Top products from r/edefreiheit

>##Starting Strength: A Review Of Mark Rippetoe's Barbell Bible


>Starting Strength is a classic, one of the best barbell-based training books ever written. Now there's a new-and-improved edition that raises the bar even higher.


>People who want to get bigger, stronger, and more athletic frequently approach me for training advice and instruction. After all, most of us agree that "strong people are harder to kill than weak people, and more useful in general." (A little Mark Rippetoe morsel for you.)

>I wish I had time to train each of these people. I'd love to pull them into a gym, put them under a bar, and guide them through the fundamentals of resistance training. Unfortunately, this approach isn't usually possible. For most of these "help-me-get-bigger" brothers, the best thing I can do is recommend a book. Time after time, I recommend the same one: Starting Strength by Mark Rippetoe.

>###The Gym Bible

>Never heard of it? Extract yourself from the crazy claws of your favorite biceps curl machine and listen up. Starting Strength teaches you everything you need to know to properly program and perform full range of motion barbell exercises, which are the best functional expression of human skeletal and muscular anatomy under a load. Simply put, your favorite isolation exercise ain't squat compared to the squat. If you're not performing barbell compound exercises, you're not getting the most from your strength workouts.

>As Coach Rip says about the deadlift, it's more functional than almost any other exercise because "it's very hard to imagine a more useful application of strength than picking heavy up off the ground."

>The big problem with barbell training, however, is that the majority of people don't know how to do it correctly, even if they've been training for years. Because every aspect of bar movement is controlled by the lifter, barbell training requires an investment in time and education. Starting Strength addresses that issue. Luckily, readers have just been blessed with the recently released Third Edition, and it's fantastic.

>###Under The Book

>The Starting Strength program is one of the most popular programs in America, particularly in high school and college weight rooms. It also has an incredibly high rating on Amazon, having garnered 90% or more 5-star reviews.

>The only complaints with previous editions of Starting Strength were that it needed better pictures and editing. Welcome to the Third Edition. Without reinventing the wheel, it comes with a new look, new photos, excellent illustrations, and updates in the program based on the experiences of thousands of athletes in the four years since the last release.

>###Why Buy?

>If you're new to weight training, this program is one your best possible investments. Furthermore, if you have been using mainly machines or doing calisthenics, not having mastered squats, bench presses, deadlifts or cleans, then Starting Strength will set you straight. Rippetoe's instructions are simple enough for a novice to understand but detailed enough for a strength coach's arsenal.

>The program stresses the basics of effective compound exercises and weight progression with an emphasis on flawless technique. It is appropriate for anyone looking for a solid foundation in strength, muscle, and power. Starting Strength teaches you to train the body as a complete system, not a collection of parts.

>"Exercise is the stimulus that returns our bodies to the conditions for which they were designed. Humans are not physically normal in the absence of hard, physical effort. Exercise is not a thing we do to fix a problem-it is a thing we must do anyway, a thing without which there will always be problems. Exercise is substitute cave-man activity." (Rippetoe 1)

>###Precision Makes Perfect

>Starting Strength puts a very heavy emphasis on lifting correctly, with over 200 pages dedicated to mastering the five most important movements: the squat, press, bench press, clean, and deadlift. You may have thought you knew how to squat, but until Mark has taught you how bar position effects torso angle, lower body joint relationships, why your knees keep caving in, and why you shouldn't look up when squatting, you'll basically never know.

>While the squat, press, bench press, clean, and deadlift are the focus of the program, Mark does recommend ancillary exercises for certain situations. These are typically useful variations of the main lifts to emphasize weak points, as well as other movements that can be used for pre-hab or corrective exercise. Other included exercises - such as the glute ham raise, dip, and row - contribute to functional strength and movement.

>You won't see leg curls or extensions in Rip's pages, however. In the real world or on the athletic field, the hamstrings and quadriceps always function together when we move. The only place where we can purely isolate these muscles is on a machine, so why should we use this equipment? Just because someone made the machine?

>After teaching you everything you will need to know about technique for the bread-and-butter barbell movements, Rippetoe gives you the carrot with his actual program. These workouts are not long, drawn-out affairs, but are designed to stimulate a response of strength and hypertrophy as efficiently as possible. The novice would start with just the main lifts done with two training sessions, three times per week (Rippetoe 296):

>[Bilder und Ausführungen]

>Rippetoe thoroughly outlines the reasoning behind this basic program, with advice on how to warm up, selecting the work load, and how to make adjustments. He also instructs the reader how to advance the program to continue progress.

>Training begins with warm-ups. This includes the general warm-up to produce tissue warmth throughout the body, as well as exercise-specific warm-ups with an Olympic bar. The specific warm-up isn't only for dynamic stretching and tissue temperature, but is vital to mastering training technique. Skilled lifters treat their barbell movements the same way Arnold Palmer treats his golf swing - they use the submaximal weight to prime the movement pattern.

>Many beginners approach their specific warm-ups the wrong way, doing far too many reps and fatiguing themselves before the work sets take place. Starting with the bar, keep the repetitions below five and advance the weight evenly over four or five sets, decreasing the repetitions to two prior to your work sets. Using this method, your squat training would look like this:

>[Tabelle zu Wiederholungen etc.]

>###Rip Riffs On Fat

>Notable (but emphasized much less) is the infamous GOMAD nutrition program. If you're training to gain significant muscle and strength, Mark suggests that most people are far too concerned with their short-term physical appearance and thus won't eat enough. For certain populations, he recommends GOMAD, which is a "Gallon of Milk a Day" in addition to four whole-food meals (this applies to the skinny guys).

>"Make up your mind that, at least for the first year or two, you're not going to worry about body fat levels if you're already lean, because lean is easier to reacquire than strong is to build" (Rippetoe 310). Rip is also keen to note that "getting ripped" isn't as easy as it might seem: "You have seen pictures of big bodybuilders at 6% body fat in contest shape so often that you think it's normal, desirable, and always possible. " This isn't the case - getting anywhere takes work, and often takes longer than you'd first like. The iron game is one you play for life, not for a few months.

>###Sum Of Rip

>This program is so effective that we can say if your squat only goes up by fifty pounds in eight months, then you obviously weren't following the program correctly. Most people aren't trying to be the next world champion bodybuilder, but would like to have some more muscle and functional strength. Simply put, if you aren't a 3 time Mr. Olympia preparing to defend your title, you shouldn't be training like one. Starting Strength will form the basis of a successful lifting career and teach the fundamentals that will make you big, strong (scary), and keep you safe in the weight room.

>If you're getting serious about training and ready to build your best body ever, you don't need to start somewhere. You need to start here.

z.b. hier hab ich mich aus der Diskussion gezogen, weil du so unehrlich warst.

Aus einen Blogpost von den Autoren der Bücher:

>"From the point of view of Why Nations Fail, the types of social norms that Ferguson talks about are institutions — they are rules that people face that centrally govern their incentives and opportunities. Of course they are not laws or written in the Lesotho constitution, rather they are what Douglass North called “informal institutions”. But they are institutions, none the less."

http://whynationsfail.com/blog/2013/10/23/cows-capitalism-and-social-embeddedness.html

>So what sorts of institutions did we emphasize? Not the written aspects of the constitution such as whether or not there is a parliamentary democracy, another thing that Henry and Miller focus on. Those things can be important, but the types of institutions that influence the political and economic incentives in society can be very different. For example, in the first chapter of Why Nations Fail, we emphasized that the distinctive economic performance of the United States was created by the US Constitution with its checks and balances and separation of powers. But we also argued that this document was an outcome of a set of political institutions that had already been established during the colonial period. A further illustration from the same period that other types of institutions matter is the two-term limit for presidents in the United States. This was not part of the Constitution. Rather, it was established as a social norm by George Washington when he decided not to run for a third term. The social norms worked form 150 years until Franklyn Roosevelt violated it. The role of the Supreme Court in assessing the constitutionality of legislation was not in the Constitution either, but likewise emerged as a social norm after the landmark Marbury versus Madison case in 1803.

>In our post last week about Cows and Capitalism, we pointed out that social norms, like the one in Lesotho that cash could be converted into cows but not vice versa, counted as institutions according to the definition we used. In this case the social norm that Washington set, for example, clearly created incentives and constraints for future US presidents that influenced their behavior. That’s what institutions do.

http://whynationsfail.com/blog/2013/10/29/what-are-institutions.html

Jetzt nochmal Wikipedia Definition.

"Institutions are "stable, valued, recurring patterns of behavior". As structures or mechanisms of social order, they govern the behaviour of a set of individuals within a given community. Institutions are identified with a social purpose, transcending individuals and intentions by mediating the rules that govern living behavior. The term "institution" commonly applies to both informal institutions such as customs, or behavior patterns important to a society, and to particular formal institutions created by entities such as the government and public services. Primary or meta-institutions are institutions such as the family that are broad enough to encompass other institutions."

Die Definition passt hier so viel mehr, als deine Anspielung auf die katholische Kirche oder das römische Reich.


aber wikipedia nimmt hier die falsche Definition... und du erwartest von mir das ich hier noch weiter diskutiere? Wenn du mir mit voller Absicht ins Gesicht lügst? Wenn du genau weißt das ich das Buch gelesen habe und mich da eigentlich auf dein Wort schon verlassen musste um überhaupt eine weitere Diskussion möglich zu machen?

Naja ich klatsch in die Hände, das weißt du dir auch gleich wieder easy weg dass es eh so gemeint war und hurr durr. Das mehrere Nobel Laureate genau diese Institutionen Argumentation preisen, ist dir ja egal, weil du ja so viel bessere Internetkommentare verfasst als diese dummen Nobelpreisträger.

https://www.amazon.de/Why-Nations-Fail-Origins-Prosperity/dp/0307719219

>“This important and insightful book, packed with historical examples, makes the case that inclusive political institutions in support of inclusive economic institutions is key to sustained prosperity. The book reviews how some good regimes got launched and then had a virtuous spiral, while bad regimes remain in a vicious spiral. This is important analysis not to be missed.” —Peter Diamond, Nobel Laureate in Economics

>“Acemoglu and Robinson have made an important contribution to the debate as to why similar-looking nations differ so greatly in their economic and political development. Through a broad multiplicity of historical examples, they show how institutional developments, sometimes based on very accidental circumstances, have had enormous consequences. The openness of a society, its willingness to permit creative destruction, and the rule of appear to be decisive for economic development.” —Kenneth Arrow, Professor Emeritus, Stanford University, Nobel Laureate in Economics, 1972

>“This fascinating and readable book centers on the complex joint evolution of political and economic institutions, in good directions and bad. It strikes a delicate balance between the logic of political and economic behavior and the shifts in direction created by contingent historical events, large and small at ‘critical junctures.' Acemoglu and Robinson provide an enormous range of historical examples to show how such shifts can tilt toward favorable institutions, progressive innovation and economic success or toward repressive institutions and eventual decay or stagnation. Somehow they can generate both excitement and reflection.” —Robert Solow, Nobel Laureate in Economics, 1987

Wie arrogant muss man eigentlich sein um zu meinen man weiß mehr über ein Thema als 3 Top Wissenschaftler dieses Gebietes? Sowas von Lächerlich. Wegen solche Sachen verwehrst du dir jeglicher zukünftiger Diskussionen mit mir.

Motto der "Tag der offenen Moschee" 2016: Hidschra - Migration als Herausforderung und Chance
Der Tag der offenen Moschee in Deutschland ist ein seit 1997 bestehender, jährlich fest terminierter Veranstaltungstag, der am 3. Oktober, dem Tag der Deutschen Einheit stattfindet.

• [What Is "Hijrah" and Is It a Trojan Horse?](http://network.crcna.org/muslim-ministry/what-hijrah-and-it-trojan-horse
  )
  
  >The Islamic doctrine of hijrah or conquest via immigration is alive and well. In a similar fashion to the movement to Medina, the purpose is to first establish a beach-head, and then slowly gain increasing influence and power, likely in a peaceful way at first, and then more violent later. The goal, as it was in Medina, is not to cooperate and to assimilate to the local customs and culture—although that can be done for a short time in order to gain a critical mass of Muslims—but it is to strategically take over more an more areas of religious and political influence.
  
  >Recall that the Albanian leader of ISIS said (quoting the example of Abraham from Sura 60:3), "We say to you as Ibrahim said to his father: "Verily we are free from you and whatever you worship besides Allah. We have rejected you, and there has started between us and you hostility and hatred forever, until you believe in Allah alone."
  
  >If one looks at areas of London, Amsterdam, Paris and Stockholm, this replay of Islamic history is patently obvious. At present four hijrah tactics are being used to gain control of certain areas:
  
  >Multiplication of Muslims by birth rates
  
  >Multiplication of Muslims by immigration
  
  >Multiplication of Muslim influence via political systems
  
  >Expulsion of non-Muslims from certain areas by numerical and sometimes dominance by force—[think of the effect of documented rape-gangs in areas of Great Britain]
  
  
• [What is Hijrah? (Islam Q&A)](https://islamqa.info/en/7191
  )
  
  
• Buch:
  [Modern Day Trojan Horse: Al-Hijra, the Islamic Doctrine of Immigration, Accepting Freedom or Imposing Islam?](https://www.amazon.de/Modern-Day-Trojan-Horse-Immigration/dp/0979492955/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1487802460&sr=8-3&keywords=islam+trojan+horse
  )
  
  
  
  
• The Muslim Refugee Trojan Horse Will Soon Burn Europe to the Ground
  
  
  
  
• THE HIJRAH INTO EUROPE
  
  

> Außerhalb der Rechten Argumentation hat dieser Begriff keine Verwendung

Weshalb die Linken den Begriff so sehr fürchten, dass sie ihn mit allen Quellen aus Wikipedia gelöscht haben und nun auf einen Artikel der sich mit Verschwörungstheorien befasst verweisen.

Kultureller Marxismus ist real.

Dazu ein Text aus dem Anfang der GamerGate Zeit. 26 Sept 2014 https://twitter.com/archon/status/515729906521890817

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1sc1pi4

> # Sorry, But Cultural Marxism is Not an Invention of Right Wing Paranoids.

> Cultural Marxism is not an invention of the paranoid right. It's a school of thought developed by left-wing Marxists and named by them as such because it describes the application of their own theory to culture rather than economics. Whether you agree with the movement or disagree with the movement, saying that it's not a movement, or that William Lind created a fictitious movement in 1998, is absurd. You are either misinformed or lying.

> Below is a list of sources drawn exclusively from professors and scholars practicing cultural Marxism in which they use the term to describe the Frankfurt- and Birmingham-descended schools of thought.

> 1. Richard R. Weiner's 1981 book "Cultural Marxism and Political Sociology" is "a thorough examination of the tensions between political sociology and the cultural oriented Marxism that emerged int the 1960s and 1970s." You can buy it here: http://www.amazon.com/Cultural-Marxism-Political-Sociology-Research/dp/0803916450

> 2. Marxist scholars Lawrence Grossberg and Cary Nelson further popularized the term in "Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture", a collection of papers from 1983 that suggested that Cultural Marxism was ideally suited to "politicizing interpretative and cultural practices" and "radically historicizing our understanding of signifying practices." You can buy it here:http://www.amazon.com/Marxism-Interpretation-Culture-Cary-Nelson/dp/0252014014

> Note that the left-wing and progressive Professor Grossberg is a world-renowned professor who is the Chair of Cultural Studies at UNC, near my house. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Grossberg

> 3. "Culutral Marxism in Postwar Britain", by Dennis Dworkin, is described by Amazon as "an intellectual history of British cultural Marxism" that "explores one of the most influential bodies of contemporary thought" that represents "an explicit theoretical effort to resolve the crisis of the postwar Left". You can buy it here: http://www.amazon.com/Cultural-Marxism-Postwar-Britain-Post-Contemporary/dp/0822319144

> 4. "Conversations on Cultural Marxism", by Fredric Jameson, is a collection of essays from 1982 to 2005 about how "the intersections of politics and culture have reshaped the critical landscape across the humanities and social sciences". You can buy it here: http://www.amazon.com/Jameson-Conversations-Cultural-Post-Contemporary-Interventions/dp/0822341093

> Note that Dennis Dworkin is a progressive professor at the University of Nevada, where his most recent book, "Class Struggles", extends the themes of "Cultural Marxism in Postwar Britain".

> 5. "Cultural Marxism," by Frederic Miller and Agnes F. Vandome, states that "Cultural Marxism is a generic term referring to a loosely associated group of critical theorists who have been influenced by Marxist thought and who share an interest in analyzing the role of the media, art, theatre, film and other cultural institutions in a society. The phrase refers to any critique of culture that has been informed by Marxist thought. Although scholars around the globe have employed various types of Marxist critique to analyze cultural artifacts, the two most influential have been the Institute for Social Research at the University of Frankfurt am Main in Germany (the Frankfurt School) and the Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies in Birmingham, UK. The latter has been at the center of a resurgent interest in the broader category of Cultural Studies." You can buy it here. http://www.abebooks.co.uk/Cultural-Marxism-Frederic-Miller-Agnes-Vandome/2237883213/bd

> The essay "Cultural Marxism and Cultural Studies," by UCLA Professor Douglas Kellner, says " 20th century Marxian theorists ranging from Georg Lukacs, Antonio Gramsci, Ernst Bloch, Walter Benjamin, and T.W. Adorno to Fredric Jameson and Terry Eagleton employed the Marxian theory to analyze cultural forms in relation to their production, their imbrications with society and history, and their impact and influences on audiences and social life... There are, however, many traditions and models of cultural studies, ranging from neo-Marxist models developed by Lukàcs, Gramsci, Bloch, and the Frankfurt school in the 1930s to feminist and psychoanalytic cultural studies to semiotic and post-structuralist perspectives (see Durham and Kellner 2001)." The essay is available here: http://pages.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/essays/culturalmarxism.pdf

> Note that Professor Kellner is a progressive professor, an expert in Herbert Marcuse, and critic of the culture of masculinity for school shootings.

> 6. For another reference, see http://culturalpolitics.net/cultural_theory/journals for a list of cultural studies journals such as "Monthly Review", the long-standing journal of Marxist cultural and political studies". Note that the website Cultural Politics is a progressive site devoted to "critical analysis" of the "arena where social, economic, and political values and meanings are created and contested."

> 7. You could also check out "Cultural Marxism: Media, Culture and Society", Volume 7, Issue 1 of Critical sociology, of the Transforming Sociology series, from the Institute for Advanced Studies in Sociology.

> I hope that this brief survey amply demonstrates that Cultural Marxism is a term created and actively used by progressive scholars to describe the school of thought that first developed at Frankfurt and Birmingham to apply Marxism to cultural studies.

wenn du es genau wissen willst empfehle ich diese beiden hier

https://www.amazon.com/IQ-Wealth-Nations-Richard-Lynn/dp/027597510X

https://www.amazon.com/Global-Inequality-Richard-Lynn-Vanhanen/dp/1593680244

Kann ich nicht zustimmen, das Buch erklärt es sehr gut.

> du wirst trotzdem im Gefängnis landen.

Nö, warum? Warum sollte ich freiwillig ins Gefängnis gehen? Wär ich doch schön blöd, oder?

Kein einziges Gesetz funktioniert, wenn nicht irgendwo am Ende der Eskalationskette ein Polizist mit einer Pistole steht.

> "ich kann mich nicht mal ordentlich in den Medien ausdrücken, weil da schreit gleich jeder ich bin ein Nazi"

Wer das sagt ist Cuckservative und sollte noch ein paar rote Pillen schlucken.

> Empfindung

Ja und?

Hier, lies das:

https://www.amazon.de/Stop-Walking-Eggshells-Borderline-Personality/dp/1572246901/

und hör auf, aus den psychischen Problemen einiger Leute Gesetze machen zu wollen.

> Einschränkung auf die Redefreiheit [...] zugleich [...] Erlaubnis zur Redefreiheit

Merkst du was?

So ganz schwachsinnig ist das nicht. Einige Pentagonberater sprechen genau davon. Es soll für die globalisierte Welt eine braune "Mischrasse" geschaffen werden mit einem niedrigen Durchschnitts-IQ. Zu dumm zu verstehen, aber schlau genug um zu Arbeiten. Siehe hier: https://www.amazon.de/Pentagons-New-Thomas-P-M-Barnett/dp/0425202399

Der Mann ist offizieller Teil einiger Pentagon Think Tanks. Alles was wir momentan in Europa erleben, wurde von diesen Think Tanks vorher skizziert. So auch der Ukraine Konflikt. Das läuft alles nach Drehbuch ab. Verschwörung kann man das nicht mal mehr nennen. Die Informationen sind ja frei zugänglich.

Aber als christlicher Teil meiner jüdischen Familie glaube ich nicht an eine jüdische Verschwörung. Wir zumindest wissen davon nichts und tragen auch keine Säckel voll Gold um den Hals. Das Gerücht hält sich halt hartnäckig wegen Superreichen wie Rothschild. Vielleicht mischen die da sogar mit, aber das ist keine jüdische Verschwörung.


-Edit-

Hier noch ein paar Infos über den Mann:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_P._M._Barnett

Also wenn der so etwas schreibt, dann wurde es zumindest an höchster Stelle diskutiert und ist mitnichten abwegig.

Klingt für mich wie eine Wunschwelt.
"Es soll allen gut gehen".
"Jeder soll freie Bildung haben!"

Und wie will man so etwas machen?
"Keine Ahnung"

Wenn jeder Bildung umsonst kriegt, gibt es keine gute Bildung mehr. Es gibt keine millionen von Top-Professoren, die einer Hand voll von Superbegabten zur zukünftigen Intellektuellen Elite die etwas erreichen wird und das Volk bereichert, die magischerweise jeden unterrichten können.

Alles, absolut alles, auch gute Bildung, wird mit Blut und Schweiß erkämpft und über Jahrzehnte aufgebaut. Schau mal wie schnell wir alles zerstört haben. Die heutige Bildung ist ein absoluter Witz im vergleich zu den 30ern, unsere Frauen von heute sind schlechter gebildet als unsere Töchter im Mittelalter, sowie davor.

Klingt nach einem erfolgreichem Weltbild, muss man aber durch um die Realität zu sehen, schaffste schon haben wir auch gepackt.

PS: Ausländer sind keine Mitmenschen, sind höchstens deine Nachbarn. leider kenne ich nur des Buch, vllt gibts das iwo alsPDF

hier was anderes

Stand 2018:

> Nach den soeben bei Cambridge University Press vorgelegten Zahlen Heiner Rindermanns (Cognitive Capitalism) liegt in den USA die Cognitive Ability der Einheimischen bei keineswegs üppigen 99, die der Zuwanderer jedoch nur bei 95. In der Schweiz steht es 102 zu 95, in Deutschland 100 zu 92, in Österreich 99 zu 92 und in Frankreich 98 zu 92.

Originalquelle: Heiner Rindermann, Cognitive Capitalism (2018)

Kann man auch hier schön sehen, wie das weltweit aussieht. Von hier gebookmarkt.

