What do we do with MAGA?

just_sayin

Argument Topic: Leftists say it is OK to call for genocide against jews

This week the presidents of Harvard, MIT, and the University of Pennsylvania said it is OK for their students to call for the genocide of Jews.  From USA Today:

'[Rep. Elise] Stefanik asked the presidents whether "calling for the genocide of Jews" would violate their codes of conduct. Gay said antisemitic speech would violate university policies when it "crosses into conduct," and Magill similarly said it would be harassment if "speech becomes conduct." Kornbluth said it would be "investigated as harassment if pervasive and severe."'

So you can call for the genocide of Jews on this campus and it is considered protected speech.  But if you call for the genocide of Black people, LGBT+ people then you can be removed for hate speech.  The left has embraced its Jew hatred and see people calling for the genocide of Jews in Israel as good.  

Yet, these leftists, who support those who call for genocide of Jewish people, claim MAGA, which hasn't called for the genocide of anyone, a greater threat.  SMH

Bogan

"Safe spaces" and "trigger warnings" to every minority group around, but to hell with the Jews.    If Leftists did not have double standards, they would have no standards at all.

Dreamer

Trump administration tried to exploit the pandemic crisis by requesting emergency powers to detain someone indefinitely.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/21/doj-coronavirus-emergency-powers-140023

just_sayin

Dreamer said:

Trump administration tried to exploit the pandemic crisis by requesting emergency powers to detain someone indefinitely.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/21/doj-coronavirus-emergency-powers-140023

The claim is a dishonest one.  Trump had nothing to do with what you claim.  The issue of posting posters by judges was an issue of who has the authority to do so.  The judge did not have that authority.  Government people are very particular about their authority.  The poster issue never rose to the level of Trump making any decision on it.  That is so dishonest to claim as such.

just_sayin

Argument Topic: Democrats are having No-Whites Christmas Parties

Democratic Boston Mayor, Michelle Wu, threw a 'Electeds of Color Holiday Party', which invitations were sent out electronically threw her government email.  She also sent them to the white council members and then told these white people.  She then explained it wasn't suppose to be sent to white people.  Now, she can as a citizen have any party she wants, but it is inappropriate to have a no-whites Christmas Party and use government resources for it.  

Now if a Republican had done this, there would be outrage.  But those on the left believe that their racism is good racism and have excused this bad and racist behavior.  These people think MAGA are the problem in society and not themselves.

Bogan

@just_sayin ;    Now if a Republican had done this, there would be outrage.  But those on the left believe that their racism is good racism and have excused this bad and racist behavior.  These people think MAGA are the problem in society and not themselves.

Dear "just-sayin", there are only two racist explanations for minority dysfunction.   (unless you can think up a viable third) 
  
1.    Races are not equal.  (which is a provable premise)
2.    Blame the white guys for everything.

The Democrat voters think it is option 2, so they are compelled to never, ever, recognise their own racism.     (which puts them on the spot logically) 
You can not choose either way, because your religion claims that all people are equal before God.     Both you and the Democrats are in denial and are easy meat to somebody who is thanking straight.  

just_sayin

Bogan said:

@just_sayin ;    Now if a Republican had done this, there would be outrage.  But those on the left believe that their racism is good racism and have excused this bad and racist behavior.  These people think MAGA are the problem in society and not themselves.

Dear "just-sayin", there are only two racist explanations for minority dysfunction.   (unless you can think up a viable third) 
  
1.    Races are not equal.  (which is a provable premise)
2.    Blame the white guys for everything.

The Democrat voters think it is option 2, so they are compelled to never, ever, recognise their own racism.     (which puts them on the spot logically) 
You can not choose either way, because your religion claims that all people are equal before God.     Both you and the Democrats are in denial and are easy meat to somebody who is thanking straight.  

@Bogan,
Not only does my religion tell me that people are equal.  History suggests that race is not the reason for differences either.  For example.  The Greeks and Egyptians once had the greatest dynasties of their time.  Many innovations and advances in science and math occurred there.  At the same time, Blacks in Egypt were thriving, British people were being laughed at for their barbaric and backward behavior.  Not long after that, China invented iron many hundred years before other countries got it.  The Chinese during that time had great advancements in warfare, science and medicine.  Yet, as time went on, the backward British, developed a written language for the first time.  This allowed them to catch up and then white Europeans advanced.  Today in the US, the demographic groups that are crushing it are Asian and those from India in scholastic tests.  So, depending on which era we are talking about, the world has been ruled by Blacks, Chinese, Europeans, and it looks like it will soon be Asians again.  Many social and cultural factors impacted these groups, like the late development of written languages in Western Europe.  Genetics didn't really change in those few thousand years - other factors did.

Bogan

@just_sayin

Hi, “Just-sayin”.    Due to the serious lack of contributors to this debate site possessing triple digit IQ’s, I thought I would give you a kick to see if I can get somebody with brains on this site to debate against.     “Openminded” has been a real disappointment, he seems to be just another brain washed trendy lefty who is frightened of debate, and he will probably become just another heckler. 

 

Just-sayin quote       Not only does my religion tell me that people are equal. 

I presume that you are a Christian?    Not being too knowledgeable of Christion theology and scriptures, can you point to any text in your scriptures which claim that all races are equal?    My perception is, that this is just a new interpretation of Christian scriptures which have been updated to conform to a new, more humane view of the world?   

 

Just sayin quote       History suggests that race is not the reason for differences either.  For example.  The Greeks and Egyptians once had the greatest dynasties of their time.  Many innovations and advances in science and math occurred there.  At the same time, Blacks in Egypt were thriving, British people were being laughed at for their barbaric and backward behavior.  Not long after that, China invented iron many hundred years before other countries got it.  The Chinese during that time had great advancements in warfare, science and medicine.  Yet, as time went on, the backward British, developed a written language for the first time.  This allowed them to catch up and then white Europeans advanced.  Today in the US, the demographic groups that are crushing it are Asian and those from India in scholastic tests.  So, depending on which era we are talking about, the world has been ruled by Blacks, Chinese, Europeans, and it looks like it will soon be Asians again.  Many social and cultural factors impacted these groups, like the late development of written languages in Western Europe.  Genetics didn't really change in those few thousand years - other factors did.

 That is quite a nice little theory that you have there, although I am unaware of black African people “thriving” anywhere.     As an atheist, my contention is, that races look different because they are different and must be different.     Each race evolved separately within widely different environments to give each race an advantage within which ever environment that they evolved in.     We can see this process today with the different sub species of animals where environmental conditions within particular environments has caused differences in appearances and temperaments within the same species..

 Whites, blacks, and Asians do not have equal solar skin protection.     Whites, blacks and Asians are not all equally evolved to live in cold climates.        On the IQ side of things, those races who lived in non tribal organised societies where skill specialisation was an important survival skill, developed higher mental skills such as mathematics while tribal societies who’s only concept of mathematics was “one, two, many” never really developed such a skill at the group level.  

 As such, it should be those societies which have the oldest civilisations which should be the smartest.     To a large extent, this is true.    But some races which should be smart have not developed to be that way for social reasons.     The Arabs should be as smart as the Chinese and Indians, but they are not, because they accepted a Muslim way of life which suppressed scientific learning for too long, and which created a society in which the most ruthless and degenerate who monopolised the breeding females rose to the top.     Western books were once banned in the Ottoman empire, and it is instructive to learn that the very first book that the Ottomans allowed into their realm was a western medical book on the treatment of syphilis. 

Without even bothering to note that cognitive metricians (who are scientists) already know through IQ testing that the bell curves of IQ among races is unequal, any interested person with a perceptive mind can clearly see that the stratification of western society, where the primary survival skill is brains, is now increasingly displaying that some races are a lot smarter than others.     DEI is a vehicle where the generally low IQ races are trying to use political means to gain entry into better paid higher status positions, that most of them are not intelligent enough to handle.   

just_sayin

@Bogan
So the logical conclusion of atheism is to believe that some races are inferior?  The Bible doesn't acknowledge any race, other than the human race.  It will recognize tribes, countries, religions, professions, and even different clothes types - but not races.  It says to treat everyone the same.

Those who show favoritism aren't good; - Proverbs 28:21
But if you show favoritism, you sin  - James 2:9
For God does not show favoritism. - Romans 2:11
Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly - Lev. 19:15

Now @Dreamer pay attention, this is where I give @Bogan a history lesson on the long and continued racist history of progressives.

@Bogan, I am so disappointed that you would by into the debunked racist fallacy of genetic determinism - popularized and promoted by progressive Democrats.  Progressive Democrats like Woodrow Wilson, who not so coincidently played the first motion picture at the white house - a fawning story about the KKK, embraced the racial hatred of genetic determinism from the book Hereditary Genius.  OH, he wasn't the only racist progressive to buy into such non-sense.  Genetic determinism using IQ tests to back their claims were touted by the presidents of Harvard,Yale, and Stanford, and by FDR also.  However to reach the racist conclusions that progressive Democrats claimed you had to omit lots of facts that went against their theory that Blacks were inferior.

For example, Army IQ tests where claimed by progressive Democrats to show that Black people were less intelligent.  In 1929, Blacks did have lower IQ scores than most whites and immigrants.  However, Children in the Blue Ridge Mountains had a range of 83.9 to 61.2 on the test, whereas the average Black child had an IQ of 85.  

In 1976 a study showed that Black children who were orphaned and raised by white parents had higher IQs than the national average.  Since genetics wasn't a factor, it seems obvious that environment played a key role.

The army IQ tests required knowing such things as the color of sapphires, the location of Cornell University, the profession of Alfred Noyes, and the city in which the Pierce Arrow Automobile was manufactured.  Why Black Americans or new immigrants would know these things is questionable.  In fact the IQ test pioneer, Carl Brighan said in 1930 that many of the immigrant men who had tested poorly in the 20's Army IQ test had now scored significantly higher and that the language issues had been a factor on the tests.  

Jews scored very low on the IQ tests in 1917, yet later, after generations in the states, the average IQ for Jews was above that of whites' in both the IQ tests and in college admissions tests..  This was obviously not genetic.

The decisive blow against IQ tests demonstrating that Blacks are genetically inferior came with the research of Professor James R. Flynn of New Zealand who showed that Black IQ performance on tests had risen substantially, even beyond that of whites in a generation or two.  Even though Blacks were answering more and more questions right each year, the tests where adjusted to keep Black IQs hovering around 85 on average.  When comparing to what the scores in 2002 for Blacks would have been on the same tests of 1947-1948, the average Black score had risen to 104.  

Even the leading academic scholar researching the effect of genes on IQs, Professor Arthur R Jensen, of the University of California at Berkeley has repudiated the IQ celling conclusions pushed by progressive Democrats, and that IQ scores reflect more exposure to certain concepts and wealth influence.

Bogan, Bogan, Bogan,  you should know that anything that arose from progressive Democrats is wrong and racist.  Whether it was Democrats support of genetic determinism, eugenics, or DEI, they have always pushed immoral racist beliefs.  Put aside the racist beliefs.  Don't be a Democrat..

Bogan

@just_sayin

Just-sayin quote   So the logical conclusion of atheism is to believe that some races are inferior? 

 Aw, gee willackers, “open-minded”, you were the last person I would have thought would put words in my mouth?       Atheism is simply the denial of the supernatural world and it’s replacement by a concept called “science” which attempts to explain the world using logic, reason, experimentation, and plain common sense.      It is therefor reasonable to conclude that African descended people make superior runners and are better evolved to live in hot climates, where clothes are un necessary,  where chasing down game on hot African savannas is a survival imperative, along with a skin resistant to UV radiation.   It is also reasonable to conclude that whites and Asians are better evolved at living in much colder climates where clothing is necessary, and a skin more evolved to accept vitamin D from whatever areas of skin are exposed to the sun, is similarly a survival imperative.     If this makes tribal blacks “superior” in hot climates while whites and Asians are "superior" in cold climates, where food preservation and predicting growing seasons develops the brain, then that’s how the cookie crumbles.

 

Just-sayin quote      The Bible doesn't acknowledge any race, other than the human race.  It will recognize tribes, countries, religions, professions, and even different clothes types - but not races.      It says to treat everyone the same.  

 It would be helpful if God was a lot more specific.     But anyway, you can not point to any text in your scriptures which says that races are equal?     So, you just interpret various vague texts to mean what you want them to mean? 

 

Just-sayin quote   I am so disappointed that you would by into the debunked racist fallacy of genetic determinism - popularized and promoted by progressive Democrats. Progressive Democrats like Woodrow Wilson, who not so coincidently played the first motion picture at the white house - a fawning story about the KKK, embraced the racial hatred of genetic determinism from the book Hereditary Genius.  OH, he wasn't the only racist progressive to buy into such non-sense.  Genetic determinism using IQ tests to back their claims were touted by the presidents of Harvard, Yale, and Stanford, and by FDR also.  However to reach the racist conclusions that progressive Democrats claimed you had to omit lots of facts that went against their theory that Blacks were inferior.

 You are talking about a period in history when US cities were not being destroyed by “mostly peaceful” black rioters where 2 billion dollars of damage was done and 19 people killed?    And where black African population proportions within US cities had not ballooned to the extent that large areas of US cities are crime filled, welfare dependent, no go zones for whites?      Where home invasions, ram raids, car jackings, armed robberies, muggings, rapes, drive by murders, and organised gangs of shoplifters are even making the areas surrounding black ghettoes unfit for decent people to live, and where chain stores to prosper?          80 years of the progressive left claiming that Africans are equal to whites in terms of intelligence and temperament has seen US society in particular go south.     It is time for you to re assess what those old time Democrats were saying.   Maybe they were not as silly as you or Leo Terrell thought they were?

 I am not religious at all.   I can only submit to you the scientific fact that human behaviour just happens to be a product of nature and nurture.   Genetics plays an important role, as much in humans as it does in animals, and any year 10 student with triple digit IQ and a high school knowledge of genetics can easily understand that.

 

Just-sayin quote       For example, Army IQ tests where claimed by progressive Democrats to show that Black people were less intelligent.  In 1929, Blacks did have lower IQ scores than most whites and immigrants.  However, Children in the Blue Ridge Mountains had a range of 83.9 to 61.2 on the test, whereas the average Black child had an IQ of 85.  

In 1976 a study showed that Black children who were orphaned and raised by white parents had higher IQs than the national average.  Since genetics wasn't a factor, it seems obvious that environment played a key role.

The army IQ tests required knowing such things as the color of sapphires, the location of Cornell University, the profession of Alfred Noyes, and the city in which the Pierce Arrow Automobile was manufactured.  Why Black Americans or new immigrants would know these things is questionable.  In fact the IQ test pioneer, Carl Brighan said in 1930 that many of the immigrant men who had tested poorly in the 20's Army IQ test had now scored significantly higher and that the language issues had been a factor on the tests.  

Jews scored very low on the IQ tests in 1917, yet later, after generations in the states, the average IQ for Jews was above that of whites' in both the IQ tests and in college admissions tests..  This was obviously not genetic.

 You are claiming that IQ testing is inaccurate?    And you give examples from 1929 when IQ testing was in it’s infancy to “prove” that.       IQ testing today is not inaccurate, it is very accurate.  So accurate that the US military, the world’s most technologically advanced military, depends upon IQ tests to determine recruit suitability.   If IQ tests were inaccurate, the military, industry, and academia would not use them.     Universities in the USA use IQ tests called “SAT scores” to determine whether student candidates are intelligent enough to handle the very demanding STEM courses that universities offer.     This meant that black and Hispanic students were very seriously under represented in university admissions.     So, along came Affirmative Action, which was based upon a false premise that all races were equal, and which mandated racial quotas to “fix” the presumed inaccuracies of IQ testing.    All it did was to prove that IQ testing was right all along.     While some people from minorities are bright enough for university, most simply are not.     All they can do is attend rubbish courses like “black studies” or “gender studies” where passing the course is just a matter of toeing the left wing party line.    Then we wonder why universities today are populated by too many du-mbarses?    Who, if it was not for the compelling “need” for DEI officers in woke corporations, would be completely unemployable.    And as these woke corporations are discovering, having a bunch of low IQ mor-ons dictating who you should hire, or how you should promote your product, is sending them broke.     

 

Just sayin quote    The decisive blow against IQ tests demonstrating that Blacks are genetically inferior came with the research of Professor James R. Flynn of New Zealand who showed that Black IQ performance on tests had risen substantially, even beyond that of whites in a generation or two.  Even though Blacks were answering more and more questions right each year, the tests where adjusted to keep Black IQs hovering around 85 on average.  When comparing to what the scores in 2002 for Blacks would have been on the same tests of 1947-1948, the average Black score had risen to 104. 

 We live in a world where left wing zealots are now infesting our universities and using the authority of science to promote their wacky ideals.        Your example is exactly like saying that a man can be a woman, if he simply feels that way?     Which just happens to now be the official position of the American Medical Association.     Do you agree with the AMA?     Well, I don’t believe your left wing professor from New Zealand, either.

 

Just-sayin quote      Even the leading academic scholar researching the effect of genes on IQs, Professor Arthur R Jensen, of the University of California at Berkeley has repudiated the IQ celling conclusions pushed by progressive Democrats, and that IQ scores reflect more exposure to certain concepts and wealth influence.

 

Arthur Jenson was the Educational Psychologist who’s was given the task by the US Federal government to collate all of the findings of the lavishly funded state and federal education programs, which were supposedly going to prove that all it took to close the already widely known 15 point IQ gap between most whites and most blacks, was education and nutritious food,        Jensen’s conclusions was that every one of these well meaning programs failed.     He therefore opined that the problem MIGHT HAVE BEEN genetic.     That was all it took to have his lectures invaded by shouting leftists, his speaking at scientific meeting disrupted by bomb threats, he had to have a personal protection squad at his own university, and he had to move house to avoid the constant attacks upon his property and family.    Saying that races are not equal is very dangerous.     There a  lot of people who’s power, prestige, and jobs depend upon promoting this false narrative.   

 

Just sayin quote      Bogan, Bogan, Bogan,  you should know that anything that arose from progressive Democrats is wrong and racist.  Whether it was Democrats support of genetic determinism, eugenics, or DEI, they have always pushed immoral racist beliefs.  Put aside the racist beliefs.  Don't Democrat.

 Just-sayin   Just-sayin   Just sayin,   I have lived through a time when the Right was the Establishment, and they were the ones who corrupted democracy to suite their right wing mates.      I am now living at a time when it is the Left who are the Establishment, and they are the ones who are corrupting democracy to suite their left wing mates.      No side of politics has a monopoly on virtue.    Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.      Today it is the Leftists who are corrupt and power mad, and they are using identity politics, based upon a false narrative that you seem to agree with, to corrupt democracy and stay in power.       But the pendulum always swings, and a free thinking man such as myself will always look at the issues with an impartial and sceptical eye.     This is to see who is benefitting from lies and insanity, and to make up my mind as to which side of politics I should support.     

just_sayin

Bogan said:

@just_sayin

Just-sayin quote   So the logical conclusion of atheism is to believe that some races are inferior? 

 Aw, gee willackers, “open-minded”, you were the last person I would have thought would put words in my mouth?       Atheism is simply the denial of the supernatural world and it’s replacement by a concept called “science” which attempts to explain the world using logic, reason, experimentation, and plain common sense.      It is therefor reasonable to conclude that African descended people make superior runners and are better evolved to live in hot climates, where clothes are un necessary,  where chasing down game on hot African savannas is a survival imperative, along with a skin resistant to UV radiation.   It is also reasonable to conclude that whites and Asians are better evolved at living in much colder climates where clothing is necessary, and a skin more evolved to accept vitamin D from whatever areas of skin are exposed to the sun, is similarly a survival imperative.     If this makes tribal blacks “superior” in hot climates while whites and Asians are "superior" in cold climates, where food preservation and predicting growing seasons develops the brain, then that’s how the cookie crumbles.

 

Just-sayin quote      The Bible doesn't acknowledge any race, other than the human race.  It will recognize tribes, countries, religions, professions, and even different clothes types - but not races.      It says to treat everyone the same.  

 It would be helpful if God was a lot more specific.     But anyway, you can not point to any text in your scriptures which says that races are equal?     So, you just interpret various vague texts to mean what you want them to mean? 

 

Just-sayin quote   I am so disappointed that you would by into the debunked racist fallacy of genetic determinism - popularized and promoted by progressive Democrats. Progressive Democrats like Woodrow Wilson, who not so coincidently played the first motion picture at the white house - a fawning story about the KKK, embraced the racial hatred of genetic determinism from the book Hereditary Genius.  OH, he wasn't the only racist progressive to buy into such non-sense.  Genetic determinism using IQ tests to back their claims were touted by the presidents of Harvard, Yale, and Stanford, and by FDR also.  However to reach the racist conclusions that progressive Democrats claimed you had to omit lots of facts that went against their theory that Blacks were inferior.

 You are talking about a period in history when US cities were not being destroyed by “mostly peaceful” black rioters where 2 billion dollars of damage was done and 19 people killed?    And where black African population proportions within US cities had not ballooned to the extent that large areas of US cities are crime filled, welfare dependent, no go zones for whites?      Where home invasions, ram raids, car jackings, armed robberies, muggings, rapes, drive by murders, and organised gangs of shoplifters are even making the areas surrounding black ghettoes unfit for decent people to live, and where chain stores to prosper?          80 years of the progressive left claiming that Africans are equal to whites in terms of intelligence and temperament has seen US society in particular go south.     It is time for you to re assess what those old time Democrats were saying.   Maybe they were not as silly as you or Leo Terrell thought they were?

 I am not religious at all.   I can only submit to you the scientific fact that human behaviour just happens to be a product of nature and nurture.   Genetics plays an important role, as much in humans as it does in animals, and any year 10 student with triple digit IQ and a high school knowledge of genetics can easily understand that.

 

Just-sayin quote       For example, Army IQ tests where claimed by progressive Democrats to show that Black people were less intelligent.  In 1929, Blacks did have lower IQ scores than most whites and immigrants.  However, Children in the Blue Ridge Mountains had a range of 83.9 to 61.2 on the test, whereas the average Black child had an IQ of 85.  

In 1976 a study showed that Black children who were orphaned and raised by white parents had higher IQs than the national average.  Since genetics wasn't a factor, it seems obvious that environment played a key role.

The army IQ tests required knowing such things as the color of sapphires, the location of Cornell University, the profession of Alfred Noyes, and the city in which the Pierce Arrow Automobile was manufactured.  Why Black Americans or new immigrants would know these things is questionable.  In fact the IQ test pioneer, Carl Brighan said in 1930 that many of the immigrant men who had tested poorly in the 20's Army IQ test had now scored significantly higher and that the language issues had been a factor on the tests.  

Jews scored very low on the IQ tests in 1917, yet later, after generations in the states, the average IQ for Jews was above that of whites' in both the IQ tests and in college admissions tests..  This was obviously not genetic.

 You are claiming that IQ testing is inaccurate?    And you give examples from 1929 when IQ testing was in it’s infancy to “prove” that.       IQ testing today is not inaccurate, it is very accurate.  So accurate that the US military, the world’s most technologically advanced military, depends upon IQ tests to determine recruit suitability.   If IQ tests were inaccurate, the military, industry, and academia would not use them.     Universities in the USA use IQ tests called “SAT scores” to determine whether student candidates are intelligent enough to handle the very demanding STEM courses that universities offer.     This meant that black and Hispanic students were very seriously under represented in university admissions.     So, along came Affirmative Action, which was based upon a false premise that all races were equal, and which mandated racial quotas to “fix” the presumed inaccuracies of IQ testing.    All it did was to prove that IQ testing was right all along.     While some people from minorities are bright enough for university, most simply are not.     All they can do is attend rubbish courses like “black studies” or “gender studies” where passing the course is just a matter of toeing the left wing party line.    Then we wonder why universities today are populated by too many du-mbarses?    Who, if it was not for the compelling “need” for DEI officers in woke corporations, would be completely unemployable.    And as these woke corporations are discovering, having a bunch of low IQ mor-ons dictating who you should hire, or how you should promote your product, is sending them broke.     

 

Just sayin quote    The decisive blow against IQ tests demonstrating that Blacks are genetically inferior came with the research of Professor James R. Flynn of New Zealand who showed that Black IQ performance on tests had risen substantially, even beyond that of whites in a generation or two.  Even though Blacks were answering more and more questions right each year, the tests where adjusted to keep Black IQs hovering around 85 on average.  When comparing to what the scores in 2002 for Blacks would have been on the same tests of 1947-1948, the average Black score had risen to 104. 

 We live in a world where left wing zealots are now infesting our universities and using the authority of science to promote their wacky ideals.        Your example is exactly like saying that a man can be a woman, if he simply feels that way?     Which just happens to now be the official position of the American Medical Association.     Do you agree with the AMA?     Well, I don’t believe your left wing professor from New Zealand, either.

 

Just-sayin quote      Even the leading academic scholar researching the effect of genes on IQs, Professor Arthur R Jensen, of the University of California at Berkeley has repudiated the IQ celling conclusions pushed by progressive Democrats, and that IQ scores reflect more exposure to certain concepts and wealth influence.

 

Arthur Jenson was the Educational Psychologist who’s was given the task by the US Federal government to collate all of the findings of the lavishly funded state and federal education programs, which were supposedly going to prove that all it took to close the already widely known 15 point IQ gap between most whites and most blacks, was education and nutritious food,        Jensen’s conclusions was that every one of these well meaning programs failed.     He therefore opined that the problem MIGHT HAVE BEEN genetic.     That was all it took to have his lectures invaded by shouting leftists, his speaking at scientific meeting disrupted by bomb threats, he had to have a personal protection squad at his own university, and he had to move house to avoid the constant attacks upon his property and family.    Saying that races are not equal is very dangerous.     There a  lot of people who’s power, prestige, and jobs depend upon promoting this false narrative.   

 

Just sayin quote      Bogan, Bogan, Bogan,  you should know that anything that arose from progressive Democrats is wrong and racist.  Whether it was Democrats support of genetic determinism, eugenics, or DEI, they have always pushed immoral racist beliefs.  Put aside the racist beliefs.  Don't Democrat.

 Just-sayin   Just-sayin   Just sayin,   I have lived through a time when the Right was the Establishment, and they were the ones who corrupted democracy to suite their right wing mates.      I am now living at a time when it is the Left who are the Establishment, and they are the ones who are corrupting democracy to suite their left wing mates.      No side of politics has a monopoly on virtue.    Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.      Today it is the Leftists who are corrupt and power mad, and they are using identity politics, based upon a false narrative that you seem to agree with, to corrupt democracy and stay in power.       But the pendulum always swings, and a free thinking man such as myself will always look at the issues with an impartial and sceptical eye.     This is to see who is benefitting from lies and insanity, and to make up my mind as to which side of politics I should support.     

Bogie,
I quoted to you the same Bible verses I did @Dreamer when I was making the point that the Bible says it is wrong to treat people differently:

Those who show favoritism aren't good; - Proverbs 28:21
But if you show favoritism, you sin  - James 2:9
For God does not show favoritism. - Romans 2:11
Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to the poor or favoritism to the great, but judge your neighbor fairly - Lev. 19:15

This suggests, that people should be treated the same, because they fundamentally are the same.  

i debunked the progressive Democrat argument that IQ tests shows Blacks are mentally inferior by pointing out evidence that spans over 100 years.  I can continue.  I can point out to you that the average Black IQ in the US is higher than the average IQ of states like Mississippi, Kentucky, Tennessee, West Virginia and South Carolina.  If white IQs should be higher, those states should have higher IQs that the average Black person.  How many Black people do you think live in West Virginia?  As I said before, the progressive's racist lie is debunked when you look at all of the available evidence.  Does it surprise you that the whole idea of genetic determinism and that IQ tests show Blacks are inferior comes from elite progressives in the Democrat party?  It didn't me.  You should reconsider accepting things that Democrat's proclaimed as truth.  The Democrat party has always preached a very racist dogma.   They still are today.  The color of whom they are discriminating against may change, but the racist belief system remains the same. Don't be a Democrat, be a good person instead.

Bogan

 @just_sayinHi Just sayin      I demolished every one of your arguments at length, point by point.     I was interested in how you would respond, point by point.     Instead, all you did was highlight my entire post before you did something strange.     After claiming that IQ tests were inaccurate, you submitted IQ tests which “proved” that blacks were just as smart as whites.   That is a contradiction.     Now, if whites, blacks and Asians all have equal intelligence, then there should be equal outcomes in life, right?     And since they do not have equal outcomes, then the neo-Marxists who hate your religion must be right?  You can not claim that AA is wrong, and then claim that the neo-Marxist ideology which justifies AA is wrong.  

  Affirmative Action advocates believe what you do.      They think that all races are equal, and if IQ testing proves them wrong, then IQ testing is wrong.     This supposed “wrong” can only be rectified by the justified use of racial quotas to supposedly mitigate the effects of a biased and flawed IQ testing system.     Now, for 40 years the people who claim that races are equal in terms of IQ had their chance to prove to the world, using AA, that they were right.     But 40 years of Affirmative Action only proved that the IQ tests were right all along.  

Now, there are only two racist explanations as to why different races have generally widely different life outcomes.   (unless you can dream up a third)  That is 
 1.    That the dysfunctional races are the victims of white oppression and white discrimination.            
  2.    That races differ in physical, mental, and temperamental qualities.  Okay, you reject option 2?     So, you must therefore support the Christian hating, neo-Marxist idea that it is all the white guys fault that some ethnicities are always a pain in the butte?    Are you not therefore “favouring” the dysfunctional races by disfavouring the white race?     

just_sayin

Bogan said:

 @just_sayinHi Just sayin      I demolished every one of your arguments at length, point by point.     I was interested in how you would respond, point by point.     Instead, all you did was highlight my entire post before you did something strange.     After claiming that IQ tests were inaccurate, you submitted IQ tests which “proved” that blacks were just as smart as whites.   That is a contradiction.     Now, if whites, blacks and Asians all have equal intelligence, then there should be equal outcomes in life, right?     And since they do not have equal outcomes, then the neo-Marxists who hate your religion must be right?  You can not claim that AA is wrong, and then claim that the neo-Marxist ideology which justifies AA is wrong.  

  Affirmative Action advocates believe what you do.      They think that all races are equal, and if IQ testing proves them wrong, then IQ testing is wrong.     This supposed “wrong” can only be rectified by the justified use of racial quotas to supposedly mitigate the effects of a biased and flawed IQ testing system.     Now, for 40 years the people who claim that races are equal in terms of IQ had their chance to prove to the world, using AA, that they were right.     But 40 years of Affirmative Action only proved that the IQ tests were right all along.  

Now, there are only two racist explanations as to why different races have generally widely different life outcomes.   (unless you can dream up a third)  That is 
 1.    That the dysfunctional races are the victims of white oppression and white discrimination.            
  2.    That races differ in physical, mental, and temperamental qualities.  Okay, you reject option 2?     So, you must therefore support the Christian hating, neo-Marxist idea that it is all the white guys fault that some ethnicities are always a pain in the butte?    Are you not therefore “favouring” the dysfunctional races by disfavouring the white race?     

You are kinda slow to grasp things, Bogie.  That kind of low performance on an IQ test would have progressive Democrats labeling the entire country of Australia as genetically inferior.  Again, I mention the IQ tests, because if you examine all of the data, and don't pick and choose, you see that the conclusion that Blacks and Australians are genetically inferior is not true.  If whites were genetically inferior, then why would mostly white states in the US have lower average IQs than the average Black person?  Answer - they wouldn't.  

IQ tests aren't measuring genetics.  Many different learning concepts are being measured, and one's exposure to these concepts and practice of them, greatly influence IQ scores.  If you think I'm wrong, Let's go back to those states that don't score as well on IQ tests, like Tennessee use to.  If a white child took those tests her average score in Tennessee was about 106 at 6 years old.  But when she takes the IQ test at 16-18, the average score is 80.  Now did some genetic thing kick in?  No, it did not.  The questions for a 6 year old showed that most 6 year olds in Tennessee had been exposed enough to the concepts in that IQ test to do above average, whereas the tests for the 16-18 year olds, which had much lower scores, showed they were not as exposed to the concepts covered in the IQ tests for that age group.  

The mistake you and progressive Democrats made is that IQ tests are not really measuring genetic determinism.  People like @Dreamer mistakenly think that people's outcomes should all be equal, but fail to understand that experiences, choices, change, and even chromosomes can impact outcomes (but I'm not talking about Black genes and white genes - I'm more talking about where someone is born without the use of a body part functioning the way it does for others).  The reason why inner city Black kids and poor white Appalachian kids do poorly isn't because they have bad genes - but because of the environment, choices, and experiences they have.  Kids in the mountains often come from 1 parent homes.  That means they are poorer, have less supervision, are talked to less, have less academic encouragement, less advanced educational opportunities, less exposure to things like libraries, etc, and most of their friends have the same limited experiences.  

As a Black Christian pastor once put it - 'The greatest obstacle that a black child faces to be a success, is not the presence of the white man, but the absence of the Black father.'  Now certainly past choices and actions of others have an impact on where someone starts, and no one can help where they start in life.  I do believe that our choices and environment can either help us towards success or harm us.  A lot of SJWs and DEI supporters refuse to acknowledge this.  They see Blacks as permanent victims and without any agency to change their situation.  To me this is a vile belief that harms Black children.

Bogan

Just-sayin quote   You are kinda slow to grasp things, Bogie. 

That cuts to the quick, just-sayin,    I am shocked and deeply hurt.    I thought we were friends?

 

Just-sayin quote       That kind of low performance on an IQ test would have progressive Democrats labeling the entire country of Australia as genetically inferior. 

I have absolutely no idea what you mean by that statement, or how it ever got into your head?

 

Just-sayin quote    Again, I mention the IQ tests, because if you examine all of the data, and don't pick and choose, you see that the conclusion that Blacks and Australians are genetically inferior is not true.  If whites were genetically inferior, then why would mostly white states in the US have lower average IQs than the average Black person?  Answer - they wouldn't. 

 Right beside my chair is my copy of “The Bell Curve”, which I think is the most important scientific work since “Origin of Species.”      It collates 60 years of IQ testing in 650 pages, and comes to certain conclusions.     It would never have been a contentious book at all had not the authors included one chapter on the IQ testing of races. (which, like Darwin, they had agonised over prior to publication,)        The authors clearly showed that 60 years of IQ testing clearly displayed that some races have very different “Bell Curves” of IQ.     Like Origin of Species, this fact set of firestorm of opposition from all sorts of people who like the Creationists before “Origin of Species”, saw the “Bell curve” book a direct threat to their neo-Marxist and even Christian humanitarian views.    

That some ethnicities have bell curves of IQ much lower than others is so screamingly obvious that one wonders why there is anyone with triple digit IQ that would even bother to doubt it all?    It precisely explains the stratification of western societies, and it also precisely explains why some ethnicities can never prosper in western society.   It even explains why the homelands of some dysfunctional minorities are completely dysfunctional and dependent upon UN welfare as well.  Especially after the dummies tossed out the smart “colonial oppressors” who were feeding them and keeping their nations economically viable.    And it does so without inventing a completely new racist ideology blaming the benefactors of the dysfunctional races for being the cause of their own dysfunction.

Just-sayin quote      IQ tests aren't measuring genetics. 

