What happens when your ideology goes so far as to reject all science even slightly related to someone who is Jewish...

It really is good for your health to know people.

haha no

You could at least reply to me instead of OP with your nonsensical post, user.

haha no

I'm starving for you attention, user. Please.

Benis

Did this thread die here?

But…if you run the calculations and you get a clear objective result that doesn't match the way the calculations are collected, then that means that there really WAS a piece that you were missing.

Attached: 1361252660290.jpg (274x276, 22.36K)

Lysenko achieved practical results, while western biologists were busy justifying social darwinism and eugenics.

Lysenko was a retard though (although epigenetics was real and the social darwinists of the west were being genetic determinist and killing and sterilizing "undesirables" left and right)

The amount of philo-semitism on this board is incredible.

Why would you blame Palestinians and other Arabs for not wanting to use the so-called sciences of the same people who are occupying them?

Yes, I don't think something should be rejected out of hand just because the science comes from the occupiers. Pretty stupid

were you just waiting for your thread to get screencapped or something

The effects of epigenetics are insignificant compared to genetics, and is reversible, unlike genetics. And I suspect that its effects are over hyped to push the narrative of inherited trauma and systematic racism. haaretz.com/science-and-health/.premium-doubts-arising-about-claimed-epigenetics-of-holocaust-trauma-1.5466710

They now think that there is a genetic reason for DNA methylation instead of it being 100% environmental. Also A lot of the things jews blame on epigenetics could just be another case of Jewish genetic diseases like Tay-Sachs

Attached: 6cb9abacc52089cf2bebc821239e49f982366f449dcd5563ce136fa178584c2d.png (396x323, 118.57K)

You mean the same Darwinist policies that were responsible for the tech booms later on the 20th century? Sterilizing illiterate people did contribute to the extreme technological advancement of the West.

The "tech boom" occured because western powers needed more scientists to help the government defeat the Soviet Union. It involved MASSIVE government support for scientific endeavours and the tech industry in general. It had absolutely nothing to do with "social darwinism."

Attached: smug satania.jpg (257x320, 20.69K)

Government funding doesn't produce a large pool of high I.Q. individuals to build missiles. Good breeding does.

this is your brain on not reading history or books in general

Attached: AEEEEEEGH.jpg (450x450, 69.01K)

Not only that, he can't show a causal correlation, but claiming to be a scientist

You can have brain damage and have a high I.Q.
Your ability to read doesn't necessarily influence your ability to achieve in other respects.

Sauce

Someone needs to read some non Talmudic books, and it ain't me.

Not that user, but are you seriously implying that the government just mass employed people with no screening from the general populace and just hoped they would be good enough based on programs done years ago which existed with no plan to actually create such a specified pool of intellectuals? The programs for projects like the ones you are talking about were selective and had only a few chosen in charge, and a large portion of the people who worked on those projects wouldn't even result from the things your talking about as many of them were taken from other countries or immigrated. The west didn't even sterilize illiterate people in the amounts that I assume your implying that would make a difference, it was always in the few thousands with most of those being within government care. A vast portion of those who could not afford schooling or who existed within the lower margin of the working class were illiterate or partially illiterate as well, you couldn't have sterilized them even if you wanted unless you wished for the replacement rate to fall significantly behind. Not only that, but the initial movement for sterilization wasn't even explicitly targeted towards the lame or illiterate of the entire populace, just the incoming Irish and Italian immigrants in order to "weed out" what its largely WASP proponents saw as a biological threat as many of them viewed those populations as inherently illiterate by race and so such programs would mitigate the population as a whole. Initially, native WASPs were left alone.

It wasn't just sterilization. It was restricted immigration, anti miscegenation laws, and abortions.

False. They targeted blacks more than anyone, and many uperclass Irishmen and Italians supported the eugenics movement.

While blacks were targeted, at the time the main issue was that of the mass immigration of Irish and Italians who were viewed as more feeble-minded and barbaric to the native populace and who posed a risk to what was seen as the more "qualified" Anglo-Saxon natives holding work. The population of blacks in the US was more or less fixed, it was the crisis of what appeared be a never ending influx of non-Anglo European migrants that caused the eugenics movement to gain traction.

Attached: harpersweekly1876.jpg (962x608 62.93 KB, 106.02K)

someone needs to read "Against the Day"

...