Ethnics/Brown People Haven't Really Contributed Much to Humanity - Giga [Racepill] - *Eugenicsmaxxing* {Mass Sterilizations}

[chaddyboi66]

The White and Yellow man have propelled mankind forward, while the other races [Ethnics] seem to just leech off them and their technology.

I say this as someone who's half "ethnic" himself, though that itself shouldn't even matter in the first place if what I'm saying is true.

I don't necessarily say this out of genuine malice or even outright hatred for them; it's just a fact of human history.

Aside from maybe a few outliers here and there I just don't see what they've really done.


This is a continuation of:

The More I Look at Low IQ People the more I Despise them - How will Humanity Ever Reach Greatness?

Ethnics and/or [really just] the low IQ in general don't belong in regions of homogeneous, non-temperamental, high trust, and high IQ people as they'll inevitably just ruin these places like they always do. I say this as someone who's half "ethnic" himself. Though I mention "ethnic" here and...

looksmax.org

Ethnics...

...and/or [really just] the low IQ in general don't belong in regions of homogeneous, non-temperamental, high trust, and high IQ people as they'll inevitably just ruin these places like they always do.

I say this as someone who's half "ethnic" himself.

Spoiler

I'm half Iranic [as in Persian + Dardic; yes, I consider Dardics Iranic-adjacent] and half White [Euro]

Though I mention "ethnic" here and there this really isn't just about the "ethnics" or necessarily even race, but rather the predictor/greatest determining factor of genetic potential on a more fundamental and individual level...

IQ

Imagine if all the stupid [low IQ], temperamental [volatile/primitive], and criminal [low trust] people in the world were segregated off into some shithole of their own making where they belong [Australia experiment 2.0].

They'd never amount to anything or bother anyone else ever again as they'd be too busy sabotaging each other's success, and the world would only be left with the best Humanity has to offer.

The brightest, most capable, and good-natured people all left to usher Humanity into its next first true golden age.


I support eugenics on a mass scale for all of Humanity via the sterilization of those with an IQ of under 110, and/or of those who prove themselves unworthy of spreading their genes.

Worthiness is based on either potential genetic contributions to the next generation's gene pool [IQ], or contributions to the advancement of Human civilization through pure merit. That way worthiness to breed will not be based on just race and/or genetic potential, as that alone isn't enough to prove oneself capable of greatness [be it in blood and/or achievement].


Sterilization combined with the segregation of Humanity's worst from its best will ensure the next generation is born with the capability to do what Humanity was meant to: Transcend.

Before any of you say something like muh "but Jfl who cares about IQ bro only and good looking people should breed"

Keep in mind those with a high IQ are already aware of this and would probably be the first to suggest it in the next generation.

A generation of high IQ people would be more open to these ideas than the current more feeble minded sheeple who can't so much as bother to even use their heads instead of regurgitating single dimensional pathos based buzzword ridden arguments that aren't their own let alone just think ahead or of the bigger picture.

In Humanity's past it was the White and Yellow man who furthered its advancement, though admittedly there were a few exceptions in between [ancient Egyptian Hamites, non-Semitic Sumerians, Semitic Akkadians, Persians etc.]

However, the achievements of these great people(s) would be leeched off of and given to the savage hordes not yet ready for such power.

The ethnic hordes were able to appeal to these great people(s) greed and trick them into giving away their technology/knowledge for trade of commodities such as gold and spice; the latter being no more than a worthless poison.

Eugenics is Good for Humanity

It only gets a bad rap because of typical one dimensional normie tier arguements that always fall back on... muh "bu- but 20th century scientific racism n shit bro" :feelswah: or muh "but like how are you even going to do that bro?" :feelsuhh: and of course muh "but that's like genocide bro!"...

looksmax.org

It only gets a bad rap because...

...of typical one dimensional normie tier arguements that always fall back on...

muh "bu- but 20th century scientific racism n shit bro"

or muh "but like how are you even going to do that bro?"

and of course muh "but that's like genocide bro!"

---

First, regarding a few misconceptions...

Eugenics doesn't necessarily entail genocide and can be brought about within a generation or two though simple sterilization.

However, eugenics shouldn't be based on trying to "remove a race from a gene pool" but rather just individual low quality genetic traits themselves; that is why selective preference should ultimately be based on traits that actually matter for a high functioning society instead like IQ.


"Modern" eugenic approaches already familiar to most people include genetic screening for inheritable diseases, and/or even just the heavy bias and selectivity in donors for sperm banks.

Society also already does this on a basic level anyway through birth control measures like contraception, though it's only under the guise of curbing the apparent "overpopulation" problem.


There is absolutely no reason why "everyone" should be encouraged to breed when some people's genes end passing undesirable traits into the gene pool.

This is especially true when said genes are spread to their children and result in some severe disease or deformity for the child.


Take for example "parents" who willingly choose to breed knowing full well that they'll only be condemning their child to a life of suffering due to some highly inheritable genetic disorder.

Such petty selfishness should not only be prevented from ever happening in the first place, but also punished and subject to compensatory damages on behalf of their child.

---

Second, why even bother with eugenics?


Eugenics ultimately comes from a place of good and doesn't have to be seen in such a negative light due to the ignorance of the masses.


I only ask you but to close your eyes and simply imagine a world where Humanity's brightest, most capable, and well-natured people are all able to thrive in a society composed of others just like them.


This dream can be more than just fantasy and ultimately realized through eugenics, as it's only by enabling the best of Humanity to flourish that our species can finally be ushered into its first true golden age.

Everyone with an IQ Under 110 Should be Sterilized

It'd be for the benefit of Humanity. East Asians are incredibly smart as a whole due to having a large amount of people with an IQ of over 120-130; this larger number of high IQ people is easy to find in a population when your average IQ is around 110. Pushing the average IQ of the global...

looksmax.org

It'd be for the benefit of Humanity.

East Asians are incredibly smart as a whole due to having a large amount of people with an IQ of over 120-130; this larger number of high IQ people is easy to find in a population when your average IQ is around 110.

Pushing the average IQ of the global population to above the same figure [110] would also lead to an increase in the amount of very high [120-130] IQ people within a generation or two, as the only people who will breed are those passing on the genes for high intelligence.

The next generation's society would look so much better being full of so many smart people.


FQ&A and Rebuttals:

 

[n9wiff]

I'm Brahmin don't lump me in with other shitskins

 

[chaddyboi66]

FQ&A and Rebuttals:

I just believe everyone should have the right to produce offspring, regardless of their IQ, race etc.

Would you also say that right also applies to parents who willingly choose to have children all the while knowing that said child will be burdened with some genetic deformity?

There is no obligation for anyone to produce let alone those who will only burden society as a whole with a low IQ and the genes to spread it.

---

it is far better to have more low iq people, so you can easily outperform,

Putting aside the fact that you already think so low enough of them as to reduce them to being no more than a self-congratulatory trophy for yourself...

...They serve no benefit to society and having them around only to "outperform" them serves no purpose in and of itself other than to just pat yourself on the back for not being stupid [like them].

The only argument I could ever see you making like this is for the low IQ to somehow do menial jobs, but even then you're only using them just to simply 'have them around' in the first place; it's pointless

This type of thinking only leads to laziness, which itself brings complacency and ultimately stagnation for a society's advancement.

This is how you ensure a society never amounts to greatness.

bro you post on looksmax about sterilizing people , what greatness are you talking about

I see you didn't read past the title when you made your first post and only just now bothered reading the rest.

Sterilization of the low IQ will leave society with only the brightest, most capable, and well-natured people Humanity has to offer.

This will then enable them to flourish and thrive in a society composed of other intelligent people just like them.

The "greatness" I refer to is how a society advances both scientifically and technologically [I say both because they go hand in hand] which comes from high IQ people pioneering it.

---

as someone who is 109 iq i feel like a detriment to society, it would be better for me to marry a down syndrome autist, at least then i would have my iq match.

You shouldn't feel as bad tbh since there are plenty of others far below you, and you probably have the potential to contribute more than they ever will.

However, even with that said you still shouldn't procreate as doing so runs the risk of spreading you genetics, which in turn may cause your descendants in the next generation to also be low IQ.

---

Nope. More like uncivilized people who cannot adapt to modern society and mindless consumers who should be.

Sure, temperament is also important to a society as is critical thinking which itself ties into IQ.

IQ does not mean sane.

IQ means intelligence; that affects how well a person is able to learn.

Many low IQ but sane people and many high iq but insane people.

Anecdotes aside being "sane" isn't inherently tied to being high or low IQ, and whether a low IQ person is "sane" doesn't matter when they're only able contribute very little to civilization's advancement if any at all even.

"Sanity" has very little to do with that.

Sure, temperament is also important to a society as is critical thinking which itself ties into IQ.

Yep but hard working ppl like my parents would be punished. If they have to be "sterilized" for betterment of society. Not every high iq person is cold and willing to sacrifice everything for "society". ...

By "sterilization" I only mean birth control [as in a vasectomy or tubal ligation/salpingectomy] for the next generation of breedable aged people with an IQ of under 110.

I'm not referring to the euthanizing or removal of any people from society at all in case that wasn't already clear enough.

Your parents would already be too old and wouldn't qualify, but even if they were [and did qualify] they'd only be prevented from having children.

It's not "cold-hearted" so much as it is simply pragmatic and ultimately coming from a place of good.

... Maybe if you said high iq ppl are able to keep their "low iq" family members, then sure.

What I offer here is similar in that your family members will be exempt from whatever you think is going to happen to them simply because they're either too old to breed and/or just prevented from having children if they're low IQ.

I haven't referred to the euthanasia of low IQ people in anything I've said.

IQ means intelligence; that affects how well a person is able to learn.

IQ alone means problem solving and pattern recognition which is part of intelligence. ...

IQ involves a lot more than just that.

The reason why it's such a good indicator of someone's intelligence is simply due to being so well rounded in its approach...

First and most important of all perhaps- critical thinking and reasoning ability are both directly accounted for when measuring IQ. These two are probably the best overall measure of one's intelligence.

IQ also involves verbal fluency which itself is an indicator of your communication skills and ability to articulate complex concepts.

Yes, it also involves basic math abilities which itself does play a role in your analytical, reasoning, pattern recognition, and predictive abilities like you mentioned.

Not to mention, it also measures basic memory and visual-spatial processing speed(s) as well which measure your brains "raw power" so to speak, which is important as it's the foundation for how you both retain and recall information. I don't think I need to mention how having a poor memory would be detrimental to one's overall abilities.

IQ is everything.

... There can be low iq creative ppl.

Look, I get where you're coming from, and I also don't deny that [there are creative low IQ people too], but IQ itself is directly related to creativity.

Anecdotes aside being "sane" isn't inherently tied to being high or low IQ, and whether a low IQ person is "sane" doesn't matter when they're only able contribute very little to civilization's advancement if any at all even.

"Sanity" has very little to do with that.

Why not just kill humanity and replace it all with self learning AI machines?

1. I unironically can't even tell if you're only saying that because you genuinely think it fits into this conversation, or if you're just saying that to purposefully make me out to be some rambling "cold-hearted" technocratic/transhumanist psychopath.


