Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Found 74 Genetic Variants Linked To Education Level (theverge.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report on The Verge: Scientists have found 74 genetic variants that are associated with educational attainment. In short, that means some people have variants of genes in their DNA that are correlated with completing more schooling. But this finding, published today in Nature, should be taken with a grain of salt. Together, these variants explain less than half a percent of the differences in educational attainment seen in the population studied -- far less than the impact that a person's wealth and environment can have on the time they spend in school. The strongest association found for a single genetic variant explained only 0.035 of one percent of the variation in educational attainment. "Put another way, the difference between people with zero and two copies of this genetic variant predicts, on average, about nine extra weeks of schooling," says Dan Benjamin, a behavioral economist at the University of Southern California who worked on the study. These variants don't mean much when it comes to people's schooling, and factors like poverty, geography, and nutrition probably have a much bigger combined impact. The Guardian's take is worth a read as well.
Let's science the shit outta this.
Lets cut through all this BS and finally admit that intelligence is genetic and heritable.
How dare they suggest that their might be differences in people that correlates with their educational ability? Next thing you know they will find that is different geographically separated groups these mutations occur in different numbers. I don't care if it is true or not, we must preserve the accepted belief that all races are equally capable, no matter what science or history has shown us.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
....as your family and your neighborhood.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
That's nice, but is the effect as great as nutrition, both pre and post-natal?
I thought humanity was going through a dumbing down period?
Genetic illnesses are also heritable and health issues are a major cause this correlation, I have no doubt.
I guess this is a good argument for waiting until your education is done and your career is set before having children?
This is yet another manifestation of how the strong, healthy, smart, and the goodlooking have unfair advantage in life. So, just because their daddy and mommy had better genes, they are better humans now? No!!
It is long overdue for awareness to be raised of this grotesque and self-perpetuating injustice. To achieve the level playing field the overly smart need to be lobotomised, the strong — crippled, and the beautiful — disfigured.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
That's nice, but is the effect as great as nutrition, both pre and post-natal?
Now that iodine and various vitamin deficiencies were largely resolved for everyone, yes. That is, nutrition impact on intelligence extends only insofar as meeting or not baseline needs.
I don't buy this completely. Because this question doesn't take into account other factors, Diet and environment being one such factor. I know where this is going. I don't like the path its leading us down. There is only one Terran race.
However beliefs and behaviours are not equal. Especially on an individual level, individual people engage in activity that is damaging to both that individual, and groups as a whole. (drinking alcohol while pregnant, smoking while pregnant, etc.)
Other times there are external third parties that can do things that damage groups through no fault of their own: Hexavalent Chromium in drinking water, Lead, Mercury, and Zinc poisoning, cancers that develop as a result of Agent Orange, etc,
Doesn't this actually show that genetic heritable traits such as intelligence can be developed in as little as 9 weeks of schooling?
Especially if you used advanced technology for biofeedback reinforcement learning. The article from earlier today that got deleted mentioned a technology NASA developed for using networked virtual reality machines hooked up to biometric sensors on its users in a game to teach them to self regulate their emotions and bodily states.
I have even heard some claim to remember going through such experiences as small children, but no concrete evidence has ever surfaced to my knowledge.
CAPTCHA: attune
anyone born between 20 and 30 years ago are completely screwed due to lead decreasing their mental faculties. Thanks to all the god damn baby boomers for putting that garbage in everything.. So yeah for this new generation I guess and f*ck everyone else right?
Lets cut through all this BS and finally admit that intelligence is genetic and heritable.
I can't tell whether you're trying to be funny or not. TFA suggests the opposite conclusion to what you suggest, even in its title: "Scientists found 74 genetic variants linked to education level -- but their impact is miniscule" with the subheading "Looking for genetic effects 'seems pointless' ".
As TFS says, the total effect of all the genetic variants they found explains less than 0.5% of the total variance for educational attainment. And from the actual Nature study conclusion:
Studies of genetic analyses of behavioural phenotypes have been prone to misinterpretation, such as characterizing identified associated variants as 'genes for education'. Such characterization is not correct for many reasons: educational attainment is primarily determined by environmental factors, the explanatory power of the individual SNPs is small, the candidate genes may not be causal, and the genetic associations with educational attainment are mediated by multiple intermediate phenotypes
Bottom line -- this study is pointing out a TINY factor that is genetic, and subject to all sorts of environmental influences.
Nutritional deficiencies have been largely resolved for *everyone*? When did that happen?
Wait, isn't this exactly what Herrnstein and Murray concluded back in 1994, shortly before they were publicly executed by savage academics who proudly signaled their virtue by proclaiming that they hadn't and never would read the book because they already "knew" it was wrong?
See that "Preview" button?
Lets cut through all this BS and finally admit that intelligence is genetic and heritable.
Actually, this doesn't prove that at all. This study correlates education to genetics, not intelligence. Having worked with plenty of idiot PhDs and a few brilliant people out of trade schools, I can tell you the two aren't necessarily the same thing.
Obtaining certain levels of education require specific skills (e.g. manipulating p-values, and writing reports). Those skills are only one kind of intelligence.
Furthermore, obtaining education requires means and desire.
You may be right, and intelligence is genetic. However, this data doesn't prove that.
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
Any way you define intelligence is either overly broad or overly exclusionary to the level that the concept of intelligence itself is BS.
My experience going through grad school (got the PhD) was that determination was a bigger factor in success at this level, not raw intelligence or creativity. Yes, PhD students tend to be more intelligent than the unwashed masses... but it's because they put in lots of work to get there, not because they were just brighter than other people.
These genes will show you just how easy it is for you to be indoctrinated. The more genes you have, the more likely you'll get indoctrinated like a good little slave.
Comfy NEET Pepe
Perhaps, but I'm not convinced work ethic, creativity, and ambition are.
"Who are you?" "No one of consequence." "I must know." "Get used to disappointment."
So your real answer is no, it's not as great, and instead of genetics, we should concern ourselves over dietary matters.
Can lots of work increase intelligence? I took a few IQ tests at my grade school (administered by a real psychologist, not an online test), and while there were some questions that you'd know the answer to if you'd been taught or read a lot 'what is a protozoa', there were also questions like '6 6 9 0 9 3 2. Please repeat the number backwards' or 'two cubes intersect each other, how many lines does it form?' which I would also say is learnable, but far less likely to have been before hand.
I realize this article says the impact of these genetic markers have a "minuscule" impact. But higher education isn't for everyone. IMO, it's not for most people. The world needs carpenters, plumbers, welders, heavy machinists and ditch diggers, too. Those are all jobs that people can and should take pride in doing well.
Educational level != intelligence
Did you mean to post that somewhere else? I think your sloppy mouse focus slipped.
the concept of intelligence itself is BS./quote
Spot the guy who scored a 93 on his last IQ test. *snicker*
The ignorance of this statement boggles all description. Holy shit...
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
Intelligence is most certainly genetic. Dogs are not as smart as humans due to genetics. Variation among a given species is trickier, but there are genetic defects that lead to mentally deficiency, so obviously there is a genetic component to that.
Sounds like a return to shock treatment for incorrect answers or not paying attention in class.
I wonder how long it would take the kids to resist the medication, ( abuse ) before they don't care about the jolts anymore?
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
Parent of a dyslexic here. Those last two questions will tell give you a prediction of position on an autism/dyslexia processing style spectrum. Correctly answering them would indicate a more autistic-like processing style. If we are convinced that intelligence is a predictor of real world achievement, then this is inconsistent with real world experience where successful people are often aneurotypical outliers on both ends of the spectrum. I'm coming to think that intelligence is successfully leveraging the uniqueness of whatever your neurobiological quirks are to solve problems in unique ways.
We regret to inform you, that Slaughterhouse-Five is the only book by Vonnegut, that is sufficiently anti-American to be approved for American readership.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Were this correlated only to the hard sciences I'd assume that to be the case. In this study, it might only correlate to how docile and malleable someone is. It isn't like it is a challenge to get a masters these days in a crap field. It is simply what is expected of you today.
Genetics and intelligence differences: five special findings: for intelligence, heritability increases linearly, from (approximately) 20% in infancy to 40% in adolescence, and to 60% in adulthood
Educational level != intelligence
Yes, you're absolutely correct, in which case the post I was responding to was off-topic and completely irrelevant... since this whole discussion is about a study concerning educational attainment and genetics.
Oh, but wait, the study actually addresses this and notes the correlation between educational attainment and "cognitive performance" (which would probably come closest in their various considerations to "intelligence"). Not surprisingly, there is in fact a correlation between educational attainment and "cognitive performance," and the genetic information they found seems to account for a significant percentage of that in a few cohorts they had data to make a comparison.
Whatever. Either you conclude that the post I was replying to was off-topic, or you look at the study and realize they did consider correlations between educational attainment and other cognitive measurements. I assume this study was on educational attainment rather than intelligence because it's quite easy to get large-scale data on educational attainment (the study had total cohorts coming to n=~300,000 people), but it's harder to get access to a large genetic cohort like that who has also all taken the same IQ tests or whatever.
Couldn't it also be that those traits are linked to certain racial groups? Those of European descent for example might be more likely to stay in school longer and share certain genetic markers but that tendency could be completely cultural rather than linked to intelligence.
Just to be clear to all the idiots who have already replied to me pointing out that intelligence IS known to have genetic factors AND intelligence !=educational attainment, I KNOW THIS ALREADY.
I was responding to a post that implied TFA was just a "news at 11" meaningless study adding to the fact that intelligence is genetic. That isn't what the study concludes at all -- it doesn't conclude much about intelligence directly at all, and what it does conclude is that educational attainment (which is known to correlate with intelligence) has only a SMALL genetic component, compared to environmental factors.
Never taken one, but you can find far more credible criticisms than me, random guy on the internet.
I would be inclined to believe those traits have a genetic component to them as well and may have more influence of perceived levels of intelligence and educational attainment than any one genetic component influencing actual cognition.
Is that a fair point though? No amount of genetic fortune would make up for starving someone...
I'm not disagreeing with what is the most prudent conclusion based on the results of this study alone, but it's important to note that this study, genetically speaking, is fairly limited in that it focused on single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), which is pretty crude. A good way of summarizing these results is that common, very simple genetic variants involving single nucleotide polymorphisms do not individually explain much in terms of educational attainment. That still leaves complex, rare polymorphisms and their interaction, along with a whole host of other things we don't understand.
This phenomenon, of "missing heritability" is very common in genetic studies--there's a huge discrepancy between what is suggested by more general studies of genetic effects, and SNP studies. SNP GWASes have largely been discredited as the most fruitful approach to studying genetic effects because they're so oversimplified. The reason why the samples in this study is so huge is because the researchers knew that they were unlikely to find anything otherwise, based on previous SNP GWASes.
Anyway, I'm not trying to argue that educational attainment is all due to genes, but I think this study provides a sort of worst-case, lower-bound estimate for what those genetic effects actually are. It is based on the simplest, most naive approach to genetics that you could possibly undertake.
I don't necessarily agree. There are plenty of things like abuse that demonstratively stunt intelligence.. IMHO this is actually a survival advantage. A person with lower intelligence is probably less likely to go crazy under severely deprived environment. Add in a dash of epigenetics and you can see how this would persist over a few generations.
love is just extroverted narcissism
This was my thought. I grew up in a mostly immigrant neighborhood of at least five distinct native countries (and associated cultures) and the weighting that different families placed on education fell in line with stereotypes. I saw it all first hand growing up. Also reinforced from living in other countries. Kinda. Foreigners seem to value education a lot more, no matter where they are from, than average Americans. Ie, the longer a family is in the US (generationally), the less they stress education. I was also told this by my girlfriend who bilingual teacher and teaches to mostly immigrant students.
Depends on how you count achievement. If it's by your standard, maybe not, but what about by the standard of the individual? How successful was he or she in attaining personal goals vs money. I scored in the top 99.8% and found making a lot of money to be easy and lost interest in it at a young age, so pursued something else. Maybe I set my goals too low but have rarely failed at anything I've attempted.
You can have reports like this, but there's also the bus driver at my school who had three masters degrees. When asked why instead of why he drove a shuttle bus instead of a real job with a lot of money, his response was that he liked it. From talking with him for 30 seconds, you'd realize that he was _very_ smart, but would he be considered successful? Not objectively, but personally he loved his life. My dad used to tell me about one of his classmate who after getting a Phd in chemistry became a hobo because that' what he wanted to do (this was back in the 50's and 60's). Come to think of it, I know very few objectively successful people, but most of them are doing whatever they feel like doing at the time with few cares. No one is going to go hungry or be without shelter or not be able to get anything they want out of life.
...sometime around the 60s I would think. Social welfare has been prevalent in all of the Western countries (even the US) for quite some time now. At one time it was even viewed as a military readiness issue. While it's still possible to be raised by meth heads, there's really no excuse for being hungry or malnourished in the West. Simple poverty isn't an excuse. Been there, did that.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
Nature vs. Nurture.
Nurture matters, but we don't teach dogs at public school, no matter what kind of family they were raised with.
You can count achievement in various ways to effectively remove the notion of "values" from the equation. You seem to want to re-define terms to the point where up means down and you can't really do that. There's no suitable re-definition that will work for you.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
See wiki:
Some people of a particular genetic background flourish while others whine and play the victim card. At some point, you have to wonder if there is some genetic component and some people are just damaged by centuries of abuse coming from others as well as themselves.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
When I was in school, there were "fast learners" and "slow learners", yet we all graduated on the same day.
If there is anything, this form of metric is likely more indicative of the top-level potential for intelligence. How optimal their genes are at optimizing pathways and dealing with abstract information encoding.
Despite what some retards keep trying to say, you CAN increase intelligence.
If you couldn't, brains simply would not function well at all, humans would never have evolved ever given that fact.
Our evolution depended on the fact that intelligence can be improved, genes inherited from god knows how many ancestors in the past.
If our brains weren't capable of such things, we'd be as thick as any other average animal, as would squids, dolphins, hell, even dogs would be thicker.
Anyone that seriously tries to argue against this fact is hilarious when there are already millions of people that go against their claims EVERY SINGLE YEAR.
IQ generally decreases with time due to pruning, but there are plenty of people that go against this by a very large margin.
And I don't mean that relatively speaking. I mean their IQ goes beyond what it should be relative to pre-pruning stages. That is called an Increase.
Education itself only partially increases intelligence. It goes as far as it needs to, which is fairly little unless you go in to highly abstract education, like the sciences.
And as mentioned above, when the hit a pruning stage, anything considered unimportant gets pruned, killing off many things: muscle control, memories, abstract thinking capability, ability to resolve certain sounds, and a hundred other things.
But actual hardcore intelligence training can push that considerably higher, as evidenced by people that deal with loads of language tasks, huge spatial awareness (typical taxi driver, especially London cabbie being well known for this) and so on.
The changes in peoples brains to optimize to these tasks is like day and night.
So, yeah, it is probably only really related to a very small niche of industries where people deal with horribly abstract data.
Some people just get it, some never can no matter how hard they try.
Of course, you will get people that thing they are superior because of this, it usually isn't true because seriously high intelligence usually results in nerfing other areas of the brain. Emotional and fine-motor control being 2 major things that get gimped by higher intelligence, sometimes smell and taste as well.
Smell already got nerfed horribly in humans when we evolved over the years. We became more of a visual-orientated species, with vision being the largest percentage of resources in the brain for a sense.
Let's face it, high intelligence is far less likely to save you from having your face ripped off by a bear compared to brute strength / high stamina.
While one can be intelligent and have high stamina, the strength side tends to not be due to the effects of testosterone on the brain.
There are a small niche of people that go against this, as always with any major groupings of humans.
Niche groups should be researched more instead of trying to believe the most retarded statement any researcher can ever utter: "there is such a thing as a human average". [vomiting intensifies]
Luckily more researchers are moving away from such idiocy. It is great, finally major advances are happening in so many areas of genetics, medicine and virology instead of just pumping out Yet Another Drug Based On Averages and a side-effects list the size of the damn Eiffel Tower!
A good recent example of research on these fronts was HIV breakthroughs, which led to major cancer breakthroughs as well.
There are now more groups in cancer research looking to people seemingly immune or highly protected from cancers to figure out why that is.
And unlike that silly article from last year that stated it is mostly luck, there is evidence completely against this.
Yet Another Case Of Stupid American Science. Why do American Researchers ignore THE REST OF THE WORLD when doing their research?
Half of them are decad
Educational level is only loosely linked to intelligence. I'd say, for example, that it takes a certain minimum level of intelligence to get through under grad, law school, med school and so on, but the minimum isn't very high. These days I'd say that the minimum intelligence required to get through a non-elite college is extremely low.
The only way we're going to figure out what genes code for intelligence is to test for intelligence on a wide scale and then decode DNA on a wide scale to find patterns. Going after small sample sizes of people based on educational attainment levels (which is a very crude proxy) is just going to produce garbage results.
...and Massachusetts did this as recently as . 2014.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/co...
A metric that is objectively quantifiable -- unlike "Intelligence", "Smarts", and "Common Sense"
Perhaps the US is not special in this regard, and immigrants everywhere emphasize education, because they require more education just to survive the day?
And I thought I was over the top in exaggerating the issue...
Thanks for posting this.
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
Apparently not. My father is orders of magnitude smarted than any of his 7 brothers and sisters, so either A) he got better nutrition or B) there's something Grandma ain't tellin' us about! He's also the youngest, and after he left to join the Navy, they lost the farm, because apparently he was that only one that was doing all the farm work. He doesn't have much contact with his relatives now, as they are all apparently living off Worker's Compensation from faked injuries, unlike those welfare queens that are a disgrace to our society...
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
In other news, genes are correlated to family. And family background is a much stronger predictor of educational attainment than anything biological.
I'd love to see a study of how educational attainment for adopted children differs from biological children of the same parents, but I don't know how you'd find a large enough sample size to be worth anything.
Sure, as soon as we get a peer reviewed set of studies that make that conclusion. By the way, this study doesn't do that at all. "Every genetic factor we found is so small that known environmental factors like socioeconomic status on the same measures would completely overwhelm the genetic variation, making any actual genetic contribution almost unnoticeable" isn't "people are just born smarter"
I think Pinker in one of his books tried to explain this as a person tries to emphasize his or her strengths. It does have to be a big effect to have a much larger affect. If everyone is 99.5% equal, but I'm .5% better in math, I will concentrate and study math a lot harder than I will concentrate on history. After not too long of a time, I am a lot better than the .5% better due to natural ability.
I read something similar goes along with savant(ism?). People aren't naturally gifted to be able to tell what day of the week May 14, 564 is (it's a Monday), but there is a formula and some people will focus exclusively on that (all waking hours) to the exclusion of all else until they know every day of the week for the last 10,000 years. Similarly with multiplying 30 digit numbers or reciting the first million digits of pi a la rain man.
Well, dont make the mistake of confusing initiative with intelligence.
Whining and playing the victim card are tactics - an intelligent person with no initiative, or who is very self centered and/or self involved or whatever, may actually play their victim card very well and make a good living off of it.
Fuck that. I want us to go back to the theory of the Elect, and that some of us just happen to be God's fucking chosen and superior to the plebs,... I mean the common civilian.
This democracy m'larky was getting old anyway. People like us should just be in charge. Science proves it or whatever.
I can't tell if this is nonsense or not. If you examine thousands (perhaps millions) of genetic variation you will find many correlations simple by chance to almost anything. Could the study really be that silly?
That's nice, but is the effect as great as nutrition, both pre and post-natal?
The answer entirely depends on what cohort / population you are looking at. The question is "what part of the observed variation is associated with a particular factor?"
In a poor undeveloped country with a homogenous population and widespread malnutrition, early nutrition may be the primary factor in intelligence.
In developed countries, the effect of variation in nutrition is much smaller. And in a multi-racial society, the variation due to genetics is much greater. Similarly in India with the caste system, you get greater genetic variation.
"...should be taken with a grain of salt..." ...Unless you have one of the 17 genes linked with high blood pressure, in which case you should use a salt substitute, like potassium chloride, instead.
In a multi race society you should do this analysis against the genes responsible for skin color. It will probably correlate tighter.
Your genes come from your parents and those same genes influence how good a home environment they are able provide for you. Compounding interest rates can be small and still cause a balance to grow significantly over over time, the same goes for the effects of genes over multiple generations. i.e. Arguments that simply contrast genetics with environment are foolish because they are often intertwined with an accumulating, multi-generational, impact.
They say it correlates to more "schooling". That is not intelligence. And it is less then 0.5 percent, so if anything, it proves the opposite of what you say. I would insult your heritage, but according to this research your stupidity seems to be almost all your own, maybe except that 0.5%.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
My reading also. And it is about "schooling" anyways, not about intelligence. That strikes me more as skill in memorization and tolerating stupid teachers.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Intelligence is definitely genetic and heritable, but many of those genes might not solely be for raw intelligence.
After all to do OK in many education systems (e.g. complete the course) you often have to be able to sit down for hours without causing problems for yourself or to others around you. And you often have to be able to handle authority well even if that authority is wrong ;). You might also have to be able to handle "traditional teaching" methods - e.g. learn from someone who drones on for most of an hour or more. And last but not least you might need to be able to delay gratification.
I'm pretty sure many of you know people who completed schooling and yet would do worse than a crow in solving some puzzles: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
What I find interesting is a crow has a brain the size of a walnut and seems more intelligent that animals with much larger brains. Brains cost a fair bit more to keep around than just fat, so why do many animals have much bigger brains despite being stupider and not having longer lifespans? Redundancy?
"Correlation does not imply causation. "
Maybe, if you can cite reliable studies. Might also help if you could define "intelligence".
Hint, this one has nothing to do with intelligence.
Watch this Heartland Institute video
and there is the cost of possible bipolar or schizophrenic disorders.
Couldn't it also be that those traits are linked to certain racial groups? Those of European descent for example might be more likely...
That is so obvious, that I'm amazed the researchers did not think of it. Oh wait ...
TFA:
To study how this is linked to genetics, the team looked at the genomes of nearly 300,000 individuals of white, European descent ...
About 45% of a child's IQ can be explained by genetics,
That makes no sense. I think what you are trying to say (or missing) is that 45% of the variation within a particular group is hereditary.
The actual number depends on which group you are looking at.
Also, the amount of school attended doesn't directly equate to intelegence.
Was it? Let's see, Dresden bombing — 25 thousand people (not all of them civilians). Compared to the multitude of genocide-attempts of the 20th century, that's literally a drop in a bucket...
For just one example, the executions of rounded-up civilian Jews in Babiy Yar: 33 thousand in two days (Dresden bombing took 4 raids spread out over 3 days)... Bleiburg is a different kind of atrocity — by Yugoslav partisans against surrendered Germans and "collaborators" — tens of thousands deaths. Katyn is yet another, USSR executed over 20 thousands Poles — surrendered military officers and captured elites alike.
You'd have to craft your rules really really tight to exclude all of these and leave the Dresden bombing as "the single most aggressive" somehow...
Wow... Talk about being full of shit... Hiroshima and Nagasaki lost between 109 to 226 thousand of civilians (justified by 20+ thousand military death and destruction of military installations and factories). That's about 4-10 Dresdens combined...
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Perhaps the US is not special in this regard, and immigrants everywhere emphasize education, because they require more education just to survive the day?
Maybe, or it might be the other way 'round: Immigrants tend to be the people who were smart enough to get themselves out of a bad social environment where they were born, and moved to another environment where they'd have better access to education and/or better jobs.
Or maybe both are true, and there are multiple processes that produce the widely-recognized "immigrants are smarter" phenomenon.
On a somewhat related track, I've read of a few studies showing that children with multiple "parents" (through whatever processes) tend to turn out smarter, better educated, etc. Or, more generally, variety in their environment tends to turn kids indo adults who seem smarter, more knowledgeable, etc.
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
Its simply amazing that the VAST majority know and accept there is a HUGE genetic discrepancy in athletic performance but you all REFUSE to acknowledge that genetics play a significant role in intelligence.. this study is directly linked to EDUCATION LEVEL and persistence in achieving those goals and only a passing reference to cognitive ability. You all can deny reality all you want to support your IDIOTIC egaltarian fantasies.. but the simple fact is this.. stupid people make stupid babies and while we now have a public education system that trophies every student and they are all winners.. the sad reality is they fail miserably at life in all but the most menial tasks. And ALL your efforts to equate outcomes while FORCING opportunity are horrid failures. Some people are simply meant to dig ditches and you can throw all the tutoring and calculus at them that your stolen tax money will fund .. sure they "might" muster a C at best but will never understand it well enough to apply it. Which leaves ALL of us poorer and that poor sap frustrated and still digging ditches with a hell of a lot more resentment towards education and academia as a whole.. Thanks to all you "everyone is equal" assholes this guy got directed to college for sure failure instead of a good trade-school where he could have made a GREAT living. So fuck every last one of you smug, egaltarian pieces of shit.
Border Collies vs. Bulldogs
Maybe. 0.5% of it.
Ah, the old "i" word. You folks sure love slinging it at anyone who disagrees with you on sociopolitical viewpoints.
Clearly the only reason anybody would possibly entertain different ideas is that they just havent been as enlightened as you, right?
http://i.cubeupload.com/T6cyLu.png
No amount of binge eating will bolster your IQ, either.
http://i.cubeupload.com/T6cyLu.png
as enlightened as you
This has nothing to do with me, and everything about claims that "Various nutrition deficiencies have been resolved for everyone".
This is blatantly incorrect to a degree I am having difficulties wrapping my head around. My first thoughts are to the families that pick through piles of refuse for their next meal to the rampant malnutrition in America. Yes believe it or not even in America there are scores of people that do no even *make enough* to feed themselves properly. On the other hand of that spectrum what *is* affordable is usually the junk food that's no good for you.
So yes, my even grossly educated ass understands just how ignorant that statement was, regardless of the current popular consensus. Hell, even the *Experts* cannot agree on what proper nutrition *is*.
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
Yeah, or the actual college kids in Allston who dive for dumpster bagels because it's cool.
Long story short, nobody needs to dig through trash to survive in america. No food bank would turn away people who were literally starving.
While junk food is certainly cheap, premade food is absolutely more expensive than simple, uncombined ingredients. I had to adapt an 80% cabbage diet that for over a month once, and it wasnt because i was trying to be healthy. But it was actually healthy whether i liked it or not. A little boring, but with some common sense and a few different ingredients, you can make all kinds of flavors.
No, the most common factor for malnutrition in developed countries is not poverty, it is laziness or a sense of entitlement.
http://i.cubeupload.com/T6cyLu.png
The more I think about what you said, the more it burns me up. You strike me as someone who has never really been hungry, but you still have all the answers and anyone who doesn't agree with you is just ignorant.
While on the subject of working for your food, how about gardening? Sunlight is free. You know what another excellent thing is? Community gardens. You probably dont even know that EBT cards can be used to purchase things like seeds, for growing your own food.
There are no families in america that need do "pick through piles of refuse" for their next meal. No one gets fat BECAUSE they're poor. They get fat because they make poor lifestyle choices, which might also have something to do with making them poor.
No matter how you stack it, when you compare doritos to cabbage by weight and price, doritos are fucking expensive, aren't they?
http://i.cubeupload.com/T6cyLu.png
Then start a cleansing war and brought Human back to animal spirituality finally! I do agree we have to use genetics to achieve properly the CONTRARY and FAST.
You really have zero right to be angry, as you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. I could give a shit less if anyone 'agreed' with me or not. My worry is that you might be old enough to vote, and vote with a bevy of apparent mis-information, and incorrect thought processes.
I can promise you have *have* gone hungry, I have gone weeks at a time without eating. And when I did it was the dog biscuits and dog food little old ladies put out for the strays. This went on for months. I had to knock ants and giant cockroaches off but I didn't care. There were days I didn't have the strength to stand. I have been homeless a couple times simply for the sake of not having a support system. And yes there was a time when I stole change from unlocked cars ( from rich areas ) to feed myself.
