SDMB Bigoted Asshole Omnibus Thread

[Vinyl Turnip]

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

As I have pointed out several times before, if the differences were environmental they would be more flexible.

And if the differences were purely genetic, you'd be President of the United States like Obama or a renowned astrophysicist like Neal deGrasse Tyson, instead of a racist loser trying desperately to sublimate his small penis anxiety by spamming message boards with half-assed Google research. Obviously more research is needed, Doctor.

[brazil84]

Originally Posted by drew870mitchell

You know damn well what I meant by "inferior,"

No, because I tried to interpret your question on the assumption that you were not strawmanning me.

However, since you insist:

Please show me where I stated that any race or races was (simply) "inferior." Please quote me. Failing that, please admit that I said no such thing and apologize.

Your choice.

[New Deal Democrat]

Originally Posted by GIGObuster

Starting on post #454 my point still stands, "where are your cites showing the scientists you linked supporting your solutions or verdicts? Where are the organizations like the Hoover Institute supporting your solutions based on your ideas?

Your voices are silent, and not only because of the facts, but because you clearly are so pathetic that you are not even capable of noticing how unlikely is that the people in power would give you even the time of the day."

I have not presented much of anything in the way of solutions. What I have posted is evidence that racial differences are significant, reasonably inflexible, and that they repeat themselves throughout the world.

In addition, I have not descended to the kind of insults you have.

[Vinyl Turnip]

Originally Posted by brazil84

No, because I tried to interpret your question on the assumption that you were not strawmanning me.

However, since you insist:

Please show me where I stated that any race or races was (simply) "inferior." Please quote me. Failing that, please admit that I said no such thing and apologize.

Your choice.

You're not really going to return to this Randroverian claim that "less intelligent" doesn't mean "inferior," are you? It was laughable bullshit then, and it hasn't improved with age.

[Truman Burbank]

"Anyone on an internet forum can claim any identity."
This is true, but I am willing to stipulate you present yourself accurately. How about an answer?
And no, I am not willing to stipulate you are well informed. Any moron can cherry pick points to support his beliefs.

[New Deal Democrat]

Originally Posted by drew870mitchell

brazil84, or New Deal Democrat if you're so inclined as well, I have a question for you:

What was the journey of discovery for you to learn that certain races are inferior? Why did you get started reading racialist theories? Did you used to believe differently? What hypothesis did you set out with, and what facts convinced you your currently-held theory is true?

My parents raised me not to dislike blacks, and to believe that the differences between blacks and whites were minimal and due to racial discrimination. I still will not dislike a black person because the person is black. However, I have learned that the differences are fairly significant, and do not seem to be diminishing.

The fact that so many liberals are unable to discuss this matter calmly - as conservatives are able to discuss global warming calmly - indicates to me that they are not really confident in what they claim to believe.

[New Deal Democrat]

Originally Posted by Truman Burbank

"Anyone on an internet forum can claim any identity."
This is true, but I am willing to stipulate you present yourself accurately. How about an answer?
And no, I am not willing to stipulate you are well informed. Any moron can cherry pick points to support his beliefs.

OK, go out and find evidence that blacks perform and behave as well as whites, or at least that that they are improving.

[iiandyiiii]

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

This is what I got from your first link:

Inhabitants at Termit, in eastern Niger became the first iron smelting people in West Africa and among the first in the world around 1500 BC.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_in...Saharan_Africa

Everything else I have read about the beginning of the iron age agrees with this:

Modern archaeological evidence identifies the start of iron production as taking place in Anatolia around 1200 BC...

Sub-Saharan Africa has produced very early instances of carbon steel found to be in production around 2000 years before present.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iron_Age

"years before present" means "years ago." What I have read is that the Bantu learned the use of iron from the Nubians about 500 BC, who learned it from Egypt.

Carbon steel and iron smelting are two different things. The Haya were first at forging carbon steel, by hundreds of years.

[Jack Batty]

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

My parents raised me not to dislike blacks, and to believe that the differences between blacks and whites were minimal and due to racial discrimination. I still will not dislike a black person because the person is black. However, I have learned that the differences are fairly significant, and do not seem to be diminishing.

Well, golly, how noble of you not to sink to hating the poor dumb negroes you have to deal with all the time.

[GIGObuster]

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

I have not presented much of anything in the way of solutions. What I have posted is evidence that racial differences are significant, reasonably inflexible, and that they repeat themselves throughout the world.

In addition, I have not descended to the kind of insults you have.

You are so cute when showing fake navitee, even in the link I already pointed out the items that you are pushing. And if you are actually not presenting any solutions, then the point by the OP is justified, just STFU.

[GIGObuster]

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

My parents raised me not to dislike blacks, and to believe that the differences between blacks and whites were minimal and due to racial discrimination. I still will not dislike a black person because the person is black. However, I have learned that the differences are fairly significant, and do not seem to be diminishing.

The fact that so many liberals are unable to discuss this matter calmly - as conservatives are able to discuss global warming calmly - indicates to me that they are not really confident in what they claim to believe.

I have discussed also global warming, suffice to say you are an ignoramus even on this, conservatives do not discuss that subject calmly, many actually even deny that there is a problem.

[Damuri Ajashi]

Originally Posted by Gyrate

They do, which is why arguments like yours always fail: they're based on phenotypes or socio-cultural groupings or geographical populations, underscored by the assumption that the members of those group share a common genotype.

Except that they don't, and it's been conclusively proven that they don't, and it gets mentioned in every single freaking one of these threads that they don't, and then the handwaving and equivocation begins. From a genetic standpoint there is no such unified (or even loosely connected) population as "blacks"; the genotypical groups that are part of the standard phenotypical or socio-cultural groupings are too diverse. And thus it can't be demonstrated that "blacks" are genetically inferior, superior or anything else.

I'm not a scientist, anthropologist or sociologist so you lose me when you deny the existence of race. Whether it is a social construct or whatever, I am pretty sure that I can pick the black guy out of a crowd of "orientals"

How are races any different than breeds of dogs or horses.

Do you think there may be some genetic basis for why the Olympic sprinting and NBA is dominated by black players or is that entirely attributable to environment as well? It seems to me that if you can draw a correlation between some heritable trait and the population of folks that most people would call black, then you should explain why you would exclude intelligence as a heritable trait that the group of people we call black can pass on to their children. I hjave no doubt that environment has a lot to do with how black children perform on IQ tests but just saying that there are environmental factors doesn't exclude the possibility of genetic factors.

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

Now, throughout most of history there was a consensus that the Negro race was inferior.

Yeah, I'm pretty comfortable categorically stating that racism played a BIG part in that.

Truth cannot be determined by a popularity contest. Some truths are unpopular.

You have a hypothesis with some data supporting you, but you have not exactly proven your point. What weakens your argument is that you refuse to acknowledge that environmental factors are probably still the largest factor in explaining any differences in IQ score.

All anyone needs to to to prove that I am wrong it to demonstrate that blacks on the average perform and behave as well as whites, or at least that there has been a significant convergence since the civil rights legislation was signed nearly two generations ago.

IIRC, there had in fact been convergence of IQ scores. There is evidence that this convergence slowed starting in the 1970's. This maybe the result of social programs or simply the result of a slower pace of economic advancement by the black community. Its also when rap music got starts... just saying...

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

The reason I think it is a genetic difference is because expensive efforts by the government to help blacks, as well as the civil rights legislation have done little to enable blacks to behave and perform as well as whites on the average.

Conservatives would point out that those programs have actually been counterproductive. They point to the slowing of the IQ convergence as one data point supporting their position.

As soon as Jews were not discriminated against intellectually they excelled. As soon as blacks were not discriminated against athletically they excelled. Blacks have not been discriminated against intellectually for nearly two generations. With affirmative action programs they are discriminated in favor of. Nevertheless, by every objective criteria they still lag very far behind.

They also have a rate of violent crime that is about eight times the white rate.

I would suggest that there are some toxic elements of black culture that that are not only tolerated but celebrated. Black guys used to call other black guys "brother" now they call them "nigger" they used to call black women "sister" not they call them "bitches" and "hos" The glorification of violence, the disdain for academics, the priorities in the family and the communities. I agree wtih Flynn on many of these points. Its just toxic..

