Brexit

[wiggles92]

Your free market is not free,that's the point I was making,it's always open to monopolies,without government the public are helpless to stop it. It's the use of words to imply it's free,it's a corrupt system.

You can't increase IQ and then you admit you can,therefore you can?
I'm sure using Ray Peat as a guideline it would increase far more.
The brain keeps growing and building throughout life,this fact renders your theory on IQ not increasing after adolescent redundant. The potential is there with the right environment.
It's not heritable,it's adaptable, plasticity.
Once again you take IQ as the definitive intellegence test which it is not.

Racial groups do not have different intelligence if put in similar environments and allowed to develop.
Your arguments will not put people down as they are obviously your own xenophobic projections onto others.

You are trying hard to ignore evidence,your stuck in an older dogma of genetic determinism, you should read more Ray Peat and stop using genetic determinism as a guise for your xenophobia.

No I'm saying there is no evidence of increasing IQ over 10%. IQ is the best predictor of longevity, job performance, income, and the ability to delay gratification (grit as it's colloquially known). It doesn't change much for individuals, genders or genetic groups, throughout life or over generations. I'd say it's both an important predictive metric, and not environmentally governed further than a 10% potential improvement. I don't get why this is so controversial to say.

Peat says disease isn't genetically determined, and alternative methods for creating a state of health have been ignored through this dogmatic assumption. I agree, that's why I'm here. However, he wouldn't say you can make Asians taller than Europeans through his therapies. There's a difference between ignoring biological theories which discard the adaptability of the human body to heal, and saying there's no heritability of anything. Otherwise I could just as easy end up with a parrot for a child. No, I'm going to get a human, and he or her will be quite a lot like me, with physical and mental faculties somewhere between me and my partner. You can't just say eugenics...racial determinism. Of course there is some genetic determinism. Peats message, as I interpret it, is that a state of health is the norm, if the right steps are taken. You are not genetically determined to get ill. I expect Peat did get a little taller and gain a couple of IQ points through progesterone. He didn't grow a foot and turn into Mozart though. He was still following the same genetic blueprint, just at a more optimal level.

 

[jaguar43]

Nobody seems to attack my arguments. You can't just call me and others racist and anti-Peat. Well you can, but if I am indeed bigoted, then prove it by showing me data. I want everyone to be able to reach the same intellectual achievements, be that academic, private enterprise, wisdom etc. Unfortunately that does not seem to be the case. Given equal opportunities, different genetic of groups, on the whole, are not capable of achieving the same things.

Do you really believe, for example, that with a meticulous Peat protocol, the Japanese will win the 100m sprint events at the Olympics? I'm not saying it's that simple, but it sort of is.

I would say anti-Peat would be anti-empiricism, through the mechanism of following emotions. The opposite being following information to its logical conclusion, beyond opinions and feelings. If I had followed my feelings about sugar being this artificial devil food I wouldn't follow the facts to their logical conclusion, which is distinctly more complicated, but in many ways opposing my original feeling about sugar.

If I make you feel upset or angry I'm sorry about that. I'm just a normal guy trying to find out the truth about race, IQ and potatoes at this moment in time.

I hope that having other individuals, whom you have seen are completely rational when it comes to less emotionally loaded topics, declare they somewhat agree with me, will lend some credence to my perspective.

There is data showing that intelligence isn't based on genetic determinism. The work of Marion Diamond proves this. The problem isn't data, the problem is that you choose not believe it for whatever reason. Ray Peat has spoken on this subject in interviews and written about this in articles and yet you didn't challenge one quote I posted. Why ? Your only argument is to question it on a social- ideological basis, not on evidence or science.

The funny thing is that those "scientist" who believe in genetic determinism regarding intelligence ALSO believe in it regarding health and longevity. On one hand you are on this forum ( I assume) to try to improve your health. On the other hand, you defend an ideology that contradicts the reason why this forum was created in the first place. It's a double standard. You want to reap the benefits of this forum and of the work of Ray Peat, but want to stay committed to an ideology that is exactly the opposite of it's ideals.

In the end this is the Ray Peat forum. To discuss about Ray Peat's ideas.

 

[Drareg]

You're being quite nasty you know. Just accusing me offhand of having a xenophobic core.

