My Response to “The Alternative Hypothesis”

I noticed that you made a video discussing my older video on how Race Does Not Equal Culture.

Original here:

So I thought I’d just make a quick aside to you acknowledging that you’ve made this and that I’ve watched it and give you my thoughts on why any educated person, or anyone who understands how the basics of this topic function will never take you seriously.

You are very keen on leaning on studies that simply cite things that correlate. For example, you cite a study which makes the claim that IQ correlates with political view. However, clearly this study does not control for all or even most outside factors so there’s no way to determine that IQ is a deciding factor on what political views one holds.

Then you decide to drag it into race, like you seem to always do. But you’re doing exactly what Zennistrad used to do in regards to lobbing studies at me and you, and a lot of your commenters, seem to have an issue with my saying “Correlation doesn’t imply causation” in regards to a lot of your points. Even though they are actually valid points.

And someone else decided to take it upon themselves to tell me to “stop pretending that regression analysis doesn’t exist” which, of course, i’m not doing. I’m just saying that the things you’ve sent me that correlate don’t prove that there’s any sort of causal relationship to be had. You just assume that to be true because of the studies you’ve actually cited to me.

If you want to prove that (just to use an analogy) Asians are genetically predisposed to prefer collectivism. You can’t simply cite something that states “Asians tend to prefer collectivism.” There is absolutely zero genetic aspect involved within that.

Also, regression analysis is a statistical estimate, not a biological experiment or study. So when you ask me to stop remaining skeptical towards a shaky estimate, I’m going to have to politely refuse that request.

You also have not scientifically even quantified “culture” which is another problem for you. You seem to be under the misapprehension that culture is not the very definition of nurture. When trying to decide whether or not something is nature or nurture it’s pretty daft to try and claim that nurture is in fact nature and therefore nature wins. It’s absolute lunacy, sir.

I have seen zero separated at birth studies trying to see whether people of a certain race still tend to prefer the culture that corresponds with their race, I guess, or any twin studies. That being, twins growing up in completely different cultures and seeing which they are more predisposed to when they are adults.

Culture is a product of people discovering what works and doesn’t work within their environment. When humans were in their infancy, they had to make dyes out of the things they had (before trade flourished), they had to eat whatever would grow the best in their respective environment. But now, update that. Update that to the 21st century where people of different races are still being born and co-mingling within different cultures.

You’re taking something that occurred when people were generally restricted by location, and applying it to people who live today and it’s retarded. It’s just absolutely retarded. In my estimation, the only reason you see a correlation between race and culture is because people tend to be brought up in the culture that their biological parents happen to be in, and people are biologically the race, of their parents.

I mean, I don’t know how to make this simpler for you. You can’t just assume environment away because it hinders what you wish to be true. It doesn’t work that way ever.