Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Genes Determine Intelligence

  1. #1
    Stefanus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bloemfontein
    Age
    57
    Posts
    1,606
    Blog Entries
    1
    Total Downloaded
    477.1 KB
    Videos
    128
    Rep Power
    10

    Default Genes Determine Intelligence

    Scientists: Genes Determine Intelligence


    March 21, 2016 by TNO Staff — Science


    Yet another scientific study—this time in Australia—has proven that intelligence is genetic and has nothing to do with environment, confirming that the liberal worldview of “human equality” is built on a deliberate lie. The new study found that math and reading skills are at least 75 percent genetic, writing skills are 50 percent genetic, and the school environment only contributes less than 5 percent of any person’s abilities.

    twins-1.jpg

    As reported by Australia’s public broadcaster, SBS (Special Broadcasting Service), the new research has definitively shown that “genes are more important in explaining differences in academic performance than teachers and schools.” The study was based on wide-ranging research into the academic performance of twins mapped out in the Australian Department of Education’s National Assessment Program—Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) tests.

    NAPLAN is made up of tests in the four areas (or ‘domains’) of reading, writing, language conventions (spelling, grammar, and punctuation), and numeracy, and is run at the direction of Australia’s Education Council.

    byrne-1.jpg
    Professor Brian Byrne. The research has been conducted by Emeritus Professor Brian Byrne and colleagues at the Centre of Excellence for Cognition and its Disorders, and the University of New England.

    The research will shortly be published in full, with much of the peer review process complete, SBS reported, although some parts of the study were published last year (“Validity of large-scale reading tests: A phenotypic and behaviour–genetic analysis,” Australian Journal of Education, April 2015 vol. 59 no. 1 5–21). That report said that “Performance on large-scale reading tests and individually administered tests was moderately to substantially heritable and the same genes contributed to performance in both types of test.”

    The SBS said that Byrne and his colleagues were allowed access to around 3,000 sets of twins and were able to look at their academic performance in literacy and numeracy NAPLAN tests in school years 3, 5, 7, and 9.


    “The results were surprising,” SBS reported, “Families, teachers, and schools had a much more modest contribution when explaining the difference in academic performance of children in the same grade or class,” and the “majority of difference between students’ abilities in literacy and numeracy were instead attributable to their genetic make-up.” Byrne said the involvement of twins in his research has been incredibly important. “They are the perfect natural experiment. We use their data to extrapolate across the wider population.” Because twins share a large portion of their genes—and almost always share the same environment growing up, a comparison of their differences and similarities reveals whether certain behaviors and abilities are the product of nature or nurture. For example, he found that twins—whether identical or fraternal—performed equally similar to one another even when they were in different classes and schools. In other words, people with high intelligence have high abilities, and people with low intelligence have low abilities—and these traits are directly inherited from their parents, and not “caused” by the school which they attend or any other social factor. “Writing skills were the least influenced by genetics—only about 50 percent,” SBS continued, adding that “genetic influences on reading, spelling, and mathematics abilities were found to be between 50–75 per cent.” “Genes are the things that are, for the most part, driving differences among children, and not different teachers, or even different schools,” Byrne told SBS Insight’s Jenny Brockie, during filming of a television show feature on twins. Byrne told SBS that his “findings undermine the idea that a really, really big player in how well children are doing is teacher qualifications and a teacher’s education.”


    He added that the findings were important “for the education system to understand that genes matter.” Approached for comment by SBS, Chris Watt, Federal Secretary of the Independent Teachers Union, said Byrne’s “research confirms what teachers have known for a long time: that some children are born with advantages, when others are not, and there needs to be greater resources that allow them to factor those differences into their teaching. At the end of the day, a school can only do so much,” he said. The findings, SBS pointed out, backed up earlier research done in the UK, where academics looked at the end of year General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE) exam results of pairs of identical and non-identical twins. The nationwide study included a sample of 11,117 16-year-olds and found that their genetic makeup may matter more than their teachers, schools, or home environments.

    RECOMMENDED READING: IQ and Race: The Complete Overview

    Featuring the work of Henry Garrrett, Arthur Jensen, J. Phillipe Rushton, Richard J. Herrnstein, Charles Murray, Richard Lynn, Tatu Vanhanen, and others. The April 2012 discovery by an international team of scientists of the gene HMGA2 which determines brain size and intelligence, has firmly established the supremacy of the “nature” or racial-determinant view of intelligence and achievement over the leftist “nurture” argument. This book reviews and summarizes all the major and influential works on IQ and race published since 1980. Starting with the full text of Professor Henry Garret’s classic IQ and Racial Differences, the remainder of the book is given over to summaries of:
    – Harvard psychologist Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray’s bestseller The Bell Curve;

    – Professors J. Phillipe Rushton and Arthur Jensen’s ground-breaking “Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability” as published by the American Psychological Association;

    – Professor Rushton’s book Race, Evolution and Behavior;

    – Professors Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen’s IQ and the Wealth of Nations with its global IQ charts; and – Full details of the 2012 HMGA2 gene discovery report.

  2. #2
    Stefanus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bloemfontein
    Age
    57
    Posts
    1,606
    Blog Entries
    1
    Total Downloaded
    477.1 KB
    Videos
    128
    Rep Power
    10

    Default IQ is Genetic: New Test Can Determine Intelligence Levels in Embryos

    IQ is Genetic: New Test Can Determine Intelligence Levels in Embryos


    Conclusive proof that intelligence is genetic and not “environmental” has come with the news that a new test can determine intelligence levels in embryos—and can accurately predict a child’s low, average, or high level IQ before it is born.

    News of the test is contained in a new article in The New Scientist magazine about the company Genomic Prediction, which has launched a “mental disability” test as one of its products. According to the article, the “new genetic test that enables people having IVF to screen out embryos likely to have a low IQ or high disease risk could soon become available in the US.” The breakthrough is the result of a new method of testing an embryo’s genes which can “assess complex traits, such as the risk of some diseases and low intelligence, in IVF embryos.” The tests haven’t been used yet, but the firm began talks last month with several in vitro fertilisation (IVF) clinics to provide them to customers, The New Scientist said. For intelligence, Genomic Prediction says that it will only offer the option of screening out embryos deemed likely to have “mental disability”. However, the same approach could in future be used to identify embryos with genes that make them more likely to have a high IQ, the article continued. “I think people are going to demand that. If we don’t do it, some other company will,” says Genomic Prediction’s co-founder Stephen Hsu. The ability to do simpler simpler genetic tests on embryos as part of the IVF process. For example, the article continued, parents at risk of having a child with cystic fibrosis or Down’s syndrome to have the option to undergo IVF and select an embryo that doesn’t carry the gene behind the condition.

    embryo.jpg

    Tests have now made it possible to work out a person’s likelihood for having certain conditions or traits by analysing many DNA regions at once to calculate something called a “polygenic risk score” and Genomic Prediction is the first company to offer polygenic risk scores for embryos rather than adults. Genomic Prediction’s intention was to offer parents a way of screening out embryos at high risk of certain medical conditions, and now, as genetic research has expanded, this has extended to the genes which determine intelligence. According to The New Scientist, the test cannot predict an exact IQ for each embryo, “but it can indicate which ones are genetic outliers, giving prospective parents the option of avoiding embryos with a high chance of an IQ 25 points below average.” Information from the same test could be used to go one step further and select whichever embryo is most likely to have a high IQ. “What that corresponds to is way-above-average intellectual potential,” says Hsu. Intelligence is only one trait the firm can give a polygenic risk score for. Others on offer include heart disease, breast cancer, type 1 and type 2 diabetes, and inflammatory bowel disease. Yet another test can accurately predict the height of a adult while he or she is still an embryo—further evidence that all life forms on earth have a biological or genetic basis. The tests are the final nail in the coffin of the liberal delusion that intelligence is “environmental,” and that all people when born are a “blank slate” whose ability is “determined” by environment. The equally important implication of the test however shows that racial differences in IQ are also genetic in origin, and therefore that achievement levels are biologically determined and unchangeable.

  3. #3
    Stefanus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bloemfontein
    Age
    57
    Posts
    1,606
    Blog Entries
    1
    Total Downloaded
    477.1 KB
    Videos
    128
    Rep Power
    10

    Default Intelligence is Genetic, MIT Admits, and IQ-DNA Tests Soon Available

    Intelligence is Genetic, MIT Admits, and IQ-DNA Tests Soon Available


    Faced with the inevitable march of impartial factual science, several leading behavioral geneticists have now fully admitted that intelligence is genetic—i.e. that intelligence is inherited, and not environmental—and that IQ DNA test kits will soon be available in the same way that there are already ancestry DNA tests.

    According to a report in the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s MIT Technology Review, “gene studies have finally gotten big enough—and hence powerful enough—to zero in on genetic differences linked to IQ.” More than 500 genes have now been tied to performance on IQ tests, and “results from an experiment correlating one million people’s DNA with their academic success are due at any time.” Quoting Robert J. Plomin, an American psychologist and geneticist best known for his work in twin studies and behavior genetics, who is now based at King’s College London, where he leads a long-term study of 13,000 pairs of British twins, the MIT Technology Review says that the new discoveries “mean we can now read the DNA of a young child and get a notion of how intelligent he or she will be.” Plomin outlined the DNA IQ test scenario in January in a paper titled “The New Genetics of Intelligence,” making a case that parents will use direct-to-consumer tests to predict kids’ mental abilities and make schooling choices, a concept he calls precision education. At least three online services, including GenePlaza and DNA Land, have started offering to quantify anyone’s genetic IQ from a spit sample. Others are holding back. The largest company offering direct-to-consumer DNA health reports, 23andMe, says it’s not telling people their brain rating out of concern the information would be poorly received. 23andMe, which has studied the DNA of more than five million people and offers consumers reports on 21 traits, including everything from the chances of having a cleft chin to the likelihood of developing a bald spot. Of these trait reports, 16 are calculated employing polygenic scores. “But 23andMe doesn’t offer any reports about intellectual faculties. And that’s not because it doesn’t have the data. It does. Because it surveys customers on how long they stayed in school, a proxy for intelligence, the Google-backed company has been playing a supporting role in the search for intelligence genes by contributing its customers’ DNA data to the largest of the gene hunts,” the MIT Technology Review continues.

    “So why not tell customers? In response to MIT Technology Review’s question, 23andMe gave us a statement. ‘Educational attainment is something we have looked at previously but are not currently pursuing for our product for several reasons,’ said Shirley Wu, director of product science for 23andMe. ‘One being the pitfalls of potential misinterpretation of such a report.’” The “misinterpretation” to which Wu refers is of course the obvious: that different races have different average IQ levels, and that science has now confirmed that this is genetically-based—and therefore unchangeable.

    Global-IQ-ScoresM.jpg

    This fact cuts to the very heart of the liberal delusion of race-denying “equality” fantasies. As IQ is clearly linked to educational attainment, social development and propensity to crime, any concession that certain races have lower IQs as well as obvious physical differences is an admission that the racially-based biological worldview is in fact the only correct and accurate political ideology.




    Recommended reading: IQ and Race: The Complete Overview


    Featuring the work of Dr. Henry Garrett and overviews of the research conducted by Professors Arthur Jensen, J. Philippe Rushton Richard J. Herrnstein, Charles Murray, Richard Lynn, Tatu Vanhanen and others.
    The April 2012 discovery by an international team of scientists of the gene HMGA2, which determines brain size and intelligence, has firmly established the supremacy of the “nature” or racial-determinant view of intelligence and achievement over the leftist “nurture” argument.

    This book reviews and summarizes all the major and influential works on IQ and race published since 1980. Includes summaries of the greatest works on race and intelligence plus full details of the 2012 HMGA2 gene discovery report.

    topperfinal.jpg

  4. #4
    Stefanus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bloemfontein
    Age
    57
    Posts
    1,606
    Blog Entries
    1
    Total Downloaded
    477.1 KB
    Videos
    128
    Rep Power
    10

    Default Science Confirms: Genes Determine Brain Size

    Science Confirms: Genes Determine Brain Size


    Two scientific studies have definitively confirmed that genes determine brain size and intelligence—and that these are inherited traits, unaffected by environment. The studies—both published in major scientific journals—conclusively disprove the lies put out by the race-denying “environmentalists” who claim that all races are equal and that all people are born “blank slates.

    skulls-races-sideview1-2.jpg

    The first study, published in the journal Molecular Psychiatry, titled “Shared genetic aetiology between cognitive functions and physical and mental health in UK Biobank and 24 GWAS consortia,” revealed a definitive link between cranial capacity—that is, brain size—and intelligence.

    The paper, authored by an international team of scientists at universities in Britain, Australia, Germany, and the U.S., tested data from the U.K. Biobank for “shared genetic aetiology between cognitive functions and neuropsychiatric disorders and physical health.”

    Molecular-Pyschiatry-1.jpg

    The study found “highly significant associations were observed between the cognitive test scores in the UK Biobank sample and many polygenic profile scores, including . . . body mass index, intracranial volume, infant head circumference, and childhood cognitive ability.”

    In other words, the study found a conclusive link between higher intelligence and large head circumferences and brain volume.

    The paper concluded that “the genetic associations between infant head circumference and intracranial volume with educational attainment and verbal-numerical reasoning are important in themselves, as are many other cognitive–mental health and cognitive–physical health associations.”

    Open-Biology-1.jpg

    The second paper, published in the Royal Society journal Open Biology, discovered the actual genes responsible for bigger brain sizes after comparing the genomes of 28 mammals with different brain sizes.

    The paper’s conclusion said that they had “identified a set of gene families whose sizes are positively associated with an expanded neocortex, providing new insights into neocortex evolution,” and that “identifying genomic signatures associated with the evolution of larger brain size and neocortex expansion will critically contribute to our understanding of the molecular pathways involved in the development and maintenance of cortical areas in highly encephalized mammals including humans.”

    The papers confirm the accuracy of the science of racial craniology—which has been rejected by the race-deniers of post-World War II liberalism—and reinforces the reality of the existence of inherent, unchangeable racial differences in morphology and intelligence.

    As detailed by Professor J. Philippe Rushton in his book Race, Evolution and Behavior, the average cranial capacity of Mongoloid Asiatics is 1,335 cm3, Caucasoids 1,341 cm3, and Negroids 1,284cm3—all differences, he notes, which are “highly significant within studies.”

    What all these studies put together means is that brain size, intelligence, and cognitive ability vary from race to race, and are inherited and unaffected by environment.

    These racial differences in intelligence are in turn the cause of differences in racial psychology and group racial behavior, as reflected in racial crime rates, social adaptability, and economic achievement.

    The studies also provide conclusive evidence that the only solution to racial problems lies in complete physical and geographic separation, because the alternative can only lead to one thing: the overwhelming and destruction of the European type by other races.

    This book reviews and summarizes all the major and influential works on IQ and race published since 1980. Includes summaries of the greatest works on race and intelligence plus full details of the 2012 HMGA2 gene discovery report, the gene which determines brain size and intelligence.
    Contents:
    IQ and Racial Differences, The Bell Curve: Summary and Findings, Thirty Years of Research on Race Differences in Cognitive Ability, IQ and the Wealth of Nations, The Genetics of Intelligence and Brain Size.

    The Biology of the Race Problem
    By Professor Wesley Critz George.
    Commissioned by the Governor of Alabama in 1962, this seminal work on the reality of racial differences remains one of the most concise works on the topic. Starting with an explanation of the workings of hereditary, the author moves on to an in-depth discussion of the fundamental—and, as he points out, unchangeable—racial differences between Europeans and Africans in particular.

    Addressed in this volume are the standard topics of physical, psychological and intellectual differences. It then moves on to the important effects these differences have on society, providing an explanation for the ongoing and disproportionately high non-white crime rate, which, the author shows is rooted in an physical difference which creates different behavioral patterns.


  5. #5
    Stefanus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bloemfontein
    Age
    57
    Posts
    1,606
    Blog Entries
    1
    Total Downloaded
    477.1 KB
    Videos
    128
    Rep Power
    10

    Default Genetics and Heritability Determine Academic Achievement, NewScientific Paper Proves

    Genetics and Heritability Determine Academic Achievement, NewScientific Paper Proves


    Scientists researching the impact of genetics upon intelligence have concluded—once again—that academic achievement is directly linked to inherited traits and not to environment.

    iq6-1.jpg

    The admission is contained in a research paper titled “The high heritability of educational achievement reflects many genetically influenced traits, not just intelligence” published in the October 2014 edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America journal, PNAS.

    In that paper, edited by Michael S. Gazzaniga, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA, the researchers focused on the UK-wide standardized exam results at age 16, the General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE).

    “We obtained exam grades from over 13,000 identical and non-identical twins from the Twins Early Development Study who were also assessed on nine broad psychological domains, including intelligence, educational self-belief, personality, behavior problems, and well-being,” the paper said.

    “Identical twins share 100% of their genes, whereas non-identical twins, just like any siblings, share on average only half of the genes that vary between people. If overall, identical twins are more alike than non-identical twins on a particular trait, then this implies there is a genetic influence.

    “Our study showed that the mean results in the GCSE core subjects of English, mathematics and science is more heritable (62 percent) than the nine other psychological domains (35–58 percent) we looked at.

    “This means that differences in how well children perform at exams are to a large extent explained by the difference in their DNA. Importantly, it does not mean that genetics explain 62 percent of a single child’s school achievement.

    “When we analyzed different traits, we found that educational achievement is correlated with many characteristics of children, not just intelligence. Our results indicate that these correlations are largely mediated by genetic factors. To the extent that children’s traits predict educational achievement, they do so largely for genetic reasons.

    “Although intelligence accounts for more of the heritability of GCSE results than any other single domain, the joint contribution of children’s self-belief, behavior problems, personality, well-being, and their perceptions of school environment, collectively account for about as much GCSE heritability as intelligence.

    “Together with intelligence, these domains account for 75% of the heritability of GCSE performance.

    “The children in this study were all taught the national curriculum, so to some extent received a similar education. As children’s learning experiences become more similar, they begin to explain the similarities between them rather than the differences between them. As a result of these diminished environmental differences, the relative genetic influences increase. So in a way, high heritability is an indicator of equality.

    “For example, despite high heritability, with sufficient educational effort, nearly all children could reach minimal levels of literacy and numeracy. This is an explicit goal of education in Finland. Success in achieving that goal would reduce differences in children’s educational achievement, which could change heritability. Hypothetically, if all environmental effects on individual differences (such as educational inequality) were to be minimalized, then the heritability estimate for educational achievement would be 100%.

    “So what to make of this? Genes are important, not just in educational achievement or intelligence, but in a whole raft of other traits which contribute to how easy and enjoyable children find learning. Education is more than what happens passively to a child. Children are active participants in selecting, modifying, and creating experiences that are matched to their genetic predispositions. In genetics, this is known as “gene-environment correlation.”

    In other words the researchers found that environment plays a minor role in educational achievement. How well a child performs academically is written in his or her genes at the moment of conception—and less intelligent parents, or parents with psychological issues, will have children bearing those same traits.

    Although the researchers did not dare draw the logical conclusion—that less intelligent parents have less intelligent children—this reality is well known.

    Furthermore, it has greater implications on an international scale, particularly when it is considered that on average, different races have different intelligence levels—which means that “changing the environment” will never, for example, raise the sub-Saharan African IQ above the 75 point level.

