Declining genes & the potential end of "modern" society: A short primer on dysgenics and the inevitable Malthusian decline

sub6manletnozygos

sub6manletnozygos

Kraken
Joined
Nov 19, 2019
Posts
3,843
Reputation
5,714
Weakening selection pressures and Malthusianism:

We will enter a period of accelerated Malthusianism: Picture exponential population growth plotted against linear resources. Now picture the exponential population reverted to the mean.

Part of this will be because of dysgenics. The industrial revolution created modern technology and modern medicine, it changed social structures and created globalization, which collectively contributed to a weakening of selection pressures. This meant that those who are low iq and are physically unhealthy, lacking capacity for delayed gratification and therein predisposed to a lifestyle premised on living fast and having lots of sex/engaging in hedonism, would have otherwise died under harsh selection pressures. Instead, such dysgenic populations have been afforded a social safety net, in the form of modern political, economic and medical intervention, afforded to by excess production, post-industrial revolution. This dysgenic population has for over 100 year bred at a rate far beyond those who preference resource accumulation and delayed breeding (populations that typically possess a higher iq and health, which are correlated, and who, pre-industrial revolution, were the population who bred the most, as it was their high iq and health that enabled them to cope well with harsh pre-industrial selection pressures, compared to low iq/sick people who died at higher rates).

Scientific evidence of dysgenics:

Notwithstanding cyclical nature of fertility, there is evidence of dysgenics.

There is an evidenced of a lowering of IQ in native populations like northern European countries, even when adjusted for the influence of immigrant populations:

Lynn (1996) Dysgenics: Genetic Deterioration in Modern Populations

Dutton, Linden, Lynn (2016) The negative Flynn effect: A systematic literature review.

These authors, in their further publications, have also noted a decrease in color discrimination ability and verbal expression.

Reaction times are decreasing:


GWAS or genome wide association studies evidence frequencies of genes associated with intelligencem decreasing generationally among native populations:


What does this mean?
If the iq of western countries continues to decline at current rates, the average western iq will be ~80, meaning society will be incapable of coming up with novel scientific or industrial ideas, meaning society won't progress, less alone even maintain current infrastructure.

I suspect that the elites' agenda 2030 campaign (sacrificing individual liberties to justify increasingly authoritarian measures), aims to lessen the blow from the incoming Malthusian decline, by limiting consumption, travel and social mobility, while ensuring those that are in power now, continue to be in power as society declines as dysgenics and civil unrest increases. Their perspective is that such social restrictions (social credit score, carbon footprint, digital ID) will act as social insulation, against humanities genetic and eventual social, political and economic suicide.

Similarly, the movement towards CRSPR technology, albeit in its infancy, and polygenic risk scoring (selecting against diseases currently and eventually for "questionable" traits like intelligence etc), are further measures to counter dysgenics.

Finally, the elites obsession with transhumanism (From Elon musk's neuralink to increasing scientific interest in nanolipid and graphene technology touted for its wide ranging application such as novel application for medical delivery) may also be an attempt to reverse dysgenics. The US government with the following two documents remarks on the widespread application of nano tech and human use.

Further sources:
 
Last edited:
  • +1
  • Ugh..
Reactions: EverythingMattersCel, saiya_online, 5'7 zoomer and 5 others
Cage at people thinking human feelings are anything more than random mutations developed over the course of millions of years to improve the species chance of survival and propagation.

that's why random ass plants and chemicals can make you feel better than any sober lived experience could - it's just random shit that happens to nicely slot into your bodies biopsychological composition

try looking at it from an outside perspective: adult salmon swim thousands of miles upstream to the exact location of their own birth in order to lay eggs. They have to swim up fucking waterfalls, are hunted by bears and eagles and the fresh water slowly kills them over time and causes their body to deteriorate. Almost all salmon die in this migration. It's extremely retarded. But they do it anyway because it's their biological programming and I'm sure it makes them feel better than anything else in this world.

Now zoom out, what makes us any different from the salmon? People have a hard time removing the bias from their own goals and desires. Feelings are just ephemeral messages to the brain, mediating the relationship between your conscious existence and the arbitrary hard coded desire of life to persist into the future. Emotions are about sending signals to maximise the likelihood of you behaving in a way that is consistent with preserving the cycles of life. Survival reproduce. Survival reproduce. Survival reproduce. Half the time they malfunction, in many people they don't work at all. But as long as more often that not it pushes people into the right direction it does it's job.

Emotions are beautiful. But they are also a myth. And that's why I choose to chill 24/7 and have fun and stuff
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Ruakh, Baldingman1998, Deleted member 19610 and 10 others
CRISPR+AI will save us
 
  • Hmm...
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 20376, whiteissuperior, saiya_online and 3 others
I don’t believe in Malthus.
We have everything we need to feed the people.
 
Weakening selection pressures and Malthusianism:

We will enter a period of accelerated Malthusianism: Picture exponential population growth plotted against linear resources. Now picture the exponential population reverted to the mean.

Part of this will be because of dysgenics. The industrial revolution created modern technology and modern medicine, it changed social structures and created globalization, which collectively contributed to a weakening of selection pressures. This meant that those who are low iq and are physically unhealthy, lacking capacity for delayed gratification and therein predisposed to a lifestyle premised on living fast and having lots of sex/engaging in hedonism, would have otherwise died under harsh selection pressures. Instead, such dysgenic populations have been afforded a social safety net, in the form of modern political, economic and medical intervention, afforded to by excess production, post-industrial revolution. This dysgenic population has for over 100 year bred at a rate far beyond those who preference resource accumulation and delayed breeding (populations that typically possess a higher iq and health, which are correlated, and who, pre-industrial revolution, were the population who bred the most, as it was their high iq and health that enabled them to cope well with harsh pre-industrial selection pressures, compared to low iq/sick people who died at higher rates).

Scientific evidence of dysgenics:

Notwithstanding cyclical nature of fertility, there is evidence of dysgenics.

There is an evidenced of a lowering of IQ in native populations like northern European countries, even when adjusted for the influence of immigrant populations:

Lynn (1996) Dysgenics: Genetic Deterioration in Modern Populations

Dutton, Linden, Lynn (2016) The negative Flynn effect: A systematic literature review.

These authors, in their further publications, have also noted a decrease in color discrimination ability and verbal expression.

Reaction times are decreasing:


GWAS or genome wide association studies evidence frequencies of genes associated with intelligencem decreasing generationally among native populations:


What does this mean?
If the iq of western countries continues to decline at current rates, the average western iq will be ~80, meaning society will be incapable of coming up with novel scientific or industrial ideas, meaning society won't progress, less alone even maintain current infrastructure.

I suspect that the elites' agenda 2030 campaign (sacrificing individual liberties to justify increasingly authoritarian measures), aims to lessen the blow from the incoming Malthusian decline, by limiting consumption, travel and social mobility, while ensuring those that are in power now, continue to be in power as society declines as dysgenics and civil unrest increases. Their perspective is that such social restrictions (social credit score, carbon footprint, digital ID) will act as social insulation, against humanities genetic and eventual social, political and economic suicide.

Similarly, the movement towards CRSPR technology, albeit in its infancy, and polygenic risk scoring (selecting against diseases currently and eventually for "questionable" traits like intelligence etc), are further measures to counter dysgenics.

Finally, the elites obsession with transhumanism (From Elon musk's neuralink to increasing scientific interest in nanolipid and graphene technology touted for its wide ranging application such as novel application for medical delivery) may also be an attempt to reverse dysgenics. The US government with the following two documents remarks on the widespread application of nano tech and human use.

Further sources:
My bro is backk
 
Cage at people thinking human feelings are anything more than random mutations developed over the course of millions of years to improve the species chance of survival and propagation.

that's why random ass plants and chemicals can make you feel better than any sober lived experience could - it's just random shit that happens to nicely slot into your bodies biopsychological composition

try looking at it from an outside perspective: adult salmon swim thousands of miles upstream to the exact location of their own birth in order to lay eggs. They have to swim up fucking waterfalls, are hunted by bears and eagles and the fresh water slowly kills them over time and causes their body to deteriorate. Almost all salmon die in this migration. It's extremely retarded. But they do it anyway because it's their biological programming and I'm sure it makes them feel better than anything else in this world.

