View Poll Results: Did evolution leave all races with equal mental and physical competency?

Voters
70. You may not vote on this poll
  • Ye

    27 38.57%
  • No

    43 61.43%
Page 16 of 28 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast
Results 151 to 160 of 279

Thread: Did evolution leave all races equal in terms of mental and physical competence?

  1. #151
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    10-16-11 @ 03:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,845

    Re: Did evolution leave all races equal in terms of mental and physical competence?

    Well.... as a whole, some races -are- more 'backwards' than others.
    Has to be a reason for it.

  2. #152
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Windy City
    Last Seen
    09-21-11 @ 11:55 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    397

    Re: Did evolution leave all races equal in terms of mental and physical competence?

    Quote Originally Posted by PzKfW IVe View Post
    Well.... as a whole, some races -are- more 'backwards' than others.
    Has to be a reason for it.
    What do you mean by 'backwards'? This is extremely vague.

  3. #153
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Last Seen
    10-16-11 @ 03:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    1,845

    Re: Did evolution leave all races equal in terms of mental and physical competence?

    Quote Originally Posted by David D. View Post
    What do you mean by 'backwards'? This is extremely vague.
    It's a broad term as there are many parameters. Use it as you like.

  4. #154
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Windy City
    Last Seen
    09-21-11 @ 11:55 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    397

    Re: Did evolution leave all races equal in terms of mental and physical competence?

    Quote Originally Posted by PzKfW IVe View Post
    It's a broad term as there are many parameters. Use it as you like.
    Ok so we'll say the first race was comprised of a bunch of high school-aged kids running north on the street, and this coincided with a second race where people were biking in the opposite direction (south, & it was a bike race, middle aged & some retirement aged people), so in essence the second race was 'backwards' when compared to the first.

    GOT IT.
    Last edited by David D.; 09-16-11 at 05:49 PM.

  5. #155
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Did evolution leave all races equal in terms of mental and physical competence?

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    OK, then. Please define for us the processes of evolution as they work at the population level such that they generate genetic variance and MORE IMPORTANTLY please list for us the factors other than those which operate under the engine of evolution which work to generate population level genetic variance.

    Don't dodge this question. You're making a serious claim here, at least to me, that I don't understand what I'm writing about. You would be doing a great service to your fellow liberal creationists on this board to show me up as the fool that you think me to be. Your mouth has led you to make this challenge so demonstrate for us that you understand the process of how population level genetic variance is induced and what processes outside of evolution you have in mind when you made your charge.
    It's not "dodging" to refuse to answer a question which is itself a red herring, a strawman, and a loaded question. Come back with a fallacy-free question and I will gladly answer it.

    You are claiming that intra-species genetic variance is caused by evolution.

    I'm correctly pointing out that this claim is backwards.

    If you actually know what you are talking about, then you know this.


    There is only one process that could plausibly be considered "outside" of the processes which comprise the driving factors of evolution which is powerful enough to induce some population level genetic variance and even this process is rightly a subset of one of the principal drivers of evolution.
    The part in bold actually shows that you do understand that the driving factors of evolution are not themselves evolution. In this statement, you even acknowledge the fact that it is not evolution which induces the intra-species genetic variance, but that it is actually the processes that allow evolution to occur that induce the variance.

  6. #156
    onomatopoeic
    mbig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-17 @ 08:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,350

    Re: Did evolution leave all races equal in terms of mental and physical competence?

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    IQ is a horrible measure of overall intelligence and problem solving ability. Best example: I spent most of my life around farmers. The medium to big farmers are mostly high school educated if they finished and do not perform well on IQ tests. However, these guys can plan out crops for several thousand acres and figure out seed needs in their heads for that. They can weld and machine on mills and lathes. They can do small and large engine repair, fix hydraulics, and program programmable controllers. They can manage betwen 5 and 20 farm hands. They can look at a weathermap and make predictions as good or better than meteorologists. They follow and understand the markets that they deal in. They handle all their businesses finances, including taxes and paperwork for their employees. In the last 15 to 20 years they have also learned to be computer literate and some of them can do more with a computer than most people. In a couple cases you can add livestock management to their abilities, with all that goes with that. And yet if you talked with them outside of those areas you would immediately note their small vocabulary and ignorance of on things we take for granted.
    And this is a great example of Fallacious 'debate' by Anecdote.
    Additionally, Confusing Education and IQ; As well as making unbacked claims about farmer's IQ.
    (btw, alot of Not so smart farmers went broke when things got tough. 'Farmaid' ring a bell?)
    And of course the debate here is about Racial IQ, not urban vs rural.
    Last edited by mbig; 09-16-11 at 06:14 PM.
    I'm personally sick of not being able to dunk a basketball because of racism.
    anon

  7. #157
    onomatopoeic
    mbig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-17 @ 08:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,350

    Re: Did evolution leave all races equal in terms of mental and physical competence?

