Race is a Social Construct. (Scientific Fact from Meta data)

Originally posted by Robtard
Yeah, I'd be genuinely interested to see that racism is inherent and not learned, or if it's a combo, where the scale lies. eg 10% inherent and 90% learned from your racist granpa who spoke oh so colorfully around you as a child.

Originally posted by Robtard
Yeah, I'd be genuinely interested to see that racism is inherent and not learned, or if it's a combo

It's definitely both and this fact is not even remotely controversial.

Originally posted by Eon Blue
It is. It goes to show how petty Whirly really is, as well as Rob.

Same nonsense tactics.

^ has PM'd me to say that has 'no ill feelings towards me' <3

Originally posted by dadudemon
It's definitely both and this fact is not even remotely controversial.

Well actually, it is a little bit...

The reaction to African-American faces was found to be weaker in people with racially diverse peers.

There's never been good reason to believe that human beings are naturally racist. After all, in the environment of human evolution--which didn't feature, for example, jet travel to other continents--there would have been virtually no encounters between groups that had different skin colors or other conspicuous physical differences. So it's not as if the human lineage could have plausibly developed, by evolutionary adaptation, an instinctive reaction to members of different races.

Nonetheless, people who want to argue that racism_is_natural have tried to buttress their position with evidence that racism is in some sense biological. For example: studies have found that when whites see black faces there is increased activity in the amygdala, a brain structure associated with emotion and, specifically, with the detection of threats.

Well, whatever power that kind of argument ever had--which wasn't much, since the fact that a psychological reaction has a biological correlate doesn't tell you whether the reaction is innate--it has even less power now. In a_paper_that will be published in the_Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, Eva Telzer of UCLA and three other researchers report that they've performed these amygdala studies--which had previously been done on adults--on children. And they found something interesting: the racial sensitivity of the amygdala doesn't kick in until around age 14.

What's more: once it kicks in, it doesn't kick in equally for everybody. The more racially diverse your peer group, the less strong the amygdala effect. At really high levels of diversity, the effect disappeared entirely. The authors of the study write that ''these findings suggest that neural biases to race are not innate and that race is a social construction, learned over time.''

This, with the evidence from Genetic studies is interesting.

How is that screaming at babies working out for you? Are you telling them about alleles, phenotypes, genotypes, pre-modern human migrations, etc.? Is it helping them?

🙂

Originally posted by dadudemon
How is that screaming at babies working out for you? Are you telling them about alleles, phenotypes, genotypes, pre-modern human migrations, etc.? Is it helping them?

🙂

And they found something interesting: the racial sensitivity of the amygdala doesn't kick in until around age 14.

Have a good weekend mate. 😉

Originally posted by Putinbot1
hmmmm also interesting,

And they found something interesting: the racial sensitivity of the amygdala doesn't kick in until around age 14.

Have a good weekend mate. 😉

Man, you keep digging that hole of yours deeper and deeper, eh?

Remember this?

Originally posted by Putinbot1
As someone with degrees in molecular biology and genetics I disagree about racism being biological.

Originally posted by dadudemon
"Racism is not genetic" is also false. A sweeping dismissal of the statement is also not academically sound.

Babies start to show "likeness affiliation/preference" at very young ages.[1] This is definitely racist. It is far more innocent than the right wing racism we see. It is a self-preservation that has roots directly in tribal preservation and our violent human evolution.[2]

What does this all mean? It means, for example, white babies show a preference for white people. And this comes from self-preservation evolution, not racism. [3]

In early human history, tribal warfare was common enough that it shaped our evolution. Humans are incredibly altruistic but also incredibly violent. [4]

[1]https://nypost.com/2017/04/13/your-baby-is-a-little-bit-racist-science-says/

[2]https://www.livescience.com/640-peace-war-early-humans-behaved.html

[3]https://www.parents.com/baby/all-about-babies/science-says-everyones-a-little-bit-racist-even-babies/

[4]https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/ancient-brutal-massacre-may-be-earliest-evidence-war-180957884/

Originally posted by dadudemon
How is that strawman working out for you?

You do understand you're arguing "the genes of race" vs. my point which is "the genes of racism" right?

Let me know how your alleles discussion works with infants when you yell at them to stop being racist. 🙂

Your links on reading just don't stand up to mine. Good luck with that.

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Well actually, it is a little bit...

The reaction to African-American faces was found to be weaker in people with racially diverse peers.

There's never been good reason to believe that human beings are naturally racist. After all, in the environment of human evolution--which didn't feature, for example, jet travel to other continents--there would have been virtually no encounters between groups that had different skin colors or other conspicuous physical differences. So it's not as if the human lineage could have plausibly developed, by evolutionary adaptation, an instinctive reaction to members of different races.

Nonetheless, people who want to argue that racism_is_natural have tried to buttress their position with evidence that racism is in some sense biological. For example: studies have found that when whites see black faces there is increased activity in the amygdala, a brain structure associated with emotion and, specifically, with the detection of threats.

Well, whatever power that kind of argument ever had--which wasn't much, since the fact that a psychological reaction has a biological correlate doesn't tell you whether the reaction is innate--it has even less power now. In a_paper_that will be published in the_Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, Eva Telzer of UCLA and three other researchers report that they've performed these amygdala studies--which had previously been done on adults--on children. And they found something interesting: the racial sensitivity of the amygdala doesn't kick in until around age 14.

What's more: once it kicks in, it doesn't kick in equally for everybody. The more racially diverse your peer group, the less strong the amygdala effect. At really high levels of diversity, the effect disappeared entirely. The authors of the study write that ''these findings suggest that neural biases to race are not innate and that race is a social construction, learned over time.''

This, with the evidence from Genetic studies is interesting.

Originally posted by Eon Blue
It is. It goes to show how petty Whirly really is, as well as Rob.

Same nonsense tactics.

Bingo, and the funny part? This isn't the first time he's done this. He created a sock and created an entire thread to make fun of his other sock putinbot lol.

Originally posted by dadudemon
Man, you keep digging that hole of yours deeper and deeper, eh?

Remember this?

Stop, you're gonna force him to create another sock to defend himself.

I'm assuming it's an ad hominem on behalf of his master or Surts obsession with following me, that made him post twice after me, although it's not unusual. Poor Surt, no anything to live for except his hate.

I love that people here have got you so backwards you sock and respond to yourself you pathetic little soul. Best part is I know you'll read this...on one sock or another 🙂

Like clockwork. 😂

eat

Dance my puppet lol, what a *****, night littlr plaything.

Keep digging that hole eat

"Everybody is a little bit racist"-Hulk Hogan

Do people agree with this?

Originally posted by Surtur
"Everybody is a little bit racist"-Hulk Hogan

Do people agree with this?

Yes. Subconsciously we all have a bit of racism inside of us. Just human nature.

Originally posted by Surtur
I love that people here have got you so backwards you sock and respond to yourself you pathetic little soul. Best part is I know you'll read this...on one sock or another 🙂

You're being rekt'd by every post Whirly makes. Why not just ignore him like he ignores you?

Originally posted by Putinbot1
Well actually, it is a little bit...

The reaction to African-American faces was found to be weaker in people with racially diverse peers.

There's never been good reason to believe that human beings are naturally racist. After all, in the environment of human evolution--which didn't feature, for example, jet travel to other continents--there would have been virtually no encounters between groups that had different skin colors or other conspicuous physical differences. So it's not as if the human lineage could have plausibly developed, by evolutionary adaptation, an instinctive reaction to members of different races.

Nonetheless, people who want to argue that racism_is_natural have tried to buttress their position with evidence that racism is in some sense biological. For example: studies have found that when whites see black faces there is increased activity in the amygdala, a brain structure associated with emotion and, specifically, with the detection of threats.

Well, whatever power that kind of argument ever had--which wasn't much, since the fact that a psychological reaction has a biological correlate doesn't tell you whether the reaction is innate--it has even less power now. In a_paper_that will be published in the_Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, Eva Telzer of UCLA and three other researchers report that they've performed these amygdala studies--which had previously been done on adults--on children. And they found something interesting: the racial sensitivity of the amygdala doesn't kick in until around age 14.

What's more: once it kicks in, it doesn't kick in equally for everybody. The more racially diverse your peer group, the less strong the amygdala effect. At really high levels of diversity, the effect disappeared entirely. The authors of the study write that ''these findings suggest that neural biases to race are not innate and that race is a social construction, learned over time.''

This, with the evidence from Genetic studies is interesting.

So much rubbish. Whirly is clearly living in a fantasy world.