[quote]orion wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
Short answer,no.I don’t believe they are linked.Given an equal background,race is about as good a determinant of intelligence as hair or eye color.
I just linked a shitload of studies by university profs that show this ^^^ is false. I know you don’t want to believe it but there IS a reason Europe is a better place to live than most of the world and there IS a reason why eventually China will be the economic hegemon.
That would actually mean that more intelligent people make for better places to live which is just an assumption.[/quote]
That may be. It seems reasonable that creating conditions for a better style of living would follow from a people being more intelligent, but how one wants to live is subjective. One person may prefer a rustic cabin while I prefer central air and a 5 car garage.
You know, I for one have never taken an IQ test. Well, now I’m damn curious and would like to see how high I can score. Anyone have a good study guide?[/quote]
You aren’t missing out on much. It is a kind of trivia exam, largely. And there is little to account for certain aspects of intelligence that are just as important to someone’s capacity for “mind power” as having a better-than-average vocabulary - i.e., artistic ability.
They can serve as a rough guide, but they are very much overrated.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
Short answer,no.I don’t believe they are linked.Given an equal background,race is about as good a determinant of intelligence as hair or eye color.
I just linked a shitload of studies by university profs that show this ^^^ is false. I know you don’t want to believe it but there IS a reason Europe is a better place to live than most of the world and there IS a reason why eventually China will be the economic hegemon.
[/quote]
He asked me what I believe,and I answered.I haven’t looked at your links because I don’t take your posts on the matter seriously.Using IQ testing as a determinant of racial intelligence superiority is a flawed idea.
Exactly. Diamond wrote a book that recycled old arguments from the old Cultural Ecology debates in academic anthropology and “disproved” a long discredited theory that no one legitimately advocates anyway - that Race determined the “winners” in the race of civilization.
And his environmental determinism is as flawed now as it was when the original theorists pressed it.
But, to reiterate - race is irrelevant to intelligence.
I just know that you have never played Civilization I to IV.
If you have no iron or horses you are basically fucked and other civilizations will be mean to you.
Actually in civilization I you can discover The Wheel before you get horseback riding, which leads to chariots which have a better attack value than cavalry.
I know, I dominated whole continents with my mighty chariots.
You need something to actually draw them though.
That is why the Mesoamerican Indians knew the wheel but never developed chariots, they had no animals that could have drawn them.
The last is a Jared Diamond fallacy.
They had wheels (on toy carts). They had slaves aplenty to be sacrificed, or to be put at hard labor. So why, Dr. Diamond and Orion, did they not use slaves to pull wheeled carts?[/quote]
[quote]Neuromancer wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
Short answer,no.I don’t believe they are linked.Given an equal background,race is about as good a determinant of intelligence as hair or eye color.
I just linked a shitload of studies by university profs that show this ^^^ is false. I know you don’t want to believe it but there IS a reason Europe is a better place to live than most of the world and there IS a reason why eventually China will be the economic hegemon.
He asked me what I believe,and I answered.I haven’t looked at your links because I don’t take your posts on the matter seriously.Using IQ testing as a determinant of racial intelligence superiority is a flawed idea.
[/quote]
One hundred years of testing on military and corporate individuals, with the results developed by university profs…and you ignore it…because what I write doesn’t jibe with liberal hogslop you have half-digested…
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Neuromancer wrote:
Short answer,no.I don’t believe they are linked.Given an equal background,race is about as good a determinant of intelligence as hair or eye color.
I just linked a shitload of studies by university profs that show this ^^^ is false. I know you don’t want to believe it but there IS a reason Europe is a better place to live than most of the world and there IS a reason why eventually China will be the economic hegemon.
He asked me what I believe,and I answered.I haven’t looked at your links because I don’t take your posts on the matter seriously.Using IQ testing as a determinant of racial intelligence superiority is a flawed idea.
One hundred years of testing on military and corporate individuals, with the results developed by university profs…and you ignore it…because what I write doesn’t jibe with liberal hogslop you have half-digested…
I am not in a position to speak definitively on this, but I suspect there probably are higher and lower averages of intelligence among the various “anthropological strains” as there also probably is in other areas as well. I doubt if the range is very large though as long as innate intelligence is what were talking about apart from education.
I do know that I have personally interacted with people all over the world who’s high end computer skills far exceed my own. Some who speak several languages and demonstrate a command of English that shames many native speakers even though they weren’t.
Who could explain to me web scripting language syntax and mysql database management in a clear concise manner in English despite being born in Mexico, the Philippines, Turkey, Brazil, and a couple smaller African countries.
I have also interacted with individuals all over the world who were somewhat challenged in the arena of critical and analytical thought.
If aliens were to come here from a different planet, they could EASILY distinguish racial groups here based on physical morphology alone, never mind geography!
There is just so much politics involved in this science that it is ridiculous, yet why wouldn’t people want to examine racial differences from a scientific perspective when it is such an obvious physical marker amongst what are least human “sub-groups” that we chose to call races?
There’s hypocrisy on this issue to. You could joke about how black guys play better basketball than whites or Asians do, or have bigger dicks than whites or Asians do, but it you suggest that whites and Asians are better as academics than blacks or are less prone to criminality and violent behavior than blacks, then you get called a racist.
And just because racial differences probably do exist, it doesn’t validate things like hate groups. Things like bell curves don’t say that all black people are dumb, it just says that a larger majority of blacks have lower iqs than other races. INDIVIDUAL exceptions are part of the mathematics of a bell curve!
It is more like an interesting peek into the evolution of mankind on planet earth! It’s science! Not for girly men socialists like Ryan P McCarter who are social science nitwits.
You know, I for one have never taken an IQ test. Well, now I’m damn curious and would like to see how high I can score. Anyone have a good study guide?
You aren’t missing out on much. It is a kind of trivia exam, largely. And there is little to account for certain aspects of intelligence that are just as important to someone’s capacity for “mind power” as having a better-than-average vocabulary - i.e., artistic ability.
They can serve as a rough guide, but they are very much overrated.
[/quote]
You have the luxury to say that because you have plenty of it.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
phil_leotardo wrote:
<<< less prone to criminality and violent behavior than blacks, >>>
This I do not buy in any way. There is absolutely no moral component in ethnicity alone. [/quote]
There is a HUGE problem in this country with violent black criminals. I don’t see the same problem with Asians even though they are not white. Blacks make up 14% of the population and are represented in the prison population at a much higher rate than 14%. Many prisons have black majorities. There could be a genetic component to both the behavior of blacks and Asians and everyone else for that matter! If the scientific question was studied, what would be the problem in learning the truth either way? As a scientist this interests me. If not, then lets live by PC dogma.
[quote]phil_leotardo wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
phil_leotardo wrote:
<<< less prone to criminality and violent behavior than blacks, >>>
This I do not buy in any way. There is absolutely no moral component in ethnicity alone.
There is a HUGE problem in this country with violent black criminals. I don’t see the same problem with Asians even though they are not white. Blacks make up 14% of the population and are represented in the prison population at a much higher rate than 14%. Many prisons have black majorities. There could be a genetic component to both the behavior of blacks and Asians and everyone else for that matter! If the scientific question was studied, what would be the problem in learning the truth either way? As a scientist this interests me. If not, then lets live by PC dogma.
[/quote]
Moral compass has nothing to do with intelligence(which needs to be defined)…especially when talking about prison populations. You’re better off looking at socio-economical influences. And in most cases the socio-economical influences will be similar for not just the black prison population…but the hispanic and white prison populations as well.
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
phil_leotardo wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
phil_leotardo wrote:
<<< less prone to criminality and violent behavior than blacks, >>>
This I do not buy in any way. There is absolutely no moral component in ethnicity alone.
There is a HUGE problem in this country with violent black criminals. I don’t see the same problem with Asians even though they are not white. Blacks make up 14% of the population and are represented in the prison population at a much higher rate than 14%. Many prisons have black majorities. There could be a genetic component to both the behavior of blacks and Asians and everyone else for that matter! If the scientific question was studied, what would be the problem in learning the truth either way? As a scientist this interests me. If not, then lets live by PC dogma.
Moral compass has nothing to do with intelligence(which needs to be defined)…especially when talking about prison populations. You’re better off looking at socio-economical influences. And in most cases the socio-economical influences will be similar for not just the black prison population…but the hispanic and white prison populations as well.
[/quote]
You already know my view on this, which happens to be the correct one, but it has nothing to do with African genes bearing a greater propensity to evil.
Big Boss is right, the main factor in crime is not so much intelligence as it is quality of character and integrity. I had seen guys, regardless of their ethnicity or background, were interested in breaking the law for their own personal gain.
Remember the biggest scammer in US history is a white man, Bernie Madoff, scheduled for release on 11-14-2139 LOL.
I started hating this thread a long time ago, most of you fail at argument, and are so immature that you take a scientific statement as racist. But what else would you expect froma bunch of non-HIT people.
[quote]mavrcksurfer69 wrote:
orion wrote:
belligerent wrote:
borrek wrote:
Maybe Africa went to hell because the Europeans were less interested in colonizing, and more interested in scavenging resources.
…or maybe it’s because Africa has always been the most violent continent on Earth since long before a white man ever set foot there.
Hardly.
They do not hold a candle to Europe.
Oh yes they do… the only difference is we know more about European history because they have recorded it for us to look back on. … A sign of a more advanced and intelligent society… BURN!
I mean look at every other continent on this planet… Every society except for Sub Saharan Africans and native Australians have created monuments and recorded history’s that still stand to this day. Native Americans, Asians, Europeans, Arabs, (Hispanics are not included because they are not a race but a mix of too many different races to be counted)… They all have tons of structures that stand the test of time … where as in sub Saharan Africa they still build using sticks and mud. Plus a lack of recorded history… What more proof do you need?
My credentials; Masters in History
… so suck it in advance to any bitch who wants to use the word racist about this post… suck it hard bc I dont give a shit… I state reality. [/quote]
That was not the point though, the point was that Africans are somehow more violent than Europeans which is highly questionable.
[quote]mavrcksurfer69 wrote:
orion wrote:
belligerent wrote:
borrek wrote:
Maybe Africa went to hell because the Europeans were less interested in colonizing, and more interested in scavenging resources.
…or maybe it’s because Africa has always been the most violent continent on Earth since long before a white man ever set foot there.
Hardly.
They do not hold a candle to Europe.
Oh yes they do… the only difference is we know more about European history because they have recorded it for us to look back on. … A sign of a more advanced and intelligent society… BURN!
I mean look at every other continent on this planet… Every society except for Sub Saharan Africans and native Australians have created monuments and recorded history’s that still stand to this day. Native Americans, Asians, Europeans, Arabs, (Hispanics are not included because they are not a race but a mix of too many different races to be counted)… They all have tons of structures that stand the test of time … where as in sub Saharan Africa they still build using sticks and mud. Plus a lack of recorded history… What more proof do you need?
My credentials; Masters in History
… so suck it in advance to any bitch who wants to use the word racist about this post… suck it hard bc I dont give a shit… I state reality. [/quote]
Lack of advancement is not NECESSARILY indicative of a lack of intelligence. Geographical considerations with the commensurate limitations of natural resources and the tribal localized nature of that region which presents much less necessity for invention could go a long way in explaining the lagging state of technology.
Someone might say, well the tribal localized nature of that region is itself a demonstration of lesser intelligence. I say if we define intelligence loosely as the ability to accurately comprehend information then intelligence is not the primary explanation.
[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I say if we define intelligence loosely as the ability to accurately comprehend information then intelligence is not the primary explanation.[/quote]
This is good. People fail to even agree on what intelligence means even before trying to apply it to a discussion of race and intelligence.