Support NeoGAF

[MisterFalcon]

I missed this post.

Black people commit a disproportionate amount of violent crime against white people.

Also interesting, the FBI stopped publishing interracial data after Obama was elected. Quite a coincidence.

If you look carefully the really important number here is the 13.7% of white victims with a black offender. Which is very close to the 'less then 13% of the population' and actually proves that blacks commit crimes against whites roughly at a rate expected if crimes were committed completely randomly. What skews the figure so much is the rate of white on black crime which should be 62% but is only 10%.

 

[LegendOfKage]

Ok yeah nah I'm out. Sorry bro, you lost me at eugenics.

He lost me at the statistical racism, which happened a long time ago in this thread, and in several others. My point in these conversations is that generalizing others is wrong. That some people look at individuals with charts and graphs and studies in their mind doesn't change the fact that individuals are individuals, and generalizations are wrong.

Or as Jordan Peterson might say, racism is attributing to the individual the characteristics of the group, as if the group was homogeneous.

I think you've had a fairly good stab at summarizing it objectively. We can agree that neither 1 nor 4 are desirable as they both exist at the extreme ends of the spectrum and are simply mirror images of each other.

I do think you pulled up short in the assessment without an adequate conclusion though because I came away with the impression that you view 2 and 3 as equally valid. I disagree and reject 2 because it is still inherently a group-level assumption based on an immutable characteristic. Moreover, it is an immutable characteristic that does not apply globally. The only option that respects the sovereignty of the individual and applies irrespective of geographical location is 3.

Sorry, I thought I was clear about this.

My point is that 1 and 4 are bad, 2 (despite the best of intentions) enables 1 and 4 to exist, and 3 is the only choice that cannot be co-opted by extremists. I thought that was clear, but yes, 3 is the only good choice. If someone cares to argue otherwise, I'd be happy to have that discussion.

 

[Papa]

He lost me at the statistical racism, which happened a long time ago in this thread, and in several others. My point in these conversations is that generalizing others is wrong. That some people look at individuals with charts and graphs and studies in their mind doesn't change the fact that individuals are individuals, and generalizations are wrong.

Or as Jordan Peterson might say, racism is attributing to the individual the characteristics of the group, as if the group was homogeneous.



Sorry, I thought I was clear about this.

My point is that 1 and 4 are bad, 2 (despite the best of intentions) enables 1 and 4 to exist, and 3 is the only choice that cannot be co-opted by extremists. I thought that was clear, but yes, 3 is the only good choice. If someone cares to argue otherwise, I'd be happy to have that discussion.

No argument from me. We're on the same page.

 

[Ulysses 31]

Please provide sources for the numbers and claims made in statements like these. As the poster citing these "facts", the burden of proof is on you to provide the relevant data that your numbers are pulled from.

Well the Bell Curve by Richard J. Hernstein and Charles Murray is a well known for researching IQ:

The testosterone levels is covered in a research called "Racial/ethnic variations in male testosterone levels: a probable contributor to group differences in health " by Lee Ellis and Helmuth Nyborg.
The lesser ability to defer gratification was measured with the "Marshmallow Experiment" but for now I don't have the one that breaks it down by race/ethnicity.

 

[Papa]

Well the Bell Curve by Richard J. Hernstein and Charles Murray is a well known for researching IQ:

The testosterone levels is covered in a research called "Racial/ethnic variations in male testosterone levels: a probable contributor to group differences in health " by Lee Ellis and Helmuth Nyborg.
The lesser ability to defer gratification was measured with the "Marshmallow Experiment" but for now I don't have the one that breaks it down by race/ethnicity.

There's massive overlap between those distributions.

How did they define black and white in this study?

 

[Cato]

And here I thought I was commenting on whether it was cool to be racist on neogaf. Is being racist a white privilege to you?

Hrm. Considering the volume of raw racist stuff that you have been spouting on neogaf, I suspect it is actually cool to be racist on neogaf. Black privilege?

 

[JordanN]

There's massive overlap between those distributions.

How did they define black and white in this study?

I'm trying to find the exact reference, but did you know in 1973, Psychologists were forced to change the definition of Mental Retardation from 85 points to 70, because of complaints from the Civil Rights movement?

That's not an overlap. I can post proof that standards were changed, I'm trying to remember the article where the Civil Rights activists complained the Retardation threshold was too high.

https://mn.gov/mnddc/parallels2/pdf/90s/99/99-MRI-MLW.pdf (See Page 381 that says Psychologists lowered the number).


Edit: I believe this was the source? I'm not sure why it's so hard to find but it came close to what I originally found.

SAN FRANCISCO, Oct. 16— Declaring that standardized intelligence tests were not a valid means of determining mental retardation in black schoolchildren, a Federal district judge ruled today that it was unconstitutional to use such tests to place blacks in classes for the mentally retarded.

The lawsuit, filed by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People eight years ago, contended that the use of standardized intelligence tests by the State of California to place children in remedial classes was unconstitutional because the tests were culturally biased against blacks.

.....

Agreeing with the plaintiffs, Judge Peckham cited statistics showing that in 80 percent of the state's schools black children represented only 27.5 percent of the student population but 62 percent of students in classes for the mentally retarded.

The judge noted that black children on the average scored 15 points below white children on standard intelligence tests such as the Wechsler intelligence scale and the Stanford‐Binet scale. The average on such tests is 100.

https://www.nytimes.com/1979/10/17/...q-test-is-no-gauge-for-retarded-students.html

So again, the research is 100% COMPLETELY ACCURATE. There was always a gap in IQ's between blacks and whites.

 

[Papa]

I'm trying to find the exact reference, but did you know in 1973, Psychologists were forced to change the definition of Mental Retardation from 85 points to 70, because of complaints from the Civil Rights movement?

That's not an overlap. I can post proof that standards were changed, I'm trying to remember the article where the Civil Rights activists complained the Retardation threshold was too high.

https://mn.gov/mnddc/parallels2/pdf/90s/99/99-MRI-MLW.pdf (See Page 381 that says Psychologists lowered the number).


Edit: I believe this was the source? I'm not sure why it's so hard to find but it came close to what I originally found.


https://www.nytimes.com/1979/10/17/...q-test-is-no-gauge-for-retarded-students.html

So again, the research is 100% COMPLETELY ACCURATE. There was always a gap in IQ's between blacks and whites.

Where does it say that the 1973 revision was because of complaints from civil rights activists?

 

[Yoshi]

Well the Bell Curve by Richard J. Hernstein and Charles Murray is a well known for researching IQ:

The testosterone levels is covered in a research called "Racial/ethnic variations in male testosterone levels: a probable contributor to group differences in health " by Lee Ellis and Helmuth Nyborg.
The lesser ability to defer gratification was measured with the "Marshmallow Experiment" but for now I don't have the one that breaks it down by race/ethnicity.

This does absolutely not show that there is a biologocial difference in intelligence. IQ tests can be trained and the necessary skills to perform well in IQ tests are tought in higher education, as well as better schools. Have a better language and mathematics education and you receive better IQ values. This could (and probably does) indicate a difference in social standing and opportunities between black and white people in the US. It is completely insufficient to claim a biological difference and considering "black" is not really a (homogenous) biological group, it would be very suprising if there was a significant difference in potential for high IQ tests, given the same opportunities.

 

[JordanN]

Where does it say that the 1973 revision was because of complaints from civil rights activists?

You can give me time to find a source that makes a direct link to it, but that lawsuit coincides with the reports around the same time the AAMR came under pressure to drop the IQ requirements for retardation.

These conflicting pressures graphically illustrate the impossibility of developing a classification system that is responsive to different ideologies and that at the same time applies objective standards for identifying persons in need by virtue of intellectual and behavioral impairments. The 1983 classification system is based on empirical and scientific evidence and reflects the state-of-the-art on the relevant issues. Admittedly, knowledge is imperfect in several critical dimensions. We do not know precisely the relationship between intelligence and social competence, how much intelligence, as measured by tests, is needed in order for individuals to Definitions 19 adapt satisfactorily to societal demands, or the nature of intelligence and whether, in fact, it can be accurately assessed with existing instruments across diverse populations. Our ability to assess impaired behavior in a variety of cultural contexts and environmental settings is also limited, and clinical judgment depends heavily on the acumen and experience of clinicians. Similarly, the delineation of social-environmental variables most crucial to the developmental process awaits further refinement. Despite these limitations, and others not noted here, an empirically based system is preferable to one dictated by the vagaries of litigation, political processes, and the pressure of special-interest groups. Every system of classification must he periodically upgraded to incorporate new discoveries and changing concepts. Conceivably, as we learn more about the adaptive capacities of individuals with limited intelligence, the parameters of our definition may require changes. Among the many utilizations of classi

https://law.resource.org/pub/us/cfr/ibr/001/aamd.classification.1973.pdf

Again, I'm 100% I remember there was an article that made the link.

 

[JordanN]

This does absolutely not show that there is a biologocial difference in intelligence. IQ tests can be trained and the necessary skills to perform well in IQ tests are tought in higher education, as well as better schools. Have a better language and mathematics education and you receive better IQ values. This could (and probably does) indicate a difference in social standing and opportunities between black and white people in the US.

The tests have been conducted for close to a 100 years. There was no change in gaps between black and white test takers.
IQ tests are not based on education. They have to do with problem solving and pattern recognition.

It is completely insufficient to claim a biological difference and considering "black" is not really a (homogenous) biological group, it would be very suprising if there was a significant difference in potential for high IQ tests, given the same opportunities.

Black people came from sub-sahara Africa and were geographically isolated from Europeans and Asians for thousands of years. They are indeed biologically closer to each other and can be identified through genetics and physical appearance.
The link between biology and IQ remains high. Adoption studies have found that even when black children are placed in white homes, the IQ gap persists.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minnesota_Transracial_Adoption_Study

In terms of socio-economic standing, again, wealth does not improve your IQ.

 

[Yoshi]

The tests have been conducted for close to a 100 years. There was no change in gaps between black and white test takers.
IQ tests are not based on education. They have to do with problem solving and pattern recognition.

Which can absolutely be trained. Of course, there is a limit to that, but the differences between the social chances of black and white people in the US have been pretty large for the last 100 years, though certainly the difference is getting smaller, so additional arguments would be required to conclude a different genetical potential from IQ tests.

 

[JordanN]

Which can absolutely be trained. Of course, there is a limit to that, but the differences between the social chances of black and white people in the US have been pretty large for the last 100 years, though certainly the difference is getting smaller, so additional arguments would be required to conclude a different genetical potential from IQ tests.

The Civil rights act passed 54 years ago. The tests did not change significantly.
Why is White IQ lower than East Asian IQ? Whites arguably have just as much educational opportunities (or more) as Asians do.
And there are impoverished Asian countries that still score higher in IQ than Black/Africans do.

 

[dragonfart28]

IQ is not a reliable measure of intelligence.

Hell, even the concept of intelligence in the first place is something that people disagree about.

 

[JordanN]

IQ is not a reliable measure of intelligence.

Jobs that are considered very professional/high skill tend to favor people who are also smart. Imagine being a CEO who had the mind of a toddler. How long would a company last under such leadership?

The Army also used IQ scores as a way of training recruits. They found people with IQ's below 80 were simply untrainable.

Hell, even the concept of intelligence in the first place is something that people disagree about.

So do you think a dog is capable of the same feats as a human? Why or why not?

 

[Silas Lang]

Jesus Christ dude, just stop. You actually think IQ is is biological? And some races are inherently superior/inferior?

It is a lack of opportunity. The reason the civil rights act didn't solve everything is because many black americans are stuck in the absolute worst school districts. No thanks to redlining neighborhoods (zoning laws). IQ can absolutely be taught. Critical thinking skills can be taught. Hard to pass a test if you can't read it. You give a child equal opportunity and they absolutely can perform. In my personal experience as a teacher, this has absolutely been what I have witnessed.

I am all open to opinions about solutions, policies, etc. I may not like them but whatever. However, I am not open to this bullshit. Suggesting eugenics, really dude? Just no.

I am looking forward to learning about some phrenology here soon.

 

[Ke0]

I gotta agree 100% here. I feel like the 90s and early 2000s were like, completely racist free.

I dunno man, I just feel like the country was far less racist pre-Obama. And I'm not pinning all this on him by any means, I'm just saying I feel like that's when the line between "racist" and "normal" became fuzzy. Now people get accused of racist for daring to treat minorities the same way they treat other white people, the fringe groups are in the forefront of the media, the president is blamed for their very existance because he doesn't like terrorism... the whole country is in some weird shit right now...

Honestly I'd say Obama becoming your President simply showed America never dealt with racism in any real capacity and that the "ignore it and it'll go away" approach doesn't really work at all.

If America was truly as post racial as people thought it was then a black guy becoming President wouldn't have moved the needle at all, but America flipped the fuck out and all kinds of weird anxieties came out. I saw people saying they were actually scared that "reverse slavery" was going to happen, or black Americans would get taxed less, or he was going to give black Americans free land by force, or he was going to replace Christianity with Islam, force white American women to be incubators for black men. Just a bunch of crazy stuff, what scared me was how utterly serious these fears were, I couldn't help but laugh at them all.

UK won't be any different, when we get a minority PM here, every slog who swears UK doesn't have race problems will suddenly disappear.

 

[Tumle]

I never heard of a U.S policy that tells people to be violent.
A neighborhood doesn't start out bad. It's created. So who created it in the first place?

I think you should be very careful in your thought process here.. because it's leading you down the wrong road..
I really hope you're not fishing what it seems like you're fishing for..
Because you are so really really wrong..
But I'll give you an answer.
What makes poor neighbourhoods have more crime than rest of society is... wait for it... drumroll pts pts pts... poverty and desperation!! Tada!
But I know you are a libertarian..

 

[BANGS]

Honestly I'd say Obama becoming your President simply showed America never dealt with racism in any real capacity and that the "ignore it and it'll go away" approach doesn't really work at all.

If America was truly as post racial as people thought it was then a black guy becoming President wouldn't have moved the needle at all, but America flipped the fuck out and all kinds of weird anxieties came out.

It was only really those fringe racists that were doing those thing though... It wasn't until well after he became president that the line started getting blurry. You advocate for personal responsibility? Racist. You don't like abortion? Racist. You do basically anything republican, racist... it wasn't like that before Obama...

 

[Ke0]

It was only really those fringe racists that were doing those thing though... It wasn't until well after he became president that the line started getting blurry. You advocate for personal responsibility? Racist. You don't like abortion? Racist. You do basically anything republican, racist... it wasn't like that before Obama...

Eh even as an outsider I've seen people of color especially black Americans have been critical of Conservatives as a racist party for a long time now.

Seems like that kind of stuff is reaching you now because of social media taking off around time Obama became president more than anything. That makes much more sense than "America had no problem with racism until Obama"…which really still suggests the country flipped their shit bc their President was no longer white.

 

[JordanN]

Jesus Christ dude, just stop. You actually think IQ is is biological? And some races are inherently superior/inferior?

Jesus Christ dude, just stop. You think the earth revolves around the sun? That some planets are inherently less orbital?
Jesus Christ dude, just stop. You think gravity makes apple falls from trees? That some objects are inherently less constrained by forces than others?
Jesus Christ dude, just stop. You think humans evolved apes? That some animals are less primate like than others?

Science isn't centered on emotions. It's centered on finding the truth. It's actually incredibly bizarre that of everything that can be studied in the universe, the concept of race is off limits for some reason.
If someone said being physically stronger is biological, no one complains. If someone says being really tall is biological, no one complains. If someone says having a certain eye color is biological, no one complains.

But the moment someone says human intelligence is biological, "OH MY GOD. RACIST. KEEL HIM!"

Humans aren't computers. We can't just buy a new CPU and run the latest version of Life.exe. The brain you're born with is the one you're stuck with till we die.

But you guys are convinced we can do this. Why? How does money and education upgrade my brain to Einstein levels?

That's because you can't buy IQ. And that's not racist. Several studies confirm its has nothing at all to do with wealth or education.

 

[Tumle]

Are you under the impression that differences between races are purely cosmetic? Studies have shown that on average, IQ of black people is lower than white people, have higher serum testosterone levels and have a lesser ability to defer gratification. The combination of lower IQ and higher testosterone makes someone more likely to commit crimes, also the lesser ability to defer gratification lends itself to a smash and grab mentality.

Are you kidding me? Your using the same freaking tactics, that people in this thread are using to try and prove white privilege?
Why do you think your kind of identity politics are better than there's?
This is a freaking circus!
"Your identity politics are wrong my identity politics are right, hur dedhur!"

How big of a difference are there in these studies of iq on black and whites?
Have you ever listen or read anything Jordan Peterson have said in the way you are using your statistics now?
I just think I'm going to leave before my head explodes from all this hypocrisy going on in this thread

 

[Gander]

Well, you're no Neil Degrasse Tyson and I believe he would have counter argument for your science.

 

[Darkking2001]

Thank you Jordan...I'll just go tell my family we are biologically inferior what could possibly go wrong....
You know maybe you should do it for me after all I'm part black so you would explain it better after all!!
You know since we are so stupid maybe we should get some reparations or something would kindly help us out.

 

[JordanN]

Well, you're no Neil Degrasse Tyson and I believe he would have counter argument for your science.

And that would be....?

And here's a test for everyone. Find me a human who is born without a brain. Give the corpse $1 million dollars. Then put that corpse through a year of Harvard University.
Have the corpse do an IQ test. Since intelligence is not biological, the corpse should be a genius, right?

 

[Sub_Level]

Why is White IQ lower than East Asian IQ? Whites arguably have just as much educational opportunities (or more) as Asians do.
And there are impoverished Asian countries that still score higher in IQ than Black/Africans do.

There are likely cultural factors that you're not considering. Asians typically take their child's education more important than parents of whites do even in less afluent Asian countries. And parents of American blacks have all kinds of issues that mitigate their ability to raise a child. The study you posted earlier makes a point, even, that the parents are worth noting.

It is essential to note, however, that the groups also differed significantly (p < .05) in their placement histories and natural mother's education.

There absolutely are biological differences between races but when it comes to intelligence I remain unconvinced.

 

[Darkking2001]

You hear dit here folks black people are as dumb as a dead corpse how useless we truly are

 

[Tumle]

This does absolutely not show that there is a biologocial difference in intelligence. IQ tests can be trained and the necessary skills to perform well in IQ tests are tought in higher education, as well as better schools. Have a better language and mathematics education and you receive better IQ values. This could (and probably does) indicate a difference in social standing and opportunities between black and white people in the US. It is completely insufficient to claim a biological difference and considering "black" is not really a (homogenous) biological group, it would be very suprising if there was a significant difference in potential for high IQ tests, given the same opportunities.

Plus the study is from 1979.. let's see the difference in it after almost 40 years.. 1979 wasn't long enough after the emancipation.. and schooling does indeed have a lot to say on how good you are at understanding the problem you want to solve in an iq test..

 

[AfricanKing]

Jesus Christ dude, just stop. You think the earth revolves around the sun? That some planets are inherently less orbital?
Jesus Christ dude, just stop. You think gravity makes apple falls from trees? That some objects are inherently less constrained by forces than others?
Jesus Christ dude, just stop. You think humans evolved apes? That some animals are less primate like than others?

Science isn't centered on emotions. It's centered on finding the truth. It's actually incredibly bizarre that of everything that can be studied in the universe, the concept of race is off limits for some reason.
If someone said being physically stronger is biological, no one complains. If someone says being really tall is biological, no one complains. If someone says having a certain eye color is biological, no one complains.

But the moment someone says human intelligence is biological, "OH MY GOD. RACIST. KEEL HIM!"

Humans aren't computers. We can't just buy a new CPU and run the latest version of Life.exe. The brain you're born with is the one you're stuck with till we die.

But you guys are convinced we can do this. Why? How does money and education upgrade my brain to Einstein levels?

That's because you can't buy IQ. And that's not racist. Several studies confirm its has nothing at all to do with wealth or education.

A simple question is all that's needed to gauge how far down the eugenics tree you are.

Do you believe black people are inferior in terms of IQ to white people.

 

[Gander]

So what you are saying is that a higher level of IQ is talent or gift passed on from the parents, it's biology right?

So if your mother can sing you can sing if your father was painter you can paint? If you parents could not do these things there is no sense in training you to do these because your naturally incapable?

 

[JordanN]

Plus the study is from 1979.. let's see the difference in it after almost 40 years.. 1979 wasn't long enough after the emancipation.. and schooling does indeed have a lot to say on how good you are at understanding the problem you want to solve in an in test..

Dude, I've been trying to tell everyone that IQ has nothing to do with wealth or discrimination.
Mongolia is a very a poor Asian country. The GDP per capita is $3,680.
And yet Mongolians still come out with an IQ of a 100.

Or how about China? Did you know millions of Chinese were slaughtered by the communists between the 1950s ~ 70s? And yet their IQ is still 105.

Wealth or discrimination doesn't change your genetics. It's actually a dumb point. Does discrimination change people's hair color? Does losing wealth make people grow shorter?
No, so why would discrimination affect genes responsible for IQ? You can't pay to replace your body with Einstein.

 

[Ke0]

Eugenics, Phrenology, Ethnostate. That's a bingo

 

[Darkking2001]

Man what should I do with my black genes...after all being black means you lost the gene lottery!

 

[Dr. Claus]

Jesus Christ dude, just stop. You actually think IQ is is biological? And some races are inherently superior/inferior?

It is a lack of opportunity. The reason the civil rights act didn't solve everything is because many black americans are stuck in the absolute worst school districts. No thanks to redlining neighborhoods (zoning laws). IQ can absolutely be taught. Critical thinking skills can be taught. Hard to pass a test if you can't read it. You give a child equal opportunity and they absolutely can perform. In my personal experience as a teacher, this has absolutely been what I have witnessed.

I am all open to opinions about solutions, policies, etc. I may not like them but whatever. However, I am not open to this bullshit. Suggesting eugenics, really dude? Just no.

I am looking forward to learning about some phrenology here soon.

There is evidence to show that there is some biological component to the average intelligence of a person, I have yet to find any research that shows that it is based on race or that it is causes significant differences when compared. Hell, much of the research done within this particular field/subject of study isn't using the best, or current, methodologies. The popular 'IQ testing' as a method to find a person's level of intelligence has been shown/suggested to be highly flawed and biased given recent research/studies in the past 15 years alone.

Many minorities within the US have suffered due to old, racist laws as you had suggested (redlining being a major issue). While the vast majority, if not all of, these laws have since been removed - we still clearly see the issues continue on in the present day. These have lead to poorer districts, weaker schools, and a lack of opportunity for the groups to learn, grow, and succeed. As you have suggested, people can be taught to think using critical thinking skills, learn to improve their study habits, and become highly successful in intellectually rigorous jobs (Comp Sci, Chemistry, etc). This is what we, as a nation, should focus on improving. There will always be stupid people, regardless of race/sex/creed - but we can minimize that group by improving education and opportunities across the board for all.

The idea of "eugenics" is one that is absolutely sickening and deplorable. That is Grade-A-Actual-Nazi-Level-Thought-Processing and should never be an option in a serious debate/discussion.

Eh even as an outsider I've seen people of color especially black Americans have been critical of Conservatives as a racist party for a long time now.

Seems like that kind of stuff is reaching you now because of social media taking off around time Obama became president more than anything. That makes much more sense than "America had no problem with racism until Obama"…which really still suggests the country flipped their shit bc their President was no longer white.

It definitely seems to be the proliferation of social media. Idiots/racists have always existed, but now they can easily signal boost their stupidity (making them seem more numerous than they really are). As for "conservatives as a racist party", that is a silly generalization. There are plenty of minorities that are conservatives as well as plenty of racists on the left. Stupidity isn't bound by a specific political party, no matter how much some would like it to be.

 

[Ulysses 31]

Are you kidding me? Your using the same freaking tactics, that people in this thread are using to try and prove white privilege?
Why do you think your kind of identity politics are better than there's?
This is a freaking circus!
"Your identity politics are wrong my identity politics are right, hur dedhur!"

How big of a difference are there in these studies of iq on black and whites?
Have you ever listen or read anything Jordan Peterson have said in the way you are using your statistics now?
I just think I'm going to leave before my head explodes from all this hypocrisy going on in this thread

What white privilege is there when pointing out results of decades worth of studies? Those same studies show that Asians do better than white people, so that's a case of Asian privilege, right?
Where am I advocating for any preferential treatment because of race?
The one I was responding too was "annoyed" by an inconvenient statistical probability and I was trying to point up that's it's silly to get that upset by a fact.

I've not seen Jordan Peterson on IQ and race so I'm not sure why he's brought up, I cited The Bell Curve.

 

[JordanN]

There is evidence to show that there is some biological component to the average intelligence of a person, I have yet to find any research that shows that it is based on race or that it is causes significant differences when compared. Hell, much of the research done within this particular field/subject of study isn't using the best, or current, methodologies. The popular 'IQ testing' as a method to find a person's level of intelligence has been shown/suggested to be highly flawed and biased given recent research/studies in the past 15 years alone.

This is not true at all. I posted a long list of IQ studies, with the most recent dating from 2012. Did you go through them all?
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/jord...white-privilege.1464114/page-7#post-253360667

There's nothing biased about IQ. It's a myth that "you need to be educated to understand it". They're not based on any languages/math. They're about pattern repetition.

And again, Asian countries both poor and rich, still outperform all White countries. Do you think Scientists are playing a jokes on whites by saying White IQ is lower than Asian? Why not just say "White IQ is 9000!!! Lol, everybody else has 10 IQ".

That would make these tests pointless if all you could do is insert any number you like.

 

[Darkking2001]

So the gene hierarchy so far is Asians > whites >>> blacks.... right?
Man being at the bottom is so sad...but hey don't be sad at facts!
I guess I can do Manuel labor or something..phew thanks Jordan

 

[Ke0]

It's the same shtick different thread with JordanN. This is literally all he ever talks about. A bunch of racist nonsense.

It definitely seems to be the proliferation of social media. Idiots/racists have always existed, but now they can easily signal boost their stupidity (making them seem more numerous than they really are). As for "conservatives as a racist party", that is a silly generalization. There are plenty of minorities that are conservatives as well as plenty of racists on the left. Stupidity isn't bound by a specific political party, no matter how much some would like it to be.

Political parties themselves are but generalizations of the will of like minded people even more so in your country since you effectively only have two political parties. and sorry but a cautionary look at policies from 17xx to current day, paint a pretty clear picture on the two prevailing ideologies in US politics.

 

[Yoshi]

So the gene hierarchy so far is Asians > whites >>> blacks.... right?
Man being at the bottom is so sad...but hey don't be sad at facts!
I guess I can do Manuel labor or something..phew thanks Jordan

Well at least you are the king of all dark people, so that's something, right?

On a more serious note, waelth and social status are not the same thing, so a pure wealth comparison does not cut it.

 

[Panda1]

Jesus Christ dude, just stop. You think the earth revolves around the sun? That some planets are inherently less orbital?
Jesus Christ dude, just stop. You think gravity makes apple falls from trees? That some objects are inherently less constrained by forces than others?
Jesus Christ dude, just stop. You think humans evolved apes? That some animals are less primate like than others?

Science isn't centered on emotions. It's centered on finding the truth. It's actually incredibly bizarre that of everything that can be studied in the universe, the concept of race is off limits for some reason.
If someone said being physically stronger is biological, no one complains. If someone says being really tall is biological, no one complains. If someone says having a certain eye color is biological, no one complains.

But the moment someone says human intelligence is biological, "OH MY GOD. RACIST. KEEL HIM!"

Humans aren't computers. We can't just buy a new CPU and run the latest version of Life.exe. The brain you're born with is the one you're stuck with till we die.

But you guys are convinced we can do this. Why? How does money and education upgrade my brain to Einstein levels?

That's because you can't buy IQ. And that's not racist. Several studies confirm its has nothing at all to do with wealth or education.

Why when I buy a dog based on its breeding we can predict IQ? Why on every animal on earth except humans that we can do this ?

 

[JordanN]

There are likely cultural factors that you're not considering. Asians typically take their child's education more important than parents of whites do even in less afluent Asian countries.

And how do you know this?
I thought the whole point of blaming Jim Crow on intelligence was because one race was denied equal services? If Whites had access to these universities the whole time, why didn't their IQ catch up/surpass Asian countries who were economically worse off?

By saying it's culture at work, you are admitting that it's not wealth/education having the greatest effect on intelligence, since white countries were never lacking that.

 

[Darkking2001]

I have one simple question....what do you hope to achieve by bringing this to light Jordan? Whats the solution? Is their a solution?

 

[Silas Lang]

Why when I buy a dog based on its breeding we can predict IQ? Why on every animal on earth except humans that we can do this ?

Human beings are not dogs. Should we really attempt to predict people's IQ like dogs?
This kind of talk is the basis of Eugenics. Let's not go there.

 

[<+)O Robido O(+>]

While the vast majority, if not all of, these laws have since been removed - we still clearly see the issues continue on in the present day. These have lead to poorer districts, weaker schools, and a lack of opportunity for the groups to learn, grow, and succeed.

Are you saying that when those laws came off the books that white people just said "Welp, can't be racist anymore."?

As for "conservatives as a racist party", that is a silly generalization.

The modern incarnation of the Republican party was founded on racist intent. When Democrats embraced Civil Rights, the racists ran to the Republican party and started "virtue signaling" to other racists that the Republican party was the place to be.

In American politics, the Southern strategy was a Republican Party electoral strategy to increase political support among white voters in the South by appealing to racism against African Americans.[1][2][3] As the civil rights movement and dismantling of Jim Crow laws in the 1950s and 1960s visibly deepened existing racial tensions in much of the Southern United States, Republican politicians such as presidential candidate Richard Nixon and Senator Barry Goldwater developed strategies that successfully contributed to the political realignment of many white, conservative voters in the South that had traditionally supported the Democratic Party to the Republican Party.[4] It also helped push the Republican Party much more to the right.[4]

 

[JordanN]

It's the same shtick different thread with JordanN. This is literally all he ever talks about. A bunch of racist nonsense.

There are people who call evolution nonsense and blab on that we didn't come from fish. Do you think I care?

Just like evolution, the evidence that exists for IQ testing is a lot stronger than gravity. And yet no one says gravity is fake, gravity is racist, gravity makes you a supremacist. So why on earth is talking about HUMAN INTELLIGENCE such a big controversy when it's no different to all other theories based around rigorous evidence?

I find it incredibly ignorant and ridiculous that the only thing stopping people being smart is money. If someone handed me a million dollars today, I will NOT turn into Einstein. Hell, I bet Einstein wasn't even that rich or came close to that. Yet why do we assume money is the reason Einstein is brilliant, and not his brain that he was born with?

 

[Ulysses 31]

I have one simple question....what do you hope to achieve by bringing this to light Jordan? Whats the solution? Is their a solution?

For one, it's you counter the narrative that the differences between races are negligible and so when there's a group "lagging" behind it's solely because of discrimination/racism/oppression by white people in the west(and some would say the world).

 

[Darkking2001]

So from there...then what?

 

[JordanN]

So what you are saying is that a higher level of IQ is talent or gift passed on from the parents, it's biology right?

So if your mother can sing you can sing if your father was painter you can paint? If you parents could not do these things there is no sense in training you to do these because your naturally incapable?

There's actually another field of research that goes into understanding creativity.

However, if your point is trying to say does painting/singing have to do with intelligence. Does the best painter also make the best doctor? Does the best singer make the best CEO?
No.

 

[Dr. Claus]

Are you saying that when those laws came off the books that white people just said "Welp, can't be racist anymore."?

Nice strawman.

I was referring specifically to laws such as redlining that have been removed. However, the effects of those laws (again, such as redlining) are still felt in the present day, with little noticeable change happening to fix them. Racists still of course exist, I state as much in my post.

The modern incarnation of the Republican party was founded on racist intent. When Democrats embraced Civil Rights, the racists ran to the Republican party and started "virtue signaling" to other racists that the Republican party was the place to be.

I stand by what I stated. There are racists on both sides. Trying to label an entire (or majority) political party (which makes up a very large group within the US) as racists is disingenuous - which you well know.

As an side: You seem desperate to want to pain white people, in general, as racist. Why is this? This seems to be a common occurrence in the majority of your posts. It is almost as if you, a left leaning individual, have some prejudice to white people.

This is not true at all. I posted a long list of IQ studies, with the most recent dating from 2012. Did you go through them all?
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/jord...white-privilege.1464114/page-7#post-253360667

There's nothing biased about IQ. It's a myth that "you need to be educated to understand it". They're not based on any languages/math. They're about pattern repetition.

And again, Asian countries both poor and rich, still outperform all White countries. Do you think Scientists are playing a jokes on whites by saying White IQ is lower than Asian? Why not just say "White IQ is 9000!!! Lol, everybody else has 10 IQ".

That would make these tests pointless if all you could do is insert any number you like.

I have, as well as a number you did not post when I did a cursory look into my university's library and interlibrary loan. I stand by what I stated.

 

[<+)O Robido O(+>]

Trying to label an entire (or majority) political party (which makes up a very large group within the US) as racists is disingenuous - which you well know.

If it walks like a duck...

As an side: You seem desperate to want to paint white people, in general, as racist.

Just the racists ones. Some of my best friends are white.

This seems to be a common occurrence in the majority of your posts. It is almost as if you, a left leaning individual, have some prejudice to white people.

Just the racists ones.