The OFFICIAL Race Thread II

[Cliche Guevara]

Originally Posted by Dread_Lord

I know what you're proposing, Jew, and why you support this thread.

You want our speech to be controlled and compartmentalized.
This thread is a cluster fuck and nearly impossible to stay on topic in, that's why you support it.

I've heard your opinions before. You want threads/forums for racist so that if we speak about racial issues of any kind anywhere else on Zoklet we could be banned.

You're a dick. Plain and simple.

continued from http://bbs.zoklet.net/showthread.php?t=11225&page=13

[Ron_Smythberg]

Originally Posted by dreadlord

View Post
I know what you're proposing, Jew, and why you support this thread.

You want our speech to be controlled and compartmentalized.
This thread is a cluster fuck and nearly impossible to stay on topic in, that's why you support it.

I've heard your opinions before. You want threads/forums for racist so that if we speak about racial issues of any kind anywhere else on Zoklet we could be banned.

You're a dick. Plain and simple.

I think it is only fair that legitimate threads be allowed to stay on topic. Right now, many upon many threads are Hi-Jacked by moronic racists. They are taken off topic and as a consequence many members are already banned for this behavior.

Yes I do want off topic threads a bannable offense, it detracts heavily from the quality of this forum. If you were a big racing fan and everywhere you constantly made posts on you favourite Race-Car drivers, etc, we would be angry aswell. The fact is Race-Car fans have the common courtesy to shut up when it is out of place, a trait most of you racist scum seem to lack.

Most of the time these racist rants are completely out of place and they are drawing people away from this community. In order to be fair to both the regular folks and extremists such as you, a section of some kind is necessary.

[Dread_Lord]

Originally Posted by Ron_Smythberg

I think it is only fair that legitimate threads be allowed to stay on topic. Right now, many upon many threads are Hi-Jacked by moronic racists. They are taken off topic and as a consequence many members are already banned for this behavior.

Yes I do want off topic threads a bannable offense, it detracts heavily from the quality of this forum. If you were a big racing fan and everywhere you constantly made posts on you favourite Race-Car drivers, etc, we would be angry aswell. The fact is Race-Car fans have the common courtesy to shut up when it is out of place, a trait most of you racist scum seem to lack.

Most of the time these racist rants are completely out of place and they are drawing people away from this community. In order to be fair to both the regular folks and extremists such as you, a section of some kind is necessary.

Tell you what then, Jew.
From now on I will not post any new threads dealing with race or Jews as long as this fucked up thread exists.
What I will do, in place of that, is go into other posts where I feel race or Jews are partly the issue and introduce everyone to my views on the subject in that regard.

Since I am doing it for you I will double my output until this thread is gone.

You think I was born yesterday, Jew?

I recommend all racists to do the same just don't break the derailing thread rule. Make sure you comments are legitimate and relevant to the topic you're posting in.

If this Jew and the Moderator want to push us then push back.


Fuck this thread.

[Struwwelpeter]

Cliche Guevara, could you please stop fucking this forum up, what you are doing is nothing more that clustering Inhumanities, creating a series of disorganized threads that make the forum look even less appealing to any newcomers. You were doing a great job until this.

[Ron_Smythberg]

Originally Posted by Dread_Lord

Tell you what then, Jew.
From now on I will not post any new threads dealing with race or Jews as long as this fucked up thread exists.
What I will do, in place of that, is go into other posts where I feel race or Jews are partly the issue and introduce everyone to my views on the subject in that regard.

Since I am doing it for you I will double my output until this thread is gone.

You think I was born yesterday, Jew?

I recommend all racists to do the same just don't break the derailing thread rule. Make sure you comments are legitimate and relevant to the topic you're posting in.

If this Jew and the Moderator want to push us then push back.


Fuck this thread.

ooh wow, you do that little boy :biggrin:

[Struwwelpeter]

Why are people so concerned about "thread derailment"?

Truth is they just want to use it as an excuse to ban racists.

