Are Blacks Inferior to Whites?

[Ryan Rudolph]

BMcGilly07 wrote:

Thanks for posting that link, it hits the nail on the head. I have long thought that the pressures of dealing with a winter climate would favor those who have a higher capacity for thought and problem-solving.

Yeah, we shouldn’t be reluctant to call a spade a spade, and contrary to what some people would like to believe, I personally don’t revel in the idea that some groups don’t have an equal chance when it comes to wisdom.

It isn’t fair how some are so lucky, while others have been given such a shabby lot. This only increases my resolve that we need to be conscious creators of our own destiny.

For anyone that is interested – Here is some surprising information I have come across, and perhaps people on the forum can give their two cents of whether they believe the following is actually happening, and whether it is a wise, and moral course of action for the species.

Recently, I watched this You tube video, alleging that there are groups powerful white people working together globally to drastically reduce population levels in countries they deem a problem. They seem to target the black race, and other overpopulated areas. One of the names that comes up quite a bit is Bill Gates, who runs an organization called planned parenthood. And apparently his organization poses as a philanthropy outfit, as they receive billions of dollars from various CEOS, celebrities etc… so that they can carry out their population control methods. They seem to achieve this through giving thousands of third world children vaccines, but including a sterilization hormone with the vaccine, which renders them unable to reproduce. These types of organizations are also accused of systematically infecting Africa, China and the Gay population with the current AIDS epidemics that have drastically spread in those particular groups.

[chikoka]

I think you have the misconception that somehow living in a stressful environment makes people have greater iq's.

I don't agree with this.Evolutionary theory holds that in order for particular traits to predominate , those people without those traits have to die or a least not procreate.
That way only the people with good genes contribute to the genetic make up of the next generation.Living in a technical environment that demands a lot of abstract thinking will not make your children smarter because activities like that do not change your genetic makeup.
If there was a way to filter out bad genes then this would make the next generation more intelligent.
No amount of hard thinking will change your IQ .
It could even be argued that technical societies will have duller IQ's with time because the slight people who should have died are cared for by those societies.They are then able to procreate and studies show that if given the chance these people general have more descendants than their more intelligent leaders.

What has been happening so far is the so called Flynn effect.
This shows that the average iq of the human race is increasing. this can only be explained by the improvement of environment and I think it can only increase till the environment is no longer a limiting factor.

[Ryan Rudolph]

chikoka,

Living in a technical environment that demands a lot of abstract thinking will not make your children smarter because activities like that do not change your genetic makeup.

Over the long term they do, like thousands of years, some mutations occur when continuous friction in the environment causes a permanent change in the genome. And this change is eventually transfered over into the blueprint of the sex hormones.

This is why blacks have much smaller brains, less friction and pressure to change.

This is the only theory that holds, as to why there is such a difference between brain sizes, you cannot deny the empirical evidence.

This shows that the average iq of the human race is increasing. this can only be explained by the improvement of environment and I think it can only increase till the environment is no longer a limiting factor.

Yes, but the black race appears to be playing catch up, and their progress is slower than some of other races. This is understandable, as some of the other races are thousands of years ahead as far as brain capacity is concerned.

[chikoka]

as some of the other races are thousands of years ahead as far as brain capacity is concerned.

Why do you still refer to the lack of invention as the proof that they are behind.
I have already given an explanation. You still choose to ignore my previous statements .
Its as if I'm talking to myself.
You could say something like "Whoa chikky , major logical fallacy..." or "I think you are wrong because x,y,z.."
But don't just ignore me.

Over the long term they do, like thousands of years, some mutations occur when continuous friction in the environment causes a permanent change in the genome. And this change is eventually transfered over into the blueprint of the sex hormones.

Mutations do not occur because of any other reason than that they are random so no continuous friction will change your genome.
Once a mutation has occurred however there has to be a method for selecting this gene for the next generation.
This method happens by way of preventing those without that gene from breeding usualy those without the gene would not be able to survive to the age where they procreate.
If there is no method for selecting genes then the those without the gene will still be able to compete with those without the gene.
That is why it is called "natural selection" and not "continuous friction"

-----------------------
This is why blacks have much smaller brains
------------------

Black people have smaller brains than other races because they have smaller bodies.
People living in cold environments have larger bodies because this minimizes their surface area to mass ratio .
This means they will not lose heat as fast.
What counts however is the brain to body mass ratio otherwise elephants would be considered more intelligent than us.
A point to consider is the Neanderthals who had larger brains in terms of cc's and we all know were they went.
Neanderthals are not our direct ancestors but are a branch of humanity that just got extinct.

