• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Leftists Say Blacks Are Not More Violent, Then Why Are African Countries #1-#57 of Murder Rates?

Half-Life said:
Koyaanisqatsi said:
Half-Life said:
Why does Obama identify as black?
Click to expand...

If it weren't for dickheads like some in this thread, he wouldn't. He would "identify" as a man. Unfortunately in this country there are still MILLIONS of ignorant fucking morons who can't seem to comprehend that and have infected our culture with this endless stupidity of separation based on skin pigmentation, so he is culturally forced to "identify as black" by those who think it actually matters.
Click to expand...

Are you saying light skinned mixed race people are bending to the whim of white supremacists?
Click to expand...

Whim? My grandaughter is black according to the laws of the state she was born in. Nothing whimsical about obeying the law.
 
For the casual reader, ...

Recall in post#1, Half-Life called American blacks "blacks."

Some other things to note:
The vast majority of the persons being called black are mixed race. Vast majority.
For example, African Americans are on average about 20-25% European.
There is wide variation across individuals.
 
Indeed one wonders why there was no outcry against the title of the thread, as well as the OP from the “not all ‘blacks’ are even black” crowd. One wonders what on earth made them fail to notice that.

What could it be?
 
The OP title is rater ignorant.

The OP title represents a general ignorance. There is genetic race and there is culture. Here in the USA under the white majority we have far mot violence than any other developed nation.

We have been bombing and killing in Afghanistan, Iraq, and now Syria for 20 years. Now our rogue president unrestrained by congress may be leading us into another war. Just hours ago Iran retaliated with a missile attack. We have been a prime cause of the turning of the mid east into a wasteland.

Our politics is in a shambles and we should feel lucky armed violence has not broken out.

We seem to be becoming more like a third world dictatorship making continuous war.

So come again about some white superiority.





Murder ares are linked to econ
 
Koyaanisqatsi said:
steve_bank said:
There is genetic race
Click to expand...

No, actually, there isn't.
Click to expand...

Yes there is. There was a poorly written article proclaiming scientists prove there is no race, which was wrong. It went viral with progressives.

And this Sega ways into a science thread on science.

The question is not that race exists, the question is what that means. From my long experince with techcal people from all over the world and uneducated at the college level as well, anyone with the same general education performs no more or less that anyone else.

That being said culture matters. Look at the mid east. Both Arabs and Persians have long rich ineffectual histories and achievements. Yet culturally they are each other's throats.

Arab and Persian texts on math and sconce fed into Europe.
 
steve_bank said:
Koyaanisqatsi said:
steve_bank said:
There is genetic race
Click to expand...

No, actually, there isn't.
Click to expand...

Yes there is.
Click to expand...

Again, no, there is not:

In the biological and social sciences, the consensus is clear: race is a social construct, not a biological attribute. Today, scientists prefer to use the term “ancestry” to describe human diversity (Figure 3). “Ancestry” reflects the fact that human variations do have a connection to the geographical origins of our ancestors—with enough information about a person’s DNA, scientists can make a reasonable guess about their ancestry. However, unlike the term “race,” it focuses on understanding how a person’s history unfolded, not how they fit into one category and not another. In a clinical setting, for instance, scientists would say that diseases such as sickle-cell anemia and cystic fibrosis are common in those of “sub-Saharan African” or “Northern European” descent, respectively, rather than in those who are “black” or “white”.
...
However, even if scientists agree that race is, at most, a social construct, any cursory search of the internet reveals that the broader public is not convinced of this. After all, if an Asian person looks so different from a European, how could they not be from distinct groups? Even if most scientists reject the concept of “race” as a biological concept, race exists, undeniably, as a social and political concept.

The popular classifications of race are based chiefly on skin color, with other relevant features including height, eyes, and hair. Though these physical differences may appear, on a superficial level, to be very dramatic, they are determined by only a minute portion of the genome: we as a species have been estimated to share 99.9% of our DNA with each other. The few differences that do exist reflect differences in environments and external factors, not core biology.

Importantly, the evolution of skin color occurred independently, and did not influence other traits such as mental abilities and behavior. In fact, science has yet to find evidence that there are genetic differences in intelligence between populations. Ultimately, while there certainly are some biological differences between different populations, these differences are few and superficial. The traits that we do share are far more profound

Science and genetics: Instruments of modern racism

Despite the scientific consensus that humanity is more alike than unlike, the long history of racism is a somber reminder that throughout human history, a mere 0.1% of variation has been sufficient justification for committing all manner of discriminations and atrocities. The advances in human genetics and the evidence of negligible differences between races might be expected to halt racist arguments. But, in fact, genetics has been used to further racist and ethnocentric arguments—as in the case of the alt-right, which promotes far-right ideologies, including white nationalism and anti-Semitism.
...
Members of the alt-right are enthusiastic proponents of ancestry testing as a way to prove their “pure” white heritage (with Scandinavian and Germanic ancestry being among the most desirable) and to rule out undesired descent from any other groups (including, unsurprisingly, Africans and the Ashkenazi Jews, but even certain European groups, such as Italians and Armenians). The belief in white superiority, and the need to preserve it, drives the alt-right movement—and genetics is both the weapon and battle standard of this new, supposedly “scientific” racism.

Those who disagree with alt-right ideologies may assume that the alt-right is merely spewing ignorant nonsense. This is certainly true for some of the alt-right. What is perhaps a more difficult truth is that many of the alt-right do, in fact, understand biology and genetics to an impressive extent, even if this understanding is flawed.

For instance, alt-right proponents have stated, correctly, that many people with European and Asian descent have inherited 1-4% of their DNA from Neanderthals ancestors, and those of African descent do not have Neanderthal heritage. They are similarly correct that Neanderthals had larger skulls than humans. Based on these facts, some within the alt-right have claimed that Europeans and Asians have superior intelligence because they have inherited larger brains from their Neanderthal ancestors.

However, this claim ignores that while there is evidence for the effect of Neanderthal DNA on certain traits, there has been no evidence for its effect on intelligence. Furthermore, scientific research indicates that the Neanderthals were not necessarily more intelligent simply because they had larger skulls. Unsurprisingly, the alt-right tends cherry-pick the ideas that align with their preconceived notions of racial hierarchies, ignoring the broader context of the field of human genetics.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom