Jump to content

Michael Hardner

Senior Member
  • Posts

    43,112
  • Joined

  • Days Won

    97

Everything posted by Michael Hardner

  1. Race certainly has IQ implications, because race indicates certain types of gene clusters... that's what race is essentially, clusters of genetic material that expresses itself in very obvious and measurable ways. Brain growth and IQ is genetically determined, Race differences in average IQ are genetic: http://www.news-medical.net/news/2005/04/26/9530.aspx we all know this. Likewise we know that different races have different genetic traits, contrary to the dogma and absurdity of liberal egalitarianism, race is not merely a skin tone... it affects all manner of developmental processes... there are many many studies who have established that the cranial sutures in black children "solidify" at earlier ages then whites... that's one way in which racial characteristics often express themselves. and black children also have very high rates of Familial idiopathic hypertrophic osteoarthropathy http://www.springerlink.com/content/nk2881q245n7l454/ Of course again racial taxonomy does not say that every black is doomed to have an IQ of 75, however reports such as the vehemently hated Bell Curve do measure the available data with very sound methodology to put forth suggestive estimates. And so far the conclusion reached by the bell curve still are largely correct... black children in the US for instance, are at the bottom rung academic achievement DESPITE preferential treatment and affirmative action and the no child left behind act... have you looked at the READING ACHIEVEMENT GAP in black kids? Its nearly 3 grades lower! and again, these stats are UNIVERSAL ANYWHERE AND EVERYWHERE BLACKS are, whether its haiti, South Africa,the Congo, south america, the US, the UK etc... its the same today as it was thousands of years ago, you have to admit that there is no shortage of evidence. Actually, these types of studies aren't widely acknowledged, as you seem to be saying they are. There are strong indications of problems with these studies. Trying to measure the intelligence of kids from South Africa apart from culture is nearly impossible, of course. A feature of proponents of these studies is they try to say things like "you have to admit there's no shortage of evidence" and "everybody knows that...". It's not true. Isolating heritage as a determinant is very difficult, and fraught with problems. For some reason, you're not honest about how widely accepted such theories are.
  2. Lictor - to add. People throwing in racial epithets when they're fighting doesn't turn the crime into a hate crime either, so try to wrap your head around that. Furthermore, if certain races are biologically prone to violence (as per your believe that biology and 'craniometry' determine one's actions) then shouldn't "being black" be a viable defense in your eyes ?
  3. Very odd the degree to which this is parsed by you - including translating Creole no less. I suspect that you have to go pretty far to try and prove that there's a race-mixing conspiracy out there, or whatever it is you're getting at. But anyway... I didn't really know about the Courtenay attack. I just looked into it, and it seemed to initially get a lot of press because the RCMP thought it was a race attack. After that, there was a CTV story indicating that some denied it was a race-based attack. The story seems to have mostly died after that. If you look on the net you can find a lot of examples of people who were extremely disturbed that there was a race-based crime, initially, but the story seems to have since died off. So this example seems to support my position and not yours: when the RCMP indicated that it may be a hate crime there was a lot of interest, which died off when it turned out to be merely a mixed-race mix up.
  4. You're switching your argument again, based on my rebuttal. Now you're saying that the point is that more blacks commit crime than whites in the US. Fine, but that's a different argument. So, that's documented and I concur that it is documented. Now, do you care to explain why cultural factors (i.e. nurture) is 50% to blame for this as you explained ?
  5. No, but you brought up IQ so I'm thinking that you suppose that it is "A" determinant of IQ, or at least a major predictor of IQ. I'm looking for you to clarify how much you believe your race decides what your IQ will be. Insignificant does not mean ZERO as I already pointed out, but as I already said cultural and other factors are more important IMO. Yeah, actually I think Rushton did try to say that hereditary factors determined aptitudes. Didn't he ? You seem to be aware of this research, so why not telling us ? And... do you believe that craniometry (?) and biology makes the tribesmen intellectually inferior then ? Again, fill me in because I don't want to speak for you. Both nurture and nature play very real and important roles.
  6. Argus/JBGlobe.... Even Lictor's statistics don't tell the complete picture. If the population is 84% white, then 84% of the victims will be white on average, all other things considered.
  7. Of course it does. I suspect that misogynistic crimes receive more attention than women-on-men crimes as well. Is that your point ? "Real, organized, and wide-spread" are mitigating terms... which indicate that there have been incidents. Have they affected Canada and the common good ? I would say yes, but... But anyway what don't you buy ? If you don't buy that race crime in Canada is a real and immediate threat, then I understand that, although it seems to run counter to your postings on immigration. But the question I think we're discussing here from the last few posts is my suggestion that people "are more concerned with a hateful, vicious murderer because he killed someone due to their race". I think that they are more concerned, even though "hate crime" may not be as common or as immediate a threat as street violence, but then neither is nuclear war. They're still threats, and items that the population is concerned about, and are considered problems in the public consciousness. There is a prioritizing that happens in each of us according to individual values, that plays out over the larger population. i.e. What are we concerned about ? News editors are aware of how issues "play" with people and shape the news accordingly. Sometimes people are concerned too much with things that should not be a prioritized problem (shark attacks) to another degree people aren't concerned enough with things that should be a prioritized problem (delivery of health care services). The status of race relations is in between, but in my believe it deserves special attention. What's the difference between racial crime and hate crime ? I'm using hate crime to describe crimes that involve people being targeted due to groups acting on racist ideology. I disagree with you. A white person assaulting a black person does not make the national news unless there is racist ideology suspected as motivating the attacks. Do you have a counter example ?
  8. You seem to be saying that a person's race is a dominant factor determining IQ. Correct me if I'm wrong. The other thing I'm wondering is where you got the 50/50 impact of nature vs. nurture. A good many scientists would be interested in your findings I think.
  9. It is an opinion, true. It's also a value. I feel that a society that recognizes that people aren't supremely intelligent and restricts their freedom to do certain things (even the State of Nevada doesn't allow cocaine use legally) creates better outcomes. Society is about balancing freedoms and I just pick a different point than you. Buying lottery tickets isn't that bad a decision, when it's done in moderation.
  10. "ZERO and insignificant" are two different things. I have said that the differences are not zero, but that they are insignificant when compared to cultural factors. For example, do you think that 'craniometry' (?) provides a basis showing that certain races have significantly more difficulty with learning for example ? I'll put cultural factors (such as wealth, emphasis on learning, reading) up against biological factors any day. Because you've jumped ahead and accused me of reducing everything to lowest common denominator, I'm thinking that you believe that biological factors mean that certain races (Asians perhaps ?) are better at certain things (math perhaps ?). Again, you should explain yourself, lest I do so incorrectly.
  11. I dunno... It should be up to the school to do something, not up to the professor... I'm sure some of the profs don't even know that the day exists...
  12. It sounds impressive, but how do you compute a $100 million profit for the games. By whom ?
  13. That's kind of like trying to imagine the impact of electricity on baseball, though.
  14. Sorry, but you're the one who started "throwing around" those words. I did quote them from a Wikipedia page about Dr. William Luther Pierce. And you used it first earlier on this thread: "but to go from there and call me a neo-nazi... I mean I suppose if you found a quote of Pierce that suggested he believed in gravity, you'd call me a neo-nazi for also believing in gravity." Would you prefer that I quoted the introductory sentence of Dr. Pierce's Wiki article: And two other points here: Firstly, don't assume you know my motives, specifically that they're different from what I've stated here. As I've said, I've given you the benefit of the doubt and I have good reason to ask you these questions. Secondly, I don't believe you've expressly indicated your beliefs on the equality of race as I have asked. You have posted here and there little insights into your thoughts, but if I quote them back without knowing the complete picture of your philosophy I will undoubtedly err and misrepresent your views. But the important question isn't whether or not we're different - clearly we are - but as to whether those differences represent anything significant enough for us to change our individual or group behavior to acknowledge that. Your answer ? Those women do have human rights, in the opinion of many people. And again, we know there are differences but are they significant enough for us to alter our group and individual behavior to account for that ? What differences do we have ? Saying that races are different isn't informative, although your belief in Darwinian evolution doesn't seem to apply to humans in the modern world - does it ? Humans evolve so slowly, that I would think our collective understanding of who we are negates the dumb force that evolution tries to apply to our biology over time. What do you think ?
  15. Argus, as with many revolutions it's happening quietly and somewhat below the radar. Younger people aren't watching television at the rates their parents did, and the multichannel multiverse is diluting viewership. Online advertising continues to grow. Meanwhile, media continue to reach out and grow together. What once was called 'convergence' continues as movies, television, games and other media are now developed together from the beginning. The xBox will soon have a myspace/twitter/facebook component. Many will lose, and many will win. And we at Maple Leaf Web are actually at the centre of the political side of this. I believe that future historians will look at posts like these one day to determine what we were thinking about. Our political systems have always been reshaped with major media changes that redefine how we communicate and the web is the next medium up to bat. (to mix a metaphor)
  16. That's not the politcal response of someone who is left-of-centre. Look at the remarks of George W. Bush after 9/11. Is he left-of-centre ? If you answer in the affirmative, then maybe it's a better idea for you to look where you stand vis-a-vis the centre. "They feel an instinctive fear for themselves and others". Yes. I fear for my community when racial supremacists target others for extermination. That sort of crime has a significant probability of perpetuating itself and harming the fabric of our society and our social relations. I'm not going to answer because you're misrepresenting what we're talking about - what a race crime is - and you're blurring what a media describes as race crime and what the authorities describe as race crime. If we're talking about people not liking each other then there's no conversation here. Race crime deserves special attention, and you don't need to know more than 50 years of history to understand why. I don't think political is as apt a word as civic. It seems to me that there are a few different questions being discussed here at once. One is why so-called "hate crimes" achieve wide news distribution, especially national distribution. Another is why certain crimes don't receive local attention. There may be similar answers to why in both cases, but they also can be different. I'll address the former question: Klan-type lynchings are a strange crime that attract special attention for a host of reasons. When they happen, there is a national interest in them. Local black-on-white or white-on-black crimes that aren't identified as being so-called "hate crimes" won't get that kind of attention because they're not special enough.
  17. Wow. I thought I was going out of my way to allow you to safely state your views, but you seem to be charging towards the exit ready to accuse me for labeling and dehumanizing you. I have not done that. Actually, I have no desire to label you - just to understand where your arguments are founded. You see, you're still not being clear on what you believe. Instead, you label yourself as a "neo-nazi", I suspect as a tactic to draw out people who would tag you as such in revulsion. I just want to know how you stand: you don't believe in liberal views on equality - do you believe that humans, from the perspective of race, are born pretty much biologically equal ? That is, although humans are born racially different, there's nothing biologically that prevents them from succeeding pretty much as others do, cultural factors aside ? If you don't believe that the races are born (basically) biologically equal, then just say so and we can move on with clarity. Don't be afraid that I will shush you away, I just don't like arguing in the dark.
  18. I don't care about his liberal leanings. I even read that he used to be friends with the Black Panthers himself. I'm not sure what his issues are. The claim is likely true, and as I said he can word things so as to evade prosecution for defaming people, but the phrase is deceptive and divisive IMO. He is smart enough to use the laws of freedom of expression in the US to exact a lot of damage, and not much positive force. The only postive thing one can say in his defense, IMO, is that he has the right to say it.
  19. Lictor, I don't want to cease talking to you, but if you don't even believe that races are equal, then why should we waste time quibbling about the details of the media. Let's go after the big fish, hmmmm ? After all, if all humans didn't have the same rights, and if all humans aren't born equal then that should be a main plank of any of your arguments on race, and you haven't overtly made it so. Why not just explain it to us ? Why do you care about 'negative connotations' or being called names ? You have nothing to discuss with such people anyway. If you're not brave enough to tell us what you really feel about things, if you censor yourself in this way then aren't you being sort of 'politically correct' ?
  20. Argus, He said that a Muslim student group was founded to bring jihad to higher education, for example. He's clearly trying to drive a wedge between groups in society, IMO. He speaks of "black progressives who kill people". Very divisive, and you get a stronger feeling for it when it's delivered over radio rather than in print. That said, he's very careful at crafting his words so that he stirs hatred without saying anything that directly espouses racial hate policy.
  21. Pliny, Sorry, but it's all too vague for me. By your logic, the poor are a "special interest" that receive a "privilege" of welfare.
  22. Lictor, I don't care if you're a neo-nazi or not, frankly. If you're a neo-nazi, though, why not admit it ? Because you're afraid to be called names ? I'd rather not debate with a neo-nazi who won't admit to it, though. So are you one ? Again, I don't care either way.
  23. Argus I completely disagree. That type of crime challenges us to work together to eliminate it. These are horrors that speak to the baser instincts (towards xenophobia) inside all of us and so they represent a type of violence that deserves particular attention. We have become the country we are because we developed institutions that raised us above our worst selves, and we should be proud of that fact and strive to support this attitude. This is just how I feel, and I don't think there's anything you could say to change my mind frankly.
  24. Argus On the first point - it's quite possible, but not proven. I agree with the second point, except for the part about 'they themselves believe'part. Most of the organizations achieve as much objectivity as can be reasonably expected, IMO, but they're still story tellers.
  25. MD Nope. Are you referring to the post from 1230 ? If so, that came before you sent me a PM on the topic. I'm not going to retroactively clean up posts, but will quote in future. If it's not that, or me using your initials then honestly I don't know what you mean.
×
×
  • Create New...