If white racism is a thing of the past.....

[Paul Essien]

I read a book called "Death's Acre". It featured Bill Bass who is one of the most famous forensic anthropologists on Earth. He was questioned about race in the book. And he stated that, while people can believe what they want, the races are different.

So because this guy called Bill Bass says so. Then in your opinion it's true. Right ?

 

[Paul Essien]

They can't argue against this. They can rant all they want but they have no rebuttal.

I just did give you a rebuttal.

 

[IM2]

Then I must ask if your concept of racism refers only to those who believe their race is totally superior to another race, or does it apply to those who believe that only certain aspects of their race is superior (or inferior) to those of other races? Negroes are physically superior to Asians and Caucasians.

It must be remembered that the original story was that black people were inferior, body and brains.

In the 1936 Olympics Hitler was still confident that his Aryan athletes would dominate the Black American sprinters.

Because of Jessie Owens. That did not happen.

So the White Supremacists pretended that they had never believed that White people were physically superior to Black people and that their ideas had not been embarrassingly refuted.

They just figured that brains were more important, so if Black people were to be sold to the world as inferior, it would have to be based on us being genetically stupid.

But you can believe anything you wish and it shows in your responses.

But when you start to make statements about certain scientific things, it would be good to know what one is talking about. Like the simple basics of the evolution theory.

Something as major as an additional pair of muscles to increase black people muscle mass would have required major evolutionary changes. Or a loss of a pair of muscles, since all humans evolved from a common ancestor.

In order for black people to have "extra muscle mass" or as you say "Negroes are physically superior to Asians and Caucasians." from other human beings there would have to be fixed genetic differences between races.

Meaning a clear break

This seems like a speciation level difference, such as "Blacks" having a gene for X and no one else. This is absolutely clearly not the case.

I'm sure you'll say "Look at how many black people are in the the NBA" OK if that's true, then why don't blacks dominate volleyball the same way ? You need to be able to jump at that. Right ?

And if black people are so naturally good at basketball then why don't African nations like Nigeria, Ghana, Ivory Coast dominate international dominate basketball comps ? They're pure black with little white admixture in them and according to you blackness and strength go hand in hand then why are African teams so average ?

Why aren't all championship high jumpers black ?

• Every player who has ever won an NHL scoring title is white.
• Every Olympic weightlifting record is held by a caucasian.
• All championship speed skaters are white.
• Every major league pitcher who has ever won 300 games is white.
• Almost all Olympic champions rowers and kayakers are white,

I don't believe that whites are physically advantaged in shooting, hockey pucks, lifting barbells, skating, or rowing. Do you ?

There are actually very good reasons why track and field and boxing events are dominated the way they are; because that's who trains and competes in them. Boxing is generally for people who have limited opportunities. Racism limits your opportunities.

And yes Africans have been ahead of the rest of the world in long distance training methods for thirty years; it's no surprise they dominate the competitions.

If people from a geographic region of Africa are the world's champion sprinters and a different group of people from a geographic region of Africa are the world's champion marathon runners and both are alleged to be part of some specific "race" you have just argued against sprinting or distance running as being a "racial" characteristic. Since the two groups you tried to put into one "race" have contradictory abilities.

For example, I believe Asians are intellectually superior to Caucasians and Negroes, Caucasians are intellectually superior to Negroes, and Negroes are physically superior to Asians and Caucasians.

I don't understand what you mean when you say "Asians are intellectually superior to Caucasians"

What do you mean by intellect superior ?

If and I'm guessing because you was not that clear that is, your making an explicatory argument, that is Asian are intellectually superior because of IQ in general, because Asians are “naturally” more intelligent that's exceptionally radical statement needs exceptionally radical proof to back it up – proof which you simply don’t have.

And if you really believed that Asians are intellectually superior then then why aren’t you and others folks demanding for a massive increase in immigration from Asian nations ? Why not flood the borders, since everyone could all benefit from a little more Asian genius? Why not have white CEOs step down from their positions and let Japanese managers take their place?

If you are trying to say that IQ is a genetic product of race then then very first thing you need to do is define the races themselves.

But I always, sit back, invite guys like you to 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 with racists.

I have yet to see any one of them, no matter what their scientific credentials, offer up an acceptably neutral definition of race.

Which are those “races” 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.

Do you even know what a scientific fact is ?

A scientific fact is that rain water freezes at 0°C at a pressure of 1 bar.

There’s no human choice involved. It’s observable and reproducible anywhere by anybody in the exact same way. Now a scientific fact, peer-reviewed, confirmed and approved, can have political consequences. Using the simple water example, it means that public administration, set into function by politics, orders winter road service to get ready once the temperatures fall below 0°C and the roads are wet.

But yet you throw around concepts "Asians are intellectually superior to Caucasians and Negroes" 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.

The reality is that there is not only one but a multitude of deviations that those “scientists” choose to ignore.

You are trying to make an absolutist claim by using extremely relative variables – variables, which (as should be obvious by now) they can’t 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 can’t conceive that such an important thing could be constructed by anything other than transhuman divine providence (or Mother Nature, take your pick).

Does that qualify me as a racist in your view?

All white people raised in a society where racism has been (and still is) so prevalent will have internalized elements of racist thinking. So in countries where beliefs in European/white superiority and domination have been historically placed, all white people will have internalized that conditioning.

I read a book called "Death's Acre". It featured Bill Bass who is one of the most famous forensic anthropologists on Earth. He was questioned about race in the book. And he stated that, while people can believe what they want, the races are different.

As for your "those who practice more" are the ones that succeed, I'll call bullshit. Blacks have better "fast twitch" muscles and are heavier boned. If you ever really research this issue, it will open your eyes.

Mark

Sorry bud, you're wrong. You see, when we look at strongman's contests most always all the participants are white.

2018 Arnold Strongman Finals

 

[80zephyr]

I read a book called "Death's Acre". It featured Bill Bass who is one of the most famous forensic anthropologists on Earth. He was questioned about race in the book. And he stated that, while people can believe what they want, the races are different.

So because this guy called Bill Bass says so. Then in your opinion it's true. Right ?

When a forensic anthropologist is invited to a scene, their job is to ascertain the sex, height, weight, and race of the person. Anthropology shows that race isn't only skin deep.

https://www.quora.com/How-can-an-anthropologist-tell-from-skeletal-remains-what-race-the-person-was

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

They can't argue against this. They can rant all they want but they have no rebuttal.

I just did give you a rebuttal.

Wrong guy Paul. I didn't make that statement.

Mark

 

[IM2]

They can't argue against this. They can rant all they want but they have no rebuttal.

I just did give you a rebuttal.

I said that Paul. They can't argue against what you have said. All they can do is rant.

 

[IM2]

I read a book called "Death's Acre". It featured Bill Bass who is one of the most famous forensic anthropologists on Earth. He was questioned about race in the book. And he stated that, while people can believe what they want, the races are different.

So because this guy called Bill Bass says so. Then in your opinion it's true. Right ?

When a forensic anthropologist is invited to a scene, their job is to ascertain the sex, height, weight, and race of the person. Anthropology shows that race isn't only skin deep.

https://www.quora.com/How-can-an-anthropologist-tell-from-skeletal-remains-what-race-the-person-was

Mark

Race is made up.

 

[80zephyr]

Then I must ask if your concept of racism refers only to those who believe their race is totally superior to another race, or does it apply to those who believe that only certain aspects of their race is superior (or inferior) to those of other races? Negroes are physically superior to Asians and Caucasians.

It must be remembered that the original story was that black people were inferior, body and brains.

In the 1936 Olympics Hitler was still confident that his Aryan athletes would dominate the Black American sprinters.

Because of Jessie Owens. That did not happen.

So the White Supremacists pretended that they had never believed that White people were physically superior to Black people and that their ideas had not been embarrassingly refuted.

They just figured that brains were more important, so if Black people were to be sold to the world as inferior, it would have to be based on us being genetically stupid.

But you can believe anything you wish and it shows in your responses.

But when you start to make statements about certain scientific things, it would be good to know what one is talking about. Like the simple basics of the evolution theory.

Something as major as an additional pair of muscles to increase black people muscle mass would have required major evolutionary changes. Or a loss of a pair of muscles, since all humans evolved from a common ancestor.

In order for black people to have "extra muscle mass" or as you say "Negroes are physically superior to Asians and Caucasians." from other human beings there would have to be fixed genetic differences between races.

Meaning a clear break

This seems like a speciation level difference, such as "Blacks" having a gene for X and no one else. This is absolutely clearly not the case.

I'm sure you'll say "Look at how many black people are in the the NBA" OK if that's true, then why don't blacks dominate volleyball the same way ? You need to be able to jump at that. Right ?

And if black people are so naturally good at basketball then why don't African nations like Nigeria, Ghana, Ivory Coast dominate international dominate basketball comps ? They're pure black with little white admixture in them and according to you blackness and strength go hand in hand then why are African teams so average ?

Why aren't all championship high jumpers black ?

• Every player who has ever won an NHL scoring title is white.
• Every Olympic weightlifting record is held by a caucasian.
• All championship speed skaters are white.
• Every major league pitcher who has ever won 300 games is white.
• Almost all Olympic champions rowers and kayakers are white,

I don't believe that whites are physically advantaged in shooting, hockey pucks, lifting barbells, skating, or rowing. Do you ?

There are actually very good reasons why track and field and boxing events are dominated the way they are; because that's who trains and competes in them. Boxing is generally for people who have limited opportunities. Racism limits your opportunities.

And yes Africans have been ahead of the rest of the world in long distance training methods for thirty years; it's no surprise they dominate the competitions.

If people from a geographic region of Africa are the world's champion sprinters and a different group of people from a geographic region of Africa are the world's champion marathon runners and both are alleged to be part of some specific "race" you have just argued against sprinting or distance running as being a "racial" characteristic. Since the two groups you tried to put into one "race" have contradictory abilities.

For example, I believe Asians are intellectually superior to Caucasians and Negroes, Caucasians are intellectually superior to Negroes, and Negroes are physically superior to Asians and Caucasians.

