1.) How does a "marginalized place in society" (is there such a thing as being a 13% minority and not inevitably being marginalized btw? And why aren't Asians in the same boat?) lead to increased testosterone?
Unfortunately for all of our fluffy illusions, the testosterone thing is just the very tip of the ice berg.
There are real, tangible biological differences between races. When it comes to blacks as compared to whites, those differences are actually somewhat muted in the USA because almost all African Americans have some Caucasian admixture DNA dulling the gap somewhat.
1.) Black infants develop faster than white infants, east Asian infants develop even slower than whites. Motor skills develop faster in blacks, etc. Here's how natural selection works: That slower development was a tradeoff and PURCHASED SOMETHING FOR WHITES AND ASIANS. What might that be? Perhaps a little bit more of the same thing human's slower development as compared to other species purchased them? Oh and also, African women produce twins at a higher rate. And what about r/K type nurture strategies? There are many very good reasons to believe various ethnic groups have not embraced both strategies to the exact same degree.
2.) African, white, and east Asian skulls exhibit dramatic differences in form. Likewise with these groups' brains. Differences noted are in overall weight of brains, which just magically happens to correspond to space provided by each group's skull for said brains. Differences in amount of wrinkling in brains... which just happens to fall on the exact same spread pattern as IQ among these 3 groups. Wrinkling of the brain, btw, as I'm sure you know already, is directly connected with brain power. This is the reason women are able to pack as much brain power as men (roughly) into a smaller skull. More wrinkling. But I'm sure, when one GROUP has more wrinkling than another, and this just HAPPENS to correspond to extremely resilient IQ score gaps in those groups, it's just a coincidence.
3.) Related to point 2, why is it that east Asians just so happen to score higher than whites on IQ tests, on average, consistently, across cultures, even controlling for upbringing, etc. As in, white couple has one biological child, adopts east Asian child, east Asian child raised in exact same environment will typically outscore their step-sibling on IQ tests.
So, is the fact that east Asians have a higher average brain weight/size than whites, utterly disconnected with the fact that they have higher average IQ scores than whites? Just a total coincidence?
4.) Why are the top Olympic sprinters all of African descent?
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jonentine/2012/08/12/the-dna-olympics-jamaicans-win-sprinting-genetic-lottery-and-why-we-should-all-care/
From that Forbes article:
Is this utterly unconnected from real, biologically observed differences in center of gravity, muscle distribution, etc in Africans as compared to Europeans?
Or, are blacks dominating in many sports because of their "marginalized place in society" ?
-------------------------------------------------------------
Face it. There is a dance between genetics and culture, certain genetic traits allow for certain cultural traits to spring up, which in turn bounce back at the genetics and impact them.
What sort of behavioral predispositions might be selected for by moving to an agricultural lifestyle from a hunter-gatherer one? A lifestyle where, everyone knows exactly where you live, and can destroy all your crops in retribution if you aren't agreeable? Could this select for said group to become more conflict-averse? What sort of impact does living in a colder climate have on genetic predisposition for future-planning, saving, thinking ahead, problem-solving, etc?
Or are human beings magically insulated from the forces of natural selection because it'd hurt our feelings if we weren't?
Some racial groups have an agricultural history and a history of building and maintaining large scale civilizations, and others don't. This helps explain why, when white South-African "Boer" farmers were run off their land and had their farms taken from them in Zimbabwe and given to native Africans, those farms plummeted in productivity. Yields dropped dramatically.
Racial groups with agricultural history WERE IMPACTED GENETICALLY BY THAT HISTORY AND THEIR GENETICS AND THE CULTURE THEY WERE PURSUING WENT BACK AND FORTH ENABLING ONE ANOTHER.
This also helps explain why very little in the way of agriculture or architecture ever happened in sub-Saharan Africa prior to any sort of colonialism. My understanding is that no two story structure or even a wheel ever saw the light of day there prior to outside forces. Or at least, that this was the case through the vast majority of sub-Saharan Africa.
Perhaps this also helps explain the difficulty certain cities in the US have once the power structure shifts to be comprised primarily of people without a genetic lineage of building and maintaining advanced civilization?
Just some food for thought.
I know, I know, I'm the bad guy.
But I'd encourage anyone who is interested in western civilization maintaining it's characteristics to consider and research these facts and think about whether they have any implications for immigration policy, and preferential hiring practices for instance.
Remember: I fully believe ALL GROUPS PRODUCE ALL TYPES OF PEOPLE. Thugs, criminals, geniuses, people predisposed to be great or horrible at every conceivable thing... music, engineering, whatever, you name it. I JUST DON'T THINK THEY ALL PRODUCE ALL TYPES OF PEOPLE AT THE SAME RATE. I also believe that when you have the luxury to judge people on a case by case basis, that is absolutely the right, moral, and more effective path. I just don't think it's practical to do on a civilizational level like, when determining immigration policy.
Facebook
Twitter