Hmm

t. nigger incel

Jow Forums is always right and I am sick of it

Attached: 1537760894130.png (2000x1433, 120K)

Funny how this image
Btfo all racists

Attached: received_10154935923192172.jpg (600x891, 44K)

Isn't that the doctors job?
You can't give Europeans African blood.

BETAMALE

Yeah, that's how people contract HIV.

That is true according to statistics. He is a intp for sure.

iq tests are the dumbest thing and the only thing they prove is how well someone will score on an iq test

if you send someone through education their iq will improve which is the exact opposite of what iq is supposed to prove

What exactly do you think IQ is supposed to prove?

> Infowars
Oppinion discarded.

Attached: 1545847224098.webm (720x404, 451K)

Low-IQ niggers weren’t briefed that red blood cells don’t contain DNA.

that aryans are the master race :^)

All I'm doing is letting you know that he's letting you down...

Intelligence.

which white one? blood is red, stupid Jow Forumsack

Jow Forums is sorta right BUT this makes people want to categorize races of pure blood humans into "dumb" "dumber" and "dumber'st've'd" which is very stupid in and of itself because it labels people by their race and not by their actual IQ which is the unscientific "racist" part.

Another huge problem is half the humans on earth are not pure blooded europeans/africans/asian/indian/other so this broad generalization is meaningless when half the planet is part of the le 56% may may.

Personally I don't like people of the "black" cultural background wether white/asian/african/mixed or whatever but fully support the decision to revoke his honorary titles as he no longer functions as part of the objective scientific communities.

Attached: boneless-feet-58c01b785f9b58af5ce8e175.png (1080x1080, 560K)

Spotted the blind liberal cuck sjw

Enjoy muslim immigrants

Adding to this: there is no scientific consensus on what human "race" is and is generally accepted as a social construct. To accurately define someone as black/white is extremely difficult given how many definitions of what makes someone "black" or "white" there are.

Anyway it's okay to be a racist but don't go touting it as intellectual prowess. You don't get an award for supporting construct X. Especially if you're part of the academic elite.

Attached: hillbillies_01.jpg (500x320, 44K)

Blood is not the whole stupid nigger, some parts of them are usable. Although i doubt a lot of niggers could donate blood because of the diseases they contracted while living in their shit ghettos

You know the world would have been better if hitlerwon ww2
You cant deny this
Pure aryans, No degeneracy like gays and No more inferior races
A world of peace and prosperity

The only thing Jow Forums has done consistently is shitpost again and aiang unrelated garbage on Jow Forums. I don't understand why mods are so slow to fix this.

Hide and report this garbage Jow Forumsentlemen.

Attached: 1547610378701.jpg (576x768, 114K)

Old people aren't responsible for what they say. When you age, your prefrontal cortex shrinks, which is responsible for inhibitions and filtering your speech (i.e. "I should keep that to myself because it's rude/racist"). It'd like being a toddler or a drunk person at all times.

To which there are those who would say, "Maybe you just shouldn't be racist".

This brings to mind the Supreme Court case Robinson v. California where Robinson was arrested for "being addicted to narcotics" and the court sided with him on the basis that it was wrong to "punish a mere status or condition".

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robinson_v._California

The underlying debate is whether racism is a choice. I tend to lean on the side that free will is an illusion and people are a product of their environment. I have a good life but I have no illusions that it was due to hard work and not luck/genetics. As a result of my external locus of control I also have extreme impostor syndrome and vote liberal because I have empathy that I could just as well have been one of the unlucky ones born poor, black, racist, disabled, drug addicted, etc.

That's based on the assumption that whatever he personally defined as aryans were "superior". Again go be racist and bark at anyone with dark color skin but don't pretend like it makes you a genius.

THAT was why this senile old man got his honorary titles dropped.

Attached: 150723-1936-olympics-15.jpg (2560x2035, 1.18M)

>whites do better on dubious tests
>This must mean that it's genetic even though I have no theory describing how some genetic traits lead to doing well on dubious tests than others.

The man was literally spouting pseudo science

Attached: Main_Chairborne__45470.1412703036.1280.1280-500x600.jpg (500x600, 56K)

There's no objective measure of purity. Thousands of years ago populations diverged and accumulated mutations that made them have different traits. Since populations could only breed with each other, they kept these mutations and tended to look similar. Now we have cars and buses and planes so the dating pool increased.

Are mutations pure? Which ones? By what measurement? By the layman definition of purity, people most similar to Mitochondrial Eve from 200,000 B.C. would be the most pure humans because they're the most "unaltered" from the "original".

At least MENSA/army tests do give a generally accurate metric of ones intellect compared to others assuming said person taking it understands how to read and write. That said it doesn't measure every possible part of the collective of human functions we call intellect. One can be mathematically/pattern detecting retarded but a prodigy in cooking or socializing.

>cells dont contain dna

Attached: 1526433475831.png (305x165, 5K)

Fucking weeb

If you killed every gay person there would still be gay people being born. Gay people don't conspire to have just enough hetero sex to produce more gay children to make sure the "gay gene" stays around.

