Being rich and successful really IS in your DNA
unz.com
doi.org
Here's Steve Sailer and the paper.
...
LOL Wow… What a breakthrough study! The nature vs. nurture debate is truly settled now.
Do these genes also cause """"""affluenza""""""?
Dude, just look at al these genes, bro!
Who is funding this?
Also if meritocracy is suposably natural can all of these researchers be my slaves when the revolution is over?
Coincidentally, those genes also correlate to being sociopathic.
Probably.
Oh man, Science has become the old Divine Right of Kings.
It has been so for quite a while now, user.
The Daily Mail:
The paper:
well then it's no longer science
You know 20th century communism had Lysenko-ism, where power tried to bend science, and boy oh boy did they get punished for it.
This is capitalisms Lysenko-ism , they are going surround them self's with yes man, that mimic scientific jargon. They are going to try to reverse the direction, in science evidence leads to a conclusion, here somebody tries to find evidence to fit a conclusion.
It really is a subversive empiricism at best and a downright religious belief at worst. We already see a lot of 'ah lurve scyens broh'-screaming nerds flock to this crap, we will be seeing more of it very soon.
What a shock!
I think you mean sociopathic.
the "buy success genes for your children, now with extra money-genes" scam industry is going to be brutal
Isn't that the whole reason for being social, to take advantage of others?
So I haven't read the article, but what are these genetic variations exactly? Is it basically just melanin/sociopathy?
No?
gotta git free CRISPR for negroids, star
mo money for dem gene programs
if you're homo economicus or a literal sociopath, then yes.
Humans are far less morally one-sided than either of those, or at least the healthy ones are.
Typical job application in 2030: "Please attach your gene-map to your CV."
is Zig Forums allergic to reading papers that don't cohere with lysenkoism?
the sample was all people european descent. Read the study.
that's how GWAS work
nah, it seems to be indicating some intellectual quality, that drives people toward higher educational attainment
People use GWAS to claim literally anything is fully heritable. It never peters out in meta analysis or replication.
I do wonder if the genes aren't phenotypic since the genes aren't isolated, that would certainly somewhat explain the correlation with personality
ubermensch essentialism confirmed
We must euthanize the bourg so that the proletariat lives in peace.
Can you give examples?
It's called the missing heritability problem. Basically, it is easy to find correlation between individual genes or small clusters of genes and certain traits, but causation is exceedingly rare to prove. Biology is much more complicated than some clickbait article implies.
Yea if you give a finite number of people a random, long enough random string (series of letters), you are bound to be able to find a correlation between a certain pattern of letters and whatever category you made up.
not
And don’t forget. A person’s DNA is EXTREMELY long.
...
That's another thing, there was no cross-reference to people of descent other than european.
even 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧wikipedia🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧 says Autism Level is 50-80 genetic, how can we still deny this?
That book the Bell Curve was actually about that intelligence was influenced by inherited and environmental factors and showed that an intellectual elite were becoming separated from the general population.
The bourg are evolving and by class warfare they are de-evolving the proletariat. Soon the proletariat will be so dumb that the bourg will kill them all out of mercy and then have robot slaves that can do all the shit that proles can do without rebelling.
Except intelligence doesn’t correlate with success under capitalism. The heritability of merit is one thing, but any idiot can see that capitalism is not a meritocracy.
technologyreview.com
After years of warning leftards that the right may have a point when it comes to genetic determinism, I've now resigned myself to the obvious, that Genetic determinism is the left's version of climate change denial, and no amount of logic or studies will break this cognitive dissonance held by most leftists. And when eventually the day comes that we are able to enhance intelligence by way of embryo selection or gene editing, the elite will use liberals and leftists fallacious arguments against genetic determinism to deny the masses access to genetic enhancement, whilst they hoard the tech for their children, who will eventually become super human and our permanent overlords . Don't be a useful idiot for those who are more than happy to use your own misguided morality against you.
I highly recommend watching this movie
literally right above you.
"It's just stone cold science" is basically the new "It is simply their divine right to rule"
It's never 100% correct either just because you slap "science" on it. Continental drift was once considered a myth that would ruin your career if you supported it and phrenology was once infalliable science. Studies are nothing but argumentative devices nowadays for liberals and reactionaries to throw one piece at another to contradict themselves.
how do people not understand genetics yet?
we share 50% of dna with rice and banana
90% with rats (basically long time ago world turned to shit and everything died, and only mammals that survived this were some weird rat creatures which carried out the genes through the environmental catastrophe, 5 of these happened in total where 99% of life died)
95+% with chimps
4% genetic difference is fucking massive, it is the difference between a chimp and a human
you know what you are going to get out of the oven based on the ingredients before it even goes in, why is this so hard for people to grasp?
brains arent magic, they develop according to the instructions they find in the genes
different dna = different brains
a tiny difference 1000 steps later become a huge difference, kinda like a small angle between two lines become a huge distance down the line
also explains why certain phenotype developed 99.99% of the modern tech and science, you know, the most crucial thing for our way of life, while the rest of the world cant even figure out separation of church and state or a functional democracy
Nobody was trying to be funny
Said nobody ITT. Keep on fighting those straws, hero.
Why even live?
Except their not talking about genetic difference, their talking about possible percentage linked with social standing. How can you fuck up in understanding this bad?
The 4% was that the correlated genes would only account for 4% of the success. The other 96% are environment and circumstance.
You Zig Forumscucks are so fucking retarded.
Time for socialist terror cells with retroviruses to reverse that.
Science was always about that. In tribal societies the truth of the world belonged to those who spent the most time on it. Anyone could aspire to reach enlightenment, and god was palpable on our daily lives.
Then came organized religion, supporting the autocratic state. The truth of the world now belonged to a special circle of people that dedicated their lives to the maintenance of a stable order, and if their claims were descriptive or prescriptive was anyone's guess. Those who reached enlightenment were now too entangled with the political structure to let inconvenient truths come out, and the wisdom of previous generations was worthless.
And then came science with liberalism. The truth was now slave to rigid bureaucratic process, those who could reach enlightenment where those privileged enough to spend years researching and all that which is unfalsifiable by nature became irrelevant. It's no coincidence that we now believe nature to follow laws and that scientist tend to be hedonistic and entitled individuals, and that we live on an ever drying horizon of morality and self-realization. Stability and slow steps became the mark of savagery, and irresponsibly accelerating technological advance, that which is only possible through the market, became progress.
It's not 4% of 20,000 people. It's 4% of all factors of socioeconomic mobility from a sample size of 20,000. So in other words 96% has nothing to do with genes.
Not its isnt 96% has nothing to do with genes.
Its approximately 4% are reliably correlating with genes.
The rest is either undetermined OR caused by other factors that may themself just be another expression of genes not yet to be explained OR may be not.
The point is the article title is pure fucking clickbait; hyperbole. This allegedly paradigm-shifting study could only link 4% of the genes in their genome wide analysis with the metrics they used for "success." That's pitifully weak; hardly the final word on the hereditarian debate. And it remains to be seen whether these results can even be replicated.
jesus fuck 4% is near nothing
That's pretty much their MO. It's just like with their whole "minority/immigrant crime" shtick. The very existence of it means that first worlders need to assert a stronger white supremacy. They don't care about data. That's why you shouldn't bother with the debunking shit if you can help it. Instead we have to promote our own ideas via memes to at least help prevent 1st world white children from going full fash.
Imagine if success within capitalism were in people's DNA. It wouldn't justify shit. What makes the way we've organized things so fucking great that the people who excel under it absolutely need to be treated as kings? It's pure, thoughtless ideology.
Success under capitalism is largely a matter of making the right connections and then taking unscrupulous advantage of them. So those genes are going to be the "success genes," in as far as they're really a thing.
underrated post, sage for nothing to add
You should engage a little bit in "debunking." Not because it hurts their argument, but because it hurts their ego. They like thinking they're rational and high-I.Q. and whatnot. So you should go tell them they're idiots who lack even the most basic critical faculties, and make sure the rest of the world hears you as you do it. They'll cry like the little bitches they are. It's great optics.
That is, as long as you refrain from painting them as evil, that's where they thrive. They're edgy motherfuckers like that. Make sure they know that they're racists, and that being a racist is bad, but not because it's evil. It's bad because it's retarded.
I've been thinking a lot about this myself. We need a new, more popular kind of science. Students need to be encouraged to read and learn about the world from trustworthy sources, but then to organize this understanding in their own way. We've been focusing too much on raw data, we need to start focusing on the integration of exciting theories again. There should be a massive project into which the whole world is engaged. Subjects could have hundreds of entry points each carefully explored by thousands of students worldwide. Currently there too often seems to be a single orthodoxy that is taught at schools. This is sure to turn science dry and infertile. Students should be free to let their curiosity roam as it will, disciplined only by the injunction to reach some form of organized understanding. Currently everything seems to work against this ideal. It doesn't fit capitalism.
Socialism should involve the introduction of a grand new education system, making use of the communication technology we now have available to us. Students should work collectively to explore subjects from exciting new angles, and organize this understanding in personal Wikis. Capitalism works against such an endeavor by making information proprietary and difficult to transverse.
hooray for Castalia
Yeah well most of the participants were probably white so not that much genetic diversity there.
The world needs a modern version of Chairman Mao's rural education reforms
Gentoo gang.