If you define “racist” to include people who believe that blacks are inherently less intelligent than whites, then yes, I am a racist.
No excuse is needed to believe in the truth.
I can’t think of a definition of racist that wouldn’t
That is the very definition of racism.
Of course it has been shown here by many citations that there is no coherent ‘black race’ by genetic evidences and that there is yet no genetic evidences that are clear about intelligence or anything that can let us say there is distribution by regional populations even if we can suspect it is possible. We have, as in the Han chinese case that was presented that 84 made his best efforts to ignore for his various excuses of “banning” others (who highlight his idiocy, this he calls ‘strawmanning’) that even in a case where a certain set of markers can identify most Han, who are a very specific population, there is a significant minority for which this is not true.
And what is the response from** 84?** The hypotheses and the analogies like as to cancer and smoking that only serve to show that he does not have the most basic understanding of scientific research.
A true Believer, with his religion as Racism. Mangificent.
It is also very humourous to see how 84 works so hard to avoid making a clear definition of his races, and tries to only respond with hisquestions so that he can avoid being caught in his contradictions, yet he states directly blacks are inferior to whites. He can not define his races, but he Believes** in them.
How dare you make me think of River in conjunction with this dishonest troll.
Tell me, are you familiar with the works of Xiang Yu?
You forgot to enclose “fallacies” in quotation marks, and the word “politically” is superfluous.
Otherwise, above average work. Particularly like the use of “Lol,” which I understand is quite hot lately among the tweeners.
Sincerely,
Your Editor
Okay, man; I’ll confess - you got me. I always thought you might just be messing around with us, but I admit that I did indeed entertain the possibility that you were sincere. When you wrote those posts using eye color as an example, supposedly not understanding that they actually disprove your point, I thought, “Okay, he’s either trying to see how long he can string this along, or he’s playing “dumb racist” in order to elicit intelligent responses for the benefit of any real dumb racists who might happen along.” But even then, I still thought that maybe, just maybe, you were actually that dumb.
But it’s impossible to misinterpret a “wink” this big. I get it. I still can’t tell if you’re trying to serve as a teaching tool, or just trolling for own amusement, but I guess it doesn’t really make a difference. Either way, this has been a really educational thread, so thanks for that, and keep up the good work.
Won’t someone – anyone – apologize to brazil84? It’s all he’s ever wanted.
In fact, allow me:
brazil84, I’m sorry for engaging in pages upon pages of vivisecting your arguments because of your utter lack of ability to comprehend even the most basic of statements without you obsessing over semantics and being, well shit, can I use the word ‘genius’ when it comes to being obtuse? On top of your debilitating ignorance, you have my pity. In that, I’m gravely sorry for your disabilities.
Now, go play in the mud… (isn’t he cute?)
Trolls don’t “ignore” people, but astoundingly dumb people do.
If anything, he’s more of a cautionary tale to not drink the pretty, shiny liquid inside a mercury thermometer.
So he says that Waenera’s quote is misrepresenting his position, then repeats Waenera’s claim as his own… Laughable…
Now he says that his genetic claim doesn’t need genes. I think this boy needs a brain cell or two.
Right. Hang on, let me turn on this megaphone here…
[unholy feedback sound]
Hey dipshit! The word substantial means it’s the biggest and strongest determining factor, so that is your argument.
And while I’m at it, Hi mom!
[sqeeeeeeal]
[click]
:eek: That’s racist!
I love how NDD sheepishly whistled some vague tune while slinking away.
Even the biggest racist this side of the Internet doesn’t want be associated with b84.
That was beautiful, man.
There’s a difference between claiming that the gap is due to genetics and claiming that a part of the gap is due to genetics.
Are you really not aware of this?
Of course not. Long before the discovery of DNA, it was possible to reasonably conclude that some population differences were genetic in origin.
Long before the discovery of X and Y chromosomes, it was possible to reasonably conclude that men are inherently taller than women.
This is just basic common sense. Which unfortunately goes out the window for folks like you when the subject of race and intelligence comes up.
Your reasoning is another example of the special pleading which infests your side of the debate.
You know that DNA existed before it was discovered, right? :rolleyes:
I’m not sure what your point is here. Everything I have said in this thread has been sincere.
Different people define “racism” differently.
I believe that blacks are inherently less smart than whites. If that falls within your definition of racism, then so be it.
And nothing I said about eye color disproves any point I have made. If you think so, it’s likely because you are thinking about a point you imagine or wish that I had made – not a point I actually made.
By the way, I would appreciate answers to the questions I asked you in Post #2200.
Among other things, please explain what you mean by “determining factor”
Also, do you agree that it’s regularly and prominently disputed that genetics plays a significant role in the achievement gaps between blacks and whites?
Next, are you aware that there are people out there (with political power) who obsess over disparate racial outcomes and insist that it must be due to discrimination?
Sure. So what?
And please answer my questions from before:
-
Do you agree that height and body shape can be affected by socioeconomic status?
-
Assuming that eye and skin color are not affected by socioeconomic status (which I basically agree with), then then why does it follow that my “special pleading” argument is nonsense?
There’s also a difference between “a part” and “a substantial part”…