>but nurture sits on top of nature because you can only work with the material you have.
Put a plant in nutrient-poor soil. Nurture is also 'you can only work with the material you have' no matter how much potential the genes have.
If race is the limiting factor (let's take the common example of a black person), then it wood follow that they couldn't possibly rise to the position of a CEO of a Fortune 500 company, or become a both pioneer
neurosurgeon and presidential candidate (Ben Carson). Look at Philip Emeagwali, with a recorded IQ of 190. Clearly the African race's genetics cannot be a limiting factor
of conventional intelligence or success in Western societies, since there are well-documented exceptions. Their races clearly have appropriate genetic material to enable them to rise to the highest humans intellectually.
How do you explain white trailer-trash in rural US and the towns with the highest rates of obesity? It's not that their race limits their collective genetic potential for culture, it's their environment limiting the general potential of those who can't find and learn from outside influence.
Culture is primarily bred out of the values of those you interact with and the people and things you learn from. That's why people speak English outside of England and why English is rooted in Latin and Greek and German. That's why there is Abrahamic religion outside of the Middle East, that didn't come from our genes. That's why there are Hindu and Roman symbolism in Nazism and Hindu–Arabic numerals in Europe. That's why we use overuse words like 'Anon', 'glowginger' and 'comfy'. That's hardly a result of our genetics.
>Comfy is subjective
You are right, comfy can be subjective. I just woodn't expect many people to agree that discussing divisive politics is compatible with comfy. Yes, I realize the irony of me saying that in this post in /comfy/.