Deine Wikipedia sagt selbst:

>Although the heritability of IQ for adults is between 58% and 77%, (with some more-recent estimates as high as 80% and 86%)

Also langsam zum Mitdenken und Mitschreiben: Jüngste Studien schätzen die Erblichkeit von Intelligenz bei 80 - 86%. Das ist das vier - bis sechsfache des Umweltanteils. Die Caveats sind ganz normale Hinweise bei genetisch begründeten Unterschieden, die für den Sachverhalt völlig irrelevant sind.

Und komm nicht mit dem Argument von Lewontin an. Schlechte Umwelteinflüsse gibt es in Asien auch. Da sieht das aber IQ-mäßig um Längen besser aus, siehe Übersichtschart oben.

>Mein Argument ist eben genau das der IQ von diesen "schwächlingen" höher wäre, wenn nicht die Umwelt zwischen gefunkt hätte.

Wäre er höchstwahrscheinlich nur extrem marginal, weil die Erblichkeit sehr hoch ist. Jordan peteson hat recht wenn er sagt dass wir wenig machen können.

>Somit hebe ich nicht über Umweltfaktoren an, sondern ich entferne negative Umweltfaktoren um auf den Normal IQ zu kommen.


Die Prävalenz von solchen ist nicht sehr hoch. Sonst wäre die Erblichkeit höher. Ein erschreckend großer Prozentsatz der Bevölkerung lässt sich nur schwer gewinnbringend in das Arbeitsleben integrieren.

>Bist noch immer kein Forscher,

Blödsinn, ich bin Uniangestellter (Genetiker).

>poste eine Kritik von einer Authoritätsfigur oder BTFO

hurr durr bin zu blöd um methodlogische Kritik selber zu verstehen hurr durr. Idiot.

>Dein Statement behauptet 0,4-0,8.

0.4 ist in kindersamples.

>Deine Studie 0,8, aber hey das du nicht rechnen kannst brauchen wir hier ja eh nicht mehr demonstrieren oder hast du eine Quelle und zitierst die einfach nicht?

Was du glaubst 0.2 der varianz wäre shared envionemnt weil die Erblichkeit 0.8 ist? Kompletter Unsinn, Gesamtvarianz besteht aus shared environment, unique environment (Zufall, messfehler, nicht genetische Biologie) und Erblichkeit . Zwillingsstudien können alle drei quantifizieren und im Erwachsenenalter ist shared environment ungefähr 0.1. Allerdings ist das eine systematische Überschätzung weil Zwillingsstudien nicht für assortative Partnerwahl korrigieren. Der echte wertist wahrscheinlich noch kleiner. cuck BTFO.

>Ich habs dir fett markiert, weil ich dachte das du zu behindert dafür bist.

Nettes Ausweichen Schäwchling. Ich habe die Studie aufgrund der hohen erwiesenen Erblichkeit zitiert, nicht wegen der feefees. Dabei habe ich nicht gelogen.

>Source needed.

https://www.amazon.de/Who-Are-How-Got-Here/dp/110187032X?SubscriptionId=AKIAILSHYYTFIVPWUY6Q&tag=duc03-21&linkCode=xm2&camp=2025&creative=165953&creativeASIN=110187032X

Sehr gutes Buch, kompletter takedown der irrelevanten Dummheit die sich Anthropologie nennt mithilfe antiker DNA analyse. Am neuesten Forschunsstand, absolut vernichtend gegenüber diesem Philisterhaufen.

>Redet über standardized testing Probleme generell und du schreibst das rüber das nur er schlechte Ergebnisse hatte, sowas unehrliches.

Die Sachen die er über standardisierte Tests gesagt hat waren noch peinlicher als seine Resultate- deswegen habe ich ja kuncels Vortrag mitverlinkt um einen Eindruck der abgrundtiefen Dummheit doieser Person zu geben - dumm auf dem Test, dumm in dem was er sagt. Kein Zufall.

>Quelle? ACH JA HABEN WIR WIEDER NICHT.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289616300629
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/cdev.12920
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289613001682

cuck BTFO