@sovietamerican2: I can give you a reason for the difference in intelligence. Would you agree that 2 heads are better than one? The aztecs incas etc. lived in compact, dense societies where the spread of knowledge was more fluent. Further north american indians were more spread out and in smaller numbers. They didnt rely on large communities because food was plentiful and therfore the spread of knowledge less rampant
Good video and rigorously honest. Race and Intelligence is more about the psychologists themselves, battling it out with each other. The peoples of all races are the audience. Being the self serving human beings that we are.We get a slight wave of euphoria when told what we wanna hear, or an uneasy feeling when our gurus may have let us down...Human intelligence being fundamentally fixed on a number is outlandish.And would mean we're all incapable of learning regardless of how much exposure
Look, Do poor people EVEN TRY hard in an IQ test? When you LOVE A PERSON AND SHOW THEM RESPECT FROM A YOUNG AGE.. THEIR IQ IMPROVES SIGNIFICANTLY. The more love they feel for themselves the more BELIEF they have in themselves.. THE HIGHER THE IQ.
When you accept that.. you realise why black ghetto IQ is low and why African born Black immigrant IQ demonstrated by degree passes (US census) IS HIGHER than US WHITES AND EVEN ASIANs. Poor social treatment in growing years lowers the IQ. FACT
I have seen amazingly child-like responses to arguments that have given me this conclusion. One of the prominent is that regardless of the fact that almost exclusively whites and asians have advanced in technology, in which they point to wars and environmental issues as foils which, in there mind, explains that they are really dumber. This progression-phobia mentality is usually synonymous with IQs under 90, including most lower races and white rednecks. Fear of science is proof of his research
The main thing I have noticed is that those on the opposite side of the fence from Rushton are usually dumber people. I am not trying to be mean, but it just fits that they probably are the people shown badly in his research. Many of their points are points a 4th grader would respond with.
If someone told me brakes were responsible for stopping a car, and the other told me the radiator stops the car, I wouldn't have to be a mechanic, but only would have to see how the components interact through observation to know that the first person was most likely correct. The second person's claim would go against everything I observed when dealing with cars, so I would likely think he is trying to sell me a new radiator or something.
According to Wikipedia, there are many other scientists that hold this viewpoint. From what I have seen, the arguments from opposing scientists don't match up with reality. Basically, you have to ignore the history of the world, modern sociology, and everything you know about humans to attempt to believe what they are espousing.
This correlates with information found in other studies supporting these differences.The smarter people seem to get, the lower the testosterone seems to be. Whether you believe the brain size claim is the reason, you can't help but see modern sociology explained by his points.
It would be naive to claim that blacks are being held down exactly the same way in every country, including Jamaica, Haita, and African countries. At the same time, Asians are being "lifted" in every country they live in
And the biggest point is that he has nothing to gain from claiming that interbreeding with asians is the trick to improving whites' IQ, and his theory that Asians are the master race when it comes to IQ.
Yet he explained the pluses and minuses of each race. For instance, the higher testosterone seems to give blacks louder, deeper voices, easier to anger, more athleticism, longer dongs, etc, while the asians are the exact opposite on all of these factors, with whites in the middle.
@brendanmcwilliams What does he stand to lose by claiming that Asians are smarter? Not much. His fixation is on claiming that Blacks are on average dumber more violent and over-sexed compared to other races. The testosterone claims are not valid. Graves covers this issue in one of his articles and the claim of Blacks being louder with deeper voices is just a stereotype Rushton has no actual evidence for. Where he fell apart in that debate was failing to explain White savagery and low Native IQ.
@MysticNinjaJay There's a simple reason for the focus on blacks. There's clearly a great discrepancy in achievement, crime rates, etc., between blacks and all other races. As long as we pretend that races are inherently equal in all regards, (despite all evidence and common sense to the contrary) we won't only not solve the problem, but continue to exacerbate it. After all, if we're all exactly the same, then blacks' collective failings can only stem from racism. That fallacy fosters resentment
@PumpingSmashkins Resentment? And what do you think trying to tell the world that Blacks are innately stupid and violent is going to do? It only inspires more contempt for White racists. And it's White racism because I don't see many Asian scientists or supporters peddling this garbage. 2 IQ points btw is not statistically significant. Native Americans should score much higher if the naturally have higher average intelligence like East Asians even if they come from a depraved environment.
@EgalitarianJay Yes, but you're claiming that all races have equivalent IQs (as absurd as that assertion clearly is), so your point about Native Americans/East Asians is totally without merit. You can't have it both ways. Besides, Native Americans separated from Asians easily long enough ago for their intellects and other physiological aspects to have developed differently.
@MaximusRelaximus I'm claiming that race does not determine differences in mental ability. According to Rushton East Asians selected for high intelligent in the Siberian climate. Since Native American crossed the Bering Strait and are supposedly of the same race they should have experienced the same selection pressure. Yet they don't have the same IQ levels which contradicts Rushton's theory. Even in my video he can't explain this.
@EgalitarianJay Reality isn't racist. Facts aren't racist. If you don't see many Asian scientists "peddling this garbage" maybe that's because Asian nations are explicitly and openly racist, and have homogeneous populations buttressed by very clear racial immigration restrictions. Therefore, they have no need to explain the natural imbalances that result from holy "diversity," since they simply have no diversity.
@MysticNinjaJay The response to the discrepancy between average IQs has gone something like this. First, it was assumed that it was due to environment, and that time alone would close the gap. When that didn't happen, the tests were deemed culturally biased, and great lengths were gone to to eliminate said "bias." Same results. Psychologists then actually intentionally tried to design tests biased in favor of blacks. Whites still outscored blacks. Now it's "IQ doesn't mean anything."
@PumpingSmashkins Actually there is significant evidence that the Black-White IQ gap is purely environmental. RIchard Nisbett wrote a great article and book about it. Recent ability tests show the gap has closed to about 7-10 IQ points so the Black American IQ average is currently at about 93. Intervention programs like Head Start boost Black IQ. IQ studies that test a correlation between High Black IQ and quantity of European ancestry show no relationship....
@EgalitarianJay Incorrect. Study after study have consistently (and predictably) been incapable of attributing the difference to environment alone, despite being designed specifically with that goal. Of course environment is a factor, so of course with improved education and nutrition, etc., there will be some narrowing of the gap. Nobody suggests that it's entirely genetic. The only whiz kids who suggest it's entirely one or the other are in your decidedly misguided and delusional camp.
- Heredity, Environment and Race Differences in IQ a Commentary on Rushton and Jensen (2005)
Everything I said is cited there. This claim of yours has been thoroughly discredited. You can't claim that study after study is incapable of showing a pure environmental model or Nil Hypothesis for genetic contribution explains the IQ gap when study after study has done just that. Rushton et al. simply ignore studies that contradict their assertions.
@MaximusRelaximus Go to my channel and look at the following videos at these select times:
- Race and Intelligence: Science's Last Taboo - Part 5 (5:50)
- A Scientific Debate on Race and Intelligence Part 11 of 11 (3:10)
These statements by Nisbett and Graves cite studies which are the nail in the coffin to racialist hereditarian theories. European ancestry does not make Blacks smarter. There are a multitude of tests which have established this fact. You are simply wrong.
@EgalitarianJay "European ancestry does not make Blacks smarter."
Wow. Not sure what part of anything I said came close to resembling something vaguely similar to that. But if that's what you somehow took away from my comments, then your proclamation that "I'm simply wrong" kind of means less than nothing, since you can't even figure out what I'm saying (very coherently and concisely, I might add). But I can easily state that you're simply wrong when you claim race is not an inherent factor.
@MaximusRelaximus I'm not claiming you said that but based on hereditarian theory if races differ in intelligence then hybrids ought to show higher intelligence than pure members of the lower IQ group since high intelligence is a valuable trait. Rushton makes that exact argument in one of the videos I told you to look at yet he has been refuted. One of the studies which refutes this claim is the Eyferth study which is a Transracial adoption study. There are several others.
@EgalitarianJay "...whereas tests based on verbal and mathematical ability cannot be completely culture-free, it is more difficult to make a case for cultural bias in nonverbal tests of abstract reasoning such as the Raven Progressive Matrices. Despite years of trying to eliminate cultural bias from standardized tests, African Americans still score lower than European Americans..."
--The Evolution of Status Expectations: A Theoretical Extension
@MaximusRelaximus There's obviously a high heritability factor between individuals. That doesn't tell us the cause of variation in IQ between groups. Raven's Matrices are more culturally loaded than test takers often acknowledge because the construction of the patterns derive from test creators who have a culture that may be distinct from others. I don't know of any racial immigration policies in Asian countries and I agree facts are facts. That's why I appeal to science on this issue.
@EgalitarianJay It goes to the heritability of IQ, which is what you've been disputing all along. Of course it doesn't in itself translate to racial differences. Never claimed it did. To assert any significant level of cultural bias in RPM is just absurd, and illustrates the contortions that the reality deniers on your side go through in their fanatical efforts to prove that which is clearly false. It's a brutal anal rape of Occam's Razor.
@MaximusRelaximus I'm disputing the idea that there are racial differences in intelligence. The heritability of IQ is really a side issue. As a scholar said in one of my videos you'd be extremely foolish to deny a heritable component to intelligence. Every biological function of the body is inherited and there can be variations from person to person. What this comes down to is the idea that there is something "wrong" with the brains of certain races that makes its members dumber than others.
@MaximusRelaximus Your invoking of Occam's Razor is based on a logical fallacy known as appeal to ridicule. You call the statement of professional Psychologists absurd without debating the legitimacy of their argument. In truth it doesn't matter what type of IQ test you devise the most direct tests of a genetic component to the Black-White IQ gap support an environmental model. Studies also show that the gap is not immutable as the average scores have been converging over the years.
@EgalitarianJay Of course it's nothing of the sort. Occam's Razor, for the sake of brevity, basically states that, given equally explanatory hypotheses, the simplest one is usually the correct one. When looking at the higher crime rates, lower test scores, greater poverty, etc., of blacks internationally and historically, the simplest explanation is that there is an inherent racial component. The opposing hypotheses go to great, convoluted lengths to try tocompletely dismiss the racial element.
@MaximusRelaximus But then again one can just as easily argue that racial discrimination has created racial inequality across the world. Your explanation isn't simpler its merely more convenient for your ideological views. Racial discrimination is a fact. Racialism is a theory that goes to great lengths to explain reality. So you are at a disadvantage. You can't deny my explanation is an important component while I can reasonable be skeptical of yours. Go ahead and try to rationalize racialism.
@EgalitarianJay Again, simply and obviously incorrect. Your intentionally simple explanation already adds an element, discrimination, that doesn't exist in the simpler explanation. How can you not see that? If it were required, then of course it can't be objected to, but it's apparent at this level that it's not. The less complicated explanation is still at least as predictive.
@MaximusRelaximus Your explanation is no simpler than mine. Tell me why racial discrimination or environmental explanations cannot be the sole and only determinant of racial inequality in the world? What empirical evidence do you have that debunks this theory? That is what matters most here. Valid evidence. When you can explain to me why races must differ in intellect and temperament logically you have a sound theoretical model. When you can prove it empirically you have revealed a truth.
@MaximusRelaximus " When looking at the higher crime rates, lower test scores, greater poverty, etc., of blacks internationally and historically, the simplest explanation is that there is an inherent racial component"
simplest isn't always accurate, especially when dealing with statistics. You can make a somewhat solid arguement for it when dealing with intelligence-because it IS genetic (whether or not that gentic component is purely based on .4% to .5% difference in genteric traits is
@MaximusRelaximus what i meant was difference in RACIAL genetic traits, is a bit of a stretch and quite limited considering the only "proof" is based on statistical trend on average between races. if it was the 100% cause of that .4% difference, then it shouldn't be possible for black people to have high IQs than the white average IQ.) Trying to pin point a gene in that .4% difference that controls intelligence lv doesn't sound simple at all, and environment and social factors can't be ignored.
@MaximusRelaximus Now leaving intelligence behind (based on the mostly social construct of "race"). Crime, poverty and other social factors are 100% social contructs. Policitics by its nature is a social phenonminon and constantly evolving at a rate at which human evolution or even the passing of traits can't keep up. Sure, you can show a statistical trend between race and crime, but finding a link between genetics and crime/poverty is rediculas.
@MaximusRelaximus Crime by its self is a 100% social construct. It does not exist in nature nor in the gene pool. It exist purely on a piece of paper and changes constantly. Defining what is a crime in the US alone can vary from state to state. Don't even bother looking at it from an international standpoint, as USA is one of the few countries in the world that keeps vast amounts of crime statistics. Now look up how those statistics are gotten-just not even a little accurate representation of-
@ikcjjtt Yes, law is a social construct, and so by extension is crime. That's self-evident. It's also irrelevant, once you remove dubious, victimless "crimes" such as drug use, gambling, etc. If you only look at the crimes that no reasonable person could argue should not be criminal--rape, murder, etc.--the statistics do not change.
Again, I will ask the question, "how does being poor make one more likely to commit rape?"
Again, I'll cite the victims' survey that corresponds with the arrests.
@PumpingSmashkins Consider the living conditions of the poor especially in urban areas. The stress of poverty often leads to alcohol and drug abuse which in turn leads to domestic violence. A child reared in a violent setting can have a negative psychological impact on them. This can lead to children growing up to be drug abusers, abusive husbands/boyfriends and even rapists. This is not an excuse for the behavior of individuals but an alternative explanation for trends.
