I'm not a racist, but I am...

This forum is full of it, but it's all true. The facts are there. Maybe there is a little hyperbole, sure black people can become doctors, fly planes etc... I'm a reasonable human being, I was raised in a liberal environment. I have bullied before, but never been racist and I see bigotry as immature, however I can't escape the fact that they are indeed very unusual looking.

http://unicast.org/forums/forum.php?forum_id=1

"golly, niggers are hideous with their buck teeth, black skin and brillo heads. Egads."

Just do a google search for skull shapes of different races and albino black people... CAucasian and mongoloid skulls are about the same and both these races have obviously exceeded negrito races in culture and civilisation. Even the obscure native americans constructed early civilisations. Their hunter gatherers tribes only existed due to their isolation, deprived of the circumstnaces that allow for agrarian civilisation. Given another 1000 years after the SPanish arrived, and the Gulf of Mexico would be like the Mediteranean circa 1000 B.C..

Though I can't say the same for black civilisations, they were not isolated, theywere exposed to the Egyptians, who were arabic, im not one of these nuts who thinks they are white. I really am not a racist or even a far right conservative...

I can't contain what i think anymore and I shouldn't be afraid of expressing my thoughts. They do look so animal like, it is as if they are a relic from evolution before human civilisation. In fact that's what they are, the only tribal systems outside of sub-saharran africa left by around 1300 were in areas which didn't have much food. Yet in the rich jungles of africa they still lived in the stone age, never utilising the wide range of plants there.

I think the out of africa theory is correct and that blacks haven't evolved much whilst caucasians and mongoloids have had to deal with the ice age.

How should I approach these facts rationally? Liberals say I should just ignore them, conservatives say I should become a whtie supremacist nut. Surely there is another way? Surely there is a way to get society to accept these facts without sinking into depths of paranoia and stupidity.

>>142
Yes, I do and yes, I have.

No, you don't, because it renders your initial statement that "given equal conditions- a black child and a white child will score the same on any wide ranging IQ tests" false. Genes play a role, which the study indicates: there is a correlation between intelligence scores and genetic similarity.

You're exactly like John Watson, with the famous beggar-man quote of his, but nowadays we know he was wrong. Read up on the history of behaviorism.

Those stats are moot, in the first fucking place.

Says who? You? It doesn't matter what the stats are, so long as they are significant. If they are significant, to any degree, that renders one of your premises false. Take a look at this:

http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/...
http://www.mugu.com/cgi-bin/Upstream/Issues/psychology/IQ/bouchard-twins.html

There are plenty of others like this.

I find it amusing that you proclaim that the seperation between nature and nurture is false (I won't contest that), yet you equally state that heredity has little to do with intelligence. Isn't this contradictory? How do you know?

Two children have identical experiences in life. They learn the same things. Now you present them the same tests. Will they score the same? Since genes play a role, not just in intelligence, but also in personality and other trains, no matter how large or small, for sufficiently large number of tests the two children probably won't have the same scores.

Now, let's consider a small population: it has certain allele frequencies. This is without contest. Don't believe me? Look up CCR5 and Eyam for a specific example, or just consider speciation. Why would this not apply to larger populations? Again, why do blacks, whites, and asias consistently look a certain way, and what about offspring of dual heritage? If skin colour, facial structure, height, likelihood of certain diseases, etc, can be inherited, why not factors that affect intelligence?

In short, it's quite possible that blacks, whites, and asians, given exactly the same conditions, education, and opportunity, will have different normal distributions of intelligence.

Your comment regarding mutations is also a red herring. The metrics used to measure intelligence already implicity account for this since they're measuring the phenotype's performance. Even so, despite the probably minute differences, there is a strong correlation. Furthermore, even if we ignore the above, errors in DNA replication occur at a rate of ~1E10 nucleotides, which is miniscule.

given equal conditions- a black child and a white child will score the same on any wide ranging IQ tests

Exceptional claims require exceptional evidence. Most the data doesn't fit your claim, so it's unlikely.

Hey, why are you complaining? Perhaps blacks will have a slightly higher intelligence score, and they are held back by history, environment, and/or culture (and why are you so happy to take credit for blacks' apparent physical prowess, but scared to consider the same for intelligence?). Or maybe some population of Asians will win out.

Or maybe it's nothing. Maybe the scores all even out. But we don't know. YOU don't know. QED.