Zimbabwe Begs White Farmers To Return As Country Plunges Into Famine

A molehill to climb maybe.

https://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/npb/people/amc/articles-pdfs/racediff

Because racist opinions on social policy beggars the facts

Intelligence and related factors? You mean related factors like the social, economic and political environment within which a person is born?

 

Gained control of the gold trade. Nothing else.

 

Now you are begging the question. The facts support racist opinions which was a source of consternation to Eysenck.

No. Related factors like time preference.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272711001381

It is an interesting fact that the children of high IQ, middle class Black parents have a lower IQ than the children of low IQ poor White parents. This is called regression to the mean and indicates a genetic basis of IQ.

 

Can you show evidence for that claim?

 

No the racist interpretation supports the racist opinions as the link I provided demonstrated.

So you actually believe that intelligence level is based solely on genetics. Of course, arrive a satisfactory opinion and then remain impervious to any other consideration.

A phenomenon seen in virually all racists, religious fanatics, jew haters, holocaust deniers, conspiracy freaks and those of low intelligence and/or intellect.

 

It says "The Portuguese gained control of the Island of Mozambique and the port city of Sofala"
So I am correct that at that point the indigenous weren't governing their own lands.

Nothing else? I think not. And so I am correct that they were oppressed for 100's of years. Thanks for playing.

 

No one cares what you think it is if you can't prove it.

No Genius it doesn't. Which is once again why you couldn't prove it.

Which I never said. Thanks again for showing when you lose a debate you make up facts your opponent never said.

I see once again you have problems with honesty.

There is zero evidence supporting the idea that attraction is a choice and mounds of it supporting the idea that attraction is based on environmental factors that are not choices.

If attraction is not a choice it must be genetic. You can't have it both ways little buddy.

I also said you argued it was natural

And homosexuality appears in natural as does natural insemination so "unnatural" (aka artificial) insemination shouldn't be a problem.

Once again your dishonesty is blown apart by your own words. I thought by now you would have learned the search button never forgets.

 

The literature suggests that intelligence is 50% - 80% heritable. Environmental factors make up the rest.

And everybody else, for that matter. Including you it would seem.

 

Eye dominance is not a choice. Which gene controls it? Handedness is not a choice. Which gene controls it?

The claim that anything that isn’t a choice must be genetic is so ******ned stupid I don’t even know where to begin.

 

See https://liberalbiorealism.wordpress.com/tag/black-white-iq-gap/

The data is from Jensen and Rushton in “Thirty years of research on race differences in cognitive ability”

http://www.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf

---------------

I did make a mistake in that the children of poor white parents score higher in the SAT, not on IQ, that the children of wealthy black parents.

 

Prove it.

Prove its genetic.

Prove it.

Prove its genetic.

As I said, you can't prove a word you just spewed and your ignored your natural argument as well. Typical Questerr.

 

Then why was it one of the richest and most valuable colonies in the hemisphere when it was controlled by the French? Lets ignore that!

 

Here is your molehill.

http://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf

Two hundred and eighty pages of text and ten pages of bibliograpy.

----------------

You are laboring under the moralistic fallacy. The moralistic fallacy is the opposite of the naturalistic fallacy.

Naturalistic fallacy: Men are naturally violent therefore war is acceptable.
Moralistic fallacy: War is unacceptable therefore men are not naturally violent.

Your version: Racial equality is a moral imperative therefore all the races are equal in average intelligence.

The science is not on your side. If it were you wouldn't have had to destroy the career of a Nobel winning scientist when he asserted this scientific truth. You could have just quoted the relevant research proving racial equality. But your evidence is slim, mine is abundant (see above). You can hate people who simply acknowledge the obvious, you can destroy their careers, you can even punch them out when you see them on the street.

But all your hatred will not raise the IQ of a single Black man, no matter how virulent your hatred is.

 

I see quantity not quality is something you value from an intellectual perspective.

Ruston's work has been pretty thoroughly deconstructed and the list of criticisms of his methodolpgies and cherry picking references "out page" his mere 280 pages with 10 pages of bibliographies.

YOu claim I am laboring under a moralistic fallacy by offering up two logical fallacies. Such demonstrations argue against average intelligence.

my hatred of racists is virulent and extent as yours is for black people,. I have noticed your penchant for asinine fallacious comments.

All your wet dreams and hatreds will not make your racist notion that black people are inferior to YOU true. I do realize looking down is a chronic affliction of racists,

I notice you have denied this but surely you must have noticed amongst your like minded circle of racists that reflected glory is about the only thing many white trash racists have going for them., that and their single wides.

 

Oh so now you are willing to admit that environment plays a huge part in development of intelligence levels.

No, I will change many of my opinions based on acquiring new knowledge and experience. Of course everyone has intransigent positions that are impervious to logic or knowledge. For instance I am a virulent bigot against racists and pedophiles and nothing will change that.

 

Yes, quantity in science is called reproduceability, and is much valued.

"Deconstructed," but not refuted. Nevertheless, if you have peer reviewed research showing that Blacks are not 1 s.d. lower in IQ than whites, contrary to hundreds of other results, please show it. You can shut me up with facts, not insults.

Yes, I am arguing that you are laboring under a fallacy and present two to compare and contrast with your fallacy.

Why do you believe that the races are equal in IQ? The only reason I can see is that you find inequality morally repugnant, as you have stated many times. That is the moral fallacy.

Why should I hate anyone because they belong to a race less intelligent than whites? Being slow is not a hateful condition. My like minded circle of racists do not include any white trash racists, regardless of the width of their trailers. So I cannot speak first hand of their desire for reflected glory.

You really ought to read more quality racist literature. If you want to hate them, at least hate them for what they say, not for what you imagine they say.

 

Geez people.....we don't need lengthy studies to prove that black IQs, on average, are far lower than that of Whites. Just try listening to any black football player being interviewed on any given Saturday or Sunday after a game......

 

But not for Zionists, Asians, blacks and latinos? Or do racists only come in one color?

 

And try explaining this to a rabid white sports fan that has a great job while his tax dollars support those that hate him.
Thank God, people are waking to the destruction of the left.
Trump should send all virtue signalling white liberals to Africa.

 

You thought it. I didn't say you said it. You agreed with the poster who claimed it was going to happen.

 

racists come in all colors. Im a virulently bigoted against racists. clear?

 

No quantity is not called reproduceability. quantity is called quantity.

yes deconstructed and quite clearly the major flaws contained in a rather slim scientific paper.




\

Yeah right. sure you did. you'll just have to forgive me if I don't think you are remotely that clever.

 

Richest for who? I’m going to bet that measure of rich didn’t take into account the abject poverty of the vast majority of the population of Haiti.

 

Choose, right now, to be left handed. Can you do it?

 

What about cultures? Do you feel some cultures are superior to others or are they all equal?