Now zoom out, what makes us any different from the salmon? People have a hard time removing the bias from their own goals and desires. Feelings are just ephemeral messages to the brain, mediating the relationship between your conscious existence and the arbitrary hard coded desire of life to persist into the future. Emotions are about sending signals to maximise the likelihood of you behaving in a way that is consistent with preserving the cycles of life. Survival reproduce. Survival reproduce. Survival reproduce. Half the time they malfunction, in many people they don't work at all. But as long as more often that not it pushes people into the right direction it does it's job.

Emotions are beautiful. But they are also a myth. And that's why I choose to chill 24/7 and have fun and stuff
>Emotions are about sending signals to maximise the likelihood of you behaving in a way that is consistent with preserving the cycles of life.
>And that's why I choose to chill 24/7 and have fun and stuff
How can you reconcile these two comments?
If you "chill 24/7" and "have fun and stuff" are you not blunting your emotions, which you argue are "consistent with preserving the cycles of life". To reconcile your first comment you would need to make the second comment the opposite: do the opposite of "chilling" and "having fun", rather do whatever needs to be to, as you say "survive and reproduce".
Or am I misinterpreting what you are saying?
 
>Emotions are about sending signals to maximise the likelihood of you behaving in a way that is consistent with preserving the cycles of life.
>And that's why I choose to chill 24/7 and have fun and stuff
How can you reconcile these two comments?
If you "chill 24/7" and "have fun and stuff" are you not blunting your emotions, which you argue are "consistent with preserving the cycles of life". To reconcile your first comment you would need to make the second comment the opposite: do the opposite of "chilling" and "having fun", rather do whatever needs to be to, as you say "survive and reproduce".
Or am I misinterpreting what you are saying?
Wait bro I'll call the expert @mogger123
 
I don’t believe in Malthus.
We have everything we need to feed the people.
Yes but the quality of food will decline and will likely be technologically augmented with nanolipid/MRNA/GMO/involve "cultured meat"/and or bugs. There is evidenced movement towards purportedly, more "sustainable" food supplies:
However, humans are not adapted to mass consumption of such foods. Forcing this on humans, may have long term effects, especially if food that humans have eaten for 1000+ years - grass fed, antibiotic free, preservative free, pesticide free, meat, diary, poultry, vegetables and fruit are wholly unavailable and/or technologically augmented.

Regardless, food is only one mechanism through which populations are supported. You are discounting the importance of dysgenics (genetic decline), which will adversely affect society's capacity to innovate and even maintain our current infrastructure.
 
Last edited:
  • +1
Reactions: saiya_online
AI throws a wrench in this this is shit that’s gonna happen a couple hundred years into the future by then the singularity will be in full swing
 
AI throws a wrench in this this is shit that’s gonna happen a couple hundred years into the future by then the singularity will be in full swing
The argument is that technological augmentation/AI/polygenic risk scoring/CRISPR is a race against time: a race against dysgenics or the point at which society cannot innovate, or where the Malthusian collapse is inevitable and unavoidable. Those in power seek to "insulate" themselves from the impending collapse through reorganizing society and concentrating power in the executive, more so than ever before, evidenced through the Agenda 2030 campaign, social credit scores, carbon credit scores, digital IDs and central bank digital currencies.
 
Last edited:
The argument is that technological augmentation/AI/polygenic risk scoring/CRISPR is a race against time: a race against dysgenics or the point at which society cannot innovate, or where the Malthusian collapse is inevitable and unavoidable.
Eveloution takes time a long time the time the selection process became shit was I’d say round 1950 that’s just a. Few decades will take a few hundred years for the collapse and tech is advancing a blinding rate
 
this is all known. ai will only take a diarrhea in the cogs of the machinery and lubricate the process
 
Eveloution takes time a long time
The articles I evidence, including the GWAS or genome wide association studies evidence a noted decline in frequencies of genes associated with intelligence/positive life outcomes. This and many other studies seem to suggest that IQ will be are 80 by the early 2100s, at which point society will devolve at a rapid pace (as 80 is around the minimum threshold that someone can materially contribute to society.

More broadly, you only need to look at the rapid decline of South Africa, Pakistan and different Middle Eastern countries to understand how quickly societies can devolve, due to harsh external and internal factors.

tech is advancing a blinding rate
This is manifestly wrong. Per capita innovation and genius peaked in the late 1800s. See any of Dutton's or Lynns works I advised above.
 
