show me the inconvenient truth that says whites are superior to blacks...you say ground your reality in science but conveniently ignore the science of genetics...it appears you pick and choose your science when it suits you...
You just proved my point. Thank you for that. The case for significant differences in IQ between racial groups (for example, between whites and blacks) is so overwhelming that the only people who deny it are the ones who do it because of ideology - people like you. And that case is far more clear than say, the case for man made global warming which i dont deny, but if i did you would call me an uneducated hillbilly. The sad truth is that you are the anti-intellectual who cant accept science because of "religious" beliefs.
the only people making that point are conservative racist who believe they understand the science when they haven't a clue(the dunning-kruger effect),with tunnel vision so bad they only see what they want to see... show me the evidence...there is none other than concocted by racist minds, while the clear overwhelming undeniable definitive evidence from genetics is ignored because it doesn't meet the agenda of racism...
1. all black people on this planet, no matter where they live, are poor and prone to violence 2. every iq test that has ever been administered has pointed to this 3. there isnt a single black inventor, scientist or intellectual on this planet that has achieved anything significant. Make the scientific case for me, why is it that these things are meaningless and you're right? Im genuinely interested. Heres your chance to convert a real racist.
FACT: Black people have a notable higher level of Testosterone than white people FACT: High testosterone is a major causitive factor in violent crime including rape.
well that leaves no doubt to what you are and of your motivation...so you can stop hiding behind non-existent scientific evidence that you invented, just quit the charade and admit what you are...
Given that IQ is measured primarily through standardized tests featuring "common knowledge", education skews the results - preventing them from being solely about intellectual capacity. Pointing out flaws in data collection technique is not a dismissal of science in favor of ideology, unlike dismissal of any principal that contradicts superstitious belief so prevalent among right-wing sheeple.
I usually am angry at those that hate religion (read religion as Christianity) who demonstrate their ignorance in what they so detest by making false misleading claims embellished with the usual anti-God anti-Christian insults. Here is a self admitted racist that is making similar demonstrations, just in another subject. Before I list the many reasons I disagree with our wayward member, I would like to comment on the (highly subjective) definition of racist. I have been accused of being racist because I oppose forced busing etc. I would like the Affirmative Action thing to go away. It helped but its time has come and gone IMO. That said a brutal or violent racist is on the lowest rungs of the moral ladder. At least our member doesn’t appear to fall into the latter catatgoy of racist. However his quote (above) is false. The only question is if the ignorance of the author is intentional or accidental. Even I, a white Christian minister raised in the ’south’ in a fairly racist area* know of a couple of famous turn of the century black scientists which is remarkable considering the slavery and laws denied blacks a formal education. Then there were many more black scientists not as famous as Carver but still remarkable for their achievements as any middle school student could tell you. Hmm' middle schools know this ...ahh' never mind I dont want to infract myself! Anyway; They are (1) the eminent Benjamin Banneker, a brilliant mathematician and astronomer. Then how could any American forget the famous (2) George Washington Carver. Here are a few more …OH THE PAIN! African American Scientists Benjamin Banneker (1731-1806) Rebecca Cole (1846-1922) Edward Alexander Bouchet Dr. Daniel Hale Williams Charles Henry Turner Ernest Everett Just (1883-1941) Archibald Alexander (1888-195 Roger Arliner Young (1889-1964) Percy L. Julian (1899-1975) Dr. Charles Richard Drew (1904-1950 Emmett Chappelle (1925-) James West (b. 1931) Philip Emeagwali (b. 1954) Aprille Ericsson (b. 1963) BTW there are just as many or more Black inventors. *(the KKK in a small town next to my hometown never stopped holding roadblocks to hand out fliers, however they did become less frequent) reva
I would absolutely love to see you sit down and say that to this guy: [video=youtube;h1iJXOUMJpg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1iJXOUMJpg[/video]
So let's see.. to be a progressive liberal, you have to believe: 1. global warming.. or climate change, or whatever.. You cannot critique any science behind it, but must believe it as religious dogma.. It is unscientific to question the conclusions of the liberal scientific community. 2. Handouts do not promote dependency.. feeding the bears in yellowstone is wrong, but targeting segments of society to do this is fine. 3. Fiscal responsibility is not 'science'. It is boring numbers, & they don't really matter. Science makes you happy & feel good. Numbers make you feel uncomfortable, therefore are bad. This is proven liberal science. 4. Everything you hear on pbs is the gospel truth. To question it is heresy. All true science comes from pbs or liberal academia. All others are fraudulent. 5. Human beings are dirty, polluting, & evil.. they are ruining the earth. Therefore, we should provide breeding grounds for them to multiply, & encourage exponential growth of the irresponsible & dependent. This is proven liberal logic. 6. Crime is not real, & criminals are just misunderstood & need a hug. ..proven social science. 7. We should accept & tolerate different views.. unless they are the vile conservatives who should all be killed. That is just common sense. You can't have haters in a happy society. 8. Science is only real if it validates our emotions, & smears the opposition. Empirical truth is relative, & can only be proved if it feels right. You know in your heart this is true. 9. Skepticism is good if it is applied to conservatives, but bad if it questions progressive ideals. 10. Inanimate objects can have a life of their own. They can cause people to do evil, & have an evil aura about them. People are good, naturally, but if they come in contact with certain combinations of forged metal, the evil within it comes out & makes them evil, too. Liberal science has proved this. 11. It is immoral to take the life of a mass murderer, but it is fine to kill babies. Liberal science has proved this. 12. Govt is wasteful, corrupt, & inefficient. To solve this, we need to expand it & make more govt. If in doubt, double down! I probably missed some.. any more to add?
So what great things did these people do? What great inventions? Carver did peanut butter what else do you have to offer?
Sorry but progressives in universities stop any serious research into areas like intelligence and ethnicity and Nobel prizewinners who dare speak out ( like Watson) are immediately sat on if they dare deviate from the line. For instance it is incontravertably true that Black people have higher testorsterone than non black people and the highest concentrations or in the Black diaspora in the Americas The same also applies to the fact that High testosterone is irrefutably correlated with violent crime including rape. It is also correlated with a lower intelligence. What you are not allowed to do is put the two together and make the obvious conclusion.
95% of greenhouse gases are water vapor. Excess CO2 in the atmosphere traps heat causing more surface water to evaporate, but it is the atmospheric water vapor creating the real warming. NASA satellite data shows that water vapor, the most important greenhouse gas, has declined in the upper atmosphere causing a cooling effect that is 16 times greater than the warming effect from man-made greenhouse gases, i.e. burning fossil fuels. Climate models predict upper atmosphere moistening which triples the greenhouse effect from man-made CO2 emissions...the climate models are not accounting for data showing declining upper atmospheric water vapor.
Liberals are not interested in science or facts. They hate science, even though they try to flip it & say conservatives hate science, like in this thread. They are agenda driven, & any 'science' has to fit within their agenda. Facts or evidence to the contrary, that don't fit within their agenda, are immediately dismissed, labeled as 'racist', & they return to coddling the agenda. That is why debating facts or evidence with progressives is so difficult. They get very emotional over any criticisms of any 'science' they have construed to support their agenda. It is seen as a personal attack & they lash out with great vengeance. Rational discussions about science with progressive liberals is impossible. Emotion always trumps reason, & there is no fact they cannot dismiss, regardless of the evidence for it. Look at any discussion where scientific facts are discussed with regard to policy or politics. If you provide alternate views or evidence, you will immediately be subject to ridicule & aspersions on your intelligence. The irony is that they don't see it. They think they are the rational, scientific elite. But it is all pseudo science bullying... bigotry using scientific terms, hijacked for a political agenda.
You can 'deem' it a fact all you want. But it is not even a good theory. There are serious problems with it, & evidence is very much lacking. I addressed a simple core issue of the theory HERE, & no evidence was ever provided to support the claim. There are lots of assertions, & hand waving & stomping of feet, & pounding the table, but evidence? Not so much. The ToE is just another pseudo science religion that the pop science crowd has embraced. It has nothing to do with theism, christianity, atheism, or any other 'ism', as people believe it from all religious backgrounds. They 'assume', like you do, that it is proven fact, when it is only an asserted assumption, with NO evidence of any vertical, increasing complexity moves in the genetic structure. The horizontal variability that is observed is made into a non-scientific assumption, & a complex model of origins is constructed built upon those assumptions. But there is no evidence for it, & it is not proven fact, like you assert. But this argument has been made plenty of times, & the result is the same: 'Don't confuse us with the facts. Our minds are made up!' The irrationality & unscientific methods employed by allegedly rational & educated people boggles the mind...
Simply because you lack the ability to comprehend the evidence and data easily found en mass in scientific literature, websites, and museums throughout the world does not make it invalid.
If it is so 'easily found', post one. Provide ONE bit of evidence proving the claim that life moves vertically.. increasing in basic complexity, not just variability. Simply asserting this happens is not evidence. The asserters cannot do it, because they hate science, & prefer their agenda to scientific truth.
Mutations change the gnome....and change is a change to information. Simple as that. Where is the requirement that a change has to, or does not have to add complexity? The asserters cannot do it, because they hate science, & prefer their agenda to scientific truth. Yes, scientists hate the truth....that's why they look for it so diligently. You're a clown.
Somehow, I doubt providing one more example to you will make any difference whatsoever based on the ways you brushed off virtually every single thing provided to you at your request....basically, you do not actually want the data you request, you simple want someone to post it so you can ignore it. You provide no incentive for debate, as you are either extremely closed to the process, or something far worse.
Did you say this to the OP? He said conservatives hate science. I said evolution asserters hate science. I at least have evidence for my premise.. threads like this! - - - Updated - - - You just don't like it because i call your bluff, & you don't have any evidence, which frustrates you, so you lash out. No problem.. i get it.
Actually, you don't, you just think you do. You're just like the little boy with a kickball who wants into the baseball game but can't get into it because they won't change the rules for you. Sucks to be you. Why do you choose to ignore the evidence for evolution...Dishonesty or Ignorance?
If by chance, you could managed to understand or accept evidence when it is provided to you, the frustration would be mediated and debate could take place. If you agree to drop the show of willful ignorance in the face of verified and agreed upon Data.....I will agree to provide you the information you have requested. Deal?
What is an example of a "popular theory today?" I think that creationism is a popular theory today, that it's nonsense, and that very few scientists support it -- especially outside of the Bible belt. "Leftists" are not a single homogeneous blob. The fact that some 'leftists' disagree with Dawkins doesn't mean that 'the left' disagrees with Dawkins.
