Could Lower Intelligence Be No Accident?

I like Peter Joseph and Jacque Fresco a lot. They articulate many of the repulsive inevitabilities of the free market system and this constant competition.

That said they are not being realistic about how many people in the world today are seriously, just savages on so many levels. These utopian societies might very well work in Sweden or Japan. Spend any amount of time in the ghetto though, see the places where street fights happen regularly, and the teen girls spread their legs for the bigger dudes with the bigger penises and the tiny brains. Some populations have an extraordinarily high prevalence of the MAOA-2R gene, that makes the carrier prone to unprovoked acts of violence. This is how mob violence happens, how the most destructive riots happen, how the knockout game happens.

I think even in MY lifetime, we could see some part of the world embrace many aspects of the mentality that is advocated by the Venus Project or Zeitgeist, but it will take an exceptional group of people with exceptional genes. There will of course be people who try to exploit it, who can't shake the meterialism mentality. It's a very difficult project made nearly impossible by rampaging dysgenics.

 

I go with the evidence. There's overwhelmingly strong evidence that blacks perform very poorly on SATs and IQ tests regardless of income. The poorest white kids in the country outperform the richest black kids.

In regards to violence and impulsiveness, all the evidence points to the fact that our genetic code has a huge impact on this. Black people are extraordinarily more likely to carry the perilous MAOA-2R gene. Black people are much more likely to carry MAOA-2R than White people, who are much more likely to carry MAOA-2R than East Asian people.

Is it any wonder why we see these groups and their rates of violence are consistently represented this way EVERYWHERE in the world?

If you can post any counterevidence I would gladly weigh it objectively, and if it was remotely convincing, it would have an impact on my stance.

 

It strikes me now that Boondocks covered this subject. Science is amazing, we can isolate the primary cause of nigga moments to a single variation on a single gene.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zhgwy9y5ttA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ecVMI81GNJU

 

I can't actually find any convincing evidence that the average American IQ is falling at all. In face, there seems to be a lot of contrasting evidence.

 

I don't think color should come into the equation at all. I do think genes play a gigantic role, and some people are bound to produce kids that don't stand a chance. People who are exceedingly likely to pass the MAOA-2R gene to their children, are going to do some harm to society. These kids with the MAOA-2R gene aren't guaranteed to commit random acts of violence, but they're much, much more likely to do it than people with healthy hormone regulation.

"Monoamine oxidase A (MAO-A) is an enzyme in the brain that breaks down neurotransmitters such as noradrenaline, adrenaline, serotonin, and dopamine."

http://selfhacked.com/2014/12/07/about-mao-a-and-what-to-do-if-you-have-the-warrior-gene/

I don't know if you're familiar with SSRI's or their prevalence among people who commit mass shootings and the like.

"SSRIs are selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, also known as antidepressant medications."

This inability to clear serotonin from the brain creates a buildup of it that leads to random agitation and impulsiveness. Some people, those with MAOA-2R have a natural condition that creates this buildup. We can create the condition with ill advised prescribed medications, or the condition can occur naturally.

 

I have no doubt you're referencing the "Flynn Effect".

Post your source, I'll break it down.

 

I don't believe that the "Flynn Effect" stems from any real increase in intelligence. From what I can tell, the effect itself is an artifact of IQ tests. I have access to peer reviewed journals, and I'm not able to find a convincing, evidence-based article or summary of literature on American IQ trends. Obviously, this was in a brief literature review, but nothing is popping out.

 

I concur.

Yeah there's a general trend that says IQ doesn't matter. Its importance is downplayed. Anything that shatters the egalitarian dogma is discarded by the PC police in Academia.

It's imperitive to these people that we be blank slates. That culture, nurture be the vast majority of our success or failure. If we believe this hard enough, it will be true, and if it's true we will be able to solve all our problems through our institutions. We won't have to address dysgenics at all! Fantastic!

 

Well the current literature on "Nature vs. nurture", as well as the general trend is science, is currently shifting to the "nature" side of the debate. Give it a few decades, and I'm sure the best knowledge will say otherwise.

 

What are these moments Nerdanderthal?

http://youtu.be/w7LtLDbMVlI

http://youtu.be/SkJgxM-zywM

 

Well stated. I'm racially aware. Folks such as "Me Again" are optimistically embracing a kind of thug culture encouraged by a media obsessed with negrofication of Western Culture. Murray was correct when he authored "The Bell Curve". Don't think so? Go to Detroit. We are balkanizing. Young European Americans will be able to choose a "New America". That is what I remain optimistic about.

 

I will try to stop harping on race. I understand the discomfort people feel when facing genetic realism.

Until we do face it though, we will continue to reach false conclusions about the causes of the inequality we see all around us.

Intellectual inequality, incarceration inequality, income inequality, there need not be ANY oppression whatsoever for these disparities to exist.

Bear in mind that East Asians tend to fall on the positive end of these trends, EVERYWHERE in the world.

Failure to acknowledge the science behind these inevitabilities, and shutting down discourse that sheds light on this science, only serves to facilitate more false accusations of discrimination and persecution. As difficult as the truth may be to confront, it's infinitely more productive than being trapped in the lie.

 

it's only on HipForums that intelligence has gone down significantly.

 

i think it was poul anderson, i think the story was called brainwave, about our solar system passing through some sort of radiation field.
(that elevated our intelligence while we were passing through it, and now we've passed back out of it again)

but what separates us, to the extent that anything does, from other species of our own planet, the whole surrounding ourselves with our artifacts, to the extent we are now able to imagine ourselves an almost completely different kind of thing, that doesn't come from having that much more brain power. we do have some, but it isn't that much more. but rather from having a stronger drive to be creative.

did that come from aliens or gods or something? i don't know. some people just discovered there was gratification in it. nianderthals or astraliopythacines or whoever they were, and we've just been going on ever since.
we've also dumbed ourselves down from time to time, with fanatacisms we also seem to have invented ourselves.

 

Which corner of the world do to you live in, anyhow?

And I'm still interested in your reputable sources about the topic at hand.

 

There is quite a discrepancy in 'brain power' from our closest evolutionary cousins, enough that I think can account for most of the differences, if not all the differences we see (and perceive) amongst other primates, Probably other animals as well.

Compared to chimpanzees, humans have have ~14 million more neurons in their brains, as well as a more developed neocortex, which functions in regards to language, awareness, reasoning, etc. and leads to this contrast in ratio.

On top of these figures, I'll add that I think having the brain sit atop our heads (brain stem), rather than at angles like other primates, allows for an advantage in what I'll call the fluidity of communication. Communication in this sense does not mean language to each other but the ability of the brain and body to work more efficiently in concert (i.e. manipulate objects, etc.)


The part that I don't really grasp is why other hominid species didn't last equipped with relatively similar benefits.

 

what makes you think, our closest evolutionary cousins, have the highest non-human brain power? and how accurately, is number of neurons, a measure of it?

 

Nowhere did I state our evolutionary cousins, have the highest non-human brain power. Chimps don't have the second most amount of neurons in the animal kingdom, however we still have ~10 billion more neurons than any other species.

I'm not sure it's the be-all, end-all of determining 'brain power' but the number of chemical messengers (neurons) is a crucial component in determining brain power, particularly if it's complimented with more developed brain regions to communicate such messengers as I have mentioned. The discrepancy with humans is obviously notable, if we were discussing among other animals perhaps other variables may factor in more.

You used the phrase, what other criteria could brain power possibly mean?