francoHFW
Diamond Member
- Sep 5, 2011
- 79,271
- 9,399
How about the United States? Of course they do worse on average because they are discriminated against by the likes of you. Try Obama general Powell condoleezza etc etc.I rarely engage the likes of you except to ridicule. But seriously, show me someplace where blacks are not the lowest rung of the ladder.Actually a manifestation of a****** racists like you and the incredible discrimination they have to suffer through at the hands of idiots. Not to mention how whites have destroyed their homelands. Like all of your political scandals there is no evidence behind your assertions. Just ridiculous idiocy....What I believe is irrelevant. What I know is that blacks are failures throughout the world and second-class citizens everywhere those of other races are represented is sufficient numbers. This is clearly a manifestation of limited intelligence and the corresponding lack of organization.Ok. Do you believe that you are superior to blk men ? Or do you believe you are inferior to blk men ?Blacks low IQ is clearly demonstrable in their failure globally. The US is no different, and neither are you.There is a difference between what is a fact and what is true.
Let me explain to you what a fact is
A scientific fact is that rain water freezes at 0Ā°C at a pressure of 1 bar.
Why ? Because thereās no human choice involved. Itās observable and reproducible anywhere by anybody in the exact same way.
But yet you throw around concepts that have no constant repeatability everywhere you try to reproduce the experiment or apply the theoretical claim.
In natural science, only one single significant deviation is enough to render the claim at least disputable, at worst invalid.
You are trying to make an absolutist claim by using extremely relative variables ā variables, which (as should be obvious by now) they canāt even be bothered to define in relativist fashion.
Your argument works (to the extent that it works) on the force of rhetoric alone simply because so many people naturalize race and canāt conceive that such an important thing could be constructed by anything other than transhuman divine providence (or Mother Nature, take your pic)
In neurology no one takes IQ seriously. It is archaic and only really useful to social scientists. Neurologists who have a better understanding of how the brain works because they spend decades of their lives studying it have little to no use for it, but to the public at large it is so important.
Why is that ?
Alfred Binet created IQ testās to see which children werenāt profiting from the Parisian school system, not so that they could be labelled stupid but so new educational programs could be created to help those children.
I think he was physic because he was afraid that his tests would be misused for nepharious reasons and he could not have been more right, because once the certain people got a hold of it, it took on a whole new meaning.
But if you still want to persists with this then if you are trying to ground IQ as a genetic product of race the very first thing you NEED to do is offer up a genetic or biological definition of race,
Something no one has not done nor has any study. But I always, sit back, invite guys like you to me give such a definition. Mainly because their fumbling attempts to define race point out just how subjective such definitions are.
In close to a decade of debating race and IQ and genetics.
I have yet to see any one of them, no matter what their scientific c credentials, offer up an acceptably neutral definition of race.
No-one has shown that human variation is great enough to account for differences of IQ, nor has anyone established the veracity of IQ as a legitimate measurement.
No one has provided an inextricable link between genetics, race, and IQ outside of methodologically flawed correlations. They make the claim, then they prove the claim.
The fact that they or you are incapable of doing so makes my life very easy.
Which are those āracesā then, purely scientifically speaking and in clear text ? What are the precise genetic criteria for making this classification ?
Those questions can obviously only be answered in arbitrary dimensions which are man-made constructs according to human perception alone. However you twist it, you will run in circles and eventually spiral back into concepts based on human perception alone.
Last edited: