? Ok, sure disease resistance, but then ... our brains for more smarts, conscientiousness, improved cooperation, reduced propensity for random violence, later literacy, numeracy, better social cognition, etc.Replies: @Whiskey, @415 reasons, @anon
Ah, but that selection has been massively disrupted by first the Industrial Revolution, and then the pill, condom, anonymous urban living (heritage of the Industrial Revolution), mass media, and improved social and earning power for women.
Think — who do women have kids with when they are fertile? Hint, its not smart men, rather aggressive, socially dominant ones. When women are *LEAST* fertile but still have some left, they settle for intelligent males who spark not an ounce of desire but have the merits of making money or having connections.
If women cared about having smart kids, they’d seek out smart men when they were most fertile and have more than one kid due to the clock running out on fertility. Women who do have more than one kid do so with various bad boys, the local drug dealer, pro athlete, aspiring rapper, tattooed bicycle messenger, etc.
If you were to graph the number of kids men had by IQ, you’d find vastly reduced (on average) numbers for high IQ (nothing is so repellent to women than male intelligence) and the sweet spot around 80-90 IQ. Or thereabouts.
This is one reason our ruling class is so disastrous. Far from being smart, they are mostly the descendants of Upper Middle Class ladies who had one “settling” baby at 39 or more likely the by-blow of some really charismatic but dumb drug dealer.
Paris is worth a Mass.
Paris is quite a mess.
Good question. I wonder if there are different SNPs that correlate amongst highly educated members of different races.
OT:
*THE SAGA CONTINUES…* via today’s NYT: Confronting Racist Objects
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/12/09/us/confronting-racist-objects.html?_r=0
*Previous episodes:*
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/07/us/confronting-my-racist-object.html
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/10/06/us/race-related-confronting-racist-objects.html
(sorry if someone already got to this, haven’t sifted through all the comments)
But honestly, there is just zero doubt that "intelligence", "smarts", "educability" and even some sort of "interest in learning stuff" are highly genetic. There is essentially *no one* who doesn't believe it when it's about people in their own families, their neighbors and their own choices when mating. (You think the blank slate bozos at Slate don't believe a smarter spouse will give them smarter kids?) It's just bloody obvious in our daily lives--"he's a sharp kid", "Johnny's always been a bit slow", etc.
The "blank slate" nonsense is entirely political and only "believed" by people when they put their political cap on, and especially when someone bothers to notice racial gaps.
~~~
And while 74 loci is interesting, when all is said and done it will be hundreds if not thousands of loci involved.
What is the main human success "tool"? -- Our brains.
And what has selection been working on, especially since the neolithic? Ok, sure disease resistance, but then ... our brains for more smarts, conscientiousness, improved cooperation, reduced propensity for random violence, later literacy, numeracy, better social cognition, etc.Replies: @Whiskey, @415 reasons, @anon
Selection is operating as it always has and always will, by selecting for traits that lead to survival and reproduction. There may be different regimes of selection operating simultaneously on different populations of the same species. If they live in different environments, for example.
There is a transmissible cancer in tasmanian devils that has wiped out 90% of them in an epidemic in the last few years and left a distinct fingerprint of selection for resistance to the cancer in the 10% that have survived. So there was pre-existing variation that was selected for in the last 10 years for the trait of transmissible cancer resistance, but we only know that that was what was selected on because we observed the epidemic. With humans it is pretty difficult to say why a given population expanded in any particular environment.
Those traits you mentioned may or may not have been selected for in some or all human populations. The first step to unraveling– even theoretically– what the different selection regimes were for the different human populations is making an annotation of the difference in which functional variants were selected in which populations.
Obviously we need to Affirmatively Further Prenatal Neural Development by moving those little black bodies to white wombs.
“Educational attainment is strongly influenced by social and other environmental factors, but genetic factors are estimated to account for at least 20% of the variation across individuals.”
If you didn’t smile a big smile at that “20%” I am disappointed in you. But I’m sure you smiled.
I think that Tasmanian Devil thing has been going on for 20 years; mouth/facial tumors that basically starve the beasts. Sounds like they will survive as a species. Good.
Jonathan F. Schulz
Yale University, Department of Psychology
November 29, 2016https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2877828Cousin Marriage Conundrum
The ancient practice discourages democratic nation-building https://www.unz.com/article/cousin-marriage-conundrum/Replies: @BRF, @anon
I hope they hat tip HBD Chick.
Coming up with the vague, flexible term “alternative right” was probably a bad idea. When Spencer came up with the label, he wanted to come up with a simpler, catchier term for identitarian. However, it was later taken up by more mainstream right-wingers like Banner and Milo, so everyone to the right of the NeverTrump movement is now associated with the most extreme or eccentric elements of the genuine far right.
What they say isn't wrong, but they want inattentive readers to see the environmental effects they crave. If shared environment did matter much, the only way the kid's genes could affect it (and hence be picked up by this kind of study) is by affecting the parent's behaviour.
But of course as we know from twin & adoption studies, shared environment (within usual vaguelly 1st-world conditions) seems to matter very little. It's genetics plus noise.Replies: @Steve Sailer
Nah, I dragged up the prenatal aspect as a joke. Don’t blame the authors for that.
The gene variants they have identified that have some minor influence in how much education a person winds up getting operate prenatally on brain development. Their paper is clear about that.
NYT: A couple of clever academics from the aptly named Trope Lab at NYU theorize that possible genetic roots of implicit bias™ cause all sorts of unfair discrimination. Fortunately, their bespoke research points to a cure: government mandated re-education.
I’m guessing that “ourselves” in the above quote refers to those who are genetically more of a Haven for bias than others.
Functional Anatomy of the Vertebrates (2001)
http://www.eeb.cornell.edu/Bemis/FAOV3.htm
http://www.eeb.cornell.edu/bemis/Powerpoint_Links.htm
For general readers new to embryology and comparative embryology, chapter (4) may be of interest.Replies: @middle aged vet !
middle aged vet a.k.a wwebd said – Thanks. The older I get the more I respect people like Bemis. Tangentially, there is a lot to be learned from cephalopods, as well. As I get older, and reflect on how impressed I have been by the crows, and dogs, and cats that I have known, not to mention the amazing monkeys and gorillas I have heard about, I still feel rather humbled about how little I know about even the most simple specimens of those great denizens of the sea whom we call by names like “octopus” and “squid”. Not to mention the potential of the cockroach brain (if you have lived in a cockroach infested apartment, as I have, out of – for the record – scientific curiosity rather than out of poverty or regrettable laziness , you probably have noticed their courage and stoic bravery and love for each other) and the weird way that fireflies have of accurately imitating, in the June darkness that they like so much, with their gentle golden phosphorescence, as if they were angels, the passing rhythms of remembered summer nights that were long gone before they were born (not so much born as hatched, to be more accurate, in a sad little biology textbook way) (the phosphorescence was theirs the remembrance was mine).
I meant to say, not the “remembrance was mine” but the “remembrance was mine and it was a gift for everyone who saw it” – those of us lucky enough to live in a place with lots of fireflies will understand…
lol, liberals are mad that Richard Spencer is so smart and articulate.Replies: @Patrick Harris, @NOTA, @JohnnyWalker123, @anon, @Negrolphin Pod Pool Party
yes
the first wave of white displacement was mostly blue collar and less articulate so it was easier to paint them in a negative light
nah – they tried but it didn’t stick
all the media did was make Bannon/Sessions the voice of the respectable Right
lolz
Jonathan F. Schulz
Yale University, Department of Psychology
November 29, 2016https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2877828Cousin Marriage Conundrum
The ancient practice discourages democratic nation-building https://www.unz.com/article/cousin-marriage-conundrum/Replies: @BRF, @anon
well done Mr Sailer and hbdchick
But honestly, there is just zero doubt that "intelligence", "smarts", "educability" and even some sort of "interest in learning stuff" are highly genetic. There is essentially *no one* who doesn't believe it when it's about people in their own families, their neighbors and their own choices when mating. (You think the blank slate bozos at Slate don't believe a smarter spouse will give them smarter kids?) It's just bloody obvious in our daily lives--"he's a sharp kid", "Johnny's always been a bit slow", etc.
The "blank slate" nonsense is entirely political and only "believed" by people when they put their political cap on, and especially when someone bothers to notice racial gaps.
~~~
And while 74 loci is interesting, when all is said and done it will be hundreds if not thousands of loci involved.
What is the main human success "tool"? -- Our brains.
And what has selection been working on, especially since the neolithic? Ok, sure disease resistance, but then ... our brains for more smarts, conscientiousness, improved cooperation, reduced propensity for random violence, later literacy, numeracy, better social cognition, etc.Replies: @Whiskey, @415 reasons, @anon
Agree that the driving force is/was political but imo there is/was a second cohort who went along with it out of soft-heartededness.
I think separating the soft-hearted from the political is possible if they are convinced the genetic differences can be changed or improved over time
or
if they are convinced the benefits of accepting genetic reality would do more good than harm e.g. medicine.
Whereas nowadays:
Paris is quite a mess.
I think Ann Coulter said something like if Trump gets immigration under control he can perform third trimester abortions in the Oval Office and marry his homosexual boyfriend in the East Room and he’ll still have my support. But your comment has historical erudition: Paris vaut une messe!
lol, liberals are mad that Richard Spencer is so smart and articulate.Replies: @Patrick Harris, @NOTA, @JohnnyWalker123, @anon, @Negrolphin Pod Pool Party
The speech was actually quite compelling. I was a little disappointed in the press conference’s Nuremberg visuals that were allowed to be trotted out over every cable news show, but after watching the Texas A&M performance I have to say the guy is kind of a bad *ss.
It’s worth viewing. His needling of the fat clown girl and other artless meddlers was quite funny. The Q&A descend into a Black Baptist call and response parody with silly sermonizing from some promising yoot scholars.
For a while now I have lamented that society has staked the case against prejudice and racism, on three ideas that are almost certain to be counterfactual: that race is a meaningless concept biologically, that all human populations are exactly equally distributed genetically across all possibly genetically-linked traits, and that intelligence is immeasurable.
As someone who is against prejudice, racism, and denying people opportunities, I have implored people to instead make the case against those based on simple moral values such treating people fairly and treating them as individuals as opposed to representatives of groups. But clearly these classically liberal ideas don't imply the same radical leftist social prescriptions as blank-slatism; hence my advice has gone nowhere.Replies: @De Gaulle, @Bill
anon, your commitment to moral values is admirable so do not despair. Many people in this world practice healing the world, by the name of tikkun olam or by other names. The people may be known in the Unz world as Citizenim.
For a while now I have lamented that society has staked the case against prejudice and racism, on three ideas that are almost certain to be counterfactual: that race is a meaningless concept biologically, that all human populations are exactly equally distributed genetically across all possibly genetically-linked traits, and that intelligence is immeasurable.
As someone who is against prejudice, racism, and denying people opportunities, I have implored people to instead make the case against those based on simple moral values such treating people fairly and treating them as individuals as opposed to representatives of groups. But clearly these classically liberal ideas don't imply the same radical leftist social prescriptions as blank-slatism; hence my advice has gone nowhere.Replies: @De Gaulle, @Bill
Instead of claiming that Bayes Rule is wrong, we should claim that it is evil.
The point is that a lot can happen in the 25 years it takes a human brain to fully develop … and let’s assume the brain has something to do with IQ. Prenatal + the first 18-24 months are crucial to that development. Examples: Fetal Alcohol Syndrome; failure to thrive after birth due to social and physical privations.
A lot of work was done studying the children abandoned in orphanages in eastern Europe after the fall of the Soviet system and the collapse of their economies. The data showed severe issues with neural and brain development in the infants and toddlers abandoned in or tied to their cribs for extended periods of time. (For example, it was hard for one caregiver to take care of 36 infants and toddlers at one time.) The development issues later showed themselves in marked social adjustment problems … the kind that led to institutionalization.
http://speech-language-pathology-audiology.advanceweb.com/Article/Orphanage-Experience-Alters-Brain-Development.aspx
If social and physical privation can lead to measurable, negative results with respect to neural and social development, then it would make sense that privileged social and physical care might lead to measurable, positive results. Hence, my suggestion is to take a close look at the nesting environments and practices of peoples with allegedly high IQs, i.e. the Chinese, Vietnamese, Ashkinazi Jews. Conversely, take the same look at people who allegedly have low IQs, i.e. sub-Saharan blacks. How children are raised in these cultures/societies might just have an impact on IQ.
Steve Sailer has noted studies that show that Black nurturing practices (compared to White nurturing practices) in the United States do have an impact on the performance of Black children in school.
https://www.unz.com/isteve/dr-betty-hart-rip-proved-blacks-dont/?highlight=vocabulary