Another point to consider is that noone doubts Africans intelligence in such things such as sport and music.
These intelligences , whether emotional or not, are still a function of brain size.
If we can have smaller brains and still be just as good in music as everyone else then why cant we excel in other endevours that are also a function of brain size.
Emotions come from glands in the body .They could be driving us to particular types of endevours but that only means that we need something to drive us to do philosophical works and not larger brains.

There is also the common misconception that races that lived in cold environments needed greater intelligence to over come their environment and so those members of those races who could not cut it out were forced into extinction.
This veiw would look true and maybe obvious to some but as we shall see this ism not the case.
There have been two main migrations from Africa in prehistory.
The first was the homo erectuses .They had reached as far as java.
Despite these people meeting harder environments than any that was in Africa they never developed into anything
They just got extinct.
In fact it was left up to the African homo erectuses to develop into early homo sapiens.
These people also migrated out of africa and had reached as far as Britain 200 000 years ago as evidenced by the swanscombe skull as well as others.
Now these people, who had foreheads very similar to us, were to go through some of the harshest environment by going through the ice ages.
You would expect that this would urge these migrants on to greater evolutionary hights but as we shall see this did not happen.

When examining the fossil record it is seen that their brain mass did increase , however their brain to body mass ratio (which is what counts ) stayed approximately the same. What could be seen as well was that their foreheads receded more and more with time , almost as if they were trying to go back to the homo erectus stage.
These people became later known as the Neanderthals.
Clearly there is an error in assuming that these conditions are the ones necessary for fostering intelligence.

http://www.quantavolution.org/vol_06/ho ... o_1_02.htm

quote
-----------
shley Montagu long ago pointed out that Swanscombe man, who was quite modern, preceded Neanderthal, and that a Swanscombe type was found at Quinzano, Italy and placed in the Middle Paleolithic. Also before Neanderthal came Fontechevade man, with cultural remains, and he "would appear in all respects a modern type of man." [11]
-----------

The final migration was that of modern humans who went out to conquer the world.
Through all this we can see one common thread.
Hominids evolve in an African climate , leave Africa , then either go extinct or evolve backwards.

What then made us who we are?

The answer is here if you take a look at the following site.

http://books.google.com/books?id=5Y4dJo ... Y#PPA17,M1

and

http://laughingmeme.org/2007/09/12/aida ... ive-towar/

This site talks about the social evolutionary principle by which humans got more and more intelligent.
Intelligence is shown in the very human act of sharing. It was also important for a hominid to know the effects or what would happen if he offended the alpha male , two days after he had last eaten , In the middle of the dry season and while the majority of the females were on heat.
This last example shows how the hominids were forced to think in terms of many variables in order to exist as a group.
Failure to do this would often result in the offender being a cast out and so his genes would not get carried on to the next generation.

When looking at the migrations it can be seen that the hominids that left Africa would have been less than those that stayed behind so the social pressures would not be as great as those in Africa.
They would also not have the luxury of "casting out" a group member because they needed all the manpower they could get to survive.

When the proto Caucasoid/mongoloid people left Africa they would have been less than the africans so if anything those people that stayed behind would have grown more intelligent with time until the others had a chance to catch up.

There is another point to consider .When the proto Caucasoid/mongoloid people left Africa they would have encountered the last of the Neanderthals and with the inevitable interbreeding that occurred there would have been a decrease in intelligence.

When comparing men and women we see that the main difference between them is that men have higher levels of testosterone.
In fact , giving testosterone to women makes them more manly , They develop an Adams apple , deeper voice and even a beard.
The point i am trying to make is that if white women have not produced as many philosophers as white men then it is testosterone that is to blame. Now black males have higher testosterone levels than white men so this should mean that however white males differ from white females , black people accentuate this difference. So this should mean , by transitivity , that black men would have had more philosophers if they had had the same chances.


As for IQ tests:

http://redaction.org/wwwboard/msgs4/4834.HTM

Quote
-------------------------------------------

Steele has found that he can completely erase the black-white differences on such tests by convincing students that the particular test they will take is not related to intelligence. Conversely, he can recreate the racial gap by an intervention as minor as having students indicate their race on a questionnaire
----------------------------------------------

Could you also explain why the two most intelligent creatures after humans come from africa.

[Kevin Solway]

Phew, lucky you had a copy chikoka, I slipped-up.

You make plenty of interesting points in that post.

I'm not sure what Ryan means by his "friction". I've heard there is some evidence that the environment can change the genome - other than by normal mutations - but so far as I know that theory is not all that well developed, and I doubt that any changes caused in that manner would match the importance of mutations.

[Ryan Rudolph]

chikoka,

Why do you still refer to the lack of invention as the proof that they are behind.

No, I am merely stating that the fact that there is a major difference in brain size, and scientists have determined that there is definitely a relationship between intelligence and brain size. More neurons = more intellectual capacity.

Mutations do not occur because of any other reason than that they are random.

Random for the most part, but maybe there could be some cases where the environment is able to directly cause mutations to better adapt the organism to its environment.

For instance: Generations of workers in one family that only do a certain type of labor become genetically adapted to it, which changes some of their hormonal/chemical levels. And this information could be transferred into the sex chromosomes sometime in their life.

Black people have smaller brains than other races because they have smaller bodies.

Why do they have smaller bodies? The environment caused those mutations through natural selection, and that mutation better adapts them to their environment, however it could have had more harmful affects when it comes to intelligence.

What counts however is the brain to body mass ratio otherwise elephants would be considered more intelligent than us.

If elephants were able to develop language, and be a bit more flexible with their limbs to make things, then I could imagine that they could be capable of a high intelligence. Although their bodies could be a tad too large, I can't imagine a civilization with elephant-sized beings...

A point to consider is the Neanderthals who had larger brains in terms of cc's and we all know were they went.

That is because they weren’t able to develop language as well because there was a problem with their voice box in the throat.

Africans intelligence in such things such as sport and music.

But they're not all that intellectual in nature, both are techniques formed through repetition.

[Iolaus]

Black people have smaller bodies??? Since when? Orientals obviously have the smallest bodies, and blacks are at least equal to whites. I think they're bigger. So all the basketball guys are black because they have smaller bodies? Where do you live?

The point i am trying to make is that if white women have not produced as many philosophers as white men then it is testosterone that is to blame. Now black males have higher testosterone levels than white men so this should mean that however white males differ from white females , black people accentuate this difference. So this should mean , by transitivity , that black men would have had more philosophers if they had had the same chances.

I think it is more than testosterone, but leaving that aside, we would then have to say that an animal with high testosterone levels must also have high intelligence and compete favorably with humans. The testosterone may very well be responsible for a lot of male behavior and provide motivation and strength, but testosterone alone does not create IQ or abstract reasoning.

Black men have not produced more philosophers, so the reasoning is faulty. To say they haven't had chances would be hard to agree with. Within the same race, however, it is interesting to investigate how much of the gender behavioral differences are due to testosterone.

Anyway, the male brain is different from the female, and their are several hormones at work. The male brain is different from the female largely due to testosterone during gestation...

[chikoka]

Basketball players are taller than most people but it can be seen that their body mass is still lower because they have a thiner structure.
The nilotic negroes are the tallest people in the world but caucasions are taller in general.
They also Have denser structures.

.

Quote:
Black people have smaller brains than other races because they have smaller bodies.

Where do you live?

I live in Zimbabwe.

Black men have not produced more philosophers, so the reasoning is faulty

Please go back to my first post and you will find out why this is so.
Explain your veiws again with that in mind.

The male brain is different from the female largely due to testosterone during gestation...

My point exactly.

No, I am merely stating that the fact that there is a major difference in brain size, and scientists have determined that there is definitely a relationship between intelligence and brain size. More neurons = more intellectual capacity.

Wouldn't you need more neurons to offset the larger body mass that you people have?
Could you make a comment on my first post please.

but maybe there could be some cases where the environment is able to directly cause mutations to better adapt the organism to its environment.

How would this happen?

For instance: Generations of workers in one family that only do a certain type of labor become genetically adapted to it, which changes some of their hormonal/chemical levels. And this information could be transferred into the sex chromosomes sometime in their life.

Could you give us a link or something so we could verify what you said.

Why do they have smaller bodies? The environment caused those mutations through natural selection, and that mutation better adapts them to their environment, however it could have had more harmful affects when it comes to intelligence.

If you get bigger bodies and bigger brains than other races then why should that translate into greater intelligence.
The extra neurons are there to manage sensory information from the greater body size and also to manage motor functions , not a greater increase in general intelligence.

More neurons = more intellectual capacity.

More neurons means greater separation of the different parts of the brain.Because of latency issues a bigger brain would act slower than a smaller one.

If elephants were able to develop language, and be a bit more flexible with their limbs to make things, then I could imagine that they could be capable of a high intelligence. Although their bodies could be a tad too large, I can't imagine a civilization with elephant-sized beings...

Wow.
Do you really believe that elephants are more intelligent than us because of their greater brain mass?

That is because they weren’t able to develop language as well because there was a problem with their voice box in the throat.

That is the whole point of evolution. Changes occur that overcome weaknesses. If the had a problem with their voice box then they should have evolved a new one.


What about this?

quote
-----------
shley Montagu long ago pointed out that Swanscombe man, who was quite modern, preceded Neanderthal, and that a Swanscombe type was found at Quinzano, Italy and placed in the Middle Paleolithic. Also before Neanderthal came Fontechevade man, with cultural remains, and he "would appear in all respects a modern type of man." [11]
-----------

and this?

Through all this we can see one common thread.
Hominids evolve in an African climate , leave Africa , then either go extinct or evolve backwards.

and this?

Could you also explain why the two most intelligent creatures after humans come from Africa.

Another point to consider is that white on white marriages are more incestuous than black on black . This is because of the greater amount of genetic variance in their genes.

Incestuous relationships usually lower Intelligence.

[Pincho Paxton]

I don't really want to get into this discussion too much, but have to say that black people have larger bodies than white people in the UK. There may be different species of black people however, and yes, I have seen some with smaller bodies as well. Aboriginese in Australia are deffinately a different species of black person, and therefore to call someone black is a bit too general. I also think that larger body sizes reduce the amount of intelligence available to a person just based on my own observations. I'm not sure why this would be, and afterall the elephant is quite an intelligent creature, and so is the whale, so it is a bit confusing. It might have something to do with dexterity.. not sure.

[average]

Using the MASCULINE logic that is used by the main players (david quinn, kevin solway, etc) on this forum the answer has to be: Yes.

Blacks are inferior to whites, just like women are inferior to men.


How many wise black sages were there? About as many as wise female ones.
=]

[chikoka]

How many wise black sages were there? About as many as wise female ones.
=]

Please refer to my first post for an answer to your question.

http://www.theabsolute.net/phpBB/viewto ... 2&start=16

[Iolaus]

Hi Chikoka,

Basketball players are taller than most people but it can be seen that their body mass is still lower because they have a thiner structure.

they are young and fit, and therefore somewhat thin, perhaps, but I do not agree they have a thinner structure than other young and fit people. You should see how thin the young women from eastern europe are.

I don't know what you've got in zimbabwe, but here blacks are not smaller. Furthermore, even if they were, I don't think that would make them dumber. I rather think what another person has said may be true - that smaller people are smarter. Orientals, for example. Have you ever seen Vietnamese people? Orientals are significantly the smallest race, and outperform whites on IQ.

Please go back to my first post and you will find out why this is so.
Explain your veiws again with that in mind.

I didn't agree with it. There are other factors than rivers and deserts, and anyway blacks have had lots of exposure to other civilisations.

The rest of your comments were to someone else's post. I didn't make those points.

I think most evolution suppositions are just fantasies supporting a theory, speculation without merit.

[chikoka]

I didn't agree with it. There are other factors than rivers and deserts, and anyway blacks have had lots of exposure to other civilisations.

What other factors?

The rest of your comments were to someone else's post. I didn't make those points.

Sorry about that. They were meant for ryan.

I think most evolution suppositions are just fantasies supporting a theory, speculation without merit.

I was countering another evolution theory i.e. the cold environment , greater intelligence theory.
If you think my evolution supposition was false then you should also reject the "cold environment" one.

The reason i mentioned my social theory was just to show that things arent as simple as they look and not to neccesarily say blacks are more intelligent than whites.

[BMcGilly07]

People who live in colder climates are actually smaller than those in warm climates. They develop stouter bodies and shorter limbs in order to retain body heat about the vital organs.

[Ryan Rudolph]

Chikoka wrote:

That is the whole point of evolution. Changes occur that overcome weaknesses.

Exactly, changes occur that overcome weakness, so if a breed of homo sapiens migrate into an environment that requires a higher degree of intellectual planning then only the more intellectual individuals will survive.

So the end result is that the White race and the Asian race had more higher quality intellectuals because that is the only way they could have survived as a race in that tough of an environment.

chikoka wrote:

More neurons means greater separation of the different parts of the brain.Because of latency issues a bigger brain would act slower than a smaller one.

No, generally, if the cortex is larger, the individuals are less emotional, and capable of more complicated intellectual thought patterns. For instance: small-brained women are the worst kind, they have the intelligence of tweedy birds. And I suspect that this rule also applies with race as well.

The empirical evidence speaks for itself. Asians have the highest IQS, and they have the largest brains, Whites are in the middle with middle-sized brains, and blacks have lower recorded IQS, and they have the smaller brains.

And women as a gender are probably down with blacks somewhere. However, I believe that interracial males can be more intelligent than their black relatives because one of the white parents gives the gene to increase the neurological complexity/brain size/language center and all the rest of it.

I suspect that if a typical white woman and an unintelligent black man have a child, and it is a boy, then that boy can have a higher intelligence than the parents.

Here is an example - Barack Obama

Although he is still quite mediocre compared to an enlightened man, he seems much more intelligent than your typical dark black man.

[TheChessPlayer]

black is just a color and its quite childish to judge someone by the color of their skin. The text im writing is black.

[Ryan Rudolph]

The Chess player wrote:

Its not "being black" which makes us what we are, its not "being a woman" which makes us what we are etc, what makes us what we are are big complicated mathematics and formulas which all connect with themselves and create us as we are and these formulas can make us talented at anything despite our race, our gender etc.

Actually, I suspect that what are we is mostly governed by our biological/genetic conditioning, with the environment as a causal influence as well, rather than some abstract mathematical theory. For instance: genetic engineering holds more promise to give individuals intellectual talents because our biology governs what we are, and what we are capable of.

[chikoka]

xactly, changes occur that overcome weakness, so if a breed of homo sapiens migrate into an environment that requires a higher degree of intellectual planning then only the more intellectual individuals will survive.

So the end result is that the White race and the Asian race had more higher quality intellectuals because that is the only way they could have survived as a race in that tough of an environment.

Where exactly did i lose you?
Please explain the evidence.

Quote:
A point to consider is the Neanderthals who had larger brains than us

and

Through all this we can see one common thread.
Hominids evolve in an African climate , leave Africa , then either go extinct or evolve backwards

and

quote
-----------
shley Montagu long ago pointed out that Swanscombe man, who was quite modern, preceded Neanderthal, and that a Swanscombe type was found at Quinzano, Italy and placed in the Middle Paleolithic. Also before Neanderthal came Fontechevade man, with cultural remains, and he "would appear in all respects a modern type of man." [11]
-----------

so if a breed of homo sapiens migrate into an environment that requires a higher degree of intellectual planning then only the more intellectual individuals will survive.

But does it require a higher degree of intellectual planning?

Humans are not the only creatures who live in cold environments so your point fails.
Why didn't these animals also get an increase in intelligence?

The fact remains that even though they live in a lax environment , the two most intelligent creatures after humans come from Africa.

Is living in a cold environment harder than living in a desert as the Australian aboriginals do?

[Ryan Rudolph]

chikoka wrote:

Humans are not the only creatures who live in cold environments so your point fails.
Why didn't these animals also get an increase in intelligence?

No, most animals other than humans are not even capable of complex thought so your counter argument doesn’t fit at all.

The major difference is that animals are able to survive the winter without thinking at all, they’re behavior is automatic, instinctive, like a flower growing.

[chikoka]

No, most animals other than humans are not even capable of complex thought so your counter argument doesn’t fit at all.

Exactly .
They are not even capable of complex thought because they live in an environment where complex thought is unnecessary Just like some other races.

The major difference is that animals are able to survive the winter without thinking at all, they’re behavior is automatic, instinctive, like a flower growing.

.

Why shouldn't this apply to humans as well?



You still keep avoiding my requests for you to explain the evidence.

[Cory Duchesne]

Interesting bit about testosterone and IQ

A little extra testosterone makes a "male brain" which is better at
math and visuo-spatial tasks. But a lot of extra testosterone results
in a lower IQ, but better fighting and mating skills in the male.
These results explain some puzzling IQ results. Black females score
one half SD higher than Black males. In Britain black female children
outscore white male British kids. In the USA Black females earn 99%
the wages of white females.

So it seems that Blacks may not have a genetically based IQ deficit.
What seems to be happening is that a high testosterone level results
in a different distribution of abilities. A little higher and math
scores are raised at the expense of verbal scores. (apparently the
brain is like a computer with a limited capacity that can be allocated
in different manners). A lot higher level of testosterone results in
a higher physical IQ (think of the "smart moves" of Black boxers or
basketball players faking out white guys).

This allocation of brain power, along with more physical and sexual
aggressiveness is fine for the jungle, but not for modern civilized
society.

Perhaps a solution would be a pill that can lower prenatel
testosterone getting to the black fetus's brain by about 20% and then
a drug to be taken by black boys after birth to lower testosterone
levels by about 20% (the amount they exceed the white level) I
predict a large rise in Black men's IQ's and less crime.

[Ryan Rudolph]

Cory, hopefully this theory is correct, and it is only a matter of adjusting testosterone levels to boost the intelligence levels of black men. However, if brain size is also a factor, then the genetic code might also need to be manipulated. Not to mention, some of the other hormonal glands must also need to be adjusted.

I think there is quite a bit of tweaking that could be done to the human being, regardless of race or gender.

The biggest problem is convincing humanity that serious modifications need to occur to every race, but some more than others, which means that measuring inferiority needs to become commonplace, and generally accepted. However, I can’t imagine how this is going to happen collectively.

Even rudimentary scientific discoveries have been fought with such backlash and outcry.

[daybrown]

<I'm sure daybrown will have his comments in due course :-)>
Yes, but there's so much. Go to grad schools, see more men. Go to Insane asylums, see more men. Nature clipped the ends of the bell curve for women to ensure enough smarts and sanity to nurture kids. On *average* they are as smart as men, only differently so.

Geeks become geniuses with a kind of tunnel vision of the mind to focus on some problem and entirely ignore the emotional needs of others, which however interferes with the concentration women can bring to the same problem. The most successful cultures are those where the women have the power to select geeks, rather than warriors, for sperm donors.

"The Blank Slate" by Pinker, and "Constant Battles" by LeBlanc both report that the graveyards of the tropical hunting tribes show *20 times* the rate of violent trauma as the graves of the yeoman farmers in Europe. Do the bloodwork, and you see the higher adrenalin and lower seratonin of the former; and since melanin is on the same strand of DNA, as the melanin goes up, so does the rate of violence.

No where is this more clear than Diamond's report in "Collapse", on the Greenland Norse. Turns out, there is a *RED* form of melanin. My own experience is- that while redheads are fabulous friends, they are dangerous lovers. Diamon writes of the high rate of broken bones; parry injuries and teeth knocked out in the Norse graves. And he cites the letters from clerics not wanting to be sent to such an unruly flock, and also mentions the draconian law used trying to control the violence.

And who are these people? The sons of Eric the *RED*. I could go into similar effects with black melanin, but people get their panties in a wad over that. Diamond also reports on the New Guinea Highlanders. 25% of the men died in battle. During WWII, on both sides in Europe, 2-3% of the men died in battle.

Europeans are generally different. There is not nearly as much red melanin there as black further south. The DNA reveals that there are only 7 mtDNA lines in Europe, the result of the hybridization process with the Neaderthals. Look at some Neanderthal skulls. Do you see the front teeth bashed in? Look at the African faces still around, or at the skulls in their graves to see how common it was.

