Biden questioned about Black crime. Answers nobody should be in jail for drug offenses
Comments
-
No, because genetics has nothing to do with the differences.SFGbob said:
Kobe since white people commit more crime and score lower on test scores than Asians do you feel they are genetically inferior to Asians? Don't hurt yourself dodging the question Kunt.TheKobeStopper said:
https://hardcorehusky.com/discussion/82291/charles-murray-the-bravest-man-in-america#latestSFGbob said:
Explain to me precisely what my "race science" is you lying piece of shit.TheKobeStopper said:
This seems like an endorsement of Bob’s race science but Tequilla has taught me to give people a chance to clarify.RaceBannon said:If Bob had said this the Kobe Race Bait response team would have been out in force
So Black people do drugs and not white people????????
Do you think black people have a lower IQ than other races because of genetics?
Bob doesn’t think black people are genetically inferior, just that they’re stupid and commit more violent crimes because of their *equal* genetics.
There is no scientific basis for race. Genetically, two white people can have more in common with a black person than they do with each other. Any pseudo science claiming otherwise is race science. -
Really? So genetics has nothing to do with intelligence or athletic ability? If that's you position Kobe how do you explain the large disparities in athletic ability and test scores when broken down by race? Why aren't there more white sprinters and NFL cornerbacks?TheKobeStopper said:
No, because genetics has nothing to do with the differences.SFGbob said:
Kobe since white people commit more crime and score lower on test scores than Asians do you feel they are genetically inferior to Asians? Don't hurt yourself dodging the question Kunt.TheKobeStopper said:
https://hardcorehusky.com/discussion/82291/charles-murray-the-bravest-man-in-america#latestSFGbob said:
Explain to me precisely what my "race science" is you lying piece of shit.TheKobeStopper said:
This seems like an endorsement of Bob’s race science but Tequilla has taught me to give people a chance to clarify.RaceBannon said:If Bob had said this the Kobe Race Bait response team would have been out in force
So Black people do drugs and not white people????????
Do you think black people have a lower IQ than other races because of genetics?
Bob doesn’t think black people are genetically inferior, just that they’re stupid and commit more violent crimes because of their *equal* genetics.
There is no scientific basis for race. Genetically, two white people can have more in common with a black person than they do with each other. Any pseudo science claiming otherwise is race science. -
The observable differences between races are environmentally driven. There is no black gene making them more athletic, there is no Asian gene making them more intelligent and there is no white gene making us colonizers. There is just as much variation inside of a race as there is comparing them to another race.SFGbob said:
Really? So genetics has nothing to do with intelligence or athletic ability? If that's you position Kobe how do you explain the large disparities in athletic ability and test scores when broken down by race? Why aren't there more white sprinters and NFL cornerbacks?TheKobeStopper said:
No, because genetics has nothing to do with the differences.SFGbob said:
Kobe since white people commit more crime and score lower on test scores than Asians do you feel they are genetically inferior to Asians? Don't hurt yourself dodging the question Kunt.TheKobeStopper said:
https://hardcorehusky.com/discussion/82291/charles-murray-the-bravest-man-in-america#latestSFGbob said:
Explain to me precisely what my "race science" is you lying piece of shit.TheKobeStopper said:
This seems like an endorsement of Bob’s race science but Tequilla has taught me to give people a chance to clarify.RaceBannon said:If Bob had said this the Kobe Race Bait response team would have been out in force
So Black people do drugs and not white people????????
Do you think black people have a lower IQ than other races because of genetics?
Bob doesn’t think black people are genetically inferior, just that they’re stupid and commit more violent crimes because of their *equal* genetics.
There is no scientific basis for race. Genetically, two white people can have more in common with a black person than they do with each other. Any pseudo science claiming otherwise is race science.
If environmental circumstances changed in specific ways (or if you wanted to breed it) you would get taller and more athletic white people. If environmental circumstances changed in specific ways (or if you wanted to breed it) you would get higher test scores from black people.
There is no scientific basis for race. There are no genetic differences based in race. We’re all the just fucking humans, man. -
Although I don't 100% agree, but this is the first time you have actually made a logical point.TheKobeStopper said:
The observable differences between races are environmentally driven. There is no black gene making them more athletic, there is no Asian gene making them more intelligent and there is no white gene making us colonizers. There is just as much variation inside of a race as there is comparing them to another race.SFGbob said:
Really? So genetics has nothing to do with intelligence or athletic ability? If that's you position Kobe how do you explain the large disparities in athletic ability and test scores when broken down by race? Why aren't there more white sprinters and NFL cornerbacks?TheKobeStopper said:
No, because genetics has nothing to do with the differences.SFGbob said:
Kobe since white people commit more crime and score lower on test scores than Asians do you feel they are genetically inferior to Asians? Don't hurt yourself dodging the question Kunt.TheKobeStopper said:
https://hardcorehusky.com/discussion/82291/charles-murray-the-bravest-man-in-america#latestSFGbob said:
Explain to me precisely what my "race science" is you lying piece of shit.TheKobeStopper said:
This seems like an endorsement of Bob’s race science but Tequilla has taught me to give people a chance to clarify.RaceBannon said:If Bob had said this the Kobe Race Bait response team would have been out in force
So Black people do drugs and not white people????????
Do you think black people have a lower IQ than other races because of genetics?
Bob doesn’t think black people are genetically inferior, just that they’re stupid and commit more violent crimes because of their *equal* genetics.
There is no scientific basis for race. Genetically, two white people can have more in common with a black person than they do with each other. Any pseudo science claiming otherwise is race science.
If environmental circumstances changed in specific ways (or if you wanted to breed it) you would get taller and more athletic white people. If environmental circumstances changed in specific ways (or if you wanted to breed it) you would get higher test scores from black people.
There is no scientific basis for race. There are no genetic differences based in race. We’re all the just fucking humans, man.
-
Although it isn't a voting issue for the Slobberer because he thinks that blacks need a firm thumb on the scale to help them out and a firm thumb on the bottom of the scale to punish whitey.alumni94 said:
Although I don't 100% agree, but this is the first time I have actually seen you made a logical point.TheKobeStopper said:
The observable differences between races are environmentally driven. There is no black gene making them more athletic, there is no Asian gene making them more intelligent and there is no white gene making us colonizers. There is just as much variation inside of a race as there is comparing them to another race.SFGbob said:
Really? So genetics has nothing to do with intelligence or athletic ability? If that's you position Kobe how do you explain the large disparities in athletic ability and test scores when broken down by race? Why aren't there more white sprinters and NFL cornerbacks?TheKobeStopper said:
No, because genetics has nothing to do with the differences.SFGbob said:
Kobe since white people commit more crime and score lower on test scores than Asians do you feel they are genetically inferior to Asians? Don't hurt yourself dodging the question Kunt.TheKobeStopper said:
https://hardcorehusky.com/discussion/82291/charles-murray-the-bravest-man-in-america#latestSFGbob said:
Explain to me precisely what my "race science" is you lying piece of shit.TheKobeStopper said:
This seems like an endorsement of Bob’s race science but Tequilla has taught me to give people a chance to clarify.RaceBannon said:If Bob had said this the Kobe Race Bait response team would have been out in force
So Black people do drugs and not white people????????
Do you think black people have a lower IQ than other races because of genetics?
Bob doesn’t think black people are genetically inferior, just that they’re stupid and commit more violent crimes because of their *equal* genetics.
There is no scientific basis for race. Genetically, two white people can have more in common with a black person than they do with each other. Any pseudo science claiming otherwise is race science.
If environmental circumstances changed in specific ways (or if you wanted to breed it) you would get taller and more athletic white people. If environmental circumstances changed in specific ways (or if you wanted to breed it) you would get higher test scores from black people.
There is no scientific basis for race. There are no genetic differences based in race. We’re all the just fucking humans, man. -
There are no genetic differences based in race.TheKobeStopper said:
The observable differences between races are environmentally driven. There is no black gene making them more athletic, there is no Asian gene making them more intelligent and there is no white gene making us colonizers. There is just as much variation inside of a race as there is comparing them to another race.SFGbob said:
Really? So genetics has nothing to do with intelligence or athletic ability? If that's you position Kobe how do you explain the large disparities in athletic ability and test scores when broken down by race? Why aren't there more white sprinters and NFL cornerbacks?TheKobeStopper said:
No, because genetics has nothing to do with the differences.SFGbob said:
Kobe since white people commit more crime and score lower on test scores than Asians do you feel they are genetically inferior to Asians? Don't hurt yourself dodging the question Kunt.TheKobeStopper said:
https://hardcorehusky.com/discussion/82291/charles-murray-the-bravest-man-in-america#latestSFGbob said:
Explain to me precisely what my "race science" is you lying piece of shit.TheKobeStopper said:
This seems like an endorsement of Bob’s race science but Tequilla has taught me to give people a chance to clarify.RaceBannon said:If Bob had said this the Kobe Race Bait response team would have been out in force
So Black people do drugs and not white people????????
Do you think black people have a lower IQ than other races because of genetics?
Bob doesn’t think black people are genetically inferior, just that they’re stupid and commit more violent crimes because of their *equal* genetics.
There is no scientific basis for race. Genetically, two white people can have more in common with a black person than they do with each other. Any pseudo science claiming otherwise is race science.
If environmental circumstances changed in specific ways (or if you wanted to breed it) you would get taller and more athletic white people. If environmental circumstances changed in specific ways (or if you wanted to breed it) you would get higher test scores from black people.
There is no scientific basis for race. There are no genetic differences based in race. We’re all the just fucking humans, man.
So the fact that blacks dominate in sports like basketball and football and that there are no white cornerbacks is due to "environment" and has nothing to do with genetics. Got it.
And if you were to place Jews or Eskimos into this same "environment" currently occupied by blacks the NFL and the NBA would shortly be dominated by said Eskimos and Jews. Okay. -
-
Just because you're black doesn't mean you'll be a great sprinter. But pretty much all greater sprinters are black. And sorry to disabuse you of your guilty white liberal creationism theory.
Genes have a lot to do with that.
https://slate.com/technology/2008/12/race-genes-and-sports.html -
-
Nope, it was all about her environment.doogie said: -
Well, I've been following this topic since it was introduced and I'm still not clear on a few things. We know behavior explains a lot. Asian and Jewish cultures have placed a huge importance on education and for that, and related, reasons, have done well academically.
But it appears the discussion is at least implying something more. So there's an unequal distribution of scores on the standard IQ test. Are we claiming that this means that those populations who have scored lower are, on a fundamental level of native intelligence, less capable?
And if so, are we also using that as a proxy to explain other things like crime rates? These seem like simple yes or no answers. IDKW Kobe likes to go five rounds with you guys like Hondo did, but at some point I seem to recall he asked a fairly straight-forward question, which I'm asking here.
Is Murray, a political scientist and purveyor of social commentary, brave because he's saying that blacks and hispanics are, on average, at an intellectual disadvantage? Is that the point?
Is the IQ test free from environmental bias? IDK much about this area, but I have been under the general impression that the relevance, usefulness, and legitimacy of the IQ test is still somewhat controversial among scientists. -
Writing things out helps me clarify and understand my own positions. And sometimes I just want to see what the crazy shit they’ll say.
-
It means that IQ is something real that can be measured. It's not phrenology, and that standardized IQ tests even when controlling for income and environment still shake out in a very consistent pattern.
I suspect that Murray would object to being labeled as a political scientist, although I know he is often called that. Murray is brave because of his willingness to discuss issues and topics that make people uncomfortable and that routinely illicit moronic responses from people such as Kobe's who know nothing of his work and who intentionally lie about what he and his books have said.
It takes a brave person in today's world to make these kinds of observations.
The charges of white privilege and systemic racism that are tearing the country apart fIoat free of reality. Two known facts, long since documented beyond reasonable doubt, need to be brought into the open and incorporated into the way we think about public policy: American whites, blacks, Hispanics, and Asians have different violent crime rates and different means and distributions of cognitive ability. The allegations of racism in policing, college admissions, segregation in housing, and hiring and promotions in the workplace ignore the ways in which the problems that prompt the allegations of systemic racism are driven by these two realities.
What good can come of bringing them into the open? America’s most precious ideal is what used to be known as the American Creed: People are not to be judged by where they came from, what social class they come from, or by race, color, or creed. They must be judged as individuals. The prevailing Progressive ideology repudiates that ideal, demanding instead that the state should judge people by their race, social origins, religion, sex, and sexual orientation.
We on the center left and center right who are the American Creed’s natural defenders have painted ourselves into a corner. We have been unwilling to say openly that different groups have significant group differences. Since we have not been willing to say that, we have been left defenseless against the claims that racism is to blame. What else could it be? We have been afraid to answer. We must. Facing Reality is a step in that direction.
Genes aren't everything, they are one part of many things, but to deny that they play any role, is liberal creationism.
Knowing a single person's IQ won't tell you much, just as knowing a single person's race won't tell you if they are a world class sprinter. But when looking at elite sprinters collectively or elite mathematicians you can make some determination based on the race of the former and the IQ and race of the later. This topic shouldn't be taboo and Murray is brave due to his willingness to discuss it. Because it's a fucking certainty that ignorant, anti-science morons like Kobe are going to smear you for it.
https://conversationswithbillkristol.org/video/charles-murray-iii/
Knowing what we know about race and IQ should we really have an expectation that our advance math and science classes be populated with people who reflect proportionately our racial demographics? We don't have that expectation for athletics, but for some reason we're supposed to for every other situation. -
Stick to Sports!!!!creepycoug said:Well, I've been following this topic since it was introduced and I'm still not clear on a few things. We know behavior explains a lot. Asian and Jewish cultures have placed a huge importance on education and for that, and related, reasons, have done well academically.
But it appears the discussion is at least implying something more. So there's an unequal distribution of scores on the standard IQ test. Are we claiming that this means that those populations who have scored lower are, on a fundamental level of native intelligence, less capable?
And if so, are we also using that as a proxy to explain other things like crime rates? These seem like simple yes or no answers. IDKW Kobe likes to go five rounds with you guys like Hondo did, but at some point I seem to recall he asked a fairly straight-forward question, which I'm asking here.
Is Murray, a political scientist and purveyor of social commentary, brave because he's saying that blacks and hispanics are, on average, at an intellectual disadvantage? Is that the point?
Is the IQ test free from environmental bias? IDK much about this area, but I have been under the general impression that the relevance, usefulness, and legitimacy of the IQ test is still somewhat controversial among scientists. -
Huh?Kaepsknee said:
Stick to Sports!!!!creepycoug said:Well, I've been following this topic since it was introduced and I'm still not clear on a few things. We know behavior explains a lot. Asian and Jewish cultures have placed a huge importance on education and for that, and related, reasons, have done well academically.
But it appears the discussion is at least implying something more. So there's an unequal distribution of scores on the standard IQ test. Are we claiming that this means that those populations who have scored lower are, on a fundamental level of native intelligence, less capable?
And if so, are we also using that as a proxy to explain other things like crime rates? These seem like simple yes or no answers. IDKW Kobe likes to go five rounds with you guys like Hondo did, but at some point I seem to recall he asked a fairly straight-forward question, which I'm asking here.
Is Murray, a political scientist and purveyor of social commentary, brave because he's saying that blacks and hispanics are, on average, at an intellectual disadvantage? Is that the point?
Is the IQ test free from environmental bias? IDK much about this area, but I have been under the general impression that the relevance, usefulness, and legitimacy of the IQ test is still somewhat controversial among scientists. -
I don’t know about the IQ test other than it’s controversial.creepycoug said:Well, I've been following this topic since it was introduced and I'm still not clear on a few things. We know behavior explains a lot. Asian and Jewish cultures have placed a huge importance on education and for that, and related, reasons, have done well academically.
But it appears the discussion is at least implying something more. So there's an unequal distribution of scores on the standard IQ test. Are we claiming that this means that those populations who have scored lower are, on a fundamental level of native intelligence, less capable?
And if so, are we also using that as a proxy to explain other things like crime rates? These seem like simple yes or no answers. IDKW Kobe likes to go five rounds with you guys like Hondo did, but at some point I seem to recall he asked a fairly straight-forward question, which I'm asking here.
Is Murray, a political scientist and purveyor of social commentary, brave because he's saying that blacks and hispanics are, on average, at an intellectual disadvantage? Is that the point?
Is the IQ test free from environmental bias? IDK much about this area, but I have been under the general impression that the relevance, usefulness, and legitimacy of the IQ test is still somewhat controversial among scientists.
We do know people are born with varying degrees of natural athletic ability. Why is it such a stretch to believe different people were born with varying degrees of intellectual ability? -
My brother scored higher on the IQ test than I did
Clearly it was biased -
On a side note, IQ tests are good at one thing: Determining who will have difficulties in education.
IQ tests being taken for any other reason is not completely worthless but close to it. For instance, I have taken an IQ test to get a job as VP of Sales for a company. Absolutely worthless waste of time and money and it was the first thing I got rid of when I was given the job. The IQ test isn't measuring personality traits, willingness to take direction, thinking on your feet in social situations, how hard an individual works, all the things that go into being a decent sales person.
Lastly, I always enjoy watching liberals try to walk that fine racist line when they get that urge to recreate society in the image they think it should resemble. To deny genetics is to deny reality. Denying that genetics plays a part erodes a liberals argument long before it even begins. It is denying science. But it is OK for them to lump all black Americans in as a disadvantaged group, one that needs exception to survive in this horribly racist world. Or to claim that all whites are polluted with the same inherent racism and white privilege (genetics). It is the hypocrisy and racism of the left that fuels this very discussion.
-
IQ tests are a pretty good indicator of where people will end up being distributed in the educational and professional fields. Will all molecular biologist have high IQs? No, but on average they will have higher IQs then the average IQ of your typical DMV employee.
Are there people with brilliant criminal minds? Yes, but on average your typical criminal has a lower IQ then a member of the general public.
-
That explains why Demonrats are criminals.SFGbob said:IQ tests are a pretty good indicator of where people will end up being distributed in the educational and professional fields. Will all molecular biologist have high IQs? No, but on average they will have higher IQs then the average IQ of your typical DMV employee.
Are there people with brilliant criminal minds? Yes, but on average your typical criminal has a lower IQ then a member of the general public. -
IQ tests aren't controversial, the results are controversial.doogie said:
I don’t know about the IQ test other than it’s controversial.creepycoug said:Well, I've been following this topic since it was introduced and I'm still not clear on a few things. We know behavior explains a lot. Asian and Jewish cultures have placed a huge importance on education and for that, and related, reasons, have done well academically.
But it appears the discussion is at least implying something more. So there's an unequal distribution of scores on the standard IQ test. Are we claiming that this means that those populations who have scored lower are, on a fundamental level of native intelligence, less capable?
And if so, are we also using that as a proxy to explain other things like crime rates? These seem like simple yes or no answers. IDKW Kobe likes to go five rounds with you guys like Hondo did, but at some point I seem to recall he asked a fairly straight-forward question, which I'm asking here.
Is Murray, a political scientist and purveyor of social commentary, brave because he's saying that blacks and hispanics are, on average, at an intellectual disadvantage? Is that the point?
Is the IQ test free from environmental bias? IDK much about this area, but I have been under the general impression that the relevance, usefulness, and legitimacy of the IQ test is still somewhat controversial among scientists.
We do know people are born with varying degrees of natural athletic ability. Why is it such a stretch to believe different people were born with varying degrees of intellectual ability? -
Fair enough. I won't disagree that this is a tough conversation to lead publicly. It's uncomfortable for obvious reasons.SFGbob said:It means that IQ is something real that can be measured. It's not phrenology, and that standardized IQ tests even when controlling for income and environment still shake out in a very consistent pattern.
I suspect that Murray would object to being labeled as a political scientist, although I know he is often called that. Murray is brave because of his willingness to discuss issues and topics that make people uncomfortable and that routinely illicit moronic responses from people such as Kobe's who know nothing of his work and who intentionally lie about what he and his books have said.
It takes a brave person in today's world to make these kinds of observations.
The charges of white privilege and systemic racism that are tearing the country apart fIoat free of reality. Two known facts, long since documented beyond reasonable doubt, need to be brought into the open and incorporated into the way we think about public policy: American whites, blacks, Hispanics, and Asians have different violent crime rates and different means and distributions of cognitive ability. The allegations of racism in policing, college admissions, segregation in housing, and hiring and promotions in the workplace ignore the ways in which the problems that prompt the allegations of systemic racism are driven by these two realities.
What good can come of bringing them into the open? America’s most precious ideal is what used to be known as the American Creed: People are not to be judged by where they came from, what social class they come from, or by race, color, or creed. They must be judged as individuals. The prevailing Progressive ideology repudiates that ideal, demanding instead that the state should judge people by their race, social origins, religion, sex, and sexual orientation.
We on the center left and center right who are the American Creed’s natural defenders have painted ourselves into a corner. We have been unwilling to say openly that different groups have significant group differences. Since we have not been willing to say that, we have been left defenseless against the claims that racism is to blame. What else could it be? We have been afraid to answer. We must. Facing Reality is a step in that direction.
Genes aren't everything, they are one part of many things, but to deny that they play any role, is liberal creationism.
Knowing a single person's IQ won't tell you much, just as knowing a single person's race won't tell you if they are a world class sprinter. But when looking at elite sprinters collectively or elite mathematicians you can make some determination based on the race of the former and the IQ and race of the later. This topic shouldn't be taboo and Murray is brave due to his willingness to discuss it. Because it's a fucking certainty that ignorant, anti-science morons like Kobe are going to smear you for it.
https://conversationswithbillkristol.org/video/charles-murray-iii/
Knowing what we know about race and IQ should we really have an expectation that our advance math and science classes be populated with people who reflect proportionately our racial demographics? We don't have that expectation for athletics, but for some reason we're supposed to for every other situation.
I guess I should read the book to understand how he connects this to, for example, crime rates. Elite sprinters and elite mathematicians are one thing. But the vast majority of us are able to live pretty fruitful and healthy lives in the United States and elsewhere with only 'under the bell curve' abilities. Which makes me curious about why we'd bring this up. Of course nobody wants to hear that some groups are less capable than others intellectually. Not being fast is one thing; not being smart is another ...
Elite sports is something that society accepts is not for everybody. But being a member of a group that is not smart enough to do this or that is a harder pill to swallow. If you tell me that I am in group that makes it much less likely that I, or anyone in my family line, will ever break 10 seconds in the 100 meters, or grab a dime off the top of the backboard, then, ok, so what. I'm still super fucking handsome and swarthy. Likewise, if you tell me that people in my line are less likely to ever be the next Stephen Hawking, then, ok, same reaction.
If, on the other hand, I'm told I'm part of a group that is generally less intellectually capable, and that means something in terms of how we order our society and where we? fit in it, I'm a little more troubled. Also, as we know, there are indeed people with nefarious intentions and beliefs that can and will use this is horrific ways. No, not Murray, but we both know they're out there, and this message only helps them confirm their beliefs.
Like I said; I'll try and make time to read the book. I've always meant to given how often it has been discussed. I have also read some summaries of interesting studies that are critical of the IQ test ... not so much junking it, but understanding its limitations. It's been some time but I'll poke around for those when time allows.
-
One other thing: I've listened to podcasts where Murray talks about the "Super Zips", and how that general trend could be really exaggerated and lead to bad societal results in an era where technology is becoming the most dominant factor in our lives. I think there is something to that and found it interesting.SFGbob said:It means that IQ is something real that can be measured. It's not phrenology, and that standardized IQ tests even when controlling for income and environment still shake out in a very consistent pattern.
I suspect that Murray would object to being labeled as a political scientist, although I know he is often called that. Murray is brave because of his willingness to discuss issues and topics that make people uncomfortable and that routinely illicit moronic responses from people such as Kobe's who know nothing of his work and who intentionally lie about what he and his books have said.
It takes a brave person in today's world to make these kinds of observations.
The charges of white privilege and systemic racism that are tearing the country apart fIoat free of reality. Two known facts, long since documented beyond reasonable doubt, need to be brought into the open and incorporated into the way we think about public policy: American whites, blacks, Hispanics, and Asians have different violent crime rates and different means and distributions of cognitive ability. The allegations of racism in policing, college admissions, segregation in housing, and hiring and promotions in the workplace ignore the ways in which the problems that prompt the allegations of systemic racism are driven by these two realities.
What good can come of bringing them into the open? America’s most precious ideal is what used to be known as the American Creed: People are not to be judged by where they came from, what social class they come from, or by race, color, or creed. They must be judged as individuals. The prevailing Progressive ideology repudiates that ideal, demanding instead that the state should judge people by their race, social origins, religion, sex, and sexual orientation.
We on the center left and center right who are the American Creed’s natural defenders have painted ourselves into a corner. We have been unwilling to say openly that different groups have significant group differences. Since we have not been willing to say that, we have been left defenseless against the claims that racism is to blame. What else could it be? We have been afraid to answer. We must. Facing Reality is a step in that direction.
Genes aren't everything, they are one part of many things, but to deny that they play any role, is liberal creationism.
Knowing a single person's IQ won't tell you much, just as knowing a single person's race won't tell you if they are a world class sprinter. But when looking at elite sprinters collectively or elite mathematicians you can make some determination based on the race of the former and the IQ and race of the later. This topic shouldn't be taboo and Murray is brave due to his willingness to discuss it. Because it's a fucking certainty that ignorant, anti-science morons like Kobe are going to smear you for it.
https://conversationswithbillkristol.org/video/charles-murray-iii/
Knowing what we know about race and IQ should we really have an expectation that our advance math and science classes be populated with people who reflect proportionately our racial demographics? We don't have that expectation for athletics, but for some reason we're supposed to for every other situation. -
Murray wasn't trying to re-order our society based upon his observations and analysis he was commenting on how society was reordering itself based upon IQ stratification.
The people who are currently trying to re-order society by forcing a square peg in round hole, are the ones who insist that it's evidence of white racism and white supremacy if the number of doctors or lawyers or scientists or professors or classic symphony players doesn't track neatly to the racial demographics of the country.
Just because you may be part of a group that statistically has a lower IQ doesn't mean you as an individual have a lower IQ. Not all Asians are good at math. But statistically more Asians are going to be better at math than white people and we shouldn't expect that white people make up their racial demographic percentage wise when it comes to hiring or filling the slots of math wiz jobs. -
Murray also talked about the intellectual strip mining of rural America. My wife's parents are from Warrenton, Oregon a small town south of Astoria. They are both very smart and my wife's dad went to work on tug boats at age 16. They both stayed and raised their kids in Warrenton. My wife is really smart and went to Oregon and after graduation moved to the Portland area. Everyone in her small graduation class that went to college moved away. In particular, the males in her class that weren't smart stayed and lots ended up on drugs and alcohol as the timber industry collapsed. Suicides, drownings, and jail was common. My wife's high school reunions were pretty sad affairs.SFGbob said:Murray wasn't trying to re-order our society based upon his observations and analysis he was commenting on how society was reordering itself based upon IQ stratification.
