Tant mieux, 84, tant mieux.
It is a silly game he has, a very silly game.
You don’t need to, just like you don’t need to be tall, handsome, fit, rich, and a smooth-talker to get dates with supermodels. But it helps.
As I said earlier, 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.
Do you think that NDD is Oriental?
If not, do you believe that he is insincere in his claim that Orientals are smarter than whites?
To be fair, they are clearly villains.
It is quite amusing that both 84 and NDD, when it is to the fundamentals in fact only are motivated by an American political question. No science, it is politics.
84 should only be replied to in the same manner he replies. Questions.
It’s irrelevant, since his only concern seems to be with Blacks, so “Group A” = ‘Negroes’, and “Group B” = “Everyone Who Isn’t A ‘Negro’”, a group he belongs to. That he isn’t an Oriental doesn’t affect the argument.
It undermines one argument for AA, but what I’m saying is, if you’re so concerned about AA then let’s attack that directly.
You surely see that getting state-sponsored racism to be acceptable again is a titanic struggle versus just stopping AA. This is why I am not convinced that being anti-AA is your motivation.
For starters to be racist you don’t have to necessarily think your race is the best of all. Heck, there are people who are racist against their own race.
But as I said earlier, I suspect that outlining at least one “even better than whites” race helps NDD convince himself of objectivity.
However, you’ll note that the difference between whites and asians is always described as very small and the gap between blacks and whites as very large. You’ll also note that he’s talked about police profiling of blacks or whatever but never the supposed other side of the spectrum – that whites should be treated worse than “orientals” or ashkenazim.
Incorrect. You don’t engage with people who refuse to play your stupid games with you.
Goodness. Another cite from NDD that has no genetic evidence that is being used as genetic evidence. Wonderful.
Sometimes I wish NDD would learn to properly frame an argument, but that would take half the pleasure out of watching the car wreck.
Give it up. If you wanted to put up an argument that racial profiling was warranted and/or effective, you should have opened a thread with THAT argument. You would have gotten a hell of a lot more traction. At least you wouldn’t have lacked any evidence at all for that one. Why you needed to go all the way back to genetic factors, when you clearly had none, is still beyond me.
Disagree? I’ll trust that you are basing your beliefs on often simplified and frequently incorrect reporting. Of course this hardly puts you in a position to justify your claim as anything more than your opinion.
No.
If you want to determine the difference between groups with any rigor, than you need to determine what these groups are first, and you need a scientific definition for them. You want to claim, for example that “race” X has a genetically higher intelligence than “race” Y? Then you have to define the two groups, and you have to justify your definitions. That’s how this works. It’s like saying “I can see the difference between a puma and a mountain lion, and no scientific definition to the different groupings are needed to make this conclusion”. No, you dunce, you need to figure out what the difference is, and you need to define it.
Hey, I’ve got a great idea – demonstrate that this is genetic in nature.
If everybody misrepresents your position, maybe the problem is that you’re really bad at communicating your position.
You guys know what I consider the funniest thing about this debate? NDD’s cites of achievement gaps and whatnot… If we can’t prove that that is due to genetic factors, the correct response and solution is, get this, more affirmative action. 
Well do you agree that a good argument – possibly the best argument – against programs like NCLB is that they are unlikely to work?
And would you agree that pointing out that NCLB is unlikely to work counts as a “direct attack” on NCLB?
If not, then what constitutes attacking NCLB directly?
If they are racist out of a need to feel superior, then it wouldn’t make much sense to believe that your race is second-best. Agreed?
Ok, so you agree that NDD probably sincerely believes that another race is superior to his own?
So you deny that Ramira misrepresented my position?
That’s not responsive to my question, it’s not an effort to scientifically define “race” and general observations of largely-cosmetic physical phenotypes do not make a satisfactory “analogy leap” to more ethereal concepts like intelligence and criminality.
The standards I’m attempting to apply in the post that you quoted are not to groups at all, but to individuals who want to present scientific arguments about race - namely, they have to bring some clear definable criteria and scientific evidence supporting same. If you want to talk in general, fine… but “in general” arguments are prone to environmental factors and you’re not describing any useful way to filter those out and get to a genetic argument, about which you’ve expressed indifference anyway, so my question of why I should take you seriously remains unanswered.
I’ll continue to wait for the person who can present something along the lines of “these are the known genetic markers for intelligence and we’ve identified certain groups who on average have more or fewer of them.”
As to my beliefs about DNA testing for race, I freely admit that I have not studied the issue carefully. Of course, this is irrelevant to my main point, which is that the intelligence gap is largely due to genetics. Long before the advent of DNA testing – or even the discovery of DNA – there was plenty of evidence to reasonably conclude that some group differences were the result of genetics.
Anyway, what is your position on the issue? Do agree or disagree that tests can be done on peoples’ DNA which would do a pretty good (but not perfect) job of sorting people into the traditional categories of Caucasoid; Mongoloid; and Negroid. (And possibly Australoid).
Or you don’t know either way?
Still waiting on evidence that the intelligence gap is based on genetics.
Yes.