Last edited:
  • +1
Reactions: EverythingMattersCel and looksmaxxed
love seeing the .org brain trust at work. How's the padded cell btw?
 
>Emotions are about sending signals to maximise the likelihood of you behaving in a way that is consistent with preserving the cycles of life.
>And that's why I choose to chill 24/7 and have fun and stuff
How can you reconcile these two comments?
If you "chill 24/7" and "have fun and stuff" are you not blunting your emotions, which you argue are "consistent with preserving the cycles of life". To reconcile your first comment you would need to make the second comment the opposite: do the opposite of "chilling" and "having fun", rather do whatever needs to be to, as you say "survive and reproduce".
Or am I misinterpreting what you are saying?
Sexual identities are exclusionary by defintion. Here's an example: when you say that you're "heterosexual", what you really mean is that you hate gay men and gay women and gay non-binaries and would never consider them as romantic partners. Similarly, if you're "homosexual" you hate all straight people because you're excluding them without even meeting and getting to know them. WTF, that is fucked up!

Any "sexual identity" that you have is basically just a list of all the types of people you hate so much you would never consider having romantic relations with them under any circumstances. it's literally bullying and im surprised there aren't more people who are as mentally distressed by this as I am.

I thought we were supposed to be about inclusivity and peace. yet here we are creating imaginary divisions between ourselves and excluding people we never even met. I feel very hurt and betrayed rn, wtf. if you have a sexual identity you need to stop ASAP because you are literally promoting bullying and causing mental health issues.
 
love seeing the .org brain trust at work. How's the padded cell btw?
You cast baseless insults, instead of offering any counter-argument at all.
 
"heterosexual", what you really mean is that you hate gay men and gay women and gay non-binaries and would never consider them as romantic partners. Similarly, if you're "homosexual" you hate all straight people because you're excluding them without even meeting and getting to know them. WTF, that is fucked up!

Any "sexual identity" that you have is basically just a list of all the types of people you hate so much you would never consider having romantic relations with them under any circumstances. it's literally bullying and im surprised there aren't more people who are as mentally distressed by this as I am.

I thought we were supposed to be about inclusivity and peace. yet here we are creating imaginary divisions between ourselves and excluding people we never even met. I feel very hurt and betrayed rn, wtf. if you have a sexual identity you need to stop ASAP because you are literally promoting bullying and causing mental health issues.
I think you are completely wrong about this. I found out that a close friend is a homosexual and I consider him a trustworthy and honest friend. I also, don't think that I am an anomaly. There are plenty of hetero and homo platonic relationships across Western societies. As a result, I don't understand how you could have the perspective that you have? Maybe you don't live in a Western society? You need to maybe whirl less in your own misconceptions, perhaps study advanced mathematics and maybe got to university/join university clubs to socially interact with people irl. Getting out in nature and going for walks also helps mental health.

I thought we were supposed to be about inclusivity and peace
yet here we are creating imaginary divisions between ourselves and excluding people we never even met. I feel very hurt and betrayed rn, wtf. if you have a sexual identity you need to stop ASAP because you are literally promoting bullying and causing mental health issues.
I don't understand how this relates to a Malthusian collapse or dysgenics from a macro (not micro perspective). Intelligence and health is in genetic decline, according to genome wide association studies, which will cause a population collapse, and decline of civil society, which was the point in my original post. I am confused by your posts tbh.
 
Last edited:
  • +1
Reactions: saiya_online and Deleted member 28691
You cast baseless insults, instead of offering any counter-argument at all.
Didn't even read your thread but population growth has significantly declined and will likely peak mid century plus Malthusians have made a compulsive habit of being wrong for centuries so cope. You're not smart you're just rambling on some gay internet aesthetics forum
 
Didn't even read your thread but population growth has significantly declined and will likely peak mid century plus Malthusians have made a compulsive habit of being wrong for centuries so cope. You're not smart you're just rambling on some gay internet aesthetics forum
Didn't even read your thread
LOL
population growth has significantly declined and will likely peak mid century plus Malthusians
You agree with the overall contention of the post.
Malthusians have made a compulsive habit of being wrong for centuries so cope.
>he espouses Malthusianism and then proceeds to say it is generally incorrectly applied.
In other words, you are saying that if a theory is wrong during a specific point in time, it must be wrong again at a later date, especially after the surrounding factors have materially changed (population has x10 since Malthus' time). This is a grave misconception. I think you underestimate the likelihood of declining excess production, which will likely result in shutting off aid to Africa or the Middle East, and in addition to all the other genetic and social factors I have listed, will likely cause an inevitable Malthusian collapse across the entire world.

