(((Eric Turkheimer))) and other charlatans BTFO
Other urls found in this thread:
vdare.com
kevinmacdonald.net
geneticshumanagency.org
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
youtube.com
npr.org
twitter.com
Source for turkheimwr being Jewish?
Go to bed Ryan, you autistic fuck.
NO
Ryan stay i love you in a sexual way.
Lol never fails
Ryan you need to refine your debating skills and start reaching out or become biologist or something and publish proper race studies.
It's too Alt deletes the comments pointing out that he's a dishonest idiot.
He's very open about it.
Nah, he should leave the debating to the other guy that writes for his blog. I forget his name but he's sometimes on with Ryan.
how is he dishonest?
Sean Last
k
So basically he is trying to say if you come from a poor family you are likely to have a low IQ? Is this to cover up niggers having a low IQ?
It seems like when Ryan is presenting ideas in his videos it's much better than when he is debating. If he was debating in a same manner he would win more debates i think.
>turkheimer
its obvious as fuck
Can you stop stuttering so much when you debate, and put some base in your voice for Christ sake. Maybe take steroids.
Other than that love your work.
Its easier to debate feels than data, even though you would expect the opposite. Ryan needs time to get his point across is all.
Although Ryan could improve his debating skills, he's ok at it. I'd say that research is Ryan's strongest point, with Ryan's research a skilled agitator could blaze a trail of destroyed anuses through shitlib heartlands
He's claiming that the heritability of IQ is lower, almost nonexistent, for poor people, thus excusing their low anchor on the left of the bell curve.
>is this to cover up niggers having a low IQ
yes
Lads it's painful to think about how far back we've probably been set in anthropology, human genetics, psychology, etc. because of Jewish paranoia.
>Sean Last
Yeah that guy.
The problem with Ryan is that he tries to answer 50 different questions when he was asked only one. He's basically trying to cover every corner but then it all just gets very autistic and sometimes he does not even get off because he's tangling his own fucking mind too much to do all these things instead of answering what is usually a quite simple question.
At least that is my armchair psychologist take.
Leave the debates to Sean Last, he seems to do good every time I listen.
I watched the first part about Scarr-Rowe Hypothesis, that IQ heritability is attenuated by SES, and the video wildly misrepresents the science. This isn't some fringe theory held only by Turkheimer. (Wouldn't it be called the Turkheimer Hypothesis?). The 4 papers Ryan picked out don't even claim to be disproving Scarr-Rowe. They're describing apparent exceptions to a broad trend. One of them is even titled something like "*When* does SES attenuate IQ heritability?". The authors of those papers largely agree with Scarr-Rowe. I guess Ryan didn't expect anyone to even check the titles of the papers he is misconstruing.
Turkheimer's own papers review the body of literature fairly comprehensively. Some of it strongly supports Scarr-Rowe, but not all of it.
Ah I gotcha. Figured this was the case. Basically a way keeping a cast system through botched scientific ((research))). Jews really are a crafty bunch of rats.
Because in his videos he just accuses everyone he disagrees with of lying and there's no one to push back and call out his flimsy bullshit.
Yeah and we'd probably be immortal if there was no rules for human testing.
Better not think about things like these.
Doesn't seem like he has many people behind him tho and i'm wondering why. Ryan is better than all of those stupid eceleb retards but there is not many people talking about him even here. We should support more research like this and get more people to watch his videos because the videos are so stacked with info that i think lefties in debate would get overwhelmed when some of /ourguys/ start talking about stuff in public.
I don't think the sort of human testing you're thinking about is moral, but we had at least a rudimentary (and growing) understanding of these topics until the Holocaust museum was built and an emphasis was placed on the role of eugenics in Nazism, and then it's like every Jew was sent a memo that we had to pretend genes weren't real.
You realize he's very autistic right? It's not a meme. He's much better now than he used to be.
