Burying racism once and for all

[uwot]

Hi Atthet, Apaosha and Recidivist

Suppose you need to find the cleverest person you can, or one of Atthet's pagan gods is going to chew your dicks off. There is a black man and a white man, how do you choose?

[RickLewis]

Turns out that Satyr, Atthet, Apaosha, johngalthasspoken, Outsider and Recidivist also hang out together on: http://knowthyself.forumotion.net

From what I read there, they have been thrown off quite a few philosophy forums, but they generally think it is fun to join a new one, and see how far they can gradually push the limits before they get banned.

We had an invasion by this bunch a year or so back, and as we are usually pretty relaxed here they gradually reduced the forum to chaos until we eventually had a purge and chucked them all out. I'm reckoning that history is likely to repeat, and that certainly seems to be what they expect themselves. However, I'm short of time (and interest) so I'm going to sort of skip to the last page by banning them all straight away. Satyr, Outsider and johngaltetc have already been banned and Apaosha was (as far as I remembered) still under a lifetime ban from last time - not sure how he snuck back in! - so really I'm just banning Recidivist now. Atthet (aka "Purple Dragon", apparently! ) can stay for the time being because he is relatively harmless and knows he'll get a ban every time he steps over the line.

Of course, this is deeply illiberal of me and in an ideal world I'd go through the steps of warning them, giving them temporary bans, giving them last chances etc as they gradually ramp up the mayhem, but (as they say on Tralfamadore) so it goes. Anyone who wishes to debate them can still do so, over on their forum: http://knowthyself.forumotion.net/t895-philosophy-now

[chaz wyman]

Wyman claims to have an MA and a PhD. What you have here is the pathetic product of thirty years of dumbing down the edumacation system, lowering standards to make it more inclusive, making exams easier to pass, so that any average dullard can get a few letters after his name and feel wanted... feel necessary. And now the exam system is in crisis in the UK, as standards have lowered so far that radical action must be taken to rescue the UK's reputation overseas and at home.

It was these lefty twits who first argued that universities were elitist and only for the privileged - as if there was ever such thing as an institution that didn't have a social and economic agenda. So the agenda became letting every Tom, Dick and Harry with an average IQ in, of mollifying the masses, of creating the illusion of equality by handing out degrees. The result has been a cultural disaster.

You would not know what a culture is let alone a cultural disaster.

If you had had the privilege of following a course of education beyond high school you would know that post high-school education evolves beyond the passive ears open, rely on what is being taught, and moves to a pro-active engagement, interpretation and thinking. Learning becomes original, self directed, and only supervised, rather than rote and direct absorption of facts imposed by the professor.
Students develop skills to think for themselves; to hold a position and argue for it.

We have seen precious little thinking of this sort from you.

[Kuznetzova]

The fact that they were used on non-whites though is proof that they are not some nihilistic, doomsday machine, but part of an ongoing, evolutionary arms race between competing sub-species.

And this is the part where they assume there is a Race War going on by simply stating so, and then assuming their audience agrees to this premise. Sorry Recidivist, but I predicted you would say this (long ago in another thread) prior to you writing it here.

[Kuznetzova]

All Non-Africans Part Neanderthal, Genetics Confirm
http://news.discovery.com/human/genetic ... 10718.html

This is too hotly debated to be quoted as evidence. Too many holes in the history of migrations.

Haplogroups as markers for genetic intelligence/cognitive ability
http://www.amren.com/news/2012/06/haplo ... e-ability/

Negroids of different lineage to Caucasians, haplogroups A&B
http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInfor ... erID=19566

http://i265.photobucket.com/albums/ii22 ... 751382.png
"Linkage tree for 9 population clusters showing genetic distance".

Yes. Good info. Haploid groups are real. Race is real. The races may have speciated if left in isolation long enough. Yes and yes.
However,

• When they start talking about "inferior vs superior", that is no longer factual, scientific nor honest. It is opinion and nothing more.
• Watch for when they say something about a duty to "exterminate the lower forms" -- that is no longer factual, scientific, nor honest.
• Watch for implied, but not explicit, language which assumes a battle between races, -- a Race War -- as if it were a pre-agreed upon fact of the human condition. That is no longer factual, scientific, nor honest. Also that kind of arguing is a form of sophistry.
• Watch for implied, but not explicit, language that depicts human warfare as a fair fight between groups , where the outcome of the war is therefore, a demonstration of which group has superior genes. That is not factual, not scientific, not historically accurate, nor honest. It is also a form of sophistry.

Indeed, in this very thread we have already seen a unqualified reference to a so-called, "ongoing arms race between the sub-species". Everyone in this thread (who is not a walk-in from stormfront.org) should know that you can agree to the biological existence of human races, if evidence is provided for these distinctions. There is nothing wrong with that. Understand that the existence of races does not entail any of the symptoms or consequences that are bandied about by white supremacists on the internet.

[Kayla]

Horseshoe crabs haven't evolved in hundreds of millions of years and are considered living fossils.

they have not evolved because there was no pressure on them to evolve. they do just fine the way they are

It's the same with races, some have evolved whilst others haven't.

leaving aside the difficulties with the concept of 'race'

supposing for the sake of argument that the statement is correct

if some race has not evolved it means that there was no reason for it to evolve - that is all - to jump from that and say that it is inferior shows total misunderstanding of evolution

Race is a physical reality, yielding quantifiable and measurable characteristics.

really?

where do you fit these people - http://www.whatisamelungeon.webs.com/

Speciation is a slow process whereby new species are formed from the divergence of old, there is always a period of time early on when reproduction between the more evolved species and its more primitive cousin is still possible.

So why didn't sub-Saharan Africans? They had hundreds of thousands of years, yet produced nothing of scientific or cultural worth.

perhaps you should restrict yourself to talking about things that you know about

before the west europeans even heard of writing there were cities and schools in sub saharan africa

[Kuznetzova]

- that is all - to jump from that and say that it is inferior shows total misunderstanding of evolution

We can get them on this every time.

Number 1,
There is nothing in nature demonstrating inferiority and superiority. We could ask them to define this, and they will make references to very recent technological advancements in written language and "culture". In other words, they suppose these differences are due to genetics, except for 99.9% of human history, the races were all hunter/gatherers. Northern Europe was basically tribes living in cave dwellings up to about the time where the Holy Roman empire "Christianized" them. So we are talking like the last 2000 years.

Number 2,
Are they supposing that evolution is a process which is a constant trending towards superiority? Because if they answer "Yes" to that question, they are committing themselves to saying that evolution has a direction; namely, towards higher superiority. Does it? Does evolution even have a direction at all?

[chaz wyman]

- that is all - to jump from that and say that it is inferior shows total misunderstanding of evolution

We can get them on this every time.

Number 1,
There is nothing in nature demonstrating inferiority and superiority. We could ask them to define this, and they will make references to very recent technological advancements in written language and "culture". In other words, they suppose these differences are due to genetics, except for 99.9% of human history, the races were all hunter/gatherers. Northern Europe was basically tribes living in cave dwellings up to about the time where the Holy Roman empire "Christianized" them. So we are talking like the last 2000 years.

Typical misconception. "Cave-men" did not really exist. Palaeolithic h/g built mobile dwellings to follow the herds. The myth about cave dwelling humans is because caves tend to preserve remains. This has given the cave an evidential exaggeration. But caves were mostly sacred places as is evident by the cave paintings found across Europe.

And you are totally ignorant about European history which was civilised for thousands of years BC. There is the small matter of the Neolithic, the Chalcolithic, the Bronze Age and Iron Age. Then there was the Pagan Roman period. Christianisation did not happen until about 100AD and not completely in the Roman Empire until Constantine.

As for the Holy Roman Empire - we have to wait a bit longer still.

