I see no reason to be civil with uncivil people, and leftists are far from civil.
Sure it maybe correlates, but that in no way means it is influenced in any way by genetics.
and low income have been shown over and over again to influence IQ levels directly. IE a causation.
Yes, extreme poverty resulting in malnutrition or abuse can lower IQ. But the base IQ was genetic. So much so that adopted adults’ IQ is so unrelated to the IQ of their adoptive mother that in some studies the correlation shows up as nonsignificantly negative. You can fuck kids up, but you can't really make them much smarter than they were born, due to their genetics.
And of course as predicted the handwave:
You are just blowing smoke.
And the ad hominem:
And anyone who modded you up is probably of equally low IQ. Are you all self hating blacks per chance?
Better question: are you perhaps a self-hating white? Why else deny the completely obvious, well-studied, and easily available via a google search research on the heritability of intelligence and the differences between geographically separated human haplogroups? I say specifically "self-hating white" because you can't really be anything else. No one else in the world believes this tripe. Go to China, to Japan, to India, to any non-western scientifically developed nation and ask their anthropologists and geneticists if different groups of humans (for lack of a better word "races") have differences in intelligence distributions and they'll say "of course." Ask the Africans in Africa even, they'll agree. Only white-guilt plagued western leftists will cover their eyes and ears and shout insults. Oh and then will turn right around and claim their moral superiority over the religious and conservatives because they FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE.
Science does not agree with you. Early school programs do not boost IQ and adopted adults’ IQ is so unrelated to the IQ of their adoptive mother that in some studies the correlation shows up as nonsignificantly negative. So Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie's adopted African kids are going to have IQs the correlate to their birth parents, and not to Brangelinas', even though they had it as good or better than Shiloh.
I'm not assuming. It's science. Intelligence is inherited. It is nature, not nurture.
Also, as I predicted, the specious handwave:
Why are you naively assuming it has anything to do with being born with anything?
Followed by the ad hominem:
It's obvious to anyone with a handful of braincells to group together that environment and opportunities are going to far out-way
Of course it is. Intelligence is a scale, at one end we call it stupidity and at the other we call it intelligence. Less of one is more of the other.
But that's not how selection pressure works. It's "you must be at least this fit to ride this ride." Do you understand the difference between a low-pass filter and a high-pass filter?
I'm outright saying that income-earning potential is relevant to eventual performance on an IQ test.
What causes "income-earning potential," then? Are people born with "doctoring potential," which lets them score high on an IQ test? What are the independent variables and what are the dependent variables here?
To be honest, I don't even know what you're arguing for here. Do you think every group of humans (however you slice them) has the same distribution of intelligence? What theory compatible with evolutionary biology explains this?
I have no complaints with FedEx, but UPS has always been a shitty vendor.
I've got a ton of free stuff from Amazon because they keep using Dynamex.
I just call and complain and I get anything from $10 credit to a refund for everything I ordered + the OK to keep it when it arrives.
Literally, every single time Dynamex was used they screwed it up. Same day turning in to 3 or 4 days, saying they delivered the item at 8pm (and I'm on the phone with Amazon saying it wasn't delivered when they show up at 11pm delivering) to not delivering at all (I have a security cam and was able to prove no delivery attempt was made).
Science tells us that "species" as a term is highly overrated and grossly misunderstood. But by no definition are different kinds of humans anywhere near to being different species. You might describe them as different varieties, at most.
This is the type of meaningless, muddying-the-waters handwave I was talking about. It doesn't matter what you call the different animal group: species, haplogroup, ethnicity, race, "bunch of people who vaguely stayed in this geographic area for this length of time." At the end of the day you have a group of animals to which a different selection pressure was applied over tens of thousands of years, which results in different traits.
Unless of course, man is some kind of magical animal where populations can be separated by 50,000 years plus, and yet have the only changes be cosmetic. How did that happen? Was it God?
The things about them that needed to change will have changed. The things that didn't mostly won't.
Intelligence is good for you no matter what your situation, and strength and speed don't preclude intelligence.
Intelligence being good for you is not the same as stupidity being bad for you. We generally talk about selection pressure working against a trait, not for it. A seasonal climate with harsh winters that needs to be prepared for selects against those who cannot engage in long term planning. In a temperate or tropical setting with food available year-round low intelligence isn't selected against.
Also, stupid people have intelligent children, and vice versa.
What is regression to the mean.
For instance, in the United States the average IQ for blacks is 85, 92 for Latinos, 100 for whites, 108 for asians, and 115 for Ashkenazi Jews. This correlates very well to income levels for each group.
Correlation, he said, is not causation. That's a sophomoric error.
But correlation is required for causation. Are you suggesting intelligence is irrelevant to income-earning potential for most people?
Is this just a kiddie troll?
There's that ad hominem. Please argue science instead of your politics.
Okay. Reality is a bunch of 4channers spammed Nazi frogs to troll the media and the Clinton campaign. So the people posting the frogs aren't evil KKK nazis, it's that hacker on steroids known as 4chinz.
In terms of mining, I'm curious about mineral concentrations on Mars. On Earth billions of years of geologic, hydrologic and biologic processes have concentrated minerals for us to mine. What about a geologically dead world like Mars? Same thing with people talking about asteroid mining. Yes, there's millions of tons of platinum on that there asteroid. There's an atom of it over there, an atom over there, an atom over there...
Then, we want to fill the universe with everyone else.
I'd be curious to see what happens when the space SJWs get involved, furious because there aren't an equal number of midget lesbian Eskimo Electrical Engineers and transgendered Australian Aboriginal neurosurgeons on the Mars colony. And what about the space Muslims?
I THINK MAN INVENTED THE CAR by instinct. -- Jack Handley, The New Mexican, 1988.