# SDMB Bigoted Asshole Omnibus Thread **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 29, 2012, 10:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489 "2012-05-29T22:59:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 53
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1041 "2012-06-07T16:46:49Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > You’re definition of race has no basis in biology, as we’ve conclusively shown- speaking of the “black” or “Negro” or “sub-Saharan African” race has no validity, genetically speaking, as we’ve shown conclusively. And the same argument shows conclusively that “Han Chinese” has no validity, genetically speaking. Except that it apparently does, by your own admission. ---
**Author:** ![Who\_me\_1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/958977/32.png) [@Who\_me\_1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Who_me_1)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1042 "2012-06-07T16:50:22Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Turning back to the example of firemens’ examinations, if (1)society accepts that blacks are genetically less intelligent than whites; and (2) black scores on the examinations are completely in line with this gap, do you agree it would weaken the argument that there must have been racial discrimination? No, it wouldn’t weaken it at all. What “society” accepts has little to do with what really is. Pre- Civil War America accepted that black were inferior to whites and any testing would have probably been in line with this. Of course the black population included slaves that had much less (if any) opportunity for education. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1043 "2012-06-07T16:51:55Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Apparently not you. > > So you accept that intelligence and other important psychological traits may not be equally distributed among the races in terms of genetic predisposition? To the extent that “the races” exist, sure. The problem is that even if true, this provides no useful basis for changes in public policy. ---
**Author:** ![rat\_avatar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rat_avatar/32/255_2.png) [@rat\_avatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rat_avatar)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1044 "2012-06-07T16:52:03Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Are there any consequences to this claim? Or is it simply an observation you are making? > > What is it about blacks as a group makes you conclude that the group does not “exist”? And does the same reasoning apply to other groups? That fact that people can make arbitrary groupings means nothing about that group. The fact that in his mind NDD can say someone is black or white means nothing on a biological level, thus does not fit his claims that blacks are dumb, need to live on plantations where they are cared for by whites and stealing jobs from blue collar whites. The fact that I can put you in a group of individuals with nicks that start wtih b has no use as a predictor of your traits. If you wish to claim there is a correlation it is you, as the one defining the category to prove that link and why it is valid. e.g. Racists, a group including you and NDD are ignorant. (I posit this is true because you belive arbitrarying groups based on one feature automaticly means there is a correlation to other traits as deminstrated by the posts on this thread) but at this point, my arbitrary grouping only contains two individuals for the purposes of this claim. But NDD is claiming the “black” are dumb because they didn’t evolve as fast you bet you need to show that blacks are even genetically groupable separate from whites. This has not been done…because although racism is directly correlated to be ignorant skin color does have a total correlation to historical migration patterns or family lines. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1045 "2012-06-07T16:57:37Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > And the same argument shows conclusively that “Han Chinese” has no validity, genetically speaking. Except that it apparently does, by your own admission. Nope, I didn’t say this. Try again. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1046 "2012-06-07T17:03:31Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Nope, I didn’t say this. Try again. Here’s what you said: > [@](#): > > That’s my whole point- that “race” is not a useful genetic grouping. There are useful genetic groupings (for example- San, or Papuan, or Han Chinese). Here’s what I asked you: > [@](#): > > Well what’s your test for deciding whether a grouping is a “useful genetic grouping”? And here was your response: > [@](#): > > There are no genetic markers that distinguish “whites” from “non-whites” or “sub-Saharan Africans” (or blacks) from “non-sub-Saharan Africans” (or non-blacks). Thus, by your own logic, there must be a genetic marker which distinguishes “Han Chinese” from “non-Han Chinese” However, are unable to point to any such marker – except by trying to make a joke. You have completely contradicted yourself. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1047 "2012-06-07T17:12:20Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > You have completely contradicted yourself. I don’t think you understand what the word “contradict” means. “Blacks” (or Negroes or sub-Saharan Africans) is not a useful genetic category because there are populations of “blacks” that are more closely related to “whites” (or Eurasians) than other “blacks”. Note that I’m talking about populations, not individuals. However, Han Chinese is a single population, genetically speaking (though of course there are many mixed Han individuals). So by definition, the Han Chinese population is more closely related to itself than any other population. I’ve explained this concept several times, at a roughly 5th grade level. If you don’t get it by now, you’ll never get it. ---
**Author:** ![Truman\_Burbank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ecc23a/32.png) [@Truman\_Burbank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Truman_Burbank)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1048 "2012-06-07T17:17:04Z")
I did Debate in HS. You have lost very, very badly, beginning and ending with the fact that your opposition has absolutely _shredded_ your sources without any effective rebuttal from you. ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1049 "2012-06-07T17:18:12Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Turning back to the example of firemens’ examinations, if (1)society accepts that blacks are genetically less intelligent than whites; and (2) black scores on the examinations are completely in line with this gap, do you agree it would weaken the argument that there must have been racial discrimination? If that’s the argument, yes. As I said though, some supporters of AA are of the mindset that there are differences so _that’s why_ there should be positive discrimination. So if you’re against AA, as I am, then asserting that some races are brighter than others is not the way: it doesn’t necessarily refute AA _even if_ everyone agreed that the assertion is correct. > [@](#): > > So you are pretty confident that NDD is either Oriental or Ashkenazi, correct? No; the whole “orientals are even smarter” thing is just to give a veneer of objectivity (starting with the book and continuing with NDD). You notice that at any provocation NDD goes back to saying, basically, “show me a black guy who’s equal to a white guy”. And in discussing the “gaps” between races he has stressed several times that the gaps between whites, “orientals” and Jews are small, whereas the gap to black people is very large. ---
**Author:** ![Great\_Antibob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Great\_Antibob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Great_Antibob)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1050 "2012-06-07T17:35:25Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Thus, by your own logic, there must be a genetic marker which distinguishes “Han Chinese” from “non-Han Chinese” How dumb can you get? There is no single such marker. Even among the Ashkenazim, there is no single such marker. But there are markers (PLURAL, PLURAL, PLURAL) which exist within the population from which you can develop profiles. But that’s not even the logic, anyway. The logic is ONLY that Han Chinese have some common genetic markers. That’s it. There’s nothing else implied in the logic. Here’s the wiki on [Y-chromosome haplogroups](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Y-chromosome_DNA_haplogroups). Knock yourself out. At any rate, [here’s one haplogroup](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup_O2b_%28Y-DNA%29) that’s more prevalent among Koreans and Japanese than other East Asians (though, as is natural, some fuzziness does occur). So, yeah, there do exist genetic marker that can be used to help differentiate people within Asia. There’s no single test for individuals, but some groupings (Japanese, Vietnamese, Han Chinese, etc) do happen to show different genetics when large enough populations are considered. But the definition of a black “race” that **NDD** tries to use has no such common grouping. Try and find one, if you can. Trying to find a genetic basis for lower test scores then means the genetic basis exists BEYOND (NOT WITHIN) the artificial racial construct **NDD** has developed for “Black”, which contradicts his inane position. Of course, Garbage In, Garbage Out, but **GIGOBuster** has shown that apparently we all sometimes fail to actually Bust GIGO in the face of massive willful ignorance and stupidity. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1051 "2012-06-07T17:38:32Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I don’t think you understand what the word “contradict” means. Lol, you are the one who does not understand. Ok, let’s break things down: (1) Do you agree that according to you, there is no genetic marker which separates “blacks” from “non-blacks” and therefore “blacks” is not a “useful genetic grouping”? (2) Do you agree that there is no genetic marker which separates “Han Chinese” from “non-Han Chinese”? (3) Do you agree that therefore, according to your logic, “Han Chinese” is not a “useful genetic grouping”? > [@](#): > > If you don’t get it by now, you’ll never get it. Yes, I have a hard time believing contradictory things simultaneously. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1052 "2012-06-07T17:42:23Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > (2) Do you agree that there is no genetic marker which separates “Han Chinese” from “non-Han Chinese”? Nope. We’re done on this particular tangent. You keep putting words into other posters mouths (or fingers). I never said this, just as no one in the thread has advocated for “the egalitarian hypothesis”. ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1053 "2012-06-07T17:45:42Z")
> [@Great\_Antibob](#): > > Of course, Garbage In, Garbage Out, but **GIGOBuster** has shown that apparently we all sometimes fail to actually Bust GIGO in the face of massive willful ignorance and stupidity. My mind, it is blown. I had never grokked that poster’s name :o. Thanks, mate ! ---
**Author:** ![Great\_Antibob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Great\_Antibob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Great_Antibob)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1054 "2012-06-07T17:47:55Z")
> [@Kobal2](#): > > My mind, it is blown. I had never grokked that poster’s name :o. Thanks, mate ! No problem. Now, if you could figure out the source of my handle, I’d be grateful. It was bestowed upon me by somebody who persistently refuses to explain it. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1055 "2012-06-07T18:04:46Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > If that’s the argument, yes. As I said though, some supporters of AA are of the mindset that there are differences so _that’s why_ there should be positive discrimination. Sure, and some people enjoy opera. > [@](#): > > So if you’re against AA, as I am, then asserting that some races are brighter than others is not the way: it doesn’t necessarily refute AA _even if_ everyone agreed that the assertion is correct. I’m not sure what you mean by “AA,” but I will assume it includes discrimination lawsuits (and the threat of lawsuits) which result in employers relaxing their standards and avoiding objective tests in order to get a more politically correct racial balance. Yes, acceptance that whites are genetically smarter than blacks does not “refute” AA, but it undermines arguments in favor of AA. On balance, those who oppose these sorts of lawsuits and policies would be better off if society accepted genetic differences in intelligence between racial groups. > [@](#): > > No; the whole “orientals are even smarter” thing is just to give a veneer of objectivity (starting with the book and continuing with NDD). :shrug: NDD seems to sincerely believe that Orientals are smarter than Whites. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1056 "2012-06-07T18:07:07Z")
> [@Great\_Antibob](#): > > There is no single such marker. Even among the Ashkenazim, there is no single such marker. But there are markers (PLURAL, PLURAL, PLURAL) which exist within the population from which you can develop profiles. Ok, and so we are clear, you deny that such markers and profiles exist which can distinguish between people of European descent and people of sub-Saharan African descent? ---
**Author:** ![Kobal2](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kobal2/32/20_2.png) [@Kobal2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kobal2)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1057 "2012-06-07T18:08:20Z")
> [@Great\_Antibob](#): > > No problem. > > Now, if you could figure out the source of my handle, I’d be grateful. It was bestowed upon me by somebody who persistently refuses to explain it. I would WAG it has something to do with [Bob](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_the_SubGenius) (do you, perchance, present a total void of slack ?) ; but not knowing the somebody in question…🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Great\_Antibob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Great\_Antibob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Great_Antibob)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1058 "2012-06-07T18:17:45Z")
> [@brazil84](#): > > Ok, and so we are clear, you deny that such markers and profiles exist which can distinguish between people of European descent and people of sub-Saharan African descent? Again, how dumb can you be? SOME populations of sub-Saharan Africans can be distinguished from SOME European populations. That’s borne out through the data. You and **NDD** seem to believe ALL sub-Saharan Africans (labeled as “Black” by **NDD** ) share enough common genetics to be placed in a single grouping, while the truth is there are several sub-populations that are closer to some groups of non-Africans than any other group of Africans on the continent. Likewise, you somehow imply that all people of European descent can be grouped together easily. Show how that is the case. It’s not even the case among East Asians, as I’ve pointed out earlier. Show some common genetic grouping for “Black” and show how it is correlated at all with intelligence, crime, or any of the other nonsensical things that have been claimed. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1059 "2012-06-07T18:20:44Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Nope. We’re done on this particular tangent. You keep putting words into other posters mouths (or fingers). Lol. Dude I QUOTED you. Here it is again: > [@brazil84](#): > > Well what’s your test for deciding whether a grouping is a “useful genetic grouping”? > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > There are no genetic markers that distinguish “whites” from “non-whites” or “sub-Saharan Africans” (or blacks) from “non-sub-Saharan Africans” (or non-blacks). > [@](#): > > I never said this Never said what? And how exactly am I misrepresenting your position? Please give quotes. ---
**Author:** ![brazil84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/8491ac/32.png) [@brazil84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brazil84)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2012, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489/1060 "2012-06-07T18:24:46Z")
> [@Great\_Antibob](#): > > Again, how dumb can you be? Umm, does that mean yes or no? > [@](#): > > SOME populations of sub-Saharan Africans can be distinguished from SOME European populations. That’s borne out through the data. Ok, so you are asserting that there are SOME sub-Saharan African populations which cannot be distinguished from European populations? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489.md?page=52) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sdmb-bigoted-asshole-omnibus-thread/623489.md?page=54)