You're not smart you're just rambling on some gay internet aesthetics forum
This is a pathetic post, given the above, and if you deny that you are dishonest. You insult but offer little substantiation. Very easy and pathetic thing to do.
Based off your post, you "are not smart", as your pathetic quip is an insult to your own intelligence, if you even have any at all - but I'll try not to judge your intellectual capacity off 1 single post.
I post here because its one of the few forums which supports free speech.
 
Last edited:
I think you are completely wrong about this. I found out that a close friend is a homosexual and I consider him a trustworthy and honest friend. I also, don't think that I am an anomaly. There are plenty of hetero and homo platonic relationships across Western societies. As a result, I don't understand how you could have the perspective that you have? Maybe you don't live in a Western society? You need to maybe whirl less in your own misconceptions, perhaps study advanced mathematics and maybe got to university/join university clubs to socially interact with people irl. Getting out in nature and going for walks also helps mental health.



I don't understand how this relates to a Malthusian collapse or dysgenics from a macro (not micro perspective). Intelligence and health is in genetic decline, according to genome wide association studies, which will cause a population collapse, and decline of civil society, which was the point in my original post. I am confused by your posts tbh.
this is why lookism was much better. users would discuss novel concepts and ideas emanating from all aspects of life, along with some meta shitposting.

in contrast this site is always filled with the same generic normie trash about online dating, clubbing, alcohol, anxiety, etc. it's just the same shit on loop. muh tinder muh bumble muh virginity muh tranny muh inhibitions muh cry me a fucking river already, no one cares
 
Last edited:
  • +1
  • Hmm...
Reactions: Deleted member 20376, looksmaxxed, SubSigma and 1 other person
this is why lookism was much better. users would discuss novel concepts and ideas emanating from all aspects of life, along with some meta shitposting.

in contrast this site is always filled with the same generic normie trash about online dating, clubbing, alcohol, anxiety, etc. it's just the same shit on loop. muh tinder muh bumble muh virginity muh tranny muh inhibitions muh cry me a fucking river already, no one cares
Yes I agree, the level of discussion on looksmax seems to be inferior to lookism. Users here also seem to have less attention span compared to the heyday of lookism.
I think it is also evidenced by the user above you, who casted baseless, unsubstantiated aspersions, and then leaves.
I appreciate your comments, even if i don't understand it initially, a lot more than the retards giving 1 line ad hominem attacks.
 
  • +1
Reactions: JackTheKnife
I appreciate your comments, even if i don't understand it initially, a lot more than the retards giving 1 line ad hominem attacks.
The fact that the bastard, is simply just an actor, Who mastered the bang and the slang and the mental, of niggas in Compton, Watts, and South Centra
 
  • Woah
Reactions: sub6manletnozygos
The fact that the bastard, is simply just an actor, Who mastered the bang and the slang and the mental, of niggas in Compton, Watts, and South Centra
Now all of a sudden dr dre is a g thing but on his own album covers he was a she thing
 
  • Ugh..
  • JFL
Reactions: Crusile and SubSigma
Bro stfu before I smash your head
IMG 8828
 
What does this mean?
It encapsulates the struggle between 2 warring factions. One being a a minor drug lord using his resources to build an empire, and another being born as a technical genius using his technical skill to assemble his own empire.
 
  • Woah
Reactions: sub6manletnozygos
You need to read Critique of Pure Reason to get it
I don't have much patience for for the over categorization so often plaguing philosophy.
Maybe I am just a nitwit filtered by Kant's doctrine of methods, his transcendental analytical and dialectical strategies for compartmentalizing the human experience. All I can remember of it is his distinction between knowledge experienced and not experienced, and that a proposition may be a priori if it is a universal, paramount and necessary to ones existence or humanity. Maybe I read it when I was too young and I should give it another go.