You are very good and copy&paste irrelevant stuff about evolution, but your knowledge of history is extremely poor indeed.





Number 2,
Are they supposing that evolution is a process which is a constant trending towards superiority? Because if they answer "Yes" to that question, they are committing themselves to saying that evolution has a direction; namely, towards higher superiority. Does it? Does evolution even have a direction at all?

This is the smartest thing you have said.

[thedoc]

So why didn't sub-Saharan Africans? They had hundreds of thousands of years, yet produced nothing of scientific or cultural worth.

perhaps you should restrict yourself to talking about things that you know about

before the west europeans even heard of writing there were cities and schools in sub saharan africa

Kayla, one thing you should remember that this group ( Satyr, Atthet, Apaosha, johngalthasspoken, Outsider and Recidivist), are only here to pick a fight and they don't care what about, and with them it is usually about nothing because that is the substance of their posts. As far as sub-Saharan Africans, they had high culture and civilizations long before Europe but it went into decline as all societies do on occasion. They happened to be at a low ebb when Europe was rising and conquering all. One other thing, I wouldn't engage 'K', it's just not worth the effort, but that is your time to waste, if you choose.

[Kuznetzova]

Typical misconception. "Cave-men" did not really exist. Palaeolithic h/g built mobile dwellings to follow the herds. The myth about cave dwelling humans is because caves tend to preserve remains. This has given the cave an evidential exaggeration. But caves were mostly sacred places as is evident by the cave paintings found across Europe.

And you are totally ignorant about European history which was civilised for thousands of years BC. There is the small matter of the Neolithic, the Chalcolithic, the Bronze Age and Iron Age. Then there was the Pagan Roman period. Christianisation did not happen until about 100AD and not completely in the Roman Empire until Constantine.

Contrary to your response, this thread is not about the proper, accurate descriptions of early Medieval dwellings in europe.

You completely missed my point. Up to about 800 AD, Northern europe was a backwater of squabbling tribes fighting over chunks of land. China had a far more advanced culture than northern Europe at that time. Europe was totally ignorable in terms of "culture" and "literacy". Ya know, kinda like Sub-saharan Africa in recent centuries. Other people in this thread got the point I was making and re-iterated it.

[chaz wyman]

Typical misconception. "Cave-men" did not really exist. Palaeolithic h/g built mobile dwellings to follow the herds. The myth about cave dwelling humans is because caves tend to preserve remains. This has given the cave an evidential exaggeration. But caves were mostly sacred places as is evident by the cave paintings found across Europe.

And you are totally ignorant about European history which was civilised for thousands of years BC. There is the small matter of the Neolithic, the Chalcolithic, the Bronze Age and Iron Age. Then there was the Pagan Roman period. Christianisation did not happen until about 100AD and not completely in the Roman Empire until Constantine.

Contrary to your response, this thread is not about the proper, accurate descriptions of early Medieval dwellings in europe.

You completely missed my point. Up to about 800 AD, Northern europe was a backwater of squabbling tribes fighting over chunks of land. China had a far more advanced culture than northern Europe at that time. Europe was totally ignorable in terms of "culture" and "literacy". Ya know, kinda like Sub-saharan Africa in recent centuries. Other people in this thread got the point I was making and re-iterated it.

I get your point - you are COMPLETELY wrong.

I can only suggest that you open a book on history and archaeology. You knowledge is disgraceful. How on earth did you ever manage to complete high school with this woeful ignorance.

During the period before your 800AD cutoff you have completely dismissed the Roman Empire which brought peace and security to Europe never seen since. The Pax Romana has neve been surpassed.

And what exactly do you think happened in 800AD to change that twisted view of your?

Recent history has demonstrated man's unique ability for bringing maximum pain and suffering through warfare - or have you never heard of World War 2?

Finally - you have not one scrap of evidence to support your claim that "Other people in this thread got the point I was making". And NO ONE has re-iterated it. For a scientist you have poor skills in reflection on evidence.