silenced by the thought police

It dosen't help people to better understand the veiws of others by silencing them if you do not agree with what they say. These veiws are extreme I understand, but the free flow of ideas promotes more communication amongst individuals who might not have communicated with eachother otherwise. Simple stated, someone may have opened my eyes to something that I hadn't considered but the great thought police of planet politically correct has silenced that possibillity. WE SHOULDN'T BE SILENCED BECAUSED WE DO NOT CONFORM WITH THE POLICALLY CORRECT VEIWS OF RACE AND HOW WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT IT IN OUR SOCIETY.Futhermore, my main goal was to understand how far a creationalist would go in accepting genetic change before evolution creeped into his logic but because of the subject matter I raised in conjunction with it, a whole other debate took place.jimmy

It was just a bad choice of source material jimmy. I'm certainly not politically correct at the best of times, but I saw nothing more than a white supremist comparing 'blacks' to apes. My use of inverted commas is because I personally don't know exactly which races are covered by the term 'blacks'.

Thread moved here from the Human Origins forum.

Please read "I would like to post this last responce, but silence it if you must Mr. Administrator" in Human Orgions if you haven't yet and respond if you don't mind. Furthermore, why are people afraid, nervous, or angry at the statements that a racist says anyway? If he has no merit take his statement to task and let us debate and learn together while teaching others who may read the comments. Stopping the thread only reinforces the idea that there is something there to be feared or avoided. This is not healthy. If you truely believe that there is absolutely no basis for what is stated then you should be able to point it out and help others even me to see that he is way off logical reasoning and comparisons. I don't feel that he is way off, maybe his work isn't as unbiased as others but let's debate not silence.jimmy

Actually, YOU started the game of credentials by proclaiming that Rushton was "a world's leading authority". This makes Rushton the person fair game. As to his theories, I provided two references discussing his "science", to which you haven't responded. Here's another, published by the Center for Evolutionary Ecology, Kin selection, genic selection, and information-dependent strategies which shreds Rushtons genetic similarity theories from a scientific standpoint.I have already noted my principle objection to Rushton’s entire premise: the fact that extreme variation among black sub-Saharan African populations renders his average traits utterly useless from a scientific standpoint. Contrast the vast phenotypical variance between a Khoisan from the Namib, an Efe pygmy from the Ituri Forest, a Nuar from southern Sudan, Tuareg nomads from the Grand Erg, a Batutsi from Burundi, or a Zulu from Natal. You have every conceivable size, shade, facial structure, and yes brain/body volume you can imagine. There’s more phenotypical variation between so-called black populations than there is between some hypothetical white European average and Inuit. And ALL variation is quite readily explainable by natural selection operating on isolated populations over the generations. Anything more than a general observation of Allen’s Rule and a note that certain genetic differences based on adaptation (i.e. sickle cell trait) is pure bunk. Nothing you posted can even remotely be considered diagnostic of any race in a biological sense — and especially provides no basis for a determination of primitive or advanced.As to the Pioneer Fund and Harry Lathlyn, you might want to check out the Fund's website, where they not only acknowledge Draper as a founder, but list him as "Pioneer’s main benefactor", and note that he was on the Board of Directors from 1937-1972. Hmmm, I'd be willing to bet you got that misinformation from "American Renaissance", right? The white separatist rag run by Jared Taylor? This is the only place on the ‘net where I’ve been able to track down this claim.You might want to consider peddling this drivel somewhere else, jimmy.

How can I grow in understanding if I do not express my opinions and current understandings with honestly and openness? I do not claim to know all there is to know about these matters but I find that staring debates like this helps me grow and see things with better circumspection. You may not beleive me but I don't beleive I know exactly what the truth is. I like to present my current understandings as if I am throughly convinced of my certainty. In doing so I find people like you who engage me with vigor and passion that I find helpful in persuading me of different views of this world. Saying things like ,"You might want to consider peddling this drivel somewhere else, jimmy" is not a good way to engage people who may hold beliefs such as the ones I presented. Encourage them to consider other ways of thinking and present strong evidence of support. Encourage them to stay here and present thier way of thinking so people may inform them of a more truthful representation of the truth. I'm going to look into the all thre things you suggested and do some more reading because I am not to proud to admit that I am not fully versed with all current relevent information needed on both sides of the debate, to make a complete and fully enlightened descion. But I thank all who took part in the debate, I needed some counter influences to my current understanding and I got it. Futhermore, I am always open to more info. and critism on this topic so don't hesitate to post it up.Jimmy

What do you think of Asians (Orientals, Malays, Indians)? Do we get into the same category as blacks?

In the book, "the Bell Curve" the data suggests that Asians always corrolate highest with the factors that predict intelligence, while Europeans fall somewhere in the middle, and Africans falling opposite of Asians. Here's a review of the book,
Page Not Found
There are other books on the matter but this is a very good start.So much for accusations of white supremacy. A better statement would be Asian supremacy supported by Europeans.Jimmy

I wouldn't rely too heavily on "The Bell Curve". Innumerable scientists, from biologists to statisticians to economists, have called nearly every aspect of that book into question - and all from a scientific standpoint. Here's one review article, A Review of the Bell Curve: Bad Science Makes for Bad Conclusions. Here’s another, from a statistician: Anatomy of an analysis showing that the entire statistical methodology used in the book is flawed. I think you’ve been seriously misled. Perhaps you should consider some other sources?

Sorry, Jimmy, but it appears to me that you've opened a new thread simply to resume promotion of racist views. This thread will be closed.In the interests of full disclosure, my co-admins are not convinced that Jimmy is a racist. My own opinion is that promotion of racist views in real life does not take place the way it happens in movies with raving white lunatics beyond reason. Racism can be taylored so as to make it receptive to any audience, as witness the scientific approach of Charles Murray's Bell Curve, and Jimmy's gentle, "I'm only looking at the evidence." Racism is dangerous because it is so insidious - "We aren't racist, they really *are* inferior, we have evidence."Racial differences are a legitimate area of inquiry and discussion, but promotion of racist views is not, at least not here.Jimmy will be banned.------------------
--EvC Forum Administrator