    If there's 1% difference between human and primate, it still doesn't "demonstrate" that "there's still Plenty of room for things like IQ difference among human 'strains'." It's jumping to conclusion to say that. That human is 99% like primates genetically just doesn't lead to the conclusion...
    My post was made Merely to show donsutherland's claim of "99.9"%" was NOT definitive or even logical in being able to 'demonstrate' if there Could be IQ difference among humans.
    You have deconextualized my statement.
    In doing so, you have unwittingly re-enforced My point about His claim.
    The whole "percent" idea, which HE said precluded significant IQ difference .. does NOT.
    I assume you agree despite yourself taking an illogical partisan/PC stance on who to oppose.


    Quote Originally Posted by nonpareill
    And what are these studies? Link please.
    There are Hundreds/thousands of IQ studies.
    Richard Lynn used over 600 with a sampling of over 800,000 people globally in his 2006 book.
    Quote Originally Posted by Race Differences in Intelligence: An Evolutionary Analysis; Table 16.2 (indigenous populations)
    Richard Lynn, "Race Differences in Intelligence: An Evolutionary Analysis" 2006 Table 16.2 (indigenous populations) Estimated average IQ

    Arctic Peoples - - - - - - - -- -- - - - - - 91
    East Asians - - - - - - - - ---- -- -- --- - 105
    Europeans - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - -100
    Native Americans (north & south) -- -- 86
    Southern Asian & Northern Africans - - 84
    Bushmen (southern Africa) - - - - - - - -54
    Africans (subsaharan) - - - - - - - - - - 67
    Native Australians (aboriginals) --- --- 62
    Southeast Asians - - - - - - - - - -- - - -87
    Pacific Islanders - - - - - - - - - - - - - -85
    Quote Originally Posted by nonpareill
    There are questions about the validity of the studies that claim the 50% heritability of IQ as well: The heritability of IQ. [Nature. 1997] - PubMed - NCBI

    A lot of studies in the past don't properly account for the womb environment and the mother's physical condition during pregnancy. Studies that measure IQ after birth will tend to have this problem since it's very hard to isolate these factors and genes without actually looking at the genes itself.
    IOW, Apologetics.

    Quote Originally Posted by nonpareill
    Quote Originally Posted by me
    4. Brain Size Differences. Studies using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) find a correlation of brain size with IQ of about 0.40. Larger brains contain more neurons and synapses and process information faster. Race differences in brain size are present at birth. By adulthood, East Asians average 1 cubic inch more cranial capacity than Whites who average 5 cubic inches more than Blacks.
    This is a common heuristic problem. It's like saying: P(A/B) > P(A/B') and P(B/C) > P(B>C') and therefore P(A/C)>P(A/C'), P(A/C) might be bigger than P(A/C') but you have to measure that to know for sure, inferring from the probability of the first two is not always correct.

    If I gave you these statements:

    Probability of getting false positive is higher with ovary cancer than non-ovary cancer
    Probability of getting ovary cancer is higher in older women than in younger women
    It doesn't follow that the Probability of getting a false positive is higher in older women. ....
    Your comparison Inapt, and for someone of your intelligence I would say.. Disingenuous.
    My post contains the 3 sizes and differentials which correlate to IQ.
    Not just abstract verbal leaps as you posted/needlessly muddied, mine contains Numbers where If 6>4:::: 4>2 ::: 6>2. We know this even without the middle number.
    That's why this section of your reply was longest. It took More BS to attempt to bury a simple fact.

    Additionally, from a Wiki mirror site, not completely updated/PCed yet.
    Mean cranial capacity (cc)

    Measurement -- East Asian European African
    Autopsy - - - - -- 1351 1356 - -- - 1223
    Endocranial volume 1415 1362 1268
    External head msrt 1335 1341 1284
    Crrt'd for body size 1356 1329 1294
    Mean - - - - - - ----- 1364 1347 1267
    Redrawn from Jensen 1998b, Table 12.1

    Cortical neurons (billions)

    East Asian European African
    13.767 - 13.665 - 13.185
    Source: Rushton 2000

    Redrawn from Jensen 1998b, Table 12.1rl=http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence]Race and intelligence - Metapedia[/url]

    Quote Originally Posted by nonpareill
    This is the same roughly 1 std deviation difference and still doesn't account for what happens in the womb and before adoption, or the effect of racial identity. The author themselves wouldn't say that it's due to genetic differences.
    The fact of the matter is that these studies all have differences that are not statistically significant and do not properly control for other environmental factors. To use them as if they proof anything conclusively is unscientific.
    IQ researchers have corrected for variables, including socioeconomic ones. IQ remains consistent not only say, in Subsaharan Africa, or Rural china, but intercontinentally with the same populations in North America.
    Additionally your statement is wrong on a statistical basis. Not just that 1 SD is "insignificant", but if one looks at Asians vs Blacks we move comfortably over 1 SD.
    ie, Compare East Asian vs Subsaharans we move over 2 SDs. See the Lynn IQ Chart above.
    Last edited by mbig; 09-16-11 at 06:51 PM.
    I'm personally sick of not being able to dunk a basketball because of racism.
    anon

  8. #158
    Sage
    RiverDad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-14 @ 02:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,039

    Re: Did evolution leave all races equal in terms of mental and physical competence?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    It's not "dodging" to refuse to answer a question which is itself a red herring, a strawman, and a loaded question. Come back with a fallacy-free question and I will gladly answer it.
    Don't play games. Initially I didn't want to get involved in a pissing contest with you and I was willing to let your error slide, but you couldn't leave well enough alone and take the graceful option I presented and you had to turn it back on me. You bluffed, now I'm calling your bluff. Show your ****ing cards. If you want to posture like you know enough about what is going on, then explain yourself.

    You are claiming that intra-species genetic variance is caused by evolution.

    I'm correctly pointing out that this claim is backwards.
    It's backwards? Now your argument is that evolution is caused by population level genetic variance? I'd really LUV to hear an explanation for how this works. The EFFECTS are now driving the CAUSE.

    The part in bold actually shows that you do understand that the driving factors of evolution are not themselves evolution.
    You're just playing meaningless word games because you've boxed yourself into a corner. The three principal drivers of evolution are mutation, selection and drift/draft. The principle requirements underlying population level genetic variance are reduced gene flow between populations on a cline, founder effects, and degrees of inbreeding. For two populations to increase the degree of genetic variation between them the actual processes all fall under the broad term of evolution. The outcomes that see today are the result of reproductively isolated groups expanding in number over time from their initial founding group and so carrying forward in time that initial genetic profile and to varying levels inbreeding amongst themselves to an extent that overwhelms the effects of introgression from outside populations and all the while mutations arise, they are selected or not and drift/draft occurs. If you take these processes to extremes you are well on the road to speciation.

    Religious creationists get quite in a tizzy about speciation and we all recognize that speciation is the result of evolution. Speciation cannot develop if there is enough gene flow between populations. Evolution is a pretty big term and it can be viewed on multiple levels. That is the basis of your mistake, or that's what I'm assuming from reading between the lines - you have some level of layman's knowledge of what you think evolution is and you're leveraging that limited understanding to put yourself into some self-proclaimed level of authority. I do my best to engage in conversations in the colloquial when these issues come up but when you write "the driving factors of evolution are not themselves evolution" you leave me no option but to get more technical. The facets of evolution which play out at the population level do not register at the gene level - founder effects and introgression and inbreeding don't matter to the question of whether a mutation propagates or dies out. There are whole other factors in play, like adaptive traits and adaptation, kin selection, etc which occor at higher levels of analysis and which I'm skipping here but they also fall under the umbrella of evolution.

    In this statement, you even acknowledge the fact that it is not evolution which induces the intra-species genetic variance, but that it is actually the processes that allow evolution to occur that induce the variance.
    Because I hate being the pedant who is correcting everyone on minor definitional points - I was giving you some slack so that we could progress beyond nitpicking and get to the point that you wanted to make but you force me to a pendentic position by this game of yours, so yes, evolution is the process which drives population level genetic variation. Prove me wrong. Explain to us what factors apart from "evolution" are driving population level genetic variance.

  9. #159
    Pragmatist
    SouthernDemocrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    KC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,410

    Re: Did evolution leave all races equal in terms of mental and physical competence?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hatuey View Post
    What is harder, surviving in a South American jungle or surviving in Siberia? I don't know. I know the pool knowledge required to survive in either one is different. The mental capacity remains constant for both individuals.
    Its much easier to survive in a hunter / gatherer society in Siberia (outside of the most extreme areas) than it is in the Amazonian Rain Forest in a hunter / gatherer society. The climate may be more harsh in Siberia, but large game is far more plentiful. In Amazonian Rain Forests large game is hard to find and there are all kinds parasites that can kill you. Victorian era explorers faired far better on polar and sub-arctic expeditions than they did in amazon expeditions. They could not even keep a horse alive more than a month or so in the rain forests.

    Not that this is very topical to the thread, but just thought I would throw that out there.
    "You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)

  10. #160
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:57 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,326
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Did evolution leave all races equal in terms of mental and physical competence?

    Quote Originally Posted by mbig View Post
    And this is a great example of Fallacious 'debate' by Anecdote.
    Additionally, Confusing Education and IQ; As well as making unbacked claims about farmer's IQ.
    (btw, alot of Not so smart farmers went broke when things got tough. 'Farmaid' ring a bell?)
    And of course the debate here is about Racial IQ, not urban vs rural.
    Btw, alot of very smart high IQ people go broke when economic conditions change. Nice job of not addressing the overall point, but then again, I didn't expect you would.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

Page 16 of 28 FirstFirst ... 6141516171826 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •