I keep coming back to this thread like I’m expecting some kind of resolution. The sad reality is, there won’t be one.
I’ll apologize if I feel I’ve made a sufficiently faulty accusation over your obtuse stance.
“I do know that there are many scientific studies out there which categorize people on the basis of race.”
Of which I ask, “cite.”
It’s one thing to categorize groups of people on the superficiality of races, as groups of gregarious people, breeding amongst each other, but quite another to think just because scientific studies group them as such, it must mean these groups are classified, scientifically and genetically as a “race” (whatever that would mean) of homo sapiens sapiens.
So far as we can tell, all genetic traits from any race you can point to can be passed on to any other race you can point to. Ergo, we’re all people of the same genus, that can inherit the same traits; white, black or any other pigmentation you care to put too much faith in as something it’s not.
It’ll be an anti-climactic fizzle.
This is the way the thread ends
This is the way the thread ends
This is the way the thread ends
Not with a bang but a whimper.
I’m not sure what your point is here.
It’s indisputable that you accused me of missing important evidence; of having a “complex”; of cherry-picking data; etc. – all without knowing or caring what my position was.
Do you seriously not understand just how rude you were?
Asserting that there are scientific studies out there which categorize people according to race is not the same thing as asserting that there are “‘races,’ having quantifiable genetic categories that classify them into genetic racial groups as such.”
I have my own rules of debate and one rule is that people are not allowed to strawman me, i.e. to pretend I said something different from what I actually said.
I am happy to give you some examples of scientific studies which categorize people according to race – if you first represent to me that you are seriously skeptical that such studies exist.
But please do not pretend that I asserted something different from what I actually asserted. This is the last time I will ask you.
I have no idea what your point is here.
Then I’m not sure what your point is. My point is the genetic idea of a race is completely meaningless.
Where do your views diverge with NDD’s?
And if you felt I was being rude, welcome to the Pit, son.
In 1995 whites whose family incomes were less than $10,000 averaged higher SAT scores than blacks whose family incomes were more than $70,000.
In 1995 whites whose parents had high school degrees, but did not go to college, averaged higher SAY scores than blacks whose parents had graduate degrees.
This is how that can be explained:
IQ Scores of Blacks and Whites Regress toward the Averages of Their Race. Parents pass on only some exceptional genes to offspring so parents with very high IQs tend to have more average children. Black and White children with parents of IQ 115 move to different averages–Blacks toward 85 and Whites to 100.
http://www.news-medical.net/news/2005/04/26/9530.aspx#id_d90f8fc5-74e1-46ab-bd03-eafd0730133a
The mental abilities of black adults in Africa should not be compared with those of white adults in the United States who are mentally retarded, but with those of white children. Many children are bi lingual.
The belief that human potential and benevolence is unlimited lead to the creation of Communist dictatorships.
No, I think it’s going well. With every post they make, NDD and now brazil are demonstrating their flaws. All we have to do is give them an occasional poke and they’re pitting themselves.
Would you say this of the anger segregationists directed at civil rights demonstrators?
The hell?
Please explain why African Americans do not deserve equal rights.
Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza, a Stanford geneticist, said in 1995 that “The Bell Curve” (1994) by Charles Murray and Harvard psychologist Richard J Herrnstein is wrong on the science.
Murray and Herrnstein said that IQ is about 60% genetic. That was the best value as of 1976. Since then several important papers, particularly Rice, Cloninger and Reich (1980), have come out showing that the true number is about 33%…
SAT scores between blacks and whites have narrowed by 30% in the past 19 years. At that rate there will be almost no difference in 70 years. It is not as if they think the SAT is not a good rough measure of intelligence.
If IQ was 33 percent genetic efforts to improve school performance would be more successful.
Since the school year of 1990-91 the race gap in SAT scores between black and whites has grown.
What’s an anger segregationist? Must be a genetic thing.
I can’t speak for olives, but if you mean angry segregationists, of course not, it’s a free nation, not a segregated one. Of course, you can be angry all you want, but shouldn’t be surprised when there’s a social backlash.
If you feel indignant from this thread, or anything else going on, I’d be interested to hear why.
I was responding to this statement:
Your statement only makes sense in giving consideration to the point of view people should suffer abuse and oppression because they’re too dark.
Why should we even consider this view? Those bigots were wrong, they were stupid, their culture backwards and retarded. Quite frankly the family they came from was defective, as it produce people so evil they’d turn attack dogs and fire houses on peaceful innocent people just wanting equal treatment.
If you do not know what my point is, you only make yourself look like an idiot by responding to something you pretend or imagine that I said.
I don’t know what it means to assert that “the genetic idea of a race” is “meaningless.”
Let me ask you this: Is there a test I can do to determine whether the “genetic idea” of a grouping is “meaningless”?
And assuming that “the genetic idea of a race” is “meaningless,” so what? Does it contradict anything I have said?
I’m not sure.
:shrug: If you admit to being rude but refuse to apologize, it’s your prerogative.
Welp, I’m convinced; these dubious numbers are clear evidence to me. They’re quite impressive, as they even have percent signs next to them.
Okay, reinstall the colored water fountains. Of course, businesses and public places can’t be expected to have a third bathroom just for negros, so they’ll be encouraged to take a shit in a hole at the back of the property line.
I feel justified, dignified even, now that I know I’m superior genetically. sniff
“Children” who should be beaten and enslaved too, no doubt.
Probably it’s worth noting that whatever the percentage is, it’s not set in stone. The more effort which is made to improve the situations of those at the bottom, the higher the percentage will go.
If you gave every last person an excellent environment, the percentage would get up to 80 or 90%, perhaps higher.
I am opposed to repealing the civil rights legislation that was signed during the 1960s. I think it should be narrowly interpreted. I oppose affirmative action and forced school busing.
I am in favor of efforts by the government to reduce economic inequality, but I think these efforts should be made without considering race or sex. Otherwise they will jeopardize white male blue collar workers.