The Tower of Babel

[Huggy Bear]

Says the person who believes black people inherently have low I.Q.s ...

What?!?

She was attempting to defend the bogus research found in the bell curve.

[Crossless2.0]

What?!?

She was attempting to defend the bogus research found in the bell curve.

You mean when she said this?

"What fucking position have I expressed on the issue?!?! I said explicitly both that I was agnostic concerning the hypothesis as well as pointing out that I haven't studied the issue and so don't have an adequate basis on which to form an opinion. That you continue to misrepresent me in this way simply makes you out to be a fucking liar."

[KevinM1]

[Angrboda]

No, just pointing out that you're an idiot who thinks things that aren't true.  But lol right back, for thinking I was drawing any larger conclusions.

Says the person who believes black people inherently have low I.Q.s ...

Evidence or GTFO. I repeatedly told you that I had no opinion on the subject and explicitly linked to the moderating discussion in Wikipedia.

Saying this simply demonstrates that you're both an idiot and a liar, and probably a racist as well.

Falsely accusing me of this simply shows how inept you are at reasoning to a valid conclusion. But by all means, keep digging that hole deeper.

[possibletarian]

*emphasis mine*

First of all whatever laws you think need to apply are irrelevant when a supernatural being that can speak matter into existence (something science says is impossible) is introduced.

One minute you are trying to explain why plants had light before the sun, the next saying that none of that matters anyway. If you are going to believe that no laws we know of apply, then why try explain them away at all ? Why not simply stay true to the text.?

We all know it is impossible for a human being to survive without a brain, heart, or lungs, yet at the beginning of YOUR creation those things did not exist, they were formed LATER, something else sustained you until those things were put in place.

By 'Your' you mean established scientific fact, of course they were formed later no one is claiming that humans existed before they evolved lungs.

Humans need to breathe. If you had zero clue about how a human being came to exist (like you do about the universe),

That's why we say 'we don't know' we don't refer to unprovable magical beings and deities.

I'd suspect stating that you took you first breaths nine months after you were formed would sound just as impossible.

You do take your first breath nine months after but you still use oxygen throughout, only the method of gaining it changes, and no it's stupid t say it's impossible when we can (unlike your god) observe and prove it every day.

You are relying more and more heavily on pulling either the silence of the bible or quotes out of the Bible from different places in utter desperation to make things fit

I'm simply letting the bible interpret itself.

How does anything interpret itself ?

Therefore you can't accuse me of making anything, up. Anything explanation given can be found directly in the bible.

Oh it is explained in the bible, it's just that with more modern knowledge of our universe it just simply does not match with what we can show to be true.
Put simply the bible is wrong about the formation of the earth, and the timespan of humans on this planet. It really is ridiculous to use it as reliable in any way.
[/quote]

[Angrboda]

What?!?

She was attempting to defend the bogus research found in the bell curve.

No, I was pointing out the flaws in your reasoning, something that appears to be a full time job. I made no defense of their research, but by all means, keep imagining things and claiming shit that did not happen. It does a lot to build up your credibility.

[Huggy Bear]

She was attempting to defend the bogus research found in the bell curve.

You mean when she said this?

"What fucking position have I expressed on the issue?!?! I said explicitly both that I was agnostic concerning the hypothesis as well as pointing out that I haven't studied the issue and so don't have an adequate basis on which to form an opinion. That you continue to misrepresent me in this way simply makes you out to be a fucking liar."

That came much later...

Generally when people know nothing of a particular subject they tend to stay out of it.

---

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?

How is posting wikki articles being construed as ad hominem?

These peoples methods were questioned by the scientific community, or did you not read that part?


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

A number of scientists, including Leon Kamin, have criticised Lynn's work on racial and national demography and intelligence for lacking scientific rigour and for promoting a racialist political agenda.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Philippe_Rushton

Rushton's controversial work was heavily criticized by the scientific community for the questionable quality of its research, with many alleging that it was conducted under a racist agenda.

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

Herrnstein and Murray were criticized for not submitting their work to peer review before publication, an omission many have seen as incompatible with their presentation of it as a scholarly text

This "research" is being funded by a single group which shows a clear agenda, what do you think the solution to all these "low IQ" people will be? Have you learned nothing from Nazi Germany?

the founder of the Pioneer fund

Wickliffe Draper (August 9, 1891 – 1972) was an American political activist and philanthropist. He was an ardent eugenicist and lifelong advocate of strict racial segregation. In 1937, he founded the Pioneer Fund, a registered charitable organisation established to provide scholarships for descendants of original white American settlers and to support research into heredity and eugenics; he later became its principal benefactor.

In August 1935, Draper traveled to Berlin to attend the International Congress for the Scientific Investigation of Population Problems. Presiding over the conference was Wilhelm Frick, the German Minister of the Interior. At the conference, Draper's travel companion, Dr. Clarence Campbell delivered an oration that concluded with the words: "The difference between the Jew and the Aryan is as unsurmountable [sic] as that between black and white. … Germany has set a pattern which other nations must follow. … To that great leader, Adolf Hitler!" Three years later, when Draper paid to print and disseminate the book, White America, by Earnest Sevier Cox, an advocate of white supremacy and racial segregation, a personal copy was delivered to Frick.

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

Adolf Hitler read about racial hygiene during his imprisonment in Landsberg Prison.[16]

Hitler believed the nation had become weak, corrupted by dysgenics, the infusion of degenerate elements into its bloodstream.

The racialism and idea of competition, termed social Darwinism in 1944, were discussed by European scientists and also in the Vienna press during the 1920s. Where Hitler picked up the ideas is uncertain. The theory of evolution had been generally accepted in Germany at the time, but this sort of extremism was rare.

So my question to you Jormungandr is; Do you agree with the OP's position?

---

Plenty of evidence had been presented up to that point so ignorance is no longer an excuse, any ignorance past that point is willful.

[Angrboda]

No, just pointing out that you're an idiot who thinks things that aren't true.  But lol right back, for thinking I was drawing any larger conclusions.

Says the person who believes black people inherently have low I.Q.s ...

This does bring up another point. As was discussed in that thread, if you're claiming that blacks don't have an inherently lower IQ, then you have a burden of proof to meet that you haven't. But then, as discussed in that thread, your misunderstanding of the scientific method leads you to believe that you don't have such a burden. So that's three things you don't understand: science, interpreting texts, and what I actually said in that thread.

Have I mentioned yet that you're an idiot?

---

You mean when she said this?

"What fucking position have I expressed on the issue?!?! I said explicitly both that I was agnostic concerning the hypothesis as well as pointing out that I haven't studied the issue and so don't have an adequate basis on which to form an opinion. That you continue to misrepresent me in this way simply makes you out to be a fucking liar."

That came much later...

Generally when people know nothing of a particular subject they tend to stay out of it.

---

How is posting wikki articles being construed as ad hominem?

These peoples methods were questioned by the scientific community, or did you not read that part?


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

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J._Philippe_Rushton

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

This "research" is being funded by a single group which shows a clear agenda, what do you think the solution to all these "low IQ" people will be? Have you learned nothing from Nazi Germany?

the founder of the Pioneer fund

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

So my question to you Jormungandr is; Do you agree with the OP's position?

---

Plenty of evidence had been presented up to that point so ignorance is no longer an excuse, ant ignorance past that point is willful.

I answered that I neither agreed nor disagreed in that thread. That you continue to look for racism where it doesn't exist and magically divine the hidden meaning behind my arguments just makes you look pathetic.

Honestly, arguing with you is like arguing with childish morons like Little Rik who, upon not receiving an answer he can use as grist for his mill tries to make an argument out of my silence on a topic. It's stupid Huggy, but it's all you.

[Huggy Bear]

This does bring up another point. As was discussed in that thread, if you're claiming that blacks don't have an inherently lower IQ, then you have a burden of proof to meet that you haven't. But then, as discussed in that thread, your misunderstanding of the scientific method leads you to believe that you don't have such a burden. So that's three things you don't understand: science, interpreting texts, and what I actually said in that thread.

Have I mentioned yet that you're an idiot?

[Angrboda]

This does bring up another point.  As was discussed in that thread, if you're claiming that blacks don't have an inherently lower IQ, then you have a burden of proof to meet that you haven't.  But then, as discussed in that thread, your misunderstanding of the scientific method leads you to believe that you don't have such a burden.  So that's three things you don't understand: science, interpreting texts, and what I actually said in that thread.

Have I mentioned yet that you're an idiot?

Well, are you? Do you even understand the question? I have my doubts.