4 ms·

I didn't get that from his comment at all. Sounds like you're conjuring up a straw man here. 30,000 babies and 30,000 adults with a lifetime of experiences are

I didn't get that from his comment at all. Sounds like you're conjuring up a straw man here. 30,000 babies and 30,000 adults with a lifetime of experiences are two very different things. It's perfectly possible to believe that immigrants from heavily-Muslim countries cannot realistically integrate with first world societies without believing racist rubbish like genetic inferiority.

foldr 8y ago
>It's perfectly possible to believe that immigrants from heavily-Muslim countries cannot realistically integrate with first world societies without believing racist rubbish like genetic inferiority. I don't see how it would be possible to believe this at all, given the abundant examples to the contrary.
- supreme_sublime 8y ago
  Unfortunately there might be an argument for some form of genetic inferiority. Considering how many first cousin marriages there are in certain Muslim communities. [0] >Although British parents of Pakistani origin account for 3.4 per cent of all births nationwide, they also account for around 30 per cent of children born with recessive gene disorders. I'm not really a fan of government force, and don't really care who other people marry, but this is obviously a problem. The risks associated with inbreeding (especially over many generations) are pretty well known. [0] - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/mother-tongue/4014743/Warning-over-births-to-first-cousin-marriages.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/mother-tongue/4014743/Warn...
- foldr 8y ago
  Just a note to add to the racist sibling comment. The stuff about cousin marriage is hysteria from people who don't understand the probability calculus. It's possible for P(child_of_cousin_marriage|abnormality) to be quite high without P(abnormality|child_of_cousin_marriage) being much greater than P(abnormality) -- as in fact it isn't.
  - supreme_sublime 8y ago
    I did take calculus in high school, but I barely remember it. So I don't understand your notation, if you could explain in a bit more layman terms it would be great. As I understand it, the chance for birth defects goes from around 1% to 3-4%, about the same as a woman in her late 30s/early 40s having a child. I'm not sure if this would compound over generations though, it seems like it would. I don't really think that my comment was "racist". Just talking about how culture affects genes and vice versa. Was it not bad that the old European nobles were inbred as well?
    - foldr 8y ago
      >I did take calculus in high school, but I barely remember it Probability calculus, not calculus in the sense of integration and differentiation. >So I don't understand your notation P(x) is the background probability of x. P(x|y) is the probability of x given y. >I'm not sure if this would compound over generations It's already had plenty of time to compound over generations, to whatever extent it does. >the chance for birth defects goes from around 1% to 3-4%, about the same as a woman in her late 30s/early 40s having a child. Indeed, which shows how silly your theory is. I mean, are you really suggesting that a slightly higher incidence of e.g. cystic fibrosis in Pakistani communities somehow makes it more difficult for them to integrate? That's such utter nonsense that you shouldn't be surprised if people infer some kind of malicious intent behind your comment.
      - supreme_sublime 8y ago
        >It's already had plenty of time to compound over generations, to whatever extent it does. I'm not sure what you mean, most westerners don't make a habit of marrying their cousins. Because of this compounding it means that the risks would be much higher than 3-4%, which is what we see in the data. >I mean, are you really suggesting that a slightly higher incidence of e.g. cystic fibrosis in Pakistani communities somehow makes it more difficult for them to integrate? It seems as though birth defects aren't the only way that inbreeding negatively affects offspring. It also appears to lower intelligence[0], while also increasing mental health issues. [0] - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01068128 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01068128

foldr 8y ago

>It's perfectly possible to believe that immigrants from heavily-Muslim countries cannot realistically integrate with first world societies without believing racist rubbish like genetic inferiority. I don't see how it would be possible to believe this at all, given the abundant examples to the contrary.

supreme_sublime 8y ago
Unfortunately there might be an argument for some form of genetic inferiority. Considering how many first cousin marriages there are in certain Muslim communities. [0] >Although British parents of Pakistani origin account for 3.4 per cent of all births nationwide, they also account for around 30 per cent of children born with recessive gene disorders. I'm not really a fan of government force, and don't really care who other people marry, but this is obviously a problem. The risks associated with inbreeding (especially over many generations) are pretty well known. [0] - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/mother-tongue/4014743/Warning-over-births-to-first-cousin-marriages.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/mother-tongue/4014743/Warn...
foldr 8y ago
Just a note to add to the racist sibling comment. The stuff about cousin marriage is hysteria from people who don't understand the probability calculus. It's possible for P(child_of_cousin_marriage|abnormality) to be quite high without P(abnormality|child_of_cousin_marriage) being much greater than P(abnormality) -- as in fact it isn't.
- supreme_sublime 8y ago
  I did take calculus in high school, but I barely remember it. So I don't understand your notation, if you could explain in a bit more layman terms it would be great. As I understand it, the chance for birth defects goes from around 1% to 3-4%, about the same as a woman in her late 30s/early 40s having a child. I'm not sure if this would compound over generations though, it seems like it would. I don't really think that my comment was "racist". Just talking about how culture affects genes and vice versa. Was it not bad that the old European nobles were inbred as well?
  - foldr 8y ago
    >I did take calculus in high school, but I barely remember it Probability calculus, not calculus in the sense of integration and differentiation. >So I don't understand your notation P(x) is the background probability of x. P(x|y) is the probability of x given y. >I'm not sure if this would compound over generations It's already had plenty of time to compound over generations, to whatever extent it does. >the chance for birth defects goes from around 1% to 3-4%, about the same as a woman in her late 30s/early 40s having a child. Indeed, which shows how silly your theory is. I mean, are you really suggesting that a slightly higher incidence of e.g. cystic fibrosis in Pakistani communities somehow makes it more difficult for them to integrate? That's such utter nonsense that you shouldn't be surprised if people infer some kind of malicious intent behind your comment.
    - supreme_sublime 8y ago
      >It's already had plenty of time to compound over generations, to whatever extent it does. I'm not sure what you mean, most westerners don't make a habit of marrying their cousins. Because of this compounding it means that the risks would be much higher than 3-4%, which is what we see in the data. >I mean, are you really suggesting that a slightly higher incidence of e.g. cystic fibrosis in Pakistani communities somehow makes it more difficult for them to integrate? It seems as though birth defects aren't the only way that inbreeding negatively affects offspring. It also appears to lower intelligence[0], while also increasing mental health issues. [0] - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01068128 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01068128