RBC don't have a nucleus. DNA tests from blood samples would always aim for the genetic material from WBC or other junk floating around.

I think this is why Jow Forums will never truly be taken seriously. Intellectual dishonesty is probably worse than actually being retarded because it enforces you to think social constructs are akin to laws of thermo-dynamics 24/7 which is cute at best.

Attached: 1518401347380.jpg (866x900, 124K)

Attached: Screenshot_20190123_140330.png (640x240, 80K)

Attached: 1545066389233.webm (640x640, 2.77M)

>ancient atiyah says something considered wrong
>"ohhh nooo we must hush this up and protect his honor this is an embarassement for the poor once great man"
>ancient watson says something considered wrong
>"what the fuck EVERYONE must know about this we must smear his name everywhere and strip all his titles right before he dies"

>part of the objective scientific communities
>the bell curve isn't objective
get real. it's reactionary bullshit like this that will prevent us from ever getting to the bottom of the issue, because in the jury in nature v nurture is far from out.
And when even James goddamn Watson isn't safe from the mob—forced to auction off his nobel prize—then no one is, and that means no one will risk speaking up and science cannot be done.

Attached: 1526512027399.jpg (800x936, 159K)

That is true but I'm pretty sure the deviation of white people's IQ is much higher than the Asian, meaning more smart white people and more dumb white people.

>only red blood cells are in blood
close but no cigar

Attached: Screenshot_2019-01-23-01-05-45(1).jpg (720x960, 266K)

Ironic

BIG THINK

Attached: thinking_girl.png (736x715, 754K)

>someone says red blood cells (and only red blood cells) don't contain dna
>make low-iq post stating without exception that all cells contain DNA
>someone shows an exception
>immediately pretend that you were talking about blood in general and not just cells specifically

Attached: 1545071607002.webm (1920x1080, 1.51M)

True but in this case it was warranted since he no longer functions on objective paradigms. Though like said it's just how growing old works so maybe he should have been kicked out of academia around age 60 anyway.

Attached: race1.png (626x530, 397K)

yall just mad ya girl got blacked

Attached: average-iq-by-race-chart_681529.png (800x526, 99K)

>advocating self-censorship
Kill yourself, bootlicker libtard faggot.

This, it really boils down to "I have better genetic mutations that were passed down from a gorrillion gears ago and I think that makes me better than you despite sharing 99% DNA with you

>he no longer functions on objective paradigms
except he absolutely does, what are you talking about? i watched that entire documentary, and he's perfectly lucid.

what? i thought it was like xenomorphs

>Low-IQ niggers weren’t briefed that red blood cells don’t contain DNA.
>red blood CELLS
Just stop.

If you can't function in an objectively oriented mindset than why be a part of a community that advocates that?

Guess how old the people are that run your government are.

see

No, it's not at all hard to see if someone is from Asia or Europe or Africa. It really isn't.

If you have three women, one from each of these places, in a room and you can't tell who's from where then you're probably blind the same way you need to have your eyes and/or brain examined if you can't tell the difference between a bulldog and a labrador. Those are both dogs, yes, but it's very obvious that they are different sub-species.

wanting to mate with a better sub-species is natural, it's not strange that black men want white women and it's also not strange that white men want qt asians.

Attached: ChaeKyung-170801.webm (1280x720, 1.38M)

>objectively
Dressing up your ideological spooks in rationalist garments is the ultimate intellectual dishonesty.

>"my social construct is better than your social construct"
kqed.org/futureofyou/434900/white-supremacists-not-happy-when-dna-tests-reveal-non-white-ancestry

>Jow Forums was never right.
>being this deep in denial

.You sure like playing the lame game of semantics, don’t you? We have commercial products that let you know what exactly your genetic markup looks like, so no, it’s not really that hard to determine how much of a 56% mutt you are.

Nice bait.

yes, and the post means absolutely nothing. The findings of SC case also have no relevance because this isn't a court of law, this is a court of public opinion.

-what does speech inhibition have to do with the ability to think rationally and objectively? If anything one could make the argument that those less inhibited by social pressures are MORE objective.
-even if you were correct in saying that elderly people tend to have degenerate brains, you'd still have to prove it for Watson. And if you knew anything about Watson from his younger years, he was always provocative. No change in behavior
-you criteria for whether people can participate in science based on their social tact is ridiculous, and would mean restricting far more than just the elderly.
-also the whole point of science is that the science speaks for itself—you don't have to concern yourself with 'oh does he have the RIGHT to put forth this science' etc etc.
-you're also wrongly implying that Watson is racist or believes in the idea of "race". Despite its scientific validity or lack thereof, people still use the word race just because it's convenient. Watson believes there are genetically distinct populations, which is 100% fact. They're all the same race, but there are genetics trends to be seen.

also nice buzzword blogpost at the end. imposter syndrome blah blah vote liberal blah blah locus of control (depression) blah blah, most of what you said isn't even logically connected

Attached: 1523759871604.png (480x365, 308K)

>phoneposter is a brainlet
Like a clockwork

Attached: 1539228123437.png (882x1025, 246K)

>Mutts aren’t white
What else is new?

>white men want frog girls
maybe if you're a low-T beta

genes are technology

Everything he said has a mountain of statistical evidence behind it.

Any choice you make will almost 100% kill you due to incompatible blood, if the blood was truly chosen by race and not by type. Stupid image.

>you don't have to concern yourself with 'oh does he have the RIGHT to put forth this science' etc etc.
Sadly - You absolutely do. There are plenty of people who will violently attack you for saying 2+2=4 because they either believe it's 5 or would prefer that it's 5. It deeply concerns me that there are so many opposed to objective science as well as math.

Rapes in my country are up 1600% the last 30 years. Saying that this increase has a correlation with immigration will get you arrested for "hate speech". It's very dangerous when scientist, economists and others won't publish research or even think about doing it because of a very real fear of getting arrested.

This should be a grave concern.

Perhaps you don't want one but I absolutely do.

Attached: official.april_30085459_214827025775967_2559287079435501568_n.jpg (1080x810, 74K)

It's accurate. Just look at how fucked up we are to fire James Watson due to our feelings being hurt rather than confronting the reality head on and discuss how to fix the problem. Unfortunately feelings and moralism bring society downward.

statistics are racist

>There are plenty of people who will violently attack you for saying 2+2=4 because they either believe it's 5 or would prefer that it's 5
that doesn't quite address my point

you'd like them less without the makeup and surgery and lighting

Attached: 1533003208232.jpg (524x440, 61K)

>The underlying debate is whether racism is a choice. I tend to lean on the side that free will is an illusion and people are a product of their environment.
Racism is a social construct to be used against white people and to gain access to their stuff and society without earning it in the first place. Every human being on this Earth naturally hates certain races more than the other. Blacks are universally disliked by most races including So.American and Muslim cultures. And so on so fourth. To say that its a choice is denying that genes do not express themselves and who we are likely to interact with. Also using big sounding 20$ words does not make you smart.

I wonder how much CNN 'touched up' these photos and videos to make him look as bad as possible

Harsh lighting, digital doctoring, enhancing the spots and blotches, making him more pale and grayish, reducing the redness of his skin, etc.

You can't really expect a propaganda network to show anything without a strong touch of bias these days.

Necessary reading, find it on libgen

Attached: cover.jpg (621x877, 53K)

>there is no scientific consensus on what human "race" is and is generally accepted as a social construct. To accurately define someone as black/white is extremely difficult given how many definitions of what makes someone "black" or "white" there are.
Erasing the lines I see and trying to create your own lines for it. I would implore you to go to South Side Chicago and tell me that race is a social construct or go into a white neighborhood with a gated community immune from all the problems in the world unable to witness and live around it yourself.

That's why CNN fell in the rankings to a very very low amount. Nobody really watches them anymore and it still is falling to this day.

>would you believe the babbling of a senile drunk hobo on the side of the street?

Attached: Senile old man.png (1600x900, 1.44M)

>go to South Side Chicago and tell me that race is a social construct
go back to Jow Forums you moron, that's not an argument.
The fundamental issue here is nature v. nurture, not some 150 year-old science on human taxonomy that no scientist in the world gives actual credence to anymore. Genetics are real. Genetic trends in populations are real. 'Race' as an actual thing, and not just a term used for convenience is bullshit. Race is a descriptive term, not prescriptive.

Attached: 1527509786677.gif (374x276, 1.92M)

>measurements need to confirm to our opinions, not the other way around
>differences that are smaller than we can see don't exist

I thought the left was the side of science, and the right were the religious inbred morons?
I guess lefty is losing it.

Attached: 1548006692436.png (319x448, 154K)

Remember when they called Zimmerman white?

Remember when so-and-so was burned at the stake for claiming the Earth orbits the Sun? History keeps repeating itself.

Genes and nature are the answer. Tell me why Africa never has made it the last 60 years despite being given almost unlimited money by Europe and the US. That's all the proof you need that Race and IQ exist.

What made it worse is they edited his photo to make him look really white as much as they could.

>I thought the left was the side of science, and the right were the religious inbred morons?
Only when it helps their side. Ever notice they wanted Freedom of speech and now want to get rid of it due to "hate speech" when they have the ability to gain control?

It should not be controversial to say has higher IQ than the other. It is very likely true, it also does not imply one race is superior to the other.

one race has higher IQ*

a bunch of /sci/entists unironically destroyed everything Watson said in the video in an old thread so it's funny seeing people shill this

link?

Care to share?

... I can't believe I'm answering this. Just to clarify the stupidity of this post one must consider at least blood type and rhesus factor. If you're white your donor will most likely be white due to immediate bio-compatibility. It's scientific common sense. Anectodes are a thing as always but the vast majority of cases can't be ignored.

Stupid nigger monkey