I prefer to be a pseud and read Dutton, so I can theorize about humanity's impending Malthusian collapse. It is also more exciting and gives me more dopamine, because the effects of the theory being right are more real and observable (declining expression, lowering iqs, increasing all cause mortality, and civil unrest, as those in control seek to insulate themselves from these realities by implementing increasingly authoritarian policy).
 
Last edited:
  • +1
Reactions: saiya_online, looksmaxxed and JackTheKnife
GWAS or genome wide association studies evidence frequencies of genes associated with intelligencem decreasing generationally among native populations:
How can there be genes for "intelligence", if IQ tests arent a measure of intelligence? How can you tell if a gene effects intelligence? literally impossible
 
How can there be genes for "intelligence", if IQ tests arent a measure of intelligence? How can you tell if a gene effects intelligence? literally impossible
EtJ_Vm-VcAAZlN4.jpg
 
this is why lookism was much better. users would discuss novel concepts and ideas emanating from all aspects of life, along with some meta shitposting.

in contrast this site is always filled with the same generic normie trash about online dating, clubbing, alcohol, anxiety, etc. it's just the same shit on loop. muh tinder muh bumble muh virginity muh tranny muh inhibitions muh cry me a fucking river already, no one cares
muh lookism, stfu
 
muh lookism, stfu
I didn't learn shit from you, retard. I was into the idea iq was fake long ago back in lookism times

I just enjoy debating and opposing the ideas of others
 
I didn't learn shit from you, retard. I was into the idea iq was fake long ago back in lookism times

I just enjoy debating and opposing the ideas of others
muh lookism times, everyones mirin your experience of random unknown forum -_-
 
muh before lookism times, everyones mirin your experience of random unknown forum -_-
This is a general pattern I've noticed. It's always low iq people that are gigacynical doomers with zero trust in anyone

Smart people tend to appreciate things for what they are and strive for improvement
 
  • +1
Reactions: thereallegend and sub6manletnozygos
How can there be genes for "intelligence", if IQ tests arent a measure of intelligence? How can you tell if a gene effects intelligence? literally impossible
The frequency of certain genes described here, are decreasing. Further, the multitude of correlates for intelligence are declining.
IQ tests don't wholly measure intellectual capacity, but they are a good indicator that may indicate life outcomes, in certain circumstances.

This study argues that IQ is not necessarily a better indicator than grades (created by will, environment etc)

These studies are interesting which discuss some of the limitations of iq tests.
scirp.org/journal/paperinformation.aspx?paperid=74943


How can you tell if a gene effects intelligence? literally impossible
No its not. That is the point of GWAS. You can survey genes and then compare to life outcomes.
Yet, many of these studies did not conclusively identify any genes that have major effects on intelligence. But that doesn't mean there aren't correlations. The counter-argument goes that given the number of genes involved, it can only be determined that each individual makes a small, but perhaps varying contribution to a person's intelligence.

Those aren't even extremely well funded and persuasive studies or "pinnacle" well regarded studies, just random stuff I find (I like to search unorthodox studies, departments or universities that may be more open to different perspectives).
I get overwhelmed by all the studies. I wish I had photographic memory and instant memory recall so I work quicker and more effectively.
 
Last edited:
The frequency of certain genes described here, are decreasing. Further, the multitude of correlates for intelligence are declining.
IQ tests don't wholly measure intellectual capacity, but they are a good indicator that may indicate life outcomes, in certain circumstances.

This study argues that IQ is not necessarily a better indicator than grades (created by will, environment etc)

These studies are interesting which discuss some of the limitations of iq tests.
scirp.org/journal/paperinformation.aspx?paperid=74943


No its not. That is the point of GWAS. You can survey genes and then compare to life outcomes.
Yet, many of these studies did not conclusively identify any genes that have major effects on intelligence. But that doesn't mean there aren't correlations. The counter-argument goes that given the number of genes involved, they only make a small contribution to a person's intelligence, individually.
Yet, many of these studies did not conclusively identify any genes that have major effects on intelligence. But that doesn't mean there aren't correlations. The counter-argument goes that given the number of genes involved, they only make a small contribution to a person's intelligence, individually.
Why wouldnt rare variants follow the trend of snps getting owned/deconfounded in within-family studies? lol at beliving in magically mystery genes that can never be proven causal or even found/discovered.

