More strawman B.S. Is it really that hard to read what people are saying? If you did, you’d quickly see no one is suggesting there is a supreme group.
No, but you are doing the equivalent of the creationist that, being unable to teach creationism directly, then will teach the “controversy”.
Well you should be. The Inuits are obviously superior. You ever see a white guy build a house out of nothing but water? You ever see a black guy hunt a motherfucking whale with nothing but a crappy row-boat and a sharp stick. Ever see a Latino master water-bending? Inuits are the master-race, and you mind as well go volunteer to work on one of their blubber plantations now before they take over and make you do it.
What I’m ‘doing’ is ironically the opposite of creationism. That is, accepting that evolution is a reality and groups differ somewhat (in the distribution of traits) due to different selection pressures arising in diverse cultures & environments. Some people seem to think humans are exempt from this.
Bullseye.
Well, it’s true isn’t it? They pretend there are no diverse groups - so presumably they don’t accept evolution either.
Mestizo supremacy? :rolleyes: What the heck is that?
Most of the time I just have deffended Latin America exist, and that Native Americans were smart people.
Offended by lumping together? I am offended when some Americans believe Latin America is Mexico as much as when some Afroamericans believe Latin America is Cuba.
With respect to our “African” genetical heritage, I know it is exagerated in the “One Drop Rule” mulatocentric forum. A site which has the agenda to show everybody in the world is a mixed individual of African and European origins. A site I left long ago. Nobody deny there are some so called “African markers” in the general Hispanic population. However, Latin America is not Puerto Rico, either.
And even Queen Elizabeth descend from Africans, isn’t?
Oh, Omar.
Having a little bit of Afro in you doesn’t make you “black”. All it means is that you have a little bit of Afro in you. Why fight this so hard? What do you gain?
That bring me memories of the “One Drop Rule” dogma.. 
If you have a so called “African” marker, then you are Black.
Remember the endless discussion about the “Latin escape hutch”, as if the only reason for Latinos to exist was to be a place where blacks slaves, escaping from the plantation, could refuge?
Remember when you were banned just for saying “that’s not true”?.. And Frank behaving just like a tropical dictator: a Castro or a Chavez?
Ahh… what a wonderful time.
That “presumably” is precisely why you can not be relied upon, The problem was using “race”.
You’d know better than I about Castro and Chavez.
Never been banned. You must be thinking of someone else.
Nope. You weren’t banned. I was banned forever, just for deffending a thesis about genetical spread of those famous “African” markers.
Umm, you are posting right now. So clearly you weren’t banned forever.
I think you might be telling lies here.
He’s talking about the Studyofracialism.org board, not this one. He was banned there, because he objected to the genetic evidence showing a small fraction of sub Saharan African ancestry in Italian and Spanish populations.
Yes. I was banned from that board because I showed a model about the spreading of the so called “African” markers to Europe, without the need of immigration. That model is easy if you know something about equilibrium and population genetics.
However, the site ideology was shaken by that idea, because shown that populations like the Berbers, the Greeks or Italians weren’t the result of intermarriage about Bantues and Nordics, which is the ideology of that site.
Yes, clearly they were afraid of your truths. The editors of peer reviewed genetics journals are also afraid of your truths, which is why they will not publish them either.
This is an earth shattering conspiracy that you have revealed and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
Oh man, I think I liked this all better when I thought he was just a pesky troll. 
Are “lawnchair” posts still frowned upon? 'Cause I could make popcorn for everyone…
If a worlwide known Nobel Prize winner, said such a stupidity about black people, just imagine the quality and impartiality of such profesion.
Make coffee, too.
Perhaps it’s wrong to call The bell Curve “discredited” in the sense of, say, creationism or alternatives to germ theory being discredited. But it was at publication, and has been since, subject to a considerable amount of criticism—due at least partially to the very silly decision not to subject it to peer review. Those within academia who would defend it entirely are pretty rare. In particular, within my field (economics) it simply seems baffling to suggest that intelligence is fixed and is the almost entirely the sole determinant of success, points well-made by Heckman (cite).
Defending The Bell Curve is spitting against the wind at this point. Which isn’t, of course, to say that there is no genetic component to intelligence.