Conks Will Love This: Most US Babies Born To Minorities Now

[Cap'n Cat]

P,
Dude, when you blow Rush Limbaugh, do you swallow or spit?

Michael Savage, not Limbaugh, and I gargle then spit.

[Pwns]

Dammit! Our conk plot to quell minority population growth with Planned Parenthood centers in minority districts isn't working!

[citdog]

Things may change elsewhere in the 'late united states' but here in South Carolina NOTHING will change!







[youtube][/youtube]

[SeattleGriz]

All I know, is that I paid for lunch at the checkout where an Indonesian girl who was easily in the top 5 hottest chicks I have ever seen, was working.

After seeing her, I can see why non whites are becoming the minority.

We have already had a couple of knuckle children.

[JohnStOnge]

This is not new.

What worries me more is that low IQ people have more children per capita and also tend to have children at younger ages. That is a "double whammy." Basically, the "typical" low IQ female has her first baby in her teens or early 20s. The typical high IQ female (115 and above) has her first baby at 28 or so. Then the typical low IQ female also has more babies. I'm going from memory. If y'all want I'll look it up and get it nailed down.

But the thing is you have a situation like this: Low IQ people produce something like three generations for each two generations produced by high IQ people. Also, low IQ people produce more offspring within each generation. Add it all up and it means of "dumbing down" of the species because, yes, there is no doubt that intelligence is largely heritable and there is no real doubt that IQ is at least an approximate measure of intelligence (even though people don't like to admit it).

If you're wondering, high IQ people tend to breed with other relatively high IQ people and low IQ people tend to breed with other relatively low IQ people. Not a complete rule, but a tendency.

It's somewhat mitigated by improvements in the environment. Kind of like height. There's no doubt that height is a heritable trait but it's been increasing over time because of improvements in health care, nutrition etc. But I don't think there's any doubt that less intellilgent people are "out reproducing" more intelligent people right now.

[catamount man]

What's to get excited about? It's not like 75% of them will know who their fathers are, they will be brought up only knowing mama's job was food stamps, medicaid, cussing out bill collectors, yet there were always plenty of smokes and cell phones available with a different pimp to slap em around each night.

WOO-HOO!!!! Thank God I'll be dead and gone!

If you see a white couple raising white children in truth and love, take a picture and keep it. Trust me, it'll be worth something someday.

[kalm]

This is not new.

What worries me more is that low IQ people have more children per capita and also tend to have children at younger ages. That is a "double whammy." Basically, the "typical" low IQ female has her first baby in her teens or early 20s. The typical high IQ female (115 and above) has her first baby at 28 or so. Then the typical low IQ female also has more babies. I'm going from memory. If y'all want I'll look it up and get it nailed down.

But the thing is you have a situation like this: Low IQ people produce something like three generations for each two generations produced by high IQ people. Also, low IQ people produce more offspring within each generation. Add it all up and it means of "dumbing down" of the species because, yes, there is no doubt that intelligence is largely heritable and there is no real doubt that IQ is at least an approximate measure of intelligence (even though people don't like to admit it).

If you're wondering, high IQ people tend to breed with other relatively high IQ people and low IQ people tend to breed with other relatively low IQ people. Not a complete rule, but a tendency.

It's somewhat mitigated by improvements in the environment. Kind of like height. There's no doubt that height is a heritable trait but it's been increasing over time because of improvements in health care, nutrition etc. But I don't think there's any doubt that less intellilgent people are "out reproducing" more intelligent people right now.

Good point, and everyone knows those minorities are dumber and shorter.

[CID1990]

So will Whitey still be to blame when he's the minority?

Also, does this mean that for children under the age of one in the US, whites are now a minority?

Does this mean my daughter gets to go to Harvard fo free?

[Pwns]

So you don't think the Flynn Effect is real, JSO?

[D1B]

So...why should I be pissed?

Because you're a racist piece of shit.

[D1B]

This is not new.

What worries me more is that low IQ people have more children per capita and also tend to have children at younger ages. That is a "double whammy." Basically, the "typical" low IQ female has her first baby in her teens or early 20s. The typical high IQ female (115 and above) has her first baby at 28 or so. Then the typical low IQ female also has more babies. I'm going from memory. If y'all want I'll look it up and get it nailed down.

