What is hate speech?

"Hate speech" is composed of everyday language that becomes interpreted by some section of the populace as carrying injurious intention. As such, it is entirely nebulous, subjective, ephemeral and unjustifiable.

 

Let’s start with that bulltwang.


Our First Nation people’s had a very complex and sophisticated use of fire to the point where we are re-introducing those practices to improve the health of the bush. They had trading routes that spread across the continent and also traded with Makasar. What they didn’t have was metallurgy. What they didn’t have was an animal population that was capable of domestication. But they did farm yams and other plants
https://www.nacc.com.au/solidscienc...tralians grew crops of,soil is at its softest.

 

Prohibitions against hate speech are unjustifiable restrictions on free speech. In practice hate speech means criticizing the Negro race. The more accurate the criticism is, the more serious is the offense, and the more severe the punishment becomes.

 

That is not a consensus based on findings of the scientific method. It is a theological dogma. Non believers are punished by the Inquisition.

 

In practice, hate speech is bullying without physical contact.

 

And as you can see, no one here is forbidding you from expressing your, uhm, opinions.
In fact, I want you to.
Now, let me get some root beer and popcorn...

 

Hate speech is the gateway drug that leads directly to stochastic terrorism.

 

You have yet to prove your point

 

Very correct and pertinent!

 

https://i0.wp.com/sitn.hms.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Fig1-raceConception-2.png

https://sitn.hms.harvard.edu/flash/2017/science-genetics-reshaping-race-debate-21st-century/

Further scientific proof that race does not exist

 

Charles Murray proved it for me by drawing attention to a double blind, repeatable experiment.

http://www.iapsych.com/wj3ewok/LinkedDocuments/Murray2005.pdf

One Charles Murray backed up by plenty of scientific evidence is worth any number of ideologues with nothing behind their assertions but cliches, dogma, and the ability to punish those who disagree.

 

No you have one out of date citation that is an opinion piece from one person. I have provided multiple citations from academic sources that are within acceptable time frames for academic citation

 

https://www.sapiens.org/biology/is-race-real/

 

A person's race or race mixture can usually be determined by appearance and always by DNA analysis. Academic sources that deny that make assertions that cannot be proved experimentally.

 

https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/health-general-science/are-you-there-race-its-me-dna

Lols! It now comes down to “define negro”

 

Every academic link I have provided so far disabuses the notion there is a genetic difference and yes it CAN be proven through human DNA research

 

Using many fewer words Charles Murray proved why that article is mistaken. I can explain why using fewer words than Charles Murray used.

About three and a half thousand people were asked to identify their race and to donate a tissue sample for DNA testing. Those who did the testing did not which race the people donating the tissue samples claimed for themselves. but the donators and the testers agreed over 99% of the time.

The nice thing about the scientific method is that an experiment carried out a century ago will have the same outcome as an experiment carried out recently, if the same methods are used.

Repeated experiments are the way to determine scientific truth, not untested consensuses, which in the case of genetics and race may be coerced.

 

https://humgenomics.biomedcentral.c...race and,unifying biological or genetic basis.
Academic paper peer reviewed

 

No because my article was published AFTER your opinion piece

It is telling that you apparently cannot find any other supporting opinions on this meanwhile

https://academic.oup.com/emph/article/9/1/232/6299389?login=false

BTW I am using google scholar

 

I explained why that does not matter.

 

And your article is relevant because it has no academic standing

 

AncestryDNA® Test Accuracy and Precision



Your AncestryDNA® test results are the product of a multi-step process. First, your DNA sample is measured, or read, in the lab. This lab processing generates raw DNA data. The raw data is then analyzed to generate your AncestryDNA® results. There is no single measure of AncestryDNA® test accuracy. Instead, the accuracy and precision of each step can be measured independently.

Accuracy of the Reading of the DNA
Reading your DNA is a first step in generating your AncestryDNA® results. Accuracy is very high when it comes to reading each of the hundreds of thousands of positions (or markers) in your DNA. With current technology, AncestryDNA® has, on average, an accuracy rate of over 99 percent for each marker tested.

https://www.ancestry.com/c/dna-lear...very high when,percent for each marker tested.

 

Lols! Shows you haven’t been reading my links and that you do not understand what an academic source is. Yes they can (sort of) identify the possible geographic area your ancestors may have come from but that has not a lot to do with race - even in Europe. Have you never heard of the Moorish invasion of Spain?

 

WHAT VANESSA WILLIAMS LEARNED FROM ANCESTRY DNA

What did Vanessa Williams learn? She discovered that her genome has the following break down: 23% Ghana, 17% British Isles, 15% Cameroon/Congo, 13% Finnish/Ural/Volga, 11% southern European, 7% Togo, 6 % Benin, 5% Senegal, 4% Spain/Portugal.

https://www.ancestry.com/c/dna-lear...very high when,percent for each marker tested.

Vanessa Williams is clearly a mixed race person.



Because DNA tests can determine national differences they can certainly determine racial differences.

 

Lols! Someone needs to read some European history!

https://blackhistorystudies.com/resources/resources/15-facts-on-the-moors-in-spain/