2. Regardless, you sound like some normie complaining with another typical regurgitated strawman response of muh "but that's like eugenics n shit bro!" as if to try to say muh "bu- but like you want to genocide all the stupid people?!?!"


3. I never mentioned anything of the sort and you're going off on a very distant and unrelated topic.

In what way does that have anything to do with what I'm talking about?


4. That wouldn't even be Humanity anymore and I only seek to help our species become the best version of itself possible to achieve greatness.

By "sterilization" I only mean birth control [as in a vasectomy or tubal ligation/salpingectomy] for the next generation of breedable aged people with an IQ of under 110. I'm not referring to the euthanizing or removal of any people from society at all in case that wasn't already clear enough. Your parents would already be too old and wouldn't qualify, but even if they were [and did qualify] they'd only be prevented from having children. It's not "cold-hearted" so much as it is simply pragmatic and ultimately coming from a place of good.

Yep, then agreed.

I thought as much.

IQ involves a lot more than just that. ... IQ is everything.

That is different type of IQ.
[ATTACH=full]2549069[/ATTACH] ...

I'm aware of that.

I listed out multiple types in my reply to your post:

IQ involves a lot more than just that.

The reason why it's such a good indicator of someone's intelligence is simply due to being so well rounded in its approach...

First and most important of all perhaps- critical thinking and reasoning ability are both directly accounted for when measuring IQ. These two are probably the best overall measure of one's intelligence.

IQ also involves verbal fluency which itself is an indicator of your communication skills and ability to articulate complex concepts.

Yes, it also involves basic math abilities which itself does play a role in your analytical, reasoning, pattern recognition, and predictive abilities like you mentioned.

Not to mention, it also measures basic memory and visual-spatial processing speed(s) as well which measure your brains "raw power" so to speak, which is important as it's the foundation for how you both retain and recall information. I don't think I need to mention how having a poor memory would be detrimental to one's overall abilities.

IQ is everything.

You were the only one trying to reduce it to just two types [of IQ] in your post:

IQ alone means problem solving and pattern recognition which is part of intelligence. There can be low iq creative ppl.

Which means you're essentially restating my point [as your own].

...Are you saying 110+ on ALL?

That's how it's generally measured to begin with anyway: cumulatively.

So in a matter of speaking, yes; there wouldn't be much of a point if I wasn't.

I disagree that critical thinking is accounted for when measuring IQ.

Okay, disagree then cause...

1. It is [accounted for].

I know have seen way too many gooks (i live in east asia),

2. Anecdotal^

they are high IQ but definitely in learning capability n being able to copy. They lack critical thinking and creativity.

3. I get where you're coming from with this but your point is still rendered moot ['moot' in the US sense as opposed to the standard UK one, since this isn't really up for debate anymore] when considering how applying learned information in-field directly draws upon one's critical thinking ability; also, again anecdotal.

Same with verbal IQ.

4. Speaking thereof...

No offence, but would this be an example of said high verbal IQ: ??

Its mostly low IQ ppl i have seen that have v v good verbal iq.

5.
>Low IQ
>High Verbal IQ

Pick one.

There are cases of high iq ppl with high verbal iq but this has not been the norm in my experience. I know many intelligent ppl but their verbal iq is low but they are deffo high iq because of things they can fix/learn fast/have good thought process, just not v good at presenting it.

6. anecdotes. me

I never mentioned anything of the sort and you're going off on a very distant and unrelated topic. In what way does that have anything to do with what I'm talking about?

I thought u meant to kill off ppl under 110 but that has been cleared so np. I support eugenics, just not killing ppl. I have seen many hard working well-meaning ppl but they are not bright. That is why it triggered me because i thought u meant genocide. But you didn't so nvm the post.

Anyway, moving on...

---

IQ is not a fixed number. It can change throughout someone's life. Also, IQ can be affected by stuff like nutrition in the formative years, and pollution. For example, exposure to lead pollution has been proven to lower people's IQ. To really increase the intelligence of humanity, all these factors have to be taken into account.

Sure, IQ isn't necessarily completely "set in stone" but that "change" you refer to won't actually shift [or rather increase as you're suggesting] by that much.

All the factors you listed would be taken into account eventually, but I'm primarily referring to a population free of said factors [like the West or East Asia for example] as any difference in IQ would just be genetic.

---

I think its more like anyone under 90 IQ. Also IQ is only one metric there are plenty of people with low inhibition that are still not low IQ.

That would be a good start but I want the next generation to start off where East Asian countries already do by default. Think 100 million people where the lowest IQ among all of them would just be 110 and plenty would well past it.

It'd be like building a civilization and already starting out as smart as the Japanese/Koreans or something having intelligence maxxed out by default, but even the IQ of the least intelligent among the flock would never dip under 110 and everyone from simple labourers to businessmen would be intelligent.

IQ is probably the most important metric; "inhibition" matters very little compared to it as intelligence is what drives a society forward.

---

I think the issue isn't low IQ people its our current parastic elite. They would rather turn the world into a brown 80 IQ mess and rule over a broken destroyed people then have a decent society where their rule would be threatened.

A stupid society is easier to manipulate and control after all.

---

Imagine valuing iq to this extent

...

This is severe autism to link such meaningless cope to euthanizing humans

Valuing IQ to this extent is how you know the difference between "euthanasia" and 'sterilization'

Eu·tha·na·sia

---

The painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma. The practice is illegal in most countries.
"she wants the laws around euthanasia to be changed"

Ster·i·li·za·tion

---

Surgery to make a person or animal unable to produce offspring.
"she had three children and had undergone sterilization"

You should be the one killed for such a take

Careful; you [only] speak for yourself here.

You can't even tell who's more autistic for having such a shit take yourself...

Who will even do the low class jobs .

Jfl is that really all you value them for?

Imagine pretending to give [so little of] a shit about low IQ people that the best argument you can bother coming up with for why they ought to exist is just so they can clean the shit from your toilet.

Bruh this shit writes itself holy fuck.

Valuing IQ to this extent is how you know the difference between "euthanasia" and 'sterilization'

I thought its synonym

It isn't; you thought wrong.

Speak for yourself.

Im arguing for low iq people cuz iq doesnt matter unless youre mentally crippled

What exactly are you arguing for them?

I'm not necessarily arguing anything against them myself, only that they shouldn't be allowed to have children so that the next generation is high IQ.

Bruh this shit writes itself holy fuck.

The real word is too practical for this incel cope and mental masturbation

You only call it that simply because you lack the capability to properly grasp the concept yourself.

I'm arguing for a [we] should rather than a could [do this].

It's perfectly feasible the same way certain groups were able to increase their average height in the last century, especially if enough public support is garnered for it.

Bro wants a world full of high iq sigma entrepreneurs with bateman pfps

It's not Bateman.

---

no iq for ur face

Oh but there will be...

Cope short and ugly people should be gassed and exterminated instead

...
You need to think further ahead.

If the next generation was high IQ they'd figure that out themselves, but the current low IQ sheeple normie-pleb masses would never get on board with the sterilization/"etc..." of short and ugly people.

This idea should have enough support to get some normies on board first as it'd be for the net benefit of society, and it'd also ensure the next generation that comes as a result of it will be able to make it happen.

---

I believe the approach to eugenics should be far less confrontational when considering a very vast portion of the population. We should focus instead on developing crispr to the point where it’s cheap and accessible for people to have “designer” babies. Abortion will be made mandatory for congenital defects such as downs. Then we could potentially create incredible incentives for having kids, especially financial. At last after both of these conditions are met the third world and ethnic nations will be sterilized through secretive means which could be chalked up to pollution. At the end the most populated countries will be the white ones, beginning a new age where man will be thrust into the cosmos.

I like this approach and also thought about using gene editing myself, though I'd still caution against it until it's mostly safe for the population it'll be used on. I intend for the next generation of high IQ people to lead Humanity into prosperity and it's first true golden age, so there mustn't be any complications in regard to potential defects from procedure in order to ensure this.

Sterilization of the low IQ also wouldn't go unnoticed by the public [at least for long anyway]; that's why I planned on using an effective propaganda campaign centered around apologetics for positive eugenics in order to convince the public it was ultimately for the greater good.

Most support will probably stem from the desire to eradicate congenital defects, and of course to prevent suffering of the children born with horrible genetic conditions. We could also even throw in a few more [new] cases of children suing their parents for still choosing to procreate all the while knowing their child would probably end up being born with a severe heritable genetic disorder.

Once enough public support had been garnered we could then move on to the next stage, which would probably involve what you mentioned in that last part only this time the public would actively be in favour of it themselves.

I honestly don't think this is that unrealistic considering how easily so many were already on board with mandates during the pandemic. The elites can convince the feeble minded masses of almost anything so long as they're willing to throw enough [worthless fiat] money at trying to convince them, which they ultimately can considering how virtually all money comes from them.

Incentives for having more [high IQ] children would need to be state sponsored in high IQ nations currently experiencing population decline, and proper [or really just "regular"] birth control measures would need to be put in place for any low IQ nations that are breeding too much not that unlike what you said.
All in all though, I'd say both of our plans seem quite similar and could maybe actually work hand in hand behind the scenes.

Granted, most of this of course rely on the elites being okay with it, or at the very least not giving enough of a shit about it to get in the way.

---

All niggers would suffice

Bro I have an iq of 163 and I'm a math genius and know two programming languages what are you talking about niggas are not dumb were the same as whites it's just most of us don't get proper nutrition

Sure, "bro"

You do know by using yourself as an [anecdotal] example he can always just say you're cherrypickinig right?

He'll then probably bring up studies testing for the difference in IQ between whites and blacks, and then two of you will go back and forth over whether education and/or other environmental factors play into the discrepancy.

From there debate will shift toward using studies specifically looking for how educated blacks perform vs uneducated whites and vice versa, and then you both will probably continue scouring research databases for studies proving both your respective points again etc. etc...

I've seen this same debate go down this very same path over and over again more times than I bother to remember counting at this point, so at least make it interesting once he sees your reply and you both finally go at it.

I know and predicted it would go down that path

Sure you did,

"bro".

A bunch of midwits won't solve anything. Plus, 110 isn't that high. There's a negligible difference between 100 and 110. You couldn't even notice it during a conversation, for example. There's also something called regression to the mean. Each generation tends to resemble the previous ones. That's why genius people have children that are slightly above the average but below their parents in IQ. So generation after generation IQ would decrease until it reached that of the average (100).

Make no mistake I have no regard for people with an IQ of 100 any more or less than I do of anyone else below them.

I seek to set the new baseline minimum for IQ to start at 110, and the only purpose of this is to "wipe the slate clean" so to speak. This means there won't be anyone with an IQ below this point to bring down the IQ of children born in the next generation.

This alone would be good enough as it removes most of the troublesome parts of Humanity [sub 110 IQ "people"] from its gene pool that only tend to bring down the rest. That said, by no means do I intend to stop there at all.

Assuming potential parents aren't forced to only pair up with partners of a roughly equal IQ [at least not yet anyway], at most this regression in IQ would only fall back to the new minimum set of the population all partners are now selected from [110]. This is of course is only assuming if IQs tend to continue regressing uninterrupted as you suggest, or if a higher IQ parent [above 110] pairs up with a partner that has an IQ beneath them [at 110 minimum]. Even with that said it isn't a given in and of itself, and not all children of high IQ parents will have an IQ lower than them.

However, with enough breeding of the initial "pure" minimum 110 IQ generation a sizable amount of higher IQ individuals [above 110] can be born for the next generation. Thus the 110 IQ midwits will become the new "low IQ" populace of this generation.

From there the remaining higher IQ populace [above 110] will repeat the process in the next generation with a new baseline being set at 10 points higher [120] from the last. Rinse and repeat [at least until this can be done with gene editing assuming it proves viable].

The initial process of setting a baseline at 110 is only meant to eradicate IQs beneath 110 from the Human race. This way the minimum IQ can continue to be pushed further without interruption from IQs beneath the baseline of the last generation before it.

There's more to life than IQ, by the way.

IQ is everything.

The people who deny the validity of IQ are (SURPRISE) within the same 110-130 range you mentioned. These are the midwits ruining everything. We don't need more of them.

View attachment 2549403

View attachment 2549404



This is you, OP.

I'd rather have a society of 110-130 midwits than one of sub 110 ethnics/retards, though I'll admit it'd be a difficult choice if said midwits were all normies.

Midwit [110-130] normies denying the validity of IQ has no bearing on other people of the same IQ.

It makes no difference if the ones complaining about muh "IQ bad tho" are midwit normies with 110-130 IQs or even Africans/ethnics with IQs below 85; neither's ignorance is reflected onto anyone else but themselves.

Regardless, what you're describing really just sounds like normie problem more than anything else.

Well put, not gonna lie. How are we going to do this?

Still working on it but what I was discussing with @ ... seemed like a decent place to start.


I'll get back to you after I've finished my snus and am done masturbating though [no porn since NNN 2021 tho Srs]


Also...

What anime is this from?

---

hope your puzzle solving skills helps you to stop getting cucked by other men

Take off your headphones and you'll probably stop @hearing [the schizo] voices.

Puzzle solved.

---

Bro I have an iq of 163 and I'm a math genius and know two programming languages what are you talking about niggas are not dumb were the same as whites it's just most of us don't get proper nutrition

I can assure you, niggers are very dumb.
[ATTACH=full]2554023[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]2554026[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]2554031[/ATTACH][ATTACH=full]2554032[/ATTACH]

---

Under 100 would be more reasonable a very large chunk of the population falls under 110 something like 70 percent would be absurd

We could maybe do it in two phases.

Initial phase 1 will sterilize those with an IQ under 100 getting rid of the bulk low IQ, and phase 2 will get rid of remaining the midwits under 110 in the next generation.

The remaining populace with the genes for IQs at 110 will breed as will the overall population of people born with IQs well above 110 in the next generation.

Would still devestate the human population and I don’t think selecting for only a singular trait is a good thing at all letting Eugene breed because he has muh iq over let’s say john passing on his autism genes

In initial numbers sure perhaps, but my intent is that the remaining population [with the genes for an IQ at or above 110] would be heavily incentivized to repopulate.

However, the true goal of this endeavour is simply meant to ensure the genes for low IQ are removed from the rest of the gene pool so that next generation can start off from a "clean slate" baseline of at least 110.

The risk of muh "high IQ = autism" is severely overstated, and I think the number associated with that risk is only 25-30% if I'm not mistaken, not to mention it's typically associated with people that have very high IQs [140+ IQ] which well above 110 IQ threshold I'm initially aiming for.

We can consider selecting for other traits such as good mental/physical health, height, looks, etc. once [as in only after] this next generation of high IQ people are born first.

I only say this [implementing the idea after the next generation of high IQ people are born first] because they'd probably be more inclined to agree with such an idea due to their higher IQs, which would drive them to think further ahead and/or really just more with their heads in general.

The current generation(s) of feeble minded lower IQ sheeple would only look at such ideas from a more basic [primitive] emotional perspective only to reject them on their face out of ignorance and fear like they already [and always] do, and this probably no more apparent than with how already vehemently normies reject the notion of "looks mattering" in any way in its entirety.

We can consider selecting for other traits such as good mental/physical health, height, looks, etc. once [as in only after] this next generation of high IQ people are born first.

This is also without even considering the idea of applying some form of gene editing first, as I'm only referring to regular selective breeding.

Gene editing technology could be used in later generations once we can ensure it's completely safe to implement.

---

I voted no because it’d drastically change the world’s distribution of ethnicities and thus looks.

Ethnicities have different IQ distributions, so setting a cutoff at 110 would make the world population substantially more Asian-dominated. The average maxilla would be flatter as a result of this. The average penis size would be smaller.

I think your IQ eugenic plan would be a good idea if every ethnicity has the same IQs. Then humanity would get more intelligent without looks going down the drain.

Tough choice ngl

My hope is that the generation of high IQ people would be both blackpilled enough about the importance of looks, and skilled enough to be able to improve said through medicine or tech.

Current generations full of feeble minded low IQ sheeple would never jump on board with any blackpilled ideas related to looks, since they'd buy into and/or virtue signal for the idea of "looks not mattering". They'd only see it from a more basic emotional perspective and immediately reject the idea on its face because they're afraid of it.

---

Hmm, so eliminate anyone with an IQ below 110... 76% of the human population is now gone. Now, 76% of those who remain are below the threshold, since the bell curve adjusted. Rinse and then repeat the process until there is only 1 human left. Then leave them to die, and with them the last of this monkey society.

I'm on board with this

No, I said sterilize not euthanize we're not "eliminating" anyone.

The population would be replenished from the remainder of the previous generation(s) each time the process is repeated.

I appreciate the sentiment though,

and your enthusiasm.

It's almost reminiscent of this...

"I'm in."

---

Cope high IQs are social retards
Maybe if you want to depopulate the planet hahaha can’t even talk to the opposite sex lmfao

Cope? Speak for yourself cause that's a pretty broad generalization. The risk of muh "high IQ = aspie" is typically only associated with very high IQ people [140 IQ and above].

The population will be replenished in the next generation with the remainder of what's left from the previous one.

We're only getting rid of the low IQ in the next generation.

High IQs have zero utility , who’s gonna build the roads buildings and infrastructure

It affects almost every aspect of your life and determines how successful you'll probably be in said life.

Normies are ultimately left forgotten by the rest of the world and history because they never really amount to anything in their lives.

Cope high IQs are social retards
Maybe if you want to depopulate the planet hahaha can’t even talk to the opposite sex lmfao

Idiotic take. They struggle socially because most people have lower IQs than theirs.

Think about it this way: Are we more socially retarded than Homo Erectus? Was Homo Erectus more socially retarded than Homo Habilis? Nope, and their IQs kept on getting higher. If anything, we got socially smarter as we evolved.

Idiotic take. They struggle socially because most people have lower IQs than theirs.
Think about it this way: Are we more socially retarded than Homo Erectus? Was Homo Erectus more socially retarded than Homo Habilis? Nope, and their IQs kept on getting higher. If anything, we got socially smarter as we evolved.

IQ has no utility outside academia or if you’re trying to rule the world
Better off being a normie

You need IQ people to design said infrastructure in the first place.

"Menial"/physical labour jobs are only thought of as being "low class" because they don't pay well and people are just lazy now.

Assuming automation doesn't take over most of said menial/low class jobs in the next generation, hard work and contributions to society will be greatly rewarded no matter how menial in nature they may be.

That way no job is undervalued and no one thinks of him or herself as above said job(s). Besides, the "lowest class" jobs could always go to the "lowest IQ" in the next generation too who'd be either at or barely above 110 IQ.

I’d say cunning behaviour is more potent than high IQ. The elite today aren’t really that smart just cunning and resourceful . Dark triad matrix

They often go hand in hand.

Cunning/dark triad mentality combined with a low IQ just leads to crime and jail time, but when combined with a high IQ it usually equals success and/or crime that simply goes unnoticed.

Sure, the elites aren't particularly intelligent but they're not low IQ either or else they'd be too incompetent and their actions would be obvious enough for even normies to start noticing [a lot of normies actually are low IQ compared to them tbh].

Most of their success comes from wealth, power, and connections established long before the current generation of elites ever came into being and they just piggyback off of what was established by their ancestors.

Spoiler: BB Codex

[QUOTE="Fiqh, post: 13351037, member: 49262"]
I just believe everyone should have the right to produce offspring, regardless of their IQ, race etc.
[/QUOTE]
Would you also say that right also applies to parents who willingly choose to have children all the while knowing that said child will be burdened with some genetic deformity?

There is no obligation for anyone to produce let alone those who will only burden society as a whole with a low IQ and the genes to spread it.



[QUOTE="SeiGun, post: 13351167, member: 847"]
it is far better to have more low iq people, so you can easily outperform,
[/QUOTE]
[I]Putting aside the fact that you already think so low enough of them as to reduce them to being no more than a self-congratulatory trophy for yourself[/I]...

...They serve no benefit to society and having them around only to "outperform" them serves no purpose in and of itself other than to just pat yourself on the back for not being stupid [[SIZE=12px]like them[/SIZE]].

The only argument I could ever see you making like this is for the low IQ to somehow do menial jobs, but even then you're only using them just to simply 'have them around' in the first place; it's pointless

This type of thinking only leads to laziness, which itself brings complacency and ultimately stagnation for a society's advancement.

This is how you ensure a society never amounts to greatness.
[QUOTE="SeiGun, post: 13351290, member: 847"]
bro you post on looksmax about sterilizing people , what greatness are you talking about
[/QUOTE]
I see you didn't read past the title when you made your first post and only just now bothered reading the rest.

Sterilization of the low IQ will leave society with only the brightest, most capable, and well-natured people Humanity has to offer.

This will then enable them to flourish and thrive in a society composed of other intelligent people just like them.

The "greatness" I refer to is how a society advances both scientifically and technologically [[SIZE=12px]I say [I][B]both[/B][/I] because they go hand in hand[/SIZE]] which comes from high IQ people pioneering it.



[QUOTE="Okulunkulu, post: 13351315, member: 30239"]
as someone who is 109 iq i feel like a detriment to society, it would be better for me to marry a down syndrome autist, at least then i would have my iq match.
[/QUOTE]
You shouldn't feel as bad tbh since there are plenty of others far below you, and you probably have the potential to contribute more than they ever will.

However, even with that said you still shouldn't procreate as doing so runs the risk of spreading you genetics, which in turn may cause your descendants in the next generation to also be low IQ.



[QUOTE="robtical, post: 13351176, member: 72"]
Nope. More like uncivilized people who cannot adapt to modern society and mindless consumers who should be.
[/QUOTE]
Sure, temperament is also important to a society as is critical thinking which itself ties into IQ.
[QUOTE="robtical, post: 13351176, member: 72"]
IQ does not mean sane.
[/QUOTE]
IQ means intelligence; that affects how well a person is able to learn.
[QUOTE="robtical, post: 13351176, member: 72"]
Many low IQ but sane people and many high iq but insane people.
[/QUOTE]
Anecdotes aside being "sane" isn't inherently tied to being high or low IQ, and whether a low IQ person is "sane" doesn't matter when they're only able contribute very little to civilization's advancement if any at all even.

