Do you think this is racism?

[QUOTE="SIapshot"][QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

LMFAO at all the people saying that it's not racism.

According to the dictionary, it's defined as racism, and that's the end of it.

"But being prejudiced against people because of their race isn't racism."

The dictionary says otherwise, and that makes you wrong. Get over it.

DeeJayInphinity

ad hominem, just answer the question. Dictionary or not, different cultures exhibit different behaviors in large groups and I have the statistics to back it up. Call it whatever you want to according to whatever dictionary you like, predominantly black neighborhoods have higher rates of criminal activity.

You have the statistics to prove that poverty can lead to crime.

Another liberal blinded by white guilt. How original. There are more white people living in poverty than black in this country, explain the racial education gap and the racial crime gap, given that poverty is your excuse.SIapshot

I'm not white so how do I have "white guilt"?

What you're trying to tell me is that there is little to no crime in impoverished areas poulated by whites.. explain why that would work?

Last I checked, whites also commit crimes; they steal, they kill, they bomb buildings.. just like any other race. your problem is that you associate crime with skin color instead of associating crime with a real cause such as poverty and oppression.

[QUOTE="SIapshot"]Another liberal blinded by white guilt. How original. There are more white people living in poverty than black in this country, explain the racial education gap and the racial crime gap, given that poverty is your excuse.DeeJayInphinity

I'm not white so how do I have "white guilt"?

What you're trying to tell me is that there is little to no crime in impoverished areas poulated by whites.. explain why that would work?

Last I checked, whites also commit crimes; they steal, they kill, they bomb buildings.. just like any other race. your problem is that you associate crime with skin color instead of associating crime with a real cause such as poverty and oppression.

You've been beat.

Um.... I've been in apartments full of white stoners just as bad....

Yes that is racist, and you should really not be friends with that guy any more.

[QUOTE="SIapshot"]Another liberal blinded by white guilt. How original. There are more white people living in poverty than black in this country, explain the racial education gap and the racial crime gap, given that poverty is your excuse.DeeJayInphinity

I'm not white so how do I have "white guilt"?

What you're trying to tell me is that there is little to no crime in impoverished areas poulated by whites.. explain why that would work?

Last I checked, whites also commit crimes; they steal, they kill, they bomb buildings.. just like any other race. your problem is that you associate crime with skin color instead of associating crime with a real cause such as poverty and oppression.

Negative. I never said that white people don't commit crimes. (white guilt is not limited to white people, all races buy into it, as evidenced by your post)

What I said is that black people commit crimes more frequently than white people, regardless of economic status. Ad hominem arguments abound in this thread.

http://www.adl.org/children_holocaust/more_resources.asp

Racism is prejudice or discrimination based on the belief that race is the primary factor determining human traits and abilities.

It's the black people that are making the noise, this isn't racist, it's just a fact. This is my fifth apartment, I've never had a problem with noise like this before. I agree we should do more research next time, but i still stand by my statement that i don't want to live in a complex where a large amount of black people live."

Your friend is saying because a few black people make noise, then ALL black people are like that. Well, that's called racism.

Negative. I never said that white people don't commit crimes. (white guilt is not limited to white people, all races buy into it, as evidenced by your post)

What I said is that black people commit crimes more frequently than white people, regardless of economic status. Ad hominem arguments abound in this post.

SIapshot

Yes, and what I said was that you are associating that difference with the skin color rather than a real cause such as poverty and oppression. You've simply restated ad hominem, attempting to seem slightly intellectual, and talked about your statistics again.

Please note that violence is not caused only by economic status, there are countless motivating factors most of which are not dependant on the color of a person's skin.

So when you're asking me to explain why some areas are more violent than others, I would respond with something other than "they're black, here are the statistics proving it." That seems like a cop-out to me. Perhaps its poverty, maybe its a lack of education or even moral instability; who knows.

http://www.adl.org/children_holocaust/more_resources.asp

Racism

Racism is prejudice or discrimination based on the belief that race is the primary factor determining human traits and abilities.

It's the black people that are making the noise, this isn't racist, it's just a fact. This is my fifth apartment, I've never had a problem with noise like this before. I agree we should do more research next time, but i still stand by my statement that i don't want to live in a complex where a large amount of black people live."

Your friend is saying because a few black people make noise, then ALL black people are like that. Well, that's called racism.

--Anna--

If he moves into an apartment complex where a "large amount of black people" live, then statistically he stands a better chance of living next to an undesirable neighbor. If he moves into an apartment complex where "a few black people" live, then he may be fine.

[QUOTE="SIapshot"]

Negative. I never said that white people don't commit crimes. (white guilt is not limited to white people, all races buy into it, as evidenced by your post)

What I said is that black people commit crimes more frequently than white people, regardless of economic status. Ad hominem arguments abound in this post.

DeeJayInphinity

Yes, and what I said was that you are associating that difference with the skin color rather than a real cause such as poverty and oppression. You've simply restated ad hominem, attempting to seem slightly intellectual, and talked about your statistics again.

Please note that violence is not caused only by economic status, there are countless motivating factors most of which are not dependant on the color of a person's skin.

So when you're asking me to explain why some areas are more violent than others, I would respond with something other than "they're black, here are the statistics proving it." That seems like a cop-out to me. Perhaps its poverty, maybe its a lack of education or even moral instability; who knows.

Why don't you give us a complete list of "motivating factors" behind the skyrocketing crime rate in black neighborhoods, and I'll shoot them down one by one.

HILARIOUS,maybe you should look up the words you're trying to use before you attack my intellect.

Why don't you give us a complete list of "motivating factors" behind the skyrocketing crime rate in black neighborhoods, and I'll shoot them down one by one.

SIapshot

Poverty, lack of educational resources, lack of extracurricular activities, poor parenting, overpopulation.. Why don't you explain to me why their skin color would have to do something with it? That's what you're trying to prove here, right?

[QUOTE="DeeJayInphinity"][QUOTE="SIapshot"][QUOTE="MrGeezer"]

LMFAO at all the people saying that it's not racism.

According to the dictionary, it's defined as racism, and that's the end of it.

"But being prejudiced against people because of their race isn't racism."

The dictionary says otherwise, and that makes you wrong. Get over it.

SIapshot

ad hominem, just answer the question. Dictionary or not, different cultures exhibit different behaviors in large groups and I have the statistics to back it up. Call it whatever you want to according to whatever dictionary you like, predominantly black neighborhoods have higher rates of criminal activity.

You have the statistics to prove that poverty can lead to crime.

Don't try and turn this thread into a hate thread. Make your own for that,

Here's another one... http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/prisons.htm

At yearend 2006 there were 3,042 black male sentenced prison inmates per 100,000 black males in the United States, compared to 1,261 Hispanic male inmates per 100,000 Hispanic males and 487 white male inmates per 100,000 white males.

That isn't a racist comment. He has made a prejudice decision that any complex with a large black community lives will be noisy, but it isn't showing any hate towards the black community in general, just the ones who were making the noise.Makaveli527

I agree. Your friend is not stating that all black people are loud.

Poverty, lack of educational resources, lack of extracurricular activities, poor parenting, and overpopulation are not unique to black people. White people suffer from these same socioeconomic problems, yet their children are not commiting crimes at nearly the same rate black kids are.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm

SIapshot

I never said they were, I said they can and do lead to crime. If a white kid has to steal to get by, he will. None of those problems are inherent to a specific race and that has been my point all along. I have also not claimed to know why some blacks comit so much crime, which is why I gave you a general list of possible motivators, but I'm sure it's not simply because they are black.

Here's another one... http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/prisons.htm

At yearend 2006 there were 3,042 black male sentenced prison inmates per 100,000 black males in the United States, compared to 1,261 Hispanic male inmates per 100,000 Hispanic males and 487 white male inmates per 100,000 white males.

SIapshot

Instead of quoting figures, why don't you just have the guts to come out with what you conclude from this data. I think its pretty clear, you just have to take that extra step and say it.

[QUOTE="SIapshot"]

Here's another one... http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/prisons.htm

At yearend 2006 there were 3,042 black male sentenced prison inmates per 100,000 black males in the United States, compared to 1,261 Hispanic male inmates per 100,000 Hispanic males and 487 white male inmates per 100,000 white males.

spacedog1973

Instead of quoting figures, why don't you just have the guts to come out with what you conclude from this data. I think its pretty clear, you just have to take that extra step and say it.

Unfortunately, these forums are not open for free opinions, I have been moderated over and over regarding my opinion (which, by the way, is no secret here), if you want to "snag" me, you're going to have to try a lot harder than that.

Go tell them to turn it down, oh wait you haven't because you're afraid of black people :\. There is a problem here people stop having a hidden agenda.-R3Volation

You're all racist. You think because you don't say it I don't know you have thought it. So if I don't hear you say it that means you're not racist? Those are playground rules son. People and their facades of perfection.

Sarcasm seems to escape everyone. Such as life is as serious as aheart attack. Everyone has a chip on their shoulder and you are always trying to make enemies People just don't want to get along and laugh. They rather label people with unfair labels and find a nemesis to start a war with.

I really wish I could understand what the big deal is. Stereotypes are funny. That's why most humor is based on stereotypes. Almost every joke you hear refers toa stereotype. It's silly therefore it's funny.

He just made a comment. He didn't open up a new chapter of the KKK. So he's not perfect. Maybe he's just bold yet rash, not tactful. Maybe he doesn't care what anyone else thinks so he doesn't lock up any of his thoughts, maybe he speaks too freely. There's a time and place for everything including sharing thoughts. I guess he chose the wrong time and the wrong place to share his thoughts and the wrong person to share them with.

[QUOTE="spacedog1973"][QUOTE="SIapshot"]

Here's another one... http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/prisons.htm

At yearend 2006 there were 3,042 black male sentenced prison inmates per 100,000 black males in the United States, compared to 1,261 Hispanic male inmates per 100,000 Hispanic males and 487 white male inmates per 100,000 white males.

SIapshot

Instead of quoting figures, why don't you just have the guts to come out with what you conclude from this data. I think its pretty clear, you just have to take that extra step and say it.

Unfortunately, these forums are not open for free opinions, I have been moderated over and over regarding my opinion (which, by the way, is no secret here), if you want to "snag" me, you're going to have to try a lot harder than that.

When you say, free opinions, you mean racism, right? I haven't the time nor the inclination to go searching someone's post history to see the history of their views and I couldn't care less if you were banned, warned, moderated or not. Don't be so defensive, I'm simply putting my point to you. If you have been moderated 'over and over' and are not willing to post your thoughts, then it seems that the mods have taught you something I cannot.

What we are left with though, is pointless numbers spread about this forum as though they in themselves prove anything. And if you arent as intellectually challenged as I'm sure you think you are not, then you will realise the futile purpose of it without subsequent commentary on that data.

[QUOTE="SIapshot"][QUOTE="spacedog1973"][QUOTE="SIapshot"]

Here's another one... http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/prisons.htm

At yearend 2006 there were 3,042 black male sentenced prison inmates per 100,000 black males in the United States, compared to 1,261 Hispanic male inmates per 100,000 Hispanic males and 487 white male inmates per 100,000 white males.

spacedog1973

Instead of quoting figures, why don't you just have the guts to come out with what you conclude from this data. I think its pretty clear, you just have to take that extra step and say it.

Unfortunately, these forums are not open for free opinions, I have been moderated over and over regarding my opinion (which, by the way, is no secret here), if you want to "snag" me, you're going to have to try a lot harder than that.

When you say, free opinions, you mean racism, right? I haven't the time nor the inclination to go searching someone's post history to see the history of their views and I couldn't care less if you were banned, warned, moderated or not. Don't be so defensive, I'm simply putting my point to you. If you have been moderated 'over and over' and are not willing to post your thoughts, then it seems that the mods have taught you something I cannot.

What we are left with though, is pointless numbers spread about this forum as though they in themselves prove anything. And if you arent as intellectually challenged as I'm sure you think you are not, then you will realise the futile purpose of it without subsequent commentary on that data.

I care not for your education as well, you asked me to step over the line that gamespot has drawn. I have not been "taught", or re-educated, or otherwise brainwashed by the mods something that you cannot.

What exists, whether you and your ilk choose to acknowledge it or not, is data that can be used to extrapolate the criminal tendencies of ethnic peoples. Subsequent commentary on this data isn't necessary for those who have the capacity to understand that there are differences between ethnic groups of people, however, for those who are "sitting on the fence", it may be a necessary catalyst to that understanding.

Has he offended anyone? If not, then who cares?Laserwolf65

Love your sig, what intrigues me is the sheer number of people who support evolution on these boards, yet these very same people refuse to acknowledge that evolution may have occurred, nay, HAS occurred on a special level. If special differences can occur as a result of geographical isolation, and skin color, as well as skeletal and skull structure can differentiate, then why do they automatically dismiss the possibility that intellect and therefore behavior can differentiate as well? Is it social conditioning? Brainwashing? What is it that continues to compel people to ignore the obvious in favor of the socially accepted?

[QUOTE="spacedog1973"][QUOTE="SIapshot"][QUOTE="spacedog1973"][QUOTE="SIapshot"]

Here's another one... http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/prisons.htm

At yearend 2006 there were 3,042 black male sentenced prison inmates per 100,000 black males in the United States, compared to 1,261 Hispanic male inmates per 100,000 Hispanic males and 487 white male inmates per 100,000 white males.

SIapshot

Instead of quoting figures, why don't you just have the guts to come out with what you conclude from this data. I think its pretty clear, you just have to take that extra step and say it.

Unfortunately, these forums are not open for free opinions, I have been moderated over and over regarding my opinion (which, by the way, is no secret here), if you want to "snag" me, you're going to have to try a lot harder than that.

When you say, free opinions, you mean racism, right? I haven't the time nor the inclination to go searching someone's post history to see the history of their views and I couldn't care less if you were banned, warned, moderated or not. Don't be so defensive, I'm simply putting my point to you. If you have been moderated 'over and over' and are not willing to post your thoughts, then it seems that the mods have taught you something I cannot.

What we are left with though, is pointless numbers spread about this forum as though they in themselves prove anything. And if you arent as intellectually challenged as I'm sure you think you are not, then you will realise the futile purpose of it without subsequent commentary on that data.

I care not for your education as well, you asked me to step over the line that gamespot has drawn. I have not been "taught", or re-educated, or otherwise brainwashed by the mods something that you cannot.

What exists, whether you and your ilk choose to acknowledge it or not, is data that can be used to extrapolate the criminal tendencies of ethnic peoples. Subsequent commentary on this data isn't necessary for those who have the capacity to understand that there are differences between ethnic groups of people, however, for those who are "sitting on the fence", it may be a necessary catalyst to that understanding.

[QUOTE="-R3Volation"]Go tell them to turn it down, oh wait you haven't because you're afraid of black people :\. There is a problem here people stop having a hidden agenda.SIapshot

Hmm, didn't get that one.

[QUOTE="Laserwolf65"]Has he offended anyone? If not, then who cares?SIapshot

Love your sig, what intrigues me is the sheer number of people who support evolution on these boards, yet these very same people refuse to acknowledge that evolution may have occurred, nay, HAS occurred on a special level. If special differences can occur as a result of geographical isolation, and skin color, as well as skeletal and skull structure can differentiate, then why do they automatically dismiss the possibility that intellect and therefore behavior can differentiate as well? Is it social conditioning? Brainwashing? What is it that continues to compel people to ignore the obvious in favor of the socially accepted?

Well, once you identify the "robs liquor stores" gene or the "smokes too much crack" gene, tghen you can publish your findings in a peer reviewed scientific journal.

Until then, saying that black people are inherently prone to crime is racist.

If black people are more inherently prone to criminal tendencies, then surely you can explain it scientifically, and publish results that are repeatable.

[QUOTE="SIapshot"]

[QUOTE="Laserwolf65"]Has he offended anyone? If not, then who cares?MrGeezer

Love your sig, what intrigues me is the sheer number of people who support evolution on these boards, yet these very same people refuse to acknowledge that evolution may have occurred, nay, HAS occurred on a special level. If special differences can occur as a result of geographical isolation, and skin color, as well as skeletal and skull structure can differentiate, then why do they automatically dismiss the possibility that intellect and therefore behavior can differentiate as well? Is it social conditioning? Brainwashing? What is it that continues to compel people to ignore the obvious in favor of the socially accepted?

Well, once you identify the "robs liquor stores" gene or the "smokes too much crack" gene, tghen you can publish your findings in a peer reviewed scientific journal.

Until then, saying that black people are inherently prone to crime is racist.

If black people are more inherently prone to criminal tendencies, then surely you can explain it scientifically, and publish results that are repeatable.

Here you go, Geezer...

http://www.prometheism.net/articles/prejudice.html

http://www.blink.org.uk/pdescription.asp?key=14854&grp=5&cat=293

http://agonist.org/20061122/genetic_breakthrough_that_reveals_the_differences_between_humans
(not quite the "loves smoking crack", or "robs liquer stores" gene, but certainly debunks the "we're all the same" myth)

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-11/hhmi-gvw112006.php

http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/stalkers/jpr01.html
Here's a commentarypublished by Professor J. Phillipe Rushton of the University of Western Ontario

Not to mention the political backlash against anyone who publishes "insensitive" scientific results (which goes against the very precepts of science itself) See the next link.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/10/18/science.race/index.html?iref=mpstoryview
Here's a perfect example of what happens when a prominent scientist goes public with an "insensitive"opinion.

