posted
OH GOD, OH NO, SOME D-ranged don't think us deft I'ts tha end of tha world WHAT HAVE WE GOT LEFT!
On a serious note: I don't give a F|U|C|K about this and
I don't give a F*U*C*K about this because:
*In my eighteen years on the planet I've come to know that racism DOES still exist.
*I know some who are maliscious has hell in their general opinions towards "white" people.
*I just read the rest of that BULLSH|T BLONDE AFRICAN thread, and seen about a million racist retarded comments by whites (That I never hear in real life {****ers}) and worse yet,
*based on the media and history spewed out, alot african-americans don't know the difference either, which is the most sad to me. Afro-americans (us) have to help ourselves.
So therefore, based on tha above, I just don't give a ****.
We need to help ourselves, **** EVerybody else. Maybe we can help others too, but just to do it. Read history, nobody's thanking any contributions made, just taken advantage, so any comments about my not being productive awards whO EVAh a nice phat F U.
To me it's okay to help other africans out. Be advised, some are sensitive (with reason I guess) against outside help/accomplishment and others don't give a flyin ****.
If it was in someones best interest to sell us out, and we want to go kiss/save/sniff* ass, wish for friend/kin-ship, and get the opposite -----Then we need to re-assess things.
Same for trying to gain acceptance from another group (they were one w/ regards to us so F. whatchu think) which enslaved "ours" and put "ours" through a holocaust: don't expect anything. This is why it's good to NOT get sucked into b.s. I would make an analytical assessment, but I no longer give a u know because: it wouldn't address my target audiences.
Everyone looks into their best interest, not the %uckin state of the world, so (I'm starting to realize in life and on here why this is one of chapelles fav. words) the ONLY CRITERIA WE SHOULD LOOK AT IS:
Is it in my best interest?
I feel good right now, toher than the feeling that I need to 'discharge' all this negative energy. Haven't felt this way in ages. Good to be back.
quote:...just be a leader not a follower...Race is a social construct...as a matter of fact, your teacher has a Black Ancestor as all human beings on earth...
posted
Intellectual racists have existed for hundreds of years.
The architects of White Supremacy were not illiterate, inbred hicks who could not express an intellectual thought if their life depended on it. They were learned men who expressed their cultural arrogance through racist theories to rationalize their position in the world.
This Latin teacher who leads a double life, speading racism on the internet does not surprise me.
I've probably had a few closest racist teachers myself.
It's one of the things in life we have to deal with. There will be people with views we do not like who are in positions of authority. It's when they use their authority to carry out injustices that you have to be concerned.
Posts: 1203 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Obviously the power and time and change have raised esteem desperation levels. Time allows for refinements and as more Black people become aware of their pre-slave history, naturally, mentalities and view of self begins to enhance and this is not good news for racist gate-keepers like Winston McCuen, who feel the need to consistently boost white students confidence against Black people with outright lies of the most unfounded base. For Winston McCuen, this is a scarifies for his race, white people or “white-hope” (whatever that means), until all those white students graduate and meet the real-world to discover a sea of intelligent black people with many of their minds shattered for the rest of their lives. It's sad but inevitability is the greatest teacher.
Brought to you by Kemson (a.k.a BlackGreat, a.k.a TheOne&Only)
Posts: 179 | From: United States | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by What Box : carLos manGuiNGez: OH GOD, OH NO, SOME D-ranged don't think us deft I'ts tha end of tha world WHAT HAVE WE GOT LEFT!
On a serious note: I don't give a F|U|C|K about this and
I don't give a F*U*C*K about this because:
*In my eighteen years on the planet I've come to know that racism DOES still exist.
*I know some who are maliscious has hell in their general opinions towards "white" people.
*I just read the rest of that BULLSH|T BLONDE AFRICAN thread, and seen about a million racist retarded comments by whites (That I never hear in real life {****ers}) and worse yet,
*based on the media and history spewed out, alot african-americans don't know the difference either, which is the most sad to me. Afro-americans (us) have to help ourselves.
So therefore, based on tha above, I just don't give a ****.
We need to help ourselves, **** EVerybody else. Maybe we can help others too, but just to do it. Read history, nobody's thanking any contributions made, just taken advantage, so any comments about my not being productive awards whO EVAh a nice phat F U.
To me it's okay to help other africans out. Be advised, some are sensitive (with reason I guess) against outside help/accomplishment and others don't give a flyin ****.
If it was in someones best interest to sell us out, and we want to go kiss/save/sniff* ass, wish for friend/kin-ship, and get the opposite -----Then we need to re-assess things.
Same for trying to gain acceptance from another group (they were one w/ regards to us so F. whatchu think) which enslaved "ours" and put "ours" through a holocaust: don't expect anything. This is why it's good to NOT get sucked into b.s. I would make an analytical assessment, but I no longer give a u know because: it wouldn't address my target audiences.
Everyone looks into their best interest, not the %uckin state of the world, so (I'm starting to realize in life and on here why this is one of chapelles fav. words) the ONLY CRITERIA WE SHOULD LOOK AT IS:
Is it in my best interest?
I feel good right now, toher than the feeling that I need to 'discharge' all this negative energy. Haven't felt this way in ages. Good to be back.
Real talk... A bit of Ma'at philosophy can help with the rage though. Don't go shooting at people
It's not time for that just yet.
Posts: 3423 | From: the jungle - when y'all stop playing games, call me. | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Mansa Musa: It's when they use their authority to carry out injustices that you have to be concerned.
Indeed. This is why we need to set up our own CORPORATIONS. If we don't work for/with racists, then there is little to worry about in the global environment.
Africans, African_Americans, West_Indians and South_Americans need to come together to make it happen. Imagine all those young men in the ghettoes, in the favelas, in African shanty towns - they could be mobilised and be a far more productive force than say, China. IF ONLY.
Funny thing is, ONE African president could probably set this off. Just ONE right-thinking African president.
Posts: 3423 | From: the jungle - when y'all stop playing games, call me. | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Kemson: Time allows for refinements and as more Black people become aware of their pre-slave history, naturally, mentalities and view of self begins to enhance and this is not good news for racist gate-keepers like Winston McCuen...
Indeed, spread the word like wild fire.
Spread the word with zeal, like those Black pentecostal churches. IN FACT, it's about time we started INVADING those churches and taking control of that pulpit and spit that TRUE WORD into the ears of Black folks. The infrastructure is already there...
If there's any pastors of those large pentecostal churches here and you're thinking of a way to subtly introduce these truths to your congregation, holler at me on PM. I know how the Black-Christian mind works.
Posts: 3423 | From: the jungle - when y'all stop playing games, call me. | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by What Box : carLos manGuiNGez: OH GOD, OH NO, SOME D-ranged don't think us deft I'ts tha end of tha world WHAT HAVE WE GOT LEFT!
On a serious note: I don't give a F|U|C|K about this and
I don't give a F*U*C*K about this because:
*In my eighteen years on the planet I've come to know that racism DOES still exist.
*Seen alot ofwhite people that vehemently deny this.
*I know some who are maliscious has hell in their general opinions towards "white" people.
*I just read the rest of that tribal BULLSH|T BLONDE AFRICAN thread.
*Seen about a million racist retarded comments by whites on tha net (That I never hear in real life {****ers}) and to add to this,
*based on the media and history spewed out, alot african-americans don't know the difference either, which is the most sad to me. Afro-americans (us) have to help ourselves.
So therefore, based on tha above, I just don't give a ****.
We need to help ourselves, **** EVerybody else. Maybe we can help others too, but just to do it. Read history, nobody's thanking any contributions made, just taken advantage, so any comments about my not being productive awards whO EVAh a nice phat F U.
To me it's okay to help other africans out. Be advised, some are sensitive (with reason I guess) against outside help/accomplishment and others don't give a flyin ****.
If it was in someones best interest to sell us out, and we want to go kiss/save/sniff* ass, wish for friend/kin-ship, and get the opposite -----Then we need to re-assess things.
Same for trying to gain acceptance from another group (they were one w/ regards to us so F. whatchu think) which enslaved "ours" and put "ours" through a holocaust: don't expect anything. This is why it's good to NOT get sucked into b.s. I would make an analytical assessment, but I no longer give a u know because: it wouldn't address my target audiences.
Everyone looks into their best interest, not the %uckin state of the world, so (I'm starting to realize in life and on here why this is one of chapelles fav. words) the ONLY CRITERIA WE SHOULD LOOK AT IS:
Is it in my best interest?
I feel good right now, toher than the feeling that I need to 'discharge' all this negative energy. Haven't felt this way in ages. Good to be back.
Real talk... A bit of Ma'at philosophy can help with the rage though. Don't go shooting at people
It's not time for that just yet.
Yep, I felt like doing something retarded yesterday, but with how things are -- naa. I guess I'll take it out on that calculus test today.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
Subjugating Your Inferiors With A Human Touch Compassionate Oppression By Jason Miller 2-19-7
An Open Letter to Ehud Olmert By T.D. "Daddy" Rice
Ehud Olmert Office of the Prime Minister 3 Kaplan St. Hakiyra, Jerusalem 91919
Dear Ehud,
My hearty congratulations to you and your fellow Zionists! You sure know how to contain those infernal camel jockeys infesting your Holy Land. A man can't help but admire your fierce determination to keep that pack of maggots from maturing into a full blown infestation of flies.
But I have to tell you that despite my reverence for you and your cause, I have concluded that you folks are going about this the wrong way. You've infuriated most of the Arab and Islamic world, the UN is constantly assailing you, and untold numbers of liberal (excuse my language) pussies are calling for my great nation to stop funding your good work. By persistently applying those ruthless, heavy-handed tactics to rein in your inferiors, you're borrowing trouble faster than our spend-happy government can increase its debts with Chinaand Japan. You are in some deep fecal matter, my friend.
I know our situations are different. We in the United States imported our ineducable criminals. Yours were squatting on your land when you arrived. Yet we both have the same essential problem. Our nations are populated by a large number of lazy, illiterate, and violent beings who stopped evolving somewhere between ape and human. I feel a deep sense of solidarity with you, brother. Therefore, nothing would please me more than to see you manage your horde of savages in a more civilized and humane manner, like us.
The smartest thing we did in the United States was to enslave the Negroids. The existence of chattel slavery for two centuries enabled a very small group of our people to accumulate tremendous amounts of wealth. Under the yoke of servitude, our African underclass had little opportunity to contaminate us with their filth or demand the "humane treatment" your scourge in Gaza and the West Bank clamor for in perpetuity. Unfortunately, overt slavery became untenable with the advent of that sanctimonious Abolitionist movement and the disastrous Civil War.
Ironically though, the emancipation of the slaves was probably the best thing that could have happened. Had we maintained that institution, the United States would have become moral pariahs, like your country.
We found better solutions to our Negro problem. We promised them forty acres and a mule. Boy did we shine in the eyes of the world when we delivered. And who noticed when Congress rescinded the Freedmen's Bureau Act and gave the land back to its rightful owners?
Old Jim Crow rose to towering heights to keep the "free men" in their rightful place. Poll taxes, separate but "equal" institutions, and lynchings (in which we all delighted) committed by radical fringe groups (with the complicity of law enforcement) were just a few of our strategies. We kept our former slaves ignorant, terrorized, impoverished, and politically impotent. What could they do but shuffle along and mumble "yes sir"?
Tragically, some uppity Negroes managed to overcome their innate deficiencies. The small handful that actually manifested some intellect and moral fiber wreaked havoc on a nearly ideal system. Genetic anomalies like W.E.B. DuBois, Martin Luther King, and Malcolm X brought the United States to the brink of insurrection. We had to do something. So we gave our troglodytes the "special rights" they demanded. Rights like voting, sharing public institutions and facilities with the rest of us, living where they wanted to, borrowing money from the lender of their choice, and unfortunately, many more.
But did we give up? Hell no! Like you Zionists, we true Americans are tenacious, clever, and innovative. We were not about to roll over and allow a group of uncivilized, genetically disadvantaged Africans steal our treasure and power.
While the losses of slavery and institutionalized racism were both significant blows, they merely steeled our determination to come up with a more opaque and subtle system of oppression.
Which brings me to the point of my letter, Mr. Olmert. Your current modus operandi is unsustainable. So pay close attention to the next few paragraphs as I delineate the fine art of subjugating a segment of your population while maintaining the appearances of a society based on equality, justice, and all that nonsense.
In the aftermath of the civil rights movement, we quickly recognized that despite our setbacks, we could still wield our power like a skull-crushing cudgel. Desegregate our schools and let those disgusting cockroaches move into our neighborhoods? No problem. We simply built an interstate highway system and created a vast network of suburbs to enable white flight from the inner cities. Before the uppity Negroes and their weak-kneed liberal allies knew what hit them, we had legal segregation of schools created by demographics, ghettos riddled with crime, poverty, and blight for "people of color" and clean, safe, comfortable neighborhoods for us real Americans. And now that dark folks are slithering their way into suburbia, we are gentrifying the inner cities to take them back for our people.
What about empowered black leaders, you might ask?
At first our methods were crude. As you know, we simply assassinated MLK. That was probably the most effective thing to do in the long run. King was a real threat. However, in the short term eliminating him caused us a host of problems. We have since learned to give the appearance of appeasement by throwing agitators like him a few meaningless crumbs. We now watch with delight as those suckers snap them up as if we had presented them with a feast fit for a King.
We have even begun carefully screening rising leaders in the colored community. Once we feel confident that such a leader will represent the interests of our moneyed elite, we allow them a degree of political power. Yet they are painfully aware that the spigots that fill their campaign coffers can close rapidly and that the corporate media selling them to the American public can turn on them in a heartbeat. As one of those rare Negroes that has attained wealth and privilege, we might just allow Obama to become President. That is provided he behaves and doesn't let his black genes come to the fore.
In a stroke of sheer brilliance, we learned to capitalize on the natural talents of these lesser beings in our midst. We all know they excel in running, jumping, and song and dance. While we allow a tiny percentage of our darkies to make millions of dollars by showcasing their talents in the sports and entertainment industries, the nearly invisible detriment to their race is worth that sacrifice. Tens of millions of young blacks neglect educations and real opportunities to chase a one in a billion chance to become a "star". A significant number of them also join a violent subculture glorified by some of the performers they emulate. Media-induced self-destruction is a powerful tool indeed.
All right, Ehud. I know this has been a long letter. Here is your payoff for laboring through it. Having saved the best for last, I will now reveal our most ingenious means of maintaining social control.
As you are well aware, in the United States the masses are easily manipulated. They eagerly accept the tripe about the mainstream media being "liberal". We both know the reality is that virtually anything that moves more than a tick left of dead center on the political spectrum is DOA in a system of "news" delivery monopolized by five behemoth corporations. Thankfully, they wouldn't let those cowardly morons from the true Left within miles of their centers of propaganda dissemination. Thus faux liberal commentators and pundits have successfully inculcated many real Americans with the belief that the black mongrels amongst us represent a perpetual threat that can only be contained through brutal incarceration.
Herein lies the essence of our domination of the African scourge in our midst. Consider, my dear comrade in arms, the myriad benefits of our resplendent mechanism that nauseating moonbats cynically refer to as the "prison industrial complex":
1. 90% of black males face arrest and jail for at least a minor offense at some point during their lives.
2. As I compose this missive, at least one million of our 35 million former slaves are safely behind bars.
3. In 1989 we had more blacks in our prisons than did the Apartheid regime in South Africa.
4. From 1980 to 2000 we increased spending on law enforcement by over 400%. This enabled us to funnel tremendous sums of public money away from education, health care, and other programs that would have benefited the black canker that slowly eats away at our social fabric.
5. 1.4 million so-called Afro-Americans have permanently lost the right to vote because they are convicted felons. An impressive political coup on our part considering the fact that only 4.6 million blacks voted in the 1996 federal elections. And remember that your good friend in the White House "won" the 2000 election in part because we managed to disenfranchise thousands of voters in Florida, despite their lack of a criminal record.
6. Rather than promoting treatment or ways out of the poverty that often motivates a person to become addicted to drugs, we have criminalized the behavior. We impose the harshest sentences on those caught possessing crack, the drug of choice for our Negroids.
7. Prison inmates, half of whom are black, provide a pool of free labor for major corporations such as Nordstrom's, IBM, Toys R Us, Victoria's Secret, JC Penney and Microsoft.
Preying upon and feeding their miserable cycle of impoverishment, violence against one another, splintered families, substance abuse, ignorance, and incarceration, we have our undesirables well in hand.
Forgive me if I am too blunt, but I must tell you that in contrasting America with Israel, it is painfully obvious that your nation needs to make some significant adjustments in how it deals with its lower order of beings. Despite the best efforts of our corporate media, which is as sympathetic to your cause of Palestinian oppression as I am, the world is awakening to the brutality of your tactics.
Increasingly, when people look to Israel, they see a nation that imposes collective punishment on a vulnerable group of indigenous people because some of them resort to violence. They see eight Palestinian children killed by Israelis for every one Israeli child killed by Palestinians, oppressive military checkpoints, wanton destruction of civilian infrastructure in the Occupied Territories by the IDF, imprisonment at a ratio of 10,000 Palestinians to ten Israelis, four Palestinian adults slaughtered for every one Israeli adult, the Apartheid Wall, illegal Israeli settlements, razings of Palestinian homes and orchards, Israeli monopolization of water supplies, and Palestinians living in abject poverty as a result of Israel's withering economic sanctions.
We in the United States project an entirely different image. The world reveres us for emancipating our slaves, abolishing the Jim Crow laws, desegregating our schools, and enacting civil rights legislation. Many view the African refugee population in our country as the failed subspecies that it is. Outside observers are intelligent enough to note that we gave those festering pustules of our society welfare, affirmative action, affordable housing, and a host of other means to escape their misery, yet they chose to continue wallowing in it.
While we in the United States are certainly under fire for our aggressive foreign policy, through brilliant machinations we have managed to preserve the façade that our domestic policies are benevolent, compassionate, and just. From the world's perspective, our Negroes have demonstrated themselves to be a failed segment of the human race, in spite of our monumental, magnanimous efforts to help them. Meanwhile, your stratagems and actions are martyrizing the Palestinians.
Ehud, I applaud your objectives and the agony you have inflicted upon those sand monkeys in your back yard. Yet my purpose in writing you is to express my deep concerns that your approaches will come back to haunt you and your fellow Zionists. I felt it was my duty to warn you of the perils of your present course and to bring potential alternative tactics to your attention.
Necessity is the mother of invention, but I do hope that you implement changes concerning the Palestinians before circumstances force your hand. If I can be of further assistance, please don't hesitate to contact me.
Best Wishes,
T.D. "Daddy" Rice
---
Jason Miller is a wage slave of the American Empire who has freed himself intellectually and spiritually. He writes prolifically, his essays have appeared widely on the Internet, and he volunteers at homeless shelters. He sometimes writes satirical apologias for racism and Zionism under the nom de plum T.D. "Daddy" Rice. He welcomes constructive correspondence at willpowerful@hotmail.com or via his blog, Thomas Paine's Corner, at http://civillibertarian.blogspot.com/
posted
^Very good post, would've commented on it a day ago if could.
I wonder though, might that teacher be our very own Professor H./ARROW99. though I thought hore taught [distorted] history.
Anyway he's not the only racist person out there. Someone posted maybe in another thread that it was not in the Jew's best interest to be perceived as racist and therefore they make sure they don't appear that way. The was actually a racist Jewish/Israeli group I saw on youtube the other day. So in conclusion, it's not in their bestinterest just as much as it's not in a white persons best interest.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Al Sharpton's ancestors were slaves owned by Strom Thurmond's relatives
NEW YORK - Genealogists have found that civil rights activist the Rev. Al Sharpton is a descendent of a slave owned by relatives of the late Sen. Strom Thurmond, a newspaper reported Sunday. The Daily News said professional genealogists, working at the newspaper's behest, recently uncovered the ancestral ties between one of the nation's best known black leaders and a man who was once a prominent defender of segregation.
posted
Haha! That guy is a clown, he says "generally" blacks are inferior to whites, yet some individual blacks can be smarter than individual whites? That would be extreme overlap, is there a such thing as a Chimpanzee who is individually more intelligent than a normal brain functioning human being? If this is some type of golden rule, that blacks are dumb on average then shouldn't there be an end point, like the black IQ stopping at 130 or something since the average black IQ is in the 80s(because of social/cultural reasons)? So all blacks with an IQ higher than 120 (me, lol) must be some type of freak. Haha, racism is so unbelievably idiotic, there's no way to even argue ignorance..
Posts: 66 | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
These kind of white racists make these "logical" determinations that blacks are inferior. Of course they have to acknowledge that those blacks who make it into success with their intelligence are 'exceptions' but...
they can not explain how these exceptions (which in their minds are few... but still number in the millions) genetically are "superior" to the rest.
they have no way of resolving those potential "exceptions" which they assume are failures. So all of the other "superior" blacks whom they assume are "inferior" are lost as well.
they have no way of dealing with the millions of inferior whites who fail. Shall a "superior" black have "superiority" rights over an "inferior" white?
Most importantly, as these questsions to this ponderous nonsense called "white supermacy" suggest, the rationalization of white supremacy is based on assumptions and on "symptoms" and not on root causes.
It was the rule-breaking of laws that allowed whites to colonize and destroy Native American lands. It was the brutality of slavery and the sexual rape of black women that created so many mixed children. It was the prejudice and rejection of representative government that allowed southern states to hold a 50/50 hold on government thanks to the Electoral College allowing them to count 60% of their slaves as extra votes at the ballot box. It was the inability to accept democracy that caused Mississippi to be a dictatorship for 4 years after the government there was voted out by the black majority of the state. It was the insanity of slavery that sent white confederate men to their death to uphold an institution which has no moral basis.
Basically it's the concept that the rules and standards of goodness only apply to "me" when convenient. When i don't get my way, then I won't count that against me. And my personal favorite "It's only morally good when it benefits my desires"
Good job teacher. Ignoramus infinitium
Posts: 68 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
if white racists would stop being racist, i guarantee, the black IQ test scores would jump to the white average. Most blacks have to deal with being seen as inferior, bad, and resigned to following, as early as the 3rd grade. I've seen it myself. Black kids who are intelligent ore more astute and sharp than white kids are usually pushed out of leading (unless of course they are the ONLY black kid in class, then they become a novelty and are pushed into being THE leader). But the average black kid, or teenager, when in a group setting with whites, the black does not get to assert himself or herself without whites trying to backstab, undermine, or distance themselves. It doesn't matter what the circumstance is. IQ tests are a reflection on how much a child or adolescent is able to know they can assert themselves intellectually. If you are taught that intellectual prowess is something to be doubleguessed or checked... then you will obviously subconsciously do so yourself when you take a test like an IQ test.
Oh and lets not forget how little access black kids have to the concepts and environment that a high IQ score would require.
quote:Originally posted by Sonofisis: Haha! That guy is a clown, he says "generally" blacks are inferior to whites, yet some individual blacks can be smarter than individual whites? That would be extreme overlap, is there a such thing as a Chimpanzee who is individually more intelligent than a normal brain functioning human being? If this is some type of golden rule, that blacks are dumb on average then shouldn't there be an end point, like the black IQ stopping at 130 or something since the average black IQ is in the 80s(because of social/cultural reasons)? So all blacks with an IQ higher than 120 (me, lol) must be some type of freak. Haha, racism is so unbelievably idiotic, there's no way to even argue ignorance..
posted
---I like your excuses for the lower I.Q averages , well it must be the racism!---
Yeah that is a pretty lame excuse I have to agree here.
---You know that an I.Q 70 and below is considered mentally retarded?---
LOL!!! That's funny
---first blacks go to the same schools. Also if anyone has the right to claim racism now a days its white. 90% of hate crimes are committed by blacks . It would be the white kid who went to school who would always be called cracker and whitey. IF a nigger went to school and was called the n word you would see that **** all over cnn.---
That is very true I will admit, but you also have to take in account that there is much race baiting in the media. Most of the people at the front of defending racism against blacks are WHITE and they use this just for sensationalism and also to get uneducated whites like yourself riled up to add to the contingent consciousness of white supremacy. Pretty good tactic actually if you ask me lol...it worked on you didn't By the way what is a white person like you doing at a black school? *snickering* Seems like you po' whites are the only ones that pull the "reverse racism" card. Whites with status could give a shiit less lmao hmmmm.
---Of course they never show any black hate crimes. Why? Because all the media is racist against whites lmao---
Another white trash statment, and I guess all liberals are commies too; huh; Mr. George Dubya lova.
---Also you guys have hundreds of black only organizations. Why? because you cant handle fairness---
Ummm this is because of a thing called "slavery" and "segregation" lol and the result of these two circumstances. Yet again; another white trash argument. Hey, "ya'll" still got dem der KKK and NRA lol so don't feel too lef' out ya heya.
---When whites went to Africa they had no laws or civilizations---
I am going to have to ask you to support this claim. Thanks in advance .
---They already proved I.Q averages even in Africa and have hard evidence along with it.---
I.Q tests are indicitive of "test taking" skills and of course the criteria and model of these test taking skills are European in origin. Why SHOULD an African have a high "European" I.Q; and thank the Gods that we don't *whew*. Now let us make an African I.Q test and polarize your argument shall we .
---YOU GUYS JUST LIKE TO WHINE AND BITCH LIKE SCHOOL GIRLS GRABBING EVERY EXUSE YOU HAVE. LIKE A MAN FALLING DOWN A WELL TRYING TO GRAB ON TO EVERYTHING---
That is because African Americans mostly aren't raised by fathers and when they are; the fathers are not fit to be productive fathers. Also, there are no Alpha Males in the African American community so I would agree with this point unfortunatly.
---YOU GUYS SEEM TO BE HYPOCRITES THOUGH. YOU CLAIM TO BELIVE IN EVOLUTION THEN DENY THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN WHITES AND BLACKS LMAO---
That's a good point and I posted something about this in another thread. They seem to keep trying to make all humans the same, yet are spiteful against the white's perception of difference. Very peculiar and definetly implies an inferiority complex. Hell, I LOVE being different than WHITES LOL, but then again I can't relate to African Americans becuase I was never a slave to any Arab or Jew or White man nor worshiped their archetype for perfection (YAHWEH/ALLAH/JESUS). So maybe you should try to empathize with this "false identity" fallacy instead of condemn them for it.
---BLACKS NEVER DID ANYTHING ON THEIR OWN---
I will need some support for this claim. Thanks in advance.
---AND DONT GO INTO THE NIGGER BLABBLE ABOUT EGYPT--
I hate to agree, but you are correct. As soon as you whites attack African Americans about civilization and culture they like to pull Egypt out of their azz. Egypt has nothing to do with African Americans what so ever and was not a homogenous culture or civilization. So it's kind of like they implicitly want to claim the civilization based on the European concept of race i.e black/white/red/yellow and include themselves because they are "black", but all the while try to abolish the European concept of race. Very odd contradiction.
---BLACKS LEFT AFRICA AND TRAVELED EAST INTO ASIA. THEY EVOLOED IN TO THE SUPERIOR MONGOLOID WITCH IN TURN EVOLOED IN TO THE SUPERIOR CAUCASOID IN ICE AGE EUROPE. SINCE WHITES HAD THE MOST TROUBLING AND ITELLENGE REQUIRED EVIRONMENT THEY HAD MORE STIMULI. THIS STIMULI RESULTED IN A SUPERIOR BRAIN---
You never know this could be true, but I don't correlate intelligence with the brain nor it's size considering my mother and grandmother are both psychiatrists and are firm non materialists and do not conform to the "the brain is the mind" as most neurologists do and I concurr with them despite my up bringing.
---OH AND DONT GIVE ME THE WHITE MAN RAPPED THEIR LAND---
Oh, but they did. As well as the Jew and the Arab and the Moor/Berber Isn't this supposed to make you MORE proud rather than GUILTY considering you are superior in everything including weaponry and savagery and theft and murdering and raping and pilaging etc. hmmmm .
---YOU THINK ONE COUNTRY COULD FUCKING STAND ON ITS FEET AT LEAST---
I am going to need support for this. Thanks in advance.
---REALLY WHERE ELSE IN NATURE DO YOU SEE A ANIMAL THAT ONLY EVOLVED PHYSICAL DIFFERENCES?---
I don't get the point here? Could you clarify?
---NO PURE NEGROID HAS an I.Q OVER 130.---
Mine is 148 and I am more pure negroid(whatever that means)than anyone here lol, but then again I went to white schools and white colleges and had strict parents that are in the top 2% of the United States economic tier so who knows that maybe why. Your statistics need to have a more diversified model in the variables, but then again that would defeat the purpose of the statistic to begin with now wouldn't it
It's clear to see you are just some filthy Irish/Welsh/Scot MICK Celt which infects almost all of the United States gene pool due to your expulsion, out-breeding and oppresion of the English to get rid of their degenerate trash and ship you to other islands being that you are descendants of criminals. Your lack of an education shows in your sentence structure and typing skills and also considering most of you filthy Micks are in the south and midwest of the United States (more segrated in the East coast where I grew up and thant the Gods lol) I can narrow you down to what?...Bama or Texas or Arkansas? LOLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh by the way did I mention along with hating the Jews/Anglos/Latins/Arabs/Indians/Native Americans/Pakis/African Americans/Hausa/Berbers/Tuaregs/Fulani/Fon/Ewe/Ashanti/Ibo/Tutsi that I also hate filthy Celts?