Wrong.  Intelligence can be heritable.     Smart people usually (but not always) have smart offspring.     People with low IQ probably never have high IQ offspring.   Interestingly, the working class with the mean IQ of 100 can sometimes have very high IQ offspring.    Bookbinder scientist Humphry Davies and town carpenter and clockmaker John Harrison (who solved the problem of Longitude) are examples of this.      Violent behaviour can also be heritable.     This is even summed up in the western folk saying “The fruit does not fall far from the tree.”

 

Just-sayin quote       Many different learning concepts are being measured, and one's exposure to these concepts and practice of them, greatly influence IQ scores.  If you think I'm wrong, Let's go back to those states that don't score as well on IQ tests, like Tennessee use to.  If a white child took those tests her average score in Tennessee was about 106 at 6 years old.  But when she takes the IQ test at 16-18, the average score is 80.  Now did some genetic thing kick in?  No, it did not.  The questions for a 6 year old showed that most 6 year olds in Tennessee had been exposed enough to the concepts in that IQ test to do above average, whereas the tests for the 16-18 year olds, which had much lower scores, showed they were not as exposed to the concepts covered in the IQ tests for that age group.  

 I have no idea who put these odd claims of IQ tests being inaccurate into your head?     If modern IQ tests are inaccurate, then why does the US military, business, and universities still use them to assess candidate suitability for recruitment?    Your claim makes no sense.   They must be accurate or these institutions would have discarded them long ago.   What makes a lot of sense, is that the usual stratification of social classes seen in western societies today, is easily explained by an understanding that some races are generally smart, and some races generally not smart.  And you don’t need to be a Mensa from the local Audubon society to figure that out.  

 

Just-sayin quote       The mistake you and progressive Democrats made is that IQ tests are not really measuring genetic determinism. 

If IQ tests reveal that certain dysfunctional ethnicities generally have low bell curves of IQ, then unfortunately, that does reinforce the notion that genetic determinism just happens to be a sad fact of life.      “May the truth be told, though the heavens may fall”.    Although, a smart person who can think would not condemn an entire dysfunctional group of people as being entirely dysfunctional.   They would concede that some people from dysfunctional ethnicities can be outliers to the norm.

 

Just-sayin quote     People like @Dreamer mistakenly think that people's outcomes should all be equal, but fail to understand that experiences, choices, change, and even chromosomes can impact outcomes (but I'm not talking about Black genes and white genes - I'm more talking about where someone is born without the use of a body part functioning the way it does for others). 

 Dreamer is a left wing ideologue who could not debate his way out of a wet paper bag.     He can not think.    All he can do is provide links, which is his substitute for thinking.   Like you, he is a racist because he thinks that everything that went wrong with the dysfunctional races must be all the fault of the white guys.    Dreamer has low IQ, but you have high IQ.   You should know better.    All I need to do, is to get you to think past your religious and overly humanitarian ideology, to get you thinking straight.  You are salvageable, because despite the religious mental barriers on your thinking, you still know how to think. 

 

Just-sayin quote      The reason why inner city Black kids and poor white Appalachian kids do poorly isn't because they have bad genes - but because of the environment, choices, and experiences they have.  Kids in the mountains often come from 1 parent homes.  That means they are poorer, have less supervision, are talked to less, have less academic encouragement, less advanced educational opportunities, less exposure to things like libraries, etc, and most of their friends have the same limited experiences.

 You keep bringing up “Appalachian people” because you say that you come from there.    I can not comment about the situation within Appalachia because the only information that I have come across about that area, was from a book on Criminology.     This book claimed that poverty was only tangentially linked to crime, and it gave pre Methamphetamine Appalachia as an example of that.     It said that Appalachia was full of very poor people with good social principles, and as such it had the lowest arrest rate, the lowest proportion of police officers to population, and the lowest incarceration rate of all of the poor areas of the USA.    Economically depressed areas of any nation may have poor areas with poor schooling, and poor economic outcomes.    But that does not mean that the people who live there are du-mb.

 

Just-sayin quote      As a Black Christian pastor once put it - 'The greatest obstacle that a black child faces to be a success, is not the presence of the white man, but the absence of the Black father.' 

Next to the Jews, the smartest race are the Asians.   Who, despite many of them not being Christian, have high rates of legal marriage, very low rates of child illegitimacy, low rates of divorce, and low rates of single parent households.   This is the opposite of black Americans.      Black American fathers typically abandon their parental responsibilities to their numerous “illegitimate” children to the state, a state they even blame for their own shortcomings.    Their behaviour is not the behaviour of intelligent people, is it?

 

Just-sayin quote     Now certainly past choices and actions of others have an impact on where someone starts, and no one can help where they start in life. 

Here in Australia, a lot of Vietnamese came to Australia with nothing other than the clothes on their backs.   Initially, there was a lot of serious violent criminal activity in “Vietnamese” enclaves within Australian cities.     But within ten years, these industrious and intelligent Asians began opening small businesses like bread and pastry shops, car repair shops, and they joined the lower middle class.     Vietnamese kids initially did badly at school owing to the language difficulties.      But only last week in New South Wales, a Vietnamese 18 year old from a refugee family topped the state in mathematics.     Meanwhile, in the “troubled” (which is leftist speak for suburbs with high Muslim and African populations) educational attainment is abysmal and teachers prefer to resign from their careers rather than teach these violent, disrespectful, and du-mb kids.   Some teacher’s cars get vandalised at school, other teachers attacked with weapons, not just by students, but their parents as well.   Others are followed home where they are subjected to rocks being thrown through their windows at night.     Not the behaviour of smart people, is it?

Just-sayin quote       I do believe that our choices and environment can either help us towards success or harm us.  A lot of SJWs and DEI supporters refuse to acknowledge this.  They see Blacks as permanent victims and without any agency to change their situation. 

 Your problem is, that because of your overly humanitarian religious ideology, your thinking is very much in accord with SJWs and DEI supporters.     In both cases, the only explanation you can provide for minority dysfunction is “it’s all the white guys fault.”     But smart people do well in western life and du-mb people do not.   That is a sad fact of life.     Trying to engage in mental gymnastics to try and prove that everybody is equal is a pointless and even an impossible exercise.     Even smart contributors on Debate Island who claim that races are equal, will not submit any reasoned argument that will supposedly “prove” their case.  Instead, they will engage in deceptive and evasive behaviour to avoid justifying their own positions.   You are different, because you are smart and honest, and I salute you for that.

  In order to solve any problem, you first have to realise and admit what the problem is.       The history of the human race shows us that human beings can always be relied upon to think logically and rationally, after every one of their ideologically programmed ideas have failed miserably, to the point that they just have to admit that their cherished ideology is wrong.     The western world is now at the tipping point.    We can go on pretending that everybody is equal, and keep importing un assimilable and dysfunctional people into our societies, in which case our civilization is going to collapse again, like it did 1600 years ago.  Or, we can start thinking straight and realise that importing low IQ people into our society which desperately needs high IQ people to function, is irrational and detrimental to our own people’s prosperity and well being. 

Just-sayin quote  To me this is a vile belief that harms Black children.

So is lying to them and claiming that since everybody is equal, then the only possible reason for black dysfunction is because the white race is keeping them down.     This creates a hatred for white people and it also encourages serious criminal behaviour towards a white society that subsidizes them, and which they still believe  is intrinsically racist and evil     And therefore robbing, raping, mugging, car jacking, home burglary, rioting, and burning down everything's is an entirely justified behaviour by the "oppressed" towards  the "oppressors."

just_sayin

@Bogan
I have no idea who put these odd claims of IQ tests being inaccurate into your head?     If modern IQ tests are inaccurate, then why does the US military, business, and universities still use them to assess candidate suitability for recruitment?    Your claim makes no sense.   They must be accurate or these institutions would have discarded them long ago.   What makes a lot of sense, is that the usual stratification of social classes seen in western societies today, is easily explained by an understanding that some races are generally smart, and some races generally not smart.  And you don’t need to be a Mensa from the local Audubon society to figure that out.  

If the tests really measured genetic acumen then Tennessee 6 year olds should have the same basic IQs when they are 16-18.  Instead, according to the IQ tests, the kids start off above average and then drop to below average.  Since their genes didn't change, how come they got dumber?  If the test is just measuring genetics, then the scores should be the same.  I.E. - the tests are not measuring race or genetics, but measuring problem solving, which is dependent upon exposure to concepts and ideas.  

It is just progressive Democrat nonsense to say intelligence is genetic.  The genes that affect skills like reading, math, and abstract reasoning.   Don't fall into the progressive Democrat racist trap.

Wrong.  Intelligence can be heritable.     Smart people usually (but not always) have smart offspring.     People with low IQ probably never have high IQ offspring.   Interestingly, the working class with the mean IQ of 100 can sometimes have very high IQ offspring.    Bookbinder scientist Humphry Davies and town carpenter and clockmaker John Harrison (who solved the problem of Longitude) are examples of this.      Violent behaviour can also be heritable.     This is even summed up in the western folk saying “The fruit does not fall far from the tree.”

As I mentioned before, studies show that Black orphaned kids raised by white parents have much higher IQs than the average Black child.  It isn't about inherited intelligence as that evidence shows.  Parents and environment do play a role.  Just growing up in a 2 parent home 

Children Raised By Two Parents Are Smarter Than Those From Single-Parent Households

That fact explains some of why Blacks and Appalachian kids have average lower scores.  Other factors are wealth, the quality of education, access to learning tools, and social structures that either promote or discourage learning.  For example, Whites on average study twice the time that Black kids do.  And Asians study a third more than white students.  

@Dreamer is a left wing ideologue who could not debate his way out of a wet paper bag.     He can not think.    All he can do is provide links, which is his substitute for thinking.   Like you, he is a racist because he thinks that everything that went wrong with the dysfunctional races must be all the fault of the white guys.    Dreamer has low IQ, but you have high IQ.   You should know better.    All I need to do, is to get you to think past your religious and overly humanitarian ideology, to get you thinking straight.  You are salvageable, because despite the religious mental barriers on your thinking, you still know how to think. 

 Your problem is, that because of your overly humanitarian religious ideology, your thinking is very much in accord with SJWs and DEI supporters.     In both cases, the only explanation you can provide for minority dysfunction is “it’s all the white guys fault.”  

First, I like Dreamer and think he is a product of his school environment.  I don't think he has a low IQ and I have no idea what my IQ is.  Dreamer and I probably would agree that where one starts can affect where one ends up.  I don't think that it is deterministic though.  I believe that people can make choices that will either help them or harm them.  I think Dreamer would say the same.

I do not think that the oppressor/victim belief system is moral or helpful.  it is immoral to assume that someone is an oppressor, just because of their race.  True justice is about justice for each individual, while so much of SJW stuff and DEI is only focused on justice for groups, therefore it rationalizes racism against individuals of groups it disfavors.  This view is a perversion of justice because it dehumanizes the individual and makes them an automaton of their group.  Therefore, blaming people today for slavery is immoral.  Asking someone today, who has been discriminated against racist Affirmative Action policies because they are white, to pay reparations, because they are white is also immoral.  No one is responsible for the sins of someone else, even if they share the same race.  I think Dreamer, if he thought about it, could recognize this.  I think he sees his racism as benevolent racism.  I'm sure it is well intentioned, but even well-intentioned racism is racism.  Telling a Black child that they will always be a victim to their oppressor, does not lift that child out of poverty, but it may certainly keep her there.  

I think discussions of whose fault are invalid.  My Appalachian family will tell you how their property rights were violated by coal mine owners and the government.  They will talk about how some were forced to work in the mines during WWII due to government mandate against their will.  The problem with this is simple, and I hope Dreamer gets this - as long as you see yourself the victim, your situation can never change.  A victim by definition is not responsible for their situation.  If you aren't responsible for your situation, then you can't do anything to change it.  This is flawed logic.  While I can't change my past.  I do have agency to make choices that will change my future.