>The problem with Ryan is that he tries to answer 50 different questions when he was asked only one. He's basically trying to cover every corner but then it all just gets very autistic and sometimes he does not even get off because he's tangling his own fucking mind too much to do all these things instead of answering what is usually a quite simple question
Pretty much this. Debates could do with short and concise btfo's rather than all-encompassing ramblings. He'd need to prepare some talking points and responses in advance for debates
I agree, Ryan is way underappreciated here. The Alt-Hype site is incredible when debating lefties
Ryan is an autistic mixed-race white ethno-nationalist clown. Why would anyone listen your "scientific" arguments when you're obviously a propagandist?
>wouldn't it be called the turkheiner hypothesis
No, not usually
>the authors largely agree
Their stated opinion is worthless, as is what they're claiming to be doing in the paper
>they dont claim to be disproving
>when does ses attenuate IQ heritability
Ryan addressed this point in the video when he discussed the bit about the somewhat circular reasoning and (((coincidentally))) identical correlations
Are you genuinely this retarded, or are you just fishing for (you)s
what mix is he? And what do you have against him?
> the authors of these papers are idiots but some brilliant autistic YouTuber has re-interpreted their otherwise valid data to prove race realism
lol
>They're describing apparent exceptions to a broad trend. One of them is even titled something like "*When* does SES attenuate IQ heritability?
post the full title you nigger
>When does socioeconomic status (SES) moderate the heritability of IQ?
>No evidence for g × SES interaction for IQ in a representative sample of 1176 Australian adolescent twin pairs
basically what they tried to do is verify turckheimer's findings and they couldn't.
He's not mixed. He used to think he was 1/16 black but that turned out to be false.
>are idiots
When did I say that retard?
In some video he says he's part "negro", I think 1/8. I don't have anything against him. I just think the typical stormfags get boring while Ryan puts up a good fight for his positions so he's more fun to go after.
You said their stated opinions are worthless, as in they don't know how to interpret their own data. And yet you trust them to collect it. Hmmm...
>He's much better now than he used to be
Actually I've been watching following Alt-Hype since he had a debate on the distributist's channel years ago. He was unironically really good in that debate. He had short speeches prepared for that debate and one of them was a nice summary of the ethno-nationalist position
>as in they dont know how
I'm implying they are lying or being soft about their own data commonly, not stupid
In this case though they arent even saying what you think they're saying, you're such a brainlet you think the title reflects results
>tfw no ryan bf
he's not mixed
>as in they don't know how to interpret their own data
He says it's IMPOSSIBLE that cognitive differences exist between populations in this very video, what the hell are you talking about? Turkheimer is claiming there's an even distribution of polygenic inheritance between the continental races, you're a joke if you don't see that's obviously wrong.
The title is saying "What are the details of this general trend we believe in? It didn't apply in this case".
The paper even favorably cites Turkheimer and he cites these authors in his work too. Read the intro or conclusion. The point of the paper is pointing out an interesting exception to a well accepted trend. There's a nice paragraph in the conclusion summing this up:
> The implications for the bioecological model bear some examination. The bioecological model is compatible with both the finding of enduring g × SES effects on IQ heritability in the US, and with the result that UK (Hanscombe et al., 2012) and (present data) Australian subjects show no such effects — indeed, the bioecological model uses high heritability precisely as an index of optimal environmental provisioning (Bronfenbrenner & Ceci, 1994). The mechanisms leading to these differences, however, need to be made explicit in the model.
interesting to see Ryan flip-flop on that, he seemed very matter of fact about it originally
This is a subtlety missed by most race realists. Mainstream science doesn't definitively claim there's no genetic differences in cognitive ability, just that there's no evidence of them. There's scant evidence on either side and so each side just accuses the other of lying. Turkheimer has talked about this: geneticshumanagency.org
> Everyone who doesn't agree with me is just a lying SJW!
k, I'm sure that will win you lots of arguments...
Read the intro or the conclusion. It's obvious that they generally support Scarr-Rowe.
>everyone I dont agree with is lying
Didnt say that retard
>read the intro or conclusion
You really are fucking stupid arent you?
>interesting to see Ryan flip-flop on that
Are you conflating Ryan's and Turkheimer's position?
>This is a subtlety missed by most race realists
no it's not
>just that there's no evidence of them
Besides every standardized test in existence that can be post-mortem converted to 'g'
>Turkheimer has talked about this
Hot takes like, racial differences in intelligence will be the worst scientific discovery since the atomic bomb
>It's obvious that they generally support Scarr-Rowe
If you're talking about a phenomenon, especially in social science, it doesn't mean you believe it matter of factly. What the fuck are you talking about?
>Environmental measures used widely in the behavioral sciences show nearly as much genetic influence as behavioral measures, a critical finding for interpreting associations between environmental factors and children's development. This research depends on the twin method that compares monozygotic and dizygotic twins, but key aspects of children's environment such as socioeconomic status (SES) cannot be investigated in twin studies because they are the same for children growing up together in a family. Here, using a new technique applied to DNA from 3000 unrelated children, we show significant genetic influence on family SES, and on its association with children's IQ at ages 7 and 12. In addition to demonstrating the ability to investigate genetic influence on between-family environmental measures, our results emphasize the need to consider genetics in research and policy on family SES and its association with children's IQ.
Here, read muh plomin study, see??? See the intro???
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
I was talking about Ryan saying he's not black. I don't really care about that though desu, just something fun to shit on him for.
> Besides every standardized test in existence that can be post-mortem converted to 'g'
We all agree that there's a black-white IQ gap, the question is why.
> Hot takes like, racial differences in intelligence will be the worst scientific discovery since the atomic bomb
Well Turkheimer is totally right about that. It would be a very consequential discovery and so it requires a high level of scrutiny. Ryan himself uses this belief to justify his advocacy of white nationalism.
did Ryan hurt you somehow? Call suicide-prevention line.
>we all agree that
You really are stupid. He was implying the standardized test scores have disparity even when measured against ses
>the question is why
The question is how many types of data manipulation are retards like you going to try before giving up
>it would be consequential
That's not what he meant, why are you such a dishonest faggot?
And if it's true, would you hide that fact? If you had conclusive evidence that that was the case, what would you do with it?
The honest thing would be to inform everyone and let them make their own choices.
>We all agree that there's a black-white IQ gap, the question is why
It's pretty clear why that is. We have the heritability of IQ combined with GWAS. But in the end, does it even matter all that much? As long as the IQ gap is unfixable, what difference does it make whether it's genetic or environmental? For all practical intents and purposes, it's immutable as if it were 100% genetic
>the question is why.
It's a never ending shifting goal post for the race-denialists. They birth things like "relative poverty", when confronted with things like purchasing power/wealth of AA compared to Eastern Europeans and their respective IQs. I think if that when the East Asians see pic related, there's no question what the cause is because they aren't anchored down by societal taboos.
>If you're talking about a phenomenon, especially in social science, it doesn't mean you believe it matter of factly.
idk wtf is so confusing. The authors support the general hypothesis but believe there are exceptions depending on the precise circumstances.
The study you quoted isn't even about Scarr-Rowe. wtf? The part of the other paper I said to read was actually relevant you fuckwit.
The argument is that if it is environmental it isnt unfixable if we just do x
It also plays politically because every narrative about racism would not be based on reality but rather pseudoscience
It also plays to the reason africa sucks
You didnt actually cite a paper by the way, I've been trying to figure out which one you're using
It's cuz he's prob some type of shitskin and the truth hurts
>not being a patron
I have watched some of Ryans videos 3 or 4 times over the years. He is worth the minimum amount of shekels
> You really are stupid. He was implying the standardized test scores have disparity even when measured against ses
Again, that's not controversial. It we could already explain the gap just with SES then the race realists would have already moved on.
> The question is how many types of data manipulation are retards like you going to try before giving up
Either enough that the known environmental factors explain the gap or until a major genetic explanation is found. Although the question will probably change as we begin to actually understand the links between genetics and IQ. In the future, this thread will probably sound like a discussion about what balance of humors is optimal for health.
> That's not what he meant, why are you such a dishonest faggot?
I guess you want me to say it would be a bad thing? Sure, but that doesn't change the science either way.
Ryan's spoken about it in the past, he said his mother made a mistake tracing their ancestry or some shit. It doesn't matter anyway, being 1/16 black hardly makes you mixed race in the way most people understand the term
>We all agree that there's a black-white IQ gap, the question is why.
While there isn't much evidence out there, the evidence that does exist (Transracial adoption studies, subtest heritability, etc) generally favours the hereditarians.
Out of interest. what do you estimate the environmental/genetic cause of the black-white IQ gap to be?
>It would be a very consequential discovery and so it requires a high level of scrutiny
Right, but look at the number of policies that assume cognitive differences between the races are all down to environmental differences. That same scrutiny is not being applied to both sides of the argument.
No one says income explains the gap.
That GWAS paper was written by a brainlet who literally says he has ESP and telekinesis.
Yeah, I understand the shitlib argument for it. All I'm saying is, as far as reality is concerned, for all intents and purposes IQ is 100% genetic. I'll accept the shitlib position once they prove that they can close the race gaps
>It would be a very consequential discovery and so it requires a high level of scrutiny
I forgot to add to this, as far as consequences go, you do realize that peddling these egalitarian bullshit lies also have huge consequences? People like you are in the process of destroying Western Civilization in the name of these lies. You people are permanently shitting up our countries in the name of your deluded ideology
this was one of the most powerful videos I've see, I wish he didn't have to put channel maintenance questions in it as well. That bit at the beginning about youtube subscriptions, what was the point of that? You just turn off new viewers.
Look at Fortnight streamers, at the beginning of all their videos is a hook, where they play their most exciting moment to get the audience interested.
youtube.com
Also, the video was a bit too long. I liked his rant at the end, but it could have ended a lot sooner. Why make the video 40 minutes long when you can cut it to 30 minutes, or maybe 20 minutes?
Such emotion. Try less feels and more logic.
Ah, I see the confusion. Someone else had already posted the titled and I was responding to them.
This is the paper. It's one of the ones that Ryan's video originally cited: "When does socioeconomic status (SES) moderate the heritability of IQ? No evidence for g × SES interaction for IQ in a representative sample of 1176 Australian adolescent twin pairs"
Broofs and also even if that were true, it still isn't a refutation
Naw, I really don't care about Ryan being a shitskin.
And? What, are you going to throw out all of physics because Newton was a brainlet who thought the bible contained the secret to transmutation?
That reading comprehension though
> Out of interest. what do you estimate the environmental/genetic cause of the black-white IQ gap to be?
I don't think there's good evidence either way and it's even a big assumption to frame things as though we'll inevitably find white people are genetically smarter than blacks and the question is how much. Ruby Bridges is still alive and in her 60s, Flynn Effect is only about 30 years old, stereotype threat is about 20 years old. I expect to be surprised in the coming decades and I don't trust my own judgment on this quesiton. But sure, if terrorists from the future kidnapped my family and demanded I take a guess... well I'd be *really* surprised that the answer neatly came out to a single number and I'd expect to lose my family... but I'd guess 20% advantage in favor of whites.
> That same scrutiny is not being applied to both sides of the argument.
I think in popsci that's true but it's much less true in primary literature and it's a reasonable stance to take anyway. One conclusion would be much more harmful than the other and result in people glossing over a lot of bad shit as totes ok.
Do you believe that non-whites suffer from systematic racism, stereotyping, etc? If yes, wouldn't the solution to that be peaceful separation?
