Race

[Darorinag]

Fadi, are you really surprised with his choices of sources? I think the predictability of such actions has been established, there is no room for objectivity on his behalf just plain stubborn pioneering of racism.

Racism? Please prove that insisting on racial differences is = racism. Fact is, the two are separate things. I can be both, but being one doesn't necessarily imply the other.

Fadi - Objectivity? Sources? Don't even get me started on how the "holocaust" is now an established "fact." By that token, jewish survivor accounts cannot qualify as "proof" to the holocaust. What are you talking about?
How about I show you sources from "nizkor" that use the ADL and only ADL in their works cited? How's THAT for proving that the "holocaust" took place? Bottom line is, where you get your sources has nothing to do with their validity - i.e. as long as you are using facts rather than wishful thinking or ideologies.

Now regarding your two protégés, Christopher Brand is a mentally deranged and known racist, he even supports some form of paedophilia…

What his personal beliefs on pedophilia are have nothing to do with race and IQ. So are you saying that a gay person cannot be a scientist because he's gay? And yes, it's comparable, because while you might not think homosexuality is immoral, a lot of people do. It's the same for pedophilia. There are a lot of people who don't object to it. Besides the fact that Christopher Brand is not a pedophile, because he does not advocate sex with minors, but relationships with adults whose age difference is bigger than the one considered "natural/normal"... such as a 20 year old woman and a 40 year old man...

Thanks for the info, good to know another academic fascist.

Ohhh, an academic fascist, eh? I think Seapahn's example of the cereal and your white supremacy obsession would be VERY helpful here and in all your posts in threads that I've posted in. You have become obsessed with me to the point of not being able to shut up about it, even in threads that are irrelevant to white supremacy. But way to show our fellow forumers your true level and mental age.

And once again I've become convinced that, at times intelligence cannot be held in such high esteem, when morality is so warped the credibility shifts to "0".

Morality? Now it's immoral to argue that there are differences between races? Wow.. you are the epitome of political correctness, aren't you? Your ancestors would be SO proud of your liberal-yet-not-so-liberal views (and hypocrisies)... but then again, you're from Armenia, aren't you? So there's no sense of loss there... your ancestors weren't the ones who were massacred because they were politically incorrect and went against the generally held belief/plan...

As for replying to Dan it's like taking a ride on a marry-go-round, motion is present but it's clear that it's spinning in circles and going nowhere.

You're right - because your replies are nothing more than cheap shots and accusations of "white supremacy" which have nothing whatsoever to do with what I am saying here. Notice that never once did I say that blacks are inferior to whites, in this thread... But your prejudice has taken you to SUCH a point of obsession that you fail to see ANYTHING other than that. Just like jews who fail to see anything but anti-semetism when a non-jewish person talks about them.

saw your stupid replies

yes yes.. yet another cheap shot.. heh.. but then again, what can you expect from someone who posts on the other forum?

As for you, my dear "anileve," I guess some people LOVE the fallacy of "arguing with you is pointless so I will not argue with you, although I can disprove all your points."

[Anonymouse]

Originally posted by Fadix Here we go, changing the subject as usual, Mr. Anon, writes a long essay, typical…, about everything beside the central point. The same individual that consider as only a belief the Earth axes shifting, when it is observed, measured, calculated etc… and on the other hand consider as “truth,” something which was discredited by all recent controlled and scientifically serious studies.

Talk about anything but the central point.

Originally posted by Fadix First of all, even the 15 points is rejected and considered as a mistake on the Bell Curve, as the “studies” used among women and their children, after making the comparable comparisons, the average differences would be 7-10 points. This was at the beginning of the 90s. One of the most recent studies compared blacks and whites of comparable social statues, found not measurable differences when using the standards IQ tests. Another study with children sent to school, and followed until college, found that when children of blacks from difficult social backgrounds were sent to school and given the appropriate help in order to increase their standards at the levels of their white counterparts, their IQ was raised and achieved those of the white students.

In fact, EVERY recent studies when comparing blacks and whites with the same educations and social statues show no statistically significant differences.

Talk about unsubstantiated assertions. Every study posted by Dan has in some ways shown differences.

Originally posted by Fadix Now Danny and Anon can start posting what ever they want, I have yet to see any recent controlled serious study that would support their claims. In order for one to support such a claim, one must be able to back it up with serious controlled studies, articles are not studies, insinuations are not studies, Anon senseless essays are not studies… self deceiving bigots hiding themselves under “rartialism” banner to not be labelled as racists are the last to be considered. Having in mind that the past years they were not able to support their claims with any of the recent studies.

Despite your appeal to your own ignorance, this is just a desperate attempt at trying to delegitimize the information provided. If you cannot refute obviously any of the information that suggests differences and not equality, it is to be expected that you will resort to such tactics.

Originally posted by Fadix Just title of any studies Dan and Anon, go ahead, if you can not find it on the web, just post the title, I can have access to it and I promises I will post the abstract.

If you can not support what you claim with recent serious studies, then, you claims will be just that, claims.

This is the last refuge of the pointless egalitarian. When he cannot confront of present evidence of "equality" he has to somehow pretend that the evidence and data offered by those that do is somehow "inconsequential".

[Anonymouse]

Originally posted by Fadix Dan, don’t start that s!.t with me, go try to sell your nonsense elsewhere. The g-factor is a joke; the references used are all pass dated uncontrolled studies and known to have been manipulated. The references used as “Lynn” comes from a known misinterpreted and manipulated study by a racist professor living in Ireland calling his research as “Negroid Intelligence.” There is hardly any sane person whom would use this man as reference. His “best study” which he refers uses black students from South Africa who knew a little of English, to pass the test written in English. And more so, one of the studies that were done, the black students scored higher in the Raven test, still Lynn ignored them and decided to not include it. In another study, he used a thousand Zambian miners without any scholarity… While on the other hand, he used for the white population for the comparison, British students or graduates. One wonder how do you ask those Zambian miners who could barely talk English to pass a test to measure their intelligence. And the results were even not on papers, but were reported orally… I can provide a lot of example, such as his other claim regarding Arabs having 75 as IQ, a flawed test, like all his other ones. Murray and Herrnstein Bell Curves uses Lynn works(by the intermediary of the magazine he was associated Editor of “Mankind Quarterly”) 24 times, practically the major bases of the work regarding the blacks IQ. The design of the studies that Lynn himself manipulated was actually from Dr. Ken Owen whom said that the poorer results of those studies had all to do with the fact that blacks had a poorer education under the racist apartheid system without denying the poor quality of those same studies.

This is simply another non-issue which you are driving to arrive at some sort of "legitimacy" regarding your position, and marginalizing ours because society is "racist". When things don't go your way, society is "racist". The blame in the current South African study is that it was a "racist apartheid" system, as opposed to now? Now it is racist in the reverse, if you didn't know. And now that it's been years since apartheid, how is S. Africa doing without white rule you say? We can only guess at the amount of crime that pervades. Now I am to guess that the criticism of testing IQs of blacks in the US is "racist" because there is "discrimination" and they don't have the exact means of "getting a better education" because of "racism".

Originally posted by Fadix The other manipulation on that article, regarding the adopted children, the reference is Weinberg studies of a hundred children adopted. Those children at age 7 scored 106 on IQ tests, while the white children scored 112. The study was run in the 70s, where black students face racial discrimination which influenced their devloppement, this explains this 6 point differences. A decade later, the black students IQ dropped to 89, while those of the whites dropped to 106. After analysing the cases Weinberg and Scarr realised that Black students in the study faced a lot of discriminations and social problems and many had to even leave school because of it. Jencks after reviewing the studies agreed and wrote: "The results are perfectly consistent with the difference being due to something in the early home environment and, for older kids, their experience in school." Even if after the problem was pinpointed, Murray and Herrnstein ignored the authors of those studies conclusion without referring it in the work, they replaced the conclusion by their own erroneous analysis by claming that the environment played a little role, without bothering checking the datas collected that pointed out that practically all the black students faced racial discrimination and social problems, and that many had to leave school because of those problems.

In the words of Richard Lynn:

Low IQ can lead to crime because less intelligent children do poorly at school and fail to learn the skills needed to get well-paid jobs, or even any job. Unemployment is therefore two to three times higher among blacks than whites. People without jobs need money, and have relatively little to lose by robbery or burglary, and may therefore commit property crimes. The association between low intelligence and crime holds for whites as well, among whom the average IQ of criminals is about 84.

Nevertheless, as Charles Murray and the late Richard Herrnstein showed in their book The Bell Curve, low IQ cannot entirely explain a black crime rate that is six-and-a-half times the white rate. When blacks and whites are matched for IQ, blacks still commit crimes at two-and-a-half times the white rate. This shows that blacks must have some other characteristic, besides low intelligence, that explains their high levels of criminality.

Prof. Herrnstein and Dr. Murray found the same race and IQ relationship for social problems other than crime: unemployment, illegitimacy, poverty, and living on welfare. All of these are more frequent among blacks and are related to low IQ, and low IQ goes some way towards explaining them, but these social problems remain greater among blacks than among whites with the same IQs. Low intelligence is therefore not the whole explanation. Prof. Herrnstein and Dr. Murray did not offer any suggestions as to what the additional factors responsible for the greater prevalence of these social problems among blacks might be. They concluded only that “some ethnic differences are not washed away by controlling for either intelligence or for any other variables that we examined. We leave those remaining differences unexplained and look forward to learning from our colleagues where the explanations lie” (p. 340).

-Personality and Individual Differences, 2002, Vol. 32, pp.273-316.

Originally posted by Fadix Now regarding your two protégés, Christopher Brand is a mentally deranged and known racist, he even supports some form of paedophilia…

As it is too late, I will go to sleep right now, I just realised that my computer was open and I decided to refresh and saw your stupid replies… will all answer them tomorrow.

Every information or academic that somehow present information that is contrary to egalitarian claims of racial equality is either a racist or deranged, or what have you, in this case its an appeal to your own ignorance.

[Anonymouse]

Originally posted by anileve Continued....................


Anon,

Now in terms of your unsupported and very inaccurate claim of blacks historically being most violent people, it is like a balloon inflated with hot air. It simply cannot be argued that historically “Caucasians” if we must go by racial terms, are most violent peoples in history. Who is historically responsible for the majority of wars, genocides and colonization? The Crusades? Germany? Turks? Russians? Spaniards? British? Mongols? The list goes on, I really cannot recall much domination done by third world countries. Africans???????? Where is the sense in that, Anon?

It is not "unsupported" nor is it "innacurate" that blacks committ most crimes. I already documented it.

Originally posted by anileve And if you want to look at things from a more statistical perspective to dispute your allegations, please look at the following statistics, National and International. Please notice that in the International statistics countries with the highest percentage of crimes are mainly westernized and “civilized” Asiatic and Anglo-Saxon dominated nations. Mexico my dear is number 13 and North Africa is not even in top 25. South Africa which is predominantly “white” is #5 on the list strangely.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/cri_tot_cri

This is flawed data. You posting this to show that the "Anglo" and "civilized" or "Asiatic" nations committ most crimes is biased. The best we can explain is they are industrialized nations. For example for the United States, it doesn't take into account the minorities, nor in Britain for that matter, and their relative contribution to the crime rate, in proportion to their population. Also, what sort of "crimes" are we talking about? Murder? Rape? Insurance fraud? Arsen? It is vague and doesn't give a break down, so anything can literally be piled up in there.

Originally posted by anileve Plus I am posting link to some of the figures for the National Crime rates, please take a look at the report and compare, do you still think that blacks commit most amount of crimes?

http://www.albany.edu/sourcebook/1995/pdf/t410.pdf

I can go on further, but I am out of fuel for tonight.

This also doesn't take into account the crimes committed in proportion to their population group as represented in the U.S. It is a nation of 290,342,554 of which around 180-200 million would be whites, so it is expected for them to obviously have a greater number in crime. However when compared to crime of each group, within proportion to their population, it is then when blacks will stand out, hence the phrase "disproportionately" involved in crime. I don't "think" blacks committ most of the crimes, in proportion to their population, I know they do.





Even for countries in Europe such as U.K., the British Commission for Racial Equality, reports that more whites are the victims of race based violence than Asians and Blacks added together.
-Daily Telegraph, London, 9 February 1999.

And according to the British Commission for Racial Equality's own statistics, for the 97-98 year, whites were attacked by non-whites in racially motivated assaults in Britain, greater than that of the supposed white on non white crime.

[Anonymouse]

One of the pervading issues that is never taken into account, and this is an honest inquiry on my behalf, and what ties in this thread with that of the immigration thread, is the issue of race and civilization, and the population shifts that are taking place right now in most of the "white" countries. I say "white", because the term is usually used like that by people who don't recognize the reality of race, since we are all the "same".

The issue of immigration and race is a pivotal one to understanding why race goes hand in hand with civilization, and how civilization is only an outward manifestation of a given people. The current trends of immigration both in North America, Europe, and Australia, if projected into the future, show "whites", as becoming minorities. By 2050 "whites" will be minority in the United States, by 2090 "whites" will be minorities in most of Western European nations.

It seems clear to me, and anyone can dispute this, that the only countries that embrace the idea of "diversity is our strength" and colorblindness, are "white" countries. You clearly will never see Korea, or Japan, ever fiddle with these ideas, for they clearly recognize civlization and cohesion go hand in hand with homogeneity, and the northeast Asian countries are one of the most racially homogenous countries on the planet. But to state these facts one is a horrible racist and/or bigot or fascist. I personally would like to be called a fascist, I like the "f" sound.

[Anonymouse]

Originally posted by anileve And do me a favor Anon, simmer down on posting articles regarding egalitarianism, equality, marxism, liberalism, anarchism and posting covers of books. Race is the main topic of this thread, let's stick to it, and just deal with one thing at a time.

If the articles and books tie in to the thread I will post them. There is no restriction on what one cannot post as long as it is within the constraints of the topic. I already said I wanted to avoid posting articles, but it naturally evolved into that, regarding equality since it has everything to do with your position of everyone being equal. If you contend that we are not equal then why are you here? If you contend that differences are not racial, but sociological, economic, or environmental, you are confirming differences in races, as each race is reacting differently to the sociological, economic, and environmental factors. I don't understand what you and Fadix are seeking to accomplish here, maybe you can summarize your position. Where do you stand?

[Darorinag]

Anonymouse, great arguments, great data you posted.

The "funniest" part (if I can call it that!) is how those who claim they are knowledgeable in Statistics have taken statistics out of context and interpreted it as they like. The crime rate vs race claim is a good example of that. Even someone who hasn't taken statistics would be able to point out the fallacy in that. It's a simple matter of logic. The larger numbers of whites, the more crimes committed by whites there would be, assuming that blacks and whites commit the same amount of crimes! but it's not even that. It's even the opposite. Blacks commit more crimes... and of course, this is not the first time that people have taken those stats out of context and interpreted them according to their whims... but to claim that would be "white supremacist." THIS is what I am talking about. Of course, I might be notorious for being a "racist", but what IS "racism" at this point? And do I CARE if I am called that at this point? It's going to be the most widely used term of the 21st century... despite the fact that they claim there are no races... yet they use the word "racist"... how's that for a contradiction?

I "understand" your "plight" to defend blacks against those claims and arguments, but really, facts are facts, let's not be fooled by our own beliefs and society's expectations of "good" behaviour from us and deny those facts.

Here:

Alabama state law required the Lamar County Board of Education to fire a black teacher after she failed a mandatory competency test five times during the three years allowed. She alleged discrimination because the test failed a disproportionate number of blacks. A judge reinstated her with three years' back salary.

[Anonymouse]

Making oneself pretend there are no differences, doesn't change the fact that there are differences, no matter where you attribute those differences, either to heredity, economics, or environment.

[Anonymouse]

The argument for superiority and inferiority.

Often times I am amazed at the people that, for the sake of believing in their minds that reality is anything but what it is, will ignore intentionally, blot out and pretend that there is no such thing as superior and inferior.

Often times this revolves around race, because since we are obsessed with race and the ones that argue for the non-existence of race, have more of a hang up with it, than the people that do. We are to believe that no race is superior or inferior to any other given race, and if we take this thinking further, individuals are not superior or inferior either. To suggest so means you are a "racist" or a "white supremacist", two smear labels concocted by those who don't want to admit to the reality of differences.

Usually, if you prove the illogicistics of the defenders of such wisdom, that yes, no individuals are alike and there are inequalities; while they may admit this, they do not want to attribute the same to race, that even though individuals may be different, races are not different.

The argument is that if you contend there is superiority and inferiority in nature, you are a "bigot" or "racist" or "white supremacist", and you are an "apologist for hate". No one here made apoligies for hate and violence and crime. No one here said because someone is different we have to kill them or oppress them. The only thing that is highlighted is that in nature is one of inequalities, and therefore superior and inferior elements. Obviously Einstein is a superior mind to me, just like I am a superior creature over an ant. Superior and inferior are part of nature. You cannot absolve it by simply pretending it doesn't exist.

If Europeans were able to explore the world, and conquer and colonize and subjugate other peoples it was because they were superior, used superior intellect, superior technology, and superior skills to defeat other peoples, who from the eyes of the European were obviously lesser, just like the Mongols were superior over the peoples they conquered, or Japan for that matter. Just like black atheletes are superior to white atheletes, and Asians by far are superior to whites and blacks on intelligence and response time. But notice, "white superiority" is not some hoopla that was invented by "whites", ironically it is invented by the same people that are intolerant of those that speak the truth.

Oh, I am to Fadix will dislike me posting "articles" or "rambling" with "unsubstantiated" assertions.

[Darorinag]

Person A: Whites are superior to blacks in intelligence.
"Unbiased" observer: You are a racist, white supremacist, Nazi SC*M!!!

Person B: Blacks are superior to whites in basketball.
"Unbiased" observer: You're right, man. Whites REALLY suck at basketball.

Of course, that's not a hypocrisy, is it? One is called white supremacy, the other "realism"... Racism, from what we understand, of course, is "feelings of antagonism and disrespect towards non-whites." I have never seen a black person being called a racist for dissing a white person, for example. Instead, that is labelled as "justified anger for years of slavery."