WHoeGR2.png
 
"Our concern is about where all this will lead. Behavior is influenced by genotype and environment. The environment provided by a parent is influenced by the parent's (not to mention the child's) genotype, and the parent's rearing environment, which had its own tangle of reciprocal genetic and environmental influences. Everything is intercorrelated; every-thing interacts. Where does this leave the columns of "model-fitting heritabilities," meticulously computed to two decimal places and starred for statistical significance on the basis of path models that cannot hope to keep pace with reciprocal causal structures described in the target article?
 
This is a general pattern I've noticed. It's always low iq people that are gigacynical doomers with zero trust in anyone

Smart people tend to appreciate things for what they are and strive for improvement
Wtf youre copy/pasting comments. extremely funny indeed -_- I am laughing
 
I thought I completely owned you, but then I didnt. Idk what to say, you got me
Crusile - annihilated
@rl⠀ - annihilated

Final boss @mogger123 is next. I should read a couple of books and have a couple of trips before attempting.
 
Can people stop randomly tagging me in their threads to validate their ramblings?

Thanks

P.S. stoped reading when you referenced Lynn

P.P.S. lol at completely butchering the works of the likes of Malthus and Pareto to rationalize incel suffering

Still, a thread 500 times more worthy of reading than 99% of content on this site

Glad I started a revolution
 
Last edited:
Can people stop randomly tagging me in their threads to validate their ramblings?

Thanks
I thought you liked the attention, don't you dedicate threads for it? :feelshah:
 
  • Love it
Reactions: rl⠀
I thought you liked the attention, don't you dedicate threads for it? :feelshah:

This is more like randoms begging for my attention to help their threads succeed, not a genuine one

I just woke up anyway, i'll check it later when i find the time and see if i have something constructive to add
 
This is more like randoms begging for my attention to help their threads succeed, not a genuine one

I just woke up anyway, i'll check it later when i find the time and see if i have something constructive to add
Do you view Will Hunting as William James Sidis?
 
Oh no! Some shit is going to happen when I no longer exist.
 
Why wouldnt rare variants follow the trend of snps getting owned/deconfounded in within-family studies? lol at beliving in magically mystery genes that can never be proven causal or even found/discovered.

WHoeGR2.png
One marker is not sufficient to prove or disprove the overall contention that genetics are associated with intelligence, especially when the presence of certain genes are being found with less frequency or speculated as activating at different times, in certain populations, with better or worse life outcomes. Small genetic effects at different developmental stages may have large consequences on mental function. I guess this points against both of our conflicting contentions, as it obviously makes specific calculation very difficult, given current technology.

They are not mystery genes. They are particular genes such as the 22 genes accounting for about 5% of the differences in intelligence scores.

While this does not seem like much, as genome sequencing and databases improve further associations will be found.
This is not because there is no correlation but because intelligence is a highly polygenic trait, necessitating much larger sample sizes to reliably identify contributing genes. Most of the GWAS I mentioned have ~70k sizes. Eventually there will be 1+ billion plus sample sized studies to calculate the reliability.

Also, SNP heritability reported in recent GWAS has ranged between >50% to 20%.

Finally, and MOST pressingly, the association is very persuasive given the adulthood heritability of IQ as being around 0.8. I genuinely don't understand your contention given this statistic, unless you can explain why the calculation is wrong.
 
Oh no! Some shit is going to happen when I no longer exist.
Socially we are already experiencing the effects. All cause mortality is up between 5-30% across the Western world according to a number of sources such as

As the world moves towards Agenda 2030 to insulate those in power from social and civil unrest caused by dysgenics, the effects will be undeniable especially if western society marches towards social credit scores, carbon footprints, digital IDs, central bank digital currencies.

Eventually if dysgenics gets so bad (~80 average iq across western world) these insulative, totalitarian measures won't be enough to prevent civil unrest, which could potentially lead to the balkanization of Western society, and from this, the creation of haven Byzantine states, across the East and West, that will act as a brain drain for the rest of the world and accelerate the decline of all other states.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Nazi Germany
Replies
32
Views
1K
(In)CelibatePsycho2
I
proibitio
Replies
44
Views
1K
bennyben23
B
heightmaxxing
Replies
56
Views
5K
lurking truecel
L
D
Replies
2
Views
513
Milosz
Milosz

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top