[Dread_Lord]

I don't know it's stupid. Anything could be considered thread derailment and they can blame anyone for it. It's an undefined retarded rule.

[Struwwelpeter]

Yeah exactly.

[lord]

Originally Posted by Dread_Lord

I don't know it's stupid. Anything could be considered thread derailment and they can blame anyone for it. It's an undefined retarded rule.

Your name is slightly like my name. I now like you

[Dread_Lord]

Originally Posted by Ron_Smythberg

ooh wow, you do that little boy :biggrin:

Oh does that make you happy?
Okay then I will continue to post more threads as well as in more threads.

I was going to anyways.

[Cliche Guevara]

Ok heres what Ill do, Ill talk it over with the new mod and see what happens.

[Slave of the Beast]

Originally Posted by Jim "fuck latinos" Carrey

Cliche Guevara, could you please stop fucking this forum up, what you are doing is nothing more that clustering Inhumanities, creating a series of disorganized threads that make the forum look even less appealing to any newcomers. You were doing a great job until this.

He has shown his true colours by siding with the devious Jew kind and their attempts to confuse and disrupt this damning exposé of their activities.

We must resist! Resist!

[crazzyass]

No one's trying to oppress you, but threads like:

OP: So, does anyone have any tips on picking up dates?


You: FUCK ALL U NIGGAZ!


Gets really fucking old after a while. But on that note, I completely support you making your views relevent to the thread, if you can. Go for it. But there has been excessive amounts of thread derailments lately.


Oh, and I'd love if you'd go back and refute some of my points, Jim. Especially the part about black people being stupid because their women have narrow hips.

[Dread_Lord]

Originally Posted by Cliche Guevara

Ok heres what Ill do, Ill talk it over with the new mod and see what happens.

Thank you good sir.

[Slapshot]

Originally Posted by Ron_Smythberg

.

Nice try, but there are no "regular" folk here on zoklet, and that's what makes it so attractive to the fringe. I think that you and your "newspaper and coffee" types should have your own forum called "douchbags and pissants".

[Struwwelpeter]

^ LOL, thank you.

[crazzyass]

Originally Posted by Jim "fuck latinos" Carrey

^ LOL, thank you.

So...when am I gonna get that reply? I've asked twice now...

[Struwwelpeter]

Crazzyass narrow hips influence the intelligence of babies thanks to the principle of constriction, as there is greater pressure on the babies skull it's cellular growth is inhibited during pregnancy and thus the brain mass is less than that of white children, which of course influences intelligence in human beings.

Your claim that hormones do not influence behavior is insurmountable because of the ignorant nature and the vagueness of it all. The greater testosterone that is flowing through one's body, the more irritable, less patient, and less attentive one is at any given time, please rephrase what it is you want to discuss if you want to do just that.

[crazzyass]

Originally Posted by Jim "fuck latinos" Carrey

Crazzyass narrow hips influence the intelligence of babies thanks to the principle of constriction, as there is greater pressure on the babies skull it's cellular growth is inhibited during pregnancy and thus the brain mass is less than that of white children, which of course influences intelligence in human beings.

Your claim that hormones do not influence behavior is insurmountable because of the ignorant nature and the vagueness of it all. The greater testosterone that is flowing through one's body, the more irritable, less patient, and less attentive one is at any given time, please rephrase what it is you want to discuss if you want to do just that.

Could you post a link to a reliable study proving that black women have narrower hips? I was under the impression they were known for wide hips...
but anyways, every race goes through constriction at birth. The skull is literally crushed into a cone shape because it is mostly cartiledge at that point, then it reforms. As far as I am aware, blacks do not experience any more crushing than anyone else. Their vaginas/birth canals are designed the exact same way as everyone elses.

*sigh* I'll say it for the third time...I never have claimed that hormones have nothing to do with behavior. Your claim was that blacks are less intelligent because they have different hormonal secretions. I said that the hormonal secretions that are different from say, whites, (because there are mild differences, yes) are hormones that have no effect on intelligence. Not that hormones in general have no effect. But the hormones that do affect intelligence and brain function are ones that the races share equal amounts of. That was my claim. Please stop putting words in my mouth and twisting my statements to make my arguments look less credible. It makes you look immature.

