n8glenn, Thank u for your efforts. U have a major misunderstanding of the actual origin of racism imo. Your erroneous opinion that the bible teaches all races come from Adam & Eve is one of your main misunderstandings. If u don't deal with the ACTUAL root of the subject, u will not change the mind of a racist. I strongly suggest the books "The Two Seeds of Gen. 3:15" by Dan Gayman & "Do All Races Share In Salvation" by same. google 'Sacred Truth Ministries Mountain City, TN' for more books
@EliyahsMessageTime I don't believe I ever said that the bible teaches racism comes from adam and eve, I'm not a big expert on the bible but I don't think the story of adam and eve mentions racism, although, curiously, genesis does mention god creating people before adam and eve, which was surprising to me. I believe racism is just a natural human tendency having to do with natural instincts which are no longer very relevant or healthy in the modern world.
@n8glenn Your erroneous opinion I mention is at about 7:40 in the video. True, many think the story is that everyone came from Adam and Eve. But that version of interp is not the origin of racism, therefore you are not dealing with the actual origin of racism.
Again, if you are attempting to deal with racism, you will have to deal with it at its roots, and in the West, its main origin is the creation story. The RACIST creation story - explained in the books etc. I mentioned in previous post.
@n8glenn I am not trying to convince toward any issue, just point out your points near the end of the video regarding 'religion' is not dealing with the racial issues in the light of racism based on religion. Your points of SHEMITIC people is erroneous because u do not take into consideration the race mixing pointed out in the bible. In other words, ESAU was the brother of Jacob, BUT married Hittites & etc. THAT were not purely Shemitic. U see the racism u r not dealing with in your statements?
@n8glenn The bible is the MOST RACIST writing WIDELY AVAILABLE on the face of the earth. You will alter no rasict opinion in the west by just attacking general erroneous ideals. You know the local churchmember generally has no understanding of the subject from a bible origin. They r lied to. They don't study such. Generally, they are not racist. BUT, nontheless, the bible and the creation story is the heart and soul of racism in the West. Learn why, then you can break it down.
Since 1996 it’s been known that, according to mitochondrial-DNA-based phylogenies, polar bears (Ursus maritimus) are actually nested within brown bears (Ursus arctos) rather than being a separate lineage. In other words, the mtDNA of some populations of brown bears—in particular, those from the Admiralty, Baranof, and Chichagof (ABC) islands of southwest Alaska—is more closely related to the mtDNA of polar bears than to the mtDNA of other brown bears.
@ n8glenn You are either very naive or very dishonest. First off coroners can determine a persons race just from their skeletal remaines which blatantly contradicts you claim that race is merely skin deep. Secondly Scientists do not believe that Homo-S have less genetic variation than other species, the actual raw data does not support that thesis. > Human genetic diversity based on autosomal microsatellite DNA = .776 Chimps .630 Brown Bears .665 G Wolf .528 Dog breeds .401. Pumas .52
@magicmoonbeam2 Thanks for starting your scholarly dissertation off with petty insults. I do not believe you have to be naive or dishonest to not be a racist, sorry. As for bones, that's a pretty weak argument, bone structure is not a marker for genetic diversity, the biggest differences come from gender, and that is determined by one chromosome. Scientists do in fact believe human genetic diversity is low compared to other species because all of humanity is descended from a SINGLE FEMALE!
@n8glenn The slur "Racist" was invented by Leon Trotsky.
The target of Trotsky slur was a group of Slavs who valued greatly their native culture and way of life, and wanted to protect it. Trotsky on the other hand saw them and others like them as an impedement to internationalist communism. To him the Slavs that committed the "crime" of loving their own people and trying to protect their traditional ways were simply "backward", and others like them were simply "racists".
Con't. The first time the "racist" is mentioned anywhere is in Leon Trotsky's 1930 work "THe History of the Russian Revolution. The word appears as "расистов", whose latin transliteration is "racistov" i.e "racist"
Trotsky invented the slur for the sole purpose to empower literally the most rotten, traitorous weasels within the west to redefine those loyal to their people & culture as the worst evil.
The word "Racist" has no meaning to me except in the context of treason against ones own.
@magicmoonbeam2 Racism is the domain of the ignorant and fearful. You can attempt to show off your knowledge of trivia all day long, you can call me a communist because I believe that racism actually exists and therefore your theory that human beings belong to different species is racism, but the mere fact that you are a racist demonstrates to me that you are an intellectual lightweight and profoundly ignorant, as does the fact that you misspelled "impediment".
@n8glenn Where did I claim that the differences in racial skeletons was evidence of genetic diversity.
You are deliberately misquotimg me.
NO scientists do not believe any such thing. The actual numbers as stated in my previous comment debunk that claim.
Now demonstrate to me, citing peer reviewed sources how a polar bear meets the genetic criteria for for a sub-species and the different human races do not.
@magicmoonbeam2 Oh, you had no argument behind your statement about skeletons, my bad, I should have known that it was just another random attempt to show off random knowledge on your part. I actually thought you had a point besides "look at me, I'm smart". I stand corrected. Yes, scientists do believe that we all descended from a single female, dubbed "eve", look it up. Your trivia and numbers do not dispute that fact, you are just spitting out technical details which mean nothing.
@magicmoonbeam2 As for autosomal microsatellites, they are characterized by extremely high mutation rates, and are not the sole determinant of genetic diversity. If you want me to give you peer reviewed scientific data which proves that human beings are all the same species and all approximately the same, as the scientific community uniformly believes, then you go ahead and give me some peer reviewed data about how white people are a separate and superior species as you believe, and we'll talk.
@n8glenn Now you are mixing race / sub-species up with species. Nobody is disputing that all human beings belong to a single species. what is in dispute here is the existence of human sub-species / races within the the homo sapien species.
@magicmoonbeam2 Maybe the existence of human subspecies is in dispute with the KKK, you, and other racists, it is not in dispute with actual scientists or scholars, I can assure you. We are all one species, and there are no subspecies, and in fact we are all genetically homogeneous because as I said before every single human being on this planet shares a common ancestor, and it wasn't that long ago, evolutionarily speaking.
@n8glenn "We are all genetically homogeneous because I said so"
Takahata (1995) reports an unbias estimate of protein heterozgosity ( gene diversity) in humans at 10-14%. The average Makarieva .A (2001 ) found in mammal species was 5.1%. So obviously, humans are not at the low end of the genetic diversity spectrum, particularly in relation to other mammals, human clearly have very high genetic diversity.
@magicmoonbeam2 Data will not give you an excuse to be racist, no matter what it is. Human beings may possibly have more genetic diversity than one species that you happen to name, so what? There are more than two species of animals in the world. Now, if I say you're a racist, that's not simply calling you names, that's describing your attitude. You are trying to convince me that human races are significantly different, in order to justify racism, and then denying it, which is just scummy.
@n8glenn every single human being on this planet shares a common ancestor, and it wasn't that long ago, evolutionarily speaking.
Polar Bears split from brown bears a mere 120 thousand years ago, so evolutionary speaking there has been plenty of time for sub-species to arise through the process of genetic drift.
@magicmoonbeam2 As for autosomal microsatellites, they are characterized by extremely high mutation rates, and are not the sole determinant of genetic diversity. If you want me to give you peer reviewed scientific data which proves that human beings are all the same species and all approximately the same, as the scientific community uniformly believes, then you go ahead and give me some peer reviewed data about how white people are a separate and superior species as you believe, and we'll talk.
Racism is not an illusion. There are obvious and measurable differences in physical and mental traits among the three main races. Africans have a 25-30 percent lower I.Q. than Asians and Aryans on average. The African has a shorter gestation period and they are born about a week earlier on average. The Africans bone structures develop faster and they mature faster. Asians are born with larger brains and take the longest to mature. Asians have an average I.Q. 2-4 points higher than Aryans.FACTS.
@MrObamaNigger I'm not so sure about all that. According to scientists who have studied human DNA, all races are remarkably homogeneous, with less genetic diversity in the entire human race than in a typical social group of chimpanzees. They theorize that this is because all humans are descended from a single female, dubbed eve, who lived during a time when humans almost went extinct. As for africans being stupid, I doubt that highly, I know of many highly intelligent black people.
@n8glenn I wasn't saying all black people were stupid. I do take in account individuality, but in a broad sense what I am saying is very true... Obviously so.
@MrObamaNigger Is it? Well, you can definitely make the case that there's more crime in black neighborhoods, that grades are lower in black schools, (let's not kid ourselves, segregation is back), but then you have to ask the question why? Is it really because black people have inferior genes, even on average, or is it because black people have been forced over centuries into a position of extreme poverty? As you no doubt know, there's a direct causal link between poverty and crime.
@n8glenn I like to take a historical view of this. I can see where you are coming from, but I see one very valid response to your case. History shows that whites have always dominated, and on occasion Asians have as well. Black Africans rarely explored outside of Africa as extensively as Whites or Asians have outside of their living space and have historically failed over and over to form a cohesive society with a strong government(remember Black Africans). I would really like to hear your views
@MrObamaNigger First of all, the dominance of white people is a very recent phenomenon, a mere blip on the radar of history, in fact all of recorded history is a mere blip so it's a blip of a blip. We are a flash in the pan compared to the roman empire, which in turn was a flash in the pan compared to the egyptian empire. Now, as for africans exploring outside of africa, that's the entire history of the human race, we're all descended from africans who explored outside of africa.
@n8glenn You don't seem to understand what I meant. I meant that after racial identities have developed only two races really pushed on and explored. Romans btw=White. Egyptians had a civilization that dominated other lower racial forms and unlike the romans did not really dominate other races. White dominance is not a recent thing. For as long as whites have had a large enough population they have been at the cutting edge of civilization and empire. Africans have not. They never have, neverwill
@MrObamaNigger Racial identities have been around a long, long time, and white people never amounted to much until very recently, the romans weren't aryan, they were italian, dark skinned mediterranean people. They ruled over white germans for a long, long time and those germanic tribes were pretty backward and undeveloped. In 1377, an arabic historian wrote about all the different races, he regarded arabs as human, while black and white people were animals, both exactly as backward.
@n8glenn I consider European whites to be one in the same. With of course their own variations, but with all the same result. The racial wolf. And yes it is difficult for a population to develop when it has only a few thousand members, such was the case of northern European tribes. And it would be wrong to say that some, as the Romans put them "barbarians" didn't have a complex and functioning culture that thrived with what they had.
