This article fits into the recent criticism of posters (me) about statistical truths related to races:

Quote:

---

American geneticists now face an even more drastic form of censorship: exclusion from access to the data necessary to conduct analyses, let alone publish results. Case in point: the National Institutes of Health now withholds access to an important database if it thinks a scientist's research may wander into forbidden territory. The source at issue, the Database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP), is an exceptional tool, combining genome scans of several million individuals with extensive data about health, education, occupation, and income. It is indispensable for research on how genes and environments combine to affect human traits. No other widely accessible American database comes close in terms of scientific utility.

My colleagues at other universities and I have run into problems involving applications to study the relationships among intelligence, education, and health outcomes. Sometimes, NIH denies access to some of the attributes that I have just mentioned, on the grounds that studying their genetic basis is "stigmatizing." Sometimes, it demands updates about ongoing research, with the implied threat that it could withdraw usage if it doesn't receive satisfactory answers. In some cases, NIH has retroactively withdrawn access for research it had previously approved.

---

I think it is a disservice to the human race to fail to continue to study things about who we are. For example, my wife has discovered, in her 20 years of teaching, to approach black students, white students, and Asian students in very different ways. Now, these are all generalities, but they hold statistical significance.

To motivate a white students, focus on how studying will impact their future. For some it's college, for some it's avoiding being grounded, for some it's being eligible for sports / extracurricular activities, for some its just giving examples of how a certain subject could be helpful in the future.

To motivate Asian students, it is almost always discussion of making parents proud vs disappointing parents.

To motivate black students, it is almost always a matter of showing them that you really do value them, and care about their future. If you will invest emotionally in black students, many will give you effort where they simply ignore other teachers.

It would be awesome to run a study about effective personal relationship styles for educators versus outcomes. It would be neat to put some data behind the above anecdotes, and see if they hold true for other educators. But there is zero percent chance such a study would ever be approved, due to stigmas attached to racial stereotypes. If you could add DNA data into the study in some educated way, the study could be even more powerful.

But putting these studies in the dustbin because they might "stigmatize" a certain group does more harm than good. If we know more about people, we can make people's lives better. But the powers that be don't want to make "people's" lives better, just their own lives, which relies on having a constant dependency class that they can buy votes from. It's all very disappointing.

Source: https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2022/10/forbidden-questions.html

If they receive government/public funding they should have no right to withhold data from any legitimate scientific study.

They are inferring the potential political use of the results and that speaks to the bigotry of the organization withholding the data, not those seeking to access it.

I don't understand how such intelligent people can be so obtuse in this regards. They telegraph their biases in their presumption others are biased.

BusterAg said:

---

This article fits into the recent criticism of posters (me) about statistical truths related to races:

Quote:

---

American geneticists now face an even more drastic form of censorship: exclusion from access to the data necessary to conduct analyses, let alone publish results. Case in point: the National Institutes of Health now withholds access to an important database if it thinks a scientist's research may wander into forbidden territory. The source at issue, the Database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP), is an exceptional tool, combining genome scans of several million individuals with extensive data about health, education, occupation, and income. It is indispensable for research on how genes and environments combine to affect human traits. No other widely accessible American database comes close in terms of scientific utility.

My colleagues at other universities and I have run into problems involving applications to study the relationships among intelligence, education, and health outcomes. Sometimes, NIH denies access to some of the attributes that I have just mentioned, on the grounds that studying their genetic basis is "stigmatizing." Sometimes, it demands updates about ongoing research, with the implied threat that it could withdraw usage if it doesn't receive satisfactory answers. In some cases, NIH has retroactively withdrawn access for research it had previously approved.

---

I think it is a disservice to the human race to fail to continue to study things about who we are. For example, my wife has discovered, in her 20 years of teaching, to approach black students, white students, and Asian students in very different ways. Now, these are all generalities, but they hold statistical significance.

To motivate a white students, focus on how studying will impact their future. For some it's college, for some it's avoiding being grounded, for some it's being eligible for sports / extracurricular activities, for some its just giving examples of how a certain subject could be helpful in the future.

To motivate Asian students, it is almost always discussion of making parents proud vs disappointing parents.

To motivate black students, it is almost always a matter of showing them that you really do value them, and care about their future. If you will invest emotionally in black students, many will give you effort where they simply ignore other teachers.

It would be awesome to run a study about effective personal relationship styles for educators versus outcomes. It would be neat to put some data behind the above anecdotes, and see if they hold true for other educators. But there is zero percent chance such a study would ever be approved, due to stigmas attached to racial stereotypes. If you could add DNA data into the study in some educated way, the study could be even more powerful.

But putting these studies in the dustbin because they might "stigmatize" a certain group does more harm than good. If we know more about people, we can make people's lives better. But the powers that be don't want to make "people's" lives better, just their own lives, which relies on having a constant dependency class that they can buy votes from. It's all very disappointing.

Source: https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2022/10/forbidden-questions.html

---

They don't allow them access because they don't want it widely known that race is far more than skin deep and that the problems and issues we face from race relations will never go away because the behavioral issues and conflicts are genetic and cannot be changed through social engineering.

Human Behavioral Genetics or Human Biodiveristy (HBD) is the single most problematic science in history. It's definitive proof that genetics governs all human behavior no matter how or what we do.

There have been numerous geneticists who have been fired from their jobs for venturing into this field because it essentially proves that all modern psychology and sociological theories are not just incorrect but wildly incorrect and that if you don't account for genetics then you're ignoring 75% of the cause.

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

They don't allow them access because they don't want it widely known that race is far more than skin deep and that the problems and issues we face from race relations will never go away because the behavioral issues and conflicts are genetic and cannot be changed through social engineering.

Human Behavioral Genetics or Human Biodiveristy (HBD) is the single most problematic science in history. It's definitive proof that genetics governs all human behavior no matter how or what we do.

There have been numerous geneticists who have been fired from their jobs for venturing into this field because it essentially proves that all modern psychology and sociological theories are not just incorrect but wildly incorrect and that if you don't account for genetics then you're ignoring 75% of the cause.

---

I can't agree with you on this at all.

It's absolutely true that certain cultural groups have certain tendencies, and that can be proven. Focusing on those tendencies, and how to adjust our social programs based on those, would be helpful to society.

But, I firmly reject the opinion that 75% of human behavior is caused by race.

I think that people that have this type of opinion are the problem, because the powers that be are more afraid of people like that than they are interested in making people's lives better.

That you, Mortimer? How's your psychotic brother doing? We haven't seen him around here for a while.

MouthBQ98 said:

---

If they receive government/public funding they should have no right to withhold data from any legitimate scientific study.

They are inferring the potential political use of the results and that speaks to the bigotry of the organization withholding the data, not those seeking to access it.

I don't understand how such intelligent people can be so obtuse in this regards. They telegraph their biases in their presumption others are biased.

---

Not only that, they are having the opposite effect. When you have this kind of suppression it suggests there is something "in it."

Almost anything the Left does is suspect and of bad and manipulative intentions. They have controlled academia with exponentially increasing impact since the 60's. Its now become clear that some deliberate misinformation sowing was going on. (The obvious tendency to gloss over Marxism's failures and atrocities is just one example)

Are currently rethinking many of the assumptions raised on and taught in academia on social matters. The more reliable "testimony" of events around the globe and historical record are pointing to a needed re-evaluation of many of the presuppositions of this topic.

Never thought I'd see science and medicine perverted by wokeness but here we are.

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

This article fits into the recent criticism of posters (me) about statistical truths related to races:

Quote:

---

American geneticists now face an even more drastic form of censorship: exclusion from access to the data necessary to conduct analyses, let alone publish results. Case in point: the National Institutes of Health now withholds access to an important database if it thinks a scientist's research may wander into forbidden territory. The source at issue, the Database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP), is an exceptional tool, combining genome scans of several million individuals with extensive data about health, education, occupation, and income. It is indispensable for research on how genes and environments combine to affect human traits. No other widely accessible American database comes close in terms of scientific utility.

My colleagues at other universities and I have run into problems involving applications to study the relationships among intelligence, education, and health outcomes. Sometimes, NIH denies access to some of the attributes that I have just mentioned, on the grounds that studying their genetic basis is "stigmatizing." Sometimes, it demands updates about ongoing research, with the implied threat that it could withdraw usage if it doesn't receive satisfactory answers. In some cases, NIH has retroactively withdrawn access for research it had previously approved.

---

I think it is a disservice to the human race to fail to continue to study things about who we are. For example, my wife has discovered, in her 20 years of teaching, to approach black students, white students, and Asian students in very different ways. Now, these are all generalities, but they hold statistical significance.

To motivate a white students, focus on how studying will impact their future. For some it's college, for some it's avoiding being grounded, for some it's being eligible for sports / extracurricular activities, for some its just giving examples of how a certain subject could be helpful in the future.

To motivate Asian students, it is almost always discussion of making parents proud vs disappointing parents.

To motivate black students, it is almost always a matter of showing them that you really do value them, and care about their future. If you will invest emotionally in black students, many will give you effort where they simply ignore other teachers.

It would be awesome to run a study about effective personal relationship styles for educators versus outcomes. It would be neat to put some data behind the above anecdotes, and see if they hold true for other educators. But there is zero percent chance such a study would ever be approved, due to stigmas attached to racial stereotypes. If you could add DNA data into the study in some educated way, the study could be even more powerful.

But putting these studies in the dustbin because they might "stigmatize" a certain group does more harm than good. If we know more about people, we can make people's lives better. But the powers that be don't want to make "people's" lives better, just their own lives, which relies on having a constant dependency class that they can buy votes from. It's all very disappointing.

Source: https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2022/10/forbidden-questions.html

---

They don't allow them access because they don't want it widely known that race is far more than skin deep and that the problems and issues we face from race relations will never go away because the behavioral issues and conflicts are genetic and cannot be changed through social engineering.

Human Behavioral Genetics or Human Biodiveristy (HBD) is the single most problematic science in history. It's definitive proof that genetics governs all human behavior no matter how or what we do.

There have been numerous geneticists who have been fired from their jobs for venturing into this field because it essentially proves that all modern psychology and sociological theories are not just incorrect but wildly incorrect and that if you don't account for genetics then you're ignoring 75% of the cause.

---

Yikes. They were fired because it's a nothing burger. Obviously "race is more than skin deep", but most looking into this are looking towards eugenics.

I recommend taking a bioethics course.

BusterAg said:

---

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

They don't allow them access because they don't want it widely known that race is far more than skin deep and that the problems and issues we face from race relations will never go away because the behavioral issues and conflicts are genetic and cannot be changed through social engineering.

Human Behavioral Genetics or Human Biodiveristy (HBD) is the single most problematic science in history. It's definitive proof that genetics governs all human behavior no matter how or what we do.

There have been numerous geneticists who have been fired from their jobs for venturing into this field because it essentially proves that all modern psychology and sociological theories are not just incorrect but wildly incorrect and that if you don't account for genetics then you're ignoring 75% of the cause.

---

I can't agree with you on this at all.

It's absolutely true that certain cultural groups have certain tendencies, and that can be proven. Focusing on those tendencies, and how to adjust our social programs based on those, would be helpful to society.

But, I firmly reject the opinion that 75% of human behavior is caused by race.

I think that people that have this type of opinion are the problem, because the powers that be are more afraid of people like that than they are interested in making people's lives better.

---

The question would like to know more clearly is whether race has any underlying genetic component, or "reality" I have seen it denied point-blank by current science (this includes more reliable late 20th C) that there is any truly measurable difference that is `automatic' rather than a product of the environment.

Put another way, I have been led to believe (and prefer to) that if you swept away every random other factor and `downstream' historical thing like some legacy of malnutrition, etc, that the potential ability and disposition of any given ethnic is about the same, in say, a Federation society. Any steep differences are cultural. Nor was this culture said to be a product of biology.

However, if this is in error -- and there are racial rather than national culture pre-dispositions, it impacts many other assumptions. Even in the late 20th C this was a tricky enough subject that anything skirting it could run into static .(see "Bell Curve") It is by extension, impossible to trust any declarations about it in the age of thought-control woke. So it remains and open enigma.

Obviously gene expression - such as the production or absence of melanin - is going to have a genetic component.

Behavior is based on environmental factors. This is the modern day equivalent of looking for "obedience bumps" on skulls.

BusterAg said:

---

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

They don't allow them access because they don't want it widely known that race is far more than skin deep and that the problems and issues we face from race relations will never go away because the behavioral issues and conflicts are genetic and cannot be changed through social engineering.

Human Behavioral Genetics or Human Biodiveristy (HBD) is the single most problematic science in history. It's definitive proof that genetics governs all human behavior no matter how or what we do.

There have been numerous geneticists who have been fired from their jobs for venturing into this field because it essentially proves that all modern psychology and sociological theories are not just incorrect but wildly incorrect and that if you don't account for genetics then you're ignoring 75% of the cause.

---

I can't agree with you on this at all.

It's absolutely true that certain cultural groups have certain tendencies, and that can be proven. Focusing on those tendencies, and how to adjust our social programs based on those, would be helpful to society.

But, I firmly reject the opinion that 75% of human behavior is caused by race.

I think that people that have this type of opinion are the problem, because the powers that be are more afraid of people like that than they are interested in making people's lives better.

---

I never said it was caused by race, just that race is genetic and much more than skin, eye, hair, and body shape. See the map below to see just how far apart the races actually are from a genetic standpoint. You can easily see that Europeans are closely related, Asians are closely related, Africans are closer to each other than anyone else, etc. Race is absolutely real from a genetic standpoint. Denying this leads back exactly to where we were before.



Genetics absolutely do govern human behavior. This is why the best choice you can make for your kids is choosing the right spouse to ensure they have solid genetics. Choose the wrong spouse and they may make bad choices no matter how well your raise then.

WaltonAg18 said:

---

Yikes. They were fired because it's a nothing burger. Obviously "race is more than skin deep", but most looking into this are looking towards eugenics.

I recommend taking a bioethics course.

---

I think that this is hyperbole and incorrect, at least in 2022. Yes "some". Highly doubt "most" as they would be kicked from Universities pretty damn quick. Yes, this was a huge topic in the 1920s - 1960s. We don't live then.

As an anecdote, here is an example of the papers that the author of this article has published. He was the one complaining about restricted access to data. These look like studies focused on helping society, not blaming one group or another:

Urban triage: Race and the fictions of multiculturalism

Characteristics of persons who died with COVID-19United States, February 12May 18, 2020

Common genetic variants associated with cognitive performance identified using the proxy-phenotype method

Genome-wide association study identifies 74 loci associated with educational attainment

Genetic variants associated with subjective well-being, depressive symptoms, and neuroticism identified through genome-wide analyses

Genome-wide association analyses of risk tolerance and risky behaviors in over 1 million individuals identify hundreds of loci and shared genetic influences

Genome-wide analysis identifies 12 loci influencing human reproductive behavior

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

Genetics absolutely do govern human behavior. This is why the best choice you can make for your kids is choosing the right spouse to ensure they have solid genetics. Choose the wrong spouse and they may make bad choices no matter how well your raise then.

---

Show me which chromosome the behavior gene is located on.

WaltonAg18 said:

---

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

This article fits into the recent criticism of posters (me) about statistical truths related to races:

Quote:

---

American geneticists now face an even more drastic form of censorship: exclusion from access to the data necessary to conduct analyses, let alone publish results. Case in point: the National Institutes of Health now withholds access to an important database if it thinks a scientist's research may wander into forbidden territory. The source at issue, the Database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP), is an exceptional tool, combining genome scans of several million individuals with extensive data about health, education, occupation, and income. It is indispensable for research on how genes and environments combine to affect human traits. No other widely accessible American database comes close in terms of scientific utility.

My colleagues at other universities and I have run into problems involving applications to study the relationships among intelligence, education, and health outcomes. Sometimes, NIH denies access to some of the attributes that I have just mentioned, on the grounds that studying their genetic basis is "stigmatizing." Sometimes, it demands updates about ongoing research, with the implied threat that it could withdraw usage if it doesn't receive satisfactory answers. In some cases, NIH has retroactively withdrawn access for research it had previously approved.

---

I think it is a disservice to the human race to fail to continue to study things about who we are. For example, my wife has discovered, in her 20 years of teaching, to approach black students, white students, and Asian students in very different ways. Now, these are all generalities, but they hold statistical significance.

To motivate a white students, focus on how studying will impact their future. For some it's college, for some it's avoiding being grounded, for some it's being eligible for sports / extracurricular activities, for some its just giving examples of how a certain subject could be helpful in the future.

To motivate Asian students, it is almost always discussion of making parents proud vs disappointing parents.

To motivate black students, it is almost always a matter of showing them that you really do value them, and care about their future. If you will invest emotionally in black students, many will give you effort where they simply ignore other teachers.

It would be awesome to run a study about effective personal relationship styles for educators versus outcomes. It would be neat to put some data behind the above anecdotes, and see if they hold true for other educators. But there is zero percent chance such a study would ever be approved, due to stigmas attached to racial stereotypes. If you could add DNA data into the study in some educated way, the study could be even more powerful.

But putting these studies in the dustbin because they might "stigmatize" a certain group does more harm than good. If we know more about people, we can make people's lives better. But the powers that be don't want to make "people's" lives better, just their own lives, which relies on having a constant dependency class that they can buy votes from. It's all very disappointing.

Source: https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2022/10/forbidden-questions.html

---

They don't allow them access because they don't want it widely known that race is far more than skin deep and that the problems and issues we face from race relations will never go away because the behavioral issues and conflicts are genetic and cannot be changed through social engineering.

Human Behavioral Genetics or Human Biodiveristy (HBD) is the single most problematic science in history. It's definitive proof that genetics governs all human behavior no matter how or what we do.

There have been numerous geneticists who have been fired from their jobs for venturing into this field because it essentially proves that all modern psychology and sociological theories are not just incorrect but wildly incorrect and that if you don't account for genetics then you're ignoring 75% of the cause.

---

Yikes. They were fired because it's a nothing burger. Obviously "race is more than skin deep", but most looking into this are looking towards eugenics.

I recommend taking a bioethics course.

---

I don't and never have recommend eugenics. I just don't believe we can ever solve these issues through any sort of social policy. It's an unattainable goal that is literally and metaphorically impossible to reach because the differences are simply too great.

Crispr (genetic engineering) may change everything with designer babies but that's a whole other can of worms that could make more problems than it fixes and given our recent experiences with mRNA vaccines, I'm not sure I would ever trust the medical community to correctly do this without some immense ethical violations.

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

WaltonAg18 said:

---

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

This article fits into the recent criticism of posters (me) about statistical truths related to races:

Quote:

---

American geneticists now face an even more drastic form of censorship: exclusion from access to the data necessary to conduct analyses, let alone publish results. Case in point: the National Institutes of Health now withholds access to an important database if it thinks a scientist's research may wander into forbidden territory. The source at issue, the Database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP), is an exceptional tool, combining genome scans of several million individuals with extensive data about health, education, occupation, and income. It is indispensable for research on how genes and environments combine to affect human traits. No other widely accessible American database comes close in terms of scientific utility.

My colleagues at other universities and I have run into problems involving applications to study the relationships among intelligence, education, and health outcomes. Sometimes, NIH denies access to some of the attributes that I have just mentioned, on the grounds that studying their genetic basis is "stigmatizing." Sometimes, it demands updates about ongoing research, with the implied threat that it could withdraw usage if it doesn't receive satisfactory answers. In some cases, NIH has retroactively withdrawn access for research it had previously approved.

---

I think it is a disservice to the human race to fail to continue to study things about who we are. For example, my wife has discovered, in her 20 years of teaching, to approach black students, white students, and Asian students in very different ways. Now, these are all generalities, but they hold statistical significance.

To motivate a white students, focus on how studying will impact their future. For some it's college, for some it's avoiding being grounded, for some it's being eligible for sports / extracurricular activities, for some its just giving examples of how a certain subject could be helpful in the future.

To motivate Asian students, it is almost always discussion of making parents proud vs disappointing parents.

To motivate black students, it is almost always a matter of showing them that you really do value them, and care about their future. If you will invest emotionally in black students, many will give you effort where they simply ignore other teachers.

It would be awesome to run a study about effective personal relationship styles for educators versus outcomes. It would be neat to put some data behind the above anecdotes, and see if they hold true for other educators. But there is zero percent chance such a study would ever be approved, due to stigmas attached to racial stereotypes. If you could add DNA data into the study in some educated way, the study could be even more powerful.

But putting these studies in the dustbin because they might "stigmatize" a certain group does more harm than good. If we know more about people, we can make people's lives better. But the powers that be don't want to make "people's" lives better, just their own lives, which relies on having a constant dependency class that they can buy votes from. It's all very disappointing.