Dr. David Duke: "By far, the most popular saying among egalitarians is that Blacks and Whites differ only in color of skin. If that were true, one would be quite stupid to believe in racial differences in intelligence, and that is the direct implication. But, the idea that skin color is the only difference is patently absurd. Yet, the media consistently repeats it like a holy incantation, "We are all the same other than color of skin", How is it then, that every one of the top 16 semi-finalists in the 1996 Olympics 100 meter sprint were black, when one hundred times more Whites participate in organized track and field in the world? If the Black difference is just a darker skin color, how could skin color make one run faster? There are genetic qualities in Black people that make them, on average, more efficient sprinters and that talent has an association with skin color. If there are differences that can make one group have faster runners, it stands to reason that there can be differences that make other groups have faster thinkers."

You are absolutely correct Geezer, saying that black people are inherintly prone to crime is racist. Unfortunately, releasing scientific data to support those claims is also racist. (or "insensitive" whichever you prefer) Hence the reluctance by well known scientists who rely on their reputations for their paychecks to engage in research that leads to a well known and already documented conclusion.

It's okay to call someone you detesta deadbeat because they are poor. It'sokay to call an obese persona fat retardsince they areoverweight because no one is gonna label you nor judge you for it.

But when it comes to color or ethnicity THAT is just CROSSING the line. :roll: BECAUSE NOBODYelse hasfeelings. :roll: As if you never excercised your own bigotry. I'm sure you just lovehanging out with the mentally challenged because they are coolest kats around. You really wanna be seen with them.

http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/stalkers/jpr01.html
Here's a commentarypublished by Professor J. Phillipe Rushton of the University of Western Ontario

SIapshot

This is the only link which is even relevant. The others are all merely speculation or are completely tangential to the discussion. This is the only link you've posted which has even attempted to approach the issue scientifically.

However, there is no stated methodology for how differences due to **** socio-economic status, etc have been weeded out. If you would like to discuss thisfurther, it is recommended that you should post a more detailed report so that we can determine if the results are valid.

As far as James Watson, even he admitted that his claims were without scientific basis. So that's that.

And by the way, if you are going to post a quote illustrating your point, you could have done better than to use a quote by David Duke. That's really not helping your case...

It's okay to call someone you detesta deadbeat because they are poor. It'sokay to call an obese persona fat retardsince they areoverweight because no one is gonna label you nor judge you for it.

MagnumPI

The fact that you think that's okay doesn't reflect well on you.

If you think black people are genetically inclined to play their music louder than white people then yes, it is racist. And that is what your friend implies by saying thathe/she doesn't want to stay in an apartment complex with black people again, he/she assumes that ALL black people play their music loud. That is racism.

God this thread is ridiculous.

[QUOTE="SIapshot"]

http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/stalkers/jpr01.html
Here's a commentarypublished by Professor J. Phillipe Rushton of the University of Western Ontario

MrGeezer

This is the only link which is even relevant. The others are all merely speculation or are completely tangential to the discussion. This is the only link you've posted which has even attempted to approach the issue scientifically.

However, there is no stated methodology for how differences due to **** socio-economic status, etc have been weeded out. If you would like to discuss thisfurther, it is recommended that you should post a more detailed report so that we can determine if the results are valid.

As far as James Watson, even he admitted that his claims were without scientific basis. So that's that.

And by the way, if you are going to post a quote illustrating your point, you could have done better than to use a quote by David Duke. That's really not helping your case...

Mr. Geezer, not only have I posted results that have been published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, but the fact that black people are inherintly prone to criminal behavior has been repeated time and time again......... :yawn:

I provided what you asked for, in fact, here is a list of Rushton's publications. http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushton_pubs.htm

and another of Rushton's publications, http://www.harbornet.com/folks/theedrich/JP_Rushton/Race.htm

If you can't, or don't have the capacity to follow up on scientific publications complete with references, then I suggest you stop asking for them.

If you think black people are genetically inclined to play their music louder than white people then yes, it is racist. And that is what your friend implies by saying thathe/she doesn't want to stay in an apartment complex with black people again, he/she assumes that ALL black people play their music loud. That is racism.

God this thread is ridiculous.

bradleybhoy

Dr. David Duke: "By far, the most popular saying among egalitarians is that Blacks and Whites differ only in color of skin. If that were true, one would be quite stupid to believe in racial differences in intelligence, and that is the direct implication. But, the idea that skin color is the only difference is patently absurd. Yet, the media consistently repeats it like a holy incantation, "We are all the same other than color of skin", How is it then, that every one of the top 16 semi-finalists in the 1996 Olympics 100 meter sprint were black, when one hundred times more Whites participate in organized track and field in the world? If the Black difference is just a darker skin color, how could skin color make one run faster? There are genetic qualities in Black people that make them, on average, more efficient sprinters and that talent has an association with skin color. If there are differences that can make one group have faster runners, it stands to reason that there can be differences that make other groups have faster thinkers."

You are absolutely correct Geezer, saying that black people are inherintly prone to crime is racist. Unfortunately, releasing scientific data to support those claims is also racist. (or "insensitive" whichever you prefer) Hence the reluctance by well known scientists who rely on their reputations for their paychecks to engage in research that leads to a well known and already documented conclusion.SIapshot

So black people can generally run faster than other people with different skin colours. Why assume this is down to genetics? In white America some of the only areas of society that were fully open to black people were athletics/sports and music/entertainment, because black people in those occupations wouldn't pose a threat to the white power structure. Black people were said to be gentically inferior and therefore less intelligent than white people. That was the justification for the racial segregation of the educational system and of course white people recieved generally a far better education. Therefore american-black culture developed around music and black people excelled in sports, however they severely lacked educational opportunities. Thus those two aspects of life, sport and entertainment are ingrained in current black-American cultural identity whereas education is not a big a part as the first two. These supposed physical and mental differences are down to differences in cultural identities and the legacy of slavery. Not genetics.

And even if it was discovered one skin colour came with intellectual superiority? If it were eastern asians (chinese, japanese) that were just genetically smarter than white people what then? Does that give them a right to practice racial discrimination against white people? Are you grasping for a justification of racist discrimination against black Americans?

Even if it were discovered one group of people with a certain skin colour were generally genetically smarter than others if we have any humanity that wouldn't make a difference. I even contend that that general margin of genetic superiority would be negligble anyway, it would only provide "justification" for racists to practice their hate.

[QUOTE="SIapshot"]Dr. David Duke: "By far, the most popular saying among egalitarians is that Blacks and Whites differ only in color of skin. If that were true, one would be quite stupid to believe in racial differences in intelligence, and that is the direct implication. But, the idea that skin color is the only difference is patently absurd. Yet, the media consistently repeats it like a holy incantation, "We are all the same other than color of skin", How is it then, that every one of the top 16 semi-finalists in the 1996 Olympics 100 meter sprint were black, when one hundred times more Whites participate in organized track and field in the world? If the Black difference is just a darker skin color, how could skin color make one run faster? There are genetic qualities in Black people that make them, on average, more efficient sprinters and that talent has an association with skin color. If there are differences that can make one group have faster runners, it stands to reason that there can be differences that make other groups have faster thinkers."

You are absolutely correct Geezer, saying that black people are inherintly prone to crime is racist. Unfortunately, releasing scientific data to support those claims is also racist. (or "insensitive" whichever you prefer) Hence the reluctance by well known scientists who rely on their reputations for their paychecks to engage in research that leads to a well known and already documented conclusion.bradleybhoy

So black people can generally run faster than other people with different skin colours. Why assume this is down to genetics? In white America some of the only areas of society that werefully open to black people were athletics/sports and music/entertainment, because black people in those occupations wouldn't pose a threat to the white power structure. Black people were said to be gentically inferior and therefore less intelligent than white people. That was the justification for the racial segregation of the educational system and of course white people recieved generally a far better education. Therefore american-black culture developed around music and black people excelled in sports, however they severely lacked educational opportunities. Thus those two aspects of life, sport and entertainment are ingrained in current black-American cultural identity whereas education is not a big a part as the first two. These supposed physical and mental differences are down to differences in cultural identities and the legacy of slavery. Not genetics.

And even if it was discovered one skin colour came with intellectual superiority? If it were eastern asians (chinese, japanese) that were just genetically smarter than white people what then? Does that give them a right to practice racial discrimination against white people? Are you grasping for a justification of racist discrimination against black Americans?

You said nothing that suggests that physical superiority could evolve without intellectual superiority evolving as well. Why do you suppose that physical superiority (who's the heavyweight boxing champ again?) could evolve, and yet intellectual superiority could not evolve?

So, if cultural identity is your excuse, how do you explain the rise of other cultures in Amerrican society? When my people arrived on these shores, they were among themost discriminated people in this country. My grandfather had a sign that read "Irish people need not apply" that used to hang in store windows, and less than one generation later we were in the White House. Without Affirmative Action, and all the other social programs that blacks enjoy. What is their excuse?

The Irish had none of that, and speaking of "cultural bias" why are Asians among the highest ranking test scores in America if our tests and classes are culturally biased toward white people? Yes, Asians score higher than white people, and there are plenty of Japanese, Chinese, and Korean nationalists that you wouldn't even blink an eye at, but me? forget about it, I'm a politically incorrect racist.

[QUOTE="bradleybhoy"][QUOTE="SIapshot"]Dr. David Duke: "By far, the most popular saying among egalitarians is that Blacks and Whites differ only in color of skin. If that were true, one would be quite stupid to believe in racial differences in intelligence, and that is the direct implication. But, the idea that skin color is the only difference is patently absurd. Yet, the media consistently repeats it like a holy incantation, "We are all the same other than color of skin", How is it then, that every one of the top 16 semi-finalists in the 1996 Olympics 100 meter sprint were black, when one hundred times more Whites participate in organized track and field in the world? If the Black difference is just a darker skin color, how could skin color make one run faster? There are genetic qualities in Black people that make them, on average, more efficient sprinters and that talent has an association with skin color. If there are differences that can make one group have faster runners, it stands to reason that there can be differences that make other groups have faster thinkers."

You are absolutely correct Geezer, saying that black people are inherintly prone to crime is racist. Unfortunately, releasing scientific data to support those claims is also racist. (or "insensitive" whichever you prefer) Hence the reluctance by well known scientists who rely on their reputations for their paychecks to engage in research that leads to a well known and already documented conclusion.SIapshot

So black people can generally run faster than other people with different skin colours. Why assume this is down to genetics? In white America some of the only areas of society that werefully open to black people were athletics/sports and music/entertainment, because black people in those occupations wouldn't pose a threat to the white power structure. Black people were said to be gentically inferior and therefore less intelligent than white people. That was the justification for the racial segregation of the educational system and of course white people recieved generally a far better education. Therefore american-black culture developed around music and black people excelled in sports, however they severely lacked educational opportunities. Thus those two aspects of life, sport and entertainment are ingrained in current black-American cultural identity whereas education is not a big a part as the first two. These supposed physical and mental differences are down to differences in cultural identities and the legacy of slavery. Not genetics.

And even if it was discovered one skin colour came with intellectual superiority? If it were eastern asians (chinese, japanese) that were just genetically smarter than white people what then? Does that give them a right to practice racial discrimination against white people? Are you grasping for a justification of racist discrimination against black Americans?

You said nothing that suggests that physical superiority could evolve without intellectual superiority evolving as well. Why do you suppose that physical superiority (who's the heavyweight boxing champ again?) could evolve, and yet intellectual superiority could not evolve?

So, if cultural identity is your excuse, how do you explain the rise of other cultures in Amerrican society? When my people arrived on these shores, they were among themost discriminated people in this country. My grandfather had a sign that read "Irish people need not apply" that used to hang in store windows, and less than one generation later we were in the White House. Without Affirmative Action, and all the other social programs that blacks enjoy. What is their excuse?

The Irish had none of that, and speaking of "cultural bias" why are Asians among the highest ranking test scores in America if our tests and classes are culturally biased toward white people? Yes, Asians score higher than white people, and there are plenty of Japanese, Chinese, and Korean nationalists that you wouldn't even blink an eye at, but me? forget about it, I'm a politically incorrect racist.

Did you evenread what I wrote?

In answer to your first point I never assumed that physical or intellectual superiority was a result of evolution or genetics. My whole first paragraph was about that. I said that physical and mental differences in groups of people with different skin colours are to do with their cultural identity, not evolution or genetics.

In answer to your second point I don't think you can possibly compare the situation of Irish immigrants to that African slaves in America. That is simply ridiculous. Racist discrimination against black people was government policy until the 60s.

In answer to your third point, yes statistically Asians are more succesful than whites academically. If we were to belive your theories then that would make Asians genetically intellectually superior to white people. That is what you must believe. However this could also be down to cultural identity. Perhaps Asians are generally encouraged to excel academically more than white people, and there is also the stereotype of the "smart" asian which must no doubt feed back into this process.

These supposed physical and mental differences between people of different coloured skins are the result of different cultural identities and societal expectations and roles based on race rather than genetic superiority/inferiority, (which is what you argued).

Listen man stop trying to sound like your not a racist. I dont care if your KKK the fact is that when you move into a place like the one you just mentioned your bound to have noisy neighbors, not just noisy but they have other nasty habbits as well like littering and destruction of property...

Its not a race thing rather a class thing....... People in the lower echelons are in general less decent and caring about their environment...thats just a generalization of course there are people who are or are not like this in every social class..

Im sorry if i sound like a biggot or racist which im not but you cant ignore that the poorer a neighborhood the most like it is that your gonna have crappy surroundings....and neighbors

and for the most part most of the poorer neighborhoods are inhabitted by minorities......alot of them happen to be black..

[QUOTE="MrGeezer"][QUOTE="SIapshot"]

http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/stalkers/jpr01.html
Here's a commentarypublished by Professor J. Phillipe Rushton of the University of Western Ontario

SIapshot

This is the only link which is even relevant. The others are all merely speculation or are completely tangential to the discussion. This is the only link you've posted which has even attempted to approach the issue scientifically.

However, there is no stated methodology for how differences due to **** socio-economic status, etc have been weeded out. If you would like to discuss thisfurther, it is recommended that you should post a more detailed report so that we can determine if the results are valid.

As far as James Watson, even he admitted that his claims were without scientific basis. So that's that.

And by the way, if you are going to post a quote illustrating your point, you could have done better than to use a quote by David Duke. That's really not helping your case...

Mr. Geezer, not only have I posted results that have been published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, but the fact that black people are inherintly prone to criminal behavior has been repeated time and time again......... :yawn:

I provided what you asked for, in fact, here is a list of Rushton's publications. http://psychology.uwo.ca/faculty/rushton_pubs.htm

and another of Rushton's publications, http://www.harbornet.com/folks/theedrich/JP_Rushton/Race.htm

If you can't, or don't have the capacity to follow up on scientific publications complete with references, then I suggest you stop asking for them.

I was gonna get mad at you for talking to me like I'm stupid, but then I read your link and saw that I really AM. I am sorry I ever doubted you. I'll never disagree with a white person ever again.

[QUOTE="SIapshot"]

http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/stalkers/jpr01.html
Here's a commentarypublished by Professor J. Phillipe Rushton of the University of Western Ontario

MrGeezer

This is the only link which is even relevant. The others are all merely speculation or are completely tangential to the discussion. This is the only link you've posted which has even attempted to approach the issue scientifically.

However, there is no stated methodology for how differences due to **** socio-economic status, etc have been weeded out. If you would like to discuss thisfurther, it is recommended that you should post a more detailed report so that we can determine if the results are valid.

As far as James Watson, even he admitted that his claims were without scientific basis. So that's that.

No, he didn't. What he did was distinguish his claims that blacks may not have equal average intelligence to other races with the notion that this equates to notions of "inferiority." You didn't read the entirety of his reply. Let's clarify it by reading from his response:

"Rarely more so than right now, where I find myself at the centre of a storm of criticism. I can understand much of this reaction. For if I said what I was quoted as saying, then I can only admit that I am bewildered by it. To those who have drawn the inference from my words that Africa, as a continent, is somehow genetically inferior, I can only apologise unreservedly. That is not what I meant. More importantly from my point of view, there is no scientific basis for such a belief."

That's the part that got most of the play in articles that selectively culled from his followup statement. However, let's continue.

"We do not yet adequately understand the way in which the different environments in the world have selected over time the genes which determine our capacity to do different things. The overwhelming desire of society today is to assume that equal powers of reason are a universal heritage of humanity. It may well be. But simply wanting this to be the case is not enough. This is not science.

To question this is not to give in to racism. This is not a discussion about superiority or inferiority, it is about seeking to understand differences, about why some of us are great musicians and others great engineers. It is very likely that at least some 10 to 15 years will pass before we get an adequate understanding for the relative importance of nature versus nurture in the achievement of important human objectives."

He reiterates the possibility that African blacks may be less intelligent (different environments possibly selecting for different genes relating to abilities). He simply states that such considerations are not one's of superiority or inferiority. That might strike some as naive but that's his point.

"In answer to your first point I never assumed that physical or intellectual superiority was a result of evolution or genetics. My whole first paragraph was about that. I said that physical and mental differences in groups of people with different skin colours are to do with their cultural identity, not evolution or genetics."

Spoken as a article of faith. The research does not show any such thing.

"These supposed physical and mental differences between people of different coloured skins are the result of different cultural identities and societal expectations and roles based on race rather than genetic superiority/inferiority, (which is what you argued)."

We know that IQ is about 70% heritable. Twin studies show this repeatedly. However, we are supposed to believe that IQ variation between blacks and whites is 0% heritable? That it has no genetic component at all? And why do we believe this? Well, you don't say. You just state it as a matter of fact.

Egalitarianism is secular religion.

Naw, it's ignorance at worst. If during his experiences, the majority of his neighbors being intolerably noisey are black, that's a natural conclusion to come to. JustPlainLucas

That's not racist. It's a generalization made from experience, and it's understandable how he'd reach that conclusion.bman784

Yea just like my mum thinks all Indians are stinky :P

no offense to any indians, i dont think your stinky :)