Batting

Kraut is batting 0 for 2. I will explain the issues in his previous videos in a general sense. The  comments will be cycled eventually so idiots will pretend nobody said anything like this, including two prominent skeptics I will throw shade on later. Just like Aydin Paladin and Astral43 were ignored, despite going into much more depth.

Video 2: Literally Lewontin! Because it makes similar attempts to disregard race as Lewontin did.

Kraut in my estimation outright LIED about what Alternative Hypothesis said in his article (which is why didnt link to the article). He never argued a correlation between heterozygosity and subspecies. He also used plenty of biological sources that Kraut claimed he didnt (the whole article was about Cluster Analysis after all). And only one link was dead, contrary to Kraut's claims. Kraut also fumbled the definition between subspecies in contradistinction to species, and also believes the biological classification schemes are more rigid than they are. Hell, the fact that certain species can produce fertile offspring with other species alone throws a wrench into this.

And his expert made a strange argument that we have to link intelligence differences with the genes involved in more superficial differences between the races. Vernaculis, who isnt an expert, tried this too. He seemed to claim that the genes which give someone black skin or sickle cell need to be what is behind their lower IQs. Nope.

And he read from a source casting shade on using race because it can lead to discrimination.

This was just to muddy the waters around race. Some people, like Vee and Sargon, were dumb enough to buy it. I had an argument with Vee in DMs about this. One of the few sources he provided to support Kraut's argument was from Lewontin. Lewontin is most well known for his attempts to deny race being called "lewontin's fallacy". Richard Dawkins assisted in making this so, so Dawkins basically finds these sorts of games the Skeptic Community is playing to be laughable. This being the same conversation where Vee tried to appeal to authority by referencing a mythical consensus, arguing one of my sources didnt count because psychologists worked with a genetcist, low-key reminding me he went to med school, and seemed adamant that Kraut finding a single mistake in one of several blog posts written by someone made race realism unscientific.

I bring this up because it is actually fairly typical behavior from a skeptic, but they usually don't run through it all so obviously and quickly.

Video 1: Antiquated Terminology, or Autistic Tirade? You decide.

Firstly, MillennialWoes' response video showed he always admitted he was probably using r/K too loosely but that it was a useful lens. This wasnt something everyone just made up. Secondly, r/K was coined by E.O Wilson. Who approved of Rushton using it in humans. And has been applied within species, though there is debate about the right way to use it. See the wiki articles on Rushton and r/K. Under "favorable reception" and "application" respectively. If anything, r/K may simply be too antiquated a term. Not that using it within species is vernoten. However, no one using it on YouTube was using it rigorously enough for me to say it wasn't just a 'handy metaphor' for them.

Finally, Kraut claimed no differences in human reproductive behavior and traits existed along anything resembling r/K. Except there are. Two egg twinning, maturity, and length of gestation period all vary by race in an r/K pattern. He used an obvious misunderstanding of what people were talking about (no, black people arent thistles) to jettison observed differences in reproductive behavior and sexual maturity

Lots of skeptics, namely Vee, seemed to think that Kraut was making good points. Vee and others want to believe Kraut a bit too badly.

Vee tried to defend Kraut obfuscating race by citing Lewontin. Most known for Lewontin's fallacy regarding his attempts to deny race. Especially funny because he tried to argue psychologists werent good enough to weigh in on heritability of psychological traits
https://books.google.ro/books?hl=en&lr=&id=R2TTBwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA381&dq=R.C.+Lewontin+(1972)+genetics&ots=Ay-AaVDqLY&sig=chFta470TgxYaCCkap7vjPMzKTE&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false