"Sanity" has very little to do with that.


[QUOTE="robtical, post: 13351381, member: 72"]
[QUOTE="chaddyboi66, post: 13351304, member: 6757"]
[SIZE=10px]Sure, temperament is also important to a society as is critical thinking which itself ties into IQ.[/SIZE]
[/QUOTE]
Yep but hard working ppl like my parents would be punished. If they have to be "sterilized" for betterment of society. Not every high iq person is cold and willing to sacrifice everything for "society". [COLOR=rgb(250, 197, 28)][B]...[/B][/COLOR]
[/QUOTE]
By "sterilization" I only mean birth control [[SIZE=12px]as in a vasectomy or tubal ligation/salpingectomy[/SIZE]] for the next generation of breedable aged people with an IQ of under 110.

I'm [B][U][COLOR=rgb(184, 49, 47)]not[/COLOR][/U][/B] referring to the euthanizing or removal of any people from society at all in case that wasn't already clear enough.

Your parents would already be too old and wouldn't qualify, but even if they were [[SIZE=12px]and did qualify[/SIZE]] they'd only be prevented from having children.

It's not "cold-hearted" so much as it is simply pragmatic and ultimately coming from a place of good.
[QUOTE="robtical, post: 13351381, member: 72"]
[B][COLOR=rgb(250, 197, 28)]...[/COLOR][/B] Maybe if you said high iq ppl are able to keep their "low iq" family members, then sure.
[/QUOTE]
What I offer here is similar in that your family members will be exempt from whatever you think is going to happen to them simply because they're either too old to breed and/or just prevented from having children if they're low IQ.

I haven't referred to the euthanasia of low IQ people in anything I've said.

[QUOTE="robtical, post: 13351381, member: 72"]
[QUOTE="chaddyboi66, post: 13351304, member: 6757"]
[SIZE=10px]IQ means intelligence; that affects how well a person is able to learn.[/SIZE]
[/QUOTE]
IQ alone means problem solving and pattern recognition which is part of intelligence. [B][COLOR=rgb(250, 197, 28)]...[/COLOR][/B]
[/QUOTE]
IQ involves a lot more than just that.

The reason why it's such a good indicator of someone's intelligence is simply due to being so well rounded in its approach...

First and most important of all perhaps- critical thinking and reasoning ability are both directly accounted for when measuring IQ. These two are probably the best overall measure of one's intelligence.

IQ also involves verbal fluency which itself is an indicator of your communication skills and ability to articulate complex concepts.

Yes, it also involves basic math abilities which itself [I]does[/I] play a role in your analytical, reasoning, pattern recognition, and predictive abilities like you mentioned.

Not to mention, it also measures basic memory and visual-spatial processing speed(s) as well which measure your brains "raw power" so to speak, which is important as it's the foundation for how you both retain and recall information. I don't think I need to mention how having a poor memory would be detrimental to one's overall abilities.

IQ is everything.
[QUOTE="robtical, post: 13351381, member: 72"]
[B][COLOR=rgb(250, 197, 28)]...[/COLOR][/B] There can be low iq creative ppl.
[/QUOTE]
Look, I get where you're coming from, and I also don't deny that [[SIZE=12px]there are creative low IQ people too[/SIZE]], but [B]IQ itself is directly related to creativity[/B].

[QUOTE="robtical, post: 13351381, member: 72"]
[QUOTE="chaddyboi66, post: 13351304, member: 6757"]
[SIZE=10px]Anecdotes aside being "sane" isn't inherently tied to being high or low IQ, and whether a low IQ person is "sane" doesn't matter when they're only able contribute very little to civilization's advancement if any at all even.

"Sanity" has very little to do with that.[/SIZE]
[/QUOTE]
Why not just kill humanity and replace it all with self learning AI machines?
[/QUOTE]
1. I unironically can't even tell if you're only saying that because you genuinely think it fits into this conversation, or if you're just saying that to purposefully make me out to be some rambling "cold-hearted" technocratic/transhumanist psychopath.


2. Regardless, you sound like some normie complaining with another typical regurgitated strawman response of muh "[I][B]but that's like eugenics n shit bro![/B][/I]" as if to try to say muh "[I][B]bu- but like you want to genocide all the stupid people?!?![/B][/I]"


3. I never mentioned anything of the sort and you're going off on a very distant and unrelated topic.

In what way does that have anything to do with what I'm talking about?


4. That wouldn't even be Humanity anymore and I only seek to help our species become the best version of itself possible to achieve greatness.


[QUOTE="robtical, post: 13351757, member: 72"]
[QUOTE]
[SIZE=9px]By "sterilization" I only mean birth control [as in a vasectomy or tubal ligation/salpingectomy] for the next generation of breedable aged people with an IQ of under 110. I'm [B][U][COLOR=rgb(184, 49, 47)]not[/COLOR][/U][/B] referring to the euthanizing or removal of any people from society at all in case that wasn't already clear enough. Your parents would already be too old and wouldn't qualify, but even if they were [and did qualify] they'd only be prevented from having children. It's not "cold-hearted" so much as it is simply pragmatic and ultimately coming from a place of good.[/SIZE]
[/QUOTE]
Yep, then agreed.
[/QUOTE]
I thought as much.
[QUOTE="robtical, post: 13351757, member: 72"]
[QUOTE="chaddyboi66, post: 13351701, member: 6757"]
[SIZE=9px]IQ involves a lot more than just that. [/SIZE][SIZE=12px][B][COLOR=rgb(184, 49, 47)]...[/COLOR][/B][/SIZE][SIZE=9px] IQ is everything.[/SIZE]
[/QUOTE]
That is different type of IQ.
[ATTACH=full]2549069[/ATTACH] [COLOR=rgb(250, 197, 28)][B]...[/B][/COLOR]
[/QUOTE]
I'm aware of that.

I listed out multiple types in [URL='https://looksmax.org/threads/everyone-with-an-iq-under-110-should-be-sterilized.873991/post-13351701']my reply[/URL] to [URL='https://looksmax.org/goto/post?id=13351381']your post[/URL]:
[QUOTE="chaddyboi66, post: 13351701, member: 6757"]
IQ involves a lot more than just that.

The reason why it's such a good indicator of someone's intelligence is simply due to being so well rounded in its approach...

First and most important of all perhaps- critical thinking and reasoning ability are both directly accounted for when measuring IQ. These two are probably the best overall measure of one's intelligence.

IQ also involves verbal fluency which itself is an indicator of your communication skills and ability to articulate complex concepts.

Yes, it also involves basic math abilities which itself [I]does[/I] play a role in your analytical, reasoning, pattern recognition, and predictive abilities like you mentioned.

Not to mention, it also measures basic memory and visual-spatial processing speed(s) as well which measure your brains "raw power" so to speak, which is important as it's the foundation for how you both retain and recall information. I don't think I need to mention how having a poor memory would be detrimental to one's overall abilities.

IQ is everything.
[/QUOTE]
You were the only one trying to reduce it to just two types [[SIZE=12px]of IQ[/SIZE]] in [URL='https://looksmax.org/threads/everyone-with-an-iq-under-110-should-be-sterilized.873991/post-13351381']your post[/URL]:
[QUOTE="robtical, post: 13351381, member: 72"]
IQ alone means problem solving and pattern recognition which is part of intelligence. There can be low iq creative ppl.
[/QUOTE]
Which means you're essentially restating my point [[SIZE=12px]as your own[/SIZE]].

[QUOTE="robtical, post: 13351757, member: 72"]
[B][COLOR=rgb(250, 197, 28)]...[/COLOR][/B]Are you saying 110+ on ALL?
[/QUOTE]
That's how it's generally measured to begin with anyway: cumulatively.

So in a matter of speaking, yes; there wouldn't be much of a point if I wasn't.

[QUOTE="robtical, post: 13351757, member: 72"]
I disagree that critical thinking is accounted for when measuring IQ.
[/QUOTE]
Okay, disagree then [I]cause[/I]...

1. It is [[SIZE=12px]accounted for[/SIZE]].

[QUOTE="robtical, post: 13351757, member: 72"]
I know have seen way too many gooks (i live in east asia),
[/QUOTE]
2. Anecdotal^

[QUOTE="robtical, post: 13351757, member: 72"]
they are high IQ but definitely in learning capability n being able to copy. They lack critical thinking and creativity.
[/QUOTE]
3. I get where you're coming from with this but your point is still rendered moot ['[SIZE=12px][I][B]moot[/B][/I][/SIZE]'[SIZE=12px] [URL='https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mootness#Moot_point']in the US sense as opposed to the standard UK one[/URL], since this isn't really up for debate anymore[/SIZE]] when considering how applying learned information in-field directly draws upon one's critical thinking ability; also, again anecdotal.

[QUOTE="robtical, post: 13351757, member: 72"]
Same with verbal IQ.
[/QUOTE]
4. [I]Speaking thereof[/I]...

No offence, but would [B]this[/B] be an example of said high verbal IQ: ??
[QUOTE="robtical, post: 13351757, member: 72"]
Its mostly low IQ ppl i have seen that have v v good verbal iq.
[/QUOTE]
5.
>Low IQ
>High Verbal IQ

Pick one.

[QUOTE="robtical, post: 13351757, member: 72"]
There are cases of high iq ppl with high verbal iq but this has not been the norm in my experience. I know many intelligent ppl but their verbal iq is low but they are deffo high iq because of things they can fix/learn fast/have good thought process, just not v good at presenting it.
[/QUOTE]
6. anecdotes. me

[QUOTE="robtical, post: 13351757, member: 72"]
[QUOTE="chaddyboi66, post: 13351701, member: 6757"]
[SIZE=9px]Look, I get where you're coming from, and I also don't deny that [there are creative low IQ people too], but [B]IQ itself is directly related to creativity[/B]. 1. I unironically can't even tell if you're only saying that because you genuinely think it fits into this conversation, or if you're just saying that to purposefully make me out to be some rambling "cold-hearted" technocratic/transhumanist psychopath. 2. Regardless, you sound like some normie complaining with another typical regurgitated strawman response of muh "[I][B]but that's like eugenics n shit bro![/B][/I]" as if to try to say muh "[I][B]bu- but like you want to genocide all the stupid people?!?![/B][/I]" 3. I never mentioned anything of the sort and you're going off on a very distant and unrelated topic.
In what way does that have anything to do with what I'm talking about? 4. That wouldn't even be Humanity anymore and I only seek to help our species become the best version of itself possible to achieve greatness.[/SIZE]
[/QUOTE]
I thought u meant to kill off ppl under 110 but that has been cleared so np. I support eugenics, just not killing ppl. I have seen many hard working well-meaning ppl but they are not bright. That is why it triggered me because i thought u meant genocide. But you didn't so nvm the post.
[/QUOTE]
Anyway, [I]moving on[/I]...



[QUOTE="Deleted member 27674, post: 13351235, member: 27674"]
IQ is not a fixed number. It can change throughout someone's life. Also, IQ can be affected by stuff like nutrition in the formative years, and pollution. For example, exposure to lead pollution has been proven to lower people's IQ. To really increase the intelligence of humanity, all these factors have to be taken into account.
[/QUOTE]
Sure, IQ isn't necessarily completely "set in stone" but that "change" you refer to won't actually shift [[SIZE=12px]or rather increase as you're suggesting[/SIZE]] by that much.

All the factors you listed would be taken into account eventually, but I'm primarily referring to a population free of said factors [[SIZE=12px]like the West or East Asia for example[/SIZE]] as any difference in IQ would just be genetic.



[QUOTE="Deleted member 11126, post: 13351024, member: 11126"]
I think its more like anyone under 90 IQ. Also IQ is only one metric there are plenty of people with low inhibition that are still not low IQ.
[/QUOTE]
That would be a good start but I want the next generation to start off where East Asian countries already do by default. Think 100 million people where the lowest IQ among all of them would just be 110 and plenty would well past it.

It'd be like building a civilization and already [S][SIZE=12px]starting out as smart as the Japanese/Koreans or something[/SIZE][/S] [B][I]having [U]intelligence maxxed out[/U] by default[/I][/B], but even the IQ of the least intelligent among the flock would never dip under 110 and everyone from simple labourers to businessmen would be intelligent.

IQ is probably the most important metric; "inhibition" matters very little compared to it as intelligence is what drives a society forward.



[QUOTE="Deleted member 11126, post: 13351042, member: 11126"]
I think the issue isn't low IQ people its our current parastic elite. They would rather turn the world into a brown 80 IQ mess and rule over a broken destroyed people then have a decent society where their rule would be threatened.
[/QUOTE]
A stupid society is easier to manipulate and control after all.













[QUOTE="try2beme, post: 13351823, member: 27641"]
Imagine valuing iq to this extent
[/QUOTE]
[IMG alt="Idi Amin Laugh GIF - Idi Amin Laugh Lol - Discover & Share GIFs"]https://media.tenor.com/_RXvBoRx9xkAAAAd/idi-amin-laugh.gif[/IMG]...
[QUOTE="try2beme, post: 13351823, member: 27641"]
This is severe autism to link such meaningless cope to [SIZE=26px][I][B]euthanizing humans[/B][/I][/SIZE]
[/QUOTE]
:feelsuhh:
Valuing IQ to this extent is how you know the difference between "[I]euthanasia[/I]" and '[B]sterilization[/B]'
[QUOTE]
Eu·tha·na·sia
[HR][/HR]
The painless killing of a patient suffering from an incurable and painful disease or in an irreversible coma. The practice is illegal in most countries.
"she wants the laws around euthanasia to be changed"
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]
Ster·i·li·za·tion
[HR][/HR]
Surgery to make a person or animal unable to produce offspring.
"she had three children and had undergone sterilization"
[/QUOTE]
📚📘📖🤓

[QUOTE="try2beme, post: 13351823, member: 27641"]
You should be the one killed for such a take
[/QUOTE]
:soy::feelswah::feelswhy:
Careful; [I]you [/I][[SIZE=12px][I]only[/I][/SIZE]][I] speak for yourself here[/I].

You can't even tell who's more autistic for having such a shit take yourself...

[QUOTE="try2beme, post: 13351823, member: 27641"]
Who will even do the low class jobs .
[/QUOTE]
Jfl is that really all you value them for?

Imagine pretending to give [[SIZE=12px]so little of[/SIZE]] a shit about low IQ people that the best argument you can bother coming up with for why they ought to exist is just so they can clean the shit from your toilet.

Bruh this shit writes itself holy fuck. :lul:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/n5lPMGaijmY


[QUOTE="try2beme, post: 13351997, member: 27641"]
[QUOTE="chaddyboi66, post: 13351890, member: 6757"]
[SIZE=10px]Valuing IQ to this extent is how you know the difference between "[I]euthanasia[/I]" and '[B]sterilization[/B]'[/SIZE]
[/QUOTE]
I thought its synonym
[/QUOTE]
It isn't; you thought wrong.

[QUOTE="try2beme, post: 13351997, member: 27641"]
[QUOTE="chaddyboi66, post: 13351890, member: 6757"]
[SIZE=10px]Speak for yourself.[/SIZE]
[/QUOTE]
Im arguing for low iq people cuz iq doesnt matter unless youre mentally crippled
[/QUOTE]
What exactly are you arguing for them?

I'm not necessarily arguing anything against them myself, only that they shouldn't be allowed to have children so that the next generation is high IQ.

[QUOTE="try2beme, post: 13351997, member: 27641"]
[QUOTE="chaddyboi66, post: 13351890, member: 6757"]
[SIZE=10px]Bruh this shit writes itself holy fuck.[/SIZE]
[/QUOTE]
The real word is too practical for this incel cope and mental masturbation
[/QUOTE]
[I]You only call it that simply because you lack the capability to properly grasp the concept yourself[/I].

I'm arguing for a [[B][SIZE=12px]we[/SIZE][/B]] [B]should[/B] rather than a [I]could[/I] [[I][SIZE=12px]do this[/SIZE][/I]].

It's perfectly feasible the same way certain groups were able to increase their average height in the last century, especially if enough public support is garnered for it.

[QUOTE="try2beme, post: 13352016, member: 27641"]
Bro wants a world full of high iq sigma entrepreneurs with bateman pfps
[/QUOTE]
It's not Bateman.
[IMG alt="MaximilianMus Oh Yeah Yeah | Know Your Meme"]https://i.ytimg.com/vi/2LxO8B8lYvo/hqdefault.jpg[/IMG][IMG alt="Deus Ex Deus GIF - Deus Ex Deus Ex - Discover & Share GIFs"]https://media.tenor.com/20wdowVmrfIAAAAC/deus-ex-deus.gif[/IMG]





[QUOTE="Deleted member 31497, post: 13352432, member: 31497"]
no iq for ur face
[/QUOTE]
[I]Oh but there will be[/I]...

[QUOTE="Deleted member 31497, post: 13351893, member: 31497"]
Cope short and ugly people should be gassed and exterminated instead
[/QUOTE]
...
You need to think further ahead.

If the next generation was high IQ they'd figure that out themselves, but the current low IQ sheeple normie-pleb masses would never get on board with the sterilization/"etc..." of short and ugly people.

This idea should have enough support to get some normies on board first as it'd be for the net benefit of society, and it'd also ensure the next generation that comes as a result of it will be able to make it happen.



[QUOTE="lightskinbengali, post: 13352817, member: 25056"]
I believe the approach to eugenics should be far less confrontational when considering a very vast portion of the population. We should focus instead on developing crispr to the point where it’s cheap and accessible for people to have “designer” babies. Abortion will be made mandatory for congenital defects such as downs. Then we could potentially create incredible incentives for having kids, especially financial. At last after both of these conditions are met the third world and ethnic nations will be sterilized through secretive means which could be chalked up to pollution. At the end the most populated countries will be the white ones, beginning a new age where man will be thrust into the cosmos.
[/QUOTE]
I like this approach and also thought about using gene editing myself, though I'd still caution against it until it's mostly safe for the population it'll be used on. I intend for the next generation of high IQ people to lead Humanity into prosperity and it's first true golden age, so there mustn't be any complications in regard to potential defects from procedure in order to ensure this.

Sterilization of the low IQ also wouldn't go unnoticed by the public [[SIZE=12px]at least for long anyway[/SIZE]]; that's why I planned on using an effective propaganda campaign centered around apologetics for positive eugenics in order to convince the public it was ultimately for the greater good.

Most support will probably stem from the desire to eradicate congenital defects, and of course to prevent suffering of the children born with horrible genetic conditions. We could also even throw in a few more [[SIZE=12px]new[/SIZE]] cases of children suing their parents for still choosing to procreate all the while knowing their child would probably end up being born with a severe heritable genetic disorder.

Once enough public support had been garnered we could then move on to the next stage, which would probably involve what you mentioned in that last part only this time the public would actively be in favour of it themselves.

[QUOTE]
[S][B][COLOR=rgb(0, 0, 0)]I honestly don't think this is [I]that[/I] unrealistic considering how easily so many were already on board with mandates during the pandemic. The elites can convince the feeble minded masses of almost anything so long as they're willing to throw enough[/COLOR][/B] [worthless fiat] [B][COLOR=rgb(0, 0, 0)]money at trying to convince them, which they ultimately can considering how virtually all money comes from them.[/COLOR][/B][/S]
[/QUOTE]

Incentives for having more [[SIZE=12px]high IQ[/SIZE]] children would need to be state sponsored in high IQ nations currently experiencing population decline, and proper [[SIZE=12px]or really just "regular"[/SIZE]] birth control measures would need to be put in place for any low IQ nations that are breeding too much not that unlike what you said.
All in all though, I'd say both of our plans seem quite similar and could maybe actually work hand in hand behind the scenes.

[QUOTE]
[S][B][COLOR=rgb(0, 0, 0)]Granted, most of this of course rely on the elites being okay with it, or at the very least not giving enough of a shit about it to get in the way.[/COLOR][/B][/S]
[/QUOTE]



[QUOTE="Stackz, post: 13352522, member: 25791"]
[QUOTE="_MVP_, post: 13350989, member: 20774"]
All niggers would suffice
[/QUOTE]
Bro I have an iq of 163 and I'm a math genius and know two programming languages what are you talking about niggas are not dumb were the same as whites it's just most of us don't get proper nutrition
[/QUOTE]
[I]Sure[/I], "[I]bro[/I]"

You do know by using yourself as an [[SIZE=12px]anecdotal[/SIZE]] example he can always just say you're cherrypickinig right?

He'll then probably bring up studies testing for the difference in IQ between whites and blacks, and then two of you will go back and forth over whether education and/or other environmental factors play into the discrepancy.

From there debate will shift toward using studies specifically looking for how educated blacks perform vs uneducated whites and vice versa, and then you both will probably continue scouring research databases for studies proving both your respective points again etc. etc...

I've seen this same debate go down this very same path over and over again more times than I bother to remember counting at this point, so at least make it interesting once he sees your reply and you both finally go at it.

[IMG alt="Deer Popcorn GIF"]https://media1.giphy.com/media/NipFetnQOuKhW/200.gif[/IMG][IMG alt="Pop Corn GIF by WWE"]https://media2.giphy.com/media/3xkNUy3Vh8QbPmJZjK/200.gif[/IMG][IMG alt="Fox Tv Popcorn GIF by The Four"]https://media3.giphy.com/media/uWzS6ZLs0AaVOJlgRd/200.gif[/IMG][IMG alt="the joker popcorn GIF"]https://media0.giphy.com/media/iaBiPW3vAOi0E/200.gif[/IMG]
[QUOTE="Stackz, post: 13353436, member: 25791"]
I know and predicted it would go down that path
[/QUOTE]
[I]Sure you did[/I],[I]
[IMG alt="Stackz"]https://looksmax.org/data/avatars/l/25/25791.jpg?1707672872[/IMG]
"bro".[/I]
[QUOTE="iamgirlcrazy, post: 13353552, member: 40788"]
A bunch of midwits won't solve anything. Plus, 110 isn't that high. There's a negligible difference between 100 and 110. You couldn't even notice it during a conversation, for example. There's also something called regression to the mean. Each generation tends to resemble the previous ones. That's why genius people have children that are slightly above the average but below their parents in IQ. So generation after generation IQ would decrease until it reached that of the average (100).
[/QUOTE]
Make no mistake I have no regard for people with an IQ of 100 any more or less than I do of anyone else below them.