> Broofs and also even if that were true, it still isn't a refutation
'Duxide' is Davide Piffer, the author of the GWAS paper, 'Emil' is a fellow race realist and even he is shitting on Davide for this
Sure, it's not an exact refutation but I wouldn't trust a physician who believed in chakra healing.
Everyone was a bible brainlet back then. You have to be a very special kind of brainlet to believe you have force powers today.
wtf is peaceful separation?! This is just a retarded foot in the door. Just going to have a peaceful and voluntary ethnic cleansing, ok.
Ok so now I dont understand your point, they literally say they find no evidence supporting turkheimers view, which was the only reason alt hype brought it up, and he says as much in his video
Also the study is on children, which has what bearing on general intelligence of adults? Of course better teachers would achieve better scores in the short term, but into adulthood?
Something like the partition of India/pakistan, but way easier.
My point is that the authors themselves are saying "we found that Scarr-Rowe didn't apply in this case" and then they go on to try and reconcile that with other research in their conclusion. They aren't saying everyone supporting Scarr-Rowe is a lying fraud. Ryan presents this paper as if it was pro-wrestling and the authors had cut a promo about how badly they rekt Turkheimer at Sciencemania. There's a good chance these guys are friends with Turkheimer and his lab.
This argument has been had already across hundreds of stupid debates available on youtube
There are a couple ways to attain this, and more than I can explain.
1. Stop forcefully integrating
2. Allow freedom of association like our constitution guarantees us. This effect would be more pronounced because people generally group together and avoid other races
3. Buy out "unwanteds". This would have a more pronounced effect over time, and wouldn't involve force.
The important thing to remember is that the goal isnt an immediate or possibly ever 100%, but rather continuously pursuing 100%
He offered several papers all failing to corroborate the bullshit theory, not one damning dependent paper, and pointing out there hasn't been corroboration
This is generally a problem in science where the real proof is weight of evidence and probability rather than a slam dunk
It's much more realistic to improve race relations.
And sorry to Poe's Law this thread, but "we're just going to peacefully relocate the undesirables" was how the Nazis started out. It was the *Final* Solution, not the First Solution.
So where's the proof that it's Piffer? Also, would you be in favor of a study looking at how the IQ-related gene variants are distributed? If it was made by someone "reliable"?
>wtf is peaceful separation?!
It's when people voluntarily move to areas that are designated to them
>This is just a retarded foot in the door. Just going to have a peaceful and voluntary ethnic cleansing, ok
Nah, all it would take is for majority white areas to separate and you'd have the ethnostate. No violence needed. Everybody would be better off. You could finally lift the yoke of the evil white man off of poor minorities' shoulders
>It's much more realistic to improve race relations.
Oh yeah? How much progress have you made on race relations in the United States over the past 150 years or so?
>it's much more realistic to improve race relations
Have fun pushing that boulder uphill
>its more realistic
Point to a successful civilization where visible differences and equality existed at the same time
And then theres the putnam study
What's realistic is my second point. It requires no intervention whatsoever, much less than the insane monumental task it would take to forcefully correct for inequality, which is already devastating the country
>sorry to poes law but nazi genocide
Sure thing retard, it's not like buyout provisions have been applied to anything else and worked every time
It's not like freedom of association isnt inherently a moral pursuit worth achieving aside from getting niggers to go away
> He offered several papers all failing to corroborate the bullshit theory, not one damning dependent paper, and pointing out there hasn't been corroboration
Those papers don't claim to disprove Scarr-Rowe though and the authors even support it as a general trend. There's been several papers corroborating Scarr-Rowe. This is why I said Ryan was being dishonest. He made it sound like this is just Turkheimer's fringe idea that he only demonstrated in one paper.
Turkheimer has a 2016 paper citing the major recent evidence for, and some against, Scarr-Rowe: "The Scarr-Rowe Interaction in Complete Seven-Year WISC Data From Louisville Twin Study: Preliminary Report"
>It's much more realistic to improve race relations.