I don't understand what you mean when you say "Asians are intellectually superior to Caucasians"

What do you mean by intellect superior ?

If and I'm guessing because you was not that clear that is, your making an explicatory argument, that is Asian are intellectually superior because of IQ in general, because Asians are “naturally” more intelligent that's exceptionally radical statement needs exceptionally radical proof to back it up – proof which you simply don’t have.

And if you really believed that Asians are intellectually superior then then why aren’t you and others folks demanding for a massive increase in immigration from Asian nations ? Why not flood the borders, since everyone could all benefit from a little more Asian genius? Why not have white CEOs step down from their positions and let Japanese managers take their place?

If you are trying to say that IQ is a genetic product of race then then very first thing you need to do is define the races themselves.

But I always, sit back, invite guys like you to 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 with racists.

I have yet to see any one of them, no matter what their scientific credentials, offer up an acceptably neutral definition of race.

Which are those “races” 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.

Do you even know what a scientific fact is ?

A scientific fact is that rain water freezes at 0°C at a pressure of 1 bar.

There’s no human choice involved. It’s observable and reproducible anywhere by anybody in the exact same way. Now a scientific fact, peer-reviewed, confirmed and approved, can have political consequences. Using the simple water example, it means that public administration, set into function by politics, orders winter road service to get ready once the temperatures fall below 0°C and the roads are wet.

But yet you throw around concepts "Asians are intellectually superior to Caucasians and Negroes" 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.

The reality is that there is not only one but a multitude of deviations that those “scientists” choose to ignore.

You are trying to make an absolutist claim by using extremely relative variables – variables, which (as should be obvious by now) they can’t 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 can’t conceive that such an important thing could be constructed by anything other than transhuman divine providence (or Mother Nature, take your pick).

Does that qualify me as a racist in your view?

All white people raised in a society where racism has been (and still is) so prevalent will have internalized elements of racist thinking. So in countries where beliefs in European/white superiority and domination have been historically placed, all white people will have internalized that conditioning.

I read a book called "Death's Acre". It featured Bill Bass who is one of the most famous forensic anthropologists on Earth. He was questioned about race in the book. And he stated that, while people can believe what they want, the races are different.

As for your "those who practice more" are the ones that succeed, I'll call bullshit. Blacks have better "fast twitch" muscles and are heavier boned. If you ever really research this issue, it will open your eyes.

Mark

Sorry bud, you're wrong. You see, when we look at strongman's contests most always all the participants are white.

2018 Arnold Strongman Finals

That they have better fast twitch muscles and are heavier boned is scientific fact. You cannot rebut that.

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

I read a book called "Death's Acre". It featured Bill Bass who is one of the most famous forensic anthropologists on Earth. He was questioned about race in the book. And he stated that, while people can believe what they want, the races are different.

So because this guy called Bill Bass says so. Then in your opinion it's true. Right ?

When a forensic anthropologist is invited to a scene, their job is to ascertain the sex, height, weight, and race of the person. Anthropology shows that race isn't only skin deep.

https://www.quora.com/How-can-an-anthropologist-tell-from-skeletal-remains-what-race-the-person-was

Mark

Race is made up.

If you look up race in the dictionary...

Race: breed, a category of humankind that shares certain distinctive physical traits

Why does the obvious bother people so?

Mark

 

[IM2]

Then I must ask if your concept of racism refers only to those who believe their race is totally superior to another race, or does it apply to those who believe that only certain aspects of their race is superior (or inferior) to those of other races? Negroes are physically superior to Asians and Caucasians.

It must be remembered that the original story was that black people were inferior, body and brains.

In the 1936 Olympics Hitler was still confident that his Aryan athletes would dominate the Black American sprinters.

Because of Jessie Owens. That did not happen.

So the White Supremacists pretended that they had never believed that White people were physically superior to Black people and that their ideas had not been embarrassingly refuted.

They just figured that brains were more important, so if Black people were to be sold to the world as inferior, it would have to be based on us being genetically stupid.

But you can believe anything you wish and it shows in your responses.

But when you start to make statements about certain scientific things, it would be good to know what one is talking about. Like the simple basics of the evolution theory.

Something as major as an additional pair of muscles to increase black people muscle mass would have required major evolutionary changes. Or a loss of a pair of muscles, since all humans evolved from a common ancestor.

In order for black people to have "extra muscle mass" or as you say "Negroes are physically superior to Asians and Caucasians." from other human beings there would have to be fixed genetic differences between races.

Meaning a clear break

This seems like a speciation level difference, such as "Blacks" having a gene for X and no one else. This is absolutely clearly not the case.

I'm sure you'll say "Look at how many black people are in the the NBA" OK if that's true, then why don't blacks dominate volleyball the same way ? You need to be able to jump at that. Right ?

And if black people are so naturally good at basketball then why don't African nations like Nigeria, Ghana, Ivory Coast dominate international dominate basketball comps ? They're pure black with little white admixture in them and according to you blackness and strength go hand in hand then why are African teams so average ?

Why aren't all championship high jumpers black ?

• Every player who has ever won an NHL scoring title is white.
• Every Olympic weightlifting record is held by a caucasian.
• All championship speed skaters are white.
• Every major league pitcher who has ever won 300 games is white.
• Almost all Olympic champions rowers and kayakers are white,

I don't believe that whites are physically advantaged in shooting, hockey pucks, lifting barbells, skating, or rowing. Do you ?

There are actually very good reasons why track and field and boxing events are dominated the way they are; because that's who trains and competes in them. Boxing is generally for people who have limited opportunities. Racism limits your opportunities.

And yes Africans have been ahead of the rest of the world in long distance training methods for thirty years; it's no surprise they dominate the competitions.

If people from a geographic region of Africa are the world's champion sprinters and a different group of people from a geographic region of Africa are the world's champion marathon runners and both are alleged to be part of some specific "race" you have just argued against sprinting or distance running as being a "racial" characteristic. Since the two groups you tried to put into one "race" have contradictory abilities.

For example, I believe Asians are intellectually superior to Caucasians and Negroes, Caucasians are intellectually superior to Negroes, and Negroes are physically superior to Asians and Caucasians.

I don't understand what you mean when you say "Asians are intellectually superior to Caucasians"

What do you mean by intellect superior ?

If and I'm guessing because you was not that clear that is, your making an explicatory argument, that is Asian are intellectually superior because of IQ in general, because Asians are “naturally” more intelligent that's exceptionally radical statement needs exceptionally radical proof to back it up – proof which you simply don’t have.

And if you really believed that Asians are intellectually superior then then why aren’t you and others folks demanding for a massive increase in immigration from Asian nations ? Why not flood the borders, since everyone could all benefit from a little more Asian genius? Why not have white CEOs step down from their positions and let Japanese managers take their place?

If you are trying to say that IQ is a genetic product of race then then very first thing you need to do is define the races themselves.

But I always, sit back, invite guys like you to 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 with racists.

I have yet to see any one of them, no matter what their scientific credentials, offer up an acceptably neutral definition of race.

Which are those “races” 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.

Do you even know what a scientific fact is ?

A scientific fact is that rain water freezes at 0°C at a pressure of 1 bar.

There’s no human choice involved. It’s observable and reproducible anywhere by anybody in the exact same way. Now a scientific fact, peer-reviewed, confirmed and approved, can have political consequences. Using the simple water example, it means that public administration, set into function by politics, orders winter road service to get ready once the temperatures fall below 0°C and the roads are wet.

But yet you throw around concepts "Asians are intellectually superior to Caucasians and Negroes" 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.

The reality is that there is not only one but a multitude of deviations that those “scientists” choose to ignore.

You are trying to make an absolutist claim by using extremely relative variables – variables, which (as should be obvious by now) they can’t 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 can’t conceive that such an important thing could be constructed by anything other than transhuman divine providence (or Mother Nature, take your pick).

Does that qualify me as a racist in your view?

All white people raised in a society where racism has been (and still is) so prevalent will have internalized elements of racist thinking. So in countries where beliefs in European/white superiority and domination have been historically placed, all white people will have internalized that conditioning.

I read a book called "Death's Acre". It featured Bill Bass who is one of the most famous forensic anthropologists on Earth. He was questioned about race in the book. And he stated that, while people can believe what they want, the races are different.

As for your "those who practice more" are the ones that succeed, I'll call bullshit. Blacks have better "fast twitch" muscles and are heavier boned. If you ever really research this issue, it will open your eyes.

Mark

Sorry bud, you're wrong. You see, when we look at strongman's contests most always all the participants are white.

2018 Arnold Strongman Finals

That they have better fast twitch muscles and are heavier boned is scientific fact. You cannot rebut that.

Mark

It was once scientific fact that blacks who ran away from slavery suffered from drapetomania too.

 

[IM2]

I read a book called "Death's Acre". It featured Bill Bass who is one of the most famous forensic anthropologists on Earth. He was questioned about race in the book. And he stated that, while people can believe what they want, the races are different.

So because this guy called Bill Bass says so. Then in your opinion it's true. Right ?

When a forensic anthropologist is invited to a scene, their job is to ascertain the sex, height, weight, and race of the person. Anthropology shows that race isn't only skin deep.

https://www.quora.com/How-can-an-anthropologist-tell-from-skeletal-remains-what-race-the-person-was

Mark

Race is made up.

If you look up race in the dictionary...

Race: breed, a category of humankind that shares certain distinctive physical traits

Why does the obvious bother people so?

Mark

Race is an artificial construct that did not show up until the 1600's. It's fake news. Along with that came scientific racism.

Simply put, scientific racism is the use of scientific theories to justify racial superiority or inferiority. It creates a belief in the natural superiority of a race or genetic superiority.

 

[80zephyr]

Then I must ask if your concept of racism refers only to those who believe their race is totally superior to another race, or does it apply to those who believe that only certain aspects of their race is superior (or inferior) to those of other races? Negroes are physically superior to Asians and Caucasians.

It must be remembered that the original story was that black people were inferior, body and brains.

In the 1936 Olympics Hitler was still confident that his Aryan athletes would dominate the Black American sprinters.

Because of Jessie Owens. That did not happen.

So the White Supremacists pretended that they had never believed that White people were physically superior to Black people and that their ideas had not been embarrassingly refuted.

They just figured that brains were more important, so if Black people were to be sold to the world as inferior, it would have to be based on us being genetically stupid.

But you can believe anything you wish and it shows in your responses.

But when you start to make statements about certain scientific things, it would be good to know what one is talking about. Like the simple basics of the evolution theory.

Something as major as an additional pair of muscles to increase black people muscle mass would have required major evolutionary changes. Or a loss of a pair of muscles, since all humans evolved from a common ancestor.

In order for black people to have "extra muscle mass" or as you say "Negroes are physically superior to Asians and Caucasians." from other human beings there would have to be fixed genetic differences between races.

Meaning a clear break

This seems like a speciation level difference, such as "Blacks" having a gene for X and no one else. This is absolutely clearly not the case.

I'm sure you'll say "Look at how many black people are in the the NBA" OK if that's true, then why don't blacks dominate volleyball the same way ? You need to be able to jump at that. Right ?

And if black people are so naturally good at basketball then why don't African nations like Nigeria, Ghana, Ivory Coast dominate international dominate basketball comps ? They're pure black with little white admixture in them and according to you blackness and strength go hand in hand then why are African teams so average ?

Why aren't all championship high jumpers black ?

• Every player who has ever won an NHL scoring title is white.
• Every Olympic weightlifting record is held by a caucasian.
• All championship speed skaters are white.
• Every major league pitcher who has ever won 300 games is white.
• Almost all Olympic champions rowers and kayakers are white,

I don't believe that whites are physically advantaged in shooting, hockey pucks, lifting barbells, skating, or rowing. Do you ?

There are actually very good reasons why track and field and boxing events are dominated the way they are; because that's who trains and competes in them. Boxing is generally for people who have limited opportunities. Racism limits your opportunities.

And yes Africans have been ahead of the rest of the world in long distance training methods for thirty years; it's no surprise they dominate the competitions.

If people from a geographic region of Africa are the world's champion sprinters and a different group of people from a geographic region of Africa are the world's champion marathon runners and both are alleged to be part of some specific "race" you have just argued against sprinting or distance running as being a "racial" characteristic. Since the two groups you tried to put into one "race" have contradictory abilities.

For example, I believe Asians are intellectually superior to Caucasians and Negroes, Caucasians are intellectually superior to Negroes, and Negroes are physically superior to Asians and Caucasians.

I don't understand what you mean when you say "Asians are intellectually superior to Caucasians"

What do you mean by intellect superior ?

If and I'm guessing because you was not that clear that is, your making an explicatory argument, that is Asian are intellectually superior because of IQ in general, because Asians are “naturally” more intelligent that's exceptionally radical statement needs exceptionally radical proof to back it up – proof which you simply don’t have.

And if you really believed that Asians are intellectually superior then then why aren’t you and others folks demanding for a massive increase in immigration from Asian nations ? Why not flood the borders, since everyone could all benefit from a little more Asian genius? Why not have white CEOs step down from their positions and let Japanese managers take their place?

If you are trying to say that IQ is a genetic product of race then then very first thing you need to do is define the races themselves.

But I always, sit back, invite guys like you to 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 with racists.

I have yet to see any one of them, no matter what their scientific credentials, offer up an acceptably neutral definition of race.

Which are those “races” 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.

Do you even know what a scientific fact is ?

A scientific fact is that rain water freezes at 0°C at a pressure of 1 bar.

There’s no human choice involved. It’s observable and reproducible anywhere by anybody in the exact same way. Now a scientific fact, peer-reviewed, confirmed and approved, can have political consequences. Using the simple water example, it means that public administration, set into function by politics, orders winter road service to get ready once the temperatures fall below 0°C and the roads are wet.

But yet you throw around concepts "Asians are intellectually superior to Caucasians and Negroes" 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.

The reality is that there is not only one but a multitude of deviations that those “scientists” choose to ignore.

You are trying to make an absolutist claim by using extremely relative variables – variables, which (as should be obvious by now) they can’t 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 can’t conceive that such an important thing could be constructed by anything other than transhuman divine providence (or Mother Nature, take your pick).

Does that qualify me as a racist in your view?

All white people raised in a society where racism has been (and still is) so prevalent will have internalized elements of racist thinking. So in countries where beliefs in European/white superiority and domination have been historically placed, all white people will have internalized that conditioning.

I read a book called "Death's Acre". It featured Bill Bass who is one of the most famous forensic anthropologists on Earth. He was questioned about race in the book. And he stated that, while people can believe what they want, the races are different.

As for your "those who practice more" are the ones that succeed, I'll call bullshit. Blacks have better "fast twitch" muscles and are heavier boned. If you ever really research this issue, it will open your eyes.

Mark

Sorry bud, you're wrong. You see, when we look at strongman's contests most always all the participants are white.

2018 Arnold Strongman Finals

That they have better fast twitch muscles and are heavier boned is scientific fact. You cannot rebut that.

Mark

It was once scientific fact that blacks who ran away from slavery suffered from drapetomania too.

I would like to keep the conversation meaningful. Are you now denying the scientific differences?

Mark

 

[80zephyr]

I read a book called "Death's Acre". It featured Bill Bass who is one of the most famous forensic anthropologists on Earth. He was questioned about race in the book. And he stated that, while people can believe what they want, the races are different.

So because this guy called Bill Bass says so. Then in your opinion it's true. Right ?

When a forensic anthropologist is invited to a scene, their job is to ascertain the sex, height, weight, and race of the person. Anthropology shows that race isn't only skin deep.

https://www.quora.com/How-can-an-anthropologist-tell-from-skeletal-remains-what-race-the-person-was

Mark

Race is made up.

If you look up race in the dictionary...

Race: breed, a category of humankind that shares certain distinctive physical traits

Why does the obvious bother people so?

Mark

Race is an artificial construct that did not show up until the 1600's. It's fake news. Along with that came scientific racism.

Simply put, scientific racism is the use of scientific theories to justify racial superiority or inferiority. It creates a belief in the natural superiority of a race or genetic superiority.

Science "creates" no beliefs. It simply is. Do you also believe that all dogs are dogs, and that there are no breeds?

Mark

 

[GreenBean]

Let's be honest there was never White racism, only low IQ non-Whites butthurt simply because they were and are intellectually and ethically unable to compete with Whitey.

Lets be honest, whitey made the laws to benefit whitey and did not allow anyone ls to compete until 1965 because whitey was scared.

Actually it started in 1950s -

Civil Rights Act of 1957

Eisenhower {Republican} Administration legislation to protect the rights of African American voters.
As a Senate leader, Lyndon Johnson who had consistently voted against any legislation to protect African Americans from lynching, worked vigorously to stifle the Civil Rights Act of 1957

Democratic Strategists, of whom Johnson was one, realized the importance of the Negro vote and in this light Johnson explained the strategy re: the Republican Civil Rights Act of 1957 to his Democratic co-conspirators:

'These Negroes, they're getting pretty uppity these days and that's a problem for us since they've got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now, we've got to do something about this; we've got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference. for if we don't move at all, then their allies [The Republicans] will line up against us and there will be no way of stopping them, we'll lose the filibuster and there will be no way of putting the brake on all sorts of wild legislation, it'll be reconstruction all over again' - Lyndon Johnson [ Inside the White House ]

Civil Rights act 1964 Only 61 percent of Democrats supported that bill, versus 80 percent of Republicans.

Voting Rights Act of 1965 - Written by Republican Senator Everett Dirksen - 94 percent of Senate Republicans voted in favor of the bill versus 73 percent of Democrats. The final vote on the House version - only one Senate Republican voted against it compared to seventeen Democrats.


View attachment 189901

1948 Democratic Party Platform

The Democratic Party is responsible for the great civil rights gains made in recent years in eliminating unfair and illegal discrimination based on race, creed or color,

The Democratic Party commits itself to continuing its efforts to eradicate all racial, religious and economic discrimination.

We again state our belief that racial and religious minorities must have the right to live, the right to work, the right to vote, the full and equal protection of the laws, on a basis of equality with all citizens as guaranteed by the Constitution.

Democratic Party Platforms: 1948 Democratic Party Platform

In 2018, the republican party would not vote for civil rights. They would want it to be a state decision.

Acions spoke louder than words - The Republicans took actions - the Dems used every trick inthe book fillibuster and what have you to thwart Republican civil rights initiatives - it wasn't untill LBJ and JFK that they realized if you can't beat em join em

Mr. Conservative: Barry Goldwater's opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964

PSsst - Goldwater Lost sweety .... The Eisenhower Republicans .... google that as I'm tired of trying to educate a moron

 

[Paul Essien]

Science "creates" no beliefs. It simply is. Do you also believe that all dogs are dogs, and that there are no breeds?
Mark

I can’t believe you attempted to equate “races” to dog breeds. But I've heard that argument before (Many times)

Dog breeds were bred for behavioral and temperament differences over many centuries. They are not scientific, just like human race, so, therefore, they must not exist. Right ? Also dogs don’t see other dogs as less dog for being the wrong breed.

I mean. Do white dogs go around fighting black dogs ?

You aint thought this through. Have you ?

Dog evolved through selective breeding. Domestic animals (such as dogs and cows) whose characteristics are artificially selected and maintained by humans through animal husbandry are divided into breeds. The goal of selective breeding is to create animals that differ from their wild counterparts and possess relatively predictable traits.

Humans have been breeding dogs for only a relatively short period, and over that time, starting with wolves, we’ve managed to produce everything from Chihuahuas to Great Danes. All breeds of dogs are the same species. They can all interbreed, although admittedly, interbreeding is easier for some pairs than for others.

You had either the proto-dog or wolves who all looked basically the same. Over time populations of dogs were isolated and selectively bred by people to create the amazing variations in modern dog breeds we see today. All that genetic variation was there in the Proto-dog originally but you couldn’t see it.

Human races are differentiated primarily by skin color, but even though the genes responsible for skin color are noticeable, the actual genetic differences among races are slight. In fact, skin color doesn’t accurately reflect the genetic differences among humans. Two people of African descent could easily be more genetically different from each other than a person of European descent may be from a person of Asian descent. Bottom line: Races have slight differences, and these differences are nowhere near the level they’d have to be to decrease gene exchange.
.
There is more genetic variation among races than there are between races. These are scientifically proven. But, according to people like you that isn’t true. Everything comes down to “race” even though only 6% of the 1% of difference between humans is allocated to “race” which scientifically negligible.

 

[IM2]

Lets be honest, whitey made the laws to benefit whitey and did not allow anyone ls to compete until 1965 because whitey was scared.

Actually it started in 1950s -

Civil Rights Act of 1957

Eisenhower {Republican} Administration legislation to protect the rights of African American voters.
As a Senate leader, Lyndon Johnson who had consistently voted against any legislation to protect African Americans from lynching, worked vigorously to stifle the Civil Rights Act of 1957

Democratic Strategists, of whom Johnson was one, realized the importance of the Negro vote and in this light Johnson explained the strategy re: the Republican Civil Rights Act of 1957 to his Democratic co-conspirators:

'These Negroes, they're getting pretty uppity these days and that's a problem for us since they've got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now, we've got to do something about this; we've got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference. for if we don't move at all, then their allies [The Republicans] will line up against us and there will be no way of stopping them, we'll lose the filibuster and there will be no way of putting the brake on all sorts of wild legislation, it'll be reconstruction all over again' - Lyndon Johnson [ Inside the White House ]

Civil Rights act 1964 Only 61 percent of Democrats supported that bill, versus 80 percent of Republicans.

Voting Rights Act of 1965 - Written by Republican Senator Everett Dirksen - 94 percent of Senate Republicans voted in favor of the bill versus 73 percent of Democrats. The final vote on the House version - only one Senate Republican voted against it compared to seventeen Democrats.


View attachment 189901

1948 Democratic Party Platform

The Democratic Party is responsible for the great civil rights gains made in recent years in eliminating unfair and illegal discrimination based on race, creed or color,

The Democratic Party commits itself to continuing its efforts to eradicate all racial, religious and economic discrimination.

We again state our belief that racial and religious minorities must have the right to live, the right to work, the right to vote, the full and equal protection of the laws, on a basis of equality with all citizens as guaranteed by the Constitution.

Democratic Party Platforms: 1948 Democratic Party Platform

In 2018, the republican party would not vote for civil rights. They would want it to be a state decision.

Acions spoke louder than words - The Republicans took actions - the Dems used every trick inthe book fillibuster and what have you to thwart Republican civil rights initiatives - it wasn't untill LBJ and JFK that they realized if you can't beat em join em

Mr. Conservative: Barry Goldwater's opposition to the Civil Rights Act of 1964

PSsst - Goldwater Lost sweety .... The Eisenhower Republicans .... google that as I'm tired of trying to educate a moron

I'm going to stop humoring you. The republican party is the racists party. Every republican here shows that. We can go to any forum where conservative's exist and it's the same thing.

 

[IM2]

It must be remembered that the original story was that black people were inferior, body and brains.

In the 1936 Olympics Hitler was still confident that his Aryan athletes would dominate the Black American sprinters.

Because of Jessie Owens. That did not happen.

So the White Supremacists pretended that they had never believed that White people were physically superior to Black people and that their ideas had not been embarrassingly refuted.

They just figured that brains were more important, so if Black people were to be sold to the world as inferior, it would have to be based on us being genetically stupid.

But you can believe anything you wish and it shows in your responses.

But when you start to make statements about certain scientific things, it would be good to know what one is talking about. Like the simple basics of the evolution theory.

Something as major as an additional pair of muscles to increase black people muscle mass would have required major evolutionary changes. Or a loss of a pair of muscles, since all humans evolved from a common ancestor.

In order for black people to have "extra muscle mass" or as you say "Negroes are physically superior to Asians and Caucasians." from other human beings there would have to be fixed genetic differences between races.

Meaning a clear break

This seems like a speciation level difference, such as "Blacks" having a gene for X and no one else. This is absolutely clearly not the case.

I'm sure you'll say "Look at how many black people are in the the NBA" OK if that's true, then why don't blacks dominate volleyball the same way ? You need to be able to jump at that. Right ?

And if black people are so naturally good at basketball then why don't African nations like Nigeria, Ghana, Ivory Coast dominate international dominate basketball comps ? They're pure black with little white admixture in them and according to you blackness and strength go hand in hand then why are African teams so average ?

Why aren't all championship high jumpers black ?

• Every player who has ever won an NHL scoring title is white.
• Every Olympic weightlifting record is held by a caucasian.
• All championship speed skaters are white.
• Every major league pitcher who has ever won 300 games is white.
• Almost all Olympic champions rowers and kayakers are white,

I don't believe that whites are physically advantaged in shooting, hockey pucks, lifting barbells, skating, or rowing. Do you ?

There are actually very good reasons why track and field and boxing events are dominated the way they are; because that's who trains and competes in them. Boxing is generally for people who have limited opportunities. Racism limits your opportunities.

And yes Africans have been ahead of the rest of the world in long distance training methods for thirty years; it's no surprise they dominate the competitions.

If people from a geographic region of Africa are the world's champion sprinters and a different group of people from a geographic region of Africa are the world's champion marathon runners and both are alleged to be part of some specific "race" you have just argued against sprinting or distance running as being a "racial" characteristic. Since the two groups you tried to put into one "race" have contradictory abilities.
I don't understand what you mean when you say "Asians are intellectually superior to Caucasians"

What do you mean by intellect superior ?

If and I'm guessing because you was not that clear that is, your making an explicatory argument, that is Asian are intellectually superior because of IQ in general, because Asians are “naturally” more intelligent that's exceptionally radical statement needs exceptionally radical proof to back it up – proof which you simply don’t have.

And if you really believed that Asians are intellectually superior then then why aren’t you and others folks demanding for a massive increase in immigration from Asian nations ? Why not flood the borders, since everyone could all benefit from a little more Asian genius? Why not have white CEOs step down from their positions and let Japanese managers take their place?

If you are trying to say that IQ is a genetic product of race then then very first thing you need to do is define the races themselves.

But I always, sit back, invite guys like you to 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 with racists.

I have yet to see any one of them, no matter what their scientific credentials, offer up an acceptably neutral definition of race.

Which are those “races” 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.

Do you even know what a scientific fact is ?

A scientific fact is that rain water freezes at 0°C at a pressure of 1 bar.

There’s no human choice involved. It’s observable and reproducible anywhere by anybody in the exact same way. Now a scientific fact, peer-reviewed, confirmed and approved, can have political consequences. Using the simple water example, it means that public administration, set into function by politics, orders winter road service to get ready once the temperatures fall below 0°C and the roads are wet.

But yet you throw around concepts "Asians are intellectually superior to Caucasians and Negroes" 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.

The reality is that there is not only one but a multitude of deviations that those “scientists” choose to ignore.

You are trying to make an absolutist claim by using extremely relative variables – variables, which (as should be obvious by now) they can’t 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 can’t conceive that such an important thing could be constructed by anything other than transhuman divine providence (or Mother Nature, take your pick).
All white people raised in a society where racism has been (and still is) so prevalent will have internalized elements of racist thinking. So in countries where beliefs in European/white superiority and domination have been historically placed, all white people will have internalized that conditioning.

I read a book called "Death's Acre". It featured Bill Bass who is one of the most famous forensic anthropologists on Earth. He was questioned about race in the book. And he stated that, while people can believe what they want, the races are different.

As for your "those who practice more" are the ones that succeed, I'll call bullshit. Blacks have better "fast twitch" muscles and are heavier boned. If you ever really research this issue, it will open your eyes.

Mark

Sorry bud, you're wrong. You see, when we look at strongman's contests most always all the participants are white.

2018 Arnold Strongman Finals

That they have better fast twitch muscles and are heavier boned is scientific fact. You cannot rebut that.

Mark

It was once scientific fact that blacks who ran away from slavery suffered from drapetomania too.

I would like to keep the conversation meaningful. Are you now denying the scientific differences?

Mark

You lost that when you started talking about how race is a scientific fact.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

I read a book called "Death's Acre". It featured Bill Bass who is one of the most famous forensic anthropologists on Earth. He was questioned about race in the book. And he stated that, while people can believe what they want, the races are different.

So because this guy called Bill Bass says so. Then in your opinion it's true. Right ?

When a forensic anthropologist is invited to a scene, their job is to ascertain the sex, height, weight, and race of the person. Anthropology shows that race isn't only skin deep.

https://www.quora.com/How-can-an-anthropologist-tell-from-skeletal-remains-what-race-the-person-was

Mark

Race is made up.

If you look up race in the dictionary...

Race: breed, a category of humankind that shares certain distinctive physical traits

Why does the obvious bother people so?

Mark

Race is an artificial construct that did not show up until the 1600's. It's fake news. Along with that came scientific racism.

Simply put, scientific racism is the use of scientific theories to justify racial superiority or inferiority. It creates a belief in the natural superiority of a race or genetic superiority.

So, you can't tell a Nigerian from a Swede from a China-man?

 

[AveryJarhman]

 

[boedicca]

I keep getting told how white racism is a thing of the past. But I see no poof of it. A bunch of people repeating a claim over and over again is not proof. Information from THIS DECADE shows it's not a thing of the past. But I'm going to give the white racists here a chance to prove their claim. All they need to do is:

Prove when racism ended and its effects were allayed. Show, with data and peer-reviewed studies supporting your argument, when the effects of the hundreds of years of anti-Black racism from chattel slavery through Old Jim Crow leveled off. Show when the wealth expropriated during that oppression was repaid to those it was expropriated from and through. And remember, after you’ve addressed the end of anti-Black racism you’ll still have to explain when anti-Latinx, anti-Asian, anti-Arab, and anti-Native racism came to an end as well.

Your feelings and opinions are not satisfactory. Peer reviewed evidence must be presented detailing the end of white racism in America.

Oh Goody! Yet another racist race baiting thread from a racist race baiter who race baits.

Here's a clue, moron: an individual doesn't have to prove he is innocent. A demographic group of people do not have to prove they are innocent.