The people who are currently trying to re-order society by forcing a square peg in round hole, are the ones who insist that it's evidence of white racism and white supremacy if the number of doctors or lawyers or scientists or professors or classic symphony players doesn't track neatly to the racial demographics of the country.
Just because you may be part of a group that statistically has a lower IQ doesn't mean you as an individual have a lower IQ. Not all Asians are good at math. But statistically more Asians are going to be better at math than white people and we shouldn't expect that white people make up their racial demographic percentage wise when it comes to hiring or filling the slots of math wiz jobs. -
As a function of policies that drive quotas, I certainly agree. I've never agreed with that approach. On the other hand, if there are environmental factors that drive bad outcomes for various groups, and it's something we can help, then I'm also not opposed to society interfering on some level. In other words, I don't insist on strict Darwinism to sort this all out and improve the lot for people.SFGbob said:Murray wasn't trying to re-order our society based upon his observations and analysis he was commenting on how society was reordering itself based upon IQ stratification.
The people who are currently trying to re-order society by forcing a square peg in round hole, are the ones who insist that it's evidence of white racism and white supremacy if the number of doctors or lawyers or scientists or professors or classic symphony players doesn't track neatly to the racial demographics of the country.
Just because you may be part of a group that statistically has a lower IQ doesn't mean you as an individual have a lower IQ. Not all Asians are good at math. But statistically more Asians are going to be better at math than white people and we shouldn't expect that white people make up their racial demographic percentage wise when it comes to hiring or filling the slots of math wiz jobs.
A good example of such people who aren't discussed nearly enough are Native Americans and their plight on the reservations. Can we do better than that arrangement? Maybe the answer is no reservations and full assimilation? Maybe that was the answer all along. That kind of thing. -
My SATs indicated that I should go into nursing
I assume because of my empathy and all around gentle and kind behavior -
This is actually a pretty damn good post.Bendintheriver said:On a side note, IQ tests are good at one thing: Determining who will have difficulties in education.
IQ tests being taken for any other reason is not completely worthless but close to it. For instance, I have taken an IQ test to get a job as VP of Sales for a company. Absolutely worthless waste of time and money and it was the first thing I got rid of when I was given the job. The IQ test isn't measuring personality traits, willingness to take direction, thinking on your feet in social situations, how hard an individual works, all the things that go into being a decent sales person.
Lastly, I always enjoy watching liberals try to walk that fine racist line when they get that urge to recreate society in the image they think it should resemble. To deny genetics is to deny reality. Denying that genetics plays a part erodes a liberals argument long before it even begins. It is denying science. But it is OK for them to lump all black Americans in as a disadvantaged group, one that needs exception to survive in this horribly racist world. Or to claim that all whites are polluted with the same inherent racism and white privilege (genetics). It is the hypocrisy and racism of the left that fuels this very discussion. -
You're an Oly Bear, and thus good for one thing: Government Jerbs.RaceBannon said:My SATs indicated that I should go into nursing
I assume because of my empathy and all around gentle and kind behavior -
My first job summer after graduation was at the old GSA Building where I could walk to work. I was a file clerk at L and I filing claims for worker disability. Yes kids, it was all on paper put into file cabinetscreepycoug said:
You're an Oly Bear, and thus good for one thing: Government Jerbs.RaceBannon said:My SATs indicated that I should go into nursing
I assume because of my empathy and all around gentle and kind behavior
Some files were inches thick with back problems. Who knew? It was kind of a running joke
Horrible job by the way. I don't think I have had a job that required 8 hours in an office since. I need the field and the office