[Struwwelpeter]

I find it somewhat insulting that you are asking for a legit source when I have already provided you with Rushton's documents. You act as if my sources are illegitimate yet your evidence is that because the majority of people understand black women to be more voluptuous because of what they see in the media, which has nothing to do with the width of the pelvis, that the information is wrong.

All races go through constriction in utero, what is your point? Anti-racists always make these arguments, that not all blacks are less intelligent, not all of them are criminals, etc. The point is not that the other races do not undergo constriction. White and Asian babies undergo less constriction as whites and Asians have wider pelvises, and thus less constriction. It has been demonstrated although I'm not sure if it has been verified that women with wider hips also have more intelligent children as their children have greater supply of EFAs relative to surface area.

As for hormonal secretion, my argument is not that they secrete different hormones, but more hormones, particularly male sex hormone, which does influence intelligence performance.

[crazzyass]

Originally Posted by Jim "fuck latinos" Carrey

I find it somewhat insulting that you are asking for a legit source when I have already provided you with Rushton's documents. You act as if my sources are illegitimate yet your evidence is that because the majority of people understand black women to be more voluptuous because of what they see in the media, which has nothing to do with the width of the pelvis, that the information is wrong.

All races go through constriction in utero, what is your point? Anti-racists always make these arguments, that not all blacks are less intelligent, not all of them are criminals, etc. The point is not that the other races do not undergo constriction. White and Asian babies undergo less constriction as whites and Asians have wider pelvises, and thus less constriction. It has been demonstrated although I'm not sure if it has been verified that women with wider hips also have more intelligent children as their children have greater supply of EFAs relative to surface area.

As for hormonal secretion, my argument is not that they secrete different hormones, but more hormones, particularly male sex hormone, which does influence intelligence performance.

Your document is as illegimate as welfare babies. I posted a link full of refutations to it by the entire scientific community attacking his biased sources and slanted experiments, not to mention outright falsified data. And even that document didn't claim that black women have narrower hips.
You are going to have to post a better reason than "cause I said so". And that includes biased, debunked "reports" that spit in the name of true science. As I have already requested, post a link proving your statement.


Okay then. Feel free to post a link supporting your statement.

[Struwwelpeter]

You did not post a link full of refutations, what you did is post a biased wikipedia article (90% of the article wasn't even about RE&B) in which a few alleged scientists say that the data was manipulated, nothing more, nothing less. There is no reason given, just quotes in which scientists, all of whom have their own leftist agenda, in which they claim he is biased. No where do they offer a follow up document, they only claim "some data" was skewered.

It's hilarious you claim to have enough knowledge in this subject to argue about it's validity, you clearly haven't even read the fucking document because the first blocks of text within it concern the very issue you are claiming it does not discuss.

And I quote:

White men can't jump. Asian men can’t either. But according to Jon Entine’s new book, Taboo:
Why Black Athletes Dominate Sports and Why We Are Afraid to Talk About It, Black men — and women
— sure can. The usual reason given for Black athletic success is that Blacks have little chance to get
ahead elsewhere. But Entine’s new book shows that in sports, Blacks have a genetic edge.
The physical facts Entine reviews are quite well known. Compared to Whites, Blacks have
narrower hips which gives them a more efficient stride. They have a shorter sitting height which provides
a higher center of gravity and a better balance. They have wider shoulders, less body fat, and more
muscle. Their muscles include more fast twitch muscles which produce power. Blacks have from 3 to
19% more of the sex hormone testosterone than Whites or East Asians. The testosterone translates
into more explosive energy.
Entine points out that these physical advantages give Blacks the edge in sports like boxing,
basketball, football, and sprinting. However, some of these race differences pose a problem for Black
swimmers. Heavier skeletons and smaller chest cavities limit their performance.
Race differences show up early in life. Black babies are born a week earlier than White babies,
yet they are more mature as measured by bone development. By age five or six, Black children excel in
the dash, the long jump, and the high jump, all of which require a short burst of power. By the teenage
years, Blacks have faster reflexes, as in the famous knee-jerk response.
East Asians run even less well than Whites. The same narrow hips, longer legs, more muscle, and
more testosterone that give Blacks an advantage over Whites, give Whites an advantage over East Asians.
But admitting these genetic race differences in sports leads to the greater taboo area — race differences in
brain size and crime. That is why it is taboo to even say that Blacks are better at many sports.
The reason why Whites and East Asians have wider hips than Blacks, and so make poorer runners
is because they give birth to larger brained babies. During evolution, increasing cranial size meant women
had to have a wider pelvis. Further, the hormones that give Blacks an edge at sports makes them restless
in school and prone to crime.

http://www.charlesdarwinresearch.org...n_Behavior.pdf

You have no right to detract from the validity of my sources, when you yourself have given no source other than hearsay.

[crazzyass]

Originally Posted by Jim "fuck latinos" Carrey

You did not post a link full of refutations, what you did is post a biased wikipedia article (90% of the article wasn't even about RE&B) in which a few alleged scientists say that the data was manipulated, nothing more, nothing less. There is no reason given, just quotes in which scientists, all of whom have their own leftist agenda, in which they claim he is biased. No where do they offer a follow up document, they only claim "some data" was skewered.

It's hilarious you claim to have enough knowledge in this subject to argue about it's validity, you clearly haven't even read the fucking document because the first blocks of text within it concern the very issue you are claiming it does not discuss.

And I quote:



http://www.charlesdarwinresearch.org...n_Behavior.pdf

You have no right to detract from the validity of my sources, when you yourself have given no source other than hearsay.

Oh my god. You post from the same study that was debunked...great source, faggot.

And they were very specific with criticisms! It appears that it is you who is not reading what is posted. These "alleged" scientists as you call them gave point-by-point reasons why the study was bogus. The only alleged scientists here is the one who is literally making his data up, and incidentally the one who wrote your source. I can post my link again if you want to brush up on how little you pay attention.

And you know, if the part you quoted had scientific validity, I would heartily agree with you. But it has been demonstrated that the data has been skewed, not through baseless assumptions, but through detailed analysis of his sources which rendered little in the way of supporting his baseless statements that he then bound together and called a "study".

[Struwwelpeter]

Where was it proved that the data that suggests black women have narrower hips skewed? Truth is none of it was shown to be skewed, you do not have access to the data you're only taking the other people, whom you know nothing about, and couldn't name their first and last names off of the bat without going back to the wikipedia article and searching for them, because they fuel your natural perversion to defend the black race. It's obvious you can't see the world for how it truly is, so why do you continue to post here?

[crazzyass]

Originally Posted by Jim "fuck latinos" Carrey

Where was it proved that the data that suggests black women have narrower hips skewed? Truth is none of it was shown to be skewed, you do not have access to the data you're only taking the other people, whom you know nothing about, and couldn't name their first and last names off of the bat without going back to the wikipedia article and searching for them, because they fuel your natural perversion to defend the black race. It's obvious you can't see the world for how it truly is, so why do you continue to post here?

Hahaha, I like your evasions. While the part about narrower hips wasn't proven wrong, its effect s on intelligence were. the parts about all blacks having an average lower brain weight, and therefore intelligence, was completely debunked.

What does naming them have to do with anything? I'm starting to think you are either an idiot or a troll.

You still haven't addressed anything.

[Struwwelpeter]

Where was it proven wrong? And what did I evade?

[crazzyass]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race,_E...,_and_Behavior


You were evading the debunkings, calling the critics "alleged scientists" and not actually addressing the issue that your one and only source is widely accepted as being SCIENTIFICALLY UNSOUND.

[crazzyass]

"Other critics have also charged that his interpretations, conclusions and methods are "sloppy" and "unscientific"[7]. For example, Rushton's diagram of cranial capacities is in error, as Neanderthal in fact had a greater cranial capacity than modern humans [8]. Genetic studies also show that there is greater genetic diversity within African populations (for example between Khoisanid Capoid, Mbuti pygmy, Sudanese Nuba, West African Negro and Ethiopian Cushitic populations, than there is amongst any two groups outside Africa rendering aggregation methods applied here nul and void [9].
"

Here is a specific quote, as you are unlikely to read my link.

[Struwwelpeter]

Check the link of the source that suggests neanderthals have a greater brain capacity. Source 8 on the wikipedia page.

They based the claim that neanderthals have a greater cranial capacity based on the finding of one nine year old European neanderthal.

In other words, one white neanderthal.

This is why you should pay greater attention before slamming away on a keyboard, try actually reading the sources instead of agreeing with anyone who is against racism.

I'm sorry, where did that mention anything about hip ratios? Fail.

That entire wikipedia page is an epic failure, try bringing a legit source to the table.

[crazzyass]

Originally Posted by Jim "fuck latinos" Carrey

The argument that it is irrelevant because neanderthals had a greater cranial capacity than modern humans is fallacious; modern humans are not neanderthals.

I'm sorry, where did that mention anything about hip ratios? Fail.

That entire wikipedia page is an epic failure, try bringing a legit source to the table.

...oh. My. God. I have already said that there are no disputes about narrower hip ratios. The quote I posted was a testiment to his bad science, nothing that we have specifically mentioned.

...oh, sorry. Next time I'll try to get a source that the entire scientific community has accepted as ridiculous and unscientific, like you.


..."averaging does nothing to reduce bias in sampling and measurement, and such flaws are abundant in the cited literature. For example, among the 38 reports on brain weight, all but two gave figures for only one group, with most cases being people living in the nation of their ancestors, such as an article on Japanese living in Japan and another on Kenyans living in Kenya. The obvious differences in environment make all of these data of dubious worth for testing hypotheses about genetic causes of group differences.[5]"

"The first problem for his theory is that there need to be major races. That is, the differences between "Oriental," "Black," and "White" need to be more than skin deep. In claiming that these old racial categories correspond to large biological differences, Rushton moves in the opposite direction from the entire development of physical anthropology and human genetics for the last thirty years. Anthropologists no longer regard "race" as a useful concept in understanding human evolution and variation.[11]"


Here are a few more basic refutations of your "legit" source. ^

[Struwwelpeter]

I have recanted my statement upon reading the source given on wikipedia, respond to my edited comment.

[Struwwelpeter]

Originally Posted by crazzyass

...oh. My. God. I have already said that there are no disputes about narrower hip ratios. The quote I posted was a testiment to his bad science, nothing that we have specifically mentioned.

Hahaha, I like your evasions. While the part about narrower hips wasn't proven wrong, its effect s on intelligence were.

[crazzyass]

Originally Posted by Jim "fuck latinos" Carrey

I have recanted my statement upon reading the source given on wikipedia, respond to my edited comment.

Sure. Just respond to my last post as well.

[crazzyass]

Originally Posted by Jim "fuck latinos" Carrey

Uh...what exactly are you getting at? No, hip ratios are not mentioned. No one has disputed his claim that they have narrower hips...however, they HAVE disputed his claim that the narrower hips caused smaller brains and less intelligence, because his data supporting that claim was corrupt.

So...what are you saying?

[crazzyass]

Originally Posted by Jim "fuck latinos" Carrey

Check the link of the source that suggests neanderthals have a greater brain capacity. Source 8 on the wikipedia page.

They based the claim that neanderthals have a greater cranial capacity based on the finding of one nine year old European neanderthal.

In other words, one white neanderthal.

This is why you should pay greater attention before slamming away on a keyboard, try actually reading the sources instead of agreeing with anyone who is against racism.

I'm sorry, where did that mention anything about hip ratios? Fail.

That entire wikipedia page is an epic failure, try bringing a legit source to the table.

Almost all recovered neanderthals have had larger craniums. The specific link that was cited, however, mentioned that particular find. That doesn't meant that it's the only one that has a larger cranium, though. You are twisting data in a way that your dear expert Rushton did. How ironic.

[Struwwelpeter]

Originally Posted by crazzyass

..."averaging does nothing to reduce bias in sampling and measurement, and such flaws are abundant in the cited literature. For example, among the 38 reports on brain weight, all but two gave figures for only one group, with most cases being people living in the nation of their ancestors, such as an article on Japanese living in Japan and another on Kenyans living in Kenya. The obvious differences in environment make all of these data of dubious worth for testing hypotheses about genetic causes of group differences.[5]"

Yet in the very same wikipedia article, the authors reference once website in which one case of less than five neadnerthals with a large cranial capacity in Europe. This quote also doesn't take in to account the numerous studies performed in Australia, The Americas and Europe in which blacks enjoy the same geographical area and yet the same IQ differences.

"The first problem for his theory is that there need to be major races. That is, the differences between "Oriental," "Black," and "White" need to be more than skin deep. In claiming that these old racial categories correspond to large biological differences, Rushton moves in the opposite direction from the entire development of physical anthropology and human genetics for the last thirty years. Anthropologists no longer regard "race" as a useful concept in understanding human evolution and variation.[11]"

This is not true, anthropologists do consider race to be important, they just label it as population instead of race.

These are the words of leftist fringe pseudo-science race deniers, not scientists.

[Struwwelpeter]

Originally Posted by crazzyass

Almost all recovered neanderthals have had larger craniums. The specific link that was cited, however, mentioned that particular find. That doesn't meant that it's the only one that has a larger cranium, though. You are twisting data in a way that your dear expert Rushton did. How ironic.

Not true, only the specific neanderthals (which accounted for less than five) had larger cranial capacity, the other neanderthals accounted for, outside of that general area near Uzbekistan, (and check that very link) had low cranial capacity. Where did I twist data?

[Struwwelpeter]

Originally Posted by crazzyass

Uh...what exactly are you getting at? No, hip ratios are not mentioned. No one has disputed his claim that they have narrower hips...however, they HAVE disputed his claim that the narrower hips caused smaller brains and less intelligence, because his data supporting that claim was corrupt.

Really? They disproved it? Then how about, for my third request, you provide me with an example where they disproved that hip ratios have no correlation.

[crazzyass]

Originally Posted by Jim "fuck latinos" Carrey

Yet in the very same wikipedia article, the authors reference once website in which one case of less than five neadnerthals with a large cranial capacity in Europe. This quote also doesn't take in to account the numerous studies performed in Australia, The Americas and Europe in which blacks enjoy the same geographical area and yet the same IQ differences.




This is not true, anthropologists do consider race to be important, they just label it as population instead of race.

These are the words of leftist fringe pseudo-science race deniers, not scientists.

That refutation didn't mention IQ, it mentioned brain weight. Get your bullshit straight.

They have since moved away from race in the skin-color sense of the word, as it has been demonstrated to be meaningless. For instance, some subsect of Africans may have more similar body and chemical make-up with white people of east european ethnicities than they do with other Africans. Anthropologists are not denying that people are broken up into categories with noticable physical differences, just that those differences have little if any correlation with skin color. As such, Rushton's seperation of subjects into catergories of Blacks, Whites, and "Orientals" speaks to his lack of knowledge about anthropology and objectivity.

[crazzyass]

Originally Posted by Jim "fuck latinos" Carrey

Not true, only the specific neanderthals (which accounted for less than five) had larger cranial capacity, the other neanderthals accounted for, outside of that general area near Uzbekistan, (and check that very link) had low cranial capacity. Where did I twist data?

By implying that just because a source lists one specific example, that's the only example there is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neander...hysical_traits

Study up on neanderthals a bit.