I mean, white supremacy IS a rhetorical tactic, if your objective is letting everyone know you’re a vicious racist.
Fair notice, DumbTree: you, also, are now on ignore. But luckily for you, I’m willing to extend the same offer I made to dumbasserie. I will consider responding to your arguments in the Pit, where at least I can deal with them on an equal footing rather than having to pretend like they have some merit. Though I do beg you, if you must hijack an existing Pit thread, at least hijack dumbasserie’s. Maybe then he’ll follow your lead and start posting in it himself. Exclusively, I hope.
As a reminder, here’s that link again (and this time with an excellent observation by LHoD):
Like who?
How about some CAUTION tape around that post, Bub? 
All fine lesson, and something I’m happy to agree with. But I’m not interested in debating someone who isn’t open to evidence, most particularly if they’re expecting me to defend some position I don’t actually hold.
No one asked you to debate yourself.
I will note that this is your quote:
No one holds that position. No one at all.
And we are open to evidence, we just find yours to be lacking, and you are not open to it being criticized on its merits.
Not necessarily. There’s a lot of class-related stigma directed at trailer park residents - “trailer trash” is the common slur. Remember, we don’t like poor people in this country.
If the Rom don’t suffer the discrimination in America that they do in Europe, I’m sure it’s due to the fact that there just aren’t that many in the US. Familiarity breeds contempt, after all. I’m over fifty years old, and I can’t remember ever encountering a Romani man or woman.
Evidence of what? That black Americans commit more crimes per capita than white Americans? I didn’t think that was controversial. I certainly didn’t expect to get accused of racism for believing something widely believed to be true. Nor for someone to suddenly demand I prove it, or some unspecified related claim, while strongly implying they will find reasons to dismiss any evidence anyway. That sure sounds like a fool’s errand to me.
Evidence that it’s race based, and not based on poverty, lack of education, lack of opportunities for success, and racism. There is NO meaningful evidence that anything in the African-American genome is responsible for the crime rate.
Who the heck said it was something in the genome? To add to your list, I’d guess drugs and gangs are also a significant factor.
Also, the crime rates are artificially inflated by racist policing, where a white guy is less likely to be arrested for the exact same act.
If you disavow actual race-based causes, then there isn’t any real issue to debate. Yes, crime rates are higher, for the reasons noted.
“Scientific Racists” – and there are such persons, if no one participating here – say that the higher crime rate among blacks is intrinsic to genetic causes. None of them has ever shown any evidence for this.
So everybody’s on the same page now?
Who called you a racist?
Self-projection.
You’re not the only one, but you’re looking at the wrong indentifier. Black Americans don’t commit more crimes than white Americans. Poor Americans commit more crimes than non poor Americans. In many American cities, the poor population and the Black population closely correlate, but they are not the same. In affluent Black neighborhoods the crime rate closely mirrors the crime rate in any other affluent neighborhood. Likewise in poor white neighborhoods.
So the talking point that Blacks commit more crimes than whites is nothing but racist claptrap, and you should not put it forth unless you wish to be called racist.
@Spice_Weasel are you back? 
That’s starting to turn into par for the course around here.
ASL didn’t get tricked into confusing median and average.
I pointed out that the average lsat score at stanford was 176 while the average lsat score was 148 and that these represented a significant difference.
ASL triumphantly declared that I said average when law schools actually use median.
I pointed out to him I was also talking about median.
Now he (and you?) think I tricked him by saying average instead of median.
You’re ideologically biased but I don’t think you’re stupid so I suspect you didn’t read the exchange or you are reading it in some weird way so that I was actually laying some sort of trap for the unwary by using the word average.
I’m trying it out.
-quietly throws confetti-
Yes, the Fryer study that finds no greater risk for black men to be killed [shot to death?] by a cop. After correcting for circumstances leading up to the death.
The study also finds that black men (and women are significantly more likely to be subjected to excessive force.
The pro publica study took the number of black kids 14-19 and put it in the numerator and the number of white kids 14-19 killed by cops and put it in the denominator and declared that cops are 21 times more likely to shoot a young black man than a young white man. And the math on that is correct. The exper they rely on has recanted but it is obvious to me that there is in fact a large difference that cannot be attributed to chance. Perhaps it is in fact racism as iiandyii claims but there is a peer reviewed paper saying otherwise.
Gigo cites another study that does this exact same arithmetic exercise. This is useful information to public health policy but it doesn’t counter the findings of the fryer paper.
You are making yourself look stupider by the moment.
How in the fuck do you call a division problem a “study” The guy that they relied on for their “study” recanted
" After the story appeared, Klinger said flaws in the FBI data made it unusable."
Even pro publica has backtracked on the notion that their “study” actually means anything
"As a final note, many have pointed to our reporting as proof of police bias. That overstates our case; ProPublica found evidence of a disparity in the risks faced by young black and white men. This does not prove that police officers target any age or racial group – the data is far too limited to point to a cause for the disparity. "
I am not disputing the disparity exists or that the 21::1 ratio was a fluke, I am arguing that it is not an adequate rebuttal to the fryer paper.
I guess he is a professional, what did he charge you?
I don’t think you understand what scientific racism means. If I was using scientific racism in great debates, you could report me. But I’m not. Words have meanings, perhaps not to you and people like you but for the rest of the world it does, or should.
Ooh, he’s going to ignore you. You must feel horrible now. ASL is the latest in a long line of very stupid liberals who think that merely being from the right tribe protects them somehow. Most of them have been banned, I’m wondering how long it will take for this shithead.
I wonder if police shootings are also more closely correlated to poverty than race.
I recall asl talking about scientific racism. Is there a difference between scientific racism and plain vanilla racism?
Someone let me know if dumbasserie wrote something worth replying to. I’m still waiting for him to learn to use his own thread (kind of like toilet training, I guess) before I waste time reading his… waste.
Again, that’s:
Because he’s been known as a moronic troglodyte crackpot for nigh onto ten years now and still hasn’t learned.