Scanning this page, I'm fully aware that Western government military intervention in the Middle East is disgusting and destructive. It makes me extremely sad, the awful abuses our militaries have done through their middle-eastern meddling. The choices of the state are not the choices of the population under that flag. We could help many more of the refugees by paying for shelter in a nearby safe country, as it's considerably cheaper than paying social welfare to them, because even if they are capable of working in advanced first-world nations, they have to learn the language etc. etc. Regardless, they isn't usually the case. Look at migrants, job statistics, welfare compared against natives. They use much more welfare, this effect doesn't change regardless of the number of generations from the original migration, and neither do the employment levels. Maybe there's systematic racism, but that doesn't seem to stop Asian and Indian migrants doing much better.

It's not just genetic intelligence. Look at the polls of migrant Muslims. Much higher levels of homophobia, sexism, acceptance of child abuse. The West fought for very long to destroy these evil irrationalities. It's ideology too.

Do you think if I'd discussed what I've said in this thread with him (Peat), he would respond that I have a xenophobic core? No. He may feel intellectually challenged, and perhaps curious if what I brought up was of interest to him. I'm not emotionally challenging you, stop attacking my identity as if you have any idea who I am. I spent 3 weeks in Turkey last year near the Syrian border, living with the locals, trying to understand what's going on first hand. I guess that's what a xenophobe would do.

I'm not saying I'm morally better than you, or you are better than me. Frankly I don't care. I just try to think rationally, which is a daily challenge.

Your posts Im commenting on, Forum member jag2594 gave you plenty of quotes from Peat,you should read them.

The welfare state can't pay its own people, the migrants have little if any influence on this. You then want to pay for shelter in a nearby safe country? Tax payers money ? Where would the safe country be or would it just be "kinda safe".
Many speak English,Syria has schools for example and higher education, they only have to speak English if it's an English speaking country they go to.
Even if they are capable of working you say, is the work that advanced in the west, you do realise Syria would have an economy with similar jobs,real jobs that require real skills, do you need advanced linguistic skills to teach someone a craft. Syria is not an alien nation of hunter gatherers.
What's the etc etc allude to or could you not think of anything,generally an etc etc would imply the obvious but I'm not xenophobic so I can't grasp your angle.

The welfare states have a welfare culture without immigrants,it's a huge issue with welfare, I've got news for you here,welfare states are taking western countries under, they can't afford the welfare pensions of an aging population,no children to make money for it. Immigrants have little to do with this and it fails whether they are here or not.

Your migrant job statistics could well be skewed by the fact that no one wants to employ what they perceive as an immigrant because the employer is a xenophobe.
Your ok now with Indian migrants and Asians are ok you mentioned earlier, this is classic xenophobe, you are familiar with said migrants because they are in your country with larger population so now they are ok,at some points you probably projected onto them but had a dissonance when you realised they are going nowhere.

Your evidence for generational migrants is lame, this can be influenced by xenophobia if it's even true

It's no longer genetic intelligence for you now?
It's polls of migrant Muslims? The polls for the brexit it predicted stay. The polls predicted David Cameron and friends would not get re-elected and they did.
The west has huge levels of sexism,homophobia, and child abuse is rampant, just look at the scandal of child abuse in the uk, Jimmy saville and members of the British Parliament.

Maybe the west should fight its own evil irrationalities first, the irony of you claiming certain races are genetically inferior while speaking about fighting evil irrationalities,lol.

Your posts are not rational nor are you intellectually challenging, your hubris is the only thing challenging.

 

[wiggles92]

There is data showing that intelligence isn't based on genetic determinism. The work of Marion Diamond proves this. The problem isn't data, the problem is that you choose not believe it for whatever reason. Ray Peat has spoken on this subject in interviews and written about this in articles and yet you didn't challenge one quote I posted. Why ? Your only argument is to question it on a social- ideological basis, not on evidence or science.

The funny thing is that those "scientist" who believe in genetic determinism regarding intelligence ALSO believe in it regarding health and longevity. On one hand you are on this forum ( I assume) to try to improve your health. On the other hand, you defend an ideology that contradicts the reason why this forum was created in the first place. It's a double standard. You want to reap the benefits of this forum and of the work of Ray Peat, but want to stay committed to an ideology that is exactly the opposite of it's ideals.

In the end this is the Ray Peat forum. To discuss about Ray Peat's ideas. I suggest you look into Storefront.org.

Ok I'll stop talking about it. Thanks for not name calling and bringing something to the table, namely this Marion Diamond. I'm here to learn, not to annoy people and corrupt a public forum. I'm very careful in my beliefs. I just haven't come across any data that actually opposes the theory I have discussed in this thread.

I want there to be no genetic determinism. That would be the best outcome, the fairest outcome.

Where should I go to find this data from Marion Diamond?

And actually you sorta did name call, reading that again. You say I should go to a forum seen as highly racist and Nazi. Please don't. I can call you a lefty brainwashed Marxist. I've no idea if that's the case though. Identity attack is irrelevant to a factual argument. There's no reason why my bringing up this information should turn the forum into an immoral cesspool.

 

[Drareg]

@Drareg -- Yes, poor nutrition, or any other injurious stimuli, will lead to the lack of development of any characteristics requiring high energy.

I very much believe in epigenetics, but epigenetic expression by definition requires that a certain set of genes are already present (but dormant) in the organism.

NOTE: As a general philosophy regarding any adaptations, trends, novelty, etc .... "Things will not happen, until they do" is the right way to view this. You need to get all the pieces in place, which is a time consuming process, where it appears like nothing is happening .... then all the pieces suddenly fall in place, and you get the Renaissance.​

My own family is an example Grandma and Grandpa malnourished and stressed during the WW2 period, grandma was about 160cm, grandpa was around 170cm. But they raised their children in a good environment, and every one of my father's male siblings were >180cm (which is basically about 6 foot).

My mother wasn't exactly malnourished -- diet was the typical high PUFA nonsense, but definitely enough calories. The same for me, and hence I end up at 189cm (and my brother at 186cm).

This didn't happen for the peers of my Grandma and Grandpa, indicative that they had a dormant "tall height" gene, that they themselves could not express, but their descendants could.

What caused them to have this mutation? It's definitely not common from the South Chinese population which they both hailed from. I have no clue But know that social norms + maybe unconscious selective bias for a tall mate, has led to all my Uncles and Aunts having children, and likely the passing down of those traits to make tall Asian crazies

----

Now, on a large scale, would it be likely that a population like the Dutch just went through many more of such unconscious selection processes? I would think that if being tall leads to advantages in that particular environment, then the selection pressure will be there.

Regarding intelligence, yes, I don't think Cold Climate alone is not enough to explain evolution of intelligence. There will be a combination of factors which force one to think into the future and come up with plans, and having the appropriate resources to manifest those plans, that would put pressure on greater intelligence.

I personally think Mushrooms were a significant factor.

Regarding Asian culture, I grew up in that culture, and Yes, there is huge selection pressure for certain traits, and has been going on for thousands of years of Chinese civilisation now. That is more than enough time to allow specific intelligence traits to arise in the population as a whole.

Chinese culture is definitely Brutal regarding intellectual tasks (and everything else really). If you don't perform, you are punished for lack of performance. Not just once, but relegated into a certain "implicit class system", and kept there through your life unless you really start to show breakout performance.

Sidenote: Xenophobia is built into the culture too ..... I grew up in Singapore BTW, and the explicit commentary about the inferiority of Malays and Indians, is common in both conversation and all the way up to the political discourse.

Another Sidenote: depending on which IQ test I took, I usually got scores around the 128-130 mark. The only relevance here was that because of that, I was selected to be part of the "pathway to elite" group in Singapore for quite awhile, and got to see the policies and talk to the people responsible first hand. It's Ugly ​

Yet Another Sidenote: "Aggression" and innovative behaviour is not something that is selected for in these East Asian cultures. The initial survival adaptation may have been to develop strong communal ties, which then became more and more rigid as time when one, to the benefit of the collective. In any case, there is no room for the crazy ones like myself Hence I am in Australia.
​

What is debatable is how quickly some of these characteristics are transferred between generations.

eg: some of the IQ research seems to show significant gains IQ points across single generations. If conditions are right, your children and smarter than you, and so on.

Of course, that needs to be balanced against potential dys-genic effects, like malnutrition and other injury, which I would argue is more common in today's world than the mainstream wants to believe.

----

In any case, what I discuss above is intended to hint at mechanics, NOT policy.

When a word like "Eugenics" is given political backing, it becomes very dangerous. Taken alone, all the word means is "selection of good genetics" --- if I were a vegetable farmer, I would like to eugenically breed my vegetables to have better yields. I would observe and study the factors that possibly led to better genetic expression, and then try and coax the vegetables into going down that path.

Of course, the word has be completely tarnished by the people wanting to use it for policy making targeted at humans.

Personally, I try to De-complect concepts, and treat individual concepts as independently as possible.

.....

I'm not sure what pressure was there for the Dutch to grow into it so to speak other than improved nutrition and environment in general, I haven't found anything on them being deemed tall before the famine.

I'm not sure you see it the way other posters are claiming, certain races have lower intelligence that can't be changed, if they don't change their culture this could be the case, cultures are information, this is all it proves in said races, their perceptions are skewed by the culture.
We need them in an environment where they are encourged to perceive,think,act, along with coherent nutrition.

 

[Drareg]

Ok I'll stop talking about it. Thanks for not name calling and bringing something to the table, namely this Marion Diamond. I'm here to learn, not to annoy people and corrupt a public forum. I'm very careful in my beliefs. I just haven't come across any data that actually opposes the theory I have discussed in this thread.

I want there to be no genetic determinism. That would be the best outcome, the fairest outcome.

Where should I go to find this data from Marion Diamond?

And actually you sorta did name call, reading that again. You say I should go to a forum seen as highly racist and Nazi. Please don't. I can call you a lefty brainwashed Marxist. I've no idea if that's the case though. Identity attack is irrelevant to a factual argument. There's no reason why my bringing up this information should turn the forum into an immoral cesspool.

Your clutching at straws with accusations name calling, it's your guise to get out of you xenophobic posts, something you still won't let go.
Your behaviour was/is being criticised.

 

[wiggles92]

I said Africans as in people from all of Africa...
When they decided to not incentivize mass immigration through social welfare programs.
I will also point out that you are still unable to justify the forcing of people to live a certain way against there own will and internal guidance systems because you think it is right(some would call that authoritarianism). I'm done posting on this thread lol, its exhausting.

Yeah I'm done too. Exhausting indeed. Hopefully our arguments have been useful to someone. I'd be happy to be proved wrong. We won't have to deal with another uncomfortable truth if that is the case.

 

[lvysaur]

Hair loss, cancer, and food intolerances are all almost completely genetic

It's been verified by science so it's true

 

[Drareg]

Yeah I'm done too. Exhausting indeed. Hopefully our arguments have been useful to someone. I'd be happy to be proved wrong. We won't have to deal with another uncomfortable truth if that is the case.

All of you should head over to an extreme right forum where delusions are the norm, your arguments(hate) will be useful over there.

 

[jaguar43]

Hair loss, cancer, and food intolerances are all almost completely genetic

It's been verified by science so it's true

Sarcasm ?

 

[lvysaur]

yes

 

[XPlus]

@wiggles92
Rational, non-xenophobic, mentally challenging, backed with empirical evidence...

Dude. What are you talking about. Like seriously.
You just cognitively-biased your way through the thread like there's no tomorrow.
You remind my of those guys on FB who post far right news and then try to show how tolerant they are by posting some group photos of them and their foreign friends partying.

First, the free market is a theoretical state - just like the theory of frictionless world - it doesn't exist in reality.
Coperate emprialism is leading the way in free market, crushing small businesses everywhere and trading "freely" within itself.
Second, radical Islam was dormant before the US decided that pan Arabism wasn't in fashion and it's a good idea to get those little jihadi monsters excited about fighting the soviets. Lots of money and preaching went into it. It worked. It created a religion of its own. Ever since, the same intelligence agencies who created the terrorists learned how to manipulate them.
It isn't too difficult to penetrate those groups. Someone with your attitude, for example, can do well under the ranks of ISIS. Rationalising bigotry, and doing it very well, is how those extremists got themselves established. Just grow your beard, shorten your clothes and get a 2-week shariah law course in Saudi Arabia before flying to the border in Turkey.
One side-effct of this mess now is the problem with existing extremist migrants who obviously couldn't and wouldn't integrate.
Third, Angela Merkel got herself a bunch of highly qualified Syrian doctors and engineers for free. The unskilled rest, will make up the slave class for the next few German generations. That way you get off some economic pressure from the backs of the middle class.
Fourth, Indian and Asian migrants come from rich families. Those making 1.79 dollars a day, in a call center or a nike workshop, can't afford to send their children to live and study in the west. Indians and East Asians don't come from a ruined homeland. They're more likely to be emotionally stable.
Fifth, it's known in the job market that your connections is what gets you the job in the majority of cases. Even in a country like New Zealand, with one of the lowest corruption rates, a local candidate is preferable and most jobs are filled through connections. This, eventually, results in skewness in the data, like Drareg said.
Sixth, unless until everyone starts realising that we're all in this mess together, we'll not figure a way out.

 

[Sheik]

So much anti-white racism in this thread. Years of white people not defending themselves have pushed the moral narrative to the point where it's wrong for whites to have a racial identity. To the point where it's wrong to acknowledge that cultural "enrichment" means great risk for our people.

And people like you keep pushing us, denying us, and this is why Donald Trump is where he is.

 

[jaguar43]

So much anti-white racism in this thread. Years of white people not defending themselves have pushed the moral narrative to the point where it's wrong for whites to have a racial identity. To the point where it's wrong to acknowledge that cultural "enrichment" means great risk for our people.

And people like you keep pushing us, denying us, and this is why Donald Trump is where he is.

I don't think thats the issue. I think white americans are in an economic position that has been worse than previous generations, specifically their parents. Instead of trying to discuss real economic issues ( which some people are trying too) they resort to the anti-white cliches and blame minorities or whoever else. They think they are the victims of 'racism' because of their economic troubles. I think thats a scapegoat and a dangerous trend that will likely lead to problems getting worse. Which is why Bernie Sanders campaign was so important in many ways. He was able to change the conversation instead of use identity politics.

 

[XPlus]

people like you keep pushing us, denying us, and this is why Donald Trump is where he is

People like who.

So much anti-white racism in this thread.

"Liars committing suicide" is how that sounds. Sounds delusional, just like those who saw thousands cheer at the 7/11.

Where's @narouz when you need him.

 

[Sheik]

I don't think thats the issue. I think white americans are in an economic position that has been worse than previous generations, specifically their parents. Instead of trying to discuss real economic issues ( which some people are trying too) they resort to the anti-white cliches and blame minorities or whoever else. They think they are the victims of 'racism' because of their economic troubles. I think thats a scapegoat and a dangerous trend that will likely lead to problems getting worse. Which is why Bernie Sanders campaign was so important in many ways. He was able to change the conversation instead of use identity politics.

I'm not talking about economic issues; I don't know how you got that idea. I care about my people, our culture, our future. I care that we're on track to become minorities in our own countries. I don't like debating but I'm going to keep speaking out for whites.

 

[Sheik]

People like who.

You're seriously trying to pull that. You're going to ask a question and end it with a period. So that you don't have to look submissive for a second.

 

[jaguar43]

I'm not talking about economic issues; I don't know how you got that idea. I care about my people, our culture, our future. I care that we're on track to become minorities in our own countries. I don't like debating but I'm going to keep speaking out for whites.

You can't care about white people without caring about everyone else regardless of race. If you don't care about people of other races then you can't care about your own race.

 

[Sheik]

You can't care about white people without caring about everyone else regardless of race. If you don't care about people of other races then you can't care about your own race.

This is what I'm talking about. Anti-white racism. Every race can fight for their own race except whites, because that's racist.

Your first sentence is literally "You can't have concern for the future of whites, you have to be race-blind."

 

[jaguar43]

This is what I'm talking about. Anti-white racism. Every race can fight for their own race except whites, because that's racist.

I think you misunderstood me, what I meant to say is that you cannot care about your own race ( assuming your white), without caring for blacks, hispanics, and asians ect. Because the problems they face are the same problem everyone faces. You say you care for your "people" and culture but thats a misnomer.