• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories
  • You may need to edit your signatures.

    When we moved to Xenfora some of the signature options didn't come over. In the old software signatures were limited by a character limit, on Xenfora there are more options and there is a character number and number of lines limit. I've set maximum number of lines to 4 and unlimited characters.

Split Thread Racism and Mass shootings

I must have totally misunderstood your post as this makes absolutely no sense to me. Descendents of slaves from Africa are not descendants of slaves? :confused:

Yes you clearly did misunderstand
How many generations of "European" ancestry is required to be a member of your white race?
Non sequitur.
If you want a discussion about the economies of "reparation" I suggest you start a thread about that.
another non sequitur
And I was talking about the information supplied by the racists in this thread, which happened to be from the USA.
but I wasn't, Norman Alexander included information about Australia which also involved categories.

And?



I am absolutely certain the likes of Trausti and Bogative are racists.

for instance have you noticed that according to many of the USA sources Spanish speaking people are distinct from "white" people?

And why do many of the racists like to separate out the "hispanic race" from the "white race"? Because to them it makes the "white race" look "better".

That's a lot more general than just two posters on here.
When you can objectively quantify these human races get back to me and we can see how they help in pinpointing where the problems lie.

No, I don't think you will ever accept any categories developed in the real world, so rest assured you won't be bothered in future.
 
Last edited:
The science is consistent and conclusive. Black Americans (to Trausti's assertion) do in fact score consistently below yellows, whites and browns (please excuse the Crayola nomenclature). But research indicates that this consistency is environmental, not genetic. Per Cambridge University:

https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/abs/in-the-know/racialethnic-group-iq-differences-are-completely-environmental-in-origin/629C14E1004936C57232FB09739CD9E5#

I really don't think you understood my request. Please read it again if you'd like to address it.
 
I really don't think you understood my request. Please read it again if you'd like to address it.

...um, I understood it, and responded to it clearly and directly the first time. It is not a perfect "one number establishes it all perfectly" scoring. Due to the breath of testing methods, it has been found to be a reliable barometer.

Your question asks for evidence that one number encompasses the scope of intelligence. No, and no one but you seems to expect that, so I don't quite know what else to tell you. The disciplines of psychology and education value it highly as an accurate, broad representation of innate intellectual ability.

Eta: the second response was swinging it back into context, per Trausti's claim that black people consistently score lower than orher ethnic groups in the US. They do, demonstrably, but in contradiction to Trausti's genetic theory, it appears more environmentally caused.
 
Last edited:
...um, I understood it, and responded to it clearly and directly the first time. It is not a perfect "one number establishes it all perfectly" scoring. Due to the breath of testing methods, it has been found to be a reliable barometer.

Your question asks for evidence that one number encompasses the scope of intelligence. No, and no one but you seems to expect that, so I don't quite know what else to tell you. The disciplines of psychology and education value it highly as an accurate, broad representation of innate intellectual ability.

Eta: the second response was swinging it back into context, per Trausti's claim that black people consistently score lower than orher ethnic groups in the US. They do, demonstrably, but in contradiction to Trausti's genetic theory, it appears more environmentally caused.

And what about the shoe sizes of people taking IQ tests?
 
Yes you clearly did misunderstand

Since you won't clarify what you meant we shall have to leave it there. To recap - I call descendants of slaves from Africa, descendants of slaves from Africa, I call descendants of slaves from India, descendants of slaves from India and so on. The same for the descendants of owners of slaves. It's a very easy to use and objective descriptor. I have no need nor is there any utility to try and say these descendants are of a "race".


Non sequitur. ...snip...

No it directly follows from your claim that unless someone has European ancestry they can't be of your white race - you said "not all slave owners had european ancestry, so no, they couldn't be described as the "white race"."

It's there in black and white.

Remember you are the one claiming there are objective human races, so what are your objective characteristics of your white race (we know you have one criteria i.e. "European ancestry") it follows that I ask you how much european ancestry does someone have to have to be labelled a member of your white race? Surely you must know?

That's a lot more general than just two posters on here.

No, I don't think you will ever accept any categories developed in the real world, so rest assured you won't be bothered in future.
Those are the only ones I'm interested in.

Why not provide me with your definition of the "white race" - you have one as you said very clearly that someone not of European ancestry can't be a member of your white race.

Mind you I do know why you won't provide a definition and it has nothing to do with me.
 
And what about the shoe sizes of people taking IQ tests?

What would be your thought on why IQ correlates so strongly with intellectual ability? If it doesn't mean anything, why is low IQ used to argue that lead exposure causes cognitive deficits? That a person with low IQ shouldn't be executed because they can't tell right from wrong? Why do universities rely on testing - a proxy for IQ - in choosing applicants? Shouldn't Harvard and Yale just go with a lottery?

OccsX.jpg
 
Last edited:
Since you won't clarify what you meant we shall have to leave it there. To recap - I call descendants of slaves from Africa, descendants of slaves from Africa, I call descendants of slaves from India, descendants of slaves from India and so on. The same for the descendants of owners of slaves. It's a very easy to use and objective descriptor. I have no need nor is there any utility to try and say these descendants are of a "race".




No it directly follows from your claim that unless someone has European ancestry they can't be of your white race - you said "not all slave owners had european ancestry, so no, they couldn't be described as the "white race"."

It's there in black and white.

Remember you are the one claiming there are objective human races, so what are your objective characteristics of your white race (we know you have one criteria i.e. "European ancestry") it follows that I ask you how much european ancestry does someone have to have to be labelled a member of your white race? Surely you must know?

Those are the only ones I'm interested in.

Why not provide me with your definition of the "white race" - you have one as you said very clearly that someone not of European ancestry can't be a member of your white race.

Mind you I do know why you won't provide a definition and it has nothing to do with me.

Do tell Darat, I know you want to....
 
And what about the shoe sizes of people taking IQ tests?

What about them? If they are taking timed tests and responding to questions, they'd be relevant. If not, not.

ETA: or if shoe size was correlated strongly across generations, we might consider why.
 
Last edited:
What about them? If they are taking timed tests and responding to questions, they'd be relevant. If not, not.

ETA: or if shoe size was correlated strongly across generations, we might consider why.

Sorry it's my version of the ice cream correlation. Most mass murderers in the USA have a shoe size of between 9.5 and 10.5 and that is mostly determined by genetics.

Yet for the racists it's always the phenotype of skin colour they keep going back to, one would almost think they had another motive than scientific accuracy.
 
Sorry it's my version of the ice cream correlation. Most mass murderers in the USA have a shoe size of between 9.5 and 10.5 and that is mostly determined by genetics.

Yet for the racists it's always the phenotype of skin colour they keep going back to, one would almost think they had another motive than scientific accuracy.

Keep tilting those windmills.
 
Sorry it's my version of the ice cream correlation. Most mass murderers in the USA have a shoe size of between 9.5 and 10.5 and that is mostly determined by genetics.

Yet for the racists it's always the phenotype of skin colour they keep going back to, one would almost think they had another motive than scientific accuracy.

Seems like a shoe size is a proxy for sex here. Yes, sex is strongly correlated with violence, and that correlation is causative in the sense that there are psychological differences between men and women, partially related to differences in testosterone levels, and those differences show up as differences in predilection to violence.

So, wrt shoe size: A causes B (male sex hormones cause larger foot growth at puberty), and A also causes C (male sex hormones cause a greater proclivity to violence). B and C are correlated because of their common cause, A.

So, I think your point is that we should be aware that there can be a correlation between two things not because one is causing the other but because they both share a common cause.

(I certainly 100% agree with that last sentence, if it is your point)
 
There has been no rebuttal that there are genetically distinct human population groups. Just a lot of handwaving.


From this link:

Despite rapid advances in mapping the human genome in recent decades, however, no set of biological markers for race or ethnicity has been identified. This has led some to conclude that race and ethnicity are socially derived constructs and therefore inappropriate for use as independent variables to explain psychological findings (Helms, Jernigan & Mascher, 2005). According to this view, race and ethnicity are more likely proxies for other independent variables which influence test scores. The reason that racial / ethnic differences appear to exist in research may be that the variables they are substituting for have not been identified (Helms et al., 2005 Personal Communication).
 
From this link:

no set of biological markers for race or ethnicity has been identified.

Good grief that's dumb. With a drop of blood, a mouth swab, or other sample, law enforcement can limit supsects to sex and race. A New DNA Test Can ID a Suspect's Race, But Police Won't Touch It But such nonsense ought to be expected of any supposed study with "social justice" in the title.

There are plently of ongoing studies identifying different population groups by ancestry: The genetic history of Scandinavia from the Roman Iron Age to the present

And: Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding in Case-Control Association Studies

We have analyzed genetic data for 326 microsatellite markers that were typed uniformly in a large multiethnic population-based sample of individuals as part of a study of the genetics of hypertension (Family Blood Pressure Program). Subjects identified themselves as belonging to one of four major racial/ethnic groups (white, African American, East Asian, and Hispanic) and were recruited from 15 different geographic locales within the United States and Taiwan. Genetic cluster analysis of the microsatellite markers produced four major clusters, which showed near-perfect correspondence with the four self-reported race/ethnicity categories. Of 3,636 subjects of varying race/ethnicity, only 5 (0.14%) showed genetic cluster membership different from their self-identified race/ethnicity.
 
Last edited:
Race is like Tinkerbell. You children just have to BELEEVE! and it'll be true.

Race does not exist. But please be mindful that females of distinct population groups evolved different birth canals after geographic separation.

Differences Found in Women's Birth Canals Are Contradicting What Evolutionary Science Told Us

The researchers say sub-Saharan African populations overall have deeper birth canals, while Native American populations exhibit wider canals. Asian and European/North African populations are somewhere in the middle, and populations from colder regions display a more oval shape of the canal inlet.

But the researchers don't think it was primarily the colder temperatures themselves responsible for these variations.

Instead, the random process of genetic drift meant that as human populations expanded further away from Africa and founded new continents, diversity in birth canals reduced as genetic diversity lessened.

"Each founding event, in fact, was achieved by a subpopulation carrying only a portion of the ancestral population's genetic diversity," the researchers suggest.

"The signature of these serial founding events is evident in modern populations' genetic variation, whereby genetic diversity decreases with increasing distance from Africa."

Ultimately, this process is responsible for 43.5 percent of canal diversity within human populations, the team says.
 
Last edited:
Good grief that's dumb. With a drop of blood, a mouth swab, or other sample, law enforcement can limit supsects to sex and race. A New DNA Test Can ID a Suspect's Race, But Police Won't Touch It But such nonsense ought to be expected of any supposed study with "social justice" in the title.

There are plently of ongoing studies identifying different population groups by ancestry: The genetic history of Scandinavia from the Roman Iron Age to the present

And: Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding in Case-Control Association Studies

Also from your link:

"In summary, from a very large study of four major racial/ethnic groups within the United States and Taiwan, we found extraordinary correspondence between SIRE and genetic cluster categories but only modest geographic differentiation within each race/ethnicity group. This result indicates that studies using genetic clusters instead of racial/ethnic labels are likely to simply reproduce racial/ethnic differences, which may or may not be genetic. On the other hand, in the absence of racial/ethnic information, it is tempting to attribute any observed difference between derived genetic clusters to a genetic etiology. Therefore, researchers performing studies without racial/ethnic labels should be wary of characterizing difference between genetically defined clusters as genetic in origin, since social, cultural, economic, behavioral, and other environmental factors may result in extreme confounding "
 
Also from your link:

"In summary, from a very large study of four major racial/ethnic groups within the United States and Taiwan, we found extraordinary correspondence between SIRE and genetic cluster categories but only modest geographic differentiation within each race/ethnicity group. This result indicates that studies using genetic clusters instead of racial/ethnic labels are likely to simply reproduce racial/ethnic differences, which may or may not be genetic. On the other hand, in the absence of racial/ethnic information, it is tempting to attribute any observed difference between derived genetic clusters to a genetic etiology. Therefore, researchers performing studies without racial/ethnic labels should be wary of characterizing difference between genetically defined clusters as genetic in origin, since social, cultural, economic, behavioral, and other environmental factors may result in extreme confounding "

Yeah, that was back in 2005. Not really a problem now.

Population genetic data of 74 microhaplotypes in four major US population groups

Moreover, the four population groups had no clear genetic affinities with the exception of U.S. European and U.S. Southwest Hispanic populations, which showed the lowest FST value.

That White Americans would be closer to Hispanics (conquistador-Americans) isn't suprising at all.
 
That's like saying dog and cat breeds don't exist.

Its all imagination!!!!

LOL. :D

It doesn't make sense to be believe that humans, which are animals, spread across the Earth, created geographically separated populations for tens of thousand of years, but didn't change at all. That the forces of evolution and natural selection spared the human animal. Without God, that doesn't work. And to accept that human population groups exist doesn't mean that one is better than the other. Just that they exist. As evolution and natural selection would predict.
 
I'm thinking we could start a show where we have purebred humans competing for best in show. Shouldn't be any problem, there.
 
Returning to the thread subject, it seems to me the whole IQ thing is a red herring. There is no test that measures truly innate cognitive ability and I don't expect there to be one in the near or far future. Quite apart from whether it would show any differences at all, those differences would have to be proven to have effects, and those effects would have to be present wherever those with the differences were present. Not gonna happen...

Yes there have been some genetic changes as the human race has spread across the planet, but AFAIK they have all been superficial physical changes with the exception of some differing succeptibility to disease. None have been detected that I know of at the depths of inate behaviour, such as an inate propensity for violence - and even should one be found in the future, it would also need to be shown to produce physical effects wherever such genetic variation was found to be of any use whatsoever.

And so we return to sociological pressures, particularly in certain situations, such as mass shootings. So, what are they, and just as importantly, what is the mechanism by which those pressures lead to violence. Finding such a mechanism would be the key to finding a way to break that link.
 

Back
Top Bottom