I seek to set the new baseline [B]minimum[/B] for IQ to start at 110, and the only purpose of this is to "wipe the slate clean" so to speak. This means there won't be anyone with an IQ below this point to bring down the IQ of children born in the next generation.

This alone would be good enough as it removes most of the troublesome parts of Humanity [[SIZE=12px]sub 110 IQ "people"[/SIZE]] from its gene pool that only tend to bring down the rest. That said, by no means do I intend to stop there at all.

Assuming potential parents [I]aren't[/I] forced to only pair up with partners of a roughly equal IQ [[SIZE=12px]at least not yet anyway[/SIZE]], [B]at most[/B] this regression in IQ would only fall back to the new minimum set of the population all partners are now selected from [[SIZE=12px]110[/SIZE]]. This is of course is only assuming if IQs [B][I]tend[/I][/B] to continue regressing uninterrupted as you suggest, or if a higher IQ parent [[SIZE=12px]above 110[/SIZE]] pairs up with a partner that has an IQ beneath them [[SIZE=12px]at 110 minimum[/SIZE]]. Even with that said it isn't a given in and of itself, and not all children of high IQ parents will have an IQ lower than them.

However, with enough breeding of the initial "pure" minimum 110 IQ generation a sizable amount of higher IQ individuals [[SIZE=12px]above 110[/SIZE]] can be born for the next generation. Thus the 110 IQ midwits will become the new "low IQ" populace of this generation.

From there the remaining higher IQ populace [[SIZE=12px]above 110[/SIZE]] will repeat the process in the next generation with a new baseline being set at 10 points higher [[SIZE=12px]120[/SIZE]] from the last. Rinse and repeat [[SIZE=12px]at least until this can be done with gene editing assuming it proves viable[/SIZE]].

The initial process of setting a baseline at 110 is only meant to eradicate IQs beneath 110 from the Human race. This way the minimum IQ can continue to be pushed further without interruption from IQs beneath the baseline of the last generation before it.

[QUOTE="iamgirlcrazy, post: 13353552, member: 40788"]
There's more to life than IQ, by the way.
[/QUOTE]
IQ is everything.

[QUOTE="iamgirlcrazy, post: 13353552, member: 40788"]
The people who deny the validity of IQ are (SURPRISE) within the same 110-130 range you mentioned. These are the midwits ruining everything. We don't need more of them.

View attachment 2549403

View attachment 2549404

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9agM261CSJU

This is you, OP.
[/QUOTE]
I'd rather have a society of 110-130 midwits than one of sub 110 ethnics/retards, though I'll admit it'd be a difficult choice if said midwits were all normies.

Midwit [[SIZE=12px]110-130[/SIZE]] normies denying the validity of IQ has no bearing on other people of the same IQ.

It makes no difference if the ones complaining about muh "IQ bad tho" are midwit normies with 110-130 IQs or even Africans/ethnics with IQs below 85; neither's ignorance is reflected onto anyone else but themselves.

Regardless, what you're describing really just sounds like normie problem more than anything else.
[QUOTE="iamgirlcrazy, post: 13355421, member: 40788"]
Well put, not gonna lie. How are we going to do this?
[/QUOTE]
Still working on it but what I was discussing with [PLAIN]@ ... seemed like a decent place to start.


I'll get back to you after I've finished my snus and am done masturbating though [no porn since NNN 2021 tho Srs]


Also...

What anime is this from?

hope your puzzle solving skills helps you to stop getting cucked by other men

Take off your headphones and you'll probably stop @hearing [the schizo] voices.

Puzzle solved.

Bro I have an iq of 163 and I'm a math genius and know two programming languages what are you talking about niggas are not dumb were the same as whites it's just most of us don't get proper nutrition

I can assure you, niggers are very dumb.
View attachment 2554023View attachment 2554026View attachment 2554031View attachment 2554032

Under 100 would be more reasonable a very large chunk of the population falls under 110 something like 70 percent would be absurd

We could maybe do it in two phases.

Initial phase 1 will sterilize those with an IQ under 100 getting rid of the bulk low IQ, and phase 2 will get rid of remaining the midwits under 110 in the next generation.

The remaining populace with the genes for IQs at 110 will breed as will the overall population of people born with IQs well above 110 in the next generation.

Would still devestate the human population and I don’t think selecting for only a singular trait is a good thing at all letting Eugene breed because he has muh iq over let’s say john passing on his autism genes

In initial numbers sure perhaps, but my intent is that the remaining population [with the genes for an IQ at or above 110] would be heavily incentivized to repopulate.

However, the true goal of this endeavour is simply meant to ensure the genes for low IQ are removed from the rest of the gene pool so that next generation can start off from a "clean slate" baseline of at least 110.

The risk of muh "high IQ = autism" is severely overstated, and I think the number associated with that risk is only 25-30% if I'm not mistaken, not to mention it's typically associated with people that have very high IQs [140+ IQ] which well above 110 IQ threshold I'm initially aiming for.

We can consider selecting for other traits such as good mental/physical health, height, looks, etc. once [as in only after] this next generation of high IQ people are born first.

I only say this [implementing the idea after the next generation of high IQ people are born first] because they'd probably be more inclined to agree with such an idea due to their higher IQs, which would drive them to think further ahead and/or really just more with their heads in general.

The current generation(s) of feeble minded lower IQ sheeple would only look at such ideas from a more basic [primitive] emotional perspective only to reject them on their face out of ignorance and fear like they already [and always] do, and this probably no more apparent than with how already vehemently normies reject the notion of "looks mattering" in any way in its entirety.

We can consider selecting for other traits such as good mental/physical health, height, looks, etc. once [as in only after] this next generation of high IQ people are born first.

This is also without even considering the idea of applying some form of gene editing first, as I'm only referring to regular selective breeding.

Gene editing technology could be used in later generations once we can ensure it's completely safe to implement.

I voted no because it’d drastically change the world’s distribution of ethnicities and thus looks.

Ethnicities have different IQ distributions, so setting a cutoff at 110 would make the world population substantially more Asian-dominated. The average maxilla would be flatter as a result of this. The average penis size would be smaller.

I think your IQ eugenic plan would be a good idea if every ethnicity has the same IQs. Then humanity would get more intelligent without looks going down the drain.

Tough choice ngl

My hope is that the generation of high IQ people would be both blackpilled enough about the importance of looks, and skilled enough to be able to improve said through medicine or tech.

Current generations full of feeble minded low IQ sheeple would never jump on board with any blackpilled ideas related to looks, since they'd buy into and/or virtue signal for the idea of "looks not mattering". They'd only see it from a more basic emotional perspective and immediately reject the idea on its face because they're afraid of it.

Hmm, so eliminate anyone with an IQ below 110... 76% of the human population is now gone. Now, 76% of those who remain are below the threshold, since the bell curve adjusted. Rinse and then repeat the process until there is only 1 human left. Then leave them to die, and with them the last of this monkey society.

I'm on board with this

No, I said sterilize not euthanize we're not "eliminating" anyone.

The population would be replenished from the remainder of the previous generation(s) each time the process is repeated.


I appreciate the sentiment though,

and the enthusiasm.

It's almost reminiscent of this...

"I'm in."

Cope high IQs are social retards
Maybe if you want to depopulate the planet hahaha can’t even talk to the opposite sex lmfao

Cope? Speak for yourself cause that's a pretty broad generalization. The risk of muh "high IQ = aspie" is typically only associated with very high IQ people [140 IQ and above].

The population will be replenished in the next generation with the remainder of what's left from the previous one.

We're only getting rid of the low IQ in the next generation.

High IQs have zero utility , who’s gonna build the roads buildings and infrastructure

It affects almost every aspect of your life and determines how successful you'll probably be in said life.

Normies are ultimately left forgotten by the rest of the world and history because they never really amount to anything in their lives.

Cope high IQs are social retards
Maybe if you want to depopulate the planet hahaha can’t even talk to the opposite sex lmfao

Idiotic take. They struggle socially because most people have lower IQs than theirs.

Think about it this way: Are we more socially retarded than Homo Erectus? Was Homo Erectus more socially retarded than Homo Habilis? Nope, and their IQs kept on getting higher. If anything, we got socially smarter as we evolved.

Idiotic take. They struggle socially because most people have lower IQs than theirs.
Think about it this way: Are we more socially retarded than Homo Erectus? Was Homo Erectus more socially retarded than Homo Habilis? Nope, and their IQs kept on getting higher. If anything, we got socially smarter as we evolved.

IQ has no utility outside academia or if you’re trying to rule the world
Better off being a normie

You need IQ people to design said infrastructure in the first place.

"Menial"/physical labour jobs are only thought of as being "low class" because they don't pay well and people are just lazy now.

Assuming automation doesn't take over most of said menial/low class jobs in the next generation, hard work and contributions to society will be greatly rewarded no matter how menial in nature they may be.

That way no job is undervalued and no one thinks of him or herself as above said job(s). Besides, the "lowest class" jobs could always go to the "lowest IQ" in the next generation too who'd be either at or barely above 110 IQ.

I’d say cunning behaviour is more potent than high IQ. The elite today aren’t really that smart just cunning and resourceful . Dark triad matrix

They often go hand in hand.

Cunning/dark triad mentality combined with a low IQ just leads to crime and jail time, but when combined with a high IQ it usually equals success and/or crime that simply goes unnoticed.

Sure, the elites aren't particularly intelligent but they're not low IQ either or else they'd be too incompetent and their actions would be obvious enough for even normies to start noticing [a lot of normies actually are low IQ compared to them tbh].

Most of their success comes from wealth, power, and connections established long before the current generation of elites ever came into being and they just piggyback off of what was established by their ancestors.
[/PLAIN]

 

[3links2]

Dnr I will contribute sperm to your mother's vagina

 

[134applesauce456]

so much words to say water is wet

 

[chaddyboi66]

chat gpt lists all ways how to destroy humanity GTFIH

list all ways how humanity could get destroyed ChatGPT: The potential ways in which humanity could be destroyed or face catastrophic harm span a wide range of scenarios, from natural disasters to human-made threats. Here are several of the most discussed risks: 1. Nuclear War A large-scale...

looksmax.org

it's impossible to increase iq for deathniqs(why race mixing is wrong)

because by 2 or 3 generations, they will have gone back to the genetic mean. say you have a 110 iq nig who isn't completely retarded, that is as statistically rare as a 130 iq among whites. what are the chances that this iq will increase? about as likely as exclusively 130+ iq white people...

looksmax.org

"Racial realism" Is Fucking Delusional

Let's start with straight facts: These racist fucks love citing "race and IQ" studies without understanding basic population genetics. The entire concept of distinct biological races is scientifically bankrupt. There's more genetic diversity between two random African villages than between...

looksmax.org

Marxism-Rodgerism - The Abolishment of Hypergamy (MANIFESTO)

It may seem difficult to understand the realities of the blackpill. It may be hard to come to terms with how - and why - the world functions as it does. And even when you do, it is even harder to understand where to go next. But there is one set of techniques which shines a clear light on the...

looksmax.org

 

[n9wiff]

Yeah this thread is honestly pretty legit

 

[wishIwasSalludon]

r u AI impact?

 

[chaddyboi66]

r u AI impact?

I don't know.

 

[chaddyboi66]

so much words to say water is wet

Tl;dr was the first 4 sentences.

The White and Yellow man have propelled mankind forward, while the other races [Ethnics] seem to just leech off them and their technology.

I say this as someone who's half "ethnic" himself, though that itself shouldn't even matter in the first place if what I'm saying is true.

I don't necessarily say this out of genuine malice or even outright hatred for them; it's just a fact of human history.

Everything else was a compilation of earlier threads, along with advocacy for mass sterilization based on iq and proper justification for it.

 

[the_machinist_786]

Not a single word

 

[Bomber517]

Eviscerated deathnics

 

[pfl]

bump

 

[overtier1011]

Let me tell you some inventions by india:-

Agriculture​

• Indigo dye – Indigo, a blue pigment and a dye, was used in India, which was also the earliest major centre for its production and processing.[2] The Indigofera tinctoria variety of Indigo was domesticated in India.[2] Indigo, used as a dye, made its way to the Greeks and the Romans via various trade routes, and was valued as a luxury product.[2]
• Jute cultivation – Jute has been cultivated in India since ancient times.[3] Raw jute was exported to the western world, where it was used to make ropes and cordage.[3] The Indian jute industry, in turn, was modernised during the British Raj in India.[3] The region of Bengal was the major centre for Jute cultivation, and remained so before the modernisation of India's jute industry in 1855, when Kolkata became a centre for jute processing in India.[3]
• Sugar – Sugarcane was originally from tropical South Asia and Southeast Asia,[4] with different species originating in India, and S. edule and S. officinarum from New Guinea.[4] The process of producing crystallised sugar from sugar cane, in India, dates to at least the beginning of the common era, with 1st century CE Greek and Roman authors writing on Indian sugar.[5][6] The process was soon transmitted to China with travelling Buddhist monks.[7] Chinese documents confirm at least two missions to India, initiated in 647 CE, for obtaining technology for sugar-refining.[8] Each mission returned with results on refining sugar.[8]

Construction, civil engineering and architecture​

• Stepwell – While the early history of stepwells is poorly understood, water structures in Western India were their likely predecessor.[9] The three features of stepwells in the subcontinent are evident from one particular site, abandoned by 2500 BCE, which combines a bathing pool, steps leading down to water, and figures of some religious importance into one structure.[9]
• Stupa – The origin of the stupa can be traced to 3rd-century BCE India.[10] It was used as a commemorative monument associated with storing sacred relics.[10] The stupa architecture was adopted in Southeast and East Asia, where it evolved into the pagoda, a Buddhist monument used for enshrining sacred relics.[10]
• Residential University – Nalanda (Nālandā, pronounced [naːlən̪d̪aː]) was a renowned mahavihara(Buddhist monastic university) in ancient Magadha(modern-day Bihar), eastern India.[11][12][13]Considered by historians to be the world's first residential university[14] and among the greatest centres of learning in the ancient world, it was located near the city of Rajagriha (now Rajgir) and about 90 kilometres (56 mi) southeast of Pataliputra (now Patna) and operated from 427 until 1197 CE.[15]

Finance and banking​

• Cheque/Check – There is early evidence of using cheques/checks. In India, during the Maurya Empire(from 321 to 185 BC), a commercial instrument called the "Adesha" was in use, which was an order on a banker desiring him to pay the money of the note to a third person (now known as or referred to as a "Negotiable Instrument").[16]
• Sushruta is considered the "Father of Plastic Surgery." He lived in India sometime between 1000 and 800 BC, and is responsible for the advancement of medicine in ancient India.

• Medicine​

  • NexCAR19, is designed to target cancer cells carrying the CD19 protein, a marker on cancer cells, enhancing precision in treatment.[250]
  • Urea stibamine – Sir Upendranath Brahmacharisynthesised urea-stibamine (carbostibamide) in 1922 and determined that it was an effective treatment for kala-azar (visceral leishmaniasis).
  • post-kala-azar dermal leishmaniasis – n 1922, Brahmachari also discovered a new, deadly form of leishmaniasis. He called it dermal leishmanoid, marked by the appearance of sudden eruptions on the face of the patients without fever or other complaints. He observed it as a disease in partially cured cases of kala-azar, along with those who had no history of the disease at all.[251] It has since been termed as post-kala-azar dermal leishmaniasis.
  • Cholera toxin – Cholera toxin was discovered in 1959 by Indian microbiologist Sambhu Nath De.[252]
  • In vitro fertilisation – the second successful birth of a 'test tube baby' occurred in India just 67 days after Louise Brown was born. The girl, named Durga, was conceived in vitro using a method developed independently by Subhash Mukhopadhyay, a physician and researcher from Kolkata. Mukhopadhyay had been performing experiments on his own with primitive instruments and a household refrigerator.[253] However, state authorities prevented him from presenting his work at scientific conferences,[254] and it was many years before Mukhopadhyay's contribution was acknowledged in works dealing with the subject.[255][better source needed]
  • Cervical cerclage – was first described by V. N. Shirodkar in Bombay in 1955.[256]

• Electronics and communications​

  • Direct-to-Mobile(D2M), The D2M technology works just like an FM radio where signals are sent via a station and received by FM radios on certain frequencies.Using D2M, users will be able to directly stream multimedia content such as live TV matches without using the internet.Telecommunications Engineering Centre (TEC), the technical arm of the Department of Telecommunications (DoT), is finalising a new draft report on direct-to-mobile (D2M) broadcasting and the standards to be adopted for the technology. The draft is based on a white paper on D2M Broadcasting developed by IIT-Kanpur.[257][258]
  • Fibre Fault Localisation System[259], This system helps a fiber optic fault diagnosis system, it mainly focus on the location and the type of the fault so that internet service providers can restore the optical communication operation.
  • Horn antenna or microwave horn, One of the first horn antennas was constructed by Jagadish Chandra Bose in 1897.[260][261]
  • Microwave communication – The first public demonstration of microwave transmission was made by Jagadish Chandra Bose, in Calcutta, in 1895, two years before a similar demonstration by Marconi in England, and just a year after Oliver Lodge's commemorative lecture on Radio communication, following Hertz's death. Bose's revolutionary demonstration forms the foundation of the technology used in mobile telephony, radars, satellite communication, radios, television broadcast, WiFi, remote controls and countless other applications.[262][263]
  • Low Mobility Large cell (LMLC), is a feature of 5G and is designed to enhance the signal transmission range of a basestation several times, helping service providers cost-effectively expand coverage in rural areas.[264]
  • Waveguide – Jagadish Chandra Bose researched millimetre wavelengths using waveguides, and in 1897 described to the Royal Institution in London his research carried out in Kolkata.[265]
  • Phantom connectivity, a system for providing a higher level security to data communication in computer networks developed by ISRO. Phantom connectivity model enables organization to copy users download data from Internet to Intranet without connecting both the networks.[266]

• Computers and programming languages​

  • Autolay, is an interactive GUI CAD software for the design of aircraft composite components developed by Aeronautical Development Agency, this tool was developed in late 1980's and used by all big aerospace companies such as Boeing, Airbus and Dassault Systèmes[267][268]
  • Visual J# – A transitional programming language for programmers of Java and Visual J++ languages, so they could use their existing knowledge and applications on .NET Framework. It was developed by the Hyderabad-based Microsoft India Development Center at HITEC City in India.

Several more inventions.

Bottom line:- High IQ and talent is in every country. Just lack resources

 

[chaddyboi66]

Let me tell you some inventions by india:-

I get what you're saying as well as why, but it still doesn't convince me because...

Agriculture

• Indigo dye – Indigo, a blue pigment and a dye, was used in India, which was also the earliest major centre for its production and processing.[2] The Indigofera tinctoria variety of Indigo was domesticated in India.[2] Indigo, used as a dye, made its way to the Greeks and the Romans via various trade routes, and was valued as a luxury product.[2]
• Jute cultivation – Jute has been cultivated in India since ancient times.[3] Raw jute was exported to the western world, where it was used to make ropes and cordage.[3] The Indian jute industry, in turn, was modernised during the British Raj in India.[3] The region of Bengal was the major centre for Jute cultivation, and remained so before the modernisation of India's jute industry in 1855, when Kolkata became a centre for jute processing in India.[3]
• Sugar – Sugarcane was originally from tropical South Asia and Southeast Asia,[4] with different species originating in India, and S. edule and S. officinarum from New Guinea.[4] The process of producing crystallised sugar from sugar cane, in India, dates to at least the beginning of the common era, with 1st century CE Greek and Roman authors writing on Indian sugar.[5][6] The process was soon transmitted to China with travelling Buddhist monks.[7] Chinese documents confirm at least two missions to India, initiated in 647 CE, for obtaining technology for sugar-refining.[8] Each mission returned with results on refining sugar.[8]

There's virtually nothing to invent here they're literally just goods they produced through crops they raised just like their spices; basically the only thing they're known for.

Construction, civil engineering and architecture

• Stepwell – While the early history of stepwells is poorly understood, water structures in Western India were their likely predecessor.[9] The three features of stepwells in the subcontinent are evident from one particular site, abandoned by 2500 BCE, which combines a bathing pool, steps leading down to water, and figures of some religious importance into one structure.[9]

The first one literally just consists of steps. It's both simple enough for any other civilization to have developed independently of India, and simultaneously not that all important, especially when considering how it hasn't had much of an impact on humanity.

• Stupa – The origin of the stupa can be traced to 3rd-century BCE India.[10] It was used as a commemorative monument associated with storing sacred relics.[10] The stupa architecture was adopted in Southeast and East Asia, where it evolved into the pagoda, a Buddhist monument used for enshrining sacred relics.[10]

The second is literally no more than decoration used in ritualistic practice; I could take a shit on the ground and call it a new architectural innovation after putting a stick in it, because it "reminds me of God's wisdom" or whatever nonsense I want believe that day.

• Residential University – Nalanda (Nālandā, pronounced [naːlən̪d̪aː]) was a renowned mahavihara(Buddhist monastic university) in ancient Magadha(modern-day Bihar), eastern India.[11][12][13]Considered by historians to be the world's first residential university[14] and among the greatest centres of learning in the ancient world, it was located near the city of Rajagriha (now Rajgir) and about 90 kilometres (56 mi) southeast of Pataliputra (now Patna) and operated from 427 until 1197 CE.[15]

Third, having an old university doesn't equate to literally inventing the concept, and its significance only lies within the influence of the Buddhist religion.

Finance and banking

• Cheque/Check – There is early evidence of using cheques/checks. In India, during the Maurya Empire(from 321 to 185 BC), a commercial instrument called the "Adesha" was in use, which was an order on a banker desiring him to pay the money of the note to a third person (now known as or referred to as a "Negotiable Instrument").[16]

It goes without saying, but they're by no means the only civilization to use them, and being one of the earliest again also doesn't mean literally inventing the concept.

• Sushruta is considered the "Father of Plastic Surgery." He lived in India sometime between 1000 and 800 BC, and is responsible for the advancement of medicine in ancient India.

How ironic that one of the most objectively ugly races could be so concerned with plastic surgery; like a plot you'd only find on this forum, but I digress.

Putting aside the fact that outliers exist among all peoples [even the worst], he isn't even the oldest historical account of plastic surgery [the Egyptians are], let alone the only example of it being implemented in antiquity [the Greeks and Romans for example].

That said, I don't say this to discredit his achievements of the time given the restraints and limited resources; I actually do find it quite impressive in spite of it [said limitations] even if they are a bit crude [literally drinking urine for example; I suppose some things never change].

Regardless, although I'll admit that his methods did have some contributory influence in the field of plastic surgery [by proxy of Europeans learning and improving upon them], his influence was largely limited to just India and didn't contribute to the field as a whole until only after the Arabs translated his works and they were spread into Europe.

However, this was ultimately still implemented by Europeans who themselves are largely responsible for modern plastic surgery due to already long having been independently developing it [along with modern medicine] on their own.

Although I could maybe give you this point, as it's the only somewhat decent one so far, it'd only be with the caveat that one would have to assume Europe also wouldn't merely independently develop the same techniques he did; mind you, I'd also even have to give the Arabs themselves some credit in a rare W in this regard [even though they just copied a lot from the Persians or the regions they occupied but whatever].

Medicine

• NexCAR19, is designed to target cancer cells carrying the CD19 protein, a marker on cancer cells, enhancing precision in treatment.[250]
• Urea stibamine – Sir Upendranath Brahmacharisynthesised urea-stibamine (carbostibamide) in 1922 and determined that it was an effective treatment for kala-azar (visceral leishmaniasis).
• post-kala-azar dermal leishmaniasis – n 1922, Brahmachari also discovered a new, deadly form of leishmaniasis. He called it dermal leishmanoid, marked by the appearance of sudden eruptions on the face of the patients without fever or other complaints. He observed it as a disease in partially cured cases of kala-azar, along with those who had no history of the disease at all.[251] It has since been termed as post-kala-azar dermal leishmaniasis.
• Cholera toxin – Cholera toxin was discovered in 1959 by Indian microbiologist Sambhu Nath De.[252]
• In vitro fertilisation – the second successful birth of a 'test tube baby' occurred in India just 67 days after Louise Brown was born. The girl, named Durga, was conceived in vitro using a method developed independently by Subhash Mukhopadhyay, a physician and researcher from Kolkata. Mukhopadhyay had been performing experiments on his own with primitive instruments and a household refrigerator.[253] However, state authorities prevented him from presenting his work at scientific conferences,[254] and it was many years before Mukhopadhyay's contribution was acknowledged in works dealing with the subject.[255][better source needed]
• Cervical cerclage – was first described by V. N. Shirodkar in Bombay in 1955.[256]

The only one of any significant mention is probably the last, yet it isn't even the method most commonly used [that would be the McDonald cerclage developed merely 2 years apart]; good for them I suppose.

Unfortunately for them, virtually all of these are still based on Western medicine and ultimately a result of colonialism; none of these are inventions native to them.

The same could be said for this...

Electronics and communications

• Direct-to-Mobile(D2M), The D2M technology works just like an FM radio where signals are sent via a station and received by FM radios on certain frequencies.Using D2M, users will be able to directly stream multimedia content such as live TV matches without using the internet.Telecommunications Engineering Centre (TEC), the technical arm of the Department of Telecommunications (DoT), is finalising a new draft report on direct-to-mobile (D2M) broadcasting and the standards to be adopted for the technology. The draft is based on a white paper on D2M Broadcasting developed by IIT-Kanpur.[257][258]
• Fibre Fault Localisation System[259], This system helps a fiber optic fault diagnosis system, it mainly focus on the location and the type of the fault so that internet service providers can restore the optical communication operation.
• Horn antenna or microwave horn, One of the first horn antennas was constructed by Jagadish Chandra Bose in 1897.[260][261]
• Microwave communication – The first public demonstration of microwave transmission was made by Jagadish Chandra Bose, in Calcutta, in 1895, two years before a similar demonstration by Marconi in England, and just a year after Oliver Lodge's commemorative lecture on Radio communication, following Hertz's death. Bose's revolutionary demonstration forms the foundation of the technology used in mobile telephony, radars, satellite communication, radios, television broadcast, WiFi, remote controls and countless other applications.[262][263]
• Low Mobility Large cell (LMLC), is a feature of 5G and is designed to enhance the signal transmission range of a basestation several times, helping service providers cost-effectively expand coverage in rural areas.[264]
• Waveguide – Jagadish Chandra Bose researched millimetre wavelengths using waveguides, and in 1897 described to the Royal Institution in London his research carried out in Kolkata.[265]
• Phantom connectivity, a system for providing a higher level security to data communication in computer networks developed by ISRO. Phantom connectivity model enables organization to copy users download data from Internet to Intranet without connecting both the networks.[266]

...

Computers and programming languages

• Autolay, is an interactive GUI CAD software for the design of aircraft composite components developed by Aeronautical Development Agency, this tool was developed in late 1980's and used by all big aerospace companies such as Boeing, Airbus and Dassault Systèmes[267][268]
• Visual J# – A transitional programming language for programmers of Java and Visual J++ languages, so they could use their existing knowledge and applications on .NET Framework. It was developed by the Hyderabad-based Microsoft India Development Center at HITEC City in India.

Several more inventions.

...and that.

Bottom line:- High IQ and talent is in every country. Just lack resources

Although, yes, that could in fact be said of virtually any country,

Spoiler: that one in particular is probably not a very good example...

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


Fuck.

Living in that shithole must be like living in a shittier version of austrailia [and I mean that literally too ]

Instead of super-engineered snakes or spiders and shit trying to kill you it's just pretty much everything else that will from...


the shitty people people:

[NSFW] Indian Crowd Rape WHITE Reporter on LIVE TV - Low Inhib Ethnic [BBC] Big Curry COCK!

Jfl remember this shit from a few years ago

looksmax.org

Curry "Women" are Being Hunted as Witches in INDIA

Magazine: Meet the Indian women hunted as witches In remote parts of India, women branded witches are still being abused, tortured and murdered. Bahura Bai says: "I keep praying and asking my goddess 'what is my crime?'" [Baba Tamim] By Baba Tamim Published On 5 Jun 2015 For 40-year-old...

looksmax.org

WTF: CURRIES EATING LIVE CHICKENS

As if shitting in the street and INDIANS DRINKING COW PISS wasn't already bad enough :sick:, curries never fail to disappoint when it comes to their level of utter sub humanity: Anglos should've just genocided them when they had the chance tbh, be doing curries and the rest of the world a...

looksmax.org

COWPILL THOERY IS GODFUEL FOR CURRIES GTFIH!

JUST ABANDON YOUR FAMILY AND FUCK COWS THEORY CONFIRMED TBH :incel:💩+🐄=💕:chad: https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4552397/cow-obsessed-indian-man-urine-dung-family-health/...

looksmax.org

[yes this nigga literally did this^]


shitty third world infrastructure [that can literally kill you]:

The Missing Piece in India's Economic Growth Story: Robust Infrastructure

www.spglobal.com

In Bad Shape | Can India adopt international practices & improve the quality of its infrastructure?

Indian projects are constructed at a fraction of the cost of what something similar costs in a developed nation. Nonetheless, changing our bid selection process and a different testing process testing would help.

www.moneycontrol.com

India’s terrible roads: how to build a world-class network and still reach net zero

China has given itself a major advantage over India by constructing a massive road network in the past two decades.

theconversation.com

Indian Infrastructure Insanity

India's new budget continues to propose greater infrastructure spending. This has not resulted in stronger economic growth over the past six years, and this is not likely to change going forward.

www.aei.org

India’s infrastructure is off the rails | The National

Despite efforts to upgrade its basic facilities, business leaders say the country’s poor infrastructure is hampering India’s economic growth and the business and investment environment, and desperately needs to be overhauled

www.thenationalnews.com

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-Indian-infrastructure-so-poor-compared-to-its-developing-foreign-counterparts-1

or literally even just going down the road...

India - Father and Son Killed While Transporting Fireworks

Extra hot curry

looksmax.org

GTA Action Movie Type Shit IRL - *Insane Dopamine Rush Guaranteed* Motorcycle Crash [No Blood]

really surprised by the camera quality tbh shit looks like something straight out of a movie https://www.kaotic.com/video/b3aa8a06_20221229164543_t could you even imagine the dopamine rush you'd get from being the rider going past it

looksmax.org

to literal shit on the streets and absence of basic public hygiene or just general filth:

[NSFW I MEAN IT] GIGA PROOF INDIAN CURRIES ARE THE FILTHIEST CREATURES ON EARTH AND JUST SOULLESS DARK JEWS

God help me, it doesn't even feel right saying His name on this disgusting thread tbh ngl. Fuuaark bros... Even this was enough to first make me feel like throwing up https://looksmax.org/threads/is-it-true-ethnics-wipe-their-ass-with-their-bare-left-hand.424891/#post-7112348 8 north...

looksmax.org

Mexican vs Curry mumbhai Sewer Cleaner

https://sanitationupdates.wordpress.com/2012/11/28/sewer-diving-in-mexico-city-mumbai-and-delhi/ Mexican: Given full hazmat diving suit, safety line, modern sanitation equipment. BBC documentary making you look macho af like construction worker or fireman. Cleaned after every dive on giga easy...

looksmax.org

Curries Bathing in and Drinking from the poop filled g̶a̶n̶g̶e̶s̶ Ganga River गंगा नदी

dug dug put put ganga ganga

looksmax.org

and of course its infamous shitty diet which also looks like literal shit too:

Indian "Food" is TERRIBLE - This is How Devansh got Klinefelter Syndrome / Low T - [Brutal] Veganpill

https://looksmax.org/threads/how-could-india-develop-such-a-shitty-diet.375082/ https://looksmax.org/threads/does-anyone-here-like-indian-cuisine.350748/ https://looksmax.org/threads/whats-the-hype-behind-indian-food.350763/ https://looksmax.org/threads/indian-food-is-good.509044/...

looksmax.org

Devansh Eating Indian Cow Poop Bread

ik niggas joke about it here but what in the actual fuck bruh :feelsmega::sick::hnghn: *holy* shit :dafuckfeels:💀

looksmax.org

Bottom line: Their impact on humanity is but a mere spec [of probably cowshit tbh] compared to the White and Yellow man; my point still stands and I remain unconvinced of yours.

 

[scrunchables]

Why did I get alerted to this