Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
1
Chasm / Re: Teeth, race, and intelligence.
« on: May 16, 2013, 10:38:43 PM »Not every difference has an adaptational reason, but even so; why would blacks need more oxygen to maintain physical performance compared to other races? The brain is an extreme consumer of resources, including oxygen, and in fact cannot break down glucose for energy without it, unlike other tissue which can in some conditions. It is extremely sensitive to drops in the oxygen saturation of the blood. Also, how would protruding teeth prevent airway compromise even if there is more room? There is plenty of room anyway, compromise is more likely to be from the tongue falling back into the throat (when unconscious), a relatively common occurance that would not be related to space anteriorly.of course this is just in the speculative stage for now. an idea to play with.
That doesnt mean this is superficial (I doubt it is), but the reductive reasoning of pure adaptation verges on silliness. Of course, with this being a mostly taboo area, the best we will get are probably these speculative biotruths for now.
The worst example of this fallacious reasoning is that gay people were more likely to be protective of the offspring of siblings and become soldiers/warriors as that is the only way they could protect their genes. Believe it or not, I have seen that repeated plenty of times.
The Jaws affect the airway, and the spine, and ultimately your physical performance. Any TMJ specialist will tell you about it. people who were mouth breathers as kids and didn't develop their jaws and teeth properly become deficient in both athleticism and academic performance. This is a very informative book.
Black people never have bad posture. They're always standing up straight with a forward jaw a straight neck and a lifted chin. Perhaps as they have had little pressure to evolve higher intelligence, all of the oxygen goes towards building them up physically. I don't know. They didn't grow the jaw specifically to survive in Africa, the jaw decreased from the previous hominids and it just remained that size for them.
I'm mainly just confused at why the teeth shifted back for white people and Asians, following Out of Africa theory. Does a huge jaw use up too much energy? Too much bone mass? And also why has this always happened even as we gradually moved up from being apes.
Smallest brain = massive jaw, and then it kept getting smaller and smaller as cranium size increased.
2
Chasm / Did Australian Aborigines know the connection between sex and childbirth?
« on: May 16, 2013, 05:03:31 PM »
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/734/when-did-mankind-figure-out-that-sex-babies
"But some cultures — including, allegedly, Australian aborigines — never got the picture. One writer says that as late as the 1960s "the Tully River Blacks of north Queensland believed that a woman got pregnant because she had been sitting over a fire on which she had roasted a fish given to her by the prospective father."
Whatever may be said for the Tully River crowd, aborigine ignorance is probably exaggerated. It's true most Aussie natives don't think intercourse is particularly important in making babies. They think pregnancy results from a "spirit child" immigrating into the womb from a "spirit center." On the other hand, the aborigines recognize that intercourse somehow paves the way for the spirit child's arrival. They just don't think it's essential. Considering the state of sexual knowledge among some Westerners, e.g., my brother ("Whaddaya mean she's pregnant? We only did it once!"), I wouldn't be too hard on the aborigines."
http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Australoid
"The australoids of Australia are also the only known culture to not have discovered the correlation between sex and childbirth."
I can't find any other info about this.
If it's true, my mind is blown.
Interesting that the further a culture moves from monogamy, the more separated sex and childbirth become. What's the need to know the connection if the village of women raises all of the children? Sex is for pleasure, children just happen. Only in an atomized liberal society, post sexual revolution, particularly with blacks in the ghetto, there is no village to raise the bastard children of unknown alphamale seeds, maybe a grandma if they're lucky.
"But some cultures — including, allegedly, Australian aborigines — never got the picture. One writer says that as late as the 1960s "the Tully River Blacks of north Queensland believed that a woman got pregnant because she had been sitting over a fire on which she had roasted a fish given to her by the prospective father."
Whatever may be said for the Tully River crowd, aborigine ignorance is probably exaggerated. It's true most Aussie natives don't think intercourse is particularly important in making babies. They think pregnancy results from a "spirit child" immigrating into the womb from a "spirit center." On the other hand, the aborigines recognize that intercourse somehow paves the way for the spirit child's arrival. They just don't think it's essential. Considering the state of sexual knowledge among some Westerners, e.g., my brother ("Whaddaya mean she's pregnant? We only did it once!"), I wouldn't be too hard on the aborigines."
http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Australoid
"The australoids of Australia are also the only known culture to not have discovered the correlation between sex and childbirth."
I can't find any other info about this.
If it's true, my mind is blown.
Interesting that the further a culture moves from monogamy, the more separated sex and childbirth become. What's the need to know the connection if the village of women raises all of the children? Sex is for pleasure, children just happen. Only in an atomized liberal society, post sexual revolution, particularly with blacks in the ghetto, there is no village to raise the bastard children of unknown alphamale seeds, maybe a grandma if they're lucky.
3
Chasm / Re: Teeth, race, and intelligence.
« on: May 16, 2013, 04:50:46 PM »Franz Boas said the old 19th century skull measurements showing differences were all fake. Therefore we're all the same and anyone who says otherwise needs to shut up. 86% of anthropologists agree. And they got to keep their jobs too.Orthodontists treat their black patients differently, for what it's worth
4
Chasm / Re: Teeth, race, and intelligence.
« on: May 16, 2013, 04:49:12 PM »Maybe I don't understand what is meant by a "protruding jaw," but it would seem to me that whites have larger jaws and chins than blacks. This kinda stuff is absolutely not my forte, but I would say over the past year or so I got kind of interested in skulls, less from any sort of scientific sense and more in an "aesthetic" sense. So all my observations are very very amateurish. I really don't read any sort of literature about this, but I just observe what I see in day to day life. Take a look at pro athletes, the white guys always have bigger chins/jaws than their black counterparts. Maybe the biggest difference I notice is not so much the jaw, but the chin. Blacks rarely have much of a chin. Take a look at that NFL player that fought in the Post 9/11 War, Pat Tillman. Have you ever seen anybody but a white guy with a chin and jaw like that?
I think what you notice on white people is angular chins and jaws.
But basically what i'm getting at is that black people never have receded lower jaws in profile, even if their jaw is less angular. and they have protruding teeth and maxillas, partly responsiblle for the ape-like appearance.
Jay Z is an example
you can tell that their teeth protrude, it shows in how the skin just barely stretches over them.
The reason this likely disappeared with whites and asians is that huge jaws and teeth compromises other things.
Australian Aborigines of course have the biggest maxillas, teeth and jaws out of everybody, and the lowest IQ
5
Chasm / Teeth, race, and intelligence.
« on: May 16, 2013, 01:52:15 PM »
Philippe Rushton noted blacks having more protruding teeth and jaws
Teeth are further back for whites, and even more so for Asians.
Usually the larger the teeth, the smaller the cranium.
in the rare times when you see a white person with huge teeth and a huge cranium, they have a primitive appearance, probable neanderthal admixture.
anybody thought about this before? I hardly imagine the jaws and teeth are merely a superficial aspect of race.
not to mention jaws are related to the airway, which might explain why blacks never developed receding jaws, they needed more oxygen to maintain physical strength and speed. having protruding teeth leaves a lot of room for the tongue such that the airway is never compromised.
Teeth are further back for whites, and even more so for Asians.
Usually the larger the teeth, the smaller the cranium.
in the rare times when you see a white person with huge teeth and a huge cranium, they have a primitive appearance, probable neanderthal admixture.
anybody thought about this before? I hardly imagine the jaws and teeth are merely a superficial aspect of race.
not to mention jaws are related to the airway, which might explain why blacks never developed receding jaws, they needed more oxygen to maintain physical strength and speed. having protruding teeth leaves a lot of room for the tongue such that the airway is never compromised.
6
Chasm / Re: Edenism/new anthropology
« on: December 24, 2012, 05:27:47 AM »He seems to offer some good advice and ideas for introverts, but lets get real here: this is the guy who claims he can determine with 99% accuracy your level of “thal” ancestry just by looking at a photo of your face.I'm a little skeptical myself because this guy's whole M.O. seems to be that he is an introvert with aspie tendencies. He started writing about seduction tips for introverts and occasionally conservative political commentary. He seems to have taken on this new thal fascination. It could be a way to make himself feel special and intelligent and blame his lack of social skills on those damn extrovert cro-mags.
This based on emotional reasoning rather than anything cool headed and logical.
For instance, I only have a basic understanding of evolutionary biology but can still tell you this is pulled straight from his ass:
“As a result, they evolved into r-strategists, favoring promiscuity and low-investment parenting as a reproductive strategy….
sexual dimorphism was relatively nonexistent because fathers rarely invested in their offspring, forcing women to pick up the slack; higher-order thinking was almost entirely absent.”
In reality K selected species exhibit minimal sexual dimorphism (eg: swans) whereas R selected species usually have dramatic dimorphism (baboons).
To me Koanic Soul's system is basically Scientology for introverts.
However the news about neanderthal interbreeding seems to have come and gone even though this has some pretty serious implications.
8
Chasm / Re: Mind control is real
« on: December 23, 2012, 07:09:34 PM »
I don't doubt that 9/11 is suspicious. There are a ton of people with phD's in physics, architecture, engineering who are CERTAIN it couldn't have happened like the official story. Everybody forgot about them.
The video of the father is surely suspicious but for now it's not enough.
The video of the father is surely suspicious but for now it's not enough.
9
Chasm / Re: Edenism/new anthropology
« on: December 22, 2012, 07:57:18 PM »I don't know how much there is truth about the ''new anthropology'' but I have never believe that all humans come from the same african ancestors.
My intuition is telling me that if some humans really came from apes, others may came from different species of animals, like boars for exemple or at least several types of apes. It's maybe why there is more difference of behavior between a human from an other one than between two dogs.
I've doubted "out of africa" myself. the PC folk use it, even though it still proves the IQ differences
interbreeding plays a role as well. many of the species/breeds that developed were capable of having offspring with others.
The range of monkey-human specimens were probabably all able to procreate with the species on either side of them.
the idea of whites having more in common with asians and blacks being a completely different group is only noted in a few anthropology texts.
If this thal hypothesis is correct, I wonder how the masses would react to it. humans wiped them out with only small traces left. funny how no equal rights existed when these hominids co-existed. We don't weep over an extinct species today even though at the time it must have been devastating. If anything the neanderthals probably applied equality becuase of the way they evolved in the north.
11
Chasm / Edenism/new anthropology
« on: December 22, 2012, 05:03:30 AM »
To start, before people push this aside as something batshit insane, this is what we know almost for certain
-Neanderthals existed and evolved separately. They lived in small groups and survived brutal climates. They were intelligent.
-Neanderthals and early humans had some interbreeding. Up to 4% neanderthal dna in some non-africans.
this is one guy's take on the anthropological implications. Interesting read whether you agree or not.
beyond white supremacy.. he claims that the majority of whites without thal dna are disposable. Also notes the neanderthal traits appearing in asians.
http://www.koanicsoul.com/blog/reading-faces-the-eyes-are-the-windows-to-the-soul/
-Neanderthals existed and evolved separately. They lived in small groups and survived brutal climates. They were intelligent.
-Neanderthals and early humans had some interbreeding. Up to 4% neanderthal dna in some non-africans.
this is one guy's take on the anthropological implications. Interesting read whether you agree or not.
beyond white supremacy.. he claims that the majority of whites without thal dna are disposable. Also notes the neanderthal traits appearing in asians.
http://www.koanicsoul.com/blog/reading-faces-the-eyes-are-the-windows-to-the-soul/
12
Chasm / Re: Connecticut Shooting
« on: December 21, 2012, 03:10:52 AM »
mediterraneansun made an excellent post.
There is nothing more brutal than a feminized high IQ kid in a socially atomized world.
http://us.cnn.com/2012/12/18/us/connecticut-shooting-adam-lanza-barber/index.html?c=&page=1
read this and actually picture it. Picture a boy whose bitter single mom doesn't even let him speak. 20 years of that shit. I'm suprised he didn't snap sooner.
Why would he care about a bunch of kids? People care in tight communitites with actual values.
Do we care about the people we are crammed into subway cars with? We push past them.
There is nothing more brutal than a feminized high IQ kid in a socially atomized world.
http://us.cnn.com/2012/12/18/us/connecticut-shooting-adam-lanza-barber/index.html?c=&page=1
read this and actually picture it. Picture a boy whose bitter single mom doesn't even let him speak. 20 years of that shit. I'm suprised he didn't snap sooner.
Why would he care about a bunch of kids? People care in tight communitites with actual values.
Do we care about the people we are crammed into subway cars with? We push past them.
13
Chasm / Re: Procrasturbation
« on: December 21, 2012, 02:57:00 AM »
a more interesting way to look at procrastination is to ask "what is worth doing?"
14
Chasm / Re: Connecticut Shooting
« on: December 17, 2012, 06:45:12 PM »If the people here talk so much against the weak, wanting to exterminate them, how come when a person that can not cope with life not only kills self but children, gets attempts at understanding?the difference is these shooters would most likely prosper in the kind of society people here envision. Most are intelligent but they go mad because the world is mad as well. In a materialist society, what difference would the age of your victims make? everyone is walking into the same sad abyss. In a society with no tight-knit communities, the children he shot were objects he didn't give a fuck about because there is no framework for that kind of thing.
15
Chasm / Re: Connecticut Shooting
« on: December 17, 2012, 04:55:10 AM »naw I think you misunderstood. laws of nature say that men do not get as much sympathy as women(fertile) and children(due to youth). They are expendable.No one gives a shit about a man's feelings until he picks up a gun.
now this is mostly due to the nature of humans HOWEVER men being raised on equality get the idea that the world gives a shit and then lash out if/when they learn the truth.
I don’t see human nature as instinctively self-centred. The traditional societies, being smaller and more tightly-knit at least make it possible (if not necessary) to love thy neighbour.
Equality is more of a political prop which in reality means nothing more than ‘individual pursuit of material wants’. People only lash out in a desperate attempt to reconcile this toxic, omnipresent world-of-shit-type realization with their true nature; the desire to love and be loved.
In the world of equality men might get the wrong idea that someone will care. Mens rights activists still hold on to the hope that we will get complete equality In a traditional society they would be raised to be stronger and more self sufficient, not needing to be emotionally dependent. The debate goes to gun control in these incidents because nobody really cares if he was an aspie, a psychopath, on meds, or why he became crazy. They just wish he killed himself before doing this, and they wish the same for all the other depressed omega males out there.