No it's not if the disparities are persistent and immutable, this is the whole point of IQ research for race realists. It is impossible to "improve" race relations in any meaningful manner and it results in an eternal racial caste system, that no one wants to take part in. White don't have some sort of duty to suffer under the demands of brown people because you believe historical narratives justify it.
>"we're just going to peacefully relocate the undesirables" was how the Nazis started out
And that's exactly what would've happened if the war was avoided.
could be going faster but we've made some progress over the last ~150 years: abolished slavery, established right to vote, ended segregation, black president
>race relations
>we'll all get along if we just try
It's not like people are just racist and have to be mentally conditioned to not be, right? It's not like the view point of every white nation before WW2 was that of a white ethnostate right? And it's not like the Nazi's were defeated by people who held positive views on segregation and white only immigration, right?
And now we have "Abolishing whiteness" as a college course, blacks with lower SAT scores than whites being admitted into colleges and given jobs over whites for diversity's sake, nonstop immigration, still have race riots, of all interracial crime between blacks and whites it's disproportionately blacks, inner cities are uninhabitable, etc etc
You're delusional if you think whites will take this in perpetuity. This is not sustainable.
They dont claim to disprove, but they do claim to find no evidence supporting him. Like the other papers do as well, aka failing to replicate
>he made it sound like a fringe theory
So far it is an unreplicate fringe theory that turkheimer is implying to his fellow faggots as settled science
These are knee-jerk things to spout off that demonstrate progress. Blacks are objectively worse in many respects today than they were at the height of segregation. Why is Democracy in and of itself a marker for prosperity? Segregation? The US is still segregated in many fashions, be it by residency, school attendance, etc.
>black president
how'd that work out for race relations and progress?
>race relations
>its one sided
>leftist academics literally calling for white genocide
>leftist media openly hostile to whites
(((Progress)))
>Point to a successful civilization where visible differences and equality existed at the same time
As if there are examples of modern countries peacefully expelling a quarter of their population to establish an ethno-state. There aren't any countries with literally no racism, but Brazil and Latin America are doing pretty good.
> And then theres the putnam study
There's a whole body of research like that and I think there's something there but it's still not a good reason to start race war.
> It's not like freedom of association isnt inherently a moral pursuit worth achieving aside from getting niggers to go away
I'm not telling any group that they can't choose who they want to associate with, but the reality is that the vast majority of people around you don't want to kick the niggers out. Go buy an island somewhere if you really want to establish a white ethno-state.
>Brazil and Latin America are doing pretty good
Jesus Christ
Sure, if it turns out that blacks are immutably intellectually inferior, then yeah, that'll be a really difficult discussion.
> literally defending Nazis
jfc...
>but Brazil and Latin America are doing pretty good.
Lmfao
>Brazil is one of the most violent countries in the world. In 2012, 56,337 people were murdered. Compare that to the U.S., where fewer than 15,000 people died violently the same year in a country with 60 percent more people.
>But those statistics hide a color-coded truth: Brazil actually has gotten a lot safer for white people. In the past decade, homicides among whites have decreased 24 percent. But among the black population they have increased 40 percent.
>Muggah says wealthier whiter populations, especially in Brazil, can pay for additional security, be it in the form of electric fences, or well-guarded apartment buildings or gated communities.
>The rest of the population has to deal with a police force that in 2012 killed some 2,000 people — or more than five a day. (From 2010 to 2012 in the United States, an FBI database showed that police killed about 400 people a year, or about an eighth as many per capita.)
>"The elite and the upper middle classes in a way tolerate a kind of repression — and in fact fuel it, and seek it," Muggah says. "I think that there is this sense among the white, whiter populations of Brazil, that the black populations are the source of much of the vice and decay and violence in society."
npr.org
>As if there are examples of modern countries peacefully expelling a quarter of their population to establish an ethno-state
There's no need for expulsions. Just let white areas have independence. Boom, there's your ethnostate