Bogan

 

Just-sayin quote         If the tests really measured genetic acumen then Tennessee 6 year olds should have the same basic IQs when they are 16-18.  Instead, according to the IQ tests, the kids start off above average and then drop to below average.  Since their genes didn't change, how come they got dumber?  If the test is just measuring genetics, then the scores should be the same.  I.E. - the tests are not measuring race or genetics, but measuring problem solving, which is dependent upon exposure to concepts and ideas.    

 I have never heard of these tests of Oklahoman children which supposedly “proved” no link between genetics and IQ.   But I do know that science today is full of neo Marxist ideologues who have no shame at all in using pseudo science to advance their left wing social agenda.     That genetics and IQ are linked is proven by the already widely known phenomenon of child prodigies.    Mozart taught himself to play the piano so well at aged 5 that he even wrote his first concerto at the same age.      Handel’s father was aghast at the musical talent of his son, because he wanted the boy to study law.    He forbade Handal from owning or having any contact with musical instruments, so Handal as a boy invented and made his own instruments     There have been child Chess Grand Masters and children who have attained degrees from prestigious universities at very young ages.   One British 13 year old girl scored a First in Mathematics from Oxford university in 1937.  

 The one common aspect of child prodigies is that they all have an insatiable need to acquire knowledge, which they can soak up like sponges and can memorise like a Cray supercomputer.        Since some child prodigies have had their natural talents suppressed by their parents, especially during the 17th and 18th centuries, because the societal expectations of young females in particular was as wives and mothers.  But they were so smart that even lacking basic education, they usually overcame every societal obstacle and went on to excel anyway      There is no other explanation for child prodigies than genetics.

 

  Just-sayin quote      It is just progressive Democrat nonsense to say intelligence is genetic.  The genes that affect skills like reading, math, and abstract reasoning.   Don't fall into the progressive Democrat racist trap.

 Actually, it is Marxist progressive nonsense to claim that genetics has nothing to do with IQ, and that all human behaviour is learned.       At the beginning of the 20th century, Psychology, Psychiatry, and Sociology were still in their infancy.       In Psychology, (the study of how people think) there were at least half a dozen “schools of thought” claiming to understand how the mind worked.    The most influential was leftist BV Skinner’s “Behavioural School”, which claimed that genetics had absolutely nothing to do with human behaviour.    Every human baby at birth was a blank cheque, which with the right schooling could be educated to become whatever society wanted it to be.      Every baby from every race and every class had the potential to be a Newton, a Mozart,  or a Leonardo.     This left wing academic ideology even became part of popular culture.   Noted Socialist George Bernard Shaw wrote the book “Pygmalion” (My Fair Lady) in which the storyline completely rejected the idea of intrinsic class differences.     You could get any East End flower girl off the streets of London, buy her a new dress, get Rex Harrison to give her elocution lessons, and it would be impossible to tell her apart from a Bohemian princess.

 The ”Behavioural” School was the dominant school until the 1950’s when a growing chorus of heretics claimed that the evidence for a genetic component of human behaviour was just too overwhelming to ignore.   They created the “Cognitive School” which claimed that both nature and nurture (genetics and social learning) were both important factors in understanding human behaviour.     But the old socialist (and perhaps Christian) idea that everybody was identical in every way, persisted.      Behaviourists got their chance to prove that they were right when in the early 1960’s, US state and Federal governments funded the ambitious “Headstart” programs which would supposedly close the already known 15 point IQ gap between black and white students.     Enthusiastic teachers were recruited to prove the racists were wrong.     The only things it proved was that the racists were right.    And that some people so overwhelmingly believed in the equality of man, that they were willing to fudge the scientific data to prove that the gap could be closed by quality education and the giving away of free, nutritious food to black students.   One educator who claimed that he had closed the 15 point gap (dubbed The Miracle in Milwaukee”) by the press, was jailed when fascinated scientific investigators checked his records and discovered his falsehoods.

 Then along came Affirmative Action, which was also going to prove that IQ and race were not linked.     While protractors admitted that selecting students on their skin colour was racist, that this would soon go away.    It was claimed that  that IQ tests were inaccurate because they discriminated against blacks and Hispanics.     After a few short decades, they announced,  the proportion of Africans and Hispanics in high status scientific and technological positions would equal their population proportions in the general population.    Naturally this did not happen, because IQ tests are accurate and they do show that races have unequal bell curves of IQ.      How many times does something have to fail before well meaning people like your good self realise that their humanitarian ideals are just a well meaning fantasy? 

 This idea that “education solves everything” is even failing in Australia.   In the Northern Territory, 66% of the education budget goes to 33% of students who identify as “aboriginal”, for a 90% failure rate in NAPLAN testing.    The solution, say the socialists?    “More money, more money, more money, to “close the gap” which never closes.     The thing that you have to get through your head, my dear “just sayin”, is that a lot of corrupt people know that aboriginal children are too du-mb to educate, but they know how to use guilt upon well meaning people like your good self to always increase government funding for dysfunctional people, with the sure knowledge that a lot of that money is going to stick to the palms of the socialist activists.    And you are indirectly helping these charlatans and crooks if you keep claiming that everybody is equal, and refuse to acknowledge that races are different.

 Just-sayin quote      As I mentioned before, studies show that Black orphaned kids raised by white parents have much higher IQs than the average Black child.  It isn't about inherited intelligence as that evidence shows.  Parents and environment do play a role.  Just growing up in a 2 parent home 

 Could you give me the name of this “study?”     My presumption is, that you have read this from some Leftist or Christian web site and you have never checked it because you do not want to know if it is correct?    I think that this is just pseudo science because it just does not make any sense, and it goes against everything I have learned from my extensive reading on this topic.

 

Just sayin quote      Children Raised By Two Parents Are Smarter Than Those From Single-Parent Households.   That  fact explains some of why Blacks and Appalachian kids have average lower scores. 

  I have already addressed this point.   Asians are the second most intelligent races around and they have low rates of illegitimate children, divorce, and single parent households.    I would put my neck out and say that regardless of race, intelligent couples are more likely to nurture their children, socialise their children to have mature emotional responses, are the least likely to divorce, which would result in single parent households.   Intelligent parents usually have intelligent children.     Implying that having two parent family is itself the cause of high IQ among children is misrepresenting data.        

 

Just-sayin quote    Other factors are wealth, the quality of education, access to learning tools, and social structures that either promote or discourage learning.  For example, Whites on average study twice the time that Black kids do.  And Asians study a third more than white students.  

 Okay, Asians are smart, so they study more than whites, who are smarter than blacks, who study a lot less than whites.

Just-sayin quote  First, I like Dreamer and think he is a product of his school environment. 

I think he is an id-iot because he acts like an id-iot, and he believes in what only an id-iot can believe.     And he is now hanging round and nodding sagely with those arch id-iots Dee, Barnadot,  jack, and Openminded.       You can tell a lot about a person’s character by the company they keep.

 

Just-sayin quote         I don't think he has a low IQ and I have no idea what my IQ is. 

Any person who believes in something that he can not even justify to himself, and who comes onto a debate site with a superior air, thinking that all he has to do to “debate” is submit links and say “so there”, obviously has trouble synapsing his neuronal pathways.

 

Just-sayin quote       Dreamer and I probably would agree that where one starts can affect where one ends up.  I don't think that it is deterministic though.  I believe that people can make choices that will either help them or harm them.  I think Dreamer would say the same.

 That would depend upon Dreamer being able to locate a site which can do his thinking for him.

 

Just-sayin quote  I do not think that the oppressor/victim belief system is moral or helpful.  it is immoral to assume that someone is an oppressor, just because of their race.  True justice is about justice for each individual, while so much of SJW stuff and DEI is only focused on justice for groups, therefore it rationalizes racism against individuals of groups it disfavors.  This view is a perversion of justice because it dehumanizes the individual and makes them an automaton of their group.  Therefore, blaming people today for slavery is immoral.  Asking someone today, who has been discriminated against racist Affirmative Action policies because they are white, to pay reparations, because they are white is also immoral.  No one is responsible for the sins of someone else, even if they share the same race.  I think Dreamer, if he thought about it, could recognize this.  I think he sees his racism as benevolent racism.  I'm sure it is well intentioned, but even well-intentioned racism is racism.  Telling a Black child that they will always be a victim to their oppressor, does not lift that child out of poverty, but it may certainly keep her there. 

 Yair, but you see, that there are only two possible explanations for why some ethnicities are always dysfunctional.   The Neo-Marxists claim it is because of white people oppress the dysfunctional people.    So, while you may disagree with the neo-Marxists on that point, you are still supporting their argument because you refuse to accept the only other alternative.   

 

Just-sayin quote       I think discussions of whose fault are invalid.  My Appalachian family will tell you how their property rights were violated by coal mine owners and the government.  They will talk about how some were forced to work in the mines during WWII due to government mandate against their will.  The problem with this is simple, and I hope Dreamer gets this - as long as you see yourself the victim, your situation can never change.  A victim by definition is not responsible for their situation.  If you aren't responsible for your situation, then you can't do anything to change it.  This is flawed logic.  While I can't change my past.  I do have agency to make choices that will change my future

 Okay, so you want them to accept that they are not the victims?    Then since you reject the idea that races have different bell curves of intelligence, then the onus is upon YOU to think up a third explanation for the reason why some ethnicities are always dysfunctional.     If you can’t do that, then you have to either agree with the oppressor/oppressed explanation put forth by the neo-Marxists who hate Christianity, or admit that the racists are right.      Food for thought.   Bon appetite. 

just_sayin

@Bogan
Could you give me the name of this “study?”     My presumption is, that you have read this from some Leftist or Christian web site and you have never checked it because you do not want to know if it is correct?    I think that this is just pseudo science because it just does not make any sense, and it goes against everything I have learned from my extensive reading on this topic.

I'm always happy to provide references.  The study is:

Sandra Scarr and Richard A. Weinsberg, "IQ Test Performance of Black Children Adopted by White Families," American Psychological (October 1976), pp. 726 -739.

I did not find it on a leftist or Christian website, but in Thomas Sowell's new book, Social Justice Fallacies (ch 2 - pgs 29 -47).  He traces the history of genetic determinism being pushed by progressive Democrats and makes the historical and philosophical connections on how it morphed into the beliefs in DEI and SJW ideology.  

Yair, but you see, that there are only two possible explanations for why some ethnicities are always dysfunctional.   The Neo-Marxists claim it is because of white people oppress the dysfunctional people.    So, while you may disagree with the neo-Marxists on that point, you are still supporting their argument because you refuse to accept the only other alternative.   

I believe there are more than 2 options than Blacks are born genetically inferior or that its the white man's fault.  I believe that for the same reasons that white people vary, or that even identical twins vary, and have different outcomes, that other groups have different outcomes also - chance, environment, choices, and even chromosomes (I'm talking about people with deformities).  So I reject the idea that I have to either say it is genetics or whiteness that is to blame.  

Bogan

@just_sayin

Just-sayin quote   I'm always happy to provide references.  The study is:      Sandra Scarr and Richard A. Weinsberg, "IQ Test Performance of Black Children Adopted by White Families," American Psychological (October 1976), pp. 726 -739    I did not find it on a leftist or Christian website, but in Thomas Sowell's new book, Social Justice Fallacies (ch 2 - pgs 29 -47).  He traces the history of genetic determinism being pushed by progressive Democrats and makes the historical and philosophical connections on how it morphed into the beliefs in DEI and SJW ideology. 

 I like Thomas Sowell and have watched his video’s on Youtube.      One of my fantasies is meeting a person like Thomas Sowell,  Candace Owen, or Ben Shapiro, and sitting down with them to discuss current events over a meal, or a cup of coffee.   I agree with most things that Thomas says, but I disagree with his conclusions about genetic determinism.   Thank you for giving me the name of the study that you submitted, at least it proves that it exists.     But I will take it’s findings with a grain of salt, since it’s findings are diametrically opposed to the sources that I have studied.

 One aspect of IQ that I have only mentioned in passing, is that IQ scores can be improved by education and by being forced to live and think within a complex society, where the need to use your brains to deal with complex tasks on a day to day basis, “exercises” the mind in the same way that a weightlifter improves his upper body strength by continually lifting weights.     When the whole idea of IQ testing was thought up, researchers needed a standard to guide them, in the same way that other scientists needed standard weights and temperatures to test their ideas.     This was arbitrarily assigned as the mean IQ score for white people in the USA (where most of this research was being done), which was set as the standard of 100.     In the last 90 years, mean white IQ has increased to 103.   Which just goes to show that brains can and do evolve over succeeding generations. 

  Other triple digit IQ debaters that I have debated against, have claimed that black IQ’s are increasing at an even greater rate than for whites, because they are coming from a much lower base.     I have never been able to confirm that, but I accept that it is true because it conforms to my understanding of why some races and ethnicities are smarter than others.     I accept that in maybe 100?  200?  500? 5000? years, that those races with  measurably low IQ may eventually achieve parity with whites, Asians and Jews., as their brains evolve and each generation passes on it’s genetic evolution to the succeeding generation.       But what we are talking about is the here and now.     Good education and good parents, who insist that their offspring study hard, can improve IQ.     But no amount of nutritious food or hard studying can turn a kid with a very low IQ into a Mensa.

 

Just-sayin quote   I believe there are more than 2 options than Blacks are born genetically inferior or that its the white man's fault. 

That is very easy to say, but the onus is therefore upon YOU to come up with a viable alterative explanation as to why the same ethnicities are always dysfunctional, within not only every western society that they inhabit, but within their own homelands as well.   I am sure that this is impossible.   So, what is left, is for you to choose between the only two social theories which adequately explain this.      Do you prefer the devil, or the deep blue sea? 

 

Just-sayin quote    I believe that for the same reasons that white people vary, or that even identical twins vary, and have different outcomes, that other groups have different outcomes also - chance, environment, choices, and even chromosomes (I'm talking about people with deformities).  So I reject the idea that I have to either say it is genetics or whiteness that is to blame.  

 “Belief” is a real problem.   Just like belief in a supernatural, it is just a belief.     It has no basis in reality, no matter what flimsy bits of data you can find which supports your position that genetics plays no part in human intelligence.     The reason why the white race rocketed ahead of all other races in term of technology and social development, (even though our IQ’s are lower than Asians), is because we stopped simply “believing” and realised that we had to justify our beliefs with cold, hard, facts.    And also to rely on our beliefs only where they were testable and repeatable with the same outcomes.     

MayCaesar

just_sayin said:

Democratic Boston Mayor, Michelle Wu, threw a 'Electeds of Color Holiday Party', which invitations were sent out electronically threw her government email.  She also sent them to the white council members and then told these white people.  She then explained it wasn't suppose to be sent to white people.  Now, she can as a citizen have any party she wants, but it is inappropriate to have a no-whites Christmas Party and use government resources for it.  

This reminds me of how I got into a bit of trouble at my university. Someone asked me to sign something in support of a statement from the Women's Mathematical Society. I objected by saying that I am not a woman, and they said, "It does not really matter, as long as you support the cause". Then I said that I do not support the cause: I do not believe in promoting interests of separate groups and would rather see People's Mathematical Society in place of that organization. They asked me, "Do you not believe that women face some discrimination in the mathematical circles?" I said, "They do, just like anyone does, and I do not think that their gender should matter". Then they said, "What can you possibly know about it? You are not a woman. Who are you to tell women whether their gender matters?"

I still have not quite understood how it works mathematically: that simultaneously I cannot have an opinion on this because I am not a woman, yet I can support this despite not being a woman... The "trouble" I mentioned though was the subsequent department-wide e-mail from the Dean emphasizing that, "despite certain individual voices, the department is committed to advocacy of the rights of women" (not the literal quote). The Dean happened to be lunching in the room in which the discussion took place.

just_sayin

MayCaesar said:

just_sayin said:

Democratic Boston Mayor, Michelle Wu, threw a 'Electeds of Color Holiday Party', which invitations were sent out electronically threw her government email.  She also sent them to the white council members and then told these white people.  She then explained it wasn't suppose to be sent to white people.  Now, she can as a citizen have any party she wants, but it is inappropriate to have a no-whites Christmas Party and use government resources for it.  

This reminds me of how I got into a bit of trouble at my university. Someone asked me to sign something in support of a statement from the Women's Mathematical Society. I objected by saying that I am not a woman, and they said, "It does not really matter, as long as you support the cause". Then I said that I do not support the cause: I do not believe in promoting interests of separate groups and would rather see People's Mathematical Society in place of that organization. They asked me, "Do you not believe that women face some discrimination in the mathematical circles?" I said, "They do, just like anyone does, and I do not think that their gender should matter". Then they said, "What can you possibly know about it? You are not a woman. Who are you to tell women whether their gender matters?"

I still have not quite understood how it works mathematically: that simultaneously I cannot have an opinion on this because I am not a woman, yet I can support this despite not being a woman... The "trouble" I mentioned though was the subsequent department-wide e-mail from the Dean emphasizing that, "despite certain individual voices, the department is committed to advocacy of the rights of women" (not the literal quote). The Dean happened to be lunching in the room in which the discussion took place.

So someone on the left took your words out of context and then demonized you?  This has never happened to you before?  

I would suspect that women are not discriminated against very often in applying for STEM jobs.  I would suggest the opposite is probably much more likely and true.  Because most women do not want to go into STEM, and there are so few of them, that when a female candidate comes around, leftists in charge of hiring want to virtue signal and will give her preferential treatment in the hiring process.  

MayCaesar

@just_sayin

Sure, having your views misrepresented is common - but I expected, of all people, mathematicians to be a little better at this. Then again, it is not uncommon for people to apply logic in certain domains of human knowledge and not apply it in other domains.

Regarding women and STEM jobs, I am not aware of any discrimination, or any substantial differences in people's ability to grasp the material and work in the field. I suppose men tend to be more ambitious career-wise in general, so if you look at the top of the top of the distribution of incomes, then it will be dominated by men - but when it comes to average STEM graduates, I do not notice any difference between the ability of people to do the job, or their expected compensation. 

The gender proportions also strongly depend on the particular field. In biostatistics women are actually the majority (~60%), while in mathematics they are the minority (~30%) - but the proportions heavily shift towards men when it comes to higher degrees (Masters and PhD). There is some effect resulting from it, where everyone (not just "leftists", mind you) wants to see more women around, so every female applicant for a PhD program has a natural advantage and gains a lot of attention - however, this effect is not significant, and the recent influx of female PhD applicants from China and India has pretty much wiped it out.

I suppose something needs to be pointed out: in STEM people, on average, tend to be more socially awkward than, say, in humanities: to be interested in STEM, a person must think more abstractly, and that tends to have negative impact on their ability to socialize. So if one is to look at all kinds of male creeps and weirdos who do not know how to behave around women, you will find a disproportionately high fraction of them in departments of mathematics, physics and computer science. And, as these things go, even one encounter with a creep/weirdo can leave a lasting impression. In this respect, I can see how a woman can feel a little less comfortable in STEM than a man.

just_sayin

MayCaesar said:

@just_sayin

Sure, having your views misrepresented is common - but I expected, of all people, mathematicians to be a little better at this. Then again, it is not uncommon for people to apply logic in certain domains of human knowledge and not apply it in other domains.

Regarding women and STEM jobs, I am not aware of any discrimination, or any substantial differences in people's ability to grasp the material and work in the field. I suppose men tend to be more ambitious career-wise in general, so if you look at the top of the top of the distribution of incomes, then it will be dominated by men - but when it comes to average STEM graduates, I do not notice any difference between the ability of people to do the job, or their expected compensation. 

The gender proportions also strongly depend on the particular field. In biostatistics women are actually the majority (~60%), while in mathematics they are the minority (~30%) - but the proportions heavily shift towards men when it comes to higher degrees (Masters and PhD). There is some effect resulting from it, where everyone (not just "leftists", mind you) wants to see more women around, so every female applicant for a PhD program has a natural advantage and gains a lot of attention - however, this effect is not significant, and the recent influx of female PhD applicants from China and India has pretty much wiped it out.

I suppose something needs to be pointed out: in STEM people, on average, tend to be more socially awkward than, say, in humanities: to be interested in STEM, a person must think more abstractly, and that tends to have negative impact on their ability to socialize. So if one is to look at all kinds of male creeps and weirdos who do not know how to behave around women, you will find a disproportionately high fraction of them in departments of mathematics, physics and computer science. And, as these things go, even one encounter with a creep/weirdo can leave a lasting impression. In this respect, I can see how a woman can feel a little less comfortable in STEM than a man.

I work in IT.  i am literally the token white guy on my team.  I understand that STEM people are socially awkward.  The amount of women teaching math related courses is higher than I would have thought.  Psychology Today says only 3 percent of mathematicians are women.   That's not a slam on women.  I feel anyone should be allowed to pursue their area of interest.  I think, if people are honest, there is nothing that keeps women from doing this.  The reality is that a plurality of women choose careers in fields where socialization and compassion are integral to the job.  It is where their interests lie.  You won't find many female coal miners or tree cutters, because those careers do not interest them as much.

I don't see actual barriers keeping women out of STEM.  Instead I see people able to pursue these fields if they want, but many women are not interested in them.

just_sayin

Wow.  Did you see what an all Democrat state court in Colorado did?  They are attempting to remove Trump from the ballot.  They claim he committed insurrection - but Trump has not only not been convicted of this, he has never been charged by a judicial court with this either.  To reach their conclusion, these Democrat judges had to try Trump in their minds and find him guilty without allowing him any defense.  This is rampant judicial activism at its worst.  Love or hate Trump, no one can be found guilty of something without a trial.  Unfortunately, leftists think that justice doesn't matter and they can do anything that helps their political agenda, even if it is a violation of law.  Again, the real danger to America is not MAGA, who wants laws to be followed, but leftists, who see the law as an obstacle to their agenda and are willing to disregard it to achieve their goals.

jack

just_sayin said:

Wow.  Did you see what an all Democrat state court in Colorado did?  They are attempting to remove Trump from the ballot.  They claim he committed insurrection - but Trump has not only not been convicted of this, he has never been charged by a judicial court with this either.

Hello just:

Words matter - especially words from the Constitution...  Here's sec 3 of the 14th Amendment...

... shall have ENGAGED in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.

In fact, the WORDS  say NOTHING about being convicted.  That would be NOTHING..  It says "engaged" not convicted.  They COULD have used the word "convicted", but they didn't..  I'm sure they knew the difference..  No??  

I posted the relevant words above.  You can read 'em yourself..  Do you really want to stand on your mis-reading of the 14th??  I guess so..   Therefore, it's up to me to correct you, and I DID.

excon

MayCaesar

just_sayin said:

I work in IT.  i am literally the token white guy on my team.  I understand that STEM people are socially awkward.  The amount of women teaching math related courses is higher than I would have thought.  Psychology Today says only 3 percent of mathematicians are women.   That's not a slam on women.  I feel anyone should be allowed to pursue their area of interest.  I think, if people are honest, there is nothing that keeps women from doing this.  The reality is that a plurality of women choose careers in fields where socialization and compassion are integral to the job.  It is where their interests lie.  You won't find many female coal miners or tree cutters, because those careers do not interest them as much.

I don't see actual barriers keeping women out of STEM.  Instead I see people able to pursue these fields if they want, but many women are not interested in them.

I think that it is more complicated than that. While it is true that men and women intrinsically have different biology and are going to be preferentially interested in different things, what we are interested in is also affected by our environment. For instance, my social circle in my teenage years made me want to become a scientist and work in academia - however, over time I realized that academia was very different from the idealized image of it I had, that of scientists meeting in a lab and excitedly exchanging their recent ideas... Real world academia involves a crazy amount of pointless paperwork and teaching, and the actual research mostly consists of sitting in a lonely office debugging your code, writing a paper, or (the worst part) reading other people's poorly written papers. I am not fit for that environment: I want to go out there and do things. And if my environment was different, chances are I would have taken a career path more optimal for me.

Part of the fact that there are disproportionately few women in mathematics, or physics, or engineering is a consequence of the environment telling women that these professions are not sexy. And since there is no strong tradition of women achieving immense success in these fields, there is no strong publicly accepted image of a successful female physicist or engineer. One of the top chess players in the world, Hikaru Nakamura, made this point about chess: in any decent school there will be a bunch of boys getting excited about chess, creating a chess club, playing in local team tournaments - and girls will typically not be invited in the club. So there is no easy point of entry for them to get interested in chess to begin with. Many girls who would enjoy chess tremendously and possibly achieve success in it never even have a chance to discover the game.

I do agree with you that there are no explicit barriers of entry that women have and men do not. But there are all kinds of other social factors that likely make their presence in these fields much smaller than what could be explained from purely biological standpoint. Then, again, the social factors can themselves be argued to be a consequence of biology, so...

In any case, my way of addressing it is to tackle a larger scale issue: the unnecessary importance of gender in many areas of life. Just as I told the person asking me to sign something in support of the Women's Mathematical Society, people should stop thinking that someone of their gender, or race, or sexuality, or any other category like this represents them. I, for instance, can as easily have a female role model as I have a male role model. The fact that someone has the same type of the reproductive organ as me does not make me be more willing to emulate their behavior. In my view, a woman should be as inspired by Einstein to do physics as a man would be.

just_sayin

MayCaesar said:

just_sayin said:

I work in IT.  i am literally the token white guy on my team.  I understand that STEM people are socially awkward.  The amount of women teaching math related courses is higher than I would have thought.  Psychology Today says only 3 percent of mathematicians are women.   That's not a slam on women.  I feel anyone should be allowed to pursue their area of interest.  I think, if people are honest, there is nothing that keeps women from doing this.  The reality is that a plurality of women choose careers in fields where socialization and compassion are integral to the job.  It is where their interests lie.  You won't find many female coal miners or tree cutters, because those careers do not interest them as much.

I don't see actual barriers keeping women out of STEM.  Instead I see people able to pursue these fields if they want, but many women are not interested in them.

I think that it is more complicated than that. While it is true that men and women intrinsically have different biology and are going to be preferentially interested in different things, what we are interested in is also affected by our environment. For instance, my social circle in my teenage years made me want to become a scientist and work in academia - however, over time I realized that academia was very different from the idealized image of it I had, that of scientists meeting in a lab and excitedly exchanging their recent ideas... Real world academia involves a crazy amount of pointless paperwork and teaching, and the actual research mostly consists of sitting in a lonely office debugging your code, writing a paper, or (the worst part) reading other people's poorly written papers. I am not fit for that environment: I want to go out there and do things. And if my environment was different, chances are I would have taken a career path more optimal for me.

Part of the fact that there are disproportionately few women in mathematics, or physics, or engineering is a consequence of the environment telling women that these professions are not sexy. And since there is no strong tradition of women achieving immense success in these fields, there is no strong publicly accepted image of a successful female physicist or engineer. One of the top chess players in the world, Hikaru Nakamura, made this point about chess: in any decent school there will be a bunch of boys getting excited about chess, creating a chess club, playing in local team tournaments - and girls will typically not be invited in the club. So there is no easy point of entry for them to get interested in chess to begin with. Many girls who would enjoy chess tremendously and possibly achieve success in it never even have a chance to discover the game.

I do agree with you that there are no explicit barriers of entry that women have and men do not. But there are all kinds of other social factors that likely make their presence in these fields much smaller than what could be explained from purely biological standpoint. Then, again, the social factors can themselves be argued to be a consequence of biology, so...

In any case, my way of addressing it is to tackle a larger scale issue: the unnecessary importance of gender in many areas of life. Just as I told the person asking me to sign something in support of the Women's Mathematical Society, people should stop thinking that someone of their gender, or race, or sexuality, or any other category like this represents them. I, for instance, can as easily have a female role model as I have a male role model. The fact that someone has the same type of the reproductive organ as me does not make me be more willing to emulate their behavior. In my view, a woman anshould be as inspired by Einstein to do physics as a man would be.

An underlying premise of your argument seems sexist to me.  Women are free to pursue the careers they want.  To suggest they must want to pursue the same careers that men do, assumes that women are just men without the junk, and that their innate motivations are somehow wrong if they are not drawn to the same things as men.  This is very sexist.  Let women pursue the careers they want and don't assume they have to pursue the same careers that men do in order to lead meaningful lives.  

MayCaesar

@just_sayin

That is not a premise of my argument at all, and I have not made that suggestion. My point was that some of the factors that cause women to make the choices they make are social/environmental, and in a different society they would gravitate towards different choices. Another point was that one's role model does not have to be the same gender as them, just as they do not have to be the same race as them. I do not think that, given the absence of said factors and presence of solely biological factors, women would tend to make the same choices as men - but the presence of women in various fields would be different from what it is today (which way, depends on the field).

I am not sure why in all discussions you choose to attribute views to me that I neither hold nor express.

Openminded

Argument Topic: What do we do with MAGA?

@jack
It started with MAGA - an absolute, irrational loyalty to Trump. Now it´s morphed into something much more insidious and pervasive - Trumpism. The tendency to adhere to authoritarianism. This is evident in the Republican candidates who simply refuse to speak badly of Trump for fear that he will seek retribution on them. Trumpism is alive and kicking. And it needs to be called out for what it is. In my view, people who adhere to Trumpism have the following in common: 1) A tendency to display authoritarian traits themselves 2) they possess a vulnerability to fear-mongering and sensationalism 3) they tend to value money over morality 4) Populism - angry rhetoric empowers them 5) bullying and lying is an acceptable way to win 6) entertainment; bombastic and braggadocio wins over boring any day and 7) Like a football game, winning seems to be the end game

Openminded

Argument Topic: If Trump does end up in power do you think he will be harder on Russia?

No. Putin´s power will be elevated.

Bogan

@Openminded ;    It started with MAGA - an absolute, irrational loyalty to Trump. Now it´s morphed into something much more insidious and pervasive - Trumpism. The tendency to adhere to authoritarianism. This is evident in the Republican candidates who simply refuse to speak badly of Trump for fear that he will seek retribution on them. Trumpism is alive and kicking. And it needs to be called out for what it is. In my view, people who adhere to Trumpism have the following in common: 1) A tendency to display authoritarian traits themselves 2) they possess a vulnerability to fear-mongering and sensationalism 3) they tend to value money over morality 4) Populism - angry rhetoric empowers them 5) bullying and lying is an acceptable way to win 6) entertainment; bombastic and braggadocio wins over boring any day and 7) Like a football game, winning seems to be the end game. 

 

 It started with Bidenism, an irrational hatred of Trump.   Now it’s has morphed into something more insidious and pervasive, Trump Derangement Syndrome.     The tendency to never see the Democratic Party’s creeping authoritarianism.     This is evident in the Democratic Party’s attempts to stifle free speech and therefore to control the narrative.    It is also glaringly obvious from Democrat attempts the frame President Trump on false and even irrational charges, and to even prevent the US electorate from freely electing the candidate of their choice.  And it needs to be called out for what it is. In my view, people who are inflicted with Trump Derangement Syndrome have the following in common: 1) A tendency to display authoritarian traits themselves 2) they possess a vulnerability to fear-mongering and sensationalism 3) they tend to value crime and welfare prone minorities over the productive and law abiding people of any race or ethnicity 4) Populism – a horrendously biased media empowers them.  5) bullying, lying, and lawfare is an acceptable way to win 6) entertainment, constant screeching denunciations over the Democrats main political rival wins over boring facts any day and 7) Like a football game, winning seems to be the end game. 

Bogan

just_sayin

Yahoo News is reporting:

A U.S. home buyer with a median income of $78,642 in 2023 would’ve had to spend a record 41.4% of their earnings on housing costs in 2023, per Redfin analysis, up from 39% in 2022 and 31% in 2021.

41.4% of the median worker's income must go just for housing under Joe Biden's administration.  The average worker must make $800 more a MONTH just to keep up with Bidenflation.  MAGA is not the enemy of the poor, Biden and leftist policies are though.

jack

Bogan said:

This is evident in the Democratic Party’s attempts to stifle free speech and therefore to control the narrative.   

Hello Bogan:

Let's set the record, straight, shall we?  You DON'T believe in free speech.. You only believe in "political" free speech, whatever the hell that is.  You think if a young boy saw a shoot 'em up western movie, he'd be COMPELLED to shoot somebody..  So, you'd BAN books, movies, songs, plays and, art. 

Tell me that's not true....  I read it right here, on these pages.

excon

MayCaesar

I wonder how many of those people lamenting about "MAGA" have actually talked to Trump supporters. During the COVID, I lived for a while in the rural "deep south", in North Carolina - the region with one of the highest levels of support for Trump. I talked to the folks there quite a lot about everything, including politics. Most of them were just regular folks going about their lives and not caring too much about politics - but when it did come to politics, they felt that the Democrats abandoned them a long time ago in favor of bizarre ideological stuff, and they would often support any leading Republican who, at least, sounded like he acknowledged their existence. They were not at all these brainwashed demons who those talking about this all the time suppose they are.

Sure, there are lots of deranged Trump supporters as well. But to claim that virtually all of his supporters are brainwashed sheeple is ludicrous. I think that the real political divide here is not between parties, but between people: because everyone is hiding behind the screen and rarely goes outside, especially during COVID, people seem to have no clue who they share this country with. The stereotypes they have about their neighbors are quite spectacular.

Bogan

@jack ;     

Not worth responding to. 

 Try writing an entire 350 word article starting with a clearly stated premise that you are prepared to defend with a reasoned argument.     Writing sneery one liners or simply submitting curt replies dealing entirely in implications is hardly going to impress anybody into thinking you have an opinion worth reading.    Neither is, pejorative abuse, or just continually asking loaded Dorothy Dixer questions.     You may think that it makes you look authoritative, but it just makes you look like an ignorant person winging it to vainly defend a position he passionately holds, but has little knowledge of.

jack

Bogan said:

@jack ;     

Not worth responding to.

Hello Bogan:

Running away again, huh???  Got it..    Truly...  You'd BAN movies cause people who SEE them will ACT upon what they've seen..  You'd BAN books cause people who READ them will ACT upon what they've read. 

That's NOT free speech..  That's fascism pure and simple.

 Don't take 350 words to say that.   DU*DE!

excon

just_sayin

Yet another example of how leftists make poor people poorer.  5 years ago Philadelphia decided that 43 taxes was not enough and added another one - a soda tax.  The claim was that the money would save the Philadelphia education system.  So what happened?
1) Soda sales went down 38%, while beer/wine sales went up 5%.
2) Tax was passed on to the customers - who are mostly poor people
3) less than half of the money went to education - And what is the condition of Philadelphia schools?  

Most Philly schools were found in ‘poor’ or ‘unsatisfactory’ condition before district paused assessments, per new analysis

What about academically?

OVERALL RESULTS (reading)
• In 2022, the average score of fourth-grade students in Philadelphia was 195. This was lower than the average score of 209 for students in large cities.
• The average score for students in Philadelphia in 2022 (195) was not significantly different from their average score in 2019 (197) and in 2009 (195).
• The percentage of students in Philadelphia who performed at or above the NAEP Proficient level was 15 percent in 2022. This percentage was not significantly different from that in 2019 (17 percent) and in 2009 (11 percent).
• The percentage of students in Philadelphia who performed at or above the NAEP Basic level was 38 percent in 2022. This percentage was not significantly different from that in 2019 (41 percent) and in 2009 (39 percent).  

4) Businesses in poor communities suffered and cut employees, who were mostly poorer citizens

So the Democrat's soda tax resulted in dumber kids, poorer poor people, richer Democrat politicians, and fewer jobs.  And some people think MAGA is the problem. SMH

https://twitter.com/i/status/1739749423604023339

MayCaesar

@just_sayin

While John Stossel very well explained the issues with the "soda tax", I think you are making an unfounded connection here. The poor performance of the Philly schools can be attributed to many factors, and I do not see any evidence of the soda tax being one of them. The fact that someone got an extra source of funds to put into the education system does not imply that the education system will improve, and there are countless other mechanisms at play here.

As for the MAGA being the problem, Trump-supporting Republicans have also messed up on numerous occasions. I used to live in Indiana back when Trump's vice-president was the governor there; among other wild things, the guy tried establishing a state-run news organization, before the local parliament told him - hey, Mike, we do not do Chinese-style propaganda here. And, of course, every time the guy needed to go buy groceries, tens of black cars would be sent along with him, blocking the roads and causing traffic jams. Things in my city only started looking up when Pence left for the White House, and the new governor let the Democratic mayor Pete (the one and only) do things his way. In 2014-2016 South Bend was a dump; by 2020, when I left for the DC, it started getting into shape.

Corrupt Republicans are not any better than corrupt Democrats, and Trump and a lot of people from his circle of buddies are certainly up there.

just_sayin

MayCaesar said:

@just_sayin

While John Stossel very well explained the issues with the "soda tax", I think you are making an unfounded connection here. The poor performance of the Philly schools can be attributed to many factors, and I do not see any evidence of the soda tax being one of them. The fact that someone got an extra source of funds to put into the education system does not imply that the education system will improve, and there are countless other mechanisms at play here.

As for the MAGA being the problem, Trump-supporting Republicans have also messed up on numerous occasions. I used to live in Indiana back when Trump's vice-president was the governor there; among other wild things, the guy tried establishing a state-run news organization, before the local parliament told him - hey, Mike, we do not do Chinese-style propaganda here. And, of course, every time the guy needed to go buy groceries, tens of black cars would be sent along with him, blocking the roads and causing traffic jams. Things in my city only started looking up when Pence left for the White House, and the new governor let the Democratic mayor Pete (the one and only) do things his way. In 2014-2016 South Bend was a dump; by 2020, when I left for the DC, it started getting into shape.

Corrupt Republicans are not any better than corrupt Democrats, and Trump and a lot of people from his circle of buddies are certainly up there.

My argument was not that the soda tax caused Philadelphia schools to be bad.  They have been bad for 50 plus years.  My observation is that the people were promised that the soda tax would change things, and it did not.  

I work in DC (well now I work from home mostly).  My travel has often been affected by presidential and foreign dignitary transportation.  That's just part of being in a city with such politicians.  The worst was when the Pope visited and fencing blocked a lot of streets and sidewalks that I take to work near the white house.  I don't blame Pence, Trump, Biden, or the Pope for that.  When I traveled daily into DC, you are always having to deal with whoever is protesting that day, and trust me, during the summer, about every day there is some group out protesting.  

My observation is that Democrats have hurt people with their tax hikes, while not delivering on the promises they made about them.  

MayCaesar

@just_sayin

I would say that this is just regular politics: politicians promising something and not delivering it. Politicians do not sign contracts with the population, they just make verbal proclamations that allow them to get elected.

Did not know that you were also in DC; we should grab a coffee some time! Your objection is sound, but maybe it is just my bad luck, but I was affected by it in Indiana when Pence was the governor much more than either there when he was not or anywhere else, including DC. I remember the Pope's visit well though, that one was rough.
The DC is also obviously the center of politics in the US, so it comes with a hefty price tag. The Lincoln Memorial is my favorite place to take a walk around, and the number of times it was blocked by protesters or preachers of some kind can no longer be counted on my fingers and toes combined.

I have lived for extended periods of time in both Democrat- and Republic-dominated states and cities, and I honestly have not noticed much difference in practice. The Democrat-run cities tend to have more regulations and prohibitions ("This park is closed after 5 pm!"), but the Republican-run cities have poorer infrastructure and worse fast response services - and these differences are not that significant in most cases. Indiana is commonly referenced as one of the worst states for drivers, and I can concur - while New York is infamous for its outlandish real estate prices, and that is true too. I suppose the only state that truly is one of a kind is California. Where Floridans try their best to distance their system as far away from the Cuban system as possible, Californians seem to be sprinting towards it.

just_sayin

@MayCaesar
Did not know that you were also in DC; we should grab a coffee some time! Your objection is sound, but maybe it is just my bad luck, but I was affected by it in Indiana when Pence was the governor much more than either there when he was not or anywhere else, including DC. I remember the Pope's visit well though, that one was rough.
The DC is also obviously the center of politics in the US, so it comes with a hefty price tag. The Lincoln Memorial is my favorite place to take a walk around, and the number of times it was blocked by protesters or preachers of some kind can no longer be counted on my fingers and toes combined.

I'm a contractor, so I've worked for a few different departments and agencies.  Currently working for a short mayor friend of yours who works near Nationals stadium.  I worked around the white house for a few contracts.  I've been pepper sprayed at the white house before, on the north side.  I was walking past some girls who had come out of the nursing school just north of the park.  They were arguing, and one spayed the other and I happened to be close enough to get a shot of it in my eyes.  I was close enough to the park restroom to wash my eyes out, but the secret service had to call for an ambulance for the girl.  I wish I could say that was my weirdest white house story, but it isn't.  

I never had any bad experiences with street preachers on the mall, but the Nation of Islam street preachers in China town, near the arena were definitely weird.  I can remember the opening words of one sermon 'Kill the white people.  Don't waste time trying to put them in chains.  Kill the white people.'  They would be out every afternoon near the metro entrance.  

Factfinder

Very rational argument. When our minds are open to lables, catagories, and defense of views we tend to close them to details, facts and dialoge automatically. What should be done about MAGA? I think as you alluded, we are all Americans so talk to them. Pretty simple really. As Americans we generally want to preserve our way of life and the freedom to do so. To me that should be common ground.@ZeusAres42

Bogan

@just_sayin

Just-sayiin quote   Not only does my religion tell me that people are equal. 

 For the last 400 years, the European people rocketed ahead of the people from every other race, culture and religion, because we started realising that what our religion taught us, “ain’t necessarily so.”     Your scriptures do not claim that everybody is equal, that is just your modern interpretation of them.    200 years ago, Christians were using biblical quotes to justify slavery.   350 years ago, Christians were using a biblical quote which were supposed to be the direct instruction from God, to put “witches” to death.       If our civilisation had not outgrown dependence on Christian scriptures, we would still think that the universe was created in six days, the world is flat, Jonah can live inside a whale, and females were created from Adam’s rib.      Now, I am not anti-Christian, I accept that one reason why the Christian world is so relatively peaceful and the people largely honest, is because of the moral teachings of Christianity.   But religion has no business giving scientific instruction based upon magical superstition.

 

Just-sayin quote   History suggests that race is not the reason for differences either.  For example.  The Greeks and Egyptians once had the greatest dynasties of their time.  Many innovations and advances in science and math occurred there. 

Even the Romans granted that the Greeks were a very intelligent race, and Greek slaves specialising in accountancy, literacy, engineering, architecture, and as political advisors were greatly prized.       The Egyptians were like the Mesopotamians, Chinese, and Indians. Their civilisations were based upon the existence of great river systems which provided an abundant food supply, which meant that their intelligent elites could educate themselves and become proficient in developing advanced technologies.       High IQ for entire populations seems to be geared to the length of time a civilisation has existed.    Although, what went wrong with the Arabs, I put down to the anti-scientific attitudes of Islamic religious leaders, as well as the most corrupt and bloodthirsty Arabs monopolising the young breeding females.      

 

Just-sayin quote          At the same time, Blacks in Egypt were thriving………,

The last time you wrote that I asked you to provide proof of that.     I have never heard of African people “thriving” anywhere.     That does not mean that there are no smart Africans, just that their proportion within their populations is not the same as for other races.     One reason for that, is that du-mb African despots routinely killed off any person with brains who could become a threat to their regimes.       In recent times, that even included doctors.

 

Just sayin quote       British people were being laughed at for their barbaric and backward behavior.

They were.    The racist name that the Romans gave the British was “Britanculi” (wretched little brits).     The reason why civilisation was delayed in Britain was because it was (like so many backward areas of the time), a backwater with few resources.     That did not change until the Romans decided to conquer and civilise them.   

  

Just-sayin quote      Not long after that, China invented iron many hundred years before other countries got it. 

I am not certain that your assertion is right, but it could be.    I know that the Chinese were the first to really mass produce the stuff, although the ancient Indians at the same time had the best steel in the world.  (they had accidently discovered crucible steel, and adding secret herbs and spices (carbon) to the process.   The Romans used imported Indian steel from India for their gladiuses’ (swords) and body armour.      

 

Just-sayin quote       The Chinese during that time had great advancements in warfare, science and medicine. 

Which supports my assertion that length of civilisation is the driving force in the evolution of the human brain.       People in advanced societies, especially in cold climates where predicting the best time to sow was an essential survival skill, needed to develop their brain to handle ever more difficult tasks and technologies.     People from largely seasonless hot societies living a hand to mouth existence had no need to force their brains to evolve.    This premise makes sense and is easy to understand.  Why can’t you see the essential truth in what makes perfect sense?  

 

Just-sayin quote        Yet, as time went on, the backward British, developed a written language for the first time.  This allowed them to catch up and then white Europeans advanced. 

The Europeans began to gain universal literacy after Gutenberg invented the printing press.    This allowed the bible to be printed in native languages for the first time.     This literacy, and the printing of the bible in native languages, was opposed tooth and nail by the Catholic church.    The church realised that their monopoly on what the scriptures said, (which was entirely for the clergy’s own benefit) would be eroded if ordinary people could read the bible directly.   The Christian church did not want people thinking straight and looking for answers to life’s problems outside of the church’s teachings.   You still seem to be thinking the way as the church today wants you to think?      Has it occurred to you that the church’s advocacy for “refugees”, and the notion that all are equal, is entirely for their own benefit as well?       Since secularism is on the rise in western countries, the only way the church can counter it is to appeal to a wider racial base, and to support the importation of as many religiously inclined people it can from third world sheetholes? 

 

Just-sayn quote      Today in the US, the demographic groups that are crushing it are Asian and those from India in scholastic tests. 

But according to your own beliefs, they can’t be.    Since you think that every race is equally smart, then if Asians and Indians are “crushing” it, then there must be “unconscious” racism in examination markings towards whites, Hispanics, and black people.        The race baiters like Al Sharpton, the Black Panthers, and the BLM movement must be right.    The only viable solution, therefore, is DEI.   This would address the unacceptable racism that higher education exhibits towards whites’, blacks, and Hispanics.       If you believe that everybody is equal, then you should support DEI as a way to rectify why there are unequal outcomes in education results.    

 Just-sayin quote       So, depending on which era we are talking about, the world has been ruled by Blacks, Chinese, Europeans, and it looks like it will soon be Asians again.  Many social and cultural factors impacted these groups, like the late development of written languages in Western Europe.  Genetics didn't really change in those few thousand years - other factors did.

Wrong.    When IQ testing was first instigated, they need a standard to measure all demographics by.     This was arbitrarily set at 100, which was the mean (most common) score for US white people.      Almost 100 years later, the same demographic has a mean score of 103.     IQ can change slowly over generations.    One opponent I debated against even claimed that the IQ’s of US Africans is increasing at a higher rate than for whites.    I am sure that he was correct.     Africans within European societies need to make their brains evolve to handle the tasks of an advanced society.     But how long it will take African blacks or Hispanics to gain parity with more intelligent races is any bodies guess?   Perhaps a few hundred years?     But what we are talking about today is the here and now.      Dysfunctional races with low population IQ, with high birth rates, have the capacity to destroy western civilisation.     And you only have to look at the “mostly peaceful” burning cities of the USA, or the civil unrest in France and Britain, to figure that out.         That should really concern you, but it doesn’t.    This inconvenient fact conflicts with your religious worldview, so like those who advocated for a flat earth or for burning witches, you won’t admit that you are wrong until either your world falls part, or you realise that you thinking is so out of date that you can’t justify it anymore.