Sir confused much? Have you not heard of the Mali Empire, and Ancient Zimbabwe empire, Mutapa empire, and dont get me started on Ethiopia. While the english were dying of the plague and blaming the devil, blacks were in the university of Timbuktu memorizing the Koran. Early slaves that were brought to America were actually Muslims that could read and write Aramaic. Of course they lost this talent very quickly with them not being aloud to academically express themselves.
@n8glenn Also I am aware of the fact that human beings are very homogeneous, but obviously if a 2% difference in DNA can go from chimp to man, than it isn't far fetched to say that the 0.5% difference between all human beings can make a large change as well. The potential variations in just that .5% is much larger than what variations have actually occurred.
@MrObamaNigger First of all, genes don't prevent you from making good grades or from doing well in society, if you have a good stable home, in a good, safe (affluent) neighborhood, then that will help you make better grades and you won't have any need to commit crimes because you'll get a good job later on. Standardized tests have been shown to be a far more accurate measure of the size of the home the child lives in than their academic ability.
@n8glenn I am also aware of this. My conclusions have not come to me lightly and I am aware of individual variation, but many researchers and experts on the matter have concluded that these cognitive differences among the races are largely genetic. In fact by the time a human being is an adult 80% of his intelligence is determined by genetics. When I say these things I mean it in a general way, I am willing to admit that there have been Africans more intelligent than myself, but overall its true
@MrObamaNigger hello Idiot, aka RYAN FAUST. So there's a "racial" IQ gap huh??? OK, Where are you facts? Your data? Your Written Novels or thesis or evidence or SUPPORTED SCIENTIFIC FILE FROM A BUREAU OF EDUCATION?!?!
You have NONE! Your have no Facts, Ficton. So You just need to sit Down and drink a nice Tall glass of Shut the Fuck up!
It's a laughable stupidity. Origins obsolete; the Nordic Germanic people are the peak of our evolution as humans. F.Y.A. genes do search, of relevant to Africans (I am not racist: my first childhood friend was black) Blue eyes are believed to have happened a result of a mutation, that it shows the potential of mutations, especially inherant in NORDIC genes; there IS NO "white race" this is only a skincolour. There is only the NORDIC GERMANIC race.
@Goetterdaemmerung7 Are you serious? You're trying to tell me that germans are better than everyone else, but you're not a racist because you had a black friend? Spoken like a true grand dragon of the KKK.
@n8glenn The KKK are degenerate scumdogs and have nothing to with anything that I have said. KKK??? You must learn. Why would I talk like a KKK scumdog when I have nothing to do with them? Do you think they have anything to do with what they "suppose"? Hitler's Nazis are the complete opposite of them if that is what you think.
@Goetterdaemmerung7 Wrong! The Romans (the Latins) are the supeior race. The Latin Romans ruled the ancient world and colonized and civilized the Nordic Bartbarian Germanics and got them out of their uncivilized ways. If the Nordics are not the craddle of civilization.
@Goetterdaemmerung7 The Nordic germanic people were what the Romans called the Barbarians, that means they were wild uncivilized people of the north. The Romans colonized Gaul (France), Germania, England, etc. and civilized them. The Nordic Germanics didn't even have an alphabet, the Romans gave them the Latin alphabet and their civilization. The craddle of western civilization was Greece and Rome. If the Nordics are so superior, how come they were not the craddle of western civilization?
@cherrylady238 Norse Vikings were amongst primary pioneers in sea-faring technology, exploration, and star-harnessing inventions. Do not deny it to spite me, and yes you are right that the German tribes were "Barbarians" but it is mostly Roman Propaganda, more than actual truth. And the Germanic tribes had even more to do with the downfall of Rome than sacking her ever-broadened borders than is attested to, but 90% of technological advances today come from Germany & Germanic Britain...
@Goetterdaemmerung7 Empires fall because empires are not forever, like people, they are born and die. Rome fell because it declined, their descendants lost their discipline and became corrupt or the empire would've lived much much longer. If the Nordic had better genes, then they would have been the craddle of Western civilization, may the Romans and Greeks had better genes. Why were the barabarians so far behind then. Can you explain it?
@Goetterdaemmerung7 It's not Roman propaganda, it's HISTORY. The Romans conquered and ruled Germania and got them out of their stone age. Germania civilization is Roman & Greek. The Romans and Greeks were the peak of evolution. And about inventions, most of the German scientists were of Jewish origin (not germanic).
@Goetterdaemmerung7 Although English is a Germanic language, 70% of its vocabulary is of Latin origin. The British though Gemanic are also have Roman blood in their veins. This could have given the English good genes.
@cherrylady238 "Latin Origin"? Yet the Elder Futhark was also a Roman co-invention? But the Romans were exceptional people, who would deny? Are you wanting to say that Germanic are not good genes?
@Goetterdaemmerung7 No, I didn't say that Germanics have bad genes. My point is to say that Nordics are just like anybody else. I disagree when someone affirms that a specifil group is better than everybody else. If that' is so, then I could easily prove with other arguments that someone else is just as good. Being the ruling power is just a matter of good luck. The Romans NEVER claimed racial superiority and neither did the Greeks. All Rome wanted was to unify the world.
@Goetterdaemmerung7 Latin was the language of Latium in Italy which was the language spoken by the Romans. Rome is located in Latium or what we call today Lazio. That's the origin of the word Latin for both the languge and the Romans.
@Goetterdaemmerung7 Latin was the language of Latium in Italy which was the language spoken by the Romans. Rome is located in Latium or what we call today Lazio. That's the origin of the word Latin for both the languge and the Romans. The Romans were Mediterraneans.
@cherrylady238 (Apology for 2 replies but space was not given enough) I would say that the highest point in human history was despoiled from within, and by deceit throughout-- not by any direct misacheivments or failures of Adolf Hitler, Reinhard Heydrich, ect.
@Goetterdaemmerung7 What if the Chinese becaome the first superpower in 50 years? They have the brains, the resources and a big population? Then once they become number one power, if they claim that the yellow race is the superior race, then, they will be the superior race. The ruling race is always the superior race. Don't forget that Attila and Genghis Khan, (the Mongols) ruled Europe for quiete some time. They were the superior race over the Germanics. The Romans were superior race.
@cherrylady238 The natural law of this world is struggle, that whosoever emerges victorious deserves their will to be acted, and is superior. The Nordic people are altitonant peak of human evolution, and if would realize this potential to be there without miscegenating it away, all will be justified. The Japanese people would be more apt if they had the numbers, they are equal to Nordics on the evolutional scale as well.
You have to be blind not see that black, white or chines are the same people. Colour changes avery human. There are so may black white people covered in black, and there are so many black white people covered in white. I have made many observations during my exposure to all these races and found out that in these people, God has hidden a secret from all of us. We don't even know who we are. The bible tells us that we have eyes but we don't see. It is true.
In the title it says "Just how different are the various races of people? Not very, according to science." This is false. Do some research on human biodiversity.
@SuddenCatharsis I have, and the truth is that there is more genetic difference found in a social group of chimpanzees than there is in the entire human race.
That's an absurd statement. Please visit real HBD sites like Steve Sailer's website and not the leftist junk science sites you've been reading. I also recommend Race, Evolution, and Behavior: A Life History Perspective by J. Philippe Rushton.. Egalitarianism is a Christian ideal, but its not scientific.
@SuddenCatharsis I'm just quoting the findings of scientists studying genetics in humans and other species, I'm not talking about political ideology, or egalitarianis, although I do happen to believe in equality, and I don't think that's such a bad position. Not that everyone is strictly equal in every way, ut everyone does have a right to equal opportunity and equal citizenship.
Change away! Why don't you go to his channel and compliment him on his racism while you're at it! However, I did not block him for disagreeing with me, I blocked him for cursing me out and being extremely dishonest and duplicitous.
I sympathize with you to some degree, but blocking is not the answer. I tend to agree with your argument but I don't think thomas is a racist based only on the comments. Night
Well, if you look at his arguments, I think the basic message is quite clear, and that is that black people are inferior, but I would not have blocked him based on that. I only blocked him because he kept contradicting himself and actually started cursing me, and to be honest it felt like an insult to my intelligence, I mean honestly, if I told you "hey it's raining outside" over and over, while simultaneously telling you "I didn't say it was raining", would you continue that conversation?
And furthermore, why is it that Ashkenazim Jews score higher than any human group, if discrimination is the culprit?
For you claims to be true, you would have to make dozens of cases of special pleading. For mine to be true, that intelligence is influence by genes, I need to make none. Ockham's Razor should be used is such instances.
Ashkenazim jews are europeans! They are no different than any other europeans, except for religion. However, assuming that they have scored higher on some test, that again means nothing. Correlation is not causation. The fact that the are jews and have scored higher on a test, does not mean that they scored higher BECAUSE they were jews, it is the same for africans, the fact that they did badly in some study does not mean that they did badly BECAUSE they were african.
You've never heard of Steven Pinker? You might want to check out his Wiki entry. Anyway, it was just a suggested video to close your mind's ignorance hole concerning Jews.
On the correlation/causation tantrum you're having: that's why psychologists control for environment. If you can control the independent variables, then the dependent variables can be accounted for. Basic scientific method.
I'm not throwing the tantrum, that would be you. I'm just stating the truth. You cannot control for environment, don't you realize that? Like I said, you can't just put a black kid in a white house and expect his life to be identical to the life of white kids.
And for fuck's sake, seriously dude: PEOPLE DO NOT SCORE HIGH OR LOW ON IQ TESTS BECAUSE THEY ARE MEMBERS OF ONE GROUP OR ANOTHER.
That's like the sixth time I had to fucking say that, and I explained how that does not contradict with the fact that human groups differ in IQ very, very well. Are you that fucking dense?
Alright, that's enough out of you. I'm blocking you now, because I don't have to put up with your tantrums, and I'm not going to keep listening to you contradict yourself. You are at the very least completely unaware of what your own arguments actually mean, but more likely simply dishonest.
That Armenians have been persecuted by Turks for hundreds of years, had nearly been wiped out by them, are currently despised by them in ways black Americans would shudder at. And yet Armenians outscore Turks on IQ tests. Not by much, but they do, and this is partially explained because Armenians have a strong Caucasian influence in their gene pool.
If the social hypothesis held water, this would not be the case, and Turks would outscore Armenians. And don't get me started on Jews in Germany.
How do you know that armenians score higher than turks? And how do you know that their experience is comparable to the experience of black people in america in any way? It's true there was an armenian genocide about a hundred years ago, but that has nothing to do with what we're talking about here. Jews in germany? It seems to me that if you read mein kampf, you'd see hitler arguing that jews are not as intelligent as aryans, and cannot produce or contribute to society in a meaningful way.
You claim is basically that "some weird cultural/discrimination thing makes blacks in every society score lower than anyone else". How do you explain transplanted Asians, who outscore everyone everywhere they go, without exception? (Except Ash Jews).
I have a hypothesis that explains the differences and lots of evidence that supports it. You have a claim that some vague, inexplicable force is at work. If you were a casual observer, who would you side with, really?
So, you're claiming that the experience of black people in america is "some weird cultural/discrimination thing"? That's a pretty big oversimplification, don't you think? Who would I side with? Not the person whose argument is based on a logical fallacy, that's for sure. You keep assuming that your tests prove that black people are dumber than white people, that white people who happen to belong to a religious minority are smarter than white people who are not, and that's really ludicrous.
Again, watch Jews, Genes, and Intelligence, available in google video. Ashkenazim Jews were self-contained for hundreds of years, and selective pressures improved their mathematical and reasoning abilities.
And what logical fallacy, exactly, have I committed?
No, they had community cohesion, they were committed to the academic achievement of their children, they worked hard, they wanted to succeed, they didn't just pop out of the womb with advanced degrees. The logical fallacy you continually make is to assume that correlation is causation, as I keep telling you.
On the correlation/causation tantrum you're having: that's why psychologists control for environment. If you can control the independent variables, then the dependent variables can be accounted for. Basic scientific method.
Right, you just stick a black kid in a white neighborhood, and presto, you've got a completely uniform environment! No one will treat that kid differently, will they? That kid will never know the difference, his life will be identical to the lives of white kids, and then, if he does poorly on some test, you can just chaulk it up to his race.
And also, are you saying that Chinese and Japanese Americans were never reviled? How about Indians in India, under British dominance? Or Cherokee in Georgia?
Not like black people. Face it, the experience of black people in america is unique, and you can't claim that you understand it, because you don't. What about cherokee? You told me earlier that you could say the same things about indians and native americans that you could about black people.
I said that? I didn't mean to - I meant that both Hispanics and Native Americans outscored blacks.
For your hypothesis to be correct, blacks in every society around the world would have had to face more discrimination than any other human group, except the Australian aborigines, who score lower on tests. This is a remarkable claim, one that many Arabs, Indians, Asians, etc., would take issue with.
Ok, you think that black people score lower all over the world? I don't know if that's true, but if so, then what is your point exactly? Tell me exactly what you think it means.
You've framed the debate so that anyone who disagrees with you, or who provides contrary evidence to your thesis, is a racist, and therefore beyond contempt and intercourse. Careful, you are on the slippery slope away from reason and towards authoritarian ideology .
Anyone who states that black people have small brains is a racist, I don't have to frame anything. Claiming you are smarter than other races of people is not just saying you are different, it's saying you're BETTER. I don't have to be careful, I'm not a racist or an authoritarian, and I never told you you couldn't be a racist, I just stated the facts, you're a racist. However, if you want to come here and tell me that racism has scientific legitimacy I'll tell you that you're flat out wrong.
If you think that you are smarter than other people because of your race, you are a racist. Do you need to go buy yourself a dictionary and look up the word? Your second point just validates my claim about you further. You want me to prove to you that racism has no scientific legitimacy, which means that you believe that racism DOES have scientific legitimacy, which means, yet again, that you are a racist, and by the way, you did not provide proof of anything, you referred to some study.
No one is smarter than someone else because of their race; they are smarter because of genes and environment. However, race is the measurement of group traits and characteristics, so it is possible that racial groups will differ in certain characteristics. How hard is this, really?
You don't know why people are more or less intelligent than others, but you assume it's because of genes, and you assume that different races have different genes related to mental capacity, and then you assume that your races are the ones with better genes regarding mental capacity, based on the studies you like to quote, which, I might remind you, don't really prove much, after all, there are often studies made which contradict each other.
Also, psychological studies that measure group characteristics says nothing about individuals within those groups. For instance, there are thousands of black geniuses in America that are much smarter than 98% percent of whites, for instance. Claiming superiority based on group statistics is infantile and wrong, and I do not do it. People should be judged as individuals. That said, I began commenting on this video because I have a passion for truth, and know that you're assumptions are faulty.
You have a passion for believing that your race makes you smarter than other people. You told me that everyone knows that black children do not do as well in school as white or asian children -- you should be ashamed of yourself for saying such things, and you WERE claiming superiority. You think that people who belong to your racial groups are smarter, not just different, if you would just admit it, I might respect you a tiny bit.
Again, race does not make one smart - how many times do I have to repeat that? Intelligence differences between groups have been repeatedly demonstrated (by people with college degrees, by the way), but that does not mean that all members of any one group are smarter than members of any other. Why do I get the feeling that you are not reading what I'm writing?
Stop contradicting yourself! I am reading your comments, are you? You keep telling me that black people do worse than "whites or asians", then you say that race does not make one smart, as if you didn't just say so yourself! Again, as I told you before, correlation is not causation. The fact that black people, who are generally poor and disadvantaged in this country, often to poorly in school does not mean that they have inferior dna.
ARRRGHHH!!! You're not getting it. Race is not a "thing that makes one smart," it's a measurement of groups differences and qualities. Yes, there are cognitive differences between races, but race is not the determinant of IQ - it is one of the correlations between races. Is that really that fucking hard to understand?
You aren't getting it, you can't have it both ways, you can't keep asking me why black people in south africa are stupider than indians and white people, and then act like you think that everyone is equal and that race has nothing to do with intelligence. You are engaged in double think, that is you hold two contradictory beliefs (well more than that really) and you are totally unaware of it!
If we were talking about body mass, and I said that whales are bigger than camels, you might say that I am asserting that species is the cause of body mass. That is not so - genes, diet, and behavior are the causes of body mass, and the species is just an arbitrary, human construct that we have made up to explain the differences we see.
Species is not some arbitrary, imaginary construct, and neither is race. You think that genes determine academic success, I don't, and I don't think it's credible at all to compare groups of people who have wildly different experiences in such a way, and it even doesn't make sense to take a black kid and put him in a white family and expect him suddenly to be equal as if he does not live in a society which sees him as inferior, the way you do.
Racial differences do not indicate superiority/inferiority. I could not that elephants have longer tusks than walruses - that does not indicate superiority. You need to label me a racist because you have no argument other than "humans are all 99.8% genetically similar" and "the Bible says we're all alike." There is ample data, of which I have provided only a sliver, that suggests that there are real, measurable differences between human groups.
No, you quoted studies, and studies are not definitive proof of anything, they often contradict each other. Racists often think that their race is smarter, but they also like to think of themselves as fair people, who want to treat everyone like equals, even when they don't consider them to be. This just doesn't work in the real world, when people are considered inferior, they are always, without exception, abused in the end.
You're right, studies are not proof, they are evidence. That aside, you just shifted from claiming to be correct about racial differences to a case of special pleading, saying that if you are not correct the consequences for society and less intelligent groups would be disastrous. You may or may not be right, and I happen to think you are wrong, but that special pleading does not address the evidence.
1) I never claimed that genes determine academic success. You're really pushing to caricature my argument in order to keep up, given the dearth of your evidence.
2) Blacks may feel inferior in a majority white country, granted. Why, then, do Indians outscore blacks in countries where they make up only a few percent of the population, given that they have dealt with the same imperial oppression? That argument does not hold water when taken in a global context.
Gee, I don't know, maybe because indians are not reviled and considered to be inferior, like black people are? As I explained in the video, stereotypes are often internalized and acted upon, and besides that, it doesn't make sense to expect different groups of people, with wildly different experiences and circumstances, to perform in exactly the same way.
Ask a black South African if they revile Indians.
On the groups and experience part, that's why the Minnesota and South African adoption studies, which you scoffed at earlier and are among the most respected studies ever published, are so telling.
Furthermore, do you mean to tell me that Chinese and Japanese were not made to feel inferior to whites? Why do Asians outscore whites, then? Is there an index of discrimination and oppression, whereby blacks got the worst oppression, and therefore score lower than Indians or Asians?
Your explanation has alot of gaps that need filled.
Of course asians are not as looked down upon as black people in america, you know that! Maybe asians score higher than whites at the moment, I don't know, but I would be willing to be that the answer to why this occurs is much more complex than simple genetics. There are many, many factors which affect academic achievement, I would speculate that the privileged white kids have grown lackadaisical about their studies, and the immigrant communities have not reached the same level of apathy.
I agree, there are dozens of factors that determine intelligence (not talking academic achievement here). All I'm saying is that genetic makeup is one of the factors. You claim it is not a factor, which I think is absurd. Ask yourself whose claim is more unbelievable?
No, replace species with race, and wales and camels with whites and blacks. Race is not the cause of IQ, just as species is not the cause of body mass, but race and species are simply man-made markers that we use to help us classify nature. There may be differences between races and species, but those differences are not caused by race and species - they are what determines race and species.
So you're saying that race does not make people more or less different, but different levels of intelligence make people different races? What is the difference? Like I said before, the only difference between races is appearance. You cannot keep citing south african, or american studies, meant to prove black people are less intelligent because of their race, and act like you aren't arguing that different races have different levels of intelligence, it is only making you look duplicitous.
No, I'm saying that genes and environment determine intelligence, and that intelligence differs between human groups.
Perhaps this will clear it up. Let's say human groups continued evolving without contact, and in another 100,000 years blacks were more intelligent than Arabs. They would still be the same human groups, only the bell-curves for intelligence would have shifted. Race does not determine IQ, nor IQ race, but there are differences between races. This is really not strong theory.
Yes, there are differences between races, like skin color, eye color, shape of the nose, etc. IQ, or intelligence quotient, is not set in stone, it fluctuates based on how much a person has exercised their mental abilities. IQ levels and academic achievement depends on many, many factors, it isn't a simple matter of being born with a brain gene and then doing well or doing poorly the rest of your life based on that gene.
I agree with everything you just said, except that I would say genes play a role. You claim genes play no role whatsoever, or so you've led me to believe. So who's the fanatic here?
Any non-biased person reading these comments will see, even if they disagree with me, that you're pretty thick-headed, or at least obstinate in the face of evidence.
It seems that way to you, but I disagree. I think that anyone who reads these comments will see you repeatedly asserting that black people in general cannot do as well as white people in school and are therefore less intelligent, and therefore inferior. You keep saying that intelligence is not determined by race, and you're therefore no racist (covering your ass) then you go on to offer arguments which are meant to prove that black people are stupid.
Nope. Sorry. There are no vast differences, there are cosmetic differences, and that's about it. Of course these differences can be traced to dna, but you are quite wrong in assuming that having different dna makes you fundamentally different from other races. All human beings are quite similar, due to the fact that we all have a single female ancestor.
By that line of reasoning we are 70% similar to bananas, because we share 70% of our DNA sequences with them. We are over 98% similar to chimps, but ah, in that less than 2%. There are vast observable behavioral differences between people of self-identified races, the only question is whether those differences are genetic or environmental. I'm betting it's a little of both. Your assertion that it's almost entirely environmental is outlandish.
Maybe we are 70% similar to bananas, and 99.9% similar to every other human on the planet. You just don't get it, do you? Internalization of stereotypes is the main reason why races seem to be so different, and like I said before, every single human on the planet is descended from the same female ancestor. Racism is actually what you're arguing for here, and let me remind you once more, racism is the domain of the ignorant.
Again, an appeal to authority. You did not address my arguments. I accepted all of your premises and provided evidence that serves to refute your argument from said premises. Please address my arguments.
No, that is not an appeal to authority, look up the term, and no, you did not "refute" anything, except to laughably assert that different races of people have different sized brains, and therefore some races are smarter than others! You are really making me laugh now, especially since you aren't even reading my comments, if you did, you'd realize that I've addressed all of your laughable assertions.
"anything, except to laughably assert that different races of people have different sized brains"
And your reply to that is?
"You are really making me laugh now, especially since you aren't even reading my comments, if you did, you'd realize that I've addressed all of your laughable assertions."
All you said was that I was operating within an ideological paradigm. Well, prove it. You are only asserting, not arguing. Provide your evidence.
You are operating with an ideological paradigm. You believe that race determines a person's brain size, and thus intelligence, but these are both leaps of faith. You don't know any of this to be true, but you should know, because i've told you, that the human race is remarkably genetically homogeneous, and also that we all share a single female ancestor, and are all thus related to each other. When you make racist statements, it proves you are a racist, I don't have to prove anything.
Incorrect. I said that there are differences between groups in brain size, on average. Race does not determine anything, race is a human observation about differences.
I agree that the human race is largely homogenous. Why do you keep saying that as if I disagree?
I'm making scientific statements that you disagree with, so you call me racist.
Even funnier than your brain size argument, in my opinion, is your assertion that you're not a racist because you're half asian! Oh man, you are really cracking me up now.
Just spit it out, you are a racist, right? You think that some races are smarter, or stronger, or better than others, right? You think that there is a master race, right? Let's hear it, unless you don't have the guts to be honest.
Depends how you define racist. If you mean recognizing that there are innate differences between races, then yes. If you mean thinking that people should be different under the law, then no. Equal rights, but a recognition that equal rights will not mean equal outcomes.
It's interesting that you do not address my arguments, but resort immediately to calling me racist. Why do you do that?
That is a lie. I did address your arguments, read my comments if you don't believe me. What you are saying is that some people are better than others because of their race, and that makes you a RACIST! The fact that you aren't willing to admit it just makes you a coward, and that's not mere name calling, that is an honest assessment of what you are based on the arguments you are giving me. You can't argue for an ideology and then complain when people correctly state that you argued for it.
You are seriously arguing that different races have different sized brains, and that somehow brain size determines intelligence?! Get real! And you ARE saying that some people are better than others, if I said to you that I was smarter, and stronger than you, I don't think you'd accept that as "stating differences", you'd take it as an insult. You are a racist, that's just the truth, and yes, you are a coward for not admitting what you really think.
My my. If you were stronger than me, I would accept you saying so, but would still maintain that that does not give you greater rights than me. If we could get past the pejoratives and the ad hominems for a moment, I really want to scientifically challenege your assumptions.
Right, let me guess, you found a study where black people were adopted by white people and still managed to do poorly in school and so you think that one study proves definitively that black people are dumb because they are black. What a thoroughly disgusting and embarrassing position.
"You can't argue for an ideology and then complain when people correctly state that you argued for it."
I'm arguing for science, and if you provided evidence that refuted my assumptions I would accept it. I think the non-biased observer would see that it is you who is arguing from ideology, if we accept that term in its Marxian context.
You have not given me proof of anything so far, you've merely asserted a bunch of things, and then asked me to prove things to you. Let's see some actual scientific research showing that people who aren't the same race as you have smaller brains, and that those smaller brains are not as good as your brain.
To state that some races of people are smarter than others is racist, there's no other way to define that, I'm sorry. To state that race determines intelligence, or anything else for that matter, is racist, and even most people ignorant enough to BE racists recognize that fact.
Don't you realize that you've been arguing that all along, that race determines intelligence? My statement was that correlation is NOT causation, you are providing me with studies meant to show that black people cannot do well in an academic environment, and your argument is not that this shows how pervasive their social disadvantages are, your argument is that they are black people and therefore inferior!
When did academic achievement enter the picture? If we're talking about that then I can provide many examples of methods of instruction where black students have flourished. See direct instruction methods, pioneered in Texas.
Then what are you talking about? You're trying to say that some races are better than others, so which one is the master race, let me guess, the race that you happen to be, right?
I'm not making implicit claims of superiority, I'm saying we're different. You are the one who apparently thinks that differences must be equivalent to superiority and inferiority.
It is obvious to even the most casual of observers that adopted black children raised by white families scored lower than Asian or white children adopted by white families. Also, identical twins reared apart show a .85 correlation in adult IQ scores, compared with dizygotic twins reared apart, who show a .5 correlation. Intelligence is largely heritable. That is not to say that environment plays no part, but your firebrand insistence of exact equality seems puerile in the face of this evidence.
White and Asian!?! LIKE YOU? Well well well, you've really shown your true colors now. No, black children are not "known" to score lower, that is nonsense. Black children are just as capable of doing well as white children, and no, I never said that everyone is equal in every way, what I said was that your physical and mental traits are not determined by your race. There is no master race, all races are equally capable and equally intelligent, on average.
n8glenn, Thank u for your efforts. U have a major misunderstanding of the actual origin of racism imo. Your erroneous opinion that the bible teaches all races come from Adam & Eve is one of your main misunderstandings. If u don't deal with the ACTUAL root of the subject, u will not change the mind of a racist. I strongly suggest the books "The Two Seeds of Gen. 3:15" by Dan Gayman & "Do All Races Share In Salvation" by same. google 'Sacred Truth Ministries Mountain City, TN' for more books
EliyahsMessageTime 4 months ago
@EliyahsMessageTime I don't believe I ever said that the bible teaches racism comes from adam and eve, I'm not a big expert on the bible but I don't think the story of adam and eve mentions racism, although, curiously, genesis does mention god creating people before adam and eve, which was surprising to me. I believe racism is just a natural human tendency having to do with natural instincts which are no longer very relevant or healthy in the modern world.
n8glenn 4 months ago
@n8glenn Your erroneous opinion I mention is at about 7:40 in the video. True, many think the story is that everyone came from Adam and Eve. But that version of interp is not the origin of racism, therefore you are not dealing with the actual origin of racism.
Again, if you are attempting to deal with racism, you will have to deal with it at its roots, and in the West, its main origin is the creation story. The RACIST creation story - explained in the books etc. I mentioned in previous post.
EliyahsMessageTime 4 months ago
@n8glenn I am not trying to convince toward any issue, just point out your points near the end of the video regarding 'religion' is not dealing with the racial issues in the light of racism based on religion. Your points of SHEMITIC people is erroneous because u do not take into consideration the race mixing pointed out in the bible. In other words, ESAU was the brother of Jacob, BUT married Hittites & etc. THAT were not purely Shemitic. U see the racism u r not dealing with in your statements?
EliyahsMessageTime 4 months ago
@n8glenn The bible is the MOST RACIST writing WIDELY AVAILABLE on the face of the earth. You will alter no rasict opinion in the west by just attacking general erroneous ideals. You know the local churchmember generally has no understanding of the subject from a bible origin. They r lied to. They don't study such. Generally, they are not racist. BUT, nontheless, the bible and the creation story is the heart and soul of racism in the West. Learn why, then you can break it down.
EliyahsMessageTime 4 months ago
ARE POLAR BEARS A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT?
Since 1996 it’s been known that, according to mitochondrial-DNA-based phylogenies, polar bears (Ursus maritimus) are actually nested within brown bears (Ursus arctos) rather than being a separate lineage. In other words, the mtDNA of some populations of brown bears—in particular, those from the Admiralty, Baranof, and Chichagof (ABC) islands of southwest Alaska—is more closely related to the mtDNA of polar bears than to the mtDNA of other brown bears.
magicmoonbeam2 4 months ago
@magicmoonbeam2 Yes, I get it, you're super smart, you know everything about bears, AND?!
n8glenn 4 months ago
@ n8glenn You are either very naive or very dishonest. First off coroners can determine a persons race just from their skeletal remaines which blatantly contradicts you claim that race is merely skin deep. Secondly Scientists do not believe that Homo-S have less genetic variation than other species, the actual raw data does not support that thesis. > Human genetic diversity based on autosomal microsatellite DNA = .776 Chimps .630 Brown Bears .665 G Wolf .528 Dog breeds .401. Pumas .52
magicmoonbeam2 4 months ago
@magicmoonbeam2 Thanks for starting your scholarly dissertation off with petty insults. I do not believe you have to be naive or dishonest to not be a racist, sorry. As for bones, that's a pretty weak argument, bone structure is not a marker for genetic diversity, the biggest differences come from gender, and that is determined by one chromosome. Scientists do in fact believe human genetic diversity is low compared to other species because all of humanity is descended from a SINGLE FEMALE!
n8glenn 4 months ago
@n8glenn The slur "Racist" was invented by Leon Trotsky.
The target of Trotsky slur was a group of Slavs who valued greatly their native culture and way of life, and wanted to protect it. Trotsky on the other hand saw them and others like them as an impedement to internationalist communism. To him the Slavs that committed the "crime" of loving their own people and trying to protect their traditional ways were simply "backward", and others like them were simply "racists".
magicmoonbeam2 4 months ago
Con't. The first time the "racist" is mentioned anywhere is in Leon Trotsky's 1930 work "THe History of the Russian Revolution. The word appears as "расистов", whose latin transliteration is "racistov" i.e "racist"
Trotsky invented the slur for the sole purpose to empower literally the most rotten, traitorous weasels within the west to redefine those loyal to their people & culture as the worst evil.
The word "Racist" has no meaning to me except in the context of treason against ones own.
magicmoonbeam2 4 months ago
@magicmoonbeam2 The more you show off the more you come across as not only an ignorant racist, but insecure as well. I'm not impressed, sorry.
n8glenn 4 months ago
@magicmoonbeam2 The more you show off the more you come across as not only an ignorant racist, but insecure as well. I'm not impressed, sorry.
n8glenn 4 months ago
@magicmoonbeam2 Racism is the domain of the ignorant and fearful. You can attempt to show off your knowledge of trivia all day long, you can call me a communist because I believe that racism actually exists and therefore your theory that human beings belong to different species is racism, but the mere fact that you are a racist demonstrates to me that you are an intellectual lightweight and profoundly ignorant, as does the fact that you misspelled "impediment".
n8glenn 4 months ago
@n8glenn Where did I claim that the differences in racial skeletons was evidence of genetic diversity.
You are deliberately misquotimg me.
NO scientists do not believe any such thing. The actual numbers as stated in my previous comment debunk that claim.
Now demonstrate to me, citing peer reviewed sources how a polar bear meets the genetic criteria for for a sub-species and the different human races do not.
magicmoonbeam2 4 months ago
@magicmoonbeam2 Oh, you had no argument behind your statement about skeletons, my bad, I should have known that it was just another random attempt to show off random knowledge on your part. I actually thought you had a point besides "look at me, I'm smart". I stand corrected. Yes, scientists do believe that we all descended from a single female, dubbed "eve", look it up. Your trivia and numbers do not dispute that fact, you are just spitting out technical details which mean nothing.
n8glenn 4 months ago
@magicmoonbeam2 As for autosomal microsatellites, they are characterized by extremely high mutation rates, and are not the sole determinant of genetic diversity. If you want me to give you peer reviewed scientific data which proves that human beings are all the same species and all approximately the same, as the scientific community uniformly believes, then you go ahead and give me some peer reviewed data about how white people are a separate and superior species as you believe, and we'll talk.
n8glenn 4 months ago
@n8glenn Now you are mixing race / sub-species up with species. Nobody is disputing that all human beings belong to a single species. what is in dispute here is the existence of human sub-species / races within the the homo sapien species.
You are obviously a retard, good night.
magicmoonbeam2 4 months ago
@magicmoonbeam2 Maybe the existence of human subspecies is in dispute with the KKK, you, and other racists, it is not in dispute with actual scientists or scholars, I can assure you. We are all one species, and there are no subspecies, and in fact we are all genetically homogeneous because as I said before every single human being on this planet shares a common ancestor, and it wasn't that long ago, evolutionarily speaking.
n8glenn 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@n8glenn "We are all genetically homogeneous because I said so"
Takahata (1995) reports an unbias estimate of protein heterozgosity ( gene diversity) in humans at 10-14%. The average Makarieva .A (2001 ) found in mammal species was 5.1%. So obviously, humans are not at the low end of the genetic diversity spectrum, particularly in relation to other mammals, human clearly have very high genetic diversity.
Calling me names won't change the data.
magicmoonbeam2 4 months ago
@magicmoonbeam2 Data will not give you an excuse to be racist, no matter what it is. Human beings may possibly have more genetic diversity than one species that you happen to name, so what? There are more than two species of animals in the world. Now, if I say you're a racist, that's not simply calling you names, that's describing your attitude. You are trying to convince me that human races are significantly different, in order to justify racism, and then denying it, which is just scummy.
n8glenn 4 months ago
@n8glenn every single human being on this planet shares a common ancestor, and it wasn't that long ago, evolutionarily speaking.
Polar Bears split from brown bears a mere 120 thousand years ago, so evolutionary speaking there has been plenty of time for sub-species to arise through the process of genetic drift.
magicmoonbeam2 4 months ago
@magicmoonbeam2 Ok, maybe you should be a polar bear supremacist instead of a white supremacist.
n8glenn 4 months ago
@magicmoonbeam2 As for autosomal microsatellites, they are characterized by extremely high mutation rates, and are not the sole determinant of genetic diversity. If you want me to give you peer reviewed scientific data which proves that human beings are all the same species and all approximately the same, as the scientific community uniformly believes, then you go ahead and give me some peer reviewed data about how white people are a separate and superior species as you believe, and we'll talk.
n8glenn 4 months ago
Very good video. Fighting ignorance is always a noble cause. Continue the good fight! - Black guy.
dancingwithcalvin 8 months ago
Racism is not an illusion. There are obvious and measurable differences in physical and mental traits among the three main races. Africans have a 25-30 percent lower I.Q. than Asians and Aryans on average. The African has a shorter gestation period and they are born about a week earlier on average. The Africans bone structures develop faster and they mature faster. Asians are born with larger brains and take the longest to mature. Asians have an average I.Q. 2-4 points higher than Aryans.FACTS.
MrObamaNigger 8 months ago
@MrObamaNigger I'm not so sure about all that. According to scientists who have studied human DNA, all races are remarkably homogeneous, with less genetic diversity in the entire human race than in a typical social group of chimpanzees. They theorize that this is because all humans are descended from a single female, dubbed eve, who lived during a time when humans almost went extinct. As for africans being stupid, I doubt that highly, I know of many highly intelligent black people.
n8glenn 8 months ago
@n8glenn I wasn't saying all black people were stupid. I do take in account individuality, but in a broad sense what I am saying is very true... Obviously so.
MrObamaNigger 8 months ago
@MrObamaNigger Is it? Well, you can definitely make the case that there's more crime in black neighborhoods, that grades are lower in black schools, (let's not kid ourselves, segregation is back), but then you have to ask the question why? Is it really because black people have inferior genes, even on average, or is it because black people have been forced over centuries into a position of extreme poverty? As you no doubt know, there's a direct causal link between poverty and crime.
n8glenn 8 months ago
@n8glenn I like to take a historical view of this. I can see where you are coming from, but I see one very valid response to your case. History shows that whites have always dominated, and on occasion Asians have as well. Black Africans rarely explored outside of Africa as extensively as Whites or Asians have outside of their living space and have historically failed over and over to form a cohesive society with a strong government(remember Black Africans). I would really like to hear your views
MrObamaNigger 8 months ago
@MrObamaNigger First of all, the dominance of white people is a very recent phenomenon, a mere blip on the radar of history, in fact all of recorded history is a mere blip so it's a blip of a blip. We are a flash in the pan compared to the roman empire, which in turn was a flash in the pan compared to the egyptian empire. Now, as for africans exploring outside of africa, that's the entire history of the human race, we're all descended from africans who explored outside of africa.
n8glenn 8 months ago
@n8glenn You don't seem to understand what I meant. I meant that after racial identities have developed only two races really pushed on and explored. Romans btw=White. Egyptians had a civilization that dominated other lower racial forms and unlike the romans did not really dominate other races. White dominance is not a recent thing. For as long as whites have had a large enough population they have been at the cutting edge of civilization and empire. Africans have not. They never have, neverwill
MrObamaNigger 8 months ago
@MrObamaNigger Racial identities have been around a long, long time, and white people never amounted to much until very recently, the romans weren't aryan, they were italian, dark skinned mediterranean people. They ruled over white germans for a long, long time and those germanic tribes were pretty backward and undeveloped. In 1377, an arabic historian wrote about all the different races, he regarded arabs as human, while black and white people were animals, both exactly as backward.
n8glenn 8 months ago
@n8glenn I consider European whites to be one in the same. With of course their own variations, but with all the same result. The racial wolf. And yes it is difficult for a population to develop when it has only a few thousand members, such was the case of northern European tribes. And it would be wrong to say that some, as the Romans put them "barbarians" didn't have a complex and functioning culture that thrived with what they had.
MrObamaNigger 8 months ago
@MrObamaNigger
Sir confused much? Have you not heard of the Mali Empire, and Ancient Zimbabwe empire, Mutapa empire, and dont get me started on Ethiopia. While the english were dying of the plague and blaming the devil, blacks were in the university of Timbuktu memorizing the Koran. Early slaves that were brought to America were actually Muslims that could read and write Aramaic. Of course they lost this talent very quickly with them not being aloud to academically express themselves.
dancingwithcalvin 8 months ago
@dancingwithcalvin
And No im not Muslim. Im catholic.
dancingwithcalvin 8 months ago
@n8glenn Also I am aware of the fact that human beings are very homogeneous, but obviously if a 2% difference in DNA can go from chimp to man, than it isn't far fetched to say that the 0.5% difference between all human beings can make a large change as well. The potential variations in just that .5% is much larger than what variations have actually occurred.
MrObamaNigger 8 months ago
@MrObamaNigger First of all, genes don't prevent you from making good grades or from doing well in society, if you have a good stable home, in a good, safe (affluent) neighborhood, then that will help you make better grades and you won't have any need to commit crimes because you'll get a good job later on. Standardized tests have been shown to be a far more accurate measure of the size of the home the child lives in than their academic ability.
n8glenn 8 months ago
@n8glenn I am also aware of this. My conclusions have not come to me lightly and I am aware of individual variation, but many researchers and experts on the matter have concluded that these cognitive differences among the races are largely genetic. In fact by the time a human being is an adult 80% of his intelligence is determined by genetics. When I say these things I mean it in a general way, I am willing to admit that there have been Africans more intelligent than myself, but overall its true
MrObamaNigger 8 months ago
@MrObamaNigger hello Idiot, aka RYAN FAUST. So there's a "racial" IQ gap huh??? OK, Where are you facts? Your data? Your Written Novels or thesis or evidence or SUPPORTED SCIENTIFIC FILE FROM A BUREAU OF EDUCATION?!?!
You have NONE! Your have no Facts, Ficton. So You just need to sit Down and drink a nice Tall glass of Shut the Fuck up!
PimpWizard3000 8 months ago
@PimpWizard3000 Why is it you keep calling me Ryan Faust? Who the fuck is that?
MrObamaNigger 8 months ago
It's a laughable stupidity. Origins obsolete; the Nordic Germanic people are the peak of our evolution as humans. F.Y.A. genes do search, of relevant to Africans (I am not racist: my first childhood friend was black) Blue eyes are believed to have happened a result of a mutation, that it shows the potential of mutations, especially inherant in NORDIC genes; there IS NO "white race" this is only a skincolour. There is only the NORDIC GERMANIC race.
Goetterdaemmerung7 9 months ago
@Goetterdaemmerung7 Are you serious? You're trying to tell me that germans are better than everyone else, but you're not a racist because you had a black friend? Spoken like a true grand dragon of the KKK.
n8glenn 9 months ago
@n8glenn The KKK are degenerate scumdogs and have nothing to with anything that I have said. KKK??? You must learn. Why would I talk like a KKK scumdog when I have nothing to do with them? Do you think they have anything to do with what they "suppose"? Hitler's Nazis are the complete opposite of them if that is what you think.
Goetterdaemmerung7 9 months ago
@Goetterdaemmerung7 Wrong! The Romans (the Latins) are the supeior race. The Latin Romans ruled the ancient world and colonized and civilized the Nordic Bartbarian Germanics and got them out of their uncivilized ways. If the Nordics are not the craddle of civilization.
cherrylady238 9 months ago
@Goetterdaemmerung7 The Nordic germanic people were what the Romans called the Barbarians, that means they were wild uncivilized people of the north. The Romans colonized Gaul (France), Germania, England, etc. and civilized them. The Nordic Germanics didn't even have an alphabet, the Romans gave them the Latin alphabet and their civilization. The craddle of western civilization was Greece and Rome. If the Nordics are so superior, how come they were not the craddle of western civilization?
cherrylady238 9 months ago
@cherrylady238 Norse Vikings were amongst primary pioneers in sea-faring technology, exploration, and star-harnessing inventions. Do not deny it to spite me, and yes you are right that the German tribes were "Barbarians" but it is mostly Roman Propaganda, more than actual truth. And the Germanic tribes had even more to do with the downfall of Rome than sacking her ever-broadened borders than is attested to, but 90% of technological advances today come from Germany & Germanic Britain...
Goetterdaemmerung7 9 months ago
@Goetterdaemmerung7 Empires fall because empires are not forever, like people, they are born and die. Rome fell because it declined, their descendants lost their discipline and became corrupt or the empire would've lived much much longer. If the Nordic had better genes, then they would have been the craddle of Western civilization, may the Romans and Greeks had better genes. Why were the barabarians so far behind then. Can you explain it?
cherrylady238 9 months ago
@Goetterdaemmerung7 It's not Roman propaganda, it's HISTORY. The Romans conquered and ruled Germania and got them out of their stone age. Germania civilization is Roman & Greek. The Romans and Greeks were the peak of evolution. And about inventions, most of the German scientists were of Jewish origin (not germanic).
cherrylady238 9 months ago
@Goetterdaemmerung7 Although English is a Germanic language, 70% of its vocabulary is of Latin origin. The British though Gemanic are also have Roman blood in their veins. This could have given the English good genes.
cherrylady238 9 months ago
@cherrylady238 "Latin Origin"? Yet the Elder Futhark was also a Roman co-invention? But the Romans were exceptional people, who would deny? Are you wanting to say that Germanic are not good genes?
Goetterdaemmerung7 9 months ago
@Goetterdaemmerung7 No, I didn't say that Germanics have bad genes. My point is to say that Nordics are just like anybody else. I disagree when someone affirms that a specifil group is better than everybody else. If that' is so, then I could easily prove with other arguments that someone else is just as good. Being the ruling power is just a matter of good luck. The Romans NEVER claimed racial superiority and neither did the Greeks. All Rome wanted was to unify the world.
cherrylady238 9 months ago
@Goetterdaemmerung7 Latin was the language of Latium in Italy which was the language spoken by the Romans. Rome is located in Latium or what we call today Lazio. That's the origin of the word Latin for both the languge and the Romans.
cherrylady238 9 months ago
@Goetterdaemmerung7 Latin was the language of Latium in Italy which was the language spoken by the Romans. Rome is located in Latium or what we call today Lazio. That's the origin of the word Latin for both the languge and the Romans. The Romans were Mediterraneans.
cherrylady238 9 months ago
@cherrylady238 (Apology for 2 replies but space was not given enough) I would say that the highest point in human history was despoiled from within, and by deceit throughout-- not by any direct misacheivments or failures of Adolf Hitler, Reinhard Heydrich, ect.
Goetterdaemmerung7 9 months ago
@Goetterdaemmerung7 What if the Chinese becaome the first superpower in 50 years? They have the brains, the resources and a big population? Then once they become number one power, if they claim that the yellow race is the superior race, then, they will be the superior race. The ruling race is always the superior race. Don't forget that Attila and Genghis Khan, (the Mongols) ruled Europe for quiete some time. They were the superior race over the Germanics. The Romans were superior race.
cherrylady238 9 months ago
@cherrylady238 The natural law of this world is struggle, that whosoever emerges victorious deserves their will to be acted, and is superior. The Nordic people are altitonant peak of human evolution, and if would realize this potential to be there without miscegenating it away, all will be justified. The Japanese people would be more apt if they had the numbers, they are equal to Nordics on the evolutional scale as well.
Goetterdaemmerung7 9 months ago
In other words we are being condition to think the way we do. Dude when are people going to wake up.
haqi9fly 10 months ago
You have to be blind not see that black, white or chines are the same people. Colour changes avery human. There are so may black white people covered in black, and there are so many black white people covered in white. I have made many observations during my exposure to all these races and found out that in these people, God has hidden a secret from all of us. We don't even know who we are. The bible tells us that we have eyes but we don't see. It is true.
nilespring9 1 year ago
@nilespring9 Well basically black, white and Chinese means nothing therefore, how can one see whether they are the same or not?
SloveintzWend 1 year ago
There was a global flood.
Accepted by current science.
The offspring of Noah populated the planet.
Africans populated the World and had diversification's of groups.
Modern day Africa included what is now known as the Middle East (Post Colonial renaming)
All are from Africa.
GOODGUUY 1 year ago
csd
Lesgettogether 1 year ago
In the title it says "Just how different are the various races of people? Not very, according to science." This is false. Do some research on human biodiversity.
SuddenCatharsis 1 year ago
@SuddenCatharsis I have, and the truth is that there is more genetic difference found in a social group of chimpanzees than there is in the entire human race.
n8glenn 1 year ago
@n8glenn
That's an absurd statement. Please visit real HBD sites like Steve Sailer's website and not the leftist junk science sites you've been reading. I also recommend Race, Evolution, and Behavior: A Life History Perspective by J. Philippe Rushton.. Egalitarianism is a Christian ideal, but its not scientific.
SuddenCatharsis 1 year ago
@SuddenCatharsis I'm just quoting the findings of scientists studying genetics in humans and other species, I'm not talking about political ideology, or egalitarianis, although I do happen to believe in equality, and I don't think that's such a bad position. Not that everyone is strictly equal in every way, ut everyone does have a right to equal opportunity and equal citizenship.
n8glenn 1 year ago
and elohim siad ''let US make man in our image,according to our likeness.i take that as ''us'' bieng more then 1 creating diffrent races .
g974tnmcj 2 years ago
Blocking a naysayer? I'm changing my rating to 1 star. Shame on you.
chitch1776 2 years ago
Change away! Why don't you go to his channel and compliment him on his racism while you're at it! However, I did not block him for disagreeing with me, I blocked him for cursing me out and being extremely dishonest and duplicitous.
n8glenn 2 years ago
I sympathize with you to some degree, but blocking is not the answer. I tend to agree with your argument but I don't think thomas is a racist based only on the comments. Night
chitch1776 2 years ago
Well, if you look at his arguments, I think the basic message is quite clear, and that is that black people are inferior, but I would not have blocked him based on that. I only blocked him because he kept contradicting himself and actually started cursing me, and to be honest it felt like an insult to my intelligence, I mean honestly, if I told you "hey it's raining outside" over and over, while simultaneously telling you "I didn't say it was raining", would you continue that conversation?
n8glenn 2 years ago
I am very interested in the subject of human diversity, but what I hate is that the subject too often attracts racists and their hateful propaganda.
GentlemanAmerican 1 year ago
Sorry, buddy, had to undo what you did. I gave 5*. Nate had legitimate reason.
italia981 2 years ago
And furthermore, why is it that Ashkenazim Jews score higher than any human group, if discrimination is the culprit?
For you claims to be true, you would have to make dozens of cases of special pleading. For mine to be true, that intelligence is influence by genes, I need to make none. Ockham's Razor should be used is such instances.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
Ashkenazim jews are europeans! They are no different than any other europeans, except for religion. However, assuming that they have scored higher on some test, that again means nothing. Correlation is not causation. The fact that the are jews and have scored higher on a test, does not mean that they scored higher BECAUSE they were jews, it is the same for africans, the fact that they did badly in some study does not mean that they did badly BECAUSE they were african.
n8glenn 2 years ago
Incorrect. See Steven Pinker's video Jews, Genes, and Intelligence, which I think is available on youtube.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
What?!? Now you're studying at the university of youtube? Offering youtube videos to me to prove once again that correlation IS causation?
n8glenn 2 years ago
You've never heard of Steven Pinker? You might want to check out his Wiki entry. Anyway, it was just a suggested video to close your mind's ignorance hole concerning Jews.
On the correlation/causation tantrum you're having: that's why psychologists control for environment. If you can control the independent variables, then the dependent variables can be accounted for. Basic scientific method.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
I'm not throwing the tantrum, that would be you. I'm just stating the truth. You cannot control for environment, don't you realize that? Like I said, you can't just put a black kid in a white house and expect his life to be identical to the life of white kids.
n8glenn 2 years ago
And for fuck's sake, seriously dude: PEOPLE DO NOT SCORE HIGH OR LOW ON IQ TESTS BECAUSE THEY ARE MEMBERS OF ONE GROUP OR ANOTHER.
That's like the sixth time I had to fucking say that, and I explained how that does not contradict with the fact that human groups differ in IQ very, very well. Are you that fucking dense?
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
Alright, that's enough out of you. I'm blocking you now, because I don't have to put up with your tantrums, and I'm not going to keep listening to you contradict yourself. You are at the very least completely unaware of what your own arguments actually mean, but more likely simply dishonest.
n8glenn 2 years ago
Right, block me, because you can not answer my arguments. See, you are authoritarian after all.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
What about Armenians in Turkey?
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
What about them?
n8glenn 2 years ago
That Armenians have been persecuted by Turks for hundreds of years, had nearly been wiped out by them, are currently despised by them in ways black Americans would shudder at. And yet Armenians outscore Turks on IQ tests. Not by much, but they do, and this is partially explained because Armenians have a strong Caucasian influence in their gene pool.
If the social hypothesis held water, this would not be the case, and Turks would outscore Armenians. And don't get me started on Jews in Germany.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
How do you know that armenians score higher than turks? And how do you know that their experience is comparable to the experience of black people in america in any way? It's true there was an armenian genocide about a hundred years ago, but that has nothing to do with what we're talking about here. Jews in germany? It seems to me that if you read mein kampf, you'd see hitler arguing that jews are not as intelligent as aryans, and cannot produce or contribute to society in a meaningful way.
n8glenn 2 years ago
You claim is basically that "some weird cultural/discrimination thing makes blacks in every society score lower than anyone else". How do you explain transplanted Asians, who outscore everyone everywhere they go, without exception? (Except Ash Jews).
I have a hypothesis that explains the differences and lots of evidence that supports it. You have a claim that some vague, inexplicable force is at work. If you were a casual observer, who would you side with, really?
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
So, you're claiming that the experience of black people in america is "some weird cultural/discrimination thing"? That's a pretty big oversimplification, don't you think? Who would I side with? Not the person whose argument is based on a logical fallacy, that's for sure. You keep assuming that your tests prove that black people are dumber than white people, that white people who happen to belong to a religious minority are smarter than white people who are not, and that's really ludicrous.
n8glenn 2 years ago
Again, watch Jews, Genes, and Intelligence, available in google video. Ashkenazim Jews were self-contained for hundreds of years, and selective pressures improved their mathematical and reasoning abilities.
And what logical fallacy, exactly, have I committed?
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
No, they had community cohesion, they were committed to the academic achievement of their children, they worked hard, they wanted to succeed, they didn't just pop out of the womb with advanced degrees. The logical fallacy you continually make is to assume that correlation is causation, as I keep telling you.
n8glenn 2 years ago
On the correlation/causation tantrum you're having: that's why psychologists control for environment. If you can control the independent variables, then the dependent variables can be accounted for. Basic scientific method.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
Right, you just stick a black kid in a white neighborhood, and presto, you've got a completely uniform environment! No one will treat that kid differently, will they? That kid will never know the difference, his life will be identical to the lives of white kids, and then, if he does poorly on some test, you can just chaulk it up to his race.
n8glenn 2 years ago
Before you block me, watch Pinker's video (after you check out his credentials).
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
And also, are you saying that Chinese and Japanese Americans were never reviled? How about Indians in India, under British dominance? Or Cherokee in Georgia?
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
Not like black people. Face it, the experience of black people in america is unique, and you can't claim that you understand it, because you don't. What about cherokee? You told me earlier that you could say the same things about indians and native americans that you could about black people.
n8glenn 2 years ago
I said that? I didn't mean to - I meant that both Hispanics and Native Americans outscored blacks.
For your hypothesis to be correct, blacks in every society around the world would have had to face more discrimination than any other human group, except the Australian aborigines, who score lower on tests. This is a remarkable claim, one that many Arabs, Indians, Asians, etc., would take issue with.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
Ok, you think that black people score lower all over the world? I don't know if that's true, but if so, then what is your point exactly? Tell me exactly what you think it means.
n8glenn 2 years ago
You've framed the debate so that anyone who disagrees with you, or who provides contrary evidence to your thesis, is a racist, and therefore beyond contempt and intercourse. Careful, you are on the slippery slope away from reason and towards authoritarian ideology .
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
Anyone who states that black people have small brains is a racist, I don't have to frame anything. Claiming you are smarter than other races of people is not just saying you are different, it's saying you're BETTER. I don't have to be careful, I'm not a racist or an authoritarian, and I never told you you couldn't be a racist, I just stated the facts, you're a racist. However, if you want to come here and tell me that racism has scientific legitimacy I'll tell you that you're flat out wrong.
n8glenn 2 years ago
Right, so let's rehash what you just said.
1) If you disagree with my assumptions about intellectual equality, your a racist.
2) Racism has no scientific legitimacy.
Not very convincing. Please provide evidence, as I have.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
If you think that you are smarter than other people because of your race, you are a racist. Do you need to go buy yourself a dictionary and look up the word? Your second point just validates my claim about you further. You want me to prove to you that racism has no scientific legitimacy, which means that you believe that racism DOES have scientific legitimacy, which means, yet again, that you are a racist, and by the way, you did not provide proof of anything, you referred to some study.
n8glenn 2 years ago
No one is smarter than someone else because of their race; they are smarter because of genes and environment. However, race is the measurement of group traits and characteristics, so it is possible that racial groups will differ in certain characteristics. How hard is this, really?
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
You don't know why people are more or less intelligent than others, but you assume it's because of genes, and you assume that different races have different genes related to mental capacity, and then you assume that your races are the ones with better genes regarding mental capacity, based on the studies you like to quote, which, I might remind you, don't really prove much, after all, there are often studies made which contradict each other.
n8glenn 2 years ago
Article:
Mainstream science on intelligence: An editorial with 52 signatories, history, and bibliography
Linda S. Gottfredson
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
Again, give me the actual passage that supports your claim to be part of a master race.
n8glenn 2 years ago
Study:
Brain size and cognitive ability: Correlations with age, sex, social class, and race.
Rushton, J. Philippe; Ankney, C. Davison
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
Quote the relevant passages, and explain to me how those passages prove that you are smarter than black people.
n8glenn 2 years ago
Also, psychological studies that measure group characteristics says nothing about individuals within those groups. For instance, there are thousands of black geniuses in America that are much smarter than 98% percent of whites, for instance. Claiming superiority based on group statistics is infantile and wrong, and I do not do it. People should be judged as individuals. That said, I began commenting on this video because I have a passion for truth, and know that you're assumptions are faulty.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
You have a passion for believing that your race makes you smarter than other people. You told me that everyone knows that black children do not do as well in school as white or asian children -- you should be ashamed of yourself for saying such things, and you WERE claiming superiority. You think that people who belong to your racial groups are smarter, not just different, if you would just admit it, I might respect you a tiny bit.
n8glenn 2 years ago
Again, race does not make one smart - how many times do I have to repeat that? Intelligence differences between groups have been repeatedly demonstrated (by people with college degrees, by the way), but that does not mean that all members of any one group are smarter than members of any other. Why do I get the feeling that you are not reading what I'm writing?
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
Stop contradicting yourself! I am reading your comments, are you? You keep telling me that black people do worse than "whites or asians", then you say that race does not make one smart, as if you didn't just say so yourself! Again, as I told you before, correlation is not causation. The fact that black people, who are generally poor and disadvantaged in this country, often to poorly in school does not mean that they have inferior dna.
n8glenn 2 years ago
ARRRGHHH!!! You're not getting it. Race is not a "thing that makes one smart," it's a measurement of groups differences and qualities. Yes, there are cognitive differences between races, but race is not the determinant of IQ - it is one of the correlations between races. Is that really that fucking hard to understand?
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
You aren't getting it, you can't have it both ways, you can't keep asking me why black people in south africa are stupider than indians and white people, and then act like you think that everyone is equal and that race has nothing to do with intelligence. You are engaged in double think, that is you hold two contradictory beliefs (well more than that really) and you are totally unaware of it!
n8glenn 2 years ago
Let me put it to you this way:
If we were talking about body mass, and I said that whales are bigger than camels, you might say that I am asserting that species is the cause of body mass. That is not so - genes, diet, and behavior are the causes of body mass, and the species is just an arbitrary, human construct that we have made up to explain the differences we see.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
Species is not some arbitrary, imaginary construct, and neither is race. You think that genes determine academic success, I don't, and I don't think it's credible at all to compare groups of people who have wildly different experiences in such a way, and it even doesn't make sense to take a black kid and put him in a white family and expect him suddenly to be equal as if he does not live in a society which sees him as inferior, the way you do.
n8glenn 2 years ago
Ok, one more time:
Racial differences do not indicate superiority/inferiority. I could not that elephants have longer tusks than walruses - that does not indicate superiority. You need to label me a racist because you have no argument other than "humans are all 99.8% genetically similar" and "the Bible says we're all alike." There is ample data, of which I have provided only a sliver, that suggests that there are real, measurable differences between human groups.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
No, you quoted studies, and studies are not definitive proof of anything, they often contradict each other. Racists often think that their race is smarter, but they also like to think of themselves as fair people, who want to treat everyone like equals, even when they don't consider them to be. This just doesn't work in the real world, when people are considered inferior, they are always, without exception, abused in the end.
n8glenn 2 years ago
You're right, studies are not proof, they are evidence. That aside, you just shifted from claiming to be correct about racial differences to a case of special pleading, saying that if you are not correct the consequences for society and less intelligent groups would be disastrous. You may or may not be right, and I happen to think you are wrong, but that special pleading does not address the evidence.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
1) I never claimed that genes determine academic success. You're really pushing to caricature my argument in order to keep up, given the dearth of your evidence.
2) Blacks may feel inferior in a majority white country, granted. Why, then, do Indians outscore blacks in countries where they make up only a few percent of the population, given that they have dealt with the same imperial oppression? That argument does not hold water when taken in a global context.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
Gee, I don't know, maybe because indians are not reviled and considered to be inferior, like black people are? As I explained in the video, stereotypes are often internalized and acted upon, and besides that, it doesn't make sense to expect different groups of people, with wildly different experiences and circumstances, to perform in exactly the same way.
n8glenn 2 years ago
Ask a black South African if they revile Indians.
On the groups and experience part, that's why the Minnesota and South African adoption studies, which you scoffed at earlier and are among the most respected studies ever published, are so telling.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
Furthermore, do you mean to tell me that Chinese and Japanese were not made to feel inferior to whites? Why do Asians outscore whites, then? Is there an index of discrimination and oppression, whereby blacks got the worst oppression, and therefore score lower than Indians or Asians?
Your explanation has alot of gaps that need filled.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
Of course asians are not as looked down upon as black people in america, you know that! Maybe asians score higher than whites at the moment, I don't know, but I would be willing to be that the answer to why this occurs is much more complex than simple genetics. There are many, many factors which affect academic achievement, I would speculate that the privileged white kids have grown lackadaisical about their studies, and the immigrant communities have not reached the same level of apathy.
n8glenn 2 years ago
I agree, there are dozens of factors that determine intelligence (not talking academic achievement here). All I'm saying is that genetic makeup is one of the factors. You claim it is not a factor, which I think is absurd. Ask yourself whose claim is more unbelievable?
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
No, replace species with race, and wales and camels with whites and blacks. Race is not the cause of IQ, just as species is not the cause of body mass, but race and species are simply man-made markers that we use to help us classify nature. There may be differences between races and species, but those differences are not caused by race and species - they are what determines race and species.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
So you're saying that race does not make people more or less different, but different levels of intelligence make people different races? What is the difference? Like I said before, the only difference between races is appearance. You cannot keep citing south african, or american studies, meant to prove black people are less intelligent because of their race, and act like you aren't arguing that different races have different levels of intelligence, it is only making you look duplicitous.
n8glenn 2 years ago
No, I'm saying that genes and environment determine intelligence, and that intelligence differs between human groups.
Perhaps this will clear it up. Let's say human groups continued evolving without contact, and in another 100,000 years blacks were more intelligent than Arabs. They would still be the same human groups, only the bell-curves for intelligence would have shifted. Race does not determine IQ, nor IQ race, but there are differences between races. This is really not strong theory.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
Yes, there are differences between races, like skin color, eye color, shape of the nose, etc. IQ, or intelligence quotient, is not set in stone, it fluctuates based on how much a person has exercised their mental abilities. IQ levels and academic achievement depends on many, many factors, it isn't a simple matter of being born with a brain gene and then doing well or doing poorly the rest of your life based on that gene.
n8glenn 2 years ago
I agree with everything you just said, except that I would say genes play a role. You claim genes play no role whatsoever, or so you've led me to believe. So who's the fanatic here?
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
Any non-biased person reading these comments will see, even if they disagree with me, that you're pretty thick-headed, or at least obstinate in the face of evidence.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
It seems that way to you, but I disagree. I think that anyone who reads these comments will see you repeatedly asserting that black people in general cannot do as well as white people in school and are therefore less intelligent, and therefore inferior. You keep saying that intelligence is not determined by race, and you're therefore no racist (covering your ass) then you go on to offer arguments which are meant to prove that black people are stupid.
n8glenn 2 years ago
There are vast, heritable behavioral, physical, and cognitive differences between self-identified races.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
Nope. Sorry. There are no vast differences, there are cosmetic differences, and that's about it. Of course these differences can be traced to dna, but you are quite wrong in assuming that having different dna makes you fundamentally different from other races. All human beings are quite similar, due to the fact that we all have a single female ancestor.
n8glenn 2 years ago
By that line of reasoning we are 70% similar to bananas, because we share 70% of our DNA sequences with them. We are over 98% similar to chimps, but ah, in that less than 2%. There are vast observable behavioral differences between people of self-identified races, the only question is whether those differences are genetic or environmental. I'm betting it's a little of both. Your assertion that it's almost entirely environmental is outlandish.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
Maybe we are 70% similar to bananas, and 99.9% similar to every other human on the planet. You just don't get it, do you? Internalization of stereotypes is the main reason why races seem to be so different, and like I said before, every single human on the planet is descended from the same female ancestor. Racism is actually what you're arguing for here, and let me remind you once more, racism is the domain of the ignorant.
n8glenn 2 years ago
Again, an appeal to authority. You did not address my arguments. I accepted all of your premises and provided evidence that serves to refute your argument from said premises. Please address my arguments.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
No, that is not an appeal to authority, look up the term, and no, you did not "refute" anything, except to laughably assert that different races of people have different sized brains, and therefore some races are smarter than others! You are really making me laugh now, especially since you aren't even reading my comments, if you did, you'd realize that I've addressed all of your laughable assertions.
n8glenn 2 years ago
"anything, except to laughably assert that different races of people have different sized brains"
And your reply to that is?
"You are really making me laugh now, especially since you aren't even reading my comments, if you did, you'd realize that I've addressed all of your laughable assertions."
All you said was that I was operating within an ideological paradigm. Well, prove it. You are only asserting, not arguing. Provide your evidence.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
You are operating with an ideological paradigm. You believe that race determines a person's brain size, and thus intelligence, but these are both leaps of faith. You don't know any of this to be true, but you should know, because i've told you, that the human race is remarkably genetically homogeneous, and also that we all share a single female ancestor, and are all thus related to each other. When you make racist statements, it proves you are a racist, I don't have to prove anything.
n8glenn 2 years ago
Incorrect. I said that there are differences between groups in brain size, on average. Race does not determine anything, race is a human observation about differences.
I agree that the human race is largely homogenous. Why do you keep saying that as if I disagree?
I'm making scientific statements that you disagree with, so you call me racist.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
Even funnier than your brain size argument, in my opinion, is your assertion that you're not a racist because you're half asian! Oh man, you are really cracking me up now.
n8glenn 2 years ago
Just spit it out, you are a racist, right? You think that some races are smarter, or stronger, or better than others, right? You think that there is a master race, right? Let's hear it, unless you don't have the guts to be honest.
n8glenn 2 years ago
Depends how you define racist. If you mean recognizing that there are innate differences between races, then yes. If you mean thinking that people should be different under the law, then no. Equal rights, but a recognition that equal rights will not mean equal outcomes.
It's interesting that you do not address my arguments, but resort immediately to calling me racist. Why do you do that?
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
That is a lie. I did address your arguments, read my comments if you don't believe me. What you are saying is that some people are better than others because of their race, and that makes you a RACIST! The fact that you aren't willing to admit it just makes you a coward, and that's not mere name calling, that is an honest assessment of what you are based on the arguments you are giving me. You can't argue for an ideology and then complain when people correctly state that you argued for it.
n8glenn 2 years ago
"I did address your arguments"
Oh? What is your answer to the correlation between brain size and intelligence?
"What you are saying is that some people are better than others because of their race"
Again, I am asserting only that there are differences.
"and that makes you a RACIST!"
And the ad hominem is capitalized. What vigor!
"The fact that you aren't willing to admit it just makes you a coward"
Didn;t admit it because it isn't true. And what not capitalize coward for that extra flair?
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
You are seriously arguing that different races have different sized brains, and that somehow brain size determines intelligence?! Get real! And you ARE saying that some people are better than others, if I said to you that I was smarter, and stronger than you, I don't think you'd accept that as "stating differences", you'd take it as an insult. You are a racist, that's just the truth, and yes, you are a coward for not admitting what you really think.
n8glenn 2 years ago
My my. If you were stronger than me, I would accept you saying so, but would still maintain that that does not give you greater rights than me. If we could get past the pejoratives and the ad hominems for a moment, I really want to scientifically challenege your assumptions.
Wiki Minnesota Transracial Adoption Study.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
Right, let me guess, you found a study where black people were adopted by white people and still managed to do poorly in school and so you think that one study proves definitively that black people are dumb because they are black. What a thoroughly disgusting and embarrassing position.
n8glenn 2 years ago
"You can't argue for an ideology and then complain when people correctly state that you argued for it."
I'm arguing for science, and if you provided evidence that refuted my assumptions I would accept it. I think the non-biased observer would see that it is you who is arguing from ideology, if we accept that term in its Marxian context.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
You have not given me proof of anything so far, you've merely asserted a bunch of things, and then asked me to prove things to you. Let's see some actual scientific research showing that people who aren't the same race as you have smaller brains, and that those smaller brains are not as good as your brain.
n8glenn 2 years ago
To state that some races of people are smarter than others is racist, there's no other way to define that, I'm sorry. To state that race determines intelligence, or anything else for that matter, is racist, and even most people ignorant enough to BE racists recognize that fact.
n8glenn 2 years ago
To state that race determines intelligence, or anything else for that matter, is racist
I never said that, but if you mean by "determines" correlates, then I am a racist by your standards. That still does not prove that you're right.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
Don't you realize that you've been arguing that all along, that race determines intelligence? My statement was that correlation is NOT causation, you are providing me with studies meant to show that black people cannot do well in an academic environment, and your argument is not that this shows how pervasive their social disadvantages are, your argument is that they are black people and therefore inferior!
n8glenn 2 years ago
When did academic achievement enter the picture? If we're talking about that then I can provide many examples of methods of instruction where black students have flourished. See direct instruction methods, pioneered in Texas.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
My guess is that you are a white supremacist. Right?
n8glenn 2 years ago
Incorrect.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
Then what are you talking about? You're trying to say that some races are better than others, so which one is the master race, let me guess, the race that you happen to be, right?
n8glenn 2 years ago
I'm not making implicit claims of superiority, I'm saying we're different. You are the one who apparently thinks that differences must be equivalent to superiority and inferiority.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
Right, you're just different because you're smarter and better, right?
n8glenn 2 years ago
It is obvious to even the most casual of observers that adopted black children raised by white families scored lower than Asian or white children adopted by white families. Also, identical twins reared apart show a .85 correlation in adult IQ scores, compared with dizygotic twins reared apart, who show a .5 correlation. Intelligence is largely heritable. That is not to say that environment plays no part, but your firebrand insistence of exact equality seems puerile in the face of this evidence.
thomasnolanearnshaw 2 years ago
White and Asian!?! LIKE YOU? Well well well, you've really shown your true colors now. No, black children are not "known" to score lower, that is nonsense. Black children are just as capable of doing well as white children, and no, I never said that everyone is equal in every way, what I said was that your physical and mental traits are not determined by your race. There is no master race, all races are equally capable and equally intelligent, on average.
n8glenn 2 years ago
I could also have said hispanic and Native American, but I omitted them because of character limits.