Eugenics, Race, IQ, Crime Genes, Sterilization, Blah, Blah, Blah

(laughs). If you look at history, 70% of all the major pillaging and hysteria was started, sponsored, and finished by white industrialists. It’s the reason why people guess that white people are behind a lot of the world's problems and high notes. White people simply control the world, no matter how you try to look at it. But if you ask me a lot of why white people get away with what they do is because they are simply the most fascinating and unique human beings. Whatever white people do or promise they always seem to back it up, and where else are you going to find a group of women with blue eyes and pretty red hair. Tiny factions of Anglo-Franco and Spanish industrialists invaded the Americas some 500 years ago, murdered and oppressed all the Mayan natives and gave them casinos and tax free cigarettes in return. Today these American natives are even trying to live amongst white people. Does Mexico ring a bell? Only white people can get away with such atrocities and ingenious socio-politics. I don't take away anything from white people, they simply are the children of human race.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Now you assume white is a breed, as if all people with the same skin color are decended from pirates and industrialists. Different breeds are different breeds, some people came from the vikings and nomads, some people came from older ancient civilizations such as this one, but in general it's not and never was just one big tent/race. The whole pan-aryanism is a new creation that came about in the last 50 years in respect to World War 2, it did not exist during World War 1.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

what are you talking about?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Wow you make a lot of assumptions. Group interests? You assume ethnic groups are real groups, they arent. Within each ethnic groups you have different cultures, religions, languages, and breeds, and these are the real groups.

People do not group up simply by ethnicity unless they have no culture whatsoever and just want to be around people who look the same. Society however does group people based on appearances but thats a different thing.

I think all this talk about space is just space talk. Down here on earth humans are killing each other out of existance and you want to worry about IQ so we can get into space? Newsflash, we will never colonize space until we stop having war on earth. We will simply go into space to win wars on earth until we can get along.

So there will be no one going into space to colonize for at least the next 500 years, and if we avoid extinction and get a second chance then we might do it.


In general though, I don't think we will be able to avoid extinction, but if we do, it's not going to be a matter of how high our IQ is.

 

Interesting idea. I like this idea. But lets examine it...it would include the extermination of black people when it comes to brain development, and a lot of white people when it comes to physical development. Black people have always dominated the 100m race for centuries, and white people have done the same for many inventions, just look at Japan...2 years ahead of any western nation...with no colonization or domination.

 

I think Eugenics and transhumanism are completely different things. Eugenics are about killing people you dislike, or sterilizing them etc.

Transhumanism is about using technology to improve ourselves through bio-engineering and stem cell research. I support stem cell research and bio-engineering to make humans better. I don't support sterilization, or killing, because I don't think it makes us better, and even if it did it would take longer, be more painful, brutal, and less efficient than just modifying our genes.

So why do we need to worry about IQ when we can simply sell a higher IQ, or sell new gene therapy, or sell the best sperm or the best eggs?

Why sterilize anyone when you can simply sell cusotmized genetic mixes to individuals who are willing to buy them? If you could buy an egg or a sperm then the whole sterilization thing is stupid because it would be bad for the sperm donor or egg donor market.

 

I.Q is probably a means to extinction, just think of nuclear energy and other big ideas that could go hail mary one day. The Dinosour was the leader of the pack for a long time too, look what happened to those guys. In fact I.Q is an expedited rail service to either prosperity or sufferville, many books have been written on this.

 

Ok now you are saying all black people are atheletes and all white people are scientists. Thats BS. Some of the best atheletes ever were white. In fact, if you go back to Roman times white people were the best warriors, in specific the Romans were the best warriors.

Secondly, the race of black that are good at sports are a different race from the blacks that are good at science.

Just like the warrior Romans were a different breed from the typical peasant, but I guess you can't see that.

It's really not so simple that you can say one group has all of a certain genotype. This would be like trying to say that white people have all the serial killer genes. I don't think thats true, but if you want to use your logic then it is.

 

I have no problem with measuring intelligences, I have a problem with measuring one type of intelligence and ignoring everything else, as if everyones brain is supposed to fit into a box. It's not going to ever work like that.

I think, it should be left up to individuals to measure intelligence on their own. Egg and Sperm should be bought and sold, and people should have the option to learn the life history of the donor. This way you'll automatically know how intelligent the donor is, you'll know if they went to college or not, if they have a criminal record or not, what sorts of writings they have produced, or what they have done in thier lives.

This is more valueable than letting some IQ number decide.

 

Interesting bit: Men are smarter than women but women live longer than men. Food for thought

 

Men aren't smarter, just more aggressive. That's not the same.

We live in a world, in a society, that rewards aggression. When a war happens, the most aggressive side often wins, and then they loot, plunder, pillage, and claim the women and culture as theirs.

There are women warriors, but let's be realistic, most of the wars in our recent history have been started by men. So what the evidence does show is that men are more aggressive. Why are men more aggressive?

Aggression is not the same as intelligence. It does not take any intelligence to just go around taking whatever you want and doing whatever you want, thats something a child could do. Women often do the same thing, but the difference is that women use covert aggression, they find more innovative ways to get what they want, sometimes by making other people give them what they want, but it still works.

So you see, aggression still has a lot of influence in society, and we will never make it into space if we simply become more and more aggressive here on earth until we aggressivelykill ourselves.

 

There is a diference between aggressive and intelligence, however if subtle. Men are smarter than women but as in all case of intelligence...there is a good reason. The physiological make-up of men makes them physically more intelligent, and their social role and expectations predicts that they are smarter.

 

There are a lot of Transhumanists, Kurzweil worshipers, and Singularitians (Whatever you want to call them) out there that are obsessed with the idea of creating sentient computer programs. I think most of the Transhumanists that are interested in artificial intelligence should really be thinking about what about the word "sentience" really means. Most people have their own ideas about the word. Some people believe that sentience occurs when the human body is occupied by life energy. (A soul) There are a lot of new things that scientists will have to learn about genetics and the human brain before we can really understand what sentience is. Until then the only thing we can do is speculate. I personally believe that the arrangement of the atoms in carbon-based life is the only thing that makes us different from inanimate objects. Perhaps one day in the future we will be able to gather all of the elements that can be found in carbon-based life, and arrange them precisely to create the chemical process that we perceive as life.

The idea of humanity evolving into non-biological creatures is the only problem that I have with Transhumanism. I don’t believe that binary code can be a replacement for chemistry. I believe that we will eventually create computer programs that can accurately simulate every chemical reaction in a carbon-based life form, and perhaps we will be able to use this technology to create digital copies of ourselves. (Mind uploading) But I don’t think it is possible for a non-biological computer program to experience emotions. Can a non-biological computer program really experience pain, sadness, joy, and anger, or can it just simulate human behavior. At what point should a robot or simulated life be considered sentient? We could program a robot to simulate our behavior, but it would not be the same thing as experiencing the biochemical reactions that we experience. It would just be a simulation. It would be a completely different kind of existence than ours.

I think the ultimate life forms of the future will combine the functions of biology with digital and quantum computing. It is difficult for me to use text to describe what I have on my mind. It would be better if I could use pictures and sound, but try to imagine an entity or race that is similar to the Borg. (Without all of the unrealistic bullshit) Imagine that humanity evolved into a race that is in complete control of the chemical reactions in their bodies. Combine that with all of the things that I am sure you heard of before. (Nanobots, internal computer software that is storing and analyzing our sensory information, evolutionary algorithms that are constantly assisting us with the important decisions that we make, the ability to use our internal software to communicate wirelessly with other people, skeletons that are composed of carbon nanotubes, and genetic modifications to improve our biological functions)

Now imagine that we were all connected to some kind of supercomputer that was constantly processing and storing all of the information that we obtained via our biological and non-biological sensors. The supercomputer could have all of the functions that I mentioned before. (Biological, digital, quantum) Imagine something like the bio-neuro circuitry on Star Trek in combination with some of the things that you may have read in Ray Kurzweil’s books. The information that is gathered by the supercomputer could be used to make new copies of ourselves if our bodies should be destroyed or damaged beyond repair. Every person would have their own thoughts and emotions, but we would all be guided by the mission objectives of the supercomputer. The mission objectives could be to simply continue gathering information with the intent of reaching a point where we would be in complete control of the space in which we exist. The supercomputer could create different machines (biological or non-biological) for different tasks. The things that biological machines did and experienced (sex, love, fear, anger, eating, defecating, sleeping, Ect.) would simply be information that the supercomputer would process and store. We would all be a like a part of one entity. (My idea of the singularity)

10 billion genetically enhanced humans would be like 10 billion cells in a human body. Unwanted pain and suffering would be a non-existent event because every person would be in complete control of the chemical reactions in their body. Any pain and suffering that we experience would occur in a conflict with other life forms that could exist in our universe, or it could be a voluntary event that someone wanted to experience. Life would probably be very boring for a biological life form that had everything that it desired, therefore I could imagine that some people would create virtual realities where they would willingly put themselves in a situation where they could experience the things that we associate with evil. A life form that could willingly turn its pain receptors on and off would probably have a completely different perception of good and evil than we do. Who knows? We may have already accomplished the things that I just described and you could be in a virtual simulation that you created. After all, pleasure and pain is nothing more than electrical impulses. It's all information.

Something that you may want to read

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consciousness#Physical_Hypotheses_about_Consciousness

 

I am curious to know if you are intentionally or ignorantly making this false claim. Eugenics: "Eu" means better/the bettering of. "Genics" means genes. "Eugenics" thus means the bettering of genes. There is no intrinsic meaning of "killing people you dislike." If person x said that he wants to get rid of STDs, would you claim that he wants to kill all Africans since they have the highest STDs rate? If not, then why assume the same thing about eugenics? Genes can be "improve" without killing anyone, just like STDs can be reduced without having to kill anyone.

Cheers!

 

So is it China's plan to become the dominant superpower in the world?

 

Here is just a little something to get started (some older research), much more to come (newer research):

http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushtonpdfs/Gould.pdf

 

Total BS. No one has yet found an accurate definition for intelligence.

Correlation is not causation.

IQ does not measure intelligence, only some kinds of intellectual ability.

Blabla.

 

Some more research:

http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/reprints/1998generalintelligencefactor.pdf

 

A question to help define human intelligence in a holistic, i.e. valid, manner -

Why is there a nobel peace prize, same last name as the prize the greatest scientists and creators receive, but there is no prize for the "smartest" evil fucker every year?

 

More data on the relation between IQ and the amount of brain neurons:

The Scientific Study of General Intelligence: Tribute to Arthur R. Jensen. Edited by Helmuth Nyborg, 2003 http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...f=sr_1_2/002-6580293-0107268?v=glance&s=books

____________________________________


Behavioral Genetics in the Postgenomic Era, published by the American Psychological Association, 2003. Editors: Plomin, Defries, Graig & McGuffin. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/A...95437/sr=11-1/ref=sr_11_1/002-6580293-0107268