asians too smart for their own good

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/20/opinion/asians-too-smart-for-their-own-good.html?_r=0

using gold as a currency (you can't use gold as a currency and make it a reserve currency retard) would mean that there wouldn't be enough money; therefore, the price of goods would decline, jobless rate would increase, because there is less economic transaction due to a lack of currency and money won't be able to be lent at a low rate as "virtual currency" is not gold, making goods that requires a large capital good investment, such as computers and other electronics, much more expensive to produce.

BETA AS FUCK ASIAN MALES

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JgoHQJQ1ORY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6XXia5B2Wg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_L0O1VJjh_A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=vug5kMq4nTc

chinese students statistics iq

The proportion of British Chinese achieving 5 or more good GCSE's stood at 70%, where it remained the highest out of all ethnic groups in the UK.

hehhehheh insult collection

and you look like an overfed cattle who didn't end up in the slaughter house once the locals realized you could become a staple tourist attraction in the region

why china never industrialized

>How the hell is this possible that Whites still turned out on top? Not the Jews, mind you, just the average Whites like Italians, Spaniards, Portuguese and of course, Anglo-Saxons. How come they, and not East Asians, colonized the world and at their peak controlled 85% of the world's land area? How come it was non-Jewish Whites who put a man on the moon, invented the car, the airplane, the electric battery and a whole lot of other stuff? If we assume the standard deviations to be equal or to be higher for East Asians, none of this will make sense anymore.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-t3QSGRN1-U&t=88m30s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=23xq5vEOyf4&t=664s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjH9lsgkqR4&t=14m01s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qjH9lsgkqR4&t=36m50s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4-eehcES3U&t=5m19s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Pw1MEyT-qU&t=5m03s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BMYz2AHwEzo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHyspkeyIfs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7deJXU4ZRG0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_DJkE3zh6RE&t=23m02s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfVn5X6gi9s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvvOCdTyPgo


 GREED

/watch?v=-t3QSGRN1-U&t=88m30s
/watch?v=23xq5vEOyf4&t=664s
/watch?v=qjH9lsgkqR4&t=14m01s
/watch?v=qjH9lsgkqR4&t=36m50s
/watch?v=y4-eehcES3U&t=5m19s
/watch?v=6Pw1MEyT-qU&t=5m03s
/watch?v=BMYz2AHwEzo
/watch?v=QHyspkeyIfs
/watch?v=7deJXU4ZRG0
/watch?v=_DJkE3zh6RE&t=23m02s

An article in the American Journal of Human Genetics by researchers in Brazil argued against the Solutrean hypothesis. "Our results strongly support the hypothesis that haplogroup X, together with the other four main mtDNA haplogroups, was part of the gene pool of a single Native American founding population; therefore they do not support models that propose haplogroup-independent migrations, such as the migration from Europe posed by the Solutrean hypothesis."[6] In a 2011 article in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology, researchers in Italy reported that "Our findings have also a second important implication. Taking into account that C4c is deeply rooted in the Asian portion of the mtDNA phylogeny and is indubitably of Asian origin, a scenario in which C4c and X2a are characterized by parallel genetic histories definitively dismisses the controversial Solutrean hypothesis of an Atlantic glacial entry route into North America for X2a (Stanford and Bradley, 2004; Straus et al., 2005)."[7] To further investigate the mystery of the Kennewick man and determine whether the skeleton belonged to the Umatilla Native American tribe, an extraction of DNA was analyzed, and according to the report of the scientists doing the DNA analysis: "available technology and protocols do not allow the analysis of ancient DNA from these remains."[9] Anthropologist Joseph Powell of the University of New Mexico was also allowed to examine the remains and his conclusions were contradictory. Powell used craniometric data obtained by anthropologist William White Howells of Harvard University and anthropologist Tsunehiko Hanihara (Japanese:埴原恒彦) of Saga University that had the advantage of including data drawn from Asian and North American populations.[10] Powell said that Kennewick Man was not European but most resembled the Ainu[6] and Polynesians.[10] Powell said that the Ainu descend from the Jōmon people who are an East Asian population with "closest biological affinity with south-east Asians rather than western Eurasian peoples".[11] Furthermore, Powell said that dental analysis showed the skull had a 94 percent chance of being a Sundadont group like the Ainu and Polynesians and only a 48 percent chance of being a Sinodont group like that of North Asia.[10] Powell said analysis of the skull showed it to be "unlike American Indians and Europeans".[10] Powell concluded that Kennewick man "is clearly not a Caucasoid unless Ainu and Polynesians are considered Caucasoid."[11]

lynn richard massaged data biased objectivity

http://dienekes.blogspot.ca/2006/09/more-massaged-data-from-richard-lynn.html

american competitiveness germany korea japan manufacturing high tech

http://democrats.science.house.gov/press-release/subcommittee-examines-proposal-help-revitalize-manufacturing

