Are minority races smart enough to VOTE ???

[HogTrash]

Intelligence reflects on many aspects of a civilization...Health, violence, crime and productivity are just a few of the many problems we deal with in a multi-cultural and racially diverse nation like the United States, with people who are permited to participate in making important decisions that affect us all, such as those that are decided in elections.

But before we can discuss this problem we must first decide if intelligence is in any way determined by racial genetics...To do this honestly and openly, we must check our political correctness at the door and open our minds to information we have been socialized to believe is taboo and racially insensitive...As adults, we must learn to deal with the reality of truth.

This is an NPR interview of Dr Philippe Rushton, concerning his findings resulting from years of scientific study and research.
[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d6kD64iS5Ow&feature=player_embedded[/YOUTUBE]

[Monkeybone]

With this topic I think that I will have to agree with the Doc, that it comes down to genetics and culture. I don't know if I would agree on the 50-50 split, but I think that very much it depends on how they were brought up and then how they live their lives.

And I think that also taints the test. They are using averages (which you would with so many ppl) and that the lower class blacks have an effect on that. I think that it has to do with how many offspring that they have. With out looking it up, I would have to pull it out of thin air that ghetto blacks be hasings mores babies than them there upper class, educated blacks... and that right there skews it as a people and sets them up for failure.

[pete311]

Hog why do you load a question as your thread title and yet not wish to discuss it?

One problem with the video is he says blacks on average have smaller brains. The size of brains within species matters very little. Women naturally have smaller brains than men. Does that mean women are less intelligent than men? The 40+ women that have won a nobel prize say otherwise.

The man in the video also admits he thinks intelligence is up to 50% cultural and that his views are in the minority.

Even if there is a difference, there is no data telling of how much. Likely there would be only fractions of a percent difference. Even an absurd difference like 10% wouldn't make me flinch much. There are PLENTY of white trash idiots out there that I hate knowing they can vote.

[HogTrash]

Hog why do you load a question as your thread title and yet not wish to discuss it?

One problem with the video is he says blacks on average have smaller brains. The size of brains within species matters very little. Women naturally have smaller brains than men. Does that mean women are less intelligent than men? The 40+ women that have won a nobel prize say otherwise.

The man in the video also admits he thinks intelligence is up to 50% cultural and that his views are in the minority.

Even if there is a difference, there is no data telling of how much. Likely there would be only fractions of a percent difference. Even an absurd difference like 10% wouldn't make me flinch much. There are PLENTY of white trash idiots out there that I hate knowing they can vote.

You might want to look over this.

http://www.lrainc.com/swtaboo/stalkers/jpr01.html

J. Philippe Rushton: Race as a Biological Concept
November 4, 1996

The mean pattern of educational and economic achievement within multi-racial countries such as Canada and the United States has increasingly been found to prove valid internationally. For example, it is not often recognized, perhaps because it contradicts the politically correct theories that intelligence is purely a matter of socio-economic conditions, that Asian-Americans and Asians in Asia often outscore white Americans and white Europeans on IQ tests and on tests of educational achievement (even though the tests were largely developed by Europeans and white Americans for use in a Euro-American culture). Blacks in the Caribbean, Britain, Canada and sub-Saharan Africa as well as in the United States have low IQ scores relative to whites. For violent crime, analyses of INTERPOL data from the 1980s and 1990s show the same international distribution that occurs within the United States (that is, Asians least, Europeans in the middle, and Africans most). A similar racial gradient is found both within the U.S. and globally for measures of sexual activity and frequencies of sexually transmitted diseases such as AIDS (based on World Health Organization data)

[pete311]

It seems they wish to eliminate socio-economic reasons for poor IQ by using data from across the world. However, can you name me an area in the world where blacks are not socio-economically depressed?

[HogTrash]

It seems they wish to eliminate socio-economic reasons for poor IQ by using data from across the world. However, can you name me an area in the world where blacks are not socio-economically depressed?

Have you ever wondered why?

Do ya think it could possibly have anything to do with the reason presented in this thread?

[hortysir]

The 40+ women that have won a nobel prize say otherwise.

Given our most recent recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, I would say that intelligence isn't a deciding factor in this award.

[HogTrash]

http://www.indiana.edu/~intell/bellcurve.shtml

The Bell Curve, published in 1994, was written by Richard Herrnstein and Charles Murray as a work designed to explain, using empirical statistical analysis, the variations in intelligence in American Society, raise some warnings regarding the consequences of this intelligence gap, and propose national social policy with the goal of mitigating the worst of the consequences attributed to this intelligence gap. Many of the assertions put forth and conclusions reached by the authors are very controversial, ranging from the relationships between low measured intelligence and anti-social behavior, to the observed relationship between low African-American test scores (compared to whites and Asians) and genetic factors in intelligence abilities. The book was released and received with a large public response. In the first several months of its release, 400,000 copies of the book were sold around the world. Several thousand reviews and commentaries have been written in the short time since the book's publication.

[Jaaaman]

Given our most recent recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, I would say that intelligence isn't a deciding factor in this award.

Good point.

[Kathianne]

Given our most recent recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, I would say that intelligence isn't a deciding factor in this award.

Actually this would be an example of political correctness on a global scale. Not the best argument against the racist propaganda HT is spewing and encouraging others to read.

[sybarite]

Given our most recent recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, I would say that intelligence isn't a deciding factor in this award.

You've got that right!!

[CynicismandMisanthropy]

Wow...Look at all those big important pretty words...I'm gonna feel really bad about the damage I'm about to do to your inflated ego...I hope I can live with myself after this.There are three main races of the human species, caucasoid, mongoloid and negroid, with slight variations of each that developed in seperate areas of the world, and you claim there is 15% genetic difference in them, and on top of that you say it as if it is insignificant.

You do you know the individual differences betwwen two peopels genome is only .02% right? And that only 15% of that .o2% can even be loosely related to race right. I should also add that a majority of the the DNA is junk DNA. It has not been activated by operons and thus does not code for anything. This is because as a species we maintain rather strong ties and interbreed with different populations quite often. Also can you claim that there are three races but you don't explain what are the phenotypic and genotypic differences between them. For race to have meaning, for race to be more than a typology, one has to have concordance. In other words, skin color needs to reflect things that are deeper in the body, under the skin. But, in fact, human variation is rather non-concordant.

I'll give you an example of concordance. Height is actually quite concordant with weight. As we get taller, we gain weight, we have more weight. One aspect of size is concordant with another aspect of size.

But most of human variation is non-concordant. Skin color or eye color or hair color is not correlated with height or weight. And they're definitely not correlated with more complex traits like intelligence or athletic performance. Those things evolve and develop in entirely different ways. Just as skin color develops in a different way from size, intelligence, athletic performance, other traits develop in different and independent ways.

A map of skin color gradients looks sort of like the map of temperature. It gets lighter, as you go towards the poles and it's darker near the equator. But then take a map of, say, the distribution of blood type A. Looks entirely different. There's no relationship between the two maps. The distributions are non-concordant. Simply, one is not related to the other. Now you keep going on about IQ but you have not made a concordance with it. You have made a weak corelation but you have not proven a causation. You have to provide a link between skin color, or whatever you're using to judge race, and IQ. This means that you have to prove that either the gene which codes for skin color also codes for IQ, or that that they code as a collective rather than on their own. Otherwise you could just as well claim that the decrease in the number of pirates is responsible for the increased rate of cancer. The number of pirates of pirates has gone down, the rate of cancer has gone up, I made a corelation. What I would have to do after this is explain why and how the decrease in pirates leads to an increased rate of cancer. Just to add to the ridiculousness I'll say that Pirates have a gene which makes them immune to cancer, and that Pirates have plasmids which they can use as vectors to transfer the cancer resistant gene via horizontal gene transfer. Again ridiculous, but that's how you would go about doing such a ridiculous thing.

Are you aware that humans share all but 5% of the genetic makeup of chimpanzees?...Do you get the "gist" of what I'm saying, Mr CynicismandMisanthropy?

{I'm terribly sorry about your feelings towards humans...Maybe you would be happier with monkies.}

I thought we were talking about race, not species. Unless you're claiming that minorties aren't Homo Sapiens. Let's not forget there's more genetic diversity within a group of chimps on a single hillside in Gomba than in the entire human species. This is because they tend to be more isolated, have shorter life spans, and have been a bit longer. Most animals are very limited by habitat and geographical features such as rivers and canyons, so it is easy for groups to become isolated and genetically distinct from one another. Humans, on the other hand, are much more adaptable and have not been limited by geography in the same way. We're very clever beasts. Early on, we could ford rivers, cross canyons, move great distances over a relatively short time, and modify our environment to fit our needs. We are also extremely mobile as a species. Even the remotest island tribe in the Pacific originally came from elsewhere and maintained some contact with neighboring groups.

We may think global migration is a recent phenomenon, but it has characterized most of human history. Whether we're moving halfway around the world or from one village to another, the passage of genes takes place under many circumstances, large scale and small: migration, wars, trade, slave-taking, rape, and exogamous marriage. Combine this tendency with the fact that it takes many generations to accumulate a lot of genetic variation, because new variants arise primarily through mutation - copying errors from one generation to the next. On the other hand, it takes just a very small amount of migration - one individual in each generation moving from one village to another and reproducing - to prevent groups from becoming genetically distinct or isolated. The reason domesticated dogs for example have so many sub-species or races is due to selective breeding under controlled conditions.

You will excuse me if I don't respond to the rest of your rediculous hypothesis.

@#$%^&*

Oh man, do I love how you carry on. This is way better than any stand up comic. Your first error is a failure to note the origin of 'white' problems: namely, that among 'white' people there are many who are inferior, and that these not only rear more inferiors, but have reduced society in complexity to the point that it rewards inferiors: those shuffling untermenschen who go off and become moronic bureaucrats, corrupt marketers, nagging spouses and cheating paramours. Looking at white societies today, it's impossible to believe the white race is superior to other races, because white societies are a mess.

You want us to blame many complex problems on a simple source: other races. Oh Yes, other races have been are manipulating you, causing problems... the solution is to reduce their population and let the light colored untermenschen rule! You would like us to believe that one day while the white man was asleep, a horde of blacks, latinos, and asians snuck in the back door, indoctrinated the white man's children, and took over the country. But if all non-whites died tomorrow, what would happen? The basic problems of whites would remain. Our nation's problem is not that it now has a better tan but that it has no gods, no kings, no colletives, only man. You ignore that reality, and prefer to send us on a wild goose chase after non-whites, so that white privilege can take the place of actually fixing our society. Not only does this ignore the problem, but by offering a placebo solution, perpetuates it.

[CynicismandMisanthropy]

Well to be blunt 85 percent of genetic variation in the human DNA is due to individual variation. A mere 15 percent could be traced to what could be interpreted as "racial" differences. This 15 percent is well below the threshold that is used to recognize race in other species. In many other large mammalian species, we see rates of differentiation two or three times that of humans before the lineages are even recognized as races. In fact humans are one of the most genetically homogenous species we know of. There's genetic variation in humanity, but it's basically at the individual level. The between-population variation is very, very minor. The other problem is little thought goes into determining and defining a race. For example we tend to group all Europeans as "White". Yet there are observable differences between the population of the British Isles and Italy. Does this mean there is a mediterranian race and an anglo-celtic race? The problem with race as a concept is that it is a typological rather than an evolutionary concept. There is not one trait or gene that distinguishes all members of a race from another. Combine this with the fact that genes are inherited seperately in the human species. The shape of my eyes are not connected to the gene which codes for hair color or the one which codes for blood type.

Race was a concept to eliminate the dividng lines between various European cultures in order to assimilate them. In order to create a stable national identity and prevent ethnic violence. Thus in America the idea of race became as popular as meth in a trailer park. Speaking of drugs it also acted as an opiate to pacify poor whites. Sure they were living out in a shack on top of a mountain but at least they were white. This idea is known as Pan-Aryanism and it entails that all things "white" should exist on the same stratum, and thus we should combine white races and tribes to produce a universal "white culture". This belief is the most modern form of nationalism, and comes almost exclusively from countries in which a high degree of inter-tribal mixing has already occurred, such as in the United States, Canada, and Russia. The Pan-Aryanists think that anyone of partial "Aryan" heritage should be included in one giant tribe, and that tribe can approximate its culture from that mix.

That is more or less the gist. It was also the synthesis between the contradictions of enlighten egalitarianism, America's desire to expand westward, and the necessity of the slave trade to bolster the rural economy of the south.

[HogTrash]

Wow...Look at all those big important pretty words...I'm gonna feel really bad about the damage I'm about to do to your inflated ego...I hope I can live with myself after this.

Well to be blunt 85 percent of genetic variation in the human DNA is due to individual variation. A mere 15 percent could be traced to what could be interpreted as "racial" differences.

There are three main races of the human species, caucasoid, mongoloid and negroid, with slight variations of each that developed in seperate areas of the world, and you claim there is 15% genetic difference in them, and on top of that you say it as if it is insignificant.

Are you aware that humans share all but 5% of the genetic makeup of chimpanzees?...Do you get the "gist" of what I'm saying, Mr CynicismandMisanthropy?
http://www.newscientist.com/article/...e-trebled.html

{I'm terribly sorry about your feelings towards humans...Maybe you would be happier with monkies.}

This 15 percent is well below the threshold that is used to recognize race in other species. In many other large mammalian species, we see rates of differentiation two or three times that of humans before the lineages are even recognized as races. In fact humans are one of the most genetically homogenous species we know of. There's genetic variation in humanity, but it's basically at the individual level. The between-population variation is very, very minor. The other problem is little thought goes into determining and defining a race. For example we tend to group all Europeans as "White". Yet there are observable differences between the population of the British Isles and Italy. Does this mean there is a mediterranian race and an anglo-celtic race? The problem with race as a concept is that it is a typological rather than an evolutionary concept. There is not one trait or gene that distinguishes all members of a race from another. Combine this with the fact that genes are inherited seperately in the human species. The shape of my eyes are not connected to the gene which codes for hair color or the one which codes for blood type.

Race was a concept to eliminate the dividng lines between various European cultures in order to assimilate them. In order to create a stable national identity and prevent ethnic violence. Thus in America the idea of race became as popular as meth in a trailer park. Speaking of drugs it also acted as an opiate to pacify poor whites. Sure they were living out in a shack on top of a mountain but at least they were white. This idea is known as Pan-Aryanism and it entails that all things "white" should exist on the same stratum, and thus we should combine white races and tribes to produce a universal "white culture". This belief is the most modern form of nationalism, and comes almost exclusively from countries in which a high degree of inter-tribal mixing has already occurred, such as in the United States, Canada, and Russia. The Pan-Aryanists think that anyone of partial "Aryan" heritage should be included in one giant tribe, and that tribe can approximate its culture from that mix.

That is more or less the gist. It was also the synthesis between the contradictions of enlighten egalitarianism, America's desire to expand westward, and the necessity of the slave trade to bolster the rural economy of the south.

You will excuse me if I don't respond to the rest of your rediculous hypothesis.

@#$%^&*

[PostmodernProphet]

There are three main races of the human species, caucasoid, mongoloid and negroid, with slight variations of each that developed in seperate areas of the world, and you claim there is 15% genetic difference in them, and on top of that you say it as if it is insignificant.

Hog, are you aware that you are likely to be more genetically identical to some black man than you are to most caucasian men?........I forget the precise numbers, but those genetic factors which represent "race" are minuscule compared to all the other genetic factors which distinguish individuals......