But the thing is you have a situation like this: Low IQ people produce something like three generations for each two generations produced by high IQ people. Also, low IQ people produce more offspring within each generation. Add it all up and it means of "dumbing down" of the species because, yes, there is no doubt that intelligence is largely heritable and there is no real doubt that IQ is at least an approximate measure of intelligence (even though people don't like to admit it).

If you're wondering, high IQ people tend to breed with other relatively high IQ people and low IQ people tend to breed with other relatively low IQ people. Not a complete rule, but a tendency.

It's somewhat mitigated by improvements in the environment. Kind of like height. There's no doubt that height is a heritable trait but it's been increasing over time because of improvements in health care, nutrition etc. But I don't think there's any doubt that less intellilgent people are "out reproducing" more intelligent people right now.

Wronge, check out the movie Idiocracy, you'll love it.

[Ivytalk]

This is not new.

What worries me more is that low IQ people have more children per capita and also tend to have children at younger ages. That is a "double whammy." Basically, the "typical" low IQ female has her first baby in her teens or early 20s. The typical high IQ female (115 and above) has her first baby at 28 or so. Then the typical low IQ female also has more babies. I'm going from memory. If y'all want I'll look it up and get it nailed down.

But the thing is you have a situation like this: Low IQ people produce something like three generations for each two generations produced by high IQ people. Also, low IQ people produce more offspring within each generation. Add it all up and it means of "dumbing down" of the species because, yes, there is no doubt that intelligence is largely heritable and there is no real doubt that IQ is at least an approximate measure of intelligence (even though people don't like to admit it).

If you're wondering, high IQ people tend to breed with other relatively high IQ people and low IQ people tend to breed with other relatively low IQ people. Not a complete rule, but a tendency.

It's somewhat mitigated by improvements in the environment. Kind of like height. There's no doubt that height is a heritable trait but it's been increasing over time because of improvements in health care, nutrition etc. But I don't think there's any doubt that less intellilgent people are "out reproducing" more intelligent people right now.

Did you minor in Eugenics at McNeese?

[BlueHen86]

This is not new.

What worries me more is that low IQ people have more children per capita and also tend to have children at younger ages. That is a "double whammy." Basically, the "typical" low IQ female has her first baby in her teens or early 20s. The typical high IQ female (115 and above) has her first baby at 28 or so. Then the typical low IQ female also has more babies. I'm going from memory. If y'all want I'll look it up and get it nailed down.

But the thing is you have a situation like this: Low IQ people produce something like three generations for each two generations produced by high IQ people. Also, low IQ people produce more offspring within each generation. Add it all up and it means of "dumbing down" of the species because, yes, there is no doubt that intelligence is largely heritable and there is no real doubt that IQ is at least an approximate measure of intelligence (even though people don't like to admit it).

If you're wondering, high IQ people tend to breed with other relatively high IQ people and low IQ people tend to breed with other relatively low IQ people. Not a complete rule, but a tendency.

It's somewhat mitigated by improvements in the environment. Kind of like height. There's no doubt that height is a heritable trait but it's been increasing over time because of improvements in health care, nutrition etc. But I don't think there's any doubt that less intellilgent people are "out reproducing" more intelligent people right now.

Did you minor in Eugenics at McNeese?

He would have made a perfect Nazi doctor.

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

If I may be allowed to say so, much of this is due to the Church's strictures on birth control with the heavily RC Hispanics.

Wrong

[CID1990]

Did you minor in Eugenics at McNeese?

He would have made a perfect Nazi doctor.

THIS.

(Is why there will never be any meaningful scholarship or scientific study on the subject.)

[JohnStOnge]

Did you minor in Eugenics at McNeese?

Hey, it's just the truth. I'm not suggesting anything can or should be done about it. Well, for other reasons I'm against the State helping people support their children (welfare,jAid to Familites with Dependent Children, Medicaid, etc.). You know, I do believe that if you have a kid YOU are responsible for that kid's well being and other people shouldn't be forced to help you feed, shelter, and otherwise take care of it through taxation. And maybe not helping people who can't afford to have kids support them would have an impact since there is a positive correlation between IQ and income.

But my motivation for being against those government programs is not eugenics.

[JohnStOnge]

So you don't think the Flynn Effect is real, JSO?

Instead of looking up the "Flynn Effect" before posting this so that I could pretend I already knew what it is, I decided to just ask you. You tell me what the "Flynn Effect" is and I'll tell you whether I think it's real or not.

[CID1990]

So you don't think the Flynn Effect is real, JSO?

Instead of looking up the "Flynn Effect" before posting this so that I could pretend I already knew what it is, I decided to just ask you. You tell me what the "Flynn Effect" is and I'll tell you whether I think it's real or not.

That's what Sarah Palin should have said when asked about the Bush Doctrine. (Heck, I didn't know it had a name, either.)

[JohnStOnge]

So you don't think the Flynn Effect is real, JSO?

Ok. When I came back you hadn't answered yet so I looked it up. I was aware of the phenomenon but didn't know it had a name (Flynn Effect). As stated in the article at http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/flynneff.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; , "The results of intelligence tests in different countries show that over the past century average IQ has been increasing at a rate of about 3 points per decade." It's an upward drift in intelligence as measured by intelligence tests over generations.

I don't find it remarkable at all. There are other inherited traits that have shown generational drift due to improvements in environmental factors. Height for instance. If you were to go back to 1900 the average height of human beings would be smaller than it is now. Height is largely heritable, but improvements in nutrition, etc., have resulted in people getting taller on average over time. I don't see why the same thing shouldn't happen with intelligence.

In fact that's what I was referring to when I said that the tendency of lower IQ people to "out-reproduce" higher IQ people has been mitigated for now by improvements in nutrition, etc. When I read about the generational upward drift in IQ, the probable reason for it seemed obvious. I still think that when it comes to reproduction there is no selective advantage right now associated with being highly intelligent. When it comes purely to what biology is all about, lower intelligence people are generally more successful in expressing their genetic material than highly intelligent people are. And I think that shapes the future of the species.

[eagleskins]

Its funny. All these racists at least have a cousin or an aunt banging a soul brother and they despise it.

[citdog]

Its funny. All these racists at least have a cousin or an aunt banging a soul brother and they despise it.

trash knows NO color. as you prove here on a daily basis.

[eagleskins]

Judan definitely knows no color.

[JohnStOnge]

The article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; is on Wikipedia so one would have to follow up to be sure everything is accurate but it's interesting to me on several counts.

First of all, it mentions nutrition as a factor in the Flynn Effect and even uses height as an example of a trait that changed, on average, over time as nutrition has improved. Interesting to me because both nutrition as a factor and height as an example trait came to my mind immediately when I read, back during the mid 1990s, about the upward drift in IQs. I think there are plenty of other factors though. Like prematal care has improved a lot. Also, people work a lot harder now on stimulating offsprings' brains during the first two years of life when the brain is "wiring" and the "wiring" is impacted by stimulation. Early childhood and pre-natal infectious disease is better controlled. And I'm sure there are other things that I haven't thought of as possibilities yet.

Also of interest is the statement that most of the gain in average is due to improvement in the lower half of the distribution. If that's correct it means that people who scored very high on IQ tests a generation ago would, if transported forward in a time machine so that they'd be at the same stage of development, score pretty close to the same on IQ tests today; but someone who scored low back then would score notably lower today. As the author(s) of the article note(s) that seems consistent with impacts by environmental factors.

Finally, the article mentions that it appears as though the Flynn Effect may have "topped out" and generational increases in average scores may have stopped. I think it would be reasonable to expect that; or to expect that at the very least it would slow down and approach a certain limit. I think that there is a huge difference between the environment to which today's children are exposed and that kids were exposed to 100 years ago. But there's only so much one can do with respect to improving prental care, early childhood stimulation, nutrition, etc.

[citdog]

Judan definitely knows no color.

skins "you ignorant wretch your nazi is worse than your english"


JUDAN







JUDEN






and skins.....







[youtube][/youtube]

[Grizalltheway]