Now this was in the middle of Los Angeles in the early 90's. As a young white male I didn't qualify for any public assistance. Sunlight may be free, but the land to grow on isn't. People get very upset if you start plowing their lawns or raiding the community gardens. Tending to crops or coming for the harvest are highly predictable behaviors that police can and do anticipate which makes it hard to benefit from your illicit activities.
Moving on from that dark time I had improved my situation and have a family but the company I worked for implodes leaving me suddenly unemployed with a high burn rate. Now I have a family with small children that aren't going to and cannot subsist on cabbage alone lest Child Protective Services abduct my children for neglect. Food Stamps will cover seeds but we still have to eat before the veggies can be harvested. We ate a LOT of Ramen, mixed Veggies and noodly type food without a lot of meat because all the people like you think that 'welfare queens / kings' only buy junk food. One big pack of Hot Dogs, enough buns, ketchup and a bag of chips go a long ways and make for happy kids, but that's still one meal. Not to mention the horrid conditions we lived in when we DID find another home. Evictions suck and it's happened not once but twice. We have lived in a van by the river with my children and later in a single wide mobile converted into a duplex that had raw sewage venting through the kitchen kitchen sink and water that smelled of Sulfer that we couldn't drink but showered in. ( Florida ) On the other side of the country we had gone to St. Vincent De Paul for assistance and were told there was nothing available, yet on the other side of the building we saw the Mexican families loading all manner of vehicles with goodies. ( California )
I am sorry, but not sorry at the same time. I *have* lived this, and you clearly have no clue. I applaud your passion, but I strongly suggest you walk in a persons shoes before making decisions or holding opinions. I am increasingly starting to detest college grads for having their heads in the 'pie in the sky' clouds regarding the real world in which we live. My suggestion to you is to save this email, and read it again in 20 years. I may or may not be around anymore, but I pray I didn't have to be put into a nursing home run by people that share your though process. If I was dependent on you or your care, I would end myself at the first opportunity. As it stands that may be a better solution. Aren't the old and inform just a burden on society anyways?
This encounter has been a positive one as it has served to educate me on one other thing I could not believe by providing a personal example. "White privilege" really is a thing. Unfortunately it's being mis-applied to old white people as well as white millennials. Affluence isn't only a white characteristic or every trailer court would be a palace.
Your privilege sir, please check it. Otherwise you can kindly go fuck yourself.
And Bless your heart.
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
Checking my Cambodian privilege, yes sir. And just what would that be worth in America? My family didn't even have privilege back in Cambodia. My parents were barely able to make it here, my aunt and uncle did not even make it. My Grandparents were dead before I was born.
My father swore that he would never let his family live in conditions like they had experienced in Cambodia, and he kept his word. My father worked 3 jobs and my mother worked 2. We've been poor, sure. I've learned from his example and that's why I have a trade. I did not waste time or money with college.
Without critiquing your skills as a parent, you further exemplify the type of stuck up person that i dislike. The one who loses a job and then sits around with unemployment waiting for the perfect job to float in. My father swore that we would never live with things like sewage and garbage again, and he didn't need a high paying white collar job to make good on that promise.
Maybe if you'd had someone like my father to look up to when you grew up, you may have learned a thing or two about keeping your family out of the gutter.
I find it hard to believe that any social worker would ever consider hot dogs and chips to be more nutritious than a diet of 80% fresh vegetables. I just said cabbage as an example but you are being obtuse on purpose it seems. There are plenty of other cheap vegetables than cabbage. I see collard greens for 75 cents a bunch.
http://i.cubeupload.com/T6cyLu.png
Congrats on your success, I am happy for you. We are in a far better condition now, but we have had some hard lessons along the way. I do feel terrible though, for I remember the time I was as young and held the same un-knowledgeable opinions as yourself.
You further exemplify the type of stuck up person that i dislike. The one who loses a job and then sits around with unemployment waiting for the perfect job to float in.
You make a LOT of assumptions. I found any job I could, and ended up impounding cars and managing a Tow Company. I worked like a dog, them moved my entire family to were the IT jobs were. In Florida we couldn't GET food stamps because we were missing half the kids birth certs. Our Church fed us.
I find it hard to believe that any social worker would ever consider hot dogs and chips to be more nutritious than a diet of 80% fresh vegetables.
It's *not* more nutritious, it's what we could *afford* at the time. ( Texas ) And the whole point I made about nutrition above.
Thank you for making my point now bugger off.
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
So you've got a woe story. So do I. So does everyone. Guess what buddy, your opinion is just that. How about you come down off your high horse and stop acting like your opinion is the one true enlightened path. Just because you think you're older than me. Is time what's gonna cure my ignorance? Another decade or two is gonna overwrite everything I've learned up to now and suddenly I'm gonna agree with a guy who's trying his absolute best to come across as the smuggest blowhard in the entire slashdot comment section? I've also been here for years, and while I don't think you deserve that title yet, I can clearly see you are striving to uphold a longstanding tradition of unlikable, opinionated blowhards who seem to think they're god's gift to Earth.
I'm still waiting for you to explain how you could only afford cheap shitty food and not cheap healthy food like the rest of the world tries to eat. The non-anglosphere world doesnt get so desperate to pig out on crappy mystery meat hot dogs. They eat lots of vegetables, rice. Even bugs. Scorpions arent bad. They have plagues of scorpions in florida, I'll bet you can eat those giant rainbow grasshoppers too. My parents told me they ate cat before i was born! I hope I never have to.
You just dont get it. You think you have all the answers because you've had a tough life and you're so old. You have no wisdom, only bitterness.
So are you using an alt account to upvote all of your comments here? I'm pretty sure nobody else is following us this deep into a personal discussion, so it must be all you. That's probably why you make sure to smugly get the last word over and over.
http://i.cubeupload.com/T6cyLu.png
stop acting like your opinion is the one true enlightened path
I never said that, you did.
Just because you think you're older than me. Is time what's gonna cure my ignorance? Another decade or two is gonna overwrite everything I've learned up to now and suddenly I'm gonna agree
Beyond a shadow of a doubt.
- who's trying his absolute best to come across as the smuggest blowhard in the entire slashdot comment section?
- I can clearly see you are striving to uphold a longstanding tradition of
Not sure you're a qualified psychic to know my intentions.
I've also been here for years, and while I don't think you deserve that title yet,
1999, HAY?
- The non-anglosphere world doesnt get so desperate to pig out on crappy mystery meat hot dogs.
- I'm still waiting for you to explain how you could only afford cheap shitty food and not cheap healthy food like the rest of the world tries to eat.
http://www.npr.org/sections/th...
http://journalistsresource.org...
http://www.usatoday.com/story/...
http://jn.nutrition.org/conten...
Let Google be your Guide.
My parents told me they ate cat before i was born! I hope I never have to
I have eaten Dog, it was the most delicious thing I had eaten in months. Would I again? If I ever got that hungry again you betcha. You would be amazed at what you would eat when you're hungry.
You just dont get it. You think you have all the answers because you've had a tough life and you're so old. You have no wisdom, only bitterness.
Nope, I have been there, and done that. I have the answers for some of the questions life has posed of me, and when you get old there are new questions. You are one of them.
So are you using an alt account to upvote all of your comments here? I'm pretty sure nobody else is following us this deep into a personal discussion, so it must be all you
Nope, I wasn't even paying attention TBH.
That's probably why you make sure to smugly get the last word over and over.
I participated in a workshop in Los Angeles when I was 19 to help find ways to help ease hunger in the area and the majority of the participants couldn't even identify a homeless person. My effort here is to hopefully educate you, or others that may be lurking in this thread to understand how people really are not getting proper nutrition and how it's a very real issue that needs attention, not dismissal 'This has all been settled, it doesn't happen in America'. There's starving children in Africa, AND America. There are people that don't believe or understand this, and then there's the people that dismiss the claims.
Smug has nothing to do with it. Nobody should have to suffer for the sake of ignorance of the topic.
Happy reading.
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
How can you draw that conclusion. They only found a correlation and a weak one. This can also be used as a counter argument to intelligence is inherited. John Oliver has very good video on the subject. Watch it.
"You are a product of your environment." --Clement Stone
Casteism
I've had enough of your ramblings, crazy man.
I can think of at least a dozen guys older than you who would call you the ignorant one. You think i just woke up one day and decided to be ignorant? Or do you think that maybe people can reach different conclusions when presented with the same facts?
You'd better be able to prove you've got the most perfect brain in the world, other wise all you've got is your opinion. You've lived such a rich life that you need to spend hours a day being condescending to people on slashdot. You've got it all figured out and you cant even convince one guy that you arent a smug prick. Way to go, buddy.
Happy sockpuppet upmodding yourself.
http://i.cubeupload.com/T6cyLu.png
You think i just woke up one day and decided to be ignorant?
Please review my posts. Have I said that in this thread?
Or do you think that maybe people can reach different conclusions when presented with the same facts?
This definitely happens. There's this thing called perspective that adds to the mix just for starters.
all you've got is your opinion.
All I have done is extended the opinions of professionals in the field. See my references above.
You've lived such a rich life that you need to spend hours a day being condescending to people on slashdot.
I don't think those words mean what you think they do...
you cant even convince one guy that you arent a smug prick
Only way to open a closed mind is with a hammer and that's 'frowned upon' but I think we could agree that would have tremendous therapeutic benefits. Too bad We can't take our difference of opinion to a duel. :)
You take care. :)
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.