[split] IF you deconverted in midlife, can you help?-NDE Discussion

[Huggy Bear]

Was I having a debate over the 'Bell Curve' with your doppelganger? 

Then please explain why you crossed out the content of this post arguing against the pseudoscience of 'bell curve'?
https://atheistforums.org/thread-55205-p...pid1767528

---

---

If according to you, pointing out someones bias is 'aggressive', then shouldn't striking out facts you don't agree with also qualify as aggressive?

I crossed out the parts that weren't ad hominems to show the amount of ad hominem you were engaging in.  It had nothing whatever to do with the facts you had presented.  I'm going to conclude that you must have been having a debate with a doppelganger, one that likely existed solely in your mind, as I never defended the opinions expressed in The Bell Curve.  And I pointed out to you the explicit reason for my post when asked immediately after posting it.  The notion that I crossed out those portions of your post because I disagreed with them is something you're pulling out of thin air.  And given that I immediately clarified my intent gives you no excuse for portraying it otherwise, other than an unjustified hostility toward me for having the audacity to have an opinion which wasn't yours.

Two points you crossed out

Rushton's controversial work was heavily criticized by the scientific community for the questionable quality of its research

Herrnstein and Murray were criticized for not submitting their work to peer review before publication

Please explain how those points are "ad hominem"...

You want to believe I'm a racist, so you just make up shit, ignoring any contrary evidence or statements.

First of all you never posted ANY contrary evidence, or maybe your doppelganger posted some that I missed somehow, please provide a link.

Secondly, I don't know what else you'd call someone that defends racist propoganda...

That there is plenty of shooting the messenger, aka ad hominem, in your reply.  Of what relevance is the nature of the Pioneer Fund to the question of whether their conclusions are justified or not?

“task is not to make an objective study of the truth, in so far as it favors the enemy, and then set it before the masses with academic fairness; its task is to serve our own right, always and unflinchingly.” - Adolf Hitler

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

Wickliffe Preston Draper, the fund's de facto final authority, served on the Board of Directors from 1937 until 1972. He founded Pioneer Fund after having acquired an interest in the Eugenics movement, which was strengthened by his 1935 visit to Nazi Germany, where he met with the leading eugenicists of the Third Reich who used the inspiration from the American movement as a basis for the Nuremberg Laws.

I thought you were pretty smart Jor, yet you can't figure you why the ideology of the organization behind the funding of the 'Bell Curve' is relevant? You would never say that the ideology of the Nazis aren't relevant to their conclusions of the genetics of Jews, yet the Founder of the Pioneer fund and Hitler had the same goal...

Let me explain it...

The Nazis received their idea of eugenics from America

The eugenics movement started in America and spread to Germany, the Nazis used that ideology to portray the Jews as subhuman in order to justify their extermination.

Any "research" supported by the pioneer fund would be used and most likely WAS used to justify the disenfranchisement of those with "low IQ's" who just happen to be black.