Africans are less intelligent than Westerners, says DNA pioneer

page: 1
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Africans are less intelligent than Westerners, says DNA pioneer


news.independent.co.uk

One of the world's most eminent scientists was embroiled in an extraordinary row last night after he claimed that black people were less intelligent than white people and the idea that "equal powers of reason" were shared across racial groups was a delusion.

The 79-year-old geneticist reopened the explosive debate about race and science in a newspaper interview in which he said Western policies towards African countries were wrongly based on an assumption that black people were as clever as their white counterparts when "testing" suggested the contrary. He claimed genes responsible for creating differences in human intelligence could be found within a decade.




(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 16-10-2007 by BlueRidge]

[edit on 16-10-2007 by BlueRidge]




posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 09:19 PM
link   
Don’t shoot the messenger! I posted this for discussion, not to prove any points. I found the link on Drudgereport.com at 10:19 EST on 10/18/07. Hopefully we can have a civil discussion.

news.independent.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 16-10-2007 by BlueRidge]



posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 09:25 PM
link   
This claim is junk for two reasons:

a) A geneticist is neither a demographer nor a psychologist and thus is not qualified to make such claims.

b) "Fryer and Levitt 2006, with data from 'the first large, nationally representative sample' of its kind, report finding only a very small racial difference when measuring mental function for children aged eight to twelve months, and that even these differences disappear when including a "limited set of controls'."

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 10:46 PM
link   
I know its not PC and everything but it makes sense. People who stayed in africa are less evolved than those who moved out to the northern regions.


apc

posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 10:50 PM
link   
There is no such thing as "less" or "more" evolved.

I don't think there's much validity to these claims. From what I can tell, most people of all races are idiots.



posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 10:55 PM
link   
reply to post by BlueRidge
 


When we can agree upon a method that will give us a world wide scale to calibrate to and determine what a measure of intelligence is, then I will take these opinions from scientists and others seriously. Unfortunately, the current collective does not have the intelligence that those like I possess to comprehend this.

I may be inclined to say, given the last 500 years of mayhem that has beset mother Africa on all fronts. No one in this country cares about Africa and what is/has/will happen there.


One of the world's most eminent scientists was embroiled in an extraordinary row last night after he claimed that black people were less intelligent than white people and the idea that "equal powers of reason" were shared across racial groups was a delusion.


If the idealogy that you base your reasoning on is fundementally different, somebodies going to seem like an idiot. ie engrish



He claimed genes responsible for creating differences in human intelligence could be found within a decade.


This just confirms that this is just part of the ongoing plan for that one world government. Make them incompetent in the eyes of the world to help themselves. Use the engineered history of third party wars et al to just take over and care for them.

Africa is dying. That is where it is said it all started, and that my friends, may be where it is going to all end.

Then we start all over again.



posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 11:04 PM
link   
Is there any proof to that claim Golack? Because I'd like to point to Colin Powell as a counterpoint to thinking that blacks are less intelligent than whites. Personally I find that testing the intelligence of races is extremely flawed since in order to get a large enough sample for accuracy you'd have to ignore demographics and environment.



posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 11:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by apc
There is no such thing as "less" or "more" evolved.

I don't think there's much validity to these claims. From what I can tell, most people of all races are idiots.


What Im trying to say is the people who moved out of Africa faced more hardships (iceage, new terrain/predators, etc) so more died. Survival of the fittest takes place and we are left with a more advanced people. I'm not advocating eugenics or anything but if you were to believe in evolution this is the most logical outcome.

How is it that the european nations built most of the civilized world we know today but Africa is in ruins.



posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 11:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by cyberdude78
Is there any proof to that claim Golack? Because I'd like to point to Colin Powell as a counterpoint to thinking that blacks are less intelligent than whites. Personally I find that testing the intelligence of races is extremely flawed since in order to get a large enough sample for accuracy you'd have to ignore demographics and environment.


I don't mean to be rude, but is there any proof that Colin Powell is 100% African?



posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 11:25 PM
link   
reply to post by cyberdude78
 


I don't think he meant that (according to his research) overall all Africans have less potential when it comes to intelligence than their European counterparts. Not that all Africans are bumbling idiots, as such, Colin Powell is irrelevant seeing as how you could list a European counterpart who was "smarter". Point is like and similar comparison within the same group and class…

[edit on 16-10-2007 by WestPoint23]



posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 11:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Golack
 



Can you tell us what a person from the "northern" regions has in their brain that an African doesn't, thanks to Africans being "less evolved" as you said?



posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 11:29 PM
link   
reply to post by DJMessiah
 


I would further like to point out that a theory of being "more evolved" is also junk because it's not like Africans had it easy, either. Although the Ice Age to a large extent did not impact Africa, the Africans had more than enough to deal with what with desertification and large, scary predators.



posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 11:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Golack
 


That argument crumbles when you factor in Native Americans who crossed Siberia and the Bering Sea to colonize the Americas. Aren't they largely "in ruins" too?



posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 11:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Golack
How is it that the european nations built most of the civilized world we know today but Africa is in ruins.


Because European civilizations didn't build the most civilized world - they stole it from others.

I don't think I have to lecture on European's colonizations and enslavement of Asia, America, African, Australian, Chinese, Indian, etc cultures and civilizations, since it should already be known. The only reason why you can look at European civilizations as so advanced is because they moved in on other people's land, stole their natural resources, then used them as slaves to build a new nation.



posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 11:42 PM
link   
I don't know about brains but modern day Homo Sapiens did originally evolve within present day Africa. Some of these early Humans ventured out into different regions, Europe, Asia etc… The environmental factors within these different regions changed (through evolution, natural selection etc...) the physical features and appearance of those groups. The lack of melanin (white v. black) in the skin due to the difference in solar radiation, the skeleton, muscular build, facial features etc… All varied from group to group because those specific features best fit that particular environment. Certainly a case can be made that other human groups not of African origin are more evolved, because they are. And by evolved I mean have gone through more physical change from how they originally were to how they are today. Whether this equates to more or less intelligence is open for debate, but if those environmental factors could alter physical features so notably why not mental features as well? That is what I think that particular poster was referring too. Africans have exhibited the least amount of change since the rise of Homo Sapiens. Mostly due to the fact that they have largely remained in the same conditions as the ones that fostered the rise of those early humans in the first place.



posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 11:45 PM
link   
reply to post by WestPoint23
 


There is a difference between evolving and adapting. It's a fact that populations that have lived on higher altitudes have larger lungs. This is so that they can have greater air intake, from the thinness of the air they have to breath.

Is this evolution? No, it's adaptation. Same reason why we have different pigment skin. Some people's body has adapted to sunlight, while others who have less contact with sun light have paler skin.



posted on Oct, 16 2007 @ 11:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJMessiah

Originally posted by Golack
How is it that the european nations built most of the civilized world we know today but Africa is in ruins.


Because European civilizations didn't build the most civilized world - they stole it from others.

I don't think I have to lecture on European's colonizations and enslavement of Asia, America, African, Australian, Chinese, Indian, etc cultures and civilizations, since it should already be known. The only reason why you can look at European civilizations as so advanced is because they moved in on other people's land, stole their natural resources, then used them as slaves to build a new nation.


Moving your society to other regions of the world and enslaving peoples takes intelligence. They had to engineer the ships and organize the armies. Im not saying its right but thats how it happened. Thanks for proving my point.



posted on Oct, 17 2007 @ 12:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Golack
 


Your point wasn't proven. See my point above.

The only point that was proven there is that Europeans are somewhat sneakier and also more war-like. Is that your point?



posted on Oct, 17 2007 @ 12:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Beachcoma
reply to post by Golack
 


That argument crumbles when you factor in Native Americans who crossed Siberia and the Bering Sea to colonize the Americas. Aren't they largely "in ruins" too?


As far as we know these people were very advanced IE the mayans and their astrological data. They were wiped out by disease, something at the time no one could prevent.



posted on Oct, 17 2007 @ 12:02 AM
link   
reply to post by DJMessiah
 


Adaptation is evolution and vice versa, evolution does not just happen without a reason, it needs an external environmental stimulus. Granted the "evolution" will not be as radical within species but significant enough to be noticeable, those percentage fractions may be misleading in this case… Still I see no reason why the body can "adapt" (see evolve) to cope with a new environment and situation while the mind cannot…

I therefore stand to reason that it is at least possible that those groups who have faced different environmental conditions other than the constant ones in Africa may have a different capacity for reason, intelligence ect… It is scientifically proven and accepted that overall due to evolutionary role men are more adapt at hunting, strategy ect… than women. Since our capacity for these areas adapted (see increased) given that we participated in such activity on a daily basis. Those men who were not able to compete died off and only the ones who were better skilled survived, reproduced ect… See where I'm going with this?





new topics
top topics
 
5
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join