NotPoliticallyCorrect

Home » Crime » Responses to The Alternative Hypothesis and Robert Lindsay on Testosterone

Responses to The Alternative Hypothesis and Robert Lindsay on Testosterone

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 121 other followers

Follow me on Twitter

Charles Darwin

Denis Noble

JP Rushton

Richard Lynn

L:inda Gottfredson

Goodreads

2300 words

I enjoy reading what other bloggers write about testosterone and its supposed link to crime, aggression, and prostate cancer; I used to believe some of the things they did, since I didn’t have a good understanding of the hormone nor its production in the body. However, once you understand how its produced in the body, then what others say about it will seem like bullshit—because it is. I’ve recently read a few articles on testosterone from the HBD-blog-o-sphere and, of course, they have a lot of misconceptions in them—some even using studies I have used myself on this blog to prove my point that testosterone does not cause crime!! Now, I know that most people don’t read studies that are linked, so they would take what it says on face value because, why not, there’s a cite so what he’s saying must be true, right? Wrong. I will begin with reviewing an article by someone at The Alternative Hypothesis and then review one article from Robert Lindsay on testosterone.

The Alternative Hypothesis

Faulk has great stuff here, but the one who wrote this article, Testosterone, Race, and Crime1) doesn’t know what he’s talking about and 2) clearly didn’t read the papers he cited. Read this article, you’ll see him make bold claims using studies I have used for my own arguments that testosterone doesn’t cause crime! Let’s take a look.

One factor which explains part of why Blacks have higher than average crime rates is testosterone. Testosterone is known to cause aggression, and Blacks are known to at once have more of it and, for genetic reasons, to be more sensitive to its effects.

  1. No it doesn’t.
  2. Testosterone is known to cause aggression“, but that’s the thing: it’s only known that it ’causes’ aggression, it really doesn’t.
  3. Evidence is mixed on blacks being “… for genetic reasons … more sensitive to its effects” (Update on Androgen Receptor gene—Race/History/Evolution Notes).

Testosterone activity has been linked many times to aggression and crime. Meta-analyses show that testosterone is correlated with aggression among humans and non human animals (Book, Starzyk, and Quinsey, 2001).

Why doesn’t he say what the correlation is? It’s .14 and this study, while Archer, Graham-Kevan and Davies, (2005) reanalyzed the studies used in the previous analysis and found the correlation to be .08. This is a dishonest statement.

Women who suffer from a disease known as congenital adrenal hyperplasia are exposed to abnormally high amounts of testosterone and are abnormally aggressive.

Abnormal levels of androgens in the womb for girls with CAH are associated with aggression, while boys with and without CAH are similar in aggression/activity level (Pasterski et al, 2008), yet black women, for instance, don’t have higher levels of testosterone than white women (Mazur, 2016). CAH is just girls showing masculinized behavior; testosterone doesn’t cause the aggression (See Archer, Graham-Kevan and Davies, 2005)

Artificially increasing the amount of testosterone in a person’s blood has been shown to lead to increases in their level of aggression (Burnham 2007Kouri et al. 1995).

Actually, no. Supraphysiological levels of testosterone administered to men (200 and 600 mg weekly) did not increase aggression or anger (Batrinos, 2012).

 Finally, people in prison have higher than average rates of testosterone (Dabbs et al., 2005).

Dabbs et al don’t untangle correlation from causation. Environmental factors can explain higher testosterone levels (Mazur, 2016) in inmates, and even then, some studies show socially dominant and aggressive men have the same levels of testosterone (Ehrenkraz, Bliss, and Sheard, 1974).

Thus, testosterone seems to cause both aggression and crime.

No, it doesn’t.

Why Testosterone Does Not Cause Crime

Testosterone and Aggressive Behavior

Can racial differences in circulating testosterone explain racial differences in crime?—Race/History/Evolution Notes

Furthermore, of the studies I could find on testosterone in Africans, they have lower levels than Western men (Campbell, O’Rourke, and Lipson, 2003Lucas and Campbell, and Ellison, 2004Campbell, Gray, and Ellison, 2006) so, along with the studies and articles cited on testosterone, aggression, and crime,  that’s another huge blow to the testosterone/crime/aggression hypothesis.

Richard et al. (2014) meta-analyzed data from 14 separate studies and found that Blacks have higher levels of free floating testosterone in their blood than Whites do.

They showed that blacks had 2.5 to 4.9 percent higher testosterone than whites, which could not explain the higher prostate cancer incidence (which meta-analyses call in to question; Sridhar et al 2010; Zagars et al 1998). That moderate amount would not be enough to cause differences in aggression either.

Exacerbating this problem even further is the fact that Blacks are more likely than Whites to have low repeat versions of the androgen receptor gene. The androgen reception (AR) gene codes for a receptor by the same name which reacts to androgenic hormones such as testosterone. This receptor is a key part of the mechanism by which testosterone has its effects throughout the body and brain.

No they’re not.

The rest of the article talks about CAG repeats and aggressive/criminal behavior, but it seems that whites have fewer CAG repeats than blacks.

Robert Lindsay

This one is much more basic, and tiring to rebut but I’ll do it anyway. Lindsay has a whole slew of articles on testosterone on his blog that show he doesn’t understand the hormone, but I’ll just talk about this one for now: Black Males and Testosterone: Evolution and Perspectives.

It was also confirmed by a recent British study (prostate cancer rates are somewhat lower in Black British men because a higher proportion of them have one White parent)

Jones and Chinegwundoh (2014) write: “Caution should be taken prior to the interpretation of these results due to a paucity of research in this area, limited accurate ethnicity data, and lack of age-specific standardisation for comparison. Cultural attitudes towards prostate cancer and health care in general may have a significant impact on these figures, combined with other clinico-pathological associations.

This finding suggests that the factor(s) responsible for the difference in rates occurs, or first occurs, early in life. Black males are exposed to higher testosterone levels from the very start.

In a study of women in early pregnancy, Ross found that testosterone levels were 50% higher in Black women than in White women (MacIntosh 1997).

I used to believe this, but it’s much more nuanced than that. Black women don’t have higher levels of testosterone than white women (Mazur, 2016; and even then Lindsay fails to point out that this was pregnant women).

According to Ross, his findings are “very consistent with the role of androgens in prostate carcinogenesis and in explaining the racial/ethnic variations in risk” (MacIntosh 1997).

Testosterone has been hypothesized to play a role in the etiology of prostate cancer, because testosterone and its metabolite, dihydrotestosterone, are the principal trophic hormones that regulate growth and function of epithelial prostate tissue.

Testosterone doesn’t cause prostate cancer (Stattin et al, 2003Michaud, Billups, and Partin, 2015). Diet explains any risk that may be there (Hayes et al, 1999; Gupta et al, 2009Kheirandish and Chinegwundoh, 2011; Williams et al, 2012Gathirua-Mingwai and Zhang, 2014). However in a small population-based study on blacks and whites from South Carolina, Sanderson et al (2017) “did not find marked differences in lifestyle factors associated with prostate cancer by race.”

Regular exercise, however, can decrease PCa incidence in black men (Moore et al, 2010). A lot of differences can be—albeit, not too largely— ameliorated by environmental interventions such as dieting and exercising.

Many studies have shown that young Black men have higher testosterone than young White men (Ellis & Nyborg 1992; Ross et al. 1992; Tsai et al. 2006).

Ellis and Nyborg (1992) found 3 percent difference. Ross et al (1992) have the same problem as Ross et al (1986), which used University students (~50) for their sample. They’re not representative of the population. Ross et al (1992) also write:

Samples were also collected between 1000 h and 1500 h to avoid confounding
by any diurnal variation in testosterone concentrations.

Testosterone levels should be measured near to 8 am. This has the same time variation too, so I don’t take this study seriously due to that confound. Assays were collected “between” the hours of 10 am and 3 pm, which means it was whenever convenient for the student. No controls on activities, nor attempting to assay at 8 am. People of any racial group could have gone at whatever time in that 5 hour time period and skew the results. Assaying “between” those times completely defeats the purpose of the study.

 

This advantage [the so-called testosterone advantage] then shrinks and eventually disappears at some point during the 30s (Gapstur et al., 2002).

Gapstur et al (2002) help my argument, not yours.

This makes it very difficult if not impossible to explain differing behavioral variables, including higher rates of crime and aggression, in Black males over the age of 33 on the basis of elevated testosterone levels.

See above where I talk about crime/testosterone/aggression.

Critics say that more recent studies done since the early 2000’s have shown no differences between Black and White testosterone levels. Perhaps they are referring to recent studies that show lower testosterone levels in adult Blacks than in adult Whites. This was the conclusion of one recent study (Alvergne et al. 2009) which found lower T levels in Senegalese men than in Western men. But these Senegalese men were 38.3 years old on average.

Alvergne, Fauri, and Raymond (2009) show that the differences are due to environmental factors:

This study investigated the relationship between mens’ salivary T and the trade-off between mating and parenting efforts in a polygynous population of agriculturists from rural Senegal. The men’s reproductive trade-offs were evaluated by recording (1) their pair-bonding/fatherhood status and (2) their behavioral profile in the allocation of parental care and their marital status (i.e. monogamously married; polygynously married).

They also controlled for age, so his statement “But these Senegalese men were 38.3 years old on average” is useless.

These critics may also be referring to various studies by Sabine Rohrmann which show no significance difference in T levels between Black and White Americans. Age is poorly controlled for in her studies.

That is one study out of many that I reference. Rohrmann et al (2007) controlled for age. I like how he literally only says “age is poorly controlled for in her studies“, because she did control for age.

That study found that more than 25% of the samples for adults between 30 and 39 years were positive for HSV-2. It is likely that those positive samples had been set aside, thus depleting the serum bank of male donors who were not only more polygamous but also more likely to have high T levels. This sample bias was probably worse for African American participants than for Euro-American participants.

Why would they use diseased samples? Do you even think?

Young Black males have higher levels of active testosterone than European and Asian males. Asian levels are about the same as Whites, but a study in Japan with young Japanese men suggested that the Japanese had lower activity of 5-alpha reductase than did U.S. Whites and Blacks (Ross et al 1992). This enzyme metabolizes testosterone into dihydrotestosterone, or DHT, which is at least eight to 10 times more potent than testosterone. So effectively, Asians have the lower testosterone levels than Blacks and Whites. In addition, androgen receptor sensitivity is highest in Black men, intermediate in Whites and lowest in Asians.

Wu et al (1995) show that Asians have the highest testosterone levels. Evidence is also mixed here as well. See above on AR sensitivity.

Ethnicmuse also showed that, contrary to popular belief, Asians have higher levels of testosterone than Africans who have higher levels of testosterone than Caucasians in his meta-analysis. (Here is his data.)

The Androgen Receptor and “masculinization”

Let us look at one study (Ross et al 1986) to see what the findings of a typical study looking for testosterone differences between races shows us. This study gives the results of assays of circulating steroid hormone levels in white and black college students in Los Angeles, CA. Mean testosterone levels in Blacks were 19% higher than in Whites, and free testosterone levels were 21% higher. Both these differences were statistically significant.

Assay times between 10 am and 3 pm, unrepresentative sample of college men, didn’t have control for waist circumference. Horribly study.

A 15% difference in circulating testosterone levels could readily explain a twofold difference in prostate cancer risk.

No, it wouldn’t (if it were true).

Higher testosterone levels are linked to violent behavior.

Causation not untangled.

Studies suggest that high testosterone lowers IQ (Ostatnikova et al 2007). Other findings suggest that increased androgen receptor sensitivity and higher sperm counts (markers for increased testosterone) are negatively correlated with intelligence when measured by speed of neuronal transmission and hence general intelligence (g) in a trade-off fashion (Manning 2007).

Who cares about correlations? Causes matter more. High testosterone doesn’t lower IQ. Racial differences in testosterone are tiring to talk about now, but there are still a few more articles I need to rebut.

Conclusion

Racial differences in testosterone don’t exist/are extremely small in magnitude (as I’ve covered countless times). The one article from TAH literally misrepresents studies/leaves out important figures in the testosterone differences between the two races to push a certain agenda. Though if you read the studies you see something completely different. It’s the same with Lindsay. He misunderstood a few studies to push his agenda about testosterone and crime and prostate cancer. They’re both wrong, though.

Why Testosterone Does Not Cause Crime

Testosterone and Aggressive Behavior

Race, Testosterone, and Prostate Cancer

Population variation in endocrine function—Race/History/Evolution Notes


Can racial differences in circulating testosterone explain racial differences in crime?—Race/History/Evolution Notes

Racial differences in testosterone are tiring to talk about now, but there are still a few more articles I need to rebut. People read and write about things they don’t understand, which is the cause of these misconceptions with the hormone, as well as, of course, misinterpreting studies. Learn about the hormone and you won’t fear it. It doesn’t cause crime, prostate cancer nor aggression; these people who write these articles have one idea in their head and they just go for it. They don’t understand the intricacies of the endocrine system and how sensitive it is to environmental influence. I will cover more articles that others have written on testosterone and aggression to point out what they got wrong.

Advertisements

78 Comments

  1. Ricks77 says:

    So what causes Crime and Aggression in Blacks. I have noticed their behaviors all over the world. They act this way even in China (They have a few Chocolate Cities)! Also in the west despite 400 years in Western Civilization MOST (I would say 70-75%) cannot Assimilate (same with many Muslims due to Inbreeding).

    I suspect the issue with Blacks and Muslims is largely Low IQ and genetics. Thoughts?

    Like

    • Chinedu says:

      Have you examined the crime and aggression of the actual Chinese in China, genius? There are about 500 riots in China every single day. Not Africans rioting in China but the Chinese themselves.

      And how about the riots by Chinese immigrants in Paris after police shot a Chinese individual there? It’s the same reason Africans protest in China; it’s rare and usually after alleged police misconduct.

      You are a fine example why race realism is a fraud. Notice that a bunch of your fellow travelers, having been indoctrinated in Internet echo chambers, abandoned their keyboards and went to Charlottesville. There they made fools of themselves, killed a woman, injured many, have generally been condemned and reviled globally and set their “cause” back by about a hundred years.

      Like

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      Thoughts?

      Yeah, you’re full of sh*t. You’ve noticed nothing and been nowhere.

      Actual homicide data:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate#By_country

      Only 8 black African countries have homicide rates higher than Russia. Five of them are actually experiencing a civil war or the aftermath of it (Ivory Coast, Central African Republic, DR Congo, Uganda, South Sudan) and the related deaths are included in homicide stats. Only 3 (Namibia, South Africa and Lesotho) have thuggery-related high crime. All pale compared to the crime levels of Central America.

      And those crude homicide rates don’t tell the whole story. You can really compare if you control for police efficiency, mean age, incarceration rates, emergency health services efficiency and so on. In short, Black Africa is not excessively dangerous, you know it when you go there (except Southern Africa which is really a high crime region).

      The issue is not that people are violent or stuff, all you can fear is petty property crime, and if you’re a really high profile traveler you can get kidnapped in some places. But yet again, the issue is not about the people, it’s about police response. If something bad happens, you’re basically on your own and help from the police requires abundant bribery. That’s why you need to be wary. If you go to big West African cities like Lagos or Accra, you don’t see thugs, you don’t hear gunshots or whatnot and contrary to western countries, anyone who gets caught committing crime faces ruthless mob justice (lynching in other words).

      So that’s it, you’re clueless.

      Like

    • iffen says:

      I suspect the issue with Blacks and Muslims is largely Low IQ and genetics. Thoughts?

      Yes, but within context.

      Individuals with a lower IQ struggle to compete in a modern economy. Group IQ differences will show up as disproportionate numbers of certain groups struggling or doing quite well (Asians and Ashkenazim, for example). In addition there are differences arising from differing historical circumstances which impact the sub-culture of the group. There are plenty of countries where blacks and Muslims do well and criminality is not an issue.

      Like

    • Phil78 says:

      To Afro.

      Surprisingly that lines up with what I’ve read of crime Whites witness in precolonial West Africa for instance.

      Violence occurred, but it was either rituals or acts between militant states like Dahonemy or Benin. These place were also places of trade rather than ethnology, so that sort of sampling on cultural analysis is arguably biased if taken as a whole.

      As far a common trend, pilfering was the most common thing I recall which is to be expected from a group of people who would be new to large market opportunities like Transatlantic trading with Europe.

      Like

    • RaceRealist says:

      Ricks77,

      what causes Crime and Aggression in Blacks.

      I don’t know. It’s not testosterone though.

      I suspect the issue with Blacks and Muslims is largely Low IQ and genetics. Thoughts?

      IQ is part of it. Which genes? MAOA? It’s not what you think.

      Like

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      To RR,

      You need to look beyond race. Most violence in the black community is caused by gang members. It’s not random black folks occasionally surrendering to instinctive urges.

      What causes gang activity? Here is an answer.

      Why People Join Gangs
      Risk Factors
      A recent Advancement Project report identified six major risk factors that contribute to gang involvement in urban environments:

      Lack of jobs for youth
      Poverty compounded by social isolation
      Domestic violence
      Negative peer networks
      Lack of parental supervision
      Early academic failure and lack of school attachment
      These risk factors increase the odds that a young person will join a gang, but is not a guarantee as we see members joining from suburbs and seemingly stable family environments. The reasons why young people join gangs can vary from simple to more complex.

      Some reasons include:
      A Sense of “Family” – Young people might feel that they don’t receive enough support or attention at home. They may be trying to escape a negative home life, or may be looking for a father figure. Gangs often make promises to give unconditional support, and to become the “family” they never had.

      Need for food or money – Gangs may present themselves as a means of survival to youth who lack basic essentials such as food, clothing and shelter. More and more, gang members use their affiliation to make a profit through illegal activities, such as selling drugs and auto theft.

      Desire for protection – Communities with high gang activity often see young people join a gang just to survive. It is often easier to join the gang than to remain vulnerable and unprotected in their neighborhoods.

      Peer Pressure – Kids and teens face constant pressure to fit in, and they may not have the support they need to avoid the pressures to join a gang. Peer pressure can come in the form of intimidation, coercion, a dare, harassment, friendly persuasion, or repetitious begging.

      Family history or tradition – Families can have gang involvement spanning over multiple generations. This is one of the toughest forms of pressure to escape, as the gang lifestyle is deeply rooted in family traditions and values.

      Excitement – Some young people get a rush out of defying authority, or committing crimes. They may be attracted to the gang lifestyle, as it lives outside the law and participates in many illicit behaviors.

      To Appear Cool – Gangs have mastered the art of manipulation to attract potential recruits. They wear the latest fashion trends, throw the hottest parties, and drive the coolest cars. They can appear to have the ‘perfect’ lifestyle to a young kid who’s looking to fit in somewhere. The offer an image of “cool” that has been glorified by the media and entertainment industry.

      To Phil,

      As far a common trend, pilfering was the most common thing I recall which is to be expected from a group of people who would be new to large market opportunities like Transatlantic trading with Europe.

      Yes and also, West Africans (and East Africans I guess) still have strong traditional dispute settlement institutions that New World blacks and Southern Africans lack because of white domination. Social control is done by elder’s councils and traditional courts, which prevent frontier-types of dispute settlement, honor culture and the likes.

      Another factor is that blacks in America and Southern Africa have low economic attachment and stability in the areas they occupy, they don’t mind burning down neighborhoods since there is nothing that is theirs in them. If more people had their economic safety tied to the neighborhood, communities would be more cooperative with the police and regular law would be better enforced.

      Like

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      the link on gang activity
      http://www.gangfree.org/gangs_why.html

      Like

    • ilovehitler says:

      it’s not only important to compare over space, but also over time. has the percentage of prisoners in US prisons who are black changed over time?

      the answer is yes. quite a lot. according to the study below, in 1926 21% of prisoners were black. in 1986 it was 44%. but there is no sudden jump. it’s a steady increase from 1926 to 1986. in 2010 blacks were 40% according to wikipedia. blacks were 9.9% of the US population in 1920 and 12% in 1990. so the population % increased by 20%, but the % of the prison population increased by more than 100%.
      https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/125618.pdf

      Like

    • ilovehitler says:

      but the incarceration rates for blacks in the uk and canada are as bad as they are in the US. blacks are 3% of canadians but 10% of canadian federal prisoners. in the uk it’s 2.7% vs 13.7%. the caribbean also has high crime rates. also black men are known to have sex with 100 different women by the age of 24. sad!

      Liked by 1 person

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      Very shortsighted stats reading. First both the UK and Canada have a much lower incarceration rate than the US. Secondly, incarceration does not exactly equal criminal activity. Thirdly, blacks in the UK and Canada are more than 3% among the crime-prone age cohorts. Add urban residence and high youth unemployment and the overrepresentation is not that high. Neither is the incarceration rate per capita.

      Like

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      And lmao, only Saudi Arabia sends people to jail for being too hawt.

      Like

    • ilovehitler says:

      then why are asians not incarcerated at much higher rates too afro? in the uk “asian” means south asian, the chinese are termed “chinese” in the wikipedia stats. 5.6% of uk population are south asian, 7.1% of prisoners are south asian. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_Kingdom#England_and_Wales_crime_statistics

      your voodoo isn’t working. sad!

      Like

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      South Asians in the UK are a very socially diverse crowd. The Indians are elite migrants. Most of the South Asian prisoners are likely Bangladeshi and Pakistani from poor social background and their overrepresentation likely equals that of Caribbeans.

      JJ’s voodoo is unbeatable.

      Like

    • ilovehitler says:

      of the 20 countries with the highest murder rates, 10 are in the caribbean. brazil and colombia are also in the top 20, and each has lots of jigaboos compared to other south american countries, all of which have lower murder rates than brazil and colombia. sad!

      Like

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      Look at the rates: El Salvador has more than twice Jamaica’s rate. Most Caribbean islands are so small that any stat is meaningless. Guyana and Trinidad have an Indian plurality. Notice the absence of Haiti which should be the epicenter of crime in the western hemisphere. For your information, Venezuela is in South America and has twice the rate of Brazil and Colombia. And so on. It’s official, mug of pee can’t read stats.

      Like

    • ilovehitler says:

      you’re right. it’s whitey’s fault. please replace us.

      Like

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      I’m working on it.

      Like

    • ilovehitler says:

      correlations are almost always imperfect afro. what counts is when it’s the same everywhere and everywhen. as i mentioned above it was not as bad in 1921. this was during prohibition. the gangsters were italian, jewish, and irish, and the murder rate was higher than it is today. santo is still single.

      Like

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      If by “the same” you mean the same per capita rate, the most basic statistics show it is not the same. Rank or overrepresentation are meaningless, a genotype is absolute, not relative.

      Like

    • RaceRealist says:

      Afro,

      All of those make sense. ‘Hispanics’ have the highest amount of gang members in the US though.

      By 1999 those proportions had changed only slightly to be 47% Hispanic, 31% African-American, 13% Caucasian, and 7% Asian. (Egley, 2000, p.1)

      The Racial and Ethnic Composition of Gangs

      There are 1 million juvenile gang members in the US (Pyrooz and Sweeten, 2015).

      I don’t disagree with any of the points cited. I believe gangs—mostly—fall into the realm of sociology though.

      Like

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      Yeah and not all gangs have the same gang culture. I suppose hispanic gangs have older members and are more like mafias. Black gang members are probably younger and they’re more like neighborhood bands.

      Like

    • ilovehitler says:

      blacks are 3% of the population of metro france. are they “elite” like indians in the uk? do they do better than blacks in the US when their economic situation is controlled for?

      i suspect the answers are, “no” and “no”.

      Like

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      Blacks are more than 3% in France I think, 5% is more realistic. As for their social class it depends on their origin. Sahelians are very underclass, Carribbeans middle class, Coastal West Africans upper middle class. There is no such thing as a monolithic black French community.

      Like

    • ilovehitler says:

      my second “no” because france is the world’s most racist country.

      Like

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      It definitely isn’t.

      Like

    • GondwanaMan says:

      Nothing is sociology, though. Not if you believe in behavioral genetics.

      Like

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      Well sociology is a lot more empirical than behavioral genetics.

      Like

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      By empirical, I mean sociology relies on qualitative research (interviews, field work, experiments) when behavioral genetics is only statistical, it can’t yield barely more than correlations. Also, behavioral genetics is almost obsolete now that molecular genetics and neurogenetics are maturing fields.

      Like

    • RaceRealist says:

      GondwanaMan,

      Nothing is sociology

      Nothing is just genetics. You need environmental stimuli to act. Even then I’m beginning to think nature/nurture isn’t the end of it. It’s much more complex.

      Not if you believe in behavioral genetics.

      You make it sound like a religion. Though both sides do. That’s what happens when it’s ideology first, facts and data second.

      There is biosociology. But do you believe that it’s only genes that influence our behavior or do environmental factors that increase/decrease hormone levels play a role in our behavior?

      I’m of the opinion that the truth lies somewhere between 2 extremes.

      Like

    • ilovehitler says:

      the simple though perhaps subtle way of putting it is…

      the P(G, E) surface is not planar.

      P(G, E) means the function which takes genes and environment to a phenotype.

      “not planar” means that the function is not a sum of genetic and environmental effects. that is, the function is not of the form P = aG + bE, where a and b are weights assigned to G and E respectively.

      what is true is that the P(G, E) surface can be approximated by a plane, locally. that is, within a small box of variation in G and in E the surface is approximately planar. for example, rich white kids attending northeastern boarding schools is a small box. the variation in IQ of this population will be due almost entirely to genes.

      is IQ like height or is it like adiposity, blood pressure, cholesterol, aerobic capacity, etc.

      all of these have been found to be as heritable as IQ in some studies yet all of them are optimized for almost everyone given a sufficiently sever environmental change.

      Like

    • ilovehitler says:

      afro is correct that the heritability statistic h^2 is a correlation. specifically it is the correlation of phenotypes for MZTs raised “apart”. other means of estimating it for a given population are much less precise.

      it seems the HBD-sphere doesn’t understand that h^2 is a correlation and thus the usual “correlation does not equal causation” applies.

      Like

    • RaceRealist says:

      ilovehitler,

      is IQ like height or is it like adiposity, blood pressure, cholesterol, aerobic capacity, etc.

      I don’t think it’s like any of them. I agree with you here.

      The claim here is that general intelligence is physiological. If it were, then it’d be just like those traits you mentioned because our systems are homeodynamic. The heritability or BMR is between .4 and .8—the same as the heritability of IQ. Is a higher BMR ‘better’ than a lower BMR? Is a lower value “worse” than a higher value?

      In sum, no physiologist would suggest the following:

      (a) that within the normal range of physiological differences, a higher level is better than any others (as is supposed in the construction of IQ tests);

      (b) that there is a general index or “quotient” (a la IQ) that could meaningfully describe levels of physiological sufficiency or ability and individual differences in it;

      (c) that “normal” variation is associated with genetic variation (except in rare deleterious conditions; and

      (d) the genetic causation of such variation can be meaningfully separated from the environmental causes of the variation.

      A preoccupation with ranking variations, assuming normal distributions, and estimating their heritabilities simply does not figure in the field of physiology in the way that it does in the field of human intelligence. This is in stark contrast with the intensity of the nature-nurture debate in the human cognitive domain. But perhaps ideology has not infiltrated the subject of physiology as much as it has that of human intelligence. (Richardson, 2017: 166-167)

      Like

    • RaceRealist says:

      ilovehitler,

      Tell me what you think of this paper.

      Heritability lost; intelligence found: Intelligence is integral to the adaptation and survival of all organisms faced with changing environments—Ken Richardson

      The rise of intelligence was vital to evolution; the ability to process and predict rapidly changing environments allowed increasingly complex organisms to survive and thrive. Intelligence remains a fundamental property of the system rather than a discretely heritable trait.

      Like

  2. GondwanaMan says:

    Afro is obviously a smart guy but he has some biases.

    One question: do you think black people have any faults? Or do you think that we’re equal to whites and other races in all ways, except sexually, where we’re superior?

    Like

    • RaceRealist says:

      Everyone is biased. From average Joe and Jane to the scientists with PhDs. It’s about minimizing your biases to get to the truth.

      Like

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      We’re equal to all races and have no inherent flaws. On sex, well we obviously have less losers than whites or Asians, but it goes with a general tendency to be more social. Blacks tend to have larger social circles and meet more people, which increases sexual success.

      Like

  3. GondwanaMan says:

    Testosterone during early childhood is correlates with adult penile length/girth.

    what do you say to that???

    Like

  4. ilovehitler says:

    from 1984 to 2016 all 72 finalists in the olympic 100m have been of west african descent, except for frankie fredericks who was namibian, i assume a native namibian.

    no jesuitry can explain this away. can it?

    a priori it is unreasonable to suppose that groups of people who have been separated for 10+k years will be perfectly equal. but it is reasonable to suppose they differ so little that the difference is seen only at the extremes. so the fastest non-blacks ever are faster than 99+% of blacks ever could be.

    so as with the 100m it may be that there will never be a black nobel laureate in natural science, never be a black world chess champion, etc.

    Like

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      Well, the genetic basis of black domination in sprinting is known and linked to muscle fibres. It’s nothing like cognition and its “thousands of genes of small effect” whose exact function in the body is not well known.

      Nobel prizes are not like olympics since their attribution is largely arbitrary. No black chess champions yet but huge west African performance in Scrabble recently, so there is no reason to think blacks can’t dominate brainy stuff.

      Like

    • RaceRealist says:

      ilovehitler,

      so as with the 100m it may be that there will never be a black nobel laureate in natural science, never be a black world chess champion, etc.

      Maybe. But you have to think that with Africa’s population explosion, there should be one/a few people that would have the ability to do so. Don’t forget malnutrition, endemic disease, parasites, etc.

      But there are physical differences, like somatype, muscle fiber etc, why not differences in the brain and genes that affect the brain? That remains to be fully proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, but there should be differences in mental ability/capacity between genetically isolated organisms that have been separated for tens of thousands of years.

      Afro,

      Well, the genetic basis of black domination in sprinting is known and linked to muscle fibres. It’s nothing like cognition and its “thousands of genes of small effect” whose exact function in the body is not well known.

      I agree here. Books and papers have been written on this (and even papers and books denying it! Which I will cover soon). My view is that all genes may be IQ genes just like all genes may be height genes.

      Nobel prizes are not like olympics since their attribution is largely arbitrary. No black chess champions yet but huge west African performance in Scrabble recently, so there is no reason to think blacks can’t dominate brainy stuff.

      Not to mention the huge ‘biases’ in Nobel candidacy…

      Like

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      My view is that all genes may be IQ genes just like all genes may be height genes.

      Agree too, with epigenetics and microbiota on top of that.

      Not to mention the huge ‘biases’ in Nobel candidacy

      Yes, this and the fact that there are only 4 Nobel Prizes a year in Physics, Chemistry, Medicine and Economics respectively. The recipients in these fields tend to be college educated (lol, obviously) and at least older than 45. The worldwide black population accounts for 15% of the total, most countries have a median age under 20 and the very few older adults have college completion rates close to 0% and they have diplomas from rudimentary African colleges.

      So the odds that one of the three prizes is awarded to a black individual or team are extremely low, almost non-existent actually. Sir Arthur Lewis of St. Lucia has a Nobel Prize in Economics though, an Literature Nobel Prize recipients are not to be looked down to, Literature requires genius and no Nobel Prize is objective.

      As For chess, I noticed that only greater Russia is impressive in championships. Do Russia, Ukraine, Belarus and the likes look like their societies are run by superiorly intelligent persons? Not really…

      Like

    • ilovehitler says:

      st lucia’s murder rate is 4.5 x that of the US.

      here’s a map of italy by frequency of extortion…what rr terms the “underground economy”.
      https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ca/Mappa_del_Pizzo.svg

      here’s a map of italy by loan default rate.

      not saying it’s genetic, but the former “kingdom of the two sicilies” is not as nice a place to live as northern italy.

      on explanation is transportation. s italy is isolated from the rest of europe.

      Like

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      st lucia’s murder rate is 4.5 x that of the US.

      And it has 6 times the per capita rate of scientific Nobel laureates of the US.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_Nobel_laureates_per_capita#Scientific_prizes

      Like

  5. ilovehitler says:

    you didn’t answer my question afro.

    you claim that you are among the french elite, and that there is no affirmative action in france.

    so…were you the only black guy or gal in your elite schools?

    were you one of a % much less than 3% (or 5% as you say)?

    if so this is very important. it would show (like the data sowell has claimed) that black under-achievement cannot be explained by black genes. or rather not explained…much.

    Like

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      I’m different to most blacks in the sense that I didn’t have a “black” upbringing and I was raised in conditions that are also much better than virtually all whites in the country.

      I was never the only black in the schools I went to. I think blacks were under-represented as a whole but it depended a lot on the country of origin. There are no reliable ethnic stats in France so I can’t ascertain anything, except that jews and traditional Catholics (which is my upbringing) were largely over-represented.

      I don’t think it’s just about ability though. I mean, me and my I high school and college pals were at our schools because of family tradition and because we had no issue paying huge tuition fees. But bright middle class and upper middle class students have plenty of free educational options of very good quality. So why applying to costly private schools or colleges?

      Like

  6. ilovehitler says:

    afro is a puppet of denmark.

    and he doesn’t even know it.

    sad!

    Like

  7. ilovehitler says:

    the simpering cougar loving rothschild banker president of france, macron, has so far spent 30,000 USD on his own make-up.

    until afro repudiates france he can NOT be taken seriously.

    Like

  8. ilovehitler says:

    the twitch fiber sprinting ability thing is a yuge myth.

    Like

    • RaceRealist says:

      the twitch fiber sprinting ability thing is a yuge myth.

      Source? Everything I’ve come across shows a difference, blacks more fast twitch, whites more slow twitch. Though I did come across one paper a while back showing no difference, it reviewed three studies, one of which was Ama et al, which I have cited. When I find it I’m going to review it, but it’s an established fact that blacks have more type II fibers, which is why they’re more likely to be obese and have metabolic syndromes.

      Results indicated that Caucasians had a higher percent type I (8%, P less than 0.01) and a lower percent type IIa (6.7%, P less than 0.05) fiber proportions than Africans.

      Skeletal muscle characteristics in sedentary black and Caucasian males.

      Based on the review, non-Hispanic Black subjects appear to have a lower maximal aerobic capacity and a greater percentage of type II skeletal muscle fibers.

      Black and White Race Differences in Aerobic Capacity, Muscle Fiber Type, and Their Influence on Metabolic Processes

      The obese women possessed fewer type I (41.5 ± 1.8 vs. 54.6 ± 1.8%) and more type IIb (25.1 ± 1.5 vs. 14.4 ± 1.5%) fibers than the lean women. When ethnicity was accounted for, the percentage of type IIb fibers in obese AA was significantly higher than in obese C (31.0 ± 2.4% vs. 19.2 ± 1.9%); fewer type I fibers were also found in obese AA (34.5 ± 2.8% vs. 48.6 ± 2.2%). These data are consistent with the higher incidence of obesity and greater weight gain reported in AA women. With weight loss intervention, there was a positive relationship (r = 0.72,P < 0.005) between the percentage of excess weight loss and the percentage of type I fibers in morbidly obese patients. These findings indicate that there is a relationship between muscle fiber type and obesity.

      The predominance of type II fibers in our African-Americans compared with Caucasian-Americans, however, was primarily due to the obese individuals, as there were no differences in fiber type between lean African-American and Caucasian women (Fig. 4).

      In summary, we observed a reduced percentage of type I and an increased percentage of type IIb muscle fibers in obese individuals compared with their lean counterparts.

      Muscle fiber type is associated with obesity and weight loss

      Like

    • ilovehitler says:

      what do you mean “source?” how about a professor of biomechanics.

      no one knows why some people are fast and others aren’t. think of all the variables you can. combine them. they won’t predict speed very well at all.

      the twitch fiber thing is “folk science”.

      coordination is the one variable which can’t be measured. the elite sprinter’s ability may be in his brain. just like the elite hitter.

      fraction fast twitch (red fibers) is a function of what kind of exercise one does.

      typical. this guinea negro goes on and on and on with all these studies but when it comes to conclusions his conclusions don’t follow.

      sad!

      white powerlifters muscles on a black sprinters skeleton = world record sprinting times.

      plus there’s the elasticity of the tendons. the bounce. this is how borzov became the world’s fastest man. he trained his tendons.

      Like

    • ilovehitler says:

      there is no difference in the speed of movement of the limbs of amateur and elite sprinters. NONE.

      whoever talks about twitch fibers is someone who thinks professional wrestling is real.

      Like

    • ilovehitler says:

      then muscle fiber type is not associated with sprinting ability.

      if it were then whites shouldn’t dominate strength events.

      it’s the same fibers.

      if you wanna increase your slow fibers jog.

      if you wanna increase you fast fibers do heavy squats. 80% of your max lift.

      Like

    • Phil78 says:

      “what do you mean “source?” how about a professor of biomechanics.

      no one knows why some people are fast and others aren’t. think of all the variables you can. combine them. they won’t predict speed very well at all.”

      Can you cite a demonstration? Given your question on short limbs and sprinting earlier, you don’t come off as the type of authority on biomechanics.

      “the twitch fiber thing is “folk science”.”

      You say that, but fail to prove so experimentally or theoretically in-depth.

      “coordination is the one variable which can’t be measured. the elite sprinter’s ability may be in his brain. just like the elite hitter.”

      If it was in the brain, it can be measured just as a hitter’s ability can as RR covered before.

      “fraction fast twitch (red fibers) is a function of what kind of exercise one does.”

      You can convert certain subtypes of Fibers under the Type 1&2 labels, but it has yet to be proven you can convert type 1 to type 2 or vice versa.

      “typical. this guinea negro goes on and on and on with all these studies but when it comes to conclusions his conclusions don’t follow.

      sad!”

      Goes on and on about the other being wrong yet has failed to so much as refer to a particular finding or research.

      Sad.

      “white powerlifters muscles on a black sprinters skeleton = world record sprinting times.”

      Care to clarify? Saying “powerlifters muscles” could either mean their muscle fiber type or their resulting shape from training.

      In either case, likely not. Fiber-wise they would be good distance runners but not the best sprinters.

      Unless you specifically mean their Type 2 variant (with would be the explosive aspect of powerlifting) then you may be right giving the aerobic advantage but that would still prove RR right in the end about the function of the two types of fibers.

      Training-shape wise no because of that bulk likely making the limbs stiffer and less flexible.

      “plus there’s the elasticity of the tendons. the bounce. this is how borzov became the world’s fastest man. he trained his tendons.”

      I thought you just said nobody knows why some people are faster than others?

      This isn’t even a refutation, this is just spitting out different variables. This one particularly just being an example of training paying off and doesn’t rule out muscle fibers as we don’t know his fiber type distribution compared to the average population to rule it out.

      I think it’s clear who needs a better grasp on communication.

      “there is no difference in the speed of movement of the limbs of amateur and elite sprinters. NONE.

      whoever talks about twitch fibers is someone who thinks professional wrestling is real.”

      Proof? Even then that wouldn’t refute much as the muscle type difference between the average population and elite sprinters are already solidified, it would just show that different factors from that point determine the best.

      “then muscle fiber type is not associated with sprinting ability.

      if it were then whites shouldn’t dominate strength events.

      it’s the same fibers.”

      No, not the same fibers.

      https://notpoliticallycorrect.me/2017/03/17/racial-differences-in-muscle-fiber-typing-cause-differences-in-elite-sporting-competition/

      “Muscle fiber typing by race

      I’ll be quick here since I’ve covered this extensively.

      Blacks have more type II muscle fibers in comparison to whites who have more type I muscle fibers. This difference in fiber typing causes differences in aerobic capacity which lead to higher rates of cardiorespiratory diseases such as type II diabetes, heart disease, and hypertension.

      There are two types of muscle fibers with two divisions: Type I and Type II with the divisions being in the slow twitch fiber, further broken down into Type IIa and Type II x. Type I fibers fire slowly and possess greater aerobic metabolic capacity due to higher levels of lipid, myoglobin, mitochondrial and capillary content. Type II fibers, on the other hand, fire faster, have reduced aerobic capacity (and all that comes with it) and are better equipped for anaerobic activity (explosive sports). Type IIa possesses more aerobic potential than IIx, but less anaerobic potential than type I fibers. Some evidence exists showing that it’s possible to train type II fibers to have a similar aerobic capacity to type I, but I don’t really buy that. It is possible to make aerobic capacity similar to the aerobic capacity that type I fibers have, but type II will not be fully like them.

      Blacks have more type II fibers while whites have more type I fibers. Type II fibers predispose people to a myriad of cardiometabolic diseases which are also associated with grip strength.

      Differences in fiber typing in elite athletes

      Now comes the fun part. How do muscle fibers differ between elite athletes? A few studies have been done but, as expected in physiology studies, they have a low n, but they still do show physiologic differences when compared to the control subjects, physiologic differences that were predicted due to what we know about muscle fiber typing.

      Type IIa fibers possess more aerobic potential than IIx, therefore, power lifters have a higher proportion of IIa fibers compared to IIx fibers. It should also be noted that powerlifters have the same amount of type I fibers as the general population (Fry et al, 2003a), so knowing this fact, since blacks have a lower proportion of type I muscle fibers as noted in Caeser and Hunter (2015), this explains why there are very few black power lifters: they have the opposite type II fiber type while having less type I fiber.

      Furthermore, Olympic lifters also use a higher percentage of type IIa fibers (Fry et al, 2003b). This also explains the lower amount of blacks in weight lifting as well. Fiber types don’t explain everything, but at elite levels, they do mean a lot and looking at the racial variation explains racial differences in elite sporting competition.

      Explaining racial differences in sprinting competitions is easy as well. Type IIx fibers combined with the ACTN3 gene=elite human performance (Mills et al, 2001). The gene ACTN3 was discovered to explain explosive power, and it just so happened to vary by race. William Saletan writes:

      the relative frequency of the X allele is 0.52 in Asians, 0.42 in whites, 0.27 in African-Americans, and 0.16 in Africans. If you break out the data further, the frequency of the XX genotype is 0.25 in Asians, 0.20 in European whites, 0.13 in African-Americans, and 0.01 in African Bantu. Conversely, the frequency of RR (the genotype for speed and power) is 0.25 in Asians, 0.36 in European whites, 0.60 in African-Americans, and 0.81 in African Bantu. Among Asians, you can expect to find one RR for every XX. Among whites, you can expect nearly two RRs for every XX. Among African-Americans, you can expect more than four RRs for every XX.

      This allele is responsible for explosive power. Explosive power is needed to excel in events such as sprinting, football, basketball and other sports where power is needed in short bursts. However, where blacks have an advantage in explosive power sports, the advantage is lost once events like swimming, power lifting (described above), Olympic lifting (differing fiber type) etc.”

      “if you wanna increase your slow fibers jog.

      if you wanna increase you fast fibers do heavy squats. 80% of your max lift.”

      Not that simple, you could train better aerobic/anaerobic ability but not the overall type.

      Like

    • ron burgundy says:

      you’re trying too hard phil.

      the point of my comment was that afro was making things up as usual.

      sprinting ability is not controlled by one or a few genes any more than IQ, so far as either has a genetic architecture at all.

      i have seen ZERO data that…

      muscle fiber type is strongly correlated with sprinting speed in untrained subjects.
      muscle fiber type cannot be trained.

      i have seen evidence to the contrary. that sprinting ability is a mystery.

      skeletal factors which differ between whites and blacks include longer foreleg in blacks, longer legs to height, narrower pelvis, narrower feet. blacks tend to have larger adrenal glands. etc.

      i challenge you to find a single paper which can predict speed in the 100m or shorter event with much accuracy in lean subjects.

      Like

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      Nope, try again.

      Like

    • Phil78 says:

      “you’re trying too hard phil.

      the point of my comment was that afro was making things up as usual.

      sprinting ability is not controlled by one or a few genes any more than IQ, so far as either has a genetic architecture at all.”

      Strawman, most of the evidence RR uses is PHENOTYPE differences, that are argued to be genetic differences, only one point of his uses particular genes.

      ” have seen ZERO data that…

      muscle fiber type is strongly correlated with sprinting speed in untrained subjects.
      muscle fiber type cannot be trained.”

      See his past articles comparing the general population’s fiber type to elite sprinters and understand the role of fast twitch fibers.

      Those two questions obviously show how confused you are. One implies that it is irrelevant to sprinting speed and the other actually suggest the different types are relevant.

      You, in turn, provided no evidence that it CAN be trained. Training can change characteristics to an extant as well as changing variations within Type 2 fibers, but there is no evidence of converting Type 1 to Type 2 or vice versa.

      Some studies I read claim this, but the thing is that hybrid fiber types exist as well, which brings into question if they were accounted for.

      But lets say they can be trained, how would that negate a racial difference in Fiber muscle proportions?

      “i have seen evidence to the contrary. that sprinting ability is a mystery.”

      Then present it. And no, it is not a mystery. Biomechanic plus fiber type.

      “skeletal factors which differ between whites and blacks include longer foreleg in blacks, longer legs to height, narrower pelvis, narrower feet. blacks tend to have larger adrenal glands. etc.”

      This doesn’t conflict with RR, he mentioned body mechanics before as well. I have even brought this up.

      “i challenge you to find a single paper which can predict speed in the 100m or shorter event with much accuracy in lean subjects.”

      Given the lack of reference you have given so far, you are in no position to demand evidence since you could present your own.

      Also, predicting speed based on lean subjects is unnecessary when figuring out the function of muscles and ALREADY knowing the role of fast twitch muscles in sprinting and how that obviously is related to their function.

      http://running.competitor.com/2014/07/training/the-role-of-muscle-fibers-in-running_82416

      Also, what if training contributes to unlocking the potential in each’s function? That wouldn’t change the significance of each IN ATHLETES at all.

      Like

    • ron burgundy says:

      afro’s incotinence fits the pattern. sad!

      Like

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      nothing sad about having kids.

      Like

    • ron burgundy says:

      afro is shown to be a liar so he resorts to non-sequiturs.

      if black africans can’t stop f—ing they should be sprayed like weeds or farmed for dog food.

      Like

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      Fertility =/= sexual activity.

      Contraceptive use and abortion rates are responsible for most of the differences in fertility.

      Like

    • Phil78 says:

      https://pumpkinperson.com/2017/06/24/rk-selection-theory-a-response-to-rushton-by-racerealist-and-afrosapiens/comment-page-1/#comment-64147

      https://pumpkinperson.com/2017/06/24/rk-selection-theory-a-response-to-rushton-by-racerealist-and-afrosapiens/comment-page-1/#comment-64150

      See my links on fertility rates and development. If you are going to bother making a racial narrative about it, it begs to question how Asians managed to fuck like crazy because they were closer in fertility to Africans than to Europeans.

      However, if you look at the basic history of the two populations, both only recently being part of the industrial world, this data makes sense. Pre-industrial China, while more developed than Africa, was still a traditional economy.

      Hell, you even see that in your chart comparing Asia and Africa. Had it been tracked back prior to their adoption of industrial infrastructure, their population extrapolation likely would’ve not compared to Africa by growth rate but out do it in terms of absolute people.

      Like

    • ron burgundy says:

      f—ing with birth control isn’t what i meant by f—ing. i realize the french think jerry lewis is funny…they have no subtlety.

      according to afro france will be just as good and just as french as it is today when its indigenous population is replaced by haitians.

      afro thinks france is an “idea nation” like america, because (((neo-con))) americans have invaded the french education system.

      and afro is in love with a jew.

      utterly pathetic!

      Like

    • Afrosapiens 🇫🇷🇪🇺 says:

      according to afro france will be just as good and just as french as it is today when its indigenous population is replaced by haitians.

      French people who are descended from pre-1789 natives in straight line are already a minority I guess. Who cares?

      afro thinks france is an “idea nation” like america, because (((neo-con))) americans have invaded the french education system.

      France has never been a tribal nation, cultural homogenization is recent and incomplete. There are still regions with a distinct local ethnic identity. But references to ethnicity were forbidden in 1872, and the automatic granting of French citizenship to anyone born in France is there since 1789.

      and afro is in love with a jew.

      utterly pathetic!

      And mug of pee is in love with his right hand.

      Like

    • ron burgundy says:

      phil is just demonstrating his bad english again.

      the point isn’t that black africans can’t stop being rabbits. barbados is 95% black and has the lowest tfr in the new world.

      the point is, until black africa stops acting like rabbits it’s 100% certain to be just as poor in 2100 as it is today.

      the one child policy coincides perfectly with china’s rise.

      the other point is that afro’s sexual behavior is disgusting and stereotypically black…yet afro has never shown any disgust with himself for his behavior.

      Like

    • Afrosapiens says:

      the other point is that afro’s sexual behavior is disgusting and stereotypically black…yet afro has never shown any disgust with himself for his behavior.

      I don’t give a damn about stereotypes, what I care about is pleasing ladies and pleasing myself in the process. And the cute young ladies would gladly trade all of the far right losers for some of JJ’s Haitian cousins.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Phil78 says:

      “phil is just demonstrating his bad english again.

      the point isn’t that black africans can’t stop being rabbits. barbados is 95% black and has the lowest tfr in the new world.

      the point is, until black africa stops acting like rabbits it’s 100% certain to be just as poor in 2100 as it is today.”

      You are demonstrating bad reasoning again. If you read my links, you would know that fertility IS dropping but increased development leads to the what we now see in growth rate as Afro said.

      “the one child policy coincides perfectly with china’s rise.”

      Yet the same applies to infrastructure changes as well, like my original point.

      “the other point is that afro’s sexual behavior is disgusting and stereotypically black…yet afro has never shown any disgust with himself for his behavior.”

      WTF is that any of your damn business? Are you the jew he’s fucking? Go see a therapist together then.

      Like

    • RaceRealist says:

      ilovehitler,

      sprinting ability is not controlled by one or a few genes any more than IQ, so far as either has a genetic architecture at all.

      Correct. Somatype and fibers control it more, for the last time.

      muscle fiber type cannot be trained.

      Muscle fiber typing is determined by the second trimester, and there is no difference in fiber typing between a 6-year-old and adults.

      Muscle fiber types and morphometric analysis of skeletal msucle in six-year-old children.

      skeletal factors which differ between whites and blacks include longer foreleg in blacks, longer legs to height, narrower pelvis, narrower feet. blacks tend to have larger adrenal glands. etc.

      All of which are conducive to sprinting/endurance running.

      If you’re interested, you can read this article on muscle fibers. Tons of information and references.

      Muscle fiber type—Strength & Conditioning Research

      Like

  9. ilovehitler says:

    and even idiots who repeat this myth can see that it’s a myth. the same fibers are used in olympic weightlifting. whites dominate. shorter limbs you say? well doesn’t this limb length bullshit also apply to sprinting?

    Like

    • Phil78 says:

      “the same fibers are used in olympic weightlifting. whites dominate. shorter limbs you say? well doesn’t this limb length bullshit also apply to sprinting?”

      …..Think about what you typed.

      Just to prevent future confusion, lets recap.

      You pointed out the fibers being important in weight lifting (true, but for stamina purposes, slow switch is overall preferable) which doesn’t prove much because in an absolute sense Whites do have a decent amount fast switch fibers to use, it’s just that in a relative sense they have less than blacks.

      As for shorter limbs not giving the same success into sprinting…that speaks for itself. A stockier body with a longer torso and shorter limbs would be at a disadvantage to a body with longer legs, shorter torsos, and higher amounts of fast switch fibers.

      Do you really need to be explained why a short legged man will be slower than a long legged man?

      Like

    • ilovehitler says:

      phil78’s native language is obviously NOT english.

      pathetic.

      Like

    • Phil78 says:

      Coming from the guy who can’t capitalize his first words in a sentence.

      My comment is clearly readable, the problem is you can’t think of a rebuttal.

      Like

    • RaceRealist says:

      the same fibers are used in olympic weightlifting. whites dominate.

      Whites (Northern Europeans) dominate mainly due to the somatype, which is endomorphic. Levers matter in strength competition.

      shorter limbs you say? well doesn’t this limb length bullshit also apply to sprinting?

      Yes it does. People with longer limbs cover more ground than people with shorter limbs.

      Anyway I covered fiber typing in regards to strength competitions and somatype here:

      Racial Differences in Somatypes

      Racial Differences in Muscle Fiber Typing Cause Differences in Elite Sporting Competition

      Like

  10. ilovehitler says:

    i believe in the organic and humane farming of black african children for dog food. https://i.pinimg.com/originals/e2/1e/04/e21e0466eda91f39a3195cab11826289.jpg

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Please keep comments on topic.

Jean Baptiste Lamarck

Eva Jablonka

Charles Murray

Arthur Jensen

Blog Stats

  • 251,386 hits
Follow NotPoliticallyCorrect on WordPress.com

suggestions, praises, criticisms

If you have any suggestions for future posts, criticisms or praises for me, email me at RaceRealist88@gmail.com
%d bloggers like this: