[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Settings Mobile Home
/sci/ - Science & Math

Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.

[Advertise on 4chan]

Is eugemics still a valid scientific discipline?

It seems to prove itself valid with each day the inferior manage to propgate but scientists seem to ignore it vehemently.
Define 'eugenic'. Define 'inferior'. This has nothing to do with science. Science doesn't say what's good or bad. It just states what it observes independently of what a researcher may fell about it.
It might be but irrelevant shit like the ratio of your nose length to your forehead width practiced by the nazis is complete pseudoscience.
scientists just research things. it would be odd and unusual and unacceptable to blame scientists. if the reich was established, then scientists would have researched genetics to a good purpose.
Would be cool as fuck if there would have been a 200 year running project to create a perfect human

From the picture I think you might mean phrenology which is the study of skull shape as it relates to personality. This of course its widely ridiculed by scientists today. But I think eugenics means selective breeding for desired characteristics which is something that seems to be a useful thing for every species but humans. Its very strange.
>This of course its widely ridiculed by scientists today.
Physiognomy is of course the only science not affected by the reproduction crisis, as it remains the most valid way of determining someone's opinions without hearing them speak. Just by seeing a photo of someone it's immediately clear whether they should be listened to or not.
problem with phrenology is that it relied on rule of thumb and almost none of it was actually statistically measurable at the time
the trends/correlations definitely exist though
The lesbo looks younger and more attractive, even though she is noticeably less symmetrical. Were the homos in the sample younger?
Eugenics is perfectly valid. Look up "Creating Future People: The Ethics of Genetic Enhancement"
It is just a metric that Nazis researched, and actually people of different races do have different physical proportions
Science does objectively show Inequality of traits, quality etc.
China has such a system, it's not 200 years old though.
most of the changes anyone would like in behaviour want are achievable by education and having a garden
File: good_old_times.jpg (1.74 MB, 1408x4320)
1.74 MB
1.74 MB JPG
> make eugenics cool again
> go to city with people who you disaggree with
> make preggos take toxic medicine (strong sedatives and opiates which are neurotoxic) during pregnancy
> poison infants with opiates
> the ones who survive end up retards
> the rest will be coerced into taking mercury based teething powder
> which makes them retarded

> point with fingers to the family with retard child
> scream: "Its ther dirty genes!"
> get everyone of their bloodline sterilized or euthanized
> because muh eugenics
> go to village
> see people you don't like
> SELL them poison (paris green and ddt) to spray on their food by telling them it protects it
> its neurotoxic arsenicals and organo chlorines
> people become retarded
> infants crippled
> point with finger at them for eugenics reasons & get everyone sterilized
> do this with every group of people you disagree with
> until only your dysgenic bloodline is left
> and those who already agree with you and not resist beeing cucked by you
> the end
This is our reality btw.
> since 200 years

so you are claiming patent medicines and products like DDT that are now thought to be dangerous were only used on certain groups of people to prevent them from reproducing ? Today they give dangerous drugs like atypical anti-psychotics to children with behavioral problems. Society is always willing to poison anybody who causes more trouble than the norm. This is not really eugenics.
Also straight guy looks blacker/Hispanic. I wonder if they restricted only to Caucasians before making the photo composites. Homosexual behaviors occur at similar rates regardless of race, but White males are far more likely to openly identify as gay versus other races, which could throw off these images.
File: feebleminded.png (562 KB, 798x753)
562 KB
562 KB PNG
>This is not really eugenics.

eugenics is fake
thats why they do it that way.

All they need is a reason
> either to inject
> or to euthanize

You only need a narrative and then you produce the "problems".

Eugenics was a scam from the beginning.
It pseudo science.

they create the policies.
Then jump all the loops to make the the case to sterilize or euthanize you.

> feeble mined
> in germany there was a eugenics program
> in sterilisation copied from the USA sterlization laws
> "what is feeble minded?"
> a 3 year old boy who could not spot the difference between a drawn ladder and a staircase 100% of the times
> if the 3 year old boy fails this test
> they sterilized them

> now imagine hating a group of people
> wrong thinkers
> rebels
> you make officers show up at their home
> and sterilize their children based on these terms
> end of bloodline
> this is genocide

IT'S a trick to not directly tell the reason why they actually "euthanize and sterilize".
>Eugenics was a scam from the beginning.
>It pseudo science.
So blacks and retards. How is this bad again?
never heard of it
eugenics might as well be engineering, but it's not science.
Biology is science, in the sense of studying how traits are inherited, genetics etc.
Eugenics is just breeding like people have always bred horses, dogs, etc. except this time using humans.
It's not science because it does not try to ascertain any truth.
That's the only scientific part of biology btw. Selective breeding is experimental and observational according to the scientific method.
and which parts of, say, phylogeny or ecology or ethology or molecular biology are not scientific, pray tell?
And this is why science shouldn't come in hands with authority, we're just abit smarter apes, not gods. It's all due to egoistic retards believing to know it all
Large swathes of the literature lacks experimental rigor.
Allow me to introduce you to the wonders of pure-bred dogs. The healthiest things man ever raised
Cheetahs are more genetically alike than purebred dogs and have none of the health issues. If you breed out any negative genes you're left with a population that has no inbreeding depression.
This just tells me the cheetah gene pool is very delicate and won’t last longer term
Cheetahs are literally a textbook example of this in genetics. Look up inbreeding depression among cheetahs.
It is hard to trust any group or government with the power to sterilize people. Genetic engineering is advancing fast, and will be a much better alternative. Embryo selection in IVF is already light eugenics.
Eugenics is less of a scientific discipline and more of a health fad from the early 1900s that was based in garbage science and directly inspired the Nazis. The hard reality is that eugenics, which just means "good breeding/reproduction" as a basic concept is entirely valid. Countries in which 1st cousin marriages are common should absolutely ban these types of marriages for the good of their overall genetic health. Additionally, the more that we learn about genetics, the more we find that there are distinct groups of humans based on the geographic distribution of their ancestors, and these distinctions matter greatly in determining the basic characteristics of those people. Nazism is self defeating garbage, but eugenics will make a come back whether or not we are comfortable with this reality
This is hyperbolic nonsense. No one is advocating for sterilization or euthanization anymore. Current applications of eugenics have more to do with banning first cousin marriages and allowing abortions of fetuses that are know to have down syndrome (this is currently banned in many countries).
which parts
File: Not_tabacco.jpg (485 KB, 1079x1708)
485 KB
485 KB JPG
Oh really?
You know that the climate fanatic movement is self sterilizing, because overpopulation makes
> le CO2

Also overpopulation was constantly discussed up until covid.
And to "sleight of hand sterilize" people is totally accepted.
> chemorherapy
> vaccines (especcially gardasil)
> psychopharma
> read the side effects of antidepressants and ritalin
> the antibaby pill (thats why women also have a hard time getting pregnant)
> and what ever the fuck is in our food
> endocheine disruptors, shitton of aluminium and lead
> arsenic in rice
> E-Vape formaldehyde mixed with bromine
> the shit they put in Cigarates besides tobacco etc. Etc.

We get poisoned from all sides.
You don't seem to know the first rule of medicine.
Everything deadly can be helpfull in the right dose and everything helpfull is deadly in the wrong dose.

Your entire list has valid reasons for why they are being used and the alternative would be worse for us.
File: 1648122295108.jpg (3.47 MB, 1079x8869)
3.47 MB
3.47 MB JPG

> You don't seem to know the first rule of medicine.
> Everything deadly can be helpfull in the right dose and everything helpfull is deadly in the wrong dose

You will always end up in a fucked up circle of
> got sick because got literally mercury and aluminium injected
> to solve the cancer caused by that
> we inject you with some chemotherapy which is "slightly" modified mustard gas, which sterilizes you and kills you with a chance of 91% within the next 5-10 years and also reduces your quality of life even more
> then because you literally destroyed the functions of your body with chemotherapy
> you need to consoom more poison which accumulates also in your body
> blood thinner (which decrease PH and make your blood acidic)
> which fucks up oxigen delivery to the brain
> which further deteriorates you
> and because you constantly having a metabolic acidosis
> you require some PH adjusting crap
> which ist most of the time pottassium phosphates
> which increase the phosphate levels in your blood which then cause mineral leakage of the bones and make you even more fragile
> know you are also prone to physical harm by just bumping into some shit
> and then you require knee surgery and so on
> which is further trauma
> and to supress the pain you take pain killers
> which aditionally fuck up your liver and kidney

As soon as human intervention in the health begins, it makes often everything worse.
Most doctors don't know shit about the crap they prescribe. They are just well payed pharma dispensers.
Only surgeons are pretty neat.
But pharmaceuticals are not medicine they are just crappy poison which supress symptoms.

> the alternative would be worse for us.
what is the alternative?
Not doing anything or just allowing the person to cure, just like we did befor the rockefeller + flexner report fucked up a culture of wellbeeing. And tricked people into "if you are sick you are disgusting" mindsets and cramping them in shitty "hospitals"
Your opinion is trash. Get fucked + your mom should have aborted you + your dad is closeted homo + you tranny kiddy diddler + get schlomo cock you bitch.
>implement eugenics
>OP cant breed
maybe it is a good idea....
File: 1649266385499.png (564 KB, 1648x2756)
564 KB
564 KB PNG

not antivax.
I'm anti pharma.
Anti scam.
Almost no """established medicine""" works as they promised.

> antibiotics
> cancer medication
> MS medication
> AIDS medication
> Lupus medication

Almost all courses of medications & tratments lead to suffering.
And then they claim "its the disease breaking through the medication, we need to increase the dosage".

Let me give an example with pox.
Doctors used to cut of the pox pustules with razors.
> kid with pox is sick, feverish and weak
> kid without pox is healthy
> cutting of pox will make kid healthy again, because no pox
> ???
> shitton of kids died
> created pox panic

Now when kids have pox, they just do nothing, but sleep, lotion to supress the itching and thats it.
File: 1662478662293176.gif (94 KB, 307x300)
94 KB
>This has nothing to do with science.
"Lol." said the Geneticst "Lmao."

>Say it with me fellow Geneticists..."JUNK DNA."
you know the "doctors" in those ads aren't real doctors, right?
You strengthen the case of eugenics.
Deformed dogs were a case of trying to achieve a singular certain characteristic, e.g. "ugly face".
Humans would not have as singular characteristic, but many.
Also, it would be a counterforce against the regular human breeding. Not a replacement.
you know real doctors prescribe shitty medicine they don't understand because they get payed for it.
Doctors don't need knowledge about toxicology or biochemistry.
They have no idea how the crap they prescribe works.
If you ask them they alsways fall back to Appeal to Authority.
> I'm not a chemist, biochemist etc.
> they know what they are doing I just follow their protocolls because they are smarter than me

Doctors are cucks, they literally obey the ones with the whiter lab coat.
Thats the main thing they learn when they become a "MD".
Follow protocoll of the leading doctor of the hospital, or you wont get the signatures to pass the practical semesters.
They are obedient religious people who are smart, full of pride and having a lack of principals and morality.


In the thalidomidescandal, it took five years to get it of the market, even though within the first 8 months of distribution safety signal were clear that it causes fetal deaths and harm.
The instant someone critizised thalidomide, they would get really angry and claim shit like:
> NO its because all the mothers smoke crack or drink alcohol
> OUR medicine is safe and effective
> there is NO way it could be caused by OUR medicin
> it must be the disgusting secretly alcoholic mothers!!!

they are obedient, and pride.
They think of themselves they are something better, and can get away with a lot of shit.
Thats why :
"Into whatever homes I go, I will enter them for the benefit of the sick, avoiding any voluntary act of impropriety or corruption, including the seduction of women or men, whether they are free men or slaves."
was in the hippocratic oath.

because they thought so much of them selves that they sexually abused their patients a lot, because they thought, "they can get away with it".
File: hippo3.png (72 KB, 865x606)
72 KB
Also the hippicratic oath, was changed in 1964 to exclude the phrase:

"I will use those dietary regimens which will benefit my patients according to my greatest ability and judgement, and I will do no harm or injustice to them."


but since modern doctors don't have to do a oath in any sense anymore, this is obsolete in modern days.
Because Doctors would never be able to keep this oath.
Not one little bit.
The problem is self-awareness.
If humans had just let nature take its course...
You're both fucking retards. Go bow to your corporate overlords some more, nigger.
Most first world countries don't hippocratic oath. This is a american LARP thing.
Try 2000 years. We could call the facility "Ishuäl".
opioids aren't neurotoxic fag, alcohol is more dangerous
Consider this.
You have three people, who each produce and consume a total amount of value.
Person A produces 4 value and consumes 3, Person B produces 5 value and consumes 3, and Person C produces 9 value and consumes 5. Since none of them consume more than they provide, the only downside to more people is organizational difficulty. Therefore, in this scenario, eugenics would almost certainly be counter-productive.
Since it isn't and certainly wasn't common for people to consume more than they provide to society, eugenics is not usually useful, while the overzealous application of it often causes more harm than the policy itself could prevent. This is in addition to the moral qualms most would have about such a policy, all of which combine to make it more beneficial to simply not consider it.
Yes, it's a good thing that a scenario in which everyone involved produces more than they consume is an accurate representation of reality.
>Since it isn't and certainly wasn't common for people to consume more than they provide to society, eugenics is not usually useful
Africans and Mestizos consume millions of dollars more than they produce per person per lifetime. If you gave every black in the US a one way ticket to Africa and 1 million dollars cash, you would still profit off of every one who left.
It isn't, but my point is that there is a limiting factor to when it can be useful. This combined with the risks is why it hasn't been used effectively.
I'm going to need a more comprehensive explanation of that belief. Even if that was true(which I don't believe,) that would be a cultural matter rather than a genetic one.

[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.