@EgalitarianJay "...This is not an excuse..." except it plainly is, and the "an alternative explanation" wording doesn't change anything. But even if such an upbringing did excuse rape (sorry, provide an alternate explanation for rape), we're already back at square one, aren't we? Why do such conditions exist?
@PumpingSmashkins Why do impoverished conditions exist? Mainly because of the failures of government. Some people are poor because of bad decisions and lack of opportunity. Now why are their racial disparities in poverty? I would say that it is because of racism. How can you not come to that conclusion given the history of institutional racism? The issue is not simple though it is complex. Negative cultural values can lead to a persistent of such conditions. But what came first?
@PumpingSmashkins Well then lets get back to the point-"Why do such conditions exist?" Why do black people do so much crime? Honestly, it's complex. There is no one word solution. Yea, i could sit here and make excuses, but there are plenty of them to go around. I could sit here and give overly simplistic answers to-like "they get caught more". Like i said before, crime thoeries attempt to explain this, but its complicated.There is no one word answer. i cant summarize the reasons in 500 letters.
@MaximusRelaximus of reality. Therefore crime is affected 100% by environmental/social factors. This determines what is a crime, who gets caught with the crime, who gets officially charged/convicted, what public attitudes are toward a crime, where crime takes place, where cops patrol, where they dont patrol, sentencing, the criminal justice system its self. It's silly to try to base all this on genetics. Now you can find genetic components for personality traits that can correalate with crime-
@MaximusRelaximus but those personality traits are not crimes in and of themselves. Now you can argue that black people have a higher chance of getting arrested,convicted, ect. because of a inherent racial component, the color of thier skin. But it's still not a crime to be black. As for why black people do seemingly more crime? Because they get caught more. There is your simplest explanation. And im not even going to bother with poverty-they have no money-simple.
@ikcjjtt And why do they have no money? Yeah, never mind, I know, Whitey did it! And how exactly does poverty motivate rape? Did you know that surveys of victims of crime show that the racial distribution of the perpetrators is statistically identical to the arrest rates? That indicates that the arrest rate has nothing to do with prejudice. And of course, the disproportionality is simply staggering. This insane "everything is Whitey's fault" nonsense is a huge part of the problem.
@MaximusRelaximus "Whitey did it". Listen, try to understand my arguement and not jump to conclusions. This isnt about white people or black people. I dont beleive RACE exists, and niether do genetic experts. Rape is motivated by anger and power. Anger over situations and powerlessness to change them. There are actual traits held by rapist, but it would be difficult to spell them all out on youtube. They are in my criminal justice book though. statistics alone do not indicate shit-u are just-
@ikcjjtt Where to begin with all that nonsense? Okay, besides the fact that race obviously does exist as something more significant and less "sinister" than a "social construct," the experts clearly do NOT agree that it does not. Simply google "does race exist" (I used that search term because it's already biased in your favor) and actually READ...not just one page, and not just the pages that seem to comply with your politically ridiculous predisposition (nor the Stormfront type pages)...
@ikcjjtt wrong, take it from Ernst Mayr, i'll give you the link if you want... it was an essay he did in 2002, short read outlining RACE is perfectly reasonable to use as a word, in short it shows bio-pathways within species that point to subspecies and then further change into other species... race is a word that helps us delineate species change as there is very obvious genetic difference within species and racial differences as subsets and groups exist as to isolation/movement over time...
@glorp896 but for the human race, that becomes obelete, and a mute point for this arguement. That still doesnt show what race has to do with crime. Black people are not sub-species, or a different one. They are human, made up of 99.9% of the same genetic materials as the other guy.
@ikcjjtt race/color are just one of many predictive variables of probability outlining future crime rates, disease rates, IQ, etc... the pattern holds based solely on knowing just color, but add brain size (blacks smallest), brain complexity (blacks least), hormone levels, etc... and you have alot more than just correlation for your predictive outcomes... of course blacks are not a different species, SUB definitely, different race definitely - a little change in a complex organism does a BUNCH!
@glorp896 "brain size (blacks smallest), brain complexity (blacks least), hormone levels, etc... and you have alot more than just correlation for your predictive outcomes... of course blacks are not a different species, SUB definitely, different race definitely - a little change in a complex organism does a BUNCH!"
um...anthropologist, geneticists, biologist, phychologists, and plenty of other experts would consider all of that a load of bullshit. But then again it depends on what experts-
@ikcjjtt no they won't because it has been repeatedly outlined in the peer review journals - i can cite many for you and no, it does not depend on WHAT experts - its a matter of reviewing whats already available as field research, which is quite exhaustive... the only real debate is cause/effect origins, not basic observational data like hormone levels, brain size, brain complexity and many other easily observable facts with plenty of independently verifiable evidence, which is just NOT popular
@glorp896 yea dude, you wont find data on any crediable scientific piece of work claiming that black people are characterized as a sub species, different race outside of social constructs, or find that cause/effect of said correalations originates from race and race alone (based on genetics ofcourse). I have never run across an expert who would agree with any of that, including Rushton who advicates that very conclusion.
@ikc dude? look up DON'T CALL ME DUDE, a utube vid by SCATTERBRAIN, and yes, THESE are dudes, not me... won't find any credible scientist? did you read the Ernst Mayr essay, and the examples he gave? i'll message it to you, he embraces race - and he is WAY beyond credible, a granddaddy of evolution-biology...
so you don't think humans can break out of this species and start another one? maybe inferior, maybe superior, such as evolution goes... of course there is some group that is closer
@glorp896 no i have not read such an essay. Of course humans can break out of this species and start a new one. But nobody here argues white people evolved from black people because black people are some kind of sub-species. And if this Ernst Mayr essay says crap along those lines then he better have ground breaking genetic evidence to back it up. If this is going to be some history of evolution, indirect evidence, and assumptions made by some 90 yr old racist, it will be a joy to read.
@ikcjjtt sub doesn't necessarily mean below, i mean sure it really does, but its like subset in math, there is no value judgment here, its just another grouping separate from others. Mayr crap?! LOL, you REALLY need to read this and find out who he is! god, thats funny, you need more experience in this issue. you are close, he was in his 90s and died about 3 years after this essay... so feel free to think he was screwed up in the, but thats not the case... he still has PC angles in this essay
@glorp896 ok i have read his essay and agree with it 100% based on his defintions, and his understanding. What i don't agree with is the stuff u have been saying, which doesn't line up with the essay. Or perhaps my interpretation of the essay is wrong. Reguardless, its what i have been trying to tell you.
@ikcjjtt i have no problem conceding the possibility that whites are faded africans, but its well known that many early hominids got around the planet, homo erectus for instance... so the out of africa idea is not a perfect theory, just a good guess so far... so i understand my humble origins QUITE WELL (ALTERED STATES has a real spin on this! check that out!)... just as cro mags and Neanderthals had larger cranial capacities i can feel regret for human evolution on this line of thinking also
@glorp896 you adher to. Though even Rushton would call BS on brain complexity, sub species,different race outside of social constructs, or that brain size is the cause of being intelligence. And correalation is ALL we have to go on. add in sex, socio economic status, age, population differences, beleif systems, environment, misleading data from Rushton, over simplified racial defintions, nutritional values, cultural beleifs, and MUCH MORE being correalated with-
@ikcjjtt not true, these factors are admitted to be causative, whatever the exact relationship in the form of some simplistic one to one ratio scale of measurement you wish to test these ideas with... bigger brains yield higher IQs, thats a fact. correlation is ALL we have? no way, thats just stupid... EVEN if you add up many correlations and don't even try to create the flow chart of cause/effect you can naturally extrapolate cause/effect assumptions... the data is reported by rushton, not his
@glorp896 "you can naturally extrapolate cause/effect assumptions" Yes u can, but that's all u can do. No expert argues for cause and effect. Not even Rushton. now he will say "this evidence is better than yours", but it ends there. Correalation does not prove causation.
@ikcjjtt nonsense, you should read the hormone level argument alone... those super charged protein chains as secreted by our endocrine system are enormous behavior modifiers... blacks have more testosterone - known to cause more violence and sex and yes, blacks have more sex than whites/asians... i'm not so stuck on JUST rushton, he is not some single source exhaustive measure of this debate, but he is one of the best... the last refuge of those who dare not be racist: correlates are not causes
@glorp896 i havent researched the hormone arguement yet. But based on all these socialogical, nutritional, environmental, cultural factors, what ever its findings are (which " testosterone - known to cause more violence and sex" is bullshit), it makes little difference over the effect envornmental and genetics have on these largly social factors. It becomes less and less about race the more studies that focus on race and inadvertedly connect these dots across a wide spectrum of issues that each-
@ikcjjtt so there you go again (and i'm stuck in this point as well), no way to fully quantify the comparison of all these variables together and put a number to the nature/nurture debate...
@glorp896 can be a contributing factor to these issues. Its surprising how these studies have to try so hard to keep the attention on race, by ignoring everything else that contradicts the cause and effect theory based on race and race alone. "Theories may seek to explain violence in men, but because it's such a complex social phenomenon, violence can perhaps best be understood as the final outcome of an intricate web of interacting factors."-netdoctor.co.uk
@ikcjjtt again, you really don't even need cause and effect explanations, but ANTI-racists demand them while ignoring all the a priori data and very predictive models of probability that help the pattern hold, and that pattern is: inferiority of blacks with my usual long laundry list i guess you need to see alot more of on each count which you will never comprehensively debunk: iq, crime, sex, longevity, disease, education, $ etc... complex indeed, and no excuse to obfuscate the obvious...
@glorp896 Actually i can debunk each of those has not having anything to do with race directly. I can see disease as being "somewhat" "racial", but medicine is not an exact science, it may have nothing to do with race either. As for $, education, crime, sex, longevity, ect. isj ust BS if u are directly relating them to race. Now blacks ARE victimized because of race based on those things, but being black doesnt make u do any of those things. So it really depends on your arguement. -
@ikcjjtt more dismissiveness on your part... and blacks are the predators, not the victims... this is most especially true relative to what they would have been today if never taken to the new world... for one they wouldn't have a nice advantage of 15%+ white genetic material and they would be far greater victims of their own kind in africa compared to USA... its not even close...
@glorp896 this is all based on assumptions, indirect correalations, wishful thinking, over generalizations, and flat out lies. Reguardless of what dogma you beleive, reality does not fit it.
@glorp896 being black is correalated with each of those things, but being black is not the cause. It just makes them a target. For example, a black man can have no money because he cant get a job BECAUSE he is black (no one wants to hire him for that reason alone). That CAN and does happen. But being black alone doesnt mean he is not competant to work, therefore he doesn't qualify for a job.
@ikcjjtt of course not, skin color is a convenient correlation - i've listed the many other correlates some as causative... why do you say such an obvious simplistic stupid thing at this point of the debate? incapable of building the discussion with memory and understanding? if anything affirmative action has created far more unqualified blacks replacing more qualified whites... this is epidemic and still ongoing, not to mention our president who admitted as much like Clarence Thomas as well!
@glorp896 everything you just said (not showing cause and effect on any of it, and in some cases contradicting the data of each other (especially brain size between sexes), and u have got an issue with jumping to hypothesis supported by either shady/incomplete data or cause and effect theory based on a A correalation of race, rather than the 20 that exist outside of race and holds correalations just as strongly.
@ikcjjtt how have i or the data contradicted itself as to gender and IQ differences? men have larger brains and higher IQs... you know that data is shady? data is always incomplete, you can always be philosophical or think there is another level of complexity and another layer of variables to add to the equation, but how much do you really need to be convinced negros are inferior? correlations are as creative as you want them to be, the ones i list are of OBVIOUS influence, not just random..
@glorp896 "but how much do you really need to be convinced negros are inferior". First off i need to know what is exactly meant by this statement. is it based on statistics via intelligence/correalations? Or is it based on some non-scientific scale of what it means to be superior? This is the MMA vs TMA debate all over again. Obvious to the naked eye, yes. Oversimplified as well considering tons of other factors that u convientianly ignore.
@ikcjjtt inferior? come on: higher crime rates, greater disease (behavioral and genetic), lower life expectancy, higher illegitimacy rates, etc... all the measure of blacks across this list and a MUCH longer one if you dare me... and yes, don't forget IQ!... i use science first and foremost... we know what makes life easier, happier and better for us all, these universal valued commodities of mankind embracing and expanding our humanity in greater directions - u know what i ignore? or assume it?
@glorp896 ok based on that defintion. I personaly do not rank races or even things based on superiority. To me it is completely based on the environment, situation, and individual. So when people start throwing superiority and inferiority out there they need to come up with a defintion.
@ikcjjtt of course you don't, NO GUTS! how can you not value a normal or above average child over a retard or downs syndrome person, or a cat over a rat or a dog over an ant... OF COURSE you can rank, you just want to lie to yourself and think we are all equal? or is it just color that you can't handle? i'll put you to the test: an earthquake happens in 72 IQ Haiti and 105+ IQ japan, who do you want to save first? the morons or the above average? i've defined superior for you in many ways
@glorp896 i know u CAN rank, and people DO and SHOULD rank. ALL societies are based on rank. We DO value stuff. I PERSONALY dont. I dont agree with capatalism and the free enterprise system because of that, but that is a whole other issue. I never said anything about being equal. But what I dont agree with is rank in (and most of the USA),race. Because in our society its obselete. Social Dawinism doesnt do shit in 2011. "Survival of the fittest" is meaningless in modern soicety.
@ikc i dont think so, race issues can be tied into free enterprise. i think capitalism has certainly gone too far and is unfair, and as such i would have a program or redistribution that would disproportionately favor nigs as they are representing the lower class more so than whites/asians. i'm tired of hearing the politicians talk about MIDDLE CLASS all the time, WHAT ABOUT THE LOWER CLASS! (and yes, i mean negros as well! aha! S. Darwinism meaningless in modernity? wrong again, ya dreaming!
@glorp896 If Black people are being victimized, suffering, or whatever people in the USA go help them out. they are not just left there to rot "because the weak shall perish". The law isnt written that way anymore. Murder is murder-white black or whatever. If people need money, we have programs for that. It doesnt matter why they need money or food, we help them anyway. (WIC, food stamps, attempt at equalizing schools, welfare, health care, ect.)
@ikc oh golly, thanks so much for the info about helping blacks in USA, i NEVER would have imagined! of course i would rather help katrina nigs than Haiti and florida nigs even more where i live... no, murder of whites by blacks is worse than murder of blacks by whites - as a whole the loss is much worse when a bunch of whites are killed compared to blacks... wrong again. it SHOULD matter, and in fact you are wrong again - there are hoops/requirements for welfare - its not so easy, unless u lie
@glorp896 wishful thinking, the law isnt written that. Thats just personal opinion and wishful thinking. You are not even talking about reality anymore. Delusion dude.
@glorp896 correalations are just that, correalations. Just becasue something correalates doesn't mean it has a cause and effect relationship. Children with bigger feet correalate with being more intelligent compared to kids with smaller ones. They did a IQ test between kids in 6th grade and 5th grade. What do feet have to do with intelligence? nothing. The 6th graders were smarter because of being older and more educated. Feet was an indirect correalation.
@glorp896 another study found that the more icecream sold on a beach the more people drowned. There was a correalation between the ice cream sold and the people that drowned. What does ice cream have to do with people drowning? nothing. The more ice cream being sold=more people at the beach.More people at the beach=more chances for people to drown. Indirect correalation. Race and IQ-indirect. Race and crime-indirect. Race and most of that other BS-indirect.
@glorp896 I dont agree with ranking race because it is obselete, there is no point. When Japan and Haiti and New Orleans had issues, USA was there to help all. Being a certain color doesnt affect the immigration policy. Most young people in America could care less about having a baby outside of thier race. And with the onset of gene splicing and being able to choose what genes our children will have, race will soon vanish from vocabulary. Superior or not, this isnt black vs white.-
@ikc the point is a better humanity for our future... you obviously don't understand or cant concede that we can predict better outcomes of people simply by looking at race/color and breeding accordingly... IT REALLY WORKS! IQ should effect immigration policy... with half a million you can get in if you say you are starting a business... not true as to cross racial breeding, it has gone up over the years, i've seen the graphs, but most DO CARE... wrong again... gene therapy? u may be correct!
@ikcjjtt they should care - some do, so it matters... i never ascribe a DOESN'T MATTER to an idea if even only one person has the idea... it always starts with one person doesn't it?
@glorp896 its more my country vs your country now. Chinese can think they are superior, but they arent a world power yet. Honestly speaking green is the only color that matters to the rest of the world. A black man with a trillion dollars will ALWAYS be worth more than a poor chinese man with no $. World ranks on money, race is pointless in the face of that.Thats why we are in all these wars now. race is an old fashion category that holds no practicle value,even if everything you say is right.
@ikcjjtt chinks are superior and a world power and RISING VERY FAST, they have had 10%++ growth rates for many years in many of their provinces... their infrastructure projects are MASSIVE... they WILL be the number one economy soon enough, they just surpassed the japs recently...it will take awhile before they surpass the USA and even longer for the EU... but i'm sure it will be done... i would think the poor chink has better chances of breeding higher IQ kids...
@glorp896 the GDP list does not follow your racial scale. many asian countries are listed well below your white countries. and countries like india and mexico are well above many white and asian countries.IF GDP rank was because of race, USA wouldnt be at the top, Haiti wouldnt be above mongolia, ect. China and japan are exceptions. Many Asian countries arent even in the top 20. This was a silly correalation.
@ikcjjtt the best retort BY FAR as to your money replacing race idea is to see the amazing work of correlation that richard lynn has done on this - his race/IQ connection - his website is screwed up, probably hacked, but wiki has his stuff..."Intelligence and the Wealth and Poverty of Nations" (code title of his article for race-$ connection)
@glorp896 iq does correalation to wealth. Race correalates to Iq. So race correalates with wealth? Indirect correalation. Which is invalid. By this logic i can correalate how big a child's feet is with intelligence. Its bullshit dude. If there is no direct correalation, there is no meaningful correalation. And race and iq is also indiect, as is iq and wealth- its just hard to prove that to a racist, who no matter how invalid the logic is, will correalate race with everything.
@ikcjjtt there you go, you can use these cause/correlations in both directions, but this gets into the CHICKEN OR EGG FIRST kind of debate as libs would like you to believe that low IQ is the result of high IQ (even though they wouldn't admit it) people exploiting the low IQ people to make them poor... well, to a large degree this is correct, the exploitation part, as the smart should have the dumb work for them, why the other way around?, thats called welfare... stop calling me dude, thank you
@glorp896 reguardless, correalation does not prove causation. You have yet to show even valid correalations outside of race and intelligence. Everything else is just indirect,pointless, or your making it up. Funny how i cant find many of the stuff u r talking about on data bases in libraries or on the internet. Its just racism that's not even valid. Even stupid people wont fall for these ploys and experts on both sides support none of this.
@glorp896 And for the record, thats also why i dont define superiority the way you do. It doesnt mean anything in race. So what if blacks are inferior? The only thing that can be done is to compensate for that and fix it (if possible). If not compensate for it (Affirmative action, reverse discrimination to some). what else do u want to do about? send them back to Africa? stop them from breeding? kill them off? Cant be done in the USA. This isnt WWII.
@ikc of course it means something in race - the correlations/cause are clear enough even if a generalization... so what? the implications are don't breed with them for starters... and why would you want to live in a neighborhood that is all black?, loads of crime. we already abort 3 times the number of black babies as we do white, i say increase this for blacks and sterilize more of them - one penny of tax dollars of welfare and SNIP SNIP! you can look up Tom Shelly's "back to africa program"
@glorp896 no body wants to live in an all black neighborhood, some people just dont have a choice. Though "all black" hoods is just a code name for low income,deserted, high crime areas. (though only 12% of people do crime in those places, and cops just ignore it-crime displacement theory).And once again you cant do any of that in America. Its wishful thinking, if they didnt want black people in your country, shouldnt have brought black slaves. Ofcourse they will breed-reek what you soe.
@ikcjjtt "inner city youth" is code for young black nigger boys... criminals in essence... you should see the crime stats... you NEED TO... 12%, interesting figure, and certainly NOT believable... guess you need to see the stats again... but in thinking about the huge percent of nigs in jail/prison, i guess you would need some to be out in order to commit the crime so we really don't know the percent until we catch and convict them, so we can assume its MUCH higher than 12%, i guess...
@glorp896 12% of the people in those areas do mot of the crime all of the time. That's a fact by the FBI. As for in the prisons, i say about 30% is represented thier. More then twice the amount in the population, but white people still populate the cells more than black people-as to be expected of the minority.
@glorp896 ..USDJ stats 2009. Over 10 million total arrests, 7 million were white, nearly 70%. Why aren't more whites in jail ? One reason could be because whites fill the mental hospitals and drug rehabs. Paying their way could be another reason. Up until 1967, whites filled the prisons. Did whites decide to behave and let blacks take over crime ? Not likely.....If you're gonna present stats, at least learn how to comprehend them, especially the fine print...
@gmccall22 the fbi is notorious for including spics in with whites and thanks to the illegals "whites" look WAY bad... there is some fine print for you... hmm, you rounded up?:
- In 2009, 69.1 percent of all persons arrested were white (and spic), 28.3 percent were black, and the remaining 2.6 percent were of other races. - so thats well over 2 times the representation of their black population (did blacks decide to behave worse and take over crime? - just in the nature? typical nig behavior?
@glorp896 ..If the FBI is so notorious for including Latinos with white"as you say" Then why are you presenting their stats in the first place ? You're saying the FBI is inaccurate ..lol..Only when it comes to whites crime. And latinos are counted separately . Did blacks decide to behave worse ? Answering my question with a question is because you can't argue...lol. And 69% is roughly whites share of the population, the same as blacks. And the RATES hasn't change hardly any since the 1950's
@gmc because thats where you got this stat from brain drain... of course they are inaccurate as to racially outlining crime stats which have been going way up for latinos as the illegals have been making hispanic rates catch up and surpass blacks in many areas... latinos are counted separately but i can show you FBI not counting them separately... if they do at times, thats great... you obviously are mathematically retarded - there is no explaining to you apparently... late 80s-early 90s=peak
@glorp896 ..You're the retard. The UCR fine print says arrests are for REPEAT offenders, they're not on an individual basis. Victimization Reports are for HOUSEHOLDS. A crime committed against ONE person, the whole household are victims which will make the numbers greater. So yeah, that's where I got my stats from. But unlike yourself, I read the fine print, and with comprehension. You went on some bogus gov site..LOL..
@gmccall22 i caught you making up crap before, so i'm going to end this quicker this time and no, it was from the FBI... go have a chat with rikki, babye...
@glorp896..I made up the fine print ? LOLOLOL...Or the fact that you went on a half truth telling site withholding the fine print ?..LOLOL...He quarrels again because he's ignorant and can't argue...This isn't the FBI's doing. It's stupid people who can read stats correctly, like YOU...Your "IQ" failed you once again
@ikcjjtt of course you don't, NO GUTS! how can you not value a normal or above average child over a retard or downs syndrome person, or a cat over a rat or a dog over an ant... OF COURSE you can rank, you just want to lie to yourself and think we are all equal? or is it just color that you can't handle? i'll put you to the test: an earthquake happens in 72 IQ Haiti and 105+ IQ japan, who do you want to save first? the morons or the above average? i've defined superior for you in many ways
@glorp896 in other words " If cohort differences across time and culture complicate interpretation of brain size differences across races, the additional uncontrolled effects of community variables in the determination of IQ across races render conclusive statements about racial IQ differences even more difficult, if not impossible at present.- M. Peters, Ph.D Deptartment of Psychology,University of Guelph.
Though i think my explanation is simplier and easier to understand.
@ikcjjtt thats nonsense, you can only say that under the assumption of some absolutist method of coming to conclusions. racists like me with their data know there's a distribution of results involved, and obvious overlap of results between races... there is no difficulty in racial IQ differences, its a matter of compiling the test results that show stark contrasts and he creates a scarecrow argument by interjecting UNCONTROLLED EFFECTS?, you can "control" for variables, its statistical analysis
@glorp896 u can not control the variables of time, social or environmental factors that can range in the 100s. Hence why even Rushton argues 50% environmental and 50% genetic.
@ikcjjtt you can factor out variables and have all kinds of controls - its called regression analysis... its a way of showing the usual nature/nurture debate is folly... just as in twin studies with different social construction help mold the idea that genetics is foremost... think of it this way: 1000s of generations, millions of years - all hardwiring your programming, instinct and imprint vulnerability measures for your SINGLE lifetime, now what is the greater force? - one lifetime or 1000s?
@glorp896 genetics plays a big role no doubt (particulary in almost genetically identical TWINS for crying out loud). But across different races and solely based in that race? nice way of thinking- but in all those millons of years, isnt it possible that envioronmental and social factors guided that evolution? I always thought things evolve to adapt to the environment. If that is true, environmental factors play a role in how genetics themselves evolved. nature vs nurture? or 1 and the same?
@ikcjjtt solely based in that race? not sure what you may be assuming i'm thinking again... that superior programming was more a function of advantage for the white race? that is true... east asians as well... and of course social construction and environment effected them, much more so than now!, so thats just it, you can reverse the whole social construction thing on the constructionists by telling them their own idea is what molds and shapes genetics and nature over nurture in one lifetime
@ikcjjtt rushton has wimped out at times and i think his scholarship is lacking, just as you say he abides by this kind of average mid way point of the usual range of 20-80% genetics is causative of IQ... rushton has chickened out sometimes, no doubt... you can bring up the full accounting of a socially constructed class structure and upbringing and compare races, the remaining balance is genetic and if regression analysis is close enough its almost a 100% genetic differential
@ikcjjtt so the point is to understand the gap... what percent of the gap is genetic and what percent is environmental and maybe far more important at this point is what percent is a function of a genetically influenced environment as in genetically inferior people are poor because they are low IQed... not low IQed because they are poor... so PC equalizers like to try to reverse the cause and effect vector to originate an inferior state without value judgment and with forgiveness/excuses...
@glorp896 my arguement is not based around people, but races. Of course there are genetically inferior people on all scales. My own brother and familly do not have my hieght, strength, and intelligence. If such genes can not be located and based 100% around a race, this arguement is pointless.
@ikcjjt good, you do have some possibility of understanding and at least admitting SOME TRUTH. i disagree as to 100%, correlations and even cause and effect are not 100%. the key is determining what is statistically significant as to how much of that percentage outlines predictive models and outcomes. try not to be so 100%ish and absolutist. some fuzzy Taoist math is in order here as we concede a distribution of results and a broad ranging mean are at work here - such is this race generalization
@ikcjjtt and really at its base is geography and cold weather serving a greater evolutionary force of higher IQ, whereas hunter-gatherer warmer africa required less of this survival thinking to get by... its amazing how this north high IQ colder weather pattern holds around the world, until its stifling, like the eskimos and even a northern japanese tribe that has lower IQs... or the lapps in scando or INUIT...
