Our most recent troll is back, and done a much bigger derail of an ID thread. Wrangling him here. Comments in that derail below the fold.
Well, I certainly wouldn't agree that we have a purpose per say, but it does fit my views rather well, in a none related way.
The Evolution of the Human race until the White Race is rather interesting, something some of you deny as well as accept (unwillingly) using the advances we have done. America, the most technologically advanced nation on the planet, we created things people could only dream of (africans, asians etc), and they now use our technology and even modify it acting like they are the creators of it.
Will we be abolished? Maybe, with the hatred for the White Race and the Anti-white propaganda spread in school with "black month' and other silly ideas (you care to mention something as negroid made?), it seems we should be ashamed of being the best, No thankyou, I want to be proud over my White History and everything we have done and will do.
I wouldn't be suprised, on the other hand, if civilized human beings would end with us if negriods or asians would take over, lacking the ability to handle the awesome technologies we have created for them, as well as the lack of ability to comprehend Democracy and value of others such as the white race.
Let's see... I'm not quite sure what you think about the pyramids (did some white people cross the Mediterranean to conscript the Egyptians into building giant tombs?), but, more recently, the Tuskegee Institute, at least to start with, provides a bunch of fairly obvious examples.
Part of your argument relies (semi-implicitly) on the fact that science has, in previous centuries and until recently, been dominated by white people. Would you extend a similar argument regarding women?
On the other hand, as of late, there's been a shortage of American science students in higher education, and I see mainly Indian immigrants picking up the slack. Is the recent climate of anti-intellectualism the result of genetic drift?
9/04/2009 1:37 PM
James K said...
First off, there have been inventions by African peoples in the past, as an example the Ethiopians were one of the first peoples to refine steel. And do I need to point out that civilisation began in Mesopotamia, not Western Europe? China and India also has sophisticated societies going long before our ancestors did.
Secondly, Western civilisation isn't a White thing, its a British thing. Both the Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution (which added together are Western Civilisation) started in the United Kingdom. The thing is, there's not really any genetic difference between the British peoples and the peoples they are descended from such as the Scandinavians and the Germans. How does that work with your theory of genetic causality?
9/04/2009 3:56 PM
Is that racist still around? It does appear at the very least he's finally admitting very clearly that he IS in fact racist, instead of denying up and down that he EVER said anything about one race being superior to another. Will he deny that he made this very post?
At any rate, Bill Watterson. Never really read those comics back in the day, but I present you with this!
This guy made a total of 10 of these cartoons and has vanished from the face of the internet. Artwork is rough but the guy is hilarious enough to deserve a full series of 15 minute shorts on Cartoon Network.
The racist doesn't appear to have ever answered my question of how he explains the existance of black or asian inventors or scientists or artists or anything that one would normally call intelligent. I think he tried to say that they are just stealing, but that really does very little to explain it all. It's a blanket explanation that totally ignores the totality of examples, one with no research at all.
We aren't so chained so very completely to our genes that they dictate every single thing about us. They can't, otherwise we'd be robots that, when presented with an elk, would immediatly start hunting it. The genes simply work from a simple basis, really simple rules that tends toward their own reproduction. One is building an intelligent brain that can figure out problems on it's own. There is no need to invoke a subconcious "true" motive. Installing that frame work has no pressure, the basic rule is all that was needed. Further, as environment changes misfirings can occur, such as
It's these misfirings brought about, especially in humans, by our own tendancy towards invention and discovery, that are the biggest way to break free of the dominance of genes. However, that's a side note. The main point is not to talk about "breaking free" so much as to point out that just because someone DOES behave some way does not mean a genetic explanation needs to be invoked to explain WHY they act that way. Two brains otherwise identical will have two different ways of behaving if they have two different environments.
(I must be absolutely clear here. This is NOT meant to give the impression that I think one "race" or another really does have superior intelligence and it's a matter of "overcoming" that weakness. There is no evidence that intelligence is in any way linked to the classic "racial" traits.)
I'll expand on my previous challenge. There ARE some genetic traits that are linked to intelligence, in terms of such conditions as down syndrome. However, notable is that these conditions are not tracable to any one "race". They are wide spread among ALL ethnicities, having the same basic effect, as though as a general rule the genetic code for how to build a human brain was similar enough that they could be changed in identical ways across that "barrier". What is your response to this? Do you believe that one race is more or less likely to have autistic kids than others, and further, what do you think of the fact that such genetic disorders seem to have the same effect, as though they have the SAME basic genes initially? Does this not completely defeat your entire premise?
Racist troll need to talk about genetics, not cherrypick history. Why are racists so terrified of discussing the Human Genome Project and such?
9/04/2009 8:02 PM
Racist racist, yes, use the word in a negative light, all it says is that I accept the true nature of our human heritage. Just like I am superior to a dog, I am superior to a negroid, facts are hard to fight.
Is it not funny that the 'viking blood', the Scandinavians, live the longest, have the safest and most advanced societies? Utopians in fact and yet, the 'white are evil' mantra still continues, 'poor negriods' and we should feel sorry for them.
Of course, you where not aware of this, and now when you are, you will deny it claiming its a conspiracy, by the 'white man' no doubt? Or maybe they written a deal with Satan himself to get does good statistics, its all fake and false, its not true. Egypt and Peru are the beams of civilizations and advancements.
Now, the asians have taken our technology, not even you seem so daft to deny this, and you have not explained that, weird isn't it? They did not actually make any of the technology, they took ours and modified it, fine, We gae them that ability, we helped them along, we tried the same with the negriod but they started wars and chaos in Africa, I remember a internew on television with a tp-notch negroid from one of these useless nations, HE HIMSELF stated that the west should STOP GIVING to them, because they cant deal with it, they need to learn to make food themselves, if we help them they cant handle it.
And when we dont give, we get blamed for being Evil.... Funny that. Oh, and did you know does Viking Scandinavians are also amongst the top aid givers in the world? Does blond blue eyed evil whites, juck.
Its sad you are ashamed of your race, its sad how the schools have made you think you got something to be ashamed of.
The problem with aid to Africa is that lots of the MO gets laid out using preconceptions that don't apply. It's a mix of perverse incentives and memetic disconnect. In other words, lots of foreign aid was distributed by people and agencies who did not know the best way to do their job.
On a less argument note, that comparison you made... Are you suggesting that human-dog hybrids are viable?