    Average_IQ_Amoung_Countries_of_the_World_2002-2006.jpg

  6. #6
    Stefanus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Bloemfontein
    Age
    57
    Posts
    1,606
    Blog Entries
    1
    Total Downloaded
    477.1 KB
    Videos
    128
    Rep Power
    10

    Default Genetics and Inheritance

    Genetics and Inheritance


    By John Bean. When the Human Genome Project was completed in 2000, it was widely touted that its result showed no genetic basis for race. In fact some scientists went so far as to dub race a “biological fiction.”

    dna01.jpg Developments since then have clearly demonstrated that quite small genetic differences can produce disproportionate results that substantiate the fact that racial differences are a reality and that they are more complex than just differences in skin colour and hair texture.

    When we are told that as the difference in DNA between peoples from different parts of the globe is so small therefore there is really no such thing as ‘race’, let us first remember that the difference between humans and chimpanzees is only just over one per cent. Yet despite sharing 99 per cent of the same DNA how is it that we are so different in appearance, behaviour and, above all, in mental abilities? Our pet dogs and cats also share around 80 per cent of our DNA. Approximately 75 per cent of mouse genes so far identified have a firm counterpart in the human genome.

    Furthermore, according to Prof Stylianos Antonarakis of the University of Geneva Medical School and Dr Ewen Kirkness of the Institute of Genomic Research, Maryland, latest DNA research shows that some DNA regions of humans, dogs, and species as distant as elephant and wallaby are nearly identical.(1)

    Importantly, they also found that huge tracts of human DNA, previously written off as meaningless junk, have been found to contain a hitherto unrecognised “genetic grammar”, making the language of our genes much more complex than previously thought. More on the importance of this DNA junk in carrying group, or racial, differences later. But for the moment let it be noted that small though DNA differences may be the effects they can have are considerable.


    It starts in your genes

    We appreciate that for some readers we may be preaching the art of egg-sucking for grandmothers. For those who have not really bothered about ‘genes’, ‘chromosomes’ and DNA, the following is a basic guide suitable for anyone with O level Science.
    DNA is made up of sugar, phosphate and nitrogen pair-bonds.

    The characteristics you inherit from your parents and ancestors are in your inherited genes. This genetic information forms part of the chromosomes which are carried in DNA, which is a chemical called deoxyribonucleic acid.

    The chromosomes, which exist in pairs, are threadlike structures, usually found in the cell nucleus of animals and plants carrying the genes. The DNA molecule takes the structure of a double helix, i.e. a pair of parallel helices with a common axis, and it exists in the nucleus of every living cell. This was the revolutionary discovery made by the British scientists Francis Crick, Maurice Wilkins and Rosalind Franklin and the American James Watson in 1953, including the fact that the two strands were complementary. The complete DNA sequence housed in a cell of an organism is known as its genome.

    DNA consists of long sequences of four chemical ‘letters’ – C,T,G, and A – strung together in different combinations like different coloured beads on a necklace.(2)The information of DNA is encoded in the precise order of these four chemicals; like writing but using fewer symbols.

    Genes are the smallest element of DNA and are the basis of heredity. There are many thousands of genes that create each chromosome. In the human body there are 46 pairs of chromosomes. They are sections of data that is received from our parents; one chromosome from each parent and they combine in the embryo to create a set.

    It was originally thought that the genetic message comes equally from each parent, but it now seems that some children might end up with three, four or even more copies of a gene from one parent. Although one can often see that offspring are related, even with large families each child, unless an identical twin, will be different in varying degrees. This is because there are immense numbers of possible combinations of the genes carried by each parent.


    Mitochondrial DNA

    It is the nuclear DNA that really makes us what we are. It consists of around 25,000 genes, compared with a paltry 37 that our mothers pass to us in mitochondria.

    Mitochondria are the powerhouse of the cell. They consume the sugars that our bodies have converted from food and in return produce electricity with which to power the cell But it is considered to be separate from the cell, because it has its own DNA, and this DNA is unaffected by other genetic exchanges.

    Although you may have inherited all manner of characteristics through your nuclear DNA from parents, grandparents and back many generations, there is one factor that remains constant: the mitochondrial DNA hasn’t altered at all. It remains intact through the female line. Male sperm contains only enough mitochondria to power the sperm to the surface of the egg – it does not enter the egg. The egg, however, contains mitochondria that have been passed from mother to daughter for countless generations. The only way for mitochondrial DNA to alter is by natural mutations, which occur very slowly when compared with the almost frantic gene mixing we and our parents take part in.

    Importantly, according to Adrian Woolfson, even the smallest DNA changes can result in significant changes to the structure and function of a living creature. In fact minute changes can have disproportionate results. It is this natural mutation of mitochondrial DNA occurring just occasionally over countless generations that has led to group differences and thereby the establishment of separate human races.

    Because the rate of mitochondrial genetic mutation is slow it can be used as a clock to turn back time to a period before the mutations had crept in. The common belief at present is that modern Europeans originated from Africa (although some, such as Prof.Carleton S.Coon contend that the ancestors of the living races of man achieved Homo sapiens sapiens status (truly modern status)independently in several different global areas). When mitochondrial DNA from modern sub-Saharan African populations are sampled they can be compared with European mitochondrial DNA. The mutation difference between the two populations can then be compared and a ‘clock’ can be produced to give a time-scale which indicates when the distant ancestors of modern Europeans first left Africa (assuming they did). But there are vast differences between the genome of the Negro peoples of sub-Saharan Africa and the present day inhabitants of Europe, Asia and the Americas, because evolution did not stop after migrants moved out of Africa.

    It is known that pre-sapiens “hominid” or humanlike populations were already in possession of many parts of the Old World before “intelligent” Homo sapiens spread around the world and replaced them. Some of these were quite intelligent, such as the Neanderthals of Ice Age Europe. But the prevailing view is that these were all replaced by the ancestors of modern men, although it is possible that in some places there may have been some genetic mixing with older more primitive populations. However that may be, the latest research indicates that after early Homo sapiens migrants from Africa entered Asia, they slowly spread outwards over the more habitable parts of Asia. Some went eastwards, in several waves, along the southern parts of Asia. The earliest of these are believed to have been ancestral to the Negritoes, a now rare people who resemble African Negroes, who have left traces of their genes in parts of India and Southeast Asia, and another wave may have been ancestral to the Australoids of Australia and New Guinea, who also left their genes amongst some of the living tribal peoples in the more remote parts of southern India, and amongst various southeast Asian peoples, notably in Cambodia. It is thought the Negritos, Gonds and so on are offshoots from the Australid wave about 60,000 years ago. They are thought to have migrated along the (now submerged – sea levels were lower due to water locked in glaciation) coasts of Arabia, India, “Sundaland” (not home to Geordies but the peninsula of Malaya-Indonesia formed when sea levels fall 300 feet) and on to a New Guinea then joined to Australia.

    But another portion of the Homo sapiens population that moved into Asia spread out in a more northerly direction, and found themselves north of the great mountain barrier that stretches from the Caucasus through northern Iran and Afghanistan. Here the climate was much colder, and from this population two further living human stocks are believed to have evolved. Those who spread eastwards became ancestral to the Mongoloids of Mongolia, China and East Asia. Those who spread in a more northwesterly direction, bccame ancestral to the Caucasoids of Europe and Western Asia. The harsh conditions of cold northern Eurasia proved a challenge to survival, and many believed that this resulted in further evolutionary selection in favour of greater intelligence. Those who could not find ways of providing for their families during the long winter months, were less likely to survive. Certainly, the non-tropical climate led to modifications in the physical appearance of those who continued to be shaped by evolution in Europe and northeastern Asia, hence the fair colouring of Europeans, especially northern Europeans, and the relatively fair skin colour of the Mongoloids of Eastern Asia.

    dna-differences.jpg
    Tiny differences in genes lead to changes in human appearance, behaviour, immunity, health and ability. Female medic from the Icelandic Army, left, and a Tamil from southern India, right.

    When talking about race, we must remember that the further we go back in the history of the human race, the more localized people were, and so different populations evolved differently. There was no genetic mixing between Central Africans, North Europeans, Chinese, or Australian aboriginals until relatively very recent times. It is true that populations living in more central areas, such as Mesopotamia were likely to become admixed with neighbouring peoples, and genetic mergers would occur in such places. The Caucasoids of the Middle East and North Africa deliberately conducted slave raids into sub-Saharan Africa to capture Negro men and women to serve them, and although they often neutered the males many had offspring from the female slaves, and so the genetic constitution of these people was changed, and their high civilization collapsed.

    The Cro-Magnons whom we find in southern Europe during the last Ice Age, some 25,000 years ago, were seemingly very similar to and probably ancestral to most living Europeans, but Northern Europe was not populated until the last Ice Age waned some 12,000 years ago, and allowed the glaciers and permafrost to disappear. DNA samples from human skeletal remains (based on a branch of science known as ‘archeogenetics’) showed that the first human settlers arrived in Britain around 10-12,000 BC as Britain was thawing. They were much the same people as the people who settled Western Germany, the Netherlands and Scandinavia as these areas became habitable. According to David Miles, formerly chief archaeologist at English Heritage and a research fellow at Oxford University(3) in his book, The Tribes of Britain, the genetic make-up of modern white indigenous Britons has hardly changed from those first post-Ice Age arrivals. He states that 80 per cent of the indigenous white British person shares the same genetic characteristics as those early hunters and gatherers.

    Some nationalists have misinterpreted this important information by suggesting that the Anglo Saxons and Vikings, and even the Celts, must have had a minimal racial contribution to white British stock if 80 per cent of us share the same genes as the first arrivals of 12,000 BC. The point here is that all these people were but different variations of a common European race.

    The earliest post-Ice Age settlers of the British Isles and Western seaboard of Europe may have been akin to the Basques of north eastern Spain, but later, in historical times, the British Isles was settled more thoroughly by Celts, whose homeland was Southern Germany, and then by the Germanic peoples, from Northern Germany, the Netherlands, and Scandinavia.

    An outcome of the human genome project indicates that what seems to have happened is that at the Last Glacial Maximum 18,000 years humans in Europe retreated to refugia, notably around the Pyrenees and in the Ukraine. Britain was settled by two very early waves, one coming along the coasts from the Pyrenees and the other across Europe from the Ukraine. The Pyrenean wave led to the “Celtic” types of Western Britain, Scotland, Ireland and Wales, and the Ukrainian one to the “Germanic” eastern Britons, such as most English. The Celts (if they actually existed as invaders in any numbers, Saxons, Danes etc were also descended ultimately from the same Ukrainian Ice Age refuge population as the indigenous Britons of England. The existence of two generically distinct British founder populations was identified in the C19th by Beddoes and others. But they thought they were “Mediterranean” Celts and Nordic Germans. In fact they are based on much earlier migrations in the initial settlement of Britain 12,000 years ago when the Ice retreated by populations from two refugia at opposite ends of Europe. 8000 years earlier.

    All were what we today would call European, with the Celts and Germans tending only to be blonder than the first settlers. Genetic testing has been carried out on modern day white Danes, Dutchmen and Germans from Saxony and in nearly all cases very little difference in DNA has been found.


    Small Differences – Wide Ranging Results

    The human DNA carries an estimated 25,000 genes and not much more than 0.1 per cent, i.e. 320 genes, account for the differences between individuals and races, whether it be freckles, Afro hair, ginger hair or hereditary in-growing toenails. Geneticist Steve Scherer, a senior scientist at Toronto’s Hospital for Sick Children, has said: “Based on what we now know it (the genetic difference) is probably in the 0.2 per cent range and in the end it may even be as high as one per cent.”(4)
    Within the last five years scientists have carried out in-depth work to chart these genetic variations. One of these, Francis Crick, who along with James Watson, Maurice Wilkins and Rosamund Franklin discovered the structure and role of DNA in the 1950’s and has more recently played a leading role in the Human Genome Project, had to admit that “well-intentioned statements” about the biological insignificance of race may have left the wrong impression: “It is not strictly true that race or ethnicity has no biological connection.”(5)

    Again, the importance of the small genetic differences between people groups/races was suggested in a paper this year by Hua Tang and other scientists on “Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity.”(6) Hua Tang et al contended that in a study of Blacks, Whites, Hispanics and Asians in 12 different U.S. locations and three in Taiwan, that there are 326 genetic markers on racial differences.

    A variation in a single gene may explain why some people can withstand pain – or other physical or emotional stress – better than others, a team from the University of Michigan and the National Institutes of Health reported in a recent issue of Science.

    If we bear in mind that flies and worms have around half as many genes as humans and that fish, rats and mice have almost the same number as us, then it cannot be genes alone that account for the differences between us. As Woolfson explains, the main difference between the genes of ‘higher’ organisms, such as vertebrates, and those of ‘lower’ organisms is that they are ‘smarter,’ which means simply that each gene is more complex, as are its behavioural patterns. As genes become smarter, the organisms they build and operate become more complex.

    We also have to consider that as much as 98% of the human genome contains ‘junk’, which are DNA sequences that lack protein-coding genes and about which scientists still need to know much more.. It is now being found that a huge amount of information lies outside genes, scattered throughout the ‘junk’ and is responsible for the maintenance, regulation and reprogramming of genetic processes.

    Now pulling all the above information together, it can be seen, for example, that the difference between the complexity of a fly and a human can be explained not only by the extra 10,000 or so genes found in a humans, but in the number of different gene behavioural patterns each genome is capable of producing. The difference is a huge number, larger than the number of elementary particles in the known universe (10 to the power 80), according to Woolfson. This means that a relatively small variation in the number of genes between two species has the potential to generate a tremendous difference in biological complexity.

    If one applies this to the 300 plus gene differences between, for example, the European and the African, it would explain the biological, physical and metaphysical differences between these two races of the common species Homo sapiens.


    The Evidence

    Several laboratory investigations carried out on behalf of the Police and/or the FBI in the USA have confirmed that genetic testing can determine a persons exact racial profile. A classic report was that by Josh Noel, a staff writer for the The Advocate News, Florida, 06/04/03. It stated:

    “A prvate genetics lab altered the hunt for the south Louisiana serial killer after telling investigators that the person they sought was a black man. For eight months the investigation had focussed on white men.
    “Tony Frudakis, chief executive officer of DNAPrint Genomics said that he told the task force that the serial killer was 85% Sub-Saharan and 15% Native American based on analysis of the killer’s DNA.”

    Eventually a black man was arrested as his DNA matched exactly the lab’s report. Frudakis has said his company can determine a person’s ancestral past by analysing 73 DNA markers and narrowing the result to proportions in four categories: East Asian, Indo-European, Native American and Sub-Saharan African.

    The Guardian, 16/06/05, reported that a drug (BiDil) was now available in America which was aimed specifically at African-Americans to remedy heart failure. Among New Yorkers aged 45 to 54 the death rate from heart disease among black people is 55% higher than among whites. The Food & Drug Authority’s stamp of approval for the drug was being opposed by some liberals because it would “give the stamp of authority on racial biological differences”.
    In an article on genetic medicines in The Times, 18/6/05, Kenan Malik said that according to the American Heart Association the death rate amongst Black Americans was five times that of Whites. Malek also pointed out that Northern Europeans are more likely to suffer from cystic fibrosis than other groups. Tay-Sachs, a fatal disease of the central nervous system, particularly affects Ashkenazi Jews. Beta-blockers appear to work less effectively for African-Americans than those of European descent.

    The New Scientist, 20/1/05 reported that a length of DNA has been found in a fifth of Europeans which is very rare in Africans and non-existent in Asians. This DNA is said to be 3 million years old and can only have passed to modern Europeans in the last 50,000 years, otherwise it would be present today in all other races.

    In 1992 Bo Rybeck, Director of the Swedish National Defence Research Institute, stated that as we became able to identify the DNA variations of different races and ethnic groups, we will be able to determine the difference between blacks and whites and Orientals and Jews and Swedes and Finns and develop an agent that will kill only a particular group.”

    The Sunday Times, 15.11.1998, revealed in a report from Israel: “Israel is working on a biological weapon that would harm Arabs but not Jews, according to Israeli military and western intelligence sources. In developing their ‘ethno-bomb’, Israeli scientists are trying to exploit medical advances by identifying genes carried by some Arabs.”

    A North Korean team of microbiologists are also said to be working on an ethno-bomb which would destroy white races.


    Earlier Evidence

    Before the secrets of DNA began to be unravelled and showed clearly that there were many genetic markers indicating racial differences, ample evidence had existed but was ignored or suppressed by the Marxist-liberal intellectual ‘elite’ and its media mouthpieces. All differences were due to environmental factors, they said. This was the standard answer to the findings of countless IQ tests over the past century which have consistently shown that North eastern Asians (Chinese, Koreans, Japanese) have a higher IQ than Europeans, who in turn are some 15 % above people of African origin.

    A broad, in-depth investigation into IQ research studies was carried out by Herrnstein and Murray, the results of which were published in The Bell Curve, 1994, and greeted in the main with abuse by those who could not challenge their findings on racial IQ differences and that it was largely genetic and hereditary.

    We are frequently told that there is a shortage of West Indian, African and Asian blood donors in the UK, but at the same time we are told there is no difference in the ratio of the blood groups in the various racial groupings. Similarly, with kidney, heart and other organ transplants emphasis is given to matching the race of the donor and the recipient. More recently doctors have found, to their apparent surprise, that this also applies to the success of bone marrow transplants.

    It has long been known that West Indians and African are almost exclusively susceptible to the hereditary blood characteristic, sickle cell anaemia. This makes them more receptive to jaundice, pneumonia and TB, sometimes leading to death.
    The UK Prostate Cancer Charity issued a report in March 2005 that Prostate cancer among African Caribbean men is three times more prevalent than among whites.

    American Indians have a tendency to hypertension and high blood pressure and, like the Japanese, have a low tolerance to alcohol.

    We could probably continue with another page of specific biological, physical and mental differences to support our view that all these minor differences add up to there being a substantial difference between the world’s main racial strains. However, the emphasis is on difference, not on superiority of any one race over another because it would depend on the yardstick chosen to measure superiority.

    To end on a personal note, the human genome project revealed that there are some 1400 potential illnesses/diseases carried by single gene markers, and one of them I suffer from. This is Dupuytren’s Contracture, which causes one or more fingers to bend in towards the palm; a ‘disease’ which I shared with Margaret Thatcher. Prior to an operation my surgeon said that it only occurs among people of “North European descent” and is sometimes known as the “Scandinavian disease”. The highest rates of incidence world-wide are in Iceland, followed by Denmark, and in Britain, the Orkneys and Shetlands followed by the north east of England (where many of my ancestors came from). Of course, distorted fingers are of little concern for the future of the world’s races, but distorted reporting on the genetic evidence of each race’s distinctiveness is of great concern.

    References

    1. Adrian Woolfson, An Intelligent Person’s Guide to Genetics, published by Duckworth Overlook, London, 2004.
    2. Science, October 2003.
    3. David Miles, The Tribes of Britain, Oxford University Press
    4. Paper by Professor Henry Harpending, University of Utah, June 2005.
    5. Nature Genetics, Autumn 2004
    6. American Journal of Human Genetics, Spring 2005.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •