Don't get me wrong, it's not a good debate, nothing gets accomplished but man they really must've picked from /pol/. I remember hearing a lot of these arguments on /pol/ and it's kinda funny hearing them said out loud in real life. My favorite is that pink shirt guy with the Texas hat.

And just to mention, a lot of it sounds really dumb and good arguments are often phrased in an incomprehensible way by dumb people.

Anyway, here's the link if you want to watch it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2S-WJN3L5eo

>>510931667 (OP)
the biggest crime is calling a discussion a debate
a debate is moderated, has an audience, has timers, and has a winner picked by that audience
listening to any given mixture of retards bicker with each other and see who can backpedal and bullshit and think faster on their feet is nothing like a debate

>>510931920
I agree, it's a farce. It's more like "entertainment/reality show about topics". I disagree with your debate winner argument though. There may be no winners in a debate and a debate may end in an agreement. That's how progress is made.

In my opinion, a better title would've been: "An average journalist vs 20 people with some vague ideas that they can't phrase clearly", in other words "an average journalist vs most /pol/ posters".

>>510931667 (OP)
Mehdi did a great job. The rest including "Rising Goy" looked like psychopaths.

Considering literally everything discussed here is being discussed and said on twitter first should tell you something

>>510932222
I thought he interrupted others too much but other than that he seems to have prepared really well for this thing. Like he was actually able to quote things accurately (regardless of whether you agree with the things he was quoting) and was able to avoid going into super dumb progressive arguments (for example, he did avoid "let's open borders for all" dumbness).

As I said, it's like "an average journalist vs 20 people with vague ideas".

>>510932225
It's telling me that the /pol/ is mainstream now. We're not even edgy anymore, we're following ....ing twitter.

>>510932508
Agreed.

Also, to mention, I actually felt bad for the Iranian guy with the hat. The journalist dude interrupted him so much and he was trying to focus on the actual claim a lot more than the others.

Sorry for posting too much in my own thread, but I have to say, the blonde chicks were really cute. Both of them.

>>510931920
debate is gay

no personal interactions only formal responses with plenty of time is boring. it's more fun when the two parties start yelling and talking at hyper speed and talking over one another

if I wanted to watch debate I'd watch misery

>>510932930
This is a big problem actually. It's like we keep rehashing same arguments over and over to make something stick and get "haha gotcha!" points.
I wish there was something similar to (and I'm sorry for bringing reddit into this) r/askhistorians kind of strictly moderated discussion platforms where politicians could debate publicly. (For information, r/askhistorians basically deletes anything that can't be supported by evidence and does not allow most strategies used in debates that helps the debate participant look cool without actually saying anything).

Here's my controversial idea. Once lawmakers are elected, none of their policy decisions can be debated privately. They cede their right to privacy and every policy debate has to be published except very specific national security issues. In the current system, they come up with conclusions from their private debates and no public debate changes anyone's opinions. If all their discussions are public, we can inform the public saying "here are arguments this lawmaker was not able to refute but he/she still voted for this". It's a silly idea but could be a fun thought experiment.

>>510932930
>I don't like thinking through ideas, I want to watch monkeys shout for status
Watch WWE then, debates aren't for you.

>>510931920
debate is the art of sophistry and it needs to stop being seen as legitimate in any way

>>510931667 (OP)
Imagine actually being far right and still supporting the fat shabbos bullshit artist and cover-up chief for kike pedo blackmail ops

>>510932222
Mehdi is one step above vaush with his bad faith sophistry and cringe inducing sperglord gish galloping. Sad.

Literally who?

>>510934315
>>510934466
I agree with both your points here. But the reality is that a Vaush level sperg like Mehdi can actually form coherent thoughts while people he was debating had mainly "vague arguments/feelings".

>>510934557
I wasn't too familiar with him either, but it's actually a funny video. Leave it on the background while doing something else, don't waste too much time on it.

>>510932222
>>510932508
>>510932710
Well that's the point of these "debates," it's like 20 simultaneous man on the street interviews against some jackass who does it for a living and is very prepped. The expected outcome is that the man on the street gets clobbered, with a minor chance that the professional fumbles. It's sensationalism. Debates that are actually debates get very few views. If someone comes up to you with a camera on the street, they were looking for content fodder and you seemed like a good lolcow, say "no comment" and run.

Presidential debates used to be a lot more like what everyone's asking for in this thread, very steady debate club type stuff, and while people treated it like a chore, they would roll their eyes, agree that
>yes debates are important I guess
and just agree to lose a night trying to understand the candidates and the issues. Ain't nobody doing that shit anymore, it ain't the 90s.

>>510934607
>while people he was debating had mainly "vague arguments/feelings".
Most were imbecilic mutt normies recently "radicalized" but 2 or 3 had sound positions that were not fully presented thanks to willful jeet derailing. Mehdi KNOWS where his incoherent position has huge gaping holes and makes sure to gish gallop anyone approaching them. In this respect he is both intelligent and entirely disingenuous.

>>510934908
>it's like 20 simultaneous man on the street interviews against some jackass who does it for a living and is very prepped.
I've also watched Jordan Peterson vs atheists video and the atheists in that video were really well prepared. I think they do give heads up regarding questions and stuff. They don't just pick people off the street. For the video in this thread though... If you could pick, who would you even pick? I mean far right talking points are so diverse and some of them are so dumb that I can't see things looking great anyway.

And I also would like to clarify, I think the setting is trash as well, I completely agree with you that it's not set up to achieve any good dialogue. It's sensational/reality/gotcha type of setting. Unfortunately, it is kinda fun to watch people get triggered and say dumb things.

>>510934996
Can you give examples regarding who had sound positions?
I'm not trying to nitpick soundbites from them. I'm just curious.

>>510935166
>who would you even pick?
I'd pick a selection of third positionists, fascists, nat socs, integralists and monarchists who have actually read about and understood their professed ideology
20 so called far rightists and not one coherent substantive defense of ethno-nationalism nor critiques of liberalism and jewry
>>510935294
The last guy who he chose to debate and the texas guy - who got frustrated with the jeets ceaseless bad faith gish gallop

>>510935607
>The last guy who he chose to debate and the texas guy
Sorry for pushing on this, could you mention some of the arguments from them that you liked?

>>510933371
This. Rhetoric >>> dialectic.

>>510931667 (OP)
Lmao this whole video just proves /pol/ is an echo chamber shithole and talking points that get pushed here never have any value irl

don spiccone

>>510935780
Texas guy is entirely correct about billionaires importing cheap foreign labour to lower wages and the flaws of neolib economists who deny it
In contrast mehdi's position here is contradictory and incoherent
The last guy's originalist position is also sound whereas the anti-White jeet clearly views the constitution as a weapon to pilpul White people into accepting ethnic disintegration and displacement

>>510935935
I mean there are realistic, reasonable points to argue. For example, you can say "Supreme Court decided children born to illegal immigrants are citizens but I disagree with this, I think they interpreted it wrong and this is incentivizing people who try to have kids in the US. Original intent was not to incentivize this, it was to formalize existing norms and over time borders became more strict and travel became a lot easier so a newer interpretation or an amendment is required."
If the guy actually said this instead of focusing on dumb tangents, I feel like he could've gotten Mehdi to agree with him or at least put him in a position where he would have to do some dumb talking points instead of reasonable talking points.

>>510935987
This clown was an idiot
Being anti-Israel is one of the few things that mehdi prick is right about

>>510932592
I thought that was the goal all along.
I didn't waste 13 years of my life here for nothing

>>510936229
I heard he took a dump on stage after they shut off the cameras

>>510936178
>If the guy actually said this instead of focusing on dumb tangents, I feel like he could've gotten Mehdi to agree with him
It was mehdi who insisted on willfully derailing into dead end tangents because he KNOWS where the weak points of his position lie
>>510936345
Just delivering a new anchor baby

>>510936092
You legally can not pay H-1Bs less than some number determined by the department of labor and you "usually" can not get a visa through work if your work is paying you less than prevailing wage that is determined by the department of labor.
However, I will 100% concede that if there are more skilled employees, the wages will not grow as much. But that's basically how economies grow. You gather hard working people to do things. For example, we bring in so many software engineers and skilled software engineers are still paid decently.
There are ways to defend this position but I think the Texas guy was just not really articulating it well. He was literally shaking.

Regarding the last guy, see the post >>510936178 , I agree, he could've defended his original claim but he went on a dumb tangent regarding originalism and then some citizenship test tangent.

>>510936492
>It was mehdi who insisted on willfully derailing into dead end tangents because he KNOWS where the weak points of his position lie
Nah, the guy was more than happy to go on tangents, Mehdi didn't even need to nudge that much on that one. This is the issue with people who are not used to stating their opinions in real life. The first time they are given a platform, they want to say everything and get distracted.

>>510935935
>LMAO I'VE BEEN PSYOPED LMAO

>>510936528
>"usually" can not get a visa through work if your work is paying you less than prevailing wage that is determined by the department of labor.
This should've been "you can't get a green card". For visa, the requirements are more basic.

>>510936528
Increase supply (of labour) and the price (wages) goes down
Econ 101
>then some citizenship test tangent.
That was daft yes....although I'm not averse to a tiered citizenship system a la starship troopers
Also birthright citizenship IS asinine
Blood determines membership to a nation. Simple as.

>>510936640
Civilians get nervous but you're blind if you deny mehdi's CONSTANT derailing and gish galloping. It was fucking painful.

>>510931667 (OP)
Imagine if Jordan Peterson, Mehdi, Piers Morgan, Ben Shapiro, and others were sitting a circle like this in chairs, and some random college kid sat in the center.
Then the countdown timer begins, and they have to run up to the chair and get there first so they could have their turn.
This is such a fucking humiliation ritual it's unreal.

>>510936846
>Blood determines membership to a nation. Simple as.
Not really. At least not in the US as it is right now.

>>510936846
>Increase supply (of labour) and the price (wages) goes down
>Econ 101
Yep, that's exactly what I wrote. However, the legislation prevents this from happening for skilled laborers (as explained here >>510936528 ) coming in legally and the legal immigration path basically blocks most other things besides farm work and temporary contract work. So if we can address illegal immigration, we can address these issues.

>>510931667 (OP)
those are paid actors retard, their paid to look stupid and make the shitskin look competent

>>510936932
That's roughly what I wrote. He did overload with arguments and he did "encourage" going on tangents for the most part. But specifically for the last guy, he basically went on a tangent by himself with very little contribution from Mehdi.

On /pol/ people say "We know the tricks the media uses, we will not fall for it" and in a real debate, they fall for it.

>>510937171
How much were they paid? I could make him look even more competent. Can you get me in touch?

>>510937235
>On /pol/ people say "We know the tricks the media uses, we will not fall for it" and in a real debate, they fall for it.
cool story!
what "people on /pol/" have you watched in an irl debate?
retarded faggot

>>510936983
>Imagine if Jordan Peterson, Mehdi, Piers Morgan, Ben Shapiro, and others were sitting a circle like this in chairs, and some random college kid sat in the center.
Someone should do that
A competent rightist could obliterate all of the above with ease
>This is such a fucking humiliation ritual it's unreal.
Agreed
>>510937123
>Not really.
Yes really
>At least not in the US as it is right now.
Therein lies the problem
> However, the legislation prevents this from happening for skilled laborers
Incorrect. The increased aggregate supply inevitably places downwards pressure on price.
>>510937235
> in a real debate, they fall for it.
No competent rightist intellectual would subject himself to that farcical spectacle
But I assure you that such people can eat several jeet sophists for breakfast - mehdi included

>>510936983
Yeah. Pitting media personalities against nobodies is completely unfair.
However, I watched the Jordan Peterson video, he made himself look silly without any help, so I would take him out of that list. (I assume Jordan Peterson would say "What do you mean list? What do you mean take? What do you mean out?" if I mentioned it to him)

>>510931667 (OP)
Right-wingers are insane now. It's over for this country.

where do people sign up for this shit? the 20 they selected to be far-right were a fucking joke

>>510937383
What is the point of fighting that statement? Why are you asking for a citation?

>>510937445
>Therein lies the problem
According to you. And that's just like your opinion man. Current standard for citizenship (or membership as you wrote) is not what you claimed. If you want to change it, vote for it and change it.

>>510937445
>Incorrect. The increased aggregate supply inevitably places downwards pressure on price.
If you have an econ101 perspective, you're right. Take another class and come back. (I know I'm engaging in a bit of ad-hominem, it's just for funny effect, I don't think we're going to be able to reach a conclusion, so let's agree to disagree)

>>510936178
The way to cut to the heart of the matter is just to bring up race and IQ, and that non-whites like him want to settle in white societies because their race is incapable of building a comparable civilization.

I'd just bring up the fact that Pakistani schoolchildren in the UK have a tested IQ around 80 and that further settlement and amalgamation will degrade our civilization, so it's rational for white people to organize to oppose it.

To win the argument you have to go all in and hammer home the racial differences.

>>510937579
The opinions presented are not uncommon in /pol/. I was actually expecting more like regular conservatives, but they must've looked at /pol/ and chose people who represent some /pol/ talking points.

>>510937579
Indeed eg
A persian zionist
A mainstream MIGA republican
A literal mexican anchor baby
A clueless tatted up Stacy
An incoherent fat papist who doesn't know what fascism means

Debates are pointless and cringe. Our politics are no longer up for debate.

>>510937788
These are literally common types in /pol/. Blonde chicks were super cute though.

>>510937630
why do you care?

>>510937792
Because right-wingers get destroyed every time

>>510937669
>According to you
And every rightist thinker in the West since Plato
>Take another class and come back
Churlish and presumptuous not to mention plainly incorrect

>>510937738
>The way to cut to the heart of the matter is just to bring up race and IQ, and that non-whites like him want to settle in white societies because their race is incapable of building a comparable civilization.
I hate to break it to you, but try this against any competent media person. You will get humiliated. You will not even be taken seriously.
I mean saying things on /pol/ is different than saying things in real life.

>>510937579
because its propaganda

>>510937738
Correct
>>510937844
The tall blond chick was also on sound footing with her implied critique of jewry and israel

>>510937975
>. You will get humiliated. You will not even be taken seriously.
Not if prepared with citations...and there are plenty.

>>510938068
>The tall blond chick was also on sound footing with her implied critique of jewry and israel
She wasn't too bad and I think she was the only person willingly ended the conversation. The other blonde chick had a better butt though, I think.

>>510937884
Just think about it on your own then.

>>510931667 (OP)
did they let everyone talk over him and mock him like the show let the 20 do to Charlie Kirk

>>510937975
Has anyone ever actually defeated Jared Taylor in a debate? His whole schtick is basically that argument and he slam dunks every media figure with it every time. You don't really have to debate hard if you're just asserting the truth.

What typically happens is they freak out and try to shut the conversation down if you touch that third rail.

>>510938155
>Not if prepared with citations...and there are plenty.
A bit tangential but flat earthers also have a lot of citations, they get humiliated either way.

>>510938222
fucking retard youre just sticking up for your mate faggot OP

>>510938228
Kinda, yeah. There was a decent amount of talking over and Mehdi also talked over a lot of participants.

>>510938241
>they get humiliated either way.
Because they're wrong - to a risible degree. We are empirically correct. Simple as.

>>510937975
>>510938155
You'll get a ton of rhetorical spin of course, but it is the meat and potatoes of the argument. Modern liberalism is built on this basis of racial equality (and gender and orientation and...), no racial equality, no liberalism.

This is also where /pol/ posters should be strongest, since I'd wager most of the userbase is former liberals/libertarians who got the pill against their will. Whatever worked on you should probably work on someone else.

>>510937775
I was only half paying attention to it. I'm going to listen to it again tomorrow at work, but what I did catch today was fucking retarded

>>510937788 (czeched o/)
yeah, mostly this

>>510938038
that's the only takeaway I had, but some of their other debates have had decent people on both sides. maybe I got my hopes up too much

>>510938347
>We are empirically correct. Simple as.
Who are we and regarding what position?

>>510938400
>I was only half paying attention to it. I'm going to listen to it again tomorrow at work, but what I did catch today was fucking retarded
I mean that is an accurate statement for /pol/ most of the time.

>>510938233
>Has anyone ever actually defeated Jared Taylor in a debate?
No
That's precisely why they generally opt for halfwits to represent our positions instead

>>510938457
>I mean
/pol/ is a glownigger infested garbage shithole and you should know cocksucker

>>510938395
Bingo
>>510938414
>Who are we
Race realists
>regarding what position
Racial differences in average IQ and behaviour
Furthermore huge numbers of people already know this to be the case deep down

>>510938395
>since I'd wager most of the userbase is former liberals/libertarians who got the pill against their will.
The pill I got was a rectal suppository and it was mainly that "unreasonable immigration policies are bad for the country and political correctness definitely has gone mad". I don't really think that if you took a kid from a different race and raised him/her properly, they would be any dumber/smarter on average. However, I have no proof and I would be skeptical about sketchy proof because this is such a hard experiment to conduct.

>>510938688
>Racial differences in average IQ and behaviour
>Furthermore huge numbers of people already know this to be the case deep down
Cool, write a paper, get it published. This would be interesting.

>>510938395
Typically they regress into epistemological and linguistic hairsplitting with "Well what is race? What about this fringe case, what about that?" and try to drag the conversation down that path. It's like a retard who is wrong about how to build furniture going "well what is a chair anyway, some chairs don't have legs, they're suspended from ropes". Of course, blacks are never expected give an hour explanation on the fine intricacies of the legitimacy of race as a category.

>>510938825
>Cool, write a paper
No need. Countless already exist. The FACT that american blacks are consistently 15IQ points below Whites is not even contested.
How new are you?

>>510938878
I just watched 30 seconds of it and already he was giving a sob story about some assaulted cop like "OMG, how can you be against this poor assaulted cop? Are you saying he is lying?"
He ran the clock, and then he added more after time was up and the kid had to leave.

>>510935987
I actually felt bad for that guy. He didn't have good arguments to be honest but Mehdi talked over him so much and got him stuck on "Others want you gone" and "do you think Israeli soldier is responsible" points. I wish he answered them and moved on quickly.

>>510932222
checked

Welcome to /pol/. Enjoy your stay.

>>510939045
>No need. Countless already exist. The FACT that american blacks are consistently 15IQ points below Whites is not even contested.
Can you refer me to some? I've heard these claims often and I've seen some screenshots but I've not read a peer reviewed paper.

>>510938825
The FACT that american blacks carry the "warrior gene" (aka psychopathy) at a rate 20 times higher than Whites is also uncontested
>>510939158
I can yes but you should learn to navigate pubmed yourself

>>510938825
You do know that in China, the biologists and geneticists there are open about race, and basically all of them agree with the race realist position? The fact they barely talk about or interact with the egalitarian blank slatists shows there's just nothing there, it's ideological posturing. If blank slatism was the stronger position, then the Chinese would at least be interacting with blank slatism and grappling with its explanatory power, but they don't lol.

The genes for intelligence are increasingly being discovered and surprise surprise, they're not distributed evenly between the races. The last final cope the egalitarians have is "W-well intelligence is a polygenetic trait down to multiple genes". As if randomly all those coded differences for the structure of the brain just randomly, from every part of the world, line up to the races being cognitively equal. It's as likely as throwing up three hundred coins and all of them landing on their side.

>>510939097
Mehdi sometimes got stuck on specific points but to be fair, the "Do you consider assaulting an officer a crime?" question was on point. He should've said "Yes" and argued further down the line with whatever arguments he had.

>>510939097
Yeah there's tricks of the trade. These people like Charlie Kirk and Ben Shapiro rote memorize their talking points and the conversation tree they want to go down. They know where to tilt the conversation in a certain direction to lead someone down into a dead end.

>>510939158

>>510939264
>I can yes but you should learn to navigate pubmed yourself
I do read papers regularly, I don't have issues searching through databases (although my field mainly uses ieeexplore, I did help a few doctors with statistics, so I'm familiar with pubmed as well). It's actually part of my job. I do want to ask you because I want to gain some perspective into things I might be missing. I have not seen a very clear paper on this topic.

>>510939158
“According to Bruce Charlton, English average IQ declined by 30 pts since the Georgian period. According to Michael Anthony Woodley of Menie, English IQ declined by 13.35 points between 1889 and 2004. Woodley also claims that England is the nation in Europe with the most rapid IQ decline with loss of 1.26 pts IQ per decade. According to Richard Lynn, a Scot from Edinburgh, the average English IQ will hit 87 by the end of this century. However, Edward Dutton disagrees and claims that English average IQ will hit 85 by the end of the century.”

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289613000470

More evidence Europeans have been completely ravaged by the industrial revolution. They used to be much much more intelligent up to two standard deviations higher in IQ than they are today.

The Flynn Effect is primarily verbal and is apparently a statistical aberration based on people being illiterate and learning how to read. If you look into it, spatial intelligence has been at best constant, and possible declining.

After seeing what the generally accepted food does to body and mind firsthand, it’s not hard to believe this.

The most intelligent groups today are the ones that were the most removed from the industrial revolution. I’ve honestly had a hunch the Flynn Effect is off, because people seem less capable than ever before.

This research indicates that intelligence negatively correlates with fertility, and mental reaction time strongly correlates and has causality with intelligence. The basis of that claim seems to be that reaction time is the health state of your mental circuitry.

The research suggests it’s possible to use the reaction time delta between the present population groups and measurements from the past population groups, as a way to determine the damage done to previous population groups. Europeans notoriously have the lowest reaction times out of any population group on earth showing the most damage!

>>510938755
>this is such a hard experiment to conduct.
Are you underage? There have been probably dozens of twin studies by this point.

>>510939625
Great, can you post some?

>>510939392
>sometimes
Lol. Lmao.
>>510939565
I suggest search engines

Hasan just sperged and didnt let anyone else talk it was lame.

>>510939669
They're on American Renaissance, I'm too lazy to look them up. Minnesota had a trans-racial adoption study in the past they did commentary on.

Typically IQ is plastic in youth, but twins on adulthood come close to the same level, regardless of how they were reared as children.

>>510939704
>I suggest search engines
I want to gain perspective from you though. When I search, I get what I search for. I want to gain perspective from the eyes of a /pol/ poster. I'm curious regarding what papers you are reading.

>>510931667 (OP)
Kys

>>510939669
The oft-cited figure that human genomes are 99.9% identical comes from the Human Genome Project and early comparative sequencing studies. This number refers to single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) — the differences in individual base pairs across the genome.

* Yes, any two humans share about 99.9% of their DNA sequence.
* However, the remaining 0.1% accounts for millions of variable sites in the genome.
* The human genome is ~3.2 billion base pairs long, so 0.1% variation = ~3.2 million differences between any two individuals.

This 0.1% is not trivial — it is where the biological differences lie.

>>510939770
https://www.amren.com/tag/race-and-intelligence/

https://www.amren.com/news/2019/10/race-differences-in-intelligence-richard-lynn/

Start with American Renaissance. Jared Taylor has meticulously categorized the last 30 years of race realist arguments.

>>510939669
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Transracial_Adoption_Study#Results
I'm going to make the massive assumption that you're just helpless and not being maliciously obtuse. Scroll past the dissembling bullshit to the table.

>>510939879
While most of the genome is shared, the specific sequence differences — SNPs, insertions, deletions, structural variants, copy number variations, and epigenetic markers — are what:

* Determine trait variation (e.g., eye color, height, disease risk)
* Influence gene expression patterns
* Drive evolutionary adaptation
* Create population structure
* Underlie individual and group-level differences

Sequence differences matter not just in quantity, but in pattern and location.

For example:
* A single nucleotide change in the HBB gene causes sickle cell anemia.
* A SNP in the SLC24A5 gene accounts for a large portion of the difference in skin pigmentation between European and African populations.
* Differences in the LCT gene determine lactase persistence (ability to digest milk into adulthood), which is common in some populations (e.g., Northern Europeans) and rare in others (e.g., East Asians)

>>510939751
>American Renaissance
Can you give me some keywords for the papers you're referring to?
For example is this a good one? https://www.amren.com/news/2022/11/the-landmark-minnesota-twin-study/

>>510939770
Use your initiative eg search "maoa gene in blacks"

>>510939922
Nope, as I said many times already, I want to gain perspective by asking you guys. I am perfectly capable of finding things myself, but I want specifically to read what you guys are reading.

>>510939931
>"Genomes are 99.9% the same however the sequencing is different, which is massive."

This is a critically important nuance often lost in popular discussions of human genetic variation.

Human Genomes Are ~99.9% Identical — So Why Does the 0.1% Matter?

While it's commonly cited that human genomes are 99.9% the same, this small 0.1% difference translates to millions of genetic variants across the 3.2 billion base pairs in the human genome. These differences, although a small percentage, can have massive functional and phenotypic consequences.

Let’s break it down:

————————

How Much Genetic Variation Are We Talking About?

* The human genome contains about 3.2 billion base pairs.
* A 0.1% difference between two individuals equals around 3.2 million base pair differences.
* These differences include:
* Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) — single base pair changes
* Insertions and deletions (indels)
* Copy number variations (CNVs)
* Structural variants like chromosomal rearrangements

This variation is what drives:
* Individual traits (e.g., eye color, height, disease risk)
* Population-specific adaptations
* Genetic clustering that corresponds closely with geography and traditional racial categories

>>510931667 (OP)
meanwhile, me (pushing it down the hill)

here's a thing about the gods, there rules dont say you can't rename a designation, so if i rename the bottom of the hill, "the top" and let it roll down, i've finished my labor.

and so, i've already won.
me: 2
false gods: 0

>>510939936
I've given you enough to do a solid few hours of reading with.

https://www.amren.com/about/issues/

There's four entire books here under the Race and IQ section you can read. There's also Edward Dutton's writing on race you can look into.

>>510940058
I don't want to read someone's summary of issues. I want to read specific studies but thank you for sharing regardless.

>>510940030
FST values, show that human populations are genetically differentiated, especially when comparing continental groups:

These FST values between human populations are comparable to or greater than those that define subspecies in other mammals.

* So while within-group variation (i.e., genetic differences among individuals of the same population) is larger than between-group variation, the between-group differences are still biologically significant.
* These differences are not just "noise" — they are:
* Functionally relevant
* Correlated with geography
* Linked to ancestry-informative traits
* Useful in predicting disease risk, drug response, and adaptation

>>510938457
>>510938565
both correct

>>510940170
Even small differences in DNA sequences can have major downstream effects:

Gene Regulation and Expression:
* Tiny differences in non-coding regions can alter gene expression levels, which influences everything from immune response to metabolic function.

Protein Function:
* A single SNP can change the structure or function of a protein — for example:
* Sickle cell anemia is caused by a single base pair change in the HBB gene.
* Lactose tolerance in adulthood is linked to a single nucleotide variant near the LCT gene.

Population-Level Differences:
* Some genetic variants are much more common in certain populations:
* The EDAR gene variant associated with thicker hair and shovel-shaped incisors is common in East Asians and Native Americans but rare in Africans and Europeans.
* The CCR5-Δ32 mutation that confers resistance to HIV is found almost exclusively in people of European descent.

These are not just abstract differences — they are biologically meaningful, and they cluster by ancestry.

>"The sequencing difference is what matters — and that is massive."

Even though we share most of our DNA, the genetic differences that do exist:
* Are not randomly distributed
* Cluster geographically
* Have functional consequences
* Can be used to predict ancestry and traits
* Are greater than those that define subspecies in other animals

This means that dismissing these differences as negligible or politically inconvenient ignores the biological reality.

>>510935987

>>510940131
I mean, wouldn't the commentary and summary be more useful for an introduction? These people are dedicated white nationalists and have ideological motivation for asserting their position, they've spent decades assembling everything you need to know on one website.

After you have read the commentaries and summaries, you can follow the reference links on the site to the original articles. People typically read mainstream history books of compiled sources when they're curious about a historical era, they don't typically go sniffing for the original sources. They can do that later on if they're still really curious and wanting to know more.

Why the fuck am I having to handhold you like this?

>>510940131
I’ve provided the science. These are politically charged issues. They are censored and not going to be handed to you on a silver platter. The powers that be have no interest in you knowno the truth.

>>510940370
It's a crypto-libshit perhaps eg a journo

>>510940370
Slowdown buddy. You don't need to handhold me at all. Have I not been very clear? I want to read specific studies you or other posters are reading to gain perspective. I'm perfectly capable of finding summaries, or papers myself.

To clarify, I want to refer to specific studies because then I can read about methodology, data gathered, and peer reviewed conclusions. Reading a summary is like reading a press release and making up your mind. I want to go into details, I'm not scared of reading articles and although I can't say I'm qualified to focus on psychology aspect of it, I can definitely qualitatively critique the methodology and conclusions. I've reviewed papers before on some decent impact journals.

>>510940370
>Why the fuck am I having to handhold you like this?
For the same reason having debates with these faggots is useless: they’re not good faith actors. There is no actual desire to become enlightened or understand their ideological counterpoints. Its performative and follow the same useless infinite spiral of
>proof??
>not good enough
>proof??
>not good enough
>see you didn’t prove anything!

>>510940500
No, I'm not but no matter what I say, your opinion is not going to change so it literally doesn't matter.

>>510931667 (OP)
I would say from my perspective, Xi is far really far right. But if you look at him from the West, sure that's left.

>>510940762
Xi is lapping everyone while we are engaging in silly debates.

>>510940732
>your opinion is not going to change
My opinions have changed based on empirical data. That's why I'm now a race realist despite being reared in a small l liberal ethos.

>>510940850
Just to clarify, I meant your opinion regarding me. I wasn't trying to change your opinion regarding the racial issues or whatever.

>>510940901
>I meant your opinion regarding me
I remain agnostic re you.

>>510940617
All he has to do is find the book listed in the article, go to the reference index, and all the original studies will be listed and sourced in there. He has everything he needs. You're right he's wasting everyone's time.

There's also the Mankind Quarterly, an entire academic journal focused on race realism.

>>510938755
>However, I have no proof and I would be skeptical about sketchy proof because this is such a hard experiment to conduct.
It's already been done.
>The Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study: A Follow-Up of IQ Test Performance at Adolescence
The IQ gap between races persists.

>44 posts by this id
Why are you posting so much if you know so little?

>>510939879
>>510939931
Where are you copying these from? I would like to read it from the source.

>>510940762
Natsoc with chinese characteristics

>>510941025
Is this a good starting page in your opinion?
https://www.amren.com/features/2012/07/science-versus-ideology/

I started the thread, I'm engaging in it because I find these topics interesting. I don't see your point.

>>510940612
You don’t know the history of Robert Maxwell and the modern peer review process, do you?

>>510941081
From modern accepted science on these topics.

>>510931667 (OP)
>>510932592
yeah sure you homo like pink shirt guy. wait till you find out that based off his twitter, he is a groyper that was ideologically and morally groomed by Nick Fuentes.

>I remember seeing these arguments on /pol/
You have never argued on /pol/ newfag. Stop trying to fit in.

>>510941213
This is a bit of a tangent but peer review depends a lot on the publication. Some publications hold submitted papers to a really high standard and you are given a guideline. They also invite more people than required to review the papers so if there are outliers, they can overlook them.

I went through academia all the way. I do have a PhD and I have published papers. Peer review process is not perfect and there are a lot of things I criticize in academia but that's not to say everything is garbage. It kinda depends. This is the reason I am asking suggestions for specific papers from people in this thread. So that I can see if they are good studies myself and not trust the peer review process blindly. I do have the necessary skills and experience to judge this myself (in other words, I've written, and published papers and I've reviewed papers as well, I haven't been an editor in any journal yet).

>>510941247
Do you have a specific reference? I'd like to read it.

>>510941358
Hahahahah, I have been here since 2008 I think. It was really different back then and this discussion would be more funny back then.

>>510941148
It's a start

>>510941469
>You could have just said, “No I haven’t”
Robert Maxwell, a prominent figure in scientific publishing, is associated with transforming the academic publishing landscape in ways that raised concerns about the integrity and accessibility of the peer review process. By aggressively expanding Pergamon Press in the 1950s and 1960s, Maxwell capitalized on the lack of free-market principles in scientific publishing. He actively recruited scientists to create new journals, rapidly increasing the number of publications under his company. This expansion led to concerns about the commercialization of peer-reviewed science, as Maxwell's focus appeared to be on maximizing profits rather than ensuring the quality and accessibility of scientific knowledge.

One of the key criticisms of Maxwell's influence on peer review is that he helped establish a system where publishers became "kingmakers of science." Universities and libraries, funded by government money, were compelled to subscribe to an ever-growing number of journals, creating a cycle where publishers held significant power over which research was disseminated. This model raised concerns about the bottleneck in knowledge dissemination and the lack of accountability in the peer review process, as the system prioritized profit over public access to scientific knowledge.

Additionally, the legacy of Maxwell's publishing model has been linked to the current challenges in academic publishing, including the high costs of journal subscriptions and the push for open access. While open access has been proposed as a solution, the transition has not resolved concerns about the oligopoly of academic publishers or the role of peer review in maintaining scientific integrity. Instead, the commercial pressures introduced by figures like Maxwell have arguably contributed to ongoing issues in ensuring transparent, unbiased, and equitable peer review practices.

https://dovydas.com/blog/undoing-robert-maxwell

>>510931667 (OP)
Just finished watching it and it was really interesting how every far right person there was on board when it came to criticizing Trump for his corrupt submission to Jews and criticizing him for handing over the US forgien policy to the Israelis to make the decisions as well as criticizing him and Israel on Gaza. With the exception of two people who were not on board.
the first person who wasn't on board was basically only half way on board. It was the dumb brainlet blond women who was like, the reason they are fighting over there is just religion and nothing else and america shouldn't support israel because america is christian and not jewish and that america should invade to make sure the holy land is controlled by christian. It was so dumb everyone else voted her out quickly she obviously didn't know what she was talking about. but fair enough she is still far right..

Then there was the second person who was completely not on board and was basically defending every israeli war crime and using israeli hasbara talking points to boot. It was that diaspora California style "I'm Persian not Iranian" Urban Iranian faggot. He was the only person that wasn't truly far right that was invited to speak. That faggot was basically a neo-liberal like Destiny and other jew owned faggots. Yet somehow he managed to get a seat in the far right circle wtf

>>510941275
Pink shirt guy with Texas hat was funny. He got super triggered. Part of it is understandable because Mehdi was talking over him but part of it was just funny.

>>510931667 (OP)
I've watched 52 minutes of this and it's just really, really boring. It's just a paki shouting over everyone, trying to disrupt them from speaking. There is nothing interesting or funny about it. This is really low brow brain rotting shit. I've seen enough

>>510931667 (OP)
Nigga, these "x vs. 1" videos are staged
They were staged every time a Conservative made them and this is staged as well
How hard do you think it is to hire a bunch of actors to make strawman arguments?
Can't believe this kindergarten level of propaganda is actually getting spammed on /pol/
Shameful, honestly

>>510941720
I don't want to assume, but I'm going to guess that I have more experience publishing things than most (I have 3 journal publications from non-profit publishers and some more that I was acknowledged for, I contributed but not enough to be an author on them).
I completely agree that for-profit science publications are usually trashy. But to be fair, if you are involved in any serious scientific debate, people will look at where something is published and how it was reviewed (this is partially why I was asking for papers to read). I mean, I've found some interesting things from unknown journals and I've found things that made me think "Who actually approved this?" from for-profit journals.

>>510942011
>But to be fair, if you are involved in any serious scientific debate
Did you take the Covid shots?

>>510931667 (OP)
Well, it's sleepy time for me. Thanks for contributing, everyone!
Good night!

>>510932508
He's 25 years older than any of them and does news for a living. Not exactly fair.

>>510942011
The point, my point is peer-review has been subverted by corporations and government. Certain topics are politicized and unreliable.

>>510942109
>here’s a peer reviewed paper
https://www.mdpi.com/1467-3045/44/3/73

lol

>>510932222

>>510932222
Jej
>>510931667 (OP)
Them and Hasan and Destiny and literally everyone should've debated me. They would have all lost the debate against Islamofascism (the ideology I'm supporting)

>>510939879
>99.9% identical
They revised it to 99.5%

>>510944990
lol

>>510941469
>I do have a PhD
tragic, but not unexpected

>>510942104
>Did you take the Covid shots?
never needed them, i was protected by my "corona de aluminio"