The Neanderthals had a rough life, compared to Rodeo bull riders; but they dont show us the fractures of the upper arms seen all over the tropical graveyards in both the New and Old worlds. Course, if you have to spend 5 months in a cave thru an ice age winter, short fused alpha males just go nuts with cabin fever.

The Mammoth bone Longhouses along the Don show bed platforms for 100-150 people in a space hardly bigger than a double wide. Its like living in a dance hall. Which was the only way to do it. There was not enuf fire wood on the ice age tundra. They used body heat. But they hadda kick the aggressive warriors out because the kids and women were too easily injured in their fights.

In the Tropics, no big deal, warfare went on all year, and they needed lots more alpha males. But now, after 5000 years of rule by the warrior classes, the brave heart, strong right arm, sword in hand, just dont cut it any more, and the alpha males are just going fucking nuts.

Alphaism is terrific if endowed by a mother with superior intelligence. Their leadership got a lot done. But lacking the intelligence to actually succeed at dominating results in "the rancor of impotence", as Nietzsche put it. I would reopen the Gladatorial games with real metal armor and weapons. Give those boys something to do besides drive bys that hit so many ancillary casualties.

They are starting to try seratonin supplements. Maybe that will help. A natural diet would as well. They were not evolved to be raised on sugar cereals, junkfood, candy, and soda. And this deficit creates more, and different problems in some gene pools.

[Cory Duchesne]

The biggest problem is convincing humanity that serious modifications need to occur to every race, but some more than others, which means that measuring inferiority needs to become commonplace, and generally accepted. However, I can’t imagine how this is going to happen collectively.

I imagine that the most significant minority of the population will be those who carry the seeds of conditions which are acknowledged (without much controversy) to be both hereditary as well as undesirable.

Just to name a few:

Acne, Alcoholism, Alzheimer's, Bipolar disorder, Cancer, Celiac disease, Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease, Color blindness, Cri du Chat, Cystic fibrosis, Diabetes, Down syndrome, Heart Disease, Hemophilia, Klinefelter syndrome, Muscular dystrophy, Neurofibromatosis, Obesity, Phenylketonuria, Prader-Willi syndrome, Sickle-cell disease, Spina bifida, Tay-Sachs, Turner syndrome

^ I think you'll find that most people who have family members with these conditions are naturally worried that their children will be afflicted. Once genetic engineering succeeds at treating blatant and extreme diseases, it will develop a more and more benign reputation. The public will warm up to it's successes and will become more and more open minded to being treated for more subtle conditions, one's that get closer to the mind.

So that's how you get the public open minded.

On the other extreme I think you will see very educated, financially successful and adventurous secularists, intellectuals, scientific/philosophic types who will say: "I want my child to be an enhanced version of my self".

Most parents lack the self esteem for this, and I think many are secretly frightened of how monstrously big their child could potentially get. Many father's secretly wish their child to be an equal version of themselves, and this is to ensure that their child never overwhelms and frightens them with behavior that exposes to the father his own deficiencies. A father will often try to get his son hooked on the very bad habits that afflict him. He does this to feel less loneliness and inadequacy. A mother on the other hand will often want her children to be as childlike, silly and needy for as long as possible. She derives self esteem from having her child dependent on her and discourages too much independence. At root, the mother and father's attitude are usually rooted in the same longing for companionship, equality and feeling of self worth. They just express that longing in different ways - dragging their children down to hell with them.

[daybrown]

Well, while you all think and debate about it, smart successful career women are using fertility clinic services, and getting the kind of kids they hope for who will grow up even more talented, sociable, sane, and charismatic to take over the businesses their moms work in, just as we know the sons of male bosses did.

It is, after all, a natural extension of civilized cultural specialization. Just cause these successful women mite like a stud muffin in bed dont mean they want to use him for a sperm donor.

Undoubtedly, some of the successful women in business are black. Are they then going to use black sperm donation? I dont *think* so. There are not nearly that many to choose from, and a Nordic line would help avoid the relatively high risk of sickle cell anemia. Successful women all over the world, of all races, will be selecting from Nordic lines far more than any other.

Its eugenics, but its not a government policy, just the natural effect of the free market. Does this make blacks inferior? Damifino. The Nordic lines are just better adapted to modern culture. Does that make them "superior"?