Posts: 271 | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
HEREDITY, ENVIRONMENT, AND RACE DIFFERENCES IN IQ A Commentary on Rushton and Jensen (2005) Richard E. Nisbett Department of Psychology, University of Michigan
ABSTRACT
J. P. Rushton and A. R. Jensen (2005) ignore or misinterpret most of the evidence of greatest relevance to the question of heritability of the Black-White IQ gap. A dispassionate reading of the evidence on the association of IQ with degree of European ancestry for members of Black populations, convergence of Black and White IQ in recent years, alterability of Black IQ by intervention programs, and adoption studies lend no support to a hereditarian interpretation of the Black-White IQ gap. On the contrary, the evidence most relevant to the question indicates that the genetic contribution to the Black-White IQ gap is nil.
Nisbett, Richard E. S-1 #1 Rushton and Jensen's (2005) article is characterized by failure to cite, in any but the most cursory way, strong evidence against their position. Their lengthy presentation of indirectly relevant evidence which, in light of the direct evidence against the hereditarian view they prefer, has little probative value, and their “scorecard” tallies of evidence on various points cannot be sustained by the evidence. The Current Difference in Intelligence Between Blacks and Whites
Nisbett, Richard E. S-2 #1 One of the most serious misrepresentations in Rushton and Jensen's (2005) article is their claim that the current difference in IQ between Blacks and Whites is slightly more than 15 points, or 1 standard deviation. The best evidence we have indicates that that value is out of date and that the Black-White IQ gap has lessened considerably in recent decades (Grissmer, 1994; Grissmer, Flanagan, & Williamson, 1998; Grissmer, Williamson, Kirby, & Berends, 1998; Hedges & Nowell, 1998; Nisbett, 1995, 1998). We do not have actual IQ scores available to establish this point but rather various ability tests, most of which are highly correlated with IQ—some as high as.8 to.9. Though IQ scores would be preferable to speak directly to the question of IQ change, such data are unavailable in the form of a national random sample. In contrast, several probability samples of U.S. elementary and high school students are available. These include, over the period 1965-1994, the Equality of Educational Opportunity (EEO) survey, the National Longitudinal Study, the High School and Beyond survey, the National Education Longitudinal Study, and the National Assessment of Educational Progress program (NAEP).
Nisbett, Richard E. S-2 #2 Hedges and Nowell (1998) found improvement on almost all tests for African American 12th graders compared with other 12th graders over the period 1965-1994. The best estimates in terms of the stability the scores provide, and in terms of their correlations with IQ, are in the form of composites, for example, reading + vocabulary + mathematics for the EEO survey. The Black-White gap on these composites over the period decreased on average by 0.13 standard deviation per decade, yielding an estimate of a reduction of the gap by around 0.39 standard deviation over the period. The largest study, conducted by the NAEP, indicated that, if trends were to continue, the gap in reading scores would be eliminated in approximately 25 years and the gap in science scores in approximately 75 years.
Nisbett, Richard E. S-2 #3 Grissmer, Flanagan, and Williamson (1998) found comparably large gains on the NAEP for Blacks in elementary school, junior high, and high school. Whites gained slightly in both math and reading between 1971 and 1996, but Blacks gained much more, narrowing the gap by 0.2 to 0.6 standard deviations. This would yield estimates of obliteration of the gap somewhere between 20 and 60 years from now, except that the gains were concentrated among the students, at all age groups, who entered school in the period between 1968 and 1980. Students entering prior to that period and after that period showed no gains. It would take us far afield to discuss why the gains occurred when they did, but the main relevance is that the old estimate of 1 standard deviation in ability scores no longer applies. The gap is substantially less than that at the present time, probably more like 0.6-0.7 standard deviation or approximately 10 IQ points. The Effects of Intervention
Nisbett, Richard E. S-3 #1 A second misrepresentation by Rushton and Jensen (2005) flows from their statement that the Head Start program leads only to immediate and not to long-term gains. Because no other early childhood intervention programs are mentioned, the implication is that such programs are not effective over the long run. But in fact, more ambitious interventions produce very significant gains that last as long as until age 15, the oldest age tested to this point to my knowledge (S. L. Ramey & Ramey, 1999). For example, Campbell and Ramey (1994) provided Black infants with an 8-hr per day intervention involving exercises designed to enhance cognitive, language, perceptual-motor, and social development. Mothers of the children had an average IQ of 85. At age 12, 56% of control children had IQs in the normal range (above 85), about what would be expected based on the mothers' IQ and assuming that the fathers' IQ was in the same vicinity. But 87% of children exposed to the intervention had IQs in the normal range. Only 13% of intervention-exposed children were of borderline IQ, and none were even mildly retarded. In contrast, 37% of control children were of borderline intelligence, and 7% were at least mildly retarded.
Nisbett, Richard E. S-3 #2Other early intervention programs have shown IQ effects of intervention programs in the range of 4-5 points, which are sustained until at least age 8-15 (e.g., S. L. Ramey & Ramey, 1999). Effects on academic achievement can also be substantial. Ramey and his colleagues found an intervention program resulted in 12% placement in special education classes at some point by the age of 15 as compared with 48% for control children (C. T. Ramey et al., 2000). They found that 30% of children who had participated in an intervention program had been retained in a grade by age 15 as compared with 56% of control children. By now, there are many studies showing significant, sometimes marked and sustained, effects of early intervention programs. But Rushton and Jensen (2005) choose to cite only one failure, and by implication to allow it to stand as the only relevant finding.
Nisbett, Richard E. S-3 #3 It should also be noted that it is not merely early intervention that increases IQ and school achievement. Programs at every age level from infancy to college can be effective (Bennett, 1987; Herrnstein, Nickerson, De Sanchez, & Swets, 1986; Selvin, 1992; Steele et al., 2004; Treisman, 1992). There is thus very good reason to believe that steps can be taken—some not terribly expensive—to improve test and academic performance of Blacks. Direct Tests of Heritability of the Black-White IQ Difference
Nisbett, Richard E. S-4 #1 Most important, Rushton and Jensen (2005) ignore or misrepresent a large literature dealing with the most direct sort of evidence, which relates to the influence of European ancestry on Black intelligence. U.S. “Black” populations contain as much as 30% European genes. This means that an individual who is identified as Black could have anywhere from 100% African ancestry to mostly European ancestry (true of as much as 15% of some U.S “Black” subpopulations; Herskovits, 1930). This allows us to identify the extent to which percentage African ancestry, variously assessed, is associated with IQ. Five different types of studies allow for an estimation of the effect of relatively African versus relatively European genes on IQ. I report these below in increasing order of what I take to be their probativeness. Skin Color
Nisbett, Richard E. S-4 #2There are numerous studies of the association between skin color and IQ. Skin color can be used as at least a weak proxy for racial admixture. We can ask whether lighter, presumably more European, skin is associated with higher IQ. Of course, if it were, this would constitute only modest support for the genetic hypothesis because there would be valid grounds for assuming that more social and economic advantages accrued to people with relatively light skin than to people with relatively dark skin and that these advantages would be reflected in higher IQs. In fact, however, the correlation between lightness of skin and IQ, averaged over a large number of studies reviewed by Shuey (1966), is in the vicinity of.10. The average correlation between IQ and judged “Negroidness” of features is even lower. Self-Reports of European Ancestry
Nisbett, Richard E. S-4 #3 Another way to determine the genetic origins of the Black-White difference is to examine the tails of the distribution of Black IQ. We can ask whether Blacks having a significant degree of European heritage are more likely to have high IQ scores. The extreme high-end tail of the IQ distribution should be especially telling, because on the hereditarian theory one would expect people at the tail to be particularly likely to have substantial European ancestry. Jenkins (1936) identified 63 children in a sample of Black Chicago schoolchildren with IQs of 125 or above, and 28 with IQs of 140 or above. Degree of European ancestry was assessed on the basis of self-reports about parents and grandparents. Children with IQs of 125 or above, as well as those with IQs of 140 or above, were slightly less likely to have substantial European ancestry than was estimated to be characteristic of the U.S. Black population as a whole at the time. The results are consistent with a model of zero genetic contribution to the Black-White gap. Rushton and Jensen do not mention this study. Children in Postwar Germany Born to Black and White American Soldiers
Nisbett, Richard E. S-4 #4 Eyferth (1961) examined the IQs of several hundred German children fathered by Black GIs during the post-1945 occupation and compared them with the IQs of children fathered by White GIs. The children of the Black GIs had an average IQ of 96.5. The children of the White GIs had an average IQ of 97. Because the (phenotypic) Black-White gap in the military was similar to that for the U.S. population, these data imply that the Black-White gap in the U.S. population as a whole is not genetic, even in part (Flynn, 1980, pp. 87-88). The results seem particularly telling because it seems highly likely that environmental conditions were inferior for Black children.
Nisbett, Richard E. S-4 #5 How do Rushton and Jensen (2005) treat this study, so telling on the face of it? They give it only two sentences of description and then proceed to critique it on two main grounds. First, 20% to 25% of the “Black” fathers were North African. But one would have to assume preposterously high IQ scores on the part of the North African portion of the Black population to make up for the substantial difference between offspring of Blacks and Whites predicted by their hereditarian theory. Second, Rushton and Jensen assume that Black soldiers were more rigorously selected than Whites and so might have had IQs nearly as high as those of the White soldiers. Blacks in the military did indeed have higher IQs than did Blacks in the general population, but the same was true of White soldiers compared with the general White population. Flynn (1980) has argued that the evidence indicates that the gap in IQ between Black and White soldiers was the same as that in the U.S. population at large. Mixed-Race Children Born to Either a Black or a White Mother
Nisbett, Richard E. S-4 #6If the Black-White IQ gap is largely hereditary, then children having one Black and one White parent should have the same IQ on average, regardless of which parent is Black. But if one assumes that mothers are particularly important to the intellectual socialization of their children and if the socialization practices of Whites are more favorable to IQ development than those of Black mothers, then children of White mothers and Black fathers should have higher IQs than children of Black mothers and White fathers. This could of course not have a plausible genetic explanation. In fact, it emerges that children of White mothers and Black fathers have IQs 9 points higher than children with Black mothers and White fathers (Willerman, Naylor, & Myrianthopoulos, 1974). This result in itself suggests that most of the Black-White IQ gap is environmental in origin. But because mothers are not the only environmental influence on the child's IQ, the 9-point difference might be regarded as a very conservative estimate of the environmental contribution to the gap.
Nisbett, Richard E. S-4 #7 What do Rushton and Jensen (2005) have to say about this study? Because the White mother-Black father pairs averaged 1 year more of education than the Black mother-White father pairs, they conclude the study is uninterpretable! Of course, there can be no basis for assuming that 1-year's difference in education on the part of the parents could possibly translate into an expected 9 IQ point difference for the children. Studies Measuring European Ancestry Through Blood Group Indicators
Nisbett, Richard E. S-4 #8Different races have different frequencies of various blood groups. If the hereditarian model is correct, Blacks having more blood groups characteristic of Europeans should have higher IQs. But Sandra Scarr and her colleagues (Scarr, Pakstis, Katz, & Barker, 1977) found that the correlation between IQ and “European” heritage among Blacks as measured by blood groups was only.05 in a sample of 144 Black adolescent twin pairs. They found a typical correlation of.15 between skin color and IQ, which suggests that the comparable correlations between skin color and IQ in other studies are due not to more European genes on the part of light-skinned Blacks but to social and economic advantages accruing to individuals with lighter skin.
Nisbett, Richard E. S-4 #9 Another blood-group study, by Loehlin, Vandenberg, and Osborne (1973), also examined the association between Europeanness and IQ in a sample of Blacks. In this study, the estimated Europeanness of blood groups (rather than the Europeanness of individuals, estimated from their blood groups) was correlated with IQ in two small samples of Blacks (Loehlin et al., 1973). A.01 correlation between IQ and the extent to which blood group genes were more characteristic of European than African populations was found. In another small sample, they found a nonsignificant, −.38 correlation, such that blood groups associated with Europeanness predicted lower IQ scores.
Nisbett, Richard E. S-4 #10 How do Rushton and Jensen (2005) deal with these data, so apparently damning of an even partially hereditary model? They report that “these studies failed to choose genetic markers with large allele frequency differences between Africans and Europeans” (p. 262). Of course, on the hereditarian hypothesis, the markers would have to have been worthless to yield a zero difference between the populations studied.
Nisbett, Richard E. S-4 #11 Rushton and Jensen (2005) add only a few studies to the list above concerned with racial admixture, and those have extremely weak findings, poor methodology, tangential relevance, or a combination of the three. For example, they cite one study by Lynn (2002), which found a correlation of.17 between self-report of skin color as “very dark,” “dark brown,” “light brown,” or “very light” and a 10-word vocabulary test score. Another study, by Rowe (2002), is merely yet another showing that Blacks have lower IQ scores than Whites. Still other studies ask us to believe that average IQ scores of 70 (in the retarded range) for samples of Africans and for the Black children in a particular Georgia county could possibly be an accurate reflection of genotypic IQ in pure African populations. This would mean that an individual 2 standard deviations from the mean would only manage to reach an IQ of 100, which is average for Western White populations.
Nisbett, Richard E. S-4 #12 Rushton and Jensen (2005) end the empirical part of their article with a scorecard. The scorecard results: hereditarian model (+); culture-only model (0). But any sensible reading of the directly relevant research would have to conclude that there is no support whatever in these studies for an even partially hereditarian model. On the contrary, the converging methodologies provide strong evidence that the genetic contribution to the Black-White IQ gap is close to zero and do not even suggest a direction for any possible genetic contribution. Adoption Studies
Nisbett, Richard E. S-5 #1There are three major adoption studies that address the question of genetic contribution to the Black-White IQ difference. The first two reported below receive one sentence each of description from Rushton and Jensen (2005); the third receives seven paragraphs. Assignment of Black Adoptees to Families of Different Races
Nisbett, Richard E. S-5 #2 Under the hereditarian model, it should make relatively little difference whether Black children are adopted by Black families or by White families. Under an environmental model that assumes that White families are especially likely to intervene in their children's socialization in ways that result in their having high IQs, it should make a substantial difference whether the Black child is raised with a Black or White family. And in fact, it does. Moore (1986) found that Black children raised by Black middle-class families had mean IQs of 104, whereas Black children raised by White middle-class families had mean IQs of 117.
Nisbett, Richard E. S-5 #3Though it is possible that self-selection of some kind might have operated to produce this difference, it could only have happened if genotypically less intelligent children were more likely to be assigned to the Black families than to the White families. But there is no reason to assume that this was the case, or at least that it could possibly account for the results by itself. It seems extraordinarily unlikely that adoption agencies could have engineered IQ differences in placement on the order of 13 points.
Nisbett, Richard E. S-5 #4 Moore's (1986) study also provides some evidence about socialization for intelligence. White mothers were more supportive of their children's intellectual explorations and more forgiving of mistakes than were Black mothers, who tended to be highly critical. Assignment of Black and White Adoptees to the Same Environment
Nisbett, Richard E. S-5 #5 Tizard, Cooperman, and Tizard (1972) studied Black and White children assigned to a highly enriched institutional environment. At age 4 or 5, the White children had IQs of 103, the Black children IQs of 108, and mixed-race children IQs of 106. The Black children were West Indian and the White children were English, and though it is possible that the Black children were born to more intelligent parents than the White children, Flynn (1980) has argued that the difference could have been only enough to eradicate the Black advantage in IQ score, not to turn the advantage to the Black children. Assignment of Black and White Adoptees to Different White Families
Nisbett, Richard E. S-5 #6 The study to which Rushton and Jensen (2005) allocate so much space is the single adoption study that provides any support whatever to the hereditarian position. This is a study by Scarr and Weinberg (1976; Weinberg, Scarr, & Waldman, 1992), which examined adoptees into White families who had two White biological parents, two Black biological parents, or one Black and one White parent. The study is more difficult to interpret than the other two, one of which assigns Black children, who were probably equivalent in expected IQ, to either Black or White middle-class families and the other of which assigns both Black and White children to the same environment. The Scarr and Weinberg study held neither race nor expected IQ nor adoptive setting constant. An additional problem with the Scarr and Weinberg study is that the Black children were adopted at a later age than the others, which would prompt an assumption of lower initial IQ for them. In addition, the Black children's mothers had lower educational levels than did those of the other two groups, which also would prompt an assumption of lower initial IQ. Finally, the “quality of placement” was higher for White children than for other children. All of these facts combined mean that it is not possible to know what to predict under either a hereditarian model or a pure environmental model.
Nisbett, Richard E. S-5 #7The average IQ of the White children at age 7 to 8 years was 112, that of mixed-race children 109, and that of Black children 97. The results are consistent with the assumption that the middle-class family environment resulted in a substantial gain in IQ for all groups. They do not rule out a genetic contribution to explain the gap because the Black children had lower IQs than those of either of the other two groups. Because of the likelihood that the Black children had lower IQs to begin with, for both genetic and nongenetic reasons, however, the results do not give strong support to the hereditarian model. At age 17 the White children had IQs (as measured by another test) of 106, the mixed-race children 99, and the Black children 89. These results are not materially different, in terms of size of the gap, from those at age 7 to 8. The Black children at the earlier point had IQs 15 points lower than those of the White children and at the later point had IQs 17 points lower. The gap was 3 points at age 7 to 8 between White children and mixed-race children and 7 points at age 17.
Nisbett, Richard E. S-5 #8 Rushton and Jensen (2005), however, wish to emphasize the relative difference at the two ages. Because the genetic influence on IQ asserts itself progressively over the life span, they maintain that the greater gap at the later age is reflective of a genetic contribution to the gap. In fact, Rushton and Jensen give as one of their main reasons for reviewing the Scarr and Weinberg study in such depth is that it continues out to the older ages (the other two reasons being that it is the “largest” and “best-known”). There are several flaws with the developmental argument. First, the relative magnitude of differences at the two ages are slight, and second, and more important, the life span data that Rushton and Jensen themselves cite do not support the claim that more of the IQ variance at age 17 is genetically driven than at earlier ages. Evidence of a greater genetic contribution to IQ occurs only after the age of 20 (see their Figure 3). Finally, Weinberg et al. (1992) noted that the scores of the adolescent Black and mixed-race children have to be interpreted in light of the fact that these children as a group had severe adjustment problems, a fact that Rushton and Jensen do not mention.
Nisbett, Richard E. S-5 #9The Scarr and Weinberg study thus provides nothing more definite than the likelihood that middle-class environments raise the IQs of children of all racial combinations. Many aspects of design weakness have to be overlooked to infer any support at all for the hereditarian model.
Nisbett, Richard E. S-5 #10 How do Rushton and Jensen (2005) assess the adoption results across the two studies showing unambiguous lack of support for the hereditarian model and the one study showing at most ambiguous support for it? Their scorecard results: hereditarian model (++); culture-only model (-)!
Nisbett, Richard E. S-5 #11 The rest of Rushton and Jensen's (2005) article consists of reports of brain size and reaction time correlates and other indirect evidence. If the direct evidence were not so strongly supportive of a purely environmental explanation of the Black-White difference in IQ, then such findings would have relevance to an understanding of the difference. But when direct evidence points so clearly to the conclusion that there is no hereditary basis for the difference, indirect correlational evidence has little meaning. Conclusion
Nisbett, Richard E. S-6 #1 In short, Rushton and Jensen (2005) ride roughshod over the evidence concerning the question of whether the Black-White IQ gap has a hereditary basis. The most directly relevant research concerns degree of European ancestry in the Black population. There is not a shred of evidence in this literature, which draws on studies having a total of five very different designs, that the gap has a genetic basis. Adoption studies give scarcely more support to the heritability position. Finally, Black and White IQ scores have converged in recent decades, and in addition, we know that intervention programs can produce substantial and lasting effects on Black IQ. The most obvious policy relevance of this set of findings is that at-risk children—those born to impoverished women, especially those likely to be unable to provide a stimulating environment, and in particular children who have low birth weight or other factors predisposing to low IQ—should be exposed to the most extensive intervention programs that it is practical to provide. This group happens to include a disproportionate percentage of Black infants, but race need not, and perhaps should not, be made a criterion for inclusion.
Posts: 66 | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Proof that varying IQ has no basis in racial genetics and is really just a correlation between poverty/environment and IQ, not race and IQ.
IQ by nation:
Hong Kong 107 Korea, South 106 Japan 105 Taiwan 104 Singapore 104 Austria 102 Germany 102 Italy 102 Netherlands 102 Sweden 101 Switzerland 101 Belgium 100 China 100 New Zealand 100 U. Kingdom 100 Hungary 99 Poland 99 Australia 98 Denmark 98 France 98 Norway 98 United States 98 Canada 97 Czech Republic 97 Finland 97 Spain 97 Argentina 96 Russia 96 Slovakia 96 Uruguay 96 Portugal 95 Slovenia 95 Israel 94 Romania 94 Bulgaria 93 Ireland 93 Greece 92 Malaysia 92 Thailand 91 Croatia 90 Peru 90 Turkey 90 Colombia 89 Indonesia 89 Suriname 89 Brazil 87 Iraq 87 Mexico 87 Samoa (Western) 87 Tonga 87 Lebanon 86 Philippines 86 Cuba 85 Morocco 85 Fiji 84 Iran 84 Marshall Islands 84 Puerto Rico 84 Egypt 83 India 81 Ecuador 80 Guatemala 79 Barbados 78 Nepal 78 Qatar 78 Zambia 77 Congo (Brazz) 73 Uganda 73 Jamaica 72 Kenya 72 South Africa 72 Sudan 72 Tanzania 72 Ghana 71 Nigeria 67 Guinea 66 Zimbabwe 66 Congo (Zaire) 65 Sierra Leone 64 Ethiopia 63 Equatorial Guinea 59-
First of all, Sub-Saharan Africa has an IQ difference of 18 points from Zambia to Equatorial Guinea and they're both considered to be of the "Negroid"(obsolete) race. It's important to note that Equatorial Guinea is one of the poorest countries in the world. Hong Kong and China differ by 7 points yet they're the same exact people! Every nation from Iraq on down scored the same or less than the African American average. I'm looking more into the difference between Ashkenazi Jews and other Jews, Asiatics, and Europeans because they seem to score a lot higher than any of them, which may be in direct relation to their previous persecution and cultural strive for academic and financial success, some what like Asians.
Either people will have to accept that IQ differences seen from test scores are worthless and completely environmental, or that if it is partly genetic, it varies just as much as phenotype. And seeing how 85% of genetic variation is between individuals and not "race", it's easy to acknowledge the fact that IQ would vary immensely between individuals, and not so much between race. The remaining 15% can easily be overlapped by 16% out of the 85% since genes are random. Also, there would be so many people in between and around that it's impossible to single out one group as inferior or one as superior. If that's the case, then individuals are superior to others as someone else brought up, there are blacks who are superior to whites and vice versa. But as I started out, I think the evidence indicates that differences in IQ are purely environmental and no evidence suggests a genetic explanation, the genetic explanation has been contradicted by other studies so many times I'm surprised that this is still a debate for some people. Just check the consensus over at the American Psychological Association.
Posts: 66 | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
simply put: When Africans are tested an IQ of 67, and are able to socialize, learn, and mentally function like a normal human being, instead of one that is mentally disabled, there IS something wrong with this so called "IQ" test. Posts: 214 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
OH and your excuse that blacks are genetically inferior is a better excuse??? Whites created the IQ test, they scale it based on their own results, and they determine the cut off based on the ideal middle ground for their own race. Other than "genetic inferiority" what other excuse is there for lower IQ tests for blacks? If you say "lack of educational ambition", then ask yourself why? It's either a genetic predisposition, or a social catastrophe caused by prejudice... i.e. racism.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by vidadavida: [QB] ---I like your excuses for the lower I.Q averages , well it must be the racism!---
Yeah that is a pretty lame excuse I have to agree here.
Posts: 68 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Blacks don't go to the same schools, the school systems in predominantly black areas have been consistently crappy since the Civil Rights era. So you already start off by lying and passing your lie off as generally accepted and agreed upon fact. Hate crimes are still and always will be overwhelmingly committed by whites. You have simply very little chance of convictions. You in here right now calling blacks niggers and what not, you're part of that problem, but you want it your way 'first' before you acknowledge the problems you cause. When did white people just all of a sudden stop being racist? When? Find out the answer before you just assume that the whole thing is turned around.
Most companies are still owned by whites, most whites still play the hiring racist game, the get them fired for nothing game, the shoot them becuse i thought they had a gun game, the steal their tax money and use it for some other reason game.
Whites went to Africa, and first of all when they went to Ethiopia they say a Christian nation older than their own, so they tried to make the Ethiopians convert to THEIR christianity. They went to West Africa and when they saw many tribes, they sold one tribe weapons to enslave the other tribe and pay them off. In East Africa when some groups refused to participate in the slave trade, they simply paid the Arabs as middle men to get more slaves anyway. Then when they wanted to take land they just came in, broke laws, and stole it. Look at South Africa. Look at that catastrophe they caused, and now you have black people there trying to learn how to read and write because for 60 years they were not allowed to. Garbage!
The only thing whites managed to do is to systemize the use of trade and technology. they did not invent civilization, they did not invent good and fair laws. Most whites were serfs and peasants when America was being colonized, they wouldn't know how to open a tin can without some rich king paying some white or arab scientist to invent something. AND SO WHAT DO THEY DO? They start off by conquering small island tribes, then they take their resources, then they attack larger and then larger tribes... each time they would pretend to mutually respect, make agreements only to break them later. The only thing Black and people of color were stupid at was trusting white people at their word, even on paper. Every country that has been colonized was done so either when they were smaller at an early time, double or triple teamed by 2 or 3 european countries, or betrayed by some sneak attack after a treaty was signed in good faith. Whites never had a real edge in anything other than mass production of guns and manipulation of treaties. Once India fell to British treachery (hence the name Jafar) that's when the whole world became suceeptible to this so called European Imperialism.
And as far as animals go, every animal comes in differnt colors while being identical in their "evolutionary" capacities, whether its a dog, a squirrel, a cat, or a frikkin horse. Skin color has nothing to do with any of this and humans have not been seperate long enough for brain capacity to be distributed by intelligence and region.
quote:Originally posted by vidadavida: ---I like your excuses for the lower I.Q averages , well it must be the racism!---
Yeah that is a pretty lame excuse I have to agree here.
---You know that an I.Q 70 and below is considered mentally retarded?---
LOL!!! That's funny
---first blacks go to the same schools. Also if anyone has the right to claim racism now a days its white. 90% of hate crimes are committed by blacks . It would be the white kid who went to school who would always be called cracker and whitey. IF a nigger went to school and was called the n word you would see that **** all over cnn.---
That is very true I will admit, but you also have to take in account that there is much race baiting in the media. Most of the people at the front of defending racism against blacks are WHITE and they use this just for sensationalism and also to get uneducated whites like yourself riled up to add to the contingent consciousness of white supremacy. Pretty good tactic actually if you ask me lol...it worked on you didn't By the way what is a white person like you doing at a black school? *snickering* Seems like you po' whites are the only ones that pull the "reverse racism" card. Whites with status could give a shiit less lmao hmmmm.
---Of course they never show any black hate crimes. Why? Because all the media is racist against whites lmao---
Another white trash statment, and I guess all liberals are commies too; huh; Mr. George Dubya lova.
---Also you guys have hundreds of black only organizations. Why? because you cant handle fairness---
Ummm this is because of a thing called "slavery" and "segregation" lol and the result of these two circumstances. Yet again; another white trash argument. Hey, "ya'll" still got dem der KKK and NRA lol so don't feel too lef' out ya heya.
---When whites went to Africa they had no laws or civilizations---
I am going to have to ask you to support this claim. Thanks in advance .
---They already proved I.Q averages even in Africa and have hard evidence along with it.---
I.Q tests are indicitive of "test taking" skills and of course the criteria and model of these test taking skills are European in origin. Why SHOULD an African have a high "European" I.Q; and thank the Gods that we don't *whew*. Now let us make an African I.Q test and polarize your argument shall we .
---YOU GUYS JUST LIKE TO WHINE AND BITCH LIKE SCHOOL GIRLS GRABBING EVERY EXUSE YOU HAVE. LIKE A MAN FALLING DOWN A WELL TRYING TO GRAB ON TO EVERYTHING---
That is because African Americans mostly aren't raised by fathers and when they are; the fathers are not fit to be productive fathers. Also, there are no Alpha Males in the African American community so I would agree with this point unfortunatly.
---YOU GUYS SEEM TO BE HYPOCRITES THOUGH. YOU CLAIM TO BELIVE IN EVOLUTION THEN DENY THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN WHITES AND BLACKS LMAO---
That's a good point and I posted something about this in another thread. They seem to keep trying to make all humans the same, yet are spiteful against the white's perception of difference. Very peculiar and definetly implies an inferiority complex. Hell, I LOVE being different than WHITES LOL, but then again I can't relate to African Americans becuase I was never a slave to any Arab or Jew or White man nor worshiped their archetype for perfection (YAHWEH/ALLAH/JESUS). So maybe you should try to empathize with this "false identity" fallacy instead of condemn them for it.
---BLACKS NEVER DID ANYTHING ON THEIR OWN---
I will need some support for this claim. Thanks in advance.
---AND DONT GO INTO THE NIGGER BLABBLE ABOUT EGYPT--
I hate to agree, but you are correct. As soon as you whites attack African Americans about civilization and culture they like to pull Egypt out of their azz. Egypt has nothing to do with African Americans what so ever and was not a homogenous culture or civilization. So it's kind of like they implicitly want to claim the civilization based on the European concept of race i.e black/white/red/yellow and include themselves because they are "black", but all the while try to abolish the European concept of race. Very odd contradiction.
---BLACKS LEFT AFRICA AND TRAVELED EAST INTO ASIA. THEY EVOLOED IN TO THE SUPERIOR MONGOLOID WITCH IN TURN EVOLOED IN TO THE SUPERIOR CAUCASOID IN ICE AGE EUROPE. SINCE WHITES HAD THE MOST TROUBLING AND ITELLENGE REQUIRED EVIRONMENT THEY HAD MORE STIMULI. THIS STIMULI RESULTED IN A SUPERIOR BRAIN---
You never know this could be true, but I don't correlate intelligence with the brain nor it's size considering my mother and grandmother are both psychiatrists and are firm non materialists and do not conform to the "the brain is the mind" as most neurologists do and I concurr with them despite my up bringing.
---OH AND DONT GIVE ME THE WHITE MAN RAPPED THEIR LAND---
Oh, but they did. As well as the Jew and the Arab and the Moor/Berber Isn't this supposed to make you MORE proud rather than GUILTY considering you are superior in everything including weaponry and savagery and theft and murdering and raping and pilaging etc. hmmmm .
---YOU THINK ONE COUNTRY COULD FUCKING STAND ON ITS FEET AT LEAST---
I am going to need support for this. Thanks in advance.
---REALLY WHERE ELSE IN NATURE DO YOU SEE A ANIMAL THAT ONLY EVOLVED PHYSICAL DIFFERENCES?---
I don't get the point here? Could you clarify?
---NO PURE NEGROID HAS an I.Q OVER 130.---
Mine is 148 and I am more pure negroid(whatever that means)than anyone here lol, but then again I went to white schools and white colleges and had strict parents that are in the top 2% of the United States economic tier so who knows that maybe why. Your statistics need to have a more diversified model in the variables, but then again that would defeat the purpose of the statistic to begin with now wouldn't it
It's clear to see you are just some filthy Irish/Welsh/Scot MICK Celt which infects almost all of the United States gene pool due to your expulsion, out-breeding and oppresion of the English to get rid of their degenerate trash and ship you to other islands being that you are descendants of criminals. Your lack of an education shows in your sentence structure and typing skills and also considering most of you filthy Micks are in the south and midwest of the United States (more segrated in the East coast where I grew up and thant the Gods lol) I can narrow you down to what?...Bama or Texas or Arkansas? LOLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Oh by the way did I mention along with hating the Jews/Anglos/Latins/Arabs/Indians/Native Americans/Pakis/African Americans/Hausa/Berbers/Tuaregs/Fulani/Fon/Ewe/Ashanti/Ibo/Tutsi that I also hate filthy Celts?
posted
This whole IQ test thing is rediculous pandering to white sensibilities. Firstly the IQ tests of many racial groups changes substantially over time. Jews 50 years ago were on the low end of the scale. Gee, and the NAZIs certainly had their own tests that determined "scientifically" that Jews were inferior. So what now?
What idiot is going to pretend that the social problems in America are not playing a big role in these tests. You think the average black kid in D.C. or Chicago, dealing with the everyday racism and poverty, you think they are going to perform just the same as if they had lived in an environment where they are not overanalyzed?
Every black person knows that they are scrutinized and overtested to prove themselves in any intellectual setting. Look at this thread... it's evidence in itself.
And the whites who bitch and whine in here... you run to genetics everytime you don't know the answer. Any problem that requires some real thinking.. the same kind of thinking you cherish for the IQ test... you refuse to use in real life.
Complex social problems... uhp, too hard? Just blame it on genetics. Cultural issues in foreign countries... too complicated? Just blame it on genetics. Any problem involving black people? too much to deal with and figure out? Oh there's your cop out... genetics.
90% of black men in prison had no fathers in their lives... but lets just blame genetics on why they are in jail.
Genetics... always the white racist's easy answer to all of the worlds complex problems... but then again why would I expect them to use their intelligence.
With the environment they think global warming is a scare-scam. With religion they think Jesus blesses those who abuse the 2nd Amendment. With politics they think "fair" means to allow them to always have their way.
This is why the IQ test is a bunch of nonsense.
Posts: 68 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Genetics is the 21st century "magic". Anytime something is too hard or complicated... whites do another reverse-logic... and go in the opposite direction that they are arguing for. So they refuse to use that "IQ" intelligence they claim to have when dealing with REAL world issues where it counts!
But again we are talking about the kind of people who swear that they are superior, that God created them as some special kind of spiritual favored people (religious self-awareness) but when dealing with how to get along with fellow humans, they take the less intelligent approach and say that we should act like animals and try to kill each other (rely on "natural" selection) instead of working together.
How many hypocritical opposing views can you people have?
-------------------- Not being entirely Black does not mean one is not Black. There is no such thing as a one drop "not black" rule. Posts: 68 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Oh and no i'm not talking about ALLLL white people, so save me the racist reverb. I'm speaking of those Eurocentric and racist types that are obviously making their presence known in this thread and elsewhere. Some white people, a lot actually, UNDERSTAND. I don't believe in a "white race", I belive that whites, like everyone else vary and have differeing origins and points of view. But this racism is such a permeating presence, I address it from it's benefactors.
-------------------- Not being entirely Black does not mean one is not Black. There is no such thing as a one drop "not black" rule. Posts: 68 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by osirica: Oh and no i'm not talking about ALLLL white people, so save me the racist reverb. I'm speaking of those Eurocentric and racist types that are obviously making their presence known in this thread and elsewhere. Some white people, a lot actually, UNDERSTAND. I don't believe in a "white race", I belive that whites, like everyone else vary and have differeing origins and points of view. But this racism is such a permeating presence, I address it from it's benefactors.
posted
you know what is so funny about that nonsense called the bell curve (and all of this genetic/biological inferiority)...
They can not find the actual evidence.
They insist it's genetic, but they can't find a gene, chromozome or any genetic evidence. Again they assume it must be genetics.
They insist it's biology of the brain... but again, try as they might they can't prove it. They can't find brain structures that differe.
Although my favorite attempt was the one where they try to say that Africans have slightly smaller brains on average.
So I waited for the "control" research done on whites...
Anyone know where the paperwork that was published showing that smaller brained whites are on average 20-30 points dumber than their larger brained white counterparts?
That's right, it doesn't exist. They wouldn't even attempt to publish that because it would cause the most destructive backlash in the white race. Imagine... whites discriminating against each other based on their brain size.
Oh wait, that's just it... many just might. And the Bell Curve people wouldn't want THAT to happen.
No... thats where they try to really dig in deep and find and illustrate and pay MORE Attention to the other factors.
So until we find the "Intellectual capacities amoung Caucasians of different brain sizes" paper, I would chuck all of this Bell Curve crap to the trash.
-------------------- Not being entirely Black does not mean one is not Black. There is no such thing as a one drop "not black" rule. Posts: 68 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
YOu know what else? That teacher was playing a role someone else probably is coordinating with him. The most important part of his video wasn't the insulting comments about blacks.. no it was at the end when he was asking in so many words if his "rights" were going to be taken away. He wants to create a backlash. He just hates black people and wants to get rid of us and like all racists he wants to piggy back his hateful hope on the 1st amendment.
-------------------- Not being entirely Black does not mean one is not Black. There is no such thing as a one drop "not black" rule. Posts: 68 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Poetry25: Well, after reading the article it seems that a few of his theories have been tested and disconfirmed.This coupled with the test he had performed on himself not looking good has allot to do with his backing off. He's simply lost confidence and doesn't feel he has anything to stand on so he's rather back off and save face.His claim that it has become "too controversial" is a cop out. It wasn't any less controversial when he first began this kind of research. A scientist that is confident in his theories isn't going to back away from controversy.
quote:Originally posted by Poetry25: Exactly, he's just backpeddling and trying to save face. I've always wondered what is the purpose of this kind of race and intelligence testing? I keep hearing how there's this great overlap of IQ scores between US blacks and whites so what's the purpose of the testing then? If these scientist really wanted to understand differences in intelligence why not study sibilings? Or differences between people who reside in different geographical locations? Why choose race unless you have some kind of agenda? The emphasis on race is what makes these studies so tainted and just plain disgusting. It just seems that there are individuals out there who desperately want to justify the mistreatment of other groups by deeming them to be inately inferior. There are people who are so guilt ridden by their ancestors role in past and present history that they are driven to prove that the mistreated group was inferior to begin with so therefore destined to fail. It's such a shame.
quote:Originally posted by rasol: The basic problem with attempting to link brain size and intelligence is that the brain is not a muscle, it's a staggeringly complex organ whose underlying functionality is only poorly understood.
For example, Neanderthal man had a brain that was on average, larger than the modern human brain.
Yet his vocal cords were primative, suggesting that Neanderthal may not have had the same physical ability or mental dexterity to speak a true language.
This in turn leads anthropologist to suggest that Neanderthal's big brain size may have provided insulation against the extreme cold of ice age Europe, and may not have been indicative of any particular intellectual adeptness.
It is a fact that Neanderthal is the most fully cold adapted hominid in history, having evolved in Europe over the course of several hundred thousand years - yet Neanderthal was apparently completely replaced by tropically adapted Africans [homo sapiens is and african species, neanderthal is a eurasian species] ... who had evolved in tropical Africa during the same several hundred thousand year timespan.
African homo sapiens had migrated into Northern Eurasia only a few thousand years hence.
A further problem with a simplistic equasion of 'big brain' equal 'smart', is that many diseases which effect the brain cause 'hypertrophy' or increase in brain size.
In these cases abnormally large brains indicate such conditions as retardation or even cancer.
There is no proof that brain size variation within homo sapiens is and indicator of superior intellect.
posted
there is no such thing as superior intellect other than that some people have exposure to experiences and are raised in such a way that their intellect is challenged and harnessed as they grow older and they are able to utilize it efficiently through mental training.
You try pulling that off in the ghetto as a matter of course.
In fact, if you even play along with these racists, even still, if you put black children in better environments, they will do so much better that the comparitive "intellect" becomes irrelevant. They are productive members of society, whether or not they become the leading scientists. That's what gets me, they contradict their own philosophy. Why is it so hard to invest in positive change in our society.
Me personally, I don't see any difference given all environmental and external psychological factors being the same. You take racism out, the preoccupation with whiteness being better (esp. at an early age), then you take out 70-90% of the factors that make the IQ and economic disparities. The other 10%-30% is dependant on parent upbringing (both have two parents, both are taught to respect each other mutually, etc).
You guys should see that youtube video of the little black kids that are asked to choose which doll is the good doll, which is the bad doll, and which doll is most like them. Seeing their reaction should give you an indicator of why this problem is what it is.
-------------------- Not being entirely Black does not mean one is not Black. There is no such thing as a one drop "not black" rule. Posts: 68 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Outstanding, I never even saw the Bill Cosby one. Outstanding.
How much of a child's mind develops, and has to contend with these things... it takes a significant amount of mental energy and focus away from these "IQ tests" and makes it harder to do well in school, but more importantly decreases the quality of life over time.
Maybe it's not so cut and dry, but it is the most important factor. Much more than genetics or brain size.
-------------------- Not being entirely Black does not mean one is not Black. There is no such thing as a one drop "not black" rule. Posts: 68 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Osirica: You try pulling that off in the ghetto as a matter of course.
For real!!! That was on point! And I'll add to that, "try pulling that off in the ghetto" from start to finish, growing up there.
Now, it's not the worst place on earth, plenty of fun and interesting times, but it's definetly NOT conducive to learning.
Also, the belief of American youth (especially ours) that it's not cool for us (blacks) to be smart added to the belief of most that we can't do it complicates things.
And our "hip-hop/African-American/Ghetto" culture gets exponential (like to the fourth power) as you move in to the ghetto. Your legal and community accepted goal choices are: singing, dancing, something to do with music or making beats, rapping, other poetry, and sports.
You should look for the original study on Youtube, the old one with the nice white lady (a teacher).
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by What Box (Willing Thinker):
quote:Osirica: You try pulling that off in the ghetto as a matter of course.
For real!!! That was on point! And I'll add to that, "try pulling that off in the ghetto" from start to finish, growing up there.
Now, it's not the worst place on earth, plenty of fun and interesting times, but it's definetly NOT conducive to learning.
Also, the belief of American youth (especially ours) that it's not cool for us (blacks) to be smart added to the belief of most that we can't do it complicates things.
And our "hip-hop/African-American/Ghetto" culture gets exponential (like to the fourth power) as you move in to the ghetto. Your legal and community accepted goal choices are: singing, dancing, something to do with music or making beats, rapping, other poetry, and sports.
You should look for the original study on Youtube, the old one with the nice white lady (a teacher).
Yea, it's called "A class divided", I have an avi file of the entire DVD. Very interesting.
Posts: 66 | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ I was almost about to waste my time with that, but decided not to, just as I had initially decided not to when I first saw Bell Curve and a couple other things on the the page.
People need to be taught that when you come you better come correct.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
That doesn’t prove anything? Blacks have far lower I.Qs, None of that was phoney science. Their brains are smaller and I.Qs lower. And for you phoney ass bullshit about environment, They did a study showing blacks that are half white, but look fully black have higher I.Qs then that of 100% blacks even when the mixed race black kid looks fully black. They also did a study of adopted kids living with a rich white family. The study showed that the whites kids had a far higher I.Q then the blacks . When the black kid was half white but still looked fully black he got a higher I.Q then that of a full black. Meaning if racism was at fault then that half black kid should have also had a lower I.Q because he looks fully black. ALSO read that entire fucking thing. None of what they say is debatable. BLACKS REALLY ARE Inferior. Read all of it, not one bit is debatable.
Posts: 9 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by flashlight101: That doesn’t prove anything? Blacks have far lower I.Qs, None of that was phoney science. Their brains are smaller and I.Qs lower. And for you phoney ass bullshit about environment, They did a study showing blacks that are half white, but look fully black have higher I.Qs then that of 100% blacks even when the mixed race black kid looks fully black. They also did a study of adopted kids living with a rich white family. The study showed that the whites kids had a far higher I.Q then the blacks . When the black kid was half white but still looked fully black he got a higher I.Q then that of a full black. Meaning if racism was at fault then that half black kid should have also had a lower I.Q because he looks fully black. ALSO read that entire fucking thing. None of what they say is debatable. BLACKS REALLY ARE Inferior. Read all of it, not one bit is debatable.
Smaller skulls you say?
Neanderthal had smaller skulls too, and those 'bullshit' scientists figured that it was only for the purpose of INSULATION FOR THE BRAIN AGAINST THE COLD!
Can you tell me what happened when the Neanderthal's met the africans? Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by What Box (Willing Thinker):
quote:Originally posted by flashlight101: That doesn’t prove anything? Blacks have far lower I.Qs, None of that was phoney science. Their brains are smaller and I.Qs lower. And for you phoney ass bullshit about environment, They did a study showing blacks that are half white, but look fully black have higher I.Qs then that of 100% blacks even when the mixed race black kid looks fully black. They also did a study of adopted kids living with a rich white family. The study showed that the whites kids had a far higher I.Q then the blacks . When the black kid was half white but still looked fully black he got a higher I.Q then that of a full black. Meaning if racism was at fault then that half black kid should have also had a lower I.Q because he looks fully black. ALSO read that entire fucking thing. None of what they say is debatable. BLACKS REALLY ARE Inferior. Read all of it, not one bit is debatable.
Smaller skulls you say?
Neanderthal had smaller skulls too, and those 'bullshit' scientists figured that it was only for the purpose of INSULATION FOR THE BRAIN AGAINST THE COLD!
Can you tell me what happened when the Neanderthal's met the africans?
Correction, the neanderthals had larger skulls, for the same purpose you mentioned. (insulation)
btw flashlight you're more than welcome to make a fool out of yourself. Your posts gave me some good laughs.
Posts: 214 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by flashlight101: That doesn’t prove anything? Blacks have far lower I.Qs, None of that was phoney science. Their brains are smaller and I.Qs lower. And for you phoney ass bullshit about environment, They did a study showing blacks that are half white, but look fully black have higher I.Qs then that of 100% blacks even when the mixed race black kid looks fully black. They also did a study of adopted kids living with a rich white family. The study showed that the whites kids had a far higher I.Q then the blacks . When the black kid was half white but still looked fully black he got a higher I.Q then that of a full black. Meaning if racism was at fault then that half black kid should have also had a lower I.Q because he looks fully black. ALSO read that entire fucking thing. None of what they say is debatable. BLACKS REALLY ARE Inferior. Read all of it, not one bit is debatable.
posted
no wait, Can any one really explain why blacks have lower I.Qs , also the study all get track of how well they did in school. So can anyone tell me why blacks have way lower I.Qs and are doing poorly in school? And it cant have anything to do with environment.
Posts: 9 | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Average IQ scores of racial and ethnic groups living in North American, Europe and East Asia according to Lynn 2006. The normalization average of 100 is shown as a dotted line. Each dot is the average IQ from a single study.[56] Datasets from South/Central America and Africa were criticized as being unrepresentative by a review of IQ and the Wealth of Nations, a previous book by Lynn.
The above is a depiction of current world wide IQ stats.
IQ testing by race presupposes the validity of racial categories. One first has to demonstrate that race exists before they can argue that intelligence is determined by race.
Veterans of Egypt search ought to know by now that Greeks have significant amounts of African ancestry - about 20-25% E3b in males. Yet they were the first literate and civilized people in Europe! How could that be if Europeans are superior?
Why was Europe the last continent to experience such boons as agriculture, writing, achitecture, animal husbandry, etc., if Europeans are superior? What's more we now know that none of these elements of civilization were developed independently in Europe.
Recommended reading: Stephen Jay Gould "The mismeasure of man"
Posts: 1038 | From: Franklin Park, NJ | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by flashlight101: no wait, Can any one really explain why blacks have lower I.Qs , also the study all get track of how well they did in school. So can anyone tell me why blacks have way lower I.Qs and are doing poorly in school? And it cant have anything to do with environment.
Why are there blacks with higher IQs than whites, moron? It makes absolutely no sense to have an "average" when enviornments produce DEFINITE biological characteristics.
for example flash, my IQ > yours
^ Does that mean i was brought up in a cold climate with light skin, and a large brain size? Please say it does . Posts: 214 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
I guess I'll take it out on that calculus test today.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic