J. Philippe Rushton, author of controversial essay on race and brain size, dies at 68 - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Daniel Smith;37989518]Wow. All you idiots put political correctness before science. It's a known fact that different races have different brain sizes and structures. Yes, there IS an intelligence gap between races (Africans being least and Asians most) but this gap is very small and does not affect much.[/QUOTE] You do realise that the term 'race' is meaningless and never really existed outside of 18th century 'science'.

[QUOTE=NoDachi;37989629]You do realise that the term 'race' is meaningless and never really existed outside of 18th century 'science'.[/QUOTE] What term should I use? I hear the word race all the time regarding different ethnic groups by teachers in school.

[QUOTE=DrMonumbo;37989508]Largest brain belongs to the Sperm whale weighing in at an average 7-8 kg. So essentially seven times the mass of a human brain.[/QUOTE] Yea the specifics is off but the point still stands.

[QUOTE=Daniel Smith;37989671][b]What term should I use? [/b]I hear the word race all the time regarding different [b]ethnic groups[/b] by teachers in school.[/QUOTE] You just answered your own question.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;37988408]Whales have brains as large as trucks and they aren't smarter than humans(at least as far as we know). It's about brain size compared to body size, I believe. A larger body requires a larger brain to carry out the mundane work(movement and shit). Humans have giant brains as far as proportion to body size goes.[/QUOTE] Conversely, some parrots could give chimps a run for their money.

[QUOTE=JgcxCub;37986096]Albert Einstein is not the be-all-and-end-all of intelligence[/QUOTE] I don't see him claiming anything of the sort.

[QUOTE=Mindtwistah;37988215]There haven't been many studies at all and most have been dismissed because of the huge race-research taboo[/QUOTE] No, they were dismissed because they have universally bad methodology. Some of this dumbarse's work comes to mind (using quotes from a erotica book and penthouse forum posts as scientific references and inverting those infamous brain size ratios*, for example). He's just trying to warm over racial tropes that have been kicking since the eighteen-hundreds (The beastial big-dicked black man), as are his fellows. Like most of that not-so-august group, he had something of a hangup about sex - he notably obssesed about the distance gizz flew. And it's funny how you would mention 'political correctness**', for these 'racial realists' - to use their own term for themselves, studies have always been motivated by a political agenda. I don't need to describe it, do I? It's just that they used to run the roost and want it (the roost) back. See: So much of anthropology up to the current day. He also ran the Pioneer Fund - ever heard of it? It's a eugenics institute, predating the second world war, founded by a textile magnate. Was up to it's greasy neck in pro-segregation and pro-apartheid horseshit. It's mostly a piggy bank for it's members these days. 2nd post had his number, no mistake. *Some of his studies that purported to show blacks had smaller brains said the opposite: there's a rather good smackdown of some of his horseshit here: [url]http://web.archive.org/web/20041213121817/http://www.mugu.com/cgi-bin/Upstream/People/Rushton/rushton-black-reply.html[/url] **Oh, political correctness. 'Hey, I hold fairly mainstream prejudices 1#, 2# 3# and don't feel the need to hide them. I'M SO ~~~EDGY~~~!

[QUOTE=Killer900;37981666]? I thought the bigger the brain the more intelligent the individual, isn't that why humans are smarter than other species due to our brain size? oh wait this is talking about individuals within the same species[/QUOTE] Whales have enormous brains, but aren't terribly intelligent. It's more a matter of brain structure than size. [editline]10th October 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=1STrandomman;37985836]I'd heard that it was the brain to body ratio that had an effect on intelligence rather than sheer size, but I could be wrong.[/QUOTE] To a point. Obviously losing weight isn't going to make you smarter by increasing the ratio, but it does give a general sense of the importance of the brain to the species. For cetaceans it isn't quite as reliable as there isn't as much selective pressure to make the brain use size efficiently. Without hip bones to interfere, aquatic animals birth canals can be much larger, so there isn't the same pressure to have a compact efficient brain, so whale's brains generally have lower neuron density.

why did some races do so much more than others?

[QUOTE=mrmamu;37992877]why did some races do so much more than others?[/QUOTE] geography

[QUOTE=Lazor;37992893]geography[/QUOTE] care to elaborate?

[QUOTE=Elecbullet;37985817]You know whatever's true is fucking true, right?[/QUOTE] yeah uh science doesn't work by declaring something true and never criticizing it ever again we have evidence for evolution because time and time again we've tried to debunk it and failed. this guy's work on the other hand has been debunked and criticized constantly along with strong opposition from the scientific community he constantly cut corners, used flawed methodology, and derived conclusions which made assumptions not supported by evidence

[QUOTE=thisispain;37992955]yeah uh science doesn't work by declaring something true and never criticizing it ever again we have evidence for evolution because time and time again we've tried to debunk it and failed. this guy's work on the other hand has been debunked and criticized constantly along with strong opposition from the scientific community he constantly cut corners, used flawed methodology, and derived conclusions which made assumptions not supported by evidence[/QUOTE] Does evolution stop at humans?

[QUOTE=mrmamu;37992983]Does evolution stop at humans?[/QUOTE] i don't even agree with the premise of your question.

[QUOTE=thisispain;37993015]i don't even agree with the premise of your question.[/QUOTE] I don't understand.

[QUOTE=mrmamu;37992901]care to elaborate?[/QUOTE] What different cultures do and how they are depend on a large number of things, there's no simple answer (just like most things in the world). Some examples I can think of off the top of my head: Geography: A group of people in a desert might be less prosperous than a group of people with lots of trees, food, water, generally supplies. Religious beliefs, need, education (a big one),1st or 3rd world country and hence these days money.

[QUOTE=Triarii;37993183]What different cultures do and how they are depend on a large number of things, there's no simple answer (just like most things in the world). Some examples I can think of off the top of my head: Geography: A group of people in a desert might be less prosperous than a group of people with lots of trees, food, water, generally supplies. Religious beliefs, need, education (a big one),1st or 3rd world country and hence these days money.[/QUOTE] People in the desert would be smarter because they have to think ahead about where their next meal will come from and through evolution this will increase their mental ability. Same applies for people from cold regions where they have to stockpile for the winter.

[QUOTE=mrmamu;37993193]People in the desert would be smarter because they have to think ahead about where their next meal will come from and through evolution this will increase their mental ability.[/QUOTE] k this is utter nonsense insects struggle for meals yet lack any mental ability so i don't know where this random assumption came from

[QUOTE=thisispain;37993213]k this is utter nonsense insects struggle for meals yet lack any mental ability so i don't know where this random assumption came from[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]Jensen endorses the "Out-of-Africa" theory, that Homo sapiens arose in Africa about 100,000 years ago, expanded beyond Africa after that, and then migrated east after a European/East Asian split about 40,000 years ago. Since evolutionary selection pressures were different in the hot savanna where Africans evolved than in the cold Arctic where Mongoloids evolved, these ecological differences had not only morphological, but also behavioral effects. The farther north the populations migrated "Out of Africa," the more they encountered the cognitively demanding problems of gathering and storing food, gaining shelter, making clothes, and raising children during prolonged winters. As these populations evolved into present- day Europeans and East Asians,[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.charlesdarwinresearch.org/gFactorBookReview98.pdf[/url]

black people have a very high tolerance to sun exposure due to their dark skin. White people burn easily in sunlight, however they are able to synthesize vitamine D more easily in cloudy weather because light skin lets in more sunlight. East-Asian people have an Epicanthic fold, which helps to prevent snow blindness These are obvious and understandable differences among races, because the climates that they evolved in demanded these changes. However there is no habitat that demanded less intelligence in order to survive. I think our high intellect evolved a LONG time ago, back when we started farming, making tools, domesticating animals, since that directly helps us to survive. Since all people all over the world from the Aztecs to the Chinese have these skills, I'd say we're all more or less the same as far as intelligence goes.

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;37993288]I think our high intellect evolved a LONG time ago, back when we started farming, making tools, domesticating animals, since that directly helps us to survive.[/QUOTE] Sub-Saharan's never accomplished any of these sans making primitive tools.

[QUOTE=mrmamu;37993268][url]http://www.charlesdarwinresearch.org/gFactorBookReview98.pdf[/url][/QUOTE] assumption from a non-accredited source. the notion that genetics play a factor in cognition to the point of naturally being selected for genes favouring cognitive intelligence is utterly unfounded. we don't know enough about that and making a jump is assumption and nothing else.

[QUOTE=mrmamu;37993298]Sub-Saharan's never accomplished any of these sans making primitive tools.[/QUOTE] well, really domestication has to be taught, but the use of tools comes naturally Those three things could just be consolidated into analytic thought

much of africa was incapable of being farmed. there's something called the fertile crescent and agriculture started there.

the thing with the idea that the differing environments that different groups of people inhabited caused them to evolve greater or lesser intelligence doesn't really work so well. the range of environments that humans inhabit is vast, yet the range of supposed intelligence differences among populations is small. environmental harshness might have selected for intelligence at the beginning, but the reason we're so much smarter than all the other species is because our social structures are so complicated. this created a positive feedback loop, where increased social complexity selected for greater intelligence and greater intelligence led to increased social complexity. there are however exceptions - there was a species of early hominid which was isolated on an island. due to the well-known phenomenon of island dwarfism, they (and their brains) gradually became smaller, until they got to the point where probably wouldn't have been considered sentient.

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;37993315]well, really domestication has to be taught, but the use of tools comes naturally Those three things could just be consolidated into analytic thought[/QUOTE] So who taught the people who taught others? [QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;37993366]the thing with the idea that the differing environments that different groups of people inhabited caused them to evolve greater or lesser intelligence doesn't really work so well. the range of environments that humans inhabit is vast, yet the range of supposed intelligence differences among populations is small. environmental harshness might have selected for intelligence at the beginning, but the reason we're so much smarter than all the other species is because our social structures are so complicated. this created a positive feedback loop, where increased social complexity selected for greater intelligence and greater intelligence led to increased social complexity. there are however exceptions - there was a species of early hominid which was isolated on an island. due to the well-known phenomenon of island dwarfism, they (and their brains) gradually became smaller, until they got to the point where probably wouldn't have been considered sentient.[/QUOTE] cool assertions.

[QUOTE=mrmamu;37993381]So who taught the people who taught others? [/QUOTE] the ones who found out about it/figured it out?

[QUOTE=Barbarian887;37993431]the ones who found out about it/figured it out?[/QUOTE] Hey don't ask me questions, you said it has to be taught.

[QUOTE=mrmamu;37993463]Hey don't ask me questions, you said it has to be taught.[/QUOTE] wasn't supposed to be a literal question my answer is the ones who found out about it/figured it out...

I'm just throwing this out there: neanderthals had both larger brains and smaller bodies than us and look how that turned out