Race Science

This will be thought at schools
Pic unrelated

Attached: Screenshot_2018-11-08-16-24-51.png (720x1280, 252K)

form follows function

Attached: 1537058933170.png (1137x1311, 247K)

opinions change your skull size? Hows that science? Or are you implying everyone who thinks all humans have the same skull shape have the same skull shape, hence why they express this opinion?
Is skull size the cause or just correlation?

Everything about this thread is far removed from science, and the questions science poses.
Your thinking of ideology

Social phenomena are the result of biological determinism.
There is no social science without understanding it.

Atheist nihilists dont mind fighting a race war and killing enough people to win.

Retard

>I don't need to be precise in my opinion
>look at those retards who aren't precise in their opinion

>peoples thoughts dont have anything to do with their biology.
>no one understand science but me.

Fuck witted and lame pilled

no one claimed that, however the opposite extreme is as stupid "skull size= opinion". Its easy to test, and false.
As for science, its very pragmatic and easy to understand if you drop ideology. Just search wikipedia

>mental slave to ideology

Can you read nigger?

yes, the picture shows people who think all humans have the same skull shape as having a cetain skullshape.

i understand the joke, and the refrence. But scientifically speaking in as nonsense as the people who dismiss biology entirely.

>That bottom skull
Never knew Rich Piana donated his body to science.

>no one claimed that, however the opposite extreme is as stupid "skull size= opinion"
"no one claimed" skull shape equals opinion.
>As for science, its very pragmatic and easy to understand if you drop ideology.
Oh really, what is my ideology?

Attached: interracial-rape-statistics.jpg (786x960, 79K)

an actual retard

Attached: 1499999614574.jpg (822x1101, 399K)

They're proportionally larger but White people on average as a whole are larger on average. Strangely Rushton, Lynn, etc. fail to clarify when they are talking in absolute as opposed to controlled or relative sizes of the brains/ skull volumes.

>Everything about this thread is far removed from science
Lets test that statement

Contains a link to a peer reviewed journal

Attached: 1537063746639.png (1905x1865, 840K)

The joke is that only an unintelligent person would believe that evolution wouldn't apply to humans above the neck.

You could compare it to jokes who portray creationists as the missing link in human evolution diagrams. Surely if you saw this you wouldn't be so dull as to say, "Do these evolutionists really think that having a certain opinion devolves you?"

Attached: Walking Man.jpg (492x342, 36K)

More race red pills, please refute this if you believe that all humans are equal.

Attached: 1537467445732.jpg (2970x2483, 1.23M)

Oh no one did? The picture sure seemed to imply so, and you would still have to explain your angry reaction to my comment about said picture.
Seems like you have something to prove first,
I never claimed you belonged to a spesific ideology either. Just that it was ideology, rather then science. Your emotions got the better of you again.

Phrenology is psuedoscience though.

Bone structure is just one of the differences. Name some more please.

we'll make out of your momma a pseudosaians.

It was a joke. Don't take it too seriously.

My favorite and the most interesting recent edition, I'm sure some people ITT remember the threads we had about that user and his pastebin. The one which took the list of genes which were associated with intelligence, their occurrence in nigerians, and the statistics showing what percentage of sub-saharan Africans had the negative associated genes and lacked the positive ones.

Attached: 1537583201811.png (1692x1936, 452K)

The comment itself is about debunking the myth that certain skullsizes cause something rather then correlate with something.
As for the other joke, that depends on how scientific they think the meme is.

IQ.

Propensity to rape.

Demands for gibs.

Carbon taxed

Attached: 1543060932648.png (580x5424, 1.85M)

Have the .gif version for lazy mobilefags

Attached: 1493333281166.gif (2970x2400, 851K)

Attached: 1531562949190.gif (298x200, 498K)

Attached: race9.jpg (1080x3566, 1.01M)

Attached: 3D7BACB4-9239-4E1F-976F-95D4B739077D.png (1334x750, 1.87M)

Attached: 1543078425696.jpg (1242x1504, 1.38M)

nice that the post which came right before mine happend to be something actually worthwhile. Im sure that saved the whole thread.
Nevertheless, it wasn't there when i posted my post. So either way, i suggest trying it again within a diffrent thread and control for such factors

Saved, thanks user.

I'm not sure if skull sizes could be said to be causal per se, but skull sizes and shapes have had to adapt to evolutionary pressures on the brain just like any other organ or part of the body.

For example, as the brain got larger, other muscles had to decrease in size otherwise the skull would get too large for the neck to support. This is why apes have much larger and more powerful jaws than humans, and it's also why Blacks have larger jaw muscles as well. Additionally Whites and Asians have more construct jaw bones than Blacks do for the same reason.

I don't know whether or not you want to call this 'causal', simply because it's just one part of the natural selection process, but it is certainly related and causal in an evolutionary sense.
youtube.com/watch?v=t1mgrTGeDPM

Rushton gives a great presentation going over the anatomical evidence for racial differences in intelligence in the above video based on skeletal measurements and inferred causality by comparison to other primates.

Attached: Walking Man.jpg (492x342, 39K)

I never understood why people bother to comment if they don't have any arguments.

Attached: 1543705198885.png (1120x2499, 505K)

Attached: fixation index.png (1498x1516, 1.27M)

Some decent content that I wasn't previously aware coming in, thanks lads. Try to keep this post towards race science rather than bitching between each other about things that don't really matter.

The nigger's jaw is low and protruding so that he can eat what others leave on the ground.

Attached: Nigger Jaw.jpg (374x410, 15K)

Attached: pca_worldgeneti2010002w78.jpg (572x532, 51K)

>lower skull volume doesn't cause smaller brains. it simply correlates with it

Attached: no(((brain))).png (545x478, 120K)

Learn to proof-read your messages before you post. Jesus...

Ryan Faulk over at Alternative Hypothesis has done some great work discussing this, and he has academic studies to cite.

Casual in this sense would mean that a skull size predisposes which types of opinions one could have. Which is a pretty easy thing to test..and falsify.
As said, its pseudoscience, the field itself would have to be alot stricter, and try to falsify its own claims, rather then just searching for proofs.
As for the true scientifc equivlent which is Craniometry, theres stil a long way to go before their methods reach the same riggor as the other natural sciences.

I don't think there is any denying distinct morphological differences among different populations of humans. The moment we are no longer able to produce fertile descendants is the moment we can call different populations a different species, because that's what species means. But the idea that any of these populations, which will hereafter be referred to as races, are superior to one another demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of natural selection and gene flow. African populations look the way they do because the genes responsible for those phenotypes provided them an advantage in their environment, causing those genes to become more prominent. We look different because our genes were selected based on where and how we lived. It has nothing to do superiority and there no such thing as more evolved. Every single thing alive today is just as evolved as any other living thing because we all share a common ancestor: the first eukaryote. Sure there is data that shows some races having greater cognitive ability, but that is completely irrelevant to genetic superiority because that's not even why humans are a successful species. Homo sapiens wasn't even the most intelligent hominid. We are successful because we lived in groups, we hand opposable thumbs to make tools, and we had children. All other hominids were just as intelligent as us. Homo sapiens neanderthalensis went extinct because we presumably out bred them. There are many more factors to our success as a species that goes beyond being able to make critical decisions.

Attached: data.png (1281x640, 328K)

>brainsize=opinions isn't true (which i said)
versus
>skulls=brainsize correlate (which is true) isn't what i said
regardless, you would have to prove causation, good luck with that, as there are people who are born with disproportionate brainzises compared to their skulls.

so this is what you call science..

You constantly shift goalposts and write like a nigger with a spellchecker. Nobody has any clue what the fuck you are saying at any given time.

dienekes.awardspace.com/calc/rac/

upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e4/Brain_Size_Map.png

I dont make fun of dumb people because im angry. I do it because it makes me happy.
Skull size is a result of genetic foundation, just like ones ability to understand logic, or the ways an animal behaves in order to gain utility.
My ideology is social darwinism, this is largely the result of biological determination...
In other words you go in the gas chamber. Just check the (((wikipedia)))

that image is even better when you realize that an IQ of 85 was the definition for retardation until recently

Attached: the absolute state of black IQ.png (1683x1446, 1.43M)

the fact that you are taking the punchline of OP's joke as literal shows that you are arguing in bad faith. the fact that you are using a meme flag shows that you are probably a jew. so why should anyone believe in your definition of what science is or isn't?

>Skull shape can't determine opinion

Can't it? That's clearly a false thing to say. I'll show you why in an example, as intelligence is related to opinion.

Say you gave two people a set of patterns - but the patterns are very nuanced and only a very intelligent person can suss it out. Bob, say, was born with a birth defect which makes his skull look like a crater-impact whereas Bill is just a normal guy with a normal skull.

If you were to ask Bob and Bill if they think there is a pattern to the data, Bob would say "no" because he is too unintelligent to recognise the pattern, whereas Bill would say "yes" because he is intelligent enough to suss out a pattern.

We know that brain size is causal because it is backed up by our knowledge of how neurons work and that because 1 neuron = so-so brain power, that 1 million neurons = more brain power than 500'000 neurons, all else being equal.

Attached: 1920s Bar.jpg (2000x1472, 473K)

Stop being a nier, you're only embarrassing your own kind

Do you guys think "Percent gun ownership" is always vastly underreported because of gun owners who fear being listed?

absolutely brutal

>what is a meme.
t. Peterson cuck

I'll keep it and replace it!

I really need to take the time to make a few new and updated versions of these, preferably with some nicer graphics.

>gun owners who fear being listed?
all commercially sold guns are listed and even if they weren't that wouldn't discredit the fact that gun crime correlates heavily with nigger population.

Thats ok, the rest of us understand.

Superiority is a question of what one values. Do you value living in a low crime, technologically advanced society or do you prefer high crime, primitive technology societies? This is why progressives conflate population statistics with white supremacy - they value intelligence above almost anything else. Claims related to differences in cognitive capacities between populations upset them because they tend to be unable to distinguish between questions related to reality (what is the case) and morality (questions of value, what ought to be the case, what someone was told as a child). What is the case remains the case regardless of how anybody feels about it.

Attached: we were north americans and such.jpg (4132x3151, 3.72M)

There is no valuestatement in darwinism however, whoever survives survives. Thats the big irony of those who believe themselves to be "strong", one actually has to be on top to be on top in such a view. Im sure you will end up in the gas chambers before me.

this is a good one.

>post modernism
>its not the argument, but the person making the argument

glad to see that the left won by making you all play their game

>glad to see that the left won by making you all play their game
>whoever survives survives
Pick a side faggot

keep whining faggot

Make sure its not ours though.

Don't worry, I'm not a civ nat cuck

If its causation your talking about rather then correlation. Its easy to test your hypothesis. Find people with the same skull size and people with a diffrent one, then compare their opinions. If its causal , the deviding line should be that your able to say those with the same skull size are also those who share the same opinion. Thats causation. The next step would be to predict that set of opinio on every person with that skull size.

This is the logical, and easy thing to do. If one cared about being a scientist, one would test ones ideas. And given how basic the assumptions of these types of genetic absolutists are, its an much easier approach to social science then what they have to deal with currently. Imagine how easy social science would be.

I didnt mean you user, i meant the

An advanced society has nothing to do with race and largely to socioeconomic factors. If you live in a country with very limited resources to only way to make a living is off of the land and you'd probably be nomadic. The Native Americans, Egyptians, and Indians built their societies off of having resources to allow for surplus. Look at the Japanese, who aren't white. Even the Africans had empires at Ghana because the are was very fertile.

one was refering to one other Jow Forumsacks opinion
the other post was refering to another Jow Forumsacks opinion

none of those expressed my opinion. You people have really gone deep into this type of thinking, if you can't even see how someone criticising other peoples integrity has to be the opposite position as them.

newsflash, one doesn't need to agree with the opposite position inorder to disagree with any given proposition.

...

Problem is, no one would fund any race realism science. What has to be realized is that just because science is a beacon of unquestionable objectivity doesn't mean it can't be twisted to fit a narrative, like cheddar man or creationist trying to prove dinosaurs fit in their 4000 years of existence bs. Science can also be ignored, if scientists are paid to not research the racial differences or if anything is found it is censored online and through the media into almost non-existence. Things like this are hard to do without being called a bigot and fired from your job

"Avoid conversations with the nigga, a nigga will lie, he will make excuses, he will use words he don't really know"

Attached: Screenshot_20181201-173624_YouTube.jpg (1080x600, 96K)

>If its causal , the deviding line should be that your able to say those with the same skull size are also those who share the same opinion.

Look buddy what you just described was actually just correlation as I'm only noticing variables coinciding with one another.

You can't actually establish causation metaphysically because one can only ever observe correlations. You can build theories, and these theories can have mechanisms which under certain conditions provide causation, but it isn't as if there is a purely mathematical statistical way you can create causation.

its a fucking joke

So, you're setting up a standard I can't meet because it is not logically possible to show anything beyond correlation for any scientific phenomena.

What we can do is construct theories, and theories which predict events that seem unlikely to have occurred and which survive more criticism and setbacks are considered to be more accurate just as a matter of probability and endurance.

Jesus christ this memeflaggot is just as insufferable as the rest of his kind

this

Based Rufus poster

never trust flags

Racr mixing is literally akin to two subspecies from across the world mating. Except wild animals don't have to worry about that ever happening.
Anyone who has a basic understanding of evolution knows you shouldn't mate with someone when the most recent common ancestor is tens of thousands of generations ago. It's asking for rare and fucked up genetic problems (not to mention the cultural issues).

>social science is what's important.
kek. kys retard.