Source: https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2022/10/forbidden-questions.html

---

They don't allow them access because they don't want it widely known that race is far more than skin deep and that the problems and issues we face from race relations will never go away because the behavioral issues and conflicts are genetic and cannot be changed through social engineering.

Human Behavioral Genetics or Human Biodiveristy (HBD) is the single most problematic science in history. It's definitive proof that genetics governs all human behavior no matter how or what we do.

There have been numerous geneticists who have been fired from their jobs for venturing into this field because it essentially proves that all modern psychology and sociological theories are not just incorrect but wildly incorrect and that if you don't account for genetics then you're ignoring 75% of the cause.

---

Yikes. They were fired because it's a nothing burger. Obviously "race is more than skin deep", but most looking into this are looking towards eugenics.

I recommend taking a bioethics course.

---

I don't and never have recommend eugenics. I just don't believe we can ever solve these issues through any sort of social policy. It's an unattainable goal that is literally and metaphorically impossible to reach because the differences are simply too great.

Crispr (genetic engineering) may change everything with designer babies but that's a whole other can of worms that could make more problems than it fixes and given our recent experiences with mRNA vaccines, I'm not sure I would ever trust the medical community to correctly do this without some immense ethical violations.

---

CRISPR is inherently flawed and only useful for small-scale edits due to the lack of specificity whenever you try to apply it to larger environment. You risk too many off-target edits that can have ramifications we can't even begin to understand until we have the immune system fully understood - which is years away at best.

titan said:

---

The question would like to know more clearly is whether race has any underlying genetic component, or "reality" I have seen it denied point-blank by current science (this includes more reliable late 20th C) that there is any truly measurable difference that is `automatic' rather than a product of the environment.

Put another way, I have been led to believe (and prefer to) that if you swept away every random other factor and `downstream' historical thing like some legacy of malnutrition, etc, that the potential ability and disposition of any given ethnic is about the same, in say, a Federation society. Any steep differences are cultural. Nor was this culture said to be a product of biology.

However, if this is in error -- and there are racial rather than national culture pre-dispositions, it impacts many other assumptions. Even in the late 20th C this was a tricky enough subject that anything skirting it could run into static .(see "Bell Curve") It is by extension, impossible to trust any declarations about it in the age of thought-control woke. So it remains and open enigma.

---

The shame is, the tools to look at this question are so much stronger in 2022 than even 5 years ago.

You can sequence a person's genome for hundreds of dollars, as compared to $1 Billion for the first sequencing. Big data capabilities have exploded in the last 5 years. AI would also be a real help here.

I tend to disagree with you about race not impacting behaviors at all. I mean, just look at the NBA compared to competitive swimming. If race can have such an impact on athletic ability, why is the human brain immune to similar differences?

That said, such studies don't really exist, because they are rejected by woke academia.

WaltonAg18 said:

---

Obviously gene expression - such as the production or absence of melanin - is going to have a genetic component.

Behavior is based on environmental factors. This is the modern day equivalent of looking for "obedience bumps" on skulls.

---

That's the question isn't it? Is that declaration true? No science that suppresses argumentation can be trusted. Truth doesn't need censorship and suppression.

Its not eugenics. You can recognize differences (if they exist) without having some stupid notion a government needs to act on it and start meddling. Recognizing the difference between men and women for example, does not mandate government interfering with that observation. And yet significantly, we see the same people in politics and academia now can no longer say what a man and woman is with conviction and willfully distort understanding. That may go for their claims about race.

I still incline toward environmental factors though. A sufficiently clear cut and simple social regimen where what is imposed and expected of all groups has no difference would probably clarify things.

WaltonAg18 said:

---

Behavior is based on environmental factors. This is the modern day equivalent of looking for "obedience bumps" on skulls.

---

How do you know?

Are you saying that genetics have zero impact on behaviors? You are basically saying that the way that every human brain develops has no dependency on genetics?

I disagree, but the data are sparse.

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

They don't allow them access because they don't want it widely known that race is far more than skin deep and that the problems and issues we face from race relations will never go away because the behavioral issues and conflicts are genetic and cannot be changed through social engineering.

Human Behavioral Genetics or Human Biodiveristy (HBD) is the single most problematic science in history. It's definitive proof that genetics governs all human behavior no matter how or what we do.

There have been numerous geneticists who have been fired from their jobs for venturing into this field because it essentially proves that all modern psychology and sociological theories are not just incorrect but wildly incorrect and that if you don't account for genetics then you're ignoring 75% of the cause.

---

I can't agree with you on this at all.

It's absolutely true that certain cultural groups have certain tendencies, and that can be proven. Focusing on those tendencies, and how to adjust our social programs based on those, would be helpful to society.

But, I firmly reject the opinion that 75% of human behavior is caused by race.

I think that people that have this type of opinion are the problem, because the powers that be are more afraid of people like that than they are interested in making people's lives better.

---

I never said it was caused by race, just that race is genetic and much more than skin, eye, hair, and body shape. See the map below to see just how far apart the races actually are from a genetic standpoint. You can easily see that Europeans are closely related, Asians are closely related, Africans are closer to each other than anyone else, etc. Race is absolutely real from a genetic standpoint. Denying this leads back exactly to where we were before.



Genetics absolutely do govern human behavior. This is why the best choice you can make for your kids is choosing the right spouse to ensure they have solid genetics. Choose the wrong spouse and they may make bad choices no matter how well your raise then.

---

Africa has the highest genetic diversity of any continent. Which makes sense because as far as we know all other continental groups are subsets of that group.

Quote:

---

I tend to disagree with you about race not impacting behaviors at all. I mean, just look at the NBA compared to competitive swimming. If race can have such an impact on athletic ability, why is the human brain immune to similar differences?

---

Not "disagree with me" --- re-read what I said. That is what we were raised on in school. I have not studied the subject and took it as an article of almost `American faith' -- per the Star Trek vision if you will, not to mention the so obviously brilliant minds and achievements of individuals of all races. That made the political govt, religious, and cultural (i.e, "environmental") explanations always more persuasive to me for differences in aggregate groups.

Quote:

---

That said, such studies don't really exist, because they are rejected by woke academia.

---

BINGO. Which has the exact same effect imo as "The most secure election in HISTORY" declarations.

A protest too much that only raises the question -- what if we were lied to? And as you say, the science to settle it is even more simpler now.

I agree that race is genetic.

I disagree that "genetics governs all human behavior no matter how or what we do".

It has to be some mix of genetics vs environment. You can look no further than the catastrophic decline of the family structure of black Americans over the last few decades. You can't blame that 100% on race. Changing cultural and political environments were absolutely a factor, if not THE major factor, and that cannot be denied.

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

Choose the wrong spouse and they may make bad choices no matter how well your raise then.

---

Nothing gets people off the rails faster than choosing the wrong spouse.

BusterAg said:

---

WaltonAg18 said:

---

Behavior is based on environmental factors. This is the modern day equivalent of looking for "obedience bumps" on skulls.

---

How do you know?

Are you saying that genetics have zero impact on behaviors? You are basically saying that the way that every human brain develops has no dependency on genetics?

I disagree, but the data are sparse.

---

Just beginning to look through some of those papers listed above, but the third ones uses a "proxy-phenotype" method to try to extrapolate from 69 "education-associated" SNPs, single nucleotide polymorphisms.

Immediately, do you see any issues trying to correlate "cognitive performance" and those SNPs? I want to know where your brain is with respect to this kind of study.

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."

George Orwell, 1984

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

I just don't believe we can ever solve these issues through any sort of social policy.

---

"Solving" racial relations is like trying to "solve" chess. It likely can never be done. There are just too many factors to consider.

That said, racial relations are absolutely worse in 2022 than they were in 2000, for example, and that is 100% due to social policies.

But, I'm not even focused on that. I am focused on how we can treat diseases, educate and socially interact based on racial differences. We can't study that right now based on genetic data due to wokeism.

Is there a single chromosome for eye color?

I mean the telltale should be that unless you can point to specific genetic areas which correspond to whatever observed attributes - and correlate those areas to certain populations - you would expect Africa to have the most variation on every* aspect. smartest and dumbest, tallest and shortest, fastest and slowest, best and worst behaved, etc etc etc

WaltonAg18 said:

---

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

WaltonAg18 said:

---

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

This article fits into the recent criticism of posters (me) about statistical truths related to races:

Quote:

---

American geneticists now face an even more drastic form of censorship: exclusion from access to the data necessary to conduct analyses, let alone publish results. Case in point: the National Institutes of Health now withholds access to an important database if it thinks a scientist's research may wander into forbidden territory. The source at issue, the Database of Genotypes and Phenotypes (dbGaP), is an exceptional tool, combining genome scans of several million individuals with extensive data about health, education, occupation, and income. It is indispensable for research on how genes and environments combine to affect human traits. No other widely accessible American database comes close in terms of scientific utility.

My colleagues at other universities and I have run into problems involving applications to study the relationships among intelligence, education, and health outcomes. Sometimes, NIH denies access to some of the attributes that I have just mentioned, on the grounds that studying their genetic basis is "stigmatizing." Sometimes, it demands updates about ongoing research, with the implied threat that it could withdraw usage if it doesn't receive satisfactory answers. In some cases, NIH has retroactively withdrawn access for research it had previously approved.

---

I think it is a disservice to the human race to fail to continue to study things about who we are. For example, my wife has discovered, in her 20 years of teaching, to approach black students, white students, and Asian students in very different ways. Now, these are all generalities, but they hold statistical significance.

To motivate a white students, focus on how studying will impact their future. For some it's college, for some it's avoiding being grounded, for some it's being eligible for sports / extracurricular activities, for some its just giving examples of how a certain subject could be helpful in the future.

To motivate Asian students, it is almost always discussion of making parents proud vs disappointing parents.

To motivate black students, it is almost always a matter of showing them that you really do value them, and care about their future. If you will invest emotionally in black students, many will give you effort where they simply ignore other teachers.

It would be awesome to run a study about effective personal relationship styles for educators versus outcomes. It would be neat to put some data behind the above anecdotes, and see if they hold true for other educators. But there is zero percent chance such a study would ever be approved, due to stigmas attached to racial stereotypes. If you could add DNA data into the study in some educated way, the study could be even more powerful.

But putting these studies in the dustbin because they might "stigmatize" a certain group does more harm than good. If we know more about people, we can make people's lives better. But the powers that be don't want to make "people's" lives better, just their own lives, which relies on having a constant dependency class that they can buy votes from. It's all very disappointing.

Source: https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2022/10/forbidden-questions.html

---

They don't allow them access because they don't want it widely known that race is far more than skin deep and that the problems and issues we face from race relations will never go away because the behavioral issues and conflicts are genetic and cannot be changed through social engineering.

Human Behavioral Genetics or Human Biodiveristy (HBD) is the single most problematic science in history. It's definitive proof that genetics governs all human behavior no matter how or what we do.

There have been numerous geneticists who have been fired from their jobs for venturing into this field because it essentially proves that all modern psychology and sociological theories are not just incorrect but wildly incorrect and that if you don't account for genetics then you're ignoring 75% of the cause.

---

Yikes. They were fired because it's a nothing burger. Obviously "race is more than skin deep", but most looking into this are looking towards eugenics.

I recommend taking a bioethics course.

---

I don't and never have recommend eugenics. I just don't believe we can ever solve these issues through any sort of social policy. It's an unattainable goal that is literally and metaphorically impossible to reach because the differences are simply too great.

Crispr (genetic engineering) may change everything with designer babies but that's a whole other can of worms that could make more problems than it fixes and given our recent experiences with mRNA vaccines, I'm not sure I would ever trust the medical community to correctly do this without some immense ethical violations.

---

CRISPR is inherently flawed and only useful for small-scale edits due to the lack of specificity whenever you try to apply it to larger environment. You risk too many off-target edits that can have ramifications we can't even begin to understand until we have the immune system fully understood - which is years away at best.

---

I know it's a long ways off and I wasn't saying it's viable. I also said it will cause more problems than it fixes.

Regardless, it doesn't matter because I will never trust the medical community to do it correctly.

BusterAg said:

---

Is there a single chromosome for eye color?

---

"Although there are about 16 different genes responsible for eye color, it is mostly attributed to two adjacent genes on chromosome 15,

(dense gene expression info) hect domain and RCC1-like domain-containing protein 2 (HERC2) and ocular albinism (that is, oculocutaneous albinism II (OCA2)). An intron in HERC2 contains the promoter region for OCA2, affecting its expression. (/dense gene expression info)

Therefore, single-nucleotide polymorphisms in either of these two genes have a large role in the eye color of an individual. "


We figured this out a while ago. It isn't a question of "woke moralists preventing the data", it's that there is no strong correlating data that matches up.

Zobel said:

---

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

They don't allow them access because they don't want it widely known that race is far more than skin deep and that the problems and issues we face from race relations will never go away because the behavioral issues and conflicts are genetic and cannot be changed through social engineering.

Human Behavioral Genetics or Human Biodiveristy (HBD) is the single most problematic science in history. It's definitive proof that genetics governs all human behavior no matter how or what we do.

There have been numerous geneticists who have been fired from their jobs for venturing into this field because it essentially proves that all modern psychology and sociological theories are not just incorrect but wildly incorrect and that if you don't account for genetics then you're ignoring 75% of the cause.

---

I can't agree with you on this at all.

It's absolutely true that certain cultural groups have certain tendencies, and that can be proven. Focusing on those tendencies, and how to adjust our social programs based on those, would be helpful to society.

But, I firmly reject the opinion that 75% of human behavior is caused by race.

I think that people that have this type of opinion are the problem, because the powers that be are more afraid of people like that than they are interested in making people's lives better.

---

I never said it was caused by race, just that race is genetic and much more than skin, eye, hair, and body shape. See the map below to see just how far apart the races actually are from a genetic standpoint. You can easily see that Europeans are closely related, Asians are closely related, Africans are closer to each other than anyone else, etc. Race is absolutely real from a genetic standpoint. Denying this leads back exactly to where we were before.



Genetics absolutely do govern human behavior. This is why the best choice you can make for your kids is choosing the right spouse to ensure they have solid genetics. Choose the wrong spouse and they may make bad choices no matter how well your raise then.

---

Africa has the highest genetic diversity of any continent. Which makes sense because as far as we know all other continental groups are subsets of that group.

---

All Africans are represented in the bottom left corner of the chart. None of them are close to Europeans or Asians and even further from natives to the Americas.

WaltonAg18 said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

WaltonAg18 said:

---

Behavior is based on environmental factors. This is the modern day equivalent of looking for "obedience bumps" on skulls.

---

How do you know?

Are you saying that genetics have zero impact on behaviors? You are basically saying that the way that every human brain develops has no dependency on genetics?

I disagree, but the data are sparse.

---

Just beginning to look through some of those papers listed above, but the third ones uses a "proxy-phenotype" method to try to extrapolate from 69 "education-associated" SNPs, single nucleotide polymorphisms.

Immediately, do you see any issues trying to correlate "cognitive performance" and those SNPs? I want to know where your brain is with respect to this kind of study.

---

Getting into the weeds here of this one guys research, and I don't really want to. I don't think that these are examples of a professor chasing eugenics, and that was my only point.

I think that a study that uses all of the available scientific tools in 2022 would be vastly more informative than previous studies. Using genome sequencing, internet profiles, big data, and AI, I absolutely think you could find associations that would be positive to society, in health, education, policy considerations, and likely other fields.

I can't find any studies like that, unfortunately. Too many roadblocks.

The proxy-phenotype method is a typical example of researchers doing the best that they can with the tools they have.

BusterAg said:

---

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

I just don't believe we can ever solve these issues through any sort of social policy.

---

"Solving" racial relations is like trying to "solve" chess. It likely can never be done. There are just too many factors to consider.

That said, racial relations are absolutely worse in 2022 than they were in 2000, for example, and that is 100% due to social policies.

But, I'm not even focused on that. I am focused on how we can treat diseases, educate and socially interact based on racial differences. We can't study that right now based on genetic data due to wokeism.

---

If you deny genetics influences behavior then you're fundamentally part of the problem. Just looking at Africa, Asia, Europe, and the Americas prior to significant immigration could easily tell you that the races are nothing alike in behavior and trying to shove them all into one area won't work.

This is why virtually every city is segregated, people choose and want to live among their own. This is never going to change.

CDUB98 said:

---

"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."

George Orwell, 1984

---

Covid was the ultimate test.

Covid confirmed that enough of the populous is malleable to the point that the globalists can do whatever they want with no recourse.

And they are.

Thats what we seeing now,

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

Zobel said:

---

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

They don't allow them access because they don't want it widely known that race is far more than skin deep and that the problems and issues we face from race relations will never go away because the behavioral issues and conflicts are genetic and cannot be changed through social engineering.

Human Behavioral Genetics or Human Biodiveristy (HBD) is the single most problematic science in history. It's definitive proof that genetics governs all human behavior no matter how or what we do.

There have been numerous geneticists who have been fired from their jobs for venturing into this field because it essentially proves that all modern psychology and sociological theories are not just incorrect but wildly incorrect and that if you don't account for genetics then you're ignoring 75% of the cause.

---

I can't agree with you on this at all.

It's absolutely true that certain cultural groups have certain tendencies, and that can be proven. Focusing on those tendencies, and how to adjust our social programs based on those, would be helpful to society.

But, I firmly reject the opinion that 75% of human behavior is caused by race.

I think that people that have this type of opinion are the problem, because the powers that be are more afraid of people like that than they are interested in making people's lives better.

---

I never said it was caused by race, just that race is genetic and much more than skin, eye, hair, and body shape. See the map below to see just how far apart the races actually are from a genetic standpoint. You can easily see that Europeans are closely related, Asians are closely related, Africans are closer to each other than anyone else, etc. Race is absolutely real from a genetic standpoint. Denying this leads back exactly to where we were before.



Genetics absolutely do govern human behavior. This is why the best choice you can make for your kids is choosing the right spouse to ensure they have solid genetics. Choose the wrong spouse and they may make bad choices no matter how well your raise then.

---

Africa has the highest genetic diversity of any continent. Which makes sense because as far as we know all other continental groups are subsets of that group.

---

All Africans are represented in the bottom left corner of the chart. None of them are close to Europeans or Asians and even further from natives to the Americas.

---

Charts like this are so intentionally vague it's ridiculous. They're using the fixation index as a measure of "distance" between races, but FST is just a measure of SNP expression.

Of course highly segregated groups are going to have different polymorphisms, that's the whole idea behind them. What is this graph trying to show?

WaltonAg18 said:

---

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

Zobel said:

---

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

BAP Enthusiast said:

---

They don't allow them access because they don't want it widely known that race is far more than skin deep and that the problems and issues we face from race relations will never go away because the behavioral issues and conflicts are genetic and cannot be changed through social engineering.

Human Behavioral Genetics or Human Biodiveristy (HBD) is the single most problematic science in history. It's definitive proof that genetics governs all human behavior no matter how or what we do.

There have been numerous geneticists who have been fired from their jobs for venturing into this field because it essentially proves that all modern psychology and sociological theories are not just incorrect but wildly incorrect and that if you don't account for genetics then you're ignoring 75% of the cause.

---

I can't agree with you on this at all.

It's absolutely true that certain cultural groups have certain tendencies, and that can be proven. Focusing on those tendencies, and how to adjust our social programs based on those, would be helpful to society.

But, I firmly reject the opinion that 75% of human behavior is caused by race.

I think that people that have this type of opinion are the problem, because the powers that be are more afraid of people like that than they are interested in making people's lives better.

---

I never said it was caused by race, just that race is genetic and much more than skin, eye, hair, and body shape. See the map below to see just how far apart the races actually are from a genetic standpoint. You can easily see that Europeans are closely related, Asians are closely related, Africans are closer to each other than anyone else, etc. Race is absolutely real from a genetic standpoint. Denying this leads back exactly to where we were before.



Genetics absolutely do govern human behavior. This is why the best choice you can make for your kids is choosing the right spouse to ensure they have solid genetics. Choose the wrong spouse and they may make bad choices no matter how well your raise then.

---

Africa has the highest genetic diversity of any continent. Which makes sense because as far as we know all other continental groups are subsets of that group.

---

All Africans are represented in the bottom left corner of the chart. None of them are close to Europeans or Asians and even further from natives to the Americas.

---

Charts like this are so intentionally vague it's ridiculous. They're using the fixation index as a measure of "distance" between races, but FST is just a measure of SNP expression.

Of course highly segregated groups are going to have different polymorphisms, that's the whole idea behind them. What is this graph trying to show?

---

Genetic distance between the races. Read the description on the top right, it explains it quite clearly.