CHINESE GREEK GEOGRAPHY OF THOUGHT

The Chinese counterpart to Greek agency was harmony. Every Chinese was first and foremost a member of a collective, or rather of several collectives — the clan, the village, and especially the family. The individual was not, as for the Greeks, an encapsulated unit who maintained a unique identity across social settings. Instead, as philosopher Henry Rosemont has written: "…For the early Confucians, there can be no me in isolation, to be considered abstractly: I am the totality of roles I live in relation to specific others…Taken collectively, they weave, for each of us, a unique pattern of personal identity, such that if some of my roles change, the others will of necessity change also, literally making me a different person." The Chinese were concerned less with issues of control of others or the environment than with self-control, so as to minimize friction with others in the family and village and to make it easier to obey the requirements of the state, administered by magistrates. The ideal of happiness was not, as for the Greeks, a life allowing the free exercise of distinctive talents, but the satisfactions of a plain country life shared within a harmonious social network. Whereas Greek vases and wine goblets show pictures of battles, athletic contests, and bacchanalian parties, ancient Chinese scrolls and porcelains depict scenes of family activities and rural pleasure.

genocide amerinidians native americans europeans white canada

www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfuY9t3VhCo&t=32m00s

china nietszche chinese

Elsewhere in The Will to Power, for instance, he groups the Chinese not only with the Jews, for whom he expressed some admiration, but also with his favorites, the Frenchmen, as all sharing the quality of "spirit"; for he maintains that "the Chinese is a more successful type [of human animal], namely more durable, than the European."

smartest people brain picture geniuses

hot hot asian women

korean movie the client

http://s16.postimage.org/bmdjptkr9/image.jpg

http://thezog.wordpress.com/who-controls-apple/

chinese engineer automatons

The previous pages have shown the development of Chinese machinery up to the end of the seventeenth century. Let’s compare the designs of the previous automatons with the reconstruction in Fig. 2.29 that is related to a fifth century BC chariot. The mechanism that operates the legs to simulate the horse’s gait is remarkable, even more if as the chariot transported heavy loads Marco Ceccarelli wrote in “An Historical Perspective of Robotics Toward the Future” (2001), [33]. It is remarkable how each technical field evolved. Agricultural, hydraulic, military, astronomical, or purely mechanical techniques evolved at a speed that was stimulated by illustrated books as previously described by the examples in the pages of this book, so revealing a technology that was barely accessible beyond its borders. It is evident that Chinese technical know-how surpassed the engineering skills in Europe or the Islamic world during the same period of time. It is also curious to reflect that some of their discoveries did not reach us (or were not reinvented in the West) until the middle or the end of the eighteenth century, being Chinese Society not involved with those inventions or reinventions.

north mongols

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2012/09/across-the-sea-of-grass-how-northern-europeans-got-to-be-10-northeast-asian/

lololol

n the 1970s and 1980s, when Japanese and Korean corporations first began to overtake their U.S. counterparts in the global electronics trade, a common refrain among American commentators was that, however good their products, Asian companies could only imitate, not innovate. Today, the same Asian companies dominate the industry, with Americans left mainly to consume. But the old saw about the Asian propensity to imitate still makes the rounds. Only now it is leveled by Japanese companies against Koreans and vice versa, with both sides also trying to slap down the Taiwanese. It's not just chauvinistic trash talk; these companies are taking each other to court in patent infringement suits across the globe, including in the United States. Korea's Samsung has been slugging it out with Japan's Sharp over patents covering LCD television technologies in lawsuits filed in Tokyo, Seoul and the Eastern District of Texas. In the plasma television category, Japan's Hitachi and Korea's LG are similarly at war and similarly fighting in Texas. Japan's Toshiba has been engaged in a long-running fight over memory chip patents with Korea's Hynix (formerly Hyundai Electronics). And last year, a patent fight between a Korean company and a Taiwanese competitor went to the U.S. Supreme Court. All these companies boast annual revenues in the tens of billions of dollars; for Samsung, Hitachi and LG, the figure tops $100 billion. If the stereotypical patent suit pits David against Goliath, those between Asian electronics makers are Goliath-on-Goliath affairs waged by parties not exactly constrained in their ability to litigate around the world. "It's a worldwide conflagration," observes A. Max Olson, the head of litigation in Morrison & Foerster In a way, the strategy makes sense. Competition in the consumer electronics market is fierce and based largely on technological innovation. Companies that spend huge sums on research and development can be expected to spend even more to protect or exploit their intellectual property. But these companies weren't always so eager to go to court. Even now, a cultural aversion to litigation common throughout Asia makes large Japanese and Korean companies much more leery of bringing most kinds of civil suits than their Western counterparts. Today, at least in the patent arena, things are different. "The trend is for Japanese companies to become more U.S. like," says Olson. "Companies are much more willing to say that patents are patents, and business is business." MoFo, for instance, recently represented Japan's Pioneer Corp. in a suit against Samsung over plasma display technology. Last October a Texas jury awarded Pioneer more than $59 million in damages. Kazumi Kuriyama, general manager of Pioneer's intellectual property unit, says the company prefers to work out fair licensing agreements but was comfortable litigating when it couldn't come to terms. In fact, Asian companies' patent suits take place within a complex web of such licensing agreements. One company's flat-screen television will invariably contain memory, image-processing chips and several other internal technologies licensed from several other companies. It is when such cross-licensing deals expire and terms need to be renegotiated that lawsuits most frequently take place. When no deal can be reached, Kuriyama says, Pioneer's approach is no different from that of Western companies. "Litigation is not an 'Asian' or 'non-Asian' issue," he says. "It is a matter of business strategy." Many Asian companies learned to adopt the American approach to patent litigation by being on the wrong end of it. In the 1980s, U.S. companies, most notably Texas Instruments and International Business Machines, hauled Japanese and Korean rivals into court for patent infringement and won a number of landmark cases. Patent royalties collected by the U.S. companies over the years account for billions in revenue. TI, for example, saw more revenue from licensing than it did from manufacturing for much of the 1990s. Stung by having to contribute to the Americans' coffers, the Asians learned their lesson. "The Japanese companies kind of woke up," says Hiroyuki Hagiwara, a Tokyo IP litigation partner with Ropes & Gray. "They said, 'Let's do to others what TI and IBM did to us.'" Japanese companies' aversion to litigation, and their long history of cross-licensing, is evident in their reluctance to sue one another, says Hagiwara. But those looking for rivals to sue quickly cast their eyes on the rising giants from Korea. Once viewed as second-rate manufacturers, Samsung and LG have emerged over the past 20 years as powerful brands that have overtaken many of their Japanese rivals. Kuriyama says Pioneer was not among those targeted by American companies in the 1980s but is following the lead of two companies that were. He cited Fujitsu and Matsushita (now Panasonic), which, respectively, sued Samsung and LG, both in 2004, claiming infringement of plasma display patents. "These lawsuits provided Pioneer with precedents for its own enforcement action," he says. While Japan and Korea have a complex, at times strained, relationship because of Japan's colonial history in Korea, Hagiwara doesn't see that as a factor in the patent battles. "It's just a function of their relative technological developments," he says. Japanese companies had a technological edge over Korean companies until the 1990s, and saw the value of building and enforcing patent portfolios sooner. Even if Japanese companies struck first, the Koreans have fought back hard, filing countersuits and bringing new infringement claims of their own. LG and Samsung are now generally regarded as more aggressive litigants than Japanese companies. Samsung underlined how seriously it regards patent suits with its appointment earlier this year of Kim Hyun-Chong, a former trade minister and United Nations ambassador, as its first chief legal officer. His top priority: developing an IP strategy for the company. Those beyond Japan and Korea are starting to feel the heat. "There's been a big surge of litigation involving Taiwanese electronics companies," says Maxwell Fox, a litigation partner in Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker's Tokyo office. Taiwan's big companies (Acer, BenQ, Quanta) aren't as well-known as their Japanese or Korean counterparts, but many do lots of outsourced manufacturing. Quanta, for example, is the world's leading laptop maker, producing computers for Apple, Dell and others. Like Japanese and Korean companies of earlier generations, Taiwanese companies were slow to detect their vulnerability to IP suits. But now they are learning quickly, says Fox, whose firm has represented many of them. Paul Hastings recently represented Quanta in a dispute with LG that the U.S. Supreme Court heard last November. Applying the doctrine of patent exhaustion, the Court ruled unanimously that LG, which had licensed chipsets to Intel, could not assert infringement against Quanta, which had legally purchased the chipsets from Intel. The stakes are high. Damages claims on a patent used in, say, flat-panel displays can climb into the hundreds of millions of dollars. Even more worrisome: the possibility of an injunction that halts the importation of infringing products. Asian electronics companies are especially vulnerable to such injunctions because they depend heavily on selling their products overseas. "The threat of an injunction stopping sales is a tremendous hammer to hold over someone else's head," says Fox. That may be why many big cases settle. In April 2004 Fujitsu sued Samsung in Tokyo and California over a patent on plasma displays. Pursuant to its Japanese suit, Fujitsu managed to have Japan's customs service keep Samsung TVs out of the country. By June, the companies settled. An injunction barring imports to the United States would be particularly devastating, as the U.S. is by far the largest single export market for most Asian electronics makers. That is one reason that, though cases are also filed throughout Asia, the U.S. has become a key forum for these patent suits. The other big reason is that U.S. courts tend to act swiftly and have fewer qualms about granting either injunctions or big damages awards. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas has emerged as one favored venue for Asian electronics companies' disputes with each other -- as it has for others filing infringement claims. The focus on U.S. litigation has proved a boon to U.S. law firms, a number of whom have taken steps to boost their IP and litigation presence in Asia. Olson had been managing partner of MoFo's Los Angeles office before moving to Tokyo in 2006 to start working with the firm's burgeoning client list there. Fox likewise moved to Tokyo from Los Angeles in 2006, and Hagiwara recently relocated from Ropes & Gray's New York office to Tokyo, which the Boston-based firm opened in 2007. Even when cases are heard in the U.S., Hagiwara explains, an on-the-ground presence in Asia is key. Complex discovery requests can be difficult for Japanese companies to follow, and an error in compliance can prove disastrous in the courtroom. "The devil is in the details," he says. "Providing substantive and timely advice is critical." And while patent suits in the U.S. are usually overseen by in-house lawyers, many Asian companies place IP under the authority of nonlawyer executives. Unlike a general counsel in the U.S., who is a senior executive in close contact with the CEO, a top Asian corporate counsel is often farther down the chain. At the same time, nonlawyer executives with strong technical backgrounds must work closely with outside counsel on legal issues. The decision-making process is also quite different in Japan, says Hagiwara, with executives slowly deliberating over detailed reports from midlevel managers. Things may be changing. Samsung's hiring of Kim, a former associate at Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy and Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom in New York before joining the Korean government, was widely noted throughout the region, given the company's already active IP litigation docket. In the past few years, Samsung has also hired a significant number of U.S. -- trained lawyers to handle IP matters, drawing on the large pool of Korean and Korean-American graduates of elite U.S. law schools. Taiwanese companies, Fox says, have also begun to hire a fair number of American-educated lawyers to focus on patent cases. With Japanese, Korean and Taiwanese companies now all in the fray, the Asian patent war is already one of the biggest things going in the IP world. But it could get bigger still. All eyes are on the emerging giants, which have yet to fully awaken. "The way the trend is going," says Fox, "mainland Chinese companies are going to be in more and more of these cases."

software patent protectionism united states

Corporate patent lawyers and lawyers in general wield great influence in the United States. One Japanese book is titled "Litigating a Country to Death -- The United States of America". Like in Britain, the patent system ran out of control rather early in the US. In the 80s, this was partially reinterpreted as an american national "pro-patent" policy by which Japan and east-asian tiger states could be kept at bay. The US has been and is allowing patent lawyers to determine its policy in multilateral rounds such as WIPO as well as in bilateral negotiations. These patent lawyers have, without much regard for US national interest, been using the muscle of the US government in order to press other countries into allowing patentability of everything under the sun according to US standards. At WIPO, the US is pushing for a Substantive Patent Law Treaty (SPLT) which rules out any limitation on subject matter and threatening to walk out if this is not achieved. Be it WIPO, WSIS or OECD, wherever unlimited patentability is not the target, the US delegation boycotts the work and instead relies on bilateral muscle-flexing. Jordan signed a bilateral agreement with the US in this sense in 2000. Japan was heavily lobbied and followed in every detail, even to extent of passing a law that obliges Japan to push for software and business method patents worldwide. US pressure has made itself felt in Europe, so that many, including French president Chirac, have spoken about a strategic need to resist the US pressure. Whether this US pressure is really based on US national interest may be doubted. But without doubt the USA is in the position of the early adopter of software patentability. While others were still not taking the (illegal) expansionism of their local patent offices seriously, software patents became -- very much against the will of most US software businesses -- firmly entrenched in the USA, leaving US companies no choice but to adapt. About 2/3 of the European (illegal) software patents are in US hands, and many at the US companies (and at some large european companies who are active in the US market) would like to be able to leverage their assets in Europe also.

By Brian J. Love Late last week, a San Jose jury awarded Apple Inc. $1.05 billion in damages for patent infringement, a huge win for Apple in its worldwide patent fight with smartphone manufacturers that, like Samsung, sell devices equipped with Google’s Android operating system. The award, the third largest in the history of U.S. patent litigation, will likely cruise into first place next month when U.S. District Court Judge Lucy Koh decides what additional amount Apple should receive from Samsung based on the jury’s finding that much of the infringement was “willful.” But even without that enhancement, which could add another $2 billion to Samsung’s tab, the jury’s $1 billion-plus verdict breaks down to just under $48 for each of the roughly 22 million infringing phones sold by Samsung. To the jury, 50 bucks per phone must have sounded like a reasonable figure, and it may well to you too. But it’s not — it’s way too high — and here’s why: The average smartphone may arguably infringe as many as 250,000 patents, not to mention myriad copyrights and other design-related intellectual property. (Companies don’t sift through every patent coming out of Washington before engineering and releasing a product; they create devices and battle claims as necessary.) If you were to divide the average retail price of a smartphone — about $400 — by those 250,000 potentially applicable patents, you’d find that each one would account for just $0.0016 of the phone’s value. And, in reality, even that’s too much, once you factor in the costs of raw materials, labor, transportation and marketing, which also contribute to a phone’s value. Yet for infringing just a handful of Apple’s patents, Samsung faces a minimum payment of $48 per phone, a shocking 30,000 times the average per patent value. Put another way, if the owners of all the 250,000 inventions that might be present in Samsung smartphones were awarded damages at the same level as Apple, Samsung would have to charge a ludicrous $2 million per phone just to break even. But wait, you say, the San Jose jury no doubt included some level of punishment in its award, in order to “send a message.” But, by law, patent damages are meant to compensate not punish, as the jury was expressly instructed. Or maybe Apple’s patents are worth far more than average intellectual property and are therefore deserving of a higher rate? Perhaps so. But thousands of times more valuable? For that matter, why shouldn’t we also entertain the possibility that Apple’s patents are actually worth less than the average? It may sound blasphemous to question the value of intellectual property owned by the world’s most valuable company, but consider this: When purchasing a phone are you willing to pay more for rounded corners and stylish icons or for the device’s ability to transmit data to a cell tower? In the smartphone wars, Apple is primarily enforcing patents on the former, Samsung and Motorola on the latter. Surprisingly, Apple is well aware of arguments about the real worth of each patent per phone: “In a world where a device can be made up of thousands of patented components, patent infringement damages should be proportionate to the value of the component in question rather than the entire product.” That’s a 2008 quote from the Coalition for Patent Fairness, an advocacy group formed by Apple and other tech companies frequently sued for patent infringement. Indeed, Apple makes this same point in some form or fashion dozens of times a year when playing defense against patent suits filed by other, much smaller patent owners. Over the last five years, no company has been sued more times for infringement than Apple. When the shoe was on the other foot, however, it was content to check its patent law principles at the courtroom door: It actually asked for far more than it received, about $2.5 billion total in “compensatory” damages. So, Apple, congratulations on your large award. Next time you’re accused of patent infringement by a start-up, an individual inventor or a dreaded “patent troll,” I’m sure you’ll be flattered when the patent owner uses your own damages calculations against you. Actually, on second thought, here’s betting you won’t like it much at all. — Brian J. Love is an assistant professor of law at Santa Clara University School of Law, where he teaches courses in patent law and remedies. He wrote this for the Los Angeles Times. © Copyright (c) The Victoria Times Colonist Read more: http://www.timescolonist.com/sports/Commentary+Armstrong+just+cheating+system/7175926/story.html#ixzz25BWcEt68

http://books.google.ca/books?id=bTHkkAVXaiAC&pg=PA270&lpg=PA270&dq=%22PLUS+RICHE+RELATIVEMENT+A%22&source=bl&ots=1B6ROOfBfx&sig=k0lI3RQ7gyE_RpWvbmop9FpFHEA&hl=en#v=onepage&q=%22PLUS%20RICHE%20RELATIVEMENT%20A%22&f=false

lg samsung design korea dominance supremacy coway patent innovation

http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/design-architecture/koreas-design-dominance-reflected-in-list-of-idea-award-winners/7371

NHAI is quite firm on the Ashkenazi IQ advantage: Ashkenazi Jews have the highest average IQ of any ethnic group for which there are reliable data. They score 0.75 to 1.0 standard deviations above the general European average, corresponding to an IQ of 112-115... although a recent review concludes that the advantage is slightly less-only half a standard deviation (Cochran et al. 2006, 3) The "recent review" they mention conveys a very different impression from that forceful assertion (Lynn 2004). It has often been asserted that Jews have a higher average level of intelligence than non- Jewish whites of European origin... Despite these assertions, the purported high IQ of the Jews has never been systematically reviewed... Despite the widespread consensus on the high Jewish verbal ability, not all studies have shown that Jews have a higher verbal IQ than gentiles. Furthermore, virtually all the existing studies are unsatisfactory because the samples have been unrepresentative, very small or for other reasons (pgs. 201-202)... There is only one study of the intelligence of American Jews in the last century which appears to be representative and had a reasonable sample size. This is Backman's (1972) analysis... The mean IQs of the Jew in relation to gentile white means of 100 and standard deviations of 15 were as follows: verbal knowledge (described as "a general factor, but primarily a measure of general information".. .)--107.8, English language 99.5; mathematics-109.7; visual reasoning ("a measure of reasoning with visual forms")-91.3; perceptual speed and accuracy-102.2; memory (short term recall of verbal symbols)-95.1 (pg. 203). Lynn compares this result with an analysis of vocabulary scores using national survey data broken down by categories including Jewish and non-Jewish white. This he translates into a verbal ability score (not full-scale IQ) of 107.5 for American Jews, compared to 100.0 for gentiles (pg. 204). Other estimates come in higher or lower. MacDonald (1994, 190)~whose three volume series is dedicated to demonstrating a Jewish evolutionary strategy of promoting their own reproductive success at the expense of gentiles-comes in at the top, with a general IQ around 117 and a verbal IQ around 125. Hughes (1928, 90), cited in NHAI, made a large study of London school children under the supervision of Cyril Burt. He found Jews scoring about 10 points higher than gentiles, regardless of economic well-being. But Hughes also refers to previous studies of Jewish immigrants to the U.S.: "four of them find that Jews are not more intelligent than the non-Jewish American population, and four of them find that they are." Patai and Wing (1975, 146-149) review studies, most of which give Jews higher IQ, but a few of which do not. That same year, Dershowitz and Frankel (1975, 127) compiled other findings. The average verbal IQ (WISC) from two studies of American Jews was 8.4 point higher than Italian-Americans, 7.5 points higher than Irish-Americans, and 3.1 points lower than WASP-Americans. For performance IQ, Jews came out lower all around, 2.7, 2.6, and 9.2 points below, respectively. For full scale IQ, Jews beat Italians and Irish both by 3.2 points, and lost to WASPs by 6.8 points. Another study by the authors of 185 Israeli Jewish children found a much lower score than for the Americans, with an average IQ of 96.13. Taking all the information together, it is fair to say that most, though not all, studies give Ashkenazi descendants a higher IQ than non-Jewish whites. How much? Take your pick Reply With Quote

asian women

creativity 4chon myth asian

Given the fact that there is an infinite number of theories possible for any given set of scientific observation and that we don't take the most creative theory, but the simplest, it is absurd to suggest Asians lack creativity. Any idiots can come up with a large number of theories. This belief verges on rational heresy. Indeed, it shows a lack of intellectual refinement and lack of creativity itself ironically. It is worth mentioning that Asian students perform well when tasked to elaborate a theory on high-level international competitions in science. ==================================== elaborating a theory is more akin to solving a problem than making art, thus intelligence is more important than creativity in science. It is more important to understand science and to master it than to do art with it. You don't do art, since creativity isn't a quality that makes a theory good.

proof asian women can have pink nipples

http://s11.postimage.org/w1we96unn/proof_asian_women_can_have_pink_nipples.jpg http://s7.postimage.org/hye819wqj/proof_asian_women_can_have_pink_nipples.jpg

creative math is hard 4chon white people

bank failure financial crisis

As a theoretical matter, failure by a bank means that it cannot extend credit, but this means a profit opportunity exists for someone else. As an empirical matter, it is difficult to establish whether panics cause credit freezes or underlying adverse shocks to the economy cause both reduced lending and panics.

jews chinese students

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_jews#Education http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_British#Education where does the myth that jews are smarter come from?

SAMSUNG JD POWER BEST PRODUCT APPLIANCES

Two recent studies by J.D. Power and Associates indicate that the manufacturers of kitchen and laundry appliances that ranked highest in 2011 continue to rank highest in customer satisfaction again this year. According to the J.D. Power and Associates 2012 Laundry Appliance Satisfaction StudySM and the J.D. Power and Associates 2012 Kitchen Appliance Satisfaction Study,SM Samsung is the highest-ranked brand in overall customer satisfaction with clothes washers, dryers, and refrigerators. Bosch achieves the highest score for dishwashers, and Kenmore Elite ranks highest for ranges, cooktops, and ovens. All of these manufacturers are repeat award recipients from 2011. Notably, Samsung clothes dryers have ranked highest for 4 consecutive years, and its washing machines for 5 years.

adam smith china more advanced

Even Adam Smith said China was richer and more advanced than Europe in WEALTH OF NATIONS in 1776.

MOON HOAX

http://www.aulis.com/stereoparallax.htm

east asian women beauty

hehhehheh

i tried to put my little 2 inch cock inside a hot apple pie, but i realized that it was too short to make love to it while standing next to the table, so i smashed it in my clean unstained-by-dirty-female-fluid bottom area, but it fucking burned my banana. i hate myself because my lowly female coworkers don't want to violate my pure and innocent fat body. I wish they go to hell, as their unworthy nature should prompt them to rush towards my female tities and lick them like one of those crazed japanese men i watch in japanese AV. I will never forgive them for not making me miserable of having this wonderful body of mine, masculine yet feminine (because of my man boobs). These dirt-slime should be left to die in the middle of a desert. Hehehwouaaa wouaaa wu wu wouaaaaaaaaaa! http://s16.postimage.org/fzephh0yd/image.png http://s9.postimage.org/4bg5eihdr/image.png

K DRAMA choson korea history drama comparison leonardo louis 14 france

http://s12.postimage.org/7ny41sai5/adffs_GG.jpg http://s17.postimage.org/qzcq7ul3z/adffs.jpg http://s8.postimage.org/gqfqtrfid/adff.jpg http://s13.postimage.org/qxfthtnif/aad.jpg http://s12.postimage.org/mrovjmm99/adgse.jpg http://s18.postimage.org/vrvryuhhl/adge.jpg http://s14.postimage.org/6xd8ui9e9/potato.jpg http://s7.postimage.org/9xn2a5wmj/ggghh.jpg http://s15.postimage.org/gwx12jvi3/New_Bitmap_Image_3.jpg http://s15.postimage.org/3rm4a6r0b/AAA.jpg http://s16.postimage.org/utba1tdl1/AFFAA.jpg http://s13.postimage.org/ap4osy7rb/Ad_FFAA.jpg http://s8.postimage.org/6q3w489n9/dddad.jpg http://s18.postimage.org/d3bui3d2h/1340762134743.jpg LOUIS 14 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjBMCcP0a4o VS CHOSON KING http://s17.postimage.org/qzcq7ul3z/adffs.jpg lul http://s13.postimage.org/ap4osy7rb/Ad_FFAA.jpg Mencius: we must live in harmony with the nature, people and neighbors. this is our duty as human beings. Nietzsche: muh dick, we must fulfill our animalistic desires muh zarathrusta, POWER OVERWHELMING!

japanese vs american civilized

japanese http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLyxyzpL2ls&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjeTTQKRfWU americans http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RVHDlPqZWE

more asians