On top of that, you add the widespread poverty, racism, lack of role models, high incarceration rate and its not really that surprising that the black community is largely dysfunctional.

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

Blacks tend to perform poorly on all the mental aptitude tests however they are designed. Efforts to bridge the race gap in performance always fail.

IIRC, the higher up in the socioeconomic spectrum you go, the less of a disparity you tend to see. Poor blacks seem to do far worse than their poor white counterparts while rich blacks only do moderately worse than their rich white counterparts. The notion seems to be that racism compounds the effects of poverty and any innate differences in IQ (if any).

During the 1960s liberals made mistakes that have turned the United States into a Republican country.

Most of what made the Republicans a viable party is the increasing pace of social change that we have experienced in the last 50 years. We're not about to put women back in the kitchen, take the vote away from blacks, or ban abortion.

Originally Posted by Gyrate

How odd that they should claim racial discrimination in instances where race appears to be the primary factor in that discrimination.

My old high school was attacked as racist because admission was based on a standardized test and the black and hispanic enrollment was disproportionately low. This was called racist. It was bullshit. The city even started a program giving free test prep in black and hispanic neighborhoods and it made little to no difference.

Which, if true, has a lot more to do with socio-economic circumstances than with genes.

Are you saying that genes have NOTHING to do with it?

Originally Posted by Kobal2

No idea, but I would WAG Tiger Momming has something to do with it. There certainly is a lot of peer pressure and expectations (nay, demands) of academic brilliance and/or work from Korean, Chinese and Japanese parents who live their lives along traditional cultural principles.
It also happens to be an oppressive and socially stunting environment ; and the social shunning involved when the children dare break from or defy this traditional upbringing is nothing short of shameful, but that's another matter.

What it is, however, is not genetic.

The tigermom meme has created a double standard for Asian kids. When an Asian kid gets a good SAT score, its because thei mothers practically took the SATs for them. When a white kid does well, its natural ability, after all white kids just fall out of bed one day and take the SATS while Asians kids start preparing for the SATs in utero. I don't see any difference ebtween the emphasis that Asian parents place on education and the emphasis that almost any immigrant or middle class parent of bright children place on education.

Originally Posted by Fuji

If it is genetic, then why did "Orientals" allow the British to force them at gunpoint to consume large quantities of opium or allow the Americans to incinerate their cities with atomic devices?

Are you under the impression that dumb people cannot shoot or bomb smart people?

To repeatedly fail in the theater of ultimate competition - war - would seem to be more indicative of mental lethargy than acuity.

Yeah cuz when the Romans conquered the Greeks it was because of Rome's intellectual sueriority.

East Asian cultures have fostered the development of individuals who perform well on standardized IQ tests.

And if those standardized IQ scores were not the best predictors we have on a whole range of other things then i would also be inclined to dismiss those scores as meaningless but high IQ scores mean more than the ability to take IQ tests well.

I have seen no credible scientific evidence to indicate that genetics explains this discrepancy more than culture does.

But do you think genetics might explain any of that discrepancy?

As for Sub-Saharan Africans - they have been historically cursed by geography, not genetics, you stupid, stubborn man.

I remember reading somewhere that the average IQ of subsaharan africans was somewher around 65. That would put the average subsaharan african was moron level mentally retarded. Its hard to believe that these test scores have any validity.

Originally Posted by Harmonix

The fact that orientals typically have low rates of criminal behavior and high IQ, does not necessarily imply a genetic reason. You can not claim that because this is true, there must be a genetic reason.

You're confusing sufficiency, with necessity. A genetic reason may be Sufficient to explain the difference, but it is not NECESSARY to explain the difference.

To prove a causative relationship in science you need to prove necessity.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. So the burden is on you. As a graduate level scientist, I can tell you that your 'evidence' does not rise to the level of nessecary to prove your claim.

I notice that a lot of the arguments for lack of heritable intelligence also confuse sufficiency for necessity. But considering that I agree taht teh burden lies with the person making the more extraordinary claim, I think at best we can call NDD's claim an opinion or a hypothesis but I don't know how people can be so goddam certain that genetics have nothing to do with it.

There are all sorts of studies on the IQ of adopted children that show IQ disparities consistent with the IQ disparities. Why do Asian kids adopted into white households tend to outperform white kids (of the same socioeconomic level) raised by their natural parents? Are adoptive parents more likely to be tiger moms? Sure there are all sorts of other factors and especially with blacks (stereotype threat, caste effect, etc.) but why the gap with hispanics in countries like Mexico, where is the stereotype threat there, where are the pernicious effects of racism there?

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

If forty years is not enough to erase racial differences it ought to have reduced them somewhat if they are environmental.

I think we have in fact seen a shift in entry of blacks into the American middle class. I think we have in fact seen those entrants maintain that socioeconomic in following generations. I suspect that if we stopped all affirmative action today, the black middle class would not collapse on itself.

In this chart of SAT scores beginning during the school year 1990-91 you can see what while Orientals have improved significantly in both mathematics and reading ability, blacks have hardly improved at all, and the gap between them and whites has grown.

You've got to measure this stuff over decades if not generations. Over the decades, IQs have converged.

That 15 IQ points you mention from time to time is probably closer to 10 points right now.

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

"Correlation does not imply causation," can be and often is used to deny any causal relationship one does not want to believe.

No, thats not really true, not in this case. Where you have multiple signifcant other factors that could explain the correlation, you can't declare victory by simply showing correlation. You might be right but you might not.

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

I do not think that blacks should be discriminated against. I do not think they should be discriminated in favor of.

Show me that racism no longer exists and that we are at the resting state absent racism and we can stop. I am not anywhere close to convinced that racism isn't a significant issue any more.

[New Deal Democrat]

Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi

Show me that racism no longer exists and that we are at the resting state absent racism and we can stop. I am not anywhere close to convinced that racism isn't a significant issue any more.

However you define "racism" you will probably agree that there is less of it now than in 1960. Unfortunately, black rates of crime are higher than they were then. Black rates of illegitimacy are much higher. There has been little improvement in academic performance.

[Truman Burbank]

What we are talking about here is interpreting statistics, research methodology, and integrating it with our subjective experiences.
What are your qualifications to interprete the science?

[Paranoid Randroid]

Wow, this thread moves fast.

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

If forty years is not enough to erase racial differences it ought to have reduced them somewhat if they are environmental.

Maybe and maybe not. Maybe other factors have been sufficient to offset any benefit from civil rights legislation. Many conservatives argue that civil rights legislation and initiatives such as affirmative action do little more than infantilize blacks and make them dependent on government assistance. Although I won’t subscribe to a theory like that it carries as much a priori plausibility as your own, which should be sophisticated enough to describe why it’s the more likely explanation.

In this chart of SAT scores beginning during the school year 1990-91 you can see what while Orientals have improved significantly in both mathematics and reading ability, blacks have hardly improved at all, and the gap between them and whites has grown.

Problem is, a thousand and one theories explain this and most of them don’t involve differences in IQ between races being primarily genetic. It just won’t do to state outright that forty years should have been time enough — you need to describe in more detail why civil rights legislation would have reduced the IQ gap if your theory were wrong. That is: you need to supply a coherent (if incomplete) model of the determinants of intelligence. Elsewhere you write that those who point out how correlation does not imply causation do so as a last resort. But that’s not a last resort; taking confounding factors into account is just what it means to do thorough, convincing causal analysis.

I also wonder if you addressed, somewhere, my pointing out that the mean IQ in Thailand is 87. Does this not falsify your theory? If it doesn’t falsify your theory, then why do the factors which explain Thailand’s relatively low IQ not apply elsewhere? I’m not suggesting they don’t, but it’s something you can’t ignore if your goal is convincing others.

[brazil84]

Originally Posted by Vinyl Turnip

You're not really going to return to this Randroverian claim that "less intelligent" doesn't mean "inferior," are you?

Sure, what's the problem with it?

Is it your position that if Person X is less intelligent than Person Y, then Person X is necessarily inferior to Person Y?

[olivesmarch4th]

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

I am not stomping my feet at all. I am calmly presenting my arguments. The foot stomping you hear is caused by those who insult me because they cannot refute my arguments.

Dude, your ''arguments'' are so beyond the bounds of rationality and decency that there really isn't any impetus to debate with you. It would be like arguing with a four year old. It's absurd that you think a few insults posted on a message board are even in the same league as the horror that your moronic ideas visit upon the world. I could viciously insult you every day for the rest of your life and never do as much harm as you have.

[New Deal Democrat]

Originally Posted by olivesmarch4th

Dude, your ''arguments'' are so beyond the bounds of rationality and decency that there really isn't any impetus to debate with you. It would be like arguing with a four year old. It's absurd that you think a few insults posted on a message board are even in the same league as the horror that your moronic ideas visit upon the world. I could viciously insult you every day for the rest of your life and never do as much harm as you have.

I have responded calmly and in a civil manner to the insults that have been thrown at me. My arguments are rational, and based on facts that I document.

How have I done any harm by telling the truth? Charles Murray put it best when he wrote,"specific policies based on premises that conflict with scientific truths about human beings tend not to work. Often they do harm."
http://www.bible-researcher.com/murray1.html

As it becomes increasingly obvious that No Child Left Behind has failed, and as more is learned about the human genome, it will become increasingly obvious that there are important relationships between genes, IQ, success in life, race and crime.

The dogma that the races were equal grew out of a revulsion against the racial policies of the Nazis. As more time passes that revulsion will fade.

[New Deal Democrat]

Originally Posted by Paranoid Randroid

Problem is, a thousand and one theories explain this and most of them don’t involve differences in IQ between races being primarily genetic.

Those theories are obviously wrong. I suspect that many are presented dishonestly by people who do not really believe them. What matters is that expensive efforts to bridge the race gap in academic performance always fail.

[BrainGlutton]

Hey, kids, can you say Idee fixe?

I knew you couldn't.

[olivesmarch4th]

New Deal Democrat is a great user name for you, because the New Deal made a point to exclude blacks from its benefits. Feel proud that you're part of a decades old tradition of hatred.

[Fuji]

Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi

Are you under the impression that dumb people cannot shoot or bomb smart people?

I was making an off-hand remark in a pit thread. I spent the amount of intellectual firepower in making that remark as I felt was commensurate to the original piece of idiocy to which I was replying (that is to say, not very much at all).

Sure - "dumb people can shoot or bomb smart people". However, it takes smart people to come up with the novel ways in which that bombing or shooting is done. In the cases I mentioned, that would be deep-sea iron warships and atomic bombs.

Yeah cuz when the Romans conquered the Greeks it was because of Rome's intellectual sueriority.

In the fields of political and military science, it most certainly was.

And if those standardized IQ scores were not the best predictors we have on a whole range of other things then i would also be inclined to dismiss those scores as meaningless but high IQ scores mean more than the ability to take IQ tests well.

I never said I thought IQ tests were worthless (though their worth in discussing genetic theories of intelligence is highly suspect). I said that the differences observed between different national or racial groups on these tests do not support a predominantly genetic basis for those differences. Culture, broadly speaking, is far more important than genes.

But do you think genetics might explain any of that discrepancy?

See above (yes).

I remember reading somewhere that the average IQ of subsaharan africans was somewher around 65. That would put the average subsaharan african was moron level mentally retarded. Its hard to believe that these test scores have any validity.

Yes, I agree. And let me repeat - "Sub-Saharan Africans have been cursed by their geography, not their genes."

[Damuri Ajashi]

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

However you define "racism" you will probably agree that there is less of it now than in 1960. Unfortunately, black rates of crime are higher than they were then. Black rates of illegitimacy are much higher. There has been little improvement in academic performance.

Of course there is less racism today than 50 years ago. When you popint out that crime rates and teenage pregnancies among blacks are higher today than 50 years ago, are you saying that blacks have gotten stupider? I don't think you are saying that blacks havea ctually gotten stupider over the last 50 years and that has cuassed higher rates of incarceration and teen pregnancy.

Couldn't whatever is causing the higher ratesd of teen pregnancy and crime also be stunting whatever progress you might have expected from the lower levels of racism in society today. I think you could make a good argument that the black community suffers from self inflicted wounds but i think its hard to say that the black community simply isn't capable of doing better than they are doing now because they are just too stupid.

[Fuji]

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

The dogma that the races were equal grew out of a revulsion against the racial policies of the Nazis. As more time passes that revulsion will fade.

And... you say that like it's a good thing? That our current social consensus that Nazi racial policies are worthy of revulsion is somehow misplaced?

What the fuck is wrong with you?

[Little Nemo]

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

My parents raised me not to dislike blacks, and to believe that the differences between blacks and whites were minimal and due to racial discrimination. I still will not dislike a black person because the person is black. However, I have learned that the differences are fairly significant, and do not seem to be diminishing.

Okay, I'll give you some credit for this one. So many racists retreat behind the excuse of "I grew up in a different time" and "that's the way I was raised".

You deserve credit for the fact that you're willing to let your parents off the hook for your racism and take full responsibility upon yourself.

[Truman Burbank]

What are your qualifications to interprete the science?

[Little Nemo]

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

What matters is that expensive efforts to bridge the race gap in academic performance always fail.

Really? They always fail? You're claiming that no black person has ever graduated from college or obtained any success in an academic or professional field? You think there are no black doctors or black lawyers or black engineers or black scientists or black professors?

[Vinyl Turnip]

Originally Posted by brazil84

Sure, what's the problem with it?

Is it your position that if Person X is less intelligent than Person Y, then Person X is necessarily inferior to Person Y?

Yes. And you know damn well that's the case in the context of this discussion, or you and your JAQoff buddies wouldn't expend so much effort trying to show scientificamally (with charts and figgers and everything!) that blacks are less intelligent.

[New Deal Democrat]

Originally Posted by Truman Burbank

What are your qualifications to interprete the science?

I can read and I can think.

Now since you think you are qualified, please explain why racial differences in average ability levels and behavior are so durable. If the differences are due to different environments, why are they not more malleable? Also, why do some racial groups - Ashkenazim and Chinese for example - create thriving environments wherever they live and move, even when they are poor? Does a superior environment create a superior people, or does a superior people create a superior environment?

[New Deal Democrat]

Originally Posted by Little Nemo

Really? They always fail? You're claiming that no black person has ever graduated from college or obtained any success in an academic or professional field? You think there are no black doctors or black lawyers or black engineers or black scientists or black professors?

I am talking in terms of averages. There are black doctors, lawyers, engineers, scientists, and professors. These demonstrate that talented blacks can rise.

[New Deal Democrat]

Originally Posted by Little Nemo

Okay, I'll give you some credit for this one. So many racists retreat behind the excuse of "I grew up in a different time" and "that's the way I was raised".

You deserve credit for the fact that you're willing to let your parents off the hook for your racism and take full responsibility upon yourself.

My parents grew up in the north and had little contact with blacks. So did I until I became an adult. As time went on my parents and I became disenchanted with the collective black response to the opportunities that were opened to then by the civil rights legislation.

My attitude toward the Negro race is one of disappointment and personal betrayal. I feel that they have substantiated arguments I argued against when I was growing up. It wasn't supposed to turn out like this. When blacks were given equal rights they were supposed to respond with equal responsibility.

Instead, the result of the civil rights legislation and the war on poverty was five years of black ghetto rioting, more durable increases in black social pathology, and what seems to be a widening gap in academic performance.

[iiandyiiii]

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

I am talking in terms of averages. There are black doctors, lawyers, engineers, scientists, and professors. These demonstrate that talented blacks can rise.

And there are far more black doctors, engineers, etc, then there were 50 years ago. What does this demonstrate?

[New Deal Democrat]

Originally Posted by Fuji

And... you say that like it's a good thing? That our current social consensus that Nazi racial policies are worthy of revulsion is somehow misplaced?

What the fuck is wrong with you?

The revulsion against the Holocaust made it fashionable to deny and ignore truths that had always been obvious. It is worth mentioning that the Holocaust was directed against the most superior racial group in the world.

[Fuji]

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

The revulsion against the Holocaust made it fashionable to deny and ignore truths that had always been obvious. It is worth mentioning that the Holocaust was directed against the most superior racial group in the world.

More lies and delusions. You are one demented asshole.

[New Deal Democrat]

Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi

Couldn't whatever is causing the higher ratesd of teen pregnancy and crime also be stunting whatever progress you might have expected from the lower levels of racism in society today. I think you could make a good argument that the black community suffers from self inflicted wounds but i think its hard to say that the black community simply isn't capable of doing better than they are doing now because they are just too stupid.

By nearly every criteria I can think of black culture has declined since the civil rights legislation was passed. Soul music was a phenomena of the 1960s and early 1970s, but compare it with rap music.

I do not see how whites can be blamed for the increase in black social pathology since the civil rights legislation was passed.

[New Deal Democrat]

Originally Posted by Fuji

More lies and delusions. You are one demented asshole.

What did I say that is not true? You are an abusive child who is incapable of debating controversial topics in an intelligent and civil manner.

[New Deal Democrat]

Originally Posted by iiandyiiii

And there are far more black doctors, engineers, etc, then there were 50 years ago. What does this demonstrate?

It demonstrates that the civil right legislation has opened opportunities for blacks who have the personal merit to take advantage of them.

[silenus]

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

I can read and I can think.

So far you've offered little evidence of the latter.

[Fuji]

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

What did I say that is not true? You are an abusive child who is incapable of debating controversial topics in an intelligent and civil manner.

1) That these "truths" exist.
2) That they are "obvious".
3) That there is in fact one racial group which is the most "superior" in the world.
4) That Jews comprise this "superior" group. (No offense intended to Jews, of course.)

You are a fucking retard who will never realize what a waste you have made of the little good sense with which you have been endowed.

[Jack Batty]

Blacks are stupid because some nerdy white guy doesn't like rap music?

Makes about as much sense as everything else, I suppose.

[Truman Burbank]

[quote=New Deal Democrat;15120360]I can read and I can think. (Snip)

Yeah, that's what I thought. I have taken and passed college-level stats, have a Master's degree in Psych, have taken and passed 2 semesters of psych testing, and taught it. I guess you'd have to take my word for that.
You are apparently neither educated, nor informed. You do have, of course, a right to your opinion. I notice that most of the White Supremicists are, by any objective standards you would care to name, underachievers. This is, of course, anecdotal, and does not prove that they cling to simplistic beliefs about their own innate superiority to other races, say, blacks, as a way of compensating for their own lack of ability or achievement.
Sociology could help you understand, possibly, why you cling to these beliefs.

[New Deal Democrat]

Originally Posted by Fuji

1) That these "truths" exist.
2) That they are "obvious".
3) That there is in fact one racial group which is the most "superior" in the world.
4) That Jews comprise this "superior" group. (No offense intended to Jews, of course.)

You are a fucking retard who will never realize what a waste you have made of the little good sense with which you have been endowed.

You are a nasty piece of work.

Before the Second World War it was widely recognized that racial differences existed and that they were important.

Even Bertrand Russell wrote, "In extreme cases there can be little doubt of the superiority of one race to another[...] It seems on the whole fair to regard Negroes as on the average inferior to white men, although for work in the tropics they are indispensable, so that their extermination (apart from the question of humanity) would be highly undesirable.[15]."

After the Second World War he wrote, "It is sometimes maintained that racial mixture is biologically undesirable. There is no evidence whatever for this view. Nor is there, apparently, any reason to think that Negroes are congenitally less intelligent than white people, but as to that it will be difficult to judge until they have equal scope and equally good social conditions."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertran...ews_on_society

Blacks do not have "equally good social conditions," but that can be attributed to the culture they create for themselves. They do have equal rights. It is interesting that in his second statement Russell is leaving open the possibility that "Negroes are congenitally less intelligent than white people." He is receptive to evidence. Many liberals are not and have made a dogma of congenital racial equality.

[New Deal Democrat]

[quote=Truman Burbank;15120480]

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

I can read and I can think. (Snip)

Yeah, that's what I thought. I have taken and passed college-level stats, have a Master's degree in Psych, have taken and passed 2 semesters of psych testing, and taught it. I guess you'd have to take my word for that.
You are apparently neither educated, nor informed. You do have, of course, a right to your opinion. I notice that most of the White Supremicists are, by any objective standards you would care to name, underachievers. This is, of course, anecdotal, and does not prove that they cling to simplistic beliefs about their own innate superiority to other races, say, blacks, as a way of compensating for their own lack of ability or achievement.
Sociology could help you understand, possibly, why you cling to these beliefs.

Because you cannot refute my arguments you defame me as an individual.

---------

Translated from Latin to English, "Ad Hominem" means "against the man" or "against the person."

An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:

Person A makes claim X.
Person B makes an attack on person A.
Therefore A's claim is false.
The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).
http://www.nizkor.org/features/falla...d-hominem.html

[Jack Batty]

Well, I, for one, have been enlightened. I had no idea Bertrand Russell was a racist douchebag too.

[Fuji]

Originally Posted by New Deal Democrat

You are a nasty piece of work.

Aw, there there. Just get out your Einsatzgruppen action figures (pull their strings - "We were only following orders! Leave no witnesses! The Ukrainians did it!") and soon you'll forget all about those big old meanies on the SDMB.

Before the Second World War it was widely recognized that racial differences existed and that they were important.

This conflation of public ignorance with "truths" does nothing of course to establish the validity of said "truths". But your formulation is so hopelessly imprecise that it doesn't matter anyway. Moving on...

Even Bertrand Russell wrote, "In extreme cases there can be little doubt of the superiority of one race to another[...] It seems on the whole fair to regard Negroes as on the average inferior to white men, although for work in the tropics they are indispensable, so that their extermination (apart from the question of humanity) would be highly undesirable.[15]."

After the Second World War he wrote, "It is sometimes maintained that racial mixture is biologically undesirable. There is no evidence whatever for this view. Nor is there, apparently, any reason to think that Negroes are congenitally less intelligent than white people, but as to that it will be difficult to judge until they have equal scope and equally good social conditions."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertran...ews_on_society

Well, the assertions of an intellectual in a field for which he was not even trained, let alone acknowledged as an expert, are not quite what most of us would consider compelling scientific evidence. Anyway...

Blacks do not have "equally good social conditions," but that can be attributed to the culture they create for themselves. They do have equal rights. It is interesting that in his second statement Russell is leaving open the possibility that "Negroes are congenitally less intelligent than white people." He is receptive to evidence. Many liberals are not and have made a dogma of congenital racial equality.

Ah, so you agree - it is down to culture, not genetics. Perhaps there's hope for you yet.

Nope, you're still a fucking retard.

[Fuji]

Originally Posted by Jack Batty

Well, I, for one, have been enlightened. I had no idea Bertrand Russell was a racist douchebag too.

Well, to be fair, at least Russell became less of a racist douchebag over time, unlike our resident fucking retard:

(from fucking retard's Wiki link)

"As with his views on religion, which developed considerably throughout his long life, Russell's views on the matter of race did not remain fixed."

[florez]

Originally Posted by Jack Batty

Blacks are stupid because some nerdy white guy doesn't like rap music?

Makes about as much sense as everything else, I suppose.

Or more like blacks are stupid because NDD once fell deeply in love with a beautiful black woman who did not return his affections, thus setting into motion the mind of the demented little bastard we see before us.

[Malleus, Incus, Stapes!]

Originally Posted by Smeghead

Sir, you wouldn't recognize "rational debate" if it stripped naked, painted "rational debate" on its chest in dayglo purple, and danced on top of your piano singing "rational debate is here again!"

+eightzillion



May I have permission to quote you in my sig? (When I remember to have a sig, anyway?)

[Truman Burbank]

I did not defame you. I asked you your background regarding the sciences. There are many areas about which I am woefully ignorant. It is good to have a general sense of where your strengths and weaknesses lie, and a realistic sense of the limits of your knowledge. You may have many strengths. The academic background to evaluate the merits of this argument do not appear to be among those strengths.

[New Deal Democrat]

Originally Posted by Fuji

Ah, so you agree - it is down to culture, not genetics. Perhaps there's hope for you yet.

Nope, you're still a fucking retard.

Your childish insults reveal what you are, not what I am.

I think it is probably the case that an inferior culture is the result of inferior genes. At any rate I do not see how whites are responsible for the social decadence of the black ghetto. In terms of crime and illegitimacy things have gotten worse there since the civil rights legislation was signed. This is what was predicted by those who opposed the legislation.