Cultural differences: A DNA link?

[Pharaoh]

Originally Posted by mburbank

Okay,

1.) The Chagnon stuff you referenced isn't in the article you linked to.

2.) You didn't mention that Chagnon's work is widely regarded as discreditted within the anthropology community. That doesn't mean he's neccesarily wrong, but its worth mentioning, especially where you bring him up out of the blue as if the two articles were interconnected.

3.) "Since personality is heritable" is part of a quote from Chagnon, delivered as if it is a scientiffic fact. It is not. It is a highly debatable contention, and I am aware of no significant body of research making any such claim.

You should read more deeply. next thing you know you'll be attributing a quote to Churchill that he didn't say and claiming to be 'proud' of him on account of it.

"They live in poorer neighborhoods because, on average, black people have lower IQs than whites or Asians, and that means lower paying jobs or none at all. "

It has been many, many years since IQ was concidered a reliable measure of intelligence. I'm also unaware of any peer reviewed studies making a causal link between average racial IQ's and demographics. Even studies that claim a link do not claim causality, since it would be nearly impossible to craft an experiemnt which would reveal if Low IQ cuased one to live in a poor neighborhood or living in a poor neighborhood caused a low IQ.

Like many Louts, you have a limmited understanding of how research works and what it takes for research to be concidered verified or even verifiable. You dislike and fear other races and are desperate to find scientfiic justification for your gut reaction so you can revel in it instead of feeling ashamed. This is almost certainly something you 'learned' from your parents, as the idea you might have 'inherited' it shows a childish understanding of what hereity and genes are.

When you respond by pointing out the spelling errors in this post, it will be an example of an attention to irrelivance that is in no way genetic.

First of all, I'm not proud of Churchill just because of a quote, and whether he said it or not I don't care at all.

Secondly you should get a new pair of specs, because at the bottom of the first page of the article is a NEXT PAGE button, and if you click on it you'll find the Chagnon bit. And there's no mention of him being discredited at all. If he was I'm sure the leftie New York Times would have said so.

Try again.