@ikcjjtt of course there is alot of guesswork and broad ranges of percentages - we aren't god yet, but we know who is more evil, stupid and as a whole more inferior regardless of the requirement by the left to know HOW it happened... it happened and is true, we racists don't have to prove in some exhaustive highly convoluted cause/effect flow chart of evolution over vast time to point out the basic observational data that holds true over 100s of years at least (black inferiority)
@glorp896 "who is more evil, stupid and as a whole more inferior regardless of the requirement by the left to know HOW it happened" lets keep this scientific please. I couldnt care less about your prejudices, but they are causing your points and statements to become incoherent and irrelavent. My arguement is on what caues said "inferiority". I would rather discuss each factor ONE at a time. Bunching them all up like this and coming to the conclusion race is the ONE and ONLY factor that matters-
@ikcjjtt prejudice is irrational founded belief - i'm guided by the empirical data... and even if i were bias/prejudice without the science you SHOULD CARE... thats what we should fight, the bias/prejudice lies... EVEN SO i'd argue you can be correct without having seen all the data... i'm hardly incoherent and NOTHING on the net keeps me more busy than race; HARDLY irrelevant, its a firestorm hot topic that yields more response than any other topic i've written about on the net...
@glorp896 by purposely ignoring glaringly obvious factors that come into play under the false notion of "regression analysis" factor's out all other variables (which it doesn't), is proof enough that black inferiority is caused by society (which view points didn't differ from yours) forcing them into a position of inferiority. And as those chains are loosened through time and understanding of each other, we see the IQ gap closing, black people making more money, becoming leaders (president),-
@ikcjjtt you keep saying i ignore, i guess you keep ignoring that i say i don't ignore these things, its merely a matter of reporting what you think is a BETTER balance of info to serve mankind as a whole... blacks are doing better than indians, THANKS TO WHITES... if we had given blacks "nations", like the Sioux nation and other indian reservations they would be on their own... and the 15%+ white genetic influx helps as well! blacks live longer and make more money than indians - obama=fraud
@ikcjjtt not according to the graph i just saw, unless its a very new trend... please list your source - last i saw black men were pushing up toward 70 life expectancy... gotta go now, can't do the research presently...
@glorp896 and ultimately the old fashion notion of racial superiority becoming more and more based on superstition and dogma rather than scientific inquiry,objective analysts of facts, and appropriate uses of statistics.
@ikcjjtt if not squelched by PC witch hunter equalizers i think just the opposite will occur, we will realize that there is a disproportionate level of advantageous genetic material condensed in certain groups - jews, japs, some NW euro whites, etc... from blood to race to GENETICISM, and that should be the new racism, genetics, which would also show blacks have some good stuff, but not enough to justify continually breeding them relative to superior races, that i shall continue to believe...
@ikcjjtt ...but all of the legitimate pages. You'll be shocked to discover that what is so glaringly obvious--that all races are not exactly the same in every respect--is actually confirmed by research.
And I see your understanding of rape comes straight out of the feminist (why is it that racism, antisemitism, & all similar types of "-isms" are bad except feminism, btw?) manifesto. Strange that rape has nothing to do with sex, since I, for one, need an erection b4 having sex. But I digress...
@PumpingSmashkins no one here is arguing anybody is the same. Nobody is. But from a crime stand point, genetics is a mute point. It doesnt matter what color you are, crime is still a crime. But who gets caught for that crime and who gets sentenced and for how long does have racial correalations. My understanding of rape comes from a criminal justice major with a PHD, real life experience, and decades of studying this stuff. So when he says some rapist cant even get an erection, let alone-
@PumpingSmashkins finish the very act of raping, i tend to take his word for it. Call it feminists if you want, but u dont need an erection to rape someone. Rape is based on the need to control and assert one's domanince. Serial killing is more of a sexual thing, even when the guy never has sex with his victims.
@ikcjjtt ...that you're even capable of believing that having no money is even a horribly flawed rationalization for rape indicates one of at least of a couple of things about you, neither/none of which are flattering.
@PumpingSmashkins ok ok ok, that was just a joke done in bad taste on my part. I wanted to rationalize by saying they have no money so they are mad at the world, particulary women (cause of thier own mom's not having enough money to take care of them). So they rape woman to get revenge on thier moms for having no money. There is a rape category for that- anger-retalitory. But that reasoning doesn't sound anymore silly than this race and IQ gig.
@MaximusRelaximus jumping to conclusions.The entire criminal justice system is build around discretion. It is foolish to think prejudice is none existence in the criminal justice system. There are cases has recent as 2001 that shows otherwise.There are studies done throughout history that shows unequal treatment based on race-people that dont look a certain way got the brunt of the inequality. In the USA this is a solid fact. Numerous research supports this.Im not here to blame or point fingers-
@MaximusRelaximus cause in truth the issue is extremily COMPLICATED. It's nobodies single fault, everybody plays a part. 500 characters just isnt enough to explain at least 2 out of the various theories that explains this phenominom. But i will say this- it has everything to do with social and enviornmental factors. Blaming it on race based on genetics doesn't make sense. and blaming it on a race is just as stupid. no one can reasonably rationalize either.
@MaximusRelaximus Though if you are interested in the theories, one is called anomie theory and the other is called crime displacement theory. Just remember that crime is inevitable, the question is why does it seem to focus on one population in relation to another. And dont bother looking at crimes rates outside of the USA-different CJ justice systems cannot accuratly correalate. If for no other reason than different laws.
How come Native Americans have lower IQ's than their East Asian counterparts when in fact their origins can be traced back to the hostile Nordic (Pleistocene) environment that North East Asians went through?? Living in a different environment for thousands of years wont change the genetics of higher intelligence, gained from living in the same region as the (superior) North East Asians. Unless of course the Flynn Effect has not occured with them yet??
Also, elucidate why the Southern Amerindians, including the Nazca people, the Incas, the Aztecs- were able to engender large advanced societies while their Northern most American-Indian counterparts were still living in inferior life styles. Give me a cogent response, if you are unable to render for me a comprehensive, laconic response, please do not switch topics.
@EgalitarianJay I'll give you the point that there are no explicit racial immigration policies in Japan that I know of. Misspoke. The larger point, though, that Asian countries are overwhelmingly racially homogeneous, and that therefore there is no call for Asian scientists to weigh in on the matter one way or the other, stands.
@EgalitarianJay "The Minnesota study of twins reared apart found that scores of MZA twins correlated about .7 while the scores of MZT (reared together) have been found to correlate about .8. The study attempted to control several economic, educational and cultural factors. Because test scores for twins reared apart correlate nearly as highly as do scores for twins reared together, the results imply that intellectual ability is largely inherited"
@PumpingSmashkins Other twin studies support and environmental model. The gap is virtually eliminated in studies where children are tested under conditions where family and neighborhood quality plus standard SES variables are controlled. Plus the evolutionary theory of Rushton was discredited,. I actually have a video that covers that one. As Black American environment improves the gap gradually closes. Racialist Hereditarians have been debunked yet stubbornly cling to discredited views.
I admit that this isn't pure science as the controls are not in place, but the other side of the argument is that it is impossible to see any correlation and nothing can be tested. So basically we have an answer that seems to explain many if not all sociological patterns and an opposing claim that nothing can ever be figured out, along with a childish refusal of evidence such as the Myriad of IQ data, social trends via Interpol and government data (which certainly has no racist motive).
It is very hard to have hard data sets when dealing with world populations and humans. It seemed he mostly used other government organizations' numbers such as Interpol. The IQ data he gathered from 60 different studies on IQ according to him. That is pretty extreme evidence unless a conspiracy is afoot. The trends follow every country without exception, so this makes the environmental argument hard. The mixed race adoption study was the nail in the coffin for me.
@brendanmcwilliams The Interpol data is not consistent when you go country by country. There are Black countries with comparatively low crime rates and White countries with higher crime rates. Rushton simply aggregates countries by continent to make a generalization. He has more than 60 IQ studies. What he said is that he has 60 variables that show a pattern. But I have never seen a full list of those variables. As it stands there is too much evidence against his genetic hypothesis.
I still think "Guns, Germs, and Steel" is a joke, which is another reason I discarded your point as being incorrect. It is the apex of cherry picking, where we have to attribute "failure to launch" in a race to specific excuses, while ignoring other pieces of information.
ie: tons of species of plant and animals, CLAIM: must all be undomesticateable.
CLAIM:impossible climate--- yet best climate knowing glaciers were in europe in ice age time
@brendanmcwilliams I have two videos uploaded in multiple parts. One is a documentary that features multiple scientists including Rushton talking about their views on the Race and Intelligence controversy. The other is a panel discussion that took place at a University which was centered around Rushton's research. I think both of these videos address alot of the major issues concerning this debate. Diamond's book is an alternative view on how civilizations developed which is really a side issue.
Sadly, that just convinced me more that he is right. Regardless of the head size deal, every correlation matched real world facts. The testosterone is likely right on. The problem is that in a purely academic sense, we can't assume this theory to be fact without empirical evidence. However, his theory matches sociology patterns to an unbelievable accuracy, including the heart disease and other factors.
Even as he is pointing out that blacks have deeper and louder voices and are more aggressive, the black speaker is constantly yelling and the blacks in the audience are make unintelligible noises and sounds. The only resistance to his data was the other speaker stating that it could be environmental. The checkmate was the native americans having higher IQ results than american blacks, in spite of being "uncivilized" longer. This would make sense if they are asian hybrids.
I actually would use that video to support Rushton's theories rather than counter them, as he was the only one with real data and facts, while the contender is pulling a 1917 newspaper article to try to counter his current data sets. Pretty wild.
I didn't see any racism in his speaking at all, as he was very clear on Asians being the highest IQ and sociological superior race and culture.
@brendanmcwilliams I have a great deal of respect for Native American cultures but let's be honest. Generally speaking they were not the cultural equivalent of Northeast Asians which somewhat undermines Rushton's theory of East Asian superiority. You had your Mayan, Incan and Aztec civilizations however most Native American cultures were hunter gatherers. I enjoyed hearing Graves retort to Rushton's claim of observed differences in Native and Black temperament. Graves is very sharp.
@brendanmcwilliams And he didn't make that up. Galton's cousin Darwin did observe opposite temperament between Native American and Black African groups. He spoke extensively about his witnessing the savagery of the Fuegian people which inspired him to write the Descent of Man to explain how Western people evolved from savage tribes. In contrast he wrote about the pleasant personalities of Blacks he encountered while on the Beagle and how he felt that Blacks had the mental acuity of Englishmen.
@brendanmcwilliams Throughout the debate with Graves I noticed Rushton looking very uneasy. He wasn't prepared to defend his scholarship on human evolution against a real Evolutionist and Graves had an answer for every argument he made. I would have loved to see Graves response to the last question where Rushton self destructed. Perhaps I will ask him about that. I see the whole argument about Asian superiority as a clever smokescreen. Rushton's theories are still fiercely anti-Black.
@brendanmcwilliams * One correction. Graves did not pull up a newspaper article from 1917. It was a study testing for a correlation between intrinsic rate of increase and IQ which is directly related to Rushton's theories on human evolution. While I heard him say 1917 as well he must have mispoken about the date. The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales was invented in 1916 and r/K selection theory was developed in 1967. There's no way Graves study is that old.
The funniest part was him explaining that blacks are louder and more aggressive merely due to higher testosterone levels, and later the black speaker is explaining that anger is a positive emotion (obviously because he had gotten angry during the conference). You would think he could have restrained himself as not to be the perfect example of Rushton's theories, but genetics outweighed this I guess. LOL!
@sovietamerican2: I can give you a reason for the difference in intelligence. Would you agree that 2 heads are better than one? The aztecs incas etc. lived in compact, dense societies where the spread of knowledge was more fluent. Further north american indians were more spread out and in smaller numbers. They didnt rely on large communities because food was plentiful and therfore the spread of knowledge less rampant
7shocker 6 days ago
Good video and rigorously honest. Race and Intelligence is more about the psychologists themselves, battling it out with each other. The peoples of all races are the audience. Being the self serving human beings that we are.We get a slight wave of euphoria when told what we wanna hear, or an uneasy feeling when our gurus may have let us down...Human intelligence being fundamentally fixed on a number is outlandish.And would mean we're all incapable of learning regardless of how much exposure
gmccall22 1 month ago in playlist Favorite videos
what really surprises me is that you dissimulate your appearance in making this video, what balls you have!
MrPierrejohansen 6 months ago
Look, Do poor people EVEN TRY hard in an IQ test? When you LOVE A PERSON AND SHOW THEM RESPECT FROM A YOUNG AGE.. THEIR IQ IMPROVES SIGNIFICANTLY. The more love they feel for themselves the more BELIEF they have in themselves.. THE HIGHER THE IQ.
When you accept that.. you realise why black ghetto IQ is low and why African born Black immigrant IQ demonstrated by degree passes (US census) IS HIGHER than US WHITES AND EVEN ASIANs. Poor social treatment in growing years lowers the IQ. FACT
Raybanmonster 9 months ago
I have seen amazingly child-like responses to arguments that have given me this conclusion. One of the prominent is that regardless of the fact that almost exclusively whites and asians have advanced in technology, in which they point to wars and environmental issues as foils which, in there mind, explains that they are really dumber. This progression-phobia mentality is usually synonymous with IQs under 90, including most lower races and white rednecks. Fear of science is proof of his research
brendanmcwilliams 10 months ago
The main thing I have noticed is that those on the opposite side of the fence from Rushton are usually dumber people. I am not trying to be mean, but it just fits that they probably are the people shown badly in his research. Many of their points are points a 4th grader would respond with.
brendanmcwilliams 10 months ago
If someone told me brakes were responsible for stopping a car, and the other told me the radiator stops the car, I wouldn't have to be a mechanic, but only would have to see how the components interact through observation to know that the first person was most likely correct. The second person's claim would go against everything I observed when dealing with cars, so I would likely think he is trying to sell me a new radiator or something.
brendanmcwilliams 10 months ago
According to Wikipedia, there are many other scientists that hold this viewpoint. From what I have seen, the arguments from opposing scientists don't match up with reality. Basically, you have to ignore the history of the world, modern sociology, and everything you know about humans to attempt to believe what they are espousing.
brendanmcwilliams 10 months ago
This correlates with information found in other studies supporting these differences.The smarter people seem to get, the lower the testosterone seems to be. Whether you believe the brain size claim is the reason, you can't help but see modern sociology explained by his points.
It would be naive to claim that blacks are being held down exactly the same way in every country, including Jamaica, Haita, and African countries. At the same time, Asians are being "lifted" in every country they live in
brendanmcwilliams 10 months ago
And the biggest point is that he has nothing to gain from claiming that interbreeding with asians is the trick to improving whites' IQ, and his theory that Asians are the master race when it comes to IQ.
Yet he explained the pluses and minuses of each race. For instance, the higher testosterone seems to give blacks louder, deeper voices, easier to anger, more athleticism, longer dongs, etc, while the asians are the exact opposite on all of these factors, with whites in the middle.
brendanmcwilliams 10 months ago
@brendanmcwilliams What does he stand to lose by claiming that Asians are smarter? Not much. His fixation is on claiming that Blacks are on average dumber more violent and over-sexed compared to other races. The testosterone claims are not valid. Graves covers this issue in one of his articles and the claim of Blacks being louder with deeper voices is just a stereotype Rushton has no actual evidence for. Where he fell apart in that debate was failing to explain White savagery and low Native IQ.
MysticNinjaJay 9 months ago
@MysticNinjaJay There's a simple reason for the focus on blacks. There's clearly a great discrepancy in achievement, crime rates, etc., between blacks and all other races. As long as we pretend that races are inherently equal in all regards, (despite all evidence and common sense to the contrary) we won't only not solve the problem, but continue to exacerbate it. After all, if we're all exactly the same, then blacks' collective failings can only stem from racism. That fallacy fosters resentment
PumpingSmashkins 9 months ago
@PumpingSmashkins Resentment? And what do you think trying to tell the world that Blacks are innately stupid and violent is going to do? It only inspires more contempt for White racists. And it's White racism because I don't see many Asian scientists or supporters peddling this garbage. 2 IQ points btw is not statistically significant. Native Americans should score much higher if the naturally have higher average intelligence like East Asians even if they come from a depraved environment.
EgalitarianJay 9 months ago
@EgalitarianJay Yes, but you're claiming that all races have equivalent IQs (as absurd as that assertion clearly is), so your point about Native Americans/East Asians is totally without merit. You can't have it both ways. Besides, Native Americans separated from Asians easily long enough ago for their intellects and other physiological aspects to have developed differently.
MaximusRelaximus 9 months ago
@MaximusRelaximus I'm claiming that race does not determine differences in mental ability. According to Rushton East Asians selected for high intelligent in the Siberian climate. Since Native American crossed the Bering Strait and are supposedly of the same race they should have experienced the same selection pressure. Yet they don't have the same IQ levels which contradicts Rushton's theory. Even in my video he can't explain this.
EgalitarianJay 9 months ago
@EgalitarianJay Reality isn't racist. Facts aren't racist. If you don't see many Asian scientists "peddling this garbage" maybe that's because Asian nations are explicitly and openly racist, and have homogeneous populations buttressed by very clear racial immigration restrictions. Therefore, they have no need to explain the natural imbalances that result from holy "diversity," since they simply have no diversity.
MaximusRelaximus 9 months ago
@MysticNinjaJay The response to the discrepancy between average IQs has gone something like this. First, it was assumed that it was due to environment, and that time alone would close the gap. When that didn't happen, the tests were deemed culturally biased, and great lengths were gone to to eliminate said "bias." Same results. Psychologists then actually intentionally tried to design tests biased in favor of blacks. Whites still outscored blacks. Now it's "IQ doesn't mean anything."
PumpingSmashkins 9 months ago
@PumpingSmashkins Actually there is significant evidence that the Black-White IQ gap is purely environmental. RIchard Nisbett wrote a great article and book about it. Recent ability tests show the gap has closed to about 7-10 IQ points so the Black American IQ average is currently at about 93. Intervention programs like Head Start boost Black IQ. IQ studies that test a correlation between High Black IQ and quantity of European ancestry show no relationship....
EgalitarianJay 9 months ago
@EgalitarianJay Incorrect. Study after study have consistently (and predictably) been incapable of attributing the difference to environment alone, despite being designed specifically with that goal. Of course environment is a factor, so of course with improved education and nutrition, etc., there will be some narrowing of the gap. Nobody suggests that it's entirely genetic. The only whiz kids who suggest it's entirely one or the other are in your decidedly misguided and delusional camp.
MaximusRelaximus 9 months ago
@MaximusRelaximus Nope read:
- Heredity, Environment and Race Differences in IQ a Commentary on Rushton and Jensen (2005)
Everything I said is cited there. This claim of yours has been thoroughly discredited. You can't claim that study after study is incapable of showing a pure environmental model or Nil Hypothesis for genetic contribution explains the IQ gap when study after study has done just that. Rushton et al. simply ignore studies that contradict their assertions.
EgalitarianJay 9 months ago
@MaximusRelaximus Go to my channel and look at the following videos at these select times:
- Race and Intelligence: Science's Last Taboo - Part 5 (5:50)
- A Scientific Debate on Race and Intelligence Part 11 of 11 (3:10)
These statements by Nisbett and Graves cite studies which are the nail in the coffin to racialist hereditarian theories. European ancestry does not make Blacks smarter. There are a multitude of tests which have established this fact. You are simply wrong.
EgalitarianJay 9 months ago
@EgalitarianJay "European ancestry does not make Blacks smarter."
Wow. Not sure what part of anything I said came close to resembling something vaguely similar to that. But if that's what you somehow took away from my comments, then your proclamation that "I'm simply wrong" kind of means less than nothing, since you can't even figure out what I'm saying (very coherently and concisely, I might add). But I can easily state that you're simply wrong when you claim race is not an inherent factor.
MaximusRelaximus 9 months ago
@MaximusRelaximus I'm not claiming you said that but based on hereditarian theory if races differ in intelligence then hybrids ought to show higher intelligence than pure members of the lower IQ group since high intelligence is a valuable trait. Rushton makes that exact argument in one of the videos I told you to look at yet he has been refuted. One of the studies which refutes this claim is the Eyferth study which is a Transracial adoption study. There are several others.
EgalitarianJay 9 months ago
@EgalitarianJay "...whereas tests based on verbal and mathematical ability cannot be completely culture-free, it is more difficult to make a case for cultural bias in nonverbal tests of abstract reasoning such as the Raven Progressive Matrices. Despite years of trying to eliminate cultural bias from standardized tests, African Americans still score lower than European Americans..."
--The Evolution of Status Expectations: A Theoretical Extension
MaximusRelaximus 9 months ago
@MaximusRelaximus There's obviously a high heritability factor between individuals. That doesn't tell us the cause of variation in IQ between groups. Raven's Matrices are more culturally loaded than test takers often acknowledge because the construction of the patterns derive from test creators who have a culture that may be distinct from others. I don't know of any racial immigration policies in Asian countries and I agree facts are facts. That's why I appeal to science on this issue.
EgalitarianJay 9 months ago
@EgalitarianJay It goes to the heritability of IQ, which is what you've been disputing all along. Of course it doesn't in itself translate to racial differences. Never claimed it did. To assert any significant level of cultural bias in RPM is just absurd, and illustrates the contortions that the reality deniers on your side go through in their fanatical efforts to prove that which is clearly false. It's a brutal anal rape of Occam's Razor.
MaximusRelaximus 9 months ago
@MaximusRelaximus I'm disputing the idea that there are racial differences in intelligence. The heritability of IQ is really a side issue. As a scholar said in one of my videos you'd be extremely foolish to deny a heritable component to intelligence. Every biological function of the body is inherited and there can be variations from person to person. What this comes down to is the idea that there is something "wrong" with the brains of certain races that makes its members dumber than others.
EgalitarianJay 9 months ago
@MaximusRelaximus Your invoking of Occam's Razor is based on a logical fallacy known as appeal to ridicule. You call the statement of professional Psychologists absurd without debating the legitimacy of their argument. In truth it doesn't matter what type of IQ test you devise the most direct tests of a genetic component to the Black-White IQ gap support an environmental model. Studies also show that the gap is not immutable as the average scores have been converging over the years.
EgalitarianJay 9 months ago
@EgalitarianJay Of course it's nothing of the sort. Occam's Razor, for the sake of brevity, basically states that, given equally explanatory hypotheses, the simplest one is usually the correct one. When looking at the higher crime rates, lower test scores, greater poverty, etc., of blacks internationally and historically, the simplest explanation is that there is an inherent racial component. The opposing hypotheses go to great, convoluted lengths to try tocompletely dismiss the racial element.
MaximusRelaximus 9 months ago
@MaximusRelaximus But then again one can just as easily argue that racial discrimination has created racial inequality across the world. Your explanation isn't simpler its merely more convenient for your ideological views. Racial discrimination is a fact. Racialism is a theory that goes to great lengths to explain reality. So you are at a disadvantage. You can't deny my explanation is an important component while I can reasonable be skeptical of yours. Go ahead and try to rationalize racialism.
EgalitarianJay 9 months ago
@EgalitarianJay Again, simply and obviously incorrect. Your intentionally simple explanation already adds an element, discrimination, that doesn't exist in the simpler explanation. How can you not see that? If it were required, then of course it can't be objected to, but it's apparent at this level that it's not. The less complicated explanation is still at least as predictive.
MaximusRelaximus 9 months ago
@MaximusRelaximus Your explanation is no simpler than mine. Tell me why racial discrimination or environmental explanations cannot be the sole and only determinant of racial inequality in the world? What empirical evidence do you have that debunks this theory? That is what matters most here. Valid evidence. When you can explain to me why races must differ in intellect and temperament logically you have a sound theoretical model. When you can prove it empirically you have revealed a truth.
EgalitarianJay 9 months ago
@MaximusRelaximus " When looking at the higher crime rates, lower test scores, greater poverty, etc., of blacks internationally and historically, the simplest explanation is that there is an inherent racial component"
simplest isn't always accurate, especially when dealing with statistics. You can make a somewhat solid arguement for it when dealing with intelligence-because it IS genetic (whether or not that gentic component is purely based on .4% to .5% difference in genteric traits is
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@MaximusRelaximus what i meant was difference in RACIAL genetic traits, is a bit of a stretch and quite limited considering the only "proof" is based on statistical trend on average between races. if it was the 100% cause of that .4% difference, then it shouldn't be possible for black people to have high IQs than the white average IQ.) Trying to pin point a gene in that .4% difference that controls intelligence lv doesn't sound simple at all, and environment and social factors can't be ignored.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@MaximusRelaximus Now leaving intelligence behind (based on the mostly social construct of "race"). Crime, poverty and other social factors are 100% social contructs. Policitics by its nature is a social phenonminon and constantly evolving at a rate at which human evolution or even the passing of traits can't keep up. Sure, you can show a statistical trend between race and crime, but finding a link between genetics and crime/poverty is rediculas.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@MaximusRelaximus Crime by its self is a 100% social construct. It does not exist in nature nor in the gene pool. It exist purely on a piece of paper and changes constantly. Defining what is a crime in the US alone can vary from state to state. Don't even bother looking at it from an international standpoint, as USA is one of the few countries in the world that keeps vast amounts of crime statistics. Now look up how those statistics are gotten-just not even a little accurate representation of-
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt Yes, law is a social construct, and so by extension is crime. That's self-evident. It's also irrelevant, once you remove dubious, victimless "crimes" such as drug use, gambling, etc. If you only look at the crimes that no reasonable person could argue should not be criminal--rape, murder, etc.--the statistics do not change.
Again, I will ask the question, "how does being poor make one more likely to commit rape?"
Again, I'll cite the victims' survey that corresponds with the arrests.
PumpingSmashkins 9 months ago
@PumpingSmashkins Consider the living conditions of the poor especially in urban areas. The stress of poverty often leads to alcohol and drug abuse which in turn leads to domestic violence. A child reared in a violent setting can have a negative psychological impact on them. This can lead to children growing up to be drug abusers, abusive husbands/boyfriends and even rapists. This is not an excuse for the behavior of individuals but an alternative explanation for trends.
EgalitarianJay 9 months ago
@EgalitarianJay "...This is not an excuse..." except it plainly is, and the "an alternative explanation" wording doesn't change anything. But even if such an upbringing did excuse rape (sorry, provide an alternate explanation for rape), we're already back at square one, aren't we? Why do such conditions exist?
PumpingSmashkins 9 months ago
@PumpingSmashkins Why do impoverished conditions exist? Mainly because of the failures of government. Some people are poor because of bad decisions and lack of opportunity. Now why are their racial disparities in poverty? I would say that it is because of racism. How can you not come to that conclusion given the history of institutional racism? The issue is not simple though it is complex. Negative cultural values can lead to a persistent of such conditions. But what came first?
EgalitarianJay 9 months ago
@PumpingSmashkins Well then lets get back to the point-"Why do such conditions exist?" Why do black people do so much crime? Honestly, it's complex. There is no one word solution. Yea, i could sit here and make excuses, but there are plenty of them to go around. I could sit here and give overly simplistic answers to-like "they get caught more". Like i said before, crime thoeries attempt to explain this, but its complicated.There is no one word answer. i cant summarize the reasons in 500 letters.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@MaximusRelaximus of reality. Therefore crime is affected 100% by environmental/social factors. This determines what is a crime, who gets caught with the crime, who gets officially charged/convicted, what public attitudes are toward a crime, where crime takes place, where cops patrol, where they dont patrol, sentencing, the criminal justice system its self. It's silly to try to base all this on genetics. Now you can find genetic components for personality traits that can correalate with crime-
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@MaximusRelaximus but those personality traits are not crimes in and of themselves. Now you can argue that black people have a higher chance of getting arrested,convicted, ect. because of a inherent racial component, the color of thier skin. But it's still not a crime to be black. As for why black people do seemingly more crime? Because they get caught more. There is your simplest explanation. And im not even going to bother with poverty-they have no money-simple.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt And why do they have no money? Yeah, never mind, I know, Whitey did it! And how exactly does poverty motivate rape? Did you know that surveys of victims of crime show that the racial distribution of the perpetrators is statistically identical to the arrest rates? That indicates that the arrest rate has nothing to do with prejudice. And of course, the disproportionality is simply staggering. This insane "everything is Whitey's fault" nonsense is a huge part of the problem.
MaximusRelaximus 9 months ago
@MaximusRelaximus "Whitey did it". Listen, try to understand my arguement and not jump to conclusions. This isnt about white people or black people. I dont beleive RACE exists, and niether do genetic experts. Rape is motivated by anger and power. Anger over situations and powerlessness to change them. There are actual traits held by rapist, but it would be difficult to spell them all out on youtube. They are in my criminal justice book though. statistics alone do not indicate shit-u are just-
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt Where to begin with all that nonsense? Okay, besides the fact that race obviously does exist as something more significant and less "sinister" than a "social construct," the experts clearly do NOT agree that it does not. Simply google "does race exist" (I used that search term because it's already biased in your favor) and actually READ...not just one page, and not just the pages that seem to comply with your politically ridiculous predisposition (nor the Stormfront type pages)...
PumpingSmashkins 9 months ago
@PumpingSmashkins race exists as a social construct. Genetically it doesnt exists.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt wrong, take it from Ernst Mayr, i'll give you the link if you want... it was an essay he did in 2002, short read outlining RACE is perfectly reasonable to use as a word, in short it shows bio-pathways within species that point to subspecies and then further change into other species... race is a word that helps us delineate species change as there is very obvious genetic difference within species and racial differences as subsets and groups exist as to isolation/movement over time...
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 but for the human race, that becomes obelete, and a mute point for this arguement. That still doesnt show what race has to do with crime. Black people are not sub-species, or a different one. They are human, made up of 99.9% of the same genetic materials as the other guy.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt race/color are just one of many predictive variables of probability outlining future crime rates, disease rates, IQ, etc... the pattern holds based solely on knowing just color, but add brain size (blacks smallest), brain complexity (blacks least), hormone levels, etc... and you have alot more than just correlation for your predictive outcomes... of course blacks are not a different species, SUB definitely, different race definitely - a little change in a complex organism does a BUNCH!
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 "brain size (blacks smallest), brain complexity (blacks least), hormone levels, etc... and you have alot more than just correlation for your predictive outcomes... of course blacks are not a different species, SUB definitely, different race definitely - a little change in a complex organism does a BUNCH!"
um...anthropologist, geneticists, biologist, phychologists, and plenty of other experts would consider all of that a load of bullshit. But then again it depends on what experts-
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt no they won't because it has been repeatedly outlined in the peer review journals - i can cite many for you and no, it does not depend on WHAT experts - its a matter of reviewing whats already available as field research, which is quite exhaustive... the only real debate is cause/effect origins, not basic observational data like hormone levels, brain size, brain complexity and many other easily observable facts with plenty of independently verifiable evidence, which is just NOT popular
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 yea dude, you wont find data on any crediable scientific piece of work claiming that black people are characterized as a sub species, different race outside of social constructs, or find that cause/effect of said correalations originates from race and race alone (based on genetics ofcourse). I have never run across an expert who would agree with any of that, including Rushton who advicates that very conclusion.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikc dude? look up DON'T CALL ME DUDE, a utube vid by SCATTERBRAIN, and yes, THESE are dudes, not me... won't find any credible scientist? did you read the Ernst Mayr essay, and the examples he gave? i'll message it to you, he embraces race - and he is WAY beyond credible, a granddaddy of evolution-biology...
so you don't think humans can break out of this species and start another one? maybe inferior, maybe superior, such as evolution goes... of course there is some group that is closer
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 no i have not read such an essay. Of course humans can break out of this species and start a new one. But nobody here argues white people evolved from black people because black people are some kind of sub-species. And if this Ernst Mayr essay says crap along those lines then he better have ground breaking genetic evidence to back it up. If this is going to be some history of evolution, indirect evidence, and assumptions made by some 90 yr old racist, it will be a joy to read.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt sub doesn't necessarily mean below, i mean sure it really does, but its like subset in math, there is no value judgment here, its just another grouping separate from others. Mayr crap?! LOL, you REALLY need to read this and find out who he is! god, thats funny, you need more experience in this issue. you are close, he was in his 90s and died about 3 years after this essay... so feel free to think he was screwed up in the, but thats not the case... he still has PC angles in this essay
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 ok i have read his essay and agree with it 100% based on his defintions, and his understanding. What i don't agree with is the stuff u have been saying, which doesn't line up with the essay. Or perhaps my interpretation of the essay is wrong. Reguardless, its what i have been trying to tell you.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt i have no problem conceding the possibility that whites are faded africans, but its well known that many early hominids got around the planet, homo erectus for instance... so the out of africa idea is not a perfect theory, just a good guess so far... so i understand my humble origins QUITE WELL (ALTERED STATES has a real spin on this! check that out!)... just as cro mags and Neanderthals had larger cranial capacities i can feel regret for human evolution on this line of thinking also
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 you adher to. Though even Rushton would call BS on brain complexity, sub species,different race outside of social constructs, or that brain size is the cause of being intelligence. And correalation is ALL we have to go on. add in sex, socio economic status, age, population differences, beleif systems, environment, misleading data from Rushton, over simplified racial defintions, nutritional values, cultural beleifs, and MUCH MORE being correalated with-
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt not true, these factors are admitted to be causative, whatever the exact relationship in the form of some simplistic one to one ratio scale of measurement you wish to test these ideas with... bigger brains yield higher IQs, thats a fact. correlation is ALL we have? no way, thats just stupid... EVEN if you add up many correlations and don't even try to create the flow chart of cause/effect you can naturally extrapolate cause/effect assumptions... the data is reported by rushton, not his
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 "you can naturally extrapolate cause/effect assumptions" Yes u can, but that's all u can do. No expert argues for cause and effect. Not even Rushton. now he will say "this evidence is better than yours", but it ends there. Correalation does not prove causation.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt nonsense, you should read the hormone level argument alone... those super charged protein chains as secreted by our endocrine system are enormous behavior modifiers... blacks have more testosterone - known to cause more violence and sex and yes, blacks have more sex than whites/asians... i'm not so stuck on JUST rushton, he is not some single source exhaustive measure of this debate, but he is one of the best... the last refuge of those who dare not be racist: correlates are not causes
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 i havent researched the hormone arguement yet. But based on all these socialogical, nutritional, environmental, cultural factors, what ever its findings are (which " testosterone - known to cause more violence and sex" is bullshit), it makes little difference over the effect envornmental and genetics have on these largly social factors. It becomes less and less about race the more studies that focus on race and inadvertedly connect these dots across a wide spectrum of issues that each-
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt so there you go again (and i'm stuck in this point as well), no way to fully quantify the comparison of all these variables together and put a number to the nature/nurture debate...
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 can be a contributing factor to these issues. Its surprising how these studies have to try so hard to keep the attention on race, by ignoring everything else that contradicts the cause and effect theory based on race and race alone. "Theories may seek to explain violence in men, but because it's such a complex social phenomenon, violence can perhaps best be understood as the final outcome of an intricate web of interacting factors."-netdoctor.co.uk
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt again, you really don't even need cause and effect explanations, but ANTI-racists demand them while ignoring all the a priori data and very predictive models of probability that help the pattern hold, and that pattern is: inferiority of blacks with my usual long laundry list i guess you need to see alot more of on each count which you will never comprehensively debunk: iq, crime, sex, longevity, disease, education, $ etc... complex indeed, and no excuse to obfuscate the obvious...
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 Actually i can debunk each of those has not having anything to do with race directly. I can see disease as being "somewhat" "racial", but medicine is not an exact science, it may have nothing to do with race either. As for $, education, crime, sex, longevity, ect. isj ust BS if u are directly relating them to race. Now blacks ARE victimized because of race based on those things, but being black doesnt make u do any of those things. So it really depends on your arguement. -
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt more dismissiveness on your part... and blacks are the predators, not the victims... this is most especially true relative to what they would have been today if never taken to the new world... for one they wouldn't have a nice advantage of 15%+ white genetic material and they would be far greater victims of their own kind in africa compared to USA... its not even close...
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 this is all based on assumptions, indirect correalations, wishful thinking, over generalizations, and flat out lies. Reguardless of what dogma you beleive, reality does not fit it.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt wrong-exaggerated assessment
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 being black is correalated with each of those things, but being black is not the cause. It just makes them a target. For example, a black man can have no money because he cant get a job BECAUSE he is black (no one wants to hire him for that reason alone). That CAN and does happen. But being black alone doesnt mean he is not competant to work, therefore he doesn't qualify for a job.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt of course not, skin color is a convenient correlation - i've listed the many other correlates some as causative... why do you say such an obvious simplistic stupid thing at this point of the debate? incapable of building the discussion with memory and understanding? if anything affirmative action has created far more unqualified blacks replacing more qualified whites... this is epidemic and still ongoing, not to mention our president who admitted as much like Clarence Thomas as well!
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 everything you just said (not showing cause and effect on any of it, and in some cases contradicting the data of each other (especially brain size between sexes), and u have got an issue with jumping to hypothesis supported by either shady/incomplete data or cause and effect theory based on a A correalation of race, rather than the 20 that exist outside of race and holds correalations just as strongly.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt how have i or the data contradicted itself as to gender and IQ differences? men have larger brains and higher IQs... you know that data is shady? data is always incomplete, you can always be philosophical or think there is another level of complexity and another layer of variables to add to the equation, but how much do you really need to be convinced negros are inferior? correlations are as creative as you want them to be, the ones i list are of OBVIOUS influence, not just random..
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 "but how much do you really need to be convinced negros are inferior". First off i need to know what is exactly meant by this statement. is it based on statistics via intelligence/correalations? Or is it based on some non-scientific scale of what it means to be superior? This is the MMA vs TMA debate all over again. Obvious to the naked eye, yes. Oversimplified as well considering tons of other factors that u convientianly ignore.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt inferior? come on: higher crime rates, greater disease (behavioral and genetic), lower life expectancy, higher illegitimacy rates, etc... all the measure of blacks across this list and a MUCH longer one if you dare me... and yes, don't forget IQ!... i use science first and foremost... we know what makes life easier, happier and better for us all, these universal valued commodities of mankind embracing and expanding our humanity in greater directions - u know what i ignore? or assume it?
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 ok based on that defintion. I personaly do not rank races or even things based on superiority. To me it is completely based on the environment, situation, and individual. So when people start throwing superiority and inferiority out there they need to come up with a defintion.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt of course you don't, NO GUTS! how can you not value a normal or above average child over a retard or downs syndrome person, or a cat over a rat or a dog over an ant... OF COURSE you can rank, you just want to lie to yourself and think we are all equal? or is it just color that you can't handle? i'll put you to the test: an earthquake happens in 72 IQ Haiti and 105+ IQ japan, who do you want to save first? the morons or the above average? i've defined superior for you in many ways
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 i know u CAN rank, and people DO and SHOULD rank. ALL societies are based on rank. We DO value stuff. I PERSONALY dont. I dont agree with capatalism and the free enterprise system because of that, but that is a whole other issue. I never said anything about being equal. But what I dont agree with is rank in (and most of the USA),race. Because in our society its obselete. Social Dawinism doesnt do shit in 2011. "Survival of the fittest" is meaningless in modern soicety.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikc i dont think so, race issues can be tied into free enterprise. i think capitalism has certainly gone too far and is unfair, and as such i would have a program or redistribution that would disproportionately favor nigs as they are representing the lower class more so than whites/asians. i'm tired of hearing the politicians talk about MIDDLE CLASS all the time, WHAT ABOUT THE LOWER CLASS! (and yes, i mean negros as well! aha! S. Darwinism meaningless in modernity? wrong again, ya dreaming!
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 If Black people are being victimized, suffering, or whatever people in the USA go help them out. they are not just left there to rot "because the weak shall perish". The law isnt written that way anymore. Murder is murder-white black or whatever. If people need money, we have programs for that. It doesnt matter why they need money or food, we help them anyway. (WIC, food stamps, attempt at equalizing schools, welfare, health care, ect.)
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikc oh golly, thanks so much for the info about helping blacks in USA, i NEVER would have imagined! of course i would rather help katrina nigs than Haiti and florida nigs even more where i live... no, murder of whites by blacks is worse than murder of blacks by whites - as a whole the loss is much worse when a bunch of whites are killed compared to blacks... wrong again. it SHOULD matter, and in fact you are wrong again - there are hoops/requirements for welfare - its not so easy, unless u lie
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 wishful thinking, the law isnt written that. Thats just personal opinion and wishful thinking. You are not even talking about reality anymore. Delusion dude.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt elaborate, i have the data, which i guess you have already had a chance to review a long time ago
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 correalations are just that, correalations. Just becasue something correalates doesn't mean it has a cause and effect relationship. Children with bigger feet correalate with being more intelligent compared to kids with smaller ones. They did a IQ test between kids in 6th grade and 5th grade. What do feet have to do with intelligence? nothing. The 6th graders were smarter because of being older and more educated. Feet was an indirect correalation.
ikcjjtt 8 months ago
@glorp896 another study found that the more icecream sold on a beach the more people drowned. There was a correalation between the ice cream sold and the people that drowned. What does ice cream have to do with people drowning? nothing. The more ice cream being sold=more people at the beach.More people at the beach=more chances for people to drown. Indirect correalation. Race and IQ-indirect. Race and crime-indirect. Race and most of that other BS-indirect.
ikcjjtt 8 months ago
@glorp896 I dont agree with ranking race because it is obselete, there is no point. When Japan and Haiti and New Orleans had issues, USA was there to help all. Being a certain color doesnt affect the immigration policy. Most young people in America could care less about having a baby outside of thier race. And with the onset of gene splicing and being able to choose what genes our children will have, race will soon vanish from vocabulary. Superior or not, this isnt black vs white.-
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikc the point is a better humanity for our future... you obviously don't understand or cant concede that we can predict better outcomes of people simply by looking at race/color and breeding accordingly... IT REALLY WORKS! IQ should effect immigration policy... with half a million you can get in if you say you are starting a business... not true as to cross racial breeding, it has gone up over the years, i've seen the graphs, but most DO CARE... wrong again... gene therapy? u may be correct!
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 it doesnt matter, because it wont happen that way. And people dont care about bettering humanity, just thier own country.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt they should care - some do, so it matters... i never ascribe a DOESN'T MATTER to an idea if even only one person has the idea... it always starts with one person doesn't it?
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 yea, and dumb ideas generally end with that one guy as well.
ikcjjtt 8 months ago
@glorp896 its more my country vs your country now. Chinese can think they are superior, but they arent a world power yet. Honestly speaking green is the only color that matters to the rest of the world. A black man with a trillion dollars will ALWAYS be worth more than a poor chinese man with no $. World ranks on money, race is pointless in the face of that.Thats why we are in all these wars now. race is an old fashion category that holds no practicle value,even if everything you say is right.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt chinks are superior and a world power and RISING VERY FAST, they have had 10%++ growth rates for many years in many of their provinces... their infrastructure projects are MASSIVE... they WILL be the number one economy soon enough, they just surpassed the japs recently...it will take awhile before they surpass the USA and even longer for the EU... but i'm sure it will be done... i would think the poor chink has better chances of breeding higher IQ kids...
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 maybe so, but as of now they arent. So race has nothing to do with thier standing. Superior doesnt mean 5th place.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt no maybes, unless you think the economic numbers are lies... 5th place? i told you 2nd highest GDP of all countries in the world...
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 the GDP list does not follow your racial scale. many asian countries are listed well below your white countries. and countries like india and mexico are well above many white and asian countries.IF GDP rank was because of race, USA wouldnt be at the top, Haiti wouldnt be above mongolia, ect. China and japan are exceptions. Many Asian countries arent even in the top 20. This was a silly correalation.
ikcjjtt 8 months ago
@ikcjjtt the best retort BY FAR as to your money replacing race idea is to see the amazing work of correlation that richard lynn has done on this - his race/IQ connection - his website is screwed up, probably hacked, but wiki has his stuff..."Intelligence and the Wealth and Poverty of Nations" (code title of his article for race-$ connection)
his book is: "IQ and the Wealth of Nations"
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 iq does correalation to wealth. Race correalates to Iq. So race correalates with wealth? Indirect correalation. Which is invalid. By this logic i can correalate how big a child's feet is with intelligence. Its bullshit dude. If there is no direct correalation, there is no meaningful correalation. And race and iq is also indiect, as is iq and wealth- its just hard to prove that to a racist, who no matter how invalid the logic is, will correalate race with everything.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt there you go, you can use these cause/correlations in both directions, but this gets into the CHICKEN OR EGG FIRST kind of debate as libs would like you to believe that low IQ is the result of high IQ (even though they wouldn't admit it) people exploiting the low IQ people to make them poor... well, to a large degree this is correct, the exploitation part, as the smart should have the dumb work for them, why the other way around?, thats called welfare... stop calling me dude, thank you
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 reguardless, correalation does not prove causation. You have yet to show even valid correalations outside of race and intelligence. Everything else is just indirect,pointless, or your making it up. Funny how i cant find many of the stuff u r talking about on data bases in libraries or on the internet. Its just racism that's not even valid. Even stupid people wont fall for these ploys and experts on both sides support none of this.
ikcjjtt 8 months ago
@glorp896 And for the record, thats also why i dont define superiority the way you do. It doesnt mean anything in race. So what if blacks are inferior? The only thing that can be done is to compensate for that and fix it (if possible). If not compensate for it (Affirmative action, reverse discrimination to some). what else do u want to do about? send them back to Africa? stop them from breeding? kill them off? Cant be done in the USA. This isnt WWII.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikc of course it means something in race - the correlations/cause are clear enough even if a generalization... so what? the implications are don't breed with them for starters... and why would you want to live in a neighborhood that is all black?, loads of crime. we already abort 3 times the number of black babies as we do white, i say increase this for blacks and sterilize more of them - one penny of tax dollars of welfare and SNIP SNIP! you can look up Tom Shelly's "back to africa program"
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 no body wants to live in an all black neighborhood, some people just dont have a choice. Though "all black" hoods is just a code name for low income,deserted, high crime areas. (though only 12% of people do crime in those places, and cops just ignore it-crime displacement theory).And once again you cant do any of that in America. Its wishful thinking, if they didnt want black people in your country, shouldnt have brought black slaves. Ofcourse they will breed-reek what you soe.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt "inner city youth" is code for young black nigger boys... criminals in essence... you should see the crime stats... you NEED TO... 12%, interesting figure, and certainly NOT believable... guess you need to see the stats again... but in thinking about the huge percent of nigs in jail/prison, i guess you would need some to be out in order to commit the crime so we really don't know the percent until we catch and convict them, so we can assume its MUCH higher than 12%, i guess...
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 12% of the people in those areas do mot of the crime all of the time. That's a fact by the FBI. As for in the prisons, i say about 30% is represented thier. More then twice the amount in the population, but white people still populate the cells more than black people-as to be expected of the minority.
ikcjjtt 8 months ago
@glorp896 ..USDJ stats 2009. Over 10 million total arrests, 7 million were white, nearly 70%. Why aren't more whites in jail ? One reason could be because whites fill the mental hospitals and drug rehabs. Paying their way could be another reason. Up until 1967, whites filled the prisons. Did whites decide to behave and let blacks take over crime ? Not likely.....If you're gonna present stats, at least learn how to comprehend them, especially the fine print...
gmccall22 8 months ago
@gmccall22 the fbi is notorious for including spics in with whites and thanks to the illegals "whites" look WAY bad... there is some fine print for you... hmm, you rounded up?:
- In 2009, 69.1 percent of all persons arrested were white (and spic), 28.3 percent were black, and the remaining 2.6 percent were of other races. - so thats well over 2 times the representation of their black population (did blacks decide to behave worse and take over crime? - just in the nature? typical nig behavior?
glorp896 8 months ago
@glorp896 ..If the FBI is so notorious for including Latinos with white"as you say" Then why are you presenting their stats in the first place ? You're saying the FBI is inaccurate ..lol..Only when it comes to whites crime. And latinos are counted separately . Did blacks decide to behave worse ? Answering my question with a question is because you can't argue...lol. And 69% is roughly whites share of the population, the same as blacks. And the RATES hasn't change hardly any since the 1950's
gmccall22 8 months ago
@gmc because thats where you got this stat from brain drain... of course they are inaccurate as to racially outlining crime stats which have been going way up for latinos as the illegals have been making hispanic rates catch up and surpass blacks in many areas... latinos are counted separately but i can show you FBI not counting them separately... if they do at times, thats great... you obviously are mathematically retarded - there is no explaining to you apparently... late 80s-early 90s=peak
glorp896 8 months ago
@glorp896 ..You're the retard. The UCR fine print says arrests are for REPEAT offenders, they're not on an individual basis. Victimization Reports are for HOUSEHOLDS. A crime committed against ONE person, the whole household are victims which will make the numbers greater. So yeah, that's where I got my stats from. But unlike yourself, I read the fine print, and with comprehension. You went on some bogus gov site..LOL..
gmccall22 8 months ago
@gmccall22 i caught you making up crap before, so i'm going to end this quicker this time and no, it was from the FBI... go have a chat with rikki, babye...
glorp896 8 months ago
@glorp896..I made up the fine print ? LOLOLOL...Or the fact that you went on a half truth telling site withholding the fine print ?..LOLOL...He quarrels again because he's ignorant and can't argue...This isn't the FBI's doing. It's stupid people who can read stats correctly, like YOU...Your "IQ" failed you once again
gmccall22 8 months ago
@ikcjjtt of course you don't, NO GUTS! how can you not value a normal or above average child over a retard or downs syndrome person, or a cat over a rat or a dog over an ant... OF COURSE you can rank, you just want to lie to yourself and think we are all equal? or is it just color that you can't handle? i'll put you to the test: an earthquake happens in 72 IQ Haiti and 105+ IQ japan, who do you want to save first? the morons or the above average? i've defined superior for you in many ways
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 in other words " If cohort differences across time and culture complicate interpretation of brain size differences across races, the additional uncontrolled effects of community variables in the determination of IQ across races render conclusive statements about racial IQ differences even more difficult, if not impossible at present.- M. Peters, Ph.D Deptartment of Psychology,University of Guelph.
Though i think my explanation is simplier and easier to understand.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt thats nonsense, you can only say that under the assumption of some absolutist method of coming to conclusions. racists like me with their data know there's a distribution of results involved, and obvious overlap of results between races... there is no difficulty in racial IQ differences, its a matter of compiling the test results that show stark contrasts and he creates a scarecrow argument by interjecting UNCONTROLLED EFFECTS?, you can "control" for variables, its statistical analysis
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 u can not control the variables of time, social or environmental factors that can range in the 100s. Hence why even Rushton argues 50% environmental and 50% genetic.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt you can factor out variables and have all kinds of controls - its called regression analysis... its a way of showing the usual nature/nurture debate is folly... just as in twin studies with different social construction help mold the idea that genetics is foremost... think of it this way: 1000s of generations, millions of years - all hardwiring your programming, instinct and imprint vulnerability measures for your SINGLE lifetime, now what is the greater force? - one lifetime or 1000s?
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 genetics plays a big role no doubt (particulary in almost genetically identical TWINS for crying out loud). But across different races and solely based in that race? nice way of thinking- but in all those millons of years, isnt it possible that envioronmental and social factors guided that evolution? I always thought things evolve to adapt to the environment. If that is true, environmental factors play a role in how genetics themselves evolved. nature vs nurture? or 1 and the same?
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt solely based in that race? not sure what you may be assuming i'm thinking again... that superior programming was more a function of advantage for the white race? that is true... east asians as well... and of course social construction and environment effected them, much more so than now!, so thats just it, you can reverse the whole social construction thing on the constructionists by telling them their own idea is what molds and shapes genetics and nature over nurture in one lifetime
glorp896 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt rushton has wimped out at times and i think his scholarship is lacking, just as you say he abides by this kind of average mid way point of the usual range of 20-80% genetics is causative of IQ... rushton has chickened out sometimes, no doubt... you can bring up the full accounting of a socially constructed class structure and upbringing and compare races, the remaining balance is genetic and if regression analysis is close enough its almost a 100% genetic differential
glorp896 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt so the point is to understand the gap... what percent of the gap is genetic and what percent is environmental and maybe far more important at this point is what percent is a function of a genetically influenced environment as in genetically inferior people are poor because they are low IQed... not low IQed because they are poor... so PC equalizers like to try to reverse the cause and effect vector to originate an inferior state without value judgment and with forgiveness/excuses...
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 my arguement is not based around people, but races. Of course there are genetically inferior people on all scales. My own brother and familly do not have my hieght, strength, and intelligence. If such genes can not be located and based 100% around a race, this arguement is pointless.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjt good, you do have some possibility of understanding and at least admitting SOME TRUTH. i disagree as to 100%, correlations and even cause and effect are not 100%. the key is determining what is statistically significant as to how much of that percentage outlines predictive models and outcomes. try not to be so 100%ish and absolutist. some fuzzy Taoist math is in order here as we concede a distribution of results and a broad ranging mean are at work here - such is this race generalization
glorp896 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt and really at its base is geography and cold weather serving a greater evolutionary force of higher IQ, whereas hunter-gatherer warmer africa required less of this survival thinking to get by... its amazing how this north high IQ colder weather pattern holds around the world, until its stifling, like the eskimos and even a northern japanese tribe that has lower IQs... or the lapps in scando or INUIT...
glorp896 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt of course there is alot of guesswork and broad ranges of percentages - we aren't god yet, but we know who is more evil, stupid and as a whole more inferior regardless of the requirement by the left to know HOW it happened... it happened and is true, we racists don't have to prove in some exhaustive highly convoluted cause/effect flow chart of evolution over vast time to point out the basic observational data that holds true over 100s of years at least (black inferiority)
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 "who is more evil, stupid and as a whole more inferior regardless of the requirement by the left to know HOW it happened" lets keep this scientific please. I couldnt care less about your prejudices, but they are causing your points and statements to become incoherent and irrelavent. My arguement is on what caues said "inferiority". I would rather discuss each factor ONE at a time. Bunching them all up like this and coming to the conclusion race is the ONE and ONLY factor that matters-
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt prejudice is irrational founded belief - i'm guided by the empirical data... and even if i were bias/prejudice without the science you SHOULD CARE... thats what we should fight, the bias/prejudice lies... EVEN SO i'd argue you can be correct without having seen all the data... i'm hardly incoherent and NOTHING on the net keeps me more busy than race; HARDLY irrelevant, its a firestorm hot topic that yields more response than any other topic i've written about on the net...
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 by purposely ignoring glaringly obvious factors that come into play under the false notion of "regression analysis" factor's out all other variables (which it doesn't), is proof enough that black inferiority is caused by society (which view points didn't differ from yours) forcing them into a position of inferiority. And as those chains are loosened through time and understanding of each other, we see the IQ gap closing, black people making more money, becoming leaders (president),-
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt you keep saying i ignore, i guess you keep ignoring that i say i don't ignore these things, its merely a matter of reporting what you think is a BETTER balance of info to serve mankind as a whole... blacks are doing better than indians, THANKS TO WHITES... if we had given blacks "nations", like the Sioux nation and other indian reservations they would be on their own... and the 15%+ white genetic influx helps as well! blacks live longer and make more money than indians - obama=fraud
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 Actually Black life expantecy is going down because of bad eating habits based on the culture and stuff...Same with all Americans.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt not according to the graph i just saw, unless its a very new trend... please list your source - last i saw black men were pushing up toward 70 life expectancy... gotta go now, can't do the research presently...
glorp896 9 months ago
@glorp896 and ultimately the old fashion notion of racial superiority becoming more and more based on superstition and dogma rather than scientific inquiry,objective analysts of facts, and appropriate uses of statistics.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt if not squelched by PC witch hunter equalizers i think just the opposite will occur, we will realize that there is a disproportionate level of advantageous genetic material condensed in certain groups - jews, japs, some NW euro whites, etc... from blood to race to GENETICISM, and that should be the new racism, genetics, which would also show blacks have some good stuff, but not enough to justify continually breeding them relative to superior races, that i shall continue to believe...
glorp896 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt ...but all of the legitimate pages. You'll be shocked to discover that what is so glaringly obvious--that all races are not exactly the same in every respect--is actually confirmed by research.
And I see your understanding of rape comes straight out of the feminist (why is it that racism, antisemitism, & all similar types of "-isms" are bad except feminism, btw?) manifesto. Strange that rape has nothing to do with sex, since I, for one, need an erection b4 having sex. But I digress...
PumpingSmashkins 9 months ago
@PumpingSmashkins no one here is arguing anybody is the same. Nobody is. But from a crime stand point, genetics is a mute point. It doesnt matter what color you are, crime is still a crime. But who gets caught for that crime and who gets sentenced and for how long does have racial correalations. My understanding of rape comes from a criminal justice major with a PHD, real life experience, and decades of studying this stuff. So when he says some rapist cant even get an erection, let alone-
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@PumpingSmashkins finish the very act of raping, i tend to take his word for it. Call it feminists if you want, but u dont need an erection to rape someone. Rape is based on the need to control and assert one's domanince. Serial killing is more of a sexual thing, even when the guy never has sex with his victims.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@ikcjjtt ...that you're even capable of believing that having no money is even a horribly flawed rationalization for rape indicates one of at least of a couple of things about you, neither/none of which are flattering.
PumpingSmashkins 9 months ago
@PumpingSmashkins ok ok ok, that was just a joke done in bad taste on my part. I wanted to rationalize by saying they have no money so they are mad at the world, particulary women (cause of thier own mom's not having enough money to take care of them). So they rape woman to get revenge on thier moms for having no money. There is a rape category for that- anger-retalitory. But that reasoning doesn't sound anymore silly than this race and IQ gig.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@MaximusRelaximus jumping to conclusions.The entire criminal justice system is build around discretion. It is foolish to think prejudice is none existence in the criminal justice system. There are cases has recent as 2001 that shows otherwise.There are studies done throughout history that shows unequal treatment based on race-people that dont look a certain way got the brunt of the inequality. In the USA this is a solid fact. Numerous research supports this.Im not here to blame or point fingers-
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@MaximusRelaximus cause in truth the issue is extremily COMPLICATED. It's nobodies single fault, everybody plays a part. 500 characters just isnt enough to explain at least 2 out of the various theories that explains this phenominom. But i will say this- it has everything to do with social and enviornmental factors. Blaming it on race based on genetics doesn't make sense. and blaming it on a race is just as stupid. no one can reasonably rationalize either.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@MaximusRelaximus Though if you are interested in the theories, one is called anomie theory and the other is called crime displacement theory. Just remember that crime is inevitable, the question is why does it seem to focus on one population in relation to another. And dont bother looking at crimes rates outside of the USA-different CJ justice systems cannot accuratly correalate. If for no other reason than different laws.
ikcjjtt 9 months ago
@MaximusRelaximus
How come Native Americans have lower IQ's than their East Asian counterparts when in fact their origins can be traced back to the hostile Nordic (Pleistocene) environment that North East Asians went through?? Living in a different environment for thousands of years wont change the genetics of higher intelligence, gained from living in the same region as the (superior) North East Asians. Unless of course the Flynn Effect has not occured with them yet??
sovietamerican2 5 months ago
@MaximusRelaximus
Also, elucidate why the Southern Amerindians, including the Nazca people, the Incas, the Aztecs- were able to engender large advanced societies while their Northern most American-Indian counterparts were still living in inferior life styles. Give me a cogent response, if you are unable to render for me a comprehensive, laconic response, please do not switch topics.
sovietamerican2 5 months ago
@EgalitarianJay I'll give you the point that there are no explicit racial immigration policies in Japan that I know of. Misspoke. The larger point, though, that Asian countries are overwhelmingly racially homogeneous, and that therefore there is no call for Asian scientists to weigh in on the matter one way or the other, stands.
MaximusRelaximus 9 months ago
@EgalitarianJay "The Minnesota study of twins reared apart found that scores of MZA twins correlated about .7 while the scores of MZT (reared together) have been found to correlate about .8. The study attempted to control several economic, educational and cultural factors. Because test scores for twins reared apart correlate nearly as highly as do scores for twins reared together, the results imply that intellectual ability is largely inherited"
-Sources of Human Psychological Differences, 1990
MaximusRelaximus 9 months ago
@PumpingSmashkins Other twin studies support and environmental model. The gap is virtually eliminated in studies where children are tested under conditions where family and neighborhood quality plus standard SES variables are controlled. Plus the evolutionary theory of Rushton was discredited,. I actually have a video that covers that one. As Black American environment improves the gap gradually closes. Racialist Hereditarians have been debunked yet stubbornly cling to discredited views.
EgalitarianJay 9 months ago
I admit that this isn't pure science as the controls are not in place, but the other side of the argument is that it is impossible to see any correlation and nothing can be tested. So basically we have an answer that seems to explain many if not all sociological patterns and an opposing claim that nothing can ever be figured out, along with a childish refusal of evidence such as the Myriad of IQ data, social trends via Interpol and government data (which certainly has no racist motive).
brendanmcwilliams 10 months ago
It is very hard to have hard data sets when dealing with world populations and humans. It seemed he mostly used other government organizations' numbers such as Interpol. The IQ data he gathered from 60 different studies on IQ according to him. That is pretty extreme evidence unless a conspiracy is afoot. The trends follow every country without exception, so this makes the environmental argument hard. The mixed race adoption study was the nail in the coffin for me.
brendanmcwilliams 10 months ago
@brendanmcwilliams The Interpol data is not consistent when you go country by country. There are Black countries with comparatively low crime rates and White countries with higher crime rates. Rushton simply aggregates countries by continent to make a generalization. He has more than 60 IQ studies. What he said is that he has 60 variables that show a pattern. But I have never seen a full list of those variables. As it stands there is too much evidence against his genetic hypothesis.
MysticNinjaJay 9 months ago
also brendan mcwilliams name even one white civilization that was the the intellectual equivalent to timbuctoo????
1976slater 10 months ago
can anyone explain if white peoples i.q was so high, why is it that africans had high culture before them???????
i bet no one can answer this question
1976slater 10 months ago
I still think "Guns, Germs, and Steel" is a joke, which is another reason I discarded your point as being incorrect. It is the apex of cherry picking, where we have to attribute "failure to launch" in a race to specific excuses, while ignoring other pieces of information.
ie: tons of species of plant and animals, CLAIM: must all be undomesticateable.
CLAIM:impossible climate--- yet best climate knowing glaciers were in europe in ice age time
brendanmcwilliams 10 months ago
@brendanmcwilliams I have two videos uploaded in multiple parts. One is a documentary that features multiple scientists including Rushton talking about their views on the Race and Intelligence controversy. The other is a panel discussion that took place at a University which was centered around Rushton's research. I think both of these videos address alot of the major issues concerning this debate. Diamond's book is an alternative view on how civilizations developed which is really a side issue.
EgalitarianJay 10 months ago
@EgalitarianJay
Sadly, that just convinced me more that he is right. Regardless of the head size deal, every correlation matched real world facts. The testosterone is likely right on. The problem is that in a purely academic sense, we can't assume this theory to be fact without empirical evidence. However, his theory matches sociology patterns to an unbelievable accuracy, including the heart disease and other factors.
brendanmcwilliams 10 months ago
@EgalitarianJay
Even as he is pointing out that blacks have deeper and louder voices and are more aggressive, the black speaker is constantly yelling and the blacks in the audience are make unintelligible noises and sounds. The only resistance to his data was the other speaker stating that it could be environmental. The checkmate was the native americans having higher IQ results than american blacks, in spite of being "uncivilized" longer. This would make sense if they are asian hybrids.
brendanmcwilliams 10 months ago
@EgalitarianJay
I actually would use that video to support Rushton's theories rather than counter them, as he was the only one with real data and facts, while the contender is pulling a 1917 newspaper article to try to counter his current data sets. Pretty wild.
I didn't see any racism in his speaking at all, as he was very clear on Asians being the highest IQ and sociological superior race and culture.
brendanmcwilliams 10 months ago
@brendanmcwilliams I have a great deal of respect for Native American cultures but let's be honest. Generally speaking they were not the cultural equivalent of Northeast Asians which somewhat undermines Rushton's theory of East Asian superiority. You had your Mayan, Incan and Aztec civilizations however most Native American cultures were hunter gatherers. I enjoyed hearing Graves retort to Rushton's claim of observed differences in Native and Black temperament. Graves is very sharp.
EgalitarianJay 10 months ago
@brendanmcwilliams And he didn't make that up. Galton's cousin Darwin did observe opposite temperament between Native American and Black African groups. He spoke extensively about his witnessing the savagery of the Fuegian people which inspired him to write the Descent of Man to explain how Western people evolved from savage tribes. In contrast he wrote about the pleasant personalities of Blacks he encountered while on the Beagle and how he felt that Blacks had the mental acuity of Englishmen.
EgalitarianJay 10 months ago
@brendanmcwilliams Throughout the debate with Graves I noticed Rushton looking very uneasy. He wasn't prepared to defend his scholarship on human evolution against a real Evolutionist and Graves had an answer for every argument he made. I would have loved to see Graves response to the last question where Rushton self destructed. Perhaps I will ask him about that. I see the whole argument about Asian superiority as a clever smokescreen. Rushton's theories are still fiercely anti-Black.
EgalitarianJay 10 months ago
@brendanmcwilliams * One correction. Graves did not pull up a newspaper article from 1917. It was a study testing for a correlation between intrinsic rate of increase and IQ which is directly related to Rushton's theories on human evolution. While I heard him say 1917 as well he must have mispoken about the date. The Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scales was invented in 1916 and r/K selection theory was developed in 1967. There's no way Graves study is that old.
EgalitarianJay 10 months ago
@EgalitarianJay
The funniest part was him explaining that blacks are louder and more aggressive merely due to higher testosterone levels, and later the black speaker is explaining that anger is a positive emotion (obviously because he had gotten angry during the conference). You would think he could have restrained himself as not to be the perfect example of Rushton's theories, but genetics outweighed this I guess. LOL!
brendanmcwilliams 10 months ago