First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
Post Reply Scientists find 40 new genes linked to intelligence , account for 20 percent of intelligence
29553 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 5/23/17

iriomote wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:


Ranwolf wrote:

Cool more support for the practise of Eugenics.


How so?

Eugenics is the practice of selective breeding in humans. If you know specifically which genes control an individual's capacity for intellectual growth then it's far easier (and becomes more tempting) to deliberately breed for those traits.


i know what eugenics is but this doesn't support it in any way.
11638 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M / Winnipeg, MB.
Online
Posted 5/23/17
I do not like these scientific findings therefore it's all just false propaganda.
35918 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M
Offline
Posted 5/23/17

Ryulightorb wrote:

i know what eugenics is but this doesn't support it in any way.

Then I suggest contemplating why eugenics proponents might be pleased with the study's findings and consider it supportive of their views.
21681 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
The White House
Offline
Posted 5/23/17
So even genes cannot account for the stupidity of some humans. Guess gene therapy isn't the solution.
29553 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 5/23/17

iriomote wrote:


Ryulightorb wrote:

i know what eugenics is but this doesn't support it in any way.

Then I suggest contemplating why eugenics proponents might be pleased with the study's findings and consider it supportive of their views.


I can see why they may be pleased and support their views but it still doesn't mean this supports eugenics.

Cenric 
12734 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 5/23/17 , edited 5/23/17
Where the fuck did they find 20%? I checked a few others and they say something like this:

"Together, the genetic variants identified in the GWAS account for only about 5 percent of individual differences in intelligence, the authors estimate."
"Taken together, all of the genes identified in the latest study explain only about 5% of the variation in people’s IQs, the scientists found."

It's cool and all but 5% is quite a bit less than 20%. Can't see the paper myself.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/40-more-intelligence-genes-found
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/may/22/scientists-uncover-40-genes-iq-einstein-genius
27179 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 5/23/17 , edited 5/23/17

redokami wrote:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/smart-genes-account-for-20percent-of-intelligence-study/ar-BBBoWf0?OCID=ansmsnnews11
Interesting, i knew intelligence was linked to our genes

But also its interesting how its saying that gene variants associated with high iq are at higher risk of autism


I've read of such accounts before--although I prefer Nature journals--and a number like 20% is a guess at best (so take it with a grain of salt). Like I said before on the matter--autism is a consequence of increasing intelligence in associated genetic variants. Even if a human had such variants, it doesn't guarantee them high intelligence--same with having autism--it's just at a higher risk given those variants. Genes are probabilistic--not deterministic--remember that.

There was no doubt in recent decades that intelligence, in some manner, has a genetic predisposition--that does not exclude the incredible influence of the environment upon those genes though.

19835 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / M / B.C, Canada
Offline
Posted 5/23/17

PrinceJudar wrote:


I've read of such accounts before--although I prefer Nature journals--and a number like 20% is a guess at best (so take it with a grain of salt). Like I said before on the matter--autism is a consequence of increasing intelligence in associated genetic variants. Even if a human had such variants, it doesn't guarantee them high intelligence--same with having autism--it's just at a higher risk given those variants. Genes are probabilistic--not deterministic--remember that.

There was no doubt in recent decades that intelligence, in some manner, has a genetic predisposition--that does not exclude the incredible influence of the environment upon those genes though.



True but we can't ignore increasing the probability of beneficial results is never a bad thing. True environmental and educational influences can have as large if not larger impact on the intellectual development of a child. But if you want to build the best sculpture you have to start with the best marble.

Some might see breeding for desired traits a bit much. But at the same time we have to realise the practice of Eugenics goes back thousands of years. And we can't ignore the fact children born of parents with desired traits tend to have a better and healthier childhoods. Also that continuance of such things leads as to heredity changes that can only benefit the human race as a whole.

Though we can't ignore the negative aspects either. Since breeding for selective traits would frankly exclude a lot of people from the gene pool. And that carries risks of it own, the most prevalent the risk of not having a deep enough gene pool to prevent inbreeding.
19896 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / missouri
Offline
Posted 5/23/17

MasterBismuth33 wrote:

Humans originally had 12 strands of DNA. They say most of our DNA is junk, but that junk DNA is really DNA that is not activated. The more active DNA you have the more intelligent you are. One way to activate your DNA is to meditate another is to practice martial arts. Listening to divine music filled with love will activate the dormant DNA. Praying or contemplating God also works.


I think you need to meditate more. humans require 46 chromosomes thats atleast 92 strands of DNA. Without all 46 chromosomes you don't live verry long, or in most cases you don't live at all.
27179 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 5/23/17 , edited 5/23/17

Ranwolf wrote:
True but we can't ignore increasing the probability of beneficial results is never a bad thing. True environmental and educational influences can have as large if not larger impact on the intellectual development of a child. But if you want to build the best sculpture you have to start with the best marble.

Some might see breeding for desired traits a bit much. But at the same time we have to realise the practice of Eugenics goes back thousands of years. And we can't ignore the fact children born of parents with desired traits tend to have a better and healthier childhoods. Also that continuance of such things leads as to heredity changes that can only benefit the human race as a whole.

Though we can't ignore the negative aspects either. Since breeding for selective traits would frankly exclude a lot of people from the gene pool. And that carries risks of it own, the most prevalent the risk of not having a deep enough gene pool to prevent inbreeding.


Indeed. In some cases--especially severe ones--it is better a person never pass on their genes. I, myself, likely should not reproduce...but I plan to do it anyway.



Posted 5/23/17

PrinceJudar wrote:


There was no doubt in recent decades that intelligence, in some manner, has a genetic predisposition--that does not exclude the incredible influence of the environment upon those genes though.



US public schooling is proof environment has very little to do with intelligence. Despite billions of dollars more than what other countries spend on education and despite being so wealthy that even the poorest of the poor have to actually try not to eat themselves into morbid obesity, the US is mediocre when it comes to grades, particularly math.
27179 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / USA
Offline
Posted 5/23/17 , edited 5/23/17

Amyas_Leigh wrote:

US public schooling is proof environment has very little to do with intelligence. Despite billions of dollars more than what other countries spend on education and despite being so wealthy that even the poorest of the poor have to actually try not to eat themselves into morbid obesity, the US is mediocre when it comes to grades, particularly math.


Our education system is shit compared to most first world countries--that's no a secret. Your expectation has been that more money means a better educational system, but the money isn't the issue--it's the methodology. Some of the most successful educational systems have children in school for significantly less time each day--we're too busy pumping the kids full of drugs instead of providing adequate recess and play for their development. So no, if anything, the example you provided supports the idea the environment has a huge influence on outcomes. Why do you think ADHD is on the rise?

Same as parents that invest more time in their children.


29553 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 5/23/17

PrinceJudar wrote:


Amyas_Leigh wrote:

US public schooling is proof environment has very little to do with intelligence. Despite billions of dollars more than what other countries spend on education and despite being so wealthy that even the poorest of the poor have to actually try not to eat themselves into morbid obesity, the US is mediocre when it comes to grades, particularly math.


Our education system is shit compared to most first world countries--that's no a secret. Your expectation has been that more money means a better educational system, but the money isn't the issue--it's the methodology. Some of the most successful educational systems have children in school for significantly less time each day--we're too busy pumping the kids full of drugs instead of providing adequate recess and play for their development. So no, if anything, the example you provided supports the idea the environment has a huge influence on outcomes. Why do you think ADHD is on the rise?

Same as parents that invest more time in their children.




I heard American universities don't kick out failing students not sure how true that is but when I heard that I cringed
29553 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 5/23/17 , edited 5/23/17

PrinceJudar wrote:


Ranwolf wrote:
True but we can't ignore increasing the probability of beneficial results is never a bad thing. True environmental and educational influences can have as large if not larger impact on the intellectual development of a child. But if you want to build the best sculpture you have to start with the best marble.

Some might see breeding for desired traits a bit much. But at the same time we have to realise the practice of Eugenics goes back thousands of years. And we can't ignore the fact children born of parents with desired traits tend to have a better and healthier childhoods. Also that continuance of such things leads as to heredity changes that can only benefit the human race as a whole.

Though we can't ignore the negative aspects either. Since breeding for selective traits would frankly exclude a lot of people from the gene pool. And that carries risks of it own, the most prevalent the risk of not having a deep enough gene pool to prevent inbreeding.


Indeed. In some cases--especially severe ones--it is better a person never pass on their genes. I, myself, likely should not reproduce...but I plan to do it anyway.





Make all the Autistic children! .....no?
29553 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Bundaberg, Queens...
Offline
Posted 5/23/17

MasterBismuth33 wrote:

Humans originally had 12 strands of DNA. They say most of our DNA is junk, but that junk DNA is really DNA that is not activated. The more active DNA you have the more intelligent you are. One way to activate your DNA is to meditate another is to practice martial arts. Listening to divine music filled with love will activate the dormant DNA. Praying or contemplating God also works.


Where did you hear this from can you provide a peer